Jeremy Bamber Forum
OFF TOPIC => Russia/Ukraine/Nato => Topic started by: Caroline on February 28, 2015, 02:44:AM
-
With the Russian invasion of the Ukraine and their reluctance to stick to any ceasefire. They have increased their spending on defence - and today
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/27/russia-boris-nemtsov-shot_n_6772212.html?utm_hp_ref=uk&ir=UK&ncid=webmail1
Putin reminds me of Hitler - he needs stopping because he is certainly up to something!
-
as far as i can russia is only defending it selelf
-
With the Russian invasion of the Ukraine and their reluctance to stick to any ceasefire. They have increased their spending on defence - and today
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/27/russia-boris-nemtsov-shot_n_6772212.html?utm_hp_ref=uk&ir=UK&ncid=webmail1
Putin reminds me of Hitler - he needs stopping because he is certainly up to something!
I agree, it's often said Russians don't understand democracy, at the moment they appear to be proving that. Hopefully this morning's news about the killing of a prominent government opposition leader may wake them up to the danger of Putin's behaviour.
-
Russia have been rumbling on for years. On my last flight over that country,the passenger plane I was travelling in,was escorted either side of the craft,by two fighter jets because of being in their air-space.It was,and felt rather intimidating as the pilot had to remain silent for the 3 odd hours it took to fly over the country.He wasn't allowed to make contact of any sort to anyone as we headed towards Orly airport.
Gorbachov was the best leader they had.He was more " human ".
-
Russia have been rumbling on for years. On my last flight over that country,the passenger plane I was travelling in,was escorted either side of the craft,by two fighter jets because of being in their air-space.It was,and felt rather intimidating as the pilot had to remain silent for the 3 odd hours it took to fly over the country.He wasn't allowed to make contact of any sort to anyone as we headed towards Orly airport.
Gorbachov was the best leader they had.He was more " human ".
Putin is ex KGB as Gorbachov is but they seem very different, it's my guess Putin ticks quite a few boxes on the Bob Hare checklist.
-
Putin is ex KGB as Gorbachov is but they seem very different, it's my guess Putin ticks quite a few boxes on the Bob Hare checklist.
I've always though the guy an unknown quantity.Mad as a hatter,eyes close together,just a power crazy idiot like " fat chops " in China.
-
it cant be established that putin did ok hes the most likely suspect be someone else could of done it
-
it cant be established that putin did ok hes the most likely suspect be someone else could of done it
I agree nugs, we don't know, it seems Russia is becoming a lawless country anyway. Interesting they are trying to blame the killing on someone from his own side but must say it sounds pretty fishy to me. Putin appears to wield massive power, he really seems to be a dictator in all but name, I'm afraid.
-
i think it could be somone from his own side i dont see what putin would have to gain i mean he knows that fingers are going to point at him.
-
i think it could be somone from his own side i dont see what putin would have to gain i mean he knows that fingers are going to point at him.
I don't think he cares.
-
i think it could be somone from his own side i dont see what putin would have to gain i mean he knows that fingers are going to point at him.
It could be anyone that's true but Putin isn't a guy I'd want as an enemy. :'(
-
i dont think hes nearly as bad as hes made out to be the west paints ebveryone it falls out with as the next hitler.
-
What are Russian military planes doing in our territories? They send them her unannounced, and twice there have been near-collisions with Dansh passenger planes. WTF are they doing here? I have heard they send them to England too.
I think Putin is stark raving mad and he IS up to something. We´ll see.
BTW, what´s with his discrimination of gay people? He is nuts.
-
What are Russian military planes doing in our territories? They send them her unannounced, and twice there have been near-collisions with Dansh passenger planes. WTF are they doing here? I have heard they send them to England too.
I think Putin is stark raving mad and he IS up to something. We´ll see.
BTW, what´s with his discrimination of gay people? He is nuts.
Probably because he is not gay. He's probably quite miserable really? ;D
-
i dont think hes nearly as bad as hes made out to be the west paints ebveryone it falls out with as the next hitler.
Billions of pounds worth of arms have been supplied to these dictatorship countries,including Russia,which have been supplied by-----------------guess who ? The UK.
I don't hear Cameron making much noise over this latest shooting,or the poisoning of Litvinenko ( which happened in this country )
-
Mr Gee maybe he is gay but in denial. :)
-
Probably because he is not gay. He's probably quite miserable really? ;D
I think he could be gay himself, but won´t admit it.
(http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/enhanced/webdr03/2013/7/24/10/enhanced-buzz-15938-1374675317-19.jpg)
(http://www.newyorker.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/putin-boro-sq.jpg)
-
Nah! All the gay people I have met have been quite nice.
-
Nah! All the gay people I have met have been quite nice.
There are always exceptions. ;)
-
Narcissist. He's had a face-lift,hasn't he ? For his fancy piece who's a model or beauty queen.
-
i dont think hes nearly as bad as hes made out to be the west paints ebveryone it falls out with as the next hitler.
Some people probably said the same of Hitler. He was said to have been kind to his mother and he loved his dog.
-
I think he could be gay himself, but won´t admit it.
(http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/enhanced/webdr03/2013/7/24/10/enhanced-buzz-15938-1374675317-19.jpg)
(http://www.newyorker.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/putin-boro-sq.jpg)
Speaks for itself really, highly developed narcissistic at the least?
The people in Ukraine are losing everything they own, they're homes and possessions and he is allowing it to happen. Don't believe he hasn't got the power to stop it if he wanted to. :(
-
Billions of pounds worth of arms have been supplied to these dictatorship countries,including Russia,which have been supplied by-----------------guess who ? The UK.
I don't hear Cameron making much noise over this latest shooting,or the poisoning of Litvinenko ( which happened in this country )
Russia manufactures its own weapons.
Litvinenko's death is still much of a mystery
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Litvinenko_assassination_theories (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Litvinenko_assassination_theories)
-
Narcissist. He's had a face-lift,hasn't he ? For his fancy piece who's a model or beauty queen.
He has had several plastic surgeries.
He´s a creep who has his opponents killed, I have no doubt he is behind it.
-
He has had several plastic surgeries.
He´s a creep who has his opponents killed, I have no doubt he is behind it.
Of course he's behind it. His spies are all over the place." Russias enemies in Britain ".
-
He has had several plastic surgeries.
He´s a creep who has his opponents killed, I have no doubt he is behind it.
I don't believe so. Its part of the Russian culture and mentality it is very different from ours.
In the Russia they like their leader to appear strong and masculine also the Russian people criticise the government from the bottom up as opposed to use we criticize the government from the top down.
In Russia they blame the mayors and the local MPs not Putin. In the country we tend to blame Cameron for everything and no one else.
Mind you he dose not always act the tough guy
(http://www.guns.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/putin_piano1.jpg)
(http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/putins-puppy-name-contest.n.jpg)
(http://old.daps.tv/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/21.jpg)
-
I don't believe so. Its part of the Russian culture and mentality it is very different from ours.
In the Russia they like their leader to appear strong and masculine also the Russian people criticise the government from the bottom up as opposed to use we criticize the government from the top down.
In Russia they blame the mayors and the local MPs not Putin. In the country we tend to blame Cameron for everything and no one else.
Mind you he dose not always act the tough guy
(http://www.guns.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/putin_piano1.jpg)
(http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/putins-puppy-name-contest.n.jpg)
(http://old.daps.tv/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/21.jpg)
Not sure which part of my post you disagree with - the plastic surgeries or the killing off opponents?
-
Some people probably said the same of Hitler. He was said to have been kind to his mother and he loved his dog.
the curent government in the ukriane has members that actually do like hitler.
-
Actually we as the public do not know the half of what has gone on in the Ukraine and we have let them down badly .We signed a treaty to protect them in return for them giving up nuclear weapons and yet we still don't hear what has happened and how many innocent people have died or lost their homes or their businesses. I know because my friend is from the Ukraine and her father has lost everything .
-
the curent government in the ukriane has members that actually do like hitler.
They wouldn't,if they had a taste of the West where anything goes.They'd soon change their minds.
-
Actually we as the public do not know the half of what has gone on in the Ukraine and we have let them down badly .We signed a treaty to protect them in return for them giving up nuclear weapons and yet we still don't hear what has happened and how many innocent people have died or lost their homes or their businesses. I know because my friend is from the Ukraine and her father has lost everything .
Another place of human tragedy and suffering, think the world is very unstable t the moment.
-
Another place of human tragedy and suffering, think the world is very unstable t the moment.
All this killing going on around the world is deeply saddening.
-
All this killing going on around the world is deeply saddening.
It is Mr Gee, I'm so thankful I was lucky enough to be born in this country.
-
i dont think hes nearly as bad as hes made out to be the west paints ebveryone it falls out with as the next hitler.
I don't think he's as bad as he's made out to be - I think he's WORSE!
-
What are Russian military planes doing in our territories? They send them her unannounced, and twice there have been near-collisions with Dansh passenger planes. WTF are they doing here? I have heard they send them to England too.
I think Putin is stark raving mad and he IS up to something. We´ll see.
BTW, what´s with his discrimination of gay people? He is nuts.
I fully agree Alias, he has sent planes here too, the last time was just last week. I think he's up to something also. He is a power crazy nut-case with little man syndrome!!
-
I fully agree Alias, he has sent planes here too, the last time was just last week. I think he's up to something also. He is a power crazy nut-case with little man syndrome!!
That's eyes at boob level to the uninitiated ;)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
I fully agree Alias, he has sent planes here too, the last time was just last week. I think he's up to something also. He is a power crazy nut-case with little man syndrome!!
Little man syndrome, spot on!
-
The aggressors in the Ukraine affair are clearly the western powers led as usual by the US and UK. Has everyone already forgotten the lies about WMD told by our leaders, and repeated uncritically by our supposedly free media, which took us to war in Iraq. The devastation caused and still being caused by those Western lies and propaganda should have woken everyone to the fact that we are the Nazis now.
Which wars of aggression have Russia started in the last 30 years?
Which Russian leaders have lied to the UN Security Council misrepresenting intelligence and telling outright lies in order to gain Security Council approval for their wars of aggression.
Surely the facts speak for themselves now and as Dubya himself famously mangled, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me again, shame on me".
It is surely evident to all by now that the aggressors are us. The list of our "humanitarian interventions", which inexplicably always leave thousands dead and countries in states of anarchy, is now too vast to believe otherwise.
-
Which wars of aggression have Russia started in the last 30 years?
Soviet occupation of Afghanistan
First Chechen war
Transnistria War
East Prigorodny Conflict
Second Chechen war
Tajikistan war
Invasion of Georgia
-
Soviet occupation of Afghanistan
First Chechen war
Transnistria War
East Prigorodny Conflict
Second Chechen war
Tajikistan war
Invasion of Georgia
To compare the Chechen conflicts with the wars of aggression launched by the west is ignoring the scope and scale of the wests invasions of sovereign territory. Russia involving itself in a civil war in a former republic is not really the same as our interventions.
In the second Chechen war the Russians were fighting Islamist separatists, the sort that our governments arm and train to destabilise regimes that refuse to do our bidding.
The conflicts in Georgia, Tajikistan, Transnistria and East Prigorodny were all civil wars/ inter ethnic conflicts in former soviet republics in the turmoil of the break up of the Soviet Union.
All of these conflicts were on Russia's doorstep, were previously under Russian/Soviet influence and were inhabited by many ethnic Russians. They are in no way comparable to US/UK led invasions of Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan nor the US invasions of Grenada and Panama. The funding and arming of "rebels" to overthrow democratically elected governments in Chile, where thousands were rounded up by the West's favourite military dictator (General Pinochet) in Santiago Stadium and shot. All of those conflicts merely scratch the surface of US/UK interventions.
I must also have missed the Russians illegal rendition programme and secret prisons out of the reach of any legal jurisdiction(Guantanamo) where the evil Russians hold prisoners without even having to tell them what the charges or accusations against them actually are and routinely torture prisoners.
Where also would all the overseas Russian military bases be hidden. The US have over 250,000 military personnel deployed worldwide.
The Soviet occupation of Afghanistan was by any fair measure somewhat more enlightened than what went on afterwards. During the Soviet occupation liberal attitudes prevailed and women went to university, were not forced to be veiled nor treated as chattel as they are in today's Afghanistan.
For those who don't remember the Soviet occupation ended in 1989. Soviet forces fought alongside Afghan troops against US funded rebels. The US funded rebels or the "brave mujahideen" as they were invariably referred to on our nightly "Propaganda at 10" included such upstanding guys as Osama Bin Laden.
So we funded these Islamist rebels to overthrow the Afghan Government. What could possibly go wrong? It's not as if any Islamist rebels hurt anyone is it, they're such nice guys. Except we all know what went disastrously, cataclysmically wrong and we still fund Islamist rebels in Syria.
It is surely apparent to anyone paying real attention to world events over the years that our own Governments are the world's biggest warmongers, the numbers speak for themselves unfortunately. The ridiculous portrayal of events in Ukraine by our government cheerled as always by a media who couldn't see the WMD lies for what they were, or so we are led to believe, are a case in point. The reporting is bordering on hysterical and cares nothing for accuracy. The only remit, or so it seems is the "daily two minute hate" of Putin.
To compare Russian aggression with US aggression and to then conclude that Russians are more aggressive on the world stage is to ignore every single piece of evidence.
-
Soviet occupation of Afghanistan
First Chechen war
Transnistria War
East Prigorodny Conflict
Second Chechen war
Tajikistan war
Invasion of Georgia
And the recent invasion of the Ukraine - Russia are trying to prove some kind of point but I think they have an 'end game' in mind. Europe needs to keep a close eye on this guy!
-
The aggressors in the Ukraine affair are clearly the western powers led as usual by the US and UK. Has everyone already forgotten the lies about WMD told by our leaders, and repeated uncritically by our supposedly free media, which took us to war in Iraq. The devastation caused and still being caused by those Western lies and propaganda should have woken everyone to the fact that we are the Nazis now.
Which wars of aggression have Russia started in the last 30 years?
Which Russian leaders have lied to the UN Security Council misrepresenting intelligence and telling outright lies in order to gain Security Council approval for their wars of aggression.
Surely the facts speak for themselves now and as Dubya himself famously mangled, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me again, shame on me".
It is surely evident to all by now that the aggressors are us. The list of our "humanitarian interventions", which inexplicably always leave thousands dead and countries in states of anarchy, is now too vast to believe otherwise.
I agree the US and to an extent the UK are far from innocent and have no doubt caused and are still causing mayhem in the Middle East just as they did in South America back in the 70s and 80s but I cannot see how that turns ex KGB Putin into a saint, he has his own axes to grind and I don't doubt he's grinding away.
-
The aggressors in the Ukraine affair are clearly the western powers led as usual by the US and UK. Has everyone already forgotten the lies about WMD told by our leaders, and repeated uncritically by our supposedly free media, which took us to war in Iraq. The devastation caused and still being caused by those Western lies and propaganda should have woken everyone to the fact that we are the Nazis now.
Which wars of aggression have Russia started in the last 30 years?
Which Russian leaders have lied to the UN Security Council misrepresenting intelligence and telling outright lies in order to gain Security Council approval for their wars of aggression.
Surely the facts speak for themselves now and as Dubya himself famously mangled, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me again, shame on me".
It is surely evident to all by now that the aggressors are us. The list of our "humanitarian interventions", which inexplicably always leave thousands dead and countries in states of anarchy, is now too vast to believe otherwise.
Hence why we're not doing much shouting.
-
Im going to upset the apple cart and admit that I actually like Putin and think he is brilliant. He has done so much for his country and his people. Are you sure you are not all being led by what is written in the MSM? It seems to me,that Putin is his own man. He can see what is going on in the west and clearly doesn't want to be part of the so called 'New World Order'. He is intelligent enough to know that the wars that the US and ourselves have started have nothing to do with WMD and everything to do with money and the control of oil. Indeed,he has told President Obama "tell your citizens that 9/11 was a was a false flag,or I will.I have the evidence to prove it". Imo warmonger Bush was far more dangerous than Putin.
-
Hello tyler I agree with you but thought it safer to keep my thoughts to myself but hey ho safety in numbers ;D :-*
-
Hello tyler I agree with you but thought it safer to keep my thoughts to myself but hey ho safety in numbers ;D :-*
Gosh Susan,I didnt expect anyone to agree with me - thank you! I dont care what people think of my opinion,all I know is that I am entitled to one and so I voiced it :P
-
what Putin does in his own country is up to him and his people.
Here is one fact.From a witness .
Murderers and rapists are given a choice in Russia . Jail or fight in Ukraine.
When the ukranians got the upper hand at one point the soldiers tried to flee back to Russia and were shot by the Russians on the border.
-
To compare the Chechen conflicts with the wars of aggression launched by the west is ignoring the scope and scale of the wests invasions of sovereign territory. Russia involving itself in a civil war in a former republic is not really the same as our interventions.
In the second Chechen war the Russians were fighting Islamist separatists, the sort that our governments arm and train to destabilise regimes that refuse to do our bidding.
The conflicts in Georgia, Tajikistan, Transnistria and East Prigorodny were all civil wars/ inter ethnic conflicts in former soviet republics in the turmoil of the break up of the Soviet Union.
All of these conflicts were on Russia's doorstep, were previously under Russian/Soviet influence and were inhabited by many ethnic Russians. They are in no way comparable to US/UK led invasions of Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan nor the US invasions of Grenada and Panama. The funding and arming of "rebels" to overthrow democratically elected governments in Chile, where thousands were rounded up by the West's favourite military dictator (General Pinochet) in Santiago Stadium and shot. All of those conflicts merely scratch the surface of US/UK interventions.
I must also have missed the Russians illegal rendition programme and secret prisons out of the reach of any legal jurisdiction(Guantanamo) where the evil Russians hold prisoners without even having to tell them what the charges or accusations against them actually are and routinely torture prisoners.
Where also would all the overseas Russian military bases be hidden. The US have over 250,000 military personnel deployed worldwide.
The Soviet occupation of Afghanistan was by any fair measure somewhat more enlightened than what went on afterwards. During the Soviet occupation liberal attitudes prevailed and women went to university, were not forced to be veiled nor treated as chattel as they are in today's Afghanistan.
For those who don't remember the Soviet occupation ended in 1989. Soviet forces fought alongside Afghan troops against US funded rebels. The US funded rebels or the "brave mujahideen" as they were invariably referred to on our nightly "Propaganda at 10" included such upstanding guys as Osama Bin Laden.
So we funded these Islamist rebels to overthrow the Afghan Government. What could possibly go wrong? It's not as if any Islamist rebels hurt anyone is it, they're such nice guys. Except we all know what went disastrously, cataclysmically wrong and we still fund Islamist rebels in Syria.
It is surely apparent to anyone paying real attention to world events over the years that our own Governments are the world's biggest warmongers, the numbers speak for themselves unfortunately. The ridiculous portrayal of events in Ukraine by our government cheerled as always by a media who couldn't see the WMD lies for what they were, or so we are led to believe, are a case in point. The reporting is bordering on hysterical and cares nothing for accuracy. The only remit, or so it seems is the "daily two minute hate" of Putin.
To compare Russian aggression with US aggression and to then conclude that Russians are more aggressive on the world stage is to ignore every single piece of evidence.
Excellent post Gringo. I agree entirely. If the USA and its allies had not spent billions in arming and supporting so called "muhajadin freedom fighters" in their efforts to destroy the democratic and progressive government of Afganistan (supported by the Soviet Union at the invitation of that government) we would not be now faced with the same "freedom fighters" attacking us.
-
He can see what is going on in the west and clearly doesn't want to be part of the so called 'New World Order'. He is intelligent enough to know that the wars that the US and ourselves have started have nothing to do with WMD and everything to do with money and the control of oil. ". Imo warmonger Bush was far more dangerous than Putin.
I agree.
-
Excellent post Gringo. I agree entirely. If the USA and its allies had not spent billions in arming and supporting so called "muhajadin freedom fighters" in their efforts to destroy the democratic and progressive government of Afganistan (supported by the Soviet Union at the invitation of that government) we would not be now faced with the same "freedom fighters" attacking us.
Im going to upset the apple cart and admit that I actually like Putin and think he is brilliant. He has done so much for his country and his people. Are you sure you are not all being led by what is written in the MSM? It seems to me,that Putin is his own man. He can see what is going on in the west and clearly doesn't want to be part of the so called 'New World Order'. He is intelligent enough to know that the wars that the US and ourselves have started have nothing to do with WMD and everything to do with money and the control of oil. Indeed,he has told President Obama "tell your citizens that 9/11 was a was a false flag,or I will.I have the evidence to prove it". Imo warmonger Bush was far more dangerous than Putin.
Unfortunately Neil our media are so craven and complicit that the questions that should be asked by a truly free press are conspicuous by their absence.
What passes as reporting world events in our media is nothing more than a Government press release and bears little or no resemblance to actual events. Memories are as long as the news cycle because surely someone in a free press should be wondering whatever became of those jolly mujahideen that we helped overthrow and form a government in Afghanistan.
Reports from Ukraine are so lacking in balance that they come across as nothing more than the propaganda that they are. The accusations of a Russian invasion are laughable. Not one piece of evidence, pictures, satellite images are shown of any russian troops or equipment crossing into Ukraine. The Ukrainian Army plus various ragtag militia are shelling their own citizens who want nothing to do with the coup installed Kiev government.
The eastern regions are largely ethnic Russian and if they want closer ties with Russia then why should anyone say otherwise. It is a civil war in Ukraine, one in which Ukrainian government conscripted boys are shelling their own citizens. Russia hasn't invaded and if they had then I am sure that there would be lots of evidence of this Russian invasion. Our government has to pretend that Russia is being aggressive in order to have one of our "humanitarian interventions" and people are seriously still falling for it.
If the Russians were really to invade Ukraine they would be in Kiev inside 48 hours. Despite the ridiculous provocations of the US/EU Russia have in fact been the only grown ups on the world stage and have resisted responding militarily, instead choosing diplomacy, and in the process have made our supposed statesmen look like warmongering fools.
Sergey Lavrov makes Hague and Kerry look out of their depth. But Hague and Kerry are just the paid stooges of vested interests rather than servants of the publics interest, something made apparent by their appetite for war.
Tyler, I think there are many who would agree with you about Putin. Cameron, Obama, Bush, Blair et al are not a patch on Putin. Our leaders look like the weak placemen that they are in comparison. Putin serves Russia's interests and our leaders serve the interests of the corporations, bankers and rich elite.
-
Unfortunately Neil our media are so craven and complicit that the questions that should be asked by a truly free press are conspicuous by their absence.
What passes as reporting world events in our media is nothing more than a Government press release and bears little or no resemblance to actual events. Memories are as long as the news cycle because surely someone in a free press should be wondering whatever became of those jolly mujahideen that we helped overthrow and form a government in Afghanistan.
Reports from Ukraine are so lacking in balance that they come across as nothing more than the propaganda that they are. The accusations of a Russian invasion are laughable. Not one piece of evidence, pictures, satellite images are shown of any russian troops or equipment crossing into Ukraine. The Ukrainian Army plus various ragtag militia are shelling their own citizens who want nothing to do with the coup installed Kiev government.
The eastern regions are largely ethnic Russian and if they want closer ties with Russia then why should anyone say otherwise. It is a civil war in Ukraine, one in which Ukrainian government conscripted boys are shelling their own citizens. Russia hasn't invaded and if they had then I am sure that there would be lots of evidence of this Russian invasion. Our government has to pretend that Russia is being aggressive in order to have one of our "humanitarian interventions" and people are seriously still falling for it.
If the Russians were really to invade Ukraine they would be in Kiev inside 48 hours. Despite the ridiculous provocations of the US/EU Russia have in fact been the only grown ups on the world stage and have resisted responding militarily, instead choosing diplomacy, and in the process have made our supposed statesmen look like warmongering fools.
Sergey Lavrov makes Hague and Kerry look out of their depth. But Hague and Kerry are just the paid stooges of vested interests rather than servants of the publics interest, something made apparent by their appetite for war.
Tyler, I think there are many who would agree with you about Putin. Cameron, Obama, Bush, Blair et al are not a patch on Putin. Our leaders look like the weak placemen that they are in comparison. Putin serves Russia's interests and our leaders serve the interests of the corporations, bankers and rich elite.
Another excellent post gringo.
-
Gosh Susan,I didnt expect anyone to agree with me - thank you! I dont care what people think of my opinion,all I know is that I am entitled to one and so I voiced it :P
Good for you tyler.I admire you for that.
-
Im going to upset the apple cart and admit that I actually like Putin and think he is brilliant. He has done so much for his country and his people. Are you sure you are not all being led by what is written in the MSM? It seems to me,that Putin is his own man. He can see what is going on in the west and clearly doesn't want to be part of the so called 'New World Order'. He is intelligent enough to know that the wars that the US and ourselves have started have nothing to do with WMD and everything to do with money and the control of oil. Indeed,he has told President Obama "tell your citizens that 9/11 was a was a false flag,or I will.I have the evidence to prove it". Imo warmonger Bush was far more dangerous than Putin.
I'm sure Vladimir is no angel. However this view does strike a chord with me. Always love reading your posts Tyler.
-
With the Russian invasion of the Ukraine and their reluctance to stick to any ceasefire. They have increased their spending on defence - and today
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/27/russia-boris-nemtsov-shot_n_6772212.html?utm_hp_ref=uk&ir=UK&ncid=webmail1
Putin reminds me of Hitler - he needs stopping because he is certainly up to something!
I've thought along these lines too. The way that the news is portrayed over here, I feel a person is naturally drawn towards this kind of view. But I get the feeling that the way news is probably portrayed in other places, a person could be drawn to an opposing view that seems equally valid.
Not sure if this is the best example to back up my theory but Nigel Farage recently gave a speech at a conservative event in the US, which also featured Sarah Palin.
Criticising Mr Obama's Middle East policy as being insufficiently forceful had been a reliable applause line at the conference throughout the day, so there was a certain amount of unease in those gathered when Mr Farage came at the topic from a different angle.
"The time has come to assess whether an interventionist foreign policy has been successful," he said. "We've actually inflamed and stoked the fire of militant Islam by doing what we've done."
His words were a sharp contrast to Ms Palin's remarks just 40 minutes earlier.
"Aside from God almighty, what is the only force strong enough to keep this barbaric tide at bay?" she asked. "It's the red, white and blue; it's the United States military."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-31629863
I have no doubt that US opinion will be divided regarding American foreign policy but I feel a sense of unease that many American people probably take the view that they are some kind of 'world police'. The point I'm trying to make is that the US & UK news corporations will spin news and the Russians are probably doing similar. It's hard to know what is fact and what is distorted or false flag.
-
I've thought along these lines too. The way that the news is portrayed over here, I feel a person is naturally drawn towards this kind of view. But I get the feeling that the way news is probably portrayed in other places, a person could be drawn to an opposing view that seems equally valid.
Not sure if this is the best example to back up my theory but Nigel Farage recently gave a speech at a conservative event in the US, which also featured Sarah Palin.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-31629863
I have no doubt that US opinion will be divided regarding American foreign policy but I feel a sense of unease that many American people probably take the view that they are some kind of 'world police'. The point I'm trying to make is that the US & UK news corporations will spin news and the Russians are probably doing similar. It's hard to know what is fact and what is distorted or false flag.
Hi Roch,
Of course I know we are often told what the powers that be want us to know, but as you allude to; it is a feature of all politics and a tactic used world wide. Only time will tell if this little DICKtator is up to something but people who question his morality and his politics - end up dead.
-
Hi Roch,
Of course I know we are often told what the powers that be want us to know, but as you allude to; it is a feature of all politics and a tactic used world wide. Only time will tell if this little DICKtator is up to something but people who question his morality and his politics - end up dead.
One way to look at it is this. If Putin does away with his own political opponents - he looks bad. I suppose it could be argued that he reduces internal opposition to himself due to the fear factor. But this would probably be in direct proportion to external opposition, which would probably rise?
So, if you wanted to stoke up external opposition to Putin - you could assasinate one of his political opponents?
There is something strange going on, with these apparent Russian planes buzzing our airspace etc.
-
One way to look at it is this. If Putin does away with his own political opponents - he looks bad. I suppose it could be argued that he reduces internal opposition to himself due to the fear factor. But this would probably be in direct proportion to external opposition, which would probably rise?
So, if you wanted to stoke up external opposition to Putin - you could assasinate one of his political opponents?
There is something strange going on, with these apparent Russian planes buzzing our airspace etc.
It is unlikely that Putin had anything to do with the killing of Nemtsov. He has absolutely nothing to gain and everything to lose from such an act. Putin enjoys massive popularity in Russia and there is no effective opposition to him so why the need to kill his opponents.
The Russian planes buzzing our airspace is not even worth reporting. NATO forces planes constantly fly near to Russian airspace. It is a game they all indulge in to test each others readiness and the fact that this is being reported as Russian aggression shows just how desperate the Western powers are to stoke the public into war readiness.
In effect what is being reported is that Russian planes flew in international airspace and were near to British airspace. So what!! US/UK planes tend to drop an awful lot of bombs when they actually violate other countries airspace.
The facts really do speak for themselves. Our governments have invaded, bombed and overthrown governments the world over whilst allying themselves with the most despotic, human rights abusing, terrorist sponsoring regimes on the planet. It is preposterous beyond belief that we can do business and ally ourselves with Saudi Arabia (Saudi Arabia!!) whilst claiming to defend human rights and promote democracy. We sell "crowd control equipment" to the Bahrain regime in order to brutally put down the demonstrations calling for more democracy there, whilst claiming to support democracy campaigners in other countries. It seems we have a horse in every race no matter where the race is but our choice seems to depend more on shared interests than ethics or humanitarianism.
But still some believe the lies and justifications given by our bought and paid for politicians for every "humanitarian intervention". That anyone can compare alleged "Russian aggression" unfavourably with our own governments military aggression shows a gullibility that is staggering.
Our leaders are warmongering psychopaths and the list of our wars and interventions is testament to that unfortunate truth. The ongoing crime scene of the Middle East is a shocking indictment of our leaders ravenous appetite for war based on economic interests and built on demonstrable lies. Putin didn't start any of those did he. In fact it was Putin who prevented the bombing of Syria at the UN, in yet another conflict being stoked by US/UK, who are currently arming and funding the Islamist terrorists.
Until UK and US citizens wake up in sufficient numbers and oust the war mongerers and demand a foreign policy that is both ethical and in line with all of our interests, not the interests of a few criminals, then we should be grateful that Putin and Russia are acting as a bulwark against the war criminals that are our current leaders.
-
One way to look at it is this. If Putin does away with his own political opponents - he looks bad. I suppose it could be argued that he reduces internal opposition to himself due to the fear factor. But this would probably be in direct proportion to external opposition, which would probably rise?
So, if you wanted to stoke up external opposition to Putin - you could assasinate one of his political opponents?
There is something strange going on, with these apparent Russian planes buzzing our airspace etc.
He denies it and people believe him (I don't), yes, there are planes buzzing around here and Alias confirms it has happened in Denmark too. I think he's seeing how far he can go and is basically sticking up two fingers to anyone who would question him. I don't trust him (although I don't trust Cameron either!).
-
Perhaps I just have trust issues where politicians are concerned? ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Perhaps I just have trust issues where politicians are concerned? ;D ;D ;D ;D
I have too. >:(
-
He denies it and people believe him (I don't), yes, there are planes buzzing around here and Alias confirms it has happened in Denmark too. I think he's seeing how far he can go and is basically sticking up two fingers to anyone who would question him. I don't trust him (although I don't trust Cameron either!).
The whole Russian planes buzzing our airspace is a concoction by NATO countries to ready the public for war. NATO and Russian planes routinely buzz each others airspace and it is not even deemed worthy of reporting. There is nothing unusual in these actions. What is unusual is that suddenly these are being sold as Russian aggression.
Putin and Russia have so far resisted the bait in Ukraine and in their desperation to paint Putin as a dangerous megalomaniac our very own dangerous megalomaniacs are having to resort to desperate means, hence the sudden spike in reporting these non events.
The whole world and it's dog knows that it is NATO planes that are the clear threat to world peace not Russian planes. This is self evident from observation over the 30 years or more. Take a look at our "statesmen" and listen to them. Take a look at the world and see which countries have the most foreign bases and mass troop presences in other countries and it isn't Russia.
We were lied to in order to justify the war crime of Iraq.
We were lied to in order to justify the bombing of Libya.
In fact every war that we have involved ourselves in over the last 30 years or more has been based on half truths and outright lies. Why would anyone believe the same people when they call for yet another war using the same lies?
It is an affront to our intelligence that our politicians have the temerity to attempt to convince us that Russian planes flying in international airspace, but a bit near to national airspace, is aggression which needs dealing with whilst the wars that we are involved in and started are peacekeeping humanitarian missions; albeit always in countries that have lots of exploitable natural resources, although this fact is no doubt coincidental.
The US/UK are a clear threat to world order and the launching of wars of aggression by these state terrorists has to be stopped. It appears that enough of the populace of these countries are still willing to buy into the narratives being sold to them by these self serving lickspittle quislings. Unfortunately until enough people in the US/UK wake up and oust the war mongerers then nothing will change and it is sad that the best hope for restraining our governments aggressive intentions is a strong Russia.
-
Another brilliantly explained post,Gringo.
I was mortified when we went to Iraq as there was clearly no need to interfere into how Saddam Hussein was running his country.
Also Afghanistan,which I thought was utter madness to try and win a war with a bunch of savages.
Our interference in such countries has got to be blamed on our half-cocked Intelligence at GCHQ.
-
The whole Russian planes buzzing our airspace is a concoction by NATO countries to ready the public for war. NATO and Russian planes routinely buzz each others airspace and it is not even deemed worthy of reporting. There is nothing unusual in these actions. What is unusual is that suddenly these are being sold as Russian aggression.
Putin and Russia have so far resisted the bait in Ukraine and in their desperation to paint Putin as a dangerous megalomaniac our very own dangerous megalomaniacs are having to resort to desperate means, hence the sudden spike in reporting these non events.
The whole world and it's dog knows that it is NATO planes that are the clear threat to world peace not Russian planes. This is self evident from observation over the 30 years or more. Take a look at our "statesmen" and listen to them. Take a look at the world and see which countries have the most foreign bases and mass troop presences in other countries and it isn't Russia.
We were lied to in order to justify the war crime of Iraq.
We were lied to in order to justify the bombing of Libya.
In fact every war that we have involved ourselves in over the last 30 years or more has been based on half truths and outright lies. Why would anyone believe the same people when they call for yet another war using the same lies?
It is an affront to our intelligence that our politicians have the temerity to attempt to convince us that Russian planes flying in international airspace, but a bit near to national airspace, is aggression which needs dealing with whilst the wars that we are involved in and started are peacekeeping humanitarian missions; albeit always in countries that have lots of exploitable natural resources, although this fact is no doubt coincidental.
The US/UK are a clear threat to world order and the launching of wars of aggression by these state terrorists has to be stopped. It appears that enough of the populace of these countries are still willing to buy into the narratives being sold to them by these self serving lickspittle quislings. Unfortunately until enough people in the US/UK wake up and oust the war mongerers then nothing will change and it is sad that the best hope for restraining our governments aggressive intentions is a strong Russia.
Another excellent post gringo.
-
So gringo, do you think the two near-collisions with Danish passenger planes are made up?
-
Im going to upset the apple cart and admit that I actually like Putin and think he is brilliant. He has done so much for his country and his people. Are you sure you are not all being led by what is written in the MSM? It seems to me,that Putin is his own man. He can see what is going on in the west and clearly doesn't want to be part of the so called 'New World Order'. He is intelligent enough to know that the wars that the US and ourselves have started have nothing to do with WMD and everything to do with money and the control of oil. Indeed,he has told President Obama "tell your citizens that 9/11 was a was a false flag,or I will.I have the evidence to prove it". Imo warmonger Bush was far more dangerous than Putin.
They said the same about Hitler and we know how that ended!
-
They said the same about Hitler and we know how that ended!
Putin is not Hitler, not even close.
-
all thses comparisons to hitler are way over the top putin hasn't gassed 6 million people.
-
all thses comparisons to hitler are way over the top putin hasn't gassed 6 million people.
Very true nugnug.
-
So gringo, do you think the two near-collisions with Danish passenger planes are made up?
Not made up but exaggerated for effect, Alias. The buzzing of each others airspace and territorial waters is all tit for tat and has always happened.
Nato planes and ships carry out manoeuvres near to Russian airspace and waters and the Russians do likewise. It has always gone on and the reporting of it, as if it is unusual, shows the agendas of those doing the reporting.
Describing the encounters as near collisions is just hyperbole, again to exaggerate the "threat" which in truth is non existent.
The evidence is all around for anyone to see Alias and is best measured by our military presence in countries throughout the world compared to Russian troops.
-
all thses comparisons to hitler are way over the top putin hasn't gassed 6 million people.
Neither had Hitler until he actually did.
-
Putin is not Hitler, not even close.
I believe he has the potential to be just as bad.
-
With the Russian invasion of the Ukraine and their reluctance to stick to any ceasefire. They have increased their spending on defence - and today
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/27/russia-boris-nemtsov-shot_n_6772212.html?utm_hp_ref=uk&ir=UK&ncid=webmail1
Putin reminds me of Hitler - he needs stopping because he is certainly up to something!
First of all, Caroline there simply is no invasion of Ukraine by Russia. There is a civil war where the Ukrainian Army are shelling their own citizens and the civilians are fighting against government forces. Quite a number of those civilians are ethnic Russian but apart from bluster and accusations there is zero evidence of a Russian invasion of Ukraine. In these days of satellite imagery and everyone having cameras it seems somewhat incongruous that there is not a single picture of Russian troops crossing into Ukraine.
Secondly Russia cannot stick to a ceasefire agreement as they are not firing in the first place unless someone can find these phantom Russian troops. There are protocols in the agreement regarding the permanent monitoring of the Russian/Ukraine border but nothing about Russians sticking to any ceasefire. Why do you think that is?
The increase in Russian defence spending that you refer to probably requires some context so I will happily oblige.
US defence spending in 2012 and 2013 was 640 and 680 billion dollars respectively.
Russian defence spending 2012 and 2013 was 90 and 87 billion dollars respectively.
Using those figures as a guide who do you think has designs on world conquest?
It should also be noted that Russian defence spending is exactly that( defence spending) while the US budget looks more like attack spending and given both of these countries record over the years, it is reasonable to conclude that US defence spending is a euphemism for war chest.
The comparisons with Hitler would be more apt applied to our own leaders. It is they who are invading and bombing countries in a never ending cycle of wars.
-
I believe he has the potential to be just as bad.
the western backed dictatorship in the Ukraine actually love hitler.
western Ukraine collaborated with the nazis took part in the holocaust.
-
First of all, Caroline there simply is no invasion of Ukraine by Russia. There is a civil war where the Ukrainian Army are shelling their own citizens and the civilians are fighting against government forces. Quite a number of those civilians are ethnic Russian but apart from bluster and accusations there is zero evidence of a Russian invasion of Ukraine. In these days of satellite imagery and everyone having cameras it seems somewhat incongruous that there is not a single picture of Russian troops crossing into Ukraine.
Secondly Russia cannot stick to a ceasefire agreement as they are not firing in the first place unless someone can find these phantom Russian troops. There are protocols in the agreement regarding the permanent monitoring of the Russian/Ukraine border but nothing about Russians sticking to any ceasefire. Why do you think that is?
The increase in Russian defence spending that you refer to probably requires some context so I will happily oblige.
US defence spending in 2012 and 2013 was 640 and 680 billion dollars respectively.
Russian defence spending 2012 and 2013 was 90 and 87 billion dollars respectively.
Using those figures as a guide who do you think has designs on world conquest?
It should also be noted that Russian defence spending is exactly that( defence spending) while the US budget looks more like attack spending and given both of these countries record over the years, it is reasonable to conclude that US defence spending is a euphemism for war chest.
The comparisons with Hitler would be more apt applied to our own leaders. It is they who are invading and bombing countries in a never ending cycle of wars.
Well, lets just wait and see.
-
Well, lets just wait and see.
It is surely better to look at the undeniable evidence of Western aggression and draw your conclusions from facts on the ground rather than repeating the baseless rhetoric from already discredited journalists and politicians.
You based your Hitler comparison on assertions that have no basis in fact or are so out of context as to be meaningless.
What makes you so confident that Putin is the threat when the evidence of Western complicity and aggression is literally all around you. You are being taken in by propaganda when there is ample information, that is a matter of record and not disputed, which contradicts the official US/UK narrative.
-
I ain't worried. ::)
-
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCUQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.globalresearch.ca%2Fthe-u-s-has-installed-a-neo-nazi-government-in-ukraine%2F5371554&ei=m7r0VK3LDcWvU8vdgZAM&usg=AFQjCNF_ZCXpj3PHagtVp5LehzllDoD-2Q&sig2=tsiKvvTRvzOf7O8ntGbXpA&bvm=bv.87269000,d.d24&cad=rja
im more worried about this lot than putin.
-
It is surely better to look at the undeniable evidence of Western aggression and draw your conclusions from facts on the ground rather than repeating the baseless rhetoric from already discredited journalists and politicians.
You based your Hitler comparison on assertions that have no basis in fact or are so out of context as to be meaningless.
What makes you so confident that Putin is the threat when the evidence of Western complicity and aggression is literally all around you. You are being taken in by propaganda when there is ample information, that is a matter of record and not disputed, which contradicts the official US/UK narrative.
Sorry Gringo, I don't see conspiracies around every corner but nor do I believe that politicians work with the best interests of the people in mind. I think they are ALL the same and Puntin is no less corrupt than the rest. Obviously western politicians have a vested interest in making him look bad but he doesn't need their help.
-
a group of neo nazis topple a democratically elected government in the government in the Ukraine and hes the bad guy for trying to stop them.
-
Sorry Gringo, I don't see conspiracies around every corner but nor do I believe that politicians work with the best interests of the people in mind. I think they are ALL the same and Puntin is no less corrupt than the rest. Obviously western politicians have a vested interest in making him look bad but he doesn't need their help.
The facts speak for themselves, Caroline. The wars , invasions, bombing missions, illegal renditions, military bases, defence spending that dwarfs all lead to the inevitable conclusion that far from being as bad as each other, our leaders are leagues ahead of Putin and Russia in terms of evil. Are you aware of all of our foreign military adventures in comparison to Russia? How do you conclude that each is as bad as the other? Saying Putin is bad but offering no evidence whatsoever to back up the assertion merely shows the power of propaganda.
Nothing I have said in this thread is conspiracy, I have given cold hard facts and it is difficult not to conclude that our leaders are much madder and badder than Putin.The invasions, bombings etc. are not conspiracy theories; they are true and it is also not conspiracy that our military, along with the US, are spread all over the world, but especially in resource rich countries.
It is not conspiracy that the Russians are not embroiled in wars throughout the world. Calling out our leaders propaganda is not conspiracy, it is something we all should do.
-
The Molotov/Ribbentrop pact is worth a read.
-
https://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D1gOM6YKcMKI&h=uAQFsecy6
-
http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnpilger.com%2Farticles%2Fwhy-the-rise-of-fascism-is-again-the-issue&h=7AQHVKWsZ
-
First of all, Caroline there simply is no invasion of Ukraine by Russia. There is a civil war where the Ukrainian Army are shelling their own citizens and the civilians are fighting against government forces. Quite a number of those civilians are ethnic Russian but apart from bluster and accusations there is zero evidence of a Russian invasion of Ukraine. In these days of satellite imagery and everyone having cameras it seems somewhat incongruous that there is not a single picture of Russian troops crossing into Ukraine.
Secondly Russia cannot stick to a ceasefire agreement as they are not firing in the first place unless someone can find these phantom Russian troops. There are protocols in the agreement regarding the permanent monitoring of the Russian/Ukraine border but nothing about Russians sticking to any ceasefire. Why do you think that is?
The increase in Russian defence spending that you refer to probably requires some context so I will happily oblige.
US defence spending in 2012 and 2013 was 640 and 680 billion dollars respectively.
Russian defence spending 2012 and 2013 was 90 and 87 billion dollars respectively.
Using those figures as a guide who do you think has designs on world conquest?
It should also be noted that Russian defence spending is exactly that( defence spending) while the US budget looks more like attack spending and given both of these countries record over the years, it is reasonable to conclude that US defence spending is a euphemism for war chest.
The comparisons with Hitler would be more apt applied to our own leaders. It is they who are invading and bombing countries in a never ending cycle of wars.
That's just simply not true.
(http://i.ytimg.com/vi/GUe62fXalRc/0.jpg)
Like in the Crimea the Russian military entered just without official insignia so they could not be spotted officially.
Many pro-Russian fighters cross the boarder into Russia to be trained and equipped by the Russian military.
Proxy/Puppet states have already been established the Ukraine/Russia border in the region is de-facto non existent
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novorossiya_(confederation) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novorossiya_(confederation))
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donetsk_People%27s_Republic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donetsk_People%27s_Republic)
-
That's just simply not true.
(http://i.ytimg.com/vi/GUe62fXalRc/0.jpg)
Like in the Crimea the Russian military entered just without official insignia so they could not be spotted officially.
Many pro-Russian fighters cross the boarder into Russia to be trained and equipped by the Russian military.
Proxy/Puppet states have already been established the Ukraine/Russia border in the region is de-facto non existent
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novorossiya_(confederation) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novorossiya_(confederation))
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donetsk_People%27s_Republic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donetsk_People%27s_Republic)
It simply is true though David. Where is the picture from so we can actually discuss the authenticity of it? If it is from Crimea then Russian troops have always been there because there are military bases there. The truth is that our governments have offered no evidence of Russian troops entering Ukraine and you posting an unattributed picture isn't evidence either.
Where and when is this picture allegedly from? If you believe that Russia has invaded Ukraine then I've got a bridge you might be interested in. It seems odd that the evidence which eludes our own intelligence services is nonetheless available to you.
I suspect that there will be as much mileage in this invasion claim of yours that there was in your rather dismal list of alleged Russian aggression earlier in the thread. You didn't respond to the reply that I gave so am I now to assume that you accept that Russia has not launched any wars of aggression in the last thirty years or so? and that the US/UK have?
Remember also that being involved in Afghanistan at the request of the Afghan government of the time is not viewed the same as invading a country in an aggressive war.
If you don't know the difference read up on Nuremberg. International law and precedent regards a war of aggression as the ultimate war crime.
The fact that some Russians cross the border to fight in the civil war is hardly surprising and nor is it evidence of a Russian invasion. The east of Ukraine is largely ethnic Russian and there are many Russians with family in the east who are under bombardment from government forces. A civil war is raging in Ukraine between the east and west and it is clear that the eastern provinces will not accept rule from the current government in Kiev.
Crimea voted overwhelmingly to join Russia and if you understood any of the history and ethnic make up of Crimea then you would not be at all surprised by this. The coup in Kiev brought to power the sort of people that the east of the country would never accept and the country inevitably descended into turmoil.
I could give you lots of examples of UK citizens fighting in civil wars throughout history but no-one would claim that this is evidence of a UK invasion. When UK citizens fought in the International Brigades during the Spanish Civil War would that constitute an invasion by the UK? Are British jihadists in Syria evidence of a UK invasion of Syria? I could go on but I am sure you can fill the gaps in yourself.
There simply is no Russian invasion of Ukraine. The Minsk agreement acknowledges this implicitly. You are swallowing hook line and sinker the propaganda being fed to you by the same media that have been shown to be dishonest and lacking even a modicum of intellectual curiosity time and time again.
The same media that tried and convicted Christopher Jeffries and many others using innuendo and gossip are now employing the same method to convict Putin of pretty much everything bad happening around the world. Evidence is what matters not gossip. Rather than an unattributed picture can you post any evidence of the Russian invasion. Do you honestly think that the Ukrainian Army would not have been overrun within days if the Russians actually did invade? If you honestly believe that the Ukrainian Army could engage an invading Russian Army in a war of attrition rather than being brushed aside in days then you are mistaken.
The usual suspects are pushing for war yet again but this time against a nuclear superpower so there really are WMD.
We have our own problems at home with our megalomaniac politicians and unsolved murders and should probably care more about putting our own house in order rather than concerning ourselves with Putin and Russia.
Nemtsov is a fine example of this. Nemtsov had between 1 and 5% support in Russia and was barely even a fringe figure. His party has no MP's in the Duma and has not had any for 13 years. He was Yeltsin's DPM and was largely reviled in Russia for being party to the looting of Russia's natural resources during the chaotic reign of Yeltsin when a few criminals became billionaires. He has been described as "Opposition Leader" when nothing could be further from the truth. The Communist Party is by far the largest opposition in Russia to Putin's United Russia. Calling Nemtsov "Opposition Leader" is akin to calling Nick Griffin "Opposition Leader". If Nick Griffin were shot outside the House of Commons and the Russian press started blaming Cameron and talking of Griffin as a political rival you would think them bonkers and you would be right. But we are expected to believe that Putin had a political nobody murdered in full view outside the Kremlin.
-
You didn't respond to the reply that I gave so am I now to assume that you accept that Russia has not launched any wars of aggression in the last thirty years or so? and that the US/UK have?
No! I did not reply because you come up with a large amount of conspiracy nut nonsense no offence.
Russia Invaded Georgia in 2008
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_War)
I mentioned other conflicts but you distorted the information to suit your narrative.
Russia has not officially invaded or declared war on Ukraine no but its fighting a proxy by supplying and training the ethnic Russians in Ukraine that want pro Russian government.
I have no problem with what Russia is doing its in their national interests . The USA cant do and don't want anything to do with it.
-
No! I did not reply because you come up with a large amount of conspiracy nut nonsense no offence.
Russia Invaded Georgia in 2008
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_War)
I mentioned other conflicts but you distorted the information to suit your narrative.
Russia has not officially invaded or declared war on Ukraine no but its fighting a proxy by supplying and training the ethnic Russians in Ukraine that want pro Russian government.
I have no problem with what Russia is doing its in their national interests . The USA cant do and don't want anything to do with it.
You will be able to point out the "conspiracy nut nonsense" then won't you?
You will obviously be able to clarify the information I gave on the conflicts that you mentioned given my claimed distortions. You listed a number of conflicts/civil wars in former Soviet Republics which you attempted to claim were Russian aggression. If you think I distorted the narrative then point out how.
All you have done so far is list some conflicts, without context, posted an unattributed undated picture and linked to a wiki page as proof of Russian invasions/aggression. I pointed out that all the conflicts were in former Soviet Republics, which is true, involved many ethnic Russians and were local civil wars on their doorstep. Which part of that is distorted? Look at a world map David, then compare and contrast the presence of Russian/US troops in other countries. The only ones believing conspiracy nut stories are those that still believe the narrative being fed to them by proven liars.
You seem confused as to whether Russia has invaded Ukraine or not, first claiming that they had, and posting a picture of some tanks by way of proof, but then claiming that the invasion is by proxy. Your belief that the US can't and won't have anything to do with it flies in the face of all the evidence.Obama, Kerry, McCain, Biden and Victoria Nuland have had plenty to say about Ukraine and arming the Ukrainian Army. There are realms of evidence of US complicity in Ukraine and you need to read more sources if you believe that they have no interest.
No offence to you either David but your understanding of world affairs is lacking in any balance or awareness of how our own countries actions are viewed by the vast majority of the world. You could do with looking through a different lens occasionally.
Anyway,when and where is the picture of the tanks from? You claimed it proved a Russian invasion and then failed to back it up, instead just deriding anything else as conspiracy without actually pointing out any.
Do you believe that the Russian involvement in Georgia was a war of aggression?
How about the US/UK invasion of Iraq?
The answer to the last two questions incidentally is no and yes, in that order, to anyone with an unbiased understanding. If your answers are yes and no then you seriously need to learn more before you engage in debate on the matter, no offence.
-
You will be able to point out the "conspiracy nut nonsense" then won't you?
You will obviously be able to clarify the information I gave on the conflicts that you mentioned given my claimed distortions. You listed a number of conflicts/civil wars in former Soviet Republics which you attempted to claim were Russian aggression. If you think I distorted the narrative then point out how.
All you have done so far is list some conflicts, without context, posted an unattributed undated picture and linked to a wiki page as proof of Russian invasions/aggression. I pointed out that all the conflicts were in former Soviet Republics, which is true, involved many ethnic Russians and were local civil wars on their doorstep. Which part of that is distorted? Look at a world map David, then compare and contrast the presence of Russian/US troops in other countries. The only ones believing conspiracy nut stories are those that still believe the narrative being fed to them by proven liars.
You seem confused as to whether Russia has invaded Ukraine or not, first claiming that they had, and posting a picture of some tanks by way of proof, but then claiming that the invasion is by proxy. Your belief that the US can't and won't have anything to do with it flies in the face of all the evidence.Obama, Kerry, McCain, Biden and Victoria Nuland have had plenty to say about Ukraine and arming the Ukrainian Army. There are realms of evidence of US complicity in Ukraine and you need to read more sources if you believe that they have no interest.
No offence to you either David but your understanding of world affairs is lacking in any balance or awareness of how our own countries actions are viewed by the vast majority of the world. You could do with looking through a different lens occasionally.
Anyway,when and where is the picture of the tanks from? You claimed it proved a Russian invasion and then failed to back it up, instead just deriding anything else as conspiracy without actually pointing out any.
Do you believe that the Russian involvement in Georgia was a war of aggression?
How about the US/UK invasion of Iraq?
The answer to the last two questions incidentally is no and yes, in that order, to anyone with an unbiased understanding. If your answers are yes and no then you seriously need to learn more before you engage in debate on the matter, no offence.
How exactly do you define a war of aggression?
If you define it as a military invasion of a state regardless of political situations then Both Iraq 2003 and Georgia 2008 would be wars of aggression.
Russia had its reasons for invading Georgia and the US had its reasons for invading Iraq. Therefore can both be considered not wars of aggression.
I would define a war of aggression as a state invading another state for no reason other than to obtain power conquest and motivated by accumulation of land and resources. By that definition
German Invasion of Poland
USSR invasion of Finland
USSR invasion of Afganistan
Iraqi Invasion of Iran
Iraqi Invasion of Kuwait
Egypt and Syria invading Israel in six day war
USA invading Canada in 1812
to name a few
As for Russian military presence in Ukraine is proven beyond all doubt - Russia may not consider the Soil to be Ukraine so can easily deny it.
http://www.newsweek.com/nemtsovs-evidence-russian-troops-ukraine-taken-police-310997 (http://www.newsweek.com/nemtsovs-evidence-russian-troops-ukraine-taken-police-310997)
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/03/us-ukraine-russia-soldiers-idUSKBN0LZ2FV20150303 (http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/03/us-ukraine-russia-soldiers-idUSKBN0LZ2FV20150303)
Russian troops in Ukraine, Ukranian buildings are behind them its undeniable
(http://im.ft-static.com/content/images/2668d3f5-fd0a-4c1e-917d-21edd73367af.img)
Russian military in Ukrainian street - undeniable
(http://media2.intoday.in/indiatoday/images/stories//2014March/troops-650_030114093116.jpg)
Russian troops outside Ukranian police station - Undeniable
(http://stmedia.startribune.com/images/492*328/030214b11TENSIONS%204.jpg)
Russian T-90 tank in Ukrainian street - road marking street signs are Ukrainian - Undeniable
(http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/images/news/201409/n_71153_1.jpg)
Russian 'Aid' convoy ::)
(http://www.independent.co.uk/incoming/article9687149.ece/alternates/w1024/Russian-aid-convoy-1.jpg)
Russian T-90 Tank in a street in Donetsk -Undeniable
(http://static.tnn.epi.vn/Uploaded/quynhanh/2015_02_02/pro-russian_separatists_ride_on_a_tank_in_donetsk_february_1_2015_CPSS.jpg?width=840)
-
How exactly do you define a war of aggression?
If you define it as a military invasion of a state regardless of political situations then Both Iraq 2003 and Georgia 2008 would be wars of aggression.
Russia had its reasons for invading Georgia and the US had its reasons for invading Iraq. Therefore can both be considered not wars of aggression.
I would define a war of aggression as a state invading another state for no reason other than to obtain power conquest and motivated by accumulation of land and resources. By that definition
German Invasion of Poland
USSR invasion of Finland
USSR invasion of Afganistan
Iraqi Invasion of Iran
Iraqi Invasion of Kuwait
Egypt and Syria invading Israel in six day war
USA invading Canada in 1812
to name a few
As for Russian military presence in Ukraine is proven beyond all doubt - Russia may not consider the Soil to be Ukraine so can easily deny it.
http://www.newsweek.com/nemtsovs-evidence-russian-troops-ukraine-taken-police-310997 (http://www.newsweek.com/nemtsovs-evidence-russian-troops-ukraine-taken-police-310997)
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/03/us-ukraine-russia-soldiers-idUSKBN0LZ2FV20150303 (http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/03/us-ukraine-russia-soldiers-idUSKBN0LZ2FV20150303)
Russian troops in Ukraine, Ukranian buildings are behind them its undeniable
(http://im.ft-static.com/content/images/2668d3f5-fd0a-4c1e-917d-21edd73367af.img)
Russian military in Ukrainian street - undeniable
(http://media2.intoday.in/indiatoday/images/stories//2014March/troops-650_030114093116.jpg)
Russian troops outside Ukranian police station - Undeniable
(http://stmedia.startribune.com/images/492*328/030214b11TENSIONS%204.jpg)
Russian T-90 tank in Ukrainian street - road marking street signs are Ukrainian - Undeniable
(http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/images/news/201409/n_71153_1.jpg)
Russian 'Aid' convoy ::)
(http://www.independent.co.uk/incoming/article9687149.ece/alternates/w1024/Russian-aid-convoy-1.jpg)
Russian T-90 Tank in a street in Donetsk -Undeniable
(http://static.tnn.epi.vn/Uploaded/quynhanh/2015_02_02/pro-russian_separatists_ride_on_a_tank_in_donetsk_february_1_2015_CPSS.jpg?width=840)
A war of aggression is a clearly understood concept. A war of aggression is one that is waged that is not in self defence. What do you think the WMD claims in Iraq were about? They were to give legal cover by attempting to obtain UNSC approval. Even asking me what I consider a war of aggression to be shows a remarkable naivety. It is a well defined concept. Your definition shows you are out of your depth. I did advise you read up on Nuremberg earlier and if you had you wouldn't ask such silly questions.
Your new list of wars of aggression is comical. How do you come up with this stuff? Do you just write the first wars that come into your head, because there seems little else that connects them all.
-
A war of aggression is a clearly understood concept. A war of aggression is one that is waged that is not in self defence. What do you think the WMD claims in Iraq were about? They were to give legal cover by attempting to obtain UNSC approval. Even asking me what I consider a war of aggression to be shows a remarkable naivety. It is a well defined concept. Your definition shows you are out of your depth. I did advise you read up on Nuremberg earlier and if you had you wouldn't ask such silly questions.
Your new list of wars of aggression is comical. How do you come up with this stuff? Do you just write the first wars that come into your head, because there seems little else that connects them all.
I disagree - Its important we both understand how we define the term, No conflict is straight forward.
I'm not to concerned about Nuremberg it was a show trial.
Saddam Hussein got himself in sh*t by his actions after 9/11 thou he had nothing to do with it.
Iraqi defectors fabricated evidence to help convince the USA to remove Saddam as they hated the guy
http://youtu.be/gvntaL3nxEw (http://youtu.be/gvntaL3nxEw)
However he had WMD and used WMD against innocent people.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halabja_chemical_attack (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halabja_chemical_attack)
Saddam Hussein was a snake I am glad he is gone it was Bush Senior that should have removed him 1991. It was a failure of the global community to allow him to be in power so long. Nevertheless Both Iraq and Afghanistan where given ultimatums to avoid the war but refused to accept them. The Taliban where told if they handed over Osama and other key members war would be avoided. Saddam Hussein and his inner circle was told to leave Iraq or face war.
My new list of wars of aggression is comical? fair enough your entitled to your opinion now please give me reasons why you think each of those wars where not wars of aggression ::)
I look forward to you explaining a just and valid reason for each of them ::)
-
I disagree - Its important we both understand how we define the term, No conflict is straight forward.
I'm not to concerned about Nuremberg it was a show trial.
Saddam Hussein got himself in sh*t by his actions after 9/11 thou he had nothing to do with it.
Iraqi defectors fabricated evidence to help convince the USA to remove Saddam as they hated the guy
http://youtu.be/gvntaL3nxEw (http://youtu.be/gvntaL3nxEw)
However he had WMD and used WMD against innocent people.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halabja_chemical_attack (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halabja_chemical_attack)
Saddam Hussein was a snake I am glad he is gone it was Bush Senior that should have removed him 1991. It was a failure of the global community to allow him to be in power so long. Nevertheless Both Iraq and Afghanistan where given ultimatums to avoid the war but refused to accept them. The Taliban where told if they handed over Osama and other key members war would be avoided. Saddam Hussein and his inner circle was told to leave Iraq or face war.
My new list of wars of aggression is comical? fair enough your entitled to your opinion now please give me reasons why you think each of those wars where not wars of aggression ::)
I look forward to you explaining a just and valid reason for each of them ::)
A war of aggression is a clearly defined and understood concept as I have already pointed out. How about we agree a war of aggression is what everybody else understands it to be, ie. a war launched that is not in self defence. What is difficult about that?
As for your list, the reason it is comical is that there is no common thread running through them and therefore it is just an arbitrary list of some wars/conflicts.
You list USSR invasion of Afghanistan as a war of aggression despite it being pointed out, more than once, that the Soviet military were there at the invitation of the Afghan government to help fight the foreign backed Islamist rebels. Or do you believe this to be conspiracy nut nonsense. Do you not know this because there is no other explanation for your bizarre claim that this constitutes a war of aggression.
Border disputes are also not considered to necessarily be wars of aggression so some others on your list would not really be considered such.
You also claim that the US invasion of Iraq could be considered not to be a war of aggression because the US "had its reasons for invading Iraq". You also claim that Saddam was given ultimatums to avoid the war and that the world community had failed in allowing Saddam to keep power for so long. By your reasoning we'd best get on quick sharp removing the Saudi, Qatari, Bahrain regimes to mention just a few. In fact the list of tyrannical regimes is long and dismal but that old pesky international law prevents us from launching wars to change regimes. Would you appreciate foreign involvement in our country just because some more powerful countries decided that your government should be changed. It would be our own task to overthrow /change our own government, not the whim of some self appointed world police.
Your grasp of international law is as sketchy as your understanding of world affairs. It is illegal under international law to launch a war for regime change and I would be interested to hear the US reasons for this war because the one they gave(WMD) turned out to be deliberate lies although you apparently believe it still. Read Colin Powell's retraction of his speech at the UN and then get back to me on whether you still believe the US genuinely believed that Iraq had WMD.
The Iraq invasion of Iran was definitely a war of aggression but we didn't say too much about that at the time because we were arming and encouraging Saddam and Iraq at the time. America even sold Iraq virus cultures and helped them produce mustard gas. They also gave the co-ordinates of the Iranian military positions to Iraq knowing that they would be attacked with chemical weapons. Watch Galloway at the US Senate hearings and you might learn something about American complicity.
Would you care to explain how "Saddam got himself in shit by his actions after 9/11 even though he had nothing to do with it"? and what on earth that even means. And you believe that Iraqi defectors fabricated evidence to help convince the US to remove Saddam....
Those naive and gullible CIA spooks were mugged off by a bunch of Iraqi defectors. You are giving far too much credit to the Iraqi defectors. The evidence was fabricated by the US, and the Iraqi defectors were simply useful stooges and to believe otherwise is incredible.
-
How exactly do you define a war of aggression?
If you define it as a military invasion of a state regardless of political situations then Both Iraq 2003 and Georgia 2008 would be wars of aggression.
Russia had its reasons for invading Georgia and the US had its reasons for invading Iraq. Therefore can both be considered not wars of aggression.
I would define a war of aggression as a state invading another state for no reason other than to obtain power conquest and motivated by accumulation of land and resources. By that definition
German Invasion of Poland
USSR invasion of Finland
USSR invasion of Afganistan
Iraqi Invasion of Iran
Iraqi Invasion of Kuwait
Egypt and Syria invading Israel in six day war
USA invading Canada in 1812
to name a few
As for Russian military presence in Ukraine is proven beyond all doubt - Russia may not consider the Soil to be Ukraine so can easily deny it.
http://www.newsweek.com/nemtsovs-evidence-russian-troops-ukraine-taken-police-310997 (http://www.newsweek.com/nemtsovs-evidence-russian-troops-ukraine-taken-police-310997)
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/03/us-ukraine-russia-soldiers-idUSKBN0LZ2FV20150303 (http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/03/us-ukraine-russia-soldiers-idUSKBN0LZ2FV20150303)
Russian troops in Ukraine, Ukranian buildings are behind them its undeniable
(http://im.ft-static.com/content/images/2668d3f5-fd0a-4c1e-917d-21edd73367af.img)
Russian military in Ukrainian street - undeniable
(http://media2.intoday.in/indiatoday/images/stories//2014March/troops-650_030114093116.jpg)
Russian troops outside Ukranian police station - Undeniable
(http://stmedia.startribune.com/images/492*328/030214b11TENSIONS%204.jpg)
Russian T-90 tank in Ukrainian street - road marking street signs are Ukrainian - Undeniable
(http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/images/news/201409/n_71153_1.jpg)
Russian 'Aid' convoy ::)
(http://www.independent.co.uk/incoming/article9687149.ece/alternates/w1024/Russian-aid-convoy-1.jpg)
Russian T-90 Tank in a street in Donetsk -Undeniable
(http://static.tnn.epi.vn/Uploaded/quynhanh/2015_02_02/pro-russian_separatists_ride_on_a_tank_in_donetsk_february_1_2015_CPSS.jpg?width=840)
Your pictures are a piss take by the way. Instead of posting more unattributed undated pictures we need to verify the ones you already have posted. Given that a picture of an Aid Convoy counts to you as evidence of invasion I am not sure that you set the bar high enough.
The picture of the Russian Troops outside a police station, I would assume to be from Crimea but without clarification from you as to the authenticity, locations and dates of these pictures then you have offered nothing that shows evidence of a Russian invasion. If it is from Crimea then you need to accept the fact that Crimea voted overwhelmingly to join Russia and there really is no doubt that this is the will of the Crimean people.
-
A war of aggression is a clearly defined and understood concept as I have already pointed out. How about we agree a war of aggression is what everybody else understands it to be, ie. a war launched that is not in self defence. What is difficult about that?
As for your list, the reason it is comical is that there is no common thread running through them and therefore it is just an arbitrary list of some wars/conflicts.
You list USSR invasion of Afghanistan as a war of aggression despite it being pointed out, more than once, that the Soviet military were there at the invitation of the Afghan government to help fight the foreign backed Islamist rebels. Or do you believe this to be conspiracy nut nonsense. Do you not know this because there is no other explanation for your bizarre claim that this constitutes a war of aggression.
Border disputes are also not considered to necessarily be wars of aggression so some others on your list would not really be considered such.
You also claim that the US invasion of Iraq could be considered not to be a war of aggression because the US "had its reasons for invading Iraq". You also claim that Saddam was given ultimatums to avoid the war and that the world community had failed in allowing Saddam to keep power for so long. By your reasoning we'd best get on quick sharp removing the Saudi, Qatari, Bahrain regimes to mention just a few. In fact the list of tyrannical regimes is long and dismal but that old pesky international law prevents us from launching wars to change regimes. Would you appreciate foreign involvement in our country just because some more powerful countries decided that your government should be changed. It would be our own task to overthrow /change our own government, not the whim of some self appointed world police.
Your grasp of international law is as sketchy as your understanding of world affairs. It is illegal under international law to launch a war for regime change and I would be interested to hear the US reasons for this war because the one they gave(WMD) turned out to be deliberate lies although you apparently believe it still. Read Colin Powell's retraction of his speech at the UN and then get back to me on whether you still believe the US genuinely believed that Iraq had WMD.
The Iraq invasion of Iran was definitely a war of aggression but we didn't say too much about that at the time because we were arming and encouraging Saddam and Iraq at the time. America even sold Iraq virus cultures and helped them produce mustard gas. They also gave the co-ordinates of the Iranian military positions to Iraq knowing that they would be attacked with chemical weapons. Watch Galloway at the US Senate hearings and you might learn something about American complicity.
Would you care to explain how "Saddam got himself in shit by his actions after 9/11 even though he had nothing to do with it"? and what on earth that even means. And you believe that Iraqi defectors fabricated evidence to help convince the US to remove Saddam....
Those naive and gullible CIA spooks were mugged off by a bunch of Iraqi defectors. You are giving far too much credit to the Iraqi defectors. The evidence was fabricated by the US and the Iraqi defectors simply useful stooges and to believe otherwise is incredible.
Oh whatever... I could give you detailed explanations on many things you mentioned. But what's the point your too opinionated and emotionally invested.
"It would be our own task to overthrow /change our own government" Try explaining that to the tens of thousands of Iraqis massacred in the 1991 uprisings. How can you enforce a law if you don't remove or stop those breaking it in the first place?
I don't find having a pointless debate with someone who wont capitulate or lacks critical thinking skills very enjoyable. Facts and reasoning don't get through your skull they probably don't even get passed your tinfoil hat. ::)
-
Oh whatever... I could give you detailed explanations on many things you mentioned. But what's the point your too opinionated and emotionally invested.
"It would be our own task to overthrow /change our own government" Try explaining that to the tens of thousands of Iraqis massacred in the 1991 uprisings. How can you enforce a law if you don't remove or stop those breaking it in the first place?
I don't find having a pointless debate with someone who wont capitulate or lacks critical thinking skills very enjoyable. Facts and reasoning don't get through your skull they probably don't even get passed your tinfoil hat. ::)
I doubt you could give a detailed explanation as you haven't so far.
What do the 1991 Iraqi uprisings have to do with anything. How does this change the fact that our internal politics is our business and it is not some foreign superpower's responsibility to intervene on anyone's behalf without invitation. The hundreds of thousands dead should have made everyone realise by now that war and invasion is rarely the correct response and causes bigger problems than it solves.
Your conspiracy nut and tin foil hat jibes merely show the paucity of your own reasoning and critical thinking skills. I asked for verification of your pictures and rather than responding with dates, locations you just resort to name calling.
You offered no response to anything and claiming that you could respond but won't because my skull is too thick is childish. With spelling as poor as yours I wouldn't be calling anyone thick.
-
Can we draw a line with this please....
-
A war of aggression is a clearly defined and understood concept as I have already pointed out. How about we agree a war of aggression is what everybody else understands it to be, ie. a war launched that is not in self defence. What is difficult about that?
As for your list, the reason it is comical is that there is no common thread running through them and therefore it is just an arbitrary list of some wars/conflicts.
You list USSR invasion of Afghanistan as a war of aggression despite it being pointed out, more than once, that the Soviet military were there at the invitation of the Afghan government to help fight the foreign backed Islamist rebels. Or do you believe this to be conspiracy nut nonsense. Do you not know this because there is no other explanation for your bizarre claim that this constitutes a war of aggression.
Border disputes are also not considered to necessarily be wars of aggression so some others on your list would not really be considered such.
You also claim that the US invasion of Iraq could be considered not to be a war of aggression because the US "had its reasons for invading Iraq". You also claim that Saddam was given ultimatums to avoid the war and that the world community had failed in allowing Saddam to keep power for so long. By your reasoning we'd best get on quick sharp removing the Saudi, Qatari, Bahrain regimes to mention just a few. In fact the list of tyrannical regimes is long and dismal but that old pesky international law prevents us from launching wars to change regimes. Would you appreciate foreign involvement in our country just because some more powerful countries decided that your government should be changed. It would be our own task to overthrow /change our own government, not the whim of some self appointed world police.
Your grasp of international law is as sketchy as your understanding of world affairs. It is illegal under international law to launch a war for regime change and I would be interested to hear the US reasons for this war because the one they gave(WMD) turned out to be deliberate lies although you apparently believe it still. Read Colin Powell's retraction of his speech at the UN and then get back to me on whether you still believe the US genuinely believed that Iraq had WMD.
The Iraq invasion of Iran was definitely a war of aggression but we didn't say too much about that at the time because we were arming and encouraging Saddam and Iraq at the time. America even sold Iraq virus cultures and helped them produce mustard gas. They also gave the co-ordinates of the Iranian military positions to Iraq knowing that they would be attacked with chemical weapons. Watch Galloway at the US Senate hearings and you might learn something about American complicity.
Would you care to explain how "Saddam got himself in shit by his actions after 9/11 even though he had nothing to do with it"? and what on earth that even means. And you believe that Iraqi defectors fabricated evidence to help convince the US to remove Saddam....
Those naive and gullible CIA spooks were mugged off by a bunch of Iraqi defectors. You are giving far too much credit to the Iraqi defectors. The evidence was fabricated by the US, and the Iraqi defectors were simply useful stooges and to believe otherwise is incredible.
Another excellent and incisive post Gringo.
-
Your pictures are a piss take by the way. Instead of posting more unattributed undated pictures we need to verify the ones you already have posted. Given that a picture of an Aid Convoy counts to you as evidence of invasion I am not sure that you set the bar high enough.
The picture of the Russian Troops outside a police station, I would assume to be from Crimea but without clarification from you as to the authenticity, locations and dates of these pictures then you have offered nothing that shows evidence of a Russian invasion. If it is from Crimea then you need to accept the fact that Crimea voted overwhelmingly to join Russia and there really is no doubt that this is the will of the Crimean people.
Again, a totally fair assessment.
-
I'm amazed at the knowledge Gringo has on the subject and also admire his stance.
What we have now in this country ( terrorism ) is a result in our interference in other countries such as Iraq,where only Saddam knew his own people,so therefore we had no right whatsoever in interfering, invading and capturing a man who was no threat to us. The excuse being WMD's. Blair should have been a subject of war crimes and treated as the criminal that he was/is,as it was his power-crazy ideas that have created the terrorist movement that we now have.
Exactly the same applies to Russia.Keep out. Their business with the Ukraine,is exactly that and not ours. Our excuse being " humanitarian ". Who's got the right to argue with a man who has the might of China on his side ? It would be suicidal for us to interfere with what we see as a humanitarian crisis,which would be nothing like the crisis that we'd face.
We,as a country,should learn from past mistakes------------Iraq and Afghanistan.
-
I'm amazed at the knowledge Gringo has on the subject and also admire his stance.
What we have now in this country ( terrorism ) is a result in our interference in other countries such as Iraq,where only Saddam knew his own people,so therefore we had no right whatsoever in interfering, invading and capturing a man who was no threat to us. The excuse being WMD's. Blair should have been a subject of war crimes and treated as the criminal that he was/is,as it was his power-crazy ideas that have created the terrorist movement that we now have.
Exactly the same applies to Russia.Keep out. Their business with the Ukraine,is exactly that and not ours. Our excuse being " humanitarian ". Who's got the right to argue with a man who has the might of China on his side ? It would be suicidal for us to interfere with what we see as a humanitarian crisis,which would be nothing like the crisis that we'd face.
We,as a country,should learn from past mistakes------------Iraq and Afghanistan.
I agree with you Lookout on everything you say. Tony Blair in particular has a lot to answer for. The lives lost and others ruined as a result of the invasion of Iraq, under totally false pretences, were totally unnecessary and in my view criminal.
-
I agree with you Lookout on everything you say. Tony Blair in particular has a lot to answer for. The lives lost and others ruined as a result of the invasion of Iraq, under totally false pretences, were totally unnecessary and in my view criminal.
Absolutely,ngb. Imagine if he was in charge now ? It really doesn't bear thinking that the " silly little man " would be throwing his weight around over the Ukraine.
As far as I'm concerned,Russia isn't a threat to us,so let's keep it that way by keeping our nose's out of their politics and how they run their own country.
-
Lookout good post with which I agree Gringo has been making some fabulous posts of late. Well done to him.
-
Absolutely,ngb. Imagine if he was in charge now ? It really doesn't bear thinking that the " silly little man " would be throwing his weight around over the Ukraine.
As far as I'm concerned,Russia isn't a threat to us,so let's keep it that way by keeping our nose's out of their politics and how they run their own country.
Why people actually decided to elect Blair a third time is beyond me ???
-
David guess the majority of voters thought Blair was the best out of a bad bunch :'(
-
Why people actually decided to elect Blair a third time is beyond me ???
That's just it.They saw him as a " Tin God ". ::) The Aggressor,which suits a lot of the population of this country---------sadly. Those with nothing between their ears I might add.
-
I agree with you Lookout on everything you say. Tony Blair in particular has a lot to answer for. The lives lost and others ruined as a result of the invasion of Iraq, under totally false pretences, were totally unnecessary and in my view criminal.
The execution of the war and pre planning led to many of the problems after. But removing Saddam Hussein was the correct thing to do. They should have taken him out in 1991.
300,000 Bodies in mass graves scattered around the dessert
estimated between 80,000 to 200,000 civilians killed in the 1991 uprisings against him
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_uprisings_in_Iraq (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_uprisings_in_Iraq)
Destruction of entire towns
http://youtu.be/O7bY8aovjuw (http://youtu.be/O7bY8aovjuw)
It was a criminal government the likes of Hitler and Stalin
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFseD4B3aFg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFseD4B3aFg)
His sons even fed people to lions
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Nb8h6d7l3U (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Nb8h6d7l3U)
http://youtu.be/5Y8wN911rMc (http://youtu.be/5Y8wN911rMc)
Iv read extensively on the Baathist rule of Iraq its very interesting due to sheer criminality of it.
-
The execution of the war and pre planning led to many of the problems after. But removing Saddam Hussein was the correct thing to do. They should have taken him out in 1991.
300,000 Bodies in mass graves scattered around the dessert
estimated between 80,000 to 200,000 civilians killed in the 1991 uprisings against him
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_uprisings_in_Iraq (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_uprisings_in_Iraq)
Destruction of entire towns
http://youtu.be/O7bY8aovjuw (http://youtu.be/O7bY8aovjuw)
It was a criminal government the likes of Hitler and Stalin
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFseD4B3aFg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFseD4B3aFg)
His sons even fed people to lions
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Nb8h6d7l3U (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Nb8h6d7l3U)
http://youtu.be/5Y8wN911rMc (http://youtu.be/5Y8wN911rMc)
Iv read extensively on the Baathist rule of Iraq its very interesting due to sheer criminality of it.
I agree that the Baathist rule of Iraq was appalling. I personally knew some victims of it. There was an active though heavily suppressed opposition within Iraq. It was for the Iraqi people to implement regime change, not an invading superpower.
-
I agree that the Baathist rule of Iraq was appalling. I personally knew some victims of it. There was an active though heavily suppressed opposition within Iraq. It was for the Iraqi people to implement regime change, not an invading superpower.
I agree however although |I was against the 1st war in 1991 I do believe that once in Iraq the US let down the Iraqi opposition when they encouraged them to go for Saddam and then withdrew leaving them exposed to appalling abuse and murder by Saddam and his troops.
-
I agree however although |I was against the 1st war in 1991 I do believe that once in Iraq the US let down the Iraqi opposition when they encouraged them to go for Saddam and then withdrew leaving them exposed to appalling abuse and murder by Saddam and his troops.
That is a fair point Maggie.
-
I agree that the Baathist rule of Iraq was appalling. I personally knew some victims of it. There was an active though heavily suppressed opposition within Iraq. It was for the Iraqi people to implement regime change, not an invading superpower.
The only way a regime change could happen without foreign intervention is if some of his generals attempted to get rid of him. The Iraqi military could not be opposed by the people if using such callous methods simply just sending in Jets and Helicopters to drop gas on people.
There where uprisings in 1988 and he just bombed them with chemical weapons.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halabja_chemical_attack (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halabja_chemical_attack)
But if you look at the timeline of events from 9/11 till the invasion of Iraq without any hindsight bias you can understand why the US decided to remove him. However in my view they should have and could have done it alone without our support.
-
The only way a regime change could happen without foreign intervention is if some of his generals attempted to get rid of him. The Iraqi military could not be opposed by the people if using such callous methods simply just sending in Jets and Helicopters to drop gas on people.
There where uprisings in 1988 and he just bombed them with chemical weapons.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halabja_chemical_attack (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halabja_chemical_attack)
But if you look at the timeline of events from 9/11 till the invasion of Iraq without any hindsight bias you can understand why the US decided to remove him. However in my view they should have and could have done it alone without our support.
So do you believe the USA has the right to be the policeman of the world? The USA has an appalling history of illegal intervention to further what their administration believes is in their interest. Apart from Iraq and Afghanistan Vietnam, Cambodia, Chile, Nicaragua and Grenada spring to mind. There is certainly no moral imperitive behind their actions -they have no problem in supporting and propping up the most vile regimes when it suits them.
-
So do you believe the USA has the right to be the policeman of the world? The USA has an appalling history of illegal intervention to further what their administration believes is in their interest. Apart from Iraq and Afghanistan Vietnam, Cambodia, Chile, Nicaragua and Grenada spring to mind. There is certainly no moral imperitive behind their actions -they have no problem in supporting and propping up the most vile regimes when it suits them.
A Nation like the USA should provide the majority of military means to prevent genocide and contain rouge states yes as it has the power to do so.
Are you saying it was right for the USA to do nothing to prevent the Rwandan genocide when it could have been prevented.
Are you saying it was wrong for the USA to help us during WW2?
The US was already in Vietnam before the conflict the south Vietcong wanted them their. The US had military instalments in Vietnam from ww2 it was communist insurgency that got the states involved. Same with south Korea they asked the US to help them and they did then it was China that threw the Americans out North Korea.
To be pragmatic the major economies are all globalized now everything has a ripple effect. Isolationism is more or less impossible.
-
A Nation like the USA should provide the majority of military means to prevent genocide and contain rouge states yes as it has the power to do so.
Are you saying it was right for the USA to do nothing to prevent the Rwandan genocide when it could have been prevented.
Are you saying it was wrong for the USA to help us during WW2?
The US was already in Vietnam before the conflict the south Vietcong wanted them their. The US had military instalments in Vietnam from ww2 it was communist insurgency that got the states involved. Same with south Korea they asked the US to help them and they did then it was China that threw the Americans out North Korea.
To be pragmatic the major economies are all globalized now everything has a ripple effect. Isolationism is more or less impossible.
I do not accept your assessment of the USA as a benign world uncle. The USA's involvement in Vietnam was solely to prop up a corrupt and extremely unpleasant administration in the south. They used as a pretext the Bay of Tonkin "incident" which was a classic false flag con. Fortunately the USA met its match and were driven out in 1975. Vietnam was then liberated, by the very people who had driven out the French occupiers, but many lives were lost, including American lives, totally needlessly.
Of course I am not saying that the USA should not have joined the war alongside the UK, USSR and the other allies. If you have forgotten Japan launched a preemptive strike against Pearl Harbor. WW2 was a war against terrifying and almost unbelievable evil.
Military action, save in clear self defence, should only be taken with UN approval. That is why the UN was formed.
-
I do not accept your assessment of the USA as a benign world uncle. The USA's involvement in Vietnam was solely to prop up a corrupt and extremely unpleasant administration in the south. They used as a pretext the Bay of Tonkin "incident" which was a classic false flag con. Fortunately the USA met its match and were driven out in 1975. Vietnam was then liberated, by the very people who had driven out the French occupiers, but many lives were lost, including American lives, totally needlessly.
Of course I am not saying that the USA should not have joined the war alongside the UK, USSR and the other allies. If you have forgotten Japan launched a preemptive strike against Pearl Harbor. WW2 was a war against terrifying and almost unbelievable evil.
Military action, save in clear self defence, should only be taken with UN approval. That is why the UN was formed.
Absolutely Neil, the USA treat the UN with contempt.
-
Military action, save in clear self defence, should only be taken with UN approval. That is why the UN was formed.
Ideally yes. But the world is not ideal
But if you have a despot like Saddam violating international law the way he was how do you stop him from doing so? Breaking international law to remove someone else breaking international law that's a bit of a dilemma, Putting theory over practise don't always work
-
Ideally yes. But the world is not ideal
But if you have a despot like Saddam violating international law the way he was how do you stop him from doing so? Breaking international law to remove someone else breaking international law that's a bit of a dilemma, Putting theory over practise don't always work
You may be happy with the US being the world police but you have to understand that the vast majority of people in the world are not. In fact the majority of the world see the US as the biggest threat to world peace.
The UN while far from ideal and in need of much reform is still the only route to authorise military action. Most of the problem with the UN is that the US often bend it to their will by economic bullying of smaller countries, or use their veto to prevent any action against allies of theirs. The US veto is wielded disproportionately especially where Israel is concerned.
The US government cannot decide who is or isn't a despot who needs removing and surely if you thought it through you would realise that. Their alliance with Saudi Arabia makes anything they have to say about human rights abuses and lack of democratic freedoms elsewhere redundant. You cannot take seriously anyone who can ally with the Saudis and claim simultaneously to support democracy and human rights. It is truly beyond satire.
Decisions about serious international affairs that affect the world cannot be left to whoever a half informed brainwashed US electorate elect as their President and surely this point shouldn't need debating. It is self evident that it is intolerable for one countries leaders to bend the world to their own will.
If the UN and international law are insufficient to solve the world's problems then reform them but starting wars and invading countries only ever makes things worse.
-
You may be happy with the US being the world police but you have to understand that the vast majority of people in the world are not. In fact the majority of the world see the US as the biggest threat to world peace.
The UN while far from ideal and in need of much reform is still the only route to authorise military action. Most of the problem with the UN is that the US often bend it to their will by economic bullying of smaller countries, or use their veto to prevent any action against allies of theirs. The US veto is wielded disproportionately especially where Israel is concerned.
The US government cannot decide who is or isn't a despot who needs removing and surely if you thought it through you would realise that. Their alliance with Saudi Arabia makes anything they have to say about human rights abuses and lack of democratic freedoms elsewhere redundant. You cannot take seriously anyone who can ally with the Saudis and claim simultaneously to support democracy and human rights. It is truly beyond satire.
Decisions about serious international affairs that affect the world cannot be left to whoever a half informed brainwashed US electorate elect as their President and surely this point shouldn't need debating. It is self evident that it is intolerable for one countries leaders to bend the world to their own will.
If the UN and international law are insufficient to solve the world's problems then reform them but starting wars and invading countries only ever makes things worse.
The Saudis are appalling and America calling them their alies is a total disgrace. The US have sold their soul for oil.
-
You may be happy with the US being the world police but you have to understand that the vast majority of people in the world are not. In fact the majority of the world see the US as the biggest threat to world peace.
The UN while far from ideal and in need of much reform is still the only route to authorise military action. Most of the problem with the UN is that the US often bend it to their will by economic bullying of smaller countries, or use their veto to prevent any action against allies of theirs. The US veto is wielded disproportionately especially where Israel is concerned.
The US government cannot decide who is or isn't a despot who needs removing and surely if you thought it through you would realise that. Their alliance with Saudi Arabia makes anything they have to say about human rights abuses and lack of democratic freedoms elsewhere redundant. You cannot take seriously anyone who can ally with the Saudis and claim simultaneously to support democracy and human rights. It is truly beyond satire.
Decisions about serious international affairs that affect the world cannot be left to whoever a half informed brainwashed US electorate elect as their President and surely this point shouldn't need debating. It is self evident that it is intolerable for one countries leaders to bend the world to their own will.
If the UN and international law are insufficient to solve the world's problems then reform them but starting wars and invading countries only ever makes things worse.
In an ideal world no but unfortunately that's the case. Many people are too dumb for their own democracy but that's how it is :(
-
The Saudis are appalling and America calling them their alies is a total disgrace. The US have sold their soul for oil.
Yes and probably the world's most prolific sponsors of terrorism too Maggie. The Saudis are the worst, in a packed field, of despotic US and UK allies.
-
In an ideal world no but unfortunately that's the case. Many people are too dumb for their own democracy but that's how it is :(
Yes and that's what we need to change. At the moment Putin and Russia are doing all they can to stop the megalomaniacs in our governments and it is ironic that they are criticized for this by the very people who should inform themselves enough to stop voting for the warmongers themselves.
-
Yes and that's what we need to change. At the moment Putin and Russia are doing all they can to stop the megalomaniacs in our governments and it is ironic that they are criticized for this by the very people who should inform themselves enough to stop voting for the warmongers themselves.
You can't change most of humanity being stupid unfortunately. Most people in east Ukraine want a pro Russian Government so I have no problems with what Putin is doing. I don't think our government cares about Ukraine there is not much we could do about it.
-
You can't change most of humanity being stupid unfortunately. Most people in east Ukraine want a pro Russian Government so I have no problems with what Putin is doing. I don't think our government cares about Ukraine there is not much we could do about it.
Except to stay out of it !!
-
Lookout yes mind our own business for a change ;D
-
as far as i can russia is only defending it selelf
Stealing land from another country because Russia wanted the ports is defending itself?
-
I agree that the Baathist rule of Iraq was appalling. I personally knew some victims of it. There was an active though heavily suppressed opposition within Iraq. It was for the Iraqi people to implement regime change, not an invading superpower.
Iraq invaded Kuwait which made it a World issue. Part of the cease fire agreement was to completely give up its programs. It had to declare all its weapons and provide unfettered monitoring. Iraq hid technology from the programs hoping to start them another day and stupidly failed to comply with the monitorying. They played cat and mouse games to make it appear they could produce WMDs anytime they wanted so that their neighbors would fear them.
Those games costed Saddam his administration and life and the people of Iraq are very happy to have him gone.
-
The aggressors in the Ukraine affair are clearly the western powers led as usual by the US and UK. Has everyone already forgotten the lies about WMD told by our leaders, and repeated uncritically by our supposedly free media, which took us to war in Iraq. The devastation caused and still being caused by those Western lies and propaganda should have woken everyone to the fact that we are the Nazis now.
Which wars of aggression have Russia started in the last 30 years?
Which Russian leaders have lied to the UN Security Council misrepresenting intelligence and telling outright lies in order to gain Security Council approval for their wars of aggression.
Surely the facts speak for themselves now and as Dubya himself famously mangled, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me again, shame on me".
It is surely evident to all by now that the aggressors are us. The list of our "humanitarian interventions", which inexplicably always leave thousands dead and countries in states of anarchy, is now too vast to believe otherwise.
The only lies are coming from you. Bush didn't lie about what the intelligence agencies assessed, the World's intelligence agencies including Russia's were all convinced Iraq had WMDs. At the time of the invasion everyone knew Iraq was in violation of the cease-fire agreement for failing to live up to the terms of the monitoring agreement. It was thought that Iraq could rapidly begin WMD production anytime it wanted. There were also expectations they began to stockpile chemical resources. It turns out it would have taken longer than expected. Iraq did illegally retain information on the production of WMDs and some equipment and did indeed plan to restart the programs once the monitoring was done but hadn't actually begun doing so as was thought. Iraq also had a great deal of undeclared chemical agents and weapons that were never declared. It took years to find and destroy all the artillery shells and agents that Iraq never declared. Getting rid of Saddam to establish a democracy was a very good thing.
-
exept no democracy has been establishd.
-
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCIQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.salon.com%2F2015%2F02%2F10%2Fyes_bush_lied_about_iraq_why_are_we_still_arguing_about_this%2F&ei=azH6VI7hOYvU7AbZmoGoBw&usg=AFQjCNFhtqVRt5c9JmBTj_0fHfddgyViTg&sig2=Cm6gCCV_YVJnDq_GcG_ImQ&bvm=bv.87611401,d.ZGU
-
With the Russian invasion of the Ukraine and their reluctance to stick to any ceasefire. They have increased their spending on defence - and today
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/27/russia-boris-nemtsov-shot_n_6772212.html?utm_hp_ref=uk&ir=UK&ncid=webmail1
Putin reminds me of Hitler - he needs stopping because he is certainly up to something!
More like Stalin, who was in many ways like Hitler. People always forget about the Soviet invasions of Finland, Rumania and even Poland- The Germans and Soviets split Poland.
Stalin already was expanding the size of the USSR before it got involved in WWII. Stalin used Allied aid during WWII in order to not only kick Germany out of the USSR but to steal land from other countries like Finland and Poland, swallowing the Baltic Republics and set up Communist puppets in Eastern Europe and even North Korea. Rather than allow free elections in Korea Stalin armed North Korea and approved of an invasion of South Korea. Soviet aircraft took part but not Soviet ground troops in earnest because he didn't want to get into a war with the US.
Stalin pushed as far as he could stopping short only of the line he knew would result in war.
At the end of WWII the Soviet Union was in tatters, they had no manpower reserves left and could not have gone toe to toe with an atomic armed Allied force. The Soviets would have to have capitulated it the Allies refused to allow them to take land from other but the Allies wouldn't do it. The Allies sold the Poles down the river just liek is being done to Ukraine.
Instead of the Allies making sure Poland was restored to the pre-WWII status quo, the Allies allowed the Soviets to steal land from Poland that Russia lost during WWI and allowed the Soviets to install a repressive Communist regime. Poles rose up against Germany in Warsaw and the Soviets would not lift a finger to help. They were Free Poles and the Soviets enjoyed seeing the Germans brutally kill them so that these Free Poles would not be able to resist the Soviets.
The Western Allies simply allowed the Soviets o take any land they wanted, allowed the Soviets to strip anything they wanted from the other countries and even allowed the Soviets to use enemy troops as slave labor till 1955. Stalin was brutal on his own people and the World did nothing.
Fast forward to the present. Putin wants all the land that borders the Black Sea to be under Russian control. He already Seized Crimea and plans to use the insurgents to help him seize the rest. He has designs over other former Soviet territory as well. The world is too selfish to care though about Ukrainians. Russia has a large army even though it is not that good and people don't want to risk a war. Putin know it and that is why Putin feels like he can play the games he does. If there were genuine resolve he would be too scared to do it.
Why did the World act in Libya and Bosnia? Because there was no threat of a major war. Libya could not do anything to the major powers. Russia is a major power though so it would take more effort and more importantly since Russia is such a huge trading partner would hurt European economies. That in fact is the biggest leverage against Putin so that a war would not even be unnecessary but Europe doesn't want to wield the threat.
Only if the US lead an effort to oppose Putin would Europe get any resolve to do something but Obama is one of the most worthless presidents in American history. Putin knows Obama is not going to organize any meaningful effort to oppose his efforts and knows Europe lacks the backbone so has no fear in continuing his meddling in Ukraine.
-
Only if the US lead an effort to oppose Putin would Europe get any resolve to do something but Obama is one of the most worthless presidents in American history. Putin knows Obama is not going to organize any meaningful effort to oppose his efforts and knows Europe lacks the backbone so has no fear in continuing his meddling in Ukraine.
Agreed.
Obamas foreign policy is a joke and he cannot assert it effectively. His middle east legacy is ISIS not to mention he has made no progress on North Korea either
However I don't mind Putin he has done a very good job rebuilding Russia.
-
Iraq invaded Kuwait which made it a World issue. Part of the cease fire agreement was to completely give up its programs. It had to declare all its weapons and provide unfettered monitoring. Iraq hid technology from the programs hoping to start them another day and stupidly failed to comply with the monitorying. They played cat and mouse games to make it appear they could produce WMDs anytime they wanted so that their neighbors would fear them.
Those games costed Saddam his administration and life and the people of Iraq are very happy to have him gone.
And how do you know this?
You call people liars without pointing any out and then come out with this gem. I think you are lying about this and you have just made it up to suit your bias( as you are so fond of saying). So what is your source for this rather bold claim. Most commentators would seem to disagree as any quick search will confirm and a Zogby poll in 2011 found the exact opposite to your claim.
The rest of the opinions you posited sound like they were written by the state department. Just believe the official story and ask no questions. No-one is taken in by your biased BS on this.
-
More like Stalin, who was in many ways like Hitler. People always forget about the Soviet invasions of Finland, Rumania and even Poland- The Germans and Soviets split Poland.
Stalin already was expanding the size of the USSR before it got involved in WWII. Stalin used Allied aid during WWII in order to not only kick Germany out of the USSR but to steal land from other countries like Finland and Poland, swallowing the Baltic Republics and set up Communist puppets in Eastern Europe and even North Korea. Rather than allow free elections in Korea Stalin armed North Korea and approved of an invasion of South Korea. Soviet aircraft took part but not Soviet ground troops in earnest because he didn't want to get into a war with the US.
Stalin pushed as far as he could stopping short only of the line he knew would result in war.
At the end of WWII the Soviet Union was in tatters, they had no manpower reserves left and could not have gone toe to toe with an atomic armed Allied force. The Soviets would have to have capitulated it the Allies refused to allow them to take land from other but the Allies wouldn't do it. The Allies sold the Poles down the river just liek is being done to Ukraine.
Instead of the Allies making sure Poland was restored to the pre-WWII status quo, the Allies allowed the Soviets to steal land from Poland that Russia lost during WWI and allowed the Soviets to install a repressive Communist regime. Poles rose up against Germany in Warsaw and the Soviets would not lift a finger to help. They were Free Poles and the Soviets enjoyed seeing the Germans brutally kill them so that these Free Poles would not be able to resist the Soviets.
The Western Allies simply allowed the Soviets o take any land they wanted, allowed the Soviets to strip anything they wanted from the other countries and even allowed the Soviets to use enemy troops as slave labor till 1955. Stalin was brutal on his own people and the World did nothing.
Fast forward to the present. Putin wants all the land that borders the Black Sea to be under Russian control. He already Seized Crimea and plans to use the insurgents to help him seize the rest. He has designs over other former Soviet territory as well. The world is too selfish to care though about Ukrainians. Russia has a large army even though it is not that good and people don't want to risk a war. Putin know it and that is why Putin feels like he can play the games he does. If there were genuine resolve he would be too scared to do it.
Why did the World act in Libya and Bosnia? Because there was no threat of a major war. Libya could not do anything to the major powers. Russia is a major power though so it would take more effort and more importantly since Russia is such a huge trading partner would hurt European economies. That in fact is the biggest leverage against Putin so that a war would not even be unnecessary but Europe doesn't want to wield the threat.
Only if the US lead an effort to oppose Putin would Europe get any resolve to do something but Obama is one of the most worthless presidents in American history. Putin knows Obama is not going to organize any meaningful effort to oppose his efforts and knows Europe lacks the backbone so has no fear in continuing his meddling in Ukraine.
Read the thread from the start. Not everyone is as gullible as you. Defending the Iraq invasion and Libya bombing, given the anarchy unleashed by those actions which is by any reasonable measure even worse than Saddam's or Gaddafi's rule, renders your opinion worthless.
How do you feel about the Saudi or Bahrain regimes? Following your principles shouldn't the US be invading those countries in their aim to promote "freedom and democracy" via the novel means of bombing them.
-
And how do you know this?
You call people liars without pointing any out and then come out with this gem. I think you are lying about this and you have just made it up to suit your bias( as you are so fond of saying). So what is your source for this rather bold claim. Most commentators would seem to disagree as any quick search will confirm and a Zogby poll in 2011 found the exact opposite to your claim.
The rest of the opinions you posited sound like they were written by the state department. Just believe the official story and ask no questions. No-one is taken in by your biased BS on this.
They didn't ask in the Zogby poll whether it was a good thing that Saddam was gone. They did ask that in this poll:
http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/pdf/jan06/Iraq_Jan06_rpt.pdf
Iraqis overall have a positive view of the toppling of Saddam Hussein. Asked, “Thinking about any hardships you might have suffered since the US-Britain invasion, do you personally think that
ousting Saddam Hussein was worth it or not?” 77% say it was worth it, while 22%
say it was not.
Gallup asked the same question in April 2004. At that time, 61% said that it was worth it and 28% said that it was not. However, here again, the ethnic divisions are very sharp. Ninety-eight percent of
Shia and 91% of Kurds say the hardships were worth it, while 83% of Sunnis say they were not.
-
Read the thread from the start. Not everyone is as gullible as you. Defending the Iraq invasion and Libya bombing, given the anarchy unleashed by those actions which is by any reasonable measure even worse than Saddam's or Gaddafi's rule, renders your opinion worthless.
How do you feel about the Saudi or Bahrain regimes? Following your principles shouldn't the US be invading those countries in their aim to promote "freedom and democracy" via the novel means of bombing them.
The US didn't unleash anarchy in Iraq, the US established a democracy in the wake of Saddam. The ISIS invasion is a foreign invasion and one that was able to do the damage it did because of the ineptitude of the leaders the Iraqi people elected so a problem of their own making as well as Obama's worthlessness in actively trying to stem ISIS through competent efforts.
Saddam Hussein was a dictator who brutally repressed the majority of the population, invaded his neighbors multiple times and was thus a threat to his neighbors. As a result the World had to keep forces there to try keeping him at bay and to make sure he didn't develop WMDs. For as long as he was in power we would have to have remained there. Installing democracy was a good thing.
The UN decided to step in in Libya where the regime was fighting islamic insurgents. Because the UN is run by idiots they picked the wrong side to help and naturally since the European countries that demanded action are so inept and scared to use ground forces and since Obama, Clinton and his other advisors are all a joke no ground forces were sent and that allowed anarchy. It is the fault of Obama and all those in charge in the various UN countries that demanded action but failed to do anything that should be done.
The US spent a great deal of money and blood to establish order in Iraq and a functioning democracy. The US didn't just run away and leave Iraq to its own devices. The World wasn't willing to walk the Walk in Libya or Syria. And the result is a far bigger mess that the World finds itself in.
The World is now standing on the threshold with respect to Iran. We know for a fact Iran was allowing Al Qaeda members safe haven there and we know they sponsor terrorism. Allowing them to get nuclear weapons will be worse than Saddam getting them. With the exception of the leader of Israel, the current leaders of the World seem to be ok with pretending Iran isn't developing them and hoping that once they do they will not use them to cause trouble. That kind of laziness at handling a problem before it become unmanageable is why the world is such a mess.
FDR and Truman mismanaged the end of WWII and the Communist takeover of China while European countries mishandled their former colonies and there are still repercussions to this day. many are like Obama and refuse to learn from history. Europe won't do anything unless there is a strong American leader who is leading the way. By the time Obama is gone who knows how much additional damage will be done so the successor will have a lot of things on his plate. If Hillary were to win then you can expect more of the same and the World is screwed. While someone else would be better- better doesn't necessarily mean great. It is better to get kicked in the ass than have someone sodomize you but neither is preferable. The wisest men who ran for the Presidency the past decade were not nominated by the Republican party- Gingrich and Giuliani. Only time will tell who they pick this time around.
-
They didn't ask in the Zogby poll whether it was a good thing that Saddam was gone. They did ask that in this poll:
http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/pdf/jan06/Iraq_Jan06_rpt.pdf
Iraqis overall have a positive view of the toppling of Saddam Hussein. Asked, “Thinking about any hardships you might have suffered since the US-Britain invasion, do you personally think that
ousting Saddam Hussein was worth it or not?” 77% say it was worth it, while 22%
say it was not.
Gallup asked the same question in April 2004. At that time, 61% said that it was worth it and 28% said that it was not. However, here again, the ethnic divisions are very sharp. Ninety-eight percent of
Shia and 91% of Kurds say the hardships were worth it, while 83% of Sunnis say they were not.
Your way behind the curve. There was a clue in that I referred to 2011 Zogby Poll and not the Rockefeller funded one from 2006 that you linked to. I had a quick look through the sponsors of Pipa, the polling agency that you linked to and it has an interesting list of sponsors, almost as if they have an agenda. The gallup poll was in partnership with USA Today and CNN. The methodology and demographics are not explained fully on either and leave one concluding that both are flawed and biased.
The methodology and demographics of the Zogby poll are clearly laid out. For instance Zogby polled in 9 countries(Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Tunisia, Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and UAE) with face to face interviews in most. They explain clearly how weighting techniques were used to obtain a representative sample. A margin of error is given. These are the basic facts required before weighing up the level of credence you should give any poll.
In addition to the 9 countries listed a further 3 online surveys were conducted in Egypt, Tunisia and the US. In total over 9,000 respondents surveyed.
Interestingly Saudi Arabia and UAE (freedom loving USA's favourite allies) were the only places where door to door interviews were not possible.A "referral sampling approach" had to be taken with measures taken to ensure a broadly representative sample.
One of the questions was,
" Do you think that the Iraqi people are better off/worse off than they were before American forces entered their country?"
The results were:
IRAQ EGYPT JORDAN SAUDI LEBANON TUNISIA UAE US IRAN
BETTER OFF 30 37 25 16 22 31 30 39 25
WORSE OFF 42 41 61 66 57 20 48 18 52
SAME?NOT SURE 23/6 13/9 14/- 16/2 3/18 49/- 17/6 30/14 20/3
The first thing that leaps out is that US opinion seems wildly out of kilter with everyone else. However I am sure that the US population is much better informed on Middle East issues than the populations of the Middle East ???
The US sample can be further broken down and splits along party lines in America. Amongst Democrats 24% believe Iraq better off, 26% worse off, 36% same, 14% not sure. Amongst Republicans an amazing 58% believe Iraq better off, 10% worse off, 23% same, 9% not sure.
So your opinion seems only to be shared by Republican supporting Americans whose views are so wildly out of whack that one has to conclude that they are mad or wildly misinformed. Personally I would say they are both mad and misinformed.
Further questions include What has improved/What has not and asks for opinions on political freedoms, education, women's rights, government and personal safety to name a few.
The Iraqis respondents were overwhelmingly of the opinion that all of those things were worse since the American invasion. Here are two examples: Since US forces entered Iraq 16% believe government is better whilst 59% believe it to be worse. Since US forces entered Iraq 18% believe personal safety and security has improved and 72% believe it worse.
The American respondents percentages for those two examples were 34% to 26% (better/worse government) and 33% to 35% (personal safety improved/deteriorated).
Again the American respondents split along party lines with Republicans obviously out on a limb again.
There is also a question that asks who benefitted the most from the war in Iraq?
Do I need to tell you that all other countries except the US concluded that the US benefitted the most?
Your bias and irrationality are shining through here.
-
The US didn't unleash anarchy in Iraq, the US established a democracy in the wake of Saddam. The ISIS invasion is a foreign invasion and one that was able to do the damage it did because of the ineptitude of the leaders the Iraqi people elected so a problem of their own making as well as Obama's worthlessness in actively trying to stem ISIS through competent efforts.
Saddam Hussein was a dictator who brutally repressed the majority of the population, invaded his neighbors multiple times and was thus a threat to his neighbors. As a result the World had to keep forces there to try keeping him at bay and to make sure he didn't develop WMDs. For as long as he was in power we would have to have remained there. Installing democracy was a good thing.
The UN decided to step in in Libya where the regime was fighting islamic insurgents. Because the UN is run by idiots they picked the wrong side to help and naturally since the European countries that demanded action are so inept and scared to use ground forces and since Obama, Clinton and his other advisors are all a joke no ground forces were sent and that allowed anarchy. It is the fault of Obama and all those in charge in the various UN countries that demanded action but failed to do anything that should be done.
The US spent a great deal of money and blood to establish order in Iraq and a functioning democracy. The US didn't just run away and leave Iraq to its own devices. The World wasn't willing to walk the Walk in Libya or Syria. And the result is a far bigger mess that the World finds itself in.
The World is now standing on the threshold with respect to Iran. We know for a fact Iran was allowing Al Qaeda members safe haven there and we know they sponsor terrorism. Allowing them to get nuclear weapons will be worse than Saddam getting them. With the exception of the leader of Israel, the current leaders of the World seem to be ok with pretending Iran isn't developing them and hoping that once they do they will not use them to cause trouble. That kind of laziness at handling a problem before it become unmanageable is why the world is such a mess.
FDR and Truman mismanaged the end of WWII and the Communist takeover of China while European countries mishandled their former colonies and there are still repercussions to this day. many are like Obama and refuse to learn from history. Europe won't do anything unless there is a strong American leader who is leading the way. By the time Obama is gone who knows how much additional damage will be done so the successor will have a lot of things on his plate. If Hillary were to win then you can expect more of the same and the World is screwed. While someone else would be better- better doesn't necessarily mean great. It is better to get kicked in the ass than have someone sodomize you but neither is preferable. The wisest men who ran for the Presidency the past decade were not nominated by the Republican party- Gingrich and Giuliani. Only time will tell who they pick this time around.
Ha Ha more fact free opinionated drivel. I will respond to this fairy tale later. It's cool but could do with more dragons ::) ::)
-
Ha Ha more fact free opinionated drivel. I will respond to this fairy tale later. It's cool but could do with more dragons ::) ::)
I'm afraid what Scip has written is very much non-fiction. The only dragons where the fact fire breathing dragons that will reduce your tinfoil hat to dust 8)
-
The only lies are coming from you. Bush didn't lie about what the intelligence agencies assessed, the World's intelligence agencies including Russia's were all convinced Iraq had WMDs. At the time of the invasion everyone knew Iraq was in violation of the cease-fire agreement for failing to live up to the terms of the monitoring agreement. It was thought that Iraq could rapidly begin WMD production anytime it wanted. There were also expectations they began to stockpile chemical resources. It turns out it would have taken longer than expected. Iraq did illegally retain information on the production of WMDs and some equipment and did indeed plan to restart the programs once the monitoring was done but hadn't actually begun doing so as was thought. Iraq also had a great deal of undeclared chemical agents and weapons that were never declared. It took years to find and destroy all the artillery shells and agents that Iraq never declared. Getting rid of Saddam to establish a democracy was a very good thing.
Iraq invaded Kuwait which made it a World issue. Part of the cease fire agreement was to completely give up its programs. It had to declare all its weapons and provide unfettered monitoring. Iraq hid technology from the programs hoping to start them another day and stupidly failed to comply with the monitorying. They played cat and mouse games to make it appear they could produce WMDs anytime they wanted so that their neighbors would fear them.
Those games costed Saddam his administration and life and the people of Iraq are very happy to have him gone.
Reason and factual history prevails! Way to go skip 8)
(http://media.giphy.com/media/Dwc3NCB3feQfK/giphy.gif)
-
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=8&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CDsQFjAH&url=http%3A%2F%2Fnymag.com%2Fdaily%2Fintelligencer%2F2015%2F02%2Frepublicans-still-denying-bush-lied-about-iraq.html&ei=YP_6VKfpO-rp7AbdmIG4BA&usg=AFQjCNGCHVxgKiInmh5aEp3fRx-6bBlcjA&sig2=jNrjo6r6PRpRKeC4Xf1HZg&bvm=bv.87611401,d.ZGU
-
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=8&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CDsQFjAH&url=http%3A%2F%2Fnymag.com%2Fdaily%2Fintelligencer%2F2015%2F02%2Frepublicans-still-denying-bush-lied-about-iraq.html&ei=YP_6VKfpO-rp7AbdmIG4BA&usg=AFQjCNGCHVxgKiInmh5aEp3fRx-6bBlcjA&sig2=jNrjo6r6PRpRKeC4Xf1HZg&bvm=bv.87611401,d.ZGU
Bush did not lie, Chemical weapons where found buried in the desert in 2006
http://www.defense.gov/News/NewsArticle.aspx?ID=15918 (http://www.defense.gov/News/NewsArticle.aspx?ID=15918)
Iraqi disarmament crisis was real and Saddam did not comply with 1991 ceasefire deal. Facilities where preserved and chemical weapons where buried in the desert some where handed over to give the impression of compliance.
From August 1992 to early 2001, Coalition pilots had flown 153,000 sorties over southern Iraq
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Southern_Watch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Southern_Watch)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Iraq_(1998) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Iraq_(1998))
IRAQ'S RECONSTITUTION OF ITS NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM
By David Albright and Khidhir Hamza
Arms Control Today, Vol. 28, No. 7
October 1998
Iraq has provided few credible indications that its nearly three-decade quest for nuclear weapons has ended. Since its invasion of Kuwait in August 1990, however, Iraq has had an extremely difficult time making any progress in building nuclear weapons. The economic sanctions imposed by the UN Security Council after the invasion disrupted many vital imports, particularly for Iraq's uranium enrichment program. The allied bombing campaign destroyed many of its key nuclear facilities.
The subsequent, highly intrusive inspections mandated by the Security Council and carried out by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Action Team in cooperation with the UN Special Commission on Iraq (UNSCOM) exposed and destroyed vast amounts of nuclear equipment and materials. In the process, the inspections uncovered a long-standing and determined clandestine nuclear weapons program, despite Iraqi denials until 1995 that such a program existed. Currently, essentially all of Iraq's pre-Gulf War nuclear facilities and equipment have been eliminated or converted to non-proscribed purposes under periodic Action Team inspections. But Iraq retains its nuclear cadres and its extensive knowledge and experience built up before the Gulf War. Moreover, some key unanswered questions remain about Iraq's effort to build the nuclear weapon itself-called "weaponization" here-and to build a gas centrifuge enrichment program t!!o enrich uranium for weapons purposes.
Since the war, Iraq is suspected of having made progress on a number of bottlenecks in its weapons program, at least those which could be done with little chance of detection by inspectors. These activities include design work, laboratory efforts, subcomponent production, and the operation of test machines. If the inspection system becomes ineffective, Iraq could reconstitute major aspects of its nuclear weapons program that would likely be discovered under the current inspection regime, a combination of historical investigations and an on-going monitoring and verification (OMV) system. Even under the OMV regime, Iraq's illicit acquisition of plutonium or highly enriched uranium (HEU) from the former Soviet Union would be very difficult to detect. Because of this and other weaknesses, the OMV system needs improvement to be effective in deterring and detecting Iraq's banned activities.
There are few alternatives. A nuclear-armed Iraq would be extremely dangerous. Nuclear weapons would aid Saddam Hussein in ensuring his own survival and increasing his regional power. If he detonated a nuclear explosive underground, the international community, and in particular the United States, may not risk intervention, particularly if definitive information about the size of Iraq's nuclear arsenal is lacking.
Essential to any discussion about about Iraq or the OMV system are estimates of the time needed for Iraq to reconstitute its nuclear weapons program. Such an assessment requires a thorough understanding of Iraq's pre-war program and reasonable inferences about its activities after the war. This article attempts to summarize this discussion and outline some of the most important scenarios of how Iraq may reconstitute its nuclear weapons program. In addition, this article looks at a neglected part of the entire inspection process, namely improving methods to reduce the risk posed by the Iraqi nuclear scientists. There is wide agreement about their central importance to any Iraqi attempt to reconstitute its nuclear program. Yet, little has been done to reduce the threat they pose.
Acquiring a Safeguarded Fuel Cycle
Since its inception in the early 1970s, Iraq's nuclear weapons program has depended on deception and determination. Originally, the plan, which one of us (Hamza) authored, was to acquire a complete nuclear fuel cycle able to produce and separate plutonium. The plan focused on the foreign acquisition of complete nuclear facilities with training in their use conducted in the supplier country.
During the 1970s, Iraq concentrated on acquiring nuclear facilities overseas that would have been under IAEA safeguards, since Iraq had signed the nuclear Non--Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1968. Nonetheless, Iraq reckoned it could defeat the safeguards at these facilities or secretly build undeclared duplicate facilities.
In 1976, Iraq succeeded in buying from France a 40-megawatt materials test -reactor called the Tammuz-1 reactor, or Osiraq reactor, that ran on weapons-grade uranium fuel. In 1979, Iraq established a radiochemical laboratory, equipped through a contract with the Italian company SNIA-Techint, suitable for laboratory research on reprocessing. It also acquired a fuel fabrication plant from Italy that was suitable for making natural uranium targets for secret irradiation in the Osiraq reactor.
Iraqi teams calculated that the Osiraq reactor could conservatively produce about 5 kilograms to 7 kilograms of weapons-grade plutonium per year. This value could be higher or lower depending on how the targets were arranged in the reactor; it also depended on the frequency of visits by IAEA inspectors and French personnel. The Iraqis believed that the safeguards on the reactor, which would have included periodic inspections and surveillance cameras, could have been defeated. Prior to visits by IAEA inspectors and French personnel, Iraq planned to pull out the unsafeguarded targets. Iraq had also developed plans to defeat the cameras.
Before Iraq could illicitly produce any plutonium and put the IAEA's safeguards to the test, however, Israel bombed the reactor in June 1981, shortly before the reactor was scheduled to go into operation. The radiochemical laboratory and fuel fabrication plant were not bombed. Later, the fabrication facility was used to produce unsafeguarded targets which were irradiated in a Russian-supplied research reactor to produce plutonium. The reactor also irradiated bismuth targets to make polonium-210, a material used in beryllium-polonium neutron initiators which trigger the nuclear explosion. Material from the targets was extracted in the Italian radiochemical laboratory, which was expanded in the early 1980s.
Iraq Goes Underground
Following the bombing of the Osiraq reactor, Iraq decided to: (1) replace the Osiraq reactor or to develop a heavy water or enriched uranium reactor and associated plutonium separation capability; and (2) develop a uranium enrichment production capacity.
Iraq tried to replace the Osiraq reactor, but by 1985, it realized that it could not buy a replacement. Before the bombing, Iraq had developed plans and purchased some minor items for a 20- to 40-megawatt heavy water natural uranium reactor. After delays in buying a replacement reactor, Iraq decided to pursue this reactor project again. In the late 1980s, however, it put its plans on hold, facing resource limitations. But Iraq continued its efforts to learn how to separate plutonium from irradiated fuel and to make heavy water. Depending on the success of the enrichment programs, Iraq may have reconstituted the nuclear reactor project.
Even before the Israeli bombing of the Osiraq reactor, Iraqi scientists had been evaluating the development of uranium enrichment technologies. However, Iraq has declared that a decision by the Iraqi leadership to pursue these options came after the June 1981 bombing. An Iraqi evaluation finished in 1981 concluded that electromagnetic isotope separation (EMIS) was the most appropriate technology for Iraq and that gaseous diffusion was the next most appropriate option. Gaseous diffusion was planned to produce low--enriched uranium (LEU) which could be used as a feedstock for EMIS, dramatically increasing overall HEU production in EMIS separators. If EMIS was unsuccessful, the plan called for expanding the gaseous diffusion facility to produce HEU directly. At the time, gas centrifuge technology was viewed as too difficult to accomplish. (See below.)
EMIS
The goal of the EMIS program was to build two production units, each able to achieve 15 kilograms per year of weapons-grade uranium using natural uranium feed. Iraqi estimates of the HEU output using LEU feed (enriched to 2.5 percent uranium-235) vary between roughly 25 kilograms and 50 kilograms of weapons-grade uranium per year. The variation reflects different plant designs and performance uncertainties.
After several years of research and development work of mixed success, Iraq nonetheless started in 1987 to build its first EMIS production facility at Tarmiya, north of Baghdad. Also in late 1987, Iraq decided to build a replica of Tarmiya at Al Sharqat, about 200 kilometers northwest of Baghdad. This facility, which was built by Iraqis only, was originally viewed as a second production site that would come into operation roughly at the same time as Tarmiya. In the late 1980s, this plan was modified to one where Al Sharqat would operate after Tarmiya was finished. Iraq also sought unsafeguarded LEU on the international market during the late 1980s. However, it has declared that its search was half-hearted and unsuccessful. Whether this declaration is complete is unclear. As of 1997, the Action Team had not pursued this issue further.
The EMIS program faced repeated delays and technical problems, and by the time of Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, Tarmiya was at least a year behind schedule. At that time, Tarmiya was not expected to produce its first goal quantity of weapons-grade uranium, or 15 kilograms, until at least 1992, assuming that the plant would function well and that a stock of LEU would be used. If natural uranium was used, the date for the production of the first goal quantity would have been 1993 or later.
Because of the large size of EMIS facilities, few expect Iraq to try to secretly rebuild its EMIS production facilities. In addition, it still has to overcome several technical problems, including problems in vacuum technology and ion sources, before its separators would work properly. Armed with a stock of LEU, however, Iraq could produce 15 kilograms per year of weapons-grade uranium with a facility about one-third the size of Tarmiya.
Enrichment Options
By 1987 or 1988, when it became apparent to the Iraqi leadership that the gaseous diffusion program was not progressing well, Iraq decided to de-emphasize this effort. It instead concentrated on chemical enrichment as a source of LEU feedstock for the EMIS program. By 1990, Iraq had made little progress in building a chemical enrichment plant. However, both programs could be reconstituted, although substantial technical challenges would need to be overcome before Iraq could operate production-scale facilities.
After the cancellation of the gaseous diffusion program, the team started to work on gas centrifuges. The team had already been transferred from the Tuwaitha Nuclear Research Center to a new site on the northern edge of Baghdad near Rashdiya, later named the Engineering Design Center (EDC). This change reflected a change of authority from the Atomic Energy Establishment to the Ministry of Industry and Military Industrialization.
This group managed to acquire extensive overseas cooperation in designing and building gas centrifuges, so much so that inspectors have characterized the assistance as key to progress in the centrifuge program.
Despite such help, at the time of the Gulf War, Iraq was still a few years from an operating plant able to produce goal quantities of weapons-grade uranium, declared by the centrifuge program as 1,000 centrifuges producing 10 kilograms of weapons-grade uranium per year. Because of the relatively small size of a gas centrifuge program and the extensive progress made before the war, Iraq is viewed as likely to reconstitute its gas centrifuge program.
Weaponization
Iraq's effort to produce a nuclear explosive started in the mid-1980s. Under a 1988 plan, Iraq intended to have its first weapon by the summer of 1991, based on an implosion design. Iraq had worked on developing the capability to make fissile material for many years prior to this date, and Iraq has explained that the decision at that particular time reflected the expectation that domestically produced HEU would become available within a few years. Iraq intended that its nuclear weapons would be put on ballistic missiles. Iraq faced many problems in trying to reduce and ruggedize its design to fit on top of a ballistic missile.
Questions remain about the status of Iraq's weaponization program at the time of the allied bombing campaign in January 1991, when most activities were halted. Nevertheless, the Action Team inspectors have concluded that with the accelerated effort under the crash program, Iraq could have finished a nuclear explosive design by the end of 1991, if certain technical problems were overcome. However, it would have needed longer to prove a design for the Al Hussein missile. This missile, for example, would have required a warhead with a diameter of 70 centimeters to 80 centimeters, much smaller than the diameter of the design nearing completion that had a diameter of about 120 centimeters.
Iraq was also planning to build a nuclear test site, called the Al Sahara Project. At the time of the allied bombing campaign, Iraq had picked candidate sites in southwest Iraq but it had not performed a site investigation. In addition, according to a senior Iraqi nuclear official, Iraq did not plan to conduct a test before it had accumulated a few nuclear weapons. Iraq has stated that it planned to develop confidence in its weapon designs through an extensive experimental testing program that stopped short of a full-scale nuclear test.
Crash Program
By the time Iraq invaded Kuwait, Iraq still lacked an indigenous source of fissile material; its enrichment plants were still far away from producing HEU. In mid-August 1990, the Iraqi leadership ordered the diversion of its stock of safeguarded HEU fuel. Iraq's initial plan was to extract the HEU from the fuel, further enrich a portion of it, and build a nuclear weapon. The goal was to execute this plan within six months, although by the time of the allied bombing campaign in mid-January 1991 which stopped the effort, Iraq had fallen several months behind. A nuclear warhead for a ballistic missile would have taken significantly longer.
Reconstitution
Iraq has denied trying to reconstitute its nuclear weapons program after the Gulf War, although Iraqi documents suggest otherwise, at least for the period right after the war. Documents dated early June 1991 but finished several weeks earlier, called for salvaged equipment for processing safeguarded HEU fuel to be moved from the Tuwaitha Nuclear Research Center to Tarmiya. Only in late May did the first inspection team show up at Tarmiya, unknowingly halting any Iraqi effort to reconstitute these projects there.
Determining whether Iraq has conducted any proscribed nuclear activities since the Gulf War remains a thorny problem for the Action Team and UNSCOM. Little evidence has surfaced since the defection in August 1995 of General Hussein Kamel, then head of the Ministry of Industry and Military Industrialization (and Saddam Hussein's son-in-law), suggesting that Iraq has been conducting secret nuclear weapons work. Given the nature of the Iraqi regime, however, few accept that it has given up its nuclear weapons ambitions. Iraq's persistence in weakening inspections and hiding equipment, information and materials over the past seven years at great cost in lost oil revenue has only intensified suspicions about its intentions.
There is no simple answer to how much Iraq has accomplished in its nuclear weapons program since 1991 or how quickly Iraq could obtain nuclear weapons in the future. Below, we consider several important -scenarios by which Iraq could build nuclear weapons. These estimates assume that the activities are carried to fruition without being discovered by the inspectors.
What Iraq Still Has
Iraq has demonstrated many times in the past seven years that it will make great sacrifices to preserve its basic resources for its weapons program. Nonetheless, vast amounts of equipment, materials and facilities have been destroyed by the inspectors. There are no known facilities working on nuclear weapons. The IAEA routinely says it has no evidence that banned activities are happening. However, an IAEA statement that it found "no evidence of any activity" does not mean that it has "evidence for no activity." This distinction is important.
Iraq is known to have kept its nuclear weapon teams together following the Gulf War. These teams are kept together by force and intimidation. They appear not to be significantly reduced in size or number from before the Gulf War. Many of these scientists are now in "unreal career paths," according to one Action Team inspector, and could be quickly redirected to nuclear weapons activities, if a decision were made to do so. Iraq has a relatively complete set of documents, despite its frequent protestations to the contrary. It has undoubtedly continued since the war collecting relevant data, reports and information throughout the world. Travel by Iraqis and Internet access have continued.
Following the Gulf War, Iraq established a program at its universities to train a new generation of nuclear scientists and provide more advanced instruction to members of the program. The new scientists are viewed as more loyal to the regime and may apply their expertise only in Iraq, further inhibiting defections. Many key nuclear scientists also gained experience and confidence after the war by rebuilding Iraq's civil industries. Nuclear scientists were instrumental in putting oil refineries, telephone exchanges and power stations back into operation under adverse conditions.
We believe that Iraqi scientists have been conducting theoretical design work and small-scale research and development in a wide range of proscribed areas since inspections began. Iraq may have also modified non-banned items that would be useful for small-scale research and development (R&D) and manufacturing work. Small numbers of such items may have been smuggled from abroad. Nonetheless, extensive progress by Iraqi scientists has been likely hampered by poor working conditions and the IAEA's and UNSCOM's intense scrutiny of the Iraqi program and facilities (and the difficulty in smuggling in key items, or items in sufficient quantity, from abroad).
However, these hardships should not disguise an important cultural shift in the nuclear program. In a new era of international sanctions, intense scrutiny and a lack of funds, new and more ruthless management teams are likely to emerge. The lack of accomplishments prior to the Gulf War, frequently exposed by the inspectors, will drive the new program to correct old mistakes and be more self-reliant and productive. Iraq's core assets are the seasoned and well-experienced cadre. These scientists can be expected to create more focused and productive programs at a reduced cost, size and visibility.
Post-War Weaponization
Prior to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, Iraq was unable to achieve its goal of making a nuclear explosive or weapon. This weakness inhibited its ability to take advantage of the safeguarded HEU fuel before the start of the allied bombing campaign. Iraq probably has focused on making sure it would not be so limited again, if it were presented with a new supply of plutonium or HEU. It is difficult to detect small-scale weaponization work, such as high explosive lenses, uranium metallurgy and neutron initiators-even under the most intrusive inspection regimes. Based on our own assessment conducted in mid-1997, we concluded that in early January 1991 Iraq was within a few months to a year of building a nuclear explosive. Building a weapon able to be mounted to a ballistic missile would have required more time.
After the war, scientists in the weaponization program worked six days a week, eight hours per day. They had time to resolve several theoretical design issues they could not properly evaluate during the crash program. They conducted a range of theoretical activities, such as computer simulations of the atomic explosion. They also worked on more advanced explosives for the device. These activities led to a much better understanding of nuclear explosives and their behavior.Iraq worked on small-scale experiments to improve its knowledge of particular components. It may have smuggled in subcomponents, machine tools and other items. Technicians could have continued to improve their skills in making uranium components by using surrogate materials. Iraq has worked on improving the design of high-explosive lenses and its ability to make them.
A special problem for Iraq is the neutron initiator. Its pre-war design was based on beryllium and polonium-210, a highly radioactive material with a half-life of about one year. Any polonium-210 Iraq may have successfully hidden from inspectors would have decayed away by now. Because Iraq obtained its polonium by irradiating bismuth targets in its research reactor, which is now defunct, it cannot produce more. Thus, Iraq needs a new type of neutron generator, and one likely candidate is a pulsed neutron generator based on tritium and deuterium. Iraq obtained several pulsed tritium-deuterium generators that are used in the oil exploration industry. One of the "oil well logging" devices could be suitable to trigger a nuclear explosive. Iraq also had established a program before the war to build its own pulsed neutron generator, but this program did not progress very far.
One of us (Hamza) was involved in an attempt in 1991 to create an off-shore company in Jordan to produce tritium-deuterium generators. The company would have produced these generators for the oil industry, but in secret; it would also have produced miniaturized neutron generators for use in Iraqi nuclear weapons. The company would have depended on the involvement of an East European expert with long experience in building such devices. This expert was not told the true purpose of the company, but he said that a civilian endeavor could no longer be done in Iraq because of the UN sanctions. Hamza pulled out of the project when Iraq stated that he could not take his family with him to Jordan. He believes that the company was never built in Jordan.
Assuming that Iraq has done nothing on weaponization since the Gulf War, we estimate that Iraq may need more than a year to reconstitute its program and finish a device, absent the fissile material. However, this scenario appears unlikely. The more likely scenario is that Iraq has made progress since the war, although the extent of progress is difficult to judge. Our conclusion is that Iraq could make a nuclear device within two to 12 months after deciding to do so, assuming it acquired sufficient fissile material. We also believe that the more probable time is closer to two months if HEU is obtained. The lower bound of two months includes the time needed to make components out of HEU and conduct any final testing of the device. The design would probably be an implosion system. However, Iraq was working on a gun-type device before the war, but it did not emphasize this design because of an anticipated scarcity of HEU. After the war, this design could have been perfected. If plutonium were obtained, Iraq would likely need more time, but still less than 12 months, to build a modified implosion device. Because the estimated time to complete a device is less than a year, likely considerably less than a year, the emphasis must remain on preventing Iraq from acquiring fissile material.
Our assessment appeared to be confirmed by Scott Ritter, an UNSCOM inspector who resigned in August 1998. He said that UNSCOM had intelligence information which indicates that Iraq has components necessary for three nuclear weapons, lacking only the fissile material. However, Ritter's statement has been challenged as unsubstantiated by UNSCOM, IAEA and U.S. officials. At least three of the four sources Ritter cited as the basis for his information have disputed Ritter's account, according to IAEA and U.S. officials.
Procurement of Fissile Material
Iraq denies ever making any attempt to procure fissile material abroad after the war. It also denies any serious attempt to do so before the war. Iraq has readily admitted, at least after Kamel's defection, that it received many offers for fissile material from abroad. One senior official said in 1996 that in the last 10 years, Iraq had received over 200 offers of everything from red mercury to fissile material to complete nuclear weapons. He insisted that Iraq had turned down every offer.
One offer, however, is being investigated by the Action Team. This offer, described in summary in a one-page document found at Kamel's farm after his defection, was purported to be by A.Q. Khan, the father of Pakistan's gas centrifuge program. An intermediary approached Iraqi intelligence in October 1990 with the following offer: Khan was prepared to give Iraq project designs for a nuclear bomb and to provide assistance in enriching uranium and building a nuclear weapon. He would also ensure any requirements of materials from Western European countries through a company Khan owns in Dubai in the United Arab Emirates. He requested a preliminary technical meeting to discuss the documents that he was willing to sell.
However, a meeting with Khan directly was not possible at that time, given the situation. An alternative of setting up a meeting with an intermediary, who had good relations with the Iraqi intelligence agents, was mentioned as a possibility. Iraqi intelligence officials believed the motive was money. Both the Pakistani government and Khan vehemently deny any such offer. Whether or nor Khan was involved, the -Iraqis took this offer as genuine. Iraq's statement that it rejected this offer appears credible.
One of us (Hamza) knew of this offer at the time, and believes Iraq would not have pursued it. This type of offer would have given those involved too much knowledge and control over highly secret nuclear programs. What if they talked? Pakistan has had close relations with the United States. If the offer was a scam, large amounts of money could be at risk.
Despite these cases, we know of no evidence that Iraq has procured plutonium or HEU overseas since the war. But concern remains that Iraq may have already attempted to do so in the former Soviet Union. We cannot exclude the possibility that it has already obtained fissile material there. Nonetheless, preventing Iraq from acquiring nuclear explosive material abroad, particularly in Russia and former Soviet republics, remains a difficult but absolutely essential goal.
Gas Centrifuge Program
The gas centrifuge enrichment process is the most critical of the technologies Iraq pursued to make fissile material domestically. This type of activity is difficult to detect under the current OMV system. Before the war, Iraq made substantial progress in mastering the operation and construction of a variety of gas centrifuge designs. It also acquired illegally a large number of highly classified gas centrifuge design, operation and manufacturing documents from German centrifuge experts.
Suspicions remain that gas centrifuge activity resumed after the war at Rashdiya. Little verified information exists for activities at Rashdiya after the war. It was not bombed at all during the war, and it was not inspected until the summer of 1991, and then only in a cursory manner. Iraq has declared that in March 1991, it started bringing evacuated equipment and materials back to Rashdiya, but had not finished reconstituting its program by the time it accepted the UN Security Council Resolution 687 (the Gulf War cease-fire resolution) in April. Iraq says that it did not resume any centrifuge work at Rashdiya or elsewhere after the war.
Nevertheless, questions remain about why Iraq decided to hide Rashdiya's existence. Although Iraq chose to tell the inspectors about many of the centrifuge pro-gram's accomplishments and the existence of other unknown centrifuge sites, it decided not to reveal Rashdiya or the extent of foreign assistance. Iraq continued to deny the importance of Rashdiya even after defectors had identified the site in 1991. Iraq came clean about Rashdiya and the extent of foreign assistance only after Kamel's defection in 1995, when exposure was certain.
Iraq also continues to maintain that all centrifuge program reports and progress reports were destroyed during the bombing or after the war. This statement is viewed by the Action Team as non-credible because documents from the rest of the Iraqi nuclear programs continue to surface. The collection of papers from Kamel's farm also included several tons of maraging steel and large quantities of carbon fiber, both key materials in making gas centrifuges. The inspectors did not know that Iraq still had this material. Whether some was used in small-scale R&D activities is unknown. In addition, Iraq may have acquired more such materials. An Iraqi official has bragged to inspectors that overseas procurement of maraging steel is no problem.
Iraq could have made progress in the following areas. It could have improved its ability to make centrifuge components to high tolerances, an absolute must for the successful operation of centrifuges and a difficult problem for Iraqi industry. Centrifuge experts could have expanded their theoretical and "hands-on" knowledge of single machines or a few hooked together by pipes into a cascade. Iraq may have also procured illicitly more machine tools to make centrifuge components. Despite this progress, Iraq would still face formidable challenges in making significant progress toward building a facility able to make kilo-grams of weapons-grade uranium annually. It would also need to acquire a stock of -uranium hexafluoride, a demanding task.
We consider two cases, which both assume that Iraq has not started to build a centrifuge facility, whose goal capacity is taken as 10 kilograms per year of weapons-grade uranium. These cases also assume that Iraq may opt for a simpler centrifuge design that is easier to build and requires materials and equipment that are less controlled internationally.
The first case posits that Iraq needs to procure manufacturing equipment, build a manufacturing plant, conduct additional testing of the centrifuge design, produce uranium hexafluoride and manufacture 1,000 to 2,000 centrifuges. We estimate that Iraq would need about three to seven years to accomplish this set of tasks and produce its first 10 kilograms of weapons-grade uranium. The second case assumes that Iraq just needs to manufacture the centrifuges in sufficient number, having finished all necessary testing and procurement of materials and equipment. In this case, Iraq would need an estimated two to three years to bring the plant into operation and produce its first 10 kilograms of weapons-grade uranium. In brief, Iraq would need at least a few years to construct and operate a clandestine gas centrifuge enrichment plant. Because Iraq would need to procure several key items a!!broad, the inspection system needs to have a strong export-import focus in order to have a better chance of detecting Iraq's procurement efforts.
Focus on Iraqi Scientists
The Action Team realized soon after inspections started the importance of identifying and interviewing key Iraqi nuclear scientists. Most key scientists have been identified. Over a hundred are periodically interviewed by the Action Team. However, this process is inadequate in obtaining necessary information or ensuring early warning if these scientists are engaged in prohibited activities.
Most of the scientists are virtual -prisoners. They live in fear of their government's punishments if they do or say anything outside the limits imposed by it. Even if they manage to leave, their families are held hostage with the possibility of terrible reprisals against them if they reveal any significant information. Currently, Iraqi scientists are interviewed in the presence of government security officials. This arrangement gives the Iraqi regime control over what the scientists can say and provides an easy way to control the information flowing to the inspectors. One of us (Hamza) was told that in case the inspectors found out his former role as head of the weaponization program, he was not to make himself available to inspectors. If he was forced to talk to them, he was instructed to claim not to remember anything about what he did.
On one inspection, the other author (Albright) was able to interview Iraqi scientists only in groups or in the presence of a "minder." One-to-one contacts usually involved pleasantries or being pulled aside to be "fed a line." In one case, the head of the gas centrifuge program tried to convince him that the first gas centrifuge facility would have taken years to finish.
Typically, the interviews are video-taped by the Iraqis. These tapes provide the Iraqis with a means to analyze in detail the information that is revealed in those sessions, any mistakes that are made, and the underlying knowledge and strategy of the inspectors. The genesis of this interviewing process dates to the beginning of inspections. One inspector said that it did not occur to the inspectors to do it any other way. "We just did not think about it," he added.
At least, the inspectors need to have the right to interview the scientists without their "minders," particularly under the OMV program. Ideally, such interviews should be conducted in another country. An alternative is to conduct the interviews in a secure room, which for example exists at the Baghdad Verification and Monitoring Center.
Getting the Scientists Out
A better solution is to create a method to allow Saddam's cadre of knowledgeable nuclear weapon scientists and their families to leave Iraq safely. With years of valuable experience before the war, Iraq's nuclear weapon experts are both a valuable and necessary asset to implement a decision to seek nuclear weapons. If the key scientists leave, Iraq may be unable to reconstitute a nuclear weapons program.
A practical method to implement this proposal is for the United States to link its support for lifting sanctions to Iraq agreeing to allow certain scientists and their families to leave Iraq. Such a method would avoid the need for Security Council agreement and permit the United States to name the scientists it wants out.
Would any scientists leave Iraq voluntarily? There is a growing recognition that many of the nuclear experts are not committed to remaining in this highly repressive police state. Most of the experts were arbitrarily assigned to the nuclear weapons program after returning from overseas education. After suffering years of hardships created by sanctions, many scientists and their families could be expected to leave. As mentioned earlier, the vast majority of the former nuclear weapon scientists have been identified through captured Iraqi documents and Action Team inspections. The resettlement of just a few dozen key scientists would devastate Saddam's ability to rebuild his nuclear weapons program.
Key to the success of this initiative is protecting the scientists and their families from retaliation. The United States would be a possible resettlement country, because it can provide adequate protection against Saddam's agents if he decides to violate Security Council resolutions. The Security Council would also need to assign the -Action Team and UNSCOM the task of investigating any suspected retaliation against family members in Iraq. In the event of retaliation, the Security Council must be ready to punish Iraq decisively.
The scientists would need to be provided economic support until they could find adequate employment. Any costs during this resettlement process could be collected from Iraq, just as the costs of UNSCOM and Action Team inspections are taken from proceeds of Iraqi oil sales. For their part, these experts would commit not to work in any weapons of mass destruction program and agree to host government or Action Team monitoring to ensure that they are not violating their commitment or secretly helping Saddam to rebuild his military programs.
Time is running out to deprive Saddam of his most valuable remaining nuclear weapons asset. If successful, this initiative could nip an Iraqi nuclear weapons program in the bud. The alternative is letting the nuclear cadre, intimidated by Saddam, remain in Iraq, awaiting the inevitable orders to reconstitute the nuclear weapons program or train the next generation of nuclear weapons experts.
Conclusion
Ensuring that Iraq does not build nuclear weapons will require vigilance. The chance of Iraq building nuclear weapons in secret depends critically on the effectiveness of the OMV system. If inspections become ineffective, even if sanctions remain, Iraq's chance of success will be unacceptably high. Iraq has developed a deep understanding of the weaknesses and vulnerabilities of the entire inspection system. It appears to have a strategy to weaken inspections at will. Although a robust and constantly improving inspection system is necessary to detect and thwart Iraq's proscribed nuclear activities, Security Council enforcement of the inspections, backed up by U.S. and British willingness to use military force, will remain vital to the future effectiveness of inspections.
The OMV needs improvement, including a more system-wide approach to its design and deployment. More environmental monitoring in Iraq is needed. Improved cooperation on detecting illicit imports into Iraq is also increasingly vital, as the sanctions become less effective. International efforts to improve controls over fissile material in the former Soviet Union must receive a higher priority. With a strengthened, enforced OMV program, Iraq is far less likely to build nuclear weapons in secret. If key Iraqi scientists are brought to the West, Saddam Hussein may find it difficult to succeed in building nuclear weapons for many years.
Ultimately, the goal of the inspections in Iraq is to buy time, in hopes that the regime will either change or give up its ambitions for nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction. A highly confrontational inspection system has little chance of lasting for decades in any country. It is a tribute to the Security Council, and in particular the United States, that the inspections have lasted this long. But the system of stringent inspections must remain effective at least as long as the current regime persists on its noncooperative path. The stakes are high. A nuclear-armed Iraq could haunt the world for decades, and make the accomplishment of Middle East peace a dream of the past.
-
from the horses mouth.
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCgQtwIwAQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DOSN-Kku_rFE&ei=ZhP7VKSjF-iV7AaS64G4Dg&usg=AFQjCNGyyfDEgvIeGMzfErTbjII0tEoBWA&sig2=sO0QiMF-fu8--MUnb3cJIg&bvm=bv.87611401,d.ZGU
-
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCUQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.independent.co.uk%2Fnews%2Fuk%2Fpolitics%2Ftony-blair-and-iraq-the-damning-evidence-8563133.html&ei=FBv7VMXWJZLV7AbOkoGgDA&usg=AFQjCNF2xT0Sbada2cUC4s_F2-mVcFq-mg&sig2=hFZ8bs57VNk8ux7Ix6EQWA&bvm=bv.87611401,d.ZGU
-
from the horses mouth.
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCgQtwIwAQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DOSN-Kku_rFE&ei=ZhP7VKSjF-iV7AaS64G4Dg&usg=AFQjCNGyyfDEgvIeGMzfErTbjII0tEoBWA&sig2=sO0QiMF-fu8--MUnb3cJIg&bvm=bv.87611401,d.ZGU
That was from 2004. Get up to date
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2014/10/16/new-york-times-reports-wmd-found-in-iraq (http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2014/10/16/new-york-times-reports-wmd-found-in-iraq)
-
exept no democracy has been establishd.
That´s right - now we have IS and the caliphate..... Bet the Iraqis and their neighbours are super happy about that!
-
Bush did not lie, Chemical weapons where found buried in the desert in 2006
http://www.defense.gov/News/NewsArticle.aspx?ID=15918 (http://www.defense.gov/News/NewsArticle.aspx?ID=15918)
Iraqi disarmament crisis was real and Saddam did not comply with 1991 ceasefire deal. Facilities where preserved and chemical weapons where buried in the desert some where handed over to give the impression of compliance.
From August 1992 to early 2001, Coalition pilots had flown 153,000 sorties over southern Iraq
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Southern_Watch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Southern_Watch)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Iraq_(1998) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Iraq_(1998))
IRAQ'S RECONSTITUTION OF ITS NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM
By David Albright and Khidhir Hamza
Arms Control Today, Vol. 28, No. 7
October 1998
the us defence department is hardly an unbiased or credible source.
-
the us defence department is hardly an unbiased or credible source.
It is certainly not.
-
That was from 2004. Get up to date
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2014/10/16/new-york-times-reports-wmd-found-in-iraq (http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2014/10/16/new-york-times-reports-wmd-found-in-iraq)
You are all over the place and appear to not know what you think.
Scipio's bullshit, as shown by the extensive and transparent Zogby poll, is believed only by Republicans and war apologists. The rest of the world and it's dog knows that Iraq was and still is a disaster, as was Afghanistan and Libya. To claim otherwise flies in the face of the evidence before everyone's eyes every day. Do you honestly believe the "war on terror" been a success?
Has Islamic terrorism increased or decreased since the "war on terror" started?
Your new sidekick has just repeated the same discredited lies from the same discredited liars. Your links are as funny as your pictures. The US state dept. is not an unbiased source. Scipio's polls are laughable, lacking even the basic explanations of methodology, sampling etc. I suspect that these details are over your head anyway as it is unlikely that your knowledge of statistics and the need to weight samples is any better than your "knowledge" of world affairs, which appears to be whatever the government and their shills in the media tell you.
Read the Zogby poll for yourself and get back to me with reasons why you dispute those findings. You won't, and nor will scipio, because you couldn't discredit them which is why you ignore them and then use diversion.
-
I'm afraid what Scip has written is very much non-fiction. The only dragons where the fact fire breathing dragons that will reduce your tinfoil hat to dust 8)
Why do think these views are a majority view only amongst American Republicans?
-
You are all over the place and appear to not know what you think. Your cheerleading of scipio after your previous brushes with him make you look like a sycophant and pathetic.
Scipio's bullshit, as shown by the extensive and transparent Zogby poll, is believed only by Republicans and war apologists. The rest of the world and it's dog knows that Iraq was and still is a disaster, as was Afghanistan and Libya. To claim otherwise flies in the face of the evidence before everyone's eyes every day. Do you honestly believe the "war on terror" been a success?
Has Islamic terrorism increased or decreased since the "war on terror" started?
Your new sidekick has just repeated the same discredited lies from the same discredited liars. Your links are as funny as your pictures. The US state dept. is not an unbiased source. Scipio's polls are laughable, lacking even the basic explanations of methodology, sampling etc. I suspect that these details are over your head anyway as it is unlikely that your knowledge of statistics and the need to weight samples is any better than your "knowledge" of world affairs, which appears to be whatever the government and their shills in the media tell you.
Read the Zogby poll for yourself and get back to me with reasons why you dispute those findings. You won't, and nor will scipio, because you couldn't discredit them which is why you ignore them and then use diversion.
You are playing games with polls to try to pretend that the majority of Iraqis are mad that Saddam is gone. The people upset Saddam is gone are mainly the Sunni minority who were profiting from Saddam's reign.
The fact that the Iraqi government has done a poor job against ISIS doesn't mean it isn't a democratic government it just means it's military and government is not waging an effective military campaign against ISIS.
The Iraqi military fought well with US airpower, US personnel training them and making sure they were properly supplied and with US personnel making the battle plans. When Obama completed a full pull out this ended and the Iraqi government failed to follow through with adequate supply and training. They have yet to build an effective airforce instead of promoting the best military commanders have appointed for political reasons. The repercussions will be felt in the elections. That is how a democracy works.
Instead of arming the Kurds and taking real efforts to stem ISIS Obama is doing token things because he is unwilling to do what is necessary.
The hilarious thing is that you cheer Russia stealing land and say they are just defending themselves and attack the US which is not taking land but rather trying to help other countries and the World.
-
I am sick and tired of hearing Americans claim that they are "helping" other countries! America is doing what it is doing because they want to control oil states.
-
You are playing games with polls to try to pretend that the majority of Iraqis are mad that Saddam is gone. The people upset Saddam is gone are mainly the Sunni minority who were profiting from Saddam's reign.
The fact that the Iraqi government has done a poor job against ISIS doesn't mean it isn't a democratic government it just means it's military and government is not waging an effective military campaign against ISIS.
The Iraqi military fought well with US airpower, US personnel training them and making sure they were properly supplied and with US personnel making the battle plans. When Obama completed a full pull out this ended and the Iraqi government failed to follow through with adequate supply and training. They have yet to build an effective airforce instead of promoting the best military commanders have appointed for political reasons. The repercussions will be felt in the elections. That is how a democracy works.
Instead of arming the Kurds and taking real efforts to stem ISIS Obama is doing token things because he is unwilling to do what is necessary.
The hilarious thing is that you cheer Russia stealing land and say they are just defending themselves and attack the US which is not taking land but rather trying to help other countries and the World.
Even more hilarious he wrote it was 'comical' when I said the invasion of Kuwait in 1991 was a war of aggression ??? think this guys gone too far down the rabbit hole
-
I am sick and tired of hearing Americans claim that they are "helping" other countries! America is doing what it is doing because they want to control oil states.
Saddam Hussein was a loose cannon that gassed anyone he didn't like. glad he got the noose
http://youtu.be/wDHwvmZXyro (http://youtu.be/wDHwvmZXyro)
There is no Oil in Afghanistan Vietnam or South Korea its not always to do with oil
-
You are all over the place and appear to not know what you think.
What on earth is a sycophant?
-
What on earth is a sycophant?
A person who acts obsequiously towards someone important in order to gain advantage.
-
Saddam Hussein was a loose cannon that gassed anyone he didn't like. glad he got the noose
http://youtu.be/wDHwvmZXyro (http://youtu.be/wDHwvmZXyro)
There is no Oil in Afghanistan Vietnam or South Korea its not always to do with oil
What had Saddam done to us ? Was he the aggressor ? No---------------we were,and look at the result,retaliation in the form of on-going terrorism. WE have created an unsafe country.
What he did in his OWN country to his OWN people was entirely his business and NO concern of anyone else's,least of all OURS.
Blair barged into Iraq,without thought for our servicemen/women and the forethought of how his own country would suffer because of his tin-pot ideas of WMD's,which was to my mind an excuse to show off his own position in politics.What a silly LITTLE man.What a criminal,who has escaped the courts for his criminal actions.
If anything had happened to my grandson when he was in Iraq,I'd have held Blair responsible for his war crimes.
-
What on earth is a sycophant?
Even more hilarious he wrote it was 'comical' when I said the invasion of Kuwait in 1991 was a war of aggression ??? think this guys gone too far down the rabbit hole
So you can't comprehend and are unable to use a dictionary. I did not say that the Iraq invasion of Kuwait wasn't a war of aggression, I said your list was comical. You are so far out of your depth here that I don't know why I am bothering but here goes anyway.
You listed a number of random wars/conflicts which involved Russia and that was basically the one common thread between them. You needed it explaining to you what a "war of aggression" is after you had boldly put forward your comical list.
Your opinion has swayed between believing that the US are right in acting as the world police to accepting that they are not the benign Uncle Sam of folklore but are an aggressive nation acting in the interests of a few. However you believed that nothing could be done about this.
You are now back to justifying the US actions again.
So you can't spell, can't comprehend, don't know how to use a dictionary and your opinions change with the wind. A couple of synonyms for sycophant are flatterer and hanger on. Your "go scipio" posts, or whatever it said, after your previous run ins with him showed you to be exactly that.
Given that I have had to explain to you the meaning of a common English word, criticism from you about my knowledge and understanding of world affairs can hardly be taken seriously.
-
A person who acts obsequiously towards someone important in order to gain advantage.
Or to give it it's more common definition; an ar*e licker! ;D ;D ;D
-
So you can't comprehend and are unable to use a dictionary. I did not say that the Iraq invasion of Kuwait wasn't a war of aggression, I said your list was comical. You are so far out of your depth here that I don't know why I am bothering but here goes anyway.
You listed a number of random wars/conflicts which involved Russia and that was basically the one common thread between them. You needed it explaining to you what a "war of aggression" is after you had boldly put forward your comical list.
Your opinion has swayed between believing that the US are right in acting as the world police to accepting that they are not the benign Uncle Sam of folklore but are an aggressive nation acting in the interests of a few. However you believed that nothing could be done about this.
You are now back to justifying the US actions again.
So you can't spell, can't comprehend, don't know how to use a dictionary and your opinions change with the wind. A couple of synonyms for sycophant are flatterer and hanger on. Your "go scipio" posts, or whatever it said, after your previous run ins with him showed you to be exactly that.
Given that I have had to explain to you the meaning of a common English word, criticism from you about my knowledge and understanding of world affairs can hardly be taken seriously.
indeed I don't agree with Scipio on the Bamber case but that don't mean I have to disagree with him on world affairs. I was the one that began defending the USA then Scipo was the only one that came to back up my position. I was thinking of explaining and typing allot of information for you but decided it was not worth my time as you would just move the goalpost or just ignore it. Then to find Scipio had explained the Iraq situation precisely and accurate more or less how I would have put it so I praised his effort.
When it comes to your opinion about me gringo
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/f4/cf/b0/f4cfb0879bdff9af620b433215e654f5.jpg)
-
So you can't comprehend and are unable to use a dictionary. I did not say that the Iraq invasion of Kuwait wasn't a war of aggression, I said your list was comical. You are so far out of your depth here that I don't know why I am bothering but here goes anyway.
You listed a number of random wars/conflicts which involved Russia and that was basically the one common thread between them. You needed it explaining to you what a "war of aggression" is after you had boldly put forward your comical list.
Your opinion has swayed between believing that the US are right in acting as the world police to accepting that they are not the benign Uncle Sam of folklore but are an aggressive nation acting in the interests of a few. However you believed that nothing could be done about this.
You are now back to justifying the US actions again.
So you can't spell, can't comprehend, don't know how to use a dictionary and your opinions change with the wind. A couple of synonyms for sycophant are flatterer and hanger on. Your "go scipio" posts, or whatever it said, after your previous run ins with him showed you to be exactly that.
Given that I have had to explain to you the meaning of a common English word, criticism from you about my knowledge and understanding of world affairs can hardly be taken seriously.
Harsh... but fair!
;D
-
indeed I don't agree with Scipio on the Bamber case but that don't mean I have to disagree with him on world affairs. I was the one that began defending the USA then Scipo was the only one that came to back up my position. I was thinking of explaining and typing allot of information for you but decided it was not worth my time as you would just move the goalpost or just ignore it. Then to find Scipio had explained the Iraq situation precisely and accurate more or less how I would have put it so I praised his effort.
When it comes to your opinion about me gringo
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/f4/cf/b0/f4cfb0879bdff9af620b433215e654f5.jpg)
You were "thinking about typing a lot of information" ;D ;D
I "would ignore it or move the goalposts". Hmmm where to begin.
You have previously posted a list and some pictures which you are unable to verify, not knowing dates, locations or anything about them for that matter. I asked you for clarification of these in order to discuss the "evidence" that you put forward and you were unwilling/unable to do so. Your list of wars was addressed by in detail. You have nothing to come back with, because you are so ill informed, and then resort to ad hom attacks on me.
In summary, I have addressed every point that you have put forward and all you have done is attempt to insult my intelligence from a ,quite frankly, weak position.
Scipio's precise explanation of the Iraq war is just a repeat of the lies told at the time to justify intervention. Those lies are now so discredited that only the deluded and war apologists repeat them now.
-
You were "thinking about typing a lot of information" ;D ;D
I "would ignore it or move the goalposts". Hmmm where to begin.
You have previously posted a list and some pictures which you are unable to verify, not knowing dates, locations or anything about them for that matter. I asked you for clarification of these in order to discuss the "evidence" that you put forward and you were unwilling/unable to do so. Your list of wars was addressed by in detail. You have nothing to come back with, because you are so ill informed, and then resort to ad hom attacks on me.
In summary, I have addressed every point that you have put forward and all you have done is attempt to insult my intelligence from a ,quite frankly, weak position.
Scipio's precise explanation of the Iraq war is just a repeat of the lies told at the time to justify intervention. Those lies are now so discredited that only the deluded and war apologists repeat them now.
(http://replygif.net/i/1126.gif)
-
David is that you still laughing at my post Manson/Bronson hahahahahaha
-
David is that you still laughing at my post Manson/Bronson hahahahahaha
lol ;D
on a serious note where does Manson/Bronson say Jeremy is guilty?
-
David I had the information sent to me by email it was Charles Bronson who stated this in an interview but I was asked not to reveal my source. Sorry.
-
David I had the information sent to me by email it was Charles Bronson who stated this in an interview but I was asked not to reveal my source. Sorry.
then we don't really know if its true :( Bronson to my understanding is isolated and not allowed to mix with others
-
The only lies are coming from you. Bush didn't lie about what the intelligence agencies assessed, the World's intelligence agencies including Russia's were all convinced Iraq had WMDs. At the time of the invasion everyone knew Iraq was in violation of the cease-fire agreement for failing to live up to the terms of the monitoring agreement. It was thought that Iraq could rapidly begin WMD production anytime it wanted. There were also expectations they began to stockpile chemical resources. It turns out it would have taken longer than expected. Iraq did illegally retain information on the production of WMDs and some equipment and did indeed plan to restart the programs once the monitoring was done but hadn't actually begun doing so as was thought. Iraq also had a great deal of undeclared chemical agents and weapons that were never declared. It took years to find and destroy all the artillery shells and agents that Iraq never declared. Getting rid of Saddam to establish a democracy was a very good thing.
There are no lies from me and if there are then I have no doubt that you can highlight them for me.
To claim that Bush didn't lie about the intelligence agency assessments is a generous interpretation. It is well known now that the politicians misrepresented the intelligence and told outright lies. Dr. David Kelly the UN weapons inspector, who was outed as the source to the BBC's Andrew Gilligan, claimed that politicians had "sexed up" the intelligence and made claims that were unsupported by the intelligence. He was found dead in a bizarre supposed suicide. Imagine a Russian scientist claiming that Putin was lying about such an issue and outing his lies and then turning up dead. What would you make of that?
Mobile chemical labs and the 45 minutes to launch WMD claims are and were supported by nothing. Colin Powell's speech to the UN has become infamous for the amount of lies and deceptions it contains. Colin Powell himself has said since that his speech would be a "blot on his record". Most people regard this as lying funnily enough.
Your recollections are just wrong scipio. Everyone did not know that Iraq were in violation of the Disarmament protocols (not a ceasefire agreement). The US at the time were pushing for war whatever the intelligence said. If you still believe this utterly discredited shit then there is no hope for you. The "sexed up" intelligence was an attempt by the US to gain legal cover from the UN for their war but it was going ahead anyway.
When you say "it was thought" and that "there was an expectation" you fail to clarify by whom. These are not the kind of statements and intelligence that justify invading another country.
Did you research the Zogby poll and compare it to the polls that you posted and is that why you haven't discussed them further?
The PIPA poll that you linked to simply has no credibility. It is funded by the likes of the Rockefeller foundation and The Ploughshares Fund. The "advisors" to these funders of PIPA are packed with white American conservatives and lots of military men as well as John Kerry. The polling was carried out on behalf of CNN and USA Today and was carried out by the Pan Arab Research Centre. The Pan Arab Research Centre is owned by M. A. Kharafi and Sons. It is fair to say that the Kharafi's have extensive interests elsewhere and that they cannot be seen as impartial.
The poll by PIPA, in summary, was commissioned by two biased American "news" channels. The polling organisation used was a group whose funding comes from supporters and sponsors of US aggression. The polling itself was carried out by an organisation with extensive commercial interests which call into question their impartiality. It is not worth the paper it is written on and is simply self serving and not an attempt to genuinely gauge Iraqi opinions. It is an attempt at justification by the very vested interests who sponsored it in the first place.
"Getting rid of Saddam to establish a democracy was a very good thing". If they had got rid of Saddam for this reason it would be illegal under international law though wouldn't it? And who decides that it is a very good thing because there are millions of Iraqis who would disagree, but no doubt the mighty scipio would be able to tell them that they are all biased idiots who refuse to accept the evidence fabricated by the perpetrators themselves.
-
There are no lies from me and if there are then I have no doubt that you can highlight them for me.
To claim that Bush didn't lie about the intelligence agency assessments is a generous interpretation. It is well known now that the politicians misrepresented the intelligence and told outright lies. Dr. David Kelly the UN weapons inspector, who was outed as the source to the BBC's Andrew Gilligan, claimed that politicians had "sexed up" the intelligence and made claims that were unsupported by the intelligence. He was found dead in a bizarre supposed suicide. Imagine a Russian scientist claiming that Putin was lying about such an issue and outing his lies and then turning up dead. What would you make of that?
Mobile chemical labs and the 45 minutes to launch WMD claims are and were supported by nothing. Colin Powell's speech to the UN has become infamous for the amount of lies and deceptions it contains. Colin Powell himself has said since that his speech would be a "blot on his record". Most people regard this as lying funnily enough.
Your recollections are just wrong scipio. Everyone did not know that Iraq were in violation of the Disarmament protocols (not a ceasefire agreement). The US at the time were pushing for war whatever the intelligence said. If you still believe this utterly discredited shit then there is no hope for you. The "sexed up" intelligence was an attempt by the US to gain legal cover from the UN for their war but it was going ahead anyway.
When you say "it was thought" and that "there was an expectation" you fail to clarify by whom. These are not the kind of statements and intelligence that justify invading another country.
Did you research the Zogby poll and compare it to the polls that you posted and is that why you haven't discussed them further?
The PIPA poll that you linked to simply has no credibility. It is funded by the likes of the Rockefeller foundation and The Ploughshares Fund. The "advisors" to these funders of PIPA are packed with white American conservatives and lots of military men as well as John Kerry. The polling was carried out on behalf of CNN and USA Today and was carried out by the Pan Arab Research Centre. The Pan Arab Research Centre is owned by M. A. Kharafi and Sons. It is fair to say that the Kharafi's have extensive interests elsewhere and that they cannot be seen as impartial.
The poll by PIPA, in summary, was commissioned by two biased American "news" channels. The polling organisation used was a group whose funding comes from supporters and sponsors of US aggression. The polling itself was carried out by an organisation with extensive commercial interests which call into question their impartiality. It is not worth the paper it is written on and is simply self serving and not an attempt to genuinely gauge Iraqi opinions. It is an attempt at justification by the very vested interests who sponsored it in the first place.
"Getting rid of Saddam to establish a democracy was a very good thing". If they had got rid of Saddam for this reason it would be illegal under international law though wouldn't it? And who decides that it is a very good thing because there are millions of Iraqis who would disagree, but no doubt the mighty scipio would be able to tell them that they are all biased idiots who refuse to accept the evidence fabricated by the perpetrators themselves.
Producing evidence that the intelligence communities were wrong doesn't in any way establish Bush lied.
You are the one lying by trying to pretend that the World's intelligence agencies didn't judge what they did and instead pretending Bush simply made it up.
You also lied about the polls regarding the attitudes of the people of Iraq. I post how the people of Iraq support deposing Saddam. A majority of Iraqis support such even though the transition has been rough just like the transition from Socialism to Capitalism in the Iron curtain was rough but deemed worth it. Instead of being honest and producing the results of such polls you resort to polls of whether their life is hard and try to pretend that such polls mean that Iraqis didn't want Saddam overthrown. You are biased and dishonest.
You already have little credibility but you further diminish any chance of having any when you praise Russian aggression and misrepresent Russian invasions of other countries as reasonable self-defense actions. Invading Georgia and Ukraine wasn't self-defense. Invading a country to annex ports is not reasonable self-defense actions. If it is then that means the US can invade any country it desires to steal ports for our vessels.
You are an apologist for Russian aggression and ridiculously attack the US as being an aggressor. You have things completely backwards and remind me of the Marxist apologists during the Cold War who loved the USSR and defended everything it did while trashing the West and Capitalism.
indeed a great number of people like you tried suggesting ISIS wasn't so bad and the West was intentionally distorting about them in order to justify invading sovereign nations. ISIS is running wild trying to wipe out the non-Muslim populations of the land they occupy, brutalizing any Muslims who stand up to them and destroying historic treasures. They are barbarians the World was not making up things to justify taking action. Despite these real horrors the World is not taking action in earnest because the leaders of the World don't care enough to do what is necessary.
-
a partly agrea with you it was actully bill clintons lie bush just repeated it wether he knew what he was saying was untrue or not well that cant be proven ethere way.
-
then we don't really know if its true :( Bronson to my understanding is isolated and not allowed to mix with others
The Krays and Me - Blood, Honour and Respect. Doing ...read his Book or google the link?
-
Producing evidence that the intelligence communities were wrong doesn't in any way establish Bush lied.
You are the one lying by trying to pretend that the World's intelligence agencies didn't judge what they did and instead pretending Bush simply made it up.
You also lied about the polls regarding the attitudes of the people of Iraq. I post how the people of Iraq support deposing Saddam. A majority of Iraqis support such even though the transition has been rough just like the transition from Socialism to Capitalism in the Iron curtain was rough but deemed worth it. Instead of being honest and producing the results of such polls you resort to polls of whether their life is hard and try to pretend that such polls mean that Iraqis didn't want Saddam overthrown. You are biased and dishonest.
You already have little credibility but you further diminish any chance of having any when you praise Russian aggression and misrepresent Russian invasions of other countries as reasonable self-defense actions. Invading Georgia and Ukraine wasn't self-defense. Invading a country to annex ports is not reasonable self-defense actions. If it is then that means the US can invade any country it desires to steal ports for our vessels.
You are an apologist for Russian aggression and ridiculously attack the US as being an aggressor. You have things completely backwards and remind me of the Marxist apologists during the Cold War who loved the USSR and defended everything it did while trashing the West and Capitalism.
indeed a great number of people like you tried suggesting ISIS wasn't so bad and the West was intentionally distorting about them in order to justify invading sovereign nations. ISIS is running wild trying to wipe out the non-Muslim populations of the land they occupy, brutalizing any Muslims who stand up to them and destroying historic treasures. They are barbarians the World was not making up things to justify taking action. Despite these real horrors the World is not taking action in earnest because the leaders of the World don't care enough to do what is necessary.
Everybody knows that the US and UK governments lied to go to war. To misrepresent this as intelligence failures is mendacious. The number of intelligence agents who have spoken since and at the time make it quite clear that the politicians deliberately exaggerated the intelligence. They asked for intelligence that would justify war. Any following of these events at the time made clear that the US was pushing for war at the UN. It wasn't other countries that had hundreds of thousands of troops massed ready to invade and bomb Iraq before war had supposedly been decided upon.
Were the US military there just in case? or do you think that they were going to war whatever the world thought? The US were wrong to invade Iraq and this is not even disputed by anyone informed.
To claim that the Russians are the aggressors on the world stage is ignoring the evidence in front of you.
You are self evidently a war apologist and your understanding of the Ukraine conflict has clearly been fed to you by the US State Dept. You may be stupid enough to believe in US exceptionalism but the rest of us see the US as world bullies. The reason that they can act in this way on the world stage is because there are enough gullible, brainwashed and half informed voters to allow it. You are obviously among their number.
Your attacks are so ridiculous that you have to put words into my mouth by claiming that I am an ISIS apologist. The wars that you support created ISIS. Without the Iraq invasion, the bombing of Libya and the US funding of Islamist rebels in Syria ISIS would not even exist. US interventions cause far more harm than good and the evidence for this is all around.
Regarding the polls, I put forward to you a number of facts which you have just ignored. I know that it is because those truths are uncomfortable for you and that you have no reply so you just fall back on your usual tactic when faced with uncomfortable truths by resorting to ad hom attacks and calling people liars. Tell me where I lied about the polls. The ones you posted were carried out by demonstrably biased parties and if you dispute my findings then do so with your own evidence to refute what I said. If you cannot do so don't worry you can just call me a liar without actually bothering to point out any lies.
I may have little credibility with you but that is to be expected with someone like you and I would have more cause to be concerned if you regarded me credible. Your arrogance in believing that you are the final word on each and every subject is staggering to behold, especially from someone so ill informed.
I watched Fox News last night for an hour or so(I know!!) and the bias and hysteria is a sight to behold and then it occurred to me that it was like listening to the News by Scip :o :o.
The views on Iran and the Middle East in general are so lacking in balance and nuance that they are beyond satire.
Your views are Iraq, Iran, Russia etc. are shared by a small minority of the world and most of those are American Republican supporters. The rest of the world view the US as the number 1 threat to world peace.
Do yourself a favour and do a search on " biggest threat to world peace poll" if you disbelieve me or think I am lying. I did that search and lots of polls came up and they were consistent in their findings. There are lots to choose from and the polling took place over lots of countries.
Who do you think the world views as the biggest threat then Scip? Could it be Russia or perhaps Iran?
Funnily enough they were not even close so you have much work to do. The biggest threat by a considerable margin was the US so it appears that the world is full of people with little credibility who are biased and dishonest. Either that or horror of horrors you are a self aggrandising half informed war apologist. Even in America the US tied for third place with North Korea as biggest threat to world peace.
Your on the wrong side of the argument scip, but that's nothing new to you :o
-
The wars that you support created ISIS.
Correction, The incompetent Iraqi army is responsible for ISIS
-
Correction, The incompetent Iraqi army is responsible for ISIS
Who trained the incompetent Iraqi Army?
Not that your summary is correct, but if it was, the incompetence of the Iraqi Army can be laid directly at the US door.
You're not very good at this are you?
-
Who trained the incompetent Iraqi Army?
Not that your summary is correct, but if it was, the incompetence of the Iraqi Army can be laid directly at the US door.
You're not very good at this are you?
The Iraqi army was responsible for state security and it failed. Half the Iraqi army joined ISIS the other half ran away like cowards.
As for WMD how about a former Iraqi airforce general is that a reliable enough source for you?
http://youtu.be/nrSl30UIPRs?t=10s (http://youtu.be/nrSl30UIPRs?t=10s)
-
Correction, The incompetent Iraqi army is responsible for ISIS
That's why ISIS was able to take over swaths of Iraq it is not what enabled ISIS to commence operations though. It started in Syria which gringo is intentionally ignoring. ISIS was able to flourish in Syria because the World chose to let a dictator remain in power and this for him to he maintained power in select areas and ceding power to Islamic fundamentalists in another. The World did nothing to establish a sane democratic government in Syria so now it is split among 2 different horrible regimes one of which is invading its neighbors.
I'm no fan of the Iraqi government but at least it is not a threat to their neighbors and not brutalizing its own people. It failute to adequately defend its people from a foreign threat is the most serious criticism to level.
-
yes they are brutlising people.
http://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0LEVi93Hf5UQXAAw2MnnIlQ;_ylu=X3oDMTEzM2pkdDNiBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMQRjb2xvA2JmMQR2dGlkA1lIUzAwMl8x/RV=2/RE=1425968631/RO=10/RU=http%3a%2f%2fwww.amnestyusa.org%2four-work%2fcountries%2fmiddle-east-and-north-africa%2firaq/RK=0/RS=cWeMsl3wydhNXf_I02dFTrAwfMI-
-
That's why ISIS was able to take over swaths of Iraq it is not what enabled ISIS to commence operations though. It started in Syria which gringo is intentionally ignoring. ISIS was able to flourish in Syria because the World chose to let a dictator remain in power and this for him to he maintained power in select areas and ceding power to Islamic fundamentalists in another. The World did nothing to establish a sane democratic government in Syria so now it is split among 2 different horrible regimes one of which is invading its neighbors.
I'm no fan of the Iraqi government but at least it is not a threat to their neighbors and not brutalizing its own people. It failute to adequately defend its people from a foreign threat is the most serious criticism to level.
Far from ignoring Syria I have mentioned it a number of times. Your analysis could have been written by the US State Dept. The US funded and armed rebels in Syria. Even NATO admit that Assad has the support of the majority of Syria, which is a secular state under Assad. He may be far from perfect but ISIS are much worse.
However much you would like to deny it, ISIS are the direct result of US interference. Had the US not invaded Iraq and disbanded the Army in their de-baathication of Iraq then ISIS and Al Qaeda would never have had a presence there. The US unleashed the chaos and there are those in the US now calling for yet more war against Iran. Needless to say it is Republicans like McCain and the usual war mongering suspects.
Had the US not interfered in Syria, by pretending that the rebels that they supported in Syria were in any way representative of what the Syrians themselves want, then ISIS would not now be swarming all over the Middle East.
Your lack of nuance and context in your ill informed analysis is embarrassing. Why do you think the majority of the world stands against your wars? Why do you think that by a considerable margin the rest of the world sees the US as the biggest threat to world peace?, even the brainwashed US public put themselves at joint third with North Korea.
Does none of this tell you anything or are you that blind and arrogant that you cannot consider the possibility that the US are the biggest danger to the planet?
-
That's why ISIS was able to take over swaths of Iraq it is not what enabled ISIS to commence operations though. It started in Syria which gringo is intentionally ignoring. ISIS was able to flourish in Syria because the World chose to let a dictator remain in power and this for him to he maintained power in select areas and ceding power to Islamic fundamentalists in another. The World did nothing to establish a sane democratic government in Syria so now it is split among 2 different horrible regimes one of which is invading its neighbors.
I'm no fan of the Iraqi government but at least it is not a threat to their neighbors and not brutalizing its own people. It failute to adequately defend its people from a foreign threat is the most serious criticism to level.
In Syria we have a religious civil war. 40% of Syrians back Assad they are all more or less non sunni muslim or Christian.
http://www.understandingwar.org/sites/default/files/PieChart13Dec.jpg (http://www.understandingwar.org/sites/default/files/PieChart13Dec.jpg)
The pro Assad are a unity of minorities that don't want Sunni rule. I cant see how the world could have done anything, To go in and create a democracy and expect the emotions of hatred to just go away?
Democracy is fairly stable in Muslim countries when the population is predominantly one sect of Islam. for example and Tunisia, Lebanon, Turkey, Kuwait and Iran (to some degree) all have a predominante religion.
In Syria like with Iraq the Sunnis will vote for the Sunni candidiate and the Shia will vote for their Shia candidate more or less. Hopefully things will change.
-
Everybody knows that the US and UK governments lied to go to war. To misrepresent this as intelligence failures is mendacious. The number of intelligence agents who have spoken since and at the time make it quite clear that the politicians deliberately exaggerated the intelligence. They asked for intelligence that would justify war. Any following of these events at the time made clear that the US was pushing for war at the UN. It wasn't other countries that had hundreds of thousands of troops massed ready to invade and bomb Iraq before war had supposedly been decided upon.
Were the US military there just in case? or do you think that they were going to war whatever the world thought? The US were wrong to invade Iraq and this is not even disputed by anyone informed.
To claim that the Russians are the aggressors on the world stage is ignoring the evidence in front of you.
You are self evidently a war apologist and your understanding of the Ukraine conflict has clearly been fed to you by the US State Dept. You may be stupid enough to believe in US exceptionalism but the rest of us see the US as world bullies. The reason that they can act in this way on the world stage is because there are enough gullible, brainwashed and half informed voters to allow it. You are obviously among their number.
Your attacks are so ridiculous that you have to put words into my mouth by claiming that I am an ISIS apologist. The wars that you support created ISIS. Without the Iraq invasion, the bombing of Libya and the US funding of Islamist rebels in Syria ISIS would not even exist. US interventions cause far more harm than good and the evidence for this is all around.
Regarding the polls, I put forward to you a number of facts which you have just ignored. I know that it is because those truths are uncomfortable for you and that you have no reply so you just fall back on your usual tactic when faced with uncomfortable truths by resorting to ad hom attacks and calling people liars. Tell me where I lied about the polls. The ones you posted were carried out by demonstrably biased parties and if you dispute my findings then do so with your own evidence to refute what I said. If you cannot do so don't worry you can just call me a liar without actually bothering to point out any lies.
I may have little credibility with you but that is to be expected with someone like you and I would have more cause to be concerned if you regarded me credible. Your arrogance in believing that you are the final word on each and every subject is staggering to behold, especially from someone so ill informed.
I watched Fox News last night for an hour or so(I know!!) and the bias and hysteria is a sight to behold and then it occurred to me that it was like listening to the News by Scip :o :o.
The views on Iran and the Middle East in general are so lacking in balance and nuance that they are beyond satire.
Your views are Iraq, Iran, Russia etc. are shared by a small minority of the world and most of those are American Republican supporters. The rest of the world view the US as the number 1 threat to world peace.
Do yourself a favour and do a search on " biggest threat to world peace poll" if you disbelieve me or think I am lying. I did that search and lots of polls came up and they were consistent in their findings. There are lots to choose from and the polling took place over lots of countries.
Who do you think the world views as the biggest threat then Scip? Could it be Russia or perhaps Iran?
Funnily enough they were not even close so you have much work to do. The biggest threat by a considerable margin was the US so it appears that the world is full of people with little credibility who are biased and dishonest. Either that or horror of horrors you are a self aggrandising half informed war apologist. Even in America the US tied for third place with North Korea as biggest threat to world peace.
Your on the wrong side of the argument scip, but that's nothing new to you :o
You are incapable of telling the truth about anything it is hilarious.
The intelligence officials confirm that the intelligence consensus was Iraq still had WMD programs. You can't produce evidence to the contrary because you are full of crap.
The US military was in Saudi Arabia for years to defend it from Iraq and enforce the no fly zones that were imposed as a result of Iraq's aggression. The US and UK militaries deployed in force after it became clear Iraq would never fully comply with its obligations. It was even selling oil on the black market to fund military projects that were thought to be WMD related.
You no doubt are one of the same clowns who insisted the US and Uk were doing this to steal Iraq's oil. What did the US and UK get out of the war? Why would they lie what benefit was there in war? The only benefit of getting rid of Saddam was getting rid of a dictator who was a threat to his neighbors. There was nothing else in it for the US and UK. The motivation they gave is the motivation they had- to get rid of a threat who they thought had WMDs that's it.
The US didn't fund ISIS this is just another of your pathetic lies. Everything you post is the complete opposite of reality which is why you praise Russian aggression of stealing lands because they want the ports.
You are like the Soviet propagandists who would trash the West and Capitalism. It is all complete BS, you know it but don't care about the truth.
-
You are incapable of telling the truth about anything it is hilarious.
The intelligence officials confirm that the intelligence consensus was Iraq still had WMD programs. You can't produce evidence to the contrary because you are full of crap.
The US military was in Saudi Arabia for years to defend it from Iraq and enforce the no fly zones that were imposed as a result of Iraq's aggression. The US and UK militaries deployed in force after it became clear Iraq would never fully comply with its obligations. It was even selling oil on the black market to fund military projects that were thought to be WMD related.
You no doubt are one of the same clowns who insisted the US and Uk were doing this to steal Iraq's oil. What did the US and UK get out of the war? Why would they lie what benefit was there in war? The only benefit of getting rid of Saddam was getting rid of a dictator who was a threat to his neighbors. There was nothing else in it for the US and UK. The motivation they gave is the motivation they had- to get rid of a threat who they thought had WMDs that's it.
The US didn't fund ISIS this is just another of your pathetic lies. Everything you post is the complete opposite of reality which is why you praise Russian aggression of stealing lands because they want the ports.
You are like the Soviet propagandists who would trash the West and Capitalism. It is all complete BS, you know it but don't care about the truth.
Scip check out what Gringo said when this thread began
Devastation caused and still being caused by those Western lies and propaganda should have woken everyone to the fact that we are the Nazis now.
And he has the audacity the call us ill informed lol
-
The Iraqi army was responsible for state security and it failed. Half the Iraqi army joined ISIS the other half ran away like cowards.
As for WMD how about a former Iraqi airforce general is that a reliable enough source for you?
http://youtu.be/nrSl30UIPRs?t=10s (http://youtu.be/nrSl30UIPRs?t=10s)
I can't believe your still here and can only assume that you don't read the posts. You were shown to be out of your depth long ago.
The Iraqi Army was disbanded by the Coalition Provisional Authority. There is lots of information on this and it is described as a blunder even by the US's own intelligence assessments. A new army was formed from scratch by the Paul Bremer who had supreme authority of the CPA. The new army was armed and trained by the US. These decisions were taken against the advice of the US military and CIA chief.
The Iraqi army formed, armed and trained by the US turned out to be not very good and to have loyalties that differed from the US. Who could possibly have predicted that? Well apart from anyone informed and all of the intelligence assessments, military and CIA advice of the time.
To be honest I couldn't be arsed watching your latest supposed evidence of Iraqi WMD, largely because I know that it will not be evidence. There were no WMD, the world knows that now. The weapons inspectors at the time said there were no WMD, weapons inspectors and intelligence agents have spoken of the distortions of the politicians to present conjecture as hard fact and misrepresent the intelligence to push for war.
Millions around the world marched against war for the reasons that are becoming apparent now. All of this turmoil was predictable and predicted by many. The supporters of war denied that turmoil would be unleashed and now blame others for it. Stop embarrassing yourself and go and have a read up
-
You are incapable of telling the truth about anything it is hilarious.
The intelligence officials confirm that the intelligence consensus was Iraq still had WMD programs. You can't produce evidence to the contrary because you are full of crap.
The US military was in Saudi Arabia for years to defend it from Iraq and enforce the no fly zones that were imposed as a result of Iraq's aggression. The US and UK militaries deployed in force after it became clear Iraq would never fully comply with its obligations. It was even selling oil on the black market to fund military projects that were thought to be WMD related.
You no doubt are one of the same clowns who insisted the US and Uk were doing this to steal Iraq's oil. What did the US and UK get out of the war? Why would they lie what benefit was there in war? The only benefit of getting rid of Saddam was getting rid of a dictator who was a threat to his neighbors. There was nothing else in it for the US and UK. The motivation they gave is the motivation they had- to get rid of a threat who they thought had WMDs that's it.
The US didn't fund ISIS this is just another of your pathetic lies. Everything you post is the complete opposite of reality which is why you praise Russian aggression of stealing lands because they want the ports.
You are like the Soviet propagandists who would trash the West and Capitalism. It is all complete BS, you know it but don't care about the truth.
Funny that the rest of the world doesn't see things your way. You have convinced no-one that the US have good intentions. More and more people are waking to the fact that the US is a threat to the world. Your lies are falling on deaf ears.
-
In Syria we have a religious civil war. 40% of Syrians back Assad they are all more or less non sunni muslim or Christian.
http://www.understandingwar.org/sites/default/files/PieChart13Dec.jpg (http://www.understandingwar.org/sites/default/files/PieChart13Dec.jpg)
The pro Assad are a unity of minorities that don't want Sunni rule. I cant see how the world could have done anything, To go in and create a democracy and expect the emotions of hatred to just go away?
Democracy is fairly stable in Muslim countries when the population is predominantly one sect of Islam. for example and Tunisia, Lebanon, Turkey, Kuwait and Iran (to some degree) all have a predominante religion.
In Syria like with Iraq the Sunnis will vote for the Sunni candidiate and the Shia will vote for their Shia candidate more or less. Hopefully things will change.
We didn't do enough to arm and train the moderate rebels and to actively help them. Even though using ground troops sucks because it results in casualties it is necessary for an effective campaign. If we told Assad we would invade to get rid of him unless he went peacefully and were serious then I don't think he would have pulled a Saddam and ran to hide in a hole in the ground he would have chosen life in exile.
We could then have helped the Free Syrians set up a government and promise a democracy for all. The Islamists didn't want that so would have resisted but it would just have been a repeat of the failure of Al Quaeda in Iraq.
Instead ISIS killed a lot of the moderates and worse have been heavily funded by rich Muslims and have become even richer as they loot the areas they take over.
The West ignored ISIS instead of actively taking efforts to squash them.
Gringo is lying about our finding of rebels allowing ISIS to grow in power it was are lack of support that allowed it:
"The moderate rebels in Syria called on Washington to send heavier artillery for months even before ISIS gained ground last summer. That aid never made it to the battlefield. And when ISIS bulldozed the border between Iraq and Syria in June, the rebels in Aleppo had to fight on multiple fronts, against Assad, ISIS and al-Nusra, with dwindling resources.
Recipients of U.S. lethal aid told IBTimes in interviews that the U.S. set them up for failure.
“The U.S. support was not enough for the rebels in the North to be strong and defeat the Islamic groups,” said Oussama Abu Zayd, one of the main advisers and an active member of Harakat Hazzm, adding that many moderate rebels defected to extremist organizations because they had more money. “They have millions of dollars from donors.”
http://www.ibtimes.com/us-backed-moderate-syrian-rebels-north-defect-obama-strategy-set-back-1839604
Each day we sit on our hands the larger the problem grows and ultimately the larger the military force that defeats them will have to be.
A sizable military force should be at the Iraqi border preventing any resupply form Syria and to prevent retreating into Syria they could be the anvil. The hammer would be other forces to encircle the ISIS fighters. You surround them and force them to either give up or you go after them and kill them.
Without Western forces this will take a lot more time and effort.
That won't be the end of course someone needs to go into Syria to clean them up. Just dropping some bombs from the air isn't going to do it.
The more established they become the larger the force they can field and the more effort it is going to take to defeat them completely.
Even if Iraq eventually manages to recapture its land without Western military power it doesn't end the ISIS threat because they will still have a large swath in Syria. Someone needs to invade Syria to clean the out. Sooner or later someone has to do it. The longer you wait the bigger the task becomes.
-
Funny that the rest of the world doesn't see things your way. You have convinced no-one that the US have good intentions. More and more people are waking to the fact that the US is a threat to the world. Your lies are falling on deaf ears.
You are delusional that you think most in the World think as you do.
You are little more than the modern rendition of a Cold War Soviet sympathizing Marxist.
-
Scip check out what Gringo said when this thread began
And he has the audacity the call us ill informed lol
His ilk I have dealt with before here are the atypical things they argue:
The UN should not have intervened to save North Korea we should have allowed them to be swallowed up by North Korea, all of Korea would be in great shape then.
The US should not have helped the Afghan rebels we should have let the Soviets take over. Our funding of the rebels prevented the Soviets from making it into a modern nation and enabled them to remain backwards. After the Soviets left US funded rebels became the Taliban and Al Qaeda (of course the Taliban movement came from Pakistan and the Arab contingent in Afghanistan (that became Al Qaeda was very small, not recruited by us they went on their own and were not funded by the US)
In 1990 the US told Saddam it was ok to annex Iraq and set Saddam up so we could then attack him.
The US invaded Iraq in 2003 to steal its oil
The funny thing is that they accuse the West of horrible human rights violations and yet anytime there are severe human rights violations going on they defend the people doing it or blame the west for creating such groups though we didn't.
Revisionist like Zinn and Chomsky help spread such crap to the masses. In College one class I took was on the Cold war. The Iron curtain fell as I was starting high school so was over for a number of years by the time I was in college. My Cold War professor was a prominent revisionist and one of the things he insisted was that the US went to War in Vietnam in order to establish a place for Japanese goods to be sold so that the US would not have to keep buying Japanese goods and could correct the trade deficit we had with them. Of course no evidence was put forth to support such assertions. All the evidence lead to trying to prevent the spread of Communism not capitalist motives to turn Vietnam into a trading partner for Japan or anyone else.
Oh and of course I forgot the 9/11 conspiracy theorists, we blew up the WTC so we could invade Afghanistan and we also allowed Japan to bomb Pearl harbor unmolested so that they could do more damage so that the American public would be more angry....
Gringo was trashing Fox news. The only time I watch Fox is when Watters goes on the street to interview people. Former Tonight Show Host Jay Leno used to do that too in a segment called Jaywalking. It is amazing just how ignorant people are about current events and history- it is funny to watch but so sad at the same time.
-
You are delusional that you think most in the World think as you do.
You are little more than the modern rendition of a Cold War Soviet sympathizing Marxist.
Far from being delusional, I am in line with all polling on the matter. The US is seen as the biggest threat to world peace. Can you point me to polling which challenges this conclusion.
You are the delusional one here if you believe that world opinion supports the US.
-
Far from being delusional, I am in line with all polling on the matter. The US is seen as the biggest threat to world peace. Can you point me to polling which challenges this conclusion.
You are the delusional one here if you believe that world opinion supports the US.
Thanks for reinforcing how delusional you are. You see to think opinion polls establish facts when by definition they are opinion polls.
Those people who think the US is a threat to World Peace are extremely ignorant and biased. At one point a majority of people thought the Earth was flat and if polled would have asserted such. Just because a majority believed that doesn't make it true.
-
Thanks for reinforcing how delusional you are. You see to think opinion polls establish facts when by definition they are opinion polls.
Those people who think the US is a threat to World Peace are extremely ignorant and biased. At one point a majority of people thought the Earth was flat and if polled would have asserted such. Just because a majority believed that doesn't make it true.
You mean it's not? :o - you'll be saying there's no Santa Claws next! ;)
-
MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin has said he ordered officials to start work on taking control of Crimea weeks before a referendum which, the Kremlin has asserted until now, prompted the region's annexation from Ukraine.
"This was on the night of Feb. 22 through to Feb. 23. We finished around 7 in the morning. And, while saying goodbye, I told all the colleagues: 'We have to start the work on Crimea's return into Russia'."
In the months since, Putin has adjusted his account of what happened. He initially denied Russian troops were providing security for the referendum, but later acknowledged special forces had been deployed.
Russian soldiers who took part have been given state medals with the citation "For returning Crimea", which give the starting date of the operation as Feb. 20, before Yanukovich was ousted.
http://news.yahoo.com/putin-says-plan-crimea-hatched-referendum-140644857.html
People were intimidated to vote for the referendum and anyone against it was driven out. Even now people can't speak freely, anyone who even dares to voice displeasure is persecuted. There was a recent article about people tattletaling to the government like in the Soviet era anytime someone says something negative about Russia taking over even if just complaining about the poor economy. Peopel are beaten and even jailed.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/03/16/the-crimea-exodus-has-begun.html
In the meantime religious groups have been persecuted as well:
Odesa, Ukraine - Since Russia’s annexation of Crimea in March, religious groups there – aside from the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate) – are facing persecution, and restrictions on their ministry.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/nov/4/faith-in-the-time-of-annexation-a-tough-choice-for/#ixzz3TwhSWKeE
http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2014/11/10/roman-catholic-religious-forced-to-leave-crimea-by-end-of-year/
Some businesses were taken over by the government and here is what happened to the rest:
http://ukraine.setimes.com/en_GB/articles/uwi/features/2015/01/28/feature-02
All the BS about ethnic Russians being persecuted by the new Ukrainian government was shear nonsense drummed up by the Russian propaganda machine.
-
You mean it's not? :o - you'll be saying there's no Santa Claws next! ;)
Sorry to burst your bubble but in a few weeks the Easter bunny won't be around either.
-
You are delusional that you think most in the World think as you do.
You are little more than the modern rendition of a Cold War Soviet sympathizing Marxist.
That may be the most terrible insult in the USA Scipio, but in the UK Europe I think you will find that more nuanced and balanced political views prevail. Very many who were not marxists, as well as many who were (the left being far stronger here than in the US) opposed US policy throughout the Cold War.
Red baiting has been a core weapon of the American right wing for many years. It does not further the argument.
-
Thanks for reinforcing how delusional you are. You see to think opinion polls establish facts when by definition they are opinion polls.
Those people who think the US is a threat to World Peace are extremely ignorant and biased. At one point a majority of people thought the Earth was flat and if polled would have asserted such. Just because a majority believed that doesn't make it true.
It was you who brought up the fact that I was delusional to believe that most of the world agreed with my view of the US. I pointed you to polling to show my belief was correct. What the opinion polls establish is that it is a fact that world opinion is in line with my views. That was the point at issue and you raised it, not me.
The polls may not establish as a fact that the US are the biggest threat, but they certainly verify that world opinion sees it this way. You dismiss it by calling the world delusional and biased. You are an arrogant deluded fool.
Are you also delusional for introducing polls into this thread in the first place?, with your ridiculous PIPA poll earlier which you claimed proved that Iraqis agreed that it was a good thing that Saddam had gone.
You are an apologist for war criminals and not even consistent in your idiocy.
-
It was you who brought up the fact that I was delusional to believe that most of the world agreed with my view of the US. I pointed you to polling to show my belief was correct. What the opinion polls establish is that it is a fact that world opinion is in line with my views. That was the point at issue and you raised it, not me.
The polls may not establish as a fact that the US are the biggest threat, but they certainly verify that world opinion sees it this way. You dismiss it by calling the world delusional and biased. You are an arrogant deluded fool.
Are you also delusional for introducing polls into this thread in the first place?, with your ridiculous PIPA poll earlier which you claimed proved that Iraqis agreed that it was a good thing that Saddam had gone.
You are an apologist for war criminals and not even consistent in your idiocy.
You call UN sanctioned operations against a guy who invaded his neighbors and gassed his own people war criminals while praising Russian aggression. That is like attacking the Western Allies as war criminals while praising Stalin's aggression. It is what is inconsistent and irrational.
-
You call UN sanctioned operations against a guy who invaded his neighbors and gassed his own people war criminals while praising Russian aggression. That is like attacking the Western Allies as war criminals while praising Stalin's aggression. It is what is inconsistent and irrational.
Are you referring to WW2? If so you have a very warped view of history. The USSR lost over 20 million of its citizens in the war and was our staunch ally in the battle against Axis evil.
-
Are you referring to WW2? If so you have a very warped view of history. The USSR lost over 20 million of its citizens in the war and was our staunch ally in the battle against Axis evil.
Far from being a staunch ally the Soviets were simply allies because Germany decided to invade.
Stalin did many things Hitler did such as persecuted Jews but did even worse starving millions of Ukrainians and other ethnics to death. Stalin did things to his own people that Hitler only did to foreigners. Since Hilter killed more Jews and did so in a more systematic fashion his actions are highlighted while people ignore those of Stalin.
Stalin was responsible for WWII beginning. Germany was scared to start a 2 front war in 1939 because Germany was not on a footing to fight such a war. The USSR formed a secret non-aggression pact with Germany. They agreed to divide Poland and other areas of Europe. Moreover the Soviets agreed to supply Germany with oil and food. This enabled Germany to invade Poland and start WWII. The Soviets invaded 16 days later on the 17th of September and committed the katyn Massacre.
Hitler wanted Germany and the West to maul one another and then he planned to swoop in and defeat both after both were exhausted. The US, and much of the World in fact, stopped trading with Germany and the US began supplying the Allies. While the US was busy supplying the allies the USSR was busy trading with the Nazis providing oil and foodstuffs.
After invading Poland the Soviets invaded Finland, next they invaded the Baltic Republics and Rumania. Stalin was busy taking more territory than Hitler until France was occupied. That was when Stalin's plan backfired. Far from the Allies and Germans fighting a protracted War of Attrition like during WWI where both were exhausted, Germany rapidly routed the Allies and was in firm control of Western Europe.
The only fighting directly against the Allies in 1940 after France was naval and some air engagements and fighting in Africa. In late 1940 the Nazis invaded the Balkans next. In 1941 came the invasion of the USSR and that event is what caused the USSR to change sides. It was because the Nazis invaded the USSR otherwise the Soviets would simply have stayed secret partners with the Nazis.
Even though the Soviets became an Ally and signed a pact saying they would not seek territorial aggrandizement they did so anyway. With our help they were able to rebuild their industrial power and the Red Army then raped and pillaged its way across Europe. Everything industrial was stripped from the land they "liberated".
3 key tenets of the Charter they signed were:
1) no territorial gains were to be sought
2) territorial adjustments must be in accord with the wishes of the peoples living on such land
3) all people had a right to self-determination
The USSR attacked Rumania and Finland annexing land from both, annexed the Baltic Republics and annexed land from Poland without regard to the desires of those living there. The Germans were forced out of Eastern Priussia and the land given to their Polish puppet state. Puppet states were established in all the lands they "liberated". They repressed the inhabitants of those lands they were supposed to be liberating. Ukraine wanted independence. Instead of respecting self-determination the people were brutally repressed.
I know all about the history of WWII and Stalin ad I thus know that your portrayal is not reality but rather what Soviet Propaganda presented and some people choose to eat up either because of ignorance or bias.
-
As an American, you were obviously brought up to see both Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union as the greatest of evils.
There is certainly a case for that, with Stalin's regime actually killing far more people than Hitler's. Although Hitler's regime brought about the holocaust, attempting to eradicate an entire race.
From a British perspective, we tend to see the Soviets role as allies during that time and point to things like their liberation of Auschwitz as a measure.
So maybe it's just a perspective thing? :-\
-
Far from being a staunch ally the Soviets were simply allies because Germany decided to invade.
Stalin did many things Hitler did such as persecuted Jews but did even worse starving millions of Ukrainians and other ethnics to death. Stalin did things to his own people that Hitler only did to foreigners. Since Hilter killed more Jews and did so in a more systematic fashion his actions are highlighted while people ignore those of Stalin.
Stalin was responsible for WWII beginning. Germany was scared to start a 2 front war in 1939 because Germany was not on a footing to fight such a war. The USSR formed a secret non-aggression pact with Germany. They agreed to divide Poland and other areas of Europe. Moreover the Soviets agreed to supply Germany with oil and food. This enabled Germany to invade Poland and start WWII. The Soviets invaded 16 days later on the 17th of September and committed the katyn Massacre.
Hitler wanted Germany and the West to maul one another and then he planned to swoop in and defeat both after both were exhausted. The US, and much of the World in fact, stopped trading with Germany and the US began supplying the Allies. While the US was busy supplying the allies the USSR was busy trading with the Nazis providing oil and foodstuffs.
After invading Poland the Soviets invaded Finland, next they invaded the Baltic Republics and Rumania. Stalin was busy taking more territory than Hitler until France was occupied. That was when Stalin's plan backfired. Far from the Allies and Germans fighting a protracted War of Attrition like during WWI where both were exhausted, Germany rapidly routed the Allies and was in firm control of Western Europe.
The only fighting directly against the Allies in 1940 after France was naval and some air engagements and fighting in Africa. In late 1940 the Nazis invaded the Balkans next. In 1941 came the invasion of the USSR and that event is what caused the USSR to change sides. It was because the Nazis invaded the USSR otherwise the Soviets would simply have stayed secret partners with the Nazis.
Even though the Soviets became an Ally and signed a pact saying they would not seek territorial aggrandizement they did so anyway. With our help they were able to rebuild their industrial power and the Red Army then raped and pillaged its way across Europe. Everything industrial was stripped from the land they "liberated".
3 key tenets of the Charter they signed were:
1) no territorial gains were to be sought
2) territorial adjustments must be in accord with the wishes of the peoples living on such land
3) all people had a right to self-determination
The USSR attacked Rumania and Finland annexing land from both, annexed the Baltic Republics and annexed land from Poland without regard to the desires of those living there. The Germans were forced out of Eastern Priussia and the land given to their Polish puppet state. Puppet states were established in all the lands they "liberated". They repressed the inhabitants of those lands they were supposed to be liberating. Ukraine wanted independence. Instead of respecting self-determination the people were brutally repressed.
I know all about the history of WWII and Stalin ad I thus know that your portrayal is not reality but rather what Soviet Propaganda presented and some people choose to eat up either because of ignorance or bias.
You are a historical revisionist Scipio. Your post is so riddled with fsalsehoods that it will take time to demolish them all. I would never denigrate the sacrifices of any of our wartime allies, uncluding the USA. For you to distort the role of the USSR in WW2 and to show the contempt for the sacrifices made its people is quite simply beyond the pale. The USSR suffered more than any of the other allies and its hard fought successes on the Eastern Front enabled the Axis to be defeated totally, shortening the war by years (if it could in fact have been won) and saving many lives of the other allied countries.
You claim to be an expert. You are not, you are a mouthpiece for the nauseating filth which spews forth from far right elements in the USA.
I will answer in following posts your specific assertions.
-
As an American, you were obviously brought up to see both Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union as the greatest of evils.
There is certainly a case for that, with Stalin's regime actually killing far more people than Hitler's. Although Hitler's regime brought about the holocaust, attempting to eradicate an entire race.
From a British perspective, we tend to see the Soviets role as allies during that time and point to things like their liberation of Auschwitz as a measure.
So maybe it's just a perspective thing? :-\
Utter rubbish.
-
Utter rubbish.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-2091670/Hitler-Stalin-The-murderous-regimes-world.html
(http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-2091670/Hitler-Stalin-The-murderous-regimes-world.html)
-
Just 10 million people in it. It seems. :-\
-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-2091670/Hitler-Stalin-The-murderous-regimes-world.html
(http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-2091670/Hitler-Stalin-The-murderous-regimes-world.html)
Those figures are grossly exaggerated
Hitler 11 million estimate
Stalin 20 Million estimate
Mao 40 Million estimate
-
Those figures are grossly exaggerated
Hitler 11 million estimate
Stalin 20 Million estimate
Mao 40 Million estimate
Well okay. But in any event, NGB's 'UTTER RUBBISH', is well ....... 'utter rubbish'.
Just sayin' ???
-
Well okay. But in any event, NGB's 'UTTER RUBBISH', is well ....... 'utter rubbish'.
Just sayin' ???
Yes its a well established fact that Stalin killed more people than Hitler, almost double
-
Yes its a well established fact that Stalin killed more people than Hitler, almost double
Thank you, I thought I was going mad. :P
-
Well okay. But in any event, NGB's 'UTTER RUBBISH', is well ....... 'utter rubbish'.
Just sayin' ???
All statistics are open to interpretation and whichever spin you wish to put on them.
You could argue that Hitler killed approximately 11 million non-combatants, whereas Stalin only killed 8-9 million non combatants, thus making Hitler worse.........
-
Far from being a staunch ally the Soviets were simply allies because Germany decided to invade.
Stalin was responsible for WWII beginning. Germany was scared to start a 2 front war in 1939 because Germany was not on a footing to fight such a war. The USSR formed a secret non-aggression pact with Germany. In 1941 came the invasion of the USSR and that event is what caused the USSR to change sides. It was because the Nazis invaded the USSR otherwise the Soviets would simply have stayed secret partners with the Nazis.
To suggest that the USSR was responsible for WW2 takes American anti-communism to new depths! Even Churchill never claimed what you have, and he was certainly no fan of communism!
In the 1930s the USSR recognised the increasing threat arising from Hitler's expansionist vision. The Soviet government and people were bitterly hostile topwards the Nazis. The communists in Germany were the first group to be persecuted by the Nazis, with its leading members sent to concentration camps and the Communist Party itself brutally suppressed. The USSR was ill prepared for war. It tried repeatedly to negotiate defence treaties with Britain and France but was rejected. In order to buy time the non aggression pact with Germany was signed. The Soviet government had no illusions that this would last, they knew (because Hitler had made it no secret) that sooner of later the Nazis would attempt to annexe large parts of the Soviet Union. The period between the signing of the treaty and the invasition of the USSR was used to enable a massive rearmament programme to be undertaken. It also enabled much heavy industry to be moved to greater safety beyond the Urals.
The Soviet government were taken by surprise by the invasion on 22nd June 1941, but only because they thought it would take place later. Of course that resulted in the USSR joining the war and becoming allies with the UK and the Commonwealth countries. At that time of course the USA was not involved. It was neutral. It entered the war against Japan as a result of the attack on Pearl Harbor on 7th December 1941. It only entered the war against Germany following Hitler's declaration of war against the USA on 11th December 1941. There was of course a very strong isolationist trend in the USA, which only changed as a result of Pearl Harbor.
That is enough for one post. I will challenge the rest of the garbage in your post later.
-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-2091670/Hitler-Stalin-The-murderous-regimes-world.html
(http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-2091670/Hitler-Stalin-The-murderous-regimes-world.html)
The Daily Mail! That's all right then.
-
The Daily Mail! That's all right then.
Haha, maybe. It seems okay when quoting a Bamber story though. :-\
-
Those figures are grossly exaggerated
Hitler 11 million estimate
Stalin 20 Million estimate
Mao 40 Million estimate
Hitler was responsible for far more deaths than 11 million. Over 20 million Soviet citizens alone died as a result of WW2.
I am not here to defend all of Stalin's actions, far from it (that is a separate discussion) but the figures for deaths in the USSR during that period are inflated by the inclusion of famine victims and are in any event magnified by those with a particular view of history.
-
Well okay. But in any event, NGB's 'UTTER RUBBISH', is well ....... 'utter rubbish'.
Just sayin' ???
We will just have to disagree.
-
Haha, maybe. It seems okay when quoting a Bamber story though. :-\
Not for me. I can't stand the paper.
-
Yes its a well established fact that Stalin killed more people than Hitler, almost double
It's no surprise that you should take that view. You and Scipio are a great team (except of course when it comes to Jeremy Bamber). ;D
-
All statistics are open to interpretation and whichever spin you wish to put on them.
You could argue that Hitler killed approximately 11 million non-combatants, whereas Stalin only killed 8-9 million non combatants, thus making Hitler worse.........
That's rubbish. all the estimates are innocent people or prisoners of war.
-
That's rubbish. all the estimates are innocent people or prisoners of war.
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2011/mar/10/hitler-vs-stalin-who-killed-more/
Think this is interesting reading
-
Stalin did many things Hitler did such as persecuted Jews. Stalin did things to his own people that Hitler only did to foreigners. Since Hilter killed more Jews and did so in a more systematic fashion his actions are highlighted while people ignore those of Stalin.
This is another outrageous calumny against the USSR. Until Russian revolution anti jewish pogroms were common, in particular in the Ukraine. One of the first decrees of the new Soviet government was to outlaw antisemitism. There were never again anti jewish pogroms, save of course for those sanctioned by the Nazis in the Soviet territory they occupied from 1941. In the USSR jews occupied senior positions in the government, the Communist Party and in the armed forces.
It really beggars belief that not only do you suggest that the USSR had a policy of killing jews but they actually killed more jews than the 6 million generally accepted as the number of jews killed by the Nazis!
You need some serious re-education - and not by some rabid right wing American institution!
-
This is another outrageous calumny against the USSR. Until Russian revolution anti jewish pogroms were common, in particular in the Ukraine. One of the first decrees of the new Soviet government was to outlaw antisemitism. There were never again anti jewish pogroms, save of course for those sanctioned by the Nazis in the Soviet territory they occupied from 1941. In the USSR jews occupied senior positions in the government, the Communist Party and in the armed forces.
It really beggars belief that not only do you suggest that the USSR had a policy of killing jews but they actually killed more jews than the 6 million generally accepted as the number of jews killed by the Nazis!
You need some serious re-education - and not by some rabid right wing American institution!
The USSR was not an anti-Semitic state no. But Stalin being extremely paranoid did have his moments and did purge Jews for being Jews
-
As an American, you were obviously brought up to see both Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union as the greatest of evils.
There is certainly a case for that, with Stalin's regime actually killing far more people than Hitler's. Although Hitler's regime brought about the holocaust, attempting to eradicate an entire race.
From a British perspective, we tend to see the Soviets role as allies during that time and point to things like their liberation of Auschwitz as a measure.
So maybe it's just a perspective thing? :-\
No my perspective is from being a historian who has studied every facet of WWII for a long time including many foreign historical sources.
Most Americans are not taught everything that Stalin did and not taught that Stalin had initially been allied with Germany.
The full outline of things I just presented is objective fact not a viewpoint of what happened.
The British and FDR regimes didn't want to fight the Soviets so praised Stalin and didn't reveal we essentially made a pact with someone as bad as Hitler. Some historians refuse to be honest because they are biased in favor of Marxism or the USSR while others want to protect the Allied actions of betraying the Poles and many of our ideals because we lacked the stomach to do anything about Stalin.
I'm not afraid of real history. I like Churchill I own books he wrote about history and thing he wrote quite well but there are still things that must be faced such as he didn't want to simply give up the entire British Empire immediately so naturally supported Soviet efforts to take the Baltics and other support on the basis that the same logic being used against the Soviets could be used to justify the British Empire being liberated.
I'm not one who is willing to sugarcoat history the simple reality is that the Allies especially the US was willing to compromise our values to avoid doing what was right. That resulted in the Iron Curtain problems which still have implications today, has major implications in Korea and especially large implications in China. The people of China have suffered for many decades under Communist rule and still do so. China has a mixed economy so it not a threat from the standpoint of invading neighbors to spread Communist but still has a tolitarian regime so the people are not free. Most people don't particularly care but if we actually did what was necessary to prevent the Communist of China takeover the world would be quite different.
The US didn't care enough about China to help though our leaders only cared enough to stop Japanese aggression in China.
If you truly study history in depth you will find that the simple things published in history textbooks leave a great deal out. Part of that is that is because a textbook is just supposed to prove a very broad overview unless it is a book exclusively to a very confined issue or point in time.
In grammar school we learned about Greece and Rome and the foundations of the Western Civilization then it leads up to Medieval Europe and eventually US history. I'm more interested in World history. I took electives in High School about other history such as Russian History. In College I took courses on Japan, China, and various European countries particularly Germany. The German courses were mainly about specific eras such as one on the unification leading up to WWI, one on Weimar, another on the Third Reich and another post War Germany. There is a huge difference when you concentrate on a specific period as opposed to getting a broad overview. The Chinese courses were mainly about Mao's China. Japan covered the Tokugawa period to WWII so provided the formation of modern Japan without being able to go into the depth of courses like Weimar that covered only a short period of time.
This is where independent reading is so important. These kinds of courses provide a good foundation to enable further learning on subjects.
The overview I provided of Stalin's actions are just the tip of iceberg but provides an accurate summary of things.
It is sheer fantasy that the USSR was doing anything to help the Allies before it was invaded by Germany and all of its actions after being invaded were for the profit of Stalin not the Soviet People. He didn't care about the Soviet people and sacrificed them for his own purposes. It wasn't just bad Soviet tactics and German skill that resulted in so many Soviet casualties. Stalin didn't care about the losses and forced actions that resulted in high casualties. He even had his own men shoot soldiers who refused to follow orders.
Hitler did some of the same things in that he virtually never allowed German forces to withdraw and when he did finally allow it then it was often too late. Leaders had to either violate orders to save their men risking being killed by Hitler or to stand their ground and get captured. German prisoners were often killed just like Soviets often were or ended up being worked to death as slave labor.
Being a soldier is never easy but the Soviet and German forces had the worst political leaders and thus were in the worst of circumstances. Hitler decided it was better for Germany to be destroyed than to surrender. Early on his stand your ground orders were seen by him as logical. He thought if they fought hard knowing they can't retreat his forces would prevail and early on that sometimes happened. But one the Allies began their counter offensives it never worked. Hitler became like those cultists who would rather have their followers die than to simply give up the cult and let them survive.
Stalin only cared about land and sacrificed over 100,000 men just for the prestige of taking Berlin. People who want to praise Stalin are doing so for motives other than to realistically evaluate his leadership.
-
The USSR was not an anti-Semitic state no. But Stalin being extremely paranoid did have his moments and did purge Jews for being Jews
I agree, there were some examples of individuals being persecuted towards the end of the Stalin era. This was based upon the somewhat paranoid view that jews might have divided loyalty in relation to the newly formed state of Israel. Kruschev exposed some of these examples in his famous speech in 1956 to the 20th congress of the Communist Party. The new government renounced this antisemitism and jews remained in leading positions in all sectors of Soviet society.
-
No my perspective is from being a historian who has studied every facet of WWII for a long time including many foreign historical sources.
Most Americans are not taught everything that Stalin did and not taught that Stalin had initially been allied with Germany.
The full outline of things I just presented is objective fact not a viewpoint of what happened.
The British and FDR regimes didn't want to fight the Soviets so praised Stalin and didn't reveal we essentially made a pact with someone as bad as Hitler. Some historians refuse to be honest because they are biased in favor of Marxism or the USSR while others want to protect the Allied actions of betraying the Poles and many of our ideals because we lacked the stomach to do anything about Stalin.
I'm not afraid of real history. I like Churchill I own books he wrote about history and thing he wrote quite well but there are still things that must be faced such as he didn't want to simply give up the entire British Empire immediately so naturally supported Soviet efforts to take the Baltics and other support on the basis that the same logic being used against the Soviets could be used to justify the British Empire being liberated.
I'm not one who is willing to sugarcoat history the simple reality is that the Allies especially the US was willing to compromise our values to avoid doing what was right. That resulted in the Iron Curtain problems which still have implications today, has major implications in Korea and especially large implications in China. The people of China have suffered for many decades under Communist rule and still do so. China has a mixed economy so it not a threat from the standpoint of invading neighbors to spread Communist but still has a tolitarian regime so the people are not free. Most people don't particularly care but if we actually did what was necessary to prevent the Communist of China takeover the world would be quite different.
The US didn't care enough about China to help though our leaders only cared enough to stop Japanese aggression in China.
If you truly study history in depth you will find that the simple things published in history textbooks leave a great deal out. Part of that is that is because a textbook is just supposed to prove a very broad overview unless it is a book exclusively to a very confined issue or point in time.
In grammar school we learned about Greece and Rome and the foundations of the Western Civilization then it leads up to Medieval Europe and eventually US history. I'm more interested in World history. I took electives in High School about other history such as Russian History. In College I took courses on Japan, China, and various European countries particularly Germany. The German courses were mainly about specific eras such as one on the unification leading up to WWI, one on Weimar, another on the Third Reich and another post War Germany. There is a huge difference when you concentrate on a specific period as opposed to getting a broad overview. The Chinese courses were mainly about Mao's China. Japan covered the Tokugawa period to WWII so provided the formation of modern Japan without being able to go into the depth of courses like Weimar that covered only a short period of time.
This is where independent reading is so important. These kinds of courses provide a good foundation to enable further learning on subjects.
The overview I provided of Stalin's actions are just the tip of iceberg but provides an accurate summary of things.
It is sheer fantasy that the USSR was doing anything to help the Allies before it was invaded by Germany and all of its actions after being invaded were for the profit of Stalin not the Soviet People. He didn't care about the Soviet people and sacrificed them for his own purposes. It wasn't just bad Soviet tactics and German skill that resulted in so many Soviet casualties. Stalin didn't care about the losses and forced actions that resulted in high casualties. He even had his own men shoot soldiers who refused to follow orders.
Hitler did some of the same things in that he virtually never allowed German forces to withdraw and when he did finally allow it then it was often too late. Leaders had to either violate orders to save their men risking being killed by Hitler or to stand their ground and get captured. German prisoners were often killed just like Soviets often were or ended up being worked to death as slave labor.
Being a soldier is never easy but the Soviet and German forces had the worst political leaders and thus were in the worst of circumstances. Hitler decided it was better for Germany to be destroyed than to surrender. Early on his stand your ground orders were seen by him as logical. He thought if they fought hard knowing they can't retreat his forces would prevail and early on that sometimes happened. But one the Allies began their counter offensives it never worked. Hitler became like those cultists who would rather have their followers die than to simply give up the cult and let them survive.
Stalin only cared about land and sacrificed over 100,000 men just for the prestige of taking Berlin. People who want to praise Stalin are doing so for motives other than to realistically evaluate his leadership.
Oh no, another one! Another steaming heap of revionist crap. Your blinkered view of the supreme benevolent role of the USA and your rabid anti- communism are the themes which underpin everything you write.
Once again I will have to respond to your points. I have not finished dealing with the last one yet. I am busy for much of tomorrow but will do what I can.
-
This is another outrageous calumny against the USSR. Until Russian revolution anti jewish pogroms were common, in particular in the Ukraine. One of the first decrees of the new Soviet government was to outlaw antisemitism. There were never again anti jewish pogroms, save of course for those sanctioned by the Nazis in the Soviet territory they occupied from 1941. In the USSR jews occupied senior positions in the government, the Communist Party and in the armed forces.
It really beggars belief that not only do you suggest that the USSR had a policy of killing jews but they actually killed more jews than the 6 million generally accepted as the number of jews killed by the Nazis!
You need some serious re-education - and not by some rabid right wing American institution!
1) your bias sees to have caused your reading comprehension skills have fallen to waste. I clearly stated Hitler killed more Jews and that is why his persecution is highlighted while Stalin's is ignored.
2) Both before and after the War Jews were persecuted by Stalin
3) Historians actually believe that the 6 million figure cited to Germany is wrong. Nazi records and population figures from the areas do not support 6 million Jews being killed. The figure has no actual evidentiary support. We will never have any way to know the actual figures considering the huge population movements during the War. There is no need to inflate them though even if only 3.5 million Jews were killed, which is much more supportable of a figure, that is still an enormous number and doesn't somehow render the Nazis less evil.
I consider contests over who killed more to be quite worthless. All mass murderers are evil and all mass murders are horrible tragedies. To try saying one is worse than another and therefore try to defend one as less evil than another is silly.
The simple truth is that Stalin agreed to split various parts of Eastern Europe with Germany knowing the West would go to War with Germany and wanting that war to happen. The Soviets continued trading with Germany providing much needed oil for their war machine. The World's largest producer and exporter of oil in that era was the US which enacted an embargo. Trying to pretend that Stalin was a great Ally and great guy is a complete waste of time. It is rubbish.
-
The British and FDR regimes didn't want to fight the Soviets so praised Stalin and didn't reveal we essentially made a pact with someone as bad as Hitler. Some historians refuse to be honest because they are biased in favor of Marxism or the USSR while others want to protect the Allied actions of betraying the Poles and many of our ideals because we lacked the stomach to do anything about Stalin.
Churchill did put plans in motion to deal with Stalin (operation unthinkable) but I think everyone was glad the war was over with. Stalin died 7 years later so that's a good enough outcome for me
-
Churchill did put plans in motion to deal with Stalin (operation unthinkable) but I think everyone was glad the war was over with. Stalin died 7 years later so that's a good enough outcome for me
It was unthinkable, and would not have succeeded.
-
It was unthinkable, and would not have succeeded.
Indeed, Russia is unconquerable
-
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2011/mar/10/hitler-vs-stalin-who-killed-more/
Think this is interesting reading
Population records prior to WWII and post WWII reveal that something on the order of 50 million people living in the lands that were part of the USSR in 1945 had died during WWII or after WWII as a result of Soviet punishment. The punished people include those who wanted freedom such as those in Ukraine, political opponents and people thought to have cooperated with the Germans. People in these classes were killed both during and after WWII.
More than 21 million Soviet troops died in the field-some who were shot by Soviet forces and some of the force was made up from people living in land other than land the Germans managed to capture. It is estimated 20 million civilians died but some of these were a result of Stalin's actions though there is no way to tell how many. There is no way to know how many were tossed in gulags after the war as opposed to during. No way to know how many civilians died at Soviet hands. We just can tell that more of the population is missing than the official casualty estimates account for. The Soviets intentionally didn't publish any population records until the 1960s because of this. Soviet archive records opened after the fall of the USSR only provide limited answers.
People seem to be hung on on the numbers. I don't care about the exact numbers the known numbers are sufficiently large to say that Stalin was horrible and his subjects suffered under his rule. He helped start WII on purpose and only fought against Germany after Germany turned on him.
-
2) Both before and after the War Jews were persecuted by Stalin
3) Historians actually believe that the 6 million figure cited to Germany is wrong. Nazi records and population figures from the areas do not support 6 million Jews being killed. The figure has no actual evidentiary support. We will never have any way to know the actual figures considering the huge population movements during the War. There is no need to inflate them though even if only 3.5 million Jews were killed, which is much more supportable of a figure, that is still an enormous number and doesn't somehow render the Nazis less evil.
Comparing Hitler and Stalins persecution of Jews is like comparing chalk and cheese. Stalin treated Jews the same as he treated all other people (Very Badly)
Your figures for the Jewish victims of the Nazi's are incorrect. Its estimated at 5.5 Million.
-
More than 21 million Soviet troops died in the field
That's incorrect. The Russian Military archives say 8.4 million soviet servicemen but western historians have speculated it could possibly be as high as 14 million. Considering the USSR always used to whitewash any records that made it look bad
-
That's rubbish. all the estimates are innocent people or prisoners of war.
I won't try and argue with you, but on this point I feel that your response to my message is clearly erroneous.
My main point is that statistics can be skewed depending on the purpose of the author. If you disagree with this point, then that is more worrying.
-
Population records prior to WWII and post WWII reveal that something on the order of 50 million people living in the lands that were part of the USSR in 1945 had died during WWII or after WWII as a result of Soviet punishment. The punished people include those who wanted freedom such as those in Ukraine, political opponents and people thought to have cooperated with the Germans. People in these classes were killed both during and after WWII.
More than 21 million Soviet troops died in the field-some who were shot by Soviet forces and some of the force was made up from people living in land other than land the Germans managed to capture. It is estimated 20 million civilians died but some of these were a result of Stalin's actions though there is no way to tell how many. There is no way to know how many were tossed in gulags after the war as opposed to during. No way to know how many civilians died at Soviet hands. We just can tell that more of the population is missing than the official casualty estimates account for. The Soviets intentionally didn't publish any population records until the 1960s because of this. Soviet archive records opened after the fall of the USSR only provide limited answers.
People seem to be hung on on the numbers. I don't care about the exact numbers the known numbers are sufficiently large to say that Stalin was horrible and his subjects suffered under his rule. He helped start WII on purpose and only fought against Germany after Germany turned on him.
I'm not hung on numbers, don't need to be, every death is a tragedy to someone but thought it was interesting as it is the most recent in depth calculation :-\
-
I won't try and argue with you, but on this point I feel that your response to my message is clearly erroneous.
My main point is that statistics can be skewed depending on the purpose of the author. If you disagree with this point, then that is more worrying.
Bare in mind Stalin had a much longer reign and ruled over a larger population most of the time.
civilians and POWs that died as a result of the laws and policies being enforced - Is that a fair definition?
-
Indeed, Russia is unconquerable
Not even close to true.
Russia had no reserves left the only men not under arms were people unfit for service. They even began using women for military jobs. Russia was having a problem finding enough people for industrial and agricultural jobs. As soon as the war ended huge numbers of soldiers were released from service and sent to work because the economy was so bad. Without lend lease help they were stuck doing everything on their own, lend-lease provide large amounts of food and fuel. People always only look at military equipment that was provided and then say lend-lease wasn't significant. Ignored is that the bulk of lend-lease aid was tools, fuel, and raw materials. This was was was needed most badly and was the most significant impact from lend-lease. The aid stopped immediately at the end of the war.
The Russians were testing out wooden planes because but for the aluminum we supplied they would not have been able to build the planes they ended up building.
US and UK forces DID NOT outnumber German forces to the same ration that the Soviets outnumbered German forces. Germany devoted most airpower against the West so let the Soviets control the skies.
In the various engagements even though they had full control of the skies and outnumbered the Germans in greater ratios than the west ever did, the Soviets incurred far more casualties than the West. The West had winning casualty rate. That means the West inflicted more casualties than suffered. The Soviets had a losing rate. They suffered more casualties than they inflicted.
The West had a much larger air-force than the Soviets. The aircraft was vastly superior to Soviet aircraft. Britain and the US were developing jets during the War but the war ended before they were used in earnest. The first Soviet Jet was developed later as the result of stolen technology. The US had atomic weapons that could have been used on the USSR. It was year slater again through stolen technology the Soviets developed the bomb.
Since Soviet forces suffered substantially more casualties against outnumbered Germans lacking air support then obviously they would suffer many more casualties against a Western force larger than the German force which would have been able to establish air superiority. The ground attack aircraft the Soviet shad would have been easily shot down by Western forces and they provided a major amount of the damage against German forces.
Lendlease was responsible for 2/3 of the Soviet aviation gas supply. That cut alone would severely curtail the flying abilities of the Soviets. None of these things are ever considered.
If we fought the Soviets conventionally we would have suffered casualties to be sure but the Soviets would not have been able to prevail. They would have suffered huge losses that they would not have been able to make up because there were no men left to try drawing from.
Stalin knew this, knew about the atomic bomb and would have capitulated to Western demands rather than risk war. He knew the economic might and military might of the West and that he could not prevail. That is why he refused to officially take part in North Korea. Soviet planes that did take part had no markings. He wasn't willing to fight the West.
Operation unthinkable was simply a contingency plan. There are always military contingency plans. it was just in case war did happen with the USSR.
Hitler wasn't the idiot that people like to pretend. He became crazy at the end and was a lousy commander in that he would not allow his military commanders to do what they wanted- which is good because that would have prolonged the war. Germany could have defeated the USSR Hitler wasn't insane. If it wasn't for Lend-lease the Soviets would have to have signed a peace deal with Germany ceding a large amount of territory. But for out efforts there would have been a stalemate, the stalemate he expected the West to have with Germany and Stalin feared the West was going to steal his idea wait in the shadows and after both sides were exhausted to swoop in.
At the end of 1941 Hitler had good reason to think the War in the USSR was winding down and would soon be over with the USSR suing for peace and giving up large swaths of land. Not only were millions of Soviet forces killed or captured, the main areas of Soviet industrial might had been taken. Ukraine accounted for most of the explosives production and a land taken also accounted for a large amount of food production. Industry was in a shambles. Hitler underestimated the ability of the US to supply the Soviets so they could continue fielding a viable force. Finding more men to stick in uniform is one thing.
because so many former Soviet citizens were under German occupation they were forced to use men from the interior of the USSR as replacements.
Feeding them, providing them with equipment and ammunition was a problem. The US provided machine tools and other equipment to outfit factories beyond the reach of German forces. There was little industry in the region at the time of the German invasion were provided a lot of materials they used to rebuild industrially. The manpower to produce aluminum, steel and other metals needed for production of tanks, planes and guns would reduce the pool of men available for military service and working in factories to produce such items. The finished weapons provided were a stopgap to be used as the Allies helped the USSR to build factories. So we helped them to build factories and provided them with raw materials for those factories to use. We provided them with railroad equipment and most of the trucks they used so that they could transport materials to the forces in the field. We also accounted for 2/3 of their aviation gas and the materials used by them for ammunition. Hitler expect them to run out of ammo and have to surrender because he knocked out most of their ammunition production. He had no idea we would be both willing and able to more than make up for the loss.
Anyone who knows about military matters will tell you logistics are the key and that is what no one looks at.
But for the West the USSR would have capitulated and basically would have been an Asian power. To be sure Stalin would have spent years rebuilding to one day renew the war to try to take the lands back but it is doubtful Germany would have been able to be dislodged at that point.
The West saw such a huge Germany as a major threat so didn't let that happen and supplied the Soviets and simultaneously built up their own forces to help defeat Hitler.
On the History channel Website we had a huge debate over Unthinkable where all the forces of each side were listed and took into account atomic power and took into account the Soviet economy less lend-lease and it was quite clear that the Soviets could not go toe to toe with the West if there had been a war. Stalin never would have gone to war though the West could have gotten a much better peace deal without needing to go to war.
-
I won't try and argue with you, but on this point I feel that your response to my message is clearly erroneous.
My main point is that statistics can be skewed depending on the purpose of the author. If you disagree with this point, then that is more worrying.
Of course they can. Authors, on behalf of the victors will probably wish to "blur" any atrocities done in their name. Authors for the vanquished will probably wish to expose/magnify them..................not that I'm undermining ANY atrocity. We Brits, down the years, have certainly shown ourselves as being rather less than squeaky clean.
-
That's incorrect. The Russian Military archives say 8.4 million soviet servicemen but western historians have speculated it could possibly be as high as 14 million. Considering the USSR always used to whitewash any records that made it look bad
Soviet archives opened up after the fall of the USSR provide losses only in the 1942-45 period. The losses during 1941 are just guesses and typically undercounted guesses though we can't be sure. the ones usually whitewashed. There clearly were on the order of over 10 million (20 was a typo) irrevocable losses. It always depends on whether you want to count just those wars against Germany or the all endeavors including the Soviet invasion of Finland.
Mind you civilians did fight against Germany and against Soviets even so... plus men from Poland and Eastern Europe fought alongside Soviets. Even some Italians fought in the USSR though not in huge numbers. So you have to be careful if trying to make a very specific point about casualties.
The USSR annexed property with 25 plus million inhabitants after the war. The prewar population in 1939 was 165-167 million (it was inflated to 171 million by scared census takers) in 1959 it was 208.8 million. That is only growth of 41.8 million over 20 years. At least 25 million of that was added by annexing lands with people on it so in fact it was only growth of at best 17 million over 20 years. 114.8 million were female and only 94 million male. 20 million more females is pretty substantial. If the census were taken right at the end of the war it would have been even more lopsided. The Germans were just as brutal against women as men. Civilian men were killed more than women but not in such lopsided numbers. Most of the difference in the gap between male and female would have to be attributable to military service, partisan service and actions of Stalin.
-
Not even close to true.
Russia had no reserves left the only men not under arms were people unfit for service. They even began using women for military jobs. Russia was having a problem finding enough people for industrial and agricultural jobs. As soon as the war ended huge numbers of soldiers were released from service and sent to work because the economy was so bad. Without lend lease help they were stuck doing everything on their own, lend-lease provide large amounts of food and fuel. People always only look at military equipment that was provided and then say lend-lease wasn't significant. Ignored is that the bulk of lend-lease aid was tools, fuel, and raw materials. This was was was needed most badly and was the most significant impact from lend-lease. The aid stopped immediately at the end of the war.
The Russians were testing out wooden planes because but for the aluminum we supplied they would not have been able to build the planes they ended up building.
US and UK forces DID NOT outnumber German forces to the same ration that the Soviets outnumbered German forces. Germany devoted most airpower against the West so let the Soviets control the skies.
In the various engagements even though they had full control of the skies and outnumbered the Germans in greater ratios than the west ever did, the Soviets incurred far more casualties than the West. The West had winning casualty rate. That means the West inflicted more casualties than suffered. The Soviets had a losing rate. They suffered more casualties than they inflicted.
The West had a much larger air-force than the Soviets. The aircraft was vastly superior to Soviet aircraft. Britain and the US were developing jets during the War but the war ended before they were used in earnest. The first Soviet Jet was developed later as the result of stolen technology. The US had atomic weapons that could have been used on the USSR. It was year slater again through stolen technology the Soviets developed the bomb.
Since Soviet forces suffered substantially more casualties against outnumbered Germans lacking air support then obviously they would suffer many more casualties against a Western force larger than the German force which would have been able to establish air superiority. The ground attack aircraft the Soviet shad would have been easily shot down by Western forces and they provided a major amount of the damage against German forces.
Lendlease was responsible for 2/3 of the Soviet aviation gas supply. That cut alone would severely curtail the flying abilities of the Soviets. None of these things are ever considered.
If we fought the Soviets conventionally we would have suffered casualties to be sure but the Soviets would not have been able to prevail. They would have suffered huge losses that they would not have been able to make up because there were no men left to try drawing from.
Stalin knew this, knew about the atomic bomb and would have capitulated to Western demands rather than risk war. He knew the economic might and military might of the West and that he could not prevail. That is why he refused to officially take part in North Korea. Soviet planes that did take part had no markings. He wasn't willing to fight the West.
Operation unthinkable was simply a contingency plan. There are always military contingency plans. it was just in case war did happen with the USSR.
Hitler wasn't the idiot that people like to pretend. He became crazy at the end and was a lousy commander in that he would not allow his military commanders to do what they wanted- which is good because that would have prolonged the war. Germany could have defeated the USSR Hitler wasn't insane. If it wasn't for Lend-lease the Soviets would have to have signed a peace deal with Germany ceding a large amount of territory. But for out efforts there would have been a stalemate, the stalemate he expected the West to have with Germany and Stalin feared the West was going to steal his idea wait in the shadows and after both sides were exhausted to swoop in.
At the end of 1941 Hitler had good reason to think the War in the USSR was winding down and would soon be over with the USSR suing for peace and giving up large swaths of land. Not only were millions of Soviet forces killed or captured, the main areas of Soviet industrial might had been taken. Ukraine accounted for most of the explosives production and a land taken also accounted for a large amount of food production. Industry was in a shambles. Hitler underestimated the ability of the US to supply the Soviets so they could continue fielding a viable force. Finding more men to stick in uniform is one thing.
because so many former Soviet citizens were under German occupation they were forced to use men from the interior of the USSR as replacements.
Feeding them, providing them with equipment and ammunition was a problem. The US provided machine tools and other equipment to outfit factories beyond the reach of German forces. There was little industry in the region at the time of the German invasion were provided a lot of materials they used to rebuild industrially. The manpower to produce aluminum, steel and other metals needed for production of tanks, planes and guns would reduce the pool of men available for military service and working in factories to produce such items. The finished weapons provided were a stopgap to be used as the Allies helped the USSR to build factories. So we helped them to build factories and provided them with raw materials for those factories to use. We provided them with railroad equipment and most of the trucks they used so that they could transport materials to the forces in the field. We also accounted for 2/3 of their aviation gas and the materials used by them for ammunition. Hitler expect them to run out of ammo and have to surrender because he knocked out most of their ammunition production. He had no idea we would be both willing and able to more than make up for the loss.
Anyone who knows about military matters will tell you logistics are the key and that is what no one looks at.
But for the West the USSR would have capitulated and basically would have been an Asian power. To be sure Stalin would have spent years rebuilding to one day renew the war to try to take the lands back but it is doubtful Germany would have been able to be dislodged at that point.
The West saw such a huge Germany as a major threat so didn't let that happen and supplied the Soviets and simultaneously built up their own forces to help defeat Hitler.
On the History channel Website we had a huge debate over Unthinkable where all the forces of each side were listed and took into account atomic power and took into account the Soviet economy less lend-lease and it was quite clear that the Soviets could not go toe to toe with the West if there had been a war. Stalin never would have gone to war though the West could have gotten a much better peace deal without needing to go to war.
What your saying about the Red army strength after defeating Germany is total garbage. Operation Unthinkable was declared 'unfeasible' by the British high command due to the soviet numerical troop advantage of 4:1 and a tank advantage of 2:1 not to mention the colossal war industry the soviets had created out of range of any American/British bombers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Unthinkable (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Unthinkable)
-
What your saying about the Red army strength after defeating Germany is total garbage. Operation Unthinkable was declared 'unfeasible' by the British high command due to the soviet numerical troop advantage of 4:1 and a tank advantage of 2:1 not to mention the colossal war industry the soviets had created out of range of any American/British bombers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Unthinkable (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Unthinkable)
The Soviet industry that you claim was colossal was a substantially lower output than before the war let and significantly lower than US output. Atomic weapons used over any area of the USSR presented a substantial threat.
The Soviet's outnumbered Germany tankwise 10:1 and had air supremacy on top of numerical advantage in Infantry and artillery and still suffered huge casualties. Thanks to lend-lease aid the USSR produced 137,273 planes from 1941-1945 with 125,000 built before VE Day while the USA produced over 300,000. This obviously doesn't even take into account UK production. US production was severely curtailed as the war ended or the figure would have been even higher.
The US Army Aircorps (forerunner of the Air Force) fielded 75,000 planes at peak strength (including a large number of heavy bombers) and the US Navy fielded another 22-25,000. The US Navy alone had more airpower than the airforces of just about every nation. So the US alone had over 100,000 aircraft to deploy. This doesn't count the Commonwealth squadrons available. How many German aircraft were they accustomed to facing? About 2500 most of which didn't have enough fuel to operate much from mid 1944 on. Their aircraft losses were tremendous despite outnumbering the Germans in the air heavily.
The West would have established aircraft Supremacy and the 2:1 advantage in tanks would have been worthless. Western Tank doctrine was much more effective anyway which is why losses were much less than those suffered by the Soviets.
The Germans were jealous of American Artillery which they considered the best. The US had a much better artillery force than the Soviets.
The Allies supplied another 15,000 planes to the Soviets most them superior to Soviet models which is why at any given time 18-25% of combat planes on the front lines were of Western origin. Throughout 1942 and 1943 Stalin kept begging for more Western fighters because Soviet domestic supply (despite lend-lease) was unable to meet the need given the casualties incurred. In 1944 Despite the Allied bombing campaign the Germans exceed the Soviets by producing 40,593 aircraft compared to 40,300 that the Soviets produced. Because of the bombing campaign they had to have smaller, more dispersed facilities.
US production of steel dwarfed that of the USSR. SO did production of just about everything.
Soviet strength is 1945 at the end of the war was around 15,000 tanks, 25,000 aircraft and 9 million men in the ground forces.
End of April 1945
Total US Army 8.3 million
Army Ground Forces 6 million, 10,000 tanks
Army Air Force 2.3 million, 75,000 plus planes
Naval figures:
Marine Corps 485,000 10,000 plus planes, 500 tanks
US Navy 3.4 million 1000 combat vessels, 28,000 planes
Merchant Marine 215,000- 6000 vessels
Note that these do not include French forces or Commonwealth Forces. Which had over 10,000 planes.
It is a myth that the Soviets could have defeated the West if they went head to head at the end of WWII. Neither side was willing to engage in the costs associated with such a war. The Soviets though would not have risked war over Poland or other issues the Western Allies could have been much more loyal.
-
The Soviet industry that you claim was colossal was a substantially lower output than before the war let and significantly lower than US output. Atomic weapons used over any area of the USSR presented a substantial threat.
The Soviet's outnumbered Germany tankwise 10:1 and had air supremacy on top of numerical advantage in Infantry and artillery and still suffered huge casualties. Thanks to lend-lease aid the USSR produced 137,273 planes from 1941-1945 with 125,000 built before VE Day while the USA produced over 300,000. This obviously doesn't even take into account UK production. US production was severely curtailed as the war ended or the figure would have been even higher.
The US Army Aircorps (forerunner of the Air Force) fielded 75,000 planes at peak strength (including a large number of heavy bombers) and the US Navy fielded another 22-25,000. The US Navy alone had more airpower than the airforces of just about every nation. So the US alone had over 100,000 aircraft to deploy. This doesn't count the Commonwealth squadrons available. How many German aircraft were they accustomed to facing? About 2500 most of which didn't have enough fuel to operate much from mid 1944 on. Their aircraft losses were tremendous despite outnumbering the Germans in the air heavily.
The West would have established aircraft Supremacy and the 2:1 advantage in tanks would have been worthless. Western Tank doctrine was much more effective anyway which is why losses were much less than those suffered by the Soviets.
The Germans were jealous of American Artillery which they considered the best. The US had a much better artillery force than the Soviets.
The Allies supplied another 15,000 planes to the Soviets most them superior to Soviet models which is why at any given time 18-25% of combat planes on the front lines were of Western origin. Throughout 1942 and 1943 Stalin kept begging for more Western fighters because Soviet domestic supply (despite lend-lease) was unable to meet the need given the casualties incurred. In 1944 Despite the Allied bombing campaign the Germans exceed the Soviets by producing 40,593 aircraft compared to 40,300 that the Soviets produced. Because of the bombing campaign they had to have smaller, more dispersed facilities.
US production of steel dwarfed that of the USSR. SO did production of just about everything.
Soviet strength is 1945 at the end of the war was around 15,000 tanks, 25,000 aircraft and 9 million men in the ground forces.
End of April 1945
Total US Army 8.3 million
Army Ground Forces 6 million, 10,000 tanks
Army Air Force 2.3 million, 75,000 plus planes
Naval figures:
Marine Corps 485,000 10,000 plus planes, 500 tanks
US Navy 3.4 million 1000 combat vessels, 28,000 planes
Merchant Marine 215,000- 6000 vessels
Note that these do not include French forces or Commonwealth Forces. Which had over 10,000 planes.
It is a myth that the Soviets could have defeated the West if they went head to head at the end of WWII. Neither side was willing to engage in the costs associated with such a war. The Soviets though would not have risked war over Poland or other issues the Western Allies could have been much more loyal.
Your making the same error of judgment that Hitler and Napoleon made that is underestimating Russia. The sheer size and the formidable winter make it more or less impossible. The hole idea of turning on the USSR after the war is rather stupid, The fact Stalin died in 1953 is good enough for me
-
Your making the same error of judgment that Hitler and Napoleon made that is underestimating Russia. The sheer size and the formidable winter make it more or less impossible. The hole idea of turning on the USSR after the war is rather stupid, The fact Stalin died in 1953 is good enough for me
You are ignoring that if Germany had fought the USSR alone the Soviets would have lost, ignoring US Industrial might which accounted for over 60 percent of the entire World's industrial production during WWII, that Western losses were much more mild than Soviet losses so the West had a larger reserve population, the significant of the atomic bomb, superiority of Western tactics and equipment and the great numerical advantage of Western airpower.
You are also ignoring that Stalin would not have gone to war with the west simply to occupy Eastern Europe if push came to shove. Resolve would have carried the day war wasn't necessary. In a war though the Soviets would have lost that is why they were always worried during the Cold War numbers don't ensure victory. In 1991 the 4th largest military in the World armed with Soviet equipment and using Soviet tactics got routed. The forces tried to fought but were simply outclassed on every level. They lost thousands of tanks while inflicting miniscule casualties on the UN forces. This sent shockwaves through the Russian military. No one expected the Iraqis to be able to prevail but the World didn't expect less than 3 days of fighting to result in such severe losses.
In 2003 some fought but most forces ended up running away after coming under attack. Those that fought had no better success than they did in 1991.
The Red Army would have inflicted losses on the West, it would not have been as lopsided as in Iraq but no where near what the West would have inflicted on the Red Army. Stalin had no delusions about such nor did the military leaders who even admitted that without Lend-lease they could not have prevailed. Stalin wasn't stupid, he knew the propaganda he was putting out was false. He was cold and calculating.
Poland didn't become free in 1953 the Iron Curtain didn't begin to crack until 1989.
-
Since the topic is what a great Ally he was something that may or may not be of interest is that he refused to allow US bombers to be based in the Far East to fly against Japan and refused to assist against Japan in any way until the end of the war when it was decided to help in order to pilfer what they could from Manchuria, seize islands and to seize to North Korea.
-
You are ignoring that if Germany had fought the USSR alone the Soviets would have lost, ignoring US Industrial might which accounted for over 60 percent of the entire World's industrial production during WWII, that Western losses were much more mild than Soviet losses so the West had a larger reserve population, the significant of the atomic bomb, superiority of Western tactics and equipment and the great numerical advantage of Western airpower.
You are also ignoring that Stalin would not have gone to war with the west simply to occupy Eastern Europe if push came to shove. Resolve would have carried the day war wasn't necessary. In a war though the Soviets would have lost that is why they were always worried during the Cold War numbers don't ensure victory. In 1991 the 4th largest military in the World armed with Soviet equipment and using Soviet tactics got routed. The forces tried to fought but were simply outclassed on every level. They lost thousands of tanks while inflicting miniscule casualties on the UN forces. This sent shockwaves through the Russian military. No one expected the Iraqis to be able to prevail but the World didn't expect less than 3 days of fighting to result in such severe losses.
In 2003 some fought but most forces ended up running away after coming under attack. Those that fought had no better success than they did in 1991.
The Red Army would have inflicted losses on the West, it would not have been as lopsided as in Iraq but no where near what the West would have inflicted on the Red Army. Stalin had no delusions about such nor did the military leaders who even admitted that without Lend-lease they could not have prevailed. Stalin wasn't stupid, he knew the propaganda he was putting out was false. He was cold and calculating.
Poland didn't become free in 1953 the Iron Curtain didn't begin to crack until 1989.
That's simply not true. The Germans only had one shot at defeating the USSR and failed, By January 1942 Germany had no chance of winning after being bushed back, Germany could only afford a short summer Blitzkreig campaign.
apart from numbers and statistics you must consider these factors
1. The German army behaved utterly barbaric towards the Russians that considered them liberators at first, this created vast soviet partisan groups deep behind German lines that would sabotage train tracks and blow up supply trains plus ensure the soviet people did not collaborate with the occupying force.
2. Hitler promoted himself to supreme commander a position he was not competent for plus he was becoming dependent on drugs that would effect his decisions
3. He sacked very good and able members of the Wehrmacht like Guderian and Von Manstein who where behind the early victories.
-
Well, all this had kind of gotton out of hand! Still think Putin is an arse though :)
-
Well, all this had kind of gotton out of hand! Still think Putin is an arse though :)
So do I.
-
So do I.
:)
-
That's simply not true. The Germans only had one shot at defeating the USSR and failed, By January 1942 Germany had no chance of winning after being bushed back, Germany could only afford a short summer Blitzkreig campaign.
apart from numbers and statistics you must consider these factors
1. The German army behaved utterly barbaric towards the Russians that considered them liberators at first, this created vast soviet partisan groups deep behind German lines that would sabotage train tracks and blow up supply trains plus ensure the soviet people did not collaborate with the occupying force.
2. Hitler promoted himself to supreme commander a position he was not competent for plus he was becoming dependent on drugs that would effect his decisions
3. He sacked very good and able members of the Wehrmacht like Guderian and Von Manstein who where behind the early victories.
As the saying goes amateurs study tactics while professionals study logistics.
In the spring of 1942 the Germans mauled the Soviets and only after lend-lease started to kick in did the tables begin to turn. Explain how the Soviets would have done on their own without any aid when they lost all their chemical works in Ukraine. They had to conserve artillery shells until they were supplied by the West with finished shells, casings and powder. Their powder works in Ukraine that accounted for the bulk of their production was gone.
Three quarters of all iron ore and manganese was in Ukraine. Coal production fell dramatically as well. They even lost a sizable amount of its arable land and crops. But perhaps most significantly
These were the Soviet losses throughout the war are you trying to tell me the majority of these losses were in 1941? They lost their ass in 1941 but they still lost a lot in subsequent years as well.
Losses throughout the war:
Tanks 83,500
SP guns 13,000
AC- 37,500
Trucks 351,800
Aircraft about 125,000
Through Lend lease the Soviets were provided with:
22 million artillery shells/bombs, nearly 1 billion shell casings, 317,000 tons of explosive materials and 103,000 tons of toluene. The Soviets manufactured 116,000 tons of toluene during the war and 600,000 tons of explosive materials in part using materials obtained through Lend-Lease. So but for Lend Lease they would have had less than half the ammunition supply they had. Lend-lease accounted for a great percentage of their ammunition supply during the darkest hours their production picked up after they started getting territory back.
Lend lease sent the equipment to build and outfit numerous refineries Theses refineries accounted for 5% of crude production and 20% of cracking ability. 20% might not sound like that much but it is significant. Technical assistance was rendered with their own existing refineries as well there is no way to measure what the result was but it had to be something.
According to Feeding the Bear, Lend-lease provided production equipment and fuel additives that raised the capacity of Soviet aviation fuel output from 110,00 metric tons in 1941 to 1.67 million metric tons in 1944. There is no way the Soviets ever would have remotely approached this capacity without the US assistance. In the meantime this production was less than half of their total supply, Lend Lease delivered 59% of aviation fuel outright. 3/4 of their aviation fuel used during the war was attributable to Lend-Lease. Obviously since their production didn't ramp up until late in the war the overwhelming majority of what they used in 1942 and 1943 was from Lend-lease.
Of course they would not have needed as much aviation fuel without lend lease because they would not have had as many aircraft or bombs. Some of the most vital components of Soviet aircraft were supplied through Lend-Lease such as 45% of copper and 55% of Aluminum came from Lend-Lease. Copper is used in wiring in aircraft among other things and aluminum is used for both the plane itself and also the engine (tank engines too). Certainly losing over half of such vital raw materials would seriously curtail production. This doesn’t even take into account the tools for construction of aircraft that the US provided (the US provided 30% of Soviet machine tools and they were more advanced than Soviet tooling) and other raw materials provided. Aircraft provided via Lend-lease accounted for a significant percentage of the aircraft used on the front lines. They never would have achieved air Supremacy without both Lend-Lease and the Allied Air campaign causing Germany to keep the bulk of the Luftwaffee protecting the homeland. The Germany military with strong air support facing the less well supplied Soviet military would have meant no ability of the Soviet forces to advance. Lendlease even accounted for a great deal of the USSR's railroad equipment and trucks (over 350,000 trucks provided). This doesn't even take into account all the food that was provided- canned food so would feed troops in the field.
The great advances the Soviets made were enabled by Lend-lease and the Allied effort siphoning off the bulk of Germany's airpower and 40% of their ground forces. A sizable amount of German production went to the Kreigsmarine, V2 rockets to use on the UK and anti-aircraft artillery to defend from the bombing campaign. The largest amount of their ammunition production went to...AAA shells. The Germans would have been able to devote more production to use against rhe USSR but for the air campaign and would have produced far more than they did historically and despite the air campaign they still produced more aircraft than the USSR which was getting tons of help through lend-lease.
I always love the crap about how the war was won in 1942 before lend-lease kicked in. That is why it took till 1945 for the war to end...
The Allies combined outnumbered Germany in every category from population to soldiers to production by huge margins. It still took nearly a year after Overlord for Germany to fall. Germany was bombed to hell, lost their oil supplies so had little fuel and sill took a long time to be defeated. The Soviets would have been stuck in a stalemate with Germany outside of Moscow and would have eventually sued for peace.
The only reason that didn't happen is because if the Allies allowed Germany to consolidate its gains then it would have been an even bigger threat and taken even greater effort to deal with. The Allies thus chose to help the USSR with Lend-lease aid so they could defeat Germany together so the effort was less than would have otherwise been required if going it alone.
The Western Allies could have defeated Germany without Soviet help but it would have required a larger effort and taken longer thus the bomb would have been used on Germany. Germany was spared mainly because by the time the bomb was ready for use the war was won.
VonManstein was arguably the best German General of the war but not a miracle worker. Logistics win wars, tacticians only help speed up victory or slow defeat.
-
A post I wrote years ago while debating WWII:
The major problems facing the Soviet forces when the Germans invaded is they expanded from 1.5 million to 5 million in such a short period of time that they lacked a lot of proper equipment and also training. The Soviets had a lot of old and obsolete equipment in their ranks but much of this was thinned out during the first year of the war. They also had very poor maintenance so plenty of this equipment was not even fully operational. Since they were in the midst of reform and decided to concentrate tanks in armored units a lot of men were in transit. Many were separated from their vehicles and had no idea where they were supposed to go or where their vehicles were. Even the General Staff had no idea where some of the units were, or even destined for. This makes things rather difficult to run a war.
To make it worse Stalin’s purges got rid of the most capable soldiers at all levels so not even they top leadership had many skilled personnel. Political commissars had to give permission for the movements of units. Apart from them being slow in making decisions communication took some time traveling from the front to them and vice versa. Worse yet, they tried to attack everything, and in war if you attack everything, you attack nothing. There is also an old Russian saying that goes "try to catch many rabbits, and you catch none;" certainly fitting of the Soviets' counterattack. The Soviet method of defense was mono-dimensional: hold ground at all cost, which was an ineffective response to the German blitz. This made it easy for the Germans to flank then surround the Red Army, resulting in enormous losses of men and machine for the Soviets.
Even before the Soviets changed their fighting methods the chance for large scale captures on the order of those that occurred July-October were nearly impossible. By November the Germans had overextended their supply lines and could not perform any major sweeping maneuvers. Without major improvement to their logistics system they had little hope of pressing into the USSR any further. They progressed a little bit further in 1942 but not to any large degree. They simply didn’t have the logistics for it. Part of this can be attributed to the scorched earth policy. Another is that they failed to truly attempt to win over the disaffected population. Some looked at the Germans as liberators at first but the Germans failed to nurse this and try to use it to their advantage. This is a blunder of the first order. The net result is that unless they built a lot more railways close to the fronts and stockpiled supplies on large scale and had large numbers of trucks to move the supplies along with the troops they would have little chance of success moving further. As they moved they would have to expand the tracks. It would take years for Germany to retool their economy to be able to do this if at all. This means as far as the Germans were concerned they were stuck fighting on a front that had little chance of advancing. They could counter attack and move around a bit but no sweeping movements like in the years passed.
The Soviets had just taken a big hit. By the year’s end they lost territory that accounted for a lot of their industrial and agricultural products. They lost 3/4 of their iron ore, coal and manganese production as well. GNP was reduced by 1/3 overall. They lost lands with 50 million people on them if you count those occupied in the Baltics, Finland and Poland so they went from 190 million down to 140 million. Due to the prior wars women accounted for a higher percentage of the population. In 1942 steel production had fallen to 8 million ton compared with 18 million before the war. In the 1930s the Soviets began to build plants east of the Urals. Some of these plants were built with American help and many were built using American designs. These plants were more efficient than the older ones in Europe but there were not enough to account for a lot of production and worse not a large population base where they were built. Thus they still relied on the older less efficient plants until the war. The loss of those plants forced them to rely on the new ones and they even built more of them. They had to force a lot of people to move near them and forced 12 hour shifts on all workers. This enabled to Soviets to continue to produce weapons. Moscow was a major industrial center as well and production there continued.
In 1942 some major issues developed. One was that these plants were so far from the front. This was the plan so they would not be within German bomber range but distance hurts both ways. Most rail traffic from the East was routed through Moscow. Many believe that if Moscow was lost the Soviets would have been unable to get equipment to the fronts any longer. Even with Moscow under Soviet control it took some time for items to reach the front line and it was a large front. The best way to express things is by building stocks of items on hand near the front and to move production to these stockpiles over time to keep them from being depleted. Losing a lot of raw materials meant the Soviets were facing shortages though. They were feeding hand to mouth. The Soviets ordered long lists of raw materials from Lend-lease. They also ordered a lot of planes so that they could use them until Soviet production was fully on line. In 1942 they nursed their assets and thus had to conserve artillery shells and other equipment they were short on.
The correspondence from Soviet leaders tends to indicate that by the end of 1942 they were in desperate need of raw materials or they would not be able to meet output requirements. Indeed 55% of all aluminum used during the war came from the US. 45 percent of copper came from the US. 1/3 of all munitions came from the US. 1/3 or more of a huge number of raw materials came from the US. Military weapons are built using machine tools. Roughly 30 percent of machine tools built during the entire war came from the US. The US provided enough steel to build 70,000 T-34 tanks. Since they didn't build anywhere near that many it means Lend-lease alone accounted for enough steel for all their medium tanks plus some to spare for other things. It also means their entire domestic production was able to be used for other things.
There is no way to know how important the American contribution was in 1942 and 43. In some 1942 months half of all munitions was coming from the US. Suppose it took 1 month for munitions to reach solders from the time of being manufactured. This means one month from the time used there could have been some type of shortage. We don’t know what the actual transit time to each area of the front nor do we know exact expenditures of each area so it is impossible to predict the exact time that there may have been a shortage. American production averaged out to certain numbers but at the time of delivery might have accounted for an even larger percentage of materials available at that time. That being the case aid could have been downright instrumental at times.
To provide an illustration take the following into consideration. The US stopped producing artillery shells because they had a surplus of shells and Congress cut off funding to save money. The army burned through their stocks in 1944 and there was a shell shortage. This certainly hurt the army’s progress. While the US Army had relatively accurate fire and the best artillery during the war, the Soviets relied on numbers. They had over 100,000 artillery weapons by the end of the war. They launched massive bombardments and relied on the number of shells not on accurate fire. They thus burned through a lot of ammo. Losing 1/3 of munitions would certainly reduce the number of shells stocked. The US accounted for a large percentage of the materials used by the Soviets for their own shell production so the loss actually would have been more substantial than just a third.
In terms of equipment the Soviets would have had problems with transportation if not for Lend-Lease. Domestic production was only perhaps 250,000 and the US provided more than double this amount of motor vehicles. Moreover 90 percent of trains and rails were from the allies. Since the factories were mostly in Eastern Russia railways were vital to moving equipment. Railways were also vital to building up forces. The Soviets spent months sending units to Kursk for example. The Soviets learned their mistake of launching an offensive along the entire front and learned to pinprick and stagger attacks at different times to keep the Germans off balance. They also needed a lot of replacements given their high casualties and these were sent by rail and truck. After supplies were unloaded from the rail they were brought to the troops by truck. Trucks were extremely important for not only supplying the men but transporting them around. Soldiers who march long distances are not very valuable in combat. Marches wear men down and make them much less effective. Also the distance that can be covered is much less. The USSR is huge and to say the rails and trucks were not significant would be crazy. In order to advance all the way to Germany they needed transportation than they were able to produce. The further they moved West the further from the Ural factories. The German rails were constantly running throughout the war to supply their forces that was why they were targeted by Allied air power.
The USSR was really at peak production given the manpower they had. As time goes on experienced workers get faster but there was little opportunity to build more plants and use even more workers. Men were much more important in the military and as the war went on more and more men were pulled from work into the military. By the end of the war 80% of agricultural workers and more than half of factory workers were women. It would have been really difficult for the USSR to have expanded the workforce and production too much more. The upshot of this is that if the USSR needed to produce something else it would have had to stop producing something else in favor of the new item. For example if the Soviets needed to build a lot more trains and railroad rails that would have meant less workers to build tanks and less steel to use on tanks as well because the steel was being used on the trains and rails. If they wanted to build more trucks that too would have used resources that historically had been allocated to something else. They would have needed to devote more to steel production and mining of metals which in turn would lower the resources for finished products.
As soon as the Soviets recovered land they pressed the men living in such territory into military service. That was how they fed the voracious manpower appetite of the Red Army. But for Lend-lease though they would not have been able to liberate the lands when they did and thus would not have been able to press such men into service. They would have been forced to conserve their assets. That in turn would have meant stalemate, they would not have been able to do anything besides hold their ground. Since Germany lacked the logistics to get into Moscow and beyond again that means stalemate.
Hitler wanted the USSR to sue for peace and give up the territory already won there was no actual intention to drive to the Urals he knew it wasn't possible and the land most valuable is what was already conquered. If Stalin didn't receive help from the Allies no way he would have continued the war he would simply have agreed to peace, tried to rebuild and hoped he could eventually rebuild enough to resume the war and liberate the lost land.
While Germany would have to station troops on the border with the USSR just in case they would not have needed to leave 60% and thus when the Allies did decide to invade Europe Germany would have more forces to use and this means the Allies would have to devote more forces than they did historically. This is why they wanted to keep the USSR in the war. Stalin feared the Allies were providing lend lease aid in order to use his strategy of getting Germany and the USSR to exhaust one another so kept demanding they open the second front ASAP. He periodically threatened to sue for peace if we didn't.
-
I'm not surprised that it took two years to write. ??? :D
-
Well, all this had kind of gotton out of hand! Still think Putin is an arse though :)
I don't ;D
-
Now Putin is missing. Very odd for a head of state.
-
Now Putin is missing. Very odd for a head of state.
Yes, I also heard that but wouldn't the news make more of it? Lets hope he's not in a 'bunker' somewhere!! :o :o ;D
-
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/kremlin-wont-comment-report-putin-missing-moscow-n323961
-
I still have to reply to some of the crap posted on this thread.
-
Now Putin is missing. Very odd for a head of state.
He's back! :)
-
He's back! :)
Shite! ;D
-
I still have to reply to some of the crap posted on this thread.
You and me both NGB :o
-
Shite! ;D
It might not be him though - the evil West might have kidnapped him and implanted an imposter ;D ;D
-
I still have to reply to some of the crap posted on this thread.
You should read this book
http://www.amazon.com/The-Chief-Culprit-Stalins-Design/dp/1591148065
and if you don't want to bother then consider:
"In August, Stalin decided on an agreement with Hitler. A non-aggression pact with Germany assured the Soviet Union tangible advantages. The Soviets would recover eastern Poland, which had formerly belonged to Imperial Russia. The Germans pledged support in the USSR's claims on Bessarabia and agreed to define Eastern Europe's Baltic and Balkan states as belonging to the Soviet "sphere of interest."
Germany was preparing to invade Poland in case a territorial dispute and related grievances defied peaceful settlement. England and France supported Poland. Stalin reasoned that were he to conclude a military compact with the West, the powerful coalition would probably discourage Hitler from war.
A German-Soviet non-aggression pact, however, would give Hitler a free hand to invade Poland. England, as Poland's ally, would declare war on Germany, drag a reluctant France into the conflagration, and Italy would rush to Hitler's side. The Soviet formula for national security rested with aggravating the conflicting interests among the "imperialist" nations and maintaining neutrality as these states expended their resources in a prolonged struggle.
Stalin had defined the premise during his March 10, 1939, speech in Moscow:
Nonintervention represents the endeavor... to allow all the warmongers to sink deeply into the mire of warfare, to quietly urge them on. The result will be that they weaken and exhaust one another. Then... (we will) appear on the scene with fresh forces and step in, naturally "in the interest of peace," to dictate terms to the weakened belligerents.2
On August 23, 1939, the German foreign minister, Joachim von Ribbentrop, was in Moscow. He and Molotov signed the historic German-Soviet non-aggression pact. The following evening, Stalin hosted prominent members of the Soviet Political Bureau in his apartment. Among the dinner guests were Molotov, Voroshilov, Lavrenti P. Beria and Nikita Khrushchev.
Stalin explained, as Khrushchev later recalled, that he considered war with Germany unavoidable, but had momentarily tricked Hitler and bought time. The Soviet premier described the treaty with Germany as a game of "who outwits whom."3 He concluded that the Soviet Union held the advantage both morally and militarily. A few months later, the Soviet Foreign Office explained Stalin's decision in a telegram to its embassy in Tokyo: "The ratifying of our treaty with Germany was dictated by the need for a war in Europe."4
On August 25, 1939, the Swiss periodical Revue de droit international published the text of a speech Stalin delivered on August 19 to a closed session of the Political Bureau in Moscow. He was quoted as follows:
It must be our objective that Germany wage war long enough to exhaust England and France so much that they cannot defeat Germany alone.... Should Germany win, it will itself be so weakened that it won't be able to wage war against us for 10 years.... It's paramount for us that this war continues as long as possible, until both sides are worn out.5
In November, Stalin responded in Pravda that the Swiss article was a "heap of lies."6 (The Russian researcher T. S. Bushuyevoy discovered Stalin's original text in the former Soviet archives in 1994; it conformed to the Swiss version.)
The Soviets seized a generous portion of Eastern Europe only days before France's surrender. In September and October 1939, the Soviet government had negotiated permission with Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia to establish military bases at their Baltic ports. In June 1940, Molotov reproached the Lithuanian prime minister, Anastas Merkys, for the alleged poor security provided the Soviet garrison; a Red Army soldier had supposedly been bushwhacked. On June 14, Molotov presented Lithuania's foreign minister with an ultimatum demanding reinforcement of the Soviet military contingent to prevent further "provocation." The diminutive republic acquiesced.
Similar ultimatums were presented to Latvia and Estonia. On the 21st, the Baltic states were declared Soviet republics, following sham elections. Molotov told the Lithuanian foreign minister on June 30, "Now we're convinced more than ever that the brilliant comrade Lenin was not wrong in asserting that World War II will bring us to power in Europe, just as World War I helped us to power in Russia."11
When Moscow presented its demand on June 23 to reoccupy Bessarabia, the formerly Russian eastern province of Romania, Ribbentrop pledged Germany's support. He asked only that the sovereignty of Romania's remaining territory be respected, to safeguard the Reich's economic interests.
Apologists for the USSR, and they abound among historians and sociologists in democratic countries, excuse these Soviet land grabs as defensive measures. The threat of potential German aggression supposedly compelled Moscow to extend the USSR's frontiers to blunt the impetus of a German offensive. The premise ignores the fact that the Soviet operations in the Baltic and into Bessarabia occurred opposite a virtually undefended German border. Four German infantry divisions and six militia divisions protected the demarcation line shared with the Soviet Union. Two were transferred to the western front in June."
http://www.wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archives/articles/stalwarplans.html
These works simply confirm what I learned years ago in College about Stalin. There are many works that reveal the truth if one actually cares to learn the truth.
-
Now Putin is saying that Russia using the nuclear bomb is not out of the question.
Such a great guy!
-
Sorry, too lazy to translate this myself, so I put it through Google Translate.
http://politiken.dk/udland/ECE2597883/ruslands-ambassadoer-truer-danmark-med-angreb-med-atommissiler/#!ditpolitiken-1
Russian Ambassador threatens Denmark with attack with nuclear missiles
In an opinion piece comes the Russian ambassador to Denmark with a stark warning over NATO cooperation
Threat. The planet's most controversial man in the past year, Russian President Vladimir Putin has already soldiers into the Ukrainian land, but also NATO countries can be attacked, warns that large country in the east. - Photo: Pavel Golovkin (Archive) / AP
Threat. The planet's most controversial man in the past year, Russian President Vladimir Putin has already soldiers into the Ukrainian land, but also NATO countries can be attacked, warns that large country in the east. - Photo: Pavel Golovkin (Archive) / AP
If someone would think that Denmark's relations with Russia could become more strained, there may be cause for reconsideration.
In an opinion piece in Jyllands-Posten Saturday warned the Russian ambassador to Denmark, Mikhail Vanin, that Denmark will be the target of a possible Russian nuclear attack if we join NATO missile defense.
"I do not think that the Danes fully understand the consequences of what happens if Denmark joins the US-led missile defense. If this happens, the Danish warships targets for Russian nuclear missiles ".
"Denmark will be part of the threat to Russia. It will be less peaceful, and relations with Russia will be damaged. Of course it is your decision - I would just remind you that I will lose both money and security, "said Mikhail Vanin Jyllands-Posten.
READ Also Europe extends sanctions against Russia
Furthermore it mentions ambassador to Russia at the same time have missiles, "as guaranteed penetrate the future global missile defense system."
Crossing inspires wonder and anger among Danish politicians. Among them is Foreign Minister Martin Lidegaard (R), despite the talk of attack calls for calm.
"If he has decided in this direction, it is obviously unacceptable. Russia knows very well that Nato's missile defense is defensive and not against them. We disagree with Russia on many important things, but it is important that the tone between us does not escalate, "said Martin Lidegaard Jyllands-Posten.
SF's defense spokesman and former foreign minister, Holger K. Nielsen, who himself is opposed to missile defense, is puzzled and says to the newspaper that "it is a crazy opinion that Denmark should be a target for Russian missiles".
-
Now Putin is saying that Russia using the nuclear bomb is not out of the question.
Such a great guy!
The media are just making trouble, Alias. The reports a few days ago were talking about Putin even though he had said nothing, nor been seen. It is almost as if the media have an agenda at the moment. Whatever Putin does or even doesn't say is reported as news and people are being propagandised to see Russia and Putin as the enemy when really the enemies are much closer to home.
It is Russia and Putin who have done the most to avoid conflict and there is much more to the whole story than is being told by western media at the moment. The facts do speak for themselves, and when you take away all the opinion and comment, US/UK, NATO aggression is the threat, not Russian aggression.
Have a quick search on US NATO first use policy and you will find that they have always refused to sign up to a no first use(NFS) policy. Russia also have dropped this pledge in 1993. The reports about what Putin allegedly said is nothing more than hot air. We have the same policy and therefore you could equally credibly report that the US/UK haven't ruled out using nuclear weapons. It is not a story, it's propaganda.
The facts on the ground are that US has by some distance more armed forces in other countries than any other nation.I would confidently hazard that it has dropped more bombs since WW2 than the rest of the world combined. The bombing campaign in the Vietnam war accounted for a massive 7.6 million tons of ordnance being dropped. To put some context on this figure, it is three times the total amount of ordnance dropped during the entire second world war.
Only one country ever in the history of the world has used a nuclear bomb( not once but twice) and that country is obviously the US.
The invasions, wars and bombing campaigns of recent years have all been initiated by US/UK and have caused an untold number of deaths(murders), horrific injuries, millions of refugees and terrorists running amok in the Middle East. The US with it's dreams of world domination based on the belief of "American exceptionalism" has created chaos the world over and are self evidently the worlds biggest threat.
The US/UK, NATO and EU are interfering and fomenting unrest in Ukraine and have been from the beginning. The anti Putin propaganda from the media and government became hysterical some time ago and we really should be asking far more searching questions of our own leaders, especially after Afghanistan and Iraq, rather than swallowing whatever is fed us as truth.
If we didn't know before Iraq that our governments were willing to lie to launch an aggressive war and if we were still unaware that our media were incapable/unwilling to ask the questions that we expect from an effective and honest media, surely we know now.
Putin is not a threat to world peace, US/UK, NATO are.
Why else would the US need to spend 640 billion dollars compared to Russias 90 billion if not for aggression. If Russia really want to act aggressively on the world stage they need to up their arms spending.
-
The media are just making trouble, Alias. The reports a few days ago were talking about Putin even though he had said nothing, nor been seen. It is almost as if the media have an agenda at the moment. Whatever Putin does or even doesn't say is reported as news and people are being propagandised to see Russia and Putin as the enemy when really the enemies are much closer to home.
It is Russia and Putin who have done the most to avoid conflict and there is much more to the whole story than is being told by western media at the moment. The facts do speak for themselves, and when you take away all the opinion and comment, US/UK, NATO aggression is the threat, not Russian aggression.
Have a quick search on US NATO first use policy and you will find that they have always refused to sign up to a no first use(NFS) policy. Russia also have dropped this pledge in 1993. The reports about what Putin allegedly said is nothing more than hot air. We have the same policy and therefore you could equally credibly report that the US/UK haven't ruled out using nuclear weapons. It is not a story, it's propaganda.
The facts on the ground are that US has by some distance more armed forces in other countries than any other nation.I would confidently hazard that it has dropped more bombs since WW2 than the rest of the world combined. The bombing campaign in the Vietnam war accounted for a massive 7.6 million tons of ordnance being dropped. To put some context on this figure, it is three times the total amount of ordnance dropped during the entire second world war.
Only one country ever in the history of the world has used a nuclear bomb( not once but twice) and that country is obviously the US.
The invasions, wars and bombing campaigns of recent years have all been initiated by US/UK and have caused an untold number of deaths(murders), horrific injuries, millions of refugees and terrorists running amok in the Middle East. The US with it's dreams of world domination based on the belief of "American exceptionalism" has created chaos the world over and are self evidently the worlds biggest threat.
The US/UK, NATO and EU are interfering and fomenting unrest in Ukraine and have been from the beginning. The anti Putin propaganda from the media and government became hysterical some time ago and we really should be asking far more searching questions of our own leaders, especially after Afghanistan and Iraq, rather than swallowing whatever is fed us as truth.
If we didn't know before Iraq that our governments were willing to lie to launch an aggressive war and if we were still unaware that our media were incapable/unwilling to ask the questions that we expect from an effective and honest media, surely we know now.
Putin is not a threat to world peace, US/UK, NATO are.
Why else would the US need to spend 640 billion dollars compared to Russias 90 billion if not for aggression. If Russia really want to act aggressively on the world stage they need to up their arms spending.
No, the Russian ambassador in Denmark actually said that it wouldn´t be impossible that Russia would nuke us. He doesn´t just go out and say something like that on his own.
The Danish foreign minister is out reacting to this - he is not the media.
-
at the end amerca cant even bring democracy to amerca the idea they can bring it to anywhere else is laughable.
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCIQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.democracynow.org%2F2008%2F10%2F9%2Fgreg_palast_on_vote_rigging_and&ei=RMImVZ3vE8bxUu_rgagN&usg=AFQjCNFFfLqnhw1uw82ekzbJ3VflzkzVRQ&sig2=lP7k0wVsdias8ZShjGmtxA&bvm=bv.90491159,d.d24
-
at the end amerca cant even bring democracy to amerca the idea they can bring it to anywhere else is laughable.
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCIQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.democracynow.org%2F2008%2F10%2F9%2Fgreg_palast_on_vote_rigging_and&ei=RMImVZ3vE8bxUu_rgagN&usg=AFQjCNFFfLqnhw1uw82ekzbJ3VflzkzVRQ&sig2=lP7k0wVsdias8ZShjGmtxA&bvm=bv.90491159,d.d24
It is all about power, but they (we) call it "bringing democracy".
That said, somehow I feel better about "our side" having the power, we might lose it soon enough.
-
If the Nazis had taken Russia its almost certain I may not be here now, one Golden rule stick to it and live don't mess with Russia , remember and remember well in Earths history to the last 30 seconds only the USA have used nuclear weapons in a war Russia have launched none.
-
If the Nazis had taken Russia its almost certain I may not be here now, one Golden rule stick to it and live don't mess with Russia , remember and remember well in Earths history to the last 30 seconds only the USA have used nuclear weapons in a war Russia have launched none.
Yet.
-
It's our support for the Ukraine which is the stumbling block now. I wish this country would keep out of the politics,etc of other countries and at least learn lessons from past UNNECESSARY wars such as Iraq and Afghanistan.Where did that get us ? Stop sending funds abroad,as invariably they end up in the hands of corrupt governments and terrorists. Will this country ever learn ?
-
Yet.
Let´s give them the benefit of the doubt - personally I like that better than suspicion in advance. In gereral in all aspects of life.
Personally I am more scared of ISIS who have no values it seems. Thugs, we need to stop that.
-
here is a good documentary on Russian soldiers In Ukraine.
Selfie Soldiers: Russia Checks in to Ukraine
"As the conflict in Ukraine continues, so too does Russian President Vladimir Putin’s denial of any Russian involvement. But a recent report from think tank the Atlantic Council used open source information and social media to find evidence of Russian troops across the border"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zssIFN2mso (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zssIFN2mso)
Also a Russian state news channel said they could turn the USA into 'Radioactive Ash'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkMT_oLempE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkMT_oLempE)
Still got your head buried in the sand Gringo? ::)
-
Putin the windbag. Looking somewhat puffy around the gills lately.
-
here is a good documentary on Russian soldiers In Ukraine.
Selfie Soldiers: Russia Checks in to Ukraine
"As the conflict in Ukraine continues, so too does Russian President Vladimir Putin’s denial of any Russian involvement. But a recent report from think tank the Atlantic Council used open source information and social media to find evidence of Russian troops across the border"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zssIFN2mso (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zssIFN2mso)
Also a Russian state news channel said they could turn the USA into 'Radioactive Ash'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkMT_oLempE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkMT_oLempE)
Still got your head buried in the sand Gringo? ::)
If you rely on sources like this in order to form your judgement on geopolitical matters then it is no surprise that you are so ill informed.
In fact the comments about the first video are more illuminating than the video itself. You're not very good at this are you? Your arguments have so far consisted of nothing more than posting links to dubious videos which you appear to take as undisputed truth without questioning obvious things first, like the source for starters. Can't you form your own opinion?
-
If you rely on sources like this in order to form your judgement on geopolitical matters then it is no surprise that you are so ill informed.
In fact the comments about the first video are more illuminating than the video itself. You're not very good at this are you? Your arguments have so far consisted of nothing more than posting links to dubious videos which you appear to take as undisputed truth without questioning obvious things first, like the source for starters. Can't you form your own opinion?
(http://www.reactiongifs.us/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/lol_ricky_gervais.gif)
-
Let´s give them the benefit of the doubt - personally I like that better than suspicion in advance. In gereral in all aspects of life.
Personally I am more scared of ISIS who have no values it seems. Thugs, we need to stop that.
IS are going to be wiped out soon including women and children blitzed in heavy air attacks , that's what war is one dirty mess, Russia need to be loked at but no more one day you might need them , should IS bring war to their soil expect Russia to begin carpet bombing without any NATO or UN clearance, likewise Israel they will remove countries if need be Israel have more bomb shelters than anyone else.
-
IS are going to be wiped out soon including women and children blitzed in heavy air attacks , that's what war is one dirty mess, Russia need to be loked at but no more one day you might need them , should IS bring war to their soil expect Russia to begin carpet bombing without any NATO or UN clearance, likewise Israel they will remove countries if need be Israel have more bomb shelters than anyone else.
They will have to put troops on the ground to get rid of ISIS. strategic bombing can only soften a target
-
They will have to put troops on the ground to get rid of ISIS. strategic bombing can only soften a target
There are other ways some very dirty mainly ensure all drinking water is contaminated, destroy all food supplies destroy hospitals and schools, training camps, destroy the oilfield they have encircle and wait for them to starve to death,
-
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-31962644
-
Video allegedly banned in USA: Putin discussing USA and ISIS:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ykb5sxTl1Rw
-
Video allegedly banned in USA: Putin discussing USA and ISIS:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ykb5sxTl1Rw
Hi Roch we should have kept our noses out of Lybia, and Iraq.
The west have stirred a hornets nest imo.
-
In fact every where the west gets involved we leave behind a disaster.
-
It may not be to our taste, but the fact is sometimes dictatorship works.
-
In fact every where the west gets involved we leave behind a disaster.
I find it hard to believe the Arab spring just happened in one country after another, imo there was meddling by the west and they got more than they bargained for.
The minute these awful facist dictators were toppled the man made countries created by the west collapsed and all the old differences and grievances came to the fore again.
-
It may not be to our taste, but the fact is sometimes dictatorship works.
I agree buddy. Each to their own. We should leave well alone.
-
Hi Roch we should have kept our noses out of Lybia, and Iraq.
The west have stirred a hornets nest imo.
ISIS started in Syria. ISIS was able to penetrate into Iraq because of the inept response from the Iraqi government. That the US didn't provide more aid to Iraq to stop ISIS right away rests entirely on Obama's shoulders. He refused to leave any US troops and refused to do anything beyond drop a few meaningless bombs.
The West wanted Assad gone but no such countries actually stepped up to get rid of him. They left the Syrians to fend for themselves just like the World left Poland to fend for itself in 1939 when attacked by Germany and the USSR. War was declared against Germany but no one actually did anything to save Poland. The US is one of the few countries willing to actually put our blood and treasure on the line for human rights- we did so in Iraq until Obama came to power and Obama changed things drastically.
The US didn't just bomb Iraq and leave the Iraqi's on their own to form a new government. We provided security while they organized a democratic government and even after that government was formed we stayed there to fight against the extremists who were terrorizing the population. Part and parcel of carrying the fight ourselves to the enemy with the Iraqi forces subordinate was to prevent the Iraqi forces from committing atrocities. It wasn't simply because the Iraqi forces could not fight without us.
Instead of remaining there to make sure the progress continued in a positive way Obama acted like Europe often acts and withdrew completely saying leave them to their own devices. The West criticized Assad and said he had to go but no one had the guts to remove him and install a government that the Syrian population would back. No one wanted to put in the effort that is required. The result of that is that ISIS was able to establish and grow unfettered and no one did crap despite all the atrocities. They didn't just brutalize the entire population- which is bad enough in terms of human rights violations but they wiped out the Christian populations of every area they entered. They killed them or forced them to leave. What did the West and UN do in the face of this? Nothing. It is way worse than what supposedly happened in the former Yugoslavia but no one acted. Why not? Because the leaders and populations of most countries don't care enough about protecting others to put their blood and treasure on the line they are all talk no action and Obama is one of them.
The West saw an opportunity to get rid of a dictator in Libya who in the past was pretty horrible but in recent times wasn't causing much trouble. He gave up his WMD programs and fell in line. But it was perceived as a chance for some payback so they bombed his forces but refused to go in with ground forces to secure the land so anarchy followed.
At this point the West feels some guilt and is taking in some refugees but still is unwilling to provide aid to stop the refugees from fleeing. You would think that they would finally realize it is better to defeat ISIS and make it safe for the people to go back to their homes instead of go to other countries but nope. Instead they are going to allow Russia to prop up Assad and hope that they defeat ISIS even while still saying Assad must go.
The US is the only Western Country where the population actually would have supported ground forces being used against ISIS. The rest of the West doesn't care enough. Our leader though was exactly like his European counterparts all mouth no brains or guts.
Obama and his counterparts are so stupid they actually think it is a good idea to let Iran spread it's power and eventually get a nuclear weapon. The stupidity of those in charge is mind boggling. Instead of nipping problems in the bud they wait until all hell breaks loose and the result is that it is much more difficult and costly when action is finally taken.
-
It may not be to our taste, but the fact is sometimes dictatorship works.
Buddy, I'm inclined to agree. In so many cases, where people are suddenly given their freedom after being confined by rigid rules, they have no idea how to be.
-
Buddy, I'm inclined to agree. In so many cases, where people are suddenly given their freedom after being confined by rigid rules, they have no idea how to be.
Crime in the UK would be much lower if there were some brutal dictator running things but would you prefer living with no freedom and state sponsored brutality instead of the current crime rate?
Those brutalized by Saddam's rule were much more happy to be living in post Saddam Iraq despite the attacks coming from terrorists that supplanted the attacks from Saddam's forced. Naturally those who were prosperous under Saddam because they were part of those doing the brutalizing and exploiting the majority preferred the existing system.
I would not want to live under a dictator, I can't fault others who feel the same way. ISIS is an oligarchy which is simply a form of dictatorship as was Taliban rule. Living under their rule is absolutely horrible.
-
ISIS started in Syria. ISIS was able to penetrate into Iraq because of the inept response from the Iraqi government. That the US didn't provide more aid to Iraq to stop ISIS right away rests entirely on Obama's shoulders. He refused to leave any US troops and refused to do anything beyond drop a few meaningless bombs.
The West wanted Assad gone but no such countries actually stepped up to get rid of him. They left the Syrians to fend for themselves just like the World left Poland to fend for itself in 1939 when attacked by Germany and the USSR. War was declared against Germany but no one actually did anything to save Poland. The US is one of the few countries willing to actually put our blood and treasure on the line for human rights- we did so in Iraq until Obama came to power and Obama changed things drastically.
The US didn't just bomb Iraq and leave the Iraqi's on their own to form a new government. We provided security while they organized a democratic government and even after that government was formed we stayed there to fight against the extremists who were terrorizing the population. Part and parcel of carrying the fight ourselves to the enemy with the Iraqi forces subordinate was to prevent the Iraqi forces from committing atrocities. It wasn't simply because the Iraqi forces could not fight without us.
Instead of remaining there to make sure the progress continued in a positive way Obama acted like Europe often acts and withdrew completely saying leave them to their own devices. The West criticized Assad and said he had to go but no one had the guts to remove him and install a government that the Syrian population would back. No one wanted to put in the effort that is required. The result of that is that ISIS was able to establish and grow unfettered and no one did crap despite all the atrocities. They didn't just brutalize the entire population- which is bad enough in terms of human rights violations but they wiped out the Christian populations of every area they entered. They killed them or forced them to leave. What did the West and UN do in the face of this? Nothing. It is way worse than what supposedly happened in the former Yugoslavia but no one acted. Why not? Because the leaders and populations of most countries don't care enough about protecting others to put their blood and treasure on the line they are all talk no action and Obama is one of them.
The West saw an opportunity to get rid of a dictator in Libya who in the past was pretty horrible but in recent times wasn't causing much trouble. He gave up his WMD programs and fell in line. But it was perceived as a chance for some payback so they bombed his forces but refused to go in with ground forces to secure the land so anarchy followed.
At this point the West feels some guilt and is taking in some refugees but still is unwilling to provide aid to stop the refugees from fleeing. You would think that they would finally realize it is better to defeat ISIS and make it safe for the people to go back to their homes instead of go to other countries but nope. Instead they are going to allow Russia to prop up Assad and hope that they defeat ISIS even while still saying Assad must go.
The US is the only Western Country where the population actually would have supported ground forces being used against ISIS. The rest of the West doesn't care enough. Our leader though was exactly like his European counterparts all mouth no brains or guts.
Obama and his counterparts are so stupid they actually think it is a good idea to let Iran spread it's power and eventually get a nuclear weapon. The stupidity of those in charge is mind boggling. Instead of nipping problems in the bud they wait until all hell breaks loose and the result is that it is much more difficult and costly when action is finally taken.
I don't agree with you war only causes more human suffering, Obama was right not to send in ground forces, interference by the west has caused most of thr trouble in the middle east imo.
-
Buddy, I'm inclined to agree. In so many cases, where people are suddenly given their freedom after being confined by rigid rules, they have no idea how to be.
The west cobbled together tribes to make countries after the 1st and 2nd WW, we were happy for them to be kept in control by cruel dictators, once the dictators fall as in Yugoslavia old resentments come to the fore again.
We meddled in many countries in the empire which led to wars after independence, however dreadful it is people have a right to choosing their own destiny ie. governments and cultures and way of life just as we have worked our own out over hundreds of years.
Keeping people down only causes more trouble in the long run.. We fought many wars over hundreds of years before we sorted out our borders and became more tolerant and democratic. War is never an answer imo, Europe paid a heavy price for war and ,any who served in the II WW became pacifists after their experience serving in the services. The US doesn't understand this because they are a young country in comparison and have never suffered with a war on their own soil, they prefer to fight their wars in other people's countries. imo
-
Crime in the UK would be much lower if there were some brutal dictator running things but would you prefer living with no freedom and state sponsored brutality instead of the current crime rate?
Those brutalized by Saddam's rule were much more happy to be living in post Saddam Iraq despite the attacks coming from terrorists that supplanted the attacks from Saddam's forced. Naturally those who were prosperous under Saddam because they were part of those doing the brutalizing and exploiting the majority preferred the existing system.
I would not want to live under a dictator, I can't fault others who feel the same way. ISIS is an oligarchy which is simply a form of dictatorship as was Taliban rule. Living under their rule is absolutely horrible.
I DO take your point. Your last sentence may well be an understatement.
-
The west cobbled together tribes to make countries after the 1st and 2nd WW, we were happy for them to be kept in control by cruel dictators, once the dictators fall as in Yugoslavia old resentments come to the fore again.
We meddled in many countries in the empire which led to wars after independence, however dreadful it is people have a right to choosing their own destiny ie. governments and cultures and way of life just as we have worked our own out over hundreds of years.
Keeping people down only causes more trouble in the long run.. We fought many wars over hundreds of years before we sorted out our borders and became more tolerant and democratic. War is never an answer imo, Europe paid a heavy price for war and ,any who served in the II WW became pacifists after their experience serving in the services. The US doesn't understand this because they are a young country in comparison and have never suffered with a war on their own soil, they prefer to fight their wars in other people's countries. imo
Maggie, I hear what you're saying but I just don't think there's "a one size fits all" answer. NOT going to war when necessary allows people like Hitler free rein. How else was he going to be stopped?
-
Maggie, I hear what you're saying but I just don't think there's "a one size fits all" answer. NOT going to war when necessary allows people like Hitler free rein. How else was he going to be stopped?
I know what you are saying and it's difficult to disagree with you. Most people who are pacifists argue that war and killing innocent civilians is never acceptable whatever the provocation and everything can be eventually sorted out by talking..
There is the argument that Hitler could have been stopped earlier, that the British and others knew he was building up an army in the Rhineland even though Germany was not allowed to have an army after the first war. Countries turned a blind eye because they believed he would attack Russia not Europe.
I think the majority Europe is far more aware that waging war in another country is wrong and because the US has never suffered a war on their land, have never experienced the bombing and devastation Europe suffered in the last war, they do not know what it's like to lose thousands of civilians to such attacks, bombing raids etc. and cannot grasp the true horror of war first hand. Because of this they are generally more willing to argue in defence of war and ground troops etc.
The Vietnam war shook America with the huge death toll of their service personnel but that is not the same as endless bombing and destruction of their own homes and the death of their childen in their own country..... imo
-
I know what you are saying and it's difficult to disagree with you. Most people who are pacifists argue that war and killing innocent civilians is never acceptable whatever the provocation and everything can be eventually sorted out by talking..
There is the argument that Hitler could have been stopped earlier, that the British and others knew he was building up an army in the Rhineland even though Germany was not allowed to have an army after the first war. Countries turned a blind eye because they believed he would attack Russia not Europe.
I think the majority Europe is far more aware that waging war in another country is wrong and because the US has never suffered a war on their land, have never experienced the bombing and devastation Europe suffered in the last war, they do not know what it's like to lose thousands of civilians to such attacks, bombing raids etc. and cannot grasp the true horror of war first hand. Because of this they are generally more willing to argue in defence of war and ground troops etc.
The Vietnam war shook America with the huge death toll of their service personnel but that is not the same as endless bombing and destruction of their own homes and the death of their childen in their own country..... imo
58,000 is not a huge death toll. The North Vietnamese used terrorist tactics against South Vietnam. They did some of the same things the Taliban are doing. They killed thousands of teachers and other members of the intelligentsia. They kidnapped people from villages to force them to fight. They killed anyone who opposed them. The US aid was to end this and to some extent it did bu only after we wiped out the Vietcong. The RVN was defeated in 1975 by a conventional invasion by North Vietnam. The Chinese and Soviets poured equipment into North Vietnam, helped them build a massive conventional force and the US in contrast abided by the 1973 peace terms. We stopped giving them military aid, fuel etc. They launched a limited invasion to see if the US would respond. We failed to use out air power to route them like we could have done and we failed to provide fuel, weapons etc. The test was for a simple reason they didn't want to lose their entire military to us. Our inaction convinced North Vietnam we would not respond to a large scale invasion. They launched it and they took over South Vietnam. The only thing the US did was fly out those that we could and took in any refugees who could manage to escape on their own. They took over and brutalized the population of South Vietnam, took their wealth and freedom. Undoubtedly they would have been bette roff under RVN rule but no one would take a stand to help them. The only reason the DRV had the power to take over was because China and the Soviets supplied them with so many weapons or they never would have been able to do it. Today Vietnam has a mixed economy but that doesn't help those they robbed, killed, or brutalized and they still have a tolitarian government today not a democracy.
When one side is using force the only way to counter it is with force of your own. If we didn't stand up in Korea then the people of South Korea would be just as miserable as those in North Korea. The same troublemakers who armed North Vietnam armed North Korea and blessed their invasion. Because we aided South Korea those in South Korea live in a very prosperous country with a strong democratic government.
The difference between what happened in Korea and Vietnam is that in 1950 we refused to allow the North to take over while in 1975 we allowed North Vietnam to invade with impunity. The ones who suffered from that decision were those living in South Vietnam.
People can make up any garbage they want at its core what it amounted to was the leaders of the US government didn't feel like spending more of our blood and treasure for the benefit of the people living in South Vietnam.
Just like the Allies stabbed the Poles in the back and refused force the USSR to allow the Free Poles to take over in Poland after WWII. The Free Poles even fought to liberate France and in exchange they got sold out. The USSR was allowed to steal land from Poland that they took over in 1941 when they carved up Poland with Germany and started the whole mess and the Allies allowed it.
When the country being subjugated is some country other than yours it is easy to say who cares about them- let them live under a horrible regime with no freedoms too bad for them.
That's really what it amount to- people saying too bad for the Syrians and Iraqis coming under ISIS rule and too bad for the Syrians being brutalized by Assad. We the World who pledged to stop human rights violations will do nothing because we don't want to spend the effort involved.
We will stand by as Russia helps Assad stay in power by brutalizing and killing those who want democracy and will stand by as Isis kills people and to make it see like we do have a heart what we will do is take in refugees if they can manage to survive to make it to the West- that is how we will be charitable.
Evil wins when good men do nothing. Putin and other bad men are doing things but the good men are doing token things that amount to nothing.
-
58,000 is not a huge death toll. The North Vietnamese used terrorist tactics against South Vietnam. They did some of the same things the Taliban are doing. They killed thousands of teachers and other members of the intelligentsia. They kidnapped people from villages to force them to fight. They killed anyone who opposed them. The US aid was to end this and to some extent it did bu only after we wiped out the Vietcong. The RVN was defeated in 1975 by a conventional invasion by North Vietnam. The Chinese and Soviets poured equipment into North Vietnam, helped them build a massive conventional force and the US in contrast abided by the 1973 peace terms. We stopped giving them military aid, fuel etc. They launched a limited invasion to see if the US would respond. We failed to use out air power to route them like we could have done and we failed to provide fuel, weapons etc. The test was for a simple reason they didn't want to lose their entire military to us. Our inaction convinced North Vietnam we would not respond to a large scale invasion. They launched it and they took over South Vietnam. The only thing the US did was fly out those that we could and took in any refugees who could manage to escape on their own. They took over and brutalized the population of South Vietnam, took their wealth and freedom. Undoubtedly they would have been bette roff under RVN rule but no one would take a stand to help them. The only reason the DRV had the power to take over was because China and the Soviets supplied them with so many weapons or they never would have been able to do it. Today Vietnam has a mixed economy but that doesn't help those they robbed, killed, or brutalized and they still have a tolitarian government today not a democracy.
When one side is using force the only way to counter it is with force of your own. If we didn't stand up in Korea then the people of South Korea would be just as miserable as those in North Korea. The same troublemakers who armed North Vietnam armed North Korea and blessed their invasion. Because we aided South Korea those in South Korea live in a very prosperous country with a strong democratic government.
The difference between what happened in Korea and Vietnam is that in 1950 we refused to allow the North to take over while in 1975 we allowed North Vietnam to invade with impunity. The ones who suffered from that decision were those living in South Vietnam.
People can make up any garbage they want at its core what it amounted to was the leaders of the US government didn't feel like spending more of our blood and treasure for the benefit of the people living in South Vietnam.
Just like the Allies stabbed the Poles in the back and refused force the USSR to allow the Free Poles to take over in Poland after WWII. The Free Poles even fought to liberate France and in exchange they got sold out. The USSR was allowed to steal land from Poland that they took over in 1941 when they carved up Poland with Germany and started the whole mess and the Allies allowed it.
When the country being subjugated is some country other than yours it is easy to say who cares about them- let them live under a horrible regime with no freedoms too bad for them.
That's really what it amount to- people saying too bad for the Syrians and Iraqis coming under ISIS rule and too bad for the Syrians being brutalized by Assad. We the World who pledged to stop human rights violations will do nothing because we don't want to spend the effort involved.
We will stand by as Russia helps Assad stay in power by brutalizing and killing those who want democracy and will stand by as Isis kills people and to make it see like we do have a heart what we will do is take in refugees if they can manage to survive to make it to the West- that is how we will be charitable.
Evil wins when good men do nothing. Putin and other bad men are doing things but the good men are doing token things that amount to nothing.
Of course it's not right for anyone to be subjugated to living under cruel dictators but the establishment of the west thought it was fine until it had served their purpose and these dictators became a threat to the west via nuclear weapons etc. Thy had to be removed and as usual it was the ordinary people who suffered and are still suffering and most of the establishment would turn a blind eye to their suffering even now if normal decent people had not refused to accept it. The people in Syria. Iraq etc. are suffering appallingly and those managing to get out are refugees, not migrants they are in fear of their lives and in fear for the lives of their children... we should welcome them and give them places of safety as they are human beings like ourselves.
If 58,000 isn't a big death toll then why did the US make such a fuss about it? I am sure many more vietcong and ordinary Vietnamese people died anyway as is always the way. People in the US have no idea what it's like to have foreign troops in their land it is much easier to fight wars in other peoples countries.
-
The west cobbled together tribes to make countries after the 1st and 2nd WW, we were happy for them to be kept in control by cruel dictators, once the dictators fall as in Yugoslavia old resentments come to the fore again.
We meddled in many countries in the empire which led to wars after independence, however dreadful it is people have a right to choosing their own destiny ie. governments and cultures and way of life just as we have worked our own out over hundreds of years.
Keeping people down only causes more trouble in the long run.. We fought many wars over hundreds of years before we sorted out our borders and became more tolerant and democratic. War is never an answer imo, Europe paid a heavy price for war and ,any who served in the II WW became pacifists after their experience serving in the services. The US doesn't understand this because they are a young country in comparison and have never suffered with a war on their own soil, they prefer to fight their wars in other people's countries. imo
Taking your claims at face value the US should have refused to aid the Allies in WWI and II and should have left things up to the people of Europe. Even before our military involvement we were providing weapons, fuel and food to the Allies to allow them to fight. If we didn't provide such aid then WWI would basically have ended in a standstill. WWII could have been even worse than it was because Germany would have hand more land and power. As it is Germany and Japan would never would have been defeated without American aid anyway.
In the meantime you are comparing past European colonization with modern world efforts to establish democratic governments which are 2 different things. European colonization was about exploitation of the resources and people of the colonies. When the cost began to exceed the gains they fled. Europeans government still have the same mindset. They are interested today only in economic profits. They can't wait to do business in Iran so want the sanctions lifted and don't care how horrible the government is just like they didn't care how horrible Saddam was and did so much business with him.
The only country consistently willing to spill our blood and treasure for liberty is the US but our leaders are schizophrenic because we have elections and different leaders at different times. If we take the lead and do it some other countries are then willing to get involved and help as well but only if we take the lead and do the bulk of the work. That is why the US is called the leader of the free world. When the leader of the free world is lead by morons like Obama the Free World does nothing and evil prevails.
-
Taking your claims at face value the US should have refused to aid the Allies in WWI and II and should have left things up to the people of Europe. Even before our military involvement we were providing weapons, fuel and food to the Allies to allow them to fight. If we didn't provide such aid then WWI would basically have ended in a standstill. WWII could have been even worse than it was because Germany would have hand more land and power. As it is Germany and Japan would never would have been defeated without American aid anyway.
In the meantime you are comparing past European colonization with modern world efforts to establish democratic governments which are 2 different things. European colonization was about exploitation of the resources and people of the colonies. When the cost began to exceed the gains they fled. Europeans government still have the same mindset. They are interested today only in economic profits. They can't wait to do business in Iran so want the sanctions lifted and don't care how horrible the government is just like they didn't care how horrible Saddam was and did so much business with him.
The only country consistently willing to spill our blood and treasure for liberty is the US but our leaders are schizophrenic because we have elections and different leaders at different times. If we take the lead and do it some other countries are then willing to get involved and help as well but only if we take the lead and do the bulk of the work. That is why the US is called the leader of the free world. When the leader of the free world is lead by morons like Obama the Free World does nothing and evil prevails.
The US is the worst offender scipio you cannot claim the high ground on this.
-
Of course it's not right for anyone to be subjugated to living under cruel dictators but the establishment of the west thought it was fine until it had served their purpose and these dictators became a threat to the west via nuclear weapons etc. Thy had to be removed and as usual it was the ordinary people who suffered and are still suffering and most of the establishment would turn a blind eye to their suffering even now if normal decent people had not refused to accept it. The people in Syria. Iraq etc. are suffering appallingly and those managing to get out are refugees, not migrants they are in fear of their lives and in fear for the lives of their children... we should welcome them and give them places of safety as they are human beings like ourselves.
If 58,000 isn't a big death toll then why did the US make such a fuss about it? I am sure many more vietcong and ordinary Vietnamese people died anyway as is always the way. People in the US have no idea what it's like to have foreign troops in their land it is much easier to fight wars in other peoples countries.
The Vietnam anti-war crowd made a big deal about it. Popular fiction is that they got us to withdraw from Vietnam but the reality we did some of our heaviest fighting while the anti-war crowd was sounding off. We left Vietnam only after a Peace Treaty was signed.
What pisses many off is that the US did nothing in 1975 to save the RVN. Our airpower could have crippled the North Vietnamese invasion like we did in past invasion attempts. Our deaths were for nothing because we didn't do anything to protect them in 1975.
Many are pissed off about Iraq for the same reason. Our efforts to establish stability in Iraq were for nothing because Obama withdrew and has done nothing to help get rid of Isis. He won't even arm the Kurds.
It would be the equivalent of withdrawing from Europe in 1945, allowing the Nazis to come to power again, taking over Europe and this time saying we won't do anything. Those who lost loved ones fighting the Nazis would be pissed that the loss was ultimately for nothing.
-
The US is the worst offender scipio you cannot claim the high ground on this.
I agree. The drivel posted about Vietnam really winds me up. Fortunately the heroic Vietnamese forces defeated the might of the USA and that was a cause for celebration the world over . I remember the final victory in 1975 very well - I was in hospital at the time and it really cheered me up. The USA acted like the criminal gangsters they have so often been in the international arena, but they got a good hiding for once.
-
The Vietnam anti-war crowd made a big deal about it. Popular fiction is that they got us to withdraw from Vietnam but the reality we did some of our heaviest fighting while the anti-war crowd was sounding off. We left Vietnam only after a Peace Treaty was signed.
What pisses many off is that the US did nothing in 1975 to save the RVN. Our airpower could have crippled the North Vietnamese invasion like we did in past invasion attempts. Our deaths were for nothing because we didn't do anything to protect them in 1975.
Many are pissed off about Iraq for the same reason. Our efforts to establish stability in Iraq were for nothing because Obama withdrew and has done nothing to help get rid of Isis. He won't even arm the Kurds.
It would be the equivalent of withdrawing from Europe in 1945, allowing the Nazis to come to power again, taking over Europe and this time saying we won't do anything. Those who lost loved ones fighting the Nazis would be pissed that the loss was ultimately for nothing.
The Scipio world view from the far right american perspective! Fortunately many of us in Eurpoe, possibly the majority, hold a very different view.
-
The US is the worst offender scipio you cannot claim the high ground on this.
Nonsense. What economic gain did the US get from WWI? The US spent a bundle on our own military efforts and ended up paying for much of the materials given to other countries, the only country to pay back its WWI debt was Finland.
WWII was even worse we wrote off most of the lend lease bills requiring countries to pay cents on the dollar. Our own expenditures were so high that we had a massive national debt for the first time and had to raise income taxes to very high level.
The whole reason Japan attacked us is because we stopped selling oil, rubber etc to Japan and we were the largest supplier of such in the World. We enacted the embargo because we didn't like their abuses in China and stopped supplying them with anything they could use in their war effort. This is the complete opposite of how Europe acted at that time.
The UK and France divied up the Ottoman Empire after WWI to enjoy the economic spoils. What did the US take over and steal the resources from?
After WWII the US loaned money to Europe to allow Europe to rebuild themselves as opposed to taking Europe satellite nations totally dependent upon us for manufactured goods and resources. The same is true of Japan, and South Korea. We did such a good job the US went from being a creditor nation to a debtor nation. We didn't create markets to sell our good in like Europe did.
The US didn't install puppet regimes either was established democratic elected governments in Germany, Japan and South Korea just like we did in Afghanistan and Iraq. Did the US take over the oil resourced of Iraq? Nope we let them contract with European oil companies. We didn't impose any obligations.
Some Europeans live in some fantasy World where they try to make themselves feel better with the notion the US economically benefited from the wars we have engaged in, in the name of democracy but such is pure fantasy. Economically these wars have cost us considerable amounts. Our post WWII efforts to rebuild our allies have been so successful we went from being a net exporter to importer. That is the complete opposite of taking financial advantage of conquests.
-
I agree. The drivel posted about Vietnam really winds me up. Fortunately the heroic Vietnamese forces defeated the might of the USA and that was a cause for celebration the world over . I remember the final victory in 1975 very well - I was in hospital at the time and it really cheered me up. The USA acted like the criminal gangsters they have so often been in the international arena, but they got a good hiding for once.
Posts like this really make me wonder about you. You sound like a communist or someone else who can't stand the US and immaturely is happy when others suffer.
The North Vietnamese didn't defeat the US. The US military left Vietnam in 1973. The extent of our military presence was Marine Security guards at the embassy and a handful of paper pushers.
For years they terrorized South Vietnamese people. They invaded and killed South Vietnamese. The few Americans were able to leave. Cheering communists killing non-communist Vietnamese, stealing their property and brutalizing them is what someone with mental problems would do.
Are you also mad that the North Koreans were prevented form establishing communist control over the entire Peninsula? I know liberals, communist sympathizers who feel exactly that way they absurdly suggest South Korea would be better off under North Korean control.
-
Posts like this really make me wonder about you. [No need to wonder!] You sound like a communist or someone else who can't stand the US [What if I am?] and immaturely is happy when others suffer.[I certainly am not happy when others suffer, which is why I have consistently opposed US foreign policy]
The North Vietnamese didn't defeat the US. The US military left Vietnam in 1973. The extent of our military presence was Marine Security guards at the embassy and a handful of paper pushers. [The US was soundly thrashed, as you well know]
For years they terrorized South Vietnamese people. They invaded and killed South Vietnamese. [Utter rubbish. The terrorising was conducted by the US and their puppets in the South. The liberating forces had massive support of the people of Vietnam, both in the North and the South] The few Americans were able to leave. Cheering communists killing non-communist Vietnamese, stealing their property and brutalizing them is what someone with mental problems would do. [I agree, but it did not happen]
-
The Scipio world view from the far right american perspective! Fortunately many of us in Eurpoe, possibly the majority, hold a very different view.
Those who hold such views are quite ignorant. In a debate over the facts you will be exposed as such quite easily. But then again the same people who hold these views are the ones who don't care at all that the entire Christian population is being killed or driven out of Syria and Iraq. It's too bad for them. The US helping establish democracy is called human rights abuses is your bizzarro World and the actions of groups like Isis heroic. It is really mind boggling that people can hold such irrational views but that helps people to sleep at night...
Some people are so immature they can't stand it that the UK is no longer the World's major power. They can't stand it knowing that that without US aid the UK could not have done anything to liberate Europe. They can't stand it that the US is so much stronger than other nations. They are so jealous of the US they want to pretend the worst about the US.
It's the ultimate immaturity to praise killers just because one is so anti-US that anytime one does something the US is against that one applauds it. I have a friend who was a Vietnamese Boat child and he has a different take because the invasion actually affect him. It's easy for heartless people to not care about things that don't affect them.
It's even more immature to pretend they defeated a US military that wasn't even there. It's just as bogus as the claims that ISIS defeated the US military in Iraq though our military wasn't there.
-
Those who hold such views are quite ignorant. In a debate over the facts you will be exposed as such quite easily. But then again the same people who hold these views are the ones who don't care at all that the entire Christian population is being killed or driven out of Syria and Iraq. It's too bad for them. The US helping establish democracy is called human rights abuses is your bizzarro World and the actions of groups like Isis heroic. It is really mind boggling that people can hold such irrational views but that helps people to sleep at night...
Some people are so immature they can't stand it that the UK is no longer the World's major power. They can't stand it knowing that that without US aid the UK could not have done anything to liberate Europe. They can't stand it that the US is so much stronger than other nations. They are so jealous of the US they want to pretend the worst about the US.
It's the ultimate immaturity to praise killers just because one is so anti-US that anytime one does something the US is against that one applauds it. I have a friend who was a Vietnamese Boat child and he has a different take because the invasion actually affect him. It's easy for heartless people to not care about things that don't affect them.
It's even more immature to pretend they defeated a US military that wasn't even there. It's just as bogus as the claims that ISIS defeated the US military in Iraq though our military wasn't there.
It is irrational to accuse people who don't like US meddling in the world of not caring about humanity, it is the US meddling which has caused so many problems and so much blood shed in the world the fact that they cause trouble and then try to fix it again to their own advantage is recognised by many. People have a right to their own self determination and if they had been allowed to have that much of what is happening now would not have occurred.
US only care about countries who have something they want ie a foothold in the region or oil.... no doubt about that.
-
"Posts like this really make me wonder about you. You sound like a communist or someone else who can't stand the US"
No need to wonder! What if I am?
That bias would explain the irraitional claims.
"and immaturely is happy when others suffer."
I certainly am not happy when others suffer, which is why I have consistently opposed US foreign policy
Saving people from horrible dictators stops suffering. What you espouse increases suffering. Your bias against the US results in viewing things the complete opposite of reality.
The communists took power in North Vietnam by force they were not elected in fair elections. They have never held a single fair election they have bogus elections where the only choices they have are communists. They took over South Vietnam by force not by any legitimate method.
"The North Vietnamese didn't defeat the US. The US military left Vietnam in 1973. The extent of our military presence was Marine Security guards at the embassy and a handful of paper pushers."
The US was soundly thrashed, as you well know
This is where you bias comes into play you hate the US so much you WISH we were thrashed and since we weren't you will just pretend it.
The US never lost a battle and the casualties inflicted on the enemy were always considerably higher than we lost.
The Vietcong were wiped out. The only Vietcong units that remained were in name only they named some North Vietnamese units Vietcong regiments. They were simply NVA units with such designation.
They gave up on the idea of relying on the Vietcong and launched numerous conventional attacks in 1971-72 all of which were decisively defeated. The RVN forces thrashing the NVA with the aid of our airpower and planners. The casualties suffered by the RVN forces was way less than they were inflicting. That was why the North Vietnamese eventually agreed to the Peace deal. They coudl not make any progress all their attacks were beaten back with high losses.
They used the post peace deal to build a massive conventional force. They were no longer fighting so no longer suffering losses. They were training men and were being supplied by the USSR and China. The military aid during this period was more than during the war period combined the Chinese aid in particular skyrocketed. This was a direct violation of the Treaty but they didn't care. The US abided by it thus stopped providing fuel, ammunition etc. Instead of helping the RVN ot keep pace we simply stuck to the deal.
When the DRV attacked we should have countered because the treaty was null at that point. But we stuck by it and left them high and dry. Then a general invasion was launched including with tanks and refugees filled the roads preventing the RVN units form being able to get to where they needed to go. They had fuel issues anyway. US airpower could have cut the attack apart like we did past conventional invasions which you ridiculously suggest amounted to us being thrashed. I don't know how killing so many enemy and the feeling amounts to being thrashed... In any event we did nothing and doing nothing is why they won they didn't defeat us we weren't there.
The South Vietnamese civilians were fleeing attackers not liberators. They were filling choppers to get to the Philippines to get away from attackers not liberators. They were being shot dead by attackers not liberators. Those who remained after the takeover were brutalized by attackers not liberators.
Your version is a fantasy version fashioned around your hatred of America instead of reality.
"For years they terrorized South Vietnamese people. They invaded and killed South Vietnamese."
Utter rubbish. The terrorising was conducted by the US and their puppets in the South.
You either know nothing about Vietnam or you are so biased you are unwilling to admit the truth about the terrorist campaign that was conducted in South Vietnam. Tens of thousands of the intelligentsia were murdered to undermine the government and make it easier for the communists to take over. When those efforts all failed they then resorted to conventional attacks which also failed. Their success came after the US left and stopped aiding South Vietnam. The people of South Vietnam did not welcome the attackers they fled from them and tried to resist though they failed. They didn't try to resist because they wanted to be attacked.
You praise violence so long as the violence is in the name of communism, against people you don't like or simply harms US interests and the only harm to US interest that wound up being served by taking over South Vietnam was the harm caused to the people living there who we considered friends.
So at its core you applaud killing and attacking people because they were friends of the US. That's incredibly immature.
The liberating forces had massive support of the people of Vietnam, both in the North and the South
If that were the case the invasion would not have been necessary. Moreover they would have welcomed the attackers instead of trying to repel them and fleeing. Your version is pure fantasy but fantasy spread by communists and leftist who hate the US and thus couldn't care less about reality.
"The few Americans were able to leave. Cheering communists killing non-communist Vietnamese, stealing their property and brutalizing them is what someone with mental problems would do."
I agree, but it did not happen
It did happen. The communists killed large numbers of people in South Vietnam from the late 1950s to 1973 and then again late 1974-76. Those political enemies they didn't kill they imprisoned and they destroyed the economy of South Vietnam including taking resources owned by people for the government's use. Communism failed and they changed to a mixed economy like China which still has massive government control and there is still only one party in control of Vietnam it is not a democracy but rather a communist oligarchy with far less freedoms than are present in democracies.
This brings us full circle to one of the points made earlier. People not actually living under these horrible regimes think they are great. If you had to live under such regime then your views would be different.
I'm too honest to admit that abandoning Poland and the RVN was ultimately a good thing for the people of such countries. They were abandoned out of selfishness not charity. That is the same reason no one is doing crap about ISI it is about being too selfish to do what is right.
If people want to be selfish that is their right but be truthful about it don't make up BS excuses.
-
The US is the worst offender scipio you cannot claim the high ground on this.
how does the US make the worst offender? please elaborate
-
I agree. The drivel posted about Vietnam really winds me up. Fortunately the heroic Vietnamese forces defeated the might of the USA and that was a cause for celebration the world over . I remember the final victory in 1975 very well - I was in hospital at the time and it really cheered me up. The USA acted like the criminal gangsters they have so often been in the international arena, but they got a good hiding for once.
The South Vietnamese certainly where not celebrating.
-
It is irrational to accuse people who don't like US meddling in the world of not caring about humanity, it is the US meddling which has caused so many problems and so much blood shed in the world the fact that they cause trouble and then try to fix it again to their own advantage is recognised by many. People have a right to their own self determination and if they had been allowed to have that much of what is happening now would not have occurred.
US only care about countries who have something they want ie a foothold in the region or oil.... no doubt about that.
The US establishing democracies enables self-determination. Attacking such efforts as being against self-determination is irrational.
The irrational views stem from refusing to face reality and instead looking at things through a biased prism that distorts.
The US should have allowed North Korea to swallow all of Korea, the US should have allowed the Communists to swallow all of Vietnam. The US should have left dictators in Iraq and Afghanistan instead of establishing democracies....
Did you know that there is a long history of there being 3 very different regions of Vietnam and that this is why the French had it divided into 3 regions. Did you know that the British were the ones who helped the French to regain control of Vietnam from the Japanese the US wanted to establish an independent country but the UK sides with their French that they should be restored to help justify them keeping possessions as well. Did you know that the communists used force to take control of North Vietnam and they were fighting not only the French but other Vietnamese. Did you know they got their weapons from foreign communist forces. The foreign intervention that enabled the killing is the same characters who armed North Korea and enabled the killing. Did you know that when the French pulled out that the lower areas were under control of the Vietnamese. Did you know that the communists launched terrorists attacks throughout Vietnam to destabilize the government and try to get people to stop supporting the government and to thus result in the government collapsing so the communists could take over. Did you know that the plan was to weaken the government through these efforts then resort to conventional military attacks on government forces. Did you know that after these conventional attacks started is when the US moved in airpower to use against North Vietnam. Did you know the first US ground forces were used to protect US air bases from attacks because the South Vietnamese forces were too busy fighting invaders to do so. Did you know the US finally approved US ground forces to go on offensive operations against the North Vietnam because a lot of the South Vietnamese forces would run away when attacked and leave their equipment behind just like the Iraqis did with ISIS. The US
had forces paired up with the RVN forces to stabilize them and train them better just like we did in Iraq and Afghanistan. We defended the population from the conventional attacks. What we could not totally stop was the terrorist attacks only large military units from hurting the population. We took up defensive positions and freed up their forces to carry out offensive operations so they could try clearing enemy from their land. As they became more capable we reduced our ground units leaving them more responsibility for their own defense. 1970 forward we were in the supporting role almost exclusively. The major fighting was done by them with our forces simply helping with supply, training and air support.
The ultimate argument of people critical of our policy is that we should have let the Chinese and Soviets sponsor a communist takeover. They say we should have done the same in Korea instead of saving the ROK. These are the same people who decided to do nothing in Syria and say we should just let Russia help Assad kill anyone who opposes his dictatorial rule.
The intervention that causes all the problems is praised and welcomed instead of opposed.
The results of such is to support the evil and attack those who want to do good.
-
The South Vietnamese certainly where not celebrating.
The ULTIMATE argument against US policy in Vietnam is that we should have let those armed by the Soviets and Chinese takeover early on. There would have been less bloodshed had we done so. The same argument is made in Korea. If we didn't intervene the war would have been over in 1950 and fewer people would have died.
People who don't know what is it like living under a tolitarian regime are saying that is preferable to the death that occurred. The people in the ROK today would disagree. They are not happy their loved ones died but they feel it was worthwhile like we feel defeating the Nazis was worth the losses we suffered.
The people of the RVN were screwed not by our aid but by rather by us cutting off aid and abandoning them. That is what makes the whole effort in vain. We were no longer willing to help and that sealed their fate. If there is any moral to that story it is if you act you have to be willing to go the distance.
We pledged to support them if the Treaty was violated but didn't. Hmm sounds familiar the West agreed to defend Ukraine in exchange for them giving up their nukes- how did that end up...
-
The US establishing democracies enables self-determination. Attacking such efforts as being against self-determination is irrational.
The irrational views stem from refusing to face reality and instead looking at things through a biased prism that distorts.
The US should have allowed North Korea to swallow all of Korea, the US should have allowed the Communists to swallow all of Vietnam. The US should have left dictators in Iraq and Afghanistan instead of establishing democracies....
Did you know that there is a long history of there being 3 very different regions of Vietnam and that this is why the French had it divided into 3 regions. Did you know that the British were the ones who helped the French to regain control of Vietnam from the Japanese the US wanted to establish an independent country but the UK sides with their French that they should be restored to help justify them keeping possessions as well. Did you know that the communists used force to take control of North Vietnam and they were fighting not only the French but other Vietnamese. Did you know they got their weapons from foreign communist forces. The foreign intervention that enabled the killing is the same characters who armed North Korea and enabled the killing. Did you know that when the French pulled out that the lower areas were under control of the Vietnamese. Did you know that the communists launched terrorists attacks throughout Vietnam to destabilize the government and try to get people to stop supporting the government and to thus result in the government collapsing so the communists could take over. Did you know that the plan was to weaken the government through these efforts then resort to conventional military attacks on government forces. Did you know that after these conventional attacks started is when the US moved in airpower to use against North Vietnam. Did you know the first US ground forces were used to protect US air bases from attacks because the South Vietnamese forces were too busy fighting invaders to do so. Did you know the US finally approved US ground forces to go on offensive operations against the North Vietnam because a lot of the South Vietnamese forces would run away when attacked and leave their equipment behind just like the Iraqis did with ISIS. The US
had forces paired up with the RVN forces to stabilize them and train them better just like we did in Iraq and Afghanistan. We defended the population from the conventional attacks. What we could not totally stop was the terrorist attacks only large military units from hurting the population. We took up defensive positions and freed up their forces to carry out offensive operations so they could try clearing enemy from their land. As they became more capable we reduced our ground units leaving them more responsibility for their own defense. 1970 forward we were in the supporting role almost exclusively. The major fighting was done by them with our forces simply helping with supply, training and air support.
The ultimate argument of people critical of our policy is that we should have let the Chinese and Soviets sponsor a communist takeover. They say we should have done the same in Korea instead of saving the ROK. These are the same people who decided to do nothing in Syria and say we should just let Russia help Assad kill anyone who opposes his dictatorial rule.
The intervention that causes all the problems is praised and welcomed instead of opposed.
The results of such is to support the evil and attack those who want to do good.
I have my opinions, don't expect you to share them.
You simply don't understand what I am saying and chucking insults at me proves nothing.
Think we should agree to differ.
-
The South Vietnamese certainly where not celebrating.
Most of them were.
-
You really have a blinkered and distorted view of the role of the USA in the world since 1945. I do not have time to answer your points, suffice it to say I do not agree with any of them. You are on the far right of politics, even in US terms, and that is saying something!
As usual you insult those who disagree with you. I do not insult you, I just say you are wrong. That is my opinion, honestly held, based on years of reflection and careful analysis of facts, together with political activity. I may be wrong, but I am not dishonest or insincere.
-
usa cant establish democravcy in the usa how the hell they would anywhere else is beyound me.
-
usa cant establish democravcy in the usa how the hell they would manage anywhere else is beyound me.
Like it ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
You really have a blinkered and distorted view of the role of the USA in the world since 1945. I do not have time to answer your points, suffice it to say I do not agree with any of them. You are on the far right of politics, even in US terms, and that is saying something!
As usual you insult those who disagree with you. I do not insult you, I just say you are wrong. That is my opinion, honestly held, based on years of reflection and careful analysis of facts, together with political activity. I may be wrong, but I am not dishonest or insincere.
You have the distorted view not me. You demonstrated that when you denied the USSR was responsibly for encouraging Germany to attack the West. The USSR carved up Eastern Europe with Germany ensuring the West would be at war with Germany. He stated outright that his plan was to make both sides exhaust one another then swoop in. He swallowed half of Poland and the West did nothing they only went to war with Germany. His peace agreement with them ensured them their Eastern border was safe and permitted them to deploy most of their forces to invade France. Did he embargo Germany? No he supplied Germany with food and fuel to help keep their war machine supplied so they could fight the West. These facts are all well known they were even known at the time. Communist sympathizers have attempted to revise history and their fictional viewpoint is the precise one you push.
Your claim that most South Vietnamese welcomed the invaders is absurd but you do not make any effort to actually offer any proof. You say you are too busy to be bothered which is what you said in the Stalin debate.
You claim to hate violence but you praised North Vietnam using violence to subjugate the people of South Vietnam and you cheered their attack on because you of amazing immaturity. It takes amazing immaturity to praise attacks because the attacks accomplish sticking a pen in the eye of the US and you can't stand the US so like a pen being stuck in our eye. Not content with such you make up that this amounted to the US military being defeated and you are glad the US got defeated because you can't stand the US.
You made up your own babble to make you feel better. Your fictional account is that the US military was defeated and once driven out the Vietnamese population overthrew the government. This is nonsense.
The US military left and the people of South Vietnam were scared that the US would not aid them if the peace treaty was broken. They were right to fear such because we didn't help them and they wanted us to help them. They didn't want a tolitarian government to send tanks and a million armed men in to take over their country. They didn't rise up against the RVN government they actually found jobs in that government including military jobs. Nor did welcome the population welcome these attackers with open arms. They fled the attackers and fled in such massive numbers that they blocked the roads preventing the military from being able to effectively respond. They ran to the US embassy begging to be flown out of the country rather than to become subjugated by the communists. There were even physical struggles in an attempt to get inside the US compound.
The US wasn't harmed by the takeover. The few Americans there left. The harm that fell was to the population that was stuck there and could not be flown out. Your irrational hatred of the US results in you pretending this hurt the US and being gleeful of that but it didn't. The takeover hurt the people of South Vietnam not the US. That was why the US government was willing to abandon them. There was no strategic need to protect South Vietnam in 1975 there was solely a moral one. The US government was unwilling to take up the effort and left South Vietnam high and dry. Your version which makes you feel good bears no semblance to reality. It was invented in your mind to make you feel good because reality was too much to tolerate.
-
Taking your claims at face value the US should have refused to aid the Allies in WWI and II and should have left things up to the people of Europe. Even before our military involvement we were providing weapons, fuel and food to the Allies to allow them to fight. If we didn't provide such aid then WWI would basically have ended in a standstill. WWII could have been even worse than it was because Germany would have hand more land and power. As it is Germany and Japan would never would have been defeated without American aid anyway.
In the meantime you are comparing past European colonization with modern world efforts to establish democratic governments which are 2 different things. European colonization was about exploitation of the resources and people of the colonies. When the cost began to exceed the gains they fled. Europeans government still have the same mindset. They are interested today only in economic profits. They can't wait to do business in Iran so want the sanctions lifted and don't care how horrible the government is just like they didn't care how horrible Saddam was and did so much business with him.
The only country consistently willing to spill our blood and treasure for liberty is the US but our leaders are schizophrenic because we have elections and different leaders at different times. If we take the lead and do it some other countries are then willing to get involved and help as well but only if we take the lead and do the bulk of the work. That is why the US is called the leader of the free world. When the leader of the free world is lead by morons like Obama the Free World does nothing and evil prevails.
You snot gobbler you supplied provisions at a cost.
UK were paying the US until about 2010 in reperation.
Meanwhile instan
1. Uk helped in your war in Korea. No charge
2. UK helped in your war in Iraq. No charge
3.UK helped in your war in Afghanistan. no charge.
You didn't give us anything we payed.
If it wasn't for pearl harbour you would not have become involved FACT.
You lot needed us.
-
You snot gobbler you supplied provisions at a cost.
UK were paying the US until about 2010 in reperation.
Meanwhile instan
1. Uk helped in your war in Korea. No charge
2. UK helped in your war in Iraq. No charge
3.UK helped in your war in Afghanistan. no charge.
You didn't give us anything we payed.
If it wasn't for pearl harbour you would not have become involved FACT.
You lot needed us.
The UK didn't have to pay back the entire value of Lend-lease aid provided, a good deal was written off, and the amount the UK was asked to pay back was much smaller than the sum provided. The amount written off was paid for by the US taxpayer. This was not unique to the UK the same happened with all Lend-lease aid- we drastically reduced the amount owed. Most countries didn't even pay the reduced amounts in full. The loans we gave to the UK were for the lend lease items the UK needed for their economy.
"The post-war loan was part-driven by the Americans' termination of the scheme. Under the programme, the US had effectively donated equipment for the war effort, but anything left over in Britain at the end of hostilities and still needed would have to be paid for. But the price would please a bargain hunter - the US only wanted one-tenth of the production cost of the equipment and would lend the money to pay for it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-American_loan
https://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/economics/staff/mharrison/comment/lendlease070110.pdf
I am the only one who seems to be aware of the facts.
As for the UK joining in the UN operations in Korea, Iraq and NATO operation in Afghanistan why should the US pay the UK for such efforts? What resources were given to the US? We used our own we didn't take resources from the UK. What loans did you give us? So there is no relevance at all to the issue at hand.
-
Most of them were.
No they where not, they where begging the US to evacuate them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3AiyFF9qOls (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3AiyFF9qOls)
-
You really have a blinkered and distorted view of the role of the USA in the world since 1945. I do not have time to answer your points, suffice it to say I do not agree with any of them. You are on the far right of politics, even in US terms, and that is saying something!
As usual you insult those who disagree with you. I do not insult you, I just say you are wrong. That is my opinion, honestly held, based on years of reflection and careful analysis of facts, together with political activity. I may be wrong, but I am not dishonest or insincere.
The far right in the US take a very isolationist stance on foreign matters and simply don't care. I don't understand your reasons for disliking the US. Both in South Vietnam and South Korea they came to the aid of an ally that asked for their help. Many people also fail to remember that the US army had a presence in Vietnam before the war even started, The French allowed them to built airforce bases there in WW2.
-
The far right in the US take a very isolationist stance on foreign matters and simply don't care. I don't understand your reasons for disliking the US. Both in South Vietnam and South Korea they came to the aid of an ally that asked for their help. Many people also fail to remember that the US army had a presence in Vietnam before the war even started, The French allowed them to built airforce bases there in WW2.
The far left and far right both are isolationist in their views. The far left and right disagree on social issues and economics.
Even if one hates the US, it is irrational to applaud people being harmed because you perceive it as harming US interests. The fake narrative was created by anti-American revisionists and socialists that the RVN wanted the communist takeover and that the US stood in the way of this nationalistic movement and that is the narrative NGB is pushing.
The US didn't want Indochina restored to French control but the UK and France got the US to relent. The US first choice was for China to take responsibility.
Popular history has it that Ho Chi Minh did a lot against the Japanese and aided the US a great deal but the reality is he did little and had only a few insignificant dealings with the US.
His rag tag communist forced declared independence though they took over control of just a few areas where the Japanese pulled out of because of their surrender. The Japanese gave them their weapons and some even stayed on and trained them. The Chinese took over these Northern areas on behalf of the allies and Ho's men fled. The Japanese remained in control of the South. Eventually the French forces were freed and the Chinese and Japanese left and the French took over Indochina.
Vietnam was divided into 3 parts under French rule. This is because the people in the areas were so different. There were plenty of minorities as well. The notion of their being a single Vietnam was a complete fiction made up by revisionists it was a hodgepodge more like Yugoslavia. That is one of the reasons why China didn't want permanent responsibility for the area.
There were many different groups that wanted independence. The communist killed the leaders of the groups and basically took control of all of them in such manner to turn it into a communist movement.
After the communist takeover of China the communists armed Ho (with a lot of the weapons they captured from the Nationalist forces that fled to Taiwan they left their weapons behind and is why they had many Western weapons) and that is when his followers began in earnest to fight the French.
The US provided military aid to the French. The French public got sick of it and decided to leave. That is when the US was asked by South Vietnam for direct aid. Popular fiction is that the US installed a puppet but that is not true we supplied the government that formed under the peace deal that resulted in the French leaving. Nor is it true that the Vietcong was a South Vietnamese entity. The organizers were all from North Vietnam they infiltrated into South Vietnam. Until 1960 it was mainly a terrorist campaign. Then it escalated into regiments and even division from North Vietnam operating there. Some were NVA AKA North Vietnamese regulars. Others were Vietcong regiments which the cadre (officers and noncoms) North Vietnamese soldiers and the rest were a mix of people who came from North Vietnam or were in South Vietnam already but were impressed into service willingly or unwillingly.
The Vietcong were absolutely decimated after the Tet Offensive. Teh Tet offensive was a major conventional attack. The counterattack from the US and RVN forces wiped out most of these forces. The remainder of the cadre were largely killed during US counterinsurgency operations. The few Vietcong regiments that remained failed miserably in operations in 1970 and 1971 and basically after that they were discontinued. They were reconstituted in name only by naming some units of the North Vietnamese Army Vietcong regiments.
Post Tet the ARVN units began to fight much better than in the past. They essentially copied the US military- they even had Vietnamese Marines, Rangers etc. They had some Americans helping lead them but began carrying on most of the fighting themselves with US airpower assisting them. The North Vietnamese suffered comparable casualties against them that the US inflicted. The ARVN was suffering considerably less casualties than the enemy. This meant there was a stalemate. This and US bombing of the North forced the to give up and agree to a peace deal.
In order to get South Vietnam to agree to peace Nixon secretly promised that if the treaty were violated we would assist them again. We stuck to the treaty and cut our aid to the RVN. The USSR and China began providing much more aid than in the past particularly the Chinese they flooded Vietnam with weapons even tanks and planes. They helped build a million man army. They didn't do it for nothing. They did it to enable the communist government to take over all of Vietnam.
They knew from the past that US airpower would decimate their large scale attacks so they started out with a limited attack that the South Vietnamese was dealing with but they were low on fuel, ammunition and asked the US not only for such aid but for US airpower assistance. Nixon was busy with Watergate and had no intention of going back because it would mean the need to stay committed forever like in Korea. Vietnam had no strategic value that he deemed would warrant such commitment. So he rebuked the. The Vietnamese saw the US refused to reengage and then launched a full scale invasion. Without US advice their planners responded ineptly. But even when they did know what to do try a counterattack fuel problems or refugees blocking the roads stood in their way. Many soldiers went home to try to defend their home villages instead of staying with their units. Obviously they would be totally ineffective in small bands against a massive conventional force. They managed to hold out longer than the French did against the Nazis but that's not much of a feat!
The US military was defeated fiction is just that a fiction. The lesson enemies got from this is that eventually the US will tire and leave and then after the US is gone they can renew the struggle. This is the strategy Saddam had in mind that is why he organized an insurgent force even before the invasion happened. He didn't expect to be caught and killed. It's the strategy the terrorists in Iraq had in mind. It's the strategy the Taliban still have in mind. Of course the North Vietnamese had something the Taliban currently lacks. The Taliban were initially supplied by Pakistan but their aid now is not from government entities but simply ordinary Pakistani extremists. That's far different from the DRV being supplied by China and the USSR with heavy weapons. They can still do damage to various villages and towns but have little hope of taking over all of Afghanistan.
-
U.S.A - worrying ?
-
U.S.A - worrying ?
Donald Trump?...... say no more ;D
-
No they where not, they where begging the US to evacuate them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3AiyFF9qOls (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3AiyFF9qOls)
A tiny minority.
-
The far left and far right both are isolationist in their views. The far left and right disagree on social issues and economics.
Even if one hates the US, it is irrational to applaud people being harmed because you perceive it as harming US interests. The fake narrative was created by anti-American revisionists and socialists that the RVN wanted the communist takeover and that the US stood in the way of this nationalistic movement and that is the narrative NGB is pushing.
The US didn't want Indochina restored to French control but the UK and France got the US to relent. The US first choice was for China to take responsibility.
Popular history has it that Ho Chi Minh did a lot against the Japanese and aided the US a great deal but the reality is he did little and had only a few insignificant dealings with the US.
His rag tag communist forced declared independence though they took over control of just a few areas where the Japanese pulled out of because of their surrender. The Japanese gave them their weapons and some even stayed on and trained them. The Chinese took over these Northern areas on behalf of the allies and Ho's men fled. The Japanese remained in control of the South. Eventually the French forces were freed and the Chinese and Japanese left and the French took over Indochina.
Vietnam was divided into 3 parts under French rule. This is because the people in the areas were so different. There were plenty of minorities as well. The notion of their being a single Vietnam was a complete fiction made up by revisionists it was a hodgepodge more like Yugoslavia. That is one of the reasons why China didn't want permanent responsibility for the area.
There were many different groups that wanted independence. The communist killed the leaders of the groups and basically took control of all of them in such manner to turn it into a communist movement.
After the communist takeover of China the communists armed Ho (with a lot of the weapons they captured from the Nationalist forces that fled to Taiwan they left their weapons behind and is why they had many Western weapons) and that is when his followers began in earnest to fight the French.
The US provided military aid to the French. The French public got sick of it and decided to leave. That is when the US was asked by South Vietnam for direct aid. Popular fiction is that the US installed a puppet but that is not true we supplied the government that formed under the peace deal that resulted in the French leaving. Nor is it true that the Vietcong was a South Vietnamese entity. The organizers were all from North Vietnam they infiltrated into South Vietnam. Until 1960 it was mainly a terrorist campaign. Then it escalated into regiments and even division from North Vietnam operating there. Some were NVA AKA North Vietnamese regulars. Others were Vietcong regiments which the cadre (officers and noncoms) North Vietnamese soldiers and the rest were a mix of people who came from North Vietnam or were in South Vietnam already but were impressed into service willingly or unwillingly.
The Vietcong were absolutely decimated after the Tet Offensive. Teh Tet offensive was a major conventional attack. The counterattack from the US and RVN forces wiped out most of these forces. The remainder of the cadre were largely killed during US counterinsurgency operations. The few Vietcong regiments that remained failed miserably in operations in 1970 and 1971 and basically after that they were discontinued. They were reconstituted in name only by naming some units of the North Vietnamese Army Vietcong regiments.
Post Tet the ARVN units began to fight much better than in the past. They essentially copied the US military- they even had Vietnamese Marines, Rangers etc. They had some Americans helping lead them but began carrying on most of the fighting themselves with US airpower assisting them. The North Vietnamese suffered comparable casualties against them that the US inflicted. The ARVN was suffering considerably less casualties than the enemy. This meant there was a stalemate. This and US bombing of the North forced the to give up and agree to a peace deal.
In order to get South Vietnam to agree to peace Nixon secretly promised that if the treaty were violated we would assist them again. We stuck to the treaty and cut our aid to the RVN. The USSR and China began providing much more aid than in the past particularly the Chinese they flooded Vietnam with weapons even tanks and planes. They helped build a million man army. They didn't do it for nothing. They did it to enable the communist government to take over all of Vietnam.
They knew from the past that US airpower would decimate their large scale attacks so they started out with a limited attack that the South Vietnamese was dealing with but they were low on fuel, ammunition and asked the US not only for such aid but for US airpower assistance. Nixon was busy with Watergate and had no intention of going back because it would mean the need to stay committed forever like in Korea. Vietnam had no strategic value that he deemed would warrant such commitment. So he rebuked the. The Vietnamese saw the US refused to reengage and then launched a full scale invasion. Without US advice their planners responded ineptly. But even when they did know what to do try a counterattack fuel problems or refugees blocking the roads stood in their way. Many soldiers went home to try to defend their home villages instead of staying with their units. Obviously they would be totally ineffective in small bands against a massive conventional force. They managed to hold out longer than the French did against the Nazis but that's not much of a feat!
The US military was defeated fiction is just that a fiction. The lesson enemies got from this is that eventually the US will tire and leave and then after the US is gone they can renew the struggle. This is the strategy Saddam had in mind that is why he organized an insurgent force even before the invasion happened. He didn't expect to be caught and killed. It's the strategy the terrorists in Iraq had in mind. It's the strategy the Taliban still have in mind. Of course the North Vietnamese had something the Taliban currently lacks. The Taliban were initially supplied by Pakistan but their aid now is not from government entities but simply ordinary Pakistani extremists. That's far different from the DRV being supplied by China and the USSR with heavy weapons. They can still do damage to various villages and towns but have little hope of taking over all of Afghanistan.
A totally revisionist view of history. You really do not have a clue.
-
A totally revisionist view of history. You really do not have a clue.
Bet he doesn't win many cases.
Judge would have dropped off listening to his long winded statements.
I repeat I do not believe he is a lawyer, or resides in the US.
How can he be up until the early hours all the time, unless of course he is unemployed, which he more than likely
-
http://www.mintpressnews.com/migrant-crisis-syria-war-fueled-by-competing-gas-pipelines/209294/?utm_content=buffer5eb49&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=bu
-
http://www.mintpressnews.com/migrant-crisis-syria-war-fueled-by-competing-gas-pipelines/209294/?utm_content=buffer5eb49&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=bu
Thanks jon, nothing changes then.... meddle, meddle all people are disposable...
-
Hi Roch we should have kept our noses out of Lybia, and Iraq.
The west have stirred a hornets nest imo.
Hi Buddy.
-
A totally revisionist view of history. You really do not have a clue.
You are the one who subscribes to revisionist babble not me. That is why you can't identify battles we lost
and are stuck making up that we were beaten by an invading force that attacked when we were no longer in Vietnam.
You wear political blinders that result in you cheering a Chinese/Soviet funded communist invasion that installed a non-democratic totalitarian government in control of all of Vietnam instead of just North Vietnam and thus harmed those living in South Vietnam not the US government or people.
This thread highlights that many couldn't care less about people living under totalitarian governments so long as it isn't them living under such governments and will even make up that they are better off under such totalitarian governments as an excuse to avoid helping them rather than to just admit the truth which is that they are too selfish to be willing to do so.
I prefer honesty- admit that you are unwilling to help don't piss on someone's leg and tell them it is raining. That is effectively what telling people they are better off under dictatorships amounts to.
-
You are the one who subscribes to revisionist babble not me. That is why you can't identify battles we lost
and are stuck making up that we were beaten by an invading force that attacked when we were no longer in Vietnam.
You wear political blinders that result in you cheering a Chinese/Soviet funded communist invasion that installed a non-democratic totalitarian government in control of all of Vietnam instead of just North Vietnam and thus harmed those living in South Vietnam not the US government or people.
This thread highlights that many couldn't care less about people living under totalitarian governments so long as it isn't them living under such governments and will even make up that they are better off under such totalitarian governments as an excuse to avoid helping them rather than to just admit the truth which is that they are too selfish to be willing to do so.
I prefer honesty- admit that you are unwilling to help don't piss on someone's leg and tell them it is raining. That is effectively what telling people they are better off under dictatorships amounts to.
Hope you aren't accusing me of not caring about people under dictatorships, that is not what I said at all.
-
Bet he doesn't win many cases.
Judge would have dropped off listening to his long winded statements.
I repeat I do not believe he is a lawyer, or resides in the US.
How can he be up until the early hours all the time, unless of course he is unemployed, which he more than likely
I think he is a Lawyer but with too much time on his hands
-
Bet he doesn't win many cases.
Judge would have dropped off listening to his long winded statements.
I repeat I do not believe he is a lawyer, or resides in the US.
How can he be up until the early hours all the time, unless of course he is unemployed, which he more than likely
Judges decide legal motions mainly, juries handle the trying of facts. Motions are decided on the papers, oral arguments are essentially worthless. Judges make up their mind before oral arguments and don't change them as a result.
I'm a real lawyer I have no reason to make it up. Facts are established by evidence to support such not the occupation of the person making the claim.
I especially have no reason to make up being in the US. How does that help it's not as if everyone here loves America.
I am awake into the early hours of the morning but rarely post those hours because I am normally watching TV and people here are asleep or just waking up. Sometimes I am doing things at the computer and will be here when people are posting early but that is usually weekends.
The post I made at 4pm your time was 11am my time. You currently are 5 hours ahead after Halloween it will jump to 6 hours ahead. 11am is when I got around to coming to this site that day. That makes it doubtful I am in the US?
Where am I Mongolia? Germany? Australia? Maybe you think I am in the UK and using American English to fool people, though why would I need to? This site is anonymous I don't need to say I am in a different country to keep my identity hidden. What purpose would be served by it?
When you go that far off the deep-end into conspiracy theories that you think I am lying about what country I am from it undermines your entire line of reasoning and thought process. You should quit while you are ahead saying you don't believe I am a lawyer to which I respond who cares. I don't care if people believe it or not I said it because if people ask about my background I have no problem answering. It doesn't mean squat whether people believe it or not such has nothing to do with the arguments I make and evidence I present.
Where I am from and what occupation I do won't change that the US left Vietnam after a peace deal was signed, that Nixon secretly promised to defend the RVN in the event the treaty is broken, that Nixon failed to live up to his promise, allowed the North Vietnamese invasion to to occur unmolested and as Saigon was falling evacuated thousands of Vietnamese to the Philippines but many more were left behind to face the wrath of the communists. These are historical facts. My background doesn't have anything to do with them. I know these historical facts because of my background- I am an American who took courses on the Cold War and Vietnam in college. One of my professors was from the "Revisionist School" but he didn't force his views on us he explained the revisionist views and traditional views. The particular revisionist arguments he subscribed to was that the US wanted to save South Vietnam from communist rule so that after the war was over they could open South Vietnam to Japanese trade so that Japan would sell to South Vietnam and that since such efforts failed Japan ended up selling to us instead creating the huge trade imbalances that followed the Vietnam War. He could not point to anyone in the government who said they were trying to set up Vietnam to become a market for Japanese goods. He could not point to anyone in the government who said they needed to open other markets anywhere in order to prevent a trade imbalance from blowing out of control with Japan. It's something these revisionists simply thought up themselves that they think deep down in secret this was the concerns. I was exposed to all sorts of schools of thought but at the end of the day I only believe what can be established with proof.
So I don't give a rat's ass that in his memoirs Dwight Eisenhower claimed the Chinese agreed to a cease fire in Korea because he threatened to use the atomic bomb and this scared them into capitulating. I look at evidence. The evidence is that the US didn't threaten China. Obscure remarks were passed to China through intermediaries that all options were on the table. That's a far cry from threatening to nuke them if they don't quit. Chinese sources reveal the government was not concerned about atomic bombs. They were prepared to endure massive loss of life like they had endured at the hands of the Japanese. That is the thing about totalitarian governments they don't care about protecting their citizens they care about their politics only.
If the US actually nuked their main industrial areas that could have caught their attention and made them realize they totally underestimated the threat but it's a damn lie to say that they were in fear of being nuked and this is why they agreed to a cease fire. Just because that was Eisenhower's opinion doesn't make it reality. I care about reality not self-serving erroneous opinions.
-
I think he is a Lawyer but with too much time on his hands
What--------in the States,you're joking ? They're " lawyer " mad.
-
What--------in the States,you're joking ? They're " lawyer " mad.
maybe he has a bad reputation ::)
-
seems amerca is having trouble bringing democracy to itself.
http://www.gregpalast.com/gop-led-purge-threat-to-3-5-million-voters/
-
seems amerca is having trouble bringing democracy to itself.
http://www.gregpalast.com/gop-led-purge-threat-to-3-5-million-voters/
Greg Palast is a pure fantasist and fraud.
"On Why Greg Palast is Dangerous: "He often makes fantastic claims based on his 'Sam Spade' detective work", drational wrote, "and then (along with his many devotees) complains when Mainstream media in this country do not report his stories. Legitimate journalists have a responsibility not to mislead people."[23]"
-
where does that qaute come from.
he works for the bbc.
-
where does that qaute come from.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greg_Palast#Criticism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greg_Palast#Criticism)
he works for the bbc.
And? So did Jimmy Saville ::)
-
palast isnt the only source though.
-
In light of events in Syria, Yemen, Iraq and Libya, does anyone still buy into the ridiculous narrative of Russian aggression being fed to us by our thoroughly discredited media?
Since this thread was started world events have moved on somewhat. The lies of the US/UK and NATO countries have been exposed for all who want to see the truth, particularly in Syria where we are now openly siding with Islamist jihadi groups.
Does anyone still believe that Russia is the problem rather than the solution?
Had Russia not supported the Syrian Government and left it instead to US/NATO, does anyone believe that Syria would be better off?
Have recent world events changed the minds/ opened the eyes of any posters?
-
In light of events in Syria, Yemen, Iraq and Libya, does anyone still buy into the ridiculous narrative of Russian aggression being fed to us by our thoroughly discredited media?
Your Still wearing the tinfoil hat then I take it. Considering since Putin has now admitted there being Russian troops in Ukraine, Plus anyone can visit Russian Social Media and see what is happening as Russian troops have uploaded photos and videos of the events. Thanks to Google Translator I was actually able to find this footage myself such as that of Russian troops taking Ukrainian soilders prisoner. Considering I don't even watch any major news networks and one can find the facts from the Russians themselves the only one peddling a rediculous narrative is yourself.
As for the Middle East Russia is helping an ally Assad this is nothing new good relations go way back. I've been telling people since 2013 that Assad is the Good guy in all this or to be pragmatic the best of a not so good bunch. Religious extremism in the Middle East will always cause mindless violence for aslong as the Religion exists. Radical Islam is a common enemy between Russia and the U.S.
-
In light of events in Syria, Yemen, Iraq and Libya, does anyone still buy into the ridiculous narrative of Russian aggression being fed to us by our thoroughly discredited media?
Since this thread was started world events have moved on somewhat. The lies of the US/UK and NATO countries have been exposed for all who want to see the truth, particularly in Syria where we are now openly siding with Islamist jihadi groups.
Does anyone still believe that Russia is the problem rather than the solution?
Had Russia not supported the Syrian Government and left it instead to US/NATO, does anyone believe that Syria would be better off?
Have recent world events changed the minds/ opened the eyes of any posters?
Your post is basically asking if people agree with you or if they are an idiot. Just so you know, you'll think I'm an idiot because I would never suggest that Russia was a solution to anything.
-
In light of events in Syria, Yemen, Iraq and Libya, does anyone still buy into the ridiculous narrative of Russian aggression being fed to us by our thoroughly discredited media?
Since this thread was started world events have moved on somewhat. The lies of the US/UK and NATO countries have been exposed for all who want to see the truth, particularly in Syria where we are now openly siding with Islamist jihadi groups.
Does anyone still believe that Russia is the problem rather than the solution?
Had Russia not supported the Syrian Government and left it instead to US/NATO, does anyone believe that Syria would be better off?
Have recent world events changed the minds/ opened the eyes of any posters?
I agree with you.
-
In light of events in Syria, Yemen, Iraq and Libya, does anyone still buy into the ridiculous narrative of Russian aggression being fed to us by our thoroughly discredited media?
Since this thread was started world events have moved on somewhat. The lies of the US/UK and NATO countries have been exposed for all who want to see the truth, particularly in Syria where we are now openly siding with Islamist jihadi groups.
Does anyone still believe that Russia is the problem rather than the solution?
Had Russia not supported the Syrian Government and left it instead to US/NATO, does anyone believe that Syria would be better off?
Have recent world events changed the minds/ opened the eyes of any posters?
i wish they would make there minds up are russia the problem or issis
-
In light of events in Syria, Yemen, Iraq and Libya, does anyone still buy into the ridiculous narrative of Russian aggression being fed to us by our thoroughly discredited media?
Since this thread was started world events have moved on somewhat. The lies of the US/UK and NATO countries have been exposed for all who want to see the truth, particularly in Syria where we are now openly siding with Islamist jihadi groups.
Does anyone still believe that Russia is the problem rather than the solution?
Had Russia not supported the Syrian Government and left it instead to US/NATO, does anyone believe that Syria would be better off?
Have recent world events changed the minds/ opened the eyes of any posters?
Russian aggression or NATO aggression, there is little to choose between them. Both are very capable of bombing civilians when it suits.
There is no easy solution to the Middle East and the Syrian crisis. If Assad stays in power it is bad news but if he is removed it is still bad news and lots of people will die. No wonder the Syrian civilians are getting the hell out!
-
Your Still wearing the tinfoil hat then I take it. Considering since Putin has now admitted there being Russian troops in Ukraine, Plus anyone can visit Russian Social Media and see what is happening as Russian troops have uploaded photos and videos of the events. Thanks to Google Translator I was actually able to find this footage myself such as that of Russian troops taking Ukrainian soilders prisoner. Considering I don't even watch any major news networks and one can find the facts from the Russians themselves the only one peddling a rediculous narrative is yourself.
As for the Middle East Russia is helping an ally Assad this is nothing new good relations go way back. I've been telling people since 2013 that Assad is the Good guy in all this or to be pragmatic the best of a not so good bunch. Religious extremism in the Middle East will always cause mindless violence for aslong as the Religion exists. Radical Islam is a common enemy between Russia and the U.S.
[/color]
So how do you see the US/UK, NATO, Turkey(our NATO allies), Saudi Arabia roles in Syria?
How about the UK involvement with Saudi Arabia in the bombing causing international outrage in Yemen at the moment?
The evidence, for those not blinded by nationalism, of western aggression is undeniable. The Russian intervention in Syria has exposed to all but the wilfully blind, that the UK/US and NATO are on the wrong side. We are attempting regime change quite openly now and still many are wearing blinkers.
The truth is that Putin and Russia, along with Iran and Hezbollah, are all that stands to protect the Christians, Druze, Yazidis, Shia and Alawite muslims plus various other minority groups(all protected under Assad's secular government) from the western sponsored jihadists. The supporting of jihadi groups and calls for Assad to go can only lead to one thing. A failed state and slaughter on a mass scale of non Wahhabists.
The plans of the West have nothing to do with the benefit of the Syrian people and everything to do with serving vested interests. How else can anyone explain Western actions in Syria?
We were lied to about WMD in Iraq which is now an anarchic state overrun by various islamist factions.
We were lied to and misled about imminent slaughter and no fly zones in Libya which is now a failed state overrun by various Islamist factions.
There is a saying, which that great orator of our time, Dubya, famously managed to mangle.
"Fool me once, shame on you,
fool me twice, shame on me"
We are being lied to by the same people again about Syria and Ukraine, but ssh don't mention Yemen.
Many it seems are willing to be fooled thrice.
Ukraine has not been invaded, Russia don't need to invade since the east of the country is largely ethnic and pro Russian anyway.Some Russian soldiers being in Ukraine does not constitute an invasion. You really need to learn more and stop swallowing propaganda. By your metric the US has invaded Syria, given that they(the US) admit to having "forces embedded amongst the rebels", no doubt the nice fluffy moderate ones that the Pentagon insists, against all evidence, actually exist.
The moderate terrorists seem to appear and disappear depending on the narrative that day.
It was only in October that the Pentagon scrapped it's train and equip program after spending $500m and being left with four or five rebels remaining when the majority defected to Jabhat Al Nusra, along with their $500m of US arms and training. At this time it was declared that there were very few non jihadist rebels in Syria by Ashton Carter(US spokesman/propagandist)
As soon as Russia started bombing however, according the US et al, moderate rebels were everywhere and the Russians and Assad were only targeting "moderates" and not ISIS.
Quite what the fuck it has to do with US/UK, NATO, Saudi, Turkey etc. is left unexplained(can of worms best left unopened). They don't explain what their interest is in who governs a country that has nothing to do with them. It is absurd to be protesting on behalf of terrorists who are attempting to overthrow a government. Russia are there to help the recognised Syrian government overcome a terrorist threat. That terrorist threat is openly supported by countries allied to us and has the aim of overthrowing a government that even NATO admit would likely win free and fair elections and would have done so at any time during this supposed civil war (In reality a US sponsored attempt at regime change ably assisted by the usual suspects).
So called Russian aggression is in fact Russian response to Western aggression and standing up to NATO which is nothing more than cover for aggressive US foreign policy.
At the moment Russia are a necessary bulwark against the destructive Western foreign policy in the Middle East and are preventing the destruction and break up of Syria by the terrorist proxies of US/Nato.
US meddling in Ukraine is not even disputed. What is their interest there?
That some are too blind to see that they are being fooled by the same propaganda by the same propagandists, but this time it is Russia who must be dealt with, shows their gullibility.
Facts don't lie and for anyone in any doubt, take a look at a map.
If you do please point out all of the foreign Russian bases and Russian forces abroad.
Then look for all of the US bases and troops stationed around the world.
If you still conclude that Russia is the aggressor then there is no hope for you
-
[/color]
So how do you see the US/UK, NATO, Turkey(our NATO allies), Saudi Arabia roles in Syria?
How about the UK involvement with Saudi Arabia in the bombing causing international outrage in Yemen at the moment?
The evidence, for those not blinded by nationalism, of western aggression is undeniable. The Russian intervention in Syria has exposed to all but the wilfully blind, that the UK/US and NATO are on the wrong side. We are attempting regime change quite openly now and still many are wearing blinkers.
The truth is that Putin and Russia, along with Iran and Hezbollah, are all that stands to protect the Christians, Druze, Yazidis, Shia and Alawite muslims plus various other minority groups(all protected under Assad's secular government) from the western sponsored jihadists. The supporting of jihadi groups and calls for Assad to go can only lead to one thing. A failed state and slaughter on a mass scale of non Wahhabists.
The plans of the West have nothing to do with the benefit of the Syrian people and everything to do with serving vested interests. How else can anyone explain Western actions in Syria?
We were lied to about WMD in Iraq which is now an anarchic state overrun by various islamist factions.
We were lied to and misled about imminent slaughter and no fly zones in Libya which is now a failed state overrun by various Islamist factions.
There is a saying, which that great orator of our time, Dubya, famously managed to mangle.
"Fool me once, shame on you,
fool me twice, shame on me"
We are being lied to by the same people again about Syria and Ukraine, but ssh don't mention Yemen.
Many it seems are willing to be fooled thrice.
Ukraine has not been invaded, Russia don't need to invade since the east of the country is largely ethnic and pro Russian anyway.Some Russian soldiers being in Ukraine does not constitute an invasion. You really need to learn more and stop swallowing propaganda. By your metric the US has invaded Syria, given that they(the US) admit to having "forces embedded amongst the rebels", no doubt the nice fluffy moderate ones that the Pentagon insists, against all evidence, actually exist.
The moderate terrorists seem to appear and disappear depending on the narrative that day.
It was only in October that the Pentagon scrapped it's train and equip program after spending $500m and being left with four or five rebels remaining when the majority defected to Jabhat Al Nusra, along with their $500m of US arms and training. At this time it was declared that there were very few non jihadist rebels in Syria by Ashton Carter(US spokesman/propagandist)
As soon as Russia started bombing however, according the US et al, moderate rebels were everywhere and the Russians and Assad were only targeting "moderates" and not ISIS.
Quite what the fuck it has to do with US/UK, NATO, Saudi, Turkey etc. is left unexplained(can of worms best left unopened). They don't explain what their interest is in who governs a country that has nothing to do with them. It is absurd to be protesting on behalf of terrorists who are attempting to overthrow a government. Russia are there to help the recognised Syrian government overcome a terrorist threat. That terrorist threat is openly supported by countries allied to us and has the aim of overthrowing a government that even NATO admit would likely win free and fair elections and would have done so at any time during this supposed civil war (In reality a US sponsored attempt at regime change ably assisted by the usual suspects).
So called Russian aggression is in fact Russian response to Western aggression and standing up to NATO which is nothing more than cover for aggressive US foreign policy.
At the moment Russia are a necessary bulwark against the destructive Western foreign policy in the Middle East and are preventing the destruction and break up of Syria by the terrorist proxies of US/Nato.
US meddling in Ukraine is not even disputed. What is their interest there?
That some are too blind to see that they are being fooled by the same propaganda by the same propagandists, but this time it is Russia who must be dealt with, shows their gullibility.
Facts don't lie and for anyone in any doubt, take a look at a map.
If you do please point out all of the foreign Russian bases and Russian forces abroad.
Then look for all of the US bases and troops stationed around the world.
If you still conclude that Russia is the aggressor then there is no hope for you
You have no idea what you are talking about.
-
[/color]
So how do you see the US/UK, NATO, Turkey(our NATO allies), Saudi Arabia roles in Syria?
How about the UK involvement with Saudi Arabia in the bombing causing international outrage in Yemen at the moment?
The evidence, for those not blinded by nationalism, of western aggression is undeniable. The Russian intervention in Syria has exposed to all but the wilfully blind, that the UK/US and NATO are on the wrong side. We are attempting regime change quite openly now and still many are wearing blinkers.
The truth is that Putin and Russia, along with Iran and Hezbollah, are all that stands to protect the Christians, Druze, Yazidis, Shia and Alawite muslims plus various other minority groups(all protected under Assad's secular government) from the western sponsored jihadists. The supporting of jihadi groups and calls for Assad to go can only lead to one thing. A failed state and slaughter on a mass scale of non Wahhabists.
The plans of the West have nothing to do with the benefit of the Syrian people and everything to do with serving vested interests. How else can anyone explain Western actions in Syria?
We were lied to about WMD in Iraq which is now an anarchic state overrun by various islamist factions.
We were lied to and misled about imminent slaughter and no fly zones in Libya which is now a failed state overrun by various Islamist factions.
There is a saying, which that great orator of our time, Dubya, famously managed to mangle.
"Fool me once, shame on you,
fool me twice, shame on me"
We are being lied to by the same people again about Syria and Ukraine, but ssh don't mention Yemen.
Many it seems are willing to be fooled thrice.
Ukraine has not been invaded, Russia don't need to invade since the east of the country is largely ethnic and pro Russian anyway.Some Russian soldiers being in Ukraine does not constitute an invasion. You really need to learn more and stop swallowing propaganda. By your metric the US has invaded Syria, given that they(the US) admit to having "forces embedded amongst the rebels", no doubt the nice fluffy moderate ones that the Pentagon insists, against all evidence, actually exist.
The moderate terrorists seem to appear and disappear depending on the narrative that day.
It was only in October that the Pentagon scrapped it's train and equip program after spending $500m and being left with four or five rebels remaining when the majority defected to Jabhat Al Nusra, along with their $500m of US arms and training. At this time it was declared that there were very few non jihadist rebels in Syria by Ashton Carter(US spokesman/propagandist)
As soon as Russia started bombing however, according the US et al, moderate rebels were everywhere and the Russians and Assad were only targeting "moderates" and not ISIS.
Quite what the fuck it has to do with US/UK, NATO, Saudi, Turkey etc. is left unexplained(can of worms best left unopened). They don't explain what their interest is in who governs a country that has nothing to do with them. It is absurd to be protesting on behalf of terrorists who are attempting to overthrow a government. Russia are there to help the recognised Syrian government overcome a terrorist threat. That terrorist threat is openly supported by countries allied to us and has the aim of overthrowing a government that even NATO admit would likely win free and fair elections and would have done so at any time during this supposed civil war (In reality a US sponsored attempt at regime change ably assisted by the usual suspects).
So called Russian aggression is in fact Russian response to Western aggression and standing up to NATO which is nothing more than cover for aggressive US foreign policy.
At the moment Russia are a necessary bulwark against the destructive Western foreign policy in the Middle East and are preventing the destruction and break up of Syria by the terrorist proxies of US/Nato.
US meddling in Ukraine is not even disputed. What is their interest there?
That some are too blind to see that they are being fooled by the same propaganda by the same propagandists, but this time it is Russia who must be dealt with, shows their gullibility.
Facts don't lie and for anyone in any doubt, take a look at a map.
If you do please point out all of the foreign Russian bases and Russian forces abroad.
Then look for all of the US bases and troops stationed around the world.
If you still conclude that Russia is the aggressor then there is no hope for you
Well argued Gringo. A very fair assessment.
-
[/color]
So how do you see the US/UK, NATO, Turkey(our NATO allies), Saudi Arabia roles in Syria?
How about the UK involvement with Saudi Arabia in the bombing causing international outrage in Yemen at the moment?
The evidence, for those not blinded by nationalism, of western aggression is undeniable. The Russian intervention in Syria has exposed to all but the wilfully blind, that the UK/US and NATO are on the wrong side. We are attempting regime change quite openly now and still many are wearing blinkers.
The truth is that Putin and Russia, along with Iran and Hezbollah, are all that stands to protect the Christians, Druze, Yazidis, Shia and Alawite muslims plus various other minority groups(all protected under Assad's secular government) from the western sponsored jihadists. The supporting of jihadi groups and calls for Assad to go can only lead to one thing. A failed state and slaughter on a mass scale of non Wahhabists.
The plans of the West have nothing to do with the benefit of the Syrian people and everything to do with serving vested interests. How else can anyone explain Western actions in Syria?
We were lied to about WMD in Iraq which is now an anarchic state overrun by various islamist factions.
We were lied to and misled about imminent slaughter and no fly zones in Libya which is now a failed state overrun by various Islamist factions.
There is a saying, which that great orator of our time, Dubya, famously managed to mangle.
"Fool me once, shame on you,
fool me twice, shame on me"
We are being lied to by the same people again about Syria and Ukraine, but ssh don't mention Yemen.
Many it seems are willing to be fooled thrice.
Ukraine has not been invaded, Russia don't need to invade since the east of the country is largely ethnic and pro Russian anyway.Some Russian soldiers being in Ukraine does not constitute an invasion. You really need to learn more and stop swallowing propaganda. By your metric the US has invaded Syria, given that they(the US) admit to having "forces embedded amongst the rebels", no doubt the nice fluffy moderate ones that the Pentagon insists, against all evidence, actually exist.
The moderate terrorists seem to appear and disappear depending on the narrative that day.
It was only in October that the Pentagon scrapped it's train and equip program after spending $500m and being left with four or five rebels remaining when the majority defected to Jabhat Al Nusra, along with their $500m of US arms and training. At this time it was declared that there were very few non jihadist rebels in Syria by Ashton Carter(US spokesman/propagandist)
As soon as Russia started bombing however, according the US et al, moderate rebels were everywhere and the Russians and Assad were only targeting "moderates" and not ISIS.
Quite what the fuck it has to do with US/UK, NATO, Saudi, Turkey etc. is left unexplained(can of worms best left unopened). They don't explain what their interest is in who governs a country that has nothing to do with them. It is absurd to be protesting on behalf of terrorists who are attempting to overthrow a government. Russia are there to help the recognised Syrian government overcome a terrorist threat. That terrorist threat is openly supported by countries allied to us and has the aim of overthrowing a government that even NATO admit would likely win free and fair elections and would have done so at any time during this supposed civil war (In reality a US sponsored attempt at regime change ably assisted by the usual suspects).
So called Russian aggression is in fact Russian response to Western aggression and standing up to NATO which is nothing more than cover for aggressive US foreign policy.
At the moment Russia are a necessary bulwark against the destructive Western foreign policy in the Middle East and are preventing the destruction and break up of Syria by the terrorist proxies of US/Nato.
US meddling in Ukraine is not even disputed. What is their interest there?
That some are too blind to see that they are being fooled by the same propaganda by the same propagandists, but this time it is Russia who must be dealt with, shows their gullibility.
Facts don't lie and for anyone in any doubt, take a look at a map.
If you do please point out all of the foreign Russian bases and Russian forces abroad.
Then look for all of the US bases and troops stationed around the world.
If you still conclude that Russia is the aggressor then there is no hope for you
I agree with the above, the west are the cause of most of the trouble in the world and we never seem to learn.
It seems crazy that after the apparent condemnation of the destruction of Iraq the west is at it again.
-
I agree with the above, the west are the cause of most of the trouble in the world and we never seem to learn.
It seems crazy that after the apparent condemnation of the destruction of Iraq the west is at it again.
Quite right Maggie, one only has to look at Tony Blair and his track record.
-
Quite right Maggie, one only has to look at Tony Blair and his track record.
I agree but why only Toni Blair what about Bush and all those Hawks, they were the power base.
-
i cant see that the west can take on putin and isis at the same time and hope to win surely you have to decide wich ones worse and they got to be isis.
-
.
-
Well argued Gringo. A very fair assessment.
How much Crack Cocaine did you have to smoke while reading Gringos ramblings to conclude its a fair assessment? Critisizing America for interventions yet supporting Russia when it does the exact same thing. Gringo enthusiastically points out the wrongdoings of the USA but when Russia does the exact same thing he paints a rosy picture finds excuses for Russia or goes into complete denial.
America Evil because its friendly with nondemocratic country, When Russia is friendly with nondemocratic country admit nothing deny everything avoid reality.
America Evil because it invades Afghanistan - But Russia also invaded Afghanistan? admit nothing deny everything avoid reality.
America Evil because it Invades Iraq, But when Russia invades Georgia admit nothing deny everything avoid reality.
America Evil because it kills Islamists in Pakistan, But when Russia Kills Islamists in Chechnya admit nothing deny everything avoid reality.
America Evil because it has done A B and C etc But Russia is good because it has done A B and C etc
Gringo mentality in a nutshell
-
How much Crack Cocaine did you have to smoke while reading Gringos ramblings to conclude its a fair assessment? Critisizing America for interventions yet supporting Russia when it does the exact same thing. Gringo enthusiastically points out the wrongdoings of the USA but when Russia does the exact same thing he paints a rosy picture finds excuses for Russia or goes into complete denial.
America Evil because its friendly with nondemocratic country, When Russia is friendly with nondemocratic country admit nothing deny everything avoid reality.
America Evil because it invades Afghanistan - But Russia also invaded Afghanistan? admit nothing deny everything avoid reality.
America Evil because it Invades Iraq, But when Russia invades Georgia admit nothing deny everything avoid reality.
America Evil because it kills Islamists in Pakistan, But when Russia Kills Islamists in Chechnya admit nothing deny everything avoid reality.
America Evil because it has done A B and C etc But Russia is good because it has done A B and C etc
Gringo mentality in a nutshell
David
I think the opening of your post to ngb is rude and quite insulting he has every right to agree with Gringo without the aid of Crack or any other substance.
-
Putin is corrupt.
-
Putin is corrupt.
They're ALL corrupt imo Buddy but imo some are more corrupt than others.
-
How much Crack Cocaine did you have to smoke while reading Gringos ramblings to conclude its a fair assessment?
That is an offensive comment and I object to it.
Critisizing America for interventions yet supporting Russia when it does the exact same thing. Gringo enthusiastically points out the wrongdoings of the USA but when Russia does the exact same thing he paints a rosy picture finds excuses for Russia or goes into complete denial.
It is not exactly the same thing. There is a fundamental difference between the interventions of Russia and those of the USA and its allies and that has been the case for many years.
America Evil because its friendly with nondemocratic country, When Russia is friendly with nondemocratic country admit nothing deny everything avoid reality.
America Evil because it invades Afghanistan - But Russia also invaded Afghanistan?
The Soviet Union did not invade Afghanistan. As wth Syria they were invited to give support by the democratically elected government of Afghanistan. With Soviet support the Afghan government made huge progress. This was thwarted and destroyed by the USA and its allies arming a bunch of fundamentalist nutters who later morphed into Al Quada and the Taliban. They were of course "freedom fighters" then!
admit nothing deny everything avoid reality.
America Evil because it Invades Iraq, But when Russia invades Georgia admit nothing deny everything avoid reality.
America Evil because it kills Islamists in Pakistan, But when Russia Kills Islamists in Chechnya admit nothing deny everything avoid reality.
America Evil because it has done A B and C etc But Russia is good because it has done A B and C etc
Gringo mentality in a nutshell
I do believe you actually believe this right wing rubbish you spout!
-
They're ALL corrupt imo Buddy but imo some are more corrupt than others.
Putin has spent millions on a holiday home, which no doubt he will retire to. I cannot believe that the Russian people have swallowed his deceit.
-
Our politicians are not squeaky clean either.
-
That is an offensive comment and I object to it.
Apologies if your sense of humor didn't register it
It is not exactly the same thing. There is a fundamental difference between the interventions of Russia and those of the USA and its allies and that has been the case for many years.
American intervention = protect its interests and expand its influence
Russian intervention = protect its interests and expand its influence
I do believe you actually believe this right wing rubbish you spout!
I don't even subscribe to the left wing/right wing view of the world. I don't know why you assume I do.
-
Putin has spent millions on a holiday home, which no doubt he will retire to. I cannot believe that the Russian people have swallowed his deceit.
that doesnt make him that much diffrent from any other world leader.
-
How much Crack Cocaine did you have to smoke while reading Gringos ramblings to conclude its a fair assessment? Critisizing America for interventions yet supporting Russia when it does the exact same thing. Gringo enthusiastically points out the wrongdoings of the USA but when Russia does the exact same thing he paints a rosy picture finds excuses for Russia or goes into complete denial.
America Evil because its friendly with nondemocratic country, When Russia is friendly with nondemocratic country admit nothing deny everything avoid reality.
America Evil because it invades Afghanistan - But Russia also invaded Afghanistan? admit nothing deny everything avoid reality.
America Evil because it Invades Iraq, But when Russia invades Georgia admit nothing deny everything avoid reality.
America Evil because it kills Islamists in Pakistan, But when Russia Kills Islamists in Chechnya admit nothing deny everything avoid reality.
America Evil because it has done A B and C etc But Russia is good because it has done A B and C etc
Gringo mentality in a nutshell
You have no idea what you are talking about.
That you compare the US invasion of Iraq with Russia's intervention in Georgia shows how ill informed and brainwashed you are. Apart from anything else the aftermath of the supposed Russian invasions are nothing compared to the anarchy and failed states which are the hallmark of Western interventions. The differences between Iraq and Georgia were explained to you much earlier in this thread but it was clearly over your head. You have said nothing to rebut the previous points made and instead just resort to poorly spelt and grammatically incorrect insults while repeating the same discredited mantra.
You are blinded by jingoism and obviously easily distracted from the crimes of your own government. Do as you're told and worry about Putin and Russia and Ukraine and don't concern yourself with what your own government is doing in your name.
What do you think about the UK arms exports and training to Saudi Arabia, given the international outcry over the Saudi war crimes in Yemen? Why are you more outraged by Putin than your own government?
Do you think, on the evidence available, that the US/UK have overtly or covertly armed and funded jihadists?
Do you think, on the evidence available, that Russia has overtly or covertly armed and funded Islamist jihadists?
Do you have nothing to say to defend US/UK et al and their invasion of Syria?
Do you think that the Russian government lied to justify their intervention in Georgia?
How about the US/UK governments? Did they lie to justify their intervention in Iraq?
If you could answer the above questions honestly then you would know the difference between recent Russian and US/NATO interventions but you will offer no coherent argument and just resort to name calling because that's all you have.
-
i cant say im a fan of ethere side really.
-
That you compare the US invasion of Iraq with Russia's intervention in Georgia shows how ill informed and brainwashed you are. Apart from anything else the aftermath of the supposed Russian invasions are nothing compared to the anarchy and failed states which are the hallmark of Western interventions. The differences between Iraq and Georgia were explained to you much earlier in this thread but it was clearly over your head. You have said nothing to rebut the previous points made and instead just resort to poorly spelt and grammatically incorrect insults while repeating the same discredited mantra.
You are blinded by jingoism and obviously easily distracted from the crimes of your own government. Do as you're told and worry about Putin and Russia and Ukraine and don't concern yourself with what your own government is doing in your name.
What do you think about the UK arms exports and training to Saudi Arabia, given the international outcry over the Saudi war crimes in Yemen? Why are you more outraged by Putin than your own government?
Do you think, on the evidence available, that the US/UK have overtly or covertly armed and funded jihadists?
Do you think, on the evidence available, that Russia has overtly or covertly armed and funded Islamist jihadists?
Do you have nothing to say to defend US/UK et al and their invasion of Syria?
Do you think that the Russian government lied to justify their intervention in Georgia?
How about the US/UK governments? Did they lie to justify their intervention in Iraq?
If you could answer the above questions honestly then you would know the difference between recent Russian and US/NATO interventions but you will offer no coherent argument and just resort to name calling because that's all you have.
America Evil because it has military bases in Germany and South Korea. But Russia is good so find excuses for Russian military bases in Armenia and Vietnam.
America Evil because it uses waterboarding to interrogate people, But Russia is good so ignore Russia poisons people with radioactive plutonium.
America Evil because its friendly with undemocratic Saudi Arabia. Ignore fact that Russia is friendly with undemocratic China because Russia is Good and America evil
Gringo logic in a nutshell
-
America Evil because it has military bases in Germany and South Korea. But Russia is good so find excuses for Russian military bases in Armenia and Vietnam.
America Evil because it uses waterboarding to interrogate people, But Russia is good so ignore Russia poisons people with radioactive plutonium.
America Evil because its friendly with undemocratic Saudi Arabia. Ignore fact that Russia is friendly with undemocratic China because Russia is Good and America evil
Gringo logic in a nutshell
To address your points in order David,
Seeing as you are comparing US and Russian military presence beyond their borders I will help flesh out your argument with the bits that you appear to have overlooked.
The US has over 700 bases worldwide with a presence in 156 countries. A total of over 250,000 US military personnel are deployed outside the US.
Russia has around 10 foreign bases and around 20,000 military personnel deployed abroad.
Your argument seems to overlook this information as if it has no relevance. Does this added information not matter to your "logic"?
Your second point is equally lacking in context and detail. It's almost as if you realise that too many facts make your views look like ill informed tosh. Again I will help you with the details that you missed and attempt to add context to your rather limited view.
The US did, as you correctly point out, waterboard people during interrogations. You forgot about the illegal rendition programme, the torture at Abu Ghraib, the ongoing outrage of Guantanamo bay.
Google US torture and find out for yourself the extent of US torture during their so called "War on terror".
You compare this to a spy being assassinated in murky circumstances. Even if you believe that the Russians killed Litvinenko, how do you compare the killing of a spy with mass torture and illegal rendition programmes? Are you seriously drawing a moral equivalence between Litvinenko's killing and industrial use of torture?
Your comparison demonstrates the intellectual rigour that you apply to your "research".
The best that can be said for the third point that you raise is that is equally as well thought through as your previous two and just shows the paucity of your reasoning skills.
Saudi Arabia being an ally should be intolerable because of their role in supporting Islamist jihadists to overthrow secular Arab governments and their promotion worldwide of their own particularly extreme religious bigotry, Wahhabism. Again google it David and wise up. Saudi Arabia are also, as I previously pointed out to you, being condemned worldwide for their war crimes in Yemen. The UK is supporting those ongoing crimes with not just arms sales, but seconded British personnel deployed with the Saudi Forces.
My problem, and everybody else's, with Saudi Arabia is not because of their lack of democracy. You just made that up because you had no defence to our support of the Saudis, so mention democracy and throw in China. You're not very good at this David and are way out of your depth.
The final sentence of your poorly constructed supposed rebuttal simply highlights your poor understanding of the subject. After putting forward such "context free" facts and attempting to pass them off as a coherent argument makes you poorly qualified to pass judgement on the logic and reasoning skills of anyone.
I think it is pretty clear whose logic is faulty.
-
you're not very good at this David and are way out of your depth.
The final sentence of your poorly constructed supposed rebuttal simply highlights your poor understanding of the subject. After putting forward such "context free" facts and attempting to pass them off as a coherent argument makes you poorly qualified to pass judgement on the logic and reasoning skills of anyone.
I think it is pretty clear whose logic is faulty
I am reluctant to waste my time arguing with someone who denies facts of the situation, believes in or resorts to absurd conspiracies and has a inconsistent contradictory view of the world. Thus I tend to give you mocking or satirical answers
Seeing as you are comparing US and Russian military presence beyond their borders I will help flesh out your argument with the bits that you appear to have overlooked.
The US has over 700 bases worldwide with a presence in 156 countries. A total of over 250,000 US military personnel are deployed outside the US.
Russia has around 10 foreign bases and around 20,000 military personnel deployed abroad.
Your argument seems to overlook this information as if it has no relevance. Does this added information not matter to your "logic"?
Your second point is equally lacking in context and detail. It's almost as if you realise that too many facts make your views look like ill informed tosh. Again I will help you with the details that you missed and attempt to add context to your rather limited view.
The US has 662 overseas bases in 38 foreign countries. It has a military presence in over 150 countries it does not mean they have an actual base in those countries. In 56 of all 150 countries, the U.S. has less than 10 active-duty personnel present.
Still far more than Russia, but you are under the impression that the US does this out of aggression, That is false, the US does what it does because it can, The US has the manpower and the wealth to create a military presence across the globe. Russia has fewer bases and less military power not because its good or the good guy but because it cannot match the United States, Russia does not have the population size, wealth or resources to create a military like the US does. If Russia did have the manpower and could afford to do so it would adopt a US style military strategy. And even if Russia did have the capability it would never build as many aircraft carries or foreign bases as the US because of Russias size and location it makes such a strategy unnecessary. Russia has Europe and Asia on its door steps already
-
I am reluctant to waste my time arguing with someone who denies facts of the situation, believes in or resorts to absurd conspiracies and has a inconsistent contradictory view of the world. Thus I tend to give you mocking or satirical answers
The US has 662 overseas bases in 38 foreign countries. It has a military presence in over 150 countries it does not mean they have an actual base in those countries. In 56 of all 150 countries, the U.S. has less than 10 active-duty personnel present.
Still far more than Russia, but you are under the impression that the US does this out of aggression, That is false, the US does what it does because it can, The US has the manpower and the wealth to create a military presence across the globe. Russia has fewer bases and less military power not because its good or the good guy but because it cannot match the United States, Russia does not have the population size, wealth or resources to create a military like the US does. If Russia did have the manpower and could afford to do so it would adopt a US style military strategy. And even if Russia did have the capability it would never build as many aircraft carries or foreign bases as the US because of Russias size and location it makes such a strategy unnecessary. Russia has Europe and Asia on its door steps already
You are reluctant to enter into debate and instead resort to insult because you have no argument, as you have demonstrated. You talk of conspiracies incessantly but have as yet been unable to point out which parts of my posts are conspiracy theory, despite me asking you for clarification many times.
You are too ill informed to enter into debate on the issue hence your insults.
The point of the comparisons between Russian and US military presence outside of their own borders was as I stated in the post. I was adding facts and context to your puerile comparisons earlier and emphasizing that your comparisons were lacking the necessary details. Do you even read the reply before resorting to insults, or is it above your reading level?
Given the amount of invasions and wars that the US has been and are involved in, I would be interested to hear how you have concluded that I am wrong to have the impression that the US acts out of aggression. You believe that the US has a large military presence "because it can" and because the US "has the manpower and the wealth".
Are you serious? Is this your considered opinion as to why the US has such massive military presence abroad?How old are you David?, because this is an incredibly naive view.
You think that the reason for the US having over a quarter of a million military personnel stationed abroad in over 150 countries and spending more on arms than the next nine largest spenders combined is because the US had to give all those people something to do, what with all that manpower.I wonder who came up with the ruse of invading and bombing lots of countries so they could use lots of this seemingly spare wealth. What a land of milk and honey the USA must be.
I hope that all those foreign people who have been slaughtered and their surviving families, all those people who were tortured as part of the US "war on terror" and the millions of displaced people realise that the US doesn't bomb and invade them out of aggression. What would give them that impression, David?
They would have to be conspiracy nuts to believe that the US has any aggressive intent wouldn't they David?
Unsurprisingly you failed to answer any of the questions asked of you so we'll try again.
Seeing as you believe that there is some equivalence between Russia's actions in Georgia and US/UK action in Iraq do you consider that Putin lied in order to justify the Russian intervention in Georgia?
Do you believe that the US and UK governments lied in order to justify their intervention in Iraq?
In your opinion have Russia armed and funded Islamist jihadists and used them as proxies to destabilise/overthrow "unfriendly" governments?
How about the US, do you think that they have armed and funded Islamist jihadists and used them as proxies to destabilise/overthrow "unfriendly" governments?
Answer those questions honestly and it should be obvious, even to one as myopic as you, that the US are the biggest threat to world peace and order.
-
You are reluctant to enter into debate and instead resort to insult because you have no argument, as you have demonstrated. You talk of conspiracies incessantly but have as yet been unable to point out which parts of my posts are conspiracy theory, despite me asking you for clarification many times.
You are too ill informed to enter into debate on the issue hence your insults.
The point of the comparisons between Russian and US military presence outside of their own borders was as I stated in the post. I was adding facts and context to your puerile comparisons earlier and emphasizing that your comparisons were lacking the necessary details. Do you even read the reply before resorting to insults, or is it above your reading level?
Given the amount of invasions and wars that the US has been and are involved in, I would be interested to hear how you have concluded that I am wrong to have the impression that the US acts out of aggression. You believe that the US has a large military presence "because it can" and because the US "has the manpower and the wealth".
Are you serious? Is this your considered opinion as to why the US has such massive military presence abroad?How old are you David?, because this is an incredibly naive view.
You think that the reason for the US having over a quarter of a million military personnel stationed abroad in over 150 countries and spending more on arms than the next nine largest spenders combined is because the US had to give all those people something to do, what with all that manpower.I wonder who came up with the ruse of invading and bombing lots of countries so they could use lots of this seemingly spare wealth. What a land of milk and honey the USA must be.
I hope that all those foreign people who have been slaughtered and their surviving families, all those people who were tortured as part of the US "war on terror" and the millions of displaced people realise that the US doesn't bomb and invade them out of aggression. What would give them that impression, David?
They would have to be conspiracy nuts to believe that the US has any aggressive intent wouldn't they David?
Unsurprisingly you failed to answer any of the questions asked of you so we'll try again.
Seeing as you believe that there is some equivalence between Russia's actions in Georgia and US/UK action in Iraq do you consider that Putin lied in order to justify the Russian intervention in Georgia?
Do you believe that the US and UK governments lied in order to justify their intervention in Iraq?
In your opinion have Russia armed and funded Islamist jihadists and used them as proxies to destabilise/overthrow "unfriendly" governments?
How about the US, do you think that they have armed and funded Islamist jihadists and used them as proxies to destabilise/overthrow "unfriendly" governments?
Answer those questions honestly and it should be obvious, even to one as myopic as you, that the US are the biggest threat to world peace and order.
That's a fair argument on a number of meandering points, although it might have been better received had you refrained from getting involved in some of the personal jibes, especially when you accuse David of doing the same, no doubt borne out of frustration.
With regards to military presence outside of borders, I can understand David's view that Russia is the largest country in the world spanning across the globe, therefore they do not require so many external bases. Although it is also worth noting that the majority of Russia's external military assets are located in territories which was formerly part of the Soviet block.
-
You are reluctant to enter into debate and instead resort to insult because you have no argument, as you have demonstrated. You talk of conspiracies incessantly but have as yet been unable to point out which parts of my posts are conspiracy theory, despite me asking you for clarification many times.
You are too ill informed to enter into debate on the issue hence your insults.
The point of the comparisons between Russian and US military presence outside of their own borders was as I stated in the post. I was adding facts and context to your puerile comparisons earlier and emphasizing that your comparisons were lacking the necessary details. Do you even read the reply before resorting to insults, or is it above your reading level?
Given the amount of invasions and wars that the US has been and are involved in, I would be interested to hear how you have concluded that I am wrong to have the impression that the US acts out of aggression. You believe that the US has a large military presence "because it can" and because the US "has the manpower and the wealth".
Are you serious? Is this your considered opinion as to why the US has such massive military presence abroad?How old are you David?, because this is an incredibly naive view.
You think that the reason for the US having over a quarter of a million military personnel stationed abroad in over 150 countries and spending more on arms than the next nine largest spenders combined is because the US had to give all those people something to do, what with all that manpower.I wonder who came up with the ruse of invading and bombing lots of countries so they could use lots of this seemingly spare wealth. What a land of milk and honey the USA must be.
I hope that all those foreign people who have been slaughtered and their surviving families, all those people who were tortured as part of the US "war on terror" and the millions of displaced people realise that the US doesn't bomb and invade them out of aggression. What would give them that impression, David?
They would have to be conspiracy nuts to believe that the US has any aggressive intent wouldn't they David?
Unsurprisingly you failed to answer any of the questions asked of you so we'll try again.
Seeing as you believe that there is some equivalence between Russia's actions in Georgia and US/UK action in Iraq do you consider that Putin lied in order to justify the Russian intervention in Georgia?
Do you believe that the US and UK governments lied in order to justify their intervention in Iraq?
In your opinion have Russia armed and funded Islamist jihadists and used them as proxies to destabilise/overthrow "unfriendly" governments?
How about the US, do you think that they have armed and funded Islamist jihadists and used them as proxies to destabilise/overthrow "unfriendly" governments?
Answer those questions honestly and it should be obvious, even to one as myopic as you, that the US are the biggest threat to world peace and order.
How ironic, several month ago you were claiming that the Russian military involvement in Ukraine was a lie being peddled by America and NATO, you when't on to say that I had been brainwashed by media outlets! Media outlets that I don't even watch or take note of. I had kindly gone out my way to show you factual documented proof of Russian military activity in Ukraine from primary sources of information, then what did you do? Deny everything and continue to believe it's all a lie despite overwhelming evidence you buried your head in the sand claiming I was the one brainwashed and ill informed.
Now Vladimir Putin himself has admitted there are Russian military boots in eastern Ukraine. Ultimately proving what was already proven and that I had explained to you all along, Now you have the audacity to continue denying your errors and one again go on to say that I am the one ill informed and not very good at debating the subject then you claim that I have no argument. You are a classic example of the Emperor with no clothes.
-
Putin is corrupt.
That must be the understatement of the day, the entire Russian government and those who pandy to it are corrupt to the core.
That said however, what do members think of the latest claim by a US general that the exodus from Syria is a carefully planned project by Russia and Assad to destabilize Europe?
ps it appears to be working!
-
That's a fair argument on a number of meandering points, although it might have been better received had you refrained from getting involved in some of the personal jibes, especially when you accuse David of doing the same, no doubt borne out of frustration.
Gringo denies factual evidence and believes his opinions are more valid than reality.
Gringo criticizes George W Bush for the American policy on Iraq when in fact it was actually Bill Clinton that made the removal of Saddam Hussein official foreign policy not George W Bush.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWT587vW5E4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWT587vW5E4)
Gringo believes that the Invasion of Iraq in 2003 was an illegal war of aggression, It may seem that way to anyone who does not understand or cannot grasp the History or the legal technicalities of the conflict. In 1991 after the US liberated Kuwait, Iraq and the US signed a conditional ceasefire approved and passed by the UN see (United Nations Security Council Resolution 687) anyone with a shade of sense will know that conditional ceasefire does not bring a conflict to a conclusion and breaking the conditions can result in the ceasefire being void thus the military conflict commences.
The Iraqi WMD program was a means to and end for Saddam Hussein, gassing tens of thousands of innocent men women and children with Sarin and Hydrogen Cyanide to ensure reqime survival was the norm under the Baathist Regime. I have documents from Saddams own government below in case Gringo starts to go into La La land again
(http://s28.postimg.org/n71lxtdop/image.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/n71lxtdop/)
(http://s28.postimg.org/4sr2tu1e1/image.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/4sr2tu1e1/)
Gringo claims that Bush lied about WMD to invade Iraq and ignores the fact that they did find WMD in Iraq and statements from former Iraq Military Commanders and Iraqi Nuclear Scientists corroborate the claims that Iraq was In violation United Nations Security Council Resolution 687.
UN Special Commission (UNSCOM)
Saddam’s primary concern was retaining a cadre of skilled scientists to facilitate reconstitution of WMD programs after sanctions were lifted, former science advisor Ja’far Diya’ Ja’far Hashim
According to ‘Abd Hamid Mahmud, Saddam privately told him that Iraq would reacquire WMD post-sanctions.
See Iraq Survey Group Final Report
(http://s27.postimg.org/b06nc6d0f/nytfoiarequest_p1_normal.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/b06nc6d0f/)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Avarice (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Avarice)
The United States has found 500 chemical weapons in Iraq since 2003 and it is an inconvenient truth everyone prefers to ignore. Specially Gringo because to him the USA is Evil Empire and a Dictatorship that uses chemical weapons on innocent people to ensure regime survival and attempts to conquests its niegbours is somehow the innocent victim of evil American Empire.
Nobody with half a brain in Kuwait or South Korea would object to US foreign policy, NGB Claims he celebrated when America left Vietnam ignorant of the fact that everyone is Saigon was begging the Americans to take them to the US, Afterall they were about to be forced into an ideology that had murdered almost 100 million people in the 20th century alone so I cannot blame them but someone USA is the evil empire in the minds of some.
With regards to military presence outside of borders, I can understand David's view that Russia is the largest country in the world spanning across the globe, therefore they do not require so many external bases. Although it is also worth noting that the majority of Russia's external military assets are located in territories which was formerly part of the Soviet block.
Exactly, Russia has eastern Europe on one end and you can see Alaska from the east of the Russia on the other end its massive!, Plus Russia has direct access to the Middle East via the black sea and the Caspian Sea, Then it borders with the Korean Peninsula and has Islands in the Japanese sea in close proximity to the Japanese mainland, a country of such size that has access to all regions except Africa and South America does not require a large amount of Bases.
The USA spends 3.5% of its GDP on its military, While Russia spends 4.5% of its GDP on its military. Both those figures are fairly reasonable.
Gringo then complains that the US uses NATO for its own ends and is then completely ignores the fact that Russia does the exact same thing with CSTO (collective security treaty organization) and Ignores the fact that Russia has a Military partnership with China and both use SCO to increase their influence over the region.
Gringo thinks America evil because it creates treaties to expand its empire of influence. But then look what Russia a China are creating?
(http://chinaincentralasia.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/SCO-members-map1.jpg)
Map of CSTO (Russian Version of Nato)
(http://www.moscowtopnews.com/image/article/1/7/5/1175.jpeg)
Talk about double standards, ;D
-
How ironic, several month ago you were claiming that the Russian military involvement in Ukraine was a lie being peddled by America and NATO, you when't on to say that I had been brainwashed by media outlets! Media outlets that I don't even watch or take note of. I had kindly gone out my way to show you factual documented proof of Russian military activity in Ukraine from primary sources of information, then what did you do? Deny everything and continue to believe it's all a lie despite overwhelming evidence you buried your head in the sand claiming I was the one brainwashed and ill informed.
Now Vladimir Putin himself has admitted there are Russian military boots in eastern Ukraine. Ultimately proving what was already proven and that I had explained to you all along, Now you have the audacity to continue denying your errors and one again go on to say that I am the one ill informed and not very good at debating the subject then you claim that I have no argument. You are a classic example of the Emperor with no clothes.
David since you claim that Russia has invaded Ukraine, then surely you will have an approximate idea of how many troops this invasion consists of. I am sure that you will be able to enlighten us with the size of this Russian invasion force. Approximate numbers will suffice and it is be expected that you will support your claim with evidence that is verifiable; not just what somebody said on youtube.
After all an invasion is not the sort of thing that you can keep secret in this age of communication. The pictures of this invasion must have been all over the news and print media.
That Russia and Russians in general support the Ukrainian rebels is understandable. If you really wanted to find out the truth rather than the version served up to you by vested interests then you would know that there is a civil war in Ukraine. It is undeniable that Ukraine is a divided country and that the majority of inhabitants of regions of the east and south of the country are pro and largely ethnic Russian.
The west of the country including Kiev is largely more orientated towards Europe and the eastern regions do not accept rule by what they see as western stooges installed by a coup. Whether you believe that a coup took place is neither here nor there, it is the view of the majority of Ukrainians in the eastern regions.
Russia has actually acted with restraint in the face of western provocations. Had they really invaded Ukraine then it would be over inside days. That there is a stalemate at the moment is evidence enough that the Ukrainian military is fighting rebels and not Russia.The east of the country will not accept the rule of what they see as the puppet government of Kiev and these are the real facts.
One of my daughters shares a house with, amongst others, a Ukrainian who is ethnically Russian. His opinion is that the West are the aggressors in Ukraine and he would like Russia to intervene officially. I am sure however that if he were a Ukrainian from Kiev then his views may well be the opposite. This is the crux of the matter. There is a civil war in Ukraine not an invasion by Russia.
I pointed out to you earlier that the US have admitted boots on the ground in Syria but you haven't mentioned the US invasion of Syria. So do let us know how many Russian troops are in Ukraine in this invasion.
Your obsession with Russia's supposed crimes is indicative of your nationalistic right wing views. You should be questioning your own government's roles in the various international conflicts that we involve ourselves in, Yemen for example. You really ought to take a more objective and less subjective view of world events.
For instance an objective view of US and Russian troop presence in Syria and Ukraine, respectively,would consider facts and context rather than treating both with equivalence.
The Russian presence in Ukraine, that has been admitted to by Putin, is of military advisors (a fairly obvious euphemism for Special forces). This much can be inferred from the fact that Putin's admission came when calling for a "calm discussion" with the Ukrainians over a prisoner swap involving two captured Russian special forces. Putin said at this time, "We never said that there weren't people there dealing with certain tasks, including in the military sphere".
Again it can be reasonably inferred from this that Russian special forces are operating and helping the rebels in Ukraine, and that Putin rather than admit this earlier peddled the line that there was no invasion by Russian troops. Whilst it may be disingenuous to omit special forces presence, it does not however constitute an invasion either.
To add some context to these verifiable facts we must now consider what the Russian interest in Ukraine is in order to take an objective view on the matter.
Ukraine borders Russia and there are legitimate concerns from Russia at the expansion of Nato towards its borders. The eastern regions want autonomy from Kiev at the least and arguably want to become a Russian territory. The eastern regions are also largely ethnic Russians and the ties with Russia are historically strong.
There have been calls from these regions for more military help from Russia to defend against the Ukrainian army and various right wing and outright Nazi paramilitaries who have fighting alongside them.
None of this can be seriously disputed.
The US presence that has been admitted to in Syria by Obama, Kerry and others is of commandos and special forces being embedded with rebels. There is also the infamous and now suspended $500m program to arm and train non jihadist rebels which was embarrassingly stopped when the US was forced to admit that all but 4 or 5 had defected to jihadist groups, mostly Al nusra(Al Qaeda affiliates).
It has also been admitted by the US that they have informed the Russians of the positions of their embedded forces in order to avoid casualties.
There is no doubt then that US forces are helping terrorists attempting to overthrow a government.
To add context to these facts we must now consider what the US interest is in Syria in order to take an objective view on the matter.
Well the US definitely doesn't border Syria and there are no parts of it that have a large make up of ethnic Americans. There are no real historical links between Syria and the US, the US have not been invited by the Syrian government and nor has their assistance been requested.
Again none of this can be seriously disputed.
If you were to be objective then you would see that Russia has legitimate interests in events in Ukraine and Syria for that matter.
It is impossible however to claim that the US interests in Syria are in any way legitimate.
Russia, on the other hand, is there at the request of the UN and internationally recognised government of Syria. Furthermore it is not disputed by NATO/US/UK that Assad would win any free and fair election held in Syria, hence their insistence that he must go and not be allowed to stand. The real goal of NATO is to overthrow Assad and their actions and statements make this clear.
Ultimately, David I'm not really in a debate with you(you are too ill informed and not well enough read),
I am schooling you. You are just failing to take the lessons on board.
-
Ultimately, David I'm not really in a debate with you(you are too ill informed and not well enough read),
I am schooling you. You are just failing to take the lessons on board.
(http://www.reactiongifs.us/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/lol_spider-man.gif)
How can I take your "lessons" on board? Ramblings of a conspiracy nut with no factual primary sources of evidence to back up his absurd claims that is not what I call schooling. The only thing you are doing is entertaining me by being a politically inept clown.
Time and time again I dismantle your claims. I even go out my way to find official documents and other primary sources of information, Yet you still like to believe I am being brainwashed by some vast media conspiracy that exists only in your imagination. And the amusing thing is your too foolish to actually work out your foolish
-
(http://www.reactiongifs.us/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/lol_spider-man.gif)
How can I take your "lessons" on board? Ramblings of a conspiracy nut with no factual primary sources of evidence to back up his absurd claims that is not what I call schooling. The only thing you are doing is entertaining me by being a politically inept clown.
Time and time again I dismantle your claims. I even go out my way to find official documents and other primary sources of information, Yet you still like to believe I am being brainwashed by some vast media conspiracy that exists only in your imagination. And the amusing thing is your too foolish to actually work out your foolish
I agree David - Russia a solution? ::)
-
David since you claim that Russia has invaded Ukraine, then surely you will have an approximate idea of how many troops this invasion consists of. I am sure that you will be able to enlighten us with the size of this Russian invasion force. Approximate numbers will suffice and it is be expected that you will support your claim with evidence that is verifiable; not just what somebody said on youtube.
After all an invasion is not the sort of thing that you can keep secret in this age of communication. The pictures of this invasion must have been all over the news and print media.
That Russia and Russians in general support the Ukrainian rebels is understandable. If you really wanted to find out the truth rather than the version served up to you by vested interests then you would know that there is a civil war in Ukraine. It is undeniable that Ukraine is a divided country and that the majority of inhabitants of regions of the east and south of the country are pro and largely ethnic Russian.
The west of the country including Kiev is largely more orientated towards Europe and the eastern regions do not accept rule by what they see as western stooges installed by a coup. Whether you believe that a coup took place is neither here nor there, it is the view of the majority of Ukrainians in the eastern regions.
Russia has actually acted with restraint in the face of western provocations. Had they really invaded Ukraine then it would be over inside days. That there is a stalemate at the moment is evidence enough that the Ukrainian military is fighting rebels and not Russia.The east of the country will not accept the rule of what they see as the puppet government of Kiev and these are the real facts.
One of my daughters shares a house with, amongst others, a Ukrainian who is ethnically Russian. His opinion is that the West are the aggressors in Ukraine and he would like Russia to intervene officially. I am sure however that if he were a Ukrainian from Kiev then his views may well be the opposite. This is the crux of the matter. There is a civil war in Ukraine not an invasion by Russia.
I pointed out to you earlier that the US have admitted boots on the ground in Syria but you haven't mentioned the US invasion of Syria. So do let us know how many Russian troops are in Ukraine in this invasion.
Your obsession with Russia's supposed crimes is indicative of your nationalistic right wing views. You should be questioning your own government's roles in the various international conflicts that we involve ourselves in, Yemen for example. You really ought to take a more objective and less subjective view of world events.
For instance an objective view of US and Russian troop presence in Syria and Ukraine, respectively,would consider facts and context rather than treating both with equivalence.
The Russian presence in Ukraine, that has been admitted to by Putin, is of military advisors (a fairly obvious euphemism for Special forces). This much can be inferred from the fact that Putin's admission came when calling for a "calm discussion" with the Ukrainians over a prisoner swap involving two captured Russian special forces. Putin said at this time, "We never said that there weren't people there dealing with certain tasks, including in the military sphere".
Again it can be reasonably inferred from this that Russian special forces are operating and helping the rebels in Ukraine, and that Putin rather than admit this earlier peddled the line that there was no invasion by Russian troops. Whilst it may be disingenuous to omit special forces presence, it does not however constitute an invasion either.
To add some context to these verifiable facts we must now consider what the Russian interest in Ukraine is in order to take an objective view on the matter.
Ukraine borders Russia and there are legitimate concerns from Russia at the expansion of Nato towards its borders. The eastern regions want autonomy from Kiev at the least and arguably want to become a Russian territory. The eastern regions are also largely ethnic Russians and the ties with Russia are historically strong.
There have been calls from these regions for more military help from Russia to defend against the Ukrainian army and various right wing and outright Nazi paramilitaries who have fighting alongside them.
None of this can be seriously disputed.
The US presence that has been admitted to in Syria by Obama, Kerry and others is of commandos and special forces being embedded with rebels. There is also the infamous and now suspended $500m program to arm and train non jihadist rebels which was embarrassingly stopped when the US was forced to admit that all but 4 or 5 had defected to jihadist groups, mostly Al nusra(Al Qaeda affiliates).
It has also been admitted by the US that they have informed the Russians of the positions of their embedded forces in order to avoid casualties.
There is no doubt then that US forces are helping terrorists attempting to overthrow a government.
To add context to these facts we must now consider what the US interest is in Syria in order to take an objective view on the matter.
Well the US definitely doesn't border Syria and there are no parts of it that have a large make up of ethnic Americans. There are no real historical links between Syria and the US, the US have not been invited by the Syrian government and nor has their assistance been requested.
Again none of this can be seriously disputed.
If you were to be objective then you would see that Russia has legitimate interests in events in Ukraine and Syria for that matter.
It is impossible however to claim that the US interests in Syria are in any way legitimate.
Russia, on the other hand, is there at the request of the UN and internationally recognised government of Syria. Furthermore it is not disputed by NATO/US/UK that Assad would win any free and fair election held in Syria, hence their insistence that he must go and not be allowed to stand. The real goal of NATO is to overthrow Assad and their actions and statements make this clear.
Ultimately, David I'm not really in a debate with you(you are too ill informed and not well enough read),
I am schooling you. You are just failing to take the lessons on board.
You present the arguments on this very well Gringo. Keep up the good work!
-
I agree David - Russia a solution? ::)
The biggest Irony in all this is that self proclaimed "leftists" like NGB criticize the US and see Russia as their solution, completely ignorant of the fact that Russia is more on the right of the spectrum than the United States is.
Russia has a flat rate of Income Tax of 13% thus has a much higher level of wealth inequality than we do (See Gini coefficients) Russia allows its citizens to own guns for self defence, In the US gay marriage is now legal while in Russia promoting homosexuality is illegal in their own words "for the Purpose of Protecting Children from Information Advocating for a Denial of Traditional Family Values"
Russia then has a road safety law preventing Transgender people obtaining driving licenses.
Reporters Without Borders put Russia at 147th place in the World Press Freedom Index (from a list of 168 countries)
Then to make matters worse Vladimir Putin favours Donald Trumps for president while Donald Trump openly expresses admiration for Vladimir Putin.
Anyone who sees the US and Russia as polar opposites and believes Russia is a solution for the things they dislike about the US is just ill informed and delusional
-
You present the arguments on this very well Gringo. Keep up the good work!
Thanks ngb, I appreciate your support.
-
(http://www.reactiongifs.us/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/lol_spider-man.gif)
How can I take your "lessons" on board? Ramblings of a conspiracy nut with no factual primary sources of evidence to back up his absurd claims that is not what I call schooling. The only thing you are doing is entertaining me by being a politically inept clown.
Time and time again I dismantle your claims. I even go out my way to find official documents and other primary sources of information, Yet you still like to believe I am being brainwashed by some vast media conspiracy that exists only in your imagination. And the amusing thing is your too foolish to actually work out your foolish
David to be brutally honest with you, being called foolish, conspiracy nut, la la etc. by someone with a reading level of approximately 11 is laughable and anyone informed can see this.
Some way back on this thread you had to ask what the meaning of "sycophant" was.
I derided you at the time for lacking the wit and intellectual curiosity to use a dictionary and also pointed out that it is a common word that it would be hard to have avoided ever coming across.
That you had to ask tells us that either you have never come across the word, in which case it is reasonable to assume that your reading material is aimed at those with a reading age of 11, or that if you have come across it then you didn't bother to find out the meaning. If it is the latter option then you need to get back to the easy stuff, because anything challenging is way over your head including most of my posts.
Your written English is also of a low standard. It is littered with bad spelling and poor grammar. My 12 year old granddaughter and 11 year old grandson could school you on that. Their written English is of a far superior standard to yours and the idea that that you, with language skills that my grandchildren would deem a low standard, are in a position to call anyone foolish is amusing.
Your reply 363 demonstrates your piss poor reading and comprehension skills.
Your first two sentences are an example.
"Gringo denies factual evidence and believes his opinions are more valid than reality"
"Gringo criticizes George W Bush for the American policy on Iraq when in fact it was actually Bill Clinton that made the removal of Saddam Hussein official foreign policy not George W Bush."
Firstly, you will find that I criticise Bush for the illegal invasion of Iraq. It happened on his watch, after all. If in order to criticise me, you need to misrepresent the things that I have said then your criticisms are invalid because, well they're lies aren't they.
It also makes you look stupid because you misrepresent me in order to supposedly demonstrate my misrepresentations. This is exactly what I mean when I tell you that you aren't very good at this debating malarkey. You lack the language skills to recognise that you have been schooled.
Your next sentence is unintentional comedy gold.
"Gringo believes that the invasion of Iraq was an illegal war of aggression, It may seem that way to anyone who does not understand or cannot grasp the History or the legal technicalities of the conflict."
People who don't understand these things, like the then secretary General of the UN, Kofi Annan, who declared the war illegal in 2004 and stated that it "breached the UN charter" after previously maintaining a silence. What would the Secretary General of the UN know about it?
How about the International Commission of International Jurists, probably the world's most prestigious and respected body of international lawyers. It was the "overwhelming consensus" that the Iraq invasion was illegal.
It is not in question that the majority of lawyers in international law regard the invasion as illegal, but what would the likes of Phillippe Sands QC know about it?
Luckily David is posting and can explain the technicalities of international law to all of us who cannot quite grasp it. I can't imagine that you would require better language skills than David possesses to understand International law. He knows how to use youtube and everything ::) ::)
-
David to be brutally honest with you, being called foolish, conspiracy nut, la la etc. by someone with a reading level of approximately 11 is laughable and anyone informed can see this.
Some way back on this thread you had to ask what the meaning of "sycophant" was.
I derided you at the time for lacking the wit and intellectual curiosity to use a dictionary and also pointed out that it is a common word that it would be hard to have avoided ever coming across.
That you had to ask tells us that either you have never come across the word, in which case it is reasonable to assume that your reading material is aimed at those with a reading age of 11, or that if you have come across it then you didn't bother to find out the meaning. If it is the latter option then you need to get back to the easy stuff, because anything challenging is way over your head including most of my posts.
Your written English is also of a low standard. It is littered with bad spelling and poor grammar. My 12 year old granddaughter and 11 year old grandson could school you on that. Their written English is of a far superior standard to yours and the idea that that you, with language skills that my grandchildren would deem a low standard, are in a position to call anyone foolish is amusing.
Your reply 363 demonstrates your piss poor reading and comprehension skills.
Your first two sentences are an example.
"Gringo denies factual evidence and believes his opinions are more valid than reality"
"Gringo criticizes George W Bush for the American policy on Iraq when in fact it was actually Bill Clinton that made the removal of Saddam Hussein official foreign policy not George W Bush."
Firstly, you will find that I criticise Bush for the illegal invasion of Iraq. It happened on his watch, after all. If in order to criticise me, you need to misrepresent the things that I have said then your criticisms are invalid because, well they're lies aren't they.
It also makes you look stupid because you misrepresent me in order to supposedly demonstrate my misrepresentations. This is exactly what I mean when I tell you that you aren't very good at this debating malarkey. You lack the language skills to recognise that you have been schooled.
Your next sentence is unintentional comedy gold.
"Gringo believes that the invasion of Iraq was an illegal war of aggression, It may seem that way to anyone who does not understand or cannot grasp the History or the legal technicalities of the conflict."
People who don't understand these things, like the then secretary General of the UN, Kofi Annan, who declared the war illegal in 2004 and stated that it "breached the UN charter" after previously maintaining a silence. What would the Secretary General of the UN know about it?
How about the International Commission of International Jurists, probably the world's most prestigious and respected body of international lawyers. It was the "overwhelming consensus" that the Iraq invasion was illegal.
It is not in question that the majority of lawyers in international law regard the invasion as illegal, but what would the likes of Phillippe Sands QC know about it?
Luckily David is posting and can explain the technicalities of international law to all of us who cannot quite grasp it. I can't imagine that you would require better language skills than David possesses to understand International law. He knows how to use youtube and everything ::) ::)
The UN had authorised into force UNSCR 678 in order to Liberate Kuwait from the occupying regime; UNSCR 687 recalled and affirmed that resolution and imposed disarmament obligations on Iraq as one of the conditions. UN Security Council 687 also allowed members to use all necessary means to enforce Iraqi disarmament and compliance with UN inspection and verification, this was a condition of the 1991 ceasefire
Then In 1998, the US and the UK bombed Iraq to “degrade” its WMD capability. The legality of the bombing in 1998 was that UNSCR 678 still governed and overshadowed the entire process.
Menzies Campbell said at the time
Some say that there is no proper legal basis because there is no single resolution of the United Nations Security Council that authorises the action taken during the past 24 hours. To them I say that, when considering the legal basis of the action, one must have regard to resolutions 687 and 688 with which the Gulf war was brought to an end, to the fact that they reflect voluntary undertakings freely entered into by the Iraqi Government to help bring the war to an end and that since then no resolution of the Security Council in respect of these matters has been anything other than entirely consistent with those obligations. When considering the legal basis of the action we must look at the body of resolutions as a whole and not seek to fasten on to one particular resolution or describe it or any other as deficient.
By Iraq breaching the terms this would revive the authorisation of force in UNSCR 678 which allows the US and the UK "Use any force necessary" This is the exact same legal argument used in 2003 when inspectors discovered ballistic missiles that Iraq that was in breach of its ceasefire agreement.
Weather you agree with the Iraq war or not and in hindsight it was a bad idea we can all agree on that. However if you look at the legalities of the situation you will find there is no basis for the 2003 to be illegal as explained above. Allot of politicians will voice the opinion that the war was illegal But the fact they see the invasion as illegal does not mean it was illegal.
I am sure NGB being a lawyer himself can agree with me in this. UNSCR 678 literally had a clause that allowed the Gulf War to restart if Saddam Hussein was in breach of its conditions (which he was) its as simple as that. You could criticize the UN for passing UNSCR 678 with such an ambiguous interpretations as "obey or we will force you to by all means necessary" but what can you do? lesson learned
-
The UN had authorised into force UNSCR 678 in order to Liberate Kuwait from the occupying regime; UNSCR 687 recalled and affirmed that resolution and imposed disarmament obligations on Iraq as one of the conditions. UN Security Council 687 also allowed members to use all necessary means to enforce Iraqi disarmament and compliance with UN inspection and verification, this was a condition of the 1991 ceasefire
Then In 1998, the US and the UK bombed Iraq to “degrade” its WMD capability. The legality of the bombing in 1998 was that UNSCR 678 still governed and overshadowed the entire process.
Menzies Campbell said at the time
Some say that there is no proper legal basis because there is no single resolution of the United Nations Security Council that authorises the action taken during the past 24 hours. To them I say that, when considering the legal basis of the action, one must have regard to resolutions 687 and 688 with which the Gulf war was brought to an end, to the fact that they reflect voluntary undertakings freely entered into by the Iraqi Government to help bring the war to an end and that since then no resolution of the Security Council in respect of these matters has been anything other than entirely consistent with those obligations. When considering the legal basis of the action we must look at the body of resolutions as a whole and not seek to fasten on to one particular resolution or describe it or any other as deficient.
By Iraq breaching the terms this would revive the authorisation of force in UNSCR 678 which allows the US and the UK "Use any force necessary" This is the exact same legal argument used in 2003 when inspectors discovered ballistic missiles that Iraq that was in breach of its ceasefire agreement.
Weather you agree with the Iraq war or not and in hindsight it was a bad idea we can all agree on that. However if you look at the legalities of the situation you will find there is no basis for the 2003 to be illegal as explained above. Allot of politicians will voice the opinion that the war was illegal But the fact they see the invasion as illegal does not mean it was illegal.
I am sure NGB being a lawyer himself can agree with me in this. UNSCR 678 literally had a clause that allowed the Gulf War to restart if Saddam Hussein was in breach of its conditions (which he was) its as simple as that. You could criticize the UN for passing UNSCR 678 with such an ambiguous interpretations as "obey or we will force you to by all means necessary" but what can you do? lesson learned
You do realise that Menzies Campbell opposed the war and has stated that it was in fact illegal. In the quote that you posted Campbell is talking about bombing in 1998 not the 2003 invasion. Here is what Campbell said about the 2003 invasion:
"The illegality was then and is today easily stated. Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter prohibits regime change. It is hardly surprising that a treaty formed immediately after the Second World War should do so since the Axis powers ignored the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of those whom they sought to annexe or conquer- just as the action against Iraq did."
So Menzies Campbell, in whose words you have so much faith, agrees that the invasion was illegal. You have quoted him talking about the bombing in 1998 not the 2003 invasion. He is pretty unequivocal in the passage above, comparing the 2003 invasion to the annexations and invasions of the Nazis. It is good to see that you agree with Menzies Campbell but by extension you now also agree with "conspiracy nuts" like myself, Kofi Annan and even "self confessed lefties" and "crack smokers" like NGB, whose agreement you are now seeking despite insulting him earlier.
This is what I mean when I say that you're not very good at this.
He goes on to say:
"The charter of the UN is not the only source of International Law. Custom and convention also play a part. It is a principle of customary international law that military action can only be justified when all other political and diplomatic alternatives have been exhausted. Until they were forced to leave Iraq by the impending military action the UN inspectors were still doing their job, as were those of the International Atomic Energy Agency. They were still receiving sufficient co-operation from the Iraqis in the search for WMD. In short, all the diplomatic alternatives had not been exhausted. Military action breached both the UN Charter and customary international law."
You claim to be explaining the intricacies of International law to, "anyone who does not understand or cannot grasp the History or the legal technicalities of the conflict."
It is lucky for us that you are around then isn't it David, to explain the legal intricacies for us. That you chose the opinion of someone who is a QC and has studied International law was a good start but unfortunately for you his opinion is the polar opposite of what you are claiming. You didn't do very well on the legal technicalities part, did you?
Never mind, perhaps you will do better on the history of the conflict that you appear to believe you grasp well enough to explain to those who don't understand.
Oh shit, you don't know the difference between 1998 and 2003. I think if I were you I would lay off attempting to teach History too. The kindest thing I could say about your grasp of History is that it is no worse than your grasp of international law.
This is just embarrassing, David.
-
You do realise that Menzies Campbell opposed the war and has stated that it was in fact illegal. In the quote that you posted Campbell is talking about bombing in 1998 not the 2003 invasion. Here is what Campbell said about the 2003 invasion:
"The illegality was then and is today easily stated. Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter prohibits regime change. It is hardly surprising that a treaty formed immediately after the Second World War should do so since the Axis powers ignored the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of those whom they sought to annexe or conquer- just as the action against Iraq did."
So Menzies Campbell, in whose words you have so much faith, agrees that the invasion was illegal. You have quoted him talking about the bombing in 1998 not the 2003 invasion. He is pretty unequivocal in the passage above, comparing the 2003 invasion to the annexations and invasions of the Nazis. It is good to see that you agree with Menzies Campbell but by extension you now also agree with "conspiracy nuts" like myself, Kofi Annan and even "self confessed lefties" and "crack smokers" like NGB, whose agreement you are now seeking despite insulting him earlier.
This is what I mean when I say that you're not very good at this.
He goes on to say:
"The charter of the UN is not the only source of International Law. Custom and convention also play a part. It is a principle of customary international law that military action can only be justified when all other political and diplomatic alternatives have been exhausted. Until they were forced to leave Iraq by the impending military action the UN inspectors were still doing their job, as were those of the International Atomic Energy Agency. They were still receiving sufficient co-operation from the Iraqis in the search for WMD. In short, all the diplomatic alternatives had not been exhausted. Military action breached both the UN Charter and customary international law."
You claim to be explaining the intricacies of International law to, "anyone who does not understand or cannot grasp the History or the legal technicalities of the conflict."
It is lucky for us that you are around then isn't it David, to the explain the legal intricacies for us. That you chose the opinion of someone who is a QC and has studied International law was a good start but unfortunately for you his opinion is the polar opposite of what you are claiming. You didn't do very well on the legal technicalities part, did you?
Never mind, perhaps you will do better on the history of the conflict that you appear to believe you grasp well enough to explain to those who don't understand.
Oh shit, you don't know the difference between 1998 and 2003. I think if I were you I would lay off attempting to teach History too. The kindest thing I could say about your grasp of History is that it is no worse than your grasp of international law.
This is just embarrassing, David.
Once again your selective reading fails miserably. I know that quote from Menzies Campbell is from 1998 and I stated that if you bothered to read properly. Its the basis of the entire argument and even more importantly it shows how Menzies Campbell is prepared to contradict himself to manipulate public opinion. Menzies Campbell knows full well the 2003 invasion was lawful just as he explained why the 1998 bombings of Iraq was lawful. What Menzies Campbell sais publicly about the 2003 invasion is what any politician does, that is say things that resonate with public opinion.
The 1998 and 1996 airstrikes on Iraq have the same directive ordinance as the 2003 Invasion.
Anthony Aust professor of international law at the London School of Economics said the following in 2004 I quote
it was lawful on the basis of earlier UN resolutions, such as 678 passed in 1990 and 687 in 1991, and subsequent action by the security council during the next decade. Resolution 678 was still in force. To say it was no longer effective because it was 13 years old is spurious. end quote
Sir Adam Roberts
Professor of international relations at Oxford University in 2004 - quote
Indeed, the 1991 ceasefire was contingent on full Iraqi compliance, and the coalition would not necessarily be bound by the ceasefire if Iraq did not comply. Many UN resolutions found that Iraq was not cooperating fully. end quote
Anyone with an objective mind will conclude the 2003 Invasion was in all respects 'Lawful' however if you want to argue if the war was Justified or not then that's a completely different argument all together.
At the end of the day Gringo I am the one who brings forward evidence from primary sources and quote from experts who know what they are talking about to back up my own claims. You on the hand simply mock and try to undermine the credibility of the material I present then you bring nothing except your own opinions not demonstrated by evidence and having to resort to conspiracy theories that are completely fictitious. The only one here causing embarrassment is yourself.
-
Once again your selective reading fails miserably. I know that quote from Menzies Campbell is from 1998 and I stated that if you bothered to read properly. Its the basis of the entire argument and even more importantly it shows how Menzies Campbell is prepared to contradict himself to manipulate public opinion. Menzies Campbell knows full well the 2003 invasion was lawful just as he explained why the 1998 bombings of Iraq was lawful. What Menzies Campbell sais publicly about the 2003 invasion is what any politician does, that is say things that resonate with public opinion.
The 1998 and 1996 airstrikes on Iraq have the same directive ordinance as the 2003 Invasion.
Anthony Aust professor of international law at the London School of Economics said the following in 2004 I quote
it was lawful on the basis of earlier UN resolutions, such as 678 passed in 1990 and 687 in 1991, and subsequent action by the security council during the next decade. Resolution 678 was still in force. To say it was no longer effective because it was 13 years old is spurious. end quote
Sir Adam Roberts
Professor of international relations at Oxford University in 2004 - quote
Indeed, the 1991 ceasefire was contingent on full Iraqi compliance, and the coalition would not necessarily be bound by the ceasefire if Iraq did not comply. Many UN resolutions found that Iraq was not cooperating fully. end quote
Anyone with an objective mind will conclude the 2003 Invasion was in all respects 'Lawful' however if you want to argue if the war was Justified or not then that's a completely different argument all together.
At the end of the day Gringo I am the one who brings forward evidence from primary sources and quote from experts who know what they are talking about to back up my own claims. You on the hand simply mock and try to undermine the credibility of the material I present then you bring nothing except your own opinions not demonstrated by evidence and having to resort to conspiracy theories that are completely fictitious. The only one here causing embarrassment is yourself.
So not put off by the fact that your previous post was thoroughly dismantled, you decide to come back for more.
So far we have Kofi Annan(sec. Gen. of the UN at the time) who presumably knows what he is talking about, the ICJ, Phillippe Sands and Menzies Campbell, with whom who you can't seem to decide whether you agree with or not.
Menzies Campbell(presumably one of your ever so reliable primary sources, although interestingly Kofi Annan et al. are not seen as primary sources by you), it seems is a reliable source when he appears to support your argument but an opportunist when he disagrees.
Anyway let's move on to your new sources to see if they in any way strengthen your argument. Also, bear in mind that you have just accused me of "selective reading".
First of all you quote Anthony Aust, somewhat selectively it could be said. For anyone who is interested in reading the whole of the article it was in the guardian on the 2/3/04, under the title, "Was the war legal? Leading lawyers give their verdict".
In light of David's accusations of "selective reading", perhaps David should read the whole article and then get back to us with his thoughts/knee jerk bigoted opinions. Anyway, I digress, let's get back to Anthony Aust, who David obviously wouldn't dream of quoting "selectively" from.
Your quote begins with the words "it was lawful". You appear to have missed the first seven words of his opinion, which has the effect of misrepresenting his views, so I will enlighten you.
"There is a good legal argument that it is lawful on the basis of earlier UN resolutions, such as 678 passed in 1990 and 687 in 1991, and subsequent action by the Security Council during the next decade. To say it was no longer effective is spurious..."
There is more that you missed out, that we shall come to in a moment, but firstly you could do with thinking about the what the difference is between stating that something is "lawful" and claiming that "there is a good legal argument that it is lawful" and whether missing out those qualifying words is an honest way to "debate".
He goes on to add, "A second resolution would have been desirable to put the position beyond all doubt and politically, but if the issue ever came before the international court of justice, it could be argued either way with equal cogency. I have been a lawyer for long enough to know you can never predict the outcome of a legal case. What is clear however is that there was legal justification for the government's position."
Anthony Aust, far from supporting the legality of the invasion, as you claim, is in fact sitting very firmly on the fence. He has basically said that a case could be made but concedes that an equally cogent case can be made that the invasion was illegal.
Legal justification for the government's position is also very different to saying that the invasion was legal but these fine distinctions are above your reading level.
Your first expert does not support your argument at all and you were only able to claim that he did by selectively quoting from him and misrepresenting his opinion.
This is pretty poor stuff even by your own usual standards and the second expert you have chosen is even less supportive than Anthony Aust.
You quote Sir Adam Roberts even more selectively.
"There was in principle a possible case for the lawfulness of the resort to war by the US and it's small coalition. In a series of resolutions since 1990, the UN security council had authorised the US and partners to restore peace and security in the region, and that included helping to ensure Iraqi compliance with disarmament arrangements. Indeed, the 1991 ceasefire was contingent on full Iraqi compliance, and the coalition would not necessarily be bound by the ceasefire if Iraq did not comply. Many UN resolutions found that Iraq was not cooperating fully.
The crucial weakness in the case for war was that the US and UK governments overstated the Iraqi threat, and underestimated the effectiveness of the ongoing processes of inspection and containment.
The governments have to be judged by the information available to them at the time. However, even by that standard the case for the lawfulness of the war looked, and looks, thin. The failure to plan properly for occupation makes it thinner still."
I have highlighted in red the part that you quoted in order to allow anyone reading judge who of us is selective in their reading.
Your second expert is even less supportive of your position than Anthony Aust and in fact he tends towards the opinion that it was unlawful.
That to support your position you have had to misrepresent expert views is laughable. The sub headline in the article that you have quoted from,"As ministers face new challenges on the legality of the invasion of Iraq, Owen Boycott talks to international law experts to find that most think it was illegal"
The two contributors that you selectively quote from do not support your position and this is the best you could do from the article. You are either stupid or dishonest.
-
Read through this again, David and you will find all of the points you have raised in the bbc thread have already been addressed. If you don't have the time then in brief you are a little confused as to the difference between a Civil War and an invasion.
If you think back to the Afghanistan and Iraq invasions it may help you to discern the difference.
-
Read through this again, David and you will find all of the points you have raised in the bbc thread have already been addressed. If you don't have the time then in brief you are a little confused as to the difference between a Civil War and an invasion.
If you think back to the Afghanistan and Iraq invasions it may help you to discern the difference.
As far as I am concerend the two Russian proto states in eastern Ukraine are now seperated from Ukraine. They are states in thier own right. What we have now is a territorial dispute between Ukraine and two new Russian satellite states .The majority of people in eastern Ukraine want to live in a Russian satellite state. So I have no problem with it.
As for Iraq. Saddam Hussein was a genocidal tyrant who constrcuted the 4th largerst army in the world despite having a population of just 20 odd million. And I think its appalling that the world sat idly by and done nothing for three decades but merely "contain" the regime. It was a war of aggression for the 20% Sunni Population but a war of liberation for the 80% Shia and Kurds. It may have been poorly executed but I will always support the principle for it.
-
As far as I am concerend the two Russian proto states in eastern Ukraine are now seperated from Ukraine. They are states in thier own right. What we have now is a territorial dispute between Ukraine and two new Russian satellite states .The majority of people in eastern Ukraine want to live in a Russian satellite state. So I have no problem with it.
As for Iraq. Saddam Hussein was a genocidal tyrant who constrcuted the 4th largerst army in the world despite having a population of just 20 odd million. And I think its appalling that the world sat idly by and done nothing for three decades but merely "contain" the regime. It was a war of aggression for the 20% Sunni Population but a war of liberation for the 80% Shia and Kurds. It may have been poorly executed but I will always support the principle for it.
The principle for the Iraq war, that you are supporting, is illegal. However bad we believe someone to be, Might is Right should never dictate foreign policy. It has brought us to where we are now with the criminal genocidal regimes being the ones doing the enforcing.
The majority of the world is willing Syria/Russia and others to bloody the nose of the western aggressors currently running amok and trashing international law. Either our maniacal leaders are stopped or WW3 is inevitable.
US/Western hegemony is coming to an end and in a fit of pique the permanent state of the Western powers appear willing to bring the world down with them. This is where turning a blind eye to international law gets you. By attacking Iraq and Libya we opened Pandora's Box.
-
The principle for the Iraq war, that you are supporting, is illegal.
I think we have argued this before.
The UN security council imposed a ceasefire agreement on Iraq in Resolution 687 in 1991, In which Iraq had to accept a number of obligations and demands. Material breach of resolution 687 revived the option to use force under resolution 678. UN resolution 1441 passed in 2002 the council determined that Iraq had failed to comply with its obligations. Consequently, the authorization to use force under Resolution 678 was revived.
Technically the invasion was perfectly legal. But you might prefer to call this a loophole. If you want to argue that the war was morally wrong because it did not have the support of the global community like it did in 1991 then that's a different matter all together.
Interestingly Operation Desert Strike in 1996 and Operation Desert Fox in 1998 were technically unauthorised as there was no UN resolution determining that Iraq had failed to comply with its obligations ceasefire agreement in Resolution 687. The 1998 operation by Bill Clinton was a blatant distraction from his impeachment scandal. In 1997 Hussein expelled members of the United Nations inspection team. So what took him so long?
-
I think we have argued this before.
The UN security council imposed a ceasefire agreement on Iraq in Resolution 687 in 1991, In which Iraq had to accept a number of obligations and demands. Material breach of resolution 687 revived the option to use force under resolution 678. UN resolution 1441 passed in 2002 the council determined that Iraq had failed to comply with its obligations. Consequently, the authorization to use force under Resolution 678 was revived.
Technically the invasion was perfectly legal. But you might prefer to call this a loophole. If you want to argue that the war was morally wrong because it did not have the support of the global community like it did in 1991 then that's a different matter all together.
Interestingly Operation Desert Strike in 1996 and Operation Desert Fox in 1998 were technically unauthorised as there was no UN resolution determining that Iraq had failed to comply with its obligations ceasefire agreement in Resolution 687. The 1998 operation by Bill Clinton was a blatant distraction from his impeachment scandal. In 1997 Hussein expelled members of the United Nations inspection team. So what took him so long?
We discussed it a page or two back and your attempts at arguing your case were laughable. Selectively quoting lawyers opinions to back up your unsupported views. The lawyers you quoted actually believed the opposite of what your context free, selectively quoted opinions attempted to claim. It was pretty desperate stuff and you were unable then as now to support your ridiculous and long discredited views.
You are part of an ever dwindling band of apologists clinging onto this myth but you are arguing against the overwhelming consensus amongst international lawyers regarding the legality of the Iraq invasion. This is why you were reduced to misrepresenting the positions of Anthony Aust QC amongst others. You claimed the support of Sir Menzies Campbell QC and international lawyer and then called him an opportunist or something when it turned out he believed the invasion illegal.
The debate over the legality has long been settled.
-
We discussed it a page or two back and your attempts at arguing your case were laughable. Selectively quoting lawyers opinions to back up your unsupported views. The lawyers you quoted actually believed the opposite of what your context free, selectively quoted opinions attempted to claim. It was pretty desperate stuff and you were unable then as now to support your ridiculous and long discredited views.
You are part of an ever dwindling band of apologists clinging onto this myth but you are arguing against the overwhelming consensus amongst international lawyers regarding the legality of the Iraq invasion. This is why you were reduced to misrepresenting the positions of Anthony Aust QC amongst others. You claimed the support of Sir Menzies Campbell QC and international lawyer and then called him an opportunist or something when it turned out he believed the invasion illegal.
The debate over the legality has long been settled.
You have not got a leg to stand on. Thats why you are just ranting and misrepresenting my arguments. How about you actually raise the legal points and attack my argument instead of attacking me?
1. Resolution 678 authorized force against Iraq to eject it from Kuwait and to restore peace and security in the area.
2. Resolution 687, which set out the cease-fire conditions after Operation Desert Storm, imposed continuing obligations on Iraq to eliminate its weapons of mass destruction in order to restore international peace and security in the area.
3. Resolution 687 suspended but did not terminate the authority to use force under resolution 678.
4. A material breach of resolution 687 revives the authority to use force under resolution 678.
5. Resolution 1441 determined that Iraq was and remained in material breach of resolution 687, because it had not fully complied with its obligations to disarm.
6. Thus, the authority to use force under resolution 678 was revived.
Resolution 678 contained the authorization to “use all necessary means” No time limit on its duration had been established in the operative part of resolution.
The combined effects of resolutions 678, 687 and 1441 under Chapter VII of the UN Charter render the war legal.
Simply telling me I am wrong and going round in circles attacking the poster and not the post is not going to make the Iraq war illegal and never will.
-
You have not got a leg to stand on. Thats why you are just ranting and misrepresenting my arguments. How about you actually raise the legal points and attack my argument instead of attacking me?
1. Resolution 678 authorized force against Iraq to eject it from Kuwait and to restore peace and security in the area.
2. Resolution 687, which set out the cease-fire conditions after Operation Desert Storm, imposed continuing obligations on Iraq to eliminate its weapons of mass destruction in order to restore international peace and security in the area.
3. Resolution 687 suspended but did not terminate the authority to use force under resolution 678.
4. A material breach of resolution 687 revives the authority to use force under resolution 678.
5. Resolution 1441 determined that Iraq was and remained in material breach of resolution 687, because it had not fully complied with its obligations to disarm.
6. Thus, the authority to use force under resolution 678 was revived.
Resolution 678 contained the authorization to “use all necessary means” No time limit on its duration had been established in the operative part of resolution.
The combined effects of resolutions 678, 687 and 1441 under Chapter VII of the UN Charter render the war legal.
Simply telling me I am wrong and going round in circles attacking the poster and not the post is not going to make the Iraq war illegal and never will.
David, your grasp of the intricacies of international law surrounding the invasion is, to put it kindly, limited. Below you can read a damning critique by eminent QC., Phillippe Sands regarding the legality of the invasion and the Chilcott report:
https://www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n15/philippe-sands/a-grand-and-disastrous-deceit
You will find that your interpretations of the resolutions you listed perhaps lack something in understanding. If you can't be arsed to read it in full here are a few relevant sections that deal specifically with the requirement of a new resolution and legality of the invasion.
"... Even so, Chilcott devotes much of his opening statement on the legality. Distinguishing between substance and process, the inquiry concludes that "the circumstances in which it was decided that there was a basis for UK military action were "far from satisfactory." "Far from satisfactory" is a career ending phrase in mandarin speak, a large boot put in with considerable force. As late as January 2003, Lord Goldsmith, the attorney general, told Blair that lawful war required a further Security Council resolution, before later changing his mind - his written advice of 7 March found a second resolution "preferable" (rather than indispensable) - and then changing it again, offering a final view on 17 March: since Iraq was in "material breach" of the existing Security Council resolutions, "the authority to use force under Resolution 678 was, "as a result" revived." Taking the documents of 7 and 17 March together, Chilcott notes that on the legal view finally adopted, war would be lawful only if there was evidence that Iraq had committed "further material breaches as specified in Resolution 1441."
The resolutions in place were well understood and debated at the time leading to millions worldwide in the biggest protests ever seen taking to the streets. At the UN the US/UK were out on a limb against the overwhelming international consensus.
The US/UK were self evidently going to war regardless of legality and desperately searching for even a fig leaf to justify their actions. Goldsmith's advice appears, to the impartial observer, to have been in some way coerced. He was changing with the wind and under intense pressure to give "legal cover" to the already made decision to go to war.
The argument is so strained as to be laughable. Phillippe Sands spells it out for you anyway and goes on to say:
"He homes in on a key question: on what basis did Blair take the decision that Iraq was in further material breach? "Not clear", Chilcott answered, somewhat generously, since the evidence before the enquiry showed that Blair consulted no one but himself - not the UN weapons inspectors, not the Joint Intelligence Committee, not anyone. Playing God and weapons inspector, Blair simply made up his mind that Iraq was in material breach. "Given the gravity of the situation," Chilcott adds, "Lord Goldsmith should have been asked to provide written advice explaining how, in the absence of a majority in the Security Council, Mr. Blair could take that decision."
This is a pretty damning indictment of the claims to legality through previous resolutions. It should also beg the question why were US/UK seeking a new resolution in the Security Council, if as you contend, the resolutions in place already justified invasion.
When it became obvious that the US/UK did not have the support for a new resolution authorising force and had no chance of getting one through the UN, there was suddenly legal advice justifying action from the AG, albeit it secret and contrary to his previous advice. Anyway Sands goes on:
"The report goes further in its criticism of the processes followed in obtaining a legal sign-off. Senior ministers were not consulted. "Normal practice" was cast aside: it was "unusual" for the attorney general rather than a minister to offer an explanation in parliament. Ministers, senior officials and the cabinet weren't provided with the written advice of 7 March: the cabinet wasn't told how Blair had reached his views on material breach. The cabinet "should have been made aware of the uncertainties", but was not. Goldsmith should have provided full written advice explaining the full legal basis for action and setting out all the risks of legal challenge.
These are forceful criticisms. They are given added heft by the inquiry's failure to be persuaded by Blair and Straw's claim that France was to blame "for the "impasse" in the UN", and by it's blunt rejection of the idea that the UK had upheld the authority of the Security Council. Rather, "in the absence of a majority in support of military action we consider the UK was,in fact, undermining the Security Council's authority."
You should read and consider those words carefully. There is an absolutely overwhelming consensus among international lawyers that the invasion was illegal. Your unsupported and dubious interpretations of international law and the authority contained within UN resolutions are pretty desperate stuff.
As mentioned in previous posts, that sailed over your head, the ICJ ( International Commission of Jurists), probably the preeminent authority on international law have the following to say:
"The invasion of Iraq was neither in self defence against armed attack nor sanctioned by UN Security Council resolution authorising the use of force by member states and thus constituted the crime of war of aggression"
When you previously attempted to argue in favour of the legality of the invasion you selectively quoted from several lawyers in international law. The lawyers and sources that you did present actually thought the opposite of what you attempted to imply.
Anthony Aust QC was one of the sources who you quoted "selectively". Sir Menzies Campbell, whose support you claimed but then attacked as an opportunist, despite previously considering him a reliable source, when it turned out that he was unequivocal in his opinion that the 2003 invasion was illegal.
Elizabeth Wilmshust, legal adviser at the FCO resigned after Goldsmith reversed her legal opinion on the legality of the war. Any number of experts on international law have given detailed opinions on the illegality of the invasion.
Against this weight of expert opinion and analysis all that you have offered is your own derisory views on resolutions about which you know nothing. There are no impartial experts arguing for the legality of the Iraq invasion and it is a dwindling, sorry band of warmongers and apologists that you are currently associating with.
Read the link in full and from there you will be able to read the many sources cited in the full article. A who's who of experts in international law in agreement that the invasion was illegal. If you open your mind and read you may learn something.
Kofi Annan the UN secretary general at the time declared the invasion illegal. Do you have any understanding at all of the sheer weight of expert opinion that you are attempting to argue against. I have pointed out to you previously that I am schooling rather than debating you and this remains true.
You would be better served to go and do some reading before commenting further because your contributions so far embarrass you.
-
David, your grasp of the intricacies of international law surrounding the invasion is, to put it kindly, limited. Below you can read a damning critique by eminent QC., Phillippe Sands regarding the legality of the invasion and the Chilcott report:
https://www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n15/philippe-sands/a-grand-and-disastrous-deceit
You will find that your interpretations of the resolutions you listed perhaps lack something in understanding. If you can't be arsed to read it in full here are a few relevant sections that deal specifically with the requirement of a new resolution and legality of the invasion.
"... Even so, Chilcott devotes much of his opening statement on the legality. Distinguishing between substance and process, the inquiry concludes that "the circumstances in which it was decided that there was a basis for UK military action were "far from satisfactory." "Far from satisfactory" is a career ending phrase in mandarin speak, a large boot put in with considerable force. As late as January 2003, Lord Goldsmith, the attorney general, told Blair that lawful war required a further Security Council resolution, before later changing his mind - his written advice of 7 March found a second resolution "preferable" (rather than indispensable) - and then changing it again, offering a final view on 17 March: since Iraq was in "material breach" of the existing Security Council resolutions, "the authority to use force under Resolution 678 was, "as a result" revived." Taking the documents of 7 and 17 March together, Chilcott notes that on the legal view finally adopted, war would be lawful only if there was evidence that Iraq had committed "further material breaches as specified in Resolution 1441."
The resolutions in place were well understood and debated at the time leading to millions worldwide in the biggest protests ever seen taking to the streets. At the UN the US/UK were out on a limb against the overwhelming international consensus.
The US/UK were self evidently going to war regardless of legality and desperately searching for even a fig leaf to justify their actions. Goldsmith's advice appears, to the impartial observer, to have been in some way coerced. He was changing with the wind and under intense pressure to give "legal cover" to the already made decision to go to war.
The argument is so strained as to be laughable. Phillippe Sands spells it out for you anyway and goes on to say:
"He homes in on a key question: on what basis did Blair take the decision that Iraq was in further material breach? "Not clear", Chilcott answered, somewhat generously, since the evidence before the enquiry showed that Blair consulted no one but himself - not the UN weapons inspectors, not the Joint Intelligence Committee, not anyone. Playing God and weapons inspector, Blair simply made up his mind that Iraq was in material breach. "Given the gravity of the situation," Chilcott adds, "Lord Goldsmith should have been asked to provide written advice explaining how, in the absence of a majority in the Security Council, Mr. Blair could take that decision."
This is a pretty damning indictment of the claims to legality through previous resolutions. It should also beg the question why were US/UK seeking a new resolution in the Security Council, if as you contend, the resolutions in place already justified invasion.
When it became obvious that the US/UK did not have the support for a new resolution authorising force and had no chance of getting one through the UN, there was suddenly legal advice justifying action from the AG, albeit it secret and contrary to his previous advice. Anyway Sands goes on:
"The report goes further in its criticism of the processes followed in obtaining a legal sign-off. Senior ministers were not consulted. "Normal practice" was cast aside: it was "unusual" for the attorney general rather than a minister to offer an explanation in parliament. Ministers, senior officials and the cabinet weren't provided with the written advice of 7 March: the cabinet wasn't told how Blair had reached his views on material breach. The cabinet "should have been made aware of the uncertainties", but was not. Goldsmith should have provided full written advice explaining the full legal basis for action and setting out all the risks of legal challenge.
These are forceful criticisms. They are given added heft by the inquiry's failure to be persuaded by Blair and Straw's claim that France was to blame "for the "impasse" in the UN", and by it's blunt rejection of the idea that the UK had upheld the authority of the Security Council. Rather, "in the absence of a majority in support of military action we consider the UK was,in fact, undermining the Security Council's authority."
You should read and consider those words carefully. There is an absolutely overwhelming consensus among international lawyers that the invasion was illegal. Your unsupported and dubious interpretations of international law and the authority contained within UN resolutions are pretty desperate stuff.
As mentioned in previous posts, that sailed over your head, the ICJ ( International Commission of Jurists), probably the preeminent authority on international law have the following to say:
"The invasion of Iraq was neither in self defence against armed attack nor sanctioned by UN Security Council resolution authorising the use of force by member states and thus constituted the crime of war of aggression"
When you previously attempted to argue in favour of the legality of the invasion you selectively quoted from several lawyers in international law. The lawyers and sources that you did present actually thought the opposite of what you attempted to imply.
Anthony Aust QC was one of the sources who you quoted "selectively". Sir Menzies Campbell, whose support you claimed but then attacked as an opportunist, despite previously considering him a reliable source, when it turned out that he was unequivocal in his opinion that the 2003 invasion was illegal.
Elizabeth Wilmshust, legal adviser at the FCO resigned after Goldsmith reversed her legal opinion on the legality of the war. Any number of experts on international law have given detailed opinions on the illegality of the invasion.
Against this weight of expert opinion and analysis all that you have offered is your own derisory views on resolutions about which you know nothing. There are no impartial experts arguing for the legality of the Iraq invasion and it is a dwindling, sorry band of warmongers and apologists that you are currently associating with.
Read the link in full and from there you will be able to read the many sources cited in the full article. A who's who of experts in international law in agreement that the invasion was illegal. If you open your mind and read you may learn something.
Kofi Annan the UN secretary general at the time declared the invasion illegal. Do you have any understanding at all of the sheer weight of expert opinion that you are attempting to argue against. I have pointed out to you previously that I am schooling rather than debating you and this remains true.
You would be better served to go and do some reading before commenting further because your contributions so far embarrass you.
This is a snippet of what you quoted.
"the authority to use force under Resolution 678 was, "as a result" revived." Taking the documents of 7 and 17 March together, Chilcott notes that on the legal view finally adopted, war would be lawful only if there was evidence that Iraq had committed "further material breaches as specified in Resolution 1441."
It all comes down to this very narrow point. Did Saddam Hussein breach the conditions of the ceasefire agreement?
If the answer to that question is yes. Then we move onto the next question
With Saddam in breach of the ceasefire agreement thus giving the US authorization to “use all necessary means” does this allow the US to forcefully remove the regime?
The term “use all necessary means” with no explicit conditions on what is unnecessary. Then yes the US can forcefully remove the regime.
Its my belief that Saddam Hussein had no intentions of ever fully cooperating. So regime removal was the only solution. Even if Saddam Hussein did not have WMD at the time of the invasion, he intended to rebuild them.
Saddam Hussein saw chemical weapons as a means of regime survival and was prepared to use them on both military and civilian targets if he felt threatened. As we already know.
When the Iranians made breakthroughs into Iraqi territory with Operation Dawn 8 thus Sorounding Basra. They were reppled by nerve agents killing 15,000 Iranian troops in the process. This is one of the reasons why the Americans did not push deep into Iraq in 1991 because they knew what would happen. Since Saddam Hussein saw chemical weapons as a means of regime survival the ceasefire proposals put forward to end what he called "the mother of all battles" as he called it UN resolution 678 was put to him as the "mother of all solutions" ie your regime survives if you disarm.
UN resolution 678 caused a humanitarian disaster. With much of Saddam's republican guard battered and demoralised, civilian uprisings began against the regime.
At the time, much of Iraq was in open revolt, the report notes, and the Iraqi regime was deeply shaken by the fall of Karbala to Shiite rebels. The report said the use of chemical weapons was an example of the “dire nature of the situation” and the regime’s “faith in ‘special weapons’” that it would consider using chemical weapons while coalition forces were still in Iraq.
https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2006_01-02/JANFEB-IraqSarin (https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2006_01-02/JANFEB-IraqSarin)
The suppression of the uprising resulted in the exodus of over ten percent of the country's population. and 30,000 Iraqi civilians killed. While the forces that Liberated Kuwait basically sat a watched it happen.
https://www.hrw.org/reports/1992/Iraq926.htm (https://www.hrw.org/reports/1992/Iraq926.htm)
The only solution was regime change. I don't care how many people disagree with me. Or how much you think my rationale is "laughable". Many pundits and political leaders have expressed the view that since the United Nations Security Council has not enacted a fresh resolution authorizing the invasion of Iraq, the countries attacking Iraq were breaching international law by doing so. I disagree.
Saddam Hussein was charged with possessing prohibited weapons and perpetuating gross violations of human rights. To argue that is removal violated international law is IMO absurd. You are essentially arguing that its illegal to enforce international law and illegal to inforce international humanitarian law.
Do I have any understanding at all of the sheer weight of expert opinion that I am attempting (and succeeding) in arguing against? Yes very much so. The sheer weight of this expert opinion is so weak all it can convince to pass judgment is a quasi kangaroo court in Kuala Lumpur that does not have a UN mandate or recognition. ;D
The International Criminal Court has passed no such judgement, despite this alleged "absolutely overwhelming consensus among international lawyers that the invasion was illegal." That you insist has merit. But it cannot even get the case to court. ;D
Blair is in the jurisdiction to be charged but is not because their is no case against him. (Bush is beyond reach regardless). Don't get me wrong Blair deserves to be humiliated and punished for a wide range of things. But that's not going to cloud by judgment on the Iraq issue. For argument sake If the International Criminal Court put on a show trial and threw all logic out the window and to find Blair guilty of war crime and then jailed him. He would no doubt deserve it for other things he has done, even if such ruling was technically unfair.
-
This is a snippet of what you quoted.
"the authority to use force under Resolution 678 was, "as a result" revived." Taking the documents of 7 and 17 March together, Chilcott notes that on the legal view finally adopted, war would be lawful only if there was evidence that Iraq had committed "further material breaches as specified in Resolution 1441."
It all comes down to this very narrow point. Did Saddam Hussein breach the conditions of the ceasefire agreement?
If the answer to that question is yes. Then we move onto the next question
With Saddam in breach of the ceasefire agreement thus giving the US authorization to “use all necessary means” does this allow the US to forcefully remove the regime?
The term “use all necessary means” with no explicit conditions on what is unnecessary. Then yes the US can forcefully remove the regime.
Its my belief that Saddam Hussein had no intentions of ever fully cooperating. So regime removal was the only solution. Even if Saddam Hussein did not have WMD at the time of the invasion, he intended to rebuild them.
Saddam Hussein saw chemical weapons as a means of regime survival and was prepared to use them on both military and civilian targets if he felt threatened. As we already know.
When the Iranians made breakthroughs into Iraqi territory with Operation Dawn 8 thus Sorounding Basra. They were reppled by nerve agents killing 15,000 Iranian troops in the process. This is one of the reasons why the Americans did not push deep into Iraq in 1991 because they knew what would happen. Since Saddam Hussein saw chemical weapons as a means of regime survival the ceasefire proposals put forward to end what he called "the mother of all battles" as he called it UN resolution 678 was put to him as the "mother of all solutions" ie your regime survives if you disarm.
UN resolution 678 caused a humanitarian disaster. With much of Saddam's republican guard battered and demoralised, civilian uprisings began against the regime.
At the time, much of Iraq was in open revolt, the report notes, and the Iraqi regime was deeply shaken by the fall of Karbala to Shiite rebels. The report said the use of chemical weapons was an example of the “dire nature of the situation” and the regime’s “faith in ‘special weapons’” that it would consider using chemical weapons while coalition forces were still in Iraq.
https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2006_01-02/JANFEB-IraqSarin (https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2006_01-02/JANFEB-IraqSarin)
The suppression of the uprising resulted in the exodus of over ten percent of the country's population. and 30,000 Iraqi civilians killed. While the forces that Liberated Kuwait basically sat a watched it happen.
https://www.hrw.org/reports/1992/Iraq926.htm (https://www.hrw.org/reports/1992/Iraq926.htm)
The only solution was regime change. I don't care how many people disagree with me. Or how much you think my rationale is "laughable". Many pundits and political leaders have expressed the view that since the United Nations Security Council has not enacted a fresh resolution authorizing the invasion of Iraq, the countries attacking Iraq were breaching international law by doing so. I disagree.
Saddam Hussein was charged with possessing prohibited weapons and perpetuating gross violations of human rights. To argue that is removal violated international law is IMO absurd. You are essentially arguing that its illegal to enforce international law and illegal to inforce international humanitarian law.
Do I have any understanding at all of the sheer weight of expert opinion that I am attempting (and succeeding) in arguing against? Yes very much so. The sheer weight of this expert opinion is so weak all it can convince to pass judgment is a quasi kangaroo court in Kuala Lumpur that does not have a UN mandate or recognition. ;D
The International Criminal Court has passed no such judgement, despite this alleged "absolutely overwhelming consensus among international lawyers that the invasion was illegal." That you insist has merit. But it cannot even get the case to court. ;D
Blair is in the jurisdiction to be charged but is not because their is no case against him. (Bush is beyond reach regardless). Don't get me wrong Blair deserves to be humiliated and punished for a wide range of things. But that's not going to cloud by judgment on the Iraq issue. For argument sake If the International Criminal Court put on a show trial and threw all logic out the window and to find Blair guilty of war crime and then jailed him. He would no doubt deserve it for other things he has done, even if such ruling was technically unfair.
Have you watched the full video of George Galloway's testimony?
-
Have you watched the full video of George Galloway's testimony?
George Galloway does not come into the equation. If he wants to bitch about Americans selling weapons to Iraq and the middle east during the Iraq-Iran war.
"If you are asking did I support the Soviet Union, yes I did. Yes, I did support the Soviet Union, and I think the disappearance of the Soviet Union is the biggest catastrophe of my life."
- George Galloway
Well Mr Galloway are you aware of who the largest supplier of weapons was to the middle east in that decade?
Anyway. I've spent more than enough time on this thread. I'm out. 8)
-
Your ability to comprehend is severely limited and clearly influenced by your own dogma. Your post literally falls apart after line 5 and 2 of those were quoting somebody else, although selectively, seemingly in order to give a false impression. Selective quoting is your speciality it seems:
This is a snippet of what you posted.
"the authority to use force under resolution 678 was, "as a result" revived. Taking the documents of 7 and 17 March together, Chilcott notes that on the legal view finally adopted, war would be lawful only if there was evidence that Iraq had committed "further material breaches as specified in resolution 1441."
It all comes down to this very narrow point. Did Saddam Hussein breach the conditions of the ceasefire agreement?
If the answer to that question is yes. Then we move on to the next question.
"If the answer to that question is yes?"
But the answer to that question was no.
Had you bothered to use the preceding and succeeding words of Phillippe Sands, helpfully provided in my previous post, then you would have seen that the question had already been dealt with in clear and damning terms. Blair decided on his own without consultation that Iraq were in breach. Can you actually read and understand at the same time? Read the full link and any other number of expert opinion on the matter.
"Then we move on to the next question."
The obvious implication here is that you believe that Iraq were in breach of 1441 despite admitting yourself, without irony intended, a few lines later that they weren't. You cite not a single expert source but instead treat us to the gem. "It is my belief... blah blah".
Who needs to read and digest the opinions of experts on international law with all it's time consuming reading, having to think about and consider things? It's much quicker and easier to take a knee jerk position based on preconceptions and dogma, isn't it David?
What bollocks is this? Is it anybody else's belief?
It is my belief that the invasion was illegal. It also happens to be the belief of what you haughtily dismiss, again without irony intended, with the delusional beyond words following claim:
"Do I have any understanding at all of the sheer weight of expert opinion that I am attempting (and succeeding) in arguing against. The sheer weight of this expert opinion is so weak all it can convince to pass judgement is a quasi kangaroo court in Kuala Lumpur..."
It is impressive, if that is the correct description, that you can pack so much delusion and ignorance into so few words. You believe that you are "succeeding" in your argument. Only if you are trying to prove your ignorance and idiocy. That being case you are doing a sterling job.
I suspect that you have done a search using the terms, "Iraq war legality", which would explain the reason why the only opinions expressed on int'l law are yours. You can't find an expert opinion that shares your view. You should ask yourself why that is. Your claim to have understanding of the opinion you are arguing against is, self evidently to any impartial reader, delusional.
You then go onto display your lack of knowledge of how international power works with your seeming belief that the reasons the architects of the US/UK aggression have not been hauled before international courts is because of the weakness of the case. Are you really that naive and misinformed?
One of the main routes to the ICC is blocked by virtue of the simple fact that no veto wielding member of the UNSC is ever going to agree to send themselves to the ICC. The US are not even signed up to it.
There is no other real mechanism that would achieve this outcome because the US/UK are powerful internationally both militarily and economically and would stymie any attempts. Your ignorance and naivete in not understanding this invalidates the half baked, knee jerk reactions you attempt to pass off as considered opinion.
It also seems reasonable to infer from this view that you believe there are no "strong cases" of US/UK war crimes ever. All that illegal rendition, torture, invasions and millions dead must have been all done in accordance with int'l law by your warped logic. Otherwise where are the ICC. Lucky for you, David, you can sleep easy, safe in the knowledge that your government are such fine and law abiding actors on the world stage.
Apropos of nothing you throw in a pathetic "potted history" of the Iraq/Iran war. Were you to watch the George Galloway testimony before the US senate, which Roch recommended, you would learn that the reason we didn't have much to say about the gas attacks at the time was because the US sold Saddam the gas and helped with the targeting.
You give an explanation of UN resolutions that is patronising and shallow but is clearly your understanding. It is perhaps how a patient and informed adult might attempt to explain int'l law to a 11 year old. You just sound like the 11 year old.
These half witted diversions are an attempt to show that you are informed and knowledgeable but only betray the fact that you have spent 15, 20 minutes searching for confirmation bias and writing any old shit, relevant or not, about Saddam, Iraq etc. in order to appear so. It hasn't worked.
All the, unsupported by anyone but yourself, drivel that you have posted in answer to the question, "do you have any understanding of the sheer weight of expert opinion you are arguing against?" would have been more honestly and accurately summed up in a one word answer.
No.
-
https://voxpoliticalonline.com/2018/05/13/more-evidence-of-false-information-on-the-poisoning-of-sergei-and-yulia-skripal/
-
An outlook on Russia: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/russia-is-a-mess-why-is-putin-such-a-formidable-adversary/ar-BBYgra7?ocid=spartanntp
-
Another poisoning it seems :-\
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bu2joAGDObc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bu2joAGDObc)
-
Another poisoning it seems :-\
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bu2joAGDObc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bu2joAGDObc)
More idiotic CIA/MI5 propaganda.
-
More idiotic CIA/MI5 propaganda.
Aljazeera is CIA/MI5 propaganda? Who would have known! ::)
-
Aljazeera is CIA/MI5 propaganda? Who would have known! ::)
Don't misrepresent me, David.
Al jazeera whilst good on many issues has it's obvious biases. Do you know who owns it? Or the interests that they represent? The rivalries and alliances?
It is owned by the Al Thani family (google it)
Their sympathies lie with the Muslim Brotherhood (again google it)
Al jazeera are only reporting what they are told.
Do you honestly believe that Putin or the Russian state had anything to do with this? There are much cleaner and easier ways to kill people with total plausible deniability than ridiculous poisonings. You no doubt believe the ridiculous Salisbury hoax and that two Russians on a tourist visa smeared a supposed deadly nerve agent on a door handle before going window shopping for a couple of hours in Salisbury. I doubt that you even consider where the missing Skripals are now. No proof of life from the UK government but nothing suspicious there just move along. Isn't this Russian poisoning shit getting a bit tired and stale now. Intelligence agencies clearly lack creativity these days. I blame the public school education.
That you still appear to believe that Russia rather than US/UK/NATO are the aggressors demonstrates that you are not really paying sufficient attention to the aggressive behaviour and language of your own government.
You see the beam in the eye of the Russians but ignore the mote in the eye of NATO.
You need to worry about your own government dragging us into wars. We are way more imperialistic brutal and warmongering. Russia don't need to control other countries natural reserves, they've got plenty of their own. It is our Govt's who covet Russia's resources, not vice versa
-
Do you honestly believe that Putin or the Russian state had anything to do with this?
I never said they did ???
There are much cleaner and easier ways to kill people with total plausible deniability than ridiculous poisonings
Well yes, the death of Alexander Perepilichny could be one example. But when poison is used like this, its out of spite, they don't just want to kill or harm they want to set an example. Whoever decided to use Polonium on Alexander Litvinenko wanted him to suffer greatly.
-
I'm afraid it's ominously redolent of an elected dictatorship, as occurs to a greater extent in China, but Russia is heading for totalitarianism all the same. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-51120166
-
I'm afraid it's ominously redolent of an elected dictatorship, as occurs to a greater extent in China, but Russia is heading for totalitarianism all the same. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-51120166
Russia has done very well under Putin. His biggest opposition is the Russian communist party and most Russians are wise enough not to give them another chance in power.
-
David, are you an American asset, operating in the UK? What's your code name - 'Cruise' (as in missile or Tom).
-
David, are you an American asset, operating in the UK? What's your code name - 'Cruise' (as in missile or Tom).
Yes. I am employed by NASA/Area 51. Assigned to the UK to go around abducting sheep in my flying saucer. They pay well and the burger king is nice so wont be going back to my home galaxy any time soon.
-
Russia has done very well under Putin. His biggest opposition is the Russian communist party and most Russians are wise enough not to give them another chance in power.
He rode the oil price increase and is heavily dependent on that commodity along with gas. The economy itself is smaller than Italy's.
-
He rode the oil price increase and is heavily dependent on that commodity along with gas. The economy itself is smaller than Italy's.
A country is heavily dependant on its natural resources? How odd!
-
Yes. I am employed by NASA/Area 51. Assigned to the UK to go around abducting sheep in my flying saucer. They pay well and the burger king is nice so wont be going back to my home galaxy any time soon.
I'm not sure why you link me to UFO's. It's not a topic I have given any attention to.
-
I'm not sure why you link me to UFO's. It's not a topic I have given any attention to.
You cited Richard Hall as credible source. That's what I ended up reading :))
-
He rode the oil price increase and is heavily dependent on that commodity along with gas. The economy itself is smaller than Italy's.
You know very little of Russia, Steve, and what little you do know is the repeated talking points of western intelligence agencies through the media. Since the heavy sanctions Russia has become self reliant in many areas, the agriculture especially has grown.
As I have already pointed out, it is not Russia who covets our natural resources. It is the West acting aggressively, not Russia. You are easily led by misinformation via a controlled media.
It is laughable to be told that Russia are killing journalists and censoring media by Western presstitutes who seem to have forgotten that the most famous case of state censorship and oppression of journalism is taking place under their noses and with their full connivance. Julian Assange anyone.
It is a great big elephant in the room with an 800lb gorilla on its back. Those guilty of the persecution of Assange, or of turning a blind eye to it, have zero credibility to lecture about press freedom.
-
A country is heavily dependant on its natural resources? How odd!
Germany and Japan in contrast to Russia have very few natural resources yet much stronger economies.
-
You cited Richard Hall as credible source. That's what I ended up reading :))
Having an interest in UFO's doesn't diminish Richard Hall's credibility as a source regarding the Thomas Mair case.
Your curious neocon sympathies don't diminish your research in the Bamber case. I wouldn't conflate the two, save perhaps, some bias on your part regarding trust in the authorities.
-
You know very little of Russia, Steve, and what little you do know is the repeated talking points of western intelligence agencies through the media. Since the heavy sanctions Russia has become self reliant in many areas, the agriculture especially has grown.
As I have already pointed out, it is not Russia who covets our natural resources. It is the West acting aggressively, not Russia. You are easily led by misinformation via a controlled media.
It is laughable to be told that Russia are killing journalists and censoring media by Western presstitutes who seem to have forgotten that the most famous case of state censorship and oppression of journalism is taking place under their noses and with their full connivance. Julian Assange anyone.
It is a great big elephant in the room with an 800lb gorilla on its back. Those guilty of the persecution of Assange, or of turning a blind eye to it, have zero credibility to lecture about press freedom.
Ah yes. Russia is a safe haven for the likes of Assange.
https://cpj.org/data/killed/europe/russia/?status=Killed&motiveConfirmed%5B%5D=Confirmed&type%5B%5D=Journalist&cc_fips%5B%5D=RS&start_year=1992&end_year=2020&group_by=location (https://cpj.org/data/killed/europe/russia/?status=Killed&motiveConfirmed%5B%5D=Confirmed&type%5B%5D=Journalist&cc_fips%5B%5D=RS&start_year=1992&end_year=2020&group_by=location)
::)
-
You know very little of Russia, Steve, and what little you do know is the repeated talking points of western intelligence agencies through the media. Since the heavy sanctions Russia has become self reliant in many areas, the agriculture especially has grown.
As I have already pointed out, it is not Russia who covets our natural resources. It is the West acting aggressively, not Russia. You are easily led by misinformation via a controlled media.
It is laughable to be told that Russia are killing journalists and censoring media by Western presstitutes who seem to have forgotten that the most famous case of state censorship and oppression of journalism is taking place under their noses and with their full connivance. Julian Assange anyone.
It is a great big elephant in the room with an 800lb gorilla on its back. Those guilty of the persecution of Assange, or of turning a blind eye to it, have zero credibility to lecture about press freedom.
If there had been no invasion of Crimea there would be no need for Western sanctions. Russia is stifling democratic debate and killing (yes killing) its political opponents. https://youtu.be/vM04zNbsaJg
-
Ah yes. Russia is a safe haven for the likes of Assange.
https://cpj.org/data/killed/europe/russia/?status=Killed&motiveConfirmed%5B%5D=Confirmed&type%5B%5D=Journalist&cc_fips%5B%5D=RS&start_year=1992&end_year=2020&group_by=location (https://cpj.org/data/killed/europe/russia/?status=Killed&motiveConfirmed%5B%5D=Confirmed&type%5B%5D=Journalist&cc_fips%5B%5D=RS&start_year=1992&end_year=2020&group_by=location)
::)
Your sarcasm is ill judged. Snowden is safe in Russia. Assange is facing 175 years prison and is subject to torture by the UK govt. according to the UN special rapporteur on torture, Nils Melzer.
The trials and tribulations of the other players in this ongoing assault on freedom of speech, Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden, are well known. You need to worry about your own government before you can criticise others.
The UK along with the usual band of war criminals masquerading as statesmen are a greater danger to world peace than Russia. The aggressions of the West are magnitudes greater than any Russian sins.
-
If there had been no invasion of Crimea there would be no need for Western sanctions. Russia is stifling democratic debate and killing (yes killing) its political opponents. https://youtu.be/vM04zNbsaJg
Do you think the Crimeans want liberating from this so called invasion? They don't, if you are unaware. Why do you think that the Crimean people should be forced to live under another regime? Why are you concerned about who governs the Crimeans? and why would you want them to be ruled by a regime they distrust?
-
Do you think the Crimeans want liberating from this so called invasion? They don't, if you are unaware. Why do you think that the Crimean people should be forced to live under another regime? Why are you concerned about who governs the Crimeans? and why would you want them to be ruled by a regime they distrust?
It was the first change of sovereignty by force in Europe since the Second World War. A terrible precedent to set.
-
Your sarcasm is ill judged. Snowden is safe in Russia. Assange is facing 175 years prison and is subject to torture by the UK govt. according to the UN special rapporteur on torture, Nils Melzer.
The trials and tribulations of the other players in this ongoing assault on freedom of speech, Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden, are well known. You need to worry about your own government before you can criticise others.
How does one "safe" american make up for 57 murdered journalists? ???
Assange is an attention whore. The "psychological torture" is an act. Had he actually answered the charges back in 2013 and (if we assume) found guilty, Obama would have commuted his sentence in 2017 like he did with his co-conspirator Chelsea Manning. Now Chelsea Manning is back in prison for refusing to testify against Assange and Assange more or less imprisioned himself in the Ecuadorian embassy for 7 years. He only has himself to blame really.
Furthermore Chelsea Manning and Assange committed theft and espionage. Freedom of speech does mean freedom to steal nor does it mean freedom to divulge confidential information without permission.
-
It was the first change of sovereignty by force in Europe since the Second World War. A terrible precedent to set.
Is it your belief that the Crimean people should be forced against their will to live under the Ukrainian regime? You don't address the issues. Don't changes of sovereignty by force count if they are not in Europe and haven't you forgotten Yugoslavia? Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya plus the ongoing attempts to destabilise Iran, Venezuela, Russia, China to name but a handful. These don't count because they aren't in Europe?
I don't need to ask why you included such irrelevant and wrong parameters in your non answer. You are way out of your depth on geopolitics as you have demonstrated previously and are limited to repeating things that you have heard via a discredited media and state institutions. Western aggression against other countries is in front of your eyes and you refuse to see it. Russia's actions in the world cannot be credibly criticised by anyone who supports/condones the actions of the UK and its criminal cohorts on the world stage.
-
Lets get back topic.
https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/poisoning-russian-dissidents-200822163134775.html (https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/poisoning-russian-dissidents-200822163134775.html)
-
How does one "safe" american make up for 57 murdered journalists? ???
Assange is an attention whore. The "psychological torture" is an act. Had he actually answered the charges back in 2013 and (if we assume) found guilty, Obama would have commuted his sentence in 2017 like he did with his co-conspirator Chelsea Manning. Now Chelsea Manning is back in prison for refusing to testify against Assange and Assange more or less imprisioned himself in the Ecuadorian embassy for 7 years. He only has himself to blame really.
Furthermore Chelsea Manning and Assange committed theft and espionage. Freedom of speech does mean freedom to steal nor does it mean freedom to divulge confidential information without permission.
You understand nothing about the Assange case as your brief summary demonstrates and are an apologist for war criminals. You also seem to be assuming that murdered journalists happen only in Russia and are all by the Kremlin. You are doing the same as you accuse Adam of. Gish Gallop. A list of journalists is not an argument. Should you wish to discuss some of those cases individually then do so.
In the same time frame, according to your source, 11 were murdered in the US. Accidents, like the one that Michael Hastings died in, are not included. You have no idea how many journalists are killed/silenced by either the Russian government or your own but it would be more honest to be holding your own government to account for reasons too obvious to point out.
-
Russia's actions in the world cannot be credibly criticised by anyone who supports/condones the actions of the UK and its criminal cohorts on the world stage.
'Axis of Evil' USA / Israel / UK - (some people might add Saudi Arabia).
-
Lets get back topic.
https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/poisoning-russian-dissidents-200822163134775.html (https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/poisoning-russian-dissidents-200822163134775.html)
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2020/08/navalny-was-not-poisoned.html#comments
Have a read, particularly the comments and you may learn something. The links between the Hospital involved and the NGO's and a previous supposed poisoning of a Pussy Riot member(an obvious Western intelligence asset) are particularly informative but you will need to read the comments to unearth those links.
-
'Axis of Evil' USA / Israel / UK - (some people might add Saudi Arabia).
And France. The Veto in the UN Security Council makes the governments of these countries particularly attractive to those intent on subjugating the world. The France, UK, US axis is sometimes referred to as FUKUS which is particularly apt. Israel in reality is a giant military base for the Western powers rather than a real nation state and its continued existence as an apartheid state is becoming increasingly untenable.
The tail is now wagging the dog.
-
And France. The Veto in the UN Security Council makes the governments of these countries particularly attractive to those intent on subjugating the world. The France, UK, US axis is sometimes referred to as FUKUS which is particularly apt. Israel in reality is a giant military base for the Western powers rather than a real nation state and its continued existence as an apartheid state is becoming increasingly untenable.
The tail is now wagging the dog.
I'm currently reading an excellent book about 7/7. There seems to be a good few Israeli links regarding that as well.
-
I'm currently reading an excellent book about 7/7. There seems to be a good few Israeli links regarding that as well.
What book are you reading?
Israel has become the tail that wags the dog. Zionism is a racist and criminal enterprise and our government and state institutions as well as France and US are full of fifth columnists who serve other interests. Our free media will never discuss this and any journalist/politician that dares to address this will be, and are, hounded and ruined.
-
You understand nothing about the Assange case as your brief summary demonstrates and are an apologist for war criminals. You also seem to be assuming that murdered journalists happen only in Russia and are all by the Kremlin. You are doing the same as you accuse Adam of. Gish Gallop. A list of journalists is not an argument. Should you wish to discuss some of those cases individually then do so.
In the same time frame, according to your source, 11 were murdered in the US. Accidents, like the one that Michael Hastings died in, are not included. You have no idea how many journalists are killed/silenced by either the Russian government or your own but it would be more honest to be holding your own government to account for reasons too obvious to point out.
Oh.. didn't mean to hit a nerve. My apologies..
-
'Axis of Evil' USA / Israel / UK - (some people might add Saudi Arabia).
Then why do you choose to live here? How does the US attract the largest migrant population on the planet?
Evil places I tell you ::)
-
Oh.. didn't mean to hit a nerve. My apologies..
You haven't hit any nerve. You seem to have hit a wall in putting forward anything credible. Is that comment meant to be a substitute for addressing any of the issues beyond posting a list of dead journalists?
Show me some credible evidence of your allegations/innuendo.
-
Then why do you choose to live here? How does the US attract the largest migrant population on the planet?
Evil places I tell you ::)
I like American people in general. I like UK people in general. But the people of the UK and USA are not in control of their respective governments, security services and media, all of which are mired in filth.
-
Then why do you choose to live here? How does the US attract the largest migrant population on the planet?
Evil places I tell you ::)
Migrants are your guide in measuring whether a country is aggressive on the world stage? What does this demonstrate to you, exactly?
-
You haven't hit any nerve. You seem to have hit a wall in putting forward anything credible. Is that comment meant to be a substitute for addressing any of the issues beyond posting a list of dead journalists?
Show me some credible evidence of your allegations/innuendo.
I am trying to talk about the poisoning of Alexey Navalny. You are the one who has taken this subject somewhere else (whether deliberately or not I do not know)
So, The situation with Alexey Navalny. I haven't pointed the finger at anyone or said anything yet.
You expressed the view its MI5/CIA propaganda. What evidence has brought you to that conclusion?
-
I like American people in general. I like UK people in general. But the people of the UK and USA are not in control of their respective governments, security services and media, all of which are mired in filth.
Agree with all of that.
Migrants want to settle in Western nations for any number of reasons. The perceived economic advantages from a point of view of someone with little to base that on. The cultural domination of the English speaking world plays a huge part in the apparent attractiveness to a migrant. English speaking films, literature and music dominate the cultural space.
This has nothing to do with Western aggression in the world. It seems that more people are waking up to the reality of UK/US et al as aggressive warmongers that the rest of the world needs to face down.
Some will never be able to face the cognitive dissonance of accepting that so much of what they believe is a lie.
Tis truly easier to fool a person than it is to convince them that they have been fooled.
-
I am trying to talk about the poisoning of Alexey Navalny. You are the one who has taken this subject somewhere else (whether deliberately or not I do not know)
So, The situation with Alexey Navalny. I haven't pointed the finger at anyone or said anything yet.
You expressed the view its MI5/CIA propaganda. What evidence has brought you to that conclusion?
Do you believe that the Skripals were poisoned by two GRU agents with Novichok in Salisbury?
This may seem irrelevant to you but I am interested in what you consider relevant evidence where poisoning by the Russian state is alleged. It may also highlight the difference between reporting and truth. Lying by omission etc.
What are your views on the Skripals?
I am happy to discuss the Navalny issue separately but I suspect that you will have your usual blinkers on.
-
Migrants are your guide in measuring whether a country is aggressive on the world stage?
No I was simply pointing out that if a place was an "Axis of evil" it wouldn't attract so many people.
People fled Nazi Germany, people fled the USSR. People flee from Cuba, people flee from North Korea etc etc. Those countries can be considered "evil" to some extent or another. Hence people leave and no one desires to move there. On the contrary North America and Western Europe is a desirable place to live people want to live there.
-
I am trying to talk about the poisoning of Alexey Navalny. You are the one who has taken this subject somewhere else (whether deliberately or not I do not know)
So, The situation with Alexey Navalny. I haven't pointed the finger at anyone or said anything yet.
You expressed the view its MI5/CIA propaganda. What evidence has brought you to that conclusion?
The Charité is a large company that is 100 percent owned by the State of Berlin
https://www.charite.de/die_charite/
Cinema For Peace organised Navalny's 'rescue' and they are also based in Berlin.
https://www.dw.com/en/the-german-ngo-behind-alexei-navalnys-rescue/a-54661016
"The founder of the NGO behind his evacuation, Jaka Bizilj, said private donations had paid for the flight — a Bombardier Challenger chartered by a Nuremberg-based firm — as well as for the medical staff on board.
Bizilj told DW that plans for the evacuation were set in motion on Thursday after members of the Russian punk band Pussy Riot Nadya Tolokonnikova and Pyotr Verzilov appealed to the NGO for help.
"I got a call from Nadia Tolokonnikova from Los Angeles, from Pussy Riot, and from Pyotr from Moscow, asking me if we could help a dear friend, Alexei, who'd got poisoned too," Bizilj told DW in an interview. The foundation had flown Verzilov himself to Berlin in 2018 after he was poisoned and fell ill.
Dizilj stressed that although the governments of Germany's Angela Merkel and France's Emmanuel Macron had been briefed, Navalny's airlift to Berlin had been a "private" activity.
"It was very expensive to do it in at very short notice, but in the end, during the process, without having to think much about it, private persons came forward and took over [costs]," he said, adding that the charter flight would not burden taxpayers."
...............
So - Pussy Riot rings Jaka Bizilj. Magically donors instantly step forward for the cost of a charter plane. The plane is then kitted out with required medical equipment and doctors and is at the Omsk airport at daylight the next day. Navalny is then transported from the military airport to the hospital with a large convoy of military and civilian ambulances and police escort.
What a load of shit.
Same old Same old. Cinema For peace and Charite.
https://www.dw.com/en/pussy-riot-activist-discharged-from-berlin-hospital-after-alleged-poisoning/a-45651878
"A member of Russian protest group Pussy Riot has been released from a German hospital after recovering from a suspected poisoning. The activist says he's "convinced" he was targeted by Russia's secret service.
Pussy Riot activist Pyotr Verzilov was discharged from hospital in Berlin on Wednesday after making progress in his recovery.
"The patient's health has considerably improved," the Charite hospital said in a statement.
Doctors at the facility found no traces of poison in Verzilov's body, but say the "absorption" of a poison was the "most plausible explanation" for his condition."
......................
The above is one of hundreds of comments in the link I gave you earlier. I watched the clip that you posted but you clearly haven't read a word of the link that i gave you.
There are interesting and informed discussions going on if you choose to look. The same players, the same narratives over and over by the Western intelligence agencies.
Do you really not see the ongoing efforts and aggression against Russia and other countries? Are you honestly incapable of detecting the same patterns and players time and again. There is ample evidence, as usual, of Western intelligence agencies controlling the narrative again. You don't want to see it.
-
Do you believe that the Skripals were poisoned by two GRU agents with Novichok in Salisbury?
Yes. Strong circumstantial evidence with no plausible alternative explanation.
I am happy to discuss the Navalny issue separately but I suspect that you will have your usual blinkers on.
OK. You expressed the view its MI5/CIA propaganda. What evidence has brought you to that conclusion?
-
The Charité is a large company that is 100 percent owned by the State of Berlin
https://www.charite.de/die_charite/
Cinema For Peace organised Navalny's 'rescue' and they are also based in Berlin.
https://www.dw.com/en/the-german-ngo-behind-alexei-navalnys-rescue/a-54661016
"The founder of the NGO behind his evacuation, Jaka Bizilj, said private donations had paid for the flight — a Bombardier Challenger chartered by a Nuremberg-based firm — as well as for the medical staff on board.
Bizilj told DW that plans for the evacuation were set in motion on Thursday after members of the Russian punk band Pussy Riot Nadya Tolokonnikova and Pyotr Verzilov appealed to the NGO for help.
"I got a call from Nadia Tolokonnikova from Los Angeles, from Pussy Riot, and from Pyotr from Moscow, asking me if we could help a dear friend, Alexei, who'd got poisoned too," Bizilj told DW in an interview. The foundation had flown Verzilov himself to Berlin in 2018 after he was poisoned and fell ill.
Dizilj stressed that although the governments of Germany's Angela Merkel and France's Emmanuel Macron had been briefed, Navalny's airlift to Berlin had been a "private" activity.
"It was very expensive to do it in at very short notice, but in the end, during the process, without having to think much about it, private persons came forward and took over [costs]," he said, adding that the charter flight would not burden taxpayers."
...............
So - Pussy Riot rings Jaka Bizilj. Magically donors instantly step forward for the cost of a charter plane. The plane is then kitted out with required medical equipment and doctors and is at the Omsk airport at daylight the next day. Navalny is then transported from the military airport to the hospital with a large convoy of military and civilian ambulances and police escort.
What a load of shit.
Same old Same old. Cinema For peace and Charite.
https://www.dw.com/en/pussy-riot-activist-discharged-from-berlin-hospital-after-alleged-poisoning/a-45651878
"A member of Russian protest group Pussy Riot has been released from a German hospital after recovering from a suspected poisoning. The activist says he's "convinced" he was targeted by Russia's secret service.
Pussy Riot activist Pyotr Verzilov was discharged from hospital in Berlin on Wednesday after making progress in his recovery.
"The patient's health has considerably improved," the Charite hospital said in a statement.
Doctors at the facility found no traces of poison in Verzilov's body, but say the "absorption" of a poison was the "most plausible explanation" for his condition."
......................
The above is one of hundreds of comments in the link I gave you earlier. I watched the clip that you posted but you clearly haven't read a word of the link that i gave you.
There are interesting and informed discussions going on if you choose to look. The same players, the same narratives over and over by the Western intelligence agencies.
Do you really not see the ongoing efforts and aggression against Russia and other countries? Are you honestly incapable of detecting the same patterns and players time and again. There is ample evidence, as usual, of Western intelligence agencies controlling the narrative again. You don't want to see it.
So you are saying Russians who dislike Putin fake being poisoned as part of a smear campaign?
-
There are a few untraceable toxins, some of which give off the same symptoms as Verzilov was given.
-
Yes. Strong circumstantial evidence with no plausible alternative explanation.
OK. You expressed the view its MI5/CIA propaganda. What evidence has brought you to that conclusion?
The fact that you believe the Skripal fairy tale and believe there to be no "plausible alternative explanation" and "strong circumstantial evidence" is evidence only of your narrow reading on the subject.
It is way more plausible that Skripal had turned yet again and that the two Russians were involved in some drop or collection with Skripal. This would more sensibly explain why two Russians were "window shopping" in Salisbury in the immediate vicinity of where the Skripals succumbed to whatever substance they were incapacitated with. It is surely not credible that they smeared a deadly nerve agent on a door handle on foreign soil(an act of war, if true) and then went window shopping after this heinous and criminal act. Also this instantaneous deadly nerve agent had no effect for some hours and then both a young woman and an older man succumbed at exactly the same time. It is way more likely that whatever incapacitated the Skripals was applied at the bench they were sitting on.
It may also explain why Pablo Miller, Skripals MI6 handler, is D noticed in connection with this event. Miller also resides in Salisbury and was Skripals recruiter and handler who now works for/with the infamous Christopher Steele at Orbis intelligence( a supposed private agency that is in reality a blatant UK intel asset run by supposed "ex spooks") also "D" noticed by the UK govt.
As for Navalny. The links between the the hospital that he transferred to and previous unfounded allegations of poisoning agaist Russia. The huge coordinated noise via the media before any details are known. Already the narrative is set.
The use of the same old script despite it being discredited time and again. It is why I asked your view on the Skripals. Your no plausible alternative is straight from the desk of GCHQ, your brainwashing is complete.
The media circus around it before facts are known is a dead giveaway that it is an intelligence op. The results of tests will be spun.
Here again, there is a relevancy to the Skripal case. Despite what you believe, Novichok has never been confirmed as used in Salisbury and more to the point, almost certainly wasn't.
The OPCW were asked to confirm that the samples gathered and presented were the same as the UK govt analysis. The UK analysis is confidential. The OPCW confirmed only what the UK asked. What we asked is confidential. A secret. There was no Novichok, it is a UK intel invention against a geoploitical rival.
You believe the Novichok tale because you don't read enough alternative to the mainstream views. It is a fact that the OPCW nor anyone else has shown that Russian agents nor anyone else used Novichok in Salisbury. The UK govt. have claimed this and media outlets have repeated these lies without question but it is a demonstrable and demonstrated lie. You choose to look the other way.
Take careful note of the medical reports that will be released. The Russian doctors are being very open about this and have samples. Russian intel is ahead of them on this latest wheeze. The media circus will write what their masters tell them and spin stories but no poison administered by Russian agents will be found. You will believe the opposite of that.
-
So you are saying Russians who dislike Putin fake being poisoned as part of a smear campaign?
David, this is a pathetic response. The Russians involved are western intelligence agency assets.
Pussy Riot, Navalny et al are fifth columnists. Yes Western Intelligence agencies are faking attacks and incidents to blame on Russia.
Do you imagine that there is no intel coordination on these stories?
Putin, like some comic book villain, plotting poisonings and ways of klling a few irrelevant dissidents?
You are gullible and naive and not well read or informed on world politics. Hence your silly dismissals as above.
-
The fact that you believe the Skripal fairy tale and believe there to be no "plausible alternative explanation" and "strong circumstantial evidence" is evidence only of your narrow reading on the subject.
It is way more plausible that Skripal had turned yet again and that the two Russians were involved in some drop or collection with Skripal. This would more sensibly explain why two Russians were "window shopping" in Salisbury in the immediate vicinity of where the Skripals succumbed to whatever substance they were incapacitated with. It is surely not credible that they smeared a deadly nerve agent on a door handle on foreign soil(an act of war, if true) and then went window shopping after this heinous and criminal act. Also this instantaneous deadly nerve agent had no effect for some hours and then both a young woman and an older man succumbed at exactly the same time. It is way more likely that whatever incapacitated the Skripals was applied at the bench they were sitting on.
It may also explain why Pablo Miller, Skripals MI6 handler, is D noticed in connection with this event. Miller also resides in Salisbury and was Skripals recruiter and handler who now works for/with the infamous Christopher Steele at Orbis intelligence( a supposed private agency that is in reality a blatant UK intel asset run by supposed "ex spooks") also "D" noticed by the UK govt.
As for Navalny. The links between the the hospital that he transferred to and previous unfounded allegations of poisoning agaist Russia. The huge coordinated noise via the media before any details are known. Already the narrative is set.
The use of the same old script despite it being discredited time and again. It is why I asked your view on the Skripals. Your no plausible alternative is straight from the desk of GCHQ, your brainwashing is complete.
The media circus around it before facts are known is a dead giveaway that it is an intelligence op. The results of tests will be spun.
Here again, there is a relevancy to the Skripal case. Despite what you believe, Novichok has never been confirmed as used in Salisbury and more to the point, almost certainly wasn't.
The OPCW were asked to confirm that the samples gathered and presented were the same as the UK govt analysis. The UK analysis is confidential. The OPCW confirmed only what the UK asked. What we asked is confidential. A secret. There was no Novichok, it is a UK intel invention against a geoploitical rival.
You believe the Novichok tale because you don't read enough alternative to the mainstream views. It is a fact that the OPCW nor anyone else has shown that Russian agents nor anyone else used Novichok in Salisbury. The UK govt. have claimed this and media outlets have repeated these lies without question but it is a demonstrable and demonstrated lie. You choose to look the other way.
Take careful note of the medical reports that will be released. The Russian doctors are being very open about this and have samples. Russian intel is ahead of them on this latest wheeze. The media circus will write what their masters tell them and spin stories but no poison administered by Russian agents will be found. You will believe the opposite of that.
-
David, this is a pathetic response. The Russians involved are western intelligence agency assets.
Pussy Riot, Navalny et al are fifth columnists. Yes Western Intelligence agencies are faking attacks and incidents to blame on Russia.
Do you imagine that there is no intel coordination on these stories?
Putin, like some comic book villain, plotting poisonings and ways of klling a few irrelevant dissidents?
You are gullible and naive and not well read or informed on world politics. Hence your silly dismissals as above.
Did Pussy Riot help blow up building 7?
-
Did Pussy Riot help blow up building 7?
David Brent gif and stupid questions. Good debating points.
-
https://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2020/08/poisoned-kremlin-critic-flown-to.html
Some reading for you
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2020/08/the-back-and-forth-about-navalnys-poisoning-.html#more
and a bit more. Inform yourself and you will rise above David Brent gifs and asking stupid misrepresented questions.
-
David Brent gif and stupid questions. Good debating points.
What is there to debate? You are just making up wild conspiracy theories without any primary sources to support what you allege. Expecting people to find Skripals MI6 handler living down the road from him as reasonable grounds for probable cause. Sorry but all that warrants is laughter.
-
David Brent gif and stupid questions. Good debating points.
The gif is removed now.
-
What is there to debate? You are just making up wild conspiracy theories without any primary sources to support what you allege. Expecting people to find Skripals MI6 handler living down the road from him as reasonable grounds for probable cause. Sorry but all that warrants is laughter.
I gave a few of the many reasons to disbelieve the UK gov story on the Skripals. You misrepresent one of those points. Previously you have shown yourself to be ignorant and ill informed on world matters because your reading is limited. You still believe the Iraq invasion to be legal and showed how far out of your depth you were when attempting, poorly, to debate it. This was some years back on this thread. It is obvious that you haven't spent the intervening years attempting to be better read and informed.
-
The gif is removed now.
Could have left it as far as I'm concerned, NGB. It denigrates the poster not the recipient. They are a childish response and speak volumes.
-
I gave a few of the many reasons to disbelieve the UK gov story on the Skripals. You misrepresent one of those points.
No, you concocted a conspiracy theory.
You still believe the Iraq invasion to be legal and showed how far out of your depth you were when attempting, poorly, to debate it.
I don't believe the Iraq Invasion was legal. I know the Iraq invasion was legal. Anyone familiar with the conditional ceasefire that was still in effect (Resolution 687) knows it was legal. You can cite as many intellectually dishonest leftist legal crackpots as you wish its not going to change that.
-
Could have left it as far as I'm concerned, NGB. It denigrates the poster not the recipient. They are a childish response and speak volumes.
I know but they are irritating, particularly when used frequently.
-
I know but they are irritating, particularly when used frequently.
I agree that they are irritating.
-
No, you concocted a conspiracy theory.
I don't believe the Iraq Invasion was legal. I know the Iraq invasion was legal. Anyone familiar with the conditional ceasefire that was still in effect (Resolution 687) knows it was legal. You can cite as many intellectually dishonest leftist legal crackpots as you wish its not going to change that.
Can you cite the OPCW confirming that the Skripals were poisoned with novichok? What did the OPCW state was in the samples taken from the Skripals? Otherwise your novichok tale is a conspiracy theory. No newspaper reports paraphrasing or repeating UK govt. spin. Just direct from the OPCW report. What did the UK govt. ask from the OPCW? Do you know? It is important what they were specifically asked to do. Even the Porton Down scientists don't state novichok as the poison.
I understand your views on the Iraq invasion and you had your arse handed to you because you could find no expert on international law to support your view. You couldn't back your case then as now and calling the experts on international law, ICJ etc. that I cited as "intellectually dishonest leftist legal crackpots" makes you intellectually dishonest.
It is also intellectually dishonest to justify the invasions and wars waged on your behalf by your government and feign concern at the welfare of Russians. There are millions dead and displaced because of actions committed on your behalf using lies as cover. Care about things closer to home that are done in your name. You are just doing as instructed and believe you are free thinking.
I am currently going through, systematically, the list of murdered Russian journalists that you posted. It is fairly obvious that you didn't. It doesn't show what you think it does. Will post results later.
-
Here is another case of poisoning. The guys face was very disfigured. :-\
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0140673609609120?via%3Dihub (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0140673609609120?via%3Dihub)
-
In regards to the Skripal case.
Two agents of the GRU Alexander Mishkin and Anatoliy Chepiga (using false names) purchased their flight tickets on the 1st of March and flew to London the next day (2nd of March). They visited Salisbury twice before leaving on the 4th. According to them, they went to see Salisbury Cathedral.
-
In regards to the Skripal case.
Two agents of the GRU Alexander Mishkin and Anatoliy Chepiga (using false names) purchased their flight tickets on the 1st of March and flew to London the next day (2nd of March). They visited Salisbury twice before leaving on the 4th. According to them, they went to see Salisbury Cathedral.
Alexander Mishkin entered the UK as Alexander Pedrov
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DpE-gFdWwAEwuMt.jpg)
(https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/10/09/world/09skripal1/09skripal1-superJumbo.jpg?quality=90&auto=webp)
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QwbY9O_zMe4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QwbY9O_zMe4)
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QwbY9O_zMe4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QwbY9O_zMe4)
They are not who they claim to be: https://youtu.be/H7g7hPdhagk
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/sep/05/planes-trains-and-fake-names-the-trail-left-by-skripal-suspects
-
What book are you reading?
Israel has become the tail that wags the dog. Zionism is a racist and criminal enterprise and our government and state institutions as well as France and US are full of fifth columnists who serve other interests. Our free media will never discuss this and any journalist/politician that dares to address this will be, and are, hounded and ruined.
.
This one. Slow start but finding it riveting now. About a quarter of the way in. It's about 350 pages.
I never realised another academic, a professor from Sheffield Hallam had carried out an analysis of the events at Canary Wharf that day. Think I'll read that too.
-
Our free media will never discuss this and any journalist/politician that dares to address this will be, and are, hounded and ruined.
I can't stress how relevant and important this point is. Our security services control our media. Whichever story is given to the media, it doesn't matter whether you read The Telegraph or The Guardian. whether you read The Mirror or The Mail, whether you watch C4 News or BBC, they will all parrot what is fed to them. There is no journalism as such. And certainly no investigative journalism. Our media is in thrall to what is fed to them either by security services or quite often by police. The chicken feed, anomalies and false trails that are put out, are not questioned in an objective, examinatory way.
-
They are not who they claim to be: https://youtu.be/H7g7hPdhagk
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/sep/05/planes-trains-and-fake-names-the-trail-left-by-skripal-suspects
Yes I know. I stated that already
-
They are not who they claim to be: https://youtu.be/H7g7hPdhagk
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/sep/05/planes-trains-and-fake-names-the-trail-left-by-skripal-suspects
I don't doubt this. I don't think many do. It is however an enormous leap from there to GRU assassins. https://www.theblogmire.com/the-salisbury-poisonings-two-years-on-a-riddle-wrapped-in-a-cover-up-inside-a-hoax/
A more in depth view if you interested in truth rather than intel agency propaganda. From Salisbury resident and blogger Rob Slane. He covered it extensively at time and the archive at the Blogmire is probably the most extensive coverage available of the contradictions and lies of the official account.
Probably a waste of time for you and David, though.
It would be like reading Dickens books to my dog.
-
Probably a waste of time for you and David, though.
It would be like reading Dickens books to my dog.
[Apply David Brent GIF here]
Speaking of Dickens characters...
-
The proof is more or less in the pudding. Both men are on Russian TV using their false names and claiming to be in the “fitness industry”. When they are in fact in the Russian military intelligence service. One is actually decorated with honours.
(https://www.bellingcat.com/app/uploads/2018/10/comparison.png)
His name is even engraved on this military monument. For the medal he has received.
(https://www.bellingcat.com/app/uploads/2018/09/monument.png)
-
The proof is more or less in the pudding. Both men are on Russian TV using their false names and claiming to be in the “fitness industry”. When they are in fact in the Russian military intelligence service. One is actually decorated with honours.
(https://www.bellingcat.com/app/uploads/2018/10/comparison.png)
His name is even engraved on this military monument. For the medal he has received.
(https://www.bellingcat.com/app/uploads/2018/09/monument.png)
My guess is that they were unwittingly snared in a sting, oversaw by British intelligence, for the purpose of 'Russia-phobia'. They came for one reason but ended up as patsies for another reason.
It's intrigue and counter intrigue. You will never fully get to the bottom of it, precisely because you're not meant to.
-
My guess is that they were unwittingly snared in a sting, oversaw by British intelligence, for the purpose of 'Russia-phobia'. They came for one reason but ended up as patsies for another reason.
It's intrigue and counter intrigue. You will never fully get to the bottom of it, precisely because you're not meant to.
lol 😂
-
lol 😂
'Russia-phobia' alongside 'war on terror' has been deployed as a mass consumption reson d'etre for our security services.
Meanwhile, it turns out we're the real 'interferers' and terrorists.
I find it all embarrassing. British spooks playing at 1970's Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, for no real reason.
-
'Russia-phobia' alongside 'war on terror' has been deployed as a mass consumption reson d'etre for our security services.
Meanwhile, it turns out we're the real 'interferers' and terrorists.
I find it all embarrassing. British spooks playing at 1970's Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, for no real reason.
No, the GRU simply wanted to punish a traitor and make an example of him. Russians are very patriotic and don't take treason lightly.
Alexander Litvinenko was making the most outrageous claims. He was publicly accusing Putin and his former allegiances of being responsible for the Russian apartment bombings, the Beslan school siege and The Moscow theater hostage crisis (all of which was perpetrated by Chechen separatists). Nobody deserves to die that way, but he more or less dug his own grave. If someone went around falsely accusing me of mass murdering my own people, including school kids, I would be pretty pissed to.
-
No, the GRU simply wanted to punish a traitor and make an example of him. Russians are very patriotic and don't take treason lightly.
Alexander Litvinenko was making the most outrageous claims. He was publicly accusing Putin and his former allegiances of being responsible for the Russian apartment bombings, the Beslan school siege and The Moscow theater hostage crisis (all of which was perpetrated by Chechen separatists). Nobody deserves to die that way, but he more or less dug his own grave. If someone went around falsely accusing me of mass murdering my own people, including school kids, I would be pretty pissed to.
https://streamable.com/1z2z2c (https://streamable.com/1z2z2c)
-
My guess is that they were unwittingly snared in a sting, oversaw by British intelligence, for the purpose of 'Russia-phobia'. They came for one reason but ended up as patsies for another reason.
It's intrigue and counter intrigue. You will never fully get to the bottom of it, precisely because you're not meant to.
Pretty fairly sums it up. There are hints as to their real purpose that day, and many plausible theories. The least plausible, in fact impossible, scenario is the incoherent drivel served up by the UK govt.
I suspect that Skripal had turned again and wanted to return to Russia. Given his service for the UK intelligence agencies there would be a price to pay for his return which more readily explains the presence of the two Russians.
It also helps to explain the changing timelines and confusion over where DS Bailey was supposedly poisoned. The D notice that was issued by the UK govt. immediately on Pablo Miller and Christopher Steele also hints at motivation. Steele is the author of the infamous "Russiagate" dossier. Miller is the original recruiter and handler of Skripal when UK intel first turned him. The UK govt. immediately banned mention of either of these two in connection with the case.
Skripal knows things about UK intel and their motivation from preventing his return is self evident. Where is he now? Where is Julia who is publically accused of nothing?
Do you remember the sneaked phone call to her cousin? I think a sympathetic nurse or hospital worker had let Julia use her phone. She stated to Victoria that she wanted to return to Russia and that she and her father were ok. Once the recorded call was out there then UK intel could not claim that they were still in coma or whatever. No consular access, no proof of life of either Sergei or Julia, no contact with the family in Russia despite Sergei's mother being 91 and hasn't heard from either since. Previously Sergei called his mother every week.
The UK govt. need to prove that Sergei and Julia are alive and able to exercise free will. Pictures of a couple of Russians and impossible claims of nerve agent attacks are not sufficient.
It is the UK gov who have questions to answer, not Russia.
-
https://streamable.com/1z2z2c (https://streamable.com/1z2z2c)
On the day of the poisoning (https://www.opcw.org/media-centre/featured-topics/incident-salisbury), GRU agents Chepiga and Mishkin (impersonating themselves tourists Boshirov and Petrov) Checked out of Salisbury Station at 11:48AM they then returned to Salisbury Station at 1:50PM. They were then at Heathrow at 7:30PM later that evening waiting for a flight back to Moscow.
A bizarre holiday indeed. Not that it will stop some indulging in their conspiratorial fantasies. Where the standard of evidence for Russia's culpability is set so high it is impossible to convince them otherwise, whereas immaterial neither here nor there will suffice their conspiracy theories. If two members of the CIA were posing as tourists under false names with the same abnormal traveling schedule that day, Roch and Gringo would likely cream their pants, and we wouldn't hear the end of it.
-
Viktor Yushchenko: Ukraine's ex-president on being poisoned (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-europe-43611547)
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Q_uKCEj2Xk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Q_uKCEj2Xk)
-
Here is a bit of an article I have read from "The echo of Moscow". I put the text through google translate.
"A certain cholinesterase inhibitor was used against Navalny. In general, this is a fairly wide range of substances, including the aforementioned sarin, soman, V-gases, "newbie". All these are phosphorus-organic substances. In addition to carbon, oxygen, hydrogen and phosphorus, sarin and soman also contain fluorine, V-gases contain nitrogen, and the “novice” (substance A-232) contains both fluorine and nitrogen. But the point is, of course, not in the elemental composition, but in the structure of these organic substances, which can be determined using mass spectrometry with chromatography - a very sensitive method. Some substances of this class can be made unstable so that they decompose in air and in the human body. For example, soman is hydrolyzed and decomposed by 50% in a neutral environment in 41 hours. Modern toxic substances (OM) of this class can decompose much faster."
"Ours will never, under any circumstances, admit involvement in the poisoning of Navalny, if only because it means that Russia is violating the Chemical Weapons Convention, which is already very serious. (The production of polonium-210, for example, is not prohibited.) Reference to possible private individuals does not save: this means that in our country access to such substances is not controlled. Russia should have already destroyed ALL of their stocks in 2017."
-
Here is a bit of an article I have read from "The echo of Moscow". I put the text through google translate.
"A certain cholinesterase inhibitor was used against Navalny. In general, this is a fairly wide range of substances, including the aforementioned sarin, soman, V-gases, "newbie". All these are phosphorus-organic substances. In addition to carbon, oxygen, hydrogen and phosphorus, sarin and soman also contain fluorine, V-gases contain nitrogen, and the “novice” (substance A-232) contains both fluorine and nitrogen. But the point is, of course, not in the elemental composition, but in the structure of these organic substances, which can be determined using mass spectrometry with chromatography - a very sensitive method. Some substances of this class can be made unstable so that they decompose in air and in the human body. For example, soman is hydrolyzed and decomposed by 50% in a neutral environment in 41 hours. Modern toxic substances (OM) of this class can decompose much faster."
"Ours will never, under any circumstances, admit involvement in the poisoning of Navalny, if only because it means that Russia is violating the Chemical Weapons Convention, which is already very serious. (The production of polonium-210, for example, is not prohibited.) Reference to possible private individuals does not save: this means that in our country access to such substances is not controlled. Russia should have already destroyed ALL of their stocks in 2017."
This has confirmed my worst suspicions.
-
This has confirmed my worst suspicions.
What is your worst suspicion?
-
Alexei Navalny poisoned with novichok, says German government
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/02/alexei-navalny-poisoned-with-novichok-says-german-government-russia (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/02/alexei-navalny-poisoned-with-novichok-says-german-government-russia)
-
What is your worst suspicion?
..that Putin's henchmen are engineering lifetime tenure for him on the same model as the Chinese Communist Party.
-
..that Putin's henchmen are engineering lifetime tenure for him on the same model as the Chinese Communist Party.
It’s difficult to argue that he is not the man for the job.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/04/GDP_of_Russia_since_1989.svg/350px-GDP_of_Russia_since_1989.svg.png)
-
I don't know why anybody is surprised about the different facets of contemporary life in Russia: https://youtu.be/2AocEgKx9eU
-
Trump refuses to condemn Russia over poisoning.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-54039710 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-54039710)
-
Trump refuses to condemn Russia over poisoning.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-54039710 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-54039710)
I wonder why that is ? I know he seems to blame China for everything else--------
-
I wonder why that is ? I know he seems to blame China for everything else--------
Trump and Putin are on very good terms. And no doubt Trump is hoping Putin will help him get re-elected.
-
In the dying days of US/UK/NATO hegemony the Western intelligence agencies are floundering from one pathetic false flag provocation to the next and their moves are becoming increasingly desperate.
Stymied at every turn in their attempt to steal Iran's oil and gas, Russia's oil, gas, gold and other vast mineral wealth, likewise Venezuela the outlaw empire is gradually being brought down.
Those countries in the cross hairs of Empire have created an effective alliance against the war criminals in control of Western Governments and any attack on any of those countries is effectively stymied.
Novichock is an invention of Western intelligence agencies and anyone still buying into this nonsense is a strawberry short of a punnet. Putin and the Russian government have successfully negated Western aggression and sanctions to become stronger. NATO in their hubris have driven China, Russia together and are now outgunned and out teched. The dream/nightmare of the New American Century is finished and a multipolar world is taking shape with the Outlaw Empire powerless to prevent it.
Everything else is just noise.
-
Novichock is an invention of Western intelligence agencies
What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
-
What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
There is no evidence presented of Novichok use by anyone. Read the OPCW reports. There are only assertions by Western politicians and media outlets telling you that there is evidence. None has been presented. The allegations have changed on each occasion, multiple times in laughable ways. The World's deadliest nerve agent has yet to kill anyone or have any evidence presented as to it's use. Groundless accusations from compromised Western politicians and media whores are not evidence.
It is worth noting that those making the accusations have form for false allegations of Chemical weapons use. The OPCW whistle blowers of the Douma incident in Syria blew the lid on this particular scam to anyone who really follows geopolitics and is widely read enough to know. Ian Henderson was one of the whistle blowers. Look him up and take it from there. You may learn something if you are genuinely interested in truth rather than just cheerleading for your side, right or wrong.
If you bother to find out about Ian Henderson and the rest of the OPCW whistle blowers then you should also learn about the White Helmets, the so called civil defence organisation. Bizarrely for a civil defence org. they were founded by a British intelligence officer( James le Mesurier) in Turkey and operated only in jihadi held areas of Syria. They filmed the supposed chemical attacks of the Syrian Army. They were funded by the UK govt., amongst others, and were allowed to operate by the jihadis(Al Qaida/Al Nusra/ISIS despite the Red Crescent volunteers being killed and run out of those areas. The Red Crescent are the Islamic equivalent of the Red Cross and affiliated with the Red Cross.
If this doesn't tell you who the White Helmets are then you don't want to know. Vanessa Beeley and Eva Bartlett have done lots of excellent reporting from Syria about these Western sponsored propagandists and agent provocateurs, as have many others. James Le Mesurier their UK intelligence agent founder died in very mysterious circumstances in November last year in Turkey. Allegations of fraud surfacing against him as well as the whole WH scam becoming increasingly transparent, and the whole affair reflects very badly on the UK gov., which is why you won't read or hear much about it from the UK media. This is what the UK government are spending our money on in their failing attempts to overthrow foreign governments.
None of these allegations of chemical weapon use have come with any verifiable or credible evidence. The common theme seems to be the UK gov making allegations against enemies, all with the same script and always without evidence, just assertions. Either all of the UK enemies, but nobody else, uses chem weapons or the UK gov just use this as a lazy accusation against all enemies. UK gov are not credible
This is just the noise I was referring to earlier. UK/US and the rest of the Israeli stooges in NATO have lost. Syria, Iran, Venezuela have successfully resisted, with Russian/Chinese assistance, the attempt by the Outlaw US/UK led alliance to subjugate their countries and steal their resource and mineral wealth.
Consider this.
All of the countries that the UK and the US, along with their band of outlaw states, are threatening are not attempting to invade or overthrow our governments. The weapons developed by these countries demonstrate their intent. The US/UK alliance develop and produce weapons and spend their "defence budget"(Orwellian or what?) on things and in ways that are designed to invade and subjugate countries. Fleets of Aircraft Carriers, overseas bases, supposed Freedom of Navigation patrols, arming Saudi Arabia and complicity in their crimes in Yemen, Arming and funding jihadists in Syria, Libya etc.
On the other hand, those countries being threatened, develop weapons and spend their defence budgets to actually defend their own country. The weapons they design and now deploy are to counter and nullify our offensive weapons. Missile tech has literally changed the rules of war. The head of the Revolutionary Guard air force summed it up neatly when he said that Iran used to see a US Carrier in the Gulf as a threat, now they see it as a target.
We need to get checkmate with our aggressive strategy. Those defending only require a stalemate.
The game is up for the West and their sponsors. All of the countries in the crosshairs can exact far too high a price for any aggressive move. A $6 billion Carrier with it's thousands of crew, hundreds of planes and missiles is negated by a 5,000 dollar missile. No more shock and awe to prepare for invasion by sailing an Aircraft Carrier group within striking distance of the Target nation. Their sponsored jihadis are not cohesive enough to beat effective well trained armies. The sanctions and economic warfare are the final moves of an empire with no good moves left.
Do you listen to Mike Pompeo and still truly believe that you are on the right side?
I said years ago, on this thread. We are the Nazis now.
-
There is no evidence presented of Novichok use by anyone. Read the OPCW reports. There are only assertions by Western politicians and media outlets telling you that there is evidence. None has been presented. The allegations have changed on each occasion, multiple times in laughable ways. The World's deadliest nerve agent has yet to kill anyone or have any evidence presented as to it's use. Groundless accusations from compromised Western politicians and media whores are not evidence.
It is worth noting that those making the accusations have form for false allegations of Chemical weapons use. The OPCW whistle blowers of the Douma incident in Syria blew the lid on this particular scam to anyone who really follows geopolitics and is widely read enough to know. Ian Henderson was one of the whistle blowers. Look him up and take it from there. You may learn something if you are genuinely interested in truth rather than just cheerleading for your side, right or wrong.
If you bother to find out about Ian Henderson and the rest of the OPCW whistle blowers then you should also learn about the White Helmets, the so called civil defence organisation. Bizarrely for a civil defence org. they were founded by a British intelligence officer( James le Mesurier) in Turkey and operated only in jihadi held areas of Syria. They filmed the supposed chemical attacks of the Syrian Army. They were funded by the UK govt., amongst others, and were allowed to operate by the jihadis(Al Qaida/Al Nusra/ISIS despite the Red Crescent volunteers being killed and run out of those areas. The Red Crescent are the Islamic equivalent of the Red Cross and affiliated with the Red Cross.
If this doesn't tell you who the White Helmets are then you don't want to know. Vanessa Beeley and Eva Bartlett have done lots of excellent reporting from Syria about these Western sponsored propagandists and agent provocateurs, as have many others. James Le Mesurier their UK intelligence agent founder died in very mysterious circumstances in November last year in Turkey. Allegations of fraud surfacing against him as well as the whole WH scam becoming increasingly transparent, and the whole affair reflects very badly on the UK gov., which is why you won't read or hear much about it from the UK media. This is what the UK government are spending our money on in their failing attempts to overthrow foreign governments.
None of these allegations of chemical weapon use have come with any verifiable or credible evidence. The common theme seems to be the UK gov making allegations against enemies, all with the same script and always without evidence, just assertions. Either all of the UK enemies, but nobody else, uses chem weapons or the UK gov just use this as a lazy accusation against all enemies. UK gov are not credible
This is just the noise I was referring to earlier. UK/US and the rest of the Israeli stooges in NATO have lost. Syria, Iran, Venezuela have successfully resisted, with Russian/Chinese assistance, the attempt by the Outlaw US/UK led alliance to subjugate their countries and steal their resource and mineral wealth.
Consider this.
All of the countries that the UK and the US, along with their band of outlaw states, are threatening are not attempting to invade or overthrow our governments. The weapons developed by these countries demonstrate their intent. The US/UK alliance develop and produce weapons and spend their "defence budget"(Orwellian or what?) on things and in ways that are designed to invade and subjugate countries. Fleets of Aircraft Carriers, overseas bases, supposed Freedom of Navigation patrols, arming Saudi Arabia and complicity in their crimes in Yemen, Arming and funding jihadists in Syria, Libya etc.
On the other hand, those countries being threatened, develop weapons and spend their defence budgets to actually defend their own country. The weapons they design and now deploy are to counter and nullify our offensive weapons. Missile tech has literally changed the rules of war. The head of the Revolutionary Guard air force summed it up neatly when he said that Iran used to see a US Carrier in the Gulf as a threat, now they see it as a target.
We need to get checkmate with our aggressive strategy. Those defending only require a stalemate.
The game is up for the West and their sponsors. All of the countries in the crosshairs can exact far too high a price for any aggressive move. A $6 billion Carrier with it's thousands of crew, hundreds of planes and missiles is negated by a 5,000 dollar missile. No more shock and awe to prepare for invasion by sailing an Aircraft Carrier group within striking distance of the Target nation. Their sponsored jihadis are not cohesive enough to beat effective well trained armies. The sanctions and economic warfare are the final moves of an empire with no good moves left.
Do you listen to Mike Pompeo and still truly believe that you are on the right side?
I said years ago, on this thread. We are the Nazis now.
So you have no evidence that Novichok was invented by western intelligence. Thought so.
-
Western intelligence nor anybody else has produced evidence of Novichok use by anyone anywhere. What were you saying about assertions? That is all we have and until you can point me to evidence of Novichok use, it didn't happen. The onus is on you to show Novichok was used not on me to prove it wasn't.
It is an obvious distraction from the rest of the failure of UK/US to subdue and subjugate Russia.
Did you bother to find out about Ian Henderson and the rest of the OPCW whistle blowers? The accusers, as I have said, have form for these type of accusations asserted without evidence. Given your supposed approach to accusations presented without evidence, I am surprised that you haven't dismissed the UK gov allegations, asserted as they are without evidence.
-
How many times do you think the OPCW have referred to Novichok use by Russia in the "investigations" into Novichok use by Russia? Have you read the report? (the answer is zero mentions in case you were curious)
Despite what you believe, beyond groundless and evidence free accusations, there is zero evidence of Novichok use. The ball is in your court to produce some.
-
From Russian chemist Vil Sultanovich Mirzayanov
"For a long time Russia simply reproduced the chemical weapons of Western countries; however, in the beginning of the 1970s Russian scientist Petr Kirpichev and his team created a new class of chemical agents which are many times more lethal than anything known up to this time. Moreover, the chemical agent known to us as A-232 was not a traditional phosphoorganic nerve agent of known structure. For that purpose, GOSNIIOKhT expressly synthesized a pesticide with an analogous structure. This opened up the possibility of using agricultural chemicals as components of binary weapons. Russia profited from this deception and set traps during the time of negotiations of the Convention on the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (CWC), especially in connection with the advancement of their binary weapons program. When two relatively harmless components react with each other during the flight of a rocket and produce a deadly chemical agent, the binary weapon eliminates most of the expense and danger of the production and storage of chemical agents. It also makes them extremely difficult to monitor and control.
Even when the CWC was being negotiated, Russia secretly and persistently pressed forward with its program of development and testing of the new class of binary chemical agents under the code name Novichok, which means “newcomer” in Russian. According to the Wyoming Accord, both the United States and Russia were required to declare their stores of chemical weapons, but Russia lied about the quantity stockpiled and has never acknowledged the Novichok program to this day. As a scientist and as a human being, I went through a long soul searching process and came to the heart wrenching realization that not only were chemical weapons useless for the country’s defense, but their main purpose is the mass slaughter of civilians. I could not bear to continue to participate in the deception of the world community by Russia’s ruling class. They just wanted to exploit the loopholes written into the CWC in order to destroy their old and useless chemical weapons, while trying to keep the development and stockpiling of new deadly binary weapons a secret."
-
https://fas.org/nuke/guide/russia/cbw/jptac008_l94001.htm (https://fas.org/nuke/guide/russia/cbw/jptac008_l94001.htm)
-
https://www.bellingcat.com/news/mena/2020/01/17/the-opcw-douma-leaks-part-2-we-need-to-talk-about-henderson/ (https://www.bellingcat.com/news/mena/2020/01/17/the-opcw-douma-leaks-part-2-we-need-to-talk-about-henderson/)
-
From Russian chemist Vil Sultanovich Mirzayanov
"From 1971 to 1973, Petr Kirpichev, a senior scientist from the Shikhany branch of GOSNIIOKhT, and his assistants developed a new class of chemical agents which later became known as Novichok agents, and all problems connected with them received this codename. The word “Novichok” translates as “newcomer”. At first, Substance A-230 was synthesized and tested, which stands for
F
/
CH3-P=O
\
N=C(CH3)-N(C2H5)2
or N-2-diethylaminomethylacetoamidido-methylphosphonofluoridate (Codename A-230 or Substance 84). For the first time, the acetoamydin-radical (C2H5)2N-C(CH3)=N- (creating P-N–bound) was introduced into the molecular skeleton of sarin or soman, instead of the O-alkyl radical. This was fantastic from standpoint of military chemists, because the toxicity of the new substance was up to 5-8 times higher than was the toxicity of Substance 33. The result depended on whether the skin-resorptive or the intravenous test was used. According to senior engineer Vladimir Uglev, who was the assistant of Kirpichev, the long time military chemists in Military Unit 61469 didn’t believe it. They only started to take this agent more seriously when they conducted their own laboratory tests with animals. Old jealousies didn’t allow them to recognize the importance of this discovery. However, Director Ivan Martynov immediately sensed the perspectives of this agent and took measures to support Kirpichev’s work, showing his personal interest. With his persistency he prompted the Central Committee of CPSU to take a decision to promote such agents.
This work was granted top priority and a few people were given clearance to become familiarized with it. This of course didn’t stop the military specialists from trying in every possible way to compromise it or break it. Things became more complicated in the winter of 1977 when they found that this agent was crystallizing in containers at temperatures below -10 Celsius. The problem was solved by adding some N,N-dimethylformamid to the pure agent. Even though this agent was diluted a bit by this solvent, its toxicity was extremely high, and GOSNIIOKhT tried to push it through the standard military field tests, with the goals of developing the technology of its production and getting it formally accepted as a chemical agent of Soviet Army. Petr Kirpichev’s group then synthesized and tested analogs of agent A-230
F
/
CH3O-P=O Agent A-232
\
N=C(CH3)-N(C2H5)2
F
/
C2H5O-P=O Agent A-234
\
N=C(CH3)-N(C2H5)2
The agent A-232 has the same toxicity as Substance 33, though it is much more volatile than Substance 33 and agent A-230. Its stability against moisture is lower than both these agents. Kirpichev synthesized and tested the ethoxy-analog of agent A-234 and ultra highly toxic solid derivatives of agent A-230 and A-232 where the amidin radical was replaced by a guanidine radical. Their codenames are A-242 and A-262, respectively:"
-
Well done for proving my point. Where is the evidence of Novichok use? You haven't posted any because there is none. You have posted stuff from the 1970's and Bellingcat(f=#?ing Bellingcat) but not what should be simple. Evidence of Novichok use.
You cannot even point to it's mention by the OPCW, as I knew you couldn't, and everything that you posted is an admission of, whilst simultaneously acting as a distraction from, the fact that there is no evidence; just assertions. These assertions can be dismissed on those grounds that you have previously identified, so you are correct about something.
Bellingcat's report on Ian Henderson has already been debunked and you really expose that your geopolitical knowledge amounts to a quick google search. If you followed and understood events in real time then you would know that Ian Henderson was in fact on the FFM team and that he has since been joined by other whistle blowers. Jose Bustani has also supported and joined them. Bustani is the former head of the OPCW forced from his post by John Bolton, former US National Security advisor but more widely known as a war criminal. Look that up and it may open your eyes to Western government interference in and corruption of bodies like the OPCW. You choose not to see the truth, David, because it is uncomfortable and you prefer comforting lies.
There is plenty of in depth reportage of the OPCW Douma scandal and that you chose MI6 front and former underwear salesman Eliot Higgins(aka Bellingcat) is telling. Higgins is an embarrassment and his "investigations" always, by massive coincidence, support the UK gov narrative. If you knew anything about world politics and followed these events actively then you would be embarrassed to quote Higgins.
If you were knowledgeable about any of this, David, then you would discuss rather than post links to information that doesn't have even a tenuous connection with events.
Can you post a link to the OPCW or even the Porton Down scientists claiming Novichok use?
No distractions or irrelevant essays talking of testing 50 years ago. No idiotic Bellingcat propaganda thinly disguised as investigations.
Can you link or quote an official finding of Novicho use?
-
Well done for proving my point.
What point? You claimed Novitchok was invented by western intelligence. That drivel of yours is now up in smoke. I already demonstrated how Novichok was used in Salisbury, You only need to go several pages back on this thread.
-
“Federal Republic of Germany confirm that the biomarkers of the cholinesterase inhibitor found in Mr Navalny’s blood and urine samples have similar structural characteristics as the toxic chemicals belonging to schedules 1.A.14 and 1.A.15 “
https://www.opcw.org/media-centre/news/2020/10/opcw-issues-report-technical-assistance-requested-germany (https://www.opcw.org/media-centre/news/2020/10/opcw-issues-report-technical-assistance-requested-germany)
https://www.opcw.org/sites/default/files/documents/2019/12/s-1820-2019%28e%29.pdf (https://www.opcw.org/sites/default/files/documents/2019/12/s-1820-2019%28e%29.pdf)
1.A.15 is Methyl-(bis(diethylamino)methylene)phosphonamidofluoridate which is a Novichok type agent.
The reports list the actual chemical nomenclature name for the Novichok agent. It seems gringo made a rush to judgment. Specifics are very important, It would very unprofessional to use an umbrella term like Novichok that applies to a family of agents. Absence of the term Novichok seems to be foundation of another one of gringos conspiracy theories which is now also up in smoke.
-
Well done for proving my point. Where is the evidence of Novichok use? You haven't posted any because there is none. You have posted stuff from the 1970's and Bellingcat(f=#?ing Bellingcat) but not what should be simple. Evidence of Novichok use.
You cannot even point to it's mention by the OPCW, as I knew you couldn't, and everything that you posted is an admission of, whilst simultaneously acting as a distraction from, the fact that there is no evidence; just assertions. These assertions can be dismissed on those grounds that you have previously identified, so you are correct about something.
Bellingcat's report on Ian Henderson has already been debunked and you really expose that your geopolitical knowledge amounts to a quick google search. If you followed and understood events in real time then you would know that Ian Henderson was in fact on the FFM team and that he has since been joined by other whistle blowers. Jose Bustani has also supported and joined them. Bustani is the former head of the OPCW forced from his post by John Bolton, former US National Security advisor but more widely known as a war criminal. Look that up and it may open your eyes to Western government interference in and corruption of bodies like the OPCW. You choose not to see the truth, David, because it is uncomfortable and you prefer comforting lies.
There is plenty of in depth reportage of the OPCW Douma scandal and that you chose MI6 front and former underwear salesman Eliot Higgins(aka Bellingcat) is telling. Higgins is an embarrassment and his "investigations" always, by massive coincidence, support the UK gov narrative. If you knew anything about world politics and followed these events actively then you would be embarrassed to quote Higgins.
If you were knowledgeable about any of this, David, then you would discuss rather than post links to information that doesn't have even a tenuous connection with events.
Can you post a link to the OPCW or even the Porton Down scientists claiming Novichok use?
No distractions or irrelevant essays talking of testing 50 years ago. No idiotic Bellingcat propaganda thinly disguised as investigations.
Can you link or quote an official finding of Novicho use?
I'm sick of your "I know something that you don't know" approach. Nobody but a fool believes Russia had nothing to do with the Skripals or the Navalny poisonings. Just because Porton Down scientists cannot definitively trace the nerve agent back to a Russian laboratory does not preclude the strong probability that it emanated from Russia. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-43377698
-
I'm sick of your "I know something that you don't know" approach. Nobody but a fool believes Russia had nothing to do with the Skripals or the Navalny poisonings. Just because Porton Down scientists cannot definitively trace the nerve agent back to a Russian laboratory does not preclude the strong probability that it emanated from Russia. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-43377698
Gringo has made an idiot of himself here. He seems to have assumed that Novichok is a single specific agent and thus should be mentioned as such by the OPCW. When in reality Novichok is an umbrella term for a whole family of 3rd generation agents produced in the USSR and the Russian federation.
What Gringo has failed to realise is that OPCW has stated Navalny was poisoned with - Methyl(bis(diethylamino)methylene)phosphonamidofluoridate. That substance is a Novichok type agent. ::)
-
What point? You claimed Novitchok was invented by western intelligence. That drivel of yours is now up in smoke. I already demonstrated how Novichok was used in Salisbury, You only need to go several pages back on this thread.
The point that the whole Novichok narrative is an invention of Western intelligence is demonstrated by your inability to post any evidence of it's use by Russia from the OPCW or Porton Down or any other source. It is well known how and when Novichok was developed and where. This is not at issue. Perhaps my wording could have been clearer but it is obvious what I was referring to.
You haven't demonstrated how Novichok was used in Salisbury for the simple reason that it wasn't and there is no official statement or evidence to back up your claim.
There is plenty of in depth discussion and analysis of the ever evolving and increasingly farcical UK govt. propaganda on this. A good starting point is here;
https://www.theblogmire.com/category/skripal-case/
where blogger and Salisbury resident Rob Slane followed and dissected events from the beginning. A lot of in depth reading if you want to get to the bottom of the Salisbury incident and read the blog from the start you will see the inconsistencies in the official account. There are many places where the incident is discussed intelligently, but you just read those sites that appear to confirm your initial knee jerk conclusions.
Your view of the world is narrow and refuses to accommodate any information which challenges this. The UK/US and their vassals are not the benign forces that you believe. They are currently aggressively attacking, threatening and sanctioning any country that refuses to bow to their supremacy. The Novichok scam is part of that policy attempting to isolate and side-line Russia. If you cannot see Western aggression in the world then you are deliberately looking the other way.
The rest of the World is consistent in agreeing in surveys that the US is the biggest threat to World peace. Not Russia or China or Iran or whoever the warmongers latest bogey man is. The US. It shames us as a country to be allied with and run by the war criminals currently rampaging their way around the world.
Russia, China, Iran, Venezuela, Syria and others are are successfully resisting the hegemon and all of these allegations by Western intelligence (Iran sponsoring terrorism, Russia poisoning with Novichok, Assad chemical weapon attacks)are inventions by the same people who brought you the Iraqi's throwing babies from incubators(Gulf War 1), Saddam's WMD(Gulf War 2), Qhaddafi slaughtering his own citizens(Libya) and on and on.
You are still falling for the same lies from the same liars in order to gain your support for the latest war of aggression. Be more sceptical, David.
-
Gringo has made an idiot of himself here. He seems to have assumed that Novichok is a single specific agent and thus should be mentioned as such by the OPCW. When in reality Novichok is an umbrella term for a whole family of 3rd generation agents produced in the USSR and the Russian federation.
What Gringo has failed to realise is that OPCW has stated Navalny was poisoned with - Methyl(bis(diethylamino)methylene)phosphonamidofluoridate. That substance is a Novichok type agent. ::)
I am fully aware of what Novichok is. A family of organophosphate nerve agents. The OPCW have not stated Novichok use by Russia.
The OPCW were only asked to confirm Porton Down findings rather than conducting a full FFM (fact finding mission where they would collect samples with full chain of evidence custody). The agents that they were confirming are confidential at the UK's behest.
The agent that was detected in Navalny was not a Novichok. If it were he would be dead, as would the Skripals and many others who came into contact.
Novichok type agent is a not very subtle way of saying it wasn't a novichok. Novichok type agent doesn't inform or mean anything concrete. That is why that form of words is used by others reporting official findings.
Novichok isn't mentioned by the OPCW because it wasn't used.
You still believe the WMD lie so it is hardly surprising that you also believe this lie, coincidentally told by the same people.
-
Distractions aside, it is becoming clear that the West, led by US/UK/Israel are losing in their attempt at World domination to a collective and collaborative response by those threatened nations and are powerless to intervene militarily.
The murder of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani and the Iranian response demonstrated the impotence of the Outlaw Empire to achieve their goals of regime change via military means. To recap General Soleimani was assassinated in January of this year by the US in Iraq whilst visiting at the request of the Iraqi prime minister. Not in a war zone or on a battlefield but on a diplomatic mission. The American attack was not only criminal but also cowardly. Also killed in this missile attack was Abu Muhandis an Iraqi and commander of the PMF militia officially part of the Iraqi military.
Iran's response was measured and game changing. Their missile attack on US Iraqi bases was deadly accurate and demonstrated that Iranian missile technology was able to accurately target within a few metres radius from hundreds of miles away. Suddenly US servicemen for the first time in decades were hiding in shelters helpless to prevent the attacks. That was with a dozen or so missiles. They have thousands of them. Iran demonstrated that any attack on them would come at an unaffordable cost to the US. Every US base in the Middle East would be destroyed should the US attack. Since then the US have been leaving their bases in Iraq because they are not defendable. Russia have made clear that Iran would come under their nuclear umbrella should they be attacked with nuclear weapons.
After the missile attack Trump claimed that no US servicemen were hurt and that a devastating response would occur if any US service personnel were hurt. Over the following weeks the US announced injuries from the attacks. First they admitted to 11 injured then 34 then 50, finally settling on over 100. A large number of Purple Hearts have been issued to personnel injured in the attacks since. Purple Hearts are given to those injured or killed. US are impotent along with the UK and are raging hence the idiotic propaganda and provocations.
Israel would love to attack Iran but would be decimated and need Uncle Sam to attack for them.
Prior to this, in June of 2019, the Iranians shot down a US drone. Not just any old drone, however, but a RQ Global Hawk surveillance drone. $200 billion worth of drone, bristling with state of the art surveillance equipment, the size of a passenger jet, one of only two that the US had. It was flying 11 miles high beyond, or so the US thought, Iranian air defence. One warning not heeded, one missile and the US stock of Global Hawks was halved.
The statement put out by the IRGC after this was even more chilling to the US. Flying with the drone was another jet with US personnel on board. Quite what was their purpose that day can only be speculated but the Iranians made clear that they knew of the other plane and chose not to shoot it down because there were "35 warm bodies on board."
Not only is it plain that they could but also that they knew that one was a drone and one had 35 people on board. How did they know? There are a number of possibilities, none of them good from the US military point of view.
The trade sanctions being applied everywhere and the abuse by the US of the dollar position as world reserve currency are the only response that they have now, along with their groundless accusations of poisonings/chemical attacks, but this has only driven the target countries together and made the fall of the US empire a matter of time. When not if. It is a case of bringing the Empire down incrementally and avoiding hot war which could soon escalate badly, especially with the psychopaths who conduct US foreign policy.
This appears to be the strategy of the "Axis of Resistance" and for the sake of humanity we should hope that they manage to do so successfully and end the criminal rampage of the West before it reaches its inevitable conclusion.
-
Distractions aside, it is becoming clear that the West, led by US/UK/Israel are losing in their attempt at World domination to a collective and collaborative response by those threatened nations and are powerless to intervene militarily.
The murder of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani and the Iranian response demonstrated the impotence of the Outlaw Empire to achieve their goals of regime change via military means. To recap General Soleimani was assassinated in January of this year by the US in Iraq whilst visiting at the request of the Iraqi prime minister. Not in a war zone or on a battlefield but on a diplomatic mission. The American attack was not only criminal but also cowardly. Also killed in this missile attack was Abu Muhandis an Iraqi and commander of the PMF militia officially part of the Iraqi military.
Iran's response was measured and game changing. Their missile attack on US Iraqi bases was deadly accurate and demonstrated that Iranian missile technology was able to accurately target within a few metres radius from hundreds of miles away. Suddenly US servicemen for the first time in decades were hiding in shelters helpless to prevent the attacks. That was with a dozen or so missiles. They have thousands of them. Iran demonstrated that any attack on them would come at an unaffordable cost to the US. Every US base in the Middle East would be destroyed should the US attack. Since then the US have been leaving their bases in Iraq because they are not defendable. Russia have made clear that Iran would come under their nuclear umbrella should they be attacked with nuclear weapons.
After the missile attack Trump claimed that no US servicemen were hurt and that a devastating response would occur if any US service personnel were hurt. Over the following weeks the US announced injuries from the attacks. First they admitted to 11 injured then 34 then 50, finally settling on over 100. A large number of Purple Hearts have been issued to personnel injured in the attacks since. Purple Hearts are given to those injured or killed. US are impotent along with the UK and are raging hence the idiotic propaganda and provocations.
Israel would love to attack Iran but would be decimated and need Uncle Sam to attack for them.
Prior to this, in June of 2019, the Iranians shot down a US drone. Not just any old drone, however, but a RQ Global Hawk surveillance drone. $200 billion worth of drone, bristling with state of the art surveillance equipment, the size of a passenger jet, one of only two that the US had. It was flying 11 miles high beyond, or so the US thought, Iranian air defence. One warning not heeded, one missile and the US stock of Global Hawks was halved.
The statement put out by the IRGC after this was even more chilling to the US. Flying with the drone was another jet with US personnel on board. Quite what was their purpose that day can only be speculated but the Iranians made clear that they knew of the other plane and chose not to shoot it down because there were "35 warm bodies on board."
Not only is it plain that they could but also that they knew that one was a drone and one had 35 people on board. How did they know? There are a number of possibilities, none of them good from the US military point of view.
The trade sanctions being applied everywhere and the abuse by the US of the dollar position as world reserve currency are the only response that they have now, along with their groundless accusations of poisonings/chemical attacks, but this has only driven the target countries together and made the fall of the US empire a matter of time. When not if. It is a case of bringing the Empire down incrementally and avoiding hot war which could soon escalate badly, especially with the psychopaths who conduct US foreign policy.
This appears to be the strategy of the "Axis of Resistance" and for the sake of humanity we should hope that they manage to do so successfully and end the criminal rampage of the West before it reaches its inevitable conclusion.
This is a selective piece filled with half-truths.
Was Iran's response measured..https://youtu.be/tcFn6KsxOgo
The cost I have of the Northrop Grumman RQ-4 Global Hawk is $131 million plus $19000 per flying hour.
-
I am fully aware of what Novichok is. A family of organophosphate nerve agents. The OPCW have not stated Novichok use by Russia.
The OPCW were only asked to confirm Porton Down findings rather than conducting a full FFM (fact finding mission where they would collect samples with full chain of evidence custody). The agents that they were confirming are confidential at the UK's behest.
The agent that was detected in Navalny was not a Novichok. If it were he would be dead, as would the Skripals and many others who came into contact.
Novichok type agent is a not very subtle way of saying it wasn't a novichok. Novichok type agent doesn't inform or mean anything concrete. That is why that form of words is used by others reporting official findings.
Novichok isn't mentioned by the OPCW because it wasn't used.
You still believe the WMD lie so it is hardly surprising that you also believe this lie, coincidentally told by the same people.
“Federal Republic of Germany confirm that the biomarkers of the cholinesterase inhibitor found in Mr Navalny’s blood and urine samples have similar structural characteristics as the toxic chemicals belonging to schedules 1.A.14 and 1.A.15 “
A Novichok agent is mentioned by OPCW via its IUPAC name and CAS identification number, The same substance mentioned by the russian chemist Vil Mirzayanov I quoted from yesterday. Now are you going to put your hands up and admit you were wrong (yet again) or continue digging a deeper hole for yourself? ;D
And don't make out that you know anything about Novichok agents, it was only until yesterday you realized where it came from. LMAO
(https://i.ibb.co/LRy3G2M/opwc.png)
-
This is a selective piece filled with half-truths.
Was Iran's response measured..https://youtu.be/tcFn6KsxOgo
The cost I have of the Northrop Grumman RQ-4 Global Hawk is $131 million plus $19000 per flying hour.
The program cost for the Grumman RQ-4 was just over 10 billion USD. A single unit cost 131 million USD.
https://www.gao.gov/assets/660/653379.pdf (https://www.gao.gov/assets/660/653379.pdf)
I don't know where Gringo got that 200 billion figure from. I suspect he got it from from where he gets most claims he has made on this thread - his imagination.
As for Irans "measured and game changing" actions. All they achieved was blowing up Airlines Flight 752 killing 176 passengers and crew. :-\
-
The program cost for the Grumman RQ-4 was just over 10 billion USD. A single unit cost 131 million USD.
https://www.gao.gov/assets/660/653379.pdf (https://www.gao.gov/assets/660/653379.pdf)
I don't know where Gringo got that 200 billion figure from. I suspect he got it from from where he gets most claims he has made on this thread - his imagination.
As for Irans "measured and game changing" actions. All they achieved was blowing up Airlines Flight 752 killing 176 passengers and crew. :-\
It is a minor quibble which demonstrates your lack of knowledge and understanding but the cost of the Reaper Drone shot down by the Iranians is given as $176b by Time Magazine, wikipedia(your favourite source) gives the cost as $222.7 made up of $131b unit cost and the rest R & D.
$200bn was reported at the time and the variance given makes that a reasonable average. Your doubting of it simultaneously demonstrates that
a) Your knowledge of Geopolitics amounts to a quick Google search and clicking on the wikipedia page.
b) You cannot even be arsed to read that properly.
Had you done so you would have saved yourself from looking so dumb now. Your figure that you "corrected" me with is from Wikipedia (the 131 billion figure). In your desperation to prove me wrong you forgot to read the full entry which gives £222 billion as the cost including R & D). So the one thing that you and Steve take issue with as inaccurate, as if to demonstrate the rest of the post is also wrong, is in fact accurate according to your own source which you couldn't even read properly.
I gave my figure from memory. I follow geopolitics keenly and can remember. I don't need to debate via Wikipedia entries wrongly quoted.
-
It is a minor quibble which demonstrates your lack of knowledge and understanding but the cost of the Reaper Drone shot down by the Iranians is given as $176b by Time Magazine, wikipedia(your favourite source) gives the cost as $222.7 made up of $131b unit cost and the rest R & D.
$200bn was reported at the time and the variance given makes that a reasonable average. Your doubting of it simultaneously demonstrates that
a) Your knowledge of Geopolitics amounts to a quick Google search and clicking on the wikipedia page.
b) You cannot even be arsed to read that properly.
Had you done so you would have saved yourself from looking so dumb now. Your figure that you "corrected" me with is from Wikipedia (the 131 billion figure). In your desperation to prove me wrong you forgot to read the full entry which gives £222 billion as the cost including R & D). So the one thing that you and Steve take issue with as inaccurate, as if to demonstrate the rest of the post is also wrong, is in fact accurate according to your own source which you couldn't even read properly.
I gave my figure from memory. I follow geopolitics keenly and can remember. I don't need to debate via Wikipedia entries wrongly quoted.
The $200 billion figure is the total cost of the US Air Force budget projected for 2021: https://www.airforcemag.com/article/the-budget-and-the-truth/
-
the cost of the Reaper Drone shot down by the Iranians is given as $176b by Time Magazine,
Iran did not shoot down an MQ-9 Reaper it was an RQ-4 Hawk. But never mind.
you would have saved yourself from looking so dumb now.
Don't project yourself onto me Gringo. So far you have made two ostentatious claims about Novichok that I have proven false in replies #481, #484 and #487 on this thread. You do not even have the modesty to admit you were wrong and resort to insults and go off topic to drones just shows you are not here for an honest debate.
-
The $200 billion figure is the total cost of the US Air Force budget projected for 2021: https://www.airforcemag.com/article/the-budget-and-the-truth/
$200 billion for a drone? ;D that is an absurd claim. Military drones are designed to be cheap and disposable. 40 military drones have either crashed or been shot down this year alone.
https://dronewars.net/drone-crash-database/ (https://dronewars.net/drone-crash-database/)
-
$200 billion for a drone? ;D that is an absurd claim. Military drones are designed to be cheap and disposable. 40 military drones have either crashed or been shot down this year alone.
https://dronewars.net/drone-crash-database/ (https://dronewars.net/drone-crash-database/)
But it's not $200 billion for the drone programme. The figure is for the total USAF budget.
-
Russia is now building military bases in six African countries.
https://sofrep.com/news/russian-military-expands-in-africa-by-building-bases-in-six-countries/ (https://sofrep.com/news/russian-military-expands-in-africa-by-building-bases-in-six-countries/)
-
This is an absolute disgrace: https://news.sky.com/story/alexei-navalny-poisoned-putin-critic-returns-to-russia-12190619
-
This is an absolute disgrace: https://news.sky.com/story/alexei-navalny-poisoned-putin-critic-returns-to-russia-12190619
I'm not so sure. I wonder if Putin is being set up?
-
I'm not so sure. I wonder if Putin is being set up?
An agent of the Russian Federal Security Service has unwittingly admitted to poisoning him.
-
An agent of the Russian Federal Security Service has unwittingly admitted to poisoning him.
Maybe, but Britain and (especially) the United States do quite a lot of nasty stuff as well you know.
What's your source for this admission, please? Link?
-
Maybe, but Britain and (especially) the United States do quite a lot of nasty stuff as well you know.
What's your source for this admission, please? Link?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CNFwimQNZg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CNFwimQNZg)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwvA49ZXnf8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwvA49ZXnf8)
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CNFwimQNZg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CNFwimQNZg)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwvA49ZXnf8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwvA49ZXnf8)
You do seem to love Bellingcat.
-
From the Daily Beast:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/putin-rumors-run-wild-as-he-shrouds-himself-in-secrecy
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CNFwimQNZg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CNFwimQNZg)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwvA49ZXnf8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwvA49ZXnf8)
Does any of that prove that Putin was behind the poisoning or even that Konstantin Kudryavtsev was?
-
He has at last acknowledged Navalny, which suggests to me that the latter will be a force to be reckoned with at the next presidential election. https://www.thedailybeast.com/putins-vacation-retreat-inflamed-protesters-so-putin-denies-owning-the-billion-dollar-palace?ref=home?ref=home
-
Shouldn't we just face the truth that Russia is a Police state..https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/alexei-navalny-s-brother-arrested-during-police-raids-on-moscow-apartments/ar-BB1d9o6N?ocid=msedgntp
-
we should face there truth tht the uk is a police state.
-
Shouldn't we just face the truth that Russia is a Police state..https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/alexei-navalny-s-brother-arrested-during-police-raids-on-moscow-apartments/ar-BB1d9o6N?ocid=msedgntp
May I just direct you to the Covid-19 thread, in which you and others are giving very vocal support to an actual police state in our day-to-day lives? Before we start casting aspersions on other countries, we should get our own house in order, don't you think?
And have you ever been to Russia? I have but personally claim no specialist knowledge of Russia the country or Alexei Navalny that would qualify me to pronounce that country (or any other country, for that matter) to be a police state. It is a habit of the English chattering classes, who think of themselves as morally astute and informed, to go round pointing the finger at other countries based on very general information that, more often than not, is quite inaccurate and reflects the agenda of some powerful person. These same people are always quick to accuse others of chauvinism and bigotry without stopping to consider their own ignorant ravings.
I don't suggest that Vladimir Putin is a nice man, but what leader is? And since when was that a qualification? Mr Putin has been set up as a sort of villain in the West and, as far as I can tell, the outrage that surrounds him is largely astro-turfed. It is essentially an Establishment agenda, and whatever the merits or otherwise of Putin and Russia's political system, I am always puzzled as to why we should be morally concerned with the domestic political arrangements of other countries. My impression is that the people who are most vocal about Putin are either those who do know something about the country and have a vested interest in either attacking him or defending him, or it is Westerners who know nothing about the country - in some cases, have never even been there - but follow whatever the media tell them.
Meanwhile, I cannot leave my house more than once without running the risk of official questioning. This, in Britain! And you support it!
-
May I just direct you to the Covid-19 thread, in which you and others are giving very vocal support to an actual police state in our day-to-day lives? Before we start casting aspersions on other countries, we should get our own house in order, don't you think?
And have you ever been to Russia? I have but personally claim no specialist knowledge of Russia the country or Alexei Navalny that would qualify me to pronounce that country (or any other country, for that matter) to be a police state. It is a habit of the English chattering classes, who think of themselves as morally astute and informed, to go round pointing the finger at other countries based on very general information that, more often than not, is quite inaccurate and reflects the agenda of some powerful person. These same people are always quick to accuse others of chauvinism and bigotry without stopping to consider their own ignorant ravings.
I don't suggest that Vladimir Putin is a nice man, but what leader is? And since when was that a qualification? Mr Putin has been set up as a sort of villain in the West and, as far as I can tell, the outrage that surrounds him is largely astro-turfed. It is essentially an Establishment agenda, and whatever the merits or otherwise of Putin and Russia's political system, I am always puzzled as to why we should be morally concerned with the domestic political arrangements of other countries. My impression is that the people who are most vocal about Putin are either those who do know something about the country and have a vested interest in either attacking him or defending him, or it is Westerners who know nothing about the country - in some cases, have never even been there - but follow whatever the media tell them.
Meanwhile, I cannot leave my house more than once without running the risk of official questioning. This, in Britain! And you support it!
I think the clip below more or less sums Putin up.
https://streamable.com/1z2z2c (https://streamable.com/1z2z2c)
-
May I just direct you to the Covid-19 thread, in which you and others are giving very vocal support to an actual police state in our day-to-day lives? Before we start casting aspersions on other countries, we should get our own house in order, don't you think?
And have you ever been to Russia? I have but personally claim no specialist knowledge of Russia the country or Alexei Navalny that would qualify me to pronounce that country (or any other country, for that matter) to be a police state. It is a habit of the English chattering classes, who think of themselves as morally astute and informed, to go round pointing the finger at other countries based on very general information that, more often than not, is quite inaccurate and reflects the agenda of some powerful person. These same people are always quick to accuse others of chauvinism and bigotry without stopping to consider their own ignorant ravings.
I don't suggest that Vladimir Putin is a nice man, but what leader is? And since when was that a qualification? Mr Putin has been set up as a sort of villain in the West and, as far as I can tell, the outrage that surrounds him is largely astro-turfed. It is essentially an Establishment agenda, and whatever the merits or otherwise of Putin and Russia's political system, I am always puzzled as to why we should be morally concerned with the domestic political arrangements of other countries. My impression is that the people who are most vocal about Putin are either those who do know something about the country and have a vested interest in either attacking him or defending him, or it is Westerners who know nothing about the country - in some cases, have never even been there - but follow whatever the media tell them.
Meanwhile, I cannot leave my house more than once without running the risk of official questioning. This, in Britain! And you support it!
I've never been to Russia, but I'll let ordinary Russians speak. This guy was the precursor of Alexei Navalny: https://youtu.be/vM04zNbsaJg
Why do we intervene in other countries? To make our streets safer, though sometimes we do get it wrong. But should we have left al-Qaeda shielding behind the Taliban in Afghanistan after the 9/11 attacks?
The invasion of Crimea, the Salisbury incident, the Alexander Litvinenko poisoning, the MH17 disaster. Has the penny dropped yet..https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-53367425
-
I've never been to Russia, but I'll let ordinary Russians speak. This guy was the precursor of Alexei Navalny: https://youtu.be/vM04zNbsaJg
Why do we intervene in other countries? To make our streets safer, though sometimes we do get it wrong. But should we have left al-Qaeda shielding behind the Taliban in Afghanistan after the 9/11 attacks?
The invasion of Crimea, the Salisbury incident, the Alexander Litvinenko poisoning, the MH17 disaster. Has the penny dropped yet..https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-53367425
Personally, I disagree on principle with all interventions in other countries, except in very exigent circumstances. I don't believe it makes us any safer. I think the onus is on you here to prove otherwise. I have plenty of facts that tell me everything we have done in these countries has worsened those countries and made our own streets less safe.
All it achieves is to create enemies and it makes us look like arrogant hypocrites. You admit you've not been to Russia, so to bolster your case you offer us the partial opinions of Russians who are set against Putin. It's not very convincing. I like to consider both sides of the argument, not just what Sky News says. I'm sure Putin has done lots of bad things. I do not, for one moment, suggest that he is a pleasant individual. He is the leader of a major world power. He can't be a nice person. He wouldn't be able to function in the role if he spent his time making daisy chains, brewing herbal teas and writing to his pen-pal in Accrington. Yet so far on this thread, nobody has provided proof of Putin's involvement in any of the malign actions alleged, or even the involvement of the Russian state. Nevertheless, you think we should set ourselves against Russia and its people. What action do you propose?
If it's more military intervention, direct or by proxy, will you go and fight? Or is this like the vaccine in that you want somebody else to take the risk? I'm not volunteering to go and fight on your behalf. Perhaps you would be good enough to volunteer? It's always best, in my view, if those who shout the loudest about these things go and do their own fighting. I've always found it distasteful that we send naive young men on these unnecessary expeditions, who in their naivety, aggression and enthusiasm, don't sensibly weigh up the risk of coming back in body bags or with missing limbs. Being young, they also don't consider whether the mission they are being sent on is actually necessary to defend the territorial integrity of the United Kingdom and British territories, which is what our armed forces are supposed to be for. That is the primary objective of armed forces, especially standing armies, and in my view, it should be their only objective.
In short, I do not believe our armed forces should be used in wars. They should only be used in national territorial defence. That is the difference between an interventionist, like yourself, and a non-interventionist such as myself. You believe in wars and support wars. I don't. I only support defence.
-
I think the clip below more or less sums Putin up.
https://streamable.com/1z2z2c (https://streamable.com/1z2z2c)
What specifically is wrong with Putin's reply in that clip, in your view?
-
What specifically is wrong with Putin's reply in that clip, in your view?
Quite simply because anyone accused of treason wouldn't get a fair trial in Russia. It's Putin's justice. As for #516 you go off on a tangent and fail to mention specific circumstances where in my opinion it was right to intervene ( Northern Ireland 1969,Afghanistan after 9/11) and where it would have been right to send British troops (Hitler's occupation of the Rhineland 1936 or the Bosnian enclave of Srebrenica in 1995).
-
i see no real diffrence bettween putin and are current prime minster other than putin seems far more competent.
-
Maybe Biden's presidency will turn out to be principled after all..https://www.thedailybeast.com/team-biden-weighs-fresh-sanctions-on-russia-for-poisoning-and-jailing-alexei-navalny?via=newsletter&source=BI-end-week-digest
-
Quite simply because anyone accused of treason wouldn't get a fair trial in Russia. It's Putin's justice.
Assuming that's even true, what has it got to do with us?
As for #516 you go off on a tangent and fail to mention specific circumstances where in my opinion it was right to intervene ( Northern Ireland 1969,Afghanistan after 9/11) and where it would have been right to send British troops (Hitler's occupation of the Rhineland 1936 or the Bosnian enclave of Srebrenica in 1995).
Northern Ireland was, and is, part of Britain. It is not a foreign intervention.
We were wrong to intervene in any country after 9/11. We should have kept well out of it, as we rightly kept out of the Vietnam War. We should have left the United States to pursue these disasters in Iraq and Afghanistan while lodging our protest at their total disregard for the basic principles of national self-determination and pointing out that it was the United States' own policies and doctrines that caused 9/11 - in particular, its attachment to Israel and the pursuit of mass immigration into the United States, which harms the American people and creates security problems. We would be a better country had we adopted that stance.
Besides, you still haven't demonstrated how intervening makes us safer. I think the onus is on you in that respect, since you're the one who wants young men to come home in body bags or with missing limbs. Tell us about all the terrorist attacks we've had here since 9/11.
I also disagree with you about Hitler and the Second World War. We should have kept out of that too. As did Ireland. As did Sweden. As did Spain. And we should have kept away from the former Yugoslavia - an intervention that was based on a completely ignorant understanding of the situation. It was none of our business.
Our great failing as a country since the early 20th. century has been a belief that we have the right to intervene in the affairs of other sovereign countries and meddle in their problems and disputes, which almost-always makes matters worse, and also that we should import foreign problems here through the madness of mass immigration.
-
We were wrong to go to Iraq in 2003 ! This was the start of the terrorist attacks in this country.
-
This would be a joke if it wasn't so serious..https://youtu.be/5k_szrJPYn8
-
This would be a joke if it wasn't so serious..https://youtu.be/5k_szrJPYn8
The allegation from pro-Navalny commenters seems to be that the Russian state is using its legal system, both civil and criminal, to harass Navalny. I assume this is with the aim of neutralising him as an opponent of the Putin government.
As I see it, there are three fundamental questions:
1. Was Navalny tried fairly for the underlying offences?
2. Were the civil cases heard fairly?
3. Is there any evidence of Russian state involvement in the poisoning of Navalny?
I can't comment informatively on 1 and 2 because the facts seem obscure, I don't speak much Russian and I have no knowledge of the laws of Russia. The usual suspects in the West seem to think he has been treated badly, including most of the Western media and the ECHR. Very frankly, I do not trust these sources on this issue. In my view, they have an agenda against Putin, for a mixture of geopolitical and ideological reasons.
Vladimir Putin is a Russian nationalist and Russian Orthodox social traditionalist. The Western hegemony is liberal-internationalist and socially-liberal. Putin favours a more traditionalist and conservative basis for Russian society than would be considered acceptable in the West.
Putin's foreign policy strategy leans more towards non-interventionism. He seeks to expand Russian influence among its immediate neighbours in the clear interests of Russia. The most well-known example of this is the Ukraine. This conflicts with Western strategic objectives, especially those of the United States, NATO and the European Union. The West is aggressively interventionist.
Putin's highest moral is the good of the Russian state, as moderated by God. The West's super-moral orientation is less clear-cut. Is the pursuit of equality and liberal-democracy as goals per se just a means to rationalise Western geo-strategy? Or is the West truly in the thrall of these ideas? Or is it a combination of the two? In a sense, Russia is culturally a Western state because as a country it shares the Western Christian axiology, but what Putin stands for is more than a negation of Western liberalism, it is a radical departure grounded in Russian history: Russia's geographic position, its Slavic ethnic identity, the separation of Western and Eastern churches, the industrialisation and modernisation under Bolshevism, and so on.
This brings me to what I think is the central point: Navalny is a Western-facing Russian and in the pockets of Western liberal-interventionists who want to 'Westernise' Russia. Putin is the ultra-parochial Russian resisting this, instead favouring illiberal non-interventionism (i.e. nationalism). This is why I am willing to defend Putin and don't trust Navalny or his defenders. I don't believe Britain should be getting involved.
In regard to 3 above, it is common ground that Navalny was hospitalised in Russia itself after falling ill on a flight, but from this point the facts become doubtful. It is said that he was poisoned, but some pro-Putin commenters are denying this. The evidence of the state's involvement in poisoning him is thin on the ground. Was Navalny poisoned? Why did he have to seek treatment in Germany?
His sentence was for breaching the conditions of an earlier suspended sentence for embezzlement. His defence must be that having been poisoned, he couldn't comply with the conditions, and I suppose he would defend his decision to leave Russia on the grounds that he believes the Russian state is trying to have him killed.
I am no expert, but given all the facts, an English criminal court could activate a custodial sentence in similar circumstances; it would depend on whether the poisoning had occurred as a result of activity that was in itself in breach of the conditions and also whether, having been poisoned, he was acting on reasonable medical advice in leaving the country to seek specialist treatment.
-
One can't always take a Sherlock Holmes approach to these matters. There's no documentary evidence that Adolf Hitler knew of the Holocaust, but would it be obtuse of me not to jump to that conclusion?
For those who want to read something more substantial: https://www.mccaininstitute.org/democracy-human-rights-and-rule-of-law-in-russia-making-the-case/
-
One can't always take a Sherlock Holmes approach to these matters. There's no documentary evidence that Adolf Hitler knew of the Holocaust, but would it be obtuse of me not to jump to that conclusion?
Not if somebody is trying to start a war.
-
Who was responsible? https://youtu.be/bXOWK-Vj7_M
-
I can't see Putin preventing the advancement of this democratic movement indefinitely. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-56385012
-
russgate debunked https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sv0-Lnv0d0k
-
Russia is becoming a pariah state, if it is not one already. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/alexei-navalny-jailed-putin-critic-moved-to-prison-hospital-with-respiratory-illness/ar-BB1fkma6?ocid=msedgntp
-
There'll be no tears shed if Navalny should suddenly die from whatever is ailing him ?. Aren't we glad we don't live there ?
-
There'll be no tears shed if Navalny should suddenly die from whatever is ailing him ?. Aren't we glad we don't live there ?
Yes we are..https://youtu.be/a1DMm6GF3o4
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-56695489
-
I'm warming to Biden..https://youtu.be/4dNCtAJeH4Y
-
A fascinating portrait of Russia by London-based lecturer and writer Mark Galeotti. https://youtu.be/EtcUW7mrlPo
-
The world is pretty unstable at the moment behind the scenes. You've got China/ Australia, Iran/Israel, US/Turkey and the Ukraine/ Russia. World War 3 is looming.
Makes me wonder all the more about this pandemic ( germ warfare )
-
The present violence in Myanmar is another indication.
-
Australia's prime minister put the damper on any good relationship with China when he questioned and doubted the Covid 19's origins. China weren't happy and iimposed tariffs on billions of dollars of goods that were bound for Australia. Tensions have worsened between the two countries with a possible military conflict in the near future. Then you'd have the concerning aggression towards Taiwan who have bolstered their navy with amphibious warships as we speak.
Communist China have already threatened if diplomatic talks aren't successful.
Russia is pushing it and things don't look so good with a build-up of troops on the border with Ukraine.
-
Surprise surprise. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/czechs-expel-russian-diplomats-and-identify-pair-wanted-over-novichok-attack/ar-BB1fL2EI?ocid=msedgntp
-
https://off-guardian.org/2021/04/19/who-is-really-behind-czechias-surprise-decision-to-expel-18-russian-diplomats/
-
https://youtu.be/-FlJuouuzzQ
-
"Overall, we rate OffGuardian a Strong Conspiracy and Moderate Pseudoscience website that also promotes Russian propaganda."
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/offguardian/ (https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/offguardian/)
-
"Overall, we rate OffGuardian a Strong Conspiracy and Moderate Pseudoscience website that also promotes Russian propaganda."
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/offguardian/ (https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/offguardian/)
Looks like two can play at the fact-checking game:
The website has been described as an amateur effort to rate news media sources based on factual accuracy and political bias.
...
The Columbia Journalism Review describes Media Bias/Fact Check as an amateur attempt at categorizing media bias and Van Zandt as an "armchair media analyst." The Poynter Institute notes, "Media Bias/Fact Check is a widely cited source for news stories and even studies about misinformation, despite the fact that its method is in no way scientific."[4] Alexandra Kitty, in a 2018 book on journalism, described MBFC as an apparent "amateur/civic outfit" and wrote that its founder's only qualification was a degree in communications.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Bias/Fact_Check
Media Bias Fact Check is a left-wing "fact-checker" owned by leftist Dave Van Zandt which purports to monitor bias in the media.
In terms of political perspective it is similar to Snopes - and most of Media Bias Fact Check’s assessments are wildly inaccurate.
Creation Ministries International
Its page on Creation Ministries International is almost entirely incorrect - with only three sentences being free of error - and in one instance it spells the organization’s name wrong. It frivolously and fraudulently accuses CMI of having “conspiracy” and “pseudoscience -” although nothing that CMI does would qualify for the definition of either of these words.
...
Media Bias Fact Check defends progressive echo chamber Wikipedia as “Least Biased -” and leftist RationalWiki repeatedly as “pro-science -” while simultaneously calling Conservapedia - “right-wing Christian propaganda.” It states that “Christianity is a set of dogmatic beliefs - which is opposed to Science which is a method that strictly avoids dogma” in its Christian Science article.[14]
Media Bias Fact Check considers the vile - far-left Salon to have “high” factual reporting. They have also given a group calling themselves the “Lincoln” Project a free pass.
Source: https://infogalactic.com/info/Media_Bias/Fact_Check
-
Does the Russian government care about domestic political opinion, let alone international opinion..https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-56834655
-
Looks like two can play at the fact-checking game:
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Bias/Fact_Check
Source: https://infogalactic.com/info/Media_Bias/Fact_Check
Your "source" is infogalactic.com? LMAO
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Infogalactic (https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Infogalactic)
-
Does Putin ever wonder why so many former Soviet states (most of which never wanted to join the USSR in the first place) have decided to join NATO rather than CSTO? ::)
Massing 100,000 troops on the border of a weaker neighbor is hardly going to put them off wanting to join NATO, it will only create the opposite effect.
-
Your "source" is infogalactic.com? LMAO
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Infogalactic (https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Infogalactic)
My sources are Wikipedia and Infogalactic, both of which say derogatory things about your source.
Are you saying that what they claim is wrong? If so, what have they got wrong?
Do you also accept that, whatever the source of information, claims must be evaluated on the merits of their content?
For instance, I would say that Wikipedia leans towards the Left and follows mainstream narratives, however I accept that Wikipedia can be a reliable source. It's a matter of evaluating claims.
By the way, your continued use of self-affirming acronyms like 'LOL' and 'LMAO' isn't convincing anybody. It just makes you look dim and immature and suggests you are insecure.
-
Does the Russian government care about domestic political opinion, let alone international opinion..https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-56834655
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-europe-38136169
Above is the BBC even admitting that Russia has nuclear shelters for the entire population of Moscow.
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/moscow-ready-nuclear-war-lots-bunkers-population-26401
There are plenty of sources other than above which also make clear that in fact the entirety of the Russian population has nuclear shelters available which are stocked with food, water, generators, tools etc.
The Russians under Putin's rule have also developed the means militarily to make clear that a successful "first strike" is not possible against them. Hypersonic missiles and superior air defence systems guarantee this.
I would suggest that Putin self evidently cares about domestic political opinion. I would also venture that if you were to test "domestic political opinion" in the UK that most would choose nuclear shelters stocked with necessities for survival over, say, an extra 120 nuclear warheads and Aircraft Carriers with which to threaten other sovereign states.
It would appear on any fair and objective reading of the facts that it is the UK government that cares less for its population than the Russians under Putin. But don't allow reality to inform your knee jerk bigotry.
-
Russia arrests ‘more than 1,700’ over pro-Navalny protests
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/4/21/hundreds-arrested-as-russia-cracks-down-on-navalny-supporters (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/4/21/hundreds-arrested-as-russia-cracks-down-on-navalny-supporters)
-
Russia arrests ‘more than 1,700’ over pro-Navalny protests
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/4/21/hundreds-arrested-as-russia-cracks-down-on-navalny-supporters (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/4/21/hundreds-arrested-as-russia-cracks-down-on-navalny-supporters)
Why do you care about Navalny? He is a grifter and a crook, not an opposition leader. He is about as relevant to Russian politics as Tommy Robinson is to UK politics. If you really cared about opposition voices being heard then there are problems closer to home. The UK is currently home to the world's most prominent political prisoner. He is allowed no statements from his Cat A prison, unlike Navalny, nor is he charged with or guilty of anything approaching a crime in this country. The noise about Navalny is more to cover our own international shame over our treatment of Assange.
Anyone in the UK complaining about Navalny is a brainwashed fool. Assange is in jail for telling too much truth, Navalny is in jail because he is a convicted fraudster.
-
Why do you care about Navalny? He is a grifter and a crook, not an opposition leader. He is about as relevant to Russian politics as Tommy Robinson is to UK politics. If you really cared about opposition voices being heard then there are problems closer to home. The UK is currently home to the world's most prominent political prisoner. He is allowed no statements from his Cat A prison, unlike Navalny, nor is he charged with or guilty of anything approaching a crime in this country. The noise about Navalny is more to cover our own international shame over our treatment of Assange.
Anyone in the UK complaining about Navalny is a brainwashed fool. Assange is in jail for telling too much truth, Navalny is in jail because he is a convicted fraudster.
Absolutely right.
-
Why do you care about Navalny? He is a grifter and a crook, not an opposition leader. He is about as relevant to Russian politics as Tommy Robinson is to UK politics. If you really cared about opposition voices being heard then there are problems closer to home. The UK is currently home to the world's most prominent political prisoner. He is allowed no statements from his Cat A prison, unlike Navalny, nor is he charged with or guilty of anything approaching a crime in this country. The noise about Navalny is more to cover our own international shame over our treatment of Assange.
Anyone in the UK complaining about Navalny is a brainwashed fool. Assange is in jail for telling too much truth, Navalny is in jail because he is a convicted fraudster.
Fair point and well put, but on the other hand, hasn't the ECHR ruled twice now (in 2014 and 2019) against the Russian Federation in actions brought by Navalny to that court? The 2014 ruling was that Navalny did not receive a fair trial in the fraud case. The 2019 ruling was that Navalny's civil and political rights have been breached by the Russian Federation.
I think it is true that Russia lacks the judicial safeguards and checks and balances that countries such as Britain have. I would have no hesitation in visiting Russia again and I would consider myself safe there, but I'm not sure I would be confident about engaging in any sort of political protest or criticism of government in that country. Not that I would do so in somebody else's country anyway, but the point in principle is that Russia - for various reasons, partly to do with its own history - does not have the same depth of commitment to political liberty that exists in the West and the Western mind.
I take on board your point about Assange's plight and the unfavourable comparison, but that is a different case. I would not extradite Julian Assange, but at the same time, I'm not sure his cause is as sympathetic as it is spun out by his supporters. I have total sympathy for his situation and I think he should be released forthwith, but he acted recklessly and stupidly in some of his activities for Wikileaks.
Personally, I think what happens in Russia in the matter of their choice of leader and system of government is no business of Britain and I am perplexed by the fuss and think most of the criticisms of Putin are wrong or unfair or misdirected, or even when valid, seem hypocritical, and in virtually all cases inevitably demonstrate ignorance about Russia - a sovereign foreign country with its own deep and rich history and way of doing things that is in some ways quite alien to the Western mind.
-
Fair point and well put, but on the other hand, hasn't the ECHR ruled twice now (in 2014 and 2019) against the Russian Federation in actions brought by Navalny to that court? The 2014 ruling was that Navalny did not receive a fair trial in the fraud case. The 2019 ruling was that Navalny's civil and political rights have been breached by the Russian Federation.
I think it is true that Russia lacks the judicial safeguards and checks and balances that countries such as Britain have. I would have no hesitation in visiting Russia again and I would consider myself safe there, but I'm not sure I would be confident about engaging in any sort of political protest or criticism of government in that country. Not that I would do so in somebody else's country anyway, but the point in principle is that Russia - for various reasons, partly to do with its own history - does not have the same depth of commitment to political liberty that exists in the West and the Western mind.
I take on board your point about Assange's plight and the unfavourable comparison, but that is a different case. I would not extradite Julian Assange, but at the same time, I'm not sure his cause is as sympathetic as it is spun out by his supporters. I have total sympathy for his situation and I think he should be released forthwith, but he acted recklessness and stupidly in some of his activities for Wikileaks.
Personally, I think what happens in Russia in the matter of their choice of leader and system of government is no business of Britain and I am perplexed by the fuss and think most of the criticisms of Putin are wrong or unfair or misdirected, or even when valid, seem hypocritical, and in virtually all cases inevitably demonstrate ignorance about Russia - a sovereign foreign country with its own deep and rich history and way of doing things that is in some ways quite alien to the Western mind.
A conviction in Russia doesn't really mean much.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-justice-system-low-acquittal-rate-uk-crown-court-a8935016.html (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-justice-system-low-acquittal-rate-uk-crown-court-a8935016.html)
-
Why do you care about Navalny? He is a grifter and a crook, not an opposition leader. He is about as relevant to Russian politics as Tommy Robinson is to UK politics. If you really cared about opposition voices being heard then there are problems closer to home. The UK is currently home to the world's most prominent political prisoner. He is allowed no statements from his Cat A prison, unlike Navalny, nor is he charged with or guilty of anything approaching a crime in this country. The noise about Navalny is more to cover our own international shame over our treatment of Assange.
Anyone in the UK complaining about Navalny is a brainwashed fool. Assange is in jail for telling too much truth, Navalny is in jail because he is a convicted fraudster.
Its the protesters I am concerned about.
-
Fair point and well put, but on the other hand, hasn't the ECHR ruled twice now (in 2014 and 2019) against the Russian Federation in actions brought by Navalny to that court? The 2014 ruling was that Navalny did not receive a fair trial in the fraud case. The 2019 ruling was that Navalny's civil and political rights have been breached by the Russian Federation.
I think it is true that Russia lacks the judicial safeguards and checks and balances that countries such as Britain have. I would have no hesitation in visiting Russia again and I would consider myself safe there, but I'm not sure I would be confident about engaging in any sort of political protest or criticism of government in that country. Not that I would do so in somebody else's country anyway, but the point in principle is that Russia - for various reasons, partly to do with its own history - does not have the same depth of commitment to political liberty that exists in the West and the Western mind.
I take on board your point about Assange's plight and the unfavourable comparison, but that is a different case. I would not extradite Julian Assange, but at the same time, I'm not sure his cause is as sympathetic as it is spun out by his supporters. I have total sympathy for his situation and I think he should be released forthwith, but he acted recklessly and stupidly in some of his activities for Wikileaks.
Personally, I think what happens in Russia in the matter of their choice of leader and system of government is no business of Britain and I am perplexed by the fuss and think most of the criticisms of Putin are wrong or unfair or misdirected, or even when valid, seem hypocritical, and in virtually all cases inevitably demonstrate ignorance about Russia - a sovereign foreign country with its own deep and rich history and way of doing things that is in some ways quite alien to the Western mind.
Not a lot to disagree with there. I am not particularly confident in the impartiality of many international institutions, ECHR included, but a fair analysis. Your main point, in a nutshell, that it is for Russians to hold their govt. to account is so obvious that I find it hard to understand the mentality of those who seem to think that they carry some sort of "white anglo mans burden".
The point of the Assange comparison was basically that there is no comparison and criticising other governments for their treatment of dissidents is lacking in self awareness, to put it kindly. Assange has committed no crime. People are free to agree or disagree with his methods but the breaching of diplomatic premises to arrest him for a foreign power was seen by the world and I don't think it was a good advert for "Brand UK". I doubt that the rest of the world fails to see this rank hypocrisy from the UK at the behest of others. David and Steve fail to see this and are forced to defend the indefensible, hence their focus on all things Russia bad just like they've been trained to.
-
Its the protesters I am concerned about.
Of course you are, David. You're concerned about the very things that you have been brainwashed into being concerned about. Luckily for you, the UK is so utopian that we have no problems of our own to concern ourselves with and we can worry other countries internal issues :o :o
-
Not a lot to disagree with there. I am not particularly confident in the impartiality of many international institutions, ECHR included, but a fair analysis. Your main point, in a nutshell, that it is for Russians to hold their govt. to account is so obvious that I find it hard to understand the mentality of those who seem to think that they carry some sort of "white anglo mans burden".
The point of the Assange comparison was basically that there is no comparison and criticising other governments for their treatment of dissidents is lacking in self awareness, to put it kindly. Assange has committed no crime. People are free to agree or disagree with his methods but the breaching of diplomatic premises to arrest him for a foreign power was seen by the world and I don't think it was a good advert for "Brand UK". I doubt that the rest of the world fails to see this rank hypocrisy from the UK at the behest of others. David and Steve fail to see this and are forced to defend the indefensible, hence their focus on all things Russia bad just like they've been trained to.
Russia is a voluntary contracting part to the Convention, having ratified it in 1998 (though the Duma also passed a law in 2015 that gives the Russian constitution supremacy over ECHR rulings). In the strict juridical sense, the ECHR are impartial in the face of the parties that litigate before them, but I agree they are not politically-neutral. Essentially the West's institutions have fallen under a Leftist orthodoxy. Russia is corrupt and lacks the civic strengths of Western countries, but the original point of the Convention was to prevent significant genuine human rights abuses, not police how contracting states conduct trials for ordinary criminal offences and other mundane matters.
I agree we should keep well out of it and I oppose all the rhetoric against Russia and Putin. People in the West who like to stir things up are the real problem.
-
Russia is a voluntary contracting part to the Convention, having ratified it in 1998 (though the Duma also passed a law in 2015 that gives the Russian constitution supremacy over ECHR rulings). In the strict juridical sense, the ECHR are impartial in the face of the parties that litigate before them, but I agree they are not politically-neutral. Essentially the West's institutions have fallen under a Leftist orthodoxy. Russia is corrupt and lacks the civic strengths of Western countries, but the original point of the Convention was to prevent significant genuine human rights abuses, not police how contracting states conduct trials for ordinary criminal offences and other mundane matters.
I agree we should keep well out of it and I oppose all the rhetoric against Russia and Putin. People in the West who like to stir things up are the real problem.
Russia in the 90's, in the aftermath of the break up of the Soviet Union, was in a different position then. I am sure that you are aware of this but I think this explains a lot. Under Yeltsin, there was a desire to "join the west" but the Western countries oversaw massive liberalisation (a euphemism for theft and looting) of substantial state assets. Much of the dirty money in the City of London is looted Russian wealth. During this period Russia was relatively weak and gave up too much.
Putin has clearly clamped down on this and by any reasonable measure, Russia has done excellently under his rule. Russia has slowly realised that Western intentions towards Russia are only on the West's non negotiable terms and has gradually moved further away. The West's anger and frothing over Putin and Russia is because he is so good, not that he is bad. He ended their looting.
Your point about cultural differences is also misunderstood by many. The provision of shelters stocked with provisions and necessities in enough numbers and size to provide shelter for the entire population is something informed by having to fight so many defensive wars. We're meant to duck under a table and hope for the best or something.
Have never visited myself yet but is somewhere that I would like to, geopolitics allowing. Obviously it is interesting enough that you would go back so not bad enough to deter you.
-
Of course you are, David. You're concerned about the very things that you have been brainwashed into being concerned about. Luckily for you, the UK is so utopian that we have no problems of our own to concern ourselves with and we can worry other countries internal issues :o :o
Arright I have been brainwashed into being concerned about the lack of human rights in various places around the world. There's me thinking it was all down to a natural sense solicitude most people have.
Thanks for pointing this out gringo 👍
-
Arright I have been brainwashed into being concerned about the lack of human rights in various places around the world. There's me thinking it was all down to a natural sense solicitude most people have.
Thanks for pointing this out gringo 👍
The lack of human rights that you concern yourself with are exactly the same ones that the UK govt., media and intel services pretend to concern themselves with also. What a massive coincidence. You need to read more widely if you want to be taken seriously on the wider geopolitical picture. Read some foreign news sites, perhaps some of the many blogs out there.
There is a fairly simple test, that anyone can do, to check the reliability of any writer/journalist. Dig into the archives and see for yourself how each has stood the test of time. BBC, Guardian and UK media generally fail this test miserably. Inconsistent and ever changing, which is exactly what would happen if you lied, coincidentally. Widen your perspective, David.
-
The lack of human rights that you concern yourself with are exactly the same ones that the UK govt., media and intel services pretend to concern themselves with also. What a massive coincidence. You need to read more widely if you want to be taken seriously on the wider geopolitical picture. Read some foreign news sites, perhaps some of the many blogs out there.
There is a fairly simple test, that anyone can do, to check the reliability of any writer/journalist. Dig into the archives and see for yourself how each has stood the test of time. BBC, Guardian and UK media generally fail this test miserably. Inconsistent and ever changing, which is exactly what would happen if you lied, coincidentally. Widen your perspective, David.
The police have just visited me. I have 24 hours to check into Redbridge council political re-education camp for indefinite internment or risk imprisonment. They must be monitoring this forum. :(
-
The police have just visited me. I have 24 hours to check into Redbridge council political re-education camp for indefinite internment or risk imprisonment. They must be monitoring this forum. :(
Inane replies, such as this, merely confirm the need to widen your reading and perspective.
-
Inane replies, such as this, merely confirm the need to widen your reading and perspective.
Gringo, what do you think of George Monbiot and Double Down News? His videos are good.
-
Gringo, what do you think of George Monbiot and Double Down News? His videos are good.
Have not read Double Down before but having just had a look at their website I will give it a read. There are writers on there who I have read plenty of articles by, Glenn Greenwald and Naomi Wimborne-idrissi to name two, whose writing I generally regard as truthful and honest. Monbiot is, in my opinion, a kind of allowed opposition. His stances on important issues are too often in step with the establishment lies. Anyone who is paid to write regularly in the Guardian, knows where the bounds are and what is allowable dissent.
Having said that, we only have a hope of finding the truth if we listen to all views and use our discernment from there.
Unz review is a good site for those willing to have their thinking challenged. There are articles on there by extremely right wing and left wing writers and everything in between. I don't endorse every writer on there, it would be intellectually impossible, but Ron Unz site is what free speech looks like.
Jonathon Cook, who previously wrote for the Guardian as middle East correspondent but whose views on Zionism and Israel are now seen as taboo in the Western MSM, is regularly given a platform for his articles. He is an excellent writer, based in Nazareth and Jewish himself but the "wrong kind of jew" for the MSM. He is also pretty vocal about the decline in the editorial independence of the Graun and has written about this. There was a change at the Guardian after the Snowden leaks and the GCHQ visit and it is no longer the paper that allowed the kind of reporting that Nick Davies performed forcing the Leveson Enquiry.
There are so many good informed writers given a platform at Unz that you can't list them all.
Michael Hudson is excellent on the wider economic financial war and its consequences and implications. Pepe Escobar is good on middle eastern politics and the geopolitical picture generally but there are lots of good informed commentators whose work is platformed there.
Excellent archives, including entire history books written in the aftermath of WW2 whose truth is now not allowed and therefore not available in print anymore. QC recommended it once, as I recall, so I assume that he also is a reader.
Moon of Alabama is an excellent one man blog, which has been running more or less since the internet was a thing, originally as Billmon blog. Particularly on the ongoing Syrian war that the UK media has to perform contortions reporting on in order to paint Al Qaeda, Al Nusra Front and various other flavours of extreme foreign Islamic jihadists as legitimate moderate rebels. It is a sick media that can portray head chopping foreign jihadists slaughtering Syrian Army, Police and citizens of all religious denominations as the good guys and the Syrians under their legitimate President fighting these invaders as the bad guys. There is a really informed and diverse commentariat in the comments section with plenty of links to opinions and voices not readily heard in our media. Also archives of all previous pieces, which allows those discerning enough to assess the credibility of the writer.
From what I can see with Double Down it deals largely with domestic politics so will definitely have a good look over next few days. Platforms like this are hopefully the future of media because we need media that functions. The mainstream does even bother to veil its hypocrisy and lies anymore. The treatment of Corbyn, whatever ones view of him, opened a few more peoples eyes to their lies and one sided narratives, the Skripal and Navalny narratives are so preposterous and full of holes that they should be embarrassed.
Meandered a bit more than intended, but if you haven't read those sites then they worth a look.
-
Hi Roch, just watched some of double down and seems good. See it is videos rather than articles so should have written watch not read earlier. I have seen a few videos previously from here from others posting links occasionally without ever linking to the homepage. Have it noted now :)
-
Thanks for the pointers there Gringo. Plenty to check out.
-
Thanks for the pointers there Gringo. Plenty to check out.
This might also be worth checking out Roch :))
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UFO_sightings_in_Russia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UFO_sightings_in_Russia)
-
This might also be worth checking out Roch :))
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UFO_sightings_in_Russia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UFO_sightings_in_Russia)
I thought we agreed you'd keep all that under wraps, David? It's traumatic enough being kidnapped by a race of sex-addicted female alien nymphs without having it broadcast all over the internet. All I was doing was walking along a lake in Siberia, minding my own business...
I can't help it if extra-terrestrials want to study me because I'm well-endowed.
-
This might also be worth checking out Roch :))
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UFO_sightings_in_Russia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UFO_sightings_in_Russia)
Your mocking links demonstrate your inability to engage on anything substantial. What has anything that has been said to do with UFO sightings or conspiracies? The ongoing wars sponsored by US/UK have killed millions and displaced many more millions. Functioning states have been bombed back to the stone age. None of this was Russia, China or Iran. You keep on telling yourself that Russia, Putin, China et al are a threat to world peace and that the UK are standing up against tyranny along with the US and other vassal states.
The US/UK NATO are without comparison when it comes to death and destruction caused in the world. China, Russia and Iran are not the threats to world peace, we are.
-
Your mocking links demonstrate your inability to engage on anything substantial.
Thats rich coming from someone who resorts to insults then dissappears from the forum when his conspiracy theories get debunked.
-
Thats rich coming from someone who resorts to insults then dissappears from the forum when his conspiracy theories get debunked.
So what is this debunked conspiracy theory which caused my disappearance?
-
This might also be worth checking out Roch :))
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UFO_sightings_in_Russia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UFO_sightings_in_Russia)
Thank you David. That is extremely helpful.
-
Thats rich coming from someone who resorts to insults then dissappears from the forum when his conspiracy theories get debunked.
Another “Arria formula” meeting concerning OPCW’s doctored investigation of alleged “chemical attacks” in Douma has been held at the UN on April 16, 2021. Aaron Maté was present again and has delivered what is, in my opinion, the best overview of the story so far?—detailed, yet succinct, eloquent and accessible.
The 27-minute video consists of three parts:
1. An introduction for those unfamiliar with the story, which is so good that I’ve decided to type it out here (0:04–5:35):
I’m very honored to be here once again. I really appreciate the opportunity.
So it has been three years since the alleged chemical attack in Douma and nearly two years since the cover-up of the OPCW investigation into Douma was exposed, but yet, all this time later, nothing has been done to address the serious flaws in this investigation. So what I want to do today is go through some of the few arguments that have been made by the OPCW and other state parties in trying to justify why they refused to meet with the inspectors—the original inspectors who challenged the cover-up of their probe—and why they refuse to investigate any of the scientific fraud that was alleged.
So, again, what are the basic details of this incident?
April 7, 2018, something horrible happens in Douma, dead bodies are filmed inside of a building, the U.S., Britain and France a few days later bomb Syria, accusing it of committing a chemical attack in Douma. Shortly after that, the OPCW gets a team on the ground—for the first time actually having a fact-finding mission reaching the site of an alleged chemical attack in Syria. They investigate, about a year later, in March 2019, a final report comes out, and that report claims that there are reasonable grounds to believe that a chlorine attack occurred in Douma, and the inference of the report is that Syria was guilty, so it aligns with the narrative put out by the countries that bombed Syria.
But then we get a pretty extraordinary series of leaks that exposes a major deception, and these leaks show that the actual inspectors who went to Douma did not reach the conclusion that was put out by the OPCW, and they actually found that there was no evidence of a chemical attack in Douma. They did not speculate as to what actually happened, but what they said is that there was no evidence of a chemical attack.
We saw that because one of the leaks we got was the original report from the Douma team—they wrote a report that was never released to the public until it was leaked. That report was peer-reviewed by the team, it was set for publication, but then something very strange happened: the author of that original report, the chief author, who’s been identified by the OPCW as inspector B, he discovered that someone above him had actually been trying to rush out a bogus report, taking the original report, removing all the key scientific findings, and adding unsupported conclusions including speculating that chlorine gas was likely used and falsely claiming that there were high concentrations of that chemical. So inspector B thwarted the publication of this bogus report, because he sent an email of protest that was sent out to all the Douma team members and some officials. That led to the publication of the interim report in early July 2018. The interim report removed the bogus claims of the doctored bogus report, but it also removed some of the key claims of the original report—so, sort of a compromise.
And around that time something else very curious happened: a U.S. delegation visited the Douma team and tried to lobby them into reaching the conclusion that there was a chlorine attack. Now, it’s very common, as we know, for state parties to share information, share views, share intelligence, but a one-on-one briefing in which the inspectors, who are supposed to be protected, come face-to-face with the U.S. delegation is very unusual. The first Director-General of the OPCW José Bustani told me at The Grayzone that he would never have allowed such a meeting to take place.
Something else happens around then, too. The original team, including inspector B, who was the chief author of the original report, they are all sidelined, they’re taken off the Douma investigation, and they're replaced by a so-called “Core team”, and this is comprised mostly of people who never set foot in Syria, and that is the team that produced the final report.
So then we get these leaks showing all this happening, and then what happens, well, the OPCW refuses to meet with the inspectors, they refuse to investigate the doctoring of the original report. When José Bustani, the first Director-General of the OPCW, tries to speak at the UN Security Council when he was invited, certain member states block him from speaking. And what’s interesting about that is José Bustani, being the first Director-General, helped design the protocols used for inspection missions like Douma, he also worked with the key dissenting inspectors—because these two inspectors, they’re so experienced at the OPCW that their tenure coincides with the organization’s first leader—and also he has experienced what we’re talking about today, which is putting pressure on the OPCW, because when he was the chief, he was forced out by the U.S., because he was standing in the way of the Iraq War. He was trying to bring Iraq into the Chemical Weapons Convention, and he was even physically threatened, as he has talked about publicly.
And meanwhile also some deceptive claims are put out in the media about the inspectors, they are disseminated through state-funded outlets, including the BBC, funded by the U.K., and also a website called Bellingcat, which is funded by the U.S., making false claims about the inspectors and the investigation.
2. A detailed explanation, accompanied by slides, of what was altered in the final OPCW report and why OPCW’s claims of the bulk of analysis having been carried out after inspectors A and B had left the organization are a lie (5:36–21:29).
3. Closing comments and a question to U.S. and U.K. ambassadors, who for some strange reason have left the meeting by that time (21:30–27:22).
The above copied and pasted is an insight to the ongoing cover ups and conspiracies that you are prepared to believe, David.
Here is a link to the full video;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ge4W9e6YeXQ&ab_channel=TheGrayzone
-
Another “Arria formula” meeting concerning OPCW’s doctored investigation of alleged “chemical attacks” in Douma has been held at the UN on April 16, 2021. Aaron Maté was present again and has delivered what is, in my opinion, the best overview of the story so far?—detailed, yet succinct, eloquent and accessible.
The 27-minute video consists of three parts:
1. An introduction for those unfamiliar with the story, which is so good that I’ve decided to type it out here (0:04–5:35):
I’m very honored to be here once again. I really appreciate the opportunity.
So it has been three years since the alleged chemical attack in Douma and nearly two years since the cover-up of the OPCW investigation into Douma was exposed, but yet, all this time later, nothing has been done to address the serious flaws in this investigation. So what I want to do today is go through some of the few arguments that have been made by the OPCW and other state parties in trying to justify why they refused to meet with the inspectors—the original inspectors who challenged the cover-up of their probe—and why they refuse to investigate any of the scientific fraud that was alleged.
So, again, what are the basic details of this incident?
April 7, 2018, something horrible happens in Douma, dead bodies are filmed inside of a building, the U.S., Britain and France a few days later bomb Syria, accusing it of committing a chemical attack in Douma. Shortly after that, the OPCW gets a team on the ground—for the first time actually having a fact-finding mission reaching the site of an alleged chemical attack in Syria. They investigate, about a year later, in March 2019, a final report comes out, and that report claims that there are reasonable grounds to believe that a chlorine attack occurred in Douma, and the inference of the report is that Syria was guilty, so it aligns with the narrative put out by the countries that bombed Syria.
But then we get a pretty extraordinary series of leaks that exposes a major deception, and these leaks show that the actual inspectors who went to Douma did not reach the conclusion that was put out by the OPCW, and they actually found that there was no evidence of a chemical attack in Douma. They did not speculate as to what actually happened, but what they said is that there was no evidence of a chemical attack.
We saw that because one of the leaks we got was the original report from the Douma team—they wrote a report that was never released to the public until it was leaked. That report was peer-reviewed by the team, it was set for publication, but then something very strange happened: the author of that original report, the chief author, who’s been identified by the OPCW as inspector B, he discovered that someone above him had actually been trying to rush out a bogus report, taking the original report, removing all the key scientific findings, and adding unsupported conclusions including speculating that chlorine gas was likely used and falsely claiming that there were high concentrations of that chemical. So inspector B thwarted the publication of this bogus report, because he sent an email of protest that was sent out to all the Douma team members and some officials. That led to the publication of the interim report in early July 2018. The interim report removed the bogus claims of the doctored bogus report, but it also removed some of the key claims of the original report—so, sort of a compromise.
And around that time something else very curious happened: a U.S. delegation visited the Douma team and tried to lobby them into reaching the conclusion that there was a chlorine attack. Now, it’s very common, as we know, for state parties to share information, share views, share intelligence, but a one-on-one briefing in which the inspectors, who are supposed to be protected, come face-to-face with the U.S. delegation is very unusual. The first Director-General of the OPCW José Bustani told me at The Grayzone that he would never have allowed such a meeting to take place.
Something else happens around then, too. The original team, including inspector B, who was the chief author of the original report, they are all sidelined, they’re taken off the Douma investigation, and they're replaced by a so-called “Core team”, and this is comprised mostly of people who never set foot in Syria, and that is the team that produced the final report.
So then we get these leaks showing all this happening, and then what happens, well, the OPCW refuses to meet with the inspectors, they refuse to investigate the doctoring of the original report. When José Bustani, the first Director-General of the OPCW, tries to speak at the UN Security Council when he was invited, certain member states block him from speaking. And what’s interesting about that is José Bustani, being the first Director-General, helped design the protocols used for inspection missions like Douma, he also worked with the key dissenting inspectors—because these two inspectors, they’re so experienced at the OPCW that their tenure coincides with the organization’s first leader—and also he has experienced what we’re talking about today, which is putting pressure on the OPCW, because when he was the chief, he was forced out by the U.S., because he was standing in the way of the Iraq War. He was trying to bring Iraq into the Chemical Weapons Convention, and he was even physically threatened, as he has talked about publicly.
And meanwhile also some deceptive claims are put out in the media about the inspectors, they are disseminated through state-funded outlets, including the BBC, funded by the U.K., and also a website called Bellingcat, which is funded by the U.S., making false claims about the inspectors and the investigation.
2. A detailed explanation, accompanied by slides, of what was altered in the final OPCW report and why OPCW’s claims of the bulk of analysis having been carried out after inspectors A and B had left the organization are a lie (5:36–21:29).
3. Closing comments and a question to U.S. and U.K. ambassadors, who for some strange reason have left the meeting by that time (21:30–27:22).
The above copied and pasted is an insight to the ongoing cover ups and conspiracies that you are prepared to believe, David.
Here is a link to the full video;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ge4W9e6YeXQ&ab_channel=TheGrayzone
David's mind.. "does not compute... Does not compute... System malfunction.. Alert.. alert.. System malfunction... Does not compute". Either that, or he will find one minor error, and use that error to dismiss the whole thing.
-
David's mind.. "does not compute... Does not compute... System malfunction.. Alert.. alert.. System malfunction... Does not compute". Either that, or he will find one minor error, and use that error to dismiss the whole thing.
I listened to the whole video and there are no errors, minor or otherwise. David will dismiss it as conspiracy. It matters little to David that the credentials of those making these allegations are impeccable and self evidently the most qualified people to call the "official findings" into serious question. Jose Bustani, the first Director General of the OPCW and the entire original investigation team that visited the site cannot be dismissed by anyone reasonable but I expect David will. Like you say, Roch, "does not compute".
David probably believes that the White Helmets are an entirely legitimate civil defence and rescue organisation rather than an obvious fake org. affiliated with, and no different from, Al Qaeda, Al Nusra et al and entirely funded by belligerent actors(US, UK etc.) and founded by Western intel agencies (MI6).
The whole shit show is about to come crashing down in my view. The pushback against the criminal actions of Western govts has clearly become coordinated with China, Russia, Iran and others now acting in alliance (united they will stand but divided they would each eventually succumb).
Syria has been a bridge too far and the Russian intervention has been a complete game changer. Russian missile and air defence technology upended the board. The whole Western strategy has backfired spectacularly and US/UK, NATO, Israel and the corrupt vassal Arab Kingdoms are in a weak and getting weaker position.
The targets of this coalition of criminal countries have been forced together and are "winning" on nearly every front of this Undeclared War.
The Saudis facing imminent defeat in Yemen and now offering peace terms to the Houthis. 7 years of brutal war waged with backing training and arms as well as personnel from UK and US and the Saudis begging for peace terms as they are about to lose Marib their last stronghold.
Iran hilariously refusing to allow the US into the JCPOA talks in Vienna and setting the terms for the US to return. How the mighty have fallen. An excellent and informative article on the wider picture of these talks by Pepe Escobar featured on The Saker blog linked below if interested
https://thesaker.is/the-vienna-shadowplay/
Syria is lost and Western desperation will not change that. Venezuelan regime change never really got off the ground, the pathetic recognition of Guaido not taken seriously by anyone, definitely no Venezuelans. Iran openly sending tankers of oil to Venezuela contrary to the illegal and unilateral sanctions of the USA which has been shown to be a paper tiger in it's powerlessness to act. A few seizures of vessels not sent by Iran govt. but containing Iranian oil to give the pretence of power is all the US could do. Iran stated publicly to the world when they sent a fleet of tankers to Venezuela in defiance of US sanctions that, "the safety of the vessels was guaranteed by Iranian missile power". The US did nothing.
The US/UK et al are letting their mouths write cheques that their arses can't cash. The rest of the world sees and hears this whether our media talk about it or not.
Provocations in Ukraine have been shown to be a non starter. Russia's massive and rapid force build up demonstrating the futility of any assault to would be belligerents.
The attempt to stir things up in the South China Sea and the Taiwan issue being a non starter for similar reasons to Ukraine. This doesn't even name all countries we are involved in attempting to "regime change" to use the euphemism for violent overthrowing of governments and sponsored invasions.
The criminal cabals currently masquerading as Western govts are currently in check all over the board. There are no good moves left, which leaves only bad ones.
The financial system of the West, such as it is, is dependent on looting and profiteering from other countries. We have been stopped and are in check.
Hopefully NATO will fracture. Cracks are already appearing.
-
So what is this debunked conspiracy theory which caused my disappearance?
That Novichok nerve agents were invented by the CIA and the attacks are staged. I debunked this in posts #481, #484 and #487.
You will probably now claim all my sources are fake, but that's not going to change anything.
-
Thank you David. That is extremely helpful.
:))
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/ufo-russia-us-putin-harry-reid-b1840336.html (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/ufo-russia-us-putin-harry-reid-b1840336.html)
-
That Novichok nerve agents were invented by the CIA and the attacks are staged. I debunked this in posts #481, #484 and #487.
You will probably now claim all my sources are fake, but that's not going to change anything.
I have never claimed that Novichok was invented by the CIA and if you have managed to come away with that interpretation then you need to brush up your reading skills. The Novichok attacks are self evidently staged by UK intel. The narrative of them all falls apart on contact with reason. Your "debunkings" are obviously nothing of the sort.
If you are really interested in the truth of Salisbury then perhaps start here;
https://www.theblogmire.com/category/skripal-case/
Salisbury resident Rob Slane who already ran a blog was caught up in this local story and his blog followed the twist, turns and obvious lies in real time.
Can you quote me claiming that Novichok was invented by the CIA?
-
Some recent news from Garry Kasporov.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/apr/30/garry-kasparov-interview-chess-vladimir-putin-russia (https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/apr/30/garry-kasparov-interview-chess-vladimir-putin-russia)
-
I listened to the whole video and there are no errors, minor or otherwise. David will dismiss it as conspiracy. It matters little to David that the credentials of those making these allegations are impeccable and self evidently the most qualified people to call the "official findings" into serious question. Jose Bustani, the first Director General of the OPCW and the entire original investigation team that visited the site cannot be dismissed by anyone reasonable but I expect David will. Like you say, Roch, "does not compute".
David probably believes that the White Helmets are an entirely legitimate civil defence and rescue organisation rather than an obvious fake org. affiliated with, and no different from, Al Qaeda, Al Nusra et al and entirely funded by belligerent actors(US, UK etc.) and founded by Western intel agencies (MI6).
The whole shit show is about to come crashing down in my view. The pushback against the criminal actions of Western govts has clearly become coordinated with China, Russia, Iran and others now acting in alliance (united they will stand but divided they would each eventually succumb).
Syria has been a bridge too far and the Russian intervention has been a complete game changer. Russian missile and air defence technology upended the board. The whole Western strategy has backfired spectacularly and US/UK, NATO, Israel and the corrupt vassal Arab Kingdoms are in a weak and getting weaker position.
The targets of this coalition of criminal countries have been forced together and are "winning" on nearly every front of this Undeclared War.
The Saudis facing imminent defeat in Yemen and now offering peace terms to the Houthis. 7 years of brutal war waged with backing training and arms as well as personnel from UK and US and the Saudis begging for peace terms as they are about to lose Marib their last stronghold.
Iran hilariously refusing to allow the US into the JCPOA talks in Vienna and setting the terms for the US to return. How the mighty have fallen. An excellent and informative article on the wider picture of these talks by Pepe Escobar featured on The Saker blog linked below if interested
https://thesaker.is/the-vienna-shadowplay/
Syria is lost and Western desperation will not change that. Venezuelan regime change never really got off the ground, the pathetic recognition of Guaido not taken seriously by anyone, definitely no Venezuelans. Iran openly sending tankers of oil to Venezuela contrary to the illegal and unilateral sanctions of the USA which has been shown to be a paper tiger in it's powerlessness to act. A few seizures of vessels not sent by Iran govt. but containing Iranian oil to give the pretence of power is all the US could do. Iran stated publicly to the world when they sent a fleet of tankers to Venezuela in defiance of US sanctions that, "the safety of the vessels was guaranteed by Iranian missile power". The US did nothing.
The US/UK et al are letting their mouths write cheques that their arses can't cash. The rest of the world sees and hears this whether our media talk about it or not.
Provocations in Ukraine have been shown to be a non starter. Russia's massive and rapid force build up demonstrating the futility of any assault to would be belligerents.
The attempt to stir things up in the South China Sea and the Taiwan issue being a non starter for similar reasons to Ukraine. This doesn't even name all countries we are involved in attempting to "regime change" to use the euphemism for violent overthrowing of governments and sponsored invasions.
The criminal cabals currently masquerading as Western govts are currently in check all over the board. There are no good moves left, which leaves only bad ones.
The financial system of the West, such as it is, is dependent on looting and profiteering from other countries. We have been stopped and are in check.
Hopefully NATO will fracture. Cracks are already appearing.
An enjoyable read.
-
Garry Kasparov on Vladimir Putin, his global influence, and standing up for freedom
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Og7BWUQuqw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Og7BWUQuqw)
-
An enjoyable read.
Thanks Roch. Did you read the Escobar piece "The Vienna Shadowplay"? A really informative analysis on the JCPOA negotiations and how the Iranian missile program and capabilities have effected the balance of power informing these negotiations. Escobar always worth reading on middle east issues particularly, very well informed and a great writer with a reputation going back decades.
It is unfortunate that we no longer have a functioning media which allows more voices and opinions but any real debate soon makes apparent the duplicity of the Western block led by US/UK. The pretence of humanitarian concerns are soon exposed as a sham. It goes something like this:
Country X happens to be sitting on vast resources of oil/gas/lithium etc. or is in a strategic location. The President/leader of country X is dictated the terms of a deal by a coalition of Countries Y and told that if he doesn't agree then there will be consequences. The president/leader refuses these terms and chooses to do a more beneficial, to his country, deal with country Z instead.
Coalition of countries Y react to this snub by funding and arming terrorists to foment terror in country X. The intel agencies plant stories via their compliant pretend journalists in mainstream western media to disseminate stories about the evil leader of country X, killing in some particularly evil way(not humanitarian killing like ours). Much hand wringing and pearl clutching takes place and it is decided that "Something Must be done!!"
Economic pressure is exerted via sanctions whilst at the same time terror groups are armed and funded to weaken Country X from within.
If this fails to succeed then coalition of countries Y ramp up the propaganda against Country X president and intervene directly militarily but only, obviously, to save the children/women(insert minority group here) from the evil president who is gassing/slaughtering (insert unspeakably evil deed here).
Rinse and repeat.
If our media functioned they would have detected the above pattern but apparently, they haven't. I suspect that it relies on the old adage that, "it is amazing the things a person can fail to understand when their job depends on not understanding it"
Western media now is just the intelligence agencies communicating directly to the public what they are supposed to believe. It demonstrates more than anything the fragility of the whole financial structure of the neoliberal western system. Freedom of speech and thought comes with too many caveats.
The world is waking up. It can't, and won't, last.
-
i hope to hell that vlad comes and librates us soon.
-
i hope to hell that vlad comes and librates us soon.
I think that Vlad is hoping for the Western populations to save themselves from their megalomaniac warmongering leaders without the need for war. The alternative to us not stopping their criminal rampage is way more dangerous.
-
I would have said that China was the most worrying country.
-
Gringo, what do you think of George Monbiot and Double Down News? His videos are good.
Here's one from DoubleDown on press freedom day with a good brief explanation of why we should all care about Assange;
https://www.doubledown.news/watch/2020/28/october/the-trial-of-julian-assange-should-terrify-everyone-matt-kennard
-
I would have said that China was the most worrying country.
This is unfortunatly China's century. Whoever is Putins successor, will be from a generation that dosent share his outdated Cold War mentality.
In 20 or 30 years time when China becomes the pre-eminent world power, Russia will come much closer to Europe and America and possibly even be a NATO member.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtHX23Trvy4&ab_channel=OxfordEconomicsSociety
If you have an hour to spare, some real depth on the history and current status of the ever raging economic/financial war which ultimately is the real force behind actual wars. The always readable/watchable Michael Hudson.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtHX23Trvy4&ab_channel=OxfordEconomicsSociety
If you have an hour to spare, some real depth on the history and current status of the ever raging economic/financial war which ultimately is the real force behind actual wars. The always readable/watchable Michael Hudson.
I did spare an hour and I suppose in some ways it was better than playing a computer game, though in some areas the Marxist view of economics leaves much to be desired.
-
I did spare an hour and I suppose in some ways it was better than playing a computer game, though in some areas the Marxist view of economics leaves much to be desired.
Fair play for sparing the hour, Steve. I think voices like Hudson should be heard and given a platform more in the mainstream media. There was a time, not so long ago, when voices that challenged the current orthodoxy were given a platform and issues were discussed with way more nuance than is tolerated now.
-
I did spare an hour and I suppose in some ways it was better than playing a computer game, though in some areas the Marxist view of economics leaves much to be desired.
We, as a society, need to get back to healthy debate, which is by definition robust and confrontational at times. Whatever happened to sticks and stones, speaking of which, a more enjoyable hour possibly than the Hudson video; the always funny and provocative Dave Chappelle Netflix special (Sticks and Stones). Assuming you have Netflix the link is below.
https://www.netflix.com/gb/title/81140577
-
We, as a society, need to get back to healthy debate, which is by definition robust and confrontational at times. Whatever happened to sticks and stones, speaking of which, a more enjoyable hour possibly than the Hudson video; the always funny and provocative Dave Chappelle Netflix special (Sticks and Stones). Assuming you have Netflix the link is below.
https://www.netflix.com/gb/title/81140577
That sounds marvellous. Unfortunately, it can't work in reality. What actually happens is that some people believe they have a divine right to insult other people. When their victims complain, the abusers start gaslighting, saying that the people they victimise are being 'hypersensitive' and it is, after all, 'free speech' and the victims should grow up, be thicker skinned and stop crying like babies. When their victims respond by adopting the behaviour of the abusers and insulting them back - giving them a taste of their own medicine - the abusers suddenly decide they are not in favour of free speech after all and would rather everybody is polite.
In reality, free speech can't work in any complex social situation, such as a society or an online forum, because human nature works against it.
-
That sounds marvellous. Unfortunately, it can't work in reality. What actually happens is that some people believe they have a divine right to insult other people. When their victims complain, the abusers start gaslighting, saying that the people they victimise are being 'hypersensitive' and it is, after all, 'free speech' and the victims should grow up, be thicker skinned and stop crying like babies. When their victims respond by adopting the behaviour of the abusers and insulting them back - giving them a taste of their own medicine - the abusers suddenly decide they are not in favour of free speech after all and would rather everybody is polite.
In reality, free speech can't work in any complex social situation, such as a society or an online forum, because human nature works against it.
Plus Brandolini's law makes debating with conspiracy nuts rather difficult.
-
Plus Brandolini's law makes debating with conspiracy nuts rather difficult.
Do you believe that the term ’conspiracy’ initially evolved as an insult? Or for that matter, the term ’conspire'?
-
Do you believe that the term ’conspiracy’ initially evolved as an insult? Or for that matter, the term ’conspire'?
I believe the term has extraterrestrial origins that NASA and the Pentagon don't want us to know about!
-
I believe the term has extraterrestrial origins that NASA and the Pentagon don't want us to know about!
We did agree that you'd keep that to yourself, David. Me and nugnug have revealed too much already about the aliens and their visits to our planet.
-
That sounds marvellous. Unfortunately, it can't work in reality. What actually happens is that some people believe they have a divine right to insult other people. When their victims complain, the abusers start gaslighting, saying that the people they victimise are being 'hypersensitive' and it is, after all, 'free speech' and the victims should grow up, be thicker skinned and stop crying like babies. When their victims respond by adopting the behaviour of the abusers and insulting them back - giving them a taste of their own medicine - the abusers suddenly decide they are not in favour of free speech after all and would rather everybody is polite.
In reality, free speech can't work in any complex social situation, such as a society or an online forum, because human nature works against it.
Free speech does work in social situations, complex or otherwise, when people are left to police their own speech. Those who step beyond the bounds of acceptability are dealt with by having their position ridiculed, shunned or ignored and excommunicated. That is how it has always worked before the advent of cancel culture and the "right" to not be offended.
To give an example; In 2009 the BNP were enjoying something of a surge in support, having taken a number of council seats and seemingly poised to take a parliamentary seat (Barking, fittingly) in the 2010 election.
Controversially this led to an invitation for Nick Griffin, the then BNP leader, onto "Question Time", a decision which led to protests and much hand wringing for "allowing" Griffin's hate speech, fascism etc.
I felt then, and still do, that if the BNP had enough support to justify inclusion, then this should be the only metric used. It is not for some anonymous arbiter to decide what we can say or hear. Who is this "Arbiter/Judge of allowed opinions? In a healthy society it is us who decide what is acceptable or the accepted norm by healthy debate; this may offend some but there is no other way.
Shutting down people like Griffin encourages the perception that others are scared of debating his "truths" and that he is being silenced. The best way to defeat "bad ideas" is with better ideas. It is notable that Griffin performed badly on QT and his ideas were shown to be hateful, ignorant, ill thought through rhetoric, not surprisingly. Shutting him down and giving in to the mob would probably have gained the BNP more votes; Allowing him to expose himself publicly with his batshit ideas allowed those who may be swayed, to see the BNP for what they really were.
Your examples are dealing with a separate issue. The argument used by you that people are for free speech until they are offended is over generalising. Which people? All of them? Were I to take offence at something you, or anybody else says, I don't expect anyone to censor you on my behalf. I can choose to respond or ignore.
The policing of debate between individuals or groups is a different issue to the policing of allowable discourse in the public commons by who knows who or what. They are not in the same ballpark, so I don't understand the relevance of abusers, victims, gas-lighters and cry babies to the issue at hand. It isn't about polite or impolite.
-
Free speech is when a Human Rights Watch report in to Israel’s treatment of Palestinians is given adequate coverage in the mainstream press & media and debated accordingly.
-
Free speech is when a Human Rights Watch report in to Israel’s treatment of Palestinians is given adequate coverage in the mainstream press & media and debated accordingly.
Occupied Palestine is never debated accordingly. It will eventually end the same way as the previous apartheid state.
-
Your examples are dealing with a separate issue. The argument used by you that people are for free speech until they are offended is over generalising. Which people? All of them?
Yes, everybody.
Free speech has never existed in reality in any complex society in all history. It isn't possible.
-
Free speech has never existed in reality in any complex society in all history.
It may be stretching it view this forum as some kind of microcosm of complex society, but overall, ngb1066 has done a decent job in upholding the right of free speech on here.
-
It may be stretching it view this forum as some kind of microcosm of complex society, but overall, ngb1066 has done a decent job in upholding the right of free speech on here.
I'm not suggesting otherwise, but he has also admitted that the liberal approach is more down to the lack of moderators available than any policy of 'free speech'. And I have just had one of my posts censored.
I maintain my assertion: free speech cannot exist because it is not fundamentally possible except under very contingent conditions, due to human nature.
Even during the height of English liberalism in the late 19th. century, there were blasphemy and obscenity laws in this country and these were enforced in the criminal courts right into the 20th. century. We now have 'ideological' blasphemy laws in the various Public Order Acts and other statutes.
-
I'm not suggesting otherwise, but he has also admitted that the liberal approach is more down to the lack of moderators available than any policy of 'free speech'. And I have just had one of my posts censored.
I maintain my assertion: free speech cannot exist because it is not fundamentally possible except under very contingent conditions, due to human nature.
Even during the height of English liberalism in the late 19th. century, there were blasphemy and obscenity laws in this country and these were enforced in the criminal courts right into the 20th. century. We now have 'ideological' blasphemy laws in the various Public Order Acts and other statutes.
As I have said, your examples are a separate issue to the one I raised. The initial post, to which you responded, where I suggested that we needed a "healthy debate" was obviously in the context of the limited "Overton window" terms of debate in our media currently. That was clear from the previous posts.
The issue of insults, victims, abusers and gaslighting that you raised is a straw man. Your posts supposedly being censored is also an entirely separate issue and not really a free speech issue. The "censoring" in question being merely the redacting of you calling other posters "sad wankers". If your posts are deemed outside the loosely applied rules of this forum by the owner/mods, it is not a curtailment of your free speech anyway.
The provider of the space for our discussions, is entitled to set the "rules of the house". Not allowing abusive language to other posters is just the same as anyone not allowing it in their home to other guests. It doesn't stop you saying it, if that is how you want to frame free speech, just not in this house.
There is a real issue with the lack, or limited terms, of discussion in our media about issues of vital importance. Foreign affairs, in particular, and also the limited terms of political and economic discussion. The Michael Hudson video was an example of how our media and politicians limit the terms of debate.
Foreign affairs are the most egregious example. Media and politicians all sing from the same sheet. The US/UK populations have zero say on the foreign misadventures conducted via our governments and dissent is not allowed. Nobody in the mainstream media will stray outside of the accepted terms of debate on Syria, Iran, Russia, China, Venezuela and on and on. They all know that their jobs depend on knowing that Assad, the "Mullahs", Putin, Xi (or the chinese generally), Maduro and on and on are evil and that we should save(insert "minority group here) from the (insert "evil dictator" here) doing (insert unspeakably evil deed here). The script is entirely predictable and the obvious lies that it is based on are discussed openly in other media around the world.
Israeli aggression against Palestinians as well as Syria, Iran and on and on is discussed openly, even in Israeli media, but is extremely limited in "western democracies" where any criticism of the apartheid state is deemed antisemitism and discussion of Israel is limited in politics and media.
A call for a "healthy debate, which is by definition robust and confrontational at times", is an obvious reference to issues like the above, not a call for calling other posters "sad wankers" in someone's house.
-
As I have said, your examples are a separate issue to the one I raised. The initial post, to which you responded, where I suggested that we needed a "healthy debate" was obviously in the context of the limited "Overton window" terms of debate in our media currently. That was clear from the previous posts.
The issue of insults, victims, abusers and gaslighting that you raised is a straw man. Your posts supposedly being censored is also an entirely separate issue and not really a free speech issue. The "censoring" in question being merely the redacting of you calling other posters "sad wankers". If your posts are deemed outside the loosely applied rules of this forum by the owner/mods, it is not a curtailment of your free speech anyway.
The provider of the space for our discussions, is entitled to set the "rules of the house". Not allowing abusive language to other posters is just the same as anyone not allowing it in their home to other guests. It doesn't stop you saying it, if that is how you want to frame free speech, just not in this house.
There is a real issue with the lack, or limited terms, of discussion in our media about issues of vital importance. Foreign affairs, in particular, and also the limited terms of political and economic discussion. The Michael Hudson video was an example of how our media and politicians limit the terms of debate.
Foreign affairs are the most egregious example. Media and politicians all sing from the same sheet. The US/UK populations have zero say on the foreign misadventures conducted via our governments and dissent is not allowed. Nobody in the mainstream media will stray outside of the accepted terms of debate on Syria, Iran, Russia, China, Venezuela and on and on. They all know that their jobs depend on knowing that Assad, the "Mullahs", Putin, Xi (or the chinese generally), Maduro and on and on are evil and that we should save(insert "minority group here) from the (insert "evil dictator" here) doing (insert unspeakably evil deed here). The script is entirely predictable and the obvious lies that it is based on are discussed openly in other media around the world.
Israeli aggression against Palestinians as well as Syria, Iran and on and on is discussed openly, even in Israeli media, but is extremely limited in "western democracies" where any criticism of the apartheid state is deemed antisemitism and discussion of Israel is limited in politics and media.
A call for a "healthy debate, which is by definition robust and confrontational at times", is an obvious reference to issues like the above, not a call for calling other posters "sad wankers" in someone's house.
I simply say that free speech can't exist. I maintain that's true. It's not separate to what you say, even if you want it to be. Sorry.
I agree that posters should not normally insult each other, but in your comments above you ignore the conduct of the person I addressed the comment to, which is why I mentioned it in the first place.
My point, again, is that I am saying free speech cannot exist. I am not saying that is a good or bad thing. I merely say, again, free speech cannot exist. If somebody wants to 'censor' or redact my posts in 'their house', that is their right, and that proves my point. This is, after all, a public forum with no prior moderation. It's not just a private space, like somebody's front sitting room.
-
That Novichok nerve agents were invented by the CIA and the attacks are staged. I debunked this in posts #481, #484 and #487.
You will probably now claim all my sources are fake, but that's not going to change anything.
Don’t know if seen this David, it seems they’ve identified the third man in the Salisbury Novichok incident?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10012831/Ringleader-Salisbury-murder-plot-former-Russian-paratrooper-captain.html
-
the bbc have apolgised for there lies about the syrian gass attack how long before they have to apolgise for there coverage of this as well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9w0LRLnBkU&t=191s
-
the bbc have apolgised for there lies about the syrian gass attack how long before they have to apolgise for there coverage of this as well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9w0LRLnBkU&t=191s
The direction of travel in world power is obvious to all observers now. Western powers are fighting like rats in a sack and the long overdue demise of the Anglosphere Empire is accelerating. NATO has shown itself as an extension of US Foreign Policy hawks. The so called "alliance" had no say in the Afghan withdrawal despite it being allegedly a NATO mission.
The Western powers are a generation behind in weapons tech and are no longer the threat they once were. The numerous failed regime change operations and the now discredited sanctions regime are showing the world that the US/UK empire is in rapid decline and a paper tiger. Venezuela, Iran, Hezbollah simply ignoring US threats and issuing their own. US unable to do anything about it. China moving into those markets with investment and win win deals.
Barring the pumped out 24/7 propaganda against Russia, China, Iran and on.. the rest of the world can see where power is going. The SCO is gaining in strength, powerful alliances are being formed. The Western powers are rapidly declining and unable to stem the inevitable tide.
The West will be driven out of the Middle East/West Asia. Iran vowed that this will be the revenge for the assassination of General Soleimani. Since then the US have been under increasing pressure and the military presence is being drawn down rapidly.
Iran's missile attack in the aftermath of the assassination demonstrated explicitly US powerlessness in the region. The US didn't respond because they understood what the price would be for doing so.
-
Don’t know if seen this David, it seems they’ve identified the third man in the Salisbury Novichok incident?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10012831/Ringleader-Salisbury-murder-plot-former-Russian-paratrooper-captain.html
They are all decorated military personnel, one of them being awarded "Hero of the Russian Federation". There is not a chance in hell any of them get extradited.
-
They are all decorated military personnel, one of them being awarded "Hero of the Russian Federation". There is not a chance in hell any of them get extradited.
I would agree but, I’m wrong if I agree and I’m wrong if I disagree 😂😂😂. But I agree anyway 100%
-
The direction of travel in world power is obvious to all observers now. Western powers are fighting like rats in a sack and the long overdue demise of the Anglosphere Empire is accelerating. NATO has shown itself as an extension of US Foreign Policy hawks. The so called "alliance" had no say in the Afghan withdrawal despite it being allegedly a NATO mission.
The Western powers are a generation behind in weapons tech and are no longer the threat they once were. The numerous failed regime change operations and the now discredited sanctions regime are showing the world that the US/UK empire is in rapid decline and a paper tiger. Venezuela, Iran, Hezbollah simply ignoring US threats and issuing their own. US unable to do anything about it. China moving into those markets with investment and win win deals.
Barring the pumped out 24/7 propaganda against Russia, China, Iran and on.. the rest of the world can see where power is going. The SCO is gaining in strength, powerful alliances are being formed. The Western powers are rapidly declining and unable to stem the inevitable tide.
The West will be driven out of the Middle East/West Asia. Iran vowed that this will be the revenge for the assassination of General Soleimani. Since then the US have been under increasing pressure and the military presence is being drawn down rapidly.
Iran's missile attack in the aftermath of the assassination demonstrated explicitly US powerlessness in the region. The US didn't respond because they understood what the price would be for doing so.
I don't accept this at all. China is a totalitarian state and could fall at any time. Russia is a democracy in name only and its economy is smaller than Italy's and dependent on oil and gas. Iran is a pariah state and sponsor of terrorism. Nobody really knows how the world will shape in the coming decades.
-
I don't accept this at all. China is a totalitarian state and could fall at any time. Russia is a democracy in name only and its economy is smaller than Italy's and dependent on oil and gas. Iran is a pariah state and sponsor of terrorism. Nobody really knows how the world will shape in the coming decades.
https://www.cmcmarkets.com/en-gb/trading-guides/largest-economies-in-the-world
Have a scan through the link above, Steve. It is a list of the top 10 economies with a little commentary on each. A few takeaways from this below;
1) Although the US is nominally the No.1 economy by GDP, it is acknowledged that China is No.1 by PPP which is also acknowledged to be widely accepted as the more relevant measure.
2) China's economy is massively diverse and not reliant on any particular sector.
3) The UK GDP of just over 3 trillion(in dollars) includes 80% (yes 80%) contribution from the Services sector, mostly tourism, finance and banking.
Without the financial and banking hub, the UK produces, innovates very little. Such a heavy reliance on tourism, finance and banking is surely less healthy than the Russian economy. Idiotic Western sanctions merely made the Russians diversify their economy.
The context free repeating of the mantra that Russia's economy is smaller than Italy's is meaningless so here is some context. Russia is the 11th largest economy in the world, Italy is 8th out of around 200.
Russia's economy is larger than all but 3 EU countries (Germany, France, Italy). Doesn't sound so bad now does it?
All but 7 countries in the world have a smaller economy than Italy. What have you got against the Italians?
China is now arguably the largest economy in the world and by Purchasing Power Parity it isn't even arguable. They have lifted hundreds of millions from poverty. What makes you honestly believe that the Chinese are unhappy with their leadership? Your notion that China could fall at any time is utter fantasy. Take a look at the civil unrest all around the Western hemisphere. There seems way more division in amongst Western populations.
Iran is a pariah state only in the minds of the warmongering psychopaths of the Western powers. Their "sponsorship of terrorism" being nothing of the sort. If you were genuinely concerned about countries who sponsor terrorism then Iran wouldn't even be in the top 20.
Iran have done more to fight ISIS/Al qaeda et al than anyone. This is acknowledged by all. They are the strongest component of the "Axis of Resistance" against Israel and of the Shia Crescent which extends to Lebanon and gives access to the Med and therefore Europe for gas etc. It is these geopolitical considerations that lead to Iran being labelled as a pariah state. You are simply repeating what you are trained to repeat, Steve.
The Western powers are pretty clearly being forced from the Middle East. It is undeniable and happening now. Power is shifting economically and militarily from the West.
-
Russia is a democracy in name only and its economy is smaller than Italy's and dependent on oil and gas.
You may wonder, and if you don't you ought to, why you have been taught that Russia is dependent on oil and gas but are unaware that the UK economy is reliant on the Service Industry to a far greater extent than Russia is reliant on gas and oil. Why have you not read that so often that you can repeat it like a mantra?
Sounds to me that the media and politicians need to be talking about our own economies over reliance on one sector of the economy and maybe leave the Russians to worry about their own.
Ask more questions from the superficial information that you are given, Steve, and see it as the propaganda that it is rather than consuming it as serious news commentary.
-
Russia is a democracy in name only and its economy is smaller than Italy's and dependent on oil and gas.
You may wonder, and if you don't you ought to, why you have been taught that Russia is dependent on oil and gas but are unaware that the UK economy is reliant on the Service Industry to a far greater extent than Russia is reliant on gas and oil. Why have you not read that so often that you can repeat it like a mantra?
Sounds to me that the media and politicians need to be talking about our own economies over reliance on one sector of the economy and maybe leave the Russians to worry about their own.
Ask more questions from the superficial information that you are given, Steve, and see it as the propaganda that it is rather than consuming it as serious news commentary.
Putin is very clever make no mistake about it.
-
Putin is very clever make no mistake about it.
I don't. He, is self evidently streets ahead of the intellectual midgets controlling the UK/US etc.
-
I don't. He, is self evidently streets ahead of the intellectual midgets controlling the UK/US etc.
Steve and David won't look so clever when they're sharing a slop bucket in some gulag in the Urals. That's what you get for slating mother Russia.
-
Steve and David won't look so clever when they're sharing a slop bucket in some gulag in the Urals. That's what you get for slating mother Russia.
It is the colonialist mentality that they don't even acknowledge they hold, Roch. They are fretting (they imagine with independent thought) about the very things that their Imperial masters tell them to worry about.
Russia bad, smaller economy than Italy, over dependent on gas, dictatorial, Iran bad, blah blah. They do as they are told and imagine that they are independent free thinkers.
-
Steve and David won't look so clever when they're sharing a slop bucket in some gulag in the Urals. That's what you get for slating mother Russia.
I don’t think the Greenback is as strong as it used to be Roch, I don’t mean currency wise, I mean Sanctions, it was always a strong tool to use on lesser Countries, unless things alter its becoming a blunt force?
-
It is the colonialist mentality that they don't even acknowledge they hold, Roch. They are fretting (they imagine with independent thought) about the very things that their Imperial masters tell them to worry about.
Russia bad, smaller economy than Italy, over dependent on gas, dictatorial, Iran bad, blah blah. They do as they are told and imagine that they are independent free thinkers.
I did recognise this myself ::). It's not that those other countries are great bastions of everything that is good, it's just that 'our' countries that feed Steve and Dave's opinions are pretty bad in many aspects in their own right.
-
I don’t think the Greenback is as strong as it used to be Roch, I don’t mean currency wise, I mean Sanctions, it was always a strong tool to use on lesser Countries, unless things alter its becoming a blunt force?
I'm not sure RJ, you may be right. I just wish the world could get on. Now I sound like a Miss World contestant who likes animals and wants 'world peace' :))
-
I don’t think the Greenback is as strong as it used to be Roch, I don’t mean currency wise, I mean Sanctions, it was always a strong tool to use on lesser Countries, unless things alter its becoming a blunt force?
Sanctions are an overused and now backfiring ploy to bully smaller and weaker countries. The rest of the world have had enough of Western bullying and the rise and obvious collaboration over many years of Russia, China and Iran is now way too strong in every way to succumb to Western bullying. The Western Imperialists have no more tools left to use.
Karma is a bitch.
-
I'm not sure RJ, you may be right. I just wish the world could get on. Now I sound like a Miss World contestant who likes animals and wants 'world peace' :))
This is all everybody wants, except our colonialist masters who want to control everything. We will all be better served when the Western imperialists are put back in their box and their rampage for world domination is finally defeated.
The time will soon enough come that neither David, Steve nor anybody else will be able to, nor want to deny Western crimes. Events will force this change soon enough.
-
I would agree but, I’m wrong if I agree and I’m wrong if I disagree 😂😂😂. But I agree anyway 100%
This topic has become a conspiratard cesspit.
-
This topic has become a conspiratard cesspit.
It's above your reading and comprehension level.
-
I'm not sure RJ, you may be right. I just wish the world could get on. Now I sound like a Miss World contestant who likes animals and wants 'world peace' :))
I agree Roch, (not that you sound like Miss World) keep doing what your doing mate and get out and about. That’s why I’ve become a plant eater 😂😂🙈. I’m just gluing myself to the M25 until we have world order 🙈
-
I agree Roch, (not that you sound like Miss World) keep doing what your doing mate and get out and about. That’s why I’ve become a plant eater 😂😂🙈. I’m just gluing myself to the M25 until we have world order 🙈
Was seriously thinking of ditching most meat again myself. Would prefer to have it as a treat, purchased from the best animal welfare sources etc. Re walking, don't get out anywhere near as much as should. Well done with your biking, commendable. 👍
-
I did recognise this myself ::). It's not that those other countries are great bastions of everything that is good, it's just that 'our' countries that feed Steve and Dave's opinions are pretty bad in many aspects in their own right.
The UK and the US are easily the world's no.1 warmongers. The trail of destruction this century alone since 9/11 has seen millions killed, countless millions displaced causing a massive refugee crisis, country after country destroyed by bombing, invasion and occupation. The death toll is surely beyond counting by now. You don't get to lecture other countries on Human Rights with a record like ours.
The most basic human right is the right to life. Too many have been murdered in our name for us to lecture Iran, Russia, China or anybody else. Not a single country that we have targeted is anywhere near the level of criminality displayed by US/UK and their merry band of vassals, satraps and hangers on.
-
A few developments lately that emphasise the obvious long term collaboration and planning of China, Russia, Iran and others to arrive at the position we are in today. The acceptance of Iran as a full member of the SCO, the huge 25 year 400 billion deal between Iran and China, the alliance between Russia and China to counter Empire. A
The development of weapons and defence systems in all of these countries has been geared towards defending against a peer rival. They have been able to concentrate on this development whilst the US/UK NATO have been spending their ill gotten gains on Aircraft carriers, overpriced jets and munitions required to invade and subdue small and weak countries.
Their not very subtle plan to isolate Russia and China in order to be able to pick them off one at a time ran out of time.
In the great game of geopolitical chess we have created threats all over the board, all have been countered successfully and we are now overstretched, in check, and checkmate is imminent.
History is a narrative not a series of random events. The invasions of the last 20/30 years were planned. They were not as a result of Saddam having WMD, Taliban sheltering Bin Laden or whatever piss poor excuse was given by our overlords and gobbled up by apologists like David. We don't live in a democratic country because we have no say in whether our countries blood and treasure is spent to spill the blood and steal the treasure of other countries. If we did have a say, none of these wars would happen in our name unless we put David in charge.
Missile and Air Defence technology of Russia, China and even Iran has made Western tech obsolete. Try parking your aircraft carrier strike group within strike range of any of those countries and see what happens. Not that we will see that, because our military planners know exactly what would happen. The planes would be shot down, the missiles intercepted and any planes that did manage to return would have no aircraft carrier to land on.
The Western Imperialists are way behind on missile tech and air defence, never saw it coming and are now attempting a series of Hail Mary's and ramping up the propaganda for the domestic audience but the writing is on the wall.
-
A few developments lately that emphasise the obvious long term collaboration and planning of China, Russia, Iran and others to arrive at the position we are in today. The acceptance of Iran as a full member of the SCO, the huge 25 year 400 billion deal between Iran and China, the alliance between Russia and China to counter Empire. A
The development of weapons and defence systems in all of these countries has been geared towards defending against a peer rival. They have been able to concentrate on this development whilst the US/UK NATO have been spending their ill gotten gains on Aircraft carriers, overpriced jets and munitions required to invade and subdue small and weak countries.
Their not very subtle plan to isolate Russia and China in order to be able to pick them off one at a time ran out of time.
In the great game of geopolitical chess we have created threats all over the board, all have been countered successfully and we are now overstretched, in check, and checkmate is imminent.
History is a narrative not a series of random events. The invasions of the last 20/30 years were planned. They were not as a result of Saddam having WMD, Taliban sheltering Bin Laden or whatever piss poor excuse was given by our overlords and gobbled up by apologists like David. We don't live in a democratic country because we have no say in whether our countries blood and treasure is spent to spill the blood and steal the treasure of other countries. If we did have a say, none of these wars would happen in our name unless we put David in charge.
Missile and Air Defence technology of Russia, China and even Iran has made Western tech obsolete. Try parking your aircraft carrier strike group within strike range of any of those countries and see what happens. Not that we will see that, because our military planners know exactly what would happen. The planes would be shot down, the missiles intercepted and any planes that did manage to return would have no aircraft carrier to land on.
The Western Imperialists are way behind on missile tech and air defence, never saw it coming and are now attempting a series of Hail Mary's and ramping up the propaganda for the domestic audience but the writing is on the wall.
Enjoyed reading that.
-
Enjoyed reading that.
It is unfortunate, Roch, that our fourth estate is so failing in its duty to speak truth to power and is in fact in the service of power, that it hasn't already been said multiple times. You know this already though.
-
It is the colonialist mentality that they don't even acknowledge they hold, Roch. They are fretting (they imagine with independent thought) about the very things that their Imperial masters tell them to worry about.
Russia bad, smaller economy than Italy, over dependent on gas, dictatorial, Iran bad, blah blah. They do as they are told and imagine that they are independent free thinkers.
Well I am an independent free thinker. This is modern China: https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/262405115777116497/
The country is No. 100 on purchasing power parity (PPP) here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita
Iran is a sponsor of Hezbollah. Some of us recall the 1983 Beirut bombings. https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/beirut-barracks-blown-up
Don't give me the mantra that China and Russia are the future. Alexander Litvinenko, Boris Nemtsov, Alexander Navalny, the Skripal poisonings. You really are in denial if you don't see the pattern.
-
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/sep/23/2380-for-a-life-uk-forces-linked-to-nearly-300-afghan-civilian-deaths
-
Well I am an independent free thinker. This is modern China: https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/262405115777116497/
The country is No. 100 on purchasing power parity (PPP) here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita
Iran is a sponsor of Hezbollah. Some of us recall the 1983 Beirut bombings. https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/beirut-barracks-blown-up
Don't give me the mantra that China and Russia are the future. Alexander Litvinenko, Boris Nemtsov, Alexander Navalny, the Skripal poisonings. You really are in denial if you don't see the pattern.
Independent free thinker are you Steve? You can discern all you need to know about "Modern China" from some pinterest pictures of workers napping. Do you know what confirmation bias means?
Your claim that China is No. 100 on PPP due to your reliance on Wikipedia is easily debunked. Here is a link which helpfully gives the rankings according to the IMF and the World Bank who I am sure you will agree are a more reliable source. The CIA world handbook also agrees with this. China No.1
https://statisticstimes.com/economy/countries-by-gdp-ppp.php
Hezbollah are regarded as a legitimate resistance against Israeli aggression in Lebanon and if you remember the Beirut barrack bombings (I know that you don't and it is something that came up on your google confirmation bias search) then you would also recall the massacre at Shabila Refugee camp in Lebanon the previous year when up to 3,500 Lebanese Shia and Palestinian refugees were slaughtered with the active connivance of the IDF and the Multinational Forces( those who were bombed the next year in the only bit that you allegedly "recall"). These are not the only events in Lebanon during that volatile time (an ongoing civil war and an invasion by Israel). The Israeli invasion being the catalyst of Hezbollah forming.
The Beirut barrack bombings didn't happen in a vacuum. If you don't know the history and context of events it is best to say nothing otherwise everyone else can tell that you don't really know what your talking about. You lack the knowledge to form any kind of coherent argument and it shows in your context-less and information free posts.
Your final "point" in your incoherent chunter was just to mention a series of murdered or allegedly poisoned Russians and the accompanying rather obvious Western Intel bullshit where we are to believe that Putin orders all the murders of Russians from his Black Sea Supervillain home.
I follow studiously, and have done for decades, geopolitics/world events. You are way out of your depth and it is obvious that your interest in world events amounts to whatever you are told to think by a remarkably uniform Western media. You do no other reading, you have no long term interest and you attempt to enter debates with this pathetic level of knowledge and the results of a google search which seems to confirm your obvious bias. You are completely unaware of any arc of history and just see a series of random events.
I could talk without notes for hours linking those narratives that have happened over the last 30 years.
You are a not very bright bootlicker who would run out of things to say after 30 seconds. Even that would be incoherent.
I am not even going to waste my time responding to any more of your bullshit and will talk past anything that you post as it is unworthy of any debate. You have nothing to say.
-
Viewing the last 30 years or so as part of an ongoing historical narrative, the huge changes in the balance of world power are clear to see and undeniable. The adage that "history never repeats but it often rhymes" was never more apt.
Our frame of easy reference begins with the Soviets finishing withdrawing from Afghanistan in 1989 after the US funded the Mujahideen including some fella called Osama Bin Laden(whatever became of him?). This funding, training and arming of the Mujahideen was apparently the brainchild of Zbigniew Brezenski, National Security Adviser to President Jimmy Carter in order to bleed the Soviets by drawing them into their own "Vietnam".
Our frame of reference ends with where we are today, with the US withdrawing from Afghanistan after a failed 20 year war after being sucked into Afghanistan themselves and giving themselves their own new "Vietnam". History really does rhyme.
In the 3 decades between these momentous and rhyming events in world history the Soviet Union has disappeared. A weakened Russia and its vast natural wealth was almost lost to the predatory Western capitalists and their equally loathsome Russian Gangster partners who almost destroyed Russia under the easily manipulated and drunk Yeltsin during the 90's. The most loathsome of these individuals are protected with their ill gotten gains in London with the UK routinely ignoring the extradition requests from Russia for these obvious financial criminals and gangsters.
In parallel to the plundering of Russian natural wealth, US NATO ramped up the aggression believing their own propaganda that they had won the cold war and were now a sole superpower able to do as they pleased.
Western aggression increased with the invasions under false pretences of Iraq, Somalia, Former Yugoslavia, Iraq (again), Libya. Aggression and sanctions against Russia, Iran, Venezuela. The coup in Ukraine and their failed gambit to seize the prize of Crimea. This is by no means a full list of Empire crimes which are way too numerous to detail.
Syria is where the line was eventually put in the sand by Putin and Russia's intervention, after being convinced by General Soleimani (later assassinated in a cowardly and despicable act by the US) to intervene. Hezbollah and the IRGC fighting alongside regular Syrian Army units against the various jihadis armed and funded by the US. Russia with just a small air force offering air cover for SAA, Hezbollah and IRGC were the most responsible for the beating back of the Western sponsored Sunni Wahhabist jihadists in Syria and the beginning of the end of the current aggressions.
Since Syria, Western failures are piling up. The attempted coup and installation of Guiado in Venezuela has failed miserably. Iran even defying the US sanctions and blockade on not only themselves but also Venezuela by exporting fuel to Venezuela and threatening the US that delivery is guaranteed by Iranian missile power. The US did nothing to enforce their so called sanctions.
US support and arming of Saudi aggression(along with the UK and others) against Yemen about to come to the same end as their misadventure in Afghanistan.
The US and other foreign forces will gradually draw down more and more in Iraq and Syria as well as the rest of the Middle East. It is happening now because they are now vulnerable and un-supportable. Missile tech really has changed the rules of the game. The West is a generation behind.
The arrival of Putin onto the political scene in 1999, in hindsight, was the beginning of an earthquake in world politics and power. This is why Western leaders hate Putin. Not because he is any of the things he is accused of being, but because he is the most influential shaper of the unfolding 21st century. He is the most effective and influential politician of our age. His impact on world events is huge. His detractors understand this perfectly well which only increases their impotent rage.
-
Pepe Escobar on the latest SCO summit and the implications. Worth a read; https://www.unz.com/pescobar/eurasia-takes-shape-how-the-sco-just-flipped-the-world-order/
-
Your claim that China is No. 100 on PPP due to your reliance on Wikipedia is easily debunked. Here is a link which helpfully gives the rankings according to the IMF and the World Bank who I am sure you will agree are a more reliable source. The CIA world handbook also agrees with this. China No.1
https://statisticstimes.com/economy/countries-by-gdp-ppp.php
The link Steve provided is for GDP per capita (per average individual) Not total GDP
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP))
-
The link Steve provided is for GDP per capita (per average individual) Not total GDP
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP))
In terms of GDP nominal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal))
-
Why Wikipedia is so great -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Why_Wikipedia_is_so_great (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Why_Wikipedia_is_so_great)
-
Why Wikipedia is so great -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Why_Wikipedia_is_so_great (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Why_Wikipedia_is_so_great)
Wikipedia is the Idiots guide which explains your overuse of it as a source. It is useful as an easy reference for uncontested information and nothing more.
A Wiki entry on why wiki is so great :-[ you are embarrassing.
No one but a half wit relies on sources like Wiki to understand world politics.
-
Wikipedia is the Idiots guide which explains your overuse of it as a source. It is useful as an easy reference for uncontested information and nothing more.
A Wiki entry on why wiki is so great :-[ you are embarrassing.
No one but a half wit relies on sources like Wiki to understand world politics.
In reality, we know that David isn't a halfwit by any means. However, his views sometimes seem a bit black or white. Very fixed.
-
In reality, we know that David isn't a halfwit by any means. However, his views sometimes seem a bit black or white. Very fixed.
Read David's contributions throughout this thread, Roch. Halfwit is too kind. He is all over the place, has no coherent view of the world and dishes out insults to everyone. His position changes with the wind because his understanding is non existent. He is a halfwit.
-
Here is a conspiratard Wikipedia for Roch and Gringo :))
https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Main_Page (https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Main_Page)
https://wikispooks.com/wiki/2005_London_bombings (https://wikispooks.com/wiki/2005_London_bombings)
-
https://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/putin-the-poisoner-more-doubts-over-attempts-to-delegitimize-russias-leader/
A fairly long but really good read by Philip Giraldi, covers Litvinenko, the Skripals and others.
He also understands the course of history as a narrative arc rather than random unconnected events.
-
https://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/putin-the-poisoner-more-doubts-over-attempts-to-delegitimize-russias-leader/
A fairly long but really good read by Philip Giraldi, covers Litvinenko, the Skripals and others.
He also understands the course of history as a narrative arc rather than random unconnected events.
There was no documentary evidence that Adolf Hitler was responsible for the Holocaust.
The Skripals have not returned to Russia. https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2020/06/08/skripals-relocate-to-new-zealand-following-russian-poisoning-attempt-reports-a70504
As for the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, when they give their citizens human rights as we expect in the West I might take them a little more seriously. https://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:11210:0::NO::P11210_COUNTRY_ID:103404
-
An excellent article on (the always riveting) Moon of Alabama blog dissecting not only the Russian elections but the uninformed drivel that passes as reporting in the West.
I have pointed out previously how removed from reality Western media are when it comes to Russian politics. Their labelling of anyone who doesn't like Putin and who courts the Western media (Nemtsov, Navalny et al.) as some kind of serious opposition figure is laughable and flies in the face of reality.
As previously pointed out, Navanly and Nemtsov are as relevant to Russian politics as Tommy Robinson or Paul Golding are to UK politics. If either of those were gunned down in London, followed by Russian media claiming that a leading opposition figure had been murdered within yards of Whitehall and speaking ominously of some suspecting that Boris Johnson himself had ordered the hit. Reporting like that would immediately discredit any organisation making such self evidently batshit crazy claims. That some lap it up when it is about Russia says much. It is still batshit.
Anyway back to the MOA article which dissects the latest New York Times piece and demonstrates the above and more. The NYT laying bare their own shortcomings and ignorance in their own editorial.
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2021/09/ny-times-acknowledges-us-failure-in-russia-adds-more-to-what-caused-it.html#more
-
Your final "point" in your incoherent chunter was just to mention a series of murdered or allegedly poisoned Russians and the accompanying rather obvious Western Intel bullshit where we are to believe that Putin orders all the murders of Russians from his Black Sea Supervillain home.
Do you believe two decorated GRU veterans used fake names and fake passports just so they could fly over here to see Salisbury Cathedral one weekend as they claim?
-
Do you believe two decorated GRU veterans used fake names and fake passports just so they could fly over here to see Salisbury Cathedral one weekend as they claim?
Who cares whether or not that is true? Only the gullible consider that a relevant question.
The amount of holes, contradictions and obvious lies in the official version of events make it plain that they were not here to murder the Skripals with the world's most lethal nerve agent either.
A nerve agent so deadly it killed no-one? It remained almost "pure" despite allegedly being left exposed for days on the door knob of the Skripals home?( Which inexplicably led to the entire roof being removed and replaced due to contamination. All hidden from view under protective screens. The door remained in place ???)
After applying the deadly nerve agent ( a gel, allegedly via aerosol? from a perfume bottle supposedly discovered months later which our intrepid Russian poisoners had resealed in its box and plastic wrapping ???) our highly trained GRU assassins went to do some shopping in Salisbury where they are seen a number of times on CCTV :-[
Is it believable that our two Russian agents after carrying out a chemical weapons attack in a foreign state( a clear act of war, it should be noted) instead of immediately getting the fuck out of Dodge instead went window shopping? It is embarrassing to fall for this shit.
Anyway back to the unconvincing, made up on the hoof by idiots as they went along, story of our highly trained (but inexplicably inept) GRU assassins and their world's most deadly( but strangely ineffective) nerve agent.
After smearing the door knob (unseen despite CCTV at the Skripals) Sergei and Yulia both allegedly touched the door knob in order to become contaminated with the WMDNA and then went for a drive, a drink and then something to eat. Luckily, no one else was contaminated by the WMDNA, despite the Skripals being in very public places. Some 4 hours after contacting the WMDNA both Yulia and Sergei succumbed simultaneously to similar symptons outside the restaurant where they had just eaten.
By serendipitous coincidence the first responder on the scene of this WMDNA attack just happened to be British Army Most Senior Nurse, Colonel Alison McCourt. She gave first aid without becoming contaminated but she probably knew some magic tricks, especially with her being a specialist in chemical weapons, and still at that time taking part in Chemical Weapons exercise, Toxic Dagger, at Porton Down just 8 miles away. Check it out yourself. How lucky for the Skripals. Anyway our GRU poisoners were still window shopping in Salisbury just 500 yards away at this time.
The two, not dead, victims of the WMDNA attack are unheard from and consular access denied to Russia by the UK to Yulia who herself expressed a wish to return to Russia in her sole(stage managed by UK intel) appearance since their disappearance. If Russia were denying access to the UK in a roles reversed situation then opprobrium would be huge and rightly so. Yulia is a Russian citizen. The UK gov need to prove that Yulia has free will. Sergei also, but Yulia is not convicted of anything and is a Russian citizen. To all appearances she is being held, against her will, by the UK gov.
There are reams of commentary on the available facts that make a mockery of the official position. The above does not remotely slightly mark, never mind scratch the surface of the holes and contradictions in the UK chemical attack tall tale. For those interested in attempting to get to the truth of the Salisbury incident, there are many excellent sites that covered this(the Blogmire https://www.theblogmire.com/category/skripal-case/ my personal favourite) and some really interesting questions to delve into. David's question doesn't even come up.
-
Who cares whether or not that is true? Only the gullible consider that a relevant question.
The amount of holes, contradictions and obvious lies in the official version of events make it plain that they were not here to murder the Skripals with the world's most lethal nerve agent either.
A nerve agent so deadly it killed no-one? It remained almost "pure" despite allegedly being left exposed for days on the door knob of the Skripals home?( Which inexplicably led to the entire roof being removed and replaced due to contamination. All hidden from view under protective screens. The door remained in place ???)
After applying the deadly nerve agent ( a gel, allegedly via aerosol? from a perfume bottle supposedly discovered months later which our intrepid Russian poisoners had resealed in its box and plastic wrapping ???) our highly trained GRU assassins went to do some shopping in Salisbury where they are seen a number of times on CCTV :-[
Is it believable that our two Russian agents after carrying out a chemical weapons attack in a foreign state( a clear act of war, it should be noted) instead of immediately getting the fuck out of Dodge instead went window shopping? It is embarrassing to fall for this shit.
Anyway back to the unconvincing, made up on the hoof by idiots as they went along, story of our highly trained (but inexplicably inept) GRU assassins and their world's most deadly( but strangely ineffective) nerve agent.
After smearing the door knob (unseen despite CCTV at the Skripals) Sergei and Yulia both allegedly touched the door knob in order to become contaminated with the WMDNA and then went for a drive, a drink and then something to eat. Luckily, no one else was contaminated by the WMDNA, despite the Skripals being in very public places. Some 4 hours after contacting the WMDNA both Yulia and Sergei succumbed simultaneously to similar symptons outside the restaurant where they had just eaten.
By serendipitous coincidence the first responder on the scene of this WMDNA attack just happened to be British Army Most Senior Nurse, Colonel Alison McCourt. She gave first aid without becoming contaminated but she probably knew some magic tricks, especially with her being a specialist in chemical weapons, and still at that time taking part in Chemical Weapons exercise, Toxic Dagger, at Porton Down just 8 miles away. Check it out yourself. How lucky for the Skripals. Anyway our GRU poisoners were still window shopping in Salisbury just 500 yards away at this time.
The two, not dead, victims of the WMDNA attack are unheard from and consular access denied to Russia by the UK to Yulia who herself expressed a wish to return to Russia in her sole(stage managed by UK intel) appearance since their disappearance. If Russia were denying access to the UK in a roles reversed situation then opprobrium would be huge and rightly so. Yulia is a Russian citizen. The UK gov need to prove that Yulia has free will. Sergei also, but Yulia is not convicted of anything and is a Russian citizen. To all appearances she is being held, against her will, by the UK gov.
There are reams of commentary on the available facts that make a mockery of the official position. The above does not remotely slightly mark, never mind scratch the surface of the holes and contradictions in the UK chemical attack tall tale. For those interested in attempting to get to the truth of the Salisbury incident, there are many excellent sites that covered this(the Blogmire https://www.theblogmire.com/category/skripal-case/ my personal favourite) and some really interesting questions to delve into. David's question doesn't even come up.
Its a simple yes or no answer Gringo. But as expected you wont answer it because -
Answering Yes would make you look either stupid or dishonest and answering No would contradict your entire warped world view. And to nobodies surprise you write a long winded word salad with links to some conspiratards blog instead. :))
-
After smearing the door knob (unseen despite CCTV at the Skripals) Sergei and Yulia both allegedly
What is your source for there being CCTV coverage at the Skripals front door?
-
Gingo asks how did the Scripals manage to go for a meal despite already having touched the contaminated door handle.
The Skripals were exposed to an Acetylcholinesterase inhibitor in liquid form. Liquid nerve agents can take a few minutes to several hours to start working. Novtchok and VX are both the same classes of nerve agent. So I make an educated guess that the same applies for liquid forms that take time to metabolise through the skin.
"Symptoms will appear within a few seconds after exposure to the vapor form of VX, and within a few minutes to up to 18 hours after exposure to the liquid form."
https://emergency.cdc.gov/agent/vx/basics/facts.asp (https://emergency.cdc.gov/agent/vx/basics/facts.asp)
Gringo then asks how comes nobody else got effected despite being in close proximity. The answer is simple, they would not have aquired an adequate dose (as intended) this explains why the only victim who died is the one who sprayed it on herself thinking it was perfume.
"The dose makes the poison
One of the fundamental principles of toxicology was first proposed by a 16th century alchemist, known as Paracelsus, who is often credited with the statement “sola dosis facit venenum”, or “the dose makes the poison”. It means that all substances are capable of being toxic if administered in a sufficient dose. This applies to normally innocuous chemicals such as water, as well as highly toxic materials such as nerve agents."
https://theconversation.com/novichok-how-are-victims-surviving-poisoning-145574 (https://theconversation.com/novichok-how-are-victims-surviving-poisoning-145574)
Gringo then asks how comes the Scripals survived? Answer is simple, they received medial help. Antidotes are well know and well kept by medical staff.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15862082/ (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15862082/)
Now that I have answered three questions. Hopefully now Gringo will answer my questions
About whether he believes two decorated GRU veterans used fake names and fake passports just so they could fly over here to see Salisbury Cathedral one weekend as they claim.
I would also like an explanation of why they didn't actually book a tour of the Cathedral since none of the staff reported seeing them in or outside the Cathedral. And what they were actually doing there that day.
Whether Gringo thinks these questions are relevant or not, they seem very important to me and I anticipate his answers.
-
Its a simple yes or no answer Gringo. But as expected you wont answer it because -
Answering Yes would make you look either stupid or dishonest and answering No would contradict your entire warped world view.
Do you understand basic inference?
I stated at the very beginning of my post.
"Who cares whether or not that is true? Only the gullible consider that a relevant question.
The amount of holes, contradictions and obvious lies in the official version of events make it plain that they were not here to murder the Skripals with the world's most lethal nerve agent either."
Note the word "either" at the end of that sentence. Your question was answered at the very beginning. To be clear, although it was already to those who understand inference, No.
Nor do I believe that they were there to carry out a chemical weapons attack. That could and should have been easily inferred by use of the word "either".
My initial response was just to write the single word, "no", but I thought I would take the opportunity afforded by your dumb and irrelevant question to pose some better ones and signpost the way to Salisbury resident and blogger Rob Slane's excellent website and archive of the ever evolving story.
The signposting isn't for you, David. Your world view would be hung, drawn and quartered with the entrails displayed publicly. It is for those of a more questioning nature who are perhaps unaware of the rolling reporting from Salisbury from Rob Slane via his blog. Lots of comments and excellent collaboration with an army of informed questioning commenters, largely locals. Here it is again
https://www.theblogmire.com/category/skripal-case/
There you go, David. Answering No to your stupid question has zero effect on my "warped world view" because it's a stupid question. By answering the way I did (which means no in case it isn't clear enough still for David with his comprehension problems) the interested are probably now checking out the more relevant questions via the Blogmire.
-
Gingo asks how did the Scripals manage to go for a meal despite already having touched the contaminated door handle.
The Skripals were exposed to an Acetylcholinesterase inhibitor in liquid form. Liquid nerve agents can take a few minutes to several hours to start working. Novtchok and VX are both the same classes of nerve agent. So I make an educated guess that the same applies for liquid forms that take time to metabolise through the skin.
"Symptoms will appear within a few seconds after exposure to the vapor form of VX, and within a few minutes to up to 18 hours after exposure to the liquid form."
https://emergency.cdc.gov/agent/vx/basics/facts.asp (https://emergency.cdc.gov/agent/vx/basics/facts.asp)
Gringo then asks how comes nobody else got effected despite being in close proximity. The answer is simple, they would not have aquired an adequate dose (as intended) this explains why the only victim who died is the one who sprayed it on herself thinking it was perfume.
"The dose makes the poison
One of the fundamental principles of toxicology was first proposed by a 16th century alchemist, known as Paracelsus, who is often credited with the statement “sola dosis facit venenum”, or “the dose makes the poison”. It means that all substances are capable of being toxic if administered in a sufficient dose. This applies to normally innocuous chemicals such as water, as well as highly toxic materials such as nerve agents."
https://theconversation.com/novichok-how-are-victims-surviving-poisoning-145574 (https://theconversation.com/novichok-how-are-victims-surviving-poisoning-145574)
Gringo then asks how comes the Scripals survived? Answer is simple, they received medial help. Antidotes are well know and well kept by medical staff.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15862082/ (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15862082/)
Now that I have answered three questions. Hopefully now Gringo will answer my questions
About whether he believes two decorated GRU veterans used fake names and fake passports just so they could fly over here to see Salisbury Cathedral one weekend as they claim.
I would also like an explanation of why they didn't actually book a tour of the Cathedral since none of the staff reported seeing them in or outside the Cathedral. And what they were actually doing there that day.
Whether Gringo thinks these questions are relevant or not, they seem very important to me and I anticipate his answers.
They aren't relevant and your answers are moronic and are just the repeated and discredited claims of the UK gov. Given your inability to grasp basic inference, I have little confidence in your ability to ask or answer anything of relevance.
They were treated initially for fentanyl overdose, incidentally. They weren't given antidotes allegedly until much later. Do some reading.
-
Its a simple yes or no answer Gringo. But as expected you wont answer it because -
Answering Yes would make you look either stupid or dishonest and answering No would contradict your entire warped world view.
Do you understand basic inference?
I stated at the very beginning of my post.
"Who cares whether or not that is true? Only the gullible consider that a relevant question.
The amount of holes, contradictions and obvious lies in the official version of events make it plain that they were not here to murder the Skripals with the world's most lethal nerve agent either."
Note the word "either" at the end of that sentence. Your question was answered at the very beginning. To be clear, although it was already to those who understand inference, No.
Nor do I believe that they were there to carry out a chemical weapons attack. That could and should have been easily inferred by use of the word "either".
My initial response was just to write the single word, "no", but I thought I would take the opportunity afforded by your dumb and irrelevant question to pose some better ones and signpost the way to Salisbury resident and blogger Rob Slane's excellent website and archive of the ever evolving story.
The signposting isn't for you, David. Your world view would be hung, drawn and quartered with the entrails displayed publicly. It is for those of a more questioning nature who are perhaps unaware of the rolling reporting from Salisbury from Rob Slane via his blog. Lots of comments and excellent collaboration with an army of informed questioning commenters, largely locals. Here it is again
https://www.theblogmire.com/category/skripal-case/
There you go, David. Answering No to your stupid question has zero effect on my "warped world view" because it's a stupid question. By answering the way I did (which means no in case it isn't clear enough still for David with his comprehension problems) the interested are probably now checking out the more relevant questions via the Blogmire.
The conspiratard running Blogmire is not going to bring up my questions because the author has no explanation that is coherent with with the conspiracy theory he is writing about. Conspiratard authors always construct their writing with a narrow scope of information consisting of nothing but inconsequential facts, unsubstantiated claims, wild guesses and ought right lies.
I have already answered enough of the what you have brought up. In having a civilized debate its only fair you now answer mine.
-
Its a simple yes or no answer Gringo. But as expected you wont answer it because -
Answering Yes would make you look either stupid or dishonest and answering No would contradict your entire warped world view.
Do you understand basic inference?
I stated at the very beginning of my post.
"Who cares whether or not that is true?
I care (obviously) since I am asking. When do you intend on answering?
-
The conspiratard running Blogmire is not going to bring up my questions because the author has no explanation that is coherent with with the conspiracy theory he is writing about. Conspiratard authors always construct their writing with a narrow scope of information consisting of nothing but inconsequential facts, unsubstantiated claims, wild guesses and ought right lies.
I have already answered enough of the what you have brought up. In having a civilized debate its only fair you now answer mine.
You don't even debate let alone debate civilly. Everyone who challenges your BBC/Foreign Office approved world view is a Conspiritard. This is your answer to everything. As a consequence I will post answers to the questions that I see fit to engage with. Yours aren't fit for purpose and can be safely talked past and ignored.
-
I care (obviously) since I am asking. When do you intend on answering?
Are you really this thick? or is this a poor attempt at a joke?
-
You don't even debate let alone debate civilly. Everyone who challenges your BBC/Foreign Office approved world view is a Conspiritard. This is your answer to everything. As a consequence I will post answers to the questions that I see fit to engage with. Yours aren't fit for purpose and can be safely talked past and ignored.
Refusing to answer questions will do you no favours. It only demonstrates you are in denial or unwilling to accept you are (once again) wrong.
Q: Do you believe two decorated GRU veterans used fake names and fake passports just so they could fly over here to see Salisbury Cathedral one weekend as they claim? Yes or No?
Q: Why did they not book an interior tour of the Cathedral they allegedly so wanted to see?
Q: If they didn't actually visit the Cathedral as claimed what were they actually doing and why did they need a cover story?
Q: What is your source for the Scipals house being under CCTV?
-
Are you really this thick? or is this a poor attempt at a joke?
Do you believe two decorated GRU veterans used fake names and fake passports just so they could fly over here to see Salisbury Cathedral one weekend as they claim? Yes or No?
It only takes two seconds to type "yes" or "no" you can do it Gringo be brave 8)
-
Everyone who challenges your BBC/Foreign Office approved world view is a Conspiritard.
David, this is pretty accurate ::)
-
Gringo do you know Tony Kevin by any chance..https://youtu.be/XpMNoeIuEys
-
David, this is pretty accurate ::)
A Conspiratard is someone who believes in stupid conspiracy theories despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary and generally lacks critical thinking skills.
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=conspiratarded (https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=conspiratarded)
-
Do you believe two decorated GRU veterans used fake names and fake passports just so they could fly over here to see Salisbury Cathedral one weekend as they claim?
That was post 645, David.
In my reply in the very next post, as I have patiently explained to you, it could be inferred quite easily that no I didn't believe that, but you didn't infer anything and repeated the question again.
From my reply in post 650 which you have quoted but obviously not read/comprehended.
"Note the word "either" at the end of that sentence. Your question was answered at the very beginning. To be clear, although it was already to those who understand inference, No."
Later on from the same post,
My initial response was just to write the single word, "no", but I thought I would take the opportunity afforded by your dumb and irrelevant question to pose some better ones and signpost the way to Salisbury resident and blogger Rob Slane's excellent website and archive of the ever evolving story.
Again from the same post,
There you go, David. Answering No to your stupid question has zero effect on my "warped world view"
At the end of the same post,
By answering the way I did (which means no in case it isn't clear enough still for David with his comprehension problems)
That post 650, was explaining to you, whilst deliberately piss taking admittedly, that I had already answered No by inference in post 646. The question was answered another 4 times (4 times!) explicitly in 650 as shown above.
I asked if you were really that thick or piss taking(655) when you asked again in 653. Your reply was to ask again(657), at least confirming that it wasn't a piss take, or so I inferred.
You add more questions when you can't even comprehend the answer to your first.
To be clear, before I move on from your state approved propaganda;
Your second question, if you could comprehend, was rendered irrelevant by the oft repeated answer to the first, also oft repeated, question. ie. the reason they didn't book a Cathedral tour was because they didn't go to visit the Cathedral, duh! Didn't need to ask, did you.
The reasons for visiting Salisbury is unknowable, but as I posited some time ago in reply to you on this thread, it is likely that there was some meeting/drop set up between Skripal and the two Russians. The available evidence of the Russians visits to Salisbury and their movements are way more suggestive of this being the motive rather than some bizarre cack handed nerve agent attack. The Novichok story should be too idiotic for anyone to believe. Window shopping after a clear act of war and being booked on a regular flight. There is no evidence to even suggest that they went to Salisbury to smear Novichok on a door handle that would stand up in a talking shop, never mind an impartial court. Regardless, it is for those making the accusations to have credible evidence before any alibi is needed.
https://www.theblogmire.com/the-claim-that-cctv-shows-the-salisbury-poisoning-suspects-in-the-vicinity-of-mr-skripals-house-is-deeply-misleading/
https://www.theblogmire.com/cctv-footage-shows-petrov-boshirov-close-to-the-skripals-only-its-not-at-mr-skripals-house/
A couple from the archives of the Blogmire. showing the CCTV evidence for the contradictory idiocy that it is (which now has the highest accolade available on this forum). David's conspiritard label which is confirmation enough for everyone else to know it must be good.
The CCTV coverage at the Skripal home, looking back, was assumed. He lived on the same road as his "D noticed" MI6 handler, Pablo Miller. It is a reasonable assumption made by many that Skripal and Miller's homes both had security(given their profession).
The officially and unofficially disclosed CCTV and stills evidence does not in any way support the wild claims.
Why was the roof and entire roof space replaced under view obscuring screens by workers in Hazmat due to supposed contamination? but not the door?
Why was the bottle, supposedly found by Charlie Rowley, in unopened Cellophane wrap?
Where is the opened bottle? Elsewhere? Did they have a cellophane wrapping machine with them?
Do you consider it plausible that Yulia and Sergei both succumbed simultaneously but 4 hours after supposedly contacting a deadly nerve agent?
Given their different genders, ages and weight, is it more likely that whatever they succumbed to was applied at the bench where they both, simultaneously collapsed?
Why no word from Sergei, even to his mother, who he previously contacted weekly?
Why only one stage managed appearance from Yulia? Where are they? Why no contact despite Yulia making clear in the one time she has spoken that she intended to return?
What are the UK gov hiding?
Are the Skripals political prisoners?
-
Gringo do you know Tony Kevin by any chance..https://youtu.be/XpMNoeIuEys
I am unsure whether you are asking this in good faith but will assume so and answer.
I didn't know Tony Kevin until I watched the video that you linked to and decided to research him further. The blatant propaganda, unsupported claims and outright lies in the video cannot be taken seriously. Tony Kevin was the only adult in a room full of children. His experience speaks volumes. The rest of it was just a series of not credible people making wild claims. One of the talking heads was the infamous Bill Browder. If you don't know who Bill Browder is, he is the person responsible for the "evidence" that led to the world wide and wide ranging Magnitsky Act sanctions on Russia. The Magnitsky Act is named after Bill Browder's supposed "lawyer" who was, according to Browder, beaten to death in his cell in Russia.
Browder solicited Andrei Nekrasov a Russian film maker and Putin critic to make a film of Magnitsky's alleged murder and the alleged theft of hundreds of millions of dollars by corrupt police. Nekrasov had previously made a film accusing the Russian State of the Litvinenko poisoning and was in no way friendly towards Putin and the Russian gov.
The two hour long film is an absolute eye opener. It is available on the link below;
https://dlive.tv/v/majes.tytyty+1eqNuaKOm
A youtube link to the same film below, if you prefer, but certainly up until a couple of years ago links to this film would always be fairly quickly removed after legal bullying by Browder
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snbepDSmA-4&ab_channel=AGS363
It is riveting and split into two natural parts as Nekrasov investigates and reaches uncomfortable, for him, conclusions.
Once you see Browder on camera having to answer questions to a committee, his evasiveness and lack of recollection. Well watch it to see exactly what an unconvincing liar he is. There are many absolutely stunning revelations in the film. The transcription of Russian records presented as truth in the Senate and EU parliaments were utterly false transcriptions and said the opposite of what was claimed in many cases. Nekrasov as a Russian speaker read the originals and was stunned. He spoke to officials and told them but they didn't want to know. It really is eye opening.
-
?Where are they? Why no contact despite Yulia making clear in the one time she has spoken that she intended to return?
What are the UK gov hiding?
Are the Skripals political prisoners?
They have been put into a witness protection program. Why should their safety be compromised because a few conspiratards on the Internet want to know?
-
The CCTV coverage at the Skripal home, looking back, was assumed.
In other words, you made it up.
-
The narrative arc of history. An excellent piece on the Saker Blog which covers Middle Eastern history over a century or so, remarkably rich in detail whilst brief enough to in 5 or 10 minutes. The role of UK intelligence throughout(with names) is revealing. For a brief history it is excellent
https://thesaker.is/who-really-runs-the-middle-east/
-
why thefuck anyone would belive a word the bbc says i dont know there proven liars.
-
A really good summation of the entire Skripal hoax. Two years on.... He lists the 40 most absurd/impossible claims made by the UK gov. and Met Police. The piece is a good summing up of the whole. A recurring theme in everything is what is rapidly becoming the less hidden hand of UK intel. Time and time again; Our spies are not what they used to be;
Sean Connery as James Bond in Dr. No. More like Leslie Neilsen as Dick Steele in Spy Hard
https://www.theblogmire.com/the-salisbury-poisonings-two-years-on-a-riddle-wrapped-in-a-cover-up-inside-a-hoax/
-
A really good summation of the entire Skripal hoax. Two years on.... He lists the 40 most absurd/impossible claims made by the UK gov. and Met Police.
No, he has produced a Gish Gallop. Something nobody with a valid argument would resort to.
"The Gish Gallop is the fallacious debate tactic of drowning your opponent in a flood of individually-weak arguments in order to prevent rebuttal of the whole argument collection without great effort. The Gish Gallop is a belt-fed version of the on the spot fallacy, as it's unreasonable for anyone to have a well-composed answer immediately available to every argument present in the Gallop. The Gish Gallop is named after creationist Duane Gish, who often abused it.
Gish Gallops are almost always performed with numerous other logical fallacies baked in. The myriad of component arguments constituting the Gallop may typically intersperse a few perfectly uncontroversial claims — the basic validity of which are intended to lend undue credence to the Gallop at large — with a devious hodgepodge of half-truths, outright lies, red herrings and straw men — which, if not rebutted as the fallacies they are, pile up into egregious problems for the refuter."
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop)
-
This comes as no surprise. The guy running theblogmire also believes in zombies and denies evolution. :))
https://www.theblogmire.com/the-wonders-of-the-resurrection/ (https://www.theblogmire.com/the-wonders-of-the-resurrection/)
https://www.theblogmire.com/lamb-spamb-or-octopamb/ (https://www.theblogmire.com/lamb-spamb-or-octopamb/)
-
No, he has produced a Gish Gallop. Something nobody with a valid argument would resort to.
"The Gish Gallop is the fallacious debate tactic of drowning your opponent in a flood of individually-weak arguments in order to prevent rebuttal of the whole argument collection without great effort. The Gish Gallop is a belt-fed version of the on the spot fallacy, as it's unreasonable for anyone to have a well-composed answer immediately available to every argument present in the Gallop. The Gish Gallop is named after creationist Duane Gish, who often abused it.
Gish Gallops are almost always performed with numerous other logical fallacies baked in. The myriad of component arguments constituting the Gallop may typically intersperse a few perfectly uncontroversial claims — the basic validity of which are intended to lend undue credence to the Gallop at large — with a devious hodgepodge of half-truths, outright lies, red herrings and straw men — which, if not rebutted as the fallacies they are, pile up into egregious problems for the refuter."
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop)
There are dozens of articles on the blog following the drama on the ground in real time. Anyone can read and see whether they think Rob Slane or David has valid arguments. The last article was a summary of two years worth of reporting hence the list. This was stated. Dismissing it as Gish Gallop demonstrates your lack of anything of value to add.
You have got nothing to add. You are just shouting from the sidelines.
-
This comes as no surprise. The guy running theblogmire also believes in zombies and denies evolution. :))
https://www.theblogmire.com/the-wonders-of-the-resurrection/ (https://www.theblogmire.com/the-wonders-of-the-resurrection/)
https://www.theblogmire.com/lamb-spamb-or-octopamb/ (https://www.theblogmire.com/lamb-spamb-or-octopamb/)
Gringo do you believe in zombies and creationism since the theblogmire is a proponent of such ideas?
-
Gringo do you believe in zombies and creationism since the theblogmire is a proponent of such ideas?
so what if it does being wrong about one thing doesnt make you wrong about everything.
-
so what if it does being wrong about one thing doesnt make you wrong about everything.
Its not one thing. More or less everything on that blog is wrong. It demonstrates that the author bases his claims on faith and sentiment, and not on objective observation. Anything on that blog that turns out to be factual is a case of a broken clock being right twice a day.
Its a classic case of crank magnetism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crank_(person)#Crank_magnetism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crank_(person)#Crank_magnetism)
Much like Roch gets his ideas from a guy who claims aliens abduct sheep and Bush destroyed the twin towers with a space laser. Gringo gets his ideas from a guy who believes in Zombies and that a super natural being got a 400 year old to build a giant floating zoo prior to flooding the planet.
-
Its not one thing. More or less everything on that blog is wrong. It demonstrates that the author bases his claims on faith and sentiment, and not on objective observation. Anything on that blog that turns out to be factual is a case of a broken clock being right twice a day.
Its a classic case of crank magnetism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crank_(person)#Crank_magnetism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crank_(person)#Crank_magnetism)
Much like Roch gets his ideas from a guy who claims aliens abduct sheep and Bush destroyed the twin towers with a space laser. Gringo gets his ideas from a guy who believes in Zombies and that a super natural being got a 400 year old to build a giant floating zoo prior to flooding the planet.
Your interpretation of a person's belief cannot impact upon CCTV footage or mobile phone images which show two different individuals, in two different sets of clothes, with two different walks, two different physiques and two different bags. Neither can it impact upon UK intelligence's ability to set and spring a trap to embarrass and sanction Russia. Nor can it impact on a plane being 'filmed' seeping in to a massive solid building, with its nose cone coming out the other side by accident 🤣
-
how about geordge gallway and criag muray are they reliable sources im not really a fan of galway but ive never known him to make things up unlike the bbc.
-
Gringo do you believe in zombies and creationism since the theblogmire is a proponent of such ideas?
You are an absolute moron who literally has nothing of any value to add. I was reading through the Thomas Mair thread earlier. Interesting discussion that I have kept up with from time to time. Seen some of the Rich Hall videos and he raises interesting and controversial things. The interesting posts in that thread aren't yours.
From a non participant reader of that thread, I find your comments childish and pointless. Roch has put his points well. Others who disagree manage to do so(QC and RJ) and the thread bubbles along and is a good discussion in large part. The small part that isn't is your idiotic contributions which amount to;
Asking if Roch believes in Aliens, constantly.
Making dumb comments in response to Roch's posts, instead of engaging with the content, making what you believe to be witty comments about people perhaps being abducted by Aliens. (It isn't witty past about Year 6/7, David). It's not even that funny then.
Ask if Roch if he believes Rich Hall claims about Aliens.
Framing dumb questions in such a way that they are an obvious false dichotomy that you then claim Roch has to answer that inevitably end with a belief in ... yes you guessed it :-[
Call everyone who disagrees with him conspiritard.
Post dumb gifs in response to well thought out and often well written posts.
And did I mention the Aliens.
You get the drift. In the same way that I imagine most readers view your childish contributions in that thread, and dismiss them as a distraction because of their childish vacuity I dismiss your contributions here for the same reason.
A few questions for you, David, in the same spirit of the questions that you ask. They are all rhetorical ( it means they need no reply, David) and are to point out the obvious shortcomings of your tactics and to take the piss a bit.
You often post links from Al Jazeera. Al Jazeera who reported that Jewish employees were informed in advance of the 9/11 attacks? Do you support those claims?
If you don't support those claims, are your posts using Al Jazeera now discredited?
Whenever you link to Al Jazeera should we all ask whether you also believe that all the Jews were warned on 9/11?
Sounds dumb, doesn't it? That is how you are constantly.
I am pretty certain that everyone finds all of the above as childish as I do. Carry on with your childish Gifs and Year 5 jokes, nobody is impressed.
-
With reference to the Shanghai Cooperation Alliance I can't help but think President Xi and Vladimir Putin could do worse than muse on one of Groucho Marx's famous remarks: https://quoteinvestigator.com/2011/04/18/groucho-resigns/
-
You are an absolute moron
When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.
-
When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.
It isn't slander because you are a moron.
Incredible that your take from that post was just the moron comment. Did the rest of it embarrass you and cut too close to the bone for you to comment? Did you only read the first line? Or is it that you have nothing to say about the rest of comment? which effectively describes the behaviour which makes you a moron. Does your non challenge of the rest of the post describing your idiocy mean that you tacitly agree with the rest of it? Here is the part that you haven't repeated in your reply;
From a non participant reader of that thread, I find your comments childish and pointless. Roch has put his points well. Others who disagree manage to do so(QC and RJ) and the thread bubbles along and is a good discussion in large part. The small part that isn't is your idiotic contributions which amount to;
Asking if Roch believes in Aliens, constantly.
Making dumb comments in response to Roch's posts, instead of engaging with the content, making what you believe to be witty comments about people perhaps being abducted by Aliens. (It isn't witty past about Year 6/7, David). It's not even that funny then.
Ask if Roch if he believes Rich Hall claims about Aliens.
Framing dumb questions in such a way that they are an obvious false dichotomy that you then claim Roch has to answer that inevitably end with a belief in ... yes you guessed it :-[
Call everyone who disagrees with him conspiritard.
Post dumb gifs in response to well thought out and often well written posts.
And did I mention the Aliens.
You get the drift. In the same way that I imagine most readers view your childish contributions in that thread, and dismiss them as a distraction because of their childish vacuity I dismiss your contributions here for the same reason.
A few questions for you, David, in the same spirit of the questions that you ask. They are all rhetorical ( it means they need no reply, David) and are to point out the obvious shortcomings of your tactics and to take the piss a bit.
You often post links from Al Jazeera. Al Jazeera who reported that Jewish employees were informed in advance of the 9/11 attacks? Do you support those claims?
If you don't support those claims, are your posts using Al Jazeera now discredited?
Whenever you link to Al Jazeera should we all ask whether you also believe that all the Jews were warned on 9/11?
Sounds dumb, doesn't it? That is how you are constantly.
I am pretty certain that everyone finds all of the above as childish as I do. Carry on with your childish Gifs and Year 5 jokes, nobody is impressed.
Do you have no comment on this? You just want me to withdraw the moron Comment?
-
When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.
true but you seem to be the one doing most of the slandring.
-
A couple of "tasters" from the article linked at the bottom. Worth reading the whole piece which includes the origins and brief history of the Taiwan issue. This is illuminating in light of the way the issue is being used to foment trouble currently by the West. You will come out the other end of this article with way more understanding than previously.
A point that I have made repeatedly and will keep on repeating is the idea of history as a narrative arc connected by years, decades and centuries. This article demonstrates precisely that. That is why history rhymes but never repeats.
"It’s a full-time job, keeping track of the US/NATO campaign to start a fire somewhere on China’s borders. It’s like tracking an inept arsonist by satellite image: “Oh, there he goes again…the idiot started a trash fire next to a concrete wall.”
"So what happens if the US succeeds in hamstringing China’s economy? Welp, what’s the most reliable distraction a gov’t can find when it wants to unite a hard-pressed population against some distant enemy?
That’s when China might actually do something about Taiwan. Oh, not the silly 20th c. style invasion the USN dreams about. That’s nonsense. The PLA has contingency planners too, and they won’t want to play those retro games. There’s a whole new military technology and an evolving strategy to optimize it, and it includes dozens of ways to neutralize carrier battle groups. Planning that campaign is probably the most requested assignment among ambitious PLA planners.
And that’s how this looks, when you stare coldly: If our military and media elites are very lucky, China will zoom ahead and ignore the endless woofing. But if US/NATO somehow succeed in crippling China’s economy, then, as Mao might put it, the flabby Golden Retriever woofing behind its picket fence at the pit bull might find that the yard gate is open."
Full article link below;
https://exiledonline.com/the-war-nerd-taiwan-the-thucydides-trapper-who-cried-woof/
-
https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiratard/comments/3mwq88/why_do_many_conspiratards_seem_to_be_russian_or/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3 (https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiratard/comments/3mwq88/why_do_many_conspiratards_seem_to_be_russian_or/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
-
Gringo are you saying Chinese threats against Taiwan are just bluster?
-
Gringo are you saying Chinese threats against Taiwan are just bluster?
I am saying that it is much more complicated than that, Steve. China regard Taiwan as an inseparable part of China. This is also, or was, the position of the Taiwanese authorities. Both regarded themselves as the government of all of China after the civil war ended in 1949 and the remnants of the Kuomintang retreated to the island of Taiwan.
This has also been the position of the US since 1970's under Nixon and the One China policy recognising the CCP as the rulers of One China. Without outside aggravation the Chinese position is that Taiwan, as Hong Kong, will be integrated eventually. There are no need for hostilities and eventually trade and economic reliance will do the trick better than force/coercion. Not all cultures have the same mindset as colonialist westerners.
Taiwan is an example of the US betraying their own One China policy in order to( as Gary Brecher in the article posted earlier brilliantly put it) start a fire on China's border, like an inept arsonist. They will fail. The CCP have time and patience.
-
I had a Chinese teacher at secondary school back in 2005/06. He told me that one day China would invade Taiwan, and to me he seemed very convinced of this.
Personally I would be very surprised if China tried. If they succeed they will attract international condemnation and if they fail the CCP will be humiliated. Its a lose-lose scenario for the CCP.
This is an interesting read -
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2021/04/28/an-asymmetric-defense-of-taiwan/ (https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2021/04/28/an-asymmetric-defense-of-taiwan/)
-
I am saying that it is much more complicated than that, Steve. China regard Taiwan as an inseparable part of China. This is also, or was, the position of the Taiwanese authorities. Both regarded themselves as the government of all of China after the civil war ended in 1949 and the remnants of the Kuomintang retreated to the island of Taiwan.
This has also been the position of the US since 1970's under Nixon and the One China policy recognising the CCP as the rulers of One China. Without outside aggravation the Chinese position is that Taiwan, as Hong Kong, will be integrated eventually. There are no need for hostilities and eventually trade and economic reliance will do the trick better than force/coercion. Not all cultures have the same mindset as colonialist westerners.
Taiwan is an example of the US betraying their own One China policy in order to( as Gary Brecher in the article posted earlier brilliantly put it) start a fire on China's border, like an inept arsonist. They will fail. The CCP have time and patience.
But Hong Kong had a deal summarized in "one country, two systems" supposedly for a 50-year period starting from 1997. This has demonstrably been broken. China is also interpreting international maritime law to its own advantage. https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/how-china-bending-rules-south-china-sea
-
Interesting recent video -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYaA69EvHGw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYaA69EvHGw)
-
But Hong Kong had a deal summarized in "one country, two systems" supposedly for a 50-year period starting from 1997. This has demonstrably been broken. China is also interpreting international maritime law to its own advantage. https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/how-china-bending-rules-south-china-sea
The days of Rule Britannia are over, Steve. The UK/US are no longer strong enough to impose their will and rules on China and Russia any longer. They can't even impose their will on countries like Syria now, the Taliban defeated them and Iran are at least their peer in missile and air defence tech.
The UK just days ago provocatively sailed a warship through the Taiwan Straits alongside the US. This is what provoked the 56 Chinese fighters and bombers to approach, which was inevitably painted as Chinese aggression.
Remember how the US reacted to USSR placing nukes on Cuba? Cuba is also a recognised sovereign state. No country recognises Taiwan as a state. It is a province of China. It is not recognised as a state at the UN. It is no more a state than the Isle of Wight.
How would the US react to China fomenting rebellion and arming separatists in Hawaii with anti aircraft missiles, armoured vehicles, artillery etc.? How would that be different to the US arming and fomenting rebellion in China?
How about Russia fomenting secession and arming separatists in Scotland? How would the UK govt. react? How would that be different from UK/US aggression around the Taiwan issue?
We are entering, have entered, a multipolar world. Dollar trade is falling and will not long be replaced by countries trading in their own currencies again. This is happening now and will only accelerate. In terms of military power there is nothing the Western powers can do to defeat even Iran now, never mind China and Russia.
It is an observable reality that US/UK and the rest of their merry band of war criminals, otherwise known as NATO, have spent decades arming, preparing and strategising for war against weaker powers. As such they have built a military machine that can destroy the militaries of weak defenceless countries.
Whilst they have been on a 20 year rampage of unprecedented war crimes invading and subjugating weak but resource rich or strategically important countries, China, Russia and Iran have outplayed them and are turning the tide.
The end of Western colonialism is something to celebrate for all. Endless wars and suffering are the only result of US/UK foreign policy and the end of their despotic wars should be celebrated. We should not be encouraging yet more provocations under false pretexts. How many times do you need lying to before you realise that you are being lied to? No babies were thrown out of Kuwaiti incubators by Saddam's Iraqi troops. That was a lie. Saddam had no WMD. That was a lie. Libya, Syria, lies. Will you ever figure it out?
Whilst the US/UK NATO have spent 20/30 years bogged down in increasingly attritional wars, the bogging down being helped along by Iran, Russia and China, all who have played roles to keep Empire bogged down in conflicts that they expected to end swiftly. Yemen, Syria, Venezuela have all been able to resist. This time has allowed the same countries to prepare for a defensive war against a predictable enemy.
Aircraft Carrier Groups are now obsolete against modern air defence and missile tech. Russia and China are so far ahead in missile tech that it is literally a game changer. NATO cannot win. Their multi billion dollar aircraft carriers negated by missiles that cost a few thousand dollars. Likewise their military bases. 30,000+ US troops in Guam would be instantly killed. Every military base would be instantly vulnerable in any attack against China, Iran, Russia. NATO are equipped for the wrong war against the wrong adversaries and would be readily defeated if they fight those that are prepared for them. It's over. They are in check everywhere on the board.
The moves and provocations now demonstrate their powerlessness. It is all show and propaganda now. They have nothing else. If China decide to militarily intervene in Taiwan the US will do nothing because there is nothing they could do. All separatists sponsored by the US are learning that the US has no loyalty and will quickly throw allies under the bus. The rest of the world saw the Afghan debacle and US weakness displayed for all to see.
-
The days of Rule Britannia are over, Steve. The UK/US are no longer strong enough to impose their will and rules on China and Russia any longer. They can't even impose their will on countries like Syria now, the Taliban defeated them and Iran are at least their peer in missile and air defence tech.
The UK just days ago provocatively sailed a warship through the Taiwan Straits alongside the US. This is what provoked the 56 Chinese fighters and bombers to approach, which was inevitably painted as Chinese aggression.
Remember how the US reacted to USSR placing nukes on Cuba? Cuba is also a recognised sovereign state. No country recognises Taiwan as a state. It is a province of China. It is not recognised as a state at the UN. It is no more a state than the Isle of Wight.
How would the US react to China fomenting rebellion and arming separatists in Hawaii with anti aircraft missiles, armoured vehicles, artillery etc.? How would that be different to the US arming and fomenting rebellion in China?
How about Russia fomenting secession and arming separatists in Scotland? How would the UK govt. react? How would that be different from UK/US aggression around the Taiwan issue?
We are entering, have entered, a multipolar world. Dollar trade is falling and will not long be replaced by countries trading in their own currencies again. This is happening now and will only accelerate. In terms of military power there is nothing the Western powers can do to defeat even Iran now, never mind China and Russia.
It is an observable reality that US/UK and the rest of their merry band of war criminals, otherwise known as NATO, have spent decades arming, preparing and strategising for war against weaker powers. As such they have built a military machine that can destroy the militaries of weak defenceless countries.
Whilst they have been on a 20 year rampage of unprecedented war crimes invading and subjugating weak but resource rich or strategically important countries, China, Russia and Iran have outplayed them and are turning the tide.
The end of Western colonialism is something to celebrate for all. Endless wars and suffering are the only result of US/UK foreign policy and the end of their despotic wars should be celebrated. We should not be encouraging yet more provocations under false pretexts. How many times do you need lying to before you realise that you are being lied to? No babies were thrown out of Kuwaiti incubators by Saddam's Iraqi troops. That was a lie. Saddam had no WMD. That was a lie. Libya, Syria, lies. Will you ever figure it out?
Whilst the US/UK NATO have spent 20/30 years bogged down in increasingly attritional wars, the bogging down being helped along by Iran, Russia and China, all who have played roles to keep Empire bogged down in conflicts that they expected to end swiftly. Yemen, Syria, Venezuela have all been able to resist. This time has allowed the same countries to prepare for a defensive war against a predictable enemy.
Aircraft Carrier Groups are now obsolete against modern air defence and missile tech. Russia and China are so far ahead in missile tech that it is literally a game changer. NATO cannot win. Their multi billion dollar aircraft carriers negated by missiles that cost a few thousand dollars. Likewise their military bases. 30,000+ US troops in Guam would be instantly killed. Every military base would be instantly vulnerable in any attack against China, Iran, Russia. NATO are equipped for the wrong war against the wrong adversaries and would be readily defeated if they fight those that are prepared for them. It's over. They are in check everywhere on the board.
The moves and provocations now demonstrate their powerlessness. It is all show and propaganda now. They have nothing else. If China decide to militarily intervene in Taiwan the US will do nothing because there is nothing they could do. All separatists sponsored by the US are learning that the US has no loyalty and will quickly throw allies under the bus. The rest of the world saw the Afghan debacle and US weakness displayed for all to see.
As much as I kind of want this to be true, it sounds like US capability and defence (aggression) spending is being underestimated by you. They are not a country who will accept lagging behind anyone. So if this the current status quo, I don't expect it to stay static for long. The US will get the upper hand (if it doesn't already have it).
-
As much as I kind of want this to be true, it sounds like US capability and defence (aggression) spending is being underestimated by you. They are not a country who will accept lagging behind anyone. So if this the current status quo, I don't expect it to stay static for long. The US will get the upper hand (if it doesn't already have it).
More like a fantasy than an underestimation. :))
They have already ordered 10 new super carriers that will be able to withstand hypersonic missiles.
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/us-aircraft-carriers-successful-trial-test-may-blunt-chinas-killer-missile-threat-report/articleshow/85296903.cms?from=mdr (https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/us-aircraft-carriers-successful-trial-test-may-blunt-chinas-killer-missile-threat-report/articleshow/85296903.cms?from=mdr)
And 8 hypersonic missile programs.
https://www.flightglobal.com/flight-international/8-key-hypersonic-missile-efforts-for-the-us-department-of-defense/138052.article (https://www.flightglobal.com/flight-international/8-key-hypersonic-missile-efforts-for-the-us-department-of-defense/138052.article)
https://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/agm-183a/ (https://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/agm-183a/)
-
As much as I kind of want this to be true, it sounds like US capability and defence (aggression) spending is being underestimated by you. They are not a country who will accept lagging behind anyone. So if this the current status quo, I don't expect it to stay static for long. The US will get the upper hand (if it doesn't already have it).
US are way behind on hypersonic missile and air defence technology, Roch. This is not even debatable. Aircraft carrier groups have been made obsolete with hypersonic missiles. US have not even successfully tested a single hypersonic missile yet. They are nowhere near putting them into service. Russia and China are not standing still while the US catches up, they are forging further ahead. There is nothing to suggest that the US will quickly catch up and no good reason to believe they will. The opposite is in fact the case.
US/NATO defence spending(a truly Orwellian term) is and has been geared towards the wrong war. Lots of overseas military bases and aircraft carrier groups makes for long and vulnerable supply/logistics chains. Missiles with pinpoint accuracy change these supply chains from vulnerable to indefensible.
Even if the US did catch up on missile tech, what then? Their aircraft carriers are still obsolete against a peer rival. The cost of sustaining so many overseas bases means that military spending and research is fighting the last centuries wars. We are in a new paradigm and this is understood by US military planners.
What did the US do in the aftermath of the Iranians targeting their bases in Iraq after the Soleimani assassination? After threatening the Iranians that they would be obliterated if they harmed a single US soldier followed by 100 Americans injured by Iranian missiles, they pretended that no Americans were harmed and did nothing. Why? Because the Iranians demonstrated that there was nothing that the US could do.
The US could not stop the missiles. They hid in their bunkers, helpless. Iran could have fired 100 or a 1000 missiles. They could have put powerful warheads on them. What could the US do about that? When you are the aggressor, as the US is, then you face a different set of problems to the defending force.
Iran have no intention of invading US in order to control their natural wealth. Nor do China, Russia, Venezuela or Syria. They do intend to defend their resources from those whose intention is to steal them. Good air defence and accurate missile technology is all that is required to defend aggression. US/NATO have no answers.
David posted in response to this that the the US Navy have ordered 10 new super carriers that will be able to withstand hypersonic missiles. Well that sounds good, super carriers :-[
He then posted a link to an article so we could "read all about it". I hope you did. I did and it is hilarious in its delusional thinking. Here is a snippet below in red;
The US Navy's aircraft carrier Gerald R Ford has successfully withstood an impact trial test of underwater detonation of 20 tonnes of explosives, which observers say could effectively reduce the threat posed by China's “carrier killer” missiles.
The US' newest and most advanced nuclear carrier's third and final full ship shock trial was completed on Sunday off the coast of Florida, following the previous such trials on June 18 and July 16, the American navy said in a press release on Monday.
Service officials described the shock trial testing – where the Navy detonates 40,000 pounds of ordnance in the water near the hull to test both the ship and its systems – as a success, with no major injuries, no fires and no flooding, the US Naval Institute's news portal USNI News reported.
The article further down makes this startling admission;
The trial proved the Ford-class aircraft carriers could withstand some water mines or nearby missile strikes, but did not show their resistance against a direct hit, he said.
This is laughable. The super carriers are nothing of the sort and the article even admits that they are defenceless against hypersonic anti shipping missiles.
Attack budgets are more expensive than defence budgets, as is apparent in this current impasse.
They had no answer to Iran attacking their bases and still have no answers. The answer to carrier killer missiles is not more carriers. How long to build a carrier? How much? How much is an anti carrier missile? How long to produce them?
Why are the US drawing down their bases in the Middle East? Anything to do with the above? Why don't they quickly catch up if they can? The US/UK NATO war criminals are in check everywhere on the board. They cannot move forward. That is why they didn't respond to Iran. Every US base and ship in the Middle East would be decimated/sunk within hours of hostilities beginning and the US would be powerless to prevent this.
There are deeper rooted problems in the West that go back decades. Gutting manufacturing industries means we are reliant on other countries and supply chains. Our defence industries are no longer self sufficient. Ships are built elsewhere, we barely produce any of our own steel. Our defence budgets are not spent on defence, but attack. This is why we are so far behind despite the money spent dwarfing that of China, Russia etc.
Arguably China, Russia, Iran spend way more on defence than us and have for years. Whilst they have been developing and spending money, time and research on actual defence, we have blown our entire budget on attacking defenceless countries, maintaining expensive overseas bases and nothing on actual defence. Despite the disparity in budgets, it is plain to see that Western defence spending is a euphemism for attack spending.
The current gap in capabilities will not be bridged quickly if at all. It may have appeared suddenly, but it happened over decades whilst the West was otherwise engaged in aggression encouraged by their belief that they were unstoppable. Until they were stopped. Venezuela, Syria, Yemen etc. The US cannot just nip out to get some hypersonics and improved air defence from Walmart. These things are years in research, development and testing before being deployable. Russia and China are not waiting for the US to catch up.
Western economies will collapse before that happens. When your economy relies on plunder and you suddenly get stopped in your plundering tracks, there will be consequences. The weakness and unsustainability of the western system is being demonstrated in real time.
It is understandable that many find it unthinkable that the balance of power can have shifted so dramatically and seemingly so rapidly. We are all used to the US/UK band of pirates being able to do as they please with no country being able to prevent them. These changes though happened over decades and only appeared to happen suddenly.
History is full of paradigm shifting events. Before the 1917 Communist revolution, Lenin, from exile is attributed with the following;
"There are decades where nothing happens; and there are weeks where decades happen"--Vladimir Ilyich Lenin.
That is where we are now. In the very midst of decades, perhaps centuries, happening.
-
I'd worry more about the yellow race.
-
More like a fantasy than an underestimation. :))
They have already ordered 10 new super carriers that will be able to withstand hypersonic missiles.
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/us-aircraft-carriers-successful-trial-test-may-blunt-chinas-killer-missile-threat-report/articleshow/85296903.cms?from=mdr (https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/us-aircraft-carriers-successful-trial-test-may-blunt-chinas-killer-missile-threat-report/articleshow/85296903.cms?from=mdr)
And 8 hypersonic missile programs.
https://www.flightglobal.com/flight-international/8-key-hypersonic-missile-efforts-for-the-us-department-of-defense/138052.article (https://www.flightglobal.com/flight-international/8-key-hypersonic-missile-efforts-for-the-us-department-of-defense/138052.article)
https://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/agm-183a/ (https://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/agm-183a/)
In a race to catch up with China and Russia, the US Air Force (USAF), Army and Navy (USN) are sharing funding, designs and pieces of technology in their effort to develop hypersonic missiles. The development approach relies on progressing several designs in parallel and borrowing features from other military services when useful. In some cases, an aerospace manufacturer working as a prime contractor on a programme, leading several business rivals as subcontractors, will then also simultaneously take a secondary role on another related project, which is in turn led by one of its rivals.
These heady early days of industry and service co-operation will probably not last, but represent the all-hands-on-deck urgency that the US Department of Defense believes is needed.
The above is the opening two paragraphs to the 8 hypersonic missile programs article that you linked to in order to supposedly counter my analysis.
You claim that my analysis of the gap in technology is "more like a fantasy than an underestimation"
The articles that you link then basically confirm everything that I have stated. The only "fantasy" here is the US after belatedly acknowledging that they have been neutralised, now throwing money at research and development in the belief that they will close the gap. Russia and China are fielding developed and tested weapons systems that the US have yet to even imagine.
"In a race to catch up with China and Russia". Can you read? Your articles admit the opposite of your claims. The US by its own admission is in a race to catch up. Not keep up. Not overtake. Catch up. They admit it themselves.
It is not me underestimating and fantasising.
You are very much overestimating and fantasising about yet to be developed, tested or fielded non existent US hypersonic missiles.
-
As much as I kind of want this to be true, it sounds like US capability and defence (aggression) spending is being underestimated by you. They are not a country who will accept lagging behind anyone. So if this the current status quo, I don't expect it to stay static for long. The US will get the upper hand (if it doesn't already have it).
As much as you want this to be true but are unsure, Roch, it is obvious that your doubt is not shared by the US side. There are countless in depth articles about the new developments, but just using the links that David provided demonstrates quite clearly that the huge gap is acknowledged by all sides including the US. The links also provide ample evidence that the US has no idea what to do about it.
The question is not whether a huge gap in missile and air defence technology exists between US/NATO and China/Russia. The reality of that situation is recognised by all sides.
The question is, "What can US/NATO do about this new reality?"
The answer seems to be that they have no idea.
Let's examine the plans and ideas to the new reality as laid out in the articles posted by David. In response to the acknowledged threat to Aircraft Carriers from Chinese/Russian carrier killer missiles the US have ordered 10 super carriers. These carriers have been tested against carrier killer missiles by exploding missiles near the carriers. The super carriers have not been tested using direct hits or even the missiles that will be fired at them. Wonder why? This is beyond a joke. The Chinese won't be landing missiles near the carrier hoping to cause turbulence :-[ They will stick great big fucking holes in it. The US to defend this need to be able to take the missiles out. They can't. Their tests are an admission of defeat. 10 super carriers that are obsolete now will be museum pieces in the time it takes to build them. What sort of a plan is that? No sort of plan. It is an admission that they have no idea how to respond.
In response to the now fielded and in operation hypersonic missiles of rival powers, the US is basically at the drawing board stage. The articles that David linked say much about intent to catch up and also make clear that they have little idea how to do so. If the US do catch up (they won't) China/Russia will already be fielding next generation. But even if they do, then so what? Russia/China aren't invading other countries. Air defence and missile tech is genuine defence spending. No-one is threatening to invade the US. They would achieve, at best, a strategic stalemate. The US as the aggressors are not happy with stalemate but have no way to achieve dominance again. Everyone else is happy with a stalemate, they aren't attempting to steal and control others resources.
This inferiority is known and acknowledged by the US, Roch. It is not what you or I would like to believe. It is what the US believes and knows.
-
US have not even successfully tested a single hypersonic missile yet.
Yes they have.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-successfully-flight-tests-raytheon-hypersonic-weapon-pentagon-2021-09-27/
(https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-successfully-flight-tests-raytheon-hypersonic-weapon-pentagon-2021-09-27/)
-
The US to defend this need to be able to take the missiles out. They can't.
Not for long..
https://www.northropgrumman.com/space/counter-hypersonics/#content (https://www.northropgrumman.com/space/counter-hypersonics/#content)
-
Wonder why? This is beyond a joke. The Chinese won't be landing missiles near the carrier hoping to cause turbulence :-[ They will stick great big fucking holes in it. The US to defend this need to be able to take the missiles out. They can't. Their tests are an admission of defeat.
No, it does not. The shock trial involved a 40,000lb explosive. The explosive on an anti-ship missile (hypersonic or not) is typically around 500lb to 1000lb. Only laughable if you are not familiar with maths.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-nsfkV14uI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-nsfkV14uI)
-
No, it does not. The shock trial involved a 40,000lb explosive. The explosive on an anti-ship missile (hypersonic or not) is typically around 500lb to 1000lb. Only laughable if you are not familiar with maths.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-nsfkV14uI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-nsfkV14uI)
David, you're like Colonel Jessup.. "You can't handle the truth!"
I think you should order a 'code red' mate.
-
David, you're like Colonel Jessup.. "You can't handle the truth!"
I think you should order a 'code red' mate.
Who?
-
Who?
Colonel Nathan R. Jessup. You don't get more stars and stripes than that.
-
No, it does not. The shock trial involved a 40,000lb explosive. The explosive on an anti-ship missile (hypersonic or not) is typically around 500lb to 1000lb. Only laughable if you are not familiar with maths.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-nsfkV14uI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-nsfkV14uI)
The shock trial didn't involve hitting the ship. This makes it laughable. Read the article you posted, it is fantasy. US/NATO are at least 15/20 years behind the Russians and Chinese. They admit it themselves and their "solutions" show that they are clueless in how to close that gap.
-
No, it does not. The shock trial involved a 40,000lb explosive. The explosive on an anti-ship missile (hypersonic or not) is typically around 500lb to 1000lb. Only laughable if you are not familiar with maths.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-nsfkV14uI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-nsfkV14uI)
Do you imagine that the Chinese and Russians are now having to develop a "new" super carrier killer missile? Do you think that these tests by the US have neutralised the current generation of Carrier Killer missiles?
-
No, it does not. The shock trial involved a 40,000lb explosive. The explosive on an anti-ship missile (hypersonic or not) is typically around 500lb to 1000lb. Only laughable if you are not familiar with maths.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-nsfkV14uI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-nsfkV14uI)
I don't think the Chinese or the Russians, even the Iranians, are worried by these yet to be built super carriers that don't protect against a direct hit.
-
Do you imagine that the Chinese and Russians are now having to develop a "new" super carrier killer missile? Do you think that these tests by the US have neutralised the current generation of Carrier Killer missiles?
Back in 2005 the RAND think tank suggested that the next generation of carries have energy dissipating armour systems and electric armour. So I'm guessing the new carriers have this? We can only speculate as a lot of this is classified (since I cannot find any details). I also anticipate that these carriers will get upgraded with a system to intercept the hypersonic missiles that consist of directed-energy weapons like high energy lasers, microwaves or rail guns.
There is no such thing as a carrier killer missile. A 15 ton missile is not going to destroy a 100,000 ton ship. The most it can do is put it out of service until it get repaired. You need to strike it below the waterline (numerous times) in order to sink it.
Russia has always had the ability to strike a US carrier since it produced its Oscar II-class submarines. Which is still being upgraded and modernized to this day.
-
Back in 2005 the RAND think tank suggested that the next generation of carries have energy dissipating armour systems and electric armour. So I'm guessing the new carriers have this? We can only speculate as a lot of this is classified (since I cannot find any details). I also anticipate that these carriers will get upgraded with a system to intercept the hypersonic missiles that consist of directed-energy weapons like high energy lasers, microwaves or rail guns.
There is no such thing as a carrier killer missile. A 15 ton missile is not going to destroy a 100,000 ton ship. The most it can do is put it out of service until it get repaired. You need to strike it below the waterline (numerous times) in order to sink it.
Russia has always had the ability to strike a US carrier since it produced its Oscar II-class submarines. Which is still being upgraded and modernized to this day.
Suggesting, guessing, speculating and anticipating are you?
Upgrades to systems that you anticipate will intercept hypersonic missiles. Lasers, microwaves and rail guns you anticipate but can't find any details. The Chinese and Russians must be shitting it.
You have at least acknowledged the huge gap now and accepted that it is fact and not idle speculation from me. You're getting there, David.
After denial and anger you are now at stage 3, bargaining. Only two to go.
-
Suggesting, guessing, speculating and anticipating are you?
Upgrades to systems that you anticipate will intercept hypersonic missiles. Lasers, microwaves and rail guns you anticipate but can't find any details. The Chinese and Russians must be shitting it.
You have at least acknowledged the huge gap now and accepted that it is fact and not idle speculation from me. You're getting there, David.
After denial and anger you are now at stage 3, bargaining. Only two to go.
I cannot find any details on the armour of the new carrier. And why would they release such details?
More details on laser shields to counter HS missiles can be found below.
https://breakingdefense.com/2020/02/army-ramps-up-funding-for-laser-shield-hypersonic-sword/ (https://breakingdefense.com/2020/02/army-ramps-up-funding-for-laser-shield-hypersonic-sword/)
Why shouldn't I anticipate that lasers or some other kind of directed-energy weapon be used? I cannot imagine a kinetic interception method will be viable.
Denial and anger? lol This has no bearings on me. Its just a subject I am interested in.
-
Secret group of US military trainers has been in Taiwan for at least a year
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/07/taiwan-us-military-trainers-china (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/07/taiwan-us-military-trainers-china)
-
As much as I kind of want this to be true, it sounds like US capability and defence (aggression) spending is being underestimated by you. They are not a country who will accept lagging behind anyone. So if this the current status quo, I don't expect it to stay static for long. The US will get the upper hand (if it doesn't already have it).
US Army fields prototype launchers for ‘Dark Eagle’ hypersonic missile
https://www.stripes.com/branches/army/2021-10-08/hypersonic-missile-army-dark-eagle-3168894.html (https://www.stripes.com/branches/army/2021-10-08/hypersonic-missile-army-dark-eagle-3168894.html)
Things are moving rather quickly.... :-\
-
Secret group of US military trainers has been in Taiwan for at least a year
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/07/taiwan-us-military-trainers-china (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/07/taiwan-us-military-trainers-china)
Everyone knows what's coming. https://swarajyamag.com/analysis/taiwanese-defence-minister-chiu-kuo-cheng-says-china-will-be-able-to-launch-a-full-scale-invasion-of-taiwan-by-2025
-
Everyone knows what's coming. https://swarajyamag.com/analysis/taiwanese-defence-minister-chiu-kuo-cheng-says-china-will-be-able-to-launch-a-full-scale-invasion-of-taiwan-by-2025
I would be very surprised if they try. Attacking and annexing a weaker and democratic country that's no threat to the aggressor and against the will of the population? If they succeed the economic and possible military repercussions would be huge.
Winnie the Pooh would have to be mad to pull the trigger.
-
I would be very surprised if they try. Attacking and annexing a weaker democratic country that's no threat to the aggressor and against the will of the population? If they succeed the economic and possible military repercussions would be huge.
Winnie the Pooh would have to be mad to pull the trigger.
It's a beacon of democracy and a thorn in the People's Republic of China's side. All totalitarian regimes are inherently insecure and have to silence the populace through terror and propaganda. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/china-s-xi-vows-reunification-with-taiwan-but-holds-off-threatening-force/ar-AAPiqf0?ocid=msedgntp
-
Meanwhile, back in the real world.
Taiwan is a province of China, it is not a country. The UK and US governments do not recognise Taiwan as a country. It has no seat at the UN because it isn't a country, it is a province of China. Western interference in China will end badly for the aggressors.
It is obvious that Steve and David support any aggression by the West and this exposes the lack of consistency in their "thinking". I placed thinking in inverted commas because really it is just mindlessly repeating the talking points that they have been trained to repeat. Pavlov's dogs.
Have you bothered to wonder whether the Taiwanese themselves want full independence? Have you any basis for your support for Taiwanese independence? No, you haven't. It is way more complicated than your simple black and white view.
It should be viewed in exactly the same way as you would view China or Russia fomenting rebellion and arming agitators and separatists in Scotland, Texas, Yorkshire. That some don't see it this way shows their own racist colonial mindset.
The latest Freedom of Navigation op by the Western powers in the South China Sea gives clues to the likelihood of success if things get hot.
The USS Connecticut, a nuclear powered submarine taking part in the above exercise is currently limping back to port in Guam after sustaining damage after hitting ? 11 injured sailors, sailing back on the surface which is itself demonstrative that the damage is bad. After the collisions in 2017, USS Fitzgerald and USS John McCain killing 17 sailors it seems the US has learnt nothing.
All that these "Freedom of Navigation" exercises have demonstrated is that countries are free to navigate international waters but that the US aren't very good at getting crews that can navigate.
Two damaged warships, one damaged submarine, 17 dead sailors, dozens injured in four years without a shot fired in anger yet. Below is a decent essay on the state of the US Navy and talking about the above two incidents.
https://features.propublica.org/navy-accidents/us-navy-crashes-japan-cause-mccain/
Sounds to me like China just need a fleet of barges and oil tankers to defeat US idiocy.
-
Meanwhile, back in the real world.
Taiwan is a province of China, it is not a country. The UK and US governments do not recognise Taiwan as a country. It has no seat at the UN because it isn't a country, it is a province of China. Western interference in China will end badly for the aggressors.
It is obvious that Steve and David support any aggression by the West and this exposes the lack of consistency in their "thinking". I placed thinking in inverted commas because really it is just mindlessly repeating the talking points that they have been trained to repeat. Pavlov's dogs.
Have you bothered to wonder whether the Taiwanese themselves want full independence? Have you any basis for your support for Taiwanese independence? No, you haven't. It is way more complicated than your simple black and white view.
It should be viewed in exactly the same way as you would view China or Russia fomenting rebellion and arming agitators and separatists in Scotland, Texas, Yorkshire. That some don't see it this way shows their own racist colonial mindset.
The latest Freedom of Navigation op by the Western powers in the South China Sea gives clues to the likelihood of success if things get hot.
The USS Connecticut, a nuclear powered submarine taking part in the above exercise is currently limping back to port in Guam after sustaining damage after hitting ? 11 injured sailors, sailing back on the surface which is itself demonstrative that the damage is bad. After the collisions in 2017, USS Fitzgerald and USS John McCain killing 17 sailors it seems the US has learnt nothing.
All that these "Freedom of Navigation" exercises have demonstrated is that countries are free to navigate international waters but that the US aren't very good at getting crews that can navigate.
Two damaged warships, one damaged submarine, 17 dead sailors, dozens injured in four years without a shot fired in anger yet. Below is a decent essay on the state of the US Navy and talking about the above two incidents.
https://features.propublica.org/navy-accidents/us-navy-crashes-japan-cause-mccain/
Sounds to me like China just need a fleet of barges and oil tankers to defeat US idiocy.
I can't speak for David of course, but I am no Pavlov dog.
Have you considered Articles 2 and 3 of the Shimonoseki Treaty of 17 April 1895..
Articles 2 & 3: China cedes to Japan in perpetuity and full sovereignty of the Pescadores group, Formosa (Taiwan) and the eastern portion of the bay of Liaodong Peninsula (Dalian) together with all fortifications, arsenals, and public property.
"China has been preparing for war with Taiwan for 30 years.." https://youtu.be/kA2KaEKs1LA
-
Meanwhile, back in the real world.
Taiwan is a province of China, it is not a country.
How do you define country?
If you define country as an entity that meets the following criteria
- A permanent population
- A defined territory
- The capacity to enter into relations with the other states
- Having its own flag
- Having its own currency
- Having its own organized economy
- Having its own military
- Having its own passport
Then Taiwan is a country.
If you define country as an entity that meets the following criteria
- Having official member status at the UN
- Having an official team that competes in the Olympics
Then Taiwan is not a country ::)
The UK and US governments do not recognise Taiwan as a country.
Are you not familiar with informal diplomacy? There are de facto British and American embassies in Taiwan and there are de facto Taiwanese embassies in London and Washington.
Have you bothered to wonder whether the Taiwanese themselves want full independence? Have you any basis for your support for Taiwanese independence? No, you haven't.
I have interacted with dozens of Taiwanese on the following forum lately.
https://www.reddit.com/r/taiwan/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/taiwan/)
See for yourself what they think.
-
(https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-d2d6576e322e2346b0732aa3c4fe9c2a-lq)
-
Are you not familiar with informal diplomacy? There are de facto British and American embassies in Taiwan and there are de facto Taiwanese embassies in London and Washington.
Unlike you, yes I am familiar with diplomacy. The "de facto British and American embassies in Taiwan" are not embassies. This is because of the UK/US One China policy. Diplomatic missions, representative offices are what you have, if say for instance, you are not a country. Countries have embassies. If your own government, along with the rest of the world, believes Taiwan to be a part of China then your beliefs are without foundation or support.
Do you not think it odd that your own government is acting against its own policy?
David's snap opinion poll on Reddit, in order to gauge the feeling in Taiwan is just bizarre. Reddit? Really? Support for full independence is in single digits, slightly higher than support for full integration. The status quo is what most Taiwanese prefer. China is fine with this as economic ties and reliance become stronger making unification more likely in future. It is the West that is in a hurry which explains their doomed to fail aggressive posturing and information war against China.
I can't speak for David of course, but I am no Pavlov dog.
Have you considered Articles 2 and 3 of the Shimonoseki Treaty of 17 April 1895..
Articles 2 & 3: China cedes to Japan in perpetuity and full sovereignty of the Pescadores group, Formosa (Taiwan) and the eastern portion of the bay of Liaodong Peninsula (Dalian) together with all fortifications, arsenals, and public property.
You're no Pavlov's dog you say, and then repeat an irrelevant talking point on command.
Have you considered that there have been two world wars and the Chinese Civil War since the 1895 treaty? Are you arguing that Taiwan belongs to Japan? What is your point?
If you are saying that the 1895 treaty is the relevant deciding factor, then do you support Japanese annexation of Taiwan?
-
i can see why he invaded crimea look at these bastards https://off-guardian.org/2021/10/09/best-of-offg-the-guardians-latest-attempts-at-pr-for-the-ukraine-nazis/
-
Are you not familiar with informal diplomacy? There are de facto British and American embassies in Taiwan and there are de facto Taiwanese embassies in London and Washington.
Unlike you, yes I am familiar with diplomacy. The "de facto British and American embassies in Taiwan" are not embassies. This is because of the UK/US One China policy. Diplomatic missions, representative offices are what you have, if say for instance, you are not a country. Countries have embassies. If your own government, along with the rest of the world, believes Taiwan to be a part of China then your beliefs are without foundation or support.
Do you not think it odd that your own government is acting against its own policy?
David's snap opinion poll on Reddit, in order to gauge the feeling in Taiwan is just bizarre. Reddit? Really? Support for full independence is in single digits, slightly higher than support for full integration. The status quo is what most Taiwanese prefer. China is fine with this as economic ties and reliance become stronger making unification more likely in future. It is the West that is in a hurry which explains their doomed to fail aggressive posturing and information war against China.
I can't speak for David of course, but I am no Pavlov dog.
Have you considered Articles 2 and 3 of the Shimonoseki Treaty of 17 April 1895..
Articles 2 & 3: China cedes to Japan in perpetuity and full sovereignty of the Pescadores group, Formosa (Taiwan) and the eastern portion of the bay of Liaodong Peninsula (Dalian) together with all fortifications, arsenals, and public property.
You're no Pavlov's dog you say, and then repeat an irrelevant talking point on command.
Have you considered that there have been two world wars and the Chinese Civil War since the 1895 treaty? Are you arguing that Taiwan belongs to Japan? What is your point?
If you are saying that the 1895 treaty is the relevant deciding factor, then do you support Japanese annexation of Taiwan?
Taiwan already has de facto independence. As the saying goes If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.
My point is I don't support a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. The people of the ROC have a right to self determination whatever that may be.
PS: If I'm a dog then you are a potato. :))
-
Taiwan already has de facto independence. As the saying goes If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.
My point is I don't support a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. The people of the ROC have a right to self determination whatever that may be.
PS: If I'm a dog then you are a potato. :))
Then why are you supporting US/UK provocations (arming and fomenting rebels to provoke China) which will almost certainly provoke the invasion that you oppose?
-
Then why are you supporting US/UK provocations (arming and fomenting rebels to provoke China) which will almost certainly provoke the invasion that you oppose?
China makes no secret of opting for military force to achieve its desire to take Taiwan.
The purpose of arming and defending Taiwan is to deter China from trying. And so far it has worked for over half a century.
-
More bluster from Winnie the Pooh.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10079579/China-warns-Taiwan-no-choice-battlefield.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10079579/China-warns-Taiwan-no-choice-battlefield.html)
-
here is the gaurdions man in russialuck harding.
https://off-guardian.org/2021/10/11/best-of-offg-luke-harding-the-hack-who-came-in-from-the-cold/
-
Japan’s ruling party openly welcomes Taiwans bid to join CPTPP
https://en.rti.org.tw/news/view/id/2006296 (https://en.rti.org.tw/news/view/id/2006296)
-
What humbug..https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/vladimir-putin-uses-first-comment-on-nobel-peace-prize-to-threaten-russian-winner/ar-AAPuRno?ocid=msedgntp
-
Suggesting, guessing, speculating and anticipating are you?
Upgrades to systems that you anticipate will intercept hypersonic missiles. Lasers, microwaves and rail guns you anticipate but can't find any details. The Chinese and Russians must be shitting it.
You have at least acknowledged the huge gap now and accepted that it is fact and not idle speculation from me. You're getting there, David.
After denial and anger you are now at stage 3, bargaining. Only two to go.
You may or may not be enlightened by the following: https://youtu.be/ZqowS-hlZ3M
-
heres the russiagate bullsit.
https://youtu.be/0D--4g9YUzc
-
The stories don't stop coming, do they..https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/a-big-problem-russia-at-war-with-uk-says-former-british-spy-who-was-left-wedding-rings-threat/ar-AAPR4YV?ocid=msedgntp
-
no and there all coming frm the same person.
-
no and there all coming frm the same person.
I really don't have an agenda on this topic, but the mass of stories in my opinion just cannot be ignored. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-58978613
-
I really don't have an agenda on this topic, but the mass of stories in my opinion just cannot be ignored. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-58978613
im notsaying you do steve but richard steele ertanly does.
-
im notsaying you do steve but richard steele ertanly does.
Yes I wonder if he has a book to sell..https://youtu.be/G4V0u0EU9ro
-
https://offgraun.wordpress.com/2018/03/11/army-document-us-strategy-to-dethrone-putin-for-oil-pipelines-might-provoke-ww3/
-
https://offgraun.wordpress.com/2018/05/25/dont-panic-lighten-up-smiley-skripal-case-forces-scientists-to-revise-everything-they-thought-they-knew-about-novichok/
-
https://offgraun.wordpress.com/2018/05/25/dont-panic-lighten-up-smiley-skripal-case-forces-scientists-to-revise-everything-they-thought-they-knew-about-novichok/
Not up to your usual standard nugnug and in my opinion in thoroughly bad taste.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pil5WgEsdF8
-
https://youtu.be/zH0hmpT2zmo
-
https://youtu.be/x2_VAuOoXXg
-
UK troops have been sent to the border to support the Polish----oh 'eck.
-
UK troops have been sent to the border to support the Polish----oh 'eck.
UK commits to supporting Poland... What could possibly go wrong?
-
UK commits to supporting Poland... What could possibly go wrong?
remind me what happend the last time we did that.
-
https://off-guardian.org/2021/11/16/myth-vs-reality-in-covid-russia/
-
"Russia-worrying ?". Possibly, as Putin's threatened the Ukraine by the end of January next year.
-
i am much more worried about our own dictaters than russias.
i cant see putin spouting a load of crap about peppa pig.
-
In the Trenches of Russia’s War Against Ukraine
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Flf1grUWCU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Flf1grUWCU)
-
Thirty years after Mikhail Gorbachev's resignation, leading to the downfall of the Soviet Union, I found this story more than a little disconcerting, and wonder just how much education a young Russian is receiving about their own history. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/video/news/the-good-old-days-positive-feelings-about-stalin-abound-in-russia/vi-AARZFon?ocid=msedgntp
-
Over a dozen Russian military deployment areas on the Ukrainian border.
https://liveuamap.com/ (https://liveuamap.com/)
-
whats the troop buil up onthe other side.
-
Over a dozen Russian military deployment areas on the Ukrainian border.
https://liveuamap.com/ (https://liveuamap.com/)
I doubt they will invade. Why face a hostile population? They've got what they wanted: the Sevastopol Naval Base.
-
https://youtu.be/vjWXomF1x6k
rusians go home even though they are allready home.
-
a bit from tucker carlson https://youtu.be/SQxPQ87t7Do
-
I'm not keen on the idea of Russian naval ships in the Irish sea ( on my doorstep ) They'll be off the coast of Ireland on " exercises ". This is happening next month, though I suppose it's best that they can be seen rather than being Underneath the sea.
-
its weird when fo news souns like the sanist chanell around https://youtu.be/xO3hdQjM2PA
-
Trump was right nugs.
-
Trump was right nugs.
That's gotta be a first!!!! :))
-
That's gotta be a first!!!! :))
He was right about remaining on "friendly" terms with Putin rather than showing hostility towards him. Trump kept his enemies close, such as Kim Jong Un. Biden would turn his back on them----wrong !
-
He was right about remaining on "friendly" terms with Putin rather than showing hostility towards him. Trump kept his enemies close, such as Kim Jong Un. Biden would turn his back on them----wrong !
That I WILL agree with!!!
-
Trump was right nugs.
pain me to say it but he was right about a lot of things.
-
pain me to say itbut he was right about a lot of things.
Of course he was nugs, no shame in saying so.
-
not sure this is the thre but nevermind https://off-guardian.org/2022/01/24/pandemic-narrative-over-false-flag-in-ukraine-next/
-
With the future of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline in doubt an interesting video on possible consequences of Russian aggression: https://youtu.be/SWcJkVyJqIc
-
What would a Russian invasion of Ukraine look like?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kak-4td-Knw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kak-4td-Knw)
-
With the future of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline in doubt an interesting video on possible consequences of Russian aggression: https://youtu.be/SWcJkVyJqIc
how are being agresive there inside there own ccountry.
-
Will he won't he ?
-
Will he won't he ?
When it comes to war, no news is good news.
-
From one of David's favourite sources:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-60173191
-
From one of David's favourite sources:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-60173191
The source is actually directly from the Kremlin.
http://kremlin.ru/events/president/news/67657 (http://kremlin.ru/events/president/news/67657)
You can read it yourself if you have auto translate feature on your web browser.
-
how are being agresive there inside there own ccountry.
They're not inside their own country: Russia invaded Crimea.
-
Biden tells Ukraine’s president to ‘prepare for impact’ as Russia invasion looms
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fL8qiU5Uuf0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fL8qiU5Uuf0)
-
They're not inside their own country: Russia invaded Crimea.
what o you think the wor russian borer means
-
what o you think the wor russian borer means
From Steven Pifer 5/12/2019
Since 2014, when Russia annexed Crimea from Ukraine, the United States has provided Ukraine with $3 billion in reform and military assistance and $3 billion in loan guarantees. U.S. troops in western Ukraine train their Ukrainian colleagues. Washington, in concert with the European Union, has taken steps to isolate Moscow politically and imposed a series of economic and visa sanctions on Russia and Russians.
The furor over President Donald Trump’s sordid bid to extort the president of Ukraine into investigating his potential 2020 political opponent raises an obvious question: Why should the United States care so much about Ukraine, a country 5,000 miles away? A big part of the reason is that U.S. officials told the Ukrainians the United States would care when negotiating the Budapest Memorandum on security assurances, signed 25 years ago this week.
In the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, the United States, Russia, and Britain committed “to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine” and “to refrain from the threat or use of force” against the country. Those assurances played a key role in persuading the Ukrainian government in Kyiv to give up what amounted to the world’s third largest nuclear arsenal, consisting of some 1,900 strategic nuclear warheads.
When the USSR broke up in late 1991, there were nuclear weapons scattered in the resulting post-Soviet states. The George H. W. Bush administration attached highest priority to ensuring this would not lead to an increase in the number of nuclear weapons states. Moreover, as it watched Yugoslavia break apart violently, the Bush administration worried that the Soviet collapse might also turn violent, raising the prospect of conflict among nuclear-armed states. Ensuring no increase in the number of nuclear weapons states meant that, in practice, only Russia would retain nuclear arms. The Clinton administration pursued the same goal. With the prospect of extending the Non-Proliferation Treaty indefinitely looming, an alternative course that allowed other post-Soviet states to keep nuclear weapons would have set a bad precedent.
Eliminating the strategic nuclear warheads, intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), and strategic bombers in Ukraine was a big deal for Washington. The ICBMs and bombers carried warheads of monstrous size — all designed, built, and deployed to attack America. The warheads atop the SS-19 and SS-24 ICBMs in Ukraine had explosive yields of 400-550 kilotons each — that is, 27 to 37 times the size of the atomic bomb that devastated Hiroshima. The 1,900 strategic nuclear warheads — more than six times the number of nuclear warheads that China currently possesses — could have destroyed every U.S. city with a population of more than 50,000 three times over, with warheads left to spare.
Before agreeing to give up this nuclear arsenal, Kyiv sought three assurances. First, it wanted compensation for the value of the highly-enriched uranium in the nuclear warheads, which could be blended down for use as fuel for nuclear reactors. Russia agreed to provide that.
Second, eliminating ICBMs, ICBM silos, and bombers did not come cheaply. With its economy rapidly contracting, the Ukrainian government could not afford the costs. The United States agreed to cover those costs with Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction assistance.
Third, Ukraine wanted guarantees or assurances of its security once it got rid of the nuclear arms. The Budapest Memorandum provided security assurances.
Unfortunately, Russia has broken virtually all the commitments it undertook in that document. It used military force to seize, and then illegally annex, Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula in early 2014. Russian and Russian proxy forces have waged war for more than five years in the eastern Ukrainian region of Donbas, claiming more than 13,000 lives and driving some two million people from their homes.
Some have argued that, since the United States did not invade Ukraine, it abided by its Budapest Memorandum commitments. True, in a narrow sense. However, when negotiating the security assurances, U.S. officials told their Ukrainian counterparts that, were Russia to violate them, the United States would take a strong interest and respond.
Washington did not promise unlimited support. The Budapest Memorandum contains security “assurances,” not “guarantees.” Guarantees would have implied a commitment of American military force, which NATO members have. U.S. officials made clear that was not on offer. Hence, assurances.
Beyond that, U.S. and Ukrainian officials did not discuss in detail how Washington might respond in the event of a Russian violation. That owed in part to then-Russian President Boris Yeltsin. He had his flaws, but he insisted that there be no revision of the boundaries separating the states that emerged from the Soviet collapse. Yeltsin respected Ukraine’s independence and territorial integrity. Vladimir Putin does not.
U.S. officials did assure their Ukrainian counterparts, however, that there would be a response. The United States should continue to provide reform and military assistance to Ukraine. It should continue sanctions on Russia. It should continue to demand that Moscow end its aggression against Ukraine. And it should continue to urge its European partners to assist Kyiv and keep the sanctions pressure on the Kremlin.
Washington should do this, because it said it would act if Russia violated the Budapest Memorandum. That was part of the price it paid in return for a drastic reduction in the nuclear threat to America. The United States should keep its word.
-
https://youtu.be/9XujTiutw88
-
https://youtu.be/9XujTiutw88
I suppose because we're economically less dependent on Russia than China.
-
Russia plans ‘very graphic’ fake video as pretext for Ukraine invasion, US claims
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/03/ukraine-russia-fake-attack-video-us-claims (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/03/ukraine-russia-fake-attack-video-us-claims)
-
tuker an aron https://youtu.be/1uw-n0erI2M
-
Have we all purchased our tin hats ?
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDVPIMy98wo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDVPIMy98wo)
-
It's all a bit iffy though. Russian Naval exercises off the coast of Ireland ? Internet cables underneath the seas. I can see them going caput first and foremost.
-
tuker carlson https://youtu.be/12t9sBQR7Og
-
a little bit from nigel farage https://youtu.be/J0o7dgwKMF4
-
criag murray https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2022/02/cry-havoc-and-let-slip-the-dogs-of-war/
-
Why are the media kicking up such a fuss here ? They really do get on my nerves.
-
https://off-guardian.org/2022/02/14/discuss-whats-really-happening-in-ukraine/
-
One possibility for whipping up the war rhetoric: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/15/alexei-navalny-faces-10-more-years-prison-focus-ukraine-crisis-russia
-
https://youtu.be/N70i1hiS79U
-
Just seen this on social media.. make of it what you will..
Author: Mike Whitney
"The Ukrainian crisis has nothing to do with Ukraine. It’s about Germany and, in particular, a pipeline that connects Germany to Russia called Nord Stream 2. Washington sees the pipeline as a threat to its primacy in Europe and has tried to sabotage the project at every turn. Even so, Nord Stream has pushed ahead and is now fully-operational and ready-to-go. Once German regulators provide the final certification, the gas deliveries will begin. German homeowners and businesses will have a reliable source of clean and inexpensive energy while Russia will see a significant boost to their gas revenues. It’s a win-win situation for both parties.
The US Foreign Policy establishment is not happy about these developments. They don’t want Germany to become more dependent on Russian gas because commerce builds trust and trust leads to the expansion of trade. As relations grow warmer, more trade barriers are lifted, regulations are eased, travel and tourism increase, and a new security architecture evolves. In a world where Germany and Russia are friends and trading partners, there is no need for US military bases, no need for expensive US-made weapons and missile systems, and no need for NATO. There’s also no need to transact energy deals in US Dollars or to stockpile US Treasuries to balance accounts. Transactions between business partners can be conducted in their own currencies which is bound to precipitate a sharp decline in the value of the dollar and a dramatic shift in economic power.
This is why the Biden administration opposes Nord Stream. It’s not just a pipeline, it’s a window into the future; a future in which Europe and Asia are drawn closer together into a massive free trade zone that increases their mutual power and prosperity while leaving the US on the outside looking in. Warmer relations between Germany and Russia signal an end to the “unipolar” world order the US has overseen for the last 75 years. A German-Russo alliance threatens to hasten the decline of the Superpower that is presently inching closer to the abyss. This is why Washington is determined to do everything it can to sabotage Nord Stream and keep Germany within its orbit. It’s a matter of survival.
That’s where Ukraine comes into the picture. Ukraine is Washington’s ‘weapon of choice’ for torpedoing Nord Stream and putting a wedge between Germany and Russia. The strategy is taken from page one of the US Foreign Policy Handbook under the rubric: Divide and Rule. Washington needs to create the perception that Russia poses a security threat to Europe. That’s the goal. They need to show that Putin is a bloodthirsty aggressor with a hair-trigger temper who cannot be trusted. To that end, the media has been given the assignment of reiterating over and over again, “Russia is planning to invade Ukraine.” What’s left unsaid is that Russia has not invaded any country since the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and that the US has invaded or toppled regimes in more than 50 countries in the same period of time, and that the US maintains over 800 military bases in countries around the world. None of this is reported by the media, instead the focus is on “evil Putin” who has amassed an estimated 100,000 troops along the Ukrainian border threatening to plunge all of Europe into another bloody war.
All of the hysterical war propaganda is created with the intention of manufacturing a crisis that can be used to isolate, demonize and, ultimately, splinter Russia into smaller units. The real target, however, is not Russia, but Germany. Check out this excerpt from an article by Michael Hudson at The Unz Review:
"The only way left for US diplomats to block European purchases is to goad Russia into a military response and then claim that avenging this response outweighs any purely national economic interest. As hawkish Under-Secretary of State for Political Affairs, Victoria Nuland, explained in a State Department press briefing on January 27: ‘If Russia invades Ukraine one way or another Nord Stream 2 will not move forward.’ (America’s Real Adversaries Are Its European and Other Allies, The Unz Review)"
There it is in black and white. The Biden team wants to “goad Russia into a military response” in order to sabotage NordStream. That implies there will be some kind of provocation designed to induce Putin to send his troops across the border to defend the ethnic Russians in the eastern part of the country. If Putin takes the bait, the response would be swift and harsh. The media will excoriate the action as a threat to all of Europe while leaders around the world will denounce Putin as the “new Hitler”. This is Washington’s strategy in a nutshell, and the whole production is being orchestrated with one goal in mind; to make it politically impossible for the German Chancellor Olaf Scholz to wave NordStream through the final approval process.
Given what we know about Washington’s opposition to Nord Stream, readers may wonder why earlier in the year the Biden administration lobbied Congress NOT to impose more sanctions on the project. The answer to that question is simple: Domestic politics. Germany is currently decommissioning its nuclear power plants and needs natural gas to make up for the energy shortfall. Also, the threat of economic sanctions is a “turn-off” for Germans who see them as a sign of foreign meddling. “Why is the United States interfering in our energy decisions,” asks the average German. “Washington should mind its own business and stay out of ours.” This is precisely the response one would expect from any reasonable person.
Then, there’s this from Al Jaz:
"Germans in the majority support the project, it is only parts of the elite and media who are against the pipeline…
‘The more the US talks about sanctioning or criticizes the project, the more it becomes popular in German society,’ said Stefan Meister, a Russia and eastern Europe expert at the German Council on Foreign Relations."
So, public opinion is solidly behind Nord Stream which helps to explain why Washington settled on a new approach. Sanctions are not going to work, so Uncle Sam has flipped to Plan B: Create a big enough external threat that Germany will be forced to block the opening of the pipeline. Frankly, the strategy smacks of desperation, but you have to be impressed by Washington’s perseverance. They might be down by 5 runs in the bottom of the 9th, but they haven’t thrown in the towel just yet. They’re going to give it one last shot and see if they can make some headway.
On Monday, President Biden held his first joint-press conference with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz at the White House. The ballyhoo surrounding the event was simply unprecedented. Everything was orchestrated to manufacture a “crisis atmosphere” that Biden used to pressure the chancellor in the direction of US policy. Earlier in the week, White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki repeatedly said that a “Russian invasion was imminent.” Her comments were followed by State Department flak Nick Price opining that the Intel agencies had provided him with details of an alleged Russian-backed “false flag” operation they expected to take place in the near future in east Ukraine. Price’s warning was followed on Sunday morning by national security advisor Jake Sullivan claiming that a Russian invasion could happen at any time maybe “even tomorrow.” This was just days after Bloomberg News agency had published its sensational and utterly-false headline that “Russia Invades Ukraine”.
Can you see the pattern here? Can you see how these baseless claims were all used to apply pressure to the unsuspecting German chancellor who seemed oblivious to the campaign that was aimed at him?
As one might expect, the final blow was delivered by the American president himself. During the press conference Biden stated emphatically that,
"If Russia invades … there will no longer [be] a Nord Stream 2.. We will bring an end to it."
So, now Washington sets policy for Germany???
What insufferable arrogance!
The German chancellor was taken aback by Biden’s comments which clearly were not part of the original script. Even so, Scholz never agreed to cancel Nord Stream and refused to even mention the pipeline by name. If Biden thought he could sandbag the leader of the world’s third biggest economy by cornering him in a public forum, he guessed wrong. Germany remains committed to launching Nord Stream regardless of potential flare-ups in far-flung Ukraine. But that could change at any time. After all, who knows what incitements Washington might be planning in the near future? Who knows how many lives they are prepared to sacrifice in order to put a wedge between Germany and Russia? Who knows what risks Biden is willing to take to slow America’s decline and prevent a new “polycentric” world order from emerging? Anything could happen in the weeks ahead. Anything.
For now, Germany is in the catbird seat. It’s up to Scholz to decide how the matter will be settled. Will he implement the policy that best serves the interests of the German people or will he cave in to Biden’s relentless arm twisting? Will he chart a new course that strengthens new alliances in the bustling Eurasian corridor or will he throw his support behind Washington’s crazed geopolitical ambitions? Will he accept Germany’s pivotal role in a new world order— in which many emerging centers of power share equally in global governance and where the leadership remains unflinchingly committed to multilateralism, peaceful development and security for all– or will he try to prop up the tattered post-War system that has clearly outlived its shelf-life?
One thing is certain; whatever Germany decides is bound to affect us all.
-
Just seen this on social media.. make of it what you will..
Author: Mike Whitney
"The Ukrainian crisis has nothing to do with Ukraine. It’s about Germany and, in particular, a pipeline that connects Germany to Russia called Nord Stream 2. Washington sees the pipeline as a threat to its primacy in Europe and has tried to sabotage the project at every turn. Even so, Nord Stream has pushed ahead and is now fully-operational and ready-to-go. Once German regulators provide the final certification, the gas deliveries will begin. German homeowners and businesses will have a reliable source of clean and inexpensive energy while Russia will see a significant boost to their gas revenues. It’s a win-win situation for both parties.
The US Foreign Policy establishment is not happy about these developments. They don’t want Germany to become more dependent on Russian gas because commerce builds trust and trust leads to the expansion of trade. As relations grow warmer, more trade barriers are lifted, regulations are eased, travel and tourism increase, and a new security architecture evolves. In a world where Germany and Russia are friends and trading partners, there is no need for US military bases, no need for expensive US-made weapons and missile systems, and no need for NATO. There’s also no need to transact energy deals in US Dollars or to stockpile US Treasuries to balance accounts. Transactions between business partners can be conducted in their own currencies which is bound to precipitate a sharp decline in the value of the dollar and a dramatic shift in economic power.
This is why the Biden administration opposes Nord Stream. It’s not just a pipeline, it’s a window into the future; a future in which Europe and Asia are drawn closer together into a massive free trade zone that increases their mutual power and prosperity while leaving the US on the outside looking in. Warmer relations between Germany and Russia signal an end to the “unipolar” world order the US has overseen for the last 75 years. A German-Russo alliance threatens to hasten the decline of the Superpower that is presently inching closer to the abyss. This is why Washington is determined to do everything it can to sabotage Nord Stream and keep Germany within its orbit. It’s a matter of survival.
That’s where Ukraine comes into the picture. Ukraine is Washington’s ‘weapon of choice’ for torpedoing Nord Stream and putting a wedge between Germany and Russia. The strategy is taken from page one of the US Foreign Policy Handbook under the rubric: Divide and Rule. Washington needs to create the perception that Russia poses a security threat to Europe. That’s the goal. They need to show that Putin is a bloodthirsty aggressor with a hair-trigger temper who cannot be trusted. To that end, the media has been given the assignment of reiterating over and over again, “Russia is planning to invade Ukraine.” What’s left unsaid is that Russia has not invaded any country since the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and that the US has invaded or toppled regimes in more than 50 countries in the same period of time, and that the US maintains over 800 military bases in countries around the world. None of this is reported by the media, instead the focus is on “evil Putin” who has amassed an estimated 100,000 troops along the Ukrainian border threatening to plunge all of Europe into another bloody war.
All of the hysterical war propaganda is created with the intention of manufacturing a crisis that can be used to isolate, demonize and, ultimately, splinter Russia into smaller units. The real target, however, is not Russia, but Germany. Check out this excerpt from an article by Michael Hudson at The Unz Review:
"The only way left for US diplomats to block European purchases is to goad Russia into a military response and then claim that avenging this response outweighs any purely national economic interest. As hawkish Under-Secretary of State for Political Affairs, Victoria Nuland, explained in a State Department press briefing on January 27: ‘If Russia invades Ukraine one way or another Nord Stream 2 will not move forward.’ (America’s Real Adversaries Are Its European and Other Allies, The Unz Review)"
There it is in black and white. The Biden team wants to “goad Russia into a military response” in order to sabotage NordStream. That implies there will be some kind of provocation designed to induce Putin to send his troops across the border to defend the ethnic Russians in the eastern part of the country. If Putin takes the bait, the response would be swift and harsh. The media will excoriate the action as a threat to all of Europe while leaders around the world will denounce Putin as the “new Hitler”. This is Washington’s strategy in a nutshell, and the whole production is being orchestrated with one goal in mind; to make it politically impossible for the German Chancellor Olaf Scholz to wave NordStream through the final approval process.
Given what we know about Washington’s opposition to Nord Stream, readers may wonder why earlier in the year the Biden administration lobbied Congress NOT to impose more sanctions on the project. The answer to that question is simple: Domestic politics. Germany is currently decommissioning its nuclear power plants and needs natural gas to make up for the energy shortfall. Also, the threat of economic sanctions is a “turn-off” for Germans who see them as a sign of foreign meddling. “Why is the United States interfering in our energy decisions,” asks the average German. “Washington should mind its own business and stay out of ours.” This is precisely the response one would expect from any reasonable person.
Then, there’s this from Al Jaz:
"Germans in the majority support the project, it is only parts of the elite and media who are against the pipeline…
‘The more the US talks about sanctioning or criticizes the project, the more it becomes popular in German society,’ said Stefan Meister, a Russia and eastern Europe expert at the German Council on Foreign Relations."
So, public opinion is solidly behind Nord Stream which helps to explain why Washington settled on a new approach. Sanctions are not going to work, so Uncle Sam has flipped to Plan B: Create a big enough external threat that Germany will be forced to block the opening of the pipeline. Frankly, the strategy smacks of desperation, but you have to be impressed by Washington’s perseverance. They might be down by 5 runs in the bottom of the 9th, but they haven’t thrown in the towel just yet. They’re going to give it one last shot and see if they can make some headway.
On Monday, President Biden held his first joint-press conference with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz at the White House. The ballyhoo surrounding the event was simply unprecedented. Everything was orchestrated to manufacture a “crisis atmosphere” that Biden used to pressure the chancellor in the direction of US policy. Earlier in the week, White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki repeatedly said that a “Russian invasion was imminent.” Her comments were followed by State Department flak Nick Price opining that the Intel agencies had provided him with details of an alleged Russian-backed “false flag” operation they expected to take place in the near future in east Ukraine. Price’s warning was followed on Sunday morning by national security advisor Jake Sullivan claiming that a Russian invasion could happen at any time maybe “even tomorrow.” This was just days after Bloomberg News agency had published its sensational and utterly-false headline that “Russia Invades Ukraine”.
Can you see the pattern here? Can you see how these baseless claims were all used to apply pressure to the unsuspecting German chancellor who seemed oblivious to the campaign that was aimed at him?
As one might expect, the final blow was delivered by the American president himself. During the press conference Biden stated emphatically that,
"If Russia invades … there will no longer [be] a Nord Stream 2.. We will bring an end to it."
So, now Washington sets policy for Germany???
What insufferable arrogance!
The German chancellor was taken aback by Biden’s comments which clearly were not part of the original script. Even so, Scholz never agreed to cancel Nord Stream and refused to even mention the pipeline by name. If Biden thought he could sandbag the leader of the world’s third biggest economy by cornering him in a public forum, he guessed wrong. Germany remains committed to launching Nord Stream regardless of potential flare-ups in far-flung Ukraine. But that could change at any time. After all, who knows what incitements Washington might be planning in the near future? Who knows how many lives they are prepared to sacrifice in order to put a wedge between Germany and Russia? Who knows what risks Biden is willing to take to slow America’s decline and prevent a new “polycentric” world order from emerging? Anything could happen in the weeks ahead. Anything.
For now, Germany is in the catbird seat. It’s up to Scholz to decide how the matter will be settled. Will he implement the policy that best serves the interests of the German people or will he cave in to Biden’s relentless arm twisting? Will he chart a new course that strengthens new alliances in the bustling Eurasian corridor or will he throw his support behind Washington’s crazed geopolitical ambitions? Will he accept Germany’s pivotal role in a new world order— in which many emerging centers of power share equally in global governance and where the leadership remains unflinchingly committed to multilateralism, peaceful development and security for all– or will he try to prop up the tattered post-War system that has clearly outlived its shelf-life?
One thing is certain; whatever Germany decides is bound to affect us all.
🛸👽
-
This is the Ukraine-Russia border at the moment.
(https://i.makeagif.com/media/11-27-2015/0WhXB_.gif)
-
I note the Ukranian finance minister is rather attractive looking:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serhiy_Marchenko
-
I note the Ukranian finance minister is rather attractive looking:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serhiy_Marchenko
Looks a little bit like Andrei Shevshenko.
-
Looks a little bit like Andrei Shevshenko.
Yes but Serhiy Marchenko has blue eyes and fuller lips.
-
I think CambridgeAlchie would fit in very well in Russia..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_consumption_in_Russia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_consumption_in_Russia)
-
I think CambridgeAlchie would fit in very well in Russia..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_consumption_in_Russia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_consumption_in_Russia)
According to the above they tend to drink more spirits than beer and wine so not really as my pref is for beer and lager.
-
According to the above they tend to drink more spirits than beer and wine so not really as my pref is for beer and lager.
Who cares when they can ice skate like this (with drugs :-\)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6czuqVgb7Y
-
According to the above they tend to drink more spirits than beer and wine so not really as my pref is for beer and lager.
Americans seem to make some of the best bottled beers at the moment.
-
US and UK trying to fend off Russian invasion by making intelligence public
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/16/us-uk-russia-invasion-ingelligence-public-briefings (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/16/us-uk-russia-invasion-ingelligence-public-briefings)
-
https://socialistworker.co.uk/news/ukraine-the-imperial-rivalries-that-push-towards-war/
-
https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/w/russian-communists-call-anti-facist-front-against-nato-led-nazification-ukraine
-
https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/w/russian-communists-call-anti-facist-front-against-nato-led-nazification-ukraine
Nazification? The current pro Nato president of Ukraine is Jewish. :))
The west is never short of useful idiots.
-
Nazification? The current pro Nato president of Ukraine is Jewish. :))
The west is never short of useful idiots.
I don't really think there are any 'good guys' in this dispute David. I tell you what though, that Sergei Lavrov - he seems quite impressive as a statesman. He's been around a while also. In the same time period, I wonder how many different politicians have served in the same role in the UK.
-
I don't really think there are any 'good guys' in this dispute David. I tell you what though, that Sergei Lavrov - he seems quite impressive as a statesman. He's been around a while also. In the same time period, I wonder how many different politicians have served in the same role in the UK.
You listen to a guy who claims Aliens go around abducting sheep. Why should I be surprised. You are the target audience for Russian propaganda and misinformation.
-
You listen to a guy who claims Aliens go around abducting sheep. Why should I be surprised. You are the target audience for Russian propaganda and misinformation.
Ha ha. I doubt Putin is Mother Teresa. But I look at our lot, and wouldn't trust them as far as I could spit them. What can you do? I think, be open to views from all angles.
-
Putin has recognized the Donetsk People's Republic and the Luhansk People's Republic. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/russia-ukraine-crisis-kremlin-calls-extraordinary-security-council-meeting/ar-AAU7cAp?ocid=msedgntp
-
...
-
...
Russia has to all intents and purposes invaded Ukraine. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/ukraine-russia-crisis-live-news-zelenskiy-says-we-re-not-afraid-as-putin-orders-troops-over-border/ar-AAU96PX?ocid=msedgntp
-
Nazification? The current pro Nato president of Ukraine is Jewish. :))
The west is never short of useful idiots.
Please, 'do not let any of us' be seen to be supporting 'racist angatamistic folklore', however, anyone with a modicom of intelligence, and of course decency or (and) respect knows, that there are many human and sub-human beings amongst us. This /that, is not to say that every human, or that every sub-human has evil intentions, but the truth of the matter is that there are many such evil monsters amongst us...
In point of fact, 'PUTIN' is almost certainly 'obsessed with trying' and to 'a certain extent' becoming, 'a duplication' of the notorious 'ADOLPH HITLER' (reborn)...
Having said 'that' / 'this', 'how', 'when', 'where', did the 'monster of Germany die'?
How do we know, that 'PUTIN' is not 'HITLER'?
The `clock is ticking`, there is `less than 3 years` [2025] before and until 'THE NEW WORLD ORDER' takes effect! By then of course, earth's population will be 'radically reduced'. Those that still exist (and who are alive and thriving now) will be, and are the historical custodians of our future, until and by 2030, when 'GOD' [as perceived by many peoples] will return and pass judgement upon all of those who have sought to become, and be 'godlike' in their behaviour. Please, be reassured that drastic changes in the way human population of the earth is changing[2025] and that these changes are being made in anticipation of 'a return to the earth of God, or as it were, God's representative...
-
There will be sanctions..https://youtu.be/VA7KUaWOG3A
"You either carry on as normal or you take up a gun.." https://youtu.be/bREkkcgngkI
-
We'll get to know what sanctions entail very soon as BJ has set them out.
-
Be interesting to see if the sanctions involve Nordstream 2 😏
-
Be interesting to see if the sanctions involve Nordstream 2 😏
Germany is seeing to that.
-
We'll get to know what sanctions entail very soon as BJ has set them out.
For the time being it's banks/ frozen accounts---until such time as a real threat is imminent then more sanctions will be put in place.
-
Be interesting to see if the sanctions involve Nordstream 2 😏
I wonder if Putin's position is secure. https://youtu.be/c5bTviQt8ZY
-
http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/67825
-
He's not a well man is he ?
-
He's not a well man is he ?
I'm always troubled by a politician when their wife leaves them: Putin, Johnson, Berlusconi, Gore.
He's living in a fantasy world. https://youtu.be/wlFM2BUwTj0
-
I'm always troubled by a politician when their wife leaves them: Putin, Johnson, Berlusconi, Gore.
He's living in a fantasy world. https://youtu.be/wlFM2BUwTj0
David Starkey's right though isn't he ?
-
Holy shit! :-\
-
I'm surprised that nobody has bumped him off in all these years. ::)
A megalomaniac of the highest order. Things are going to look bleak indeed.
-
What sanctions did UK and US face, for an illegal invasion of Iraq? The worst thing that probably happened was that we got nil points in the Eurovision Song Contest.
-
What sanctions did UK and US face, for an illegal invasion of Iraq? The worst thing that probably happened was that we got nil points in the Eurovision Song Contest.
-
I doubt the families of all the dead Iraqis are laughing. Same goes for the surviving veterans in the US. I doubt they're laughing. I also doubt that David Brent supported the war.
-
Anyway, I hope that there are the most minimum of casualties possible in all this. Thoughts are with people currently facing life threatening danger and terror.
-
Our sanctions have been no way forceful enough. Sling all their dirty laundered money out of London, seize their assets once and for all. Every country do the same.
Those poor Ukranians. My grandson works with them as we have a lot of them living on Merseyside whose families are in the Ukraine and many rely on money being sent to them. Imagine having your family there !
We'll just have to sit tight and do nothing for the time being as retaliation will be the wrong way to go at this stage.
-
I doubt the families of all the dead Iraqis are laughing. Same goes for the surviving veterans in the US. I doubt they're laughing. I also doubt that David Brent supported the war.
A - The Iraq war was not illegal.
B - It was a collation of willing democracies.
C - Most the Iraqi people wanted Saddam gone.
D - America did not annex Iraq into its own territory.
E - The Iraqi national congress wanted the invasion.
The fact you bring this up and create a false equivalence just goes to show you have nothing to really say.
-
A - The Iraq war was not illegal.
B - It was a collation of willing democracies.
C - Most the Iraqi people wanted Saddam gone.
D - America did not annex Iraq into its own territory.
E - The Iraqi national congress wanted the invasion.
The fact you bring this up and create a false equivalence just goes to show you have nothing to really say.
The war in Iraq deeply damaged the reputations of the US and UK.
Even though some countries who took part were members of NATO, the war was not sanctioned by NATO.
The war was not sanctioned by the UN.
The war was deeply unpopular across the world.
The justification for the war was based on lies.
The UK expert who questioned the accuracy of intelligence 'committed suicide'. A finding that was backed by your old friend, Peter Vanezis, suprise, suprise.
After, issuing bullying ultimatums, the US was assisted by lapdogs.
It was a war of plunder, in which US corporations will no doubt have benefited.
Ill disciplined security contractors added to the carnage.
The power vacuum that was created after the initial victory, facilitated mass murder and mayhem.
The US was involved in torture and extraditions.
In short, The US is in a somewhat dubious position, if it tries to take the moral high ground with Russia.
-
The war in Iraq deeply damaged the reputations of the US and UK.
Even though some countries who took part were members of NATO, the war was not sanctioned by NATO.
The war was not sanctioned by the UN.
The war was deeply unpopular across the world.
The justification for the war was based on lies.
The UK expert who questioned the accuracy of intelligence 'committed suicide'. A finding that was backed by your old friend, Peter Vanezis, suprise, suprise.
After, issuing bullying ultimatums, the US was assisted by lapdogs.
It was a war of plunder, in which US corporations will no doubt have benefited.
Ill disciplined security contractors added to the carnage.
The power vacuum that was created after the initial victory, facilitated mass murder and mayhem.
The US was involved in torture and extraditions.
In short, The US is in a somewhat dubious position, if it tries to take the moral high ground with Russia.
👽
-
Watching Putins latest speech, he seems to have lost it.
-
Watching Putins latest speech, he seems to have lost it.
How prescient that the UK Defence Secretary said yesterday 'It looks as if he's gone full Tonto'
-
How prescient that the UK Defence Secretary said yesterday 'It looks as if he's gone full Tonto'
I was surprised the woke brigade didn't jump on that. He will get cancelled.
-
Mad as a hatter !
The skies seem to be " busy " here with high-up jets over the river. Probably RAF Valley Anglesey exercising/ training. Won't go down well with the Russian Navy off the Irish coast. They are in an area where all communications can be severed between USA and Europe----from underwater cables.
-
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/t08sgh/the_first_invaders_are_already_in_hell/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/t08sgh/the_first_invaders_are_already_in_hell/)
I am waiting for Gringos rant on how this is all CIA propaganda.
-
i will ae gringothe troule its all ia propogana.
-
https://youtu.be/hCE_O0HSSk8
-
Lavrov is giving a withering speech on BBC1 now. He has certainly not lost his marbles.
-
The war in Iraq deeply damaged the reputations of the US and UK.
Even though some countries who took part were members of NATO, the war was not sanctioned by NATO.
The war was not sanctioned by the UN.
The war was deeply unpopular across the world.
The justification for the war was based on lies.
The UK expert who questioned the accuracy of intelligence 'committed suicide'. A finding that was backed by your old friend, Peter Vanezis, suprise, suprise.
After, issuing bullying ultimatums, the US was assisted by lapdogs.
It was a war of plunder, in which US corporations will no doubt have benefited.
Ill disciplined security contractors added to the carnage.
The power vacuum that was created after the initial victory, facilitated mass murder and mayhem.
The US was involved in torture and extraditions.
In short, The US is in a somewhat dubious position, if it tries to take the moral high ground with Russia.
A very good post Roch. I agree with you.
-
So far 450 Russian soldiers have died.
-
So far 450 Russian soldiers have died.
If the figure is accurate, what a stupid waste of life. That would be an extremely high casualty rate for Russia.
-
A very good post Roch. I agree with you.
I too agree and condemned the war in Iraq right from the start.
-
The war in Iraq deeply damaged the reputations of the US and UK.
Even though some countries who took part were members of NATO, the war was not sanctioned by NATO.
The war was not sanctioned by the UN.
The war was deeply unpopular across the world.
The justification for the war was based on lies.
The UK expert who questioned the accuracy of intelligence 'committed suicide'. A finding that was backed by your old friend, Peter Vanezis, suprise, suprise.
After, issuing bullying ultimatums, the US was assisted by lapdogs.
It was a war of plunder, in which US corporations will no doubt have benefited.
Ill disciplined security contractors added to the carnage.
The power vacuum that was created after the initial victory, facilitated mass murder and mayhem.
The US was involved in torture and extraditions.
In short, The US is in a somewhat dubious position, if it tries to take the moral high ground with Russia.
Prof Vanezis didn't carry out the post-mortem. It was carried out by Dr Nicholas Hunt. Both agreed along with others:
The forensic pathologist who examined Kelly's body, Dr Nicholas Hunt, gave the formal cause of death as: "Haemorrhage due to incised wounds of the left wrist", in conjunction with "Coproxamol ingestion and coronary artery atherosclerosis".
Professor Peter Vanezis, senior consultant in forensic medicine to the armed forces, said: "These people are more clinicians and are obviously surprised that a person can kill themselves like that."Vanezis also said the lack of large amounts of blood in the wood where Kelly was discovered could also be easily explained: "It was outside, it could have gone into the soil."
Dr Andrew Davison, a forensic pathologist with Cardiff university agreed: "You only have so much blood going around, if you have a heart condition you can't afford to lose as much blood as a healthy person."
Professor Derrick Pounder, head of forensic medicine and forensic pathologist at the university of Dundee said: "It may be that there are several factors in a death. In this case, we know he had taken more than a therapeutic dose of drugs, and that he had some pre-existing heart disease.We have three factors in the death that are known to the public. The cause of death is likely an interplay between the three."
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/aug/16/david-kelly-inquest-hutton-inquiry
Are they all part of your conspiracy theories?
-
Prof Vanezis didn't carry out the post-mortem. It was carried out by Dr Nicholas Hunt. Both agreed along with others:
The forensic pathologist who examined Kelly's body, Dr Nicholas Hunt, gave the formal cause of death as: "Haemorrhage due to incised wounds of the left wrist", in conjunction with "Coproxamol ingestion and coronary artery atherosclerosis".
Professor Peter Vanezis, senior consultant in forensic medicine to the armed forces, said: "These people are more clinicians and are obviously surprised that a person can kill themselves like that."Vanezis also said the lack of large amounts of blood in the wood where Kelly was discovered could also be easily explained: "It was outside, it could have gone into the soil."
Dr Andrew Davison, a forensic pathologist with Cardiff university agreed: "You only have so much blood going around, if you have a heart condition you can't afford to lose as much blood as a healthy person."
Professor Derrick Pounder, head of forensic medicine and forensic pathologist at the university of Dundee said: "It may be that there are several factors in a death. In this case, we know he had taken more than a therapeutic dose of drugs, and that he had some pre-existing heart disease.We have three factors in the death that are known to the public. The cause of death is likely an interplay between the three."
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/aug/16/david-kelly-inquest-hutton-inquiry
Are they all part of your conspiracy theories?
I haven't outlined a conspiracy theory. But do you honestly believe a British pathologist would conclude that it was murder dressed as suicide, given the implications that it would imply a state sanctioned murder?
-
'Peter Venesis' is, was 'a fucking deviant lying, evil bastard' in the employ of 'THE POWERS THAT BE'
-
1000 Russians dead now.
https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/russia-ukraine-crisis-over-1-000-russian-soldiers-killed-so-far-says-ukraine-2789642 (https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/russia-ukraine-crisis-over-1-000-russian-soldiers-killed-so-far-says-ukraine-2789642)
-
I haven't outlined a conspiracy theory. But do you honestly believe a British pathologist would conclude that it was murder dressed as suicide, given the implications that it would imply a state sanctioned murder?
You're suggesting once again that Prof Vanezis produced a less than truthful post-mortem to appease others. Utterly ludicrous imo. I believe 99.9% of registered UK pathologists produce entirely reliable pm's without consideration of any external influence.
Does the UK have a history of "state sanctioned murder" of its own people?
I really shouldn't be indulging you :'(
-
'Peter Venesis' is, was 'a fucking deviant lying, evil bastard' in the employ of 'THE POWERS THAT BE'
What evidence exists to support the above?
-
1000 Russians dead now.
https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/russia-ukraine-crisis-over-1-000-russian-soldiers-killed-so-far-says-ukraine-2789642 (https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/russia-ukraine-crisis-over-1-000-russian-soldiers-killed-so-far-says-ukraine-2789642)
I'm sure there will be a lot of propaganda put out by both sides so how do you know your figures of 450 and 1,000 are accurate?
If it escalates into member countries of NATO you're young enough to be conscripted David. The millennials might have a shock when they find its a far cry from playing war games on Xbox.
-
You're suggesting once again that Prof Vanezis produced a less than truthful post-mortem to appease others. Utterly ludicrous imo. I believe 99.9% of registered UK pathologists produce entirely reliable pm's without consideration of any external influence.[
Does the UK have a history of "state sanctioned murder" of its own people?
I really shouldn't be indulging you :'(
How could you possibly have evidence to back up your 'belief'? Even accounting for unreliable post mortems that have been uncovered (which you have assessed at 0.1%), there is still the possibility of unreliable post mortems which have not been uncovered.
Re your second question: what's the probability that the British state has never sanctioned the killing / disappearance of a British citizen?
-
You're suggesting once again that Prof Vanezis produced a less than truthful post-mortem to appease others.
Also, you got this wrong. I did not suggest this. I was aware of his comment regarding the soil. I never implied he carried out anything related to the PM.
Concerns were expressed by doctors:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1302640/Dr-Kelly-investigation-inadequate-Now-NINE-doctors-demand-inquest.html
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1199109/13-doctors-demand-inquest-Dr-David-Kellys-death.html
There was also this article. The Mail seems to have a monopoly on it:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-488667/Why-I-know-weapons-expert-Dr-David-Kelly-murdered-MP-spent-year-investigating-death.html
-
What evidence exists to support the above?
All over the crime scene negatives of the deceased. We are getting off topic from Russia.
That's just reminded me... I forgot to reply to your McDonnell post.
-
2800 Russians dead.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukrainian-minister-says-russia-has-lost-about-2800-servicemen-attacks-2022-02-25/ (https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukrainian-minister-says-russia-has-lost-about-2800-servicemen-attacks-2022-02-25/)
-
There's a lot of disinformation about David and Russia themselves are putting a lot of it out.
-
There's a lot of disinformation about David and Russia themselves are putting a lot of it out.
The maps show battles all over the country. The Ukrainians are willing to fight.
-
If those figures were accurate, I think Putin would be forced out by his own people.
-
If those figures were accurate, I think Putin would be forced out by his own people.
The majority of Russians are too brainwashed. And the Russian state domestic security apparatus is ruthless. If Putin is overthrown, it would probably be done by one of his generals or inner circle.
-
The majority of Russians are too brainwashed. And the Russian state domestic security apparatus is ruthless. If Putin is overthrown, it would probably be done by one of his generals or inner circle.
There have been large scale protests across Russian cities. I think you oversimplify due to decades of US propaganda.
-
There have been large scale protests across Russian cities. I think you oversimplify due to decades of US propaganda.
I wouldn't describe them as "large scale". Saying that they never get a chance to gain momentum.
https://news.sky.com/story/ukraine-police-arrest-more-than-1-700-anti-war-protesters-in-russia-as-anger-erupts-over-invasion-12550653 (https://news.sky.com/story/ukraine-police-arrest-more-than-1-700-anti-war-protesters-in-russia-as-anger-erupts-over-invasion-12550653)
What propaganda?
-
I wouldn't describe them as "large scale". Saying that they never get a chance to gain momentum.
https://news.sky.com/story/ukraine-police-arrest-more-than-1-700-anti-war-protesters-in-russia-as-anger-erupts-over-invasion-12550653 (https://news.sky.com/story/ukraine-police-arrest-more-than-1-700-anti-war-protesters-in-russia-as-anger-erupts-over-invasion-12550653)
What propaganda?
Exactly what propaganda? You have no means of discerning fact from fiction. All you can hope is that Ukraine are able to transfer their footballing abilities to the battlefield
and beat Russia!
-
Exactly what propaganda? You have no means of discerning fact from fiction. All you can hope is that Ukraine are able to transfer their footballing abilities to the battlefield
and beat Russia!
Fifa world rankings:
Ukraine - 27
Russia - 35
-
I wouldn't describe them as "large scale". Saying that they never get a chance to gain momentum.
https://news.sky.com/story/ukraine-police-arrest-more-than-1-700-anti-war-protesters-in-russia-as-anger-erupts-over-invasion-12550653 (https://news.sky.com/story/ukraine-police-arrest-more-than-1-700-anti-war-protesters-in-russia-as-anger-erupts-over-invasion-12550653)
What propaganda?
What about the ones that didn't get captured?
I have this image of the prevailing view in America..
America = good guys. Russia = bad guys
America = Capitalism. Russia = Communism
Capitalism = good. Communism = bad.
Yes, I know that Russia isn't Communist, but you get my drift..
-
What about the ones that didn't get captured?
I have this image of the prevailing view in America..
America = good guys. Russia = bad guys
America = Capitalism. Russia = Communism
Capitalism = good. Communism = bad.
Yes, I know that Russia isn't Communist, but you get my drift..
Its more a case of Putin and the Russian Government = bad. Not Russian People = Bad.
Do you still believe the UK government attacked Scripal with Novitchok to make Russia look bad? ::)
-
Its more a case of Putin and the Russian Government = bad. Not Russian People = Bad.
Do you still believe the UK government attacked Scripal with Novitchok to make Russia look bad? ::)
If Putin is bad, where does that leave Bush Jr.?
I suspect the Russians were drawn in to a sting operation. As for Skripal, he could easily appear in an unidentifiable location to say hello on camera. Any makeshift, nondescript room would do. But just like Tommy Mair, he has disappeared.
-
If Putin is bad, where does that leave Bush Jr.?
Comparing Putin to Bush Jr is like comparing a wolf to a tame dog. Bush was a naive church boy raised in an ivory tower while Putin is an old school KGB gangster.
I suspect the Russians were drawn in to a sting operation. As for Skripal, he could easily appear in an unidentifiable location to say hello on camera. Any makeshift, nondescript room would do. But just like Tommy Mair, he has disappeared.
👽
-
The Ukranians have won the 1st battle of Kyiv and 3500 Russian soldiers have been killed.
-
The Ukranians have won the 1st battle of Kyiv and 3500 Russian soldiers have been killed.
What is the source for the figures David?
-
What is the source for the figures David?
"Mykhailo Podoliak, an adviser in the Volodymyr Zelensky government, was quoted by Ukrainian media outlets as saying 3,500 Russian troops had been killed in the fighting and around 200 had been taken prisoner."
-
"Mykhailo Podoliak, an adviser in the Volodymyr Zelensky government, was quoted by Ukrainian media outlets as saying 3,500 Russian troops had been killed in the fighting and around 200 had been taken prisoner."
The figure seems very high. Putin would not be able to hide the deaths or the loss of military equipment that you suggested yesterday.
-
The figure seems very high. Putin would not be able to hide the deaths or the loss of military equipment that you suggested yesterday.
Russian state media will just deny or deflate the figurers. And spin it in anyway they deem appropriate.
https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-entertainment-media-europe-moscow-a760a2b6dcf5ef820cee7138336a5b3b (https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-entertainment-media-europe-moscow-a760a2b6dcf5ef820cee7138336a5b3b)
-
Putin would never let it be known how many of his troops have perished so I'd view that with caution.
-
Russian state media will just deny or deflate the figurers. And spin it in anyway they deem appropriate.
https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-entertainment-media-europe-moscow-a760a2b6dcf5ef820cee7138336a5b3b (https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-entertainment-media-europe-moscow-a760a2b6dcf5ef820cee7138336a5b3b)
I doubt Russian state media is believed by everyone. 600000 people in Russia signed a petition against the war. The Russian population are not stupid. Regarding the loss of military equipment, the generals and army would know of this. Regarding casualties, there is no way to hide them. Families would know that their family member in the armed forces had disappeared without contact.
Just out of interest, if Russia, China, Iran and North Korea formed their own alternative to NATO, which began attracting other nations, and countries within Central America wanted to join or were being encouraged to join - how would the US react?
-
What's bothering me are Russians stealing vehicles that have been left behind and motoring across these borders.
-
I doubt Russian state media is believed by everyone. 600000 people in Russia signed a petition against the war. The Russian population are not stupid. Regarding the loss of military equipment, the generals and army would know of this. Regarding casualties, there is no way to hide them. Families would know that their family member in the armed forces had disappeared without contact.
Family members of soldiers killed will be informed. That is no issue. The relatives wont all be getting together across the entire country to add the numbers up.
Just out of interest, if Russia, China, Iran and North Korea formed their own alternative to NATO, which began attracting other nations, and countries within Central America wanted to join or were bring encouraged to join - how would the US react?
All those countries you listed are too unalike and mismatched to form any meaningful alliance. The Soviet Union and Vietnam did not get on well with China and North Korea in the last half of the 20th century and almost went to war despite all being communist countries. NATO exists because of Russia and you can actually see Russia from Alaska. Russia and the USA are only 50 miles apart.
-
Family members of soldiers killed will be informed. That is no issue. The relatives wont all be getting together across the entire country to add the numbers up.
All those countries you listed are too unalike and mismatched to form any meaningful alliance. The Soviet Union and Vietnam did not get on well with China and North Korea in the last half of the 20th century and almost went to war despite all being communist countries. NATO exists because of Russia USSR and you can actually see Russia from Alaska. Russia and the USA are only 50 miles apart.
I think it's inconceivable that Russia / Russians wont be able to work out the actual number of casualties.
I agree regarding geographical closeness. Given the US is the most powerful nation in the world, why cant it do more to foster good relations with Russia. If you lead, set the example.
-
I wonder how Finland and Sweden feel about all this ? Putin will be eyeing them up to make sure they don't join NATO-----or else.
-
I think it's inconceivable that Russia / Russians wont be able to work out the actual number of casualties.
I agree regarding geographical closeness. Given the US is the most powerful nation in the world, why cant it do more to foster good relations with Russia. If you lead, set the example.
Why would America want to foster good relations with Putin's government? The only leaders with good relations with Putin are other dictators and corrupt kleptocracies like Maduro and Assad. Its a bit like asking me why I don't pursue good relations with local thieves and thugs. Why on earth would I want to?
-
Why would America want to foster good relations with Putin's government? The only leaders with good relations with Putin are other dictators and corrupt kleptocracies like Maduro and Assad. Its a bit like asking me why I don't pursue good relations with local thieves and thugs. Why on earth would I want to?
If Russia, China and some lesser states did not pursue some of the lines and strategy that they have done so far, we would have one nation ruling over the entire world. The USA. The world doesn't want to be ruled over by the USA.
Why do you paint the USA as if it is untarnished, unblemished, a beacon of light for us all?
-
If Russia, China and some lesser states did not pursue some of the lines and strategy that they have done so far, we would have one nation ruling over the entire world. The USA. The world doesn't want to be ruled over by the USA.
👽
Why do you paint the USA as if it is untarnished, unblemished, a beacon of light for us all?
Would you rather this country fall under Chinese or Russian influence considering what's happening to the people of Tibet, Hong Kong and Ukraine? America promotes democracy and freedom of expression over its sphere of influence. The other major powers do the opposite.
-
👽
Would you rather this country fall under Chinese or Russian influence considering what's happening to the people of Tibet, Hong Kong and Ukraine? America promotes democracy and freedom of expression over its sphere of influence. The other major powers do the opposite.
Utter rubbish. You really are brainwashed.
-
Utter rubbish. You really are brainwashed.
Off to gulag for much needed reeducation.
-
Finland----no air space for Russia.
Why is the Russian ambassador still in this country with other Russian officials there ?
-
I hope Liverpool hammers Chelsea today !!
-
Here's a pause for thought, 'I was watching Sky News' between 3.00 am and until about 5.30am, and 'I thought I caught a glimpse of' Putin' and his 'hencemen' amongst a long queue of volunteers in the capital city of 'ukraines', 'who wanted to fight the Russions invaders' ..
I videoed the coverage, and captured certain images, which anyone can give their own view on the matter...
-
https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/02/25/1046495/how-to-share-information-russia-ukraine-invasion/
-
This could well be the end of Putin.
-
yes but it oul also been the en us to it could be the end of eerybody.
-
https://youtu.be/iFb0gcbxgqw
-
Let there be no doubt, that many of our world leaders 'do not automatically tell members of the public the truth by themselves giving honest answers to a, or several questions which are very often put to them! This strain of our humanity, usually answers such questions, with Questions of their own. The real reason they all tend to do this, is because they dare not give us a truthful answer! 'They are special` and `a whole lot better' [in their collective opininions.]
I think 'wholeheartedly' that 'PUTIN' and some of 'his henchmen' or 'his bodyguards', or 'special forces' were there in `Krumania' meeting man to man, with the Ukrainian leader in the knowledge that they did meet and talk about a possible resolution, when 'Pritin' claimed only a day or so, that the 'Kruation leader failed to turn up at the other location to discuss the matters which (incidentally' were discussed between them, at their unofficial meeting, yesterday [or when ever] in the capital city of 'Ukrania' - these world leaders are chiefly 'fucking lying bastards',all of whom have access to wealth and power'nobody should believe or take at face value, what they may have to say, at one moment to the next, the absolute truth, is that all of them are versed (educationally) to practice their unique philosophy upon the rest of us', 'there is one rule of law for this type of human specimen' (for them), and 'a different set of laws' for 'the rest of us'...
Please, understand that I have been the victim of 'countless false allegations made by unscrurpolace police officers', and 'other abhorrent staff members, which belonged (to that /this awful criminal justice system' which casts hourly, daily, weekly, monthly annually impose such positions upon vuneralable individuals, at an earlier stage or point in time...
-
Someone needs to bump this man off before he bumps us all off.
-
What do people think of Putin's views on:
Belgrade
Afghanistan (he doesn't actually mention - prob because of their own invasion).
Libya
Syria
Iraq
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/2/24/putins-speech-declaring-war-on-ukraine-translated-excerpts
I don't agree with him regarding Belgrade, but I may have been brainwashed that the Serbs had it coming.
-
Footage of Russian multiple rocket launchers reportedly firing from Tavriiskom the shores of the Dniepr towards Kherson.
https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarReports/comments/t2vtpl/footage_of_russian_multiple_rocket_launchers/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarReports/comments/t2vtpl/footage_of_russian_multiple_rocket_launchers/)
-
Russian Chechen division outside Kyiv
https://twitter.com/200_zoka/status/1498002858733719558?s=21 (https://twitter.com/200_zoka/status/1498002858733719558?s=21)
-
why the fuk do we care about a bunch of nai collaberaters.
-
why the fuk do we care about a bunch of nai collaberaters.
Learn to spell.
https://youtu.be/pCc33-UOJoM?t=5 (https://youtu.be/pCc33-UOJoM?t=5)
-
Learn to spell.
https://youtu.be/pCc33-UOJoM?t=5 (https://youtu.be/pCc33-UOJoM?t=5)
David, I think you're better than this post. It's not very inclusive. I would hate for anyone to judge me on my maths ability!
-
David, I think you're better than this post. It's not very inclusive. I would hate for anyone to judge me on my maths ability!
I am no good at maths either. But we don't communicate via maths, we communicate via English. There is no point posting on a forum where people cannot understand what you are saying.
-
Learn to spell.
https://youtu.be/pCc33-UOJoM?t=5 (https://youtu.be/pCc33-UOJoM?t=5)
you are such brae man behind a omputer i am so impressed.
-
Here's a pause for thought, 'I was watching Sky News' between 3.00 am and until about 5.30am, and 'I thought I caught a glimpse of' Putin' and his 'hencemen' amongst a long queue of volunteers in the capital city of 'ukraines', 'who wanted to fight the Russions invaders' ..
I videoed the coverage, and captured certain images, which anyone can give their own view on the matter...
All of the checks I have made, indicate with 99.9% certainty, that 'President Putin' [who's surname should be pronounced as 'PUKIN'),was 'present in the Capital' of the 'Ukraine' 'acting as though he was a freedom fighter' who was 'willing to fight against the Russian [invasion] `debacle' - so, what has and is really playing itself out in this globally aware crisis? Furthermore, the 'Belarus leader' I have dubbed him, 'BELL- END BRUCE'....
How convenient, that the risks to public health, and deaths from [the] covid 19 ('variants') virus, is no longer as important as 'the invasion of Ukraine'? WELL, 'the world as we knew it, is on the verge of changing dramatically, by at the latest 2025, when 'money is worthless', it won't count for nothing'...
By the way, 'I have nicknamed myself' as 'THE HUMAN BULLSHITTER' (who suffers from 'incontinance') who, for one reason or another, cannot get the 'truthshit' out to ordinary members of the public, regarding 'what is', and 'what has been going on'...
-
https://youtu.be/XvmddazUW3I peter hithens
-
https://youtu.be/IBCZW5Aqn-I
-
https://youtu.be/XvmddazUW3I peter hithens
I made myself watch all of that. An excellent interview nugnug. I would encourage members on this thread to give it a full hearing.
-
bit rom offf gaurdion.
https://off-guardian.org/2022/02/27/7-fake-news-stories-coming-out-of-ukraine/
-
I wouldn't be surprised if Gringo never shows up on here again.
-
I wouldn't be surprised if Gringo never shows up on here again.
Peter Hitchens has kindly stood in for him. ::)
-
Peter Hitchens has kindly stood in for him. ::)
Even worse!
-
(https://i.redd.it/0l4b71jxakk81.jpg)
A phone from a dead Russian soldier
Last message writes -
"Mom I'm in Ukraine. Here we have real war. We are attacking everyone, even civilians. They told us they would meet us with flowers, but they block our forces and Don't let us go further. They call us fascists. Mom it's really hard here."
-
(https://i.redd.it/0l4b71jxakk81.jpg)
A phone from a dead Russian soldier
Last message writes -
"Mom I'm in Ukraine. Here we have real war. We are attacking everyone, even civilians. They told us they would meet us with flowers, but they block our forces and Don't let us go further. They call us fascists. Mom it's really hard here."
David, surely it can't be taken for granted this is genuine :))
-
David, surely it can't be taken for granted this is genuine :))
👽
Have you not seen the footage of Russian POWs? or are they CIA holograms?
-
Russians are now using banned cluster munitions against civilian areas.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10559373/Ukraine-war-Kyiv-survives-night-Russians-suffer-losses.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10559373/Ukraine-war-Kyiv-survives-night-Russians-suffer-losses.html)
-
I don't know which is worse, this or the floods in Australia. I've had Channel9 News on ( Aussie channel )
and the water has covered houses and cars. Businesses are gone and there's ruddy snakes in the floodwater where people are wading through helping with rescues.
-
The Ukrainians are shouting "go home" at Russian soldiers who have taken the city of Berdyansk, Ukraine.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/t3hkha/the_ukrainians_are_shouting_go_home_at_russian/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/t3hkha/the_ukrainians_are_shouting_go_home_at_russian/)
-
👽
Have you not seen the footage of Russian POWs? or are they CIA holograms?
How does that prove the image you put up is genuine?
-
Is this your hero David? ;)
-
How does that prove the image you put up is genuine?
They are more or less saying the same thing in the text message.
PS. Your hero Lavrov is now saying we will "bear the consequences" for supplying Ukraine.
-
They are more or less saying the same thing in the text message.
PS. Your hero Lavrov is now saying we will "bear the consequences" for supplying Ukraine.
Seems a fair comment. Lavrov is ten times the statesmen anyone we can produce.
-
Anyone see this woman the other day? Straight away I thought it looked mocked up.
-
Ukraine claims 5,300 Russian troops killed so far! Destroyed 146 tanks, 29 Jets and over 1,000 armoured fighting vehicles.
-
Anyone see this woman the other day? Straight away I thought it looked mocked up.
Yes, I saw that. She's a teacher I think and was involved in a strike of some sort.
-
I did warn people on here that Russians are behind nutnuts favourite source of fake news. :))
https://off-guardian.org/2022/02/25/whats-really-going-on-in-ukraine/ (https://off-guardian.org/2022/02/25/whats-really-going-on-in-ukraine/)
-
you learly haent rea the many pages there that attack russia and putin
-
you learly haent rea the many pages there that attack russia and putin
My understanding was that contributers were previously censored or banned contributers to The Guardian.
-
nor stream. https://youtu.be/VOUIMVTAKmQ
-
Why did we not see the same sort of fall out over the annexation of Crimea?
-
Why did we not see the same sort of fall out over the annexation of Crimea?
bbeouse our governments dident need to istrat from there own crimes then.
-
https://youtu.be/-gpfmx0q-gM
-
I wouldn't feel safe in Poland either.
-
I wouldn't feel safe in Poland either.
If Ukraine had joined NATO, or it was a possibility on the cards, I expect many in Russia wouldn't feel safe either. How many US / NATO bases dotted are around Europe, especially eastern Europe?
-
https://off-guardian.org/2022/03/01/us-nato-is-in-the-grip-of-a-daemonic-death-wish-the-entire-world-is-threatened/
-
If Ukraine had joined NATO, or it was a possibility on the cards, I expect many in Russia wouldn't feel safe either. How many US / NATO bases dotted are around Europe, especially eastern Europe?
👽
-
👽
Well let's see a map of bases?
-
Well let's see a map of bases?
Now that you see Putin for what he is, you should now know why those bases are there in the first place.
Where is your fellow conspiratard and tankie Gringo? Is he waiting for Eva Bartlett to find "evidence" that the invasion is a CIA psyop?
-
Now that you see Putin for what he is, you should now know why those bases are there in the first place.
Where is your fellow conspiratard and tankie Gringo? Is he waiting for Eva Bartlett to find "evidence" that the invasion is a CIA psyop?
You are only interested in one side of the story. Generally, we are only presented with one side of the story, which is a great shame. We should have multiple perspectives available and there should be a great more depth in analysis on our screens.
I don't in any way condone Putin's invasion of Ukraine. But given that it's real, we shouldn't have to put up with fake news stories as depicted further up on the thread.
We live in a world where it's suggested that Putin could be charged with war crimes but Tony Blair should be given a knighthood. You think that children didn't cower in their houses in Baghdad and other places, as all kinds of US/UK munitions reigned down on their cities? As I have already expressed, the UK and US have absolutely no moral authority regarding Ukraine. Listening to the hipocrisy on the BBC news reporting is sickening. I caught a glimpse of CNN and I could not believe what I was hearing, it was just rabid anti-russian vitriol. I might as well have been watching a cartoon 'American Dad' or whatever it's called.
-
The world needs more female leaders! Imo men are by nature predatory creatures!
-
You really have a blinkered and distorted view of the role of the USA in the world since 1945. I do not have time to answer your points, suffice it to say I do not agree with any of them. You are on the far right of politics, even in US terms, and that is saying something!
As usual you insult those who disagree with you. I do not insult you, I just say you are wrong. That is my opinion, honestly held, based on years of reflection and careful analysis of facts, together with political activity. I may be wrong, but I am not dishonest or insincere.
Are you able recommend any 'light' reading material on the matter? I've dusted off a copy of 'The Times Consise History Of The World' which I purchased during lockdown but never got round to reading it. Is this any good for an overview?
-
What is it tonight Cambridge? A four pack of Ukranian Obolon to show solidarity?
Guzzle Guzzle Guzzle... ;D
-
What is it tonight Cambridge? A four pack of Ukranian Obolon to show solidarity?
Guzzle Guzzle Guzzle... ;D
Never heard of it but I'll look out for it in 31 days time after a month of abstinence :'(
Have you visited US and Russia?
-
The world needs more female leaders! Imo men are by nature predatory creatures!
Is that the 'boys with toys' view of men and weaponry? There is probably some mileage in that view.
-
Is that the 'boys with toys' view of men and weaponry? There is probably some mileage in that view.
Imagine a USA run by Marjorie Greene, Lauren Boebert and Sarah Palin :-\
-
Imagine a USA run by Marjorie Greene, Lauren Boebert and Sarah Palin :-\
Golda Mier and Indira Gandhi were both involved in wars, though I think in Mier's case it was thrust upon her. I suppose you could argue the same for Thatcher in '82.
-
https://youtu.be/mffCvWZujWA
-
https://youtu.be/rkacr7g86BY
-
Karkiv city hall struck by Russian missile.
(https://nypost.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2022/03/ukraine-building-bombed-06.jpg?quality=90&strip=all&w=1535)
-
Russian artillery and missiles striking civilian areas.
(https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/GIF-Bombing-Kharkiv-750x500_V2.gif?strip=all&w=300&h=192&crop=1)
-
It seems that in weeks before this conflict that red crosses were painted on rooftops and certain areas of the town. The paint is luminous and they're being used as guides for the Russian paratroopers.
Didn't anyone see what was coming ?
-
Apartment buildings bombed.
(https://i.redd.it/xpk45205qzk81.jpg)
-
All this while the madman is holed up in his bomb-proof home in Siberia and nobody can do a thing about it.
-
All this while the madman is holed up in his bomb-proof home in Siberia and nobody can do a thing about it.
Hitler had his "Eagles' Lair". I see other similarities.
-
Hitler had his "Eagles' Lair". I see other similarities.
Power-hungry madmen Jane. You wouldn't know what his next move would be but he's itching to start WW3. Everyone's suffering because of one man, it doesn't make sense. It would have to be one of his own to end it all.
-
Why are the likes of Macron, Truss, Stoltenberg etc. staying quiet on what was discussed prior to the invasion? It should be in our press and media, regarding exactly what was discussed, what was requested by the Russian leadership and what the response was to the Russian leadership. It's a failure of diplomacy in some way or form.
-
Excellent docu:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b09vb7m3/putin-the-new-tsar
-
Why are the likes of Macron, Truss, Stoltenberg etc. staying quiet on what was discussed prior to the invasion? It should be in our press and media, regarding exactly what was discussed, what was requested by the Russian leadership and what the response was to the Russian leadership. It's a failure of diplomacy in some way or form.
I thought the main condition was for Ukraine not to join NATO? Jack Straw's comments are interesting in this doc towards the end:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b09vb7m3/putin-the-new-tsar
-
not a ig fanof hri hege ut he has a good point here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AR_UeNZ_8zY
-
This short vid is worth a listen..
https://fb.watch/bwkqqapdA0/
-
Excellent docu:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b09vb7m3/putin-the-new-tsar
Think I saw some of this at the time.
-
I've absolutely no idea about the rights or wrongs of the Russian oligarchs' wealth but it seems odd to my mind that the West can suddenly say 'ok we're seizing all your assets'? Ambramovich was being courted by UK in 2003:
https://www.standard.co.uk/hp/front/roman-personality-of-the-year-7236295.html (Paper now owned by a Russian: Lord Lebedev).
Money laundering was really tightened up across EU post 9/11. I think 'unexplained wealth orders' came along later and I'm not sure if they can be applied retrospectively? The time to ask questions was surely when they, or companies linked to them, purchased property, planes, yachts, cars etc?
-
I've absolutely no idea about the rights or wrongs of the Russian oligarchs' wealth but it seems odd to my mind that the West can suddenly say 'ok we're seizing all your assets'? Ambramovich was being courted by UK in 2003:
https://www.standard.co.uk/hp/front/roman-personality-of-the-year-7236295.html (Paper now owned by a Russian: Lord Lebedev).
Money laundering was really tightened up across EU post 9/11. I think 'unexplained wealth orders' came along later and I'm not sure if they can be applied retrospectively? The time to ask questions was surely when they, or companies linked to them, purchased property, planes, yachts, cars etc?
When the UK sold off state owned industries eg BT, BG etc private citizens were given the opportunity of buying shares and many were purchased by institutional investors to hold in pension funds. How come when Russia off loaded state owned industries they ended up in the hands of a few ie Russian oligarchs?
-
France has just seized the following:
https://news.sky.com/story/putin-ally-and-boss-of-russian-oil-giant-has-120m-yacht-seized-in-france-12556352
Did the West have agreements with the RO's they would turn a blind eye to how they acquired their wealth on the basis they kept Putin in check?
-
Cambridge, do you have any opinions on this?..
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10740.msg516429.html#msg516429
(Just trying to stimulate debate).
-
France has just seized the following:
https://news.sky.com/story/putin-ally-and-boss-of-russian-oil-giant-has-120m-yacht-seized-in-france-12556352
Did the West have agreements with the RO's they would turn a blind eye to how they acquired their wealth on the basis they kept Putin in check?
The idea that the RO keep Putin in check is false. The reverse is true. He acts like a medieval king and they are the Barons. If he needs money to prop up the state or line his own pockets he expects them to put their hands in their pockets. If they do not dance to his tune he imprisons them under spurious corruption charges or bumps them off.
Read this article by Angus Roxborough ex BBC Russia correspondent.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/feb/24/ukraine-russia-vladimir-putin-kremlin
-
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2022/03/the-universal-boosting-of-putin/
-
The idea that the RO keep Putin in check is false. The reverse is true. He acts like a medieval king and they are the Barons. If he needs money to prop up the state or line his own pockets he expects them to put their hands in their pockets. If they do not dance to his tune he imprisons them under spurious corruption charges or bumps them off.
Read this article by Angus Roxborough ex BBC Russia correspondent.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/feb/24/ukraine-russia-vladimir-putin-kremlin
No mention of RO's in the above article.
If the West didn't think the RO's could keep a handle on Putin then why have they been courted and allowed to invest and spend their 'ill-gotten' gains in the West? Why is the West going after them now?
-
Cambridge, do you have any opinions on this?..
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10740.msg516429.html#msg516429
(Just trying to stimulate debate).
Off-topic! I'll respond later on the other thread.
-
David, I think you're better than this post. It's not very inclusive. I would hate for anyone to judge me on my maths ability!
I suspect nutnut's spelling is rather better than he/she likes to let on:
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10220.msg504092.html#msg504092
-
I suspect nutnut's spelling is rather better than he/she likes to let on:
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10220.msg504092.html#msg504092
Perhaps he felt pressurised in to ensuring the spelling.
-
Five reasons to oppose the war in Ukraine..
https://socialistworker.co.uk/news/five-reasons-why-we-oppose-the-war/
-
Perhaps he felt pressurised in to ensuring the spelling.
Maybe. Or maybe someone else typed on his behalf. Or maybe his spelling is better than he likes to let on. Maybe he is so anti-establishment he thinks he should not have to adhere to the basic rules of English language.
-
Now emergency legislation to speed up sanctions against RO's. If the West didn't have some spoken/unspoken agreement with these people to keep Putin in check why have they waited until this moment to take action?
-
Japan will be worth watching against Russia's invasion as they scrambled a couple of their jets yesterday when a Russian helicopter flew in Japan's airspace. Neither Japan nor Russia signed a formal Peace Treaty after WWII and Japan's support of the Ukraine has reignited the feud when Russia seized islands after declaring war on the empire in 1945.
-
Now emergency legislation to speed up sanctions against RO's. If the West didn't have some spoken/unspoken agreement with these people to keep Putin in check why have they waited until this moment to take action?
They want their money for political donations, keeping house prices rocketing. Investing their money in British businesses and they hide their money in offshore tax havens as do a lot of 'Tories' . They may find themselves in hot water if the RO's are using the same rackets to hide their money from the tax man. They are worried about too much disclosure.
-
The greed is immense. No wonder their thought processes are deranged, it's a disease of the mega-wealthy
-
from somone who is actully from the ukriane. https://twitter.com/i/status/1498738347518353410
-
why did joe bidden block a deal cleray he wanted a war https://youtu.be/RPRER1tlkRs
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wGA1gR2-4HQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wGA1gR2-4HQ)
-
heres the asov batalien lovely people i am ure you will all agree. https://youtu.be/KfaAyiP8Wuc
-
heres the asov batalien lovely people i am ure you will all agree. https://youtu.be/KfaAyiP8Wuc
Ah yes. The Ukrainian president who is Jewish and his great grandfather and three other relatives were murdered in the holocaust. Very Nazi government.. ::)
-
Ah yes. The Ukrainian president who is Jewish and his great grandfather and three other relatives were murdered in the holocaust. Very Nazi government.. ::)
these guys areopenly amiting to being nazis i you atully other to watch it.
https://youtu.be/KfaAyiP8Wuc
-
these guys areopenly amiting to being nazis i you atully other to watch it.
https://youtu.be/KfaAyiP8Wuc
They don't represent Ukraine or the Ukranian people.
-
Russian independent TV boss flees Moscow over media crackdown
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3HsmcAvLuw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3HsmcAvLuw)
-
intresting theory here https://153news.net/watch_video.php?v=SMGK57YD33M6
-
from tim pool https://youtu.be/y_eqsg2vEmI
-
The Russian authorities, ['Pukin' and aided by' Bell-end 'Bruce'] are clearly 'intent upon misleading', not only 'the people of the Ukraine', and the 'innocent [public] members of the Russian confederation', [plus, 'a world wide audience'] should, 'if these humans' have [not] been (or be) 'intent upon telling the truth' [ as `it may prove to be the case`] that a third world war has already begun - 'nuclear war' on a 'world-wide scale' is 'IMMINENT'.
-
https://youtu.be/9X3vu8skviE
-
Failed Russian attack on Hostomel (NSFL)
https://v.redd.it/zl1q5fo8dbl81/DASH_720.mp4 (https://v.redd.it/zl1q5fo8dbl81/DASH_720.mp4)
WARNING contains images which may be distressing (Roch).
-
Destruction of Borodyanka Kyiv.
https://v.redd.it/2znfecocq7l81/DASH_720.mp4 (https://v.redd.it/2znfecocq7l81/DASH_720.mp4)
-
Destruction of Borodyanka Kyiv.
https://v.redd.it/2znfecocq7l81/DASH_720.mp4 (https://v.redd.it/2znfecocq7l81/DASH_720.mp4)
Horrific. And an absolute tragic disgrace. Putin has made himself a pariah. He is no better than Bush and Blair now. I hope the world recognises the absolute failure of US foreign policy. This is largely the result of placing psychopaths like Paul Wolfovitz in high positions of influence within US policy making. It is US overtures an policy that drives NATO and it's members, and drives the world's attitude towards Russia.
-
Horrific. And an absolute tragic disgrace. Putin has made himself a pariah. He is no better than Bush and Blair now. I hope the world recognises the absolute failure of US foreign policy. This is largely the result of placing psychopaths like Paul Wolfovitz in high positions of influence within US policy making. It is US overtures an policy that drives NATO and it's members, and drives the world's attitude towards Russia.
Putin has made himself a pariah but NATO drives the worlds attitude towards Russia? Makes no sense.
The worlds attitude toward Russia is down to its governments own actions.
For someone who believes in conspiracy theories, its rather ironic that you defend or deny the actions of a corrupt country that repeatedly conspires against its own people and its neighbouring countries.
-
russian cats are banned now lol.
https://youtu.be/liofcQjoRk4
-
How astounding, that the 'covid/micron virus' 19 is not as important, anymore 'once Russia waged war on Ukraine'..
Which country is 'next'?
-
I think now is the time to teach Russia a lesson, sooner rather than later. It's a chance we're all going to have to take.
-
How astounding, that the 'covid/micron virus' 19 is not as important, anymore 'once Russia waged war on Ukraine'..
Which country is 'next'?
-
I think now is the time to teach Russia a lesson, sooner rather than later. It's a chance we're all going to have to take.
It's a pity the entire world couldn't teach the US a lesson.
-
..
-
Putin has made himself a pariah but NATO drives the worlds attitude towards Russia? Makes no sense.
The worlds attitude toward Russia is down to its governments own actions.
For someone who believes in conspiracy theories, its rather ironic that you defend or deny the actions of a corrupt country that repeatedly conspires against its own people and its neighbouring countries.
I'm sure the US is a paragon of virtue, committed to peace keeping, a free press and an honest, transparent democracy. I'm sure they have the world's best interests at heart. For all their ills, I understand they have their good points also (that's sarcasm David).
-
Russia has admitted to 500 dead and 1500 wounded. Those figures are astounding. Every mother in Russia should want to kill Putin.
-
Just reading my local paper which says there's a ship docked in Liverpool ( Ukranian captain ) and the crew are both Ukranian and Russian but there's no conflict amongst them as they stated that they " were all family ". None of them know if they'll see their families again but the Liverpool Seafarer's Centre are making sure they have connections by providing them with support and SIM cards for the Ukranians to keep in touch with families.
Sanctions are proving difficult for the Russian seafarers in accessing their pay, travel and access to ports.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=000XhSUFm2c
-
https://youtu.be/_heIuKEIW9Y
-
They want their money for political donations, keeping house prices rocketing. Investing their money in British businesses and they hide their money in offshore tax havens as do a lot of 'Tories' . They may find themselves in hot water if the RO's are using the same rackets to hide their money from the tax man. They are worried about too much disclosure.
If by they you mean Con and Lab then why rock the boat now attempting to seize assets?
What evidence exists that Tories are evading tax?
-
I see elements of Serbia are supporting Russia.
-
If by they you mean Con and Lab then why rock the boat now attempting to seize assets?
What evidence exists that Tories are evading tax?
I do not wish to get into a political debate but both David Cameron and Zac Goldsmith are funded by trusts set up by their fathers. It is termed tax avoidance not evasion. I am sure if I had the time or inclination I could find others. Generally members of other political parties do not have the wealth in the first instance and I do not know Tony Blair's tax arrangements.
The seizing of assets is window dressing in some peoples eyes. There is little support for Ukraine militarily except sending some defensive equipment. The only other way is to hurt Russia and its citizens is economic so the removal of assets of the RO's is a gesture. I think it unlikely they will seek to rid themselves of Putin. They are trapped in his web.
-
I see elements of Serbia are supporting Russia.
Inevitable probably. The Russians sent a military presence as an attempt to thwart NATO in a previous conflict. Can't remember if it was Serbia or Kosovo.
-
I do not wish to get into a political debate but both David Cameron and Zac Goldsmith are funded by trusts set up by their fathers. It is termed tax avoidance not evasion. I am sure if I had the time or inclination I could find others. Generally members of other political parties do not have the wealth in the first instance and I do not know Tony Blair's tax arrangements.
The seizing of assets is window dressing in some peoples eyes. There is little support for Ukraine militarily except sending some defensive equipment. The only other way is to hurt Russia and its citizens is economic so the removal of assets of the RO's is a gesture. I think it unlikely they will seek to rid themselves of Putin. They are trapped in his web.
Many people avoid tax eg by using their ISA allowance. Tax avoidance is legal; tax evasion isn't.
But the seizing of RO's assets are small fry compared to Russia's revenues from oil and gas. In any event why has the West waited until now to go after the RO's? Rightly or wrongly I think the West believes the RO's have some influence over Putin.
-
Inevitable probably. The Russians sent a military presence as an attempt to thwart NATO in a previous conflict. Can't remember if it was Serbia or Kosovo.
Yes apparently Russia and Serbia share long historical ties.
-
Yes apparently Russia and Serbia share long historical ties.
Slavic people's, I think. Both fought against Nazi Germany. Whereas Ukraine and Croatia had nazi units.
-
Many people avoid tax eg by using their ISA allowance. Tax avoidance is legal; tax evasion isn't.
But the seizing of RO's assets are small fry compared to Russia's revenues from oil and gas. In any event why has the West waited until now to go after the RO's? Rightly or wrongly I think the West believes the RO's have some influence over Putin.
I believe this thinking is misplaced. see reply 955
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,6518.msg516506.html#msg516506
-
Slavic people's, I think. Both fought against Nazi Germany. Whereas Ukraine and Croatia had nazi units.
I'm just brushing up on my history!
I've watched episode 1 which was excellent:
ttps://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episodes/m00084td/rise-of-the-nazis?seriesId=p09jgl9v
-
I believe this thinking is misplaced. see reply 955
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,6518.msg516506.html#msg516506
In which case why give the RO's carte blanche in the first place and allow them to spend their ill-gotten gains and time in the West where he has no control over them?
-
The disgrace at the moment is the sheer deprivation of the students from India to whom everyone's ignored.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yw5lzKVn3sc
Former MI6 Chief On the Ukraine & Russia Conflict | Oxford Union
-
a bit from john pilger http://johnpilger.com/articles/war-in-europe-and-the-rise-of-raw-propaganda
-
Russian attack chopper shot down
https://v.redd.it/uowbt11t2jl81/DASH_720.mp4 (https://v.redd.it/uowbt11t2jl81/DASH_720.mp4)
-
Russian convoy struck by Ukrainian drones.
https://v.redd.it/6ursp1ba9ck81/DASH_360.mp4 (https://v.redd.it/6ursp1ba9ck81/DASH_360.mp4)
-
Is there any info regarding whether any NATO forces were embedded in Ukraine for training purposes?
-
a bit from john pilger http://johnpilger.com/articles/war-in-europe-and-the-rise-of-raw-propaganda
Interesting read.
-
Is there any info regarding whether any NATO forces were embedded in Ukraine for training purposes?
👽
-
Retired Admiral William McRaven joins Smerconish to talk about Ukraine's chances of winning this war with Russia.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9RIwlc_fX4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9RIwlc_fX4)
-
👽
Yes, of course, that would never happen would it? 😏
-
the presdent did try and make peace with russia but the asov were not having it.
https://thegrayzone.com/2022/03/04/nazis-ukrainian-war-russia/
-
Putin explains..
https://www.rt.com/russia/551314-putin-explains-ukraine-tactic/
-
Putin's latest public appearance on Russian state TV is a deep fake.
https://v.redd.it/yeejujp9ull81/DASH_720.mp4 (https://v.redd.it/yeejujp9ull81/DASH_720.mp4)
-
Worth watching. Illustrates how dictators ultimately fail. Only two females feature, both pacifists who ended up being executed!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/search?q=nazis
-
Putin explains..
https://www.rt.com/russia/551314-putin-explains-ukraine-tactic/
Why wasn't it resolved via negotiations before it got to this? Let those in Crimea, DPR and LPR and others who want to align with Russia settle on that side of Ukraine and the rest who want to align with the Ukraine/West to settle the other side. :)
-
There's no reasoning when you're dealing with a deranged person. No amount of talking is going to stop this man in his determination to annihilate those within the countries that he wants full power of. Only an insider crony can finish this conflict by putting a bullet through Putin's head.
-
jut an ordnary couple https://youtu.be/TGX3pbG987Q
-
Putin explains..
https://www.rt.com/russia/551314-putin-explains-ukraine-tactic/
You take the word of someone who spent months telling the world he had no intentions of invading Ukraine then he goes and does it. :))
-
Our government and military (and our countries police force, and or our `Criminal justice system') can be just as evil and monstrous as 'Bell-end Bruce' and 'Dissident Pukin'...
These heads of state are all best of pals!
The 'new world order' is already in existence - its all about reducing '[the] World population', and by 2025 the project will be accomplished. There will be no access to money no matter which part of the world any of us live at, or in...
The resources upon, and inside the earth are drastically insufficient to continue maintaining all of us - the powers that be, are getting rid of excessive populations.
'Pukin' is behaving like 'Hitler'...
Remember the 'Holocaust'?
The 'Natzi' regime, separated women and children, from their husbands, fathers and tricked them into believing that these victims were being reunited with family, friends and loved ones! But, they were directed into the 'Gas Chambers'...
'Pukin' is trying to replicate this plan of action, and all the other heads of state and their ministers are standing by doing 'Fuck - all' to prevent what's happening...
-
Please, be reassured, that 'China' is 'biding its time' in' the background' - when the moment presents itself, the world will be at peril of being annihilated by robots, artificial intelligence warfare tactics!
The truth is out there - stop pretending that what is happening, what has happened, or what is going to happen, is imaginary, because it is reality!
-
You take the word of someone who spent months telling the world he had no intentions of invading Ukraine then he goes and does it. :))
I think arrayed his forces to bring a stupid US and NATO to the bargaining table. They gambled that he wouldn't invade and so refused to bargain. He gambled they would bargain, but they didn't. He then either had to withdraw his forces in an embarrassing climbdown or show the US and NATO he meant business. Tragically he chose the latter. Ukraine has been sacrificed by US, NATO and Russia power politics.
-
I think arrayed his forces to bring a stupid US and NATO to the bargaining table. They gambled that he wouldn't invade and so refused to bargain. He gambled they would bargain, but they didn't. He then either had to withdraw his forces in an embarrassing climbdown or show the US and NATO he meant business. Tragically he chose the latter. Ukraine has been sacrificed by US, NATO and Russia power politics.
Stop making an idiot out of yourself. At least Gringo has the common sense to say nothing.
-
Russian artillery formation destroyed in Ukraine
https://youtu.be/qQFS7MYb2K4 (https://youtu.be/qQFS7MYb2K4)
-
Stop making an idiot out of yourself. At least Gringo has the common sense to say nothing.
I think it's you who make a fool of your self with your Uncle Sam / Netenyahu take on geopolitics.
-
The Ukranian leader isn't looking very well :(
-
Which one is David... Could be either 😏
-
How is the war in Ukraine going for Russia?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1po2OdNnIc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1po2OdNnIc)
-
https://youtu.be/rD4QBQVNCCw from rusel brand
-
https://youtu.be/b_TiImrd7xA
-
Russia is seriously getting its arse kicked.. (NSFL)
https://v.redd.it/iop4s7v5axl81/DASH_480.mp4 (https://v.redd.it/iop4s7v5axl81/DASH_480.mp4)
-
All casualties on both sides could have been prevented by US and NATO. Instead, the US and NATO would rather see the casualties happen.
-
What are the Ukrainian civilian casualties so far? I expect they are high. The latest figure I saw was 360. We are approaching the two week stage.
In 2003, it is estimated that during Shock and Awe, 7,185 Iraqi civilians were killed in the first two months.
How can what Putin is doing be classed as war crimes when civilians are killed, but for Bush and Blair, it is not classed as war crimes? In the case of Blair, he even receives a knighthood. What does that say regarding the honesty of how conflicts are presented to us?
-
Closer to home can anyone tell me how Gavin Williamson received a kinghthood after his shambles in the education sector during Covid ? Exams in chaos, failure to supply laptops during school lockdowns to those children who were struggling to learn. He was an absolute disgrace.
It would seem that knight-hoods are dished out to those who've failed !!
-
All casualties on both sides could have been prevented by US and NATO. Instead, the US and NATO would rather see the casualties happen.
Your head is so far up Putins arse. Todays breakfast was yesterdays beef stroganoff.
-
International court of justice to fast-track ruling on Russian invasion
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/07/international-court-of-justice-to-fast-track-ruling-on-russian-invasion-of-ukraine (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/07/international-court-of-justice-to-fast-track-ruling-on-russian-invasion-of-ukraine)
-
According to Reuters latest estimate. There have been at least 9000 deaths and 1700 buildings destroyed.
-
International court of justice to fast-track ruling on Russian invasion
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/07/international-court-of-justice-to-fast-track-ruling-on-russian-invasion-of-ukraine (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/07/international-court-of-justice-to-fast-track-ruling-on-russian-invasion-of-ukraine)
Pity they couldn't do that for all the dead Iraqi civilians. But the good ole' US of A doesn't accept it should ever be accountable. And with it being the most powerful nation in the world, nobody is willing or able to rectify that.
-
Pity they couldn't do that for all the dead Iraqi civilians. But the good ole' US of A doesn't accept it should ever be accountable. And with it being the most powerful nation in the world, nobody is willing or able to rectify that.
👽
Firstly, the Iraq invasion was not in violation of international law since it was in a conditional cease-fire agreement from the gulf war.
Secondly, the predominantly Kurdish/Shia government of Iraq would never have brought any complaints to the international court since they supported the invasion and wanted Saddam and his mainly Sunni regime gone.
-
👽
Firstly, the Iraq invasion was not in violation of international law since it was in a conditional cease-fire agreement from the gulf war.
Secondly, the predominantly Kurdish/Shia government of Iraq would never have brought any complaints to the international court since they supported the invasion and wanted Saddam and his mainly Sunni regime gone.
So you can just write-off the deaths of over 7000 Iraqi civilians in the first two months of Shock and Awe.
USA does what it wants, when it wants, with no consequences.
Have you found that map of US / NATO bases yet?
-
So you can just write-off the deaths of over 7000 Iraqi civilians in the first two months of Shock and Awe.
USA does what it wants, when it wants, with no consequences.
Have you found that map of US / NATO bases yet?
Where are you getting 7000 from? The figure is 3,750
http://www.comw.org/pda/0310rm8.html (http://www.comw.org/pda/0310rm8.html)
What has a map of Nato or bases got to do with anything?
-
Where are you getting 7000 from? The figure is 3,750
http://www.comw.org/pda/0310rm8.html (http://www.comw.org/pda/0310rm8.html)
What has a map of Nato or bases got to do with anything?
I got the figure from this site: https://insight.livestories.com/s/v2/five-facts-civilian-deaths-in-iraq/4911d75d-bcef-410d-9f80-547aec168616/
Use your head regards bases.
-
Use your head regards bases.
Thanks to Putin's recent actions, there will soon be NATO bases in not only Ukraine but Sweden, Finland and Moldova also.
The only American base you should concern yourself with, is the one on Roswell New Mexico.
-
Thanks to Putin's recent actions, there will soon be NATO bases in not only Ukraine but Sweden, Finland and Moldova also.
The only American base you should concern yourself with, is the one on Roswell New Mexico.
OK David..
https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/f/understanding-conflict-ukraine-and-perspectives-anti-war-movement
-
Is this the same woman ... Again?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news
-
All those poor people fleeing Ukraine should have got on a boat to Dover----they'd have all been allowed into the country ! I'm disgusted with the UK !!
-
Latvia wants permanent U.S. troops.
https://www.reuters.com/world/latvia-wants-permanent-us-troops-foreign-minister-tells-blinken-2022-03-07/ (https://www.reuters.com/world/latvia-wants-permanent-us-troops-foreign-minister-tells-blinken-2022-03-07/)
-
The BBC have got rid of the picture of that woman.
-
US bio-labs in Ukraine..
https://www.rt.com/russia/551440-ukraine-us-financed-biolaboratories/
-
OK David..
https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/f/understanding-conflict-ukraine-and-perspectives-anti-war-movement
Interesting read. Thanks.
-
Anyone noticed how if Zelenski is on TV, his words are translated fluently. But if Putin or Lavrov are giving a speech in Russian, it's translated in a faltering, pigeon English style?
-
US bio-labs in Ukraine..
https://www.rt.com/russia/551440-ukraine-us-financed-biolaboratories/
🛸 👽 🛸
-
🛸 👽 🛸
Have you seen your defence spending compared to other nations?
-
what about it?
https://www.statista.com/statistics/266892/military-expenditure-as-percentage-of-gdp-in-highest-spending-countries/ (https://www.statista.com/statistics/266892/military-expenditure-as-percentage-of-gdp-in-highest-spending-countries/)
-
what about it?
https://www.statista.com/statistics/266892/military-expenditure-as-percentage-of-gdp-in-highest-spending-countries/ (https://www.statista.com/statistics/266892/military-expenditure-as-percentage-of-gdp-in-highest-spending-countries/)
An attempt to mislead. Please show the table in amount of billions.
-
An attempt to mislead. Please show the table in amount of billions.
Now that would be attempt to mislead.
-
Now that would be attempt to mislead.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/262742/countries-with-the-highest-military-spending/
-
https://www.statista.com/statistics/262742/countries-with-the-highest-military-spending/
The US and China are the biggest economies in the world. What do you expect? A country will spend what it can afford.
-
You are starting to show your true colours Roch. :))
(https://preview.redd.it/vnefzc7a7cw21.jpg?auto=webp&s=e7e5060ecea2ef6c8c6d48ad2c5efa1ec3c81806)
-
David, I am simply somebody who suspects the US could set a better example; and that it has within its gift, the ability to do so rather than continuing to act as the monster it has become.
When a nation can say 'we recognise that your nation behaves the way it does partly because of our own nation's previous actions.. but we want to put that right and atone for it.' - it will be a huge step forward. But the US doesn't want to do that, it wants to play 'King of the heap'.
-
David, I am simply somebody who suspects the US could set a better example; and that it has within its gift, the ability to do so rather than continuing to act as the monster it has become.
When a nation can say 'we recognise that your nation behaves the way it does partly because of our own nation's previous actions.. but we want to put that right and atone for it.' - it will be a huge step forward. But the US doesn't want to do that, it wants to play 'King of the heap'.
👽👽
-
https://off-guardian.org/2022/03/07/revenge-of-the-putin-nazis/
-
https://thiscantbehappening.net/the-uss-aggressive-expansion-of-nato-created-this-horror-the-us-can-and-should-end-it/
-
https://thiscantbehappening.net/the-uss-aggressive-expansion-of-nato-created-this-horror-the-us-can-and-should-end-it/
👽
Is the moron that wrote that aware of Putin's recent essay claiming that Ukraine is part of Russia and needs to be reunited with its "historical motherland".
-
There's some heavy planes flying over in the early hours and they're not passenger planes. I've heard them on and off for a week now. They sound like thunder.
-
👽
Is the moron that wrote that aware of Putin's recent essay claiming that Ukraine is part of Russia and needs to be reunited with its "historical motherland".
Why don't you put your self forward as a Russian translator? There seems to be a dearth of them in our media for some reason. I can't fathom why.
Ukraine has at some points in its history been controlled by Russia and later by the USSR. I very much doubt that that is the central issue here. As pointed out by Peter Hitchens above, Ukraine's best bet was to remain a neutral buffer state between Russia and NATO countries.
-
Why don't you put your self forward as a Russian translator? There seems to be a dearth of them in our media for some reason. I can't fathom why.
Ukraine has at some points in its history been controlled by Russia and later by the USSR. I very much doubt that that is the central issue here. As pointed out by Peter Hitchens above, Ukraine's best bet was to remain a neutral buffer state between Russia and NATO countries.
Whatever Rockski
-
fo news has it right https://youtu.be/60zIcBwA2ZA
-
fo news has it right https://youtu.be/60zIcBwA2ZA
Everybody should see this. David should be forced to watch it on repeat.
-
30 years of post soviet economic progress vaporized in two weeks.
https://som.yale.edu/story/2022/over-200-companies-have-withdrawn-russia-some-remain (https://som.yale.edu/story/2022/over-200-companies-have-withdrawn-russia-some-remain)
-
Can anyone stop the Russian president?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5U9aLGDH-I (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5U9aLGDH-I)
-
Over 380,000 civilians have suffered violent deaths as a direct result of US military action in the last 20 years.
https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/costs/human/civilians#:~:text=Key%20Findings,post%2D9%2F11%20wars.
But apparently, we can rely upon the US to collate evidence of war crimes in Ukraine.
-
timeline https://off-guardian.org/2022/03/08/timeline-the-crimean-referendum/
-
timeline https://off-guardian.org/2022/03/08/timeline-the-crimean-referendum/
An excellent article nugnug, which references previous work carried out by BBC and Forbes and UN Development Program, among other organisations.
Did you notice this in the comments section:
Jen Mar 9, 2022 6:20 AM
There was also an incident in late February 2014 when several busloads of passengers from Crimea returning to Crimea from Kiev were ambushed near Khorsun by neo-Nazi thugs (who’d been tipped off in advance) and were beaten up and tortured. Several passengers apparently died. The survivors fled back to Crimea and raised the alarm, and this led to the special meeting in the Crimean Parliament which resolved to organise the independence referendum.
Of course, this incident near Khorsun has been whitewashed from most search engines or is referred to as a hoax incident
-
Russian tanks shoot up civilian car
https://v.redd.it/grnjk9htj5m81/DASH_360.mp4 (https://v.redd.it/grnjk9htj5m81/DASH_360.mp4)
-
Russian tanks shoot up civilian car
https://v.redd.it/grnjk9htj5m81/DASH_360.mp4 (https://v.redd.it/grnjk9htj5m81/DASH_360.mp4)
American contractors shooting at cars in Iraq
https://youtu.be/WcJROVgVqAA
-
American contractors shooting at cars in Iraq
https://youtu.be/WcJROVgVqAA
Different situation Rochski. The Ukranian's are not going to be carrying out suicide bombing via cars nor do the Russians have contractors.
These were an elderly couple (NSFL)
https://v.redd.it/884gwgpjjnk81/DASH_360.mp4 (https://v.redd.it/884gwgpjjnk81/DASH_360.mp4)
-
Different situation Rochski. The Ukranian's are not going to be carrying out suicide bombing via cars nor do the Russians have contractors.
Come on David, it is indefensible in either situation, Ukraine or Iraq. The contractors were clearly out of control. There are probably plenty more examples. Like the one Assange got in trouble for.
-
Come on David, it is indefensible in either situation, Ukraine or Iraq. The contractors were clearly out of control. There are probably plenty more examples. Like the one Assange got in trouble for.
Rochski the Iraqi people celebrated the American presence and gave them flowers. The Ukranian people are fleeing the Russians and giving them molotov cocktails.
https://streamable.com/855zvo (https://streamable.com/855zvo)
-
Rochski the Iraqi people celebrated the American presence and gave them flowers. The Ukranian people are fleeing the Russians and giving them molotov cocktails.
https://streamable.com/855zvo (https://streamable.com/855zvo)
This is just silly David. Some Iraqi people initially welcomed the US presence. Obviously the 7,185 civilians killed in the first two months probably shouldn't be included that figure.
Imagine if Mexico joined a defence and security cooperative alliance with Russia, China, Iran, North Korea etc, all of who started providing arms and weapons systems to Mexico. They've already snapped up a number of central and south American states also. But Mexico is the buffer zone. What would be the US reaction over there, if diplomatic requests that Mexico remains neutral fail?
Remember, if you try to take the bull by the horns in frustration, everyone will be waving Mexican flags and the Mexicans will be making Molitov cocktails.
-
This is just silly David. Some Iraqi people initially welcomed the US presence. Obviously the 7,185 civilians killed in the first two months probably shouldn't be included that figure.
Imagine if Mexico joined a defence and security cooperative alliance with Russia, China, Iran, North Korea etc, all of who started providing arms and weapons systems to Mexico. They've already snapped up a number of central and south American states also. But Mexico is the buffer zone. What would be the US reaction over there, if diplomatic requests that Mexico remains neutral fail?
Remember, if you try to take the bull by the horns in frustration, everyone will be waving Mexican flags and the Mexicans will be making Molitov cocktails.
You are not going to justify a war with hypothetical fictional scenarios Rockhski.
-
Rochski the Iraqi people celebrated the American presence and gave them flowers. The Ukranian people are fleeing the Russians and giving them molotov cocktails.
https://streamable.com/855zvo (https://streamable.com/855zvo)
If this is true it begs the question why the US didn't just send in SEAL to take out SH as they did with OBL? Why did the US spend so long in Iraq if they were just met with flowers akin to QE2 opening some new civil building? ::)
-
If this is true it begs the question why the US didn't just send in SEAL to take out SH as they did with OBL? Why did the US spend so long in Iraq if they were just met with flowers akin to QE2 opening some new civil building? ::)
The problem with Iraq stems from the fact that there was no plan for the future ready to be executed. with regard to an initial recovery phase and then how the politics could be be managed thereafter. They cleaned out the civil service Baathists' which led to chaos. The people turned against the West aided by a variety of insurgent terrorist groups. To this was added the internal religious divisions between the Sunni and Shia. The Shia majority had been previously down trodden by a minority. No wonder it all went 'Tits up'
-
If this is true it begs the question why the US didn't just send in SEAL to take out SH as they did with OBL?
SH had 70,000 republican guard troops loyal to him and had access to bunkers in his palaces. OBL had a hide out on a dirt road with just his family. ::)
SH had his sons and other high ranking Baathists ready to replace him. ::)
One SEAL team is not going to be able to dismantle the Baathist party. ::)
Why did the US spend so long in Iraq if they were just met with flowers akin to QE2 opening some new civil building?[
Poor planning and dealing with a civil war between the Sunni and Shia population.
-
SH had 70,000 republican guard troops loyal to him and had access to bunkers in his palaces. OBL had a hide out on a dirt road with with just his family. ::)
SH had his sons and other high ranking Baathists ready to replace him. ::)
One SEAL team is not going to be able to dismantle the Baathist party. ::)
Poor planning and dealing with a civil war between the Sunni and Shia population.
Exactly you had two warring factions: Sunnis and Shias akin to Ukraines some of whom align with the West and others who align with Russia.
Your world view of geopolitics is simple to say the least!
-
If Ukraine/West want to live in peace and prosperity more should have been done to find a peaceful solution to Putin's security concerns whether they be real or rooted in paranoia.
-
How much time/effort did UK/EU spend trying to resolve Putin's security concerns compared with UK's withdrawal from EU?
-
Your world view of geopolitics is simple to say the least!
Stop projecting and have another special brew.
-
He thinks that the 7,185 civilians who died in the first two months is negligible - but is up in arms about events in Ukraine.
-
He thinks that the 7,185 civilians who died in the first two months is negligible - but is up in arms about events in Ukraine.
Most of the world is up in arms about what is happening in Ukraine. A dictator is trying to impose his will by force on a democratic and peaceful country.
-
Most of the world is up in arms about what is happening in Ukraine. A dictator is trying to impose his will by force on a democratic and peaceful country.
That's your assessment of the situation.
I suppose regarding Iraq, the world's powerful nation just decided it would find an excuse to plunder resources.
-
That's your assessment of the situation.
I suppose regarding Iraq, the world's powerful nation just decided it would find an excuse to plunder resources.
Ah right, the US spent a trillion dollars on war instead of just buying cheap Iraqi oil. They then left the country and Iraq's current oil market is 100% state owned by the Iraqi government.
Rochski no offence but you really haven't got a clue.
-
Ah right, the US spent a trillion dollars on war instead of just buying cheap Iraqi oil. They then left the country and Iraq's current oil market is 100% state owned by the Iraqi government.
Rochski no offence but you really haven't got a clue.
A trillion dollars to the big corporations who run the country, along with psychopaths like Woofivitz? How much oil did the US grab before it was handed over to whatever puppet regime that was installed?
-
Not forgetting that it was the US who built up the tyrant Saddam in the first place, then turned on him.
-
If Ukraine/West want to live in peace and prosperity more should have been done to find a peaceful solution to Putin's security concerns whether they be real or rooted in paranoia.
In the Balkans war Bosnia wanted to retain Kosovo, inhabited by Albanians. They had to give it up. If Ukraine had ceded the two regions to the East and Crimea they could have survived without them. Their lack of compromise has led to an arguably worst situation. They could have joined the EU and asked for legally guaranteed neutrality. They would have prospered more than those under the Russians and may have led to these regions to re-join Ukraine. Geopolitics is about an overcrowded planet and resources. It is also being driven by climate change.
-
A trillion dollars to the big corporations who run the country, along with psychopaths like Woofivitz? How much oil did you grab before it was handed over to whatever puppet regime was installed?
Arr right, they started a war to enrich arms companies instead of just giving them more of the same money they get in peace time. They forgot about the Iraqi oil in 1991. Then spent another trillion dollars invading a country with no oil (Afghanistan).
Evil American Empire really doesn't know what its doing. :-[
-
Arr right, they started a war to enrich arms companies instead of just giving them more of the same money they get in peace time. They forgot about the Iraqi oil in 1991. Then spent another trillion dollars invading a country with no oil (Afghanistan).
Evil Americam Empire really doesn't know what its doing. :-[
Yes I'm sure they're the most philanthropic country on Earth and that their wars are all made for good reasons and all the people they kill are grateful. I'm sure nobody in the US benefits financially from it.
-
Yes I'm sure they're the most philanthropic country on Earth and that their wars are all made for good reasons and all the people they kill are grateful. I'm sure nobody in the US benefits financially from it.
"There is no instance of a nation benefitting from prolonged warfare". - Sun Tzu
Moreover. Its all about whether the ends justify the means. Does the end goal justify the human loss of life needed to achieve it?
For example -
Pot Pot has murdered nearly two million of his own people and created a humanitarian crisis on the Vietnam border. - Vietnam invaded Cambodia to remove Pol Pot at the expense of thousands of military and civilian lives. Did the ends justify the means? Yes.
-
"There is no instance of a nation benefitting from prolonged warfare". - Sun Tzu
Moreover. Its all about whether the ends justify the means. Does the end goal justify the human loss of life needed to achieve it?
For example -
Pot Pot has murdered nearly two million of his own people and created a humanitarian crisis on the Vietnam border. - Vietnam invaded Cambodia to remove Pol Pot at the expense of thousands of military and civilian lives. Did the ends justify the means? Yes.
The US wasn't planning on a long war though was it? It completely fxxked up. Then there's Afghanistan. We all know what happened there.
-
The US wasn't planning on a long war though was it? It completely fxxked up. Then there's Afghanistan. We all know what happened there.
And Putin expected Ukraine to buckle in 3 days. :))
As for Afghanistan, we left them with a well equipped army, they just didn't have the will to fight. In hindsight we should have either stayed longer or left once OBL was killed.
-
And Putin expected Ukraine to buckle in 3 days. :))
As for Afghanistan, we left them with a well equipped army, they just didn't have the will to fight. In hindsight we should have either stayed longer or left once OBL was killed.
Ukraine was never going to buckle in three days. It has had weaponry provided to it by NATO countries, and will have had training provided also. It's also a huge country. Russia also went in without maximum force for the first few days or more.
As for Afghanistan, the Saigon/Kabul imagery takes some beating.
-
Ukraine was never going to buckle in three days. It has had weaponry provided to it by NATO countries, and will have had training provided also. It's also a huge country. Russia also went in without maximum force for the first few days or more.
As for Afghanistan. MAJOR embarrassment for UK / US. Yet again. The Saigon/Kabul imagery takes some beating.
On the 2nd day of Ukraine invasion, The Russian 76th Guards Air Assault Division and other light forces landed in Kyiv intending to overthrow the government but were pushed back. Documents found on dead Russians show they intended for this all to be over by the 6th of March.
https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-ato/3418403-invasion-planning-documents-approved-on-jan-18-seized-paperwork-confirms.html (https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-ato/3418403-invasion-planning-documents-approved-on-jan-18-seized-paperwork-confirms.html)
The Russian army looks impressive on paper and that is how Putin would have seen it also. However the reality is very different. A lot of money intended for its military has ended up in the hands of corrupt bureaucrats. There was even reports of Russian troops selling their petrol on the black market right before the attack, hence they have a 40km long traffic jam. Outside Kyiv.
-
Russian shopping centre now.
https://v.redd.it/6zsihkxnbdm81/DASH_360.mp4 (https://v.redd.it/6zsihkxnbdm81/DASH_360.mp4)
-
Former heavyweight champ Wladimir Klitschko
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/tad0lm/ive_just_seen_some_pictures_my_heart_is_bleeding/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/tad0lm/ive_just_seen_some_pictures_my_heart_is_bleeding/)
-
oh look o there not nazis https://youtu.be/TtdWbZ-iO1I
-
On the 2nd day of Ukraine invasion, The Russian 76th Guards Air Assault Division and other light forces landed in Kyiv intending to overthrow the government but were pushed back. Documents found on dead Russians show they intended for this all to be over by the 6th of March.
https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-ato/3418403-invasion-planning-documents-approved-on-jan-18-seized-paperwork-confirms.html (https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-ato/3418403-invasion-planning-documents-approved-on-jan-18-seized-paperwork-confirms.html)
The Russian army looks impressive on paper and that is how Putin would have seen it also. However the reality is very different. A lot of money intended for its military has ended up in the hands of corrupt bureaucrats. There was even reports of Russian troops selling their petrol on the black market right before the attack, hence they have a 40km long traffic jam. Outside Kyiv.
I'm not sure of the veracity of what you post. It could be true.
But I love this ..
https://mobile.twitter.com/caitoz/status/1501367736416751616
-
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FNcSrh1XwAwM9P6?format=png&name=900x900)
-
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FNcSrh1XwAwM9P6?format=png&name=900x900)
Re Ned and his ilk? How can you believe a word they say? They have lied about virtually every war they have been involved in. Even if they are correct on this assertion regarding the bio-labs, it would be like believing the boy who cried wolf.
-
Re Ned and his ilk? How can you believe a word they say? They have lied about virtually every war they have been involved in. Even if they are correct on this assertion regarding the bio-labs, it would be like believing the boy who cried wolf.
(https://preview.redd.it/vnefzc7a7cw21.jpg?auto=webp&s=e7e5060ecea2ef6c8c6d48ad2c5efa1ec3c81806)
-
I don't even understand the meme. I am not a Communist btw.
-
I don't even understand the meme. I am not a Communist btw.
Then why do you read Socialist Worker and other far-left material?
-
Points in favour of Ukraine succeeding against the Russian forces are discussed here. It's an interesting read.
https://mobile.twitter.com/TrentTelenko/status/1501799537773531136?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1501799537773531136%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.readytogo.net%2Fsmb%2Fthreads%2Frussia-invading-ukraine.1566159%2Fpage-1176
-
Then why do you read Socialist Worker and other far-left material?
I don't restrict myself regarding which media I check. I check Financial Times, Telegraph, Times, Independent, Guardian as well as other sites. Therefore I check Socialist Worker and Morning Star also. I think it's good to see different perspectives. Except that with the mainstream press listed above, on certain issues, perspectives just merge in to one.
-
Points in favour of Ukraine succeeding against the Russian forces are discussed here. It's an interesting read.
https://mobile.twitter.com/TrentTelenko/status/1501799537773531136?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1501799537773531136%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.readytogo.net%2Fsmb%2Fthreads%2Frussia-invading-ukraine.1566159%2Fpage-1176
Even if they take Kyiv and kill Zelenskky etc. There is no way the Ukrainian army will stop and nor will the people accept whatever puppet Putin installs and neither can the Russian Army subdue the whole Ukranian population.
In two weeks, the Russians have lost more troops than the US lost during 8 years in Iraq. Its not sustainable.
-
the white helmets are there https://off-guardian.org/2022/03/10/nato-white-helmets-follow-al-qaeda-to-ukraine/
-
Even if they take Kyiv and kill Zelenskky etc. There is no way the Ukrainian army will stop and nor will the people accept whatever puppet Putin installs and neither can the Russian Army subdue the whole Ukranian population.
In two weeks, the Russians have lost more troops than the US lost during 8 years in Iraq. Its not sustainable.
The thing that struck me, is where it describes territorial auxiliaries who are able to position themselves in ambush situations and pick-off columns with the weapons they have received (from the likes of UK).
Even if the Ukrainian professional army are in retreat or are outgunned in a particular vicinity, the travelling Russian vehicles are vulnerable to assault from armed auxiliaries. Russia would need to scuttle abandoned vehicles to prevent them from falling in to the hands of Ukrainian forces.
Whatever the Ukrainians have done regarding training territorials or having received training from NATO forces for their own professional army - I would have expected Russia to have had intelligence of such and to calculate the risk. This seems to be lacking.
Another issue that has come to light is the use of Russian conscripts as opposed to their professional army. Surely conscripts should have been in the rear? I may sound like an armchair general but there you have it.
On top of the needless casualties on both sides, the thing that pisses me off is that Putin has inestimably weakened Russia's position as a counterweight to US. If he has been drawn in to doing this, then you have say he has been outfoxed by the US. When you consider his standing in the wake of Russian intervention in Syria, this could be a huge fall for them. That is not good for the rest of the world, as it simply emboldens the US.
-
Another issue that has come to light is the use of Russian conscripts as opposed to their professional army. Surely conscripts should have been in the rear? I may sound like an armchair general but there you have it.
The consensus is that the conscripts were used as "cannon fodder". That being sending in conscripts with obsolete tanks in front in order to deplete the Ukrainian anti tank missiles.
-
the white helmets are there https://off-guardian.org/2022/03/10/nato-white-helmets-follow-al-qaeda-to-ukraine/
That's all we need. Next there will be a 'Russian chemical attack'. They are already paving the way by leaking stories predicting it. Tried and tested tactics.
-
The consensus is that the conscripts were used as "cannon fodder". That being sending in conscripts with obsolete tanks in front in order to deplete the Ukrainian anti tank missiles.
They should have used drones and missiles first. They should have been monitoring by satellite, all movement on the ground. Why risk tanks in that way?
-
That's all we need. Next there will be a 'Russian chemical attack'. They are already paving the way by leaking stories predicting it. Tried and tested tactics.
Off Guardian is a fake news outlet only a retard would take seriously.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/offguardian/ (https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/offguardian/)
-
They should have used drones and missiles first. They should have been monitoring by satellite, all movement on the ground. Why risk tanks in that way?
Russia have fired 600 cruise missiles so far.
The Ukrainian troops seem mostly dispersed in the cities, lurking in buildings waiting with anti tank and anti aircraft rockets. The Russians will either need to fight door to door or reduce to cities to nothing via artillery.
Russia claims to have destroyed over 900 Ukrainian tanks.
https://interfax.com/newsroom/top-stories/76081/ (https://interfax.com/newsroom/top-stories/76081/)
-
Off Guardian is a fake news outlet only a retard would take seriously.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/offguardian/ (https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/offguardian/)
Off-Guardian is not a fake news site. It is simply not a mainstream news site. Some of its contributers have been censored or banned by The Guardian.
Can you please refrain from using the R word, as it is offensive.
-
Roch, what do you think will happen to Putin? He has no easy way out of this.
-
Russia have fired 600 cruise missiles so far.
The Ukrainian troops seem mostly dispersed in the cities, lurking in buildings waiting with anti tank and anti aircraft rockets. The Russians will either need to fight door to door or reduce to cities to nothing via artillery.
Russia claims to have destroyed over 900 Ukrainian tanks.
https://interfax.com/newsroom/top-stories/76081/ (https://interfax.com/newsroom/top-stories/76081/)
It's difficult to see how Russia can sustain its original aims. The sanctions will be crippling the state financially, but certain NATO countries will pour in millions, if not billions, in funding and arms to prop up the Ukrainian defence.
Having said that, if the figure is believed, I doubt over 900 tanks can be replaced, even by accosting abandoned Russian vehicles. But the Ukrainians will probably have other stocks replenished.
-
Roch, what do you think will happen to Putin? He has no easy way out of this.
He could be finished. Maybe someone will assassinate him? Or arrest him?
-
It's difficult to see how Russia can sustain its original aims. The sanctions will be crippling the state financially, but certain NATO countries will pour in millions, if not billions, in funding and arms to prop up the Ukrainian defence.
Having said that, if the figure is believed, I doubt over 900 tanks can be replaced, even by accosting abandoned Russian vehicles. But the Ukrainians will probably have other stocks replenished.
According to Lavrov, Russia has not invaded Ukraine :))
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/tawbdo/russian_foreign_minister_lavrov_says_russia_didnt/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/tawbdo/russian_foreign_minister_lavrov_says_russia_didnt/)
-
He could be finished. Maybe someone will assassinate him? Or arrest him?
It was a revolution which deposed the Tsar. Another revolution, perhaps? Another Stalin?
-
It was a revolution which deposed the Tsar. Another revolution, perhaps? Another Stalin?
Who knows Jane. But somebody needs to answer for blunders regarding this operation. Stalin would probably have purged his generals for the way this operation has gone so far (if accounts are to be believed).
-
Who knows Jane. But somebody needs to answer for blunders regarding this operation. Stalin would probably have purged his generals for the way this operation has gone so far (if accounts are to be believed).
You need to give the Ukrainians credit for putting up fierce resistance, its not purely down to poor Russian planning.
After all the 300 Spartans lost the battle of Thermopylae.
-
You need to give the Ukrainians credit for putting up fierce resistance, its not purely down to poor Russian planning.
Afterall the 300 Spartans lost the battle of Thermopylae.
They've obviously been trained and set up to be able to resist, precisely because of the possibility of invasion. But the Russians' intelligence should have picked that up. It shouldn't have been a surprise.
It now looks to me as if NATO had far better intelligence on Russia's plans than Russia did regarding the condition of Ukraine's forces.
You can't blame Ukraine for being prepared. But you can blame Russia for being duped. Looks very sloppy for a major military force.
-
They've obviously been trained and set up to be able to resist, precisely because of the possibility of invasion. But the Russians' intelligence should have picked that up. It shouldn't have been a surprise.
It now looks to me as if NATO had far better intelligence on Russia's plans than Russia did regarding the condition of Ukraine's forces.
You can't blame Ukraine for being prepared. But you can blame Russia for being duped. Looks very sloppy for a major military force.
There are two main problems with the Russian invasion -
Firstly, the war is not in the hearts and minds of the Russian troops. They have no real cause contrary to the Ukranians.
Secondly, there is major corruption in the Russian military whereby a lot of the defence budget is embezzled.
You can read more about that here - https://sites.tufts.edu/wpf/files/2018/05/Russian-Defense-Corruption-Report-Beliakova-Perlo-Freeman-20180502-final.pdf (https://sites.tufts.edu/wpf/files/2018/05/Russian-Defense-Corruption-Report-Beliakova-Perlo-Freeman-20180502-final.pdf)
Putin also miscalculated, believing the Russian speaking Ukrainians in the east would welcome his troops like they did in Crimea. Lets face it, he lives in a palace surrounded by yes men and has very little political opposition to criticise him and give him a reality check. Plus he is 70 years old now and is probably suffering from cognitive decline.
-
Roch, what do you think will happen to Putin? He has no easy way out of this.
Much of what you've posted here is at odds with historian David Starkey:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=he25Rl0fE1c
-
Much of what you've posted here is at odds with historian David Starkey:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=he25Rl0fE1c
His lungs are giving way by the sounds of it. He reminds me of Kessler from Secret Army. Did you watch any of his history programs?
-
As War Drags On, Russia Expert Says ‘Putin Needs To Watch His Back’
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KaD46FGRIt4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KaD46FGRIt4)
-
Edward Snowden has been very quiet lately ::)
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/why-so-silent-edward-snowden-has-gone-underground-since-russias-invasion (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/why-so-silent-edward-snowden-has-gone-underground-since-russias-invasion)
-
His lungs are giving way by the sounds of it. He reminds me of Kessler from Secret Army. Did you watch any of his history programs?
No I didn't watch any of his progs. I'm not a fan. Niall Ferguson is my go-to history man. Far easier on the ear and eye ;)
-
There are two main problems with the Russian invasion -
Firstly, the war is not in the hearts and minds of the Russian troops. They have no real cause contrary to the Ukranians.
Secondly, there is major corruption in the Russian military whereby a lot of the defence budget is embezzled.
You can read more about that here - https://sites.tufts.edu/wpf/files/2018/05/Russian-Defense-Corruption-Report-Beliakova-Perlo-Freeman-20180502-final.pdf (https://sites.tufts.edu/wpf/files/2018/05/Russian-Defense-Corruption-Report-Beliakova-Perlo-Freeman-20180502-final.pdf)
Putin also miscalculated, believing the Russian speaking Ukrainians in the east would welcome his troops like they did in Crimea. Lets face it, he lives in a palace surrounded by yes men and has very little political opposition to criticise him and give him a reality check. Plus he is 70 years old now and is probably suffering from cognitive decline.
Due think that Russia could have been lured in to taking this action, over a period of time, precisely because weaknesses were known and therefore could be exploited? That would of course be extremely sinister - however, the long term benefits for US / NATO would be significant (if Putin became a spent force and Russia's forces were exposed as deficient and were used up in a costly war of attrition, without the economy to replenish them.
-
No I didn't watch any of his progs. I'm not a fan. Niall Ferguson is my go-to history man. Far easier on the ear and eye ;)
Starkey is certainly not everyone's cup of tea. Then of course he landed himself in hot water when he made remarks that were deemed offensive. He obviously didn't intend to offend. He was caught out by the changing times.
I am not that familiar with Ferguson. Didn't Michael Wood cut a dashing figure when he entered the fray around 1980? :))
-
Starkey is certainly not everyone's cup of tea. Then of course he landed himself in hot water when he made remarks that were deemed offensive. He obviously didn't intend to offend. He was caught out by the changing times.
I am not that familiar with Ferguson. Didn't Michael Wood cut a dashing figure when he entered the fray around 1980? :))
I find Starkey a pompous old windbag who's big on theatrical and low on fact.
Never heard of Michael Wood but I'll look him up.
I'll upload some of Ferguson's vids. Simply the best imo:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9e-4QbW5CQE
-
Niall Ferguson on Russia/Ukraine:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niall_Ferguson
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RfUA7sDd8w
-
I find Starkey a pompous old windbag who's big on theatrical and low on fact.
Never heard of Michael Wood but I'll look him up.
I'll upload some of Ferguson's vids. Simply the best imo:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9e-4QbW5CQE
It's interesting that his closing statement is almost the opposite of my question / suggestion to David above. However, he reasons that there will be an immensely destructive Russian victory, whereas I think we are in for a bitter war of attrition that will sap Russia's resources to the point where its position as a global power is diminished. Mind you, I am not an expert :)).
Looks / voice wise, is he a poor man's Ewan McGregor?
-
It's interesting that his closing statement is almost the opposite of my question / suggestion to David above. However, he reasons that there will be an immensely destructive Russian victory, whereas I think we are in for a bitter war of attrition that will sap Russia's resources to the point where its position as a global power is diminished. Mind you, I am not an expert :)).
Looks / voice wise, is he a poor man's Ewan McGregor?
It looks to me as if Putin is pushing all the buttons he can to provoke a more proactive response in others, so he can claim, as justified, an attack he's itching to make, using chemical weapons, or worse. Quite where the outcome of using such will leave him? Perhaps he simply doesn't care?
-
It's interesting that his closing statement is almost the opposite of my question / suggestion to David above. However, he reasons that there will be an immensely destructive Russian victory, whereas I think we are in for a bitter war of attrition that will sap Russia's resources to the point where its position as a global power is diminished. Mind you, I am not an expert :)).
Looks / voice wise, is he a poor man's Ewan McGregor?
I doubt anyone knows for certain how its going to pan out. Too many variables/unknowns not least how citizens of the various countries are going to behave. We can already see how numskull Chelsea supporters are behaving:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/60704463
Sad to say citzens will probably become desensitised. At some point the crisis will be taken over by some other issue probably economics if the Queen doesn't pass before inflation/interest rates/cost of living goes through the roof!
-
It looks to me as if Putin is pushing all the buttons he can to provoke a more proactive response in others, so he can claim, as justified, an attack he's itching to make, using chemical weapons, or worse. Quite where the outcome of using such will leave him? Perhaps he simply doesn't care?
I think we have to treat some claims made in our media with caution. I don't think Russia is itching to use chemical weapons. If an incident happens I will be very sceptical. But obviously, I can't discount the possibility that they could genuinely do so.
-
I think we have to treat some claims made in our media with caution. I don't think Russia is itching to use chemical weapons. If an incident happens I will be very sceptical. But obviously, I can't discount the possibility that they could genuinely do so.
Oh, I don't think "Russia" per se, is. I think there may be a widening chasm between Russia and Putin...........or is that just wishful thinking?
-
Oh, I don't think "Russia" per se, is. I think there may be a widening chasm between Russia and Putin...........or is that just wishful thinking?
You know what it is Jane, if I was him, I would be worried that someone might bump me off or arrest me. No I don't think he will want to use chemical weapons in Ukraine. But he may get accused of doing so. The thing is, his stock is so low at the moment, I don't even think doing that is necessary.
-
You know what it is Jane, if I was him, I would be worried that someone might bump me off or arrest me. No I don't think he will want to use chemical weapons in Ukraine. But he may get accused of doing so. The thing is, his stock is so low at the moment, I don't even think doing that is necessary.
I'm happy to trust that you're right, Roch! But I'll be coming for you if you're not!!!
-
I'm happy to trust that you're right, Roch! But I'll be coming for you if you're not!!!
If an incident happens - treat with caution - that's all I am saying.
Don't know if anyone has the time or inclination to watch this, but I just found it via social media.. a film by Oliver Stone..
https://rumble.com/vwxxi8-ukraine-on-fire.html
-
We are where we are. It's time for Putin and Zelenskyy to sit round a table and negotiate. Putin looks to me as if he's on medication with his puffy cheeks. I don't like it but we should give him a way out. https://youtu.be/9ydToMo-pW8
-
Street in Karkiv after indiscriminate shelling.
https://v.redd.it/q95uqr539pm81/DASH_480.mp4 (https://v.redd.it/q95uqr539pm81/DASH_480.mp4)
-
We are where we are. It's time for Putin and Zelenskyy to sit round a table and negotiate. Putin looks to me as if he's on medication with his puffy cheeks. I don't like it but we should give him a way out. https://youtu.be/9ydToMo-pW8
Interesting comment, Steve. I'd thought the same thing. Steroids?
-
Interesting comment, Steve. I'd thought the same thing. Steroids?
I think corticosteroids Jane. There have been rumours about his mental health, as well as allegations of terminal bowel cancer. I don't trust him not to escalate, and I don't trust his generals not to countermand any orders he may issue.
-
Putin looks to me as if he's on medication with his puffy cheeks.
Its cosmetic fillers and botox.
https://nationalpost.com/news/ever-wonder-why-vladimir-putin-doesnt-age-we-asked-some-cosmetic-surgeons (https://nationalpost.com/news/ever-wonder-why-vladimir-putin-doesnt-age-we-asked-some-cosmetic-surgeons)
-
Its cosmetic fillers and botox.
https://nationalpost.com/news/ever-wonder-why-vladimir-putin-doesnt-age-we-asked-some-cosmetic-surgeons (https://nationalpost.com/news/ever-wonder-why-vladimir-putin-doesnt-age-we-asked-some-cosmetic-surgeons)
I'm sure he has undergone cosmetic procedures of some description, but if you stop the video on #1151 at 1.11 you will see the egregious puffiness, which short of him inserting pads in his face I doubt any aesthetic surgeon could produce.
-
https://off-guardian.org/2022/03/10/covid-19-to-ukraine-bouncing-from-one-crisis-to-the-next/
-
So this is where everyone is hiding, anyone following this war on the telegrams?
-
https://youtu.be/JCr7zkPAm1Y
-
Not for the first time, I find myself out-of-sync with the rest of this Forum. It appears to me that Russia is winning - slowly - and I think the reaction in the West has been ridiculous, and at times, quite offensive. Ukraine is not a NATO member state or a Member State of the European Union (which has its own defence co-ordination). Thus, there is no obligation, legal or moral, on Britain or EU Member States to side with Ukraine.
Most people are relying on mainstream media sources for their information about this war and any rationale or explanation for Russia's actions. The problem with this is that the Western media will only report the 'NATO' point-of-view, which is essentially a Washington Beltway perspective on things, which means you are only hearing one side of the argument; and sure enough, some people on this thread are lapsing into the trap of demonising or monsterising Putin, rather than making an effort to understand the historical complexities and political nuances of the situation.
The UK and - to a large extent - the major European powers, have tagged along with the foolish policies of the United States, not always in their own interests. For example, Germany would greatly benefit from an alliance with Russia, but instead cancels Nordstream 2 and falls in line with Washington, D.C. It is true that Germany relies on the nuclear shield of NATO, but of what practical value is this? Nobody who understands the situation deeply seriously thinks that Putin has designs on eastern Germany.
Britain itself would benefit from a more favourable attitude to Russia, but instead pursues this ludicrous course of interfering with the sovereignty of Russia and the property rights of Russians with economic interests in the United Kingdom.
-
I wonder what Gorbachev thinks of all this ? I think he's still breathing ?
-
Forbes on military equipment losses.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/vikrammittal/2022/03/10/military-equipment-losses-provide-insight-into-russia-ukraine-war/
-
Newspapers from across the world can be accessed from this link.
https://onlinenewspapers.com/index.shtml
-
This is a very interesting watch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpzUCSdxi7k (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpzUCSdxi7k)
-
This is a very interesting watch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpzUCSdxi7k (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpzUCSdxi7k)
This must have been known for quite a long time, which would provide Ukraine and its NATO advisors a strategy for suppressing Russian air superiority. In other words a potential advantage. Again, you cannot blame Ukraine for that. Russia should be aware of any shortcomings militarily, but it should also be aware of to what extent those shortcomings have been studied by other military forces.
-
This must have been known for quite a long time, which would provide Ukraine and its NATO advisors a strategy for suppressing Russian air superiority. In other words a potential advantage. Again, you cannot blame Ukraine for that. Russia should be aware of any shortcomings militarily, but it should also be aware of to what extent those shortcomings have been studied by other military forces.
Did you read the study I posted the other day on corruption and embezzlement in the Russian military?
-
Sergei Lavrov's stepdaughter owns a £4.4 million London flat.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/11/mps-call-for-sanctions-on-uk-second-family-of-sergei-lavrov (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/11/mps-call-for-sanctions-on-uk-second-family-of-sergei-lavrov)
-
Did you read the study I posted the other day on corruption and embezzlement in the Russian military?
I don't think I did but I saw mention of it elsewhere. I do think he has put himself at risk (Putin). Maybe Lavrov is a softer target, but they say you should strike at the head. My thoughts on this haven't changed mind. We should not be getting just one side of the story. However, I have to also consider the multitude of nations that have turned against Russia due this action. Mind you, some of it from the trade sector is virtue signalling that snowballs - McDonald's FFS.
-
Not for the first time, I find myself out-of-sync with the rest of this Forum. It appears to me that Russia is winning - slowly - and I think the reaction in the West has been ridiculous, and at times, quite offensive. Ukraine is not a NATO member state or a Member State of the European Union (which has its own defence co-ordination). Thus, there is no obligation, legal or moral, on Britain or EU Member States to side with Ukraine.
Most people are relying on mainstream media sources for their information about this war and any rationale or explanation for Russia's actions. The problem with this is that the Western media will only report the 'NATO' point-of-view, which is essentially a Washington Beltway perspective on things, which means you are only hearing one side of the argument; and sure enough, some people on this thread are lapsing into the trap of demonising or monsterising Putin, rather than making an effort to understand the historical complexities and political nuances of the situation.
The UK and - to a large extent - the major European powers, have tagged along with the foolish policies of the United States, not always in their own interests. For example, Germany would greatly benefit from an alliance with Russia, but instead cancels Nordstream 2 and falls in line with Washington, D.C. It is true that Germany relies on the nuclear shield of NATO, but of what practical value is this? Nobody who understands the situation deeply seriously thinks that Putin has designs on eastern Germany.
Britain itself would benefit from a more favourable attitude to Russia, but instead pursues this ludicrous course of interfering with the sovereignty of Russia and the property rights of Russians with economic interests in the United Kingdom.
That's not surprising is it sir? You can't escape from Russia invading a sovereign state, encouraging insurgents in Luhansk and Donestk, when it's far from clear a majority wish to join Russia or even be part of an independent republic, not forgetting the annexation of Crimea. I'm sure British exporters would favour a more cordial relationship, but there have been incidents too numerous to mention in recent years to normalize relations.
-
That's not surprising is it sir? You can't escape from Russia invading a sovereign state, encouraging insurgents in Luhansk and Donestk, when it's far from clear a majority wish to join Russia or even be part of an independent republic, not forgetting the annexation of Crimea. I'm sure British exporters would favour a more cordial relationship, but there have been incidents too numerous to mention in recent years to normalize relations.
NATO has intervened in the affairs of sovereign states and the United States has invaded sovereign states - including Iraq and Afghanistan, and intervened in Libya and Syria. I assume you condemn those actions too? Or are you arguing not for an international order but purely for the self-interest of the United States? Perhaps you could clarify. I believe Britain's national interests are in neutrality outside NATO and amity with Russia.
I am not taking sides. Neutrality means neutrality. I have no idea if the Russians are right or the Ukrainians. The Russians claim that ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine are persecuted by the government in Kiev. The US-NATO-EU media hegemon claims that Putin is invading a sovereign state and screams that he is a murderous dictator, but that is not how it looks from a Russian perspective. From the Russian point-of-view, The Ukraine is part of the Russian homeland and a keystone of its revanchist claims (in point of fact, the Ukraine rests at the core of the historic Russian nation and Kiev is Russia's ancient capital, not Moscow). My point is that it is complex. Roughly half of geographical Ukraine has a large ethnic Russian population, and they form a majority in some areas.
Then there is the geopolitical aspect. In the wake of the fall of the USSR, the Russian Federation received solemn assurances that NATO's ambitions would not extend into the East and threaten Russia strategically. NATO - in effect, the United States - has gone back on this assurance and pursued an expansionist policy. Russia has a right to defend itself.
That is a summary of the other side. I could say more. None of it is to say Russia is right, but it is not a simple matter and I think the characterisation of Western politicians as foolish and ignorant is not far off the mark. Britain's politicians should be pursuing the national interests of Britain, not the agenda of the Washington Beltway (and it is highly debatable whether that is even truly in the interests of the United States).
I also see you mention nothing about the outrageous interference in personal liberties and property rights of Russian nationals in the West, indeed the commercial and economic attacks on Russia itself by supposedly privately-owned businesses.
-
Russia has kidnapped mayor of Melitopol. And is shelling cities like Karkiv and Mariupol into submission. This conduct will haunt Russia for decades.
-
A Ukrainian girl, being interviewed this morning, had texted her sister in Moscow to find out why she hadn't called to see how they were coping. Her sister replied that she hadn't thought it necessary as Russian soldiers had come in peace to rid them of criminals! After telling her how it was, and having her truth denied, it seems the sisterly bond has been irretrievably broken. I'd wondered how Putin had defended invading a country which had shown no aggression. I hadn't realized that all citizens within it were criminals.
-
Exclusive: Full Interview With Russian President Vladimir Putin by Keir Simmons June 15 2021.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keir_Simmons
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6pJd6O_NT0
-
Russia has kidnapped mayor of Melitopol. And is shelling cities like Karkiv and Mariupol into submission. This conduct will haunt Russia for decades.
It might haunt you too if it escalates!
-
Vladimir Putin interviewed by the Financial Times | FT on 5th July 2019:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbY0VpyjtuI
-
Thousands of Russians are making their way to Georgia then on to Turkey, at least 25,000 have fled so far.
-
Kremlin is right..
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/12/arms-shipments-are-a-legitimate-military-target-kremlin-warns-west
-
It's damn worrying when you think that Putin's next move could be Poland !!
-
It's damn worrying when you think that Putin's next move could be Poland !!
I very much doubt he could do it. It will take years for Russia to recoup what it's lost already.
-
I very much doubt he could do it. It will take years for Russia to recoup what it's lost already.
He hasn't expended any nuclear capability yet!
-
It's damn worrying when you think that Putin's next move could be Poland !!
Still a way to go until he catches up with the Scousers:
https://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/collections/social-history/blitz
Do you remember the blitz?
-
Can anthropolgists say for sure we haven't progressed to this point previously?! Was the 'origin' of the universe aka the 'big bang' in fact a nuclear explosion?!
-
I very much doubt he could do it. It will take years for Russia to recoup what it's lost already.
Russian troops are already too close for comfort to the Polish border.
-
Russian troops are already too close for comfort to the Polish border.
Although saying that, they'll get a rude awakening from the forces who are on the border, waiting.
-
Still a way to go until he catches up with the Scousers:
https://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/collections/social-history/blitz
Do you remember the blitz?
No, I don't remember the blitz. I was born just after the war began, but I do remember bombers flying over from Burtonwood. We had an Anderson shelter in the garden on top of which dad grew strawberries.
-
BTW, I'm not a " Scouser " as was born 10 miles out of Liverpool. Though better than the champagne Charley's any day ! More human.
-
No, I don't remember the blitz. I was born just after the war began, but I do remember bombers flying over from Burtonwood. We had an Anderson shelter in the garden on top of which dad grew strawberries.
Had to look up 'Anderson shelter'. How did you come to have one?
Do you remember rationing? I wonder if something similar will happen with fuel if it becomes scarce?
-
BTW, I'm not a " Scouser " as was born 10 miles out of Liverpool. Though better than the champagne Charley's any day ! More human.
Lets not split hairs its north of Watford Gap! Full of dread and horror.
-
Had to look up 'Anderson shelter'. How did you come to have one?
Do you remember rationing? I wonder if something similar will happen with fuel if it becomes scarce?
We had an Anderson shelter because mum would never go into a communal one ( air-raid shelter ). My dad had apparently rigged up the shelter below ground using corrugated metal for the walls and ceiling then he'd dug up sods of grass and soil from other areas of the garden. After the war he filled it all in again after emptying loads of sand-bagged soil back into it. Nobody would ever have known it was there.
-
Lets not split hairs its north of Watford Gap! Full of dread and horror.
It's all those "dark Satanic mills" what does it!
-
Had to look up 'Anderson shelter'. How did you come to have one?
Do you remember rationing? I wonder if something similar will happen with fuel if it becomes scarce?
I do remember rationing and I've still got some ration books somewhere around the place. I was never aware of a petrol shortage as dad always seemed to be driving somewhere in his Standard Vanguard , an ugly car I used to think as a child, big and bulky.
I think it was the grocers shop where mum queued up at. We had our own fruit and veg up the garden.
Clothing rations too of which I don't remember much of as we didn't seem to go without anything. Until we knew a farmer, locally, powdered egg was used for baking as that was all there was, yuk !
-
I believe brother and I should have been evacuated but mum had refused so we took our chances. We weren't far from a USA airforce base so it was obviously a target during the war.
-
"Osama Bin Laden, Islamic State chief Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi and Iranian
Republican Guard Commander Qasem Soleimani all represented direct
threats to the West. They were all killed to counter those threats.
Putin represents a permanent and deadly threat that will remain while he
is in power.
“Our priority should be to help remove
him. If enough pressure is brought to bear on Putin’s oligarchs it could
lead to a palace coup.”
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/western-allies-should-not-rule-26452793?fbclid=IwAR0U3QKbzcObxotW4PZZAlcC7zu6BfbHuxhttKciyibqB3og0csUfUxf5aA (https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/western-allies-should-not-rule-26452793?fbclid=IwAR0U3QKbzcObxotW4PZZAlcC7zu6BfbHuxhttKciyibqB3og0csUfUxf5aA)
-
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/western-allies-should-not-rule-26452793?fbclid=IwAR0U3QKbzcObxotW4PZZAlcC7zu6BfbHuxhttKciyibqB3og0csUfUxf5aA (https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/western-allies-should-not-rule-26452793?fbclid=IwAR0U3QKbzcObxotW4PZZAlcC7zu6BfbHuxhttKciyibqB3og0csUfUxf5aA)
"Osama Bin Laden, Islamic State chief Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi and Iranian Republican Guard Commander Qasem Soleimani all represented directthreats to the West. They were all killed to counter those threats.Putin represents a permanent and deadly threat that will remain while he is in power.“Our priority should be to help remove him. If enough pressure is brought to bear on Putin’s oligarchs it could lead to a palace coup.”..
-
"Osama Bin Laden, Islamic State chief Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi and Iranian
Republican Guard Commander Qasem Soleimani all represented direct
threats to the West. They were all killed to counter those threats.
Putin represents a permanent and deadly threat that will remain while he
is in power.
“Our priority should be to help remove
him. If enough pressure is brought to bear on Putin’s oligarchs it could
lead to a palace coup.”
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/western-allies-should-not-rule-26452793?fbclid=IwAR0U3QKbzcObxotW4PZZAlcC7zu6BfbHuxhttKciyibqB3og0csUfUxf5aA (https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/western-allies-should-not-rule-26452793?fbclid=IwAR0U3QKbzcObxotW4PZZAlcC7zu6BfbHuxhttKciyibqB3og0csUfUxf5aA)
In other words, if we can engineer Putin's downfall, we are back on course to rule the world again. Next target probably Iran.
-
Can anthropolgists say for sure we haven't progressed to this point previously?! Was the 'origin' of the universe aka the 'big bang' in fact a nuclear explosion?!
This is very plausible, but it would obviously be a different species. We would assume a hominid or proto-hominid species of some sort, but it could have been reptiles. Humans could be hybrids of them. I've always thought that when David Icke talks about reptilians in human form, the notion is not as strange or outlandish as it first seems, provided you don't take him literally and instead treat it as a theory of human hybrid evolution.
We think of homo sapiens sapiens as one single species descended from primates. This is now anthropological dogma, but seems naive and simplistic to me, as there are vast differences across human populations.
Maybe psychopathy has some sort of physical anthropological explanation along these lines, in that psychopaths are a 'species within a species' who belong to a genetic line hybridised differently to most others and their psychopathy is an expression of a latent primeval pedigree?
Bear in mind also that, in a similar way to physical anthropology, the Big Bang theory is cosmological dogma without much rigorous science to back it up. It's essentially theorising based on what evidence can be gathered. Our metaphysical comprehension is impaired as we lack the full picture and also have a tendency since modernity to lean on 'science' dogmatically. It may not be true. The Universe could instead be a physical constant, or could be shrinking, or there may be multiple universies (multi-verses) or there may be additional dimensions of physical reality we don't know of. There are other explanations.
Save for my allusions to political ponerology and references to psychopathy, this the whole topic belongs on a different thread of course.
-
https://off-guardian.org/2022/03/14/10-signs-the-war-in-ukraine-is-part-of-the-great-reset/
-
Difficult to see how this can be brought to an end. The Ukrainians have caused severe casualties to the Russian military, which you would think might give them an advantage in negotiations, as it is clear that Ukraine could turn in to a mass grave for Russian soldiers if the war continues. But if Ukraine try and play that card in negotiations, all that is going to happen is that Russia will pulverise Ukrainian cities and cause mass casualties among the civilian population, as well as destroying infrastructure.
If NATO tries to supply Ukraine with arms, those shipments could become targets for Russia. Then there will be an incident which NATO could use to intervene. That would escalate in to a wider conflict which nobody wants.
If the Ukrainian leader enters in to an agreement which was already on the table prior to the invasion, all the Ukrainian deaths will be seen as being in vain. Therefore, to reach an agreement, Putin might have to concede on some of his pre- invasion red lines. If that happened, I think he would be deposed after the conflict ends, due to the loss of Russian military lives and the damage to Russia"s economy / impact on its oligarchy. As it could be argued, that this was too high a price to pay for the agreement.
-
Lets not split hairs its north of Watford Gap! Full of dread and horror.
Completely ::)
-
https://youtu.be/RSoGiFCzhLw
-
My Northern twopenneth.. my town from the air. I have to admit, I have experience of both southern and northern living. Pros and cons. I think we are less overcrowded in the northeast.
-
Difficult to see how this can be brought to an end. The Ukrainians have caused severe casualties to the Russian military, which you would think might give them an advantage in negotiations, as it is clear that Ukraine could turn in to a mass grave for Russian soldiers if the war continues. But if Ukraine try and play that card in negotiations, all that is going to happen is that Russia will pulverise Ukrainian cities and cause mass casualties among the civilian population, as well as destroying infrastructure.
If NATO tries to supply Ukraine with arms, those shipments could become targets for Russia. Then there will be an incident which NATO could use to intervene. That would escalate in to a wider conflict which nobody wants.
If the Ukrainian leader enters in to an agreement which was already on the table prior to the invasion, all the Ukrainian deaths will be seen as being in vain. Therefore, to reach an agreement, Putin might have to concede on some of his pre- invasion red lines. If that happened, I think he would be deposed after the conflict ends, due to the loss of Russian military lives and the damage to Russia"s economy / impact on its oligarchy. As it could be argued, that this was too high a price to pay for the agreement.
There is no positive outcome for Putin either way. He has united the Ukrainian people against Russia and severed all bridges for decades if not centuries. At least 6000 Russian troops killed and they have only taken one out of twenty major cities.
-
It's the battle for Odessa that's worrying me now so far as casualties go. It'll be horrendous.
-
My Northern twopenneth.. my town from the air. I have to admit, I have experience of both southern and northern living. Pros and cons. I think we are less overcrowded in the northeast.
I'm on the edge of the sea too---the little bit that juts out on the map across from where you are.
-
There is no positive outcome for Putin either way. He has united the Ukrainian people against Russia and severed all bridges for decades if not centuries. At least 6000 Russian troops killed and they have only taken one out of twenty major cities.
FT article..
https://www.ft.com/content/90421972-2f1e-4871-a4c6-0a9e9257e9b0
-
FT article..
https://www.ft.com/content/90421972-2f1e-4871-a4c6-0a9e9257e9b0
Its behind a paywall.
-
Its behind a paywall.
See if this works? I accessed the article in Google search 'what percentage of Russian military are in Ukraine'
-
See if this works? I accessed the article in Google search 'what percentage of Russian military are in Ukraine'
I think I have exceeded my amount of monthly free articles for FT.
-
Close combat in Mariupol
https://v.redd.it/93fyrphhjcn81/DASH_720.mp4 (https://v.redd.it/93fyrphhjcn81/DASH_720.mp4)
-
Today, a missile impact in Kurenivka district, Kyiv.
https://v.redd.it/7ehrejl94cn81/DASH_480.mp4 (https://v.redd.it/7ehrejl94cn81/DASH_480.mp4)
-
I think I have exceeded my amount of monthly free articles for FT.
It worked for me on a phone search. But I can't access FT articles normally. I see they're saying three UK special forces may have been killed in the western Ukraine attack.
-
It worked for me on a phone search. But I can't access FT articles normally. I see they're saying three UK special forces may have been killed in the western Ukraine attack.
Thousands of volunteers from around the world are in Ukraine.
-
Thousands of volunteers from around the world are in Ukraine.
But this was a base that NATO personnel visited. So our own special forces 'Ex-special forces' have been inside Ukraine, which is basically what I suggested before, ie re training etc. It was also in the Guardian recently that Azov brigade had been incorporated in to Ukrainian forces. Ironically, this was in an article trying to undermine Russian claims that there were Nazis in Ukraine.
Regarding Ex-special forces. You never know whether they're volunteers / mercenaries or just not 'officially' in a role but in position with the full knowledge of whichever dept.
-
But this was a base that NATO personnel visited. So our own special forces 'Ex-special forces' have been inside Ukraine, which is basically what I suggested before, ie re training etc. It was also in the Guardian recently that Azov brigade had been incorporated in to Ukrainian forces. Ironically, this was in an article trying to undermine Russian claims that there were Nazis in Ukraine.
Regarding Ex-special forces. You never know whether they're volunteers / mercenaries or just not 'officially' in a role but in position with the full knowledge of whichever dept.
👽
-
👽
David, it was a Ukrainian base near the border with Poland. How can you guarantee that there just happened to be three volunteers from UK Ex-special forces personnel. That's how it was reported, but in all honesty, there is no guarantee that they were volunteers nor that they were there without official knowledge. That's all I'm saying.
-
David, it was a Ukrainian base near the border with Poland. How can you guarantee that there just happened to be three volunteers from UK Ex-special forces personnel. That's how it was reported, but in all honesty, there is no guarantee that they were volunteers nor that they were there without official knowledge. That's all I'm saying.
👽
-
👽
Access the Guardian website and use their search facility for 'Azov' then read the articles that feature. I couldn't see the latest article. But there are some older ones.
-
Which is why vetting all refugees is vital ! It wouldn't be the first time there have been infiltrators.
-
What's the betting that Russia will attack some kind of shipment, whether convoy or otherwise, and advise that the shipment included arms bound for Ukraine (ie they had intelligence). The other side (our side) will say it was a shipment of aid for Ukrainian civilians. They say the first casualty of war is truth. There is precedent for this, regarding aid shipments bound for Palestine, which are intercepted by Israeli forces etc.
-
Access the Guardian website and use their search facility for 'Azov' then read the articles that feature. I couldn't see the latest article. But there are some older ones.
I know what the Azov battalion are. Saying Ukraine are Nazis because of them is like saying we are Nazis because of the EDL. ::)
-
I know what the Azov battalion are. Saying Ukraine are Nazis because of them is like saying we are Nazis because of the EDL. ::)
The EDL were not paramilitary - I don't even think they were Nazis per se. They were for the most part young, bigoted etc. Ironically, they were a product of Bush and Blair's 'war on terror' and the divisions that ensued between Muslim and non-muslim Brits.
-
Putin is waging a war against civilians and infrastructure
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/tenkao/putin_is_waging_a_war_against_civilians_and/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/tenkao/putin_is_waging_a_war_against_civilians_and/)
-
Putin is waging a war against civilians and infrastructure
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/tenkao/putin_is_waging_a_war_against_civilians_and/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/tenkao/putin_is_waging_a_war_against_civilians_and/)
If I put my Armchair General hat on, I'd say Russian military tactics seem to have been rubbish from the start. You have to wonder whether some of the current shelling is in retaliation for the deaths of Russian soldiers early on. In which case, that's even worse tactics!
-
Georgy Zhukov must be spinning in his grave at this latest batch of Russian generals.
-
Near the beginning of this short video, watch what Putin says about the US in respect of NATO and vice versa. This is what David refuses to take in to account.
https://youtu.be/eiuplgzbCC4
-
Near the beginning of this short video, watch what Putin says about the US in respect of NATO and vice versa. This is what David refuses to take in to account.
https://youtu.be/eiuplgzbCC4
I have seen all four episodes of the Putin interviews.
-
The EDL were not paramilitary - I don't even think they were Nazis per se. They were for the most part young, bigoted etc. Ironically, they were a product of Bush and Blair's 'war on terror' and the divisions that ensued between Muslim and non-muslim Brits.
They would be if this country was attacked and the government was handing out guns to anyone and everyone like they are in Ukraine.
-
I have seen all four episodes of the Putin interviews.
Zelenski has said Ukraine can never be part of NATO. It looks like they're heading for some kind of agreement?
-
If I put my Armchair General hat on, I'd say Russian military tactics seem to have been rubbish from the start.
No they haven't. In the first days of the invasion, Russian special forces and light airborne infantry took over an airport in Kyiv. The plan was to have reinforcements landing there quickly and they would swiftly move into the government buildings and overthrow Zellensky. But they were repelled before this could materialise. Everything since then has been rubbish.
-
Zelenski has said Ukraine can never be part of NATO. It looks like they're heading for some kind of agreement?
I think this will have to be the compromise to avoid World War Three. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/zelensky-ukraine-conflict-nato-russia-b2036280.html
-
This is from back in 2014:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KS8QH2eG6uk
Not the first time I find myself in agreement with Mr Corbyn.
-
I really hope that we have not just witnessed about 10,000 lives lost, destruction of homes and infrastructure, plus 3 million refugees, for a deal that could have been struck beforehand.
-
I was wondering whether the release of Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe and Anousheh Ashouri has anything to do with events in Ukraine? Maybe UK gov talking with Iran over Russia-Ukraine and negotiated some sort of package which includes the releases? Maybe just a coincidence.
-
I was wondering whether the release of Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe and Anousheh Ashouri has anything to do with events in Ukraine? Maybe UK gov talking with Iran over Russia-Ukraine and negotiated some sort of package which includes the releases? Maybe just a coincidence.
What did you make of the claim, that we have paid Iran a 400M debt from 1979?
-
What did you make of the claim, that we have paid Iran a 400M debt from 1979?
Nothing official on that front but if true it begs the question why now especially given the UK's historic stance on the outstanding debt? Maybe the UK has negotiated some overall settlement including securing oil and lifting of sanctions?
-
Nothing official on that front but if true it begs the question why now especially given the UK's historic stance on the outstanding debt? Maybe the UK has negotiated some overall settlement including securing oil and lifting of sanctions?
Securing oil crossed my mind. But also the historic ties between Russia and Iran?
-
I'm on the edge of the sea too---the little bit that juts out on the map across from where you are.
Getting back in the off topic grim north theme, this pub is 15 mins walk from our house..
-
Getting back in the off topic grim north theme, this pub is 15 mins walk from our house..
The very height of grimness, that, Roch.
-
I was wondering whether the release of Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe and Anousheh Ashouri has anything to do with events in Ukraine? Maybe UK gov talking with Iran over Russia-Ukraine and negotiated some sort of package which includes the releases? Maybe just a coincidence.
Neutrality is the key in the answer to all this with Russia and Ukraine---such as that with Sweden and Austria.
I somehow doubt that Zelensky would agree though, I don't know.
-
Getting back in the off topic grim north theme, this pub is 15 mins walk from our house..
There are a few such places near me which are close to the water's edge but caution has to prevail during gales ;D
-
The very height of grimness, that, Roch.
:)) There's worse places to live - but my home town is hardly a desirable location. We are 25 mins on the train to Newcastle city centre. It's not a bad little city. Tbh, I think the market towns in North Yorkshire are probably some of best places to live in the north. Richmond is only one hour down the A1, it's a different world.
-
:)) There's worse places to live - but my home town is hardly a desirable location. We are 25 mins on the train to Newcastle city centre. It's not a bad little city. Tbh, I think the market towns in North Yorkshire are probably some of best places to live in the north. Richmond is only one hour down the A1, it's a different world.
We can all list run down areas within our own vicinities, Roch. Believe me, they're plentiful enough, here in the South. They're not the sort of places I'd take visitors to see, as they're neither interesting nor attractive. I live within spitting distance of the oldest town in England, but various councils seem to have lost direction regarding it. I've been North on several occasions, but I've only seen breath taking rural scenery and places of interest in well kept urban areas.
-
Getting back in the off topic grim north theme, this pub is 15 mins walk from our house..
If I ever need any encouragement to visit a pub...!!! What's the beer like?
Its not all bad up north. NE based Zinsser paint specialist came to my rescue last year with a DIY project. The Geordie in the customer services dept was very helpful.
-
If I ever need any encouragement to visit a pub...!!! What's the beer like?
Its not all bad up north. NE based Zinsser paint specialist came to my rescue last year with a DIY project. The Geordie in the customer services dept was very helpful.
The beer is nothing special unfortunately. Passable but not a draw. As for Zinsser, I have used a few tins myself, due to water staining. Didn't know they were NE based.
-
The beer is nothing special unfortunately. Passable but not a draw. As for Zinsser, I have used a few tins myself, due to water staining. Didn't know they were NE based.
That's a pity.
I think Zinsser roots are in US (bet you'll think twice about using it again ;D) but its UK manufacturing base is in County Durham. I wanted to paint some exterior walls with rubbish rendering and bricks I now know to be engineering. I started off using Sandtex and within a few days and some rain it all went horribly wrong :'( After some research I discovered the Zinsser primer and the all coat paint. Expensive but excellent products.
Where's best for mixed sized wood dowels?
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FguV-zo2wpI
:o
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FguV-zo2wpI
:o
Putin reminds me physically of an older version of Anders Behring Breivik
https://alchetron.com/Anders-Behring-Breivik
-
Putin reminds me physically of an older version of Anders Behring Breivik
https://alchetron.com/Anders-Behring-Breivik
ABSOLUTELY!!!..........won't be long before ABB's released, unless they can find a reason to keep him locked up.
-
That's a pity.
I think Zinsser roots are in US (bet you'll think twice about using it again ;D) but its UK manufacturing base is in County Durham. I wanted to paint some exterior walls with rubbish rendering and bricks I now know to be engineering. I started off using Sandtex and within a few days and some rain it all went horribly wrong :'( After some research I discovered the Zinsser primer and the all coat paint. Expensive but excellent products.
Where's best for mixed sized wood dowels?
I can't answer the dowels question. Hope you get sorted through.
-
Other states who apparently feared Russia, should be now feeling relieved. Russia doesn't look capable of some grand empire land grab in eastern / northern Europe. It can't even take one fifth of Ukraine. I think those advancing the Russian empire argument (like Starkey) will now have to go back to the drawing board.
-
Other states who apparently feared Russia, should be now feeling relieved. Russia doesn't look capable of some grand empire land grab in eastern / northern Europe. It can't even take one fifth of Ukraine. I think those advancing the Russian empire argument (like Starkey) will now have to go back to the drawing board.
The latest estimate put the Russian death toll at 7000.
This is looking very much like the Finnish-Soviet war. They invaded Finland with the intent to conquer it and set up a puppet regime. Three months later with over 100,000 Russian soldiers killed, they signed a peace treaty with only modest gains.
Its very difficult for an aggressors military to win an unjust war specially when the local population are against them as it leads to the troops being unwilling and unmotivated.
-
The latest estimate put the Russian death toll at 7000.
This is looking very much like the Finnish-Soviet war. They invaded Finland with the intent to conquer it and set up a puppet regime. Three months later with over 100,000 Russian soldiers killed, they signed a peace treaty with only modest gains.
They also suffered badly when they confronted Japan.
-
They also suffered badly when they confronted Japan.
Japan have recently brought up the fact that Russia is still occupying two of its islands since WW2. :))
-
I have seen all four episodes of the Putin interviews.
David, since you are indelibly linked to Tom Cruise on this forum, regarding Oliver Stone, would it be safe to say you were born on the 4th July? :))
-
David, since you are indelibly linked to Tom Cruise on this forum, regarding Oliver Stone, would it be safe to say you were born on the 4th July? :))
Yes, July 4th 1990 in Covent Gardens Dunkin Donuts.
-
Yes, July 4th 1990 in Covent Gardens Dunkin Donuts.
Please don't shatter my illusions. I thought you were from Idaho Falls or somewhere like that.
-
Please don't shatter my illusions. I thought you were from Idaho Falls or somewhere like that.
On a serious note, there are many things about America domestically that I am no fan of. For starters their healthcare is an utter joke. My barber wanted to emigrate there and I asked if he was prepared to pay the $8000 dollars a year for health insurance with a annual 10k deductible. He then decided it was not such a good idea after all. :))
-
On a serious note, there are many things about America domestically that I am no fan of. For starters their healthcare is an utter joke. My barber wanted to emigrate there and I asked if he was prepared to pay the $8000 dollars a year for health insurance with a annual 10k deductible. He then decided it was not such a good idea after all. :))
Are you seriously saying that you're not American and don't have a US accent?
-
According to The Times, US claims 7000 Russian military personnel killed. If accurate, that would represent a shocking rate of attrition. Even a quarter of that figure would be shocking in my opinion. Putin has to take responsibility for it. I can't see how he will survive, literally.
-
None of their children have been killed Roch.
-
Are you seriously saying that you're not American and don't have a US accent?
I was born and raised in Essex.
-
I have relatives in Southend-on-sea.
-
According to The Times, US claims 7000 Russian military personnel killed. If accurate, that would represent a shocking rate of attrition. Even a quarter of that figure would be shocking in my opinion. Putin has to take responsibility for it. I can't see how he will survive, literally.
That is the worrying thing. If he finds himself cornered so to speak, he might resort to far more desperate measures. Like a false flag chemical attack to justify using tactical nuclear artillery.
-
I was born and raised in Essex.
I am stunned at that David. I thought you were a yank over here. In fact I was certain. You must have unwittingly given that impression earlier on, somehow. Think I'm gonna need a drink to get over this.
-
I am stunned at that David. I thought you were a yank over here. In fact I was certain. You must have unwittingly given that impression earlier on, somehow. Think I'm gonna need a drink to get over this.
LOL
-
None of their children have been killed Roch.
No child should be killed in any conflicts, anywhere.
Some of these Russian soldiers are just young lads. From a Russian perspective, there should have been a strategy which preserved their lives. Heads should roll on that score.
-
No child should be killed in any conflicts, anywhere.
Some of these Russian soldiers are just young lads. From a Russian perspective, there should have been a strategy which preserved their lives. Heads should roll on that score.
The Russian kids in kindy are taught propaganda so is it any wonder their young soldiers are on a killing spree, they don't know any different.
-
Young lads or not, something's not right when they can bomb somewhere knowing that there are women and children in the premises. They're indoctrinated or they wouldn't do it.
-
https://thegrayzone.com/2022/03/10/congress-american-workers-war-russia/
-
https://thegrayzone.com/2022/03/09/victoria-nuland-us-biological-research-facilities-ukraine/
they admited they were funing las in theukriane.
-
Young lads or not, something's not right when they can bomb somewhere knowing that there are women and children in the premises. They're indoctrinated or they wouldn't do it.
Sadly, you're right, Lookout, but it's what happens. Children, world over, are indoctrinated with adult -parental/political/religious- beliefs. Thankfully, children in the free world will have wider beliefs than those under a "one horse" regime, but when it comes to dropping bombs? Did we not drop them on innocent women and children -albeit in retaliation- in WW2? It's politicians who make wars, and populations who suffer.
-
Sadly, you're right, Lookout, but it's what happens. Children, world over, are indoctrinated with adult -parental/political/religious- beliefs. Thankfully, children in the free world will have wider beliefs than those under a "one horse" regime, but when it comes to dropping bombs? Did we not drop them on innocent women and children -albeit in retaliation- in WW2? It's politicians who make wars, and populations who suffer.
Yes, you're right about WW2, as in retaliation, but it was still the aggressor who'd instigated the war as in this case. It's all about protecting your country, the difference here being that no bombs/ missiles have been dropped on the people/ children of Russia----in retaliation ?
-
Did anyone watch the rally in Moscow ? The thousands upon thousands of Putin supporters ? What chance is anyone going to stand while this venomous thug is still breathing ? Not a sniper in sight when he gave his speech !
-
What's it going to take before we rid this slug of his onslaught / genocide ? An all out war ?
-
The Führer speaks.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtOSNQRXqU8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtOSNQRXqU8)
-
A typical Stalin.
-
40,000 Syrians have signed up to join Russia's troops.
-
40,000 Syrians have signed up to join Russia's troops.
I can't see that many getting involved. Somebody needs to de-escalate the conflict. But Russian demands that Ukraine demilitarise are ridiculous. A neutral state yes. But not one without a substantial defence capability. If Zelenskii is going to have to give ground, then Putin needs to shift his position also.
-
I can't see that many getting involved. Somebody needs to de-escalate the conflict. But Russian demands that Ukraine demilitarise are ridiculous. A neutral state yes. But not one without a substantial defence capability. If Zelenskii is going to have to give ground, then Putin needs to shift his position also.
Something to do with a debt between Assad and Putin. An advanced forced arrived in Russia yesterday ( 150 ) this has been claimed by the European Intelligence.
-
It's getting bad Roch.
-
It's getting bad Roch.
The vast majority of newly enlisted Syrian mercenaries are trading in salaries of $15 a month for monthly deals worth between $600 and $3,000. Rank and experience in the gruelling decade of insurrection attracts the higher dollars, but even the basic salary is luring recruits who have few ways out of overwhelming poverty.
Full article.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/18/syrians-join-russian-ranks-in-ukraine-as-putin-calls-in-assads-debt
-
Not looking good for Ukraine, Bubo bubo.
-
Putin wears a £10,000 designer jacket while his people face going back to soviet style poverty.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10628565/Vladimir-Putin-dons-10-000-Loro-Piana-jacket-worth-twice-average-yearly-salary-rally.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10628565/Vladimir-Putin-dons-10-000-Loro-Piana-jacket-worth-twice-average-yearly-salary-rally.html)
-
The 'New World Order' financial, economic and planet population will be life changing by 2025 - the monetary system, and physical possession of spendable cash will no longer be available to surviviours worldwide...
Every transaction will be electronically functional, credited, vouchered, and earned!
The world's population has to be reduced - this is what governments of the world are acting out, covid type virus 'grand reapers', wars and inflatiry tactics, making the cost of living spiral out of control...
Not long to go now - just another 3 years or so!
-
Putin wears a £10,000 designer jacket while his people face going back to soviet style poverty.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10628565/Vladimir-Putin-dons-10-000-Loro-Piana-jacket-worth-twice-average-yearly-salary-rally.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10628565/Vladimir-Putin-dons-10-000-Loro-Piana-jacket-worth-twice-average-yearly-salary-rally.html)
It's true Russians will face hardship when the sanctions begin to bite, but adjusted for purchasing power parity they have done well during Putin's tenure, hence his popularity still amongst the masses. https://tradingeconomics.com/russia/gdp-per-capita-ppp
-
Why can't Ukraine drop a few bombs over Moscow ?
-
Why can't Ukraine drop a few bombs over Moscow ?
..because Putin is a madman akin to Adolf Hitler and there would be nothing left of Ukraine save a heap of ash.
-
..because Putin is a madman akin to Adolf Hitler and there would be nothing left of Ukraine save a heap of ash.
He's trying to follow the same path as Hitler did by going for Poland and once this happens, we've had it, though the beautiful Odessa will be in his sights first.
It seems ironic that it was Russia who put a stop to Hitler but thinking back it's a great pity that Germany hadn't got as far as taking Moscow while they were at it.
To me, the most awful scenes were the crowds piling onto the trains----except that they weren't going to their deaths as in WW2 :(
-
With Russia severely weakened, we are going to start hearing about how dangerous Iran is (picking up the previously stalled US/Israel hit list). In a year's time, I expect the majority of people will be baying for strong action to be taken against Iran (as they will have been made to fear and despise the Iranian regime and military, via the media).
-
I don't think Russia is " weakened ". Don't believe what the papers/ news says.
-
The Guardian Australia stated that the Russian cosmonauts boarding ISS were wearing colours of the Ukraine flag.
-
The Hitler template is wrong, though it remains of relevance for other reasons. Hitler's strategy was driven by ideas that came from deeper German history and academic geopolitics in Germany, and was also ideologically-motivated by opposition to Bolshevism. He sought to conquer the East to establish living space for the Germanic peoples and the security of Germany and wider Europe.
Russia's strategy is not to conquer eastern Europe. The invasion of Ukraine would end if the West gave the necessary assurances to Russia. Like Germany, Russia has an interest in maintaining a sphere of influence in eastern Europe. Halford Mackinder's theories are of some relevance. Control of eastern Europe is pivotal in world geopolitics, but it is also important to the security of Russia itself.
NATO since the 1990s has spent considerable energy rolling back verbal assurances given to the former USSR that there would be no eastward expansion of NATO. In response, Russia seeks to check NATO expansion where it can.
What we can conclude from all this is that, in reality, we are witnessing two powers vying for control of eastern Europe. Until maybe 2008, NATO has had the upper hand and the period 1991 to 2004 marked an expansion of NATO into the East and the Baltic while Russia recovered. In 2008, Russia kicked back and invaded Georgia, thus preventing that country from joining NATO. Then Russia took back the Crimea and we now have the Ukraine crisis.
-
The Hitler template is wrong, though it remains of relevance for other reasons. Hitler's strategy was driven by ideas that came from deeper German history and academic geopolitics in Germany, and was also ideologically-motivated by opposition to Bolshevism. He sought to conquer the East to establish living space for the Germanic peoples and the security of Germany and wider Europe.
Russia's strategy is not to conquer eastern Europe. The invasion of Ukraine would end if the West gave the necessary assurances to Russia. Like Germany, Russia has an interest in maintaining a sphere of influence in eastern Europe. Halford Mackinder's theories are of some relevance. Control of eastern Europe is pivotal in world geopolitics, but it is also important to the security of Russia itself.
NATO since the 1990s has spent considerable energy rolling back verbal assurances given to the former USSR that there would be no eastward expansion of NATO. In response, Russia seeks to check NATO expansion where it can.
What we can conclude from all this is that, in reality, we are witnessing two powers vying for control of eastern Europe. Until maybe 2008, NATO has had the upper hand and the period 1991 to 2004 marked an expansion of NATO into the East and the Baltic while Russia recovered. In 2008, Russia kicked back and invaded Georgia, thus preventing that country from joining NATO. Then Russia took back the Crimea and we now have the Ukraine crisis.
I never claimed it to be a template. Once again you misinterpret what I wrote, either deliberately or through ignorance. Hitler wished to unite the German-speaking peoples, just as Putin sees Ukraine as part of the former Soviet Union, which broke away by chance as the Soviet empire disintegrated.
There were no assurances given by NATO on the point you assert. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2014/11/06/did-nato-promise-not-to-enlarge-gorbachev-says-no/
-
Why was Gorbachev the only approachable president ? He was almost human.
-
Why was Gorbachev the only approachable president ? He was almost human.
The break-up of the Soviet Union appeared unthinkable in the 1970s, so rigid a system it seemed to be. I suppose following the death of three leaders within a short space of time the Politburo opted for a politician from a new generation, hence a new approach.
-
The break-up of the Soviet Union appeared unthinkable in the 1970s, so rigid a system it seemed to be. I suppose following the death of three leaders within a short space of time the Politburo opted for a politician from a new generation, hence a new approach.
What should happen now is give Putin what he wants----then shoot him.
-
I never claimed it to be a template. Once again you misinterpret what I wrote, either deliberately or through ignorance. Hitler wished to unite the German-speaking peoples, just as Putin sees Ukraine as part of the former Soviet Union, which broke away by chance as the Soviet empire disintegrated.
There were no assurances given by NATO on the point you assert. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2014/11/06/did-nato-promise-not-to-enlarge-gorbachev-says-no/
I wasn't necessarily addressing you in particular, as I never mentioned you, but in any event, I stand by the point I make about the different strategies. I believe many people are falling into the trap of thinking that Russia is taking military action to 'invade and conquer', whereas that is not necessarily how things are seen in the Kremlin, where the strategy is more likely to be expansion of Russian influence and restoration of Russian soft power in a pivotal region.
The former USSR was given the assurances I mention in 1991. As I clearly state above, the assurances were verbal and it was all documented. We can argue back-and-forth over whether the assurances were or are enforceable, or whether a change in circumstances justified NATO in reneging on the understanding laid out, but the assurances were given.
Before accusing others of misreading your posts, please try to read more carefully. Please also refrain from making things personal, such as accusing people of ignorance. Thank you.
-
Regarding the above, I'm not sure the 'empire argument' is linked to the former USSR. Is it not linked to some former period in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. It seems that there is an empire argument, a NATO argument and a denazification argument. Of the three, I suspect that latter has been stretched a bit. Behind the NATO argument seems to be a rationale that the US strives for global domination and that NATO is merely a tool of that aim.
-
It's only by a miracle that the transport systems haven't been put out of action. That would have been horrendous having nowhere to go and doesn't bear thinking.
-
https://off-guardian.org/2022/03/19/is-russia-really-fighting-globalism-in-ukraine/
-
20,000 volunteers from 52 countries have taken up arms to help Ukraine, including Australia. They're all housed in training camps but most will shy away from cameras, identities being their greatest fear rather than being on the frontline.
-
The war veteran Mamuka Mamulashvili is in charge of all the foreign volunteers.
I wouldn't like to argue with him :)
-
It's only by a miracle that the transport systems haven't been put out of action. That would have been horrendous having nowhere to go and doesn't bear thinking.
Fortunately the Russians need the railway. They cannot move their men equipment, etc by road as we have seen and it is easily attacked. They will need a functioning rail system to keep control if they succeed
-
Regarding the above, I'm not sure the 'empire argument' is linked to the former USSR. Is it not linked to some former period in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. It seems that there is an empire argument, a NATO argument and a denazification argument. Of the three, I suspect that latter has been stretched a bit. Behind the NATO argument seems to be a rationale that the US strives for global domination and that NATO is merely a tool of that aim.
Russia's sheer size makes her both powerful and vulnerable at one and the same time. The Continental United States does not have this problem as she is out of the way with good natural defences - the Atlantic Ocean, the Isthmus of Panama, and Chukotka and Canada. While Russia does have some natural defences, she can easily be surrounded, save for her northern Arctic coast. Thus, Russia has to be interventionist, to an extent, whereas the United States does not have to be.
Yet the United States has gone to great efforts to limit the geographic Russophere and surround Russia with pro-NATO and pro-US countries. What we might call 'strategic encirclement' became a particular problem for the former USSR with the advent of inter-continental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). The US has worked to ensure that a US military presence and missile bases surround Russia on three sides. Part of the reason for the US-led invasion of Afghanistan was to set up a pro-US regime on the southern border of CIS (pro-Russian) states. To this end, NATO is unquestionably a tool of the US. Certainly since NATO's expansion from the 1990s onwards this has been the case, as the smaller eastern European states will look to the United States in particular to provide the political guarantee of a nuclear shield and defensive support against what they perceive as an expansionist Russia. In exchange, the US - oh, sorry, NATO and the EU defence partnership - carries out 'military exercises' in eastern European and Baltic states. In fact, the United States now has missile bases in eastern Europe. Significantly, the United States includes Britain, as she is dependent on the United States entirely for her nuclear deterrent, which in effect makes Britain a client state of the US. Not all other NATO member states will toe the line faithfully, but generally-speaking, Britain will do as the Americans say with few questions asked.
In short, what I am telling you so far is that NATO has evolved. It began as a US-led alliance to counter the nuclear and conventional threat from the former USSR and its client states. This is a defensive posture. When the USSR fell, NATO should perhaps have been disbanded or reformed. Instead, it expanded to an aggressive posture against the Russian Federation and the CIS. That is the crux of it.
For a long part of its history in the 19th. and early 20th. centuries, the United States' geographical isolation led to a strong and popular domestic movement calling for strategic isolationism, with support from mainstream politicians. During this period, Britain was the interventionist power in the world. The counter position was typified by presidents like Woodrow Wilson, who was strongly interventionist, partly perhaps motivated by a wish to supplant Britain and its Empire with an American global hegemony. The undercurrent of the United States keeping out of world affairs is still popular in provincial America and mainstream American politicians give lip service to it now and then. For instance, George W. Bush ("We'll smoke him out of his cave") during the 2000 presidential election campaign seemed to lean towards isolationism in his foreign policy. He can't have meant it, but it's popular among small 'c' conservative American voters, so American politicians often say it. Trump said much the same things and at points in his 2016 presidential election campaign threw the whole future of NATO into doubt due to his rhetoric.
Given the United States has an abundance of resources and has no need to intervene anywhere, one has to ask why is this just campaign rhetoric and not serious policy? The reason I would suggest is simple: pure greed, along with a general wish to be 'top dog'. There is also the subsidiary motivation of ideology. The United States was founded on aggressive liberal idealistic principles, whereas its Mother Country, Britain, was a calmer society with a deep-rooted organic national history in which a more consensual - though not democratic - body politic had developed, and this was reflected in Britain's more commercial approach to Empire. But there are also factors that it would not be politically-correct to discuss here. The people who dominate the Washington Beltway are not 'Americans'.
Potsdam can be seen as a continuation of Versailles. The aim was to hobble Germany, as Germany was perceived as Europe's aggressor. A subtext to Potsdam was that the USSR was also seen as a threat. This perhaps had its roots in what is now called the 'Soviet offensive plans controversy' (see Suvorov' book, Icebreaker). In regard to that controversy, I think it is fair to say that the truth is somewhere in the middle: Stalin did want to take his chances and seize territory in the East, and Hitler wanted the same, and to an extent Hitler also wanted to pre-emptively counter a Soviet invasion threat, which explains Barbarossa. And here we come to a distinction I make between Russian aggression and Western aggression.
The Soviets never formally annexed territory in the East, whereas Hitler's plan was to conquer and annex the eastern territories to Germany. Putin is not Hitler and a 'Hitler template' for his actions is wrong. The simple fact is that Russia is already a vast territory but with a relatively low population and a stretched military and creaking infrastructure. Putin's aim is not to conquer but to project power. The invasion of Ukraine is one way of doing this by forcing a resolution of the Ukraine Question in Russia's favour.
-
Fortunately the Russians need the railway. They cannot move their men equipment, etc by road as we have seen and it is easily attacked. They will need a functioning rail system to keep control if they succeed
Yes, of course Bubo bubo. I should have known that or they'd have bombed it otherwise.
-
Russia launches 'vacuum bombs'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXdTlF-tEw4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXdTlF-tEw4)
-
Russia headed to strategic defeat in Ukraine
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BeacXBxPARQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BeacXBxPARQ)
-
I can't look at much more news it's making me feel ill. All those poor people and children, how can anyone bomb where they all are ?
-
I can't look at much more news it's making me feel ill. All those poor people and children, how can anyone bomb where they all are ?
The news is definitely a difficult watch.
-
Can we now hope/ wish for a Russian coup ??
-
https://youtu.be/p0szgyQH_-Q
-
Over 9,861 soldiers Russian soldiers killed.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10637425/Russia-loses-10-000-men-just-four-weeks-toll-Ukraine-invasion-revealed.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10637425/Russia-loses-10-000-men-just-four-weeks-toll-Ukraine-invasion-revealed.html)
-
https://off-guardian.org/2022/03/22/10-reasons-to-question-the-putin-vs-davos-narrative/
-
are theukriane isanningoption partys i thouht putinwa theiter.
-
Ukraine is ‘defending all of us’ from Putin - Timothy Snyder Interview
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qdvjslwvIU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qdvjslwvIU)
-
A very good explanation I thought, David. Zelensky has been brilliant in his determination to keep that mongrel from taking over his country.
-
It's the cyber attack that Putin's got in mind that bothers me ( security services comment ) so I'm hoping they're up to speed on this as an attack would crash all services here in the West.
-
Ukraine is ‘defending all of us’ from Putin - Timothy Snyder Interview
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qdvjslwvIU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qdvjslwvIU)
He argues that Russia is inventing stuff about its neighbour, in order to provide a (false) pretext to justify invasion. How is that any different that falsely stating Iraq had weapons of mass destruction as a pretext to invade Iraq?
There is no difference. At best, Russia probably wants a neutral Ukrainian state separate from NATO. At worst Russia wants a puppet Ukrainian state.
The USA probably approved which candidate should take over the running of Iraq. That candidate would need to be a lot more pro USA than Saddam Hussein was.
If Ukraine are protecting us all from Russia, then who is going protect any other states from the USA?
-
A very good explanation I thought, David. Zelensky has been brilliant in his determination to keep that mongrel from taking over his country.
hes banned all option partys.
-
He argues that Russia is inventing stuff about its neighbour, in order to provide a (false) pretext to justify invasion. How is that any different that falsely stating Iraq had weapons of mass destruction as a pretext to invade Iraq?
There is no difference. At best, Russia probably wants a neutral Ukrainian state separate from NATO. At worst Russia wants a puppet Ukrainian state.
The USA probably approved which candidate should take over the running of Iraq. That candidate would need to be a lot more pro USA than Saddam Hussein was.
If Ukraine are protecting us all from Russia, then who is going protect any other states from the USA?
👽
-
As many as 15,000 Russian troops have been killed since the invasion of Ukraine began four weeks ago, according to NATO's first estimate.
-
The first bit of news I watched was this evening when all those little orphans boarded a flight to Scotland, bless them. I'd followed their journey last night when things had been delayed due to paperwork problems but they're in the air and on their way to safety. Their lives were already in turmoil being orphaned for whatever reason so now I hope they'll feel settled and should hope that they're all kept together.
-
The first bit of news I watched was this evening when all those little orphans boarded a flight to Scotland, bless them. I'd followed their journey last night when things had been delayed due to paperwork problems but they're in the air and on their way to safety. Their lives were already in turmoil being orphaned for whatever reason so now I hope they'll feel settled and should hope that they're all kept together.
I sometimes think of all the animals and pets, left behind, turned loose or trapped / buried in the rubble. More innocent victims of war.
-
I sometimes think of all the animals and pets, left behind, turned loose or trapped / buried in the rubble. More innocent victims of war.
Oh yes, I was thinking of the animals when this first kicked off and was hoping it didn't show any wandering in the streets. Thankfully those people who fled the areas took their dogs and cats with them.
I did also see some news about someone rescuing all the animals from an animal shelter.
You can't help thinking about the ones that didn't make it though :(
-
Nato to boost forces in eastern Europe
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGI31bumtGw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGI31bumtGw)
-
Nato to boost forces in eastern Europe
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGI31bumtGw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGI31bumtGw)
I don't see him as threatening NATO states in Eastern Europe.
Ukraine has attacked a Russian landing craft where it was docked..
https://www.forbes.com/sites/siladityaray/2022/03/24/russian-landing-ship-destroyed-while-docked-in-berdyansk-port-ukrainian-navy-claims/
-
I don't see him as threatening NATO states in Eastern Europe.
Ukraine has attacked a Russian landing craft where it was docked..
https://www.forbes.com/sites/siladityaray/2022/03/24/russian-landing-ship-destroyed-while-docked-in-berdyansk-port-ukrainian-navy-claims/
One crazy development in all this, is the fact Chechens are fighting Chechens.
-
I wonder what's come out of the summit meeting as I haven't been watching the news.
-
I wonder what's come out of the summit meeting as I haven't been watching the news.
I expect summit came out of it... 💁
-
I expect summit came out of it... 💁
Or now't ;D
-
https://www.rt.com/russia/552600-diplomats-predicted-escalation-ukraine/
-
The source is obviously going to provide the highest set of figures in comparison to other sources. Nevertheless, the figures are staggering. https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-ato/3439443-update-on-russian-losses-in-ukraine-war-over-16000-personnel-115-warplanes-561-tanks.html
-
If the news from Russia is to be believed, it sounds like they have folded on their original aims. Humiliating. I bet they wished they could turn back the clock five weeks and cancel the invasion.
-
I'm not seeing it Roch at all because I can't help thinking/ seeing all the damage done to the cities and peoples lives being lost.
-
I'm not seeing it Roch at all because I can't help thinking/ seeing all the damage done to the cities and peoples lives being lost.
My friend has Martin Sixsmith's "Russia -a chronicle of 1000 years of the wild East". I can't wait to read it. I've been to the Ukraine and the thought of all those lives lost, and all their magnificent and historical architecture being destroyed is heartbreaking, but buildings can be replaced, lives can't.
-
If the news from Russia is to be believed, it sounds like they have folded on their original aims. Humiliating. I bet they wished they could turn back the clock five weeks and cancel the invasion.
From an FSB leak
"Blitzkrieg failed. It is simply impossible to complete the task now: if Zelensky and the authorities were captured in the first 1-3 days, they seized all the key buildings in Kyiv, they gave them the order to surrender - yes, the resistance would subside to the minimum values. In theory. But what's next? Even with this ideal variant, there was an unsolvable problem: with whom to negotiate? If we demolish Zelensky, well, with whom should we sign agreements? If with Zelensky, then after we demolish it, these papers are worth nothing. Opposition Platform for Life refused to cooperate: Medvedchuk is a coward, he fled. There is a second leader there - Boyko, but he refuses to work with us - even his own people will not understand him. They wanted to return Tsarev, so even our pro-Russians turned against him. Return Yanukovych? But as? If we say that it is impossible to occupy, then any of our authorities will be killed there in 10 minutes, as we leave. Occupy? Where are we going to get so many people? Commandant's offices, military police, counterintelligence, security - even with minimal resistance from the locals, we need 500 thousand or more people. Not counting the supply system. And there is a rule that by covering the poor quality of management with quantity, you only spoil everything. And this, I repeat, would be with the ideal option, which does not exist."
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/t7l1e8/fsb_whistleblowers_letter_verified_by_bellingcat/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/t7l1e8/fsb_whistleblowers_letter_verified_by_bellingcat/)
-
loser.com (http://loser.com)
:))
-
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/mar/26/putin-has-a-21st-century-digital-battle-plan-so-why-is-he-fighting-like-its-1939
Putin has a 21st-century digital battle plan, so why is he fighting like it’s 1939?
John Naughton
-
It looks like there are clowns in charge of tactics and communication.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ukrainians-watch-astonished-at-groundhog-day-blunders-t332ftnf7
-
I am [and many, many others] are direct victims of 'ADOLF HITLERS' regime. 'Now', another 'anti human monster' -['pukin', 'pooing', 'lunatic','vermin brain dead', 'authoritarian radical' - unfortunately, for 'you, [you murdering bastard]. When, and if you die, 'you will not be returned to god', and 'you will not be welcome into the household of Satin'
-
I think Oborne expresses this really well. Also a fan of the channel in general.
https://youtu.be/h9DtoNm0QJA
-
A brilliant video which highlights our immoral country here in the UK. Dreadful !! I truly don't know which is the worst---UK or the USA.
-
A brilliant video which highlights our immoral country here in the UK. Dreadful !! I truly don't know which is the worst---UK or the USA.
I am glad that you gave it your time Lookout and that you appreciated this perspective.
-
I am glad that you gave it your time Lookout and that you appreciated this perspective.
It's something you think about Roch and when it's put over and explained in the way that Oborne did it explained everything very clearly and in a way fills you with shame that you're part of a nation who doesn't care and where greed is evident.
-
It looks like there are clowns in charge of tactics and communication.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ukrainians-watch-astonished-at-groundhog-day-blunders-t332ftnf7
The guy in charge of the Russian military and this whole shit show is Sergei Shoigu who actually has no military experience :))
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergei_Shoigu (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergei_Shoigu)
-
Abramovich in suspected poisoning
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10660555/Roman-Abramovich-suffered-suspected-POISONING-Ukraine-peace-negotiators.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10660555/Roman-Abramovich-suffered-suspected-POISONING-Ukraine-peace-negotiators.html)
-
Abramovich in suspected poisoning
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10660555/Roman-Abramovich-suffered-suspected-POISONING-Ukraine-peace-negotiators.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10660555/Roman-Abramovich-suffered-suspected-POISONING-Ukraine-peace-negotiators.html)
I saw that David. I wondered how long it would take for Putin to go to his " cocktail cabinet ".
-
I'm thinking of all those who've been captured from Mariupol and taken to Russia. Bargaining tools ?
-
David Starkey speaks: https://youtu.be/DgPqemB_7Sk
-
David Starkey speaks: https://youtu.be/DgPqemB_7Sk
I can't get away with him. His voice grates on me and his style of delivery seems contrived in the way he applies emphasis. I did used to watch his Tudor programs.
-
Digressing----Wakefield prison, Channel 5. Started 9pm.
-
According to the Independent, Russia are to drastically scale back their assault on Kyiv, as Ukraine offer neutrality.
-
According to the Independent, Russia are to drastically scale back their assault on Kyiv, as Ukraine offer neutrality.
They know they cant take Kyiv with the invasion force they have. They need at least double the amount of troops.
-
They know they cant take Kyiv with the invasion force they have. They need at least double the amount of troops.
They will focus attention on a land grab in the east. It will be very difficult for them to save face now. Surely it's the beginning of the end for Putin.
-
They will focus attention on a land grab in the east. It will be very difficult for them to save face now. Surely it's the beginning of the end for Putin.
Yeah, but it could be a long process. A few months back he could have retired with a controversial love him or hate him type legacy. But now, the history books will not be positive at all.
-
They suspect Abramovitch was poisoned with Chloropicrin
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10666877/Roman-Abramovich-poisoned-WWI-agent-Chloropicrin-low-dosage-Novichok-experts-say.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10666877/Roman-Abramovich-poisoned-WWI-agent-Chloropicrin-low-dosage-Novichok-experts-say.html)
-
Why did Zelenskiy believe Putin's " promise to hold back firing ?" ::) Nobody on this earth would ever believe what a Russian said, never mind its leader.
-
heres omthing i thought myself https://off-guardian.org/2022/03/30/is-russia-the-real-target-of-western-sanctions/
-
heres omthing i thought myself https://off-guardian.org/2022/03/30/is-russia-the-real-target-of-western-sanctions/
I think this is poor economic analysis. The Rouble has recovered because the government is having to use revenue to buy Roubles and keep its value inflated against the Dollar. It means they have less money for other things like weapons. It cannot use the huge reserves which they built up pre war because they are largely frozen.
This shows how poor this reporting is.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2022/mar/31/biden-oil-strategic-reserves-release-ukraine-russia-pence-us-politics-latest-updates
-
Why did Zelenskiy believe Putin's " promise to hold back firing ?" ::) Nobody on this earth would ever believe what a Russian said, never mind its leader.
Roch and Gringo believe everything the Russians say. :))
-
I think this is poor economic analysis. The Rouble has recovered because the government is having to use revenue to buy Roubles and keep its value inflated against the Dollar. It means they have less money for other things like weapons. It cannot use the huge reserves which they built up pre war because they are largely frozen.
This shows how poor this reporting is.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2022/mar/31/biden-oil-strategic-reserves-release-ukraine-russia-pence-us-politics-latest-updates
the rubbleis back up eouse the sanctions have coused anoilprices hike and russia is major prudecer if anything they have helped russia
-
Roch and Gringo believe everything the Russians say. :))
Yes, I forgot 'we' are so flawless at telling the truth.
-
the rubbleis back up eouse the sanctions have coused anoilprices hike and russia is major prudecer if anything they have helped russia
The economic consequences will only emerge over time. I would rather countries took some kind of action other than going to war or sitting on their hands and watching the barbarism unfold.
-
It's quite plain what his plan was all along. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/putin-threatens-to-cut-europe-off-from-russian-gas-from-tomorrow/ar-AAVInqk?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=549d1680480a492fbb36a86128d33a9f
-
At least there'd be no enormous gas bills.
-
Australia are shipping their " specialities " to Ukraine. They are Bushmaster military vehicles which serve a variety of roles including as ambulances. These vehicles have fearsome reputations amongst the Coalition Forces in the Middle East, even the Americans praise them. President Zelensky had made a special plea to Australia during his address to parliament.
-
Two Ukrainian attack helicopters have flown 20 miles into Russian territory and destroyed an oil facility!
https://v.redd.it/w18isxoqouq81/DASH_480.mp4 (https://v.redd.it/w18isxoqouq81/DASH_480.mp4)
-
And I'm just reading that Russian forces have seized 14 tonnes of food and medical supplies bound for Mariupol :( as well as blocking a convoy of 45 buses attempting to evacuate civilians.
-
And I'm just reading that Russian forces have seized 14 tonnes of food and medical supplies bound for Mariupol :( as well as blocking a convoy of 45 buses attempting to evacuate civilians.
They are absolutely determined to take that city. But such tactics are inexcusable. He's fighting for his own survival now. If Putin can't walk away from this with the region he wants, then what have they achieved?
-
Two Ukrainian attack helicopters have flown 20 miles into Russian territory and destroyed an oil facility!
https://v.redd.it/w18isxoqouq81/DASH_480.mp4 (https://v.redd.it/w18isxoqouq81/DASH_480.mp4)
How did the Russians fail to intercept them?
Huge battles being fought near capital..
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/kyiv-russia-battles-vitaliy-klitschko-b2049056.html
-
Again, the figures are from Ukrainian source.
https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-ato/3445725-russia-lost-more-than-10b-worth-of-military-equipment-in-ukraine-defense-ministry.html
But can you imagine Putin accepting such losses prior to giving the green light to invade? No way.
-
How did the Russians fail to intercept them?
Since both countries are using the same model helicopter (mi-24) I guess it would be rather difficult to distinguish friend from foe. Plus the Russians were probably caught off guard.
-
Since both countries are using the same model helicopter (mi-24) I guess it would be rather difficult to distinguish friend from foe. Plus the Russians were probably caught off guard.
Ukraine denies responsibility?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2022/apr/01/russia-ukraine-war-latest-news-germany-rejects-putins-gas-supply-blackmail-russia-drawing-on-forces-from-georgia-uk-says-live
-
I think it's more likely that Russia did it themselves.
-
https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-ato/3446450-russias-combat-losses-in-ukraine-reach-178-thousand-troops.html
Where are all the Russian bodies? Who's burying them, or transporting them? I assume many will be inside damaged or burned out vehicles. But if this number of bodies is being left out in the open, surely we would be hearing more about the health hazards and the poisoning of the landscape? But there is nothing stated about any environment factors relating to these thousands of Russian bodies?
-
I wondered that too Roch, as considering the vast amount of killings there have been-----not that I wish to see such a sight, but I'd been puzzled by a sparse scattering of bodies against what has been recorded by the media.
-
Have we heard any more about the 130+ Ukranian women/ children who were trapped, sheltering in the basement of a bombed building ? What happened to them ? Did they manage to get out ? I understand that they had no food/ water at the time.
-
https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-ato/3446450-russias-combat-losses-in-ukraine-reach-178-thousand-troops.html
Where are all the Russian bodies? Who's burying them, or transporting them? I assume many will be inside damaged or burned out vehicles. But if this number of bodies is being left out in the open, surely we would be hearing more about the health hazards and the poisoning of the landscape? But there is nothing stated about any environment factors relating to these thousands of Russian bodies?
They are being incinerated in mobile crematoriums.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/russia-deploys-mobile-crematoriums-follow-26314565 (https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/russia-deploys-mobile-crematoriums-follow-26314565)
-
An unnecessary waste of lives of which there's no understanding.
-
They are being incinerated in mobile crematoriums.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/russia-deploys-mobile-crematoriums-follow-26314565 (https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/russia-deploys-mobile-crematoriums-follow-26314565)
There's not a great deal to go on, to prove the claim. However, it is not exactly unbelievable. They seem pretty cold and ruthless.
-
They're monsters Roch. Ate each other during the famine of the 1920's. Cannibals !
-
They're monsters Roch. Ate each other during the famine of the 1920's. Cannibals !
Look what they left behind - (NSFL)
https://i.redd.it/qxa7url4c2r81.jpg (https://i.redd.it/qxa7url4c2r81.jpg)
Russian troops have reportedly killed all males between ages 18 and 60 in that town before it was liberated today.
-
Alleged concerted 'whitewash' by Western media..
https://www.rt.com/russia/553148-azov-ukraine-media-whitewash/
-
Alleged concerted 'whitewash' by Western media..
https://www.rt.com/russia/553148-azov-ukraine-media-whitewash/
Stop posting Kremlinal propaganda.
-
Stop posting Kremlinal propaganda.
I reserve the right to post from a range of sources. The world is not always a straight split between black or white / right or wrong / fact or fiction.
-
Russian soldiers are being poisoned by Ukranian " delicacies "-----stuffed buns. 28 of the soldiers are in intensive care. This is after 500 soldiers were poisoned with alcohol which was also laced. Saboteur unknown.
-
Russian soldiers are being poisoned by Ukranian " delicacies "-----stuffed buns. 28 of the soldiers are in intensive care. This is after 500 soldiers were poisoned with alcohol which was also laced. Saboteur unknown.
Think that tactic was used in the borderlands between England and Scotland. People fleeing a village would leave pies or similar which were made with dodgy meat. The visiting soldiers / marauders would then eat the soiled food and become extremely ill or die.
-
I reserve the right to post from a range of sources. The world is not always a straight split between black or white / right or wrong / fact or fiction.
And sometimes it is.
-
And sometimes it is.
Yes, you're right, sometimes it is.
-
I reserve the right to post from a range of sources. The world is not always a straight split between black or white / right or wrong / fact or fiction.
You are doing so at the expense of your own credibility.
-
New mass grave containing 57 bodies found in Bucha
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/04/03/russia-ukraine-war-latest-news-putin-zelensky-soldiers-retreat/ (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/04/03/russia-ukraine-war-latest-news-putin-zelensky-soldiers-retreat/)
-
You are doing so at the expense of your own credibility.
That's a bold statement.
-
theysaid assa gassed hes own people turned he dident i am sure this will prove to be bullshit too.
-
https://off-guardian.org/2022/04/02/debate-russia-and-the-great-reset-resistance-or-complicity/
-
David, please note, this is not my response. It is the response published in RT.
I accept no responsibility either for the veracity of the claims made by Ukraine, nor the response to the claims as published in RT.
https://www.rt.com/russia/553231-bucha-war-crimes-allegations-denied/
-
David, please note, this is not my response. It is the response published in RT.
I accept no responsibility either for the veracity of the claims made by Ukraine, nor the response to the claims as published in RT.
https://www.rt.com/russia/553231-bucha-war-crimes-allegations-denied/
You are posting links to Russian state media denying their own criminal acts. Well done round of applause!
-
Footage from Bucha. In one of the houses, the invaders set up a headquarters with two rooms: in the first there was a torture room, in the second, bounded civilians were shot in the back of the head after torture.
https://v.redd.it/z3r8lovrfbr81/DASH_720.mp4 (https://v.redd.it/z3r8lovrfbr81/DASH_720.mp4)
-
You are posting links to Russian state media denying their own criminal acts. Well done round of applause!
So what? Any person who has witnessed previous conflicts unfold in the media in their lifetime can decide whether or not such responses should be given any consideration or not. Since you actively support Palestinians being smashed up, I hardly think you have any moral authority over me.
-
So what? Any person who has witnessed previous conflicts unfold in the media in their lifetime can decide whether or not such responses should be given any consideration or not. Since you actively support Palestinians being smashed up, I hardly think you have any moral authority over me.
So, how do you explain the footage and photos of Ukrainian civilians tied up and shot in the areas Russia recently occupied?
-
So what? Any person who has witnessed previous conflicts unfold in the media in their lifetime can decide whether or not such responses should be given any consideration or not. Since you actively support Palestinians being smashed up, I hardly think you have any moral authority over me.
Perhaps there should be separate threads for other wars/conflicts?
-
So, how do you explain the footage and photos of Ukrainian civilians tied up and shot in the areas Russia recently occupied?
Are you referring to incidents about which there are already posts / links on this thread, or are you referring to other incidents?
-
Perhaps there should be separate threads for other wars/conflicts?
Perhaps references to civilians killed in conflicts that we are less likely to focus on should have different threads? Maybe you are right. Feel free to start such threads.
-
Are you referring to incidents about which there are already posts / links on this thread, or are you referring to other incidents?
You know what I am talking about!
-
You know what I am talking about!
No, I don't. I have seen one image or video you posted up earlier. If that is the what you're referring to, then why not just say so??
-
David, please note, this is not my response. It is the response published in RT.
I accept no responsibility either for the veracity of the claims made by Ukraine, nor the response to the claims as published in RT.
https://www.rt.com/russia/553231-bucha-war-crimes-allegations-denied/
But you can't possibly rate Sergei Lavrov as a world statesman as you have done previously. He's Putin's puppet and his theory of a fairer world order lies in tatters. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-europe-26803006
-
But you can't possibly rate Sergei Lavrov as a world statesman as you have done previously. He's Putin's puppet and his theory of a fairer world order lies in tatters. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-europe-26803006
I would class him as being more of a world statesman than Liz Truss; Gavin Williamson; Dominic Raab etc. However, where he has been found wanting and is therefore deserving of criticism, then he should be subject to such criticism.
-
https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/w/ukrainian-officials-discover%E2%80%93mass-grave-after%E2%80%93control%E2%80%93of%E2%80%93kiev-from-russian-troops
-
Moscow calls for extraordinary meeting of UN Security council over Bucha.
https://www.rt.com/russia/553242-bucha-un-security-council/
-
That's a bold statement.
At least Gringo knows better than to say anything. Here you are making an idiot out of yourself. :))
-
Satellite imagery of Bucha mass graves appears to contradict Russian denials
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/satellite-imagery-of-bucha-mass-graves-b2050267.html (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/satellite-imagery-of-bucha-mass-graves-b2050267.html)
-
At least Gringo knows better than to say anything. Here you are making an idiot out of yourself. :))
If you can explain how I am making an idiot of myself, then please go ahead and enlighten us all.
-
Satellite imagery of Bucha mass graves appears to contradict Russian denials
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/satellite-imagery-of-bucha-mass-graves-b2050267.html (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/satellite-imagery-of-bucha-mass-graves-b2050267.html)
The sooner the UN war crimes investigators become involved, the better (if it is safe to do so). However, regarding the two examples you posted up yesterday, I could not be certain whether they appeared genuine or staged.
-
At least Gringo knows better than to say anything. Here you are making an idiot out of yourself. :))
I am quite sure Gringo would give a good account of himself if he posted here again. He was very effective in developing and supporting the arguments he advanced. It is a pity he is not posting at present.
-
so much for helping the ukriane. https://youtu.be/zbo5ApHmjiM
-
German President: "I was wrong" and "We have failed with the establishment of a common European house in which Russia is included. We have failed with the approach of including Russia in a common security architecture." "There will be no return to the status quo before the war."
https://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/steinmeier-selbstkritik-russland-1.5560571 (https://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/steinmeier-selbstkritik-russland-1.5560571)
-
I am quite sure Gringo would give a good account of himself if he posted here again. He was very effective in developing and supporting the arguments he advanced. It is a pity he is not posting at present.
He has made dozens upon dozens of posts being an apologist for Putin's Russia. Denying its crimes with looney conspiracy theories, demonizing its victims while portraying Putin as a saint. All while thinking he was being some kind of esoteric logician.
What can he possibly say other than admit he was a useful idiot for Russian propaganda all along?
This reminds me of a friend who once lived down the road from me. He kept telling me how the World would end on December 21st 2012 citing the ancient Mayan calendar and NASA was hiding it from the public. He had nothing to say about it on December 22nd. :))
-
He has made dozens upon dozens of posts being an apologist for Putin's Russia. Denying its crimes with looney conspiracy theories, demonizing its victims while portraying Putin as a saint. All while thinking he was being some kind of esoteric logician.
What can he possibly say other than admit he was a useful idiot for Russian propaganda all along?
This reminds me of a friend who once lived down the road from me. He kept telling me how the World would end on December 21st 2012 citing the ancient Mayan calendar and NASA was hiding it from the public. He had nothing to say about it on December 22nd. :))
You do Gringo a grave injustice. It is a pity he is not here now because he would rip you apart!
-
As a general comment, it seems to me that the question of what is and is not a war crime is in the eye of the beholder.
War is a ghastly business.
The Süddeutsche Zeitung, which somebody links to above, is a pro-NATO propaganda rag.
I take the position that all alleged war crimes - of any side - are a hoax unless demonstrated otherwise. We must additionally bear in mind that it is in the nature of modern warfare that the battle zone coincides with civilian living space, therefore collateral civilian casualties are inevitable in conflict zones.
Armies don't meet on fields out of the way, dressed in gentleman's tunics and firing muskets. That stopped quite a while ago.
I repeat: war is horrible. We are very, very lucky in Britain to have lived out our lives in such a relatively stable society and I curse those politicians and members of the public - including certain people on this Forum - who want to introduce needless conflict and instability into our lives by interfering in complex matters they are almost-entirely ignorant of, all so that they can parade round as people of sanctimonious virtue.
Sorry if this offends anybody here, but in matters of foreign policy and defence, I am an aggressive neutralist. I think we could have learned something from the Swiss, who until recently wisely kept their noses out of other people's business.
You do Gringo a grave injustice. It is a pity he is not here now because he would rip you apart!
I will echo this. Gringo did baffle me on one occasion when he made an entirely unprovoked and unhinged attack on me, completely out-of-the-blue, because I questioned something said by Craig Murray. Nevertheless, we badly could do with some diversity of opinion on current affairs rather than a regurgitation of the mainstream media line on everything.
-
The Russians have produced a timeline re Bucha:
https://www.rt.com/russia/553274-bucha-war-crimes-allegations/
I have removed the link to another article by Scott Ritter, as he has a controversial offending history to say the least. But it's on the same site if anyone cares to read his opinion. Clearly he is somebody who went up against his own country in 2001.
-
You do Gringo a grave injustice. It is a pity he is not here now because he would rip you apart!
He has been logging in but not posting anything. He is often very quick to defend Russian aggression. But not anymore.
-
How could Vladimir Putin be prosecuted for war crimes?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/04/putin-war-crimes-accusation-ukraine-icc (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/04/putin-war-crimes-accusation-ukraine-icc)
-
He has been logging in but not posting anything. He is often very quick to defend Russian aggression. But not anymore.
You are misrepresenting his posts, which were detailed and well reasoned.
-
How could Vladimir Putin be prosecuted for war crimes?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/04/putin-war-crimes-accusation-ukraine-icc (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/04/putin-war-crimes-accusation-ukraine-icc)
Perhaps he should be. But we need to remember that Russia and Ukraine are in a propaganda and information war against each other.
-
2016 documentary about the Donbass..
https://youtu.be/bN68OfFKaWs
-
Wladimir Klitschko calls Bucha killings 'genocide of Ukrainian population'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTJUauFoKEo
-
As a general comment, it seems to me that the question of what is and is not a war crime is in the eye of the beholder.
War is a ghastly business.
The Süddeutsche Zeitung, which somebody links to above, is a pro-NATO propaganda rag.
I take the position that all alleged war crimes - of any side - are a hoax unless demonstrated otherwise. We must additionally bear in mind that it is in the nature of modern warfare that the battle zone coincides with civilian living space, therefore collateral civilian casualties are inevitable in conflict zones.
Armies don't meet on fields out of the way, dressed in gentleman's tunics and firing muskets. That stopped quite a while ago.
I repeat: war is horrible. We are very, very lucky in Britain to have lived out our lives in such a relatively stable society and I curse those politicians and members of the public - including certain people on this Forum - who want to introduce needless conflict and instability into our lives by interfering in complex matters they are almost-entirely ignorant of, all so that they can parade round as people of sanctimonious virtue.
Sorry if this offends anybody here, but in matters of foreign policy and defence, I am an aggressive neutralist. I think we could have learned something from the Swiss, who until recently wisely kept their noses out of other people's business.
I will echo this. Gringo did baffle me on one occasion when he made an entirely unprovoked and unhinged attack on me, completely out-of-the-blue, because I questioned something said by Craig Murray. Nevertheless, we badly could do with some diversity of opinion on current affairs rather than a regurgitation of the mainstream media line on everything.
Yes we know all about your neutralism: not fighting Hitler in 1940 but giving him a free hand in the East.https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10903.0.html
-
false flag https://youtu.be/Rhn2rw1fyh0
-
proof zelensky rejected peace deal https://youtu.be/6m9PoKnCNR0
-
Yes we know all about your neutralism: not fighting Hitler in 1940 but giving him a free hand in the East.https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10903.0.html
I'm sorry that my views offend people of your ethnicity.
-
This article is an interesting read and quite sad / poignant.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/05/barbarians-russian-troops-leave-grisly-mark-on-ukraine-town-of-trostianets
-
This article is an interesting read and quite sad / poignant.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/05/barbarians-russian-troops-leave-grisly-mark-on-ukraine-town-of-trostianets
Utterly appalling.
I am very disappointed with both the Russian militaries performance and conduct. I was expecting precision strikes and efforts to win over the population (however futile). Not besiegement and collective punishment.
-
Utterly appalling.
I am very disappointed with both the Russian militaries performance and conduct. I was expecting precision strikes and efforts to win over the population (however futile). Not besiegement and collective punishment.
It sounds more like when the Argentinians invaded the Falklands and a lot of their troops were made up of conscripts. I do think the Russians have committed war crimes. Some of their troops are clearly ill disciplined and disorganized. I think they will be reeling from all the casualties they have taken and may lash out at civilian population as a result.
However I also think it is possible in some situations, for Ukrainian forces to kill citizens deemed to be collaborating with Russia. It would be possible to show or pose the bodies and claim they were victims of Russian war crimes. This would in effect be killing two birds with one stone. Ukraine are after all, seeking to defeat the invasion by any means possible, including increased international sanctions etc.
-
All your life you have waited for the Russians to attack, and now they have. Who will be in your elite unit David?
Captain America and Ronald Mcdonald :))
-
A single Ukrainian tank engaging a large Russian convoy.
https://v.redd.it/af1acx4ijqr81/DASH_720.mp4 (https://v.redd.it/af1acx4ijqr81/DASH_720.mp4)
-
How the false Russian biolab story came to circulate among the U.S. far right
https://www.npr.org/2022/03/25/1087910880/biological-weapons-far-right-russia-ukraine?t=1649283564393 (https://www.npr.org/2022/03/25/1087910880/biological-weapons-far-right-russia-ukraine?t=1649283564393)
-
David 1819: At least Gringo knows better than to say anything. Here you are making an idiot out of yourself. :))
NGB 1066: I am quite sure Gringo would give a good account of himself if he posted here again. He was very effective in developing and supporting the arguments he advanced. It is a pity he is not posting at present.
David 1819: He has made dozens upon dozens of posts being an apologist for Putin's Russia. Denying its crimes with looney conspiracy theories, demonizing its victims while portraying Putin as a saint. All while thinking he was being some kind of esoteric logician.
What can he possibly say other than admit he was a useful idiot for Russian propaganda all along?
This reminds me of a friend who once lived down the road from me. He kept telling me how the World would end on December 21st 2012 citing the ancient Mayan calendar and NASA was hiding it from the public. He had nothing to say about it on December 22nd. :))
NGB 1066: You do Gringo a grave injustice. It is a pity he is not here now because he would rip you apart!
David 1819: He has been logging in but not posting anything. He is often very quick to defend Russian aggression. But not anymore.
NGB 1066: You are misrepresenting his posts, which were detailed and well reasoned.
David isn't smart enough to recognise when his argument has been defeated. It amuses me that David is so arrogant as to believe his ill informed opinion about anything geopolitical is the reason for posters not posting. The last time I took a break, he imagined it was because I had no answer but couldn't remember when pressed what this "owning" was. It now appears that while I haven't posted for 6 months he is still bothered enough by my opinions to check my logging in status.
Sounds to me that my posts rattle David rather more than vice versa. Probably to do with the fact that I have shown over and over again throughout this thread over years that he is not very well read or informed, but he is also blissfully unaware of his own ignorance.
Thanks NGB for your comments, which I have taken as an offer I can't refuse. Empire of Lies will explode David's head.
-
How the false Russian biolab story came to circulate among the U.S. far right
https://www.npr.org/2022/03/25/1087910880/biological-weapons-far-right-russia-ukraine?t=1649283564393 (https://www.npr.org/2022/03/25/1087910880/biological-weapons-far-right-russia-ukraine?t=1649283564393)
I think the existence of actual biolabs and Victoria Nulands testimony is what made the biolab story circulate. You are gullible and believe whatever you are told.
There are hundreds of biolabs funded by the Pentagon. This is not going away.
-
David 1819: At least Gringo knows better than to say anything. Here you are making an idiot out of yourself. :))
NGB 1066: I am quite sure Gringo would give a good account of himself if he posted here again. He was very effective in developing and supporting the arguments he advanced. It is a pity he is not posting at present.
David 1819: He has made dozens upon dozens of posts being an apologist for Putin's Russia. Denying its crimes with looney conspiracy theories, demonizing its victims while portraying Putin as a saint. All while thinking he was being some kind of esoteric logician.
What can he possibly say other than admit he was a useful idiot for Russian propaganda all along?
This reminds me of a friend who once lived down the road from me. He kept telling me how the World would end on December 21st 2012 citing the ancient Mayan calendar and NASA was hiding it from the public. He had nothing to say about it on December 22nd. :))
NGB 1066: You do Gringo a grave injustice. It is a pity he is not here now because he would rip you apart!
David 1819: He has been logging in but not posting anything. He is often very quick to defend Russian aggression. But not anymore.
NGB 1066: You are misrepresenting his posts, which were detailed and well reasoned.
David isn't smart enough to recognise when his argument has been defeated. It amuses me that David is so arrogant as to believe his ill informed opinion about anything geopolitical is the reason for posters not posting. The last time I took a break, he imagined it was because I had no answer but couldn't remember when pressed what this "owning" was. It now appears that while I haven't posted for 6 months he is still bothered enough by my opinions to check my logging in status.
Sounds to me that my posts rattle David rather more than vice versa. Probably to do with the fact that I have shown over and over again throughout this thread over years that he is not very well read or informed, but he is also blissfully unaware of his own ignorance.
Thanks NGB for your comments, which I have taken as an offer I can't refuse. Empire of Lies will explode David's head.
What took you so long? You have decided to never admit defeat. It's better to just stay on the Titanic and pretend. Pretend like everything is fine. Just refuse to acknowledge the ice cold water flowing in. It doesn't even matter if it goes over your head, you can still hold your breath. 👍
-
1965 UAZ. This will bring NATO to its knees!
(https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/facebook/002/322/379/be6.jpg)
-
Russian tank destroyed in Mariupol.
https://v.redd.it/camn5nu3csn81/DASH_720.mp4 (https://v.redd.it/camn5nu3csn81/DASH_720.mp4)
-
What happened to the line of tanks the other week ?
-
What happened to the line of tanks the other week ?
Mostly destroyed. Just like in the gulf war of 1991, the Ukrainian conflict is demonstrating a serious design flaw in Soviet/Russian armour.
(https://s3.amazonaws.com/manakeep/users/5e37578e7263831073f7cb84/2021-03-31/updated%20ammo%20models.jpg)
The T-72 and T-90 tanks use an autoloader on a carousel situated right under the turret. This means that once the tanks armour is breached, the ammunition is at risk of detonating and this results in the entire turret blowing off the chassis.
(https://storage.googleapis.com/prod-zenger-storage/image/20220303/4-3_6f304696-deff-4b38-9b02-6d86fd84ddf5.jpeg?20220303182549)
(https://images.wsj.net/im-506640?width=700&height=467)
Whereas in US and NATO tank designs. They store the ammunition in the rear of the turret complete with blast panels to deflect the explosion outwards away from the tank and crew. This leaves the crew safe and the tank in a good state of repair.
(https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-f639e4c69aaf10f7484a78560096c5c2-pjlq)
-
Goodness me, what a mess. You'd have thought the Russians of all people would have done better than that ! Unprepared really, weren't they ?
-
Jeeze, Russians are denying killing civilians !!
-
Jeeze, Russians are denying killing civilians !!
The Russian denials are getting more and more egregious.
This is an interesting read.
https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PE198.html (https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PE198.html)
-
Russian nationalists attend a "Russian March" demonstration on National Unity Day in Moscow November 4, 2012. Notice the bald guy at the front.
(https://s1.reutersmedia.net/resources/r/?m=02&d=20121105&t=2&i=671072933&w=780&fh=&fw=&ll=&pl=&sq=&r=2012-11-05T195045Z_02_GM1E8B41POX01_RTRRPP_0_RUSSIA)
The Irony! :))
(https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/001/053/300/c41.jpg)
-
Subhuman is right ! There are too many of those around.
-
Nothing between their ears, just a walnut rattling around for a brain ? Beavis and Butthead.
-
Russian nationalists attend a "Russian March" demonstration on National Unity Day in Moscow November 4, 2012. Notice the bald guy at the front.
(https://s1.reutersmedia.net/resources/r/?m=02&d=20121105&t=2&i=671072933&w=780&fh=&fw=&ll=&pl=&sq=&r=2012-11-05T195045Z_02_GM1E8B41POX01_RTRRPP_0_RUSSIA)
The Irony! :))
(https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/001/053/300/c41.jpg)
Anybody could post a picture of a neo nazi in every western country, including ours.
Why post such irrelevant links and pictures? Is your point that all the Russians are nazis? What is the point you are failing to make?
-
Anybody could post a picture of a neo nazi in every western country, including ours.
Why post such irrelevant links and pictures? Is your point that all the Russians are nazis? What is the point you are failing to make?
I find the irony amusing.
-
More uncomfortable truths about western lies and war crimes from the excellent Bernhard at Moon of Alabama below;
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2022/04/us-intelligence-says-its-intelligence-is-bullshit.html#more
I cannot recommend highly enough to follow the discussion below the line here. In my view the liveliest most informed geopolitical analysis anywhere on the web. It is a very long established site with a long established well informed commentariat. A geopolitical university.
-
Russia has been suspended from UN Human Rights Council
https://news.sky.com/video/ukraine-war-russia-expelled-from-un-human-rights-council-12584562 (https://news.sky.com/video/ukraine-war-russia-expelled-from-un-human-rights-council-12584562)
-
Russian cluster bomb container lands in some poor guys kitchen.
https://v.redd.it/ui5js5jqdko81/DASH_1080.mp4 (https://v.redd.it/ui5js5jqdko81/DASH_1080.mp4)
-
Russia has been suspended from UN Human Rights Council
https://news.sky.com/video/ukraine-war-russia-expelled-from-un-human-rights-council-12584562 (https://news.sky.com/video/ukraine-war-russia-expelled-from-un-human-rights-council-12584562)
There are many parts of the UN that have been corrupted and politicised by Western powers at the UN. They use their usual MO to "encourage" small weak nations to do their bidding.
None of this is a secret. The US with their loyal yapping dogs of the UK and France abuse their permanent member status and financial and military might to bribe, blackmail, coerce and threaten smaller countries.
The OPCW is a good example of how functioning impartial UN bodies can be corrupted to become tools of politics.
The former head of the OPCW, Jose Bustani, has told how he was threatened by John Bolton on behalf of the US government. The US wanted him to step down and he was threatened and told that they knew where his kids went to school etc. All of this is recounted by Bustani himself. A more acceptable, to the US, was eventually appointed
Later we had the whistleblowers from the inspection teams(Ian Henderson et al) who visited alleged chemical weapon attack sites in Syria. The findings of the inspection team were that the evidence pointed to the so called western backed rebels being responsible. Before their findings were put into an official report the OPCW headquarters was "paid a visit" by unnamed "US officials". The inspectors were sacked and replaced and a report with much redacted and removed was released which led readers to infer Syrian govt. responsibility contrary to the actual findings.
The OPCW, once a credible impartial organisation, is now simply a political tool for nefarious western interests. Unfortunately many people still give The OPCW the credence it used to deserve. Those who now effectively control its pronouncements use this as cover.
The corruption and politicising of the OPCW has been ongoing for many years but remains unreported in the West. Ask yourself this.
If a former head of the OPCW recounted threats from a senior Russian government official.
If the FSB then "paid a visit" to OPCW headquarters and then inspectors who had found results unfavourable were sacked and a new team appointed to issue a report completely at odds with the inspection teams findings.
Do you think it would be on the News? In the papers?
Of course it would and you would treat anything and everything coming from the OPCW after that with the derision it now deserves.
But that never happened. What did happen is the undeniable corruption and politicisation of a formerly neutral and honest institution by the US to favour whose? interest. And it wasn't on the news in the west, or the papers or discussed.
We do not stay informed by consuming what is given to us and by what we are told by vested interests. We have to look for ourselves and display some real intellectual curiosity if we are really interested in anything other than comforting lies.
-
eery ountry has neo nazis only the ukriane has neo nais serin in its army and in senior poistions in its goernment.
-
The more the sanctions against Putin, the worse he'll be.
-
Poland will be on standby because Putin will go there.
-
Poland will be on standby because Putin will go there.
I doubt it. Russia has been found extremely wanting militarily. I don't think they would even consider it.
-
If a former head of the OPCW recounted threats from a senior Russian government official.
If the FSB then "paid a visit" to OPCW headquarters and then inspectors who had found results unfavourable were sacked and a new team appointed to issue a report completely at odds with the inspection teams findings.
Do you think it would be on the News? In the papers?
Of course it would and you would treat anything and everything coming from the OPCW after that with
the derision it now deserves.
But that never happened.
Of course it never happened, that is not how Putin's Russia operates. The Russian government has complete disdain for any intergovernmental organization. When did Russia seek a UN security council resolution for its operations in Chechnya and Syria and its invasions of Georgia and Ukraine? Never!
Why pressure the OPCW into providing favourable results when simply inventing a tale out of thin air will suffice? If the OPCW provide results you don't like? just make false and damaging statements against the organisation. Can you direct me to a single independent public inquiry that has taken place in Russia?
Why bend the rules when you can simply play by your own if and when it suits? Comparing Russia's conduct to that of the US, is like comparing an illegal drug cartel to a pharmaceutical company. Yes, they both produce drugs for the public but their methods of doing so could not be further apart.
-
I doubt it. Russia has been found extremely wanting militarily. I don't think they would even consider it.
Russia has only been found wanting militarily according to western media who end up believing their own propaganda.
The column of military vehicles outside Kiev for instance sent western media out of their minds. They had no intention of invading Kiev but those forces effectively pinned many Ukrainian forces preventing them from reinforcing/helping the closing cauldron in Donetsk in the East. 50-60,000 Ukrainian forces, the backbone of the army, is now effectively left with the choice of surrendering or fighting to the death.
The Ukrainian air force, navy, communications all destroyed in the first days. Total Russian dominance of the airspace. The column of tanks wasn't destroyed, contrary to David's claim, because Russia control the airspace which is why it could sit untouched pinning the Ukrainian forces. NATO military planners know this.
The calls for a no fly zone in the media to be enforced by NATO, are admitted to be unrealistic by NATO, because they understand that the ineffective Russian military have air defence and electronic warfare capabilities far in advance of NATO.
The western media convinced that the Russians were about to invade Kiev now believe that they were resisted despite no resistance taking place. The Russian pinning manoeuvre served its purpose. Have a look at how the Ukrainian forces are doing in Donbass. They are encircled with no chance or access for resupply. Don't wait for the BBC or the Guardian to give you the unedited, unexpurgated news.
There has been a wider undeclared war between Russia(and others) and NATO for some time now.
It isn't the Russian military that is underperforming, hence the western hysteria.
-
Total Russian dominance of the airspace.
This is your idea of total dominance of the airspace?
(https://preview.redd.it/dgembr6i8br81.jpg?width=1080&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=cbe700ecd9c83bec4126374b2e4bc0e8bb7f90dc)
(https://ik.imagekit.io/po8th4g4eqj/prod/tr:h-630,w-1200/Su-25SM3-shot-down-3-march-22-Signpost.jpg)
(https://thumbs.gfycat.com/LawfulFoolhardyHyrax-size_restricted.gif)
The column of tanks wasn't destroyed, contrary to David's claim, because Russia control the airspace which is why it could sit untouched pinning the Ukrainian forces.
It looks rather destroyed to me.
(https://www.thetimes.co.uk/imageserver/image/%2Fmethode%2Ftimes%2Fprod%2Fweb%2Fbin%2F387bb1c8-a64c-11ec-a03b-e2dc3fd8780f.jpg?crop=1600%2C900%2C0%2C0&resize=1200)
The calls for a no fly zone in the media to be enforced by NATO, are admitted to be unrealistic by NATO, because they understand that the ineffective Russian military have air defence and electronic warfare capabilities far in advance of NATO.
Which is why Ukrainian helicopters recently flew into Russian airspace and bombed a strategic fuel depot.
-
The usual unattributed and then wildly speculated on pictures from David. Are there any reports and pictures of this column of destroyed tanks or just your unattributed picture of a handful of tanks? No there aren't because Russia control the airspace. The tanks were not destroyed and had they been so it would have had saturated western media coverage complete with footage. This didn't happen because the tanks being destroyed didn't happen.
https://thesaker.is/andrei-martyanov-what-is-the-plan/
A more informed appraisal of the situation. Andrei Martyanov
-
The usual unattributed and then wildly speculated on pictures from David. Are there any reports and pictures of this column of destroyed tanks or just your unattributed picture of a handful of tanks? No there aren't because Russia control the airspace. The tanks were not destroyed and had they been so it would have had saturated western media coverage complete with footage. This didn't happen because the tanks being destroyed didn't happen.
https://thesaker.is/andrei-martyanov-what-is-the-plan/
A more informed appraisal of the situation. Andrei Martyanov
A complete list of Russian tank losses along with confirmed photographic proof can be found here.
https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html (https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html)
448 Russian tanks have been destroyed thus far. Each entry has a link to photos.
-
Footage of Russian tanks destroyed by Ukrainian army near Kyiv
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UJH3fcvPow (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UJH3fcvPow)
-
Captured Russian soldier.
(https://i.redd.it/5k0gn817r9s81.jpg)
-
I doubt it. Russia has been found extremely wanting militarily. I don't think they would even consider it.
If things don't go as well as he wants them to he'll definitely make an attempt, even by way of antagonising the West into a war----which he wants. He's unstoppable so will push his luck.
-
The more the sanctions against Putin, the worse he'll be.
the only people the santions are hurting are us
-
the rubble is even tronger than before https://off-guardian.org/2022/04/08/despite-sanctions-the-ruble-is-stronger-than-before-the-war-why/
-
Looks like Russia might get 800 miles of NATO on its border. :-\
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10698857/Finland-apply-NATO-membership-weeks-despite-Russian-warnings-destruction.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10698857/Finland-apply-NATO-membership-weeks-despite-Russian-warnings-destruction.html)
-
Oh yes, Putin will be knocking on their door !
-
Looks like Russia might get 800 miles of NATO on its border. :-\
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10698857/Finland-apply-NATO-membership-weeks-despite-Russian-warnings-destruction.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10698857/Finland-apply-NATO-membership-weeks-despite-Russian-warnings-destruction.html)
I expect that now the weaknesses of Russia's military have been truly exposed, the hawks within NATO might fancy calling Russia's bluff regarding Finland.
-
I expect that now the weaknesses of Russia's military have been truly exposed, the hawks within NATO might fancy calling Russia's bluff regarding Finland.
Its being suggested that Finland intends to join NATO on Russians may 9th victory day parade. :))
-
Children among at least 50 people killed in Kramatorsk train station attack.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2022/apr/08/russia-ukraine-war-latest-news-zelenskiy-says-borodyanka-much-worse-than-bucha-johnson-to-meet-scholz-live (https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2022/apr/08/russia-ukraine-war-latest-news-zelenskiy-says-borodyanka-much-worse-than-bucha-johnson-to-meet-scholz-live)
-
Children among at least 50 people killed in Kramatorsk train station attack.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2022/apr/08/russia-ukraine-war-latest-news-zelenskiy-says-borodyanka-much-worse-than-bucha-johnson-to-meet-scholz-live (https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2022/apr/08/russia-ukraine-war-latest-news-zelenskiy-says-borodyanka-much-worse-than-bucha-johnson-to-meet-scholz-live)
Russia is claiming that they know where the missile was fired from. Have nam d a town currently controlled by Ukraine. There is an argument about who had that type of Soviet era missile. Russia say they dont use them any more. I think Ukraine have claimed Belarus do.
-
Russia is claiming that they know where the missile was fired from. Have nam d a town currently controlled by Ukraine. There is an argument about who had that type of Soviet era missile. Russia say they dont use them any more. I think Ukraine have claimed Belarus do.
Yeah, totally makes sense. Just like the RAF was behind the blitz and bombed their own capitol. The USAF was behind pearl harbour. But Japan nuking themselves twice was a bit of an overreaction.
-
Yeah, totally makes sense. Just like the RAF was behind the blitz and bombed their own capitol. The USAF was behind pearl harbour. But Japan nuking themselves twice was a bit of an overreaction.
Here is the article. https://www.rt.com/russia/553533-kramatorsk-missile-strike-origin/
-
Here is the article. https://www.rt.com/russia/553533-kramatorsk-missile-strike-origin/
Vladolf Putlers Goebbels machine.
-
Vladolf Putlers Goebbels machine.
I am a bit more sceptical than you, as you know. Anyway, I also found this..
https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/w/russia-blames-britain-for-blocking-un-meeting-to-discuss-alleged-war-crimes-in-ukraine
-
It doesn't surprise me that Russia blames this country. I don't think there's another country which drags its feet as much as this one-----in everything ! Why ? It's annoying, frustrating and above all, embarrassing.
When a thing needs to be done---do it now ! 14 years ? Says it all. Which accounts for the mass complacency of our citizens over the years through a lack of leadership who've only had their own interests at heart and not those of its people. It's positively shameful.
My work ethic all through life has been " never put off until tomorrow that which can be done today ".
This country has never been a step ahead or had any forethought whatsoever and because I'm always thinking ahead, personally, I have no understanding of rulers of this country with a huge responsibility who can't see further than the ends of their nose's.
Look at the sheer mess we're in now. Incompetence at its worst.
Delays at the Home Office. Delays at airports. Delays at Dover. What are our ministers doing for God's sake ?
-
(https://i.redd.it/8xf1c4i2jhs81.jpg)
-
A Russian soldier has filmed himself raping a Ukrainian toddler.
https://twitter.com/KremlinTrolls/status/1512760202919038976 (https://twitter.com/KremlinTrolls/status/1512760202919038976)
https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/tzqshb/this_russian_soldier_aleksei_bychkov_filmed/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/tzqshb/this_russian_soldier_aleksei_bychkov_filmed/)
-
A Russian soldier has filmed himself raping a Ukrainian toddler.
https://twitter.com/KremlinTrolls/status/1512760202919038976 (https://twitter.com/KremlinTrolls/status/1512760202919038976)
https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/tzqshb/this_russian_soldier_aleksei_bychkov_filmed/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/tzqshb/this_russian_soldier_aleksei_bychkov_filmed/)
Monsters, that's all I can call them. I won't be watching any clips, I can't. He needs shooting !
-
Monsters, that's all I can call them. I won't be watching any clips, I can't. He needs shooting !
How can such claims be verified as genuine?
-
How can such claims be verified as genuine?
The video had been circulating on twitter and reddit earlier today. But its been taken down due to it being pedophilia/child porn. Apparently you can still find the video on telegram.
-
The video had been circulating on twitter and reddit earlier today. But its been taken down due to it being pedophilia/child porn. Apparently you can still find the video on telegram.
OK but how can we know it's bonafide? I mean I dread to think what it shows.
-
OK but how can we know it's bonafide? I mean I dread to think what it shows.
You'd have to watch it yourself. Not something I recommend
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHylQRVN2Qs
"There is no monopoly of common sense, on either side of the political fence" - Sting.
-
OK but how can we know it's bonafide? I mean I dread to think what it shows.
He has been arrested in Russia
https://mobile.twitter.com/olex_scherba/status/1512758674405613574 (https://mobile.twitter.com/olex_scherba/status/1512758674405613574)
-
Russian soldier Aleksey Bychkov, who allegedly had been raping babies in Ukraine has been arrested in Russia
https://theins.ru/news/250158?fbclid=IwAR1j4LQT4EgI5fvAlK4m4PEfTB4FPcrJgOsidFEVhWcMSNyJvbEAVy3tPR8
(https://theins.ru/news/250158?fbclid=IwAR1j4LQT4EgI5fvAlK4m4PEfTB4FPcrJgOsidFEVhWcMSNyJvbEAVy3tPR8)
https://twitter.com/alexkokcharov/status/1512874902818332680?s=21&t=FFmSXw8KStBx9TquTQtv3A (https://twitter.com/alexkokcharov/status/1512874902818332680?s=21&t=FFmSXw8KStBx9TquTQtv3A)
-
There should be shredders for people like that.
-
How disgusting that a convoy of cars waving the Russian flag and some with " Z " painted on them, driving on a motorway in Ireland ! There are some troublesome beings on this planet, many of whom are on the doorstep.
-
How disgusting that a convoy of cars waving the Russian flag and some with " Z " painted on them, driving on a motorway in Ireland ! There are some troublesome beings on this planet, many of whom are on the doorstep.
The same happened in Germany lookout. https://youtu.be/7Dw9yuZueH4
This is the reality of what the demonstrators are supporting: https://www.aol.co.uk/news/ukraine-says-more-1-200-083938811.html?utm_source=spotim&utm_medium=spotim_recirculation
-
The same happened in Germany lookout. https://youtu.be/7Dw9yuZueH4
This is the reality of what the demonstrators are supporting: https://www.aol.co.uk/news/ukraine-says-more-1-200-083938811.html?utm_source=spotim&utm_medium=spotim_recirculation
Why are these vermin doing this ?
-
This is what becomes of abuse of freedom !! All the same sub-humans jumping on the bandwagon.
-
How disgusting that a convoy of cars waving the Russian flag and some with " Z " painted on them, driving on a motorway in Ireland ! There are some troublesome beings on this planet, many of whom are on the doorstep.
How much do you want to bet that Gringo has painted a Z on his mobility scooter? :))
-
How much do you want to bet that Gringo has painted a Z on his mobility scooter? :))
Do you think that comment adds anything whatsoever to the discussion?
-
Do you think that comment adds anything whatsoever to the discussion?
Yes
-
Yes
That response makes it worse. Why not debate the issues with Gringo, rather than hurl childish insults?
-
„WARNING!!! About an hour ago, Russian occupation forces used a poisonous substance of unknown origin against Ukrainian military and civilians in the city of Mariupol, which was dropped from an enemy UAV. The victims have respiratory failure, vestibulo-atactic syndrome. The consequences of using an unknown substance are being clarified.“ - translated by Google Translator
-
Novichok.
-
So, victims fleeing from this---if they survive, will carry the substance on their clothing thus spreading it.
-
Below is the machine translation of an interview Sergei Lavrov on Rossiya24 earlier. Long but well worth reading for anyone interested. It is always worth seeking out Lavrov interviews and press conferences, full of information and insight in Russian perspectives and thinking. He is head and shoulders above western "diplomats" who shame us all with their grandstanding and berating and making demands of other countries.
I have highlighted a few parts that I feel are particularly noteworthy but as always with Lavrov, the whole thing is worth reading and then reading again to fully digest.
Question: I would like to ask you about the "strange" statements made by the EU regarding the course of Russia's military operation in Ukraine. The head of EU diplomacy, George Borrell, said that this war (speaking of the Russian special operation) should be won on the battlefield. Somehow this does not fit with the status of the EU, first of all, as a political and economic Organization. German President Francis Steinmeier says that he is now "sprinkling ashes on his head," which he once stated about the possibility of a normal dialogue with Russia. Now he probably doesn't see that possibility. How do you talk to these people? How to negotiate with them?
Sergey Lavrov: - This is a serious reversal in the policy that the EU and the Us-led West as a whole (there is no doubt about this) began to pursue after the start of our special military operation. It reflects the anger, the frenzy (pardon the non-diplomatic expression) which is determined not only by Ukraine, but by the fact that this country began to make a springboard for the final suppression of Russia and its subordination to the global system built by the West, despite the end of the Cold War, despite the disappearance of both the Warsaw Pact and the Soviet Union, the West has always moved close to our borders despite all the promises made not to expand NATO
[/color][/b]. contrary to claims that we are no longer adversaries and much more. Our special military operation is designed to put an end to the reckless expansion and course towards the complete domination of the United States and the rest of NATO countries in the international arena. It is being built with a gross violation of international law according to certain "rules", which they are only now talking about. They are developed from time to time. In Kosovo, it is possible to recognize independence without a referendum, but in Crimea, as a result of a referendum observed by hundreds of objective representatives and the public of foreign countries, it is impossible.
In Iraq (10,000 km from the United States), they "saw" a threat to their American security. They bombed him, found no threat, and didn't even apologize. Neo-Nazis and ultra-radicals are being "grown" on our borders, dozens of biological laboratories are being created through the Pentagon, and experiments aimed at creating biological weapons are being conducted. The discovered documents leave no doubt about this. We are not allowed to respond to a threat on our borders, not across the ocean. That's what it's all about.
President Vladimir Putin spoke in detail about the reasons for the decision on a special military operation– the eight-year sabotage of the implementation of the Minsk Agreements, accompanied by daily bombing of Donbass, the pumping of Western weapons into the country of Ukraine, the instructors who trained the most extremist-minded units, which were then sent to the Armed Forces of Ukraine and formed the backbone of the groups that are now resisting our operation to demilitarization and denazification of Ukraine. Western propaganda immediately translated all this into a description of Russia as an absolute evil, and they, accordingly, are the embodiment of absolute good. The current Ukrainian regime is supposedly the light of democracy, justice, freedom, a craving for everything European, for the values that Europe has allegedly always professed. The subsequent reaction shows that they are well aware that it is not only and not so much about Ukraine. The point is that not everyone is ready to obey their dominance. Russia, with its history and traditions, is one of those countries that will never occupy a subordinate position. We can only be members of the international community on equal terms, on conditions of indivisible security, which were agreed upon, but they were ignored by our Western colleagues. But what George Borrell said even against this unprecedented and aggressive background is a significant game changer. The EU has never acted as a military organization. Yes, they are now discussing their "strategic compass". For the first time in history, Germany has allocated an additional 100 billion euros to "pump up" its military "muscles", which is a qualitative change. This "strategic compass" involves a significant increase in military spending and the construction of a kind of collective structure for defense against potential aggressors. But the result of all this independence is zero, because everything that is done is completely controlled by the United States. There is no independent role for the EU, including in the efforts that are being made within the EU. They are perfectly controlled by the Balts, the Danes, the Poles, who will not allow the EU to somehow separate from NATO. On the contrary, they will push him into NATO networks.
Q: A NATO affiliate?
Sergey Lavrov: It turns out. When the head of diplomacy of a country or some organization (in this case, Jeanne Borrell, who represents EU diplomacy) says that a particular conflict can be resolved exclusively by military means. So, either he has something personal accumulated, or he made a mistake, or "blabbed" that no one instructed him. This is an extraordinary statement. We will officially talk about this in detail in our documents. I hope that in the next day or two we will analyse all this.
At the same time, you mentioned Frank-Walter Steinmeier, whom I know well from his work as Foreign Minister. Now he is the President of the Federal Republic of Germany. In an interview a few days ago, he was asked whether it was necessary to hold an international tribunal, to declare representatives of the Russian leadership, starting with President Vladimir Putin and the Minister of Foreign Affairs, war criminals. He replied in the affirmative, saying that all those responsible for the military operation, political decisions, must be held accountable. I leave that to his conscience. I think that in Germany, facts will make their way, and it will become known who commits war crimes there. And this will be determined not on the basis of fakes (such as Bucha, Kramatorsk), but on the basis of the murderous facts that we present, our military discover during a special military operation and on the basis of the testimony of people who lived for many years in the divided Donbass, in isolation from their sons who remained on the eastern part of the contact line, lived under the oppression of these neo-Nazis. When these people are released now, it is impossible to "play" the feelings they express and invent the hardships they describe in life under the control of neo-Nazi and other "territorial" battalions.
But Fyodor Steinmeier said another interesting thing about Ukraine as such. He said that, as a diplomat, he had never devoted so much time to any country like Ukraine. I remembered that in 2007, when Germany held the presidency of the EU, it was he who initiated the start of negotiations on the preparation of the Association Agreement with the EU. In 2013, when the unrest on the Maidan began, it was he who initiated negotiations between Viktor Yanukovych and the opposition. That's just the way it is. The only thing I note is that half-truths are worse than lies. In fact, F.-W. Steinmeier forgot about some important episodes, the turning points of the events he mentioned. First, the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the EU provided for the transition to zero tariffs for the vast majority of goods. By the time this agreement "matured" in 2013, we reminded our Ukrainian colleagues that we also have a free trade zone within the CIS. And we have serious protection against European goods when we joined the WTO. Therefore, if they have zero tariffs with Europe and we and Ukraine have long had zero tariffs on most goods, then goods from the EU will flood to us, contrary to the agreements that we reached when joining the WTO. We warned them that we need to sit down and solve how to "settle" this problem so that we do not suffer from their relations with the EU. But it was the same EU that (as Frank Steinmeier says) began negotiations on the Association Agreement on his initiative, told us that we had nothing to do with it, that they wanted to and would agree with Ukraine. After that, Viktor Yanukovych realized that there would be a problem and the Russian side would be forced to build a barrier from Ukrainian goods on the border with Ukraine. The President of Ukraine asked to postpone the signing for several months so that we could resolve these problems taking into account the interests of Ukraine, Russia and the EU.
It was after this that Europe, which F.-W. Steinmeier is so proud of, saying that Ukraine aspires to European values, provoked the "Maidan". They raised people under the slogans of the fight against Viktor Yanukovych: they say, he does not allow Ukraine to join the EU.
Fyodor Steinmeier did not mention that he was not just the initiator of the talks between Viktor Yanukovych and the opposition, but a participant in their completion by signing the settlement agreement. Frank-Walter Steinmeier (on behalf of Germany and the EU), together with the foreign ministers of Poland and France, put his signature as a guarantor of this agreement. The next morning, his signature was "superimposed." The opposition tore up the agreement, from the first day advocated the abolition of the special status of the Russian language (contrary to the Constitution of Ukraine), called on Russians to "get out" of the Crimea, sent there "friendship trains" with armed bandits who wanted to storm the Supreme Soviet. After that, there was a referendum. Eastern Ukraine has completely refused to recognize the coup d'état. They did not attack anyone, but they were declared terrorists and proclaimed the beginning of an anti-terrorist operation.
Frank-Walter Steinmeier forgot to say that Germany, France, Poland and the entire European Union have shown their complete helplessness and lack of self-respect. Their signatures "didn't give a damn", they were trampled on. They silently began to even encourage this, as soon as they realized that the bandits who came to power would help the West in every possible way and manipulate it. They were silent when these people in Odessa in the House of Trade Unions burned dozens of innocent citizens; when, on June 2, 2014, Ukrainian Air Force planes bombed the center of Luhansk. They were just silent. Already in the process of trying to resolve the settlement (months and years later), we asked: how could they allow a coup d'état? They replied that it was "not quite a coup d'état." What? "The Costs of the Democratic Process". Not ashamed?
Frank Steinmeier forgot to mention February 2015, when he was one of the co-authors (along with the leaders of the Normandy format) of the Minsk Agreements. Immediately after the signing, in fact, the next day, P.A. Poroshenko and his team, speaking in the Verkhovna Rada, refused to fulfill them. They called the Minsk agreements a "political declaration", they say, they do not impose any obligation. Then we unanimously approved the Package of Measures in the UN Security Council. It has become part of international law – obligations have been imposed. They "did not give a damn" about them and strongly encouraged the Ukrainian regime to further sabotage its obligations.
We continued our efforts to find compromises, were ready to make additional concessions and encourage the republics to do so, with which Kiev refused to speak directly. As a flexible line, at some point in the negotiations, they supported what was called the "Steinmeier formula". When we "ran into" the sequence of actions that first – the special status or elections – he proposed a denouement, which suited everyone and became known as the "Steinmeier formula". A couple of weeks after the "formula" was approved and everyone greeted it, it again disappeared into oblivion, it was remembered in vain. P.A. Poroshenko, and after him V.A. Zelensky categorically refused to fulfill it.
By and large, F.-V. Steinmeier for the second time in several years experienced a diplomatic shame for a man who considers himself the initiator (as he is proud in that interview) of many things related to the development of Ukrainian society.
Question: Can we talk about a change in the positions of the parties during the Russian-Ukrainian talks after the provocations in Bucha and Kramatorsk and taking into account the fact that the "collective West", primarily the United States, is doing everything to continue hostilities?
Sergey Lavrov: President of Russia Vladimir Putin has repeatedly stressed that we prefer negotiations. During the very first round of talks, when the Ukrainian side proposed, and we agreed to contact the delegations, President Vladimir Putin gave the order to take a break in hostilities and a special military operation. When we were convinced that the Ukrainians were not going to reciprocate, it was decided that we would not make any pauses for subsequent rounds of negotiations until a final agreement was reached and signed.
The provocations are outrageous. According to Buche, our military presented both chronological arguments and video materials (sorry for the details – with the position of the corpses and their appearance). Everything that could be presented was presented. I don't know how adults, if they seriously think of themselves as politicians, diplomats, can try to say the opposite, unsubstantiated.
Please note that if the situation in N.N. Bucha continued to be "played out" for several weeks, then the city of Kramotorsk was quickly silenced. Evidence was presented on the same day, ballistic facts and a number of others, including the absence of Tochka-U in our arsenal. There will still be provocations.
The other day, the Ministry of Defense and the National Center for Defense Management of Russia presented intelligence revealing the plans of the Ukrainian regime, with the direct support of Western special services, to arrange new provocations: with chemicals, staging mass executions, burials. There will be provocations. We need to respond to them with facts. Our most important argument is what is happening "on the ground".
I see no reason why we cannot continue negotiations. Although the Ukrainian side turns 180 degrees every time. She rejects what she has just proposed.
We are patient and persistent people.
Question: Under what conditions do our diplomats work now in unfriendly countries, at the UN headquarters? We see how Russophobia is growing at an alarming pace. Threats are coming in, people are with their families and children abroad. Did you have to strengthen security for employees? How can we protect the rights of our compatriots against the backdrop of growing Russophobia?
Sergey Lavrov: Diplomats live and work in difficult conditions. There are attacks, in fact terrorist acts against our institutions, their physical security. But diplomats are more or less secured by status. It is often not recommended to go out into the city alone.
Most of all, we are concerned about the situation of compatriots, citizens, just Russians living abroad. They are subject to regular physical attacks. I know that this is discussed in Western capitals, at meetings of Western embassies in Moscow. EU ambassadors meet periodically. Some of our good friends say that at the meetings of the EU ambassadors in Moscow, serious concern is expressed about what is happening with manifestations of Russophobia in Europe. Like, this is wrong, spoils the image of the European Union. I would say it doesn't spoil, but additionally makes it what it is.
The speed and immediacy with which the Russophobic "wave" was launched suggests (as one of the American researchers wrote) that "latent racism" from Europe has not disappeared. Just as A. Hitler mobilized his society and other European countries in particular against the Jews (he also did not forget the Slavs). Now the Russians are the "fas" team. The "gloss" flew off, all the conventions and political correctness disappeared. Nothing is there.
Ukrainian figures declare that "a good Russian is a dead Russian, and any other is a "bad one." The ministers say that Europe should discriminate against all Russians, ostracize them, saying that now there is no time to figure out whether a particular person is for or against Vladimir Putin. They just speak in plain text.
These are serious things. We will apply all available legal means to protect our citizens. There is a Fund for support and protection of the rights of compatriots living abroad. It is mainly related to the ability to hire lawyers for people who find themselves abroad. We are sharply increasing its funding.
That's a big problem. Let's talk about it.
-
„WARNING!!! About an hour ago, Russian occupation forces used a poisonous substance of unknown origin against Ukrainian military and civilians in the city of Mariupol, which was dropped from an enemy UAV. The victims have respiratory failure, vestibulo-atactic syndrome. The consequences of using an unknown substance are being clarified.“ - translated by Google Translator
I wonder if Dvornikov "Butcher of Syria" was involved in this..https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/russia-appoints-general-cruel-history-oversee-ukraine-offensive-rcna23784
-
who isreally omiting the atroitys. https://t.co/JJIVA681BT
-
So it's someone above Putin ? Putin being complicit of course.
-
Below is the machine translation of an interview Sergei Lavrov on Rossiya24 earlier. Long but well worth reading for anyone interested. It is always worth seeking out Lavrov interviews and press conferences, full of information and insight in Russian perspectives and thinking. He is head and shoulders above western "diplomats" who shame us all with their grandstanding and berating and making demands of other countries.
I have highlighted a few parts that I feel are particularly noteworthy but as always with Lavrov, the whole thing is worth reading and then reading again to fully digest.
Question: I would like to ask you about the "strange" statements made by the EU regarding the course of Russia's military operation in Ukraine. The head of EU diplomacy, George Borrell, said that this war (speaking of the Russian special operation) should be won on the battlefield. Somehow this does not fit with the status of the EU, first of all, as a political and economic Organization. German President Francis Steinmeier says that he is now "sprinkling ashes on his head," which he once stated about the possibility of a normal dialogue with Russia. Now he probably doesn't see that possibility. How do you talk to these people? How to negotiate with them?
Sergey Lavrov: - This is a serious reversal in the policy that the EU and the Us-led West as a whole (there is no doubt about this) began to pursue after the start of our special military operation. It reflects the anger, the frenzy (pardon the non-diplomatic expression) which is determined not only by Ukraine, but by the fact that this country began to make a springboard for the final suppression of Russia and its subordination to the global system built by the West, despite the end of the Cold War, despite the disappearance of both the Warsaw Pact and the Soviet Union, the West has always moved close to our borders despite all the promises made not to expand NATO
[/color][/b]. contrary to claims that we are no longer adversaries and much more. Our special military operation is designed to put an end to the reckless expansion and course towards the complete domination of the United States and the rest of NATO countries in the international arena. It is being built with a gross violation of international law according to certain "rules", which they are only now talking about. They are developed from time to time. In Kosovo, it is possible to recognize independence without a referendum, but in Crimea, as a result of a referendum observed by hundreds of objective representatives and the public of foreign countries, it is impossible.
In Iraq (10,000 km from the United States), they "saw" a threat to their American security. They bombed him, found no threat, and didn't even apologize. Neo-Nazis and ultra-radicals are being "grown" on our borders, dozens of biological laboratories are being created through the Pentagon, and experiments aimed at creating biological weapons are being conducted. The discovered documents leave no doubt about this. We are not allowed to respond to a threat on our borders, not across the ocean. That's what it's all about.
President Vladimir Putin spoke in detail about the reasons for the decision on a special military operation– the eight-year sabotage of the implementation of the Minsk Agreements, accompanied by daily bombing of Donbass, the pumping of Western weapons into the country of Ukraine, the instructors who trained the most extremist-minded units, which were then sent to the Armed Forces of Ukraine and formed the backbone of the groups that are now resisting our operation to demilitarization and denazification of Ukraine. Western propaganda immediately translated all this into a description of Russia as an absolute evil, and they, accordingly, are the embodiment of absolute good. The current Ukrainian regime is supposedly the light of democracy, justice, freedom, a craving for everything European, for the values that Europe has allegedly always professed. The subsequent reaction shows that they are well aware that it is not only and not so much about Ukraine. The point is that not everyone is ready to obey their dominance. Russia, with its history and traditions, is one of those countries that will never occupy a subordinate position. We can only be members of the international community on equal terms, on conditions of indivisible security, which were agreed upon, but they were ignored by our Western colleagues. But what George Borrell said even against this unprecedented and aggressive background is a significant game changer. The EU has never acted as a military organization. Yes, they are now discussing their "strategic compass". For the first time in history, Germany has allocated an additional 100 billion euros to "pump up" its military "muscles", which is a qualitative change. This "strategic compass" involves a significant increase in military spending and the construction of a kind of collective structure for defense against potential aggressors. But the result of all this independence is zero, because everything that is done is completely controlled by the United States. There is no independent role for the EU, including in the efforts that are being made within the EU. They are perfectly controlled by the Balts, the Danes, the Poles, who will not allow the EU to somehow separate from NATO. On the contrary, they will push him into NATO networks.
Q: A NATO affiliate?
Sergey Lavrov: It turns out. When the head of diplomacy of a country or some organization (in this case, Jeanne Borrell, who represents EU diplomacy) says that a particular conflict can be resolved exclusively by military means. So, either he has something personal accumulated, or he made a mistake, or "blabbed" that no one instructed him. This is an extraordinary statement. We will officially talk about this in detail in our documents. I hope that in the next day or two we will analyse all this.
At the same time, you mentioned Frank-Walter Steinmeier, whom I know well from his work as Foreign Minister. Now he is the President of the Federal Republic of Germany. In an interview a few days ago, he was asked whether it was necessary to hold an international tribunal, to declare representatives of the Russian leadership, starting with President Vladimir Putin and the Minister of Foreign Affairs, war criminals. He replied in the affirmative, saying that all those responsible for the military operation, political decisions, must be held accountable. I leave that to his conscience. I think that in Germany, facts will make their way, and it will become known who commits war crimes there. And this will be determined not on the basis of fakes (such as Bucha, Kramatorsk), but on the basis of the murderous facts that we present, our military discover during a special military operation and on the basis of the testimony of people who lived for many years in the divided Donbass, in isolation from their sons who remained on the eastern part of the contact line, lived under the oppression of these neo-Nazis. When these people are released now, it is impossible to "play" the feelings they express and invent the hardships they describe in life under the control of neo-Nazi and other "territorial" battalions.
But Fyodor Steinmeier said another interesting thing about Ukraine as such. He said that, as a diplomat, he had never devoted so much time to any country like Ukraine. I remembered that in 2007, when Germany held the presidency of the EU, it was he who initiated the start of negotiations on the preparation of the Association Agreement with the EU. In 2013, when the unrest on the Maidan began, it was he who initiated negotiations between Viktor Yanukovych and the opposition. That's just the way it is. The only thing I note is that half-truths are worse than lies. In fact, F.-W. Steinmeier forgot about some important episodes, the turning points of the events he mentioned. First, the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the EU provided for the transition to zero tariffs for the vast majority of goods. By the time this agreement "matured" in 2013, we reminded our Ukrainian colleagues that we also have a free trade zone within the CIS. And we have serious protection against European goods when we joined the WTO. Therefore, if they have zero tariffs with Europe and we and Ukraine have long had zero tariffs on most goods, then goods from the EU will flood to us, contrary to the agreements that we reached when joining the WTO. We warned them that we need to sit down and solve how to "settle" this problem so that we do not suffer from their relations with the EU. But it was the same EU that (as Frank Steinmeier says) began negotiations on the Association Agreement on his initiative, told us that we had nothing to do with it, that they wanted to and would agree with Ukraine. After that, Viktor Yanukovych realized that there would be a problem and the Russian side would be forced to build a barrier from Ukrainian goods on the border with Ukraine. The President of Ukraine asked to postpone the signing for several months so that we could resolve these problems taking into account the interests of Ukraine, Russia and the EU.
It was after this that Europe, which F.-W. Steinmeier is so proud of, saying that Ukraine aspires to European values, provoked the "Maidan". They raised people under the slogans of the fight against Viktor Yanukovych: they say, he does not allow Ukraine to join the EU.
Fyodor Steinmeier did not mention that he was not just the initiator of the talks between Viktor Yanukovych and the opposition, but a participant in their completion by signing the settlement agreement. Frank-Walter Steinmeier (on behalf of Germany and the EU), together with the foreign ministers of Poland and France, put his signature as a guarantor of this agreement. The next morning, his signature was "superimposed." The opposition tore up the agreement, from the first day advocated the abolition of the special status of the Russian language (contrary to the Constitution of Ukraine), called on Russians to "get out" of the Crimea, sent there "friendship trains" with armed bandits who wanted to storm the Supreme Soviet. After that, there was a referendum. Eastern Ukraine has completely refused to recognize the coup d'état. They did not attack anyone, but they were declared terrorists and proclaimed the beginning of an anti-terrorist operation.
Frank-Walter Steinmeier forgot to say that Germany, France, Poland and the entire European Union have shown their complete helplessness and lack of self-respect. Their signatures "didn't give a damn", they were trampled on. They silently began to even encourage this, as soon as they realized that the bandits who came to power would help the West in every possible way and manipulate it. They were silent when these people in Odessa in the House of Trade Unions burned dozens of innocent citizens; when, on June 2, 2014, Ukrainian Air Force planes bombed the center of Luhansk. They were just silent. Already in the process of trying to resolve the settlement (months and years later), we asked: how could they allow a coup d'état? They replied that it was "not quite a coup d'état." What? "The Costs of the Democratic Process". Not ashamed?
Frank Steinmeier forgot to mention February 2015, when he was one of the co-authors (along with the leaders of the Normandy format) of the Minsk Agreements. Immediately after the signing, in fact, the next day, P.A. Poroshenko and his team, speaking in the Verkhovna Rada, refused to fulfill them. They called the Minsk agreements a "political declaration", they say, they do not impose any obligation. Then we unanimously approved the Package of Measures in the UN Security Council. It has become part of international law – obligations have been imposed. They "did not give a damn" about them and strongly encouraged the Ukrainian regime to further sabotage its obligations.
We continued our efforts to find compromises, were ready to make additional concessions and encourage the republics to do so, with which Kiev refused to speak directly. As a flexible line, at some point in the negotiations, they supported what was called the "Steinmeier formula". When we "ran into" the sequence of actions that first – the special status or elections – he proposed a denouement, which suited everyone and became known as the "Steinmeier formula". A couple of weeks after the "formula" was approved and everyone greeted it, it again disappeared into oblivion, it was remembered in vain. P.A. Poroshenko, and after him V.A. Zelensky categorically refused to fulfill it.
By and large, F.-V. Steinmeier for the second time in several years experienced a diplomatic shame for a man who considers himself the initiator (as he is proud in that interview) of many things related to the development of Ukrainian society.
Question: Can we talk about a change in the positions of the parties during the Russian-Ukrainian talks after the provocations in Bucha and Kramatorsk and taking into account the fact that the "collective West", primarily the United States, is doing everything to continue hostilities?
Sergey Lavrov: President of Russia Vladimir Putin has repeatedly stressed that we prefer negotiations. During the very first round of talks, when the Ukrainian side proposed, and we agreed to contact the delegations, President Vladimir Putin gave the order to take a break in hostilities and a special military operation. When we were convinced that the Ukrainians were not going to reciprocate, it was decided that we would not make any pauses for subsequent rounds of negotiations until a final agreement was reached and signed.
The provocations are outrageous. According to Buche, our military presented both chronological arguments and video materials (sorry for the details – with the position of the corpses and their appearance). Everything that could be presented was presented. I don't know how adults, if they seriously think of themselves as politicians, diplomats, can try to say the opposite, unsubstantiated.
Please note that if the situation in N.N. Bucha continued to be "played out" for several weeks, then the city of Kramotorsk was quickly silenced. Evidence was presented on the same day, ballistic facts and a number of others, including the absence of Tochka-U in our arsenal. There will still be provocations.
The other day, the Ministry of Defense and the National Center for Defense Management of Russia presented intelligence revealing the plans of the Ukrainian regime, with the direct support of Western special services, to arrange new provocations: with chemicals, staging mass executions, burials. There will be provocations. We need to respond to them with facts. Our most important argument is what is happening "on the ground".
I see no reason why we cannot continue negotiations. Although the Ukrainian side turns 180 degrees every time. She rejects what she has just proposed.
We are patient and persistent people.
Question: Under what conditions do our diplomats work now in unfriendly countries, at the UN headquarters? We see how Russophobia is growing at an alarming pace. Threats are coming in, people are with their families and children abroad. Did you have to strengthen security for employees? How can we protect the rights of our compatriots against the backdrop of growing Russophobia?
Sergey Lavrov: Diplomats live and work in difficult conditions. There are attacks, in fact terrorist acts against our institutions, their physical security. But diplomats are more or less secured by status. It is often not recommended to go out into the city alone.
Most of all, we are concerned about the situation of compatriots, citizens, just Russians living abroad. They are subject to regular physical attacks. I know that this is discussed in Western capitals, at meetings of Western embassies in Moscow. EU ambassadors meet periodically. Some of our good friends say that at the meetings of the EU ambassadors in Moscow, serious concern is expressed about what is happening with manifestations of Russophobia in Europe. Like, this is wrong, spoils the image of the European Union. I would say it doesn't spoil, but additionally makes it what it is.
The speed and immediacy with which the Russophobic "wave" was launched suggests (as one of the American researchers wrote) that "latent racism" from Europe has not disappeared. Just as A. Hitler mobilized his society and other European countries in particular against the Jews (he also did not forget the Slavs). Now the Russians are the "fas" team. The "gloss" flew off, all the conventions and political correctness disappeared. Nothing is there.
Ukrainian figures declare that "a good Russian is a dead Russian, and any other is a "bad one." The ministers say that Europe should discriminate against all Russians, ostracize them, saying that now there is no time to figure out whether a particular person is for or against Vladimir Putin. They just speak in plain text.
These are serious things. We will apply all available legal means to protect our citizens. There is a Fund for support and protection of the rights of compatriots living abroad. It is mainly related to the ability to hire lawyers for people who find themselves abroad. We are sharply increasing its funding.
That's a big problem. Let's talk about it.
I'm reminded of Josef Goebbels Gringo. Putin wants a buffer state between Russia and NATO at all cost, including the truth. He achieved it in Belarus, whose elections in 2020 were rigged: https://www.euronews.com/2020/08/11/eu-foreign-minister-belarus-elections-were-neither-free-nor-fair
As for Euromaidan, Transparency International noted that Yanokovych led the most corrupt regime in the world: https://transparency.eu/corruption-opulence-and-decadence-in-ukraine/
You have a point with Kosovo, but this was following the civil war in the former Yugoslavia where over 100,000 had already been killed.
As for Sergei Lavrov, he'd be a complete joke if this wasn't so serious, and negotiations hitherto have been a farce. https://youtu.be/lP-7-dNdbyI
-
Keep your eye on news coming from the Azovstal steelworks in Mariupol. The constant, blatant false flags and provocations( Bucha, Kramatorsk etc. ) are keeping the news cycle and eyes away from whatever it is that is being hidden there.
Whatever or whoever it is has led to a number of suicidal rescue attempts. Currently holed up in the bowels of the plant are 2,000 or so elite Azov battalion Nazis but it is becoming increasingly clear that there are also other things or people or both also there. The plant has 6/8 basement levels and a catacomb of tunnels, stretching for kilometres( a mini city).
Other events that may be related to this are Macron's desperation this past week or so to arrange a humanitarian corridor in "Mariupol" with Putin.
Why is Macron so concerned with one specific city?
Are French intel trapped there?
Is the sacking of the head of military intelligence (General Eric Vivaud) last week related to this?
What or who is it that some are so desperate to keep out of Russian hands that it has led to a number of destined to fail operations to extract?
If it is the case that NATO intel and instructors are there then this is extremely serious. All will be revealed shortly because whatever/whoever is there will soon be captured by the Russians and it seems that it will be explosive enough to blow up the western/NATO narrative.
-
Keep your eye on news coming from the Azovstal steelworks in Mariupol. The constant, blatant false flags and provocations( Bucha, Kramatorsk etc. ) are keeping the news cycle and eyes away from whatever it is that is being hidden there.
Whatever or whoever it is has led to a number of suicidal rescue attempts. Currently holed up in the bowels of the plant are 2,000 or so elite Azov battalion Nazis but it is becoming increasingly clear that there are also other things or people or both also there. The plant has 6/8 basement levels and a catacomb of tunnels, stretching for kilometres( a mini city).
Other events that may be related to this are Macron's desperation this past week or so to arrange a humanitarian corridor in "Mariupol" with Putin.
Why is Macron so concerned with one specific city?
Are French intel trapped there?
Is the sacking of the head of military intelligence (General Eric Vivaud) last week related to this?
What or who is it that some are so desperate to keep out of Russian hands that it has led to a number of destined to fail operations to extract?
If it is the case that NATO intel and instructors are there then this is extremely serious. All will be revealed shortly because whatever/whoever is there will soon be captured by the Russians and it seems that it will be explosive enough to blow up the western/NATO narrative.
You cannot possibly write this stuff while keeping a straight face. :))
-
The most humiliating minute of Peskov’s career:
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/u0lxwv/the_most_humiliating_minute_of_peskovs_career/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3 (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/u0lxwv/the_most_humiliating_minute_of_peskovs_career/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
-
Putler is resettling Ukrainians to Siberia and the Far East, Kremlin document shows
https://inews.co.uk/news/vladimir-putin-ukraine-russia-mariupol-siberia-kremlin-1569431 (https://inews.co.uk/news/vladimir-putin-ukraine-russia-mariupol-siberia-kremlin-1569431)
-
What's the craic with this?
-
All I can say is, that's the end of him.
-
If Mariupol falls to Russia, will it mark the end of this debacle or will they go for the port, Odessa ?
-
What's the craic with this?
Its not true.
https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-cloutier-captured/fact-check-nato-chief-cloutier-not-captured-in-ukraine-idUSL2N2W914L (https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-cloutier-captured/fact-check-nato-chief-cloutier-not-captured-in-ukraine-idUSL2N2W914L)
-
All I can say is, that's the end of him.
He is alive and well in Turkey. If you have a linkedin profile you can see him uploading photos of himself there.
-
Its not true.
https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-cloutier-captured/fact-check-nato-chief-cloutier-not-captured-in-ukraine-idUSL2N2W914L (https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-cloutier-captured/fact-check-nato-chief-cloutier-not-captured-in-ukraine-idUSL2N2W914L)
Interesting David.
-
It would seem that a lot of them are in Turkey ? Not a country to be trusted.
-
He is alive and well in Turkey. If you have a linkedin profile you can see him uploading photos of himself there.
I'm not saying it's not him - but that could be arranged as a contingency plan in the event he was captured. Then again, his 'capture' could be load of tosh.
-
I'm not saying it's not him - but that could be arranged as a contingency plan in the event he was captured. Then again, his 'capture' could be load of tosh.
Of course its BS. He is Chief of Nato Allied Land Command. You don't have someone of that rank and age in the middle of a battlezone.
-
Looks like insufficient evidence so far, regarding the alleged chemical release...
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/12/did-russia-really-use-chemical-weapons-mariupol-ukraine-expert-remain-sceptical
However, the news in general is not good with Putin claiming peace talks have reached a dead end and the Mayor of Mariupol claiming 20,000 people have died in the city. :-[
-
I wish I'd kept my Mickey Mouse gas mask from WWII ! We're going to need them I think :(
-
I wish I'd kept my Mickey Mouse gas mask from WWII ! We're going to need them I think :(
Can you remember this Lookout?
-
Can you remember this Lookout?
Only pictures in the newspapers after the war ended, Roch. I was five but remember my gas-mask and the Anderson shelter in the garden because mum wouldn't go in an air-raid shelter.
I also remember big planes overhead from the US air base at Burtonwood, then in 1945/6 loads of army lorries heading to Liverpool, some carrying aeroplane parts.
Fortunately we weren't near Liverpool who were hit hard, but I know my mum was out of her mind when she heard the German planes ( Doodlebugs ) 12 miles away as when the engines stopped the bomb was released.
-
What's the craic with this?
Not sure. The "evidence" either way is sketchy. The Linkedin posts could be done by any staffer and are old pictures so are not confirmation of Cloutiers well being. Despite this I suspect that this is a rumour. Devastating if true and I would not be entirely surprised.
Whether Cloutier has been captured/trapped, it is now explicitly stated by Zelensky(Under NATO orders?) that they want to trade to get 1,000 trapped forces out of Azovstal. To this end they have paraded arrested opposition politician Viktor Medvedchuk (handcuffed and dishevelled ) on TV.
Ukrainian forces are surrendering en masse, tens of thousands caught in a cauldron in Donetsk but these 1,000 or whatever trapped Nazis in Azovstal are causing apoplexy to NATO countries for reasons yet to be explained.
We will see soon enough but I expect that there are NATO "trainers" and operatives there.
-
Here Liz Truss weighs in:
Tweet
See new Tweets
Conversation
Liz Truss
@trussliz
United Kingdom government official
Reports that Russian forces may have used chemical agents in an attack on the people of Mariupol. We are working urgently with partners to verify details.
Any use of such weapons would be a callous escalation in this conflict and we will hold Putin and his regime to account.
Curiouser and curiouser.
To be clear, these reports of chemical agents being used are coming from the Nazis holed up in Azovstal. These are the "partners" that Liz Truss refers to "working urgently" with.
Questions, questions.
-
The latest sitrep from Nightvision on the Saker:
http://thesaker.is/sitrep-operation-z-8/
Situation collapsing for Ukraine and their NATO sponsors.
-
Zelensky posted the pictures of opposition politician on his Telegram channel. Offered him in exchange for Ukrainian prisoners.
Imagine the press that Putin(or any non allied leader) would get if he paraded beaten and handcuffed politicians on his personal social media channel offering crude and cynical trades for captured forces. Very Statesmanlike and Presidential.
The crude gangsterism will not even be commented on by Western media.
-
Putler ‘purges’ 150 FSB agents in response to Russia’s botched war with Ukraine.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/putin-purges-150-fsb-agents-in-response-to-russias-botched-war-with-ukraine-lf9k6tn6g (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/putin-purges-150-fsb-agents-in-response-to-russias-botched-war-with-ukraine-lf9k6tn6g)
-
Only pictures in the newspapers after the war ended, Roch. I was five but remember my gas-mask and the Anderson shelter in the garden because mum wouldn't go in an air-raid shelter.
I also remember big planes overhead from the US air base at Burtonwood, then in 1945/6 loads of army lorries heading to Liverpool, some carrying aeroplane parts.
Fortunately we weren't near Liverpool who were hit hard, but I know my mum was out of her mind when she heard the German planes ( Doodlebugs ) 12 miles away as when the engines stopped the bomb was released.
Hi Lookout, I was only joking. The image is from WW1.
-
Three war crimes in Bucha reflect the senseless murder of Ukrainians by Russian troops
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqxLc5XxIuo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqxLc5XxIuo)
-
Looks like insufficient evidence so far, regarding the alleged chemical release...
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/12/did-russia-really-use-chemical-weapons-mariupol-ukraine-expert-remain-sceptical
However, the news in general is not good with Putin claiming peace talks have reached a dead end and the Mayor of Mariupol claiming 20,000 people have died in the city. :-[
Its 10,000 dead. Still a horrific number.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/joewalsh/2022/04/11/over-10000-mariupol-residents-have-died-mayor-says-and-death-toll-could-double/?sh=1ea00baf1b4d (https://www.forbes.com/sites/joewalsh/2022/04/11/over-10000-mariupol-residents-have-died-mayor-says-and-death-toll-could-double/?sh=1ea00baf1b4d)
-
Finnish and Swedish leaders to hold joint press conference on NATO membership
https://www.dw.com/en/finnish-and-swedish-leaders-to-hold-joint-press-conference-on-nato-membership/a-61458860 (https://www.dw.com/en/finnish-and-swedish-leaders-to-hold-joint-press-conference-on-nato-membership/a-61458860)
-
Hi Lookout, I was only joking. The image is from WW1.
" You are awful, but I like you " ( Dick Emery ) ;D. I thought the pic. seemed a little on the ancient side.
-
Interesting politics in France right now. What difference will it make if Marine Le Pen wins-----being a friend of Putin ?
-
This is a very complicated and complex war at the moment where Russia calls out Ukraine for their Nazi tendencies yet it's Russia who are re-enacting the Second World War ? All very confusing.
-
Interesting article with regards to what/where it refers to..
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-putin-war-crimes-state-media-b2056633.html
-
Marine Le Pen was/ is a member of the National Front and her vote is to remove France from the EU. Why ?
It's our equivelant of Brexit ( for which I didn't vote for ) Britain's reason why ? No answer ! Because it's a far-right vote so far as I can see involving many facets of society.
What exactly does the National Front stand for ? Authoritarianism !
In the 70's I attended a very " closed " meeting with the late John Tyndall ( NF-BNP ) , a very cold character, clever and a marvellous speaker---I'd give him that. Looking back, his actions were a mixture of Hitler and Putin but an interesting person nevertheless. Waiting outside were hordes of skinheads and mounted police. Here, we had one thing laughing at the other---skinheads decrying a far-right speaker ?
-
Interesting article with regards to what/where it refers to..
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-putin-war-crimes-state-media-b2056633.html
Of course they're war crimes.
-
Interesting article with regards to what/where it refers to..
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-putin-war-crimes-state-media-b2056633.html
Their own contradictory claims prove their culpability. First Bucha never happened, then Bucha was staged by the Ukraine, now Bucha did happen but it was done by British forces.
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/12/putin-and-lukashenko-claim-british-operatives-committed-the-atrocities-in-bucha.html (https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/12/putin-and-lukashenko-claim-british-operatives-committed-the-atrocities-in-bucha.html)
Clowns.
-
Disassembling Russian Orlan-10 UAV to uncover Russian secret design elements.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WP681BVWk0Q (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WP681BVWk0Q)
-
Zelensky posted the pictures of opposition politician on his Telegram channel. Offered him in exchange for Ukrainian prisoners.
Imagine the press that Putin(or any non allied leader) would get if he paraded beaten and handcuffed politicians on his personal social media channel offering crude and cynical trades for captured forces. Very Statesmanlike and Presidential.
The crude gangsterism will not even be commented on by Western media.
Extortion, kidnapping all done publicly via social media. It doesn't appear to be going too well for the NATO gangsters. Zelensky has no agency and is the puppet of others. Gangsterism and thuggery such as the above make this evident.
-
A media seemingly interested in war crimes to the point of obsession but no comment. Perhaps they don't follow Zelensky on Telegram.
-
Extortion, kidnapping all done publicly via social media. It doesn't appear to be going too well for the NATO gangsters. Zelensky has no agency and is the puppet of others. Gangsterism and thuggery such as the above make this evident.
So Ukrainians keeping a guy alive in handcuffs and taking a photo of him is bad. Russians tying people up and shooting them before burying them mass graves is ok. Gringo logic 101
-
A media seemingly interested in war crimes to the point of obsession but no comment. Perhaps they don't follow Zelensky on Telegram.
He really ought to get on Twitter. Liz Truss has an account and is interested in working with her Nazi partners as she tweeted yesterday.
-
He really ought to get on Twitter. Liz Truss has an account and is interested in working with her Nazi partners as she tweeted yesterday.
He is on Twitter.
https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa
-
So Ukrainians keeping a guy alive in handcuffs and taking a photo of him is bad. Russians tying people up and shooting them before burying them mass graves is ok. Gringo logic 101
Somewhat twisted interpretation.
Your post is pathetic. The president of a country has kidnapped opposition politicians and is now using them publicly, parading them handcuffed and clearly beaten up in order to offer them as ransom for Nazis.
You call this "Ukrainians keeping a guy alive in handcuffs and taking a photo of him"
If Putin did this, I am certain that you would not whitewash it with such pathetic drivel.
-
He is on Twitter.
https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa
I know. It was just a sarky aside, Lookout, to demonstrate the idiocy of western leaders. More interested in social media than international diplomacy. They embarrass us.
-
Somewhat twisted interpretation.
Your post is a pathetic. The president of a country has kidnapped opposition politicians and is now using them publicly, parading them handcuffed and clearly beaten up in order to offer them as ransom for Nazis.
You call this "Ukrainians keeping a guy alive in handcuffs and taking a photo of him"
If Putin did this, I am certain that you would not whitewash it with such pathetic drivel.
If Putin done that, it would be a move towards clemency on his part compared to the usual poison and bullets.
-
I know. It was just a sarky aside, Lookout, to demonstrate the idiocy of western leaders. More interested in social media than international diplomacy. They embarrass us.
https://www.instagram.com/leadervladimirputin/?hl=en (https://www.instagram.com/leadervladimirputin/?hl=en)
https://twitter.com/kremlinrussia_e (https://twitter.com/kremlinrussia_e)
::)
-
I know. It was just a sarky aside, Lookout, to demonstrate the idiocy of western leaders. More interested in social media than international diplomacy. They embarrass us.
Even more embarrassingly they use social media to display their idiocy and criminality.
Liz Truss claiming to be working closely with "our partners" to verify details of alleged chemical weapons. The only reports of this were from Nazis holed up in Azovstal. By reasonable inference the UK is "partners" with the Azov Nazis.
Zelensky parading arrested and beaten up opposition politicians.
They are desperate, losing badly and the only "victories" they can claim are in the information war but only in indoctrinated western populations. Endless censorship, propaganda and outright lies. Those who are kidnapping politicians to publicly parade and offer as ransom and those partnering with human shield using Nazis deserve no time or attention paid to their accusations.
-
https://www.instagram.com/leadervladimirputin/?hl=en (https://www.instagram.com/leadervladimirputin/?hl=en)
https://twitter.com/kremlinrussia_e (https://twitter.com/kremlinrussia_e)
::)
I missed the kidnapped politicians and ransom demands on the Kremlin account, David.
Given that you have already dismissed kidnapping and extortion carried out by parading your beaten and handcuffed victim on social media as, "Ukrainians keeping a guy alive in handcuffs and taking a photo of him", you should perhaps remain silent.
Your silence would be a better response. Justifying and acting as an apologist for the admitted crimes above makes clear your attitude to war is shaped by playing war porn war games more than any serious analysis of history and geopolitics.
-
Even more embarrassingly they use social media to display their idiocy and criminality.
Liz Truss claiming to be working closely with "our partners" to verify details of alleged chemical weapons. The only reports of this were from Nazis holed up in Azovstal. By reasonable inference the UK is "partners" with the Azov Nazis.
Zelensky parading arrested and beaten up opposition politicians.
They are desperate, losing badly and the only "victories" they can claim are in the information war but only in indoctrinated western populations. Endless censorship, propaganda and outright lies. Those who are kidnapping politicians to publicly parade and offer as ransom and those partnering with human shield using Nazis deserve no time or attention paid to their accusations.
The Russians have already lost the war. At best they will achieve a pyrrhic victory in the Dombas. A farcry from their initial hope of turning Ukraine into another Belarus.
They have turned the Ukrainian people against them indefinitely and prompted Sweden and Finland to start joining NATO.
-
The Russians have already lost the war. At best they will achieve a pyrrhic victory in the Dombas. A farcry from their initial hope of turning Ukraine into another Belarus.
They have turned the Ukrainian people against them indefinitely and prompted Sweden and Finland to start joining NATO.
Russians have only "lost the war" according to hysterical western propaganda. According to "facts on the ground" your analysis? is the opposite of truth. I posted this earlier but in case you missed it, the latest sitrep from Nightvision on the Saker blog.
https://thesaker.is/sitrep-operation-z-8/
Read it. Detailed and more accurate appraisal of the situation.
NATO/Ukraine lost this war in the first days and they are going to keep on losing. It also explains the tactics being used by the "winning side" now. Kidnapping, extortion, false flags and propaganda. Ukrainians en masse surrendering. Too much winning!
-
If Putin done that, it would be a move towards clemency on his part compared to the usual poison and bullets.
Didn't know that Putin had been posting on social media about killing opponents with poison and bullets. There is a difference between accusations from hysterical propagandists and personally parading beaten opposition politicians, something that you seem unable/unwilling to grasp. You seem desperate to discuss anything but the current and undisputed kidnapping and ransom demands via social media by supposed "President Zelensky".
Your responses are embarrassing.
-
Desperate moves by desperate actors. The desperation to get something embarrassing out of Azovstal leading them to open and public gangsterism such as this should lead to even blinkered souls like David asking critical questions. That it doesn't speaks volumes.
-
It has been a terrible war for both Ukraine and Russia. Think of all the men, women, children, animals, soldiers, volunteers who were still alive, still uninjured, on the day before the invasion. All those lives wasted or maimed. The lives of their families blighted forever. All the millions of people strewn across Europe. All the houses and infrastructure destroyed.
Russia are going to have to pull something really impressive out of the hat, in order to justify the immediate human consequences of this invasion. It may never be possible to justify their tactics. They are talking about an end to US dominated geopolitics. I have very little trust in US UK etc. However, there is barely any support for Russia from the countries that surround it, which possibly tells its own story.
Even if Russia were to pull these impressive justifications and proofs from the hat, I get the impression that they will not be reported in the same vein over here. We live in a world where there the truth can simply be whichever narrative is being pushed, with the opposing narrative being relegated as fake in the process.
-
I missed the kidnapped politicians and ransom demands on the Kremlin account, David.
Given that you have already dismissed kidnapping and extortion carried out by parading your beaten and handcuffed victim on social media as, "Ukrainians keeping a guy alive in handcuffs and taking a photo of him", you should perhaps remain silent.
Your silence would be a better response. Justifying and acting as an apologist for the admitted crimes above makes clear your attitude to war is shaped by playing war war porn more than any serious analysis of history and geopolitics.
What on earth is "war porn"? ???
You really are weird.
-
Russians have only "lost the war" according to hysterical western propaganda. According to "facts on the ground" your analysis? is the opposite of truth. I posted this earlier but in case you missed it, the latest sitrep from Nightvision on the Saker blog.
https://thesaker.is/sitrep-operation-z-8/
Read it. Detailed and more accurate appraisal of the situation.
NATO/Ukraine lost this war in the first days and they are going to keep on losing. It also explains the tactics being used by the "winning side" now. Kidnapping, extortion, false flags and propaganda. Ukrainians en masse surrendering. Too much winning!
The saker is not a primary source of information. Its an opinion blog run by a troll who lives in Florida who has probably never even set foot in Russia. And wouldn't last 2 minutes living there.
The following is a leaked communication from the FSB. That is what I am going on.
"Blitzkrieg failed. It is simply impossible to complete the task now: if Zelensky and the authorities were captured in the first 1-3 days, they seized all the key buildings in Kyiv, they gave them the order to surrender - yes, the resistance would subside to the minimum values. In theory. But what's next? Even with this ideal variant, there was an unsolvable problem: with whom to negotiate? If we demolish Zelensky, well, with whom should we sign agreements? If with Zelensky, then after we demolish it, these papers are worth nothing. Opposition Platform for Life refused to cooperate: Medvedchuk is a coward, he fled. There is a second leader there - Boyko, but he refuses to work with us - even his own people will not understand him. They wanted to return Tsarev, so even our pro-Russians turned against him. Return Yanukovych? But as? If we say that it is impossible to occupy, then any of our authorities will be killed there in 10 minutes, as we leave. Occupy? Where are we going to get so many people? Commandant's offices, military police, counterintelligence, security - even with minimal resistance from the locals, we need 500 thousand or more people. Not counting the supply system. And there is a rule that by covering the poor quality of management with quantity, you only spoil everything. And this, I repeat, would be with the ideal option, which does not exist."
-
I know. It was just a sarky aside, Lookout, to demonstrate the idiocy of western leaders. More interested in social media than international diplomacy. They embarrass us.
Gringo do you think any news should be blacked out ? Something as serious as is happening appears like a circus and gives way to fake news etc. Maybe just the odd Reuter report but nothing else.
-
I have no faith in any politician !!
-
Giving politicians airtime, such as Truss is an absolute joke !
-
I blame this country for everything, especially terrorism because of the crap leaders we've had !
-
I blame this country for everything, especially terrorism because of the crap leaders we've had !
I suspect evil abounds in many places in the world. We're probably capable of being the good guys in some situations. But there is no doubt in my mind that we are sometimes the bad guys. i cannot believe some of the things we get away with at home, never mind abroad.
-
It has been a terrible war for both Ukraine and Russia. Think of all the men, women, children, animals, soldiers, volunteers who were still alive, still uninjured, on the day before the invasion. All those lives wasted or maimed. The lives of their families blighted forever. All the millions of people strewn across Europe. All the houses and infrastructure destroyed.
Russia are going to have to pull something really impressive out of the hat, in order to justify the immediate human consequences of this invasion. It may never be possible to justify their tactics. They are talking about an end to US dominated geopolitics. I have very little trust in US UK etc. However, there is barely any support for Russia from the countries that surround it, which possibly tells its own story.
Even if Russia were to pull these impressive justifications and proofs from the hat, I get the impression that they will not be reported in the same vein over here. We live in a world where there the truth can simply be whichever narrative is being pushed, with the opposing narrative being relegated as fake in the process.
I have been looking into how the Russians train their military. And I have come across "Dedovshchina". This would explain their callousness. Sheer might is right. :-\
https://youtu.be/oA1kd3zL840?t=112 (https://youtu.be/oA1kd3zL840?t=112)
-
Gringo do you think any news should be blacked out ? Something as serious as is happening appears like a circus and gives way to fake news etc. Maybe just the odd Reuter report but nothing else.
No, I don't, Lookout. Propaganda and lies are pushing western populations into war. There is no such thing as being afraid of the lies. Being "Afraid of the truth" on the other hand is well known.
Those who tell truth aren't afraid of lies.
Those who tell lies are afraid of the truth.
All you need to know.
-
I have no faith in any politician !!
You need to lower the bar still further, Lookout. Less than zero faith.
-
No, I don't, Lookout. Propaganda and lies are pushing western populations into war. There is no such thing as being afraid of the lies. Being "Afraid of the truth" on the other hand is well known.
Those who tell truth aren't afraid of lies.
Those who tell lies are afraid of the truth.
All you need to know.
I understand, gringo.
-
"Russian media confirms severe damage and possible sinking of the flagship Moskva after the Ukrainian army claimed to hit it with Neptune missiles"
-
"Russian media confirms severe damage and possible sinking of the flagship Moskva after the Ukrainian army claimed to hit it with Neptune missiles"
(https://preview.redd.it/32blewulldt81.png?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=1e9167077f847ace33d2cfcca76d1424c2e544f9)
-
https://www.rebelnews.com/french_journalist_claims_americans_are_in_charge_ukraine_i_found_myself_facing_the_pentagon
-
Are tanks to blame for Russian failures in Ukraine?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUopUK075Ek (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUopUK075Ek)
-
Loss of Moskva strikes serious blow to Russian military’s prestige
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/15/loss-of-moskva-strikes-serious-blow-to-russian-militarys-prestige (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/15/loss-of-moskva-strikes-serious-blow-to-russian-militarys-prestige)
-
That won't deter Putin, David.
-
That won't deter Putin, David.
David, at the head of some Texas Rangers, with all the latest Tom Clancy gear, deep behind enemy lines... Now that would deter Putin.
-
The ship was an old rust bucket as Putin is saving his best 'till last ! He's unpredictable and barmy.
-
The ship was an old rust bucket as Putin is saving his best 'till last ! He's unpredictable and barmy.
Most of the Russian fleet is a rust bucket.
-
Reminder: during wars, both sides suffer losses.
During the Falklands War, Britain lost the HMS Sheffield to an exocet missile. Fortunately for Britain, Argentina had only five AM39 exocets and did not manage to hit a carrier, or the war might have been lost.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUZu8bvxJs4
-
Russia loses its eighth general and 34th colonel in Ukraine in the latest hammer blow to Putin's botched invasion.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10724673/Russia-loses-eighth-general-34th-colonel-Ukraine-latest-blow-Putins-botched-invasion.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10724673/Russia-loses-eighth-general-34th-colonel-Ukraine-latest-blow-Putins-botched-invasion.html)
-
Reminder: during wars, both sides suffer losses.
During the Falklands War, Britain lost the HMS Sheffield to an exocet missile. Fortunately for Britain, Argentina had only five AM39 exocets and did not manage to hit a carrier, or the war might have been lost.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUZu8bvxJs4
I recall that the British carried out a deception operation in order to prevent the Argentines from buying up more Exocets. I think at the time, the French were the sellers.
-
A point of view which tallies with my own: https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/putin-s-dictatorship-is-based-now-on-fear-rather-than-spin/ar-AAWhHY0?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=479df65dfe2046b88c679b70a38ffc76
-
No major cities taken since the invasion began. 20,000 Russian troops dead. Black Sea flagship sunk. Assault on Kyiv and Kharkiv repelled. Finland and Sweden joining NATO. Russia has been humiliated.
-
Beware of Putin because he'll be running scared. Will his next move be nuclear ? I think this is what's on Zelenskiy's mind.
Anti-radiation pills next ?
-
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2022/04/analysis-chain-of-negligence-caused-the-loss-of-the-moskva-cruiser/
-
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2022/04/analysis-chain-of-negligence-caused-the-loss-of-the-moskva-cruiser/
It was definitely a SSM. Hence all the other Russian ships have moved further away from Ukrainian coast line.
-
It was definitely a SSM. Hence all the other Russian ships have moved further away from Ukrainian coast line.
The bit I noticed was the suggestion that the weapon wasn't available for use by Ukraine at the beginning of the conflict.
-
The bit I noticed was the suggestion that the weapon wasn't available for use by Ukraine at the beginning of the conflict.
Its been in service since March 2021
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R-360_Neptune (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R-360_Neptune)
-
Russian military TNT contains nothing but blocks of wood. :))
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/u5obhd/corruption_in_russian_army_really_helped/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/u5obhd/corruption_in_russian_army_really_helped/)
-
No major cities taken since the invasion began. 20,000 Russian troops dead. Black Sea flagship sunk. Assault on Kyiv and Kharkiv repelled. Finland and Sweden joining NATO. Russia has been humiliated.
Russia loses its eighth general and 34th colonel in Ukraine in the latest hammer blow to Putin's botched invasion.
Russian military TNT contains nothing but blocks of wood.
Do you actually believe this rubbish? Are you so indoctrinated that you lose any and all ability to question the truth or relevance of anything that you post? You play too much PlayStation and read too little and too narrowly.
The Moskva sinking has exactly zero relevance to the outcome in this war. What does have relevance is the capture/sinking and neutralisation of the entire Ukrainian Navy in the opening days of the war. Missed your comments on that. You will have been posting some irrelevant and unattributed you-tube video in a poor attempt at appearing informed.
No major cities taken? All you are doing is repeating the ill informed projection that passes for analysis from "paid to not understand" experts. The troops outside Kiev, as even some of those "experts" now seem to have cottoned, far from "failing to take Kiev" have in fact "succeeded" in their main aim of pinning large numbers of Ukrainian soldiers and "shaping the battlefield" for phase two. A much larger invasion force would be required to take cities. Everyone knows this. The Russians certainly know this. Why would you still believe, given the above, that their intention was taking Kiev and Kharkov at this stage?
Ukraine has no navy left, no air force left, minimal air defence still intact, no manoeuvrability (lack of fuel and air cover), have lost an area the size of the UK already, something between 60 to 100,000 of their elite formations in a cauldron in Donbass without chance of relief or reinforcement, Black Sea access likely to be completely cut off shortly and you get a hard on because a Russian ship sank. It has no relevance to the outcome which is a done deal already.
All of the above has been discussed and analysed at length by experts who understand Russian military doctrine, war and geopolitics. Scott Ritter, Col. Douglas MacGregor, Andrei Martyanov and many others all understand perfectly well the reality on the ground.
The dead Colonels and Generals claim that you repeat and believe to be an example of the "botched invasion", even if true, is the repeated projection of supposed experts. Russians generals and colonels lead on the battlefield not sat back in an armchair somewhere.
Your 20,000 Russian dead figure is obvious bollocks. Finland and Sweden will get a visit from Russian missiles the moment they place NATO missiles on their territory. Going to do something isn't the same as doing something. Russian TNT contains only blocks of wood which you have discovered via your usual evidence of an unattributed youtube video shows how dumb and gullible you are.
NATO arms and mercs? are being destroyed with missiles the moment they enter Ukraine. All Ukraine have left is one off raids and propaganda. A NATO trained and armed army of 600,000 about to be entirely neutralised and disarmed by a hugely outnumbered attacking force. Phase 2 about to begin. It is delusional to believe that "Russia has been humiliated" as David continues to believe. You need to face up to some uncomfortable truths. Reality on the ground will no longer be able to be shut out with comforting lies.
Reality is that hypersonic missile tech, integrated air defence systems way in advance of NATO junk and Electronic Warfare systems have re-invented modern warfare and NATO are not even in the game. What they going to do? Send an aircraft carrier group? Send some more weapons that the Russians will obliterate with missiles before they get anywhere near the battlefield? All of this is and has been understood for some years now by any serious and independent analysts/experts. I wrote of these developments and their consequences some years back on this thread. David mocked the hypersonic claims by deploying some Gif's, as I recall, and regarding it as Russian disinformation or something. It was true then and it is even more so now, as the gap has widened, but this is one of those "uncomfortable truths" so David ignores the implications.
All of the above with a military budget over the last 20 years or so of around 6/7% of the US alone. How corrupt must the US MIC be to outspend Russia by 15/16 times and still be generations behind in all the tech that has literally changed warfare and how it is waged.
You understand too little and are too closed to uncomfortable truths to take seriously, David, on anything with regard to geopolitics.
-
No major cities taken? All you are doing is repeating the ill informed projection that passes for analysis from "paid to not understand" experts. The troops outside Kiev, as even some of those "experts" now seem to have cottoned, far from "failing to take Kiev" have in fact "succeeded" in their main aim of pinning large numbers of Ukrainian soldiers and "shaping the battlefield" for phase two. A much larger invasion force would be required to take cities. Everyone knows this. The Russians certainly know this. Why would you still believe, given the above, that their intention was taking Kiev and Kharkov at this stage?
Right, they sent tens of thousands of troops into Belarus giving them short proximity to the capital and sent in special light airborne troops in take the city airports on day two of the war, but had no intention of taking the city. They then spent weeks redeploying the troops giving the Ukrainian military plenty of time of reinforce their troops in the east and south. :)) Your excuses are nothing but sour grapes. The Americans took Baghdad with 30,000 troops. Its very doable so long as the population actually want their government toppled.
They intended to take Kyiv, their own intel proves that -
"Blitzkrieg failed. It is simply impossible to complete the task now: if Zelensky and the authorities were captured in the first 1-3 days, they seized all the key buildings in Kyiv, they gave them the order to surrender - yes, the resistance would subside to the minimum values. In theory. But what's next? Even with this ideal variant, there was an unsolvable problem: with whom to negotiate? If we demolish Zelensky, well, with whom should we sign agreements? If with Zelensky, then after we demolish it, these papers are worth nothing. Opposition Platform for Life refused to cooperate: Medvedchuk is a coward, he fled. There is a second leader there - Boyko, but he refuses to work with us - even his own people will not understand him. They wanted to return Tsarev, so even our pro-Russians turned against him. Return Yanukovych? But as? If we say that it is impossible to occupy, then any of our authorities will be killed there in 10 minutes, as we leave. Occupy? Where are we going to get so many people? Commandant's offices, military police, counterintelligence, security - even with minimal resistance from the locals, we need 500 thousand or more people. Not counting the supply system. And there is a rule that by covering the poor quality of management with quantity, you only spoil everything. And this, I repeat, would be with the ideal option, which does not exist."
Reality is that hypersonic missile tech, integrated air defence systems way in advance of NATO junk and Electronic Warfare systems have re-invented modern warfare and NATO are not even in the game.
Hence NATO tech given to the Ukrainians is doing this to Russia's air-force.
(https://preview.redd.it/dgembr6i8br81.jpg?width=1080&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=cbe700ecd9c83bec4126374b2e4bc0e8bb7f90dc)
(https://ik.imagekit.io/po8th4g4eqj/prod/tr:h-630,w-1200/Su-25SM3-shot-down-3-march-22-Signpost.jpg)
(https://thumbs.gfycat.com/LawfulFoolhardyHyrax-size_restricted.gif)
-
Russia wants a buffer around Crimea and a corridor alongside. https://youtu.be/zPZWFYMCJn8
-
They intended to take Kyiv, their own intel proves that -
"Blitzkrieg failed. It is simply impossible to complete the task now: if Zelensky and the authorities were captured in the first 1-3 days, they seized all the key buildings in Kyiv, they gave them the order to surrender - yes, the resistance would subside to the minimum values.
You are too gullible and willing to believe anything that suits. "Their own intel", as you describe it, is in actual fact a random posting on Telegram. I came across this particular piece of unattributed bullshit a few days ago and only an idiot with an agenda would accept it at face value which explains your embracing of it.
The use of a smaller invading force plus stand off weaponry has allowed the Russians to shape the battlefield with Ukrainian forces now largely pinned and lacking manoeuvrability. This is demonstrable by reality on the ground. No air cover, fuel. This has become apparent even to some of the commentators whose words you parrot.
Only a fool believes that Russia attempted to "blitzkrieg" Ukraine. They simply did not have the necessary numbers in the invading force. An unattributed post on Telegram is just that. It is not the secret Russian invasion plans, no matter how much you want to believe.
-
Russia wants a buffer around Crimea and a corridor alongside. https://youtu.be/zPZWFYMCJn8
Russia will get what it wants. NATO and US/UK are exposed to the world as paper tigers.
-
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/19/police-scout-for-pro-russian-collaborators-in-eastern-ukraine
This makes me wonder whether some of the war crimes bodies are actually the bodies of slain 'collaborators' staged as 'war crimes by Russia'.
However, I am not saying Russia hasn't committed war crimes. I believe it will have done so.
-
Russia will get what it wants. NATO and US/UK are exposed to the world as paper tigers.
I'm quite sure Russia will keep Crimea, but wouldn't the navy at Sevastopol have to navigate past NATO countries in a crisis?
I found this clip quite telling gringo: https://youtu.be/r5LyDd4vQPk
-
The cauldron containing somewhere between 60,000 and 100,000 will be, is being, neutralised next. The previous "shaping of the battlefield" (or blitzkrieg as David believes) is now over and has prevented any chance of re-supply or reinforcement to troops on the Donbass front-line. They will be left with only the choice of surrendering or fighting to their death. This will happen shortly. Facts on the ground tell you this even as the Mighty Wurlitzer insists that Russia is losing, humiliated. Who/what to believe? The always honest and independent Mighty Wurlitzer, or your own lying eyes?
I suspect that the entire Black Sea coastline, including Odessa, will be taken to leave a land locked rump state. Ukraine along with their backers and advisers from NATO are defeated. There will be more defeats to come as the rest of the world breaks free from the yoke of US/NATO hegemony and dominance. Ukraine is just the first domino.
-
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/19/police-scout-for-pro-russian-collaborators-in-eastern-ukraine
This makes me wonder whether some of the war crimes bodies are actually the bodies of slain 'collaborators' staged as 'war crimes by Russia'.
However, I am not saying Russia hasn't committed war crimes. I believe it will have done so.
There are an abundance of verified videos showing Ukrainian soldiers torturing Russian captives, POW's and alleged collaborators. The Bucha timeline proves that the murdered citizens were killed by Ukrainian forces. Everyone knows the playbook now, Roch. Seen it all before with atrocity videos shot by the "White Helmets" to spread western lies. The Mighty Wurlitzer is losing its power.
-
There are an abundance of verified videos showing Ukrainian soldiers torturing Russian captives, POW's and alleged collaborators. The Bucha timeline proves that the murdered citizens were killed by Ukrainian forces. Everyone knows the playbook now, Roch. Seen it all before with atrocity videos shot by the "White Helmets" to spread western lies. The Mighty Wurlitzer is losing its power.
You have utterly lost it.
-
The cauldron containing somewhere between 60,000 and 100,000 will be, is being, neutralised next. The previous "shaping of the battlefield" (or blitzkrieg as David believes) is now over and has prevented any chance of re-supply or reinforcement to troops on the Donbass front-line. They will be left with only the choice of surrendering or fighting to their death. This will happen shortly. Facts on the ground tell you this even as the Mighty Wurlitzer insists that Russia is losing, humiliated. Who/what to believe? The always honest and independent Mighty Wurlitzer, or your own lying eyes?
I suspect that the entire Black Sea coastline, including Odessa, will be taken to leave a land locked rump state. Ukraine along with their backers and advisers from NATO are defeated. There will be more defeats to come as the rest of the world breaks free from the yoke of US/NATO hegemony and dominance. Ukraine is just the first domino.
Time will tell who is correct. And it wont be favorable to you. Not that it will prevent you from spinning a tale on how its somehow a victory.
-
You are too gullible and willing to believe anything that suits.
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Selfawarewolf (https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Selfawarewolf)
You are at it again. :))
-
I'm quite sure Russia will keep Crimea, but wouldn't the navy at Sevastopol have to navigate past NATO countries in a crisis?
I found this clip quite telling gringo: https://youtu.be/r5LyDd4vQPk
It is telling, Steve. Shows the US/NATO plans for this are long in the planning, not that there isn't already an abundance of evidence showing this. McCain showing his usual true colours. Warmongers gonna warmonger.
If the crisis you refer to were large enough then I doubt that NATO navies would need to be navigated past. It would be more likely that the navies would be neutralised via stand off weaponry that NATO neither possesses or can defend against.
-
Time will tell who is correct. And it wont be favorable to you. Not that it will prevent you from spinning a tale on how its somehow a victory.
Time has been telling who is correct since this thread started, years ago. You have been consistently wrong.
-
Time has been telling who is correct since this thread started, years ago. You have been consistently wrong.
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Selfawarewolf
Aaaand again! :))
-
How Ukraine Won the Battle for Kyiv
https://www.rollingstone.co.uk/politics/features/how-ukraine-won-battle-kyiv-14872/ (https://www.rollingstone.co.uk/politics/features/how-ukraine-won-battle-kyiv-14872/)
-
https://socialistworker.co.uk/news/cover-up-as-british-army-fuels-war-drive-in-ukraine/
-
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Selfawarewolf (https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Selfawarewolf)
You are at it again. :))
When you can cohesively and coherently present your own argument, I may take you seriously. I would stick to the playstation games if I were you, David. Your lack of any real insight or knowledge of world affairs is exposed by the shallowness of your comments.
Who the fuck has ever used the expression "selfawarewolf"? You can't even compose your own insults. I refer you back to this;
David: Have you ever heard of a "Selfawarewolf"? Its when someone unknowingly describes themselves.
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Selfawarewolf
gringo: Have you ever heard of a gobshite?
It's the sort of person who when attempting to debate above his reading level resorts to arbitrary links as an "appeal to authority", posts irrelevant pictures and memes and uses urban dictionary in the absence of being able to construct a cohesive and coherent reply.
The fact that you don't attempt to refute my points raised, as I have yours in previous posts, demonstrates your lack of argument and lack of knowledge required to debate hence your non original and repeated childish insults. You need to raise your game.
-
How Ukraine Won the Battle for Kyiv
https://www.rollingstone.co.uk/politics/features/how-ukraine-won-battle-kyiv-14872/ (https://www.rollingstone.co.uk/politics/features/how-ukraine-won-battle-kyiv-14872/)
There was no battle of Kiev, David.
Russia has successfully shaped the battlefield and pinned the larger defending forces who now lack any means of mobility. This has become apparent to all but the wilfully blind.
-
https://socialistworker.co.uk/news/cover-up-as-british-army-fuels-war-drive-in-ukraine/
I knew they were in Poland in February ( training ) but I didn't know they were in Ukraine----though it wouldn't be difficult to work out.
-
There was no battle of Kiev, David.
Russia has successfully shaped the battlefield and pinned the larger defending forces who now lack any means of mobility. This has become apparent to all but the wilfully blind.
Sour grapes. Sour grapes. Soon you will be saying there was no battle for eastern Ukraine. :))
-
Sour grapes. Sour grapes. Soon you will be saying there was no battle for eastern Ukraine. :))
How is the Donbass cauldron going? Any supplies, fuel or reinforcements?
There are between 60 and 100 thousand of the Ukrainian army there.
Do you think the Ukrainians are in a strong position?
This is the backbone of the Army.
Do you still believe that Russia are running out of ammo?
Do you think that what you imagine to be the battle for Kiev played any part in the Donbass front becoming isolated and now without supply lines or reinforcements?
It's called a pinning manoeuvre, very useful tactic in chess and war. That you still cannot conceive of strategies and tactics below the surface probably explains your string of chess defeats to NGB.
-
How is the Donbass cauldron going? Any supplies, fuel or reinforcements?
There are between 60 and 100 thousand of the Ukrainian army there.
Do you think the Ukrainians are in a strong position?
This is the backbone of the Army.
Do you still believe that Russia are running out of ammo?
Do you think that what you imagine to be the battle for Kiev played any part in the Donbass front becoming isolated and now without supply lines or reinforcements?
It's called a pinning manoeuvre, very useful tactic in chess and war. That you still cannot conceive of strategies and tactics below the surface probably explains your string of chess defeats to NGB.
Sorry David, but I had a schoolboy snigger when I read the last couple of sentences.
-
How is the Donbass cauldron going? Any supplies, fuel or reinforcements?
There are between 60 and 100 thousand of the Ukrainian army there.
Do you think the Ukrainians are in a strong position?
This is the backbone of the Army.
Do you still believe that Russia are running out of ammo?
Its all down to psychology. The Ukrainian troops are on "deaths ground" as Sun Tzu would put it. They are willing and motivated. They are fighting for everything, their homeland their families and their freedom. Failure is not an option for them. The Russian troops on the other hand are demoralised and reluctant to fight and who can blame them? Risking your life because some egomaniac in the Kremlin knows his days are numbered and fancies himself as the next Peter the Great for the history books.
Do you think that what you imagine to be the battle for Kiev played any part in the Donbass front becoming isolated and now without supply lines or reinforcements?
Dombas is not isolated. The forces intended for Kyiv are being sent to the south in a desperate attempt to achieve something in time for Vladolf Putler's may 9th parade.
It's called a pinning manoeuvre, very useful tactic in chess and war.
No, its called spinning a tale after a failure. For example...
From Führer headquarters, 3 February 1943. The supreme command of the Wehrmacht announces that the battle of Stalingrad has come to an end. True to its oath of allegiance, the Sixth Army under the exemplary leadership of Field Marshal Paulus has been annihilated by the overwhelming superiority of enemy numbers. The sacrifice of the Sixth Army was not in vain. As the bulwark of our historic European mission, it has held out against the onslaught of six Soviet armies. They died so that Germany might live.
Huge contrast from the fact that Paulus actually surrendered and almost 100,000 German troops were taken prisoner.
Likewise Putler's defeat at Kyiv is spun as some kind of victory.
That you still cannot conceive of strategies and tactics below the surface probably explains your string of chess defeats to NGB.
No, my string of defeats is simply explained by the fact that NGB plays better than I do.
-
Quote from: gringo on Today at 08:46 PM
That you still cannot conceive of strategies and tactics below the surface probably explains your string of chess defeats to NGB.
No, my string of defeats is simply explained by the fact that NGB plays better than I do.
Why does NGB play better than you? Probably because of the above. Until you figure it out, your string of defeats will get longer.
-
Its all down to psychology. The Ukrainian troops are on "deaths ground" as Sun Tzu would put it. They are willing and motivated. They are fighting for everything, their homeland their families and their freedom. Failure is not an option for them. The Russian troops on the other hand are demoralised and reluctant to fight and who can blame them? Risking your life because some egomaniac in the Kremlin knows his days are numbered and fancies himself as the next Peter the Great for the history books.
That is wishful thinking, not analysis. Just slightly below hope. If that is your strategy for the cut off, no chance of re-supply or reinforcement or escape Ukrainian army in the Donbass cauldron then they are doomed. To be honest there is no strategy that could be successful.
Your pulled from your arse, and based on more of your "wishful thinking", opinion that the Russian troops are demoralised but the surrounded and isolated Ukrainians willing and motivated is the total opposite of reality. Have a little think about it. Russian artillery and bombs landing constantly degrading their dug in defences. Fast running out supplies of everything.
Something about Peter the Great; you have nothing to say do you?
No, its called spinning a tale after a failure. For example...
From Führer headquarters, 3 February 1943. The supreme command of the Wehrmacht announces that the battle of Stalingrad has come to an end. True to its oath of allegiance, the Sixth Army under the exemplary leadership of Field Marshal Paulus has been annihilated by the overwhelming superiority of enemy numbers. The sacrifice of the Sixth Army was not in vain. As the bulwark of our historic European mission, it has held out against the onslaught of six Soviet armies. They died so that Germany might live.
Huge contrast from the fact that Paulus actually surrendered and almost 100,000 German troops were taken prisoner.
Likewise Putler's defeat at Kyiv is spun as some kind of victory.
An irrelevant historical comparison that for unexplained reasons you consider apt. You have nothing to say but say it anyway. If you really believe that the Ukrainian troops caught in the cauldron will survive on the wishful thinking presented by you, then the rest of your opinions should be given the same weight that this one deserves.
-
Quote from: gringo on Today at 08:46 PM
That you still cannot conceive of strategies and tactics below the surface probably explains your string of chess defeats to NGB.
No, my string of defeats is simply explained by the fact that NGB plays better than I do.
Why does NGB play better than you? Probably because of the above. Until you figure it out, your string of defeats will get longer.
Maybe you should listen to, arguably the greatest chess player of all time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OF5xMw0wKXM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OF5xMw0wKXM)
-
Maybe you should listen to, arguably the greatest chess player of all time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OF5xMw0wKXM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OF5xMw0wKXM)
Maybe if you learned more from his unarguably brilliant chess playing and listened less to his always wrong geopolitics, then you could perhaps be better informed at the latter and eventually defeat NGB at the former.
-
Maybe if you learned more from his unarguably brilliant chess playing and listened less to his always wrong geopolitics, then you could perhaps be better informed at the latter and eventually defeat NGB at the former.
You claimed my perceived lack of understanding of your analysis is why I lose chess games. Yet the greatest chess player of all time shares the same view I do on the same subject that is (according to you) the reason I lose at chess.
:)) Checkmate.
-
You claimed my perceived lack of understanding of your analysis is why I lose chess games. Yet the greatest chess player of all time shares the same view I do on the same subject that is (according to you) the reason I lose at chess.
:)) Checkmate.
Your lack of understanding of strategies and tactics below the surface was a reason I gave for your string of defeats. As well as being a bit funny (well made Roch snigger) it is also true. Even without following move by move, your encounters with NGB, I can confidently assert that there are hidden (to you for certain) strategies being employed by NGB. That is literally how you play better at chess.
Kasparov was, I'm sure still is, a dynamic chess player. I remember following the Karpov/Kasparov games, which were well reported in those days as well as his encounters with the computers (forget the names, can't be arsed to look). I played chess regularly at that time and Kasparov was a genuinely exciting player, even though that sounds like an oxymoron. Chess exciting?
Since his heady days as a precocious chess talent and towering presence as the seemingly unbeatable world champion, he has become better known as an outspoken critic/dissident of the Russian government. He sides with questionable allies and his political views are not in any way related to his undoubted talent as a chess genius.
In the video that you presented, Kasparov was not talking about strategy and tactics, he is talking/stuttering his way through heaps of wishful thinking. It's all believe and hope. Bollocks in other words.
Your still in checkmate yourself, agreeing with Kasparov on his own personal politics is not the same as being Kasparov's chess equal, but you are used to it anyway.
-
Your lack of understanding of strategies and tactics below the surface was a reason I gave for your string of defeats. As well as being a bit funny (well made Roch snigger) it is also true. Even without following move by move, your encounters with NGB, I can confidently assert that there are hidden (to you for certain) strategies being employed by NGB. That is literally how you play better at chess.
Kasparov was, I'm sure still is, a dynamic chess player. I remember following the Karpov/Kasparov games, which were well reported in those days as well as his encounters with the computers (forget the names, can't be arsed to look). I played chess regularly at that time and Kasparov was a genuinely exciting player, even though that sounds like an oxymoron. Chess exciting?
Since his heady days as a precocious chess talent and towering presence as the seemingly unbeatable world champion, he has become better known as an outspoken critic/dissident of the Russian government. He sides with questionable allies and his political views are not in any way related to his undoubted talent as a chess genius.
In the video that you presented, Kasparov was not talking about strategy and tactics, he is talking/stuttering his way through heaps of wishful thinking. It's all believe and hope. Bollocks in other words.
Your still in checkmate yourself, agreeing with Kasparov on his own personal politics is not the same as being Kasparov's chess equal, but you are used to it anyway.
Here is a more recent interview of him.
https://youtu.be/fF_yVv52j_Q?t=38 (https://youtu.be/fF_yVv52j_Q?t=38)
-
Here is a more recent interview of him.
https://youtu.be/fF_yVv52j_Q?t=38 (https://youtu.be/fF_yVv52j_Q?t=38)
As I say. His mastery of chess - groundbreaking.
His political views - groundless.
-
Wladimir Klitschko speaks to GB News
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DWz68y8btY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DWz68y8btY)
-
https://socialistworker.co.uk/news/cover-up-as-british-army-fuels-war-drive-in-ukraine/
That article is pretty stunning really, Roch, in what is revealed. There are a number of reasonable inferences that can be made and it is made worse by the statement from Brigadier Dodds.
Brigadier Geoffrey Dodds, Secretary of the DSMA, said, “Should any editor currently be considering publishing or broadcasting information on these operations, may I ask you to seek my advice beforehand?” What did they want to hide? The D Notice said it didn’t want any details published of “Special Forces and other Ministry of Defence units engaged in security, intelligence and counter-terrorism operations, including their methods, techniques and activities. Such disclosure could reveal details of operations or operating methods and techniques before, during and after their execution which would bestow an advantage on an adversary.”
First of all, he appears to be admitting that the British Army are engaged in "operations" against an "adversary" in Ukraine. Who might this adversary be? Can only be Russia, but we are not at war with Russia. Were we so, then...?
This is inviting retaliation from Russia. Waging undeclared war is no different from declared war in the responses it legitimately allows.
In reality the notice isn’t about protecting “British lives” it’s about controlling what the press writes about the war. The Times report said, “Former British soldiers, marines and special forces commandos are also in Ukraine working as training contractors and volunteers, but the Ukrainian officers were adamant that their training this month was carried out by serving British soldiers.
When you think it can get no worse. "Ukrainian officers were adamant that their training this month was carried out by serving British soldiers". Serving British soldiers!
Do the UK MOD deny it? No they stick a "D notice" on it.
It goes from bad to worse to even worse after that and leaves little doubt that UK is in an undeclared war, and has been for some time, with Russia.
The "D notices" speak volumes.
The government waged war first, then via "D notices" are controlling what can be reported. They have banned/censored opposing media. They are "manufacturing consent" for their already undeclared war on Russia and now need the consent. Propaganda, censorship and lies are their only mechanisms.
Any response from Russia would be legal and the UK govt. and their obedient press are using the British public and soldiers as pawns in their blind hatred of Russia.
-
April 19 Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment (ISW)
https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-april-19 (https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-april-19)
-
Can Ukraine’s Military Hold Off Russia’s Offensive In The Donbas Region?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lp8wliDB55Q (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lp8wliDB55Q)
-
Destroyed Russian tanks in recaptured Bucha, Ukraine
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dkwTIRaQ2g (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dkwTIRaQ2g)
-
Putin’s Russia: A Moderate Fascist State by Vladislav Inozemtsev
https://archive.transatlanticrelations.org/publication/putins-russia-moderate-fascist-state-vladislav-inozemtsev/ (https://archive.transatlanticrelations.org/publication/putins-russia-moderate-fascist-state-vladislav-inozemtsev/)
-
That article is pretty stunning really, Roch, in what is revealed. There are a number of reasonable inferences that can be made and it is made worse by the statement from Brigadier Dodds.
Brigadier Geoffrey Dodds, Secretary of the DSMA, said, “Should any editor currently be considering publishing or broadcasting information on these operations, may I ask you to seek my advice beforehand?” What did they want to hide? The D Notice said it didn’t want any details published of “Special Forces and other Ministry of Defence units engaged in security, intelligence and counter-terrorism operations, including their methods, techniques and activities. Such disclosure could reveal details of operations or operating methods and techniques before, during and after their execution which would bestow an advantage on an adversary.”
First of all, he appears to be admitting that the British Army are engaged in "operations" against an "adversary" in Ukraine. Who might this adversary be? Can only be Russia, but we are not at war with Russia. Were we so, then...?
This is inviting retaliation from Russia. Waging undeclared war is no different from declared war in the responses it legitimately allows.
In reality the notice isn’t about protecting “British lives” it’s about controlling what the press writes about the war. The Times report said, “Former British soldiers, marines and special forces commandos are also in Ukraine working as training contractors and volunteers, but the Ukrainian officers were adamant that their training this month was carried out by serving British soldiers.
When you think it can get no worse. "Ukrainian officers were adamant that their training this month was carried out by serving British soldiers". Serving British soldiers!
Do the UK MOD deny it? No they stick a "D notice" on it.
It goes from bad to worse to even worse after that and leaves little doubt that UK is in an undeclared war, and has been for some time, with Russia.
The "D notices" speak volumes.
The government waged war first, then via "D notices" are controlling what can be reported. They have banned/censored opposing media. They are "manufacturing consent" for their already undeclared war on Russia and now need the consent. Propaganda, censorship and lies are their only mechanisms.
Any response from Russia would be legal and the UK govt. and their obedient press are using the British public and soldiers as pawns in their blind hatred of Russia.
Yes, the D Notice is particularly interesting. I agree regarding censorship on our part.
-
Yes, the D Notice is particularly interesting. I agree regarding censorship on our part.
How is it being censored when the article has been published in the first place? :))
-
How is it being censored when the article has been published in the first place? :))
I would have to see the Times article to give an opinion. If we take your view though, why waste time and energy with D Notices?
A wider issue and question is, just how compliment is our press, with regards to D Notices? A high level of compliance could imply a controlled press (as I have previously suggested). The problem is David, if you have a mechanism for censorship that can be applied when there is a genuine need for censorship, those who control that mechanism will quickly realise that the mechanism can be abused. This is what I believe has happened to our press / media. They are probably overly compliant.
-
I would have to see the Times article to give an opinion. If we take your view though, why waste time and energy with D Notices?
A wider issue and question is, just how compliment is our press, with regards to D Notices? A high level of compliance could imply a controlled press (as I have previously suggested). The problem is David, if you have a mechanism for censorship that can be applied when there is a genuine need for censorship, those who control that mechanism will quickly realise that the mechanism can be abused. This is what I believe has happened to our press / media. They are probably overly compliant.
That site is a joke. Big censorship coverup! read all about it in this uncensored article. They wont let us publish this but here were are publishing it! :))
-
Roch if you are into conspiracies you might like this...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sx2YmSXDy8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sx2YmSXDy8)
Just for the record, I am not convinced Putin done this.
-
Yes, the D Notice is particularly interesting. I agree regarding censorship on our part.
I remember at the time of the Skripal fantasy, Lavrov commenting about the UK govt. quoted from Alice's Adventures in Wonderland,
"Verdict first, evidence later"
How apt. Lavrov knows his history and understands the ways of the "Perfidious Albion".
There were also "D notices" in place forbidding mention of certain persons in the Skripal farce, that we know of for certain, and in light of this it begs the question of just how many "D notices" have been issued in the last few years. It is also a curious coincidence that whenever there are allegations against the Russian state, UK intel and "D notices" seem to pop up. It has been going on for some time, the provocations against Russia.
This new stage goes beyond provocations. UK/US and NATO are insanely criminally irresponsible now using their populations as pawns in their desperation to subdue Russia.
This time it appears that the UK govt. have waged an undeclared war and via "D notices", censorship and outright lies are seeking a casus belli.
This is extremely serious and by the actions of the UK state it is clear, at this point, that decisions of such magnitude are taken to serve someone other than the UK public. A functioning democracy with a free press would rid themselves of such vile warmongers. Alleged "Russian aggression" is going to be reported regardless of there actually being any.
Verdict first, evidence later evolves into
War first, casus belli later.
-
I remember at the time of the Skripal fantasy, Lavrov commenting about the UK govt. quoted from Alice's Adventures in Wonderland,
"Verdict first, evidence later"
How apt. Lavrov knows his history and understands the ways of the "Perfidious Albion".
There were also "D notices" in place forbidding mention of certain persons in the Skripal farce, that we know of for certain, and in light of this it begs the question of just how many "D notices" have been issued in the last few years. It is also a curious coincidence that whenever there are allegations against the Russian state, UK intel and "D notices" seem to pop up. It has been going on for some time, the provocations against Russia.
This new stage goes beyond provocations. UK/US and NATO are insanely criminally irresponsible now using their populations as pawns in their desperation to subdue Russia.
This time it appears that the UK govt. have waged an undeclared war and via "D notices", censorship and outright lies are seeking a casus belli.
This is extremely serious and by the actions of the UK state it is clear, at this point, that decisions of such magnitude are taken to serve someone other than the UK public. A functioning democracy with a free press would rid themselves of such vile warmongers. Alleged "Russian aggression" is going to be reported regardless of there actually being any.
Verdict first, evidence later evolves into
War first, casus belli later.
Ah yes, the poisoning of Sergei Skripal. How fortunate it was for the UK government conspirators that two GRU agents took a random holiday to see Salisbury Cathedral that day along with a pre-booked return flight to Russia leaving just hours after after our government tried to frame them! :))
-
How is it being censored when the article has been published in the first place? :))
You never disappoint in your unerring ability to spectacularly miss the point and then misrepresent what is being discussed. Banning of media, social media and MSM banning prominent commentators/journalists who question official western narratives is the censorship.
The subject matter of what had a "D notice" put on it is what is important. That it was breached "this time" does not make everything ok.
Waging undeclared war on Russia putting in danger the UK public does not become okay because the secret's out. It makes it worse.
Are you of the opinion that this is all okay because it has been reported, although not widely?
What real point, if any, do you have to add? this one's rhetorical.
-
https://youtu.be/8dUrDSELzjY
-
You never disappoint in your unerring ability to spectacularly miss the point and then misrepresent what is being discussed. Banning of media, social media and MSM banning prominent commentators/journalists who question official western narratives is the censorship.
The subject matter of what had a "D notice" put on it is what is important. That it was breached "this time" does not make everything ok.
Waging undeclared war on Russia putting in danger the UK public does not become okay because the secret's out. It makes it worse.
Are you of the opinion that this is all okay because it has been reported, although not widely?
What real point, if any, do you have to add? this one's rhetorical.
Ukraine like any country can invite its allies personnel (military or otherwise) to assist it with training on its own soil. Russian troops on foreign soil where they are not welcome have it coming.
-
Russian troops on foreign soil where they are not welcome have it coming.
Just Russians?
Are you ok with UK/US/NATO troops on foreign soil where they are not welcome?
To maintain consistency, do you comment much on how UK/US/NATO troops have it coming?
-
I'm afraid that we as a country have a habit of encroaching in other countries----take 2003 for instance and Iraq !! Now we have the PM poking around in India ? Why ? A great ally of Russia----nice, when our own country is in the biggest mess that's going to take years to unravel.
Should there be a war, where would allegiances be of those who've entered this country ?
-
Russian troops on foreign soil where they are not welcome have it coming.
Just Russians?
Are you ok with UK/US/NATO troops on foreign soil where they are not welcome?
To maintain consistency, do you comment much on how UK/US/NATO troops have it coming?
Membership is NATO is voluntary. Its only unwelcome by those running autocratic kleptocracies and whoever they have managed to brainwash (such as yourself).
Ukraine is a democratic country and its people want to be closer to western Europe. Hence Vladolf Putler has to resort to force and repression in order to impose his will on the region.
-
It seems American Neo-Nazis are supporting Putin.
https://www.stormfront.org/forum/t1358692-4/ (https://www.stormfront.org/forum/t1358692-4/)
That thread is hilarious.
-
Not only USA David. There's a lot of unrest in many countries involving the so-called Neo-Nazi's which has been created from within caused by bad leaders and inept governments-----as well as all the " do-gooders " who've caused most of what we witness present day.
I could say an awful lot but ironically this freedom of speech that we're all supposed to " enjoy " doesn't permit the real spoken truth, only that which will never be censored !
-
In Sweden, a comparatively quiet country, there were riots a few days ago after a far-right politician had planned a burning of the Koran in towns and cities.
-
The 'Queens' - 'return to god' will officially signal 'the beginning of a full scale World War Three', the collapse of the world wide monetary systems, and many of us old, sick, people will not be around to experience 'living on credit rationing'. My original timed event was /is 2025, for the official 'New World Order' empowerment - it will all bear down to the timing of the queen's death!
Mark my words, the time for change is upon us, 'the clock is ticking'!
-
What Russia's Losses In Ukraine Could Mean For Putin And Russia
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_ZUDMmcyFY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_ZUDMmcyFY)
-
Roch if you are into conspiracies you might like this...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sx2YmSXDy8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sx2YmSXDy8)
Just for the record, I am not convinced Putin done this.
Wouldn't be surprised. It's a tried and tested formula.
-
What Russia's Losses In Ukraine Could Mean For Putin And Russia
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_ZUDMmcyFY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_ZUDMmcyFY)
Speaking as a renowned armchair general.. 😏
There will have to be root and branch reform of the Russian military: it's recruitment; it's leadership and command structure; it's training; it's strategy and tactics; and it's motorised vehicles / tanks etc.
The thing is, what has happened in Ukraine provides Russia with a perfect opportunity to do this. At least theoretically, if not practically (ie if their economy is ravaged as a result of sanctions / inflation etc). If you have all your faults laid bare before your eyes, then maybe the only way is up. They will surely not wish to make the same mistakes twice, should any future conflict occur.
-
Speaking as a renowned armchair general.. 😏
There will have to be root and branch reform of the Russian military: it's recruitment; it's leadership and command structure; it's training; it's strategy and tactics; and it's motorised vehicles / tanks etc.
The thing is, what has happened in Ukraine provides Russia with a perfect opportunity to do this. At least theoretically, if not practically (ie if their economy is ravaged as a result of sanctions / inflation etc). If you have all your faults laid bare before your eyes, then maybe the only way is up. They will surely not wish to make the same mistakes twice, should any future conflict occur.
With their shrinking population, economic brain drain and Europe along with North America transitioning to renewable and nuclear energy plus the transition to electric cars. Russia as we know it is doomed either way.
-
It seems American Neo-Nazis are supporting Putin.
https://www.stormfront.org/forum/t1358692-4/ (https://www.stormfront.org/forum/t1358692-4/)
That thread is hilarious.
do you think the leting down there naicomraes in the ukriane then well thatis a fair point.
-
"Meanwhile on Russian state TV: host Vladimir Solovyov threatens Europe and all NATO countries, asking whether they will have enough weapons and people to defend themselves once Russia's "special operation" in Ukraine comes to an end. Solovyov adds: "There will be no mercy.""
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/uatoqa/russian_state_tv_host_vladimir_solovyov_threatens/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/uatoqa/russian_state_tv_host_vladimir_solovyov_threatens/)
-
Six Russian oligarchs have "committed suicide" since Putlers invasion started.
https://globalnews.ca/news/8790242/russian-oligarchs-suicides-ukraine/ (https://globalnews.ca/news/8790242/russian-oligarchs-suicides-ukraine/)
-
I think it's all lies David, as one miraculously came back to life not long ago after it was reported that he'd been killed.
We, or rather the Ukranians have to see what Putin has up his sleeve for the 9th of May yet. That date and month commemorates the victory of the Russian army in WWII.
Mariupol is all but finished / wiped out, will it be Donbas by the 9th ?
-
looks like russia is winning https://youtu.be/vxXtrjB1xSo
-
Russian Oligarch Deaths Were Not Suicide, Says Gas Exec Who Fled Country
https://www.newsweek.com/russian-oligarch-deaths-suicide-gas-exec-fled-igor-volobuev-vladislav-avaev-sergey-protosenya-1701373 (https://www.newsweek.com/russian-oligarch-deaths-suicide-gas-exec-fled-igor-volobuev-vladislav-avaev-sergey-protosenya-1701373)
-
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/apr/28/liz-truss-ukraine-war-russia-conservative-power
-
Russian ‘troll factory’ waging disinformation war online
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-ukraine-war-latest-victory-day-putin-kyiv-b2068927.html (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-ukraine-war-latest-victory-day-putin-kyiv-b2068927.html)
-
Lasted 2 days. lol
(https://preview.redd.it/8nney0fp3ww81.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=790bef7475bcb9d6239c0421a1360ae504aa62e3)
(https://preview.redd.it/gwobh1fp3ww81.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=676ff03a1436e483818c5d15e01c5c211b1bc4ce)
-
I'd been wondering about those poor people who'd been trapped beneath the steelworks all this time and saw on the news that they'd finally got out. What an inhuman existance they've suffered, over 2 months of darkness, fear and trauma yet still remain with a positive outcome for their futures. All heroes !
I can't help but feel a sense of shame at our country and its leaders against the heroism of the Ukranian people !
-
Russian Oligarch Deaths Were Not Suicide, Says Gas Exec Who Fled Country
https://www.newsweek.com/russian-oligarch-deaths-suicide-gas-exec-fled-igor-volobuev-vladislav-avaev-sergey-protosenya-1701373 (https://www.newsweek.com/russian-oligarch-deaths-suicide-gas-exec-fled-igor-volobuev-vladislav-avaev-sergey-protosenya-1701373)
👽
-
"Russian president Vladimir Putin wants you to believe that NATO is responsible for his February 24 invasion of Ukraine—that rounds of NATO enlargement made Russia insecure, forcing Putin to lash out. This argument has two key flaws. First, NATO has been a variable and not a constant source of tension between Russia and the West. Moscow has in the past acknowledged Ukraine's right to join NATO; the Kremlin's complaints about the alliance spike in a clear pattern after democratic breakthroughs in the post-Soviet space. This highlights a second flaw: Since Putin fears democracy and the threat that it poses to his regime, and not expanded NATO membership, taking the latter off the table will not quell his insecurity. His declared goal of the invasion, the "denazification" of Ukraine, is a code for his real aim: antidemocratic regime change."
https://muse.jhu.edu/article/852742 (https://muse.jhu.edu/article/852742)
-
I'd been wondering about those poor people who'd been trapped beneath the steelworks all this time and saw on the news that they'd finally got out. What an inhuman existance they've suffered, over 2 months of darkness, fear and trauma yet still remain with a positive outcome for their futures. All heroes !
I can't help but feel a sense of shame at our country and its leaders against the heroism of the Ukranian people !
Those poor people are being held hostage as human shields by the Azov, Lookout. There have been numerous ceasefires and humanitarian corridors set up for the civilians, which have not been used. We should wonder whether they chose to stay in bunkers with admitted and proud Nazis of the Azov battalion whilst under siege, or if they were forced to stay as human shields to protect the aforementioned Nazis? We should not wonder for too long though. The answer is obvious when given even a few seconds consideration. Now that some have been released there is an abundance of testimony to this fact, such as;
https://twitter.com/supertima_/status/1521116992278863873
There is no question of coercion on Russia's part with both Red Cross and UN present. Also why are not all civilians freed at the same time. Feels more like a hostage situation.
It has long been apparent that the Azovstal plant has become disproportionately important to NATO countries. Numerous desperate attempts have been made to extract something or some people from there. Since then we have had interventions from the UN Sec. Gen. (Guterres), the Pope? and blanket coverage of the civilians in Azovstal and Russia brutal bombing, poor civilians, from media and politicians. None bothering to ask the obvious questions.
No-one in the media coming to the obvious conclusion that these civilians were self evidently hostages of the Azov Nazis, who we are now to believe are cuddly freedom fighters. Much like our embrace and arming of Al Qaeda, Al Nusra et al. in Syria.
The civilians were shields and are now probably being used as leverage in the final attempt by NATO and their Nazi henchmen to prevent Russia getting their hands on whatever it is that they are desperate to keep Russian hands off.
It will likely prove NATO involvement. Which would mean that Russia were being truthful claiming that Ukraine were planning to invade the breakaway republics as well as Crimea. Which in turn makes it legal under the R2P doctrine, which is Russia's claim. R2P is something which NATO have abused numerous times (Yugoslavia, Libya). It also, very much, changes the Rules of Engagement.
-
How complicated, Gringo. At the very beginning of the conflict I inwardly sensed a " far-right " movement when people were being evacuated from buildings.
Interestingly, if you read the 14 points of fascism, our government is quite close :)
-
How complicated, Gringo. At the very beginning of the conflict I inwardly sensed a " far-right " movement when people were being evacuated from buildings.
Interestingly, if you read the 14 points of fascism, our government is quite close :)
Took your advice and read the 14 points, Lookout. There isn't a cigarette paper between the 14 points and UK govt.
-
I would class him as being more of a world statesman than Liz Truss; Gavin Williamson; Dominic Raab etc. However, where he has been found wanting and is therefore deserving of criticism, then he should be subject to such criticism.
Apart from denying Russia invaded Ukraine. Lavrov is now claiming Hitler was part Jewish 🤡
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-61296682 (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-61296682)
-
Those poor people are being held hostage as human shields by the Azov, Lookout. There have been numerous ceasefires and humanitarian corridors set up for the civilians, which have not been used. We should wonder whether they chose to stay in bunkers with admitted and proud Nazis of the Azov battalion whilst under siege, or if they were forced to stay as human shields to protect the aforementioned Nazis? We should not wonder for too long though. The answer is obvious when given even a few seconds consideration. Now that some have been released there is an abundance of testimony to this fact, such as;
https://twitter.com/supertima_/status/1521116992278863873
There is no question of coercion on Russia's part with both Red Cross and UN present. Also why are not all civilians freed at the same time. Feels more like a hostage situation.
It has long been apparent that the Azovstal plant has become disproportionately important to NATO countries. Numerous desperate attempts have been made to extract something or some people from there. Since then we have had interventions from the UN Sec. Gen. (Guterres), the Pope? and blanket coverage of the civilians in Azovstal and Russia brutal bombing, poor civilians, from media and politicians. None bothering to ask the obvious questions.
No-one in the media coming to the obvious conclusion that these civilians were self evidently hostages of the Azov Nazis, who we are now to believe are cuddly freedom fighters. Much like our embrace and arming of Al Qaeda, Al Nusra et al. in Syria.
The civilians were shields and are now probably being used as leverage in the final attempt by NATO and their Nazi henchmen to prevent Russia getting their hands on whatever it is that they are desperate to keep Russian hands off.
It will likely prove NATO involvement. Which would mean that Russia were being truthful claiming that Ukraine were planning to invade the breakaway republics as well as Crimea. Which in turn makes it legal under the R2P doctrine, which is Russia's claim. R2P is something which NATO have abused numerous times (Yugoslavia, Libya). It also, very much, changes the Rules of Engagement.
There's no clear evidence that peaceful ethnic Russians were being massacred in Ukraine, neither that a majority of Russian speakers in Donestsk and Luhansk wish to join Russia. The R2P (Responsibilty to Protect) provision under UN Security Council Resolution 1973 is being blatantly abused.
-
There's no clear evidence that peaceful ethnic Russians were being massacred in Ukraine, neither that a majority of Russian speakers in Donestsk and Luhansk wish to join Russia. The R2P (Responsibilty to Protect) provision under UN Security Council Resolution 1973 is being blatantly abused.
There is an abundance of evidence of ethnic Russians being massacred in Donetsk and Luhansk, Steve. 14,000+ civilian deaths from shelling, all documented and evidence collected for the 8 years prior to the Russian action. If you had been paying attention all along, you would know this. It didn't start in February.
R2P has clearly been abused to regime change "unfriendly governments" by NATO. No fly zones abused for political purposes. The shelling and war on Ukrainians in Donetsk by their own army has been documented over the last 8 years and is an undeniable fact. It has been reported on throughout this time in western media. It is also becoming clearer by the day that the Russian move merely pre-empted the planned Ukraine/NATO action.
Russia certainly have a stronger case for R2P in Donetsk than NATO had in Yugoslavia, Libya, Syria and anywhere else that they have abused it.
-
There is an abundance of evidence of ethnic Russians being massacred in Donetsk and Luhansk, Steve. 14,000+ civilian deaths from shelling, all documented and evidence collected for the 8 years prior to the Russian action. If you had been paying attention all along, you would know this. It didn't start in February.
R2P has clearly been abused to regime change "unfriendly governments" by NATO. No fly zones abused for political purposes. The shelling and war on Ukrainians in Donetsk by their own army has been documented over the last 8 years and is an undeniable fact. It has been reported on throughout this time in western media. It is also becoming clearer by the day that the Russian move merely pre-empted the planned Ukraine/NATO action.
Russia certainly have a stronger case for R2P in Donetsk than NATO had in Yugoslavia, Libya, Syria and anywhere else that they have abused it.
But you're forgetting that Ukraine is sovereign territory and there was a civil war. My suspicion is that Russia took Crimea as a trophy for the naval base, whose lease was about to run out. I don't attempt to justify all the NATO interventions you describe except to say following the Srebrenica massacre in July 1995 there was genuine concern that no repetition should be countenanced in that area of Europe.
-
They seek him here,
They seek him there,
They seek the General Cadieu,
Is he in heaven,
Or Azovstahl,
That damned elusive General.
The "missing" Canadian General rumoured to be captured by Russia in Mariupol. The reporting around this would suggest that the rumours have some basis. As well as multiple reports on foreign media and telegram channels, Canadian media have been reporting snippets here and there which appear to be attempts to get ahead of the unfolding narrative.
Canadian media are reporting that Cadieu resigned his commission on April 5 after more than 30 years service. We are to believe that he gave up his approx. $270,000 salary after 30+ years service to act as a mercenary/volunteer in Ukraine??!!
The writer goes out of their way to point out that Cadieu's actions are his "personal choice" and obviously nothing to do with the Canadian military!!
Here is the full piece;
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/military-officer-retires-heads-to-ukraine-amid-sex-misconduct-investigation-1.5871017
The resignation story is clearly bollocks and as stated, an attempt to get ahead of the narrative.
-
There is an abundance of evidence of ethnic Russians being massacred in Donetsk and Luhansk, Steve.
Strange how they failed to show up at court to prove it.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-russia-face-off-world-court-over-genocide-claim-2022-03-06/ (https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-russia-face-off-world-court-over-genocide-claim-2022-03-06/)
"The fact that Russia's seats are empty speaks loudly. They are not here in this court of law: they are on a battlefield waging an aggressive war against my country,"
-
But you're forgetting that Ukraine is sovereign territory and there was a civil war. My suspicion is that Russia took Crimea as a trophy for the naval base, whose lease was about to run out. I don't attempt to justify all the NATO interventions you describe except to say following the Srebrenica massacre in July 1995 there was genuine concern that no repetition should be countenanced in that area of Europe.
I haven't forgotten anything, Steve. Yugoslavia, Libya, Syria were all also sovereign territories. Sovereignty has nothing to do with R2P. If sovereignty prevented R2P then all R2P has been illegal according to this metric. Sovereignty is not a defence for massacres or crimes against humanity.
Weeks prior to the invasion, the Russians handed their evidence alleging genocide to the UN. This was largely unreported in the West because the implications were understood. By alleging genocide and providing evidence, this was setting the legal groundwork for the R2P intervention. Dotting the i's and crossing the t's, as it were, with properly documented evidence handed to the UN.
It is worth comparing with the Western/NATO approach to R2P. They gather a bunch of propaganda and lies and hand it to the pliant media channels who then uncritically repeat it and tell us that we (NATO/UK/US) must do something. In Western NATO parlance, this is legal justification for bombing the shit out of some countries civilians and armed forces whilst arming and training various mercs, nazis and jihadists, or as we call them, "moderate rebels" to overthrow a sovereign government.
To be fair, NATO did at one time attempt to go through recognised legal channels. Although after the testimony of the Kuwaiti nurse before the UN, vis a vis the throwing babies from incubators by Iraqi troops lie. She turned out to be the Ambassador's daughter, wasn't a nurse, hadn't been in the hospital and the whole tale was invented to justify (you guessed it) a NATO war on Iraq. And who can forget Colin Powell disgracing himself with a vial of Anthrax, again before the UN, to justify yet another Iraqi invasion. The anthrax turned out to have come from American Biolab Fort Detrick.
After these debacles NATO/US/UK don't concern themselves with presenting evidence through the UN anymore and instead go the "court of public opinion" but only after massively propagandising and hiding relevant aspects from the "court of public opinion".
Your comments on Crimea are the opposite of truth.
Crimea is Russian and the Crimeans overwhelmingly want to remain part of Russia. A large number of Ukrainian troops stationed in Crimea defected to the Russians in 2014. There was no fight because Russians were welcomed there. The Ukrainian coup government was not. It is that simple.
The Russians made sure that NATO did not get their hands on Sevastopol, which was one of the main intentions behind the 2014 Maidan coup. Sevastopol is Russia's only warm water port and of huge strategic significance.
Remember that history rhymes. Crimea is an old tune. It comes up time and again because of it's significance to Russia. Russia is the defender, not the aggressor. These are self evident truths that western selective reading of history and events wilfully ignores.
-
The excellent Andrei Martyanov today with this piece, well worth reading. Copied and pasted the whole article below. Brilliant!
The Larry Johnson piece that Martyanov quotes from and recommends reading in full is worth the recommendation also.
1. Larry Johnson posted yesterday a very good piece from his friend on Maskirovka and deception in Operation Z.
Deception. The Soviets were probably the greatest masters of battlefield deception that there has ever been. I recommend David Glantz’s book for those who want to make a real study of it and for those who want a shorter introduction I suggest this essay (“one is awed by the magician’s illusions of objects disappearing and appearing”). Some in the West may remember D-Day’s ghost army but, as far as I know, this was the only time the Western Allies did deception on this scale. As the references above make clear, the Soviets did deception operations on this scale all the time – dummy vehicles, faked tank tracks, silent movement, lights moving at night, loudspeakers making engine noises, feint attacks, radio traffic, carefully encouraging the enemy to see what he wanted to see; as House says, they almost always fooled the Germans. And not just then – the 1939 attack at Khalkhin Gol stunned the Japanese – “we had no prior clue“. One may be certain that the Russian Army has inherited this talent.
Read the whole thing at Larry's blog--it is excellent.
2. The Hill, ever neocon and exceptionalist rag, suddenly was afflicted by a bout of clarity and in an opinion piece concluded:
The unprecedented U.S.-led Western sanctions against Russia have been likened to economic weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) that would ultimately destroy the Russian economy. In reality, the sanctions are like a double-edged sword — they inflict pain on Russia but also impose costs on their imposers. The West, in fact, is caught in a trap: The sanctions and the deepening conflict, by helping to raise global commodity and energy prices, translate into higher revenues for Moscow in spite of a significant decrease in its exports. And the higher international prices, by fueling inflation, mean political trouble at home for those behind the sanctions.
No shit, geniuses. How about learning what actual economy is and how it operates. The author also makes another discovery.
Look at another paradox: Despite Russia being cut off from the world’s financial arteries, the Russian ruble has dramatically recovered through state intervention. But, as if to signal that Japan is paying a price for following the U.S. lead on Russia, the Japanese yen (the world’s third-most-traded currency) has sunk to a 20-year low against the U.S. dollar, ranking this year as the worst performing of the 41 currencies tracked — worse than the ruble.
In general, Russophobia is being made by Russia a very expensive luxury. But the author DOES give a sensible explanation on why Operation Z proceeds the way it proceeds.
Biden’s belief that “this war could continue for a long time” is backed by Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley, who testified that he expects it to last years. But as the conflict drags on and the boomerang effects of the sanctions deepen the cost-of-living crisis, the divides in the Western camp will widen and “Ukraine fatigue” will set in. The West will be left with little choice but to negotiate with Putin to end the conflict, as predicted by Javier Solana, a former NATO chief who also served as Spain’s foreign minister. Such negotiations will be vital to halt Ukraine’s destruction and avert Europe from paying the main price.
You see, Russia CAN afford to be methodical and deliberate in her demilitarization of Ukraine, the West cannot--it simply doesn't have time. And that is the difference, a strategic one, between real economy and a virtual one. Nobody cares what Biden believes or what kind of, traditionally wrong, forecasts all those D.C. think-tanks produced, the reality "on the ground" has its own mind and those who do not understand it are bound to fail. Of course news like this:
China Calls Out U.S. Dollar Dominance As It Buys Russian Coal With Yuan
also send shivers down the spines of many in D.C. because all that is just the unfolding spectacle of the destruction of the US Dollar dominance. You see, one cannot accuse me of Russian rah-rah, all what I posted here is taken from the US sources. Repeat after me--reality is a bitch.
-
I wonder how many people are aware of this incident..
https://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/article/w/ukrainian-authorities-block-memorial-odessa-massacre
-
I wonder how many people are aware of this incident..
https://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/article/w/ukrainian-authorities-block-memorial-odessa-massacre
In the western Anglosphere, not as many as ought to, Roch. It was reported at the time extensively elsewhere and is not forgotten. This is who the Russians are dealing with. There is a lot of payback coming for the Odessa atrocity that you linked plus many others.
-
What clowns.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4eJvwtQJu4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4eJvwtQJu4)
-
What clowns.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4eJvwtQJu4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4eJvwtQJu4)
I would prefer it if Liz Truss kept her mouth shut. Every time she opens it, she seems to make things worse.
-
And who can forget Colin Powell disgracing himself with a vial of Anthrax, again before the UN, to justify yet another Iraqi invasion. The anthrax turned out to have come from American Biolab Fort Detrick.
It been publicly known since 1994 that the University of Baghdad's department of microbiology obtained Anthrax spores from Fort Detrick and US academia. So, don't try and spin that one into a conspiracy.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1994/02/10/rockville-firm-shipped-germ-agents-to-iraq-riegle-says/ad42c892-7d7a-4531-b604-ee64b4eb7147/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1994/02/10/rockville-firm-shipped-germ-agents-to-iraq-riegle-says/ad42c892-7d7a-4531-b604-ee64b4eb7147/)
https://web.archive.org/web/20160424022339/http://www.markswatson.com/iraqbio.html (https://web.archive.org/web/20160424022339/http://www.markswatson.com/iraqbio.html)
-
I would prefer it if Liz Truss kept her mouth shut. Every time she opens it, she seems to make things worse.
Evil prevails when the good do nothing.
-
Evil prevails when the good do nothing.
She's been a bit gaffe prone in her latest role.
Truss is probably somebody who would get the earliest possible warning and would likely be in a bunker. I don't fancy trying to navigate a mutoid wasteland above ground due to her inflammatory rhetoric.
-
She's been a bit gaffe prone in her latest role.
Truss is probably somebody who would get the earliest possible warning and would likely be in a bunker. I don't fancy trying to navigate a mutoid wasteland above ground due to her inflammatory rhetoric.
If Putin gives the order to strike first, its unlikely such an order would be carried out. Gerasimov would probably put a bullet in his dome.
But, if a strike is launched you are probably safe.
https://youtu.be/3LPdmxnBkIU?t=20 (https://youtu.be/3LPdmxnBkIU?t=20)
-
David in response to the comment about Colin Powell disgracing himself at the UN with a vial of white powder and claiming that Anthrax mailed to high profile figures was from Iraq. It was in fact traced to Fort Detrick, a US biolab.
It been publicly known since 1994 that the University of Baghdad's department of microbiology obtained Anthrax spores from Fort Detrick and US academia. So, don't try and spin that one into a conspiracy.
From the Guardian in 2011 but you can find this anywhere;
The person the FBI finally named as responsible for the anthrax letters had no link to Iraq. He was Bruce Ivins, a disgruntled scientist working at the Army's biodefence labs at Fort Detrick, Maryland. He committed suicide in 2008 before he could be brought to trial.
The only person turning it into a conspiracy is David, still believing the long discredited and admitted lie. Below is the link to the full article;
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/sep/15/anthrax-iraq
Your drive by comments are dismal and show how far out of your depth you are.
-
David in response to the comment about Colin Powell disgracing himself at the UN with a vial of white powder and claiming that Anthrax mailed to high profile figures was from Iraq. It was in fact traced to Fort Detrick, a US biolab.
It been publicly known since 1994 that the University of Baghdad's department of microbiology obtained Anthrax spores from Fort Detrick and US academia. So, don't try and spin that one into a conspiracy.
From the Guardian in 2011 but you can find this anywhere;
The person the FBI finally named as responsible for the anthrax letters had no link to Iraq. He was Bruce Ivins, a disgruntled scientist working at the Army's biodefence labs at Fort Detrick, Maryland. He committed suicide in 2008 before he could be brought to trial.
The only person turning it into a conspiracy is David, still believing the long discredited and admitted lie. Below is the link to the full article;
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/sep/15/anthrax-iraq
Your drive by comments are dismal and show how far out of your depth you are.
Who said anything about the 2001 anthrax attacks? They never blamed Iraq for it. And suspected it was from a domestic source as early as December 2001.
Bruce Ivins left a radical Islamist letter as a red herring to mislead any subsequent investigation. It would have been the perfect opportunity to frame Iraq yet they followed the evidence and found the perpetrator. Which is behaviour very contrary to your conspiratorial view of the US government.
https://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/22/us/nation-challenged-anthrax-trail-us-inquiry-tried-but-failed-link-iraq-anthrax.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/22/us/nation-challenged-anthrax-trail-us-inquiry-tried-but-failed-link-iraq-anthrax.html)
-
Who said anything about the 2001 anthrax attacks? They never blamed Iraq for it. And suspected it was from a domestic source as early as December 2001.
Bruce Ivins left a radical Islamist letter as a red herring to mislead any subsequent investigation. It would have been the perfect opportunity to frame Iraq yet they followed the evidence and found the perpetrator. Which is behaviour very contrary to your conspiratorial view of the US government.
https://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/22/us/nation-challenged-anthrax-trail-us-inquiry-tried-but-failed-link-iraq-anthrax.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/22/us/nation-challenged-anthrax-trail-us-inquiry-tried-but-failed-link-iraq-anthrax.html)
You obviously didn't read the 2011 Guardian article linked in the post that you are replying to. Had you bothered to do so, you would discover that it was Colin Powell himself, at the UN in 2003, who referred to the letters. You would also have discovered that Bush and Blair were explicitly linking the attacks/letters to Iraq in 2002/3.
Try reading then replying.
-
Who said anything about the 2001 anthrax attacks? They never blamed Iraq for it. And suspected it was from a domestic source as early as December 2001.
Bruce Ivins left a radical Islamist letter as a red herring to mislead any subsequent investigation. It would have been the perfect opportunity to frame Iraq yet they followed the evidence and found the perpetrator. Which is behaviour very contrary to your conspiratorial view of the US government.
https://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/22/us/nation-challenged-anthrax-trail-us-inquiry-tried-but-failed-link-iraq-anthrax.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/22/us/nation-challenged-anthrax-trail-us-inquiry-tried-but-failed-link-iraq-anthrax.html)
So you believe that the US presenting fabricated evidence, proven and now admitted, twice to the UN to justify an invasion of Iraq in 1990 and 2003 contradicts my "conspiratorial view of the US govt."
The guy who eventually was nailed for it committed suicide before standing trial. The Anthrax came from US biolab Fort Detrick. The "link" to Iraq was used by the US to lie at the UN. Blair, Bush and intelligence agencies supported all this. The invasions that the US wanted did happen.
Really undermines any conspiratorial thoughts ???
-
You obviously didn't read the 2011 Guardian article linked in the post that you are replying to. Had you bothered to do so, you would discover that it was Colin Powell himself, at the UN in 2003, who referred to the letters. You would also have discovered that Bush and Blair were explicitly linking the attacks/letters to Iraq in 2002/3.
Try reading then replying.
The only mention of the Anthrax attack in Colin Powells UN speech is below -
"Second, when Iraq finally admitted having these weapons in 1995, the quantities were vast. Less than a teaspoon of dry anthrax, a little bit about this amount - this is just about the amount of a teaspoon - less than a teaspoon full of dry anthrax in an envelope shut down the United States Senate in the fall of 2001. This forced several hundred people to undergo emergency medical treatment and killed two postal workers just from an amount just about this quantity that was inside of an envelope."
Nowhere does he implicate Iraq or anyone in particular.
As for the Guardian opinion piece article. They quote Bush saying -
"Never would we dream, that someone would use our own planes and our own mail to attack us."
Again, not implicating Iraq.
-
So you believe that the US presenting fabricated evidence, proven and now admitted, twice to the UN to justify an invasion of Iraq in 1990 and 2003 contradicts my "conspiratorial view of the US govt."
The guy who eventually was nailed for it committed suicide before standing trial. The Anthrax came from US biolab Fort Detrick. The "link" to Iraq was used by the US to lie at the UN. Blair, Bush and intelligence agencies supported all this. The invasions that the US wanted did happen.
Really undermines any conspiratorial thoughts ???
As I have already pointed out, Iraq was not accused of sending the letters. My point was, if your conspiratorial view of the US government is correct, it would make no sense for them to accuse a American of the attacks, specially since Iraq had already obtained Anthrax spores from the same Lab in the mid eighties thus already giving them a "paper trial" to support their agenda.
As for Bruce Ivins do you think he was behind it? The anthrax letters where actually written by a child. The perpetrator had used a child to write them in order to hide their own handwriting and the child wont realise what they have been asked to write thus no witness.
http://anthraxdebate.blogspot.com/2013/03/subject-handwriting-evidence.html (http://anthraxdebate.blogspot.com/2013/03/subject-handwriting-evidence.html)
Ivins wife was running a children's day care. Make of that what you want.
-
The only mention of the Anthrax attack in Colin Powells UN speech is below -
"Second, when Iraq finally admitted having these weapons in 1995, the quantities were vast. Less than a teaspoon of dry anthrax, a little bit about this amount - this is just about the amount of a teaspoon - less than a teaspoon full of dry anthrax in an envelope shut down the United States Senate in the fall of 2001. This forced several hundred people to undergo emergency medical treatment and killed two postal workers just from an amount just about this quantity that was inside of an envelope."
Nowhere does he implicate Iraq or anyone in particular.
As for the Guardian opinion piece article. They quote Bush saying -
"Never would we dream, that someone would use our own planes and our own mail to attack us."
Again, not implicating Iraq.
When I suggested that you read and then reply, I meant read and understand as a whole, not selectively.
Copied from the article and highlighted in red below for you. If you want to persist in your delusions, that is up to you, but I would say that the highlighted sections below make clear that Bush was blaming Iraq.
After Woolsey's and Butler's op-eds, President Bush himself took the lead in link anthrax, bioterrorism and Iraq. On 6 November Bush, speaking by satellite to a central European conference on counterterrorism, warned that America's enemies are "seeking chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons". A day later, at a joint news conference with Britain's prime minister Tony Blair, Bush made the anthrax letters central to his remarks. "Never would we dream," he told reporters, "that someone would use our own planes and our own mail to attack us." He made a similar connection in his address to the nation later that week.
In the US, Iraq and Saddam were widely blamed/suspected of involvement in 9/11 also, hence the reference to our own planes. Anyway he goes on to leave no doubt who those "enemies" are;
By the time of his State of the Union Address in January 2002, the linkage the president wanted to make between the anthrax letters and Iraq had put him in a position to all but declare war. "The Iraqi regime has plotted to develop anthrax and nerve gas weapons for over a decade," he told the country before going on to say America would not wait to be attacked. "All nation should know: America will do what is necessary to ensure our nation's security."
The theme was one that Bush stuck to for the rest of 2002, and continued into 2003, when on 3 February in a speech at the National Institutes of Health, he promised that if Saddam Hussein does not disarm, the United States "will lead a coalition to disarm him." With just over a month to go before the invasion of Iraq, it remained only for Secretary of State Colin Powell, the foreign policy moderate in the Bush administration, to make the case at the United Nations security council for a possible war with Iraq.
The speech Powell delivered with George Tenet, the director of the CIA, sitting directly behind him employed charts and satellite photos, but its most dramatic moment came when Powell held up a vial of white powder equivalent to a teaspoon of anthrax. Less than a teaspoon of dry anthrax had closed down the United States Senate in 2001, he told the United Nations delegates. Iraq, he then pointedly noted, "could have produced 25,000 litres" of anthrax according to UN inspectors but had "not verifiably accounted for even one teaspoonful of this deadly material". It was a compelling speech that swung a number of liberals to Powell's side, among them columnist Mary McGrory, who wrote in the Washington Post, "I can only say that he persuaded me, and I was tough as France to convince."
Powell's information was, as he later acknowledged, wrong. His had not given the UN "facts and conclusions based on solid evidence". As he told Barbara Walters in an interview on ABC's 20/20, his United Nations speech was a "blot" on his record. But equally flawed were the larger political assumptions about who was behind the anthrax attacks.
And here we are back at Colin Powell disgracing himself.
And you still claim that Iraq were not being blamed.
Still got invaded twice.
There were no babies thrown from incubators!
There was no Iraqi anthrax!
Some time back Roch recommended and linked, as I recall, George Galloway's testimony to the US Senate. You dismissed it with some sarky comment about Galloway, again as I recall.
It was a riveting display from Galloway whose command of the facts and substance left senator after senator embarrassingly fumbling through their notes before having no further questions with their arses presented on a plate, courtesy of Galloway. Linked again below. It's connection to the later accusations against Iraq should be noted. History often rhymes;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5u1skEoqLs
-
When I suggested that you read and then reply, I meant read and understand as a whole, not selectively.
Copied from the article and highlighted in red below for you. If you want to persist in your delusions, that is up to you, but I would say that the highlighted sections below make clear that Bush was blaming Iraq.
After Woolsey's and Butler's op-eds, President Bush himself took the lead in link anthrax, bioterrorism and Iraq. On 6 November Bush, speaking by satellite to a central European conference on counterterrorism, warned that America's enemies are "seeking chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons". A day later, at a joint news conference with Britain's prime minister Tony Blair, Bush made the anthrax letters central to his remarks. "Never would we dream," he told reporters, "that someone would use our own planes and our own mail to attack us." He made a similar connection in his address to the nation later that week.
In the US, Iraq and Saddam were widely blamed/suspected of involvement in 9/11 also, hence the reference to our own planes. Anyway he goes on to leave no doubt who those "enemies" are;
By the time of his State of the Union Address in January 2002, the linkage the president wanted to make between the anthrax letters and Iraq had put him in a position to all but declare war. "The Iraqi regime has plotted to develop anthrax and nerve gas weapons for over a decade," he told the country before going on to say America would not wait to be attacked. "All nation should know: America will do what is necessary to ensure our nation's security."
The theme was one that Bush stuck to for the rest of 2002, and continued into 2003, when on 3 February in a speech at the National Institutes of Health, he promised that if Saddam Hussein does not disarm, the United States "will lead a coalition to disarm him." With just over a month to go before the invasion of Iraq, it remained only for Secretary of State Colin Powell, the foreign policy moderate in the Bush administration, to make the case at the United Nations security council for a possible war with Iraq.
The speech Powell delivered with George Tenet, the director of the CIA, sitting directly behind him employed charts and satellite photos, but its most dramatic moment came when Powell held up a vial of white powder equivalent to a teaspoon of anthrax. Less than a teaspoon of dry anthrax had closed down the United States Senate in 2001, he told the United Nations delegates. Iraq, he then pointedly noted, "could have produced 25,000 litres" of anthrax according to UN inspectors but had "not verifiably accounted for even one teaspoonful of this deadly material". It was a compelling speech that swung a number of liberals to Powell's side, among them columnist Mary McGrory, who wrote in the Washington Post, "I can only say that he persuaded me, and I was tough as France to convince."
Powell's information was, as he later acknowledged, wrong. His had not given the UN "facts and conclusions based on solid evidence". As he told Barbara Walters in an interview on ABC's 20/20, his United Nations speech was a "blot" on his record. But equally flawed were the larger political assumptions about who was behind the anthrax attacks.
And here we are back at Colin Powell disgracing himself.
And you still claim that Iraq were not being blamed.
Still got invaded twice.
There were no babies thrown from incubators!
There was no Iraqi anthrax!
Some time back Roch recommended and linked, as I recall, George Galloway's testimony to the US Senate. You dismissed it with some sarky comment about Galloway, again as I recall.
It was a riveting display from Galloway whose command of the facts and substance left senator after senator embarrassingly fumbling through their notes before having no further questions with their arses presented on a plate, courtesy of Galloway. Linked again below. It's connection to the later accusations against Iraq should be noted. History often rhymes;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5u1skEoqLs
Nowhere in Colin Powell's speech does he blame Iraq for the 2001 anthrax attacks.
You can read the whole thing here.
https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2003/02/text/20030205-1.html (https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2003/02/text/20030205-1.html)
George Galloway is a laughing stock. What appears as a "riveting display from Galloway" with "command of the facts" to you is merely a crazy rant to others.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQA2X4yvK_g (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQA2X4yvK_g)
-
I haven't forgotten anything, Steve. Yugoslavia, Libya, Syria were all also sovereign territories. Sovereignty has nothing to do with R2P. If sovereignty prevented R2P then all R2P has been illegal according to this metric. Sovereignty is not a defence for massacres or crimes against humanity.
Weeks prior to the invasion, the Russians handed their evidence alleging genocide to the UN. This was largely unreported in the West because the implications were understood. By alleging genocide and providing evidence, this was setting the legal groundwork for the R2P intervention. Dotting the i's and crossing the t's, as it were, with properly documented evidence handed to the UN.
It is worth comparing with the Western/NATO approach to R2P. They gather a bunch of propaganda and lies and hand it to the pliant media channels who then uncritically repeat it and tell us that we (NATO/UK/US) must do something. In Western NATO parlance, this is legal justification for bombing the shit out of some countries civilians and armed forces whilst arming and training various mercs, nazis and jihadists, or as we call them, "moderate rebels" to overthrow a sovereign government.
To be fair, NATO did at one time attempt to go through recognised legal channels. Although after the testimony of the Kuwaiti nurse before the UN, vis a vis the throwing babies from incubators by Iraqi troops lie. She turned out to be the Ambassador's daughter, wasn't a nurse, hadn't been in the hospital and the whole tale was invented to justify (you guessed it) a NATO war on Iraq. And who can forget Colin Powell disgracing himself with a vial of Anthrax, again before the UN, to justify yet another Iraqi invasion. The anthrax turned out to have come from American Biolab Fort Detrick.
After these debacles NATO/US/UK don't concern themselves with presenting evidence through the UN anymore and instead go the "court of public opinion" but only after massively propagandising and hiding relevant aspects from the "court of public opinion".
Your comments on Crimea are the opposite of truth.
Crimea is Russian and the Crimeans overwhelmingly want to remain part of Russia. A large number of Ukrainian troops stationed in Crimea defected to the Russians in 2014. There was no fight because Russians were welcomed there. The Ukrainian coup government was not. It is that simple.
The Russians made sure that NATO did not get their hands on Sevastopol, which was one of the main intentions behind the 2014 Maidan coup. Sevastopol is Russia's only warm water port and of huge strategic significance.
Remember that history rhymes. Crimea is an old tune. It comes up time and again because of it's significance to Russia. Russia is the defender, not the aggressor. These are self evident truths that western selective reading of history and events wilfully ignores.
You have a habit of forgetting the truth. I don't doubt your sincerity, which makes your comments all the more frightening. Ukraine's borders were guaranteed under the 1994 Budapest Memorandum. Putin won a fraudulent presidential election in 2018, followed by a rigged election for United Russia in 2021. He's invaded sovereign territory whether you like it or not.
-
You have a habit of forgetting the truth. I don't doubt your sincerity, which makes your comments all the more frightening. Ukraine's borders were guaranteed under the 1994 Budapest Memorandum. Putin won a fraudulent presidential election in 2018, followed by a rigged election for United Russia in 2021. He's invaded sovereign territory whether you like it or not.
You are simply repeating talking points from western media, Steve. Taking at face value, your non doubting of my sincerity, then let us discuss your objections. I don't doubt that you are willing to discuss, reasonably, the points that you raise.
1) "Ukraine's borders were guaranteed under the 1994 Budapest Memorandum."(BM)
As with anything, Steve, context is everything. When the media quote only nine words from a memorandum which contains approx. 500, give or take, then immediately you should be curious what the rest of the memorandum says, that isn't being repeated. There are only 6 points, each a paragraph long.
The 1st point of BM is RF/USA/UK commit to respect the Independence, Sovereignty and existing borders of Ukraine.
2nd point of BM is RF/USA/UK committing to refrain from threat or use of force against the territorial integrity of Ukraine except in self defence or otherwise in accordance with the charter of the United Nations
The highlighted part is missing context from western MSM which leads to your final point when you say, "He's invaded sovereign territory whether you like it or not". Putting aside the characterisation of Russia with Putin personally, a very silly thing that western governments and media do when they want to attack countries. Makes their crimes easier to whitewash amongst the proles when your saving the world from a boogey man. Civilians are just acceptable collateral damage. Got the bad man though so it's ok. Unfortunately the masses fall for it and repeat these linguistic tricks without realising. Not Syria but Assad, not Iraq but Saddam, not Libya but Qaddafi etc.
When NATO invoke R2P they do not gather evidence and go through proper channels, as already said. They use their pliant press to uncritically repeat their lies. Time after time after time. I am incredulous that anyone still falls for it.
Russia, not Putin personally, are claiming and have gathered the evidence which has been handed to the UN invoking the Genocide convention against Ukraine govt. for their shelling and targeting of civilians in Luhansk and Donetsk. It has been reported on, even in western media over the last 8 years. No-one can honestly doubt that Ukraine has been using its armed forces against its own civilians. Russia have gone through the correct legal processes to invoke R2P.
The Budapest Memorandum does not guarantee Ukraine's borders under any and all circumstances. It does not free them to shell and target civilians.
You may dispute the Russian govt. claim. But you need to discredit that claim rather than repeating 9 out of context words. Below the Budapest Memorandum link. Read it, Steve, and discuss with sincerity the whole document. I will respond in kind.
The other two points that you raised are again just repeated, un-evidenced and irrelevant, but simply allow the environment to characterise Russia as Putin alone. Some dictator who controls every aspect of the Russian state. It is just a silly caricature painted by those who are hostile to but know little about Russia. You should be above repeating such irrelevant and silly caricatures,.
https://www.pircenter.org/media/content/files/12/13943175580.pdf
-
Nowhere in Colin Powell's speech does he blame Iraq for the 2001 anthrax attacks.
You can read the whole thing here.
Your original position was that the 2001 attacks were not mentioned at all just a few posts back, David. Iraq were not suspected according to you. I had made it up according to you, so now having demonstrated that Powell did in fact mention the 2001 Anthrax letters in his speech to the UN to justify an invasion of Iraq, you shift the goalposts. So tell me, genius, now that you accept that Powell did mention the anthrax letters in his speech about alleged Iraq Bio and chemical weapons programs. Who did you infer he was talking about? It is pretty clear as demonstrated in previous posts. Taken in conjunction with Blair and Bush statements in 2002 and 2003, there is zero doubt that Iraq were being blamed. Your initial position was that Powell never mentioned it and Iraq weren't even suspected after 2001 has been dismantled. You're all over the place, as usual.
George Galloway is a laughing stock. What appears as a "riveting display from Galloway" with "command of the facts" to you is merely a crazy rant to others.
This dumb comment demonstrates your own ideological blinkers. A quick search on the web will bring up numerous articles from the time of the hearing. There was a universal consensus, even amongst Galloway's detractors, that Galloway made absolute mincemeat of senator after senator. This was on both sides of the Atlantic. Your opinion that Galloway's display was a "crazy rant" to everyone else is in fact an opinion I have seen voiced only by you. It was so commanding that even his detractors could find no way to say otherwise. You are ideologically blind and clearly incapable of impartial judgement.
Linking to Galloway as a cat in Big Brother on youtube, really?
It is one way to demonstrate that you are out of your depth discussing anything of substance.
As is your flag, by the way. Waving a flag and treating serious issues like some sort of football game shows your mentality and that you are incapable of serious discussion.
Here is Galloway again, schooling senator after senator and exposing US hypocrisy and warmongering in a 45 minute masterclass.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5u1skEoqLs
-
I blame Blair for all that happened in Iraq. Idiot that he was, plus our useless Intelligence before 2003.
-
Admiral Grigorovich-class frigate of the Russian Navy Black Sea Fleet is reportedly on fire near Zmiiny island in Black Sea. Rescue operation ongoing, multiple aircraft, rescue vessels in the area
-
I blame Blair for all that happened in Iraq. Idiot that he was, plus our useless Intelligence before 2003.
Lookout, I think the 'intelligence' was just a smokescreen. There was no intelligence. It was contrived for the purposes of justifying an invasion.
-
Lookout, I think the 'intelligence' was just a smokescreen. There was no intelligence. It was contrived for the purposes of justifying an invasion.
..and it evidently gave Putin justification in his own mind to commit his own crimes.
-
..and it evidently gave Putin justification in his own mind to commit his own crimes.
She was referring to Iraq Steve.
-
She was referring to Iraq Steve.
Iraq..weapons of mass destruction..Ukraine genocide against ethnic Russians..Lavrov says Ukraine has not been invaded. So many lies to swallow.
-
Iraq..weapons of mass destruction..Ukraine genocide against ethnic Russians..Lavrov says Ukraine has not been invaded. So many lies to swallow.
I expect that the Russians have used the needle between Ukrainians and ethnic Russians (in the east) as a pretext to invade. Part of me wants to believe that Ukraine did indeed grossly mistreat these ethnic Russians. However, if this were true, I wonder why they would take the risk of enraging the bear next door that is Russia. It doesn't seem to make sense. I do strongly suspect that the US and it's puppet the UK have covertly been involved in stirring things up to some extent. The whole Skripal debacle itself seems contrived. It's as if there is a bear bating backstory, out of view, with the bear obviously representing Russia. A cynic may be forgiven for wondering whether the whole context is one which is designed to entice / provoke / ensnare Russia in to taking action for which the US / UK is well prepared for. Then again, I have to also consider that Putin's Russia itself is probably a rotten egg
-
Iraq..weapons of mass destruction..Ukraine genocide against ethnic Russians..Lavrov says Ukraine has not been invaded. So many lies to swallow.
Don't forget this one.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine_biolabs_conspiracy_theory (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine_biolabs_conspiracy_theory)
-
I expect that the Russians have used the needle between Ukrainians and ethnic Russians (in the east) as a pretext to invade. Part of me wants to believe that Ukraine did indeed grossly mistreat these ethnic Russians. However, if this were true, I wonder why they would take the risk of enraging the bear next door that is Russia. It doesn't seem to make sense. I do strongly suspect that the US and it's puppet the UK have covertly been involved in stirring things up to some extent. The whole Skripal debacle itself seems contrived. It's as if there is a bear bating backstory, out of view, with the bear obviously representing Russia. A cynic may be forgiven for wondering whether the whole context is one which is designed to entice / provoke / ensnare Russia in to taking action for which the US / UK is well prepared for. Then again, I have to also consider that Putin's Russia itself is probably a rotten egg
👽
-
https://www.kyivpost.com/eastern-europe/kremlin-to-family-members-of-moskva-cruiser-crew-ship-sank-by-accident-no-war-compensation.html (https://www.kyivpost.com/eastern-europe/kremlin-to-family-members-of-moskva-cruiser-crew-ship-sank-by-accident-no-war-compensation.html)
Disgusting
-
Lindsey Graham with the vile John McCain, Poroshenko and Ukie troops. Watch this, from 2016. There is no question of NATO aggression against Russia using Ukraine as a proxy.
It is pretty clear that this confrontation would have started in 2017 if Hillary Clinton had been elected.
https://twitter.com/timand2037/status/1521748399543967744
Transcribed below are Graham's and McCain's words
Lindsey Graham; "I admire the fact that you fight for your homeland. Your fight is our fight, 2017 will be the year of offence. All of us (gestures towards himself, John McCain and other US senators/congressmen) will go back to Washington and we will push the case against Russia. Enough of Russian aggression, it is time for them to pay a heavier price. Our fight is not with Russian people but with Putin. Our promise to you is to take your calls to Washington, inform the American people of your bravery and make the case against Putin to the world."
John warmongering McCain; "I believe you will win, I am convinced you will win and we will do everything we can to provide you with what you need to win. We have succeeded not because of equipment but because of your courage. So, I thank you and the world is watching, and the world is watching because we cannot allow Vladimir Putin to succeed here, because if he succeeds here, he will succeed in other countries."
US/UK/NATO have been planning this for a long time. Those who claim to not see NATO aggression are making a choice. It is self evident that NATO are and have been the most aggressive presence on the planet for at least 30 years now, and very easily arguably, for much longer.
So 2017 would have been the year of offence. Long planned by US/NATO. NATO/US tell us about their planned aggression and there are still fuckwits who deny NATO aggression.
-
Poroshenko, then President, after the coup in 2014 and before the meeting in 2016 in the above post with US senators;
https://twitter.com/WarKamikaze/status/1519866610231689217
Transcribed for you below,
President Poroshenko, calling for a cleansing in Donbass. "We will have work, they will not. We will have pensions, they will not. Our children go to schools and nurseries, yours will hide in basements."
The Ukrainian govt. have never hidden their intent to ethnically cleanse the Eastern and Ethnic Russian areas. They admit a policy of planned genocide. You can readily find an absolute abundance of evidence showing the intent and crimes of the post 2014 Maidan coup Ukie govt. How is it possible to require further evidence of their intent and crimes?
-
Evidence is growing that Russian soldiers are using rape as a weapon of war in Ukraine. In areas retaken by Ukrainian forces, civilians are giving horrifying accounts of sexual violence and murder.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/ukdoah/nsfl_evidence_is_growing_that_russian_soldiers/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/ukdoah/nsfl_evidence_is_growing_that_russian_soldiers/)
-
Interesting posts Gringo. It's the side of the story we are not being given. The context.
-
Interesting posts Gringo. It's the side of the story we are not being given. The context.
Useful idiots will be useful idiots.
-
Lindsey Graham with the vile John McCain, Poroshenko and Ukie troops. Watch this, from 2016. There is no question of NATO aggression against Russia using Ukraine as a proxy.
It is pretty clear that this confrontation would have started in 2017 if Hillary Clinton had been elected.
https://twitter.com/timand2037/status/1521748399543967744
Transcribed below are Graham's and McCain's words
Lindsey Graham; "I admire the fact that you fight for your homeland. Your fight is our fight, 2017 will be the year of offence. All of us (gestures towards himself, John McCain and other US senators/congressmen) will go back to Washington and we will push the case against Russia. Enough of Russian aggression, it is time for them to pay a heavier price. Our fight is not with Russian people but with Putin. Our promise to you is to take your calls to Washington, inform the American people of your bravery and make the case against Putin to the world."
John warmongering McCain; "I believe you will win, I am convinced you will win and we will do everything we can to provide you with what you need to win. We have succeeded not because of equipment but because of your courage. So, I thank you and the world is watching, and the world is watching because we cannot allow Vladimir Putin to succeed here, because if he succeeds here, he will succeed in other countries."
US/UK/NATO have been planning this for a long time. Those who claim to not see NATO aggression are making a choice. It is self evident that NATO are and have been the most aggressive presence on the planet for at least 30 years now, and very easily arguably, for much longer.
So 2017 would have been the year of offence. Long planned by US/NATO. NATO/US tell us about their planned aggression and there are still fuckwits who deny NATO aggression.
Here we go again.
(https://preview.redd.it/vnefzc7a7cw21.jpg?auto=webp&s=e7e5060ecea2ef6c8c6d48ad2c5efa1ec3c81806)
-
Interesting posts Gringo. It's the side of the story we are not being given. The context.
I think most people sense that there is a hidden story, Roch, that we are, as you say, "not being given." This is the crucial thing. We are "not being given" the context and background. So we should no longer rely on those who are supposedly tasked with "giving us the story" and should be proactively seeking reliable sources of information ourselves. We only have ourselves to blame for being unaware. We live in the information age and even in the age of censorship, we can easily find reliable sources.
Look in the archives of sites and read their reporting on world events over the years. Given the benefit of hindsight we can easily measure their credibility. Seek information from credible honest and unbiased sources and you will find "the side of the story we are not being given".
-
Interesting posts Gringo. It's the side of the story we are not being given. The context.
For more information on the side we are not being given, Roch.
For informed and very wide discussion about geopolitics generally there is no better site than Moon of Alabama. It is run by Bernhard Horstmann, but is more a "discussion site" than a blog. Issues that are hugely important and very relevant but strangely missing from our media are discussed at length and in depth.
For military analysis, especially of the situation now, Andrei Martyanov is highly recommended. Again, it is easy to check for yourself if his day to day postings and youtube videos (he is funny) are consistent, accurate and more importantly, do they stand the test of scrutiny days, weeks, months later as more becomes revealed? The answer is yes, by the way Roch. Martyanov is undisputedly an expert on modern warfare and his military analysis, second to none. His blog is called Reminiscence of the Future.
-
Here is a link to Andrei Martyanov's blog;
http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/
And here is one to Moon of Alabama;
https://www.moonofalabama.org/
if you want to see the "side not given" and much more context.
-
Useful idiots will be useful idiots.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FMag1C5XMAANV2_.jpg)
-
Copied and pasted below, a comment from MOA quoting directly Dmitry Polyansky at the UN and Reuters. Calling out Reuters distorted and selective reporting of the words of Natalia Usmanova a civilian evacuee rescued from Mariupol;
"Reuters has heavily censored and distorted testimonies by a woman evacuated from Mariupol in order to adjust her words to its own claims about the city’s shellings by the Russian army, Dmitry Polyansky said at an informal Arria Formula meeting of the UN Security Council, devoted to crimes by the Ukrainian military.
"The Reuters story creates an impression that the woman, Natalya Usmanova, is scared by Russian strikes and apparently hates Russia for what it has done to Ukraine," Polyansky said. He stressed that at the same time Reuters preferred to keep quiet about what the woman said loudly and clearly on Russian television.
Polyansky showed this video of Usmanova saying something Reuters did not dare quote in its story. The woman evacuee literally said:
"I do not wish to return to Ukraine. Honestly. My family’s vote was unanimous. Even if we ever decide to return, we will return only to Mariupol, to the Donetsk People’s Republic. And not to Ukraine," Usmanova said.
Yet, a Reuters spokesperson said the news organization stood by its reporting: "We are still seeking to verify key aspects of Natalia Usmanova's account. We are committed to reporting on the conflict on Ukraine in an impartial and independent way."
"It is deplorable that Western journalists in most cases participate in censorship and conceal undesirable information from their readerships and audiences," Polyansky concluded."
The side we are not being given again, Roch.
-
Is this your current employer Gringo? :))
https://www.rferl.org/a/russian-troll-factory-hacking/31076160.html (https://www.rferl.org/a/russian-troll-factory-hacking/31076160.html)
-
David, everybody else contributing to this thread are discussing without the need for childish tactics of Gifs and flag waving. Your nothing to add contributions pollute the thread and you come across as childish. Lookout, Roch, Nugnug, Steve and myself have all managed to post without the need for such childishness. If you have nothing to add to the discussion, then I would suggest you go back to your playstation and leave the adults to discuss without your idiocy.
-
While Putin wears Loro Piana coats that sells for nearly $14,000 a piece. And his Oil oligarchs buy mega-yatchs worth up to 500 million. 25% of the Russian population are without a toilet.
https://russialist.org/one-russian-in-four-lacks-an-indoor-toilet-one-of-many-signs-there-are-now-four-distinct-russias/ (https://russialist.org/one-russian-in-four-lacks-an-indoor-toilet-one-of-many-signs-there-are-now-four-distinct-russias/)
https://qz.com/2145468/putin-wore-a-14000-puffer-jacket-to-ukraine-invasion-rally/ (https://qz.com/2145468/putin-wore-a-14000-puffer-jacket-to-ukraine-invasion-rally/)
-
David, everybody else contributing to this thread are discussing without the need for childish tactics of Gifs and flag waving. Your nothing to add contributions pollute the thread and you come across as childish. Lookout, Roch, Nugnug, Steve and myself have all managed to post without the need for such childishness. If you have nothing to add to the discussion, then I would suggest you go back to your playstation and leave the adults to discuss without your idiocy.
I don't have a PlayStation. But OK.
-
Gringo what do you make of Putin having £10,000 Loro Piana jackets and his oligarchs like Kerimov owning 350ft long luxury yachts while 1 in 4 Russians don't have a toilet or running water? Is that NATOs fault also?
-
Poroshenko, then President, after the coup in 2014 and before the meeting in 2016 in the above post with US senators;
https://twitter.com/WarKamikaze/status/1519866610231689217
Transcribed for you below,
President Poroshenko, calling for a cleansing in Donbass. "We will have work, they will not. We will have pensions, they will not. Our children go to schools and nurseries, yours will hide in basements."
The Ukrainian govt. have never hidden their intent to ethnically cleanse the Eastern and Ethnic Russian areas. They admit a policy of planned genocide. You can readily find an absolute abundance of evidence showing the intent and crimes of the post 2014 Maidan coup Ukie govt. How is it possible to require further evidence of their intent and crimes?
When the actual president of the country states this, we can be in no doubt that this is official policy. He is not some rogue Ukrainian Piers Morgan saying controversial things for effect. This is the actual President in 2014.
Fairly recently Roch linked to a documentary by a French film maker, whose name I forget. The documentary was about the ongoing crimes in Donbass and really good. Oliver Stone's "Ukraine on Fire" documentary from 2016 is also an info packed hour and a half of otherwise unreported facts and background. Both are worth a watch.
-
Gringo what do you make of Putin having £10,000 Loro Piana jackets and his oligarchs like Kerimov owning 350ft long luxury yachts while 1 in 4 Russians don't have a toilet or running water? Is that NATOs fault also?
I don't make anything of it. Gossip about what jackets Putin wears, "Putin's oligarchs" yachts and uninformed chatter about Russian living standards is not something worth wasting valuable thinking time on, except for the simple minded.
What do you think about it?
-
Gringo what do you make of Putin having £10,000 Loro Piana jackets and his oligarchs like Kerimov owning 350ft long luxury yachts while 1 in 4 Russians don't have a toilet or running water? Is that NATOs fault also?
I don't make anything of it. Gossip about what jackets Putin wears, "Putin's oligarchs" yachts and uninformed chatter about Russian living standards is not something worth wasting valuable thinking time on, except for the simple minded.
What do you think about it?
..and yet Putin's henchmen have been systematically murdering them when the time is propitious. https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/suspicious-deaths-six-russian-oligarchs-26881083
-
..and yet Putin's henchmen have been systematically murdering them when the time is propitious. https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/suspicious-deaths-six-russian-oligarchs-26881083
Steve, contrary to western MSM reporting, Putin does not personally order every murder in Russia. It is a ridiculous caricature that you should be seeing through by now.
-
Gringo what do you make of Putin having £10,000 Loro Piana jackets and his oligarchs like Kerimov owning 350ft long luxury yachts while 1 in 4 Russians don't have a toilet or running water? Is that NATOs fault also?
I don't make anything of it. Gossip about what jackets Putin wears, "Putin's oligarchs" yachts and uninformed chatter about Russian living standards is not something worth wasting valuable thinking time on, except for the simple minded.
What do you think about it?
So, you think its OK for him to spend £10,000 of his peoples money on a designer Italian coat and letting his Oligarchs plunder Russian oil for mega yachts and football clubs. While millions of Russians are without basic necessities? That's your idea of righteous government that should be held in high regard?
PS: the Russia’s state statistical agency is not "uninformed chatter".
-
So, you thinks its OK for him to spend £10,000 of his peoples money on a designer Italian coat and letting his Oligarchs plunder Russian oil for mega yachts and football clubs. While millions of Russians are without basic necessities? That's your idea of righteous government that should be held in high regard?
PS: the Russia’s state statistical agency is not "uninformed chatter".
The interpretation of those statistics is the uninformed chatter. Johnsons blog? Link to the stats not some halfwitted and biased interpretation. You have a very loose definition of what should be considered facts. Putin's jackets?
What is the relevance?
What do you think about then Ukrainian President Poroshenko, in 2014, saying, "Our children go to schools and nurseries, yours will hide in basements" ?
What do you think the Ukrainian President meant when he said that Ukrainian children in the Donbass region would "hide in basements" ?
Bit more relevant than Putin's coat, so do you have an opinion on this statement of the Ukrainian president?
-
Two Ukrainian Su-27 striking Russian facilities on the famous Snake Island in the Black Sea, in remarkable footage filmed by a TB-2 drone. As we can observe, there is serious damage
https://liveuamap.com/en/2022/7-may-two-ukrainian-su27-striking-russian-facilities-on-the (https://liveuamap.com/en/2022/7-may-two-ukrainian-su27-striking-russian-facilities-on-the)
-
What do you think about then Ukrainian President Poroshenko, in 2014, saying, "Our children go to schools and nurseries, yours will hide in basements" ?
What do you think the Ukrainian President meant when he said that Ukrainian children in the Donbass region would "hide in basements" ?
Bit more relevant than Putin's coat, so do you have an opinion on this statement of the Ukrainian president?
David when you ask questions and have opinions on Putin's coat but studiously avoid questions like those posed above, then you cannot be taken seriously. Same old story, you can't tackle the difficult facts so choose to ignore them and divert onto something else.
Don't you have any thoughts on the Ukrainian president explicitly threatening war on Ukrainian children?
-
The total exports from China to the Russian Federation has decreased by 27 percent since the beginning of Russia's war against Ukraine. A number of major Chinese tech companies including Lenovo and Xiaomi are quietly winding down their business in Russia.
-
The total exports from China to the Russian Federation has decreased by 27 percent since the beginning of Russia's war against Ukraine. A number of major Chinese tech companies including Lenovo and Xiaomi are quietly winding down their business in Russia.
More diversions because you cannot find an answer to the inconvenient facts that destroy the narrative that you adhere to.
Russia, China trade is surging you absolute idiot as any quick search would tell you. Here are a couple for you to start.
China's trade with Russia up by 12% in March from a year earlier, from the Guardian(not known for a Russia friendly stance) below;
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/13/chinas-trade-with-russia-up-by-12-in-march-from-a-year-earlier
Or this one, from the BBC( again not exactly pro Russian in their reporting)
Here is an excerpt below in red;
Bilateral trade with Russia surged in the first quarter of the year, rising by 28% from the previous year, according to Chinese customs data.
In March, after Russia launched its invasion, overall trade between the two countries rose over 12% from a year earlier.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/60571253
I could go on. There are countless articles in Western MSM as well as the two above (Forbes, Reuters, CNN etc.) talking about the surging trade between China and Russia. An undeniable fact but you still deny it. You are blinkered and not interested in debate.
And apparently you think it unworthy of consideration when a President of a country threatens military action and shelling on children of that country.
Still no answer to this question, David.
Are you going to post something about dead generals as your next diversion?
-
More diversions because you cannot find an answer to the inconvenient facts that destroy the narrative that you adhere to.
Russia, China trade is surging you absolute idiot
When the debate is lost. Insults become the tool of the loser.
-
David;When the debate is lost. Insults become the tool of the loser.
You aren't in any debate because you can't answer questions. And after throwing around terms like conspiritard, useful idiot (about an hour ago) as well as attempts to insult by Gif, it defies credibility that that you posted that with a straight face.
The point and implication that you raised was proven to be wrong, as I showed with my reply and links.
You are really embarrassingly bad at this. Are you now going to debunk my reply to your China/Russia trade post?
And why have you still not formulated a response to the threat of genocide against his own citizens and explicitly the children by Ukrainian President Poroshenko?
-
Exports to Russia from China decreased to 3825254.66 USD in March from 12617700 USD in February of 2022. source: China Customs
https://tradingeconomics.com/china/exports-to-russia (https://tradingeconomics.com/china/exports-to-russia)
-
Exports to Russia from China decreased to 3825254.66 USD in March from 12617700 USD in February of 2022. source: China Customs
https://tradingeconomics.com/china/exports-to-russia (https://tradingeconomics.com/china/exports-to-russia)
David. You have referred to China's exports to Russia, only in March and February. What about the imports from Russia? Article after article from around the world tells the same story. Surging China Russia trade. There is no-one who claims that China/Russia trade is decreasing rather than increasing. Google "China Russia trade 2022" and get back to me.
Trade, funnily enough David, includes imports and exports. So you can't debunk the widely reported surging China Russia trade narrative for the obvious reason that you are hopelessly ill informed and plain wrong.
Now have a go at the Poroshenko genocide question.
-
China’s Exports to Russia Slump After Ukraine Invasion.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-04-13/china-s-exports-to-russia-slump-after-invasion-of-ukraine (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-04-13/china-s-exports-to-russia-slump-after-invasion-of-ukraine)
-
Two Ukrainian Su-27 striking Russian facilities on the famous Snake Island in the Black Sea, in remarkable footage filmed by a TB-2 drone. As we can observe, there is serious damage
https://liveuamap.com/en/2022/7-may-two-ukrainian-su27-striking-russian-facilities-on-the (https://liveuamap.com/en/2022/7-may-two-ukrainian-su27-striking-russian-facilities-on-the)
The Ukrainian air force is still alive!
https://v.redd.it/cf625mbie4y81/DASH_720.mp4 (https://v.redd.it/cf625mbie4y81/DASH_720.mp4)
-
Destroying a Russian helicopter on Snake Island
https://v.redd.it/upbplwhe87y81/DASH_360.mp4 (https://v.redd.it/upbplwhe87y81/DASH_360.mp4)
-
Russia is burning again. A big fire has broke out in the center of Perm one of many sabotage operations across Russian territory
https://v.redd.it/0bfrebjdy8y81/DASH_720.mp4 (https://v.redd.it/0bfrebjdy8y81/DASH_720.mp4)
-
David. You have referred to China's exports to Russia, only in March and February. What about the imports from Russia? Article after article from around the world tells the same story. Surging China Russia trade. There is no-one who claims that China/Russia trade is decreasing rather than increasing. Google "China Russia trade 2022" and get back to me.
Trade, funnily enough David, includes imports and exports. So you can't debunk the widely reported surging China Russia trade narrative for the obvious reason that you are hopelessly ill informed and plain wrong.
Now have a go at the Poroshenko genocide question.
He's probably referring to those Russian-backed terrorists who shot down a passenger airliner. https://youtu.be/-gPJUDOnMfg
-
Now have a go at the Poroshenko genocide question.
He's probably referring to those Russian-backed terrorists who shot down a passenger airliner. https://youtu.be/-gPJUDOnMfg
At least you attempted to answer the question, but it is impossible that he was referring to "Russian backed terrorists", unless those "terrorists" were schoolchildren.
Here is the relevant part of the quote again for you, Steve;
"Our children go to schools and nurseries, yours will hide in basements"
He was definitely referring to schoolchildren and, let's not forget, nursery age children. He appears to be an equal opportunity Nazi at least.
This is what you are attempting to whitewash, Steve.
-
Now have a go at the Poroshenko genocide question.
At least you attempted to answer the question, but it is impossible that he was referring to "Russian backed terrorists", unless those "terrorists" were schoolchildren.
Here is the relevant part of the quote again for you, Steve;
"Our children go to schools and nurseries, yours will hide in basements"
He was definitely referring to schoolchildren and, let's not forget, nursery age children. He appears to be an equal opportunity Nazi at least.
This is what you are attempting to whitewash, Steve.
I've no way of checking the translation but he does put it in the future tense, thus to my mind implying there will be conflict in the future for the terrorists and their offspring.
Is this what Mother Russia is doing right now..https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61369229
-
Just so that you are in no doubt about who and what you are acting as apologists and enablers of; War graves in Nijmegen, Holland, were vandalised a few days ago. Take a look at their handiwork,
https://twitter.com/Taurevanime/status/1522454058430353408
-
Just so that you are in no doubt about who and what you are acting as apologists and enablers of; War graves in Nijmegen, Holland, were vandalised a few days ago. Take a look at their handiwork,
https://twitter.com/Taurevanime/status/1522454058430353408
Nobody is apologizing for Poroshenko's remarks or the Azov regiment: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/1/who-are-the-azov-regiment
-
Just so that you are in no doubt about who and what you are acting as apologists and enablers of; War graves in Nijmegen, Holland, were vandalised a few days ago. Take a look at their handiwork,
Nobody is apologizing for Poroshenko's remarks or the Azov regiment: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/1/who-are-the-azov-regiment
Apologist; a person who offers an argument in defence of something controversial.
I didn't suggest that you were apologising for Poroshenko's comments or for the Azov Nazis. I was pointing out that you are (offering an argument in defence of something controversial) acting as an apologist for Nazis.
-
I've no way of checking the translation but he does put it in the future tense, thus to my mind implying there will be conflict in the future for the terrorists and their offspring.
Is this what Mother Russia is doing right now..https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61369229
There are plenty of ways of checking the translation, we live in the information age, Steve. It should have provoked at least a little intellectual curiosity from you. There is no denying that Poroshenko made that statement.
Do you have any comment on the footage of US Senators Graham and McCain promising that 2017 would be the "year of offence" against Russia from Ukraine. Would you agree that it blows a hole in the Russian aggression narrative. No need to check any translations with that one either; it's in English.
-
Watching Putin laying flowers on the tomb of the unknown soldier this morning made him look almost human.
I really can't understand his way of thinking at all in carrying out the same thing that he blames the Nazi's of doing ?
The nearest I've been to Russia is when I met the Red Army choir in the 70's when on tour, and shook hands with Boris Alexandrov, who was the leader of this fabulous choir. They were amazing !
I did want to visit the country at one time but my brother just said " I'd rather you didn't ", as he was working for the government at the time involving telecommunications and computers. This was in the 70's/ 80's before there'd been an attempt on his life from one of their spies in South Africa.
-
Watching Putin laying flowers on the tomb of the unknown soldier this morning made him look almost human.
I really can't understand his way of thinking at all in carrying out the same thing that he blames the Nazi's of doing ?
The nearest I've been to Russia is when I met the Red Army choir in the 70's when on tour, and shook hands with Boris Alexandrov, who was the leader of this fabulous choir. They were amazing !
I did want to visit the country at one time but my brother just said " I'd rather you didn't ", as he was working for the government at the time involving telecommunications and computers. This was in the 70's/ 80's before there'd been an attempt on his life from one of their spies in South Africa.
Bloody hell Lookout sounds serious. I take it he survived without injuries?
I can imagine you on some covert mission.. 'Lookout behind the Iron Curtain' 🙂
-
Bloody hell Lookout sounds serious. I take it he survived without injuries?
I can imagine you on some covert mission.. 'Lookout behind the Iron Curtain' 🙂
Yes Roch, he survived after having been " poisoned ". That was the thanks that brother got for inviting the" businessman" to stay at his home after picking him up from the flight at Heathrow. It was a business deal between this country and South Africa after brother had equipped about a dozen army trucks with the latest telecommunication equipment in South Africa. The guy was obviously a Russian spy. Needless to say it was hushed up at GCHQ where brother worked from. I think Khreschev was leader then.?
Speaking of curtains, I prefer velvet ones to iron ;D.
-
I was all for writing to the papers about the incident but brother didn't want that.
-
Much as we all like and admire the architecture in Moscow, why hasn't Ukraine lobbed a few bombs there to destroy what they have ?
-
I only know one person who visited the USSR. He told me that the hotel manger offered and bought a pair of his jeans for two hundred US dollars.
-
I only know one person who visited the USSR. He told me that the hotel manger offered and bought a pair of his jeans for two hundred US dollars.
No, they're not that hard-up are they ? Like the boat people who pay £5,000 to get into this country. I don't believe anyone who says that they're skint, really are ! In fact I don't believe anything any more :(
-
No, they're not that hard-up are they ? Like the boat people who pay £5,000 to get into this country. I don't believe anyone who says that they're skint, really are ! In fact I don't believe anything any more :(
200 USD back then is over 600 USD now. I'm guessing that hotel manager was in on the widespread corruption in the soviet union. While all the other staff were paid peanuts.
-
200 USD back then is over 600 USD now. I'm guessing that hotel manager was in on the widespread corruption in the soviet union. While all the other staff were paid peanuts.
A bit like here then.
-
The nearest I've been to Russia is when I met the Red Army choir in the 70's when on tour, and shook hands with Boris Alexandrov, who was the leader of this fabulous choir. They were amazing !
I did want to visit the country at one time but my brother just said " I'd rather you didn't ", as he was working for the government at the time involving telecommunications and computers. This was in the 70's/ 80's before there'd been an attempt on his life from one of their spies in South Africa.
Don't give any first hand accounts of Russian skulduggery. Gringo will start accusing you of being CIA propaganda. :))
-
https://off-guardian.org/2022/05/09/the-rise-of-the-new-normal-reich/
-
Just so that you are in no doubt about who and what you are acting as apologists and enablers of; War graves in Nijmegen, Holland, were vandalised a few days ago. Take a look at their handiwork,
Apologist; a person who offers an argument in defence of something controversial.
I didn't suggest that you were apologising for Poroshenko's comments or for the Azov Nazis. I was pointing out that you are (offering an argument in defence of something controversial) acting as an apologist for Nazis.
What nonsense. Where is the condemnation within Russia of the desecration of the Babyn Yar Holocaust Memorial? Did Putin know about this memorial and its significance? https://youtu.be/PcWk_ORbd64
-
There are plenty of ways of checking the translation, we live in the information age, Steve. It should have provoked at least a little intellectual curiosity from you. There is no denying that Poroshenko made that statement.
Do you have any comment on the footage of US Senators Graham and McCain promising that 2017 would be the "year of offence" against Russia from Ukraine. Would you agree that it blows a hole in the Russian aggression narrative. No need to check any translations with that one either; it's in English.
This is in the context of the Russian invasion of Crimea, Ukrainian territory. Had McCain's and Graham's advice been heeded then we might not have found ourselves in another fine mess now, Stanley..https://thehill.com/policy/defense/224619-mccain-graham-call-for-us-to-arm-ukrainians/
-
Why is Russia’s army so weak? | The Economist
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8C7aMeunE0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8C7aMeunE0)
-
borris is bloking peae talks https://youtu.be/bj5pBU_rbNE
-
Finland announces intention to join NATO
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/uk-signs-security-treaty-with-sweden-and-finland-z30k29ccf (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/uk-signs-security-treaty-with-sweden-and-finland-z30k29ccf)
-
Finland announces intention to join NATO
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/uk-signs-security-treaty-with-sweden-and-finland-z30k29ccf (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/uk-signs-security-treaty-with-sweden-and-finland-z30k29ccf)
The Soviet Union stole 9& of Finland's territory following the Winter War of 1939-40.
-
The Soviet Union stole 9& of Finland's territory following the Winter War of 1939-40.
I think steal is the wrong word. They acted in self defence. Finland at the time was closely allied to Hitler and Finland was of strategic importance to the USSR.
-
I think steal is the wrong word. They acted in self defence. Finland at the time was closely allied to Hitler and Finland was of strategic importance to the USSR.
Didn't Finland have certain ores needed by Germany? Rings a bell that Hitler warned against Russian aggression towards the Fins. They fought well against Russia - I wonder if Germany supplied them.
-
I wonder what effect it'll have on " the mad one now ? "
-
Didn't Finland have certain ores needed by Germany? Rings a bell that Hitler warned against Russian aggression towards the Fins. They fought well against Russia - I wonder if Germany supplied them.
It was iron ores in Sweden and Norwegian sea ports that Germany needed. The "territorial and political rearrangement" of Finland was set out in Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact.
The Fins done well in the winter war because the Red Army was in an abysmal state. Hence why Germans done well initially in 1941.
-
It was iron ores in Sweden and Norwegian sea ports that Germany needed. The "territorial and political rearrangement" of Finland was set out in Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact.
The Fins done well in the winter war because the Red Army was in an abysmal state. Hence why Germans done well initially in 1941.
Thanks for clarifying.
-
Steroids have driven the man insane.
-
Steroids have driven the man insane.
He was insane to invade. But I believe they're right, regarding their concerns about the US trying to run the world. I think the stress of this war will kill Putin. He doesn't look too clever (in a physical sense) - his face seems swollen?
-
He was insane to invade. But I believe they're right, regarding their concerns about the US trying to run the world. I think the stress of this war will kill Putin. He doesn't look too clever (in a physical sense) - his face seems swollen?
The swelling is what steroids do when used in treatment of an illness.
-
Ukraine has won the battle of Kharkiv
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/14/ukraine-has-won-the-battle-of-kharkiv-analysts-say-as-kyiv-warns-of-long-phase-of-war (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/14/ukraine-has-won-the-battle-of-kharkiv-analysts-say-as-kyiv-warns-of-long-phase-of-war)
-
Why is it that nobody appears to be perturbed by Putin's threats of a nuclear disaster against this country ?
The man is gone in the head but is more than capable of carrying out a " spur of the moment " attack.
-
Why is it that nobody appears to be perturbed by Putin's threats of a nuclear disaster against this country ?
The man is gone in the head but is more than capable of carrying out a " spur of the moment " attack.
He could order anything in his ailing disposition. One hopes that his underlings have enough nous to exercise restraint. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/russia-threatens-to-use-satan-2-hypersonic-nuclear-missile-to-strike-britain/ar-AAXgGBy?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=ab893823c42443af84072748540d87e0
-
He could order anything in his ailing disposition. One hopes that his underlings have enough nous to exercise restraint. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/russia-threatens-to-use-satan-2-hypersonic-nuclear-missile-to-strike-britain/ar-AAXgGBy?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=ab893823c42443af84072748540d87e0
Being as deranged as he is, anything could happen. If he's as sick as it's alleged ( blood cancer ) he personally, has nothing to lose---which is where the danger lies.
-
Why is it that nobody appears to be perturbed by Putin's threats of a nuclear disaster against this country ?
The man is gone in the head but is more than capable of carrying out a " spur of the moment " attack.
Because they are empty threats.
-
Because they are empty threats.
What he's doing now aren't empty threats David.He just does it, such as when the Ukranian people think they've been given a safe passage to escape from cellars etc. but are still fired on. It's ruthless.
-
What he's doing now aren't empty threats David.He just does it, such as when the Ukranian people think they've been given a safe passage to escape from cellars etc. but are still fired on. It's ruthless.
The nuclear threats are empty threats. His arsenal of nukes are mostly Soviet era rust buckets and he knows Moscow will be turned to dust if he launches anything.
-
https://off-guardian.org/2022/05/15/the-subtleties-of-anti-russia-leftist-rhetoric/
-
Echos of Holodomor
(https://i.redd.it/aohxpjdmcmz81.jpg)
-
When does the bad weather start in Ukraine? If Russian forces are demoralised and faltering now, how will they stay intact and remain purposeful in harsh conditions?
-
When does the bad weather start in Ukraine? If Russian forces are demoralised and faltering now, how will they stay intact and remain purposeful in harsh conditions?
Around the same time as us only theirs is worse. They've got summer coming now. They're only 3 hours ahead of us as well, so seasons in some areas are the same.
-
Around the same time as us only theirs is worse. They've got summer coming now. They're only 3 hours ahead of us as well, so seasons in some areas are the same.
Thanks Lookout. Well somebody has given very frank views on Russian state TV:
https://mobile.twitter.com/JuliaDavisNews/status/1526333878788665345?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1526419152897974273%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es3_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.readytogo.net%2Fsmb%2Fthreads%2Frussia-invading-ukraine-news-updates-please-put-sensitive-content-behind-a-spoiler.1575096%2Fpage-258
-
https://youtu.be/Xwmor6pXHrQ
-
redataceted onersations https://youtu.be/OzMLPSXb7RU
-
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/17/i-look-at-my-government-differently-losses-in-ukraine-test-russians-faith
-
cnn cought lying agian https://youtu.be/qvEUSOgxkPk
-
wondere this https://youtu.be/qP6xojrSov8
-
Russia’s Orlan-10 drone uses engines sold by Ali-express
(https://i.redd.it/z95fkv2epk091.jpg)
-
More comment: https://youtu.be/1farRUI_CRY
-
A member of Russia’s permanent mission to the UN has resigned, describing himself as “ashamed” of the country for its invasion of Ukraine, according to posts on his social media pages.
“Long overdue, but today I resign from civil service. Enough is enough,” Boris Bondarev, an arms control adviser to the Russian UN mission, wrote in a statement.
“For twenty years of my diplomatic career I have seen different turns of our foreign policy, but never have I been so ashamed of my country as on February 24 of this year,”
https://www.ft.com/content/ab665086-37e9-4be8-8292-2f9d24d1e337 (https://www.ft.com/content/ab665086-37e9-4be8-8292-2f9d24d1e337)
-
A member of Russia’s permanent mission to the UN has resigned, describing himself as “ashamed” of the country for its invasion of Ukraine, according to posts on his social media pages.
“Long overdue, but today I resign from civil service. Enough is enough,” Boris Bondarev, an arms control adviser to the Russian UN mission, wrote in a statement.
“For twenty years of my diplomatic career I have seen different turns of our foreign policy, but never have I been so ashamed of my country as on February 24 of this year,”
https://www.ft.com/content/ab665086-37e9-4be8-8292-2f9d24d1e337 (https://www.ft.com/content/ab665086-37e9-4be8-8292-2f9d24d1e337)
Wrong link David. BTW, how's life in Michigan? 😏
-
Wrong link David. BTW, how's life in Michigan? 😏
If you still for whatever reason think I am American. I have spoken to NGB on the phone in the past, ask him how American my accent is. :))
-
If you still for whatever reason think I am American. I have spoken to NGB on the phone in the past, ask him how American my accent is. :))
Last time I spoke with him, he told me you had a Kentuckyan drawl. You certainly get about over there. I've had you down as being resident in about 20 states :))
-
Weather's been shocking in Michigan with a bad twister last week that did damage----and snow too !
-
https://off-guardian.org/2022/05/27/russia-fast-tracks-cbdc-digital-ruble-to-be-used-in-real-operations-in-2023/
-
Tankie be like...
(https://preview.redd.it/it2neukx99y81.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=714300786ca9f6ce4129fa2a430cba3bf40e850d)
-
Is he dead..https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/top-british-spies-now-believe-vladimir-putin-might-already-be-dead/ar-AAXQPeP?ocid=msedgntp
-
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/30/negative-views-of-russia-mainly-limited-to-western-liberal-democracies-poll-shows
-
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/30/negative-views-of-russia-mainly-limited-to-western-liberal-democracies-poll-shows
I am trying to get into the Russian psyche but can't put behind me the pattern of behaviour displayed by Putin towards his enemies, let alone the brutality of the Stalin era. However as a balance I post this video, whose conclusions might surprise many. https://youtu.be/dkMlLkCRmRQ
-
For the Russophiles what possible justification is there for this..https://www.aol.co.uk/news/zelensky-warns-hunger-catastrophe-russia-152203961.html
-
For the Russophiles what possible justification is there for this..https://www.aol.co.uk/news/zelensky-warns-hunger-catastrophe-russia-152203961.html
If you are interested, have a quick read of this, Steve. The blocking of the ports and the grain is not Russia's doing. Ukraine are preventing the ships leaving and have let loose hundreds of mines to hold the ships and their crews hostage. This is confirmed by the International Maritime Organisation (IMO)
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2022/05/no-the-ukraine-war-has-not-stoked-a-global-food-crisis.html
The world knows who started this crisis. There are remnants of the propagandised remaining in Western NATO states that still believe everything Russia Bad just as they have been taught for years, but they will slowly but surely emerge from their conditioning. The world is changing rapidly. The G7, DAVOS, WEF are no longer the Masters of the Universe. Economic difficulties in Western States brought on by their idiotic, suicidal and illegal sanctions against Russia are coming home to roost. Blaming Russia, Putin, Assad, China etc. will no longer work. It is not Russia, China or any other governments that will be regime changed this time. Those governments compromised or idiotic enough to involve themselves in attempting to bring down Russia and Putin have guaranteed their own regime change.
The Russia blocking grain is just the same as the lies about Snake Island, dead Russian Generals that appear alive days later, Ghost of Kiev, Russia running out of soldiers/fuel/missiles/tanks and on and on. Ukraine, who are NATO's proxy force, only have propaganda left as an effective weapon. Trouble is, it's only effective in about 12% of the world and even there only fleetingly. The rest of the world is turning East. NATO has been exposed as weak militarily.
It was only the threat of US/UK led NATO military that "guaranteed" the world economy was run in ways that were beneficial to those Western powers, now exposed as not so powerful after all. The Western alliances are powerless to stop the coming multipolar world. You should celebrate it. We might get rid of the compromised, corrupt warmongering fuckwits currently governing us.
-
howo these sanctions hurt putin he dosent need to sell us that oil theres plenty of other countrys that will take it.
its only hurting us.
-
US/UK foreign legion in Ukraine.
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/uyk4o2/ukus_foreign_legion_fights_fire_rgw90_antitank/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3 (https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/uyk4o2/ukus_foreign_legion_fights_fire_rgw90_antitank/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
-
do like my new avatar
-
The Jews were given a hard time in Ukraine weren't they ? Don't know if it still goes on, though it's noticed that Putin has aimed for the areas with the highest Jewish population.
-
Is he dead..https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/top-british-spies-now-believe-vladimir-putin-might-already-be-dead/ar-AAXQPeP?ocid=msedgntp
Quick tip, Steve. Any article that begins with a sentence that includes the words, "British spies", "believe" and "might" is 100% guaranteed to be followed by hundreds of words of baseless speculation, lies, mis-directions and straight up bullshit.
You're welcome.
-
do like my new avatar
Not really Nuggsy. Seems a bit hard tbh.
-
Quick tip, Steve. Any article that begins with a sentence that includes the words, "British spies", "believe" and "might" is 100% guaranteed to be followed by hundreds of words of baseless speculation, lies, mis-directions and straight up bullshit.
You're welcome.
Second tip for you, Steve.
When media outlets are merely repeating to you what our intelligence agencies supposedly "believe", does it not occur to you that by doing so they are exposing themselves as mere extensions or, at least,tools of those agencies?
And do you believe that our "senior British spies" believe Putin may be dead? Are you not yet entertaining the possibility that it isn't what our "top British spies" believe. It is what they want you to believe.
-
I'll believe the humanitarian corridors when I see them: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/26/russia-accused-of-shelling-mariupol-humanitarian-corridor
-
10 reasons why Russophiles & Putinophiles are wrong on Ukraine
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hncqk_HwcyA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hncqk_HwcyA)
-
A $120 million superyacht linked to a sanctioned Russian oligarch has appeared in Antigua more than 2 months after turning its tracking off.
https://www.businessinsider.com/sanctioned-russia-oligarch-superyacht-antigua-turning-ais-tracking-off-guryev-2022-5?r=US&IR=T (https://www.businessinsider.com/sanctioned-russia-oligarch-superyacht-antigua-turning-ais-tracking-off-guryev-2022-5?r=US&IR=T)
-
Russia's running out of things problems are getting worse. After the expected running out of missiles and fuel in early March, as predicted by Bellingcrap and other MSM outlets, it appears that the recent death of Vladimir Putin (touted by the ever reliable UK intel agencies) has led to Russia running out of short, balding 70 year olds with an uncanny resemblance to the recently deceased?! VVP.
Meanwhile Russia and the rest of humanity are running out of patience with the imbeciles running Western/Nato policy.
NATO and their paid propagandist media have run out of credibility :-[
-
Russia's running out of things problems are getting worse. After the expected running out of missiles and fuel in early March, as predicted by Bellingcrap and other MSM outlets, it appears that the recent death of Vladimir Putin (touted by the ever reliable UK intel agencies) has led to Russia running out of short, balding 70 year olds with an uncanny resemblance to the recently deceased?! VVP.
Meanwhile Russia and the rest of humanity are running out of patience with the imbeciles running Western/Nato policy.
NATO and their paid propagandist media have run out of credibility :-[
Do you believe that Russians should be allowed to have a democratic choice in their elections? https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/us/russia-s-navalny-says-he-faces-new-criminal-charges/ar-AAXW8I7?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=b958d218573d49dda76ddbe99b3697d3
-
Do you believe that Russians should be allowed to have a democratic choice in their elections? https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/us/russia-s-navalny-says-he-faces-new-criminal-charges/ar-AAXW8I7?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=b958d218573d49dda76ddbe99b3697d3
They do have a democratic choice. They choose United Russia and Putin.
Navalny is not a serious politician and nor does he have enough support to be regarded as opposition. Do some research on Russian politics instead of listening to lying, misrepresenting (and out of credibility) western media. He is a fraudster, embezzler and general all round crook. He is currently tweeting from jail where he rightly should be. His support is around 1 to 2% and he appeals to a very small demographic. The fact that he is touted as "Opposition Leader" in western media is a clue to their credibility. Russian media do not call Tommy Robinson, "Opposition Leader", nor do they claim that he is a political prisoner silenced by the Queen or Johnson when he is jailed for criminal actions.
Navalny is nothing more or less than a Russian Tommy Robinson. Look up his support yourself. Look up his beliefs also whilst you're about it and you may ask a better question next time.
The main opposition to Putin is the Communist Party, but admitting that doesn't suit western narratives, which ignore the truth. Navalny is utterly irrelevant to Russian politics. The Communist Party, by the way, support the military actions of Russia and in fact believe Putin is being too soft on NATO. Over 80% of Russians are utterly behind their President including most opposition parties.
Your "knowledge" of Russian domestic politics is nil. In fact it is less than nil. All of your "knowledge" has come from paid to be biased sources and all you now have is the "information" that your masters want you to have.
-
They do have a democratic choice. They choose United Russia and Putin.
Navalny is not a serious politician and nor does he have enough support to be regarded as opposition. Do some research on Russian politics instead of listening to lying, misrepresenting (and out of credibility) western media. He is a fraudster, embezzler and general all round crook. He is currently tweeting from jail where he rightly should be. His support is around 1 to 2% and he appeals to a very small demographic. The fact that he is touted as "Opposition Leader" in western media is a clue to their credibility. Russian media do not call Tommy Robinson, "Opposition Leader", nor do they claim that he is a political prisoner silenced by the Queen or Johnson when he is jailed for criminal actions.
Navalny is nothing more or less than a Russian Tommy Robinson. Look up his support yourself. Look up his beliefs also whilst you're about it and you may ask a better question next time.
The main opposition to Putin is the Communist Party, but admitting that doesn't suit western narratives, which ignore the truth. Navalny is utterly irrelevant to Russian politics. The Communist Party, by the way, support the military actions of Russia and in fact believe Putin is being too soft on NATO. Over 80% of Russians are utterly behind their President including most opposition parties.
Your "knowledge" of Russian domestic politics is nil. In fact it is less than nil. All of your "knowledge" has come from paid to be biased sources and all you now have is the "information" that your masters want you to have.
What absolute drivel. Your knowledge of Russia and what its people want is seriously lacking: https://youtu.be/vM04zNbsaJg
-
What absolute drivel. Your knowledge of Russia and what its people want is seriously lacking: https://youtu.be/vM04zNbsaJg
If it is absolute drivel then you would be able to debunk it point by point. But you can't hence your blanket dismissal followed by a link to an irrelevant youtube video about Boris Nemtsov, a murder that is linked by you and western propagandists without evidence to Putin. Pretty much all murders in Russia are by Putin's henchmen if western media is to be believed.
By drivel are you suggesting that the Communist Party are not the main opposition to United Russia? or that I have underestimated the relevance of Navalny? Are you saying that he isn't a convicted fraudster and embezzler? Is the Tommy Robinson comparison not apt? If not, why not?
Every time that you attempt to engage it is apparent that you know no context and have sought zero information from critical and diverse sources. Beyond parroting MSM talking points, it is obvious that you rely entirely on one sided context free drivel spoon fed to you by the MSM and repeated by you without questioning.
Recently you raised the Budapest Memorandum and it was apparent that your entire knowledge of this was the one line repeated ad nauseam by MSM whereby the signatory states commit to “respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine”.
I posted a link to the entire memorandum, only six paragraphs. I took up your "challenge" to debate this and as usual you had nothing more to add. You had no knowledge beyond the one line that you had been trained to repeat. There is plenty to discuss in those six paragraphs. Any reasonable discussion would point out that the US and UK breached point 3 of the memorandum (no economic coercion) in 2014, as well as previous times. 2014 is perhaps the most egregious and obvious example of, "economic coercion designed to subordinate to their own interest the exercise by Ukraine of the rights inherent in its sovereignty and thus to secure advantages of any kind".
There is much more than that to discuss. Zelensky by admitting to pursuing nuclear weapons earlier in February, nullified the whole memorandum. That is the context of the memorandum. It is Ukraine giving up its nuclear warheads, from the former Soviet Union, and joining the NPT (Non Proliferation Treaty). Declaring that you intend to acquire nuclear warheads ends the agreement.
But you only know one context free line so you can't discuss this.
-
What absolute drivel. Your knowledge of Russia and what its people want is seriously lacking: https://youtu.be/vM04zNbsaJg
Gringo lives in a fantasy world when it comes to the subject of Russia. He has never been there and its unlikely he knows anyone who has.
I have friends whose parents grew up in the USSR, I have had colleagues and acquaintances who grew up in the Warsaw pact (mostly Poland and Latvia). I asked them about their experiences. I am not going to be put under any illusions propagated by the Kremlin.
-
Putin controls the mass media, he controls the Duma and he controls the judiciary. Strange with all these advantages he garnered 49% in opinion polls (far less among the youth) yet 76% in the Presidential election.
Any opposition to him from wherever it emanates is crushed: https://youtu.be/m9SJ2hx9wmo
The third paragraph of the Budapest Memorandum you quote analysed:
The third paragraph holds the parties to refrain from economic coercion designed to subordinate to their own interest Ukraine’s exercise of its sovereign rights. Since 2014, Russia has imposed embargoes on Ukrainian essential raw materials and agricultural products. The UK and the US did not engage in economic coercion against Ukraine.
Unfortunately, Russia has broken virtually all the commitments it undertook in that document. It used military force to seize, and then illegally annex, Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula in early 2014. Russian and Russian proxy forces have waged war for more than five years in the eastern Ukrainian region of Donbas, claiming more than 13,000 lives and driving some two million people from their homes.
-
Gringo lives in a fantasy world when it comes to the subject of Russia. He has never been there and its unlikely he knows anyone who has.
I have friends whose parents grew up in the USSR, I have had colleagues and acquaintances who grew up in the Warsaw pact (mostly Poland and Latvia). I asked them about their experiences. I am not going to be put under any illusions propagated by the Kremlin.
Why would you imagine that, David? My views on Russia are based on a wide spectrum of views and opinions. The USSR hasn't existed for over 30 years. Russia is not the USSR. You don't seem to have any opinions of your own.
You have nothing to add and you cannot, so don't, attempt to debunk anything that I have stated. Just some evidence free imaginings about who I may have met or know and what my imagined life experiences are.
The fantasy world is the quickly evaporating Western-centric world view. The world is changing, power is shifting and facts being created on the ground, militarily, politically and economically, are daily destroying this fantasy world. Even the propaganda is failing now.
The rest of the world doesn't see Russia as the aggressor. NATO under the leadership of the US is what the rest of the world sees as a threat.
Your mates parents? Seriously you are a halfwit.
-
Why would you imagine that, David? My views on Russia are based on a wide spectrum of views and opinions. The USSR hasn't existed for over 30 years. Russia is not the USSR. You don't seem to have any opinions of your own.
You have nothing to add and you cannot, so don't, attempt to debunk anything that I have stated. Just some evidence free imaginings about who I may have met or know and what my imagined life experiences are.
The fantasy world is the quickly evaporating Western-centric world view. The world is changing, power is shifting and facts being created on the ground, militarily, politically and economically, are daily destroying this fantasy world. Even the propaganda is failing now.
The rest of the world doesn't see Russia as the aggressor. NATO under the leadership of the US is what the rest of the world sees as a threat.
Your mates parents? Seriously you are a halfwit.
We don't address fellow-members in those terms. NATO was formed in response to the Soviet occupation of East European states post-1945 and don't you forget it. A brave new world ruled by Putin and Xi, the latter president of a country where there are no free trades unions and democracy denied to Hong Kong after guaranteeing "one country, two systems" for fifty years?
You're having a laugh.
-
Putin controls the mass media, he controls the Duma and he controls the judiciary. Strange with all these advantages he garnered 49% in opinion polls (far less among the youth) yet 76% in the Presidential election.
Any opposition to him from wherever it emanates is crushed: https://youtu.be/m9SJ2hx9wmo
The third paragraph of the Budapest Memorandum you quote analysed:
The third paragraph holds the parties to refrain from economic coercion designed to subordinate to their own interest Ukraine’s exercise of its sovereign rights. Since 2014, Russia has imposed embargoes on Ukrainian essential raw materials and agricultural products. The UK and the US did not engage in economic coercion against Ukraine.
Unfortunately, Russia has broken virtually all the commitments it undertook in that document. It used military force to seize, and then illegally annex, Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula in early 2014. Russian and Russian proxy forces have waged war for more than five years in the eastern Ukrainian region of Donbas, claiming more than 13,000 lives and driving some two million people from their homes.
The economic coercion by the US is openly admitted. That is why I referred to it. The US spent $5bn to get their people in the government in the 2014 Maidan coup. Look up the Victoria Nuland/ Geoffrey Pyatt leaked phone call. There is little doubt that the US used economic coercion.
There is also no doubt that Zelensky nullifies it anyway by declaring his ambition to seek nuclear warheads.
Your claim of Russia and proxy forces is demonstrably false. The Donbass militias are residents of Donbass. They are Ukrainians, not Russians. The civilian deaths, recorded by the OSCE, make clear that it is the Ukrainian armed forces who have been shelling Donbass residents for the last 8 years. The OSCE figures tell this tale. Not Russia.
The Ukrainian government has been in breach of the Minsk 2 accords from day one. Minsk 2 is also UNSC 2202. Russia made sure to put Minsk 2 to the UNSC because of the failure of the Kiev government to abide by Minsk 1.
I am aware that the only thing that David and Steve know about Minsk 2/UNSC 2202 is what they have heard/read in the media. Russia must fulfil its obligations was the constant line. These obligations were never laid out however. The reasons for this are simple. Russia was not a party to and had no "obligations" to fulfil under Minsk 2. The Minsk 2 accords were an agreement by the Ukrainian government with the separatists to negotiate federalisation and to immediately ceasefire. They did none of this and carried on shelling citizens who wanted no part of the Maidan Russia hating coup government.
You ought to look up the Debaltseve cauldron. The many NATO forces caught in this cauldron is the reason that Minsk 2 came about and became a United Nations Security Council resolution(2202). Why do you think it wasn't vetoed by US, UK or France despite it being favourable to the separatists and putting no obligations on Russia? You know none of this because it isn't reported in the sources that you read.
-
and democracy denied to Hong Kong after guaranteeing "one country, two systems" for fifty years?
You're having a laugh.
Your concern for the citizens of Hong Kong and the denial of democracy is a day late and a dollar short. The British seized Hong Kong from China in order that they could trade opium. Hong Kong under British rule was not democratic. It was ruled by a governor. Why are you supposedly concerned now about a system you know nothing of? The world is piece by piece shaking off the shackles of hundreds of years of western imperialism. Your faux concern for Hong Kong is what is funny. I am having a laugh at you.
-
Russian oligarch’s $300 million yacht found hidden in a creek.
https://fortune.com/2022/06/02/russian-oligarch-300-million-yacht-found-in-creek/ (https://fortune.com/2022/06/02/russian-oligarch-300-million-yacht-found-in-creek/)
-
The economic coercion by the US is openly admitted. That is why I referred to it. The US spent $5bn to get their people in the government in the 2014 Maidan coup. Look up the Victoria Nuland/ Geoffrey Pyatt leaked phone call. There is little doubt that the US used economic coercion.
There is also no doubt that Zelensky nullifies it anyway by declaring his ambition to seek nuclear warheads.
Your claim of Russia and proxy forces is demonstrably false. The Donbass militias are residents of Donbass. They are Ukrainians, not Russians. The civilian deaths, recorded by the OSCE, make clear that it is the Ukrainian armed forces who have been shelling Donbass residents for the last 8 years. The OSCE figures tell this tale. Not Russia.
The Ukrainian government has been in breach of the Minsk 2 accords from day one. Minsk 2 is also UNSC 2202. Russia made sure to put Minsk 2 to the UNSC because of the failure of the Kiev government to abide by Minsk 1.
I am aware that the only thing that David and Steve know about Minsk 2/UNSC 2202 is what they have heard/read in the media. Russia must fulfil its obligations was the constant line. These obligations were never laid out however. The reasons for this are simple. Russia was not a party to and had no "obligations" to fulfil under Minsk 2. The Minsk 2 accords were an agreement by the Ukrainian government with the separatists to negotiate federalisation and to immediately ceasefire. They did none of this and carried on shelling citizens who wanted no part of the Maidan Russia hating coup government.
You ought to look up the Debaltseve cauldron. The many NATO forces caught in this cauldron is the reason that Minsk 2 came about and became a United Nations Security Council resolution(2202). Why do you think it wasn't vetoed by US, UK or France despite it being favourable to the separatists and putting no obligations on Russia? You know none of this because it isn't reported in the sources that you read.
What nonsense. The UN resolution 2202 was not vetoed because it reaffirmed "full respect for the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Ukraine." Minsk 2 did not enviasge a de facto independent Luhansk and Donetsk, with its own police force, judiciary and ability to make agreements with foreign powers.
-
What nonsense. The UN resolution 2202 was not vetoed because it reaffirmed "full respect for the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Ukraine." Minsk 2 did not enviasge a de facto independent Luhansk and Donetsk, with its own police force, judiciary and ability to make agreements with foreign powers.
This was all reported and discussed at the time of Minsk 2. You clearly have not followed world affairs outside of occasional western reporting. The cauldron at Debaltseve is what led directly to Minsk 2 and this isn't disputed by anyone serious. Minsk 2 places obligations on the Ukraine govt. to negotiate federalism for the breakaway republics with the separatists. It also called for an immediate ceasefire which was broken almost immediately. Of course it envisages separate police, judiciary etc.
Minsk 2 places all obligations on Ukraine to negotiate with separatists. You have no idea of the circumstances leading to any of the agreements/resolutions and it shows.
Research the Debaltseve cauldron.
Ask yourself why the western powers didn't veto the draft of Minsk 2 but now refer to Russia failing its obligations but without naming these obligations. Why would the western powers not negotiate and present a different' more acceptable to them, draft?
The separatists had a gun to the head of the Ukraine government and also, more importantly, they had a gun to the head of those powers who could veto the resolution. There were NATO troops who had no legal reason to be there caught in a massive cauldron who had the choice of capture or death. The US/UK/France chose not to veto UNSC 2202 because the alternative was way worse. I, and many others followed this in real time, at the time.
You have clearly just googled it earlier.
-
Russian oligarch’s $300 million yacht found hidden in a creek.
Russia running out of super yachts by mid June.
Western media running out of bullshit.
-
This was all reported and discussed at the time of Minsk 2. You clearly have not followed world affairs outside of occasional western reporting. The cauldron at Debaltseve is what led directly to Minsk 2 and this isn't disputed by anyone serious. Minsk 2 places obligations on the Ukraine govt. to negotiate federalism for the breakaway republics with the separatists. It also called for an immediate ceasefire which was broken almost immediately. Of course it envisages separate police, judiciary etc.
Minsk 2 places all obligations on Ukraine to negotiate with separatists. You have no idea of the circumstances leading to any of the agreements/resolutions and it shows.
Research the Debaltseve cauldron.
Ask yourself why the western powers didn't veto the draft of Minsk 2 but now refer to Russia failing its obligations but without naming these obligations. Why would the western powers not negotiate and present a different' more acceptable to them, draft?
The separatists had a gun to the head of the Ukraine government and also, more importantly, they had a gun to the head of those powers who could veto the resolution. There were NATO troops who had no legal reason to be there caught in a massive cauldron who had the choice of capture or death. The US/UK/France chose not to veto UNSC 2202 because the alternative was way worse. I, and many others followed this in real time, at the time.
You have clearly just googled it earlier.
Let's cut to the chase gringo. There is a civil war going on in Ukraine since March 2014 when Russia annexed Crimea. You have no evidence whatsoever that a majority of Ukrainian citizens in Luhansk and Donetsk back the rebels, neither do you have evidence that a majority in those areas wish to leave Ukraine and unite with Russia.
-
Russian oligarch’s $300 million yacht found hidden in a creek.
Russia running out of super yachts by mid June.
Western media running out of bullshit.
One cannot be "running out of bullshit" as there is a limitless amount of bullshit one can produce. Hence you often post drivel on this subject consisting of dozens upon dozens of paragraphs. Your "end of the empire of lies" being a prime example.
I can see a large yatch in Ras Al-Khaimah creek on shiptracker.live but it conveniently has its tracker switched off so I cannot know exactly what model or number it is.
-
So many stories..are they all lies? https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10754207/Russian-accused-killing-wife-daughter-hanging-Spain-MURDERED-son-says.html
-
Let's cut to the chase gringo. There is a civil war going on in Ukraine since March 2014 when Russia annexed Crimea. You have no evidence whatsoever that a majority of Ukrainian citizens in Luhansk and Donetsk back the rebels, neither do you have evidence that a majority in those areas wish to leave Ukraine and unite with Russia.
We can agree that there is a civil war going on in Ukraine since 2014. Civil war being the correct terminology. Your linkage of it with the clear and democratic choice of the Crimean population to rejoin Russia, or as you call it, "annexation by Russia" is a biased, dramatic and over emotional description of events.
Perhaps you can write a coherent post describing this "annexation by Russia". Sounds brutal and violent, annexing territories. How many lives were lost in this annexation? How many troops did Russia send for this "annexation"? What about the Ukrainian soldiers stationed in Crimea? What did they do? What happened, Steve?
I can only remember the peaceful transition chosen by the Crimean people. What did I miss?
The civil war started in 2014 because of events in Maidan, Kiev. The Crimeans desire to rejoin Russia is also because of the coup in 2014. The civil war did not begin because the Russians "annexed Crimea".
The civil war and the peaceful transition of Crimea back into the RF happened because there was a western sponsored coup in 2014 and the civilians of these territories demanded separatism from a government they regard as hostile to them and their culture. The shelling by Ukrainian forces since then only strengthen their claim.
The evidence that the citizens of Donetsk and Luhansk wish to leave Ukraine is implicit in the recognition of this fact and recognition of the leaders of the breakaway republics in both the Minsk 1 and 2 agreements signed and agreed by the Ukrainian government. Who signed them and what do they recognise if not the above?
Anyway, tell me all about this dramatic "annexation by Russia" of Crimea. Not a link to some article which won't describe it anyway, cos it never happened. You tell me all about it. It sounds quite dramatic, I hope it lives up to the hype!
-
We can agree that there is a civil war going on in Ukraine since 2014. Civil war being the correct terminology. Your linkage of it with the clear and democratic choice of the Crimean population to rejoin Russia, or as you call it, "annexation by Russia" is a biased, dramatic and over emotional description of events.
Perhaps you can write a coherent post describing this "annexation by Russia". Sounds brutal and violent, annexing territories. How many lives were lost in this annexation? How many troops did Russia send for this "annexation"? What about the Ukrainian soldiers stationed in Crimea? What did they do? What happened, Steve?
I can only remember the peaceful transition chosen by the Crimean people. What did I miss?
The civil war started in 2014 because of events in Maidan, Kiev. The Crimeans desire to rejoin Russia is also because of the coup in 2014. The civil war did not begin because the Russians "annexed Crimea".
The civil war and the peaceful transition of Crimea back into the RF happened because there was a western sponsored coup in 2014 and the civilians of these territories demanded separatism from a government they regard as hostile to them and their culture. The shelling by Ukrainian forces since then only strengthen their claim.
The evidence that the citizens of Donetsk and Luhansk wish to leave Ukraine is implicit in the recognition of this fact and recognition of the leaders of the breakaway republics in both the Minsk 1 and 2 agreements signed and agreed by the Ukrainian government. Who signed them and what do they recognise if not the above?
Anyway, tell me all about this dramatic "annexation by Russia" of Crimea. Not a link to some article which won't describe it anyway, cos it never happened. You tell me all about it. It sounds quite dramatic, I hope it lives up to the hype!
It was the first invasion of sovereign territory in Eastern Europe since 1945. The tactics used were similar to the Gleiwitz incident of August 31 1939 (do google it gringo.) Angela Merkel thought she had a special relationship with Putin since she grew up in East Germany and could speak to him in Russian. He has duped everyone including her and yourself.
I notice you don't answer the question on where the proof is that a majority of Luhansk and Donetsk residents wish to join Russia. There is none, because a small group of thugs with backing from Mother Russia caused chaos in that region hoping that in so doing it would facilitate the granting of their demands.
-
It was the first invasion of sovereign territory in Eastern Europe since 1945. The tactics used were similar to the Gleiwitz incident of August 31 1939 (do google it gringo.) Angela Merkel thought she had a special relationship with Putin since she grew up in East Germany and could speak to him in Russian. He has duped everyone including her and yourself.
I notice you don't answer the question on where the proof is that a majority of Luhansk and Donetsk residents wish to join Russia. There is none, because a small group of thugs with backing from Mother Russia caused chaos in that region hoping that in so doing it would facilitate the granting of their demands.
There was no invasion. I have asked you to describe this invasion. You haven't because there was no invasion or annexation of anything. Gleiwitz has what to do with Crimea exactly, Steve? There is no connection in any way shape or form. False flag attacks by Nazis in Poland? What is the connection to Crimea? There is none, you are just throwing shit around now.
I noticed that your noticing of my non answering of the desire of Luhansk/Donetsk regions shows you didn't read and comprehend the reply. I did answer it. You have yet to answer anything. Here is the answer again, Steve, copied and pasted below. From the post where you noticed that I didn't answer,
The evidence that the citizens of Donetsk and Luhansk wish to leave Ukraine is implicit in the recognition of this fact and recognition of the leaders of the breakaway republics in both the Minsk 1 and 2 agreements signed and agreed by the Ukrainian government. Who signed them and what do they recognise if not the above?
-
There was no invasion. I have asked you to describe this invasion. You haven't because there was no invasion or annexation of anything. Gleiwitz has what to do with Crimea exactly, Steve? There is no connection in any way shape or form. False flag attacks by Nazis in Poland? What is the connection to Crimea? There is none, you are just throwing shit around now.
I noticed that your noticing of my non answering of the desire of Luhansk/Donetsk regions shows you didn't read and comprehend the reply. I did answer it. You have yet to answer anything. Here is the answer again, Steve, copied and pasted below. From the post where you noticed that I didn't answer,
The evidence that the citizens of Donetsk and Luhansk wish to leave Ukraine is implicit in the recognition of this fact and recognition of the leaders of the breakaway republics in both the Minsk 1 and 2 agreements signed and agreed by the Ukrainian government. Who signed them and what do they recognise if not the above?
But as you stated in one of your previous posts: Russia wasn't mentioned. But interfere they continued to do. How do you think the Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 was brought down?
The Gleiwitz/ Crimea invasion parallel is the lack of national military uniform whilst invading. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_green_men_(Russo-Ukrainian_War)
-
But as you stated in one of your previous posts: Russia wasn't mentioned. But interfere they continued to do. How do you think the Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 was brought down?
The Gleiwitz/ Crimea invasion parallel is the lack of national military uniform whilst invading. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_green_men_(Russo-Ukrainian_War)
You are all over the place, Steve, and incoherent. Russia did not invade Crimea. Russian and Ukrainian troops were stationed there already. The Crimeans overwhelmingly chose to rejoin Russia, democratically.
Do you think that the Russians should have ignored the desire of the Crimeans? What would the result have been had Russia refused to recognise the Crimeans desire? Should they have allowed Crimea, to be attacked by the Ukrainian Army, as Donetsk and Luhansk were? What would be the result of this? What exactly do you think should happen with Crimea?
Why do you not recognise the right of Crimeans to self determination? Would you force them to live under the rule of a government that they see as hostile to them?
-
You are all over the place, Steve, and incoherent. Russia did not invade Crimea. Russian and Ukrainian troops were stationed there already. The Crimeans overwhelmingly chose to rejoin Russia, democratically.
Do you think that the Russians should have ignored the desire of the Crimeans? What would the result have been had Russia refused to recognise the Crimeans desire? Should they have allowed Crimea, to be attacked by the Ukrainian Army, as Donetsk and Luhansk were? What would be the result of this? What exactly do you think should happen with Crimea?
Why do you not recognise the right of Crimeans to self determination? Would you force them to live under the rule of a government that they see as hostile to them?
The answer is autonomy, not sending in young men to their deaths. https://youtu.be/KEGF9a3x9iE
-
Here is a more realistic appraisal of events;
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2022/06/ukraine-beyond-day-100-breaking-resistance-deep-operation-a-new-country.html#more
-
Here is a more realistic appraisal of events;
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2022/06/ukraine-beyond-day-100-breaking-resistance-deep-operation-a-new-country.html#more
Who killed the passengers on MH17 gringo? https://youtu.be/8pU3KluWRkg
-
Who killed the passengers on MH17 gringo? https://youtu.be/8pU3KluWRkg
Probably the Ukrainians but we will never know for certain. You are clearly out of your depth hence your shifting of the goalposts on every post. You raise issues and then have no response when they are tackled other than to introduce some new idiotic allegation against Russia brought to you by those impeccable sources, "UK intelligence believes blah blah". Every piece of rubbish that you regurgitate has at one point been preceded by those or similar words, "UK spies believe....".
When you understand that reports claiming that "UK spies believe..." is a euphemism for, "UK intel knows that this is a pile of steaming bullshit but it is what they want the public to believe", then you might have a Eureka moment. But I doubt it, you are too ideologically wedded to the narrative now.
-
Probably the Ukrainians but we will never know for certain. You are clearly out of your depth hence your shifting of the goalposts on every post. You raise issues and then have no response when they are tackled other than to introduce some new idiotic allegation against Russia brought to you by those impeccable sources, "UK intelligence believes blah blah". Every piece of rubbish that you regurgitate has at one point been preceded by those or similar words, "UK spies believe....".
When you understand that reports claiming that "UK spies believe..." is a euphemism for, "UK intel knows that this is a pile of steaming bullshit but it is what they want the public to believe", then you might have a Eureka moment. But I doubt it, you are too ideologically wedded to the narrative now.
Citizens of Ukraine, though thugs by nature. I have answered every one of your points and not once mentioned British spies. Time will tell what happens to Putin. I sincerely hope he is removed by the Russian people in the same way Khrushchev was.
-
I wonder what Gorbachev thinks of all this ?
-
Here is a more realistic appraisal of events;
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2022/06/ukraine-beyond-day-100-breaking-resistance-deep-operation-a-new-country.html#more
(https://dirtyglasses.typepad.com/dirtyglasses/mainleft.jpg)
Definition from Oxford Languages
barfly
plural noun: barflies
a person who spends much of their time drinking in bars.
"a beer-swilling barfly"
Sounds about right. So, Gringo has gone from a paleo-conservative creationist blog (the blogmire) to an Alcoholics forum. :))
-
Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan do not express a desire to participate in the war against Ukraine.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/v62d0d/russia_hinted_at_the_introduction_of_csto_troops/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/v62d0d/russia_hinted_at_the_introduction_of_csto_troops/)
-
https://off-guardian.org/2022/06/07/ukraine-war-what-is-it-good-for-transformation/
-
Russians bombing another supermarket in Kharkiv.
https://v.redd.it/vipx7pc3oj491/DASH_720.mp4 (https://v.redd.it/vipx7pc3oj491/DASH_720.mp4)
"Destroying infrastructure divides the people living there into two groups:
- Refugees - they leave
- Those who stay - these the Russians call "resistance fighters" and shoot on sight.
From the Russian point of view, it simplifies matters. Destroy everything that makes a society function. Anyone who doesn't flee - kill them. It's a brute-force approach to war, because they are not skilled enough to operate with any precision."
-
Britons sentenced to death after ‘show trial’ in Russian-occupied Ukraine
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/09/britons-sentenced-to-death-russian-occupied-ukraine-aiden-aslin-shaun-pinner (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/09/britons-sentenced-to-death-russian-occupied-ukraine-aiden-aslin-shaun-pinner)
-
Britons sentenced to death after ‘show trial’ in Russian-occupied Ukraine
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/09/britons-sentenced-to-death-russian-occupied-ukraine-aiden-aslin-shaun-pinner (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/09/britons-sentenced-to-death-russian-occupied-ukraine-aiden-aslin-shaun-pinner)
Good job MP's and others had the sense to distance themselves from Liz Truss's idiotic comments, early on in the conflict.
-
Good job MP's and others had the sense to distance themselves from Liz Truss's idiotic comments, early on in the conflict.
Did they?
-
Did they?
Sometimes I wonder what world you inhabit.
-
How sad..
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/10/ukraine-casualty-rate-russia-war-tipping-point
-
https://thegrayzone.com/2022/06/13/paul-masons-collusion-british-intelligence-agent/
-
https://www.jonathan-cook.net/2022-03-25/putin-war-criminal-madeleine-albright/
-
https://www.jonathan-cook.net/2022-03-25/putin-war-criminal-madeleine-albright/
It's a complicated picture. Saddam Hussein had attacked Iran and invaded Kuwait. Ukraine was no threat to its neighbours.
-
Russia claims that ethnic Russian Ukrainians were persecuted by the Kiev government. If - if - this is true, one could make a good argument for the Russian invasion of at least the eastern Ukraine.
Ukraine itself has never been a geopolitical threat to Russia, but NATO is, and Ukraine and NATO (with the EU) have been moving towards alliance in defiance of understandings reached after the end of the Cold War. You could argue that it should be up to sovereign Ukraine to decide on its military alliances, but not all Ukrainians support an alignment with the 'West', and the history of the situation is anyway complicated. Many respectable Ukrainians and Russians alike do not regard the Ukraine as a separate country to Russia. Personally I take no sides and remain neutral, I merely note that there is more to it than just cheaply monsterising Vladimir Putin will allow.
I don't believe Russia's objective is to occupy the whole of the Ukraine. That would serve no purpose. The aim is to neutralise the Ukraine and bring the parties to the table for an agreement that will contain NATO.
In view of all this, I don't accept that Ukraine are the nice country everybody pretends, nor do I accept that Vladimir Putin is unusually cynical for a world leader.
You mention Saddam Hussein, by comparison. I don't accept that Saddam Hussein was beyond the pale. He has been turned into a comical villain by Western propaganda, but the facts tell me that:
- when Saddam Hussein came to power in Iraq, he set about Westernising the country, in contrast to revolutionary Islamic Iran, and sought friendly relations with the West;
- Saddam turned Iraq from a Middle Eastern backwater into a modern society;
- Saddam enjoyed amicable and constructive relations, even ally status, with the United States until the first Gulf War. I believe the USA sided with Iraq during the Iran-Iraq War and gave billions of dollars in aid;
- Iraq started the Iran-Iraq War, but Iran was the cause of it. This is reflected in the support of the U.S. government for Iraq, not Iran. Iran was attempting to spread its revolutionary Islamic system to Iraq. The suspicion has to be that Washington told Saddam Hussein to invade Iran - and I believe that is what occurred;
- I accept that the invasion of Kuwait was wrong, but Saddam claimed the U.S. had no objection to the invasion and only turned on him after the event. This may or may not be true, but consider that relations between the two countries were amicable up until this point, and initially the U.S. reaction to the invasion was a stance of neutrality;
- when Saddam Hussein was on trial in Iraq, his reaction was often to laugh at his accusers. Given the 'true' history of what occurred, some of which I have outlined above, I am not surprised that he laughed. He must have been astonished at the nerve and hypocrisy of his accusers, especially when you consider that the invasion of Iraq itself (which you disgracefully seem to want to justify) removed the very regime that was a determined bulwark against aggressive Islamic fundamentalism. The invasion of Iraq was not only an illegal act and a massive war crime, it was one of the stupidest acts in history, and Madeleine Albright is a war criminal, along with the rest.
I don't pretend that Saddam Hussein was a nice man. I am sure aspects of his regime were horrible, but he was not how he was portrayed. You could possibly make a case that he was a war criminal for his prosecution of the Iran-Iraq War, but as I have explained, he didn't cause it and one thing people like you never mention is that it was Iraq that sued for peace in that war and Iran then evolved into the obdurate aggressor. Unlike George W. Bush, who undoubtedly was a war criminal and all that's left is the formality of a trial, in Saddam's case the matter is very much open to debate. It is even possible to regard Saddam Hussein as a hero for his actions over the Iran-Iraq War. I appreciate that he started that war partly for reasons of national self-esteem and self-interest, including greed, but Iraq was also setting out to prevent the spread of revolutionary Islam, which is why the U.S. government back them (and ironically, also was a borrowed justification for the later invasion of Iraq).
If you go through life believing what the mainstream media say, you will end up with a very misconceived view of world events.
They are lying to you.
-
https://youtu.be/4YwwLR7vtDk
-
I don't respond directly to people who should not be onsite. I would say that the issue is complicated, it depends at what point you start, the Oil-for-Food programme was badly administered and reeked of corruption, neither was I in favour of the invasion of Iraq. https://youtu.be/-CgqXifzYKs
-
I don't respond directly to people who should not be onsite. I would say that the issue is complicated, it depends at what point you start, the Oil-for-Food programme was badly administered and reeked of corruption, neither was I in favour of the invasion of Iraq. https://youtu.be/-CgqXifzYKs
That's a relief. It means we can be spared a load a twaddle.
-
That's a relief. It means we can be spared a load a twaddle.
Twaddle to me is the repeated " war crimes " that we've heard since the invasion began. How about a turnaround by Ukraine and start lobbing a few bombs towards Russia and risk WWIII ?
Personally I'm sick of hearing about war crimes so surely this latest atrocity in the supermarket would/ should urge on Ukraine to start fighting back ? Get on with it for heavens sake !
-
If we send any more £millions/billions and further arms to assist Ukraine, we'll be left with little in which to face Russia should it come knocking at our door. It's time to come to some sort of a decision in which to halt Putin and his manipulating and scheming in furthering his atrocities.
It's obvious that his latest atrocity in the shopping area was done in conjunction with the meeting of leaders at the G7.
Are we going to continue with yet more hot air coming from this bunch of ditherers ?
-
The problem is they have the ultimate weapon. We will have to make an acommodation with Russia in some form or another. https://youtu.be/7SnTkc0r6gk
-
His assassination would be a start.
-
Russian scientist dies after being taken from his hospital bed on espionage charges in Russia.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/dmitry-kolker-dies-scientist-taken-hospital-bed-espionage-charges-russia/ (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/dmitry-kolker-dies-scientist-taken-hospital-bed-espionage-charges-russia/)
-
US donated HIMARS being used by Ukrainian army to target Russian forces in Ukraine
https://v.redd.it/jj04o1yw1k991/DASH_720.mp4 (https://v.redd.it/jj04o1yw1k991/DASH_720.mp4)
-
The Bulgarian secret services have data showing that Russia pays about €2000 (BGN 4,000) per month to public figures, journalists, and politicians to spread its propaganda in the country.
https://www.euractiv.com/section/politics/short_news/bulgarian-secret-services-russia-pays-public-figures-to-spread-propaganda/ (https://www.euractiv.com/section/politics/short_news/bulgarian-secret-services-russia-pays-public-figures-to-spread-propaganda/)
-
The Bulgarian secret services have data showing that Russia pays about €2000 (BGN 4,000) per month to public figures, journalists, and politicians to spread its propaganda in the country.
https://www.euractiv.com/section/politics/short_news/bulgarian-secret-services-russia-pays-public-figures-to-spread-propaganda/ (https://www.euractiv.com/section/politics/short_news/bulgarian-secret-services-russia-pays-public-figures-to-spread-propaganda/)
How do you apply to take part?
-
How do you apply to take part?
Ask Marjorie Greene or George Galloway.
-
Ask Marjorie Greene or George Galloway.
You don't seem to like Galloway because he speaks the truth about apartheid in Israel / Palestine. And because he gave it to US senators, both barrels, regarding the invasion of Iraq. Probably one of the greatest speeches ever filmed.
-
You don't seem to like Galloway because he speaks the truth about apartheid in Israel / Palestine. And because he gave it to US senators, both barrels, regarding the invasion of Iraq. Probably one of the greatest speeches ever filmed.
I am told by several I don't like so and so because they "speak the truth". ::)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3VgQDULX84 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3VgQDULX84)
-
You don't seem to like Galloway because he speaks the truth about apartheid in Israel / Palestine. And because he gave it to US senators, both barrels, regarding the invasion of Iraq. Probably one of the greatest speeches ever filmed.
I agree.
-
I am told by several I don't like so and so because they "speak the truth". ::)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3VgQDULX84 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3VgQDULX84)
Uday's and his father's position were cemented with the help of the US, who used Ba'athist Iraq as a bulwark against Iran.
-
I was on an American forum-cum-chat news last night and they were all against the leaders ( presidents ) that they had and have presently got. It was discussing the 4th of July shootings in Chicago yesterday and I said that the shooter was bound to have been Mexican-----well I think he is !.
Why do leaders have to continually interfere where it's got nothing to do with them ?
-
Blair interfered in Iraq and look what's happened since ? Terrorist attacks galore !
-
Uday's and his father's position were cemented with the help of the US, who used Ba'athist Iraq as a bulwark against Iran.
Saddam came to power through his own machiavellian backstabbing and purges. Uday was POS because his father let him get away with it.
-
I am told by several I don't like so and so because they "speak the truth". ::)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3VgQDULX84 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3VgQDULX84)
You are in denial about increased US/UK NATO aggression of the last 3 decades and refuse to see, speak or hear of any truth that exposes the genocidal nature of the wars waged by these entities in the name of "Freedom and democracy" or their self appointed "Responsibility to Protect".
The cognitive dissonance is too much for you to deal with. Continued denial of western crimes will be impossible soon even for you. Increasing clampdowns, shortages, inflation are awakening the previously comfortable and complacent populations of the West. The supposed "leaders" of the Western bloc are cornered and clueless. The funding of more weapons and men to be sent into the meat grinder of Ukraine and relentless artillery strikes will do nothing to prevent the defeat that marks the end of US/UK/NATO hegemony.
Here is the last paragraph of the essay "End for The Empire of Lies" written three months ago. It is becoming obvious to all now that there is much more than Russia fighting Ukraine going on.
Russia, China and the multipolar world order have won, the Great Resetters have been reset. It will take time for the aftermath and consequences of the overturning of the western system to fully unravel but there can be little doubt that western financial power and sanctions regimes are being rendered null and void by the moves in currency and commodity trading backed by China/Russia. Western military might has been exposed as incapable of taking on anything other than small weak defenceless countries(and still get beat).
The propaganda arm (the media) having to work overtime to hide the failures mentioned above and as a consequence, merely helping along their own discrediting amongst even the usually unquestioning. Like the boy who cried wolf, in the end everyone just assumes he is lying. Our media have cried wolf way too often and shown too few wolves to be believed. People who usually ask no questions, suddenly are. As the moves in the world financial system start to impact more and more people's everyday lives then even more will ask questions. The usual lies will not pass muster at this point.
The old World Order is dead/dying. Exposed as pirates and thieves to the rest of the world. Goodbye Empire of Lies.
The world is uniting to end NATO hegemony. The how is spelt out in the Empire of Lies thread here;
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,11205.0.html
Everything I wrote 3 months ago is unfolding at an accelerating pace. There is a new multipolar world order emerging. Western hegemony, theft and piracy is being dismantled. The tide of history can't be ignored away with copium.
-
You are in denial about increased US/UK NATO aggression of the last 3 decades and refuse to see, speak or hear of any truth that exposes the genocidal nature of the wars waged by these entities in the name of "Freedom and democracy" or their self appointed "Responsibility to Protect".
The cognitive dissonance is too much for you to deal with. Continued denial of western crimes will be impossible soon even for you. Increasing clampdowns, shortages, inflation are awakening the previously comfortable and complacent populations of the West. The supposed "leaders" of the Western bloc are cornered and clueless. The funding of more weapons and men to be sent into the meat grinder of Ukraine and relentless artillery strikes will do nothing to prevent the defeat that marks the end of US/UK/NATO hegemony.
Here is the last paragraph of the essay "End for The Empire of Lies" written three months ago. It is becoming obvious to all now that there is much more than Russia fighting Ukraine going on.
Russia, China and the multipolar world order have won, the Great Resetters have been reset. It will take time for the aftermath and consequences of the overturning of the western system to fully unravel but there can be little doubt that western financial power and sanctions regimes are being rendered null and void by the moves in currency and commodity trading backed by China/Russia. Western military might has been exposed as incapable of taking on anything other than small weak defenceless countries(and still get beat).
The propaganda arm (the media) having to work overtime to hide the failures mentioned above and as a consequence, merely helping along their own discrediting amongst even the usually unquestioning. Like the boy who cried wolf, in the end everyone just assumes he is lying. Our media have cried wolf way too often and shown too few wolves to be believed. People who usually ask no questions, suddenly are. As the moves in the world financial system start to impact more and more people's everyday lives then even more will ask questions. The usual lies will not pass muster at this point.
The old World Order is dead/dying. Exposed as pirates and thieves to the rest of the world. Goodbye Empire of Lies.
The world is uniting to end NATO hegemony. The how is spelt out in the Empire of Lies thread here;
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,11205.0.html
Everything I wrote 3 months ago is unfolding at an accelerating pace. There is a new multipolar world order emerging. Western hegemony, theft and piracy is being dismantled. The tide of history can't be ignored away with copium.
And what else is happening on planet Gringo?
-
It is also clear that the slow grinding pace of the Russian advances suits Russia just fine. It is the western countries pouring in arms and aid who are suffering after their idiotic and backfiring sanctions. Most of the world are ignoring illegal western sanctions and trading with Russia. The Rouble is stronger than ever, Russian income from gas and oil booming because of the increased prices caused by self defeating Western actions.
The longer it takes is just more pain for the west. Russia is taking minimal losses while the Ukrainian army is being ground up by relentless artillery and taking huge losses. NATO are powerless to do anything about it. The vast majority of the world cheering on the Fall of Empire.
Some years back, on this thread, Russian military tech and the effect on modern warfare was discussed. It was apparent then and is being demonstrated now that missile technology, electronic warfare advances and air and missile defence systems way in advance of anything the US/UK NATO possess would and have nullified NATO power. Some dismissed it as propaganda or something.
NATO are only good for bullying weak defenceless countries. They have no answer to strong air defence and missile tech. NATO aircraft carriers and air power are rendered useless by a few thousand dollars missile. I said this years ago. It is unarguable now. NATO will be forced to draw down around the world, it is just a matter of time. So many bases will become(have become) indefensible.
The longer the Ukraine war carries on, the more pain will be felt in the western countries sponsoring the whole shit-show. Inflation rocketing, fuel and energy prices rocketing. Blaming Russia and Putin for everything is wearing thin even amongst the apathetic now.
Who believes that this ends any other way than when Russia says so? Ukraine will be left a land locked rump state at best. The entire Black Sea coast will be taken. NATO missile bases in Romania and Poland will be removed voluntarily or otherwise. The proposals put forward by Russia in December but ignored by NATO will be implemented in full. Who will stop it?
-
You cannot take on the world
-
You cannot take on the world
Unclear what you mean by this?
If you are suggesting that Russia is "taking on the world" then you could not be more wrong. Russia is taking on NATO. Russia has most of the world with it.
NATO on the other hand has been "taking on the world" for decades. Now that NATO has bitten off more than it can chew by provoking Russia, the rest of the world tired of living under Western NATO rules, invasions, piracy and theft are behind Russia.
Your observation is correct but it is NATO who are being shown that they indeed cannot take on the world.
-
It is also clear that the slow grinding pace of the Russian advances suits Russia just fine. It is the western countries pouring in arms and aid who are suffering after their idiotic and backfiring sanctions. Most of the world are ignoring illegal western sanctions and trading with Russia. The Rouble is stronger than ever, Russian income from gas and oil booming because of the increased prices caused by self defeating Western actions.
The longer it takes is just more pain for the west. Russia is taking minimal losses while the Ukrainian army is being ground up by relentless artillery and taking huge losses. NATO are powerless to do anything about it. The vast majority of the world cheering on the Fall of Empire.
Some years back, on this thread, Russian military tech and the effect on modern warfare was discussed. It was apparent then and is being demonstrated now that missile technology, electronic warfare advances and air and missile defence systems way in advance of anything the US/UK NATO possess would and have nullified NATO power. Some dismissed it as propaganda or something.
NATO are only good for bullying weak defenceless countries. They have no answer to strong air defence and missile tech. NATO aircraft carriers and air power are rendered useless by a few thousand dollars missile. I said this years ago. It is unarguable now. NATO will be forced to draw down around the world, it is just a matter of time. So many bases will become(have become) indefensible.
The longer the Ukraine war carries on, the more pain will be felt in the western countries sponsoring the whole shit-show. Inflation rocketing, fuel and energy prices rocketing. Blaming Russia and Putin for everything is wearing thin even amongst the apathetic now.
Who believes that this ends any other way than when Russia says so? Ukraine will be left a land locked rump state at best. The entire Black Sea coast will be taken. NATO missile bases in Romania and Poland will be removed voluntarily or otherwise. The proposals put forward by Russia in December but ignored by NATO will be implemented in full. Who will stop it?
What utter fantasy. Russian losses are so horrific they are resorting to recruiting their prison population.
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/05/23/russia-scrambles-for-soldiers-amid-ukraine-war-manpower-shortage-a77750 (https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/05/23/russia-scrambles-for-soldiers-amid-ukraine-war-manpower-shortage-a77750)
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/07/05/russian-prisons-corporations-recruit-ukraine-volunteers-reports-a78206 (https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/07/05/russian-prisons-corporations-recruit-ukraine-volunteers-reports-a78206)
Since the paleo-conservative creationist blog (the blogmire) no longer posts anything about Russia. Your primary source of events is an alcoholics forum.
-
Unclear what you mean by this?
If you are suggesting that Russia is "taking on the world" then you could not be more wrong. Russia is taking on NATO. Russia has most of the world with it.
NATO on the other hand has been "taking on the world" for decades. Now that NATO has bitten off more than it can chew by provoking Russia, the rest of the world tired of living under Western NATO rules, invasions, piracy and theft are behind Russia.
Your observation is correct but it is NATO who are being shown that they indeed cannot take on the world.
The only countries behind Russia are North Korea, Syria, Belarus and Eritrea. :))
(https://static.timesofisrael.com/www/uploads/2022/03/whatsapp_image_2022-03-02_at_10.58.09_am__1_.jpeg)
-
Unclear what you mean by this?
If you are suggesting that Russia is "taking on the world" then you could not be more wrong. Russia is taking on NATO. Russia has most of the world with it.
NATO on the other hand has been "taking on the world" for decades. Now that NATO has bitten off more than it can chew by provoking Russia, the rest of the world tired of living under Western NATO rules, invasions, piracy and theft are behind Russia.
Your observation is correct but it is NATO who are being shown that they indeed cannot take on the world.
Well then I'd have to ask you this. What country comes after Ukraine to the west?
What do you think the ultimate agenda Putin has?
-
Saddam came to power through his own machiavellian backstabbing and purges. Uday was POS because his father let him get away with it.
The man who was also given the key to Detroit in 1983.
-
Saddam came to power through his own machiavellian backstabbing and purges. Uday was POS because his father let him get away with it.
Uday and qusay were just victims of their own upbringing
-
Well then I'd have to ask you this. What country comes after Ukraine to the west?
What do you think the ultimate agenda Putin has?
Russia's goals were made clear in December. Ukraine will be demilitarised. NATO missile installations to be rolled back to 1997. Only the propagandised believe western media nonsense that Putin intends to recreate the Soviet Union, on his days off from interfering in western elections or not receiving treatment for (insert terminal condition here).
It was spelled out in December, in writing. NATO pretended that the proposals could be ignored. Russia's goals are publicly spelled out.
-
What utter fantasy. Russian losses are so horrific they are resorting to recruiting their prison population.
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/05/23/russia-scrambles-for-soldiers-amid-ukraine-war-manpower-shortage-a77750 (https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/05/23/russia-scrambles-for-soldiers-amid-ukraine-war-manpower-shortage-a77750)
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/07/05/russian-prisons-corporations-recruit-ukraine-volunteers-reports-a78206 (https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/07/05/russian-prisons-corporations-recruit-ukraine-volunteers-reports-a78206)
Since the paleo-conservative creationist blog (the blogmire) no longer posts anything about Russia. Your primary source of events is an alcoholics forum.
Believe what you will, David. Ukraine and NATO are losing badly. Moscow Times are not a real Russian publication. For someone who derides the owners of other blogs for their not hidden and explicitly stated views, you are remarkably unperturbed by the hidden ownership of your own sources.
Do you know where the figures you quote are sourced from? One of the articles sources was unnamed "analysts" and un-named "British officials". What does that even mean? The ISW who you have used previously and who are the source of Western media outlets "information" from Ukraine, as one glaring example. Do you know who founded the ISW? who are it's directors?
Founded by Kimberley Kagan, sister in law of Victoria Nuland and directors that are a who's who of US Neocon warmongers. Wonder if they are impartial and honest?!
According to "British officials" and "analysts" may be sufficient evidence for you but if you took off your blinkers you would realise that it is unsupported, evidence free propaganda.
-
The only countries behind Russia are North Korea, Syria, Belarus and Eritrea. :))
The above demonstrates your lack of understanding of geopolitics. The vote that you refer to was in the UNGA, was purely symbolic and was postponed for days until the US had coerced and blackmailed representatives to vote favourably. The US admitted to delaying whilst they "furiously lobbied" representatives before voting.
Nothing happened or will happen as a result of this "vote". Real actions speak much more loudly.
Argentina, one of the 141, have applied to join BRICS.
China and India, who abstained, are trading with and self evidently support Russia. The General Assembly vote is good for propaganda to the uninitiated, but means nothing in Realpolitik.
China and India between them represent nearly half of the world population.
A bunch of meaningless votes off vassal micro-states and votes coerced with economic threats are nothing, especially when this vote has zero consequences.
-
Russia's goals were made clear in December. Ukraine will be demilitarised. NATO missile installations to be rolled back to 1997. Only the propagandised believe western media nonsense that Putin intends to recreate the Soviet Union, on his days off from interfering in western elections or not receiving treatment for (insert terminal condition here).
It was spelled out in December, in writing. NATO pretended that the proposals could be ignored. Russia's goals are publicly spelled out.
I believe also that Adolf Hitler promised not to invade Czechoslovakia
-
Since the paleo-conservative creationist blog (the blogmire) no longer posts anything about Russia. Your primary source of events is an alcoholics forum.
The blogmire, is owned and run by Rob Slane. I came across it when the whole Skripal affair unfolded. He is a resident of Salisbury and his writing and the discussions below were much more balanced and informative than the media that you trust, largely owned by dodgy intel connected billionaires or shady corporations. In your propagandised world this counts as impartial reporting.
I don't read the Blogmire for geopolitical affairs but your obsession with his beliefs is odd given that you care not a jot about the possible motivations of the BBC, Forbes, ISW, Moscow fucking Times and the rest of the assorted biased rabble that you read.
Dismissing the excellent https://www.moonofalabama.org/ as an alcoholics forum because of the tagline "where barflies meet" is puerile and to be expected of you. It has been around a long time and the discussions and analysis have proven to be remarkably accurate, unlike our MSM.
There are many writers and reporters acting independently and much more honestly than the paid to lie dregs that you rely on.
Alastair Crooke, Pepe Escobar, Elijah Magnier, Gilbert Doctorow, Eva Bartlett, Vanessa Beeley, M K Bhadrakumar, Andrei Martyanov, Jonathon Cook and on and on. There are many more who have been exclusively following geopolitics for decades. Their archives are testimony to their reliability.
The publications that you rely on have been shown to uncritically repeat whatever they are told by "intelligence sources" and "officials". In other words they are nothing more than mouthpieces for western intelligence agencies. But, believe what you will.
Facts on the ground are being created that don't care about propaganda. Empire of Lies is dead.
-
I believe also that Adolf Hitler promised not to invade Czechoslovakia
Have you heard of Godwin's law?
It is the observation that the longer an internet discussion goes on the probability that a comparison with Hitler will be made approaches 1 (or 100% if you prefer).
It is also generally accepted that whoever makes the Hitler comparison loses the debate. Between yourself, David and Steve there is a Hitler comparison just about every other page.
It simply demonstrates that you have nothing meaningful to add.
-
I believe also that Adolf Hitler promised not to invade Czechoslovakia
What would be more relevant to the discussion would be the promises made by NATO/US to not expand to Russia's borders in the aftermath of the break up of the Soviet Union. Since that time the "game has been on" to weaken and balkanise Russia to plunder its vast resources. NATO aggression, interference, failure to renew missile defence treaties, walking away from treaties and expansion towards Russia are the source of today's situation.
Had NATO stuck to its promises and adhered to treaties we wouldn't be where we are.
Pretending that Russia is the aggressor after the last 30 years of NATO invasions and aggression all around the world is wilful blindness. Or complete ignorance.
-
Footage of Ukrainians using more American M142 HIMARS.
https://v.redd.it/e9b3rtvn3d991/DASH_360.mp4 (https://v.redd.it/e9b3rtvn3d991/DASH_360.mp4)
-
Have you heard of Godwin's law?
It is the observation that the longer an internet discussion goes on the probability that a comparison with Hitler will be made approaches 1 (or 100% if you prefer).
It is also generally accepted that whoever makes the Hitler comparison loses the debate. Between yourself, David and Steve there is a Hitler comparison just about every other page.
It simply demonstrates that you have nothing meaningful to add.
I'm sorry but what do you think of an individual who wakes up one morning and decides to invade a peaceful nation?
Ukraine is an independent, separate sovereign nation
What are we debating exactly? Do you think it is right what has happened?
-
Are you saying the world should let him have Ukraine then. Appeasement?
The Hitler comparison is not stupid in the slightest
Forgot proposals. You have absolutely no idea of what his ultimate agenda is.
-
I'm sorry but what do you think of an individual who wakes up one morning and decides to invade a peaceful nation?
Ukraine is an independent, separate sovereign nation
What are we debating exactly? Do you think it is right what has happened?
Ukraine was not a "peaceful nation".
For 8 years the Ukrainian Army has been shelling civilian areas in Donbass/Luhansk. This is in breach of the 2015 Minsk 2 accords, which are also a UNSC resolution. I know this is all over your head, but I'll explain anyway.
The ceasefire violations, lack of any attempt to negotiate with the separatists as stipulated in Minsk 2 and the continued shelling of civilian areas, killing thousands, all recorded by the OSCE necessitated Russia to intervene under the R2P doctrine.
The build up of Ukrainian troops on the borders of Donbass threatening invasion showed Ukraine to be anything but a peaceful nation. The 2014 coup has also ensured that they are anything but an "independent sovereign nation". They are clearly US/NATO vassals as evidenced by the amount of US/UK/NATO aid, arms and mercenaries? pouring in from the real leaders of this US vassal.
Your questions and the framing of them show that you have no understanding of world affairs and no interest in any real discussion about it. You just want to hear, "Putin bad, Russia bad".
In truth the western machinations to interfere in Ukraine have been ongoing for decades and if you knew anything about the matters you are attempting to discuss, you would already know this, but you don't.
2014 is when western plots went into overdrive with the Maidan coup. You are nowhere near understanding what is going on in Ukraine and seem to think it started only this year when,
"peaceful, sovereign and independent Ukraine who were just hanging around minding their own business shelling civilians and threatening, along with NATO, to put nuclear missiles next to Russia's border were suddenly invaded for no other reason than Putin just waking up and deciding one morning"
Do some reading!
-
Russia's T-72 Tank Has a Crucial Vulnerability, Complicating Moscow’s Ukraine War
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x78oE2yxNpI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x78oE2yxNpI)
-
Are you saying the world should let him have Ukraine then. Appeasement?
The Hitler comparison is not stupid in the slightest
Forgot proposals. You have absolutely no idea of what his ultimate agenda is.
Should the world have let NATO dismember Yugoslavia, bomb Belgrade?
Was this appeasement of US/NATO?
Should the world have allowed NATO to invade Afghanistan?
Was this appeasement?
Should the world have allowed NATO to invade Iraq?
Should the world have allowed NATO to bomb sovereign states like Syria, Yemen?
Should the world have allowed NATO to invade Libya?
Should the world allow NATO?
You have absolutely no idea of what NATO's ultimate agenda is. Although there are some fucking big clues.
Do you think that NATO are perhaps seeking world domination?
Did you make Hitler comparisons when any of the above was taking place, in your name?
Did you even give a shit? or is it only now? Indoctrinated much?
-
Should the world have let NATO dismember Yugoslavia, bomb Belgrade?
Was this appeasement of US/NATO?
Should the world have allowed NATO to invade Afghanistan?
Was this appeasement?
Should the world have allowed NATO to invade Iraq?
Should the world have allowed NATO to bomb sovereign states like Syria, Yemen?
Should the world have allowed NATO to invade Libya?
Should the world allow NATO?
You have absolutely no idea of what NATO's ultimate agenda is. Although there are some fucking big clues.
Do you think that NATO are perhaps seeking world domination?
Did you make Hitler comparisons when any of the above was taking place, in your name?
Did you even give a shit? or is it only now? Indoctrinated much?
I think they wanted to avoid another Srebrenica massacre. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-33445772
The Taliban were harbouring Osama bin Laden. They could have handed him over to the USA and avoided the invasion.
-
I think they wanted to avoid another Srebrenica massacre. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-33445772
The Taliban were harbouring Osama bin Laden. They could have handed him over to the USA and avoided the invasion.
Of course that was the reason, Steve. Many believed this at the time but ongoing aggression and the benefit of hindsight has disabused most of them and it is now seen, correctly, as the first blow in NATO's world domination tour.
The Taliban harbouring Osama Bin Laden is an even bigger joke. The US refused to show evidence through any extradition procedure. The US simply demanded that the Taliban(Afghani govt.) hand over Bin Laden without evidence. No sovereign state would agree to this evidence free non legal demand. They knew that the Taliban couldn't do this. You have to show the evidence before any extradition.
Country X demanding that country Y hand over a guest or else we will invade is not legal, Steve.
The US were always going to invade Afghanistan.
Every military invasion, bombing campaign by US/NATO has been based on later to be proven lies.
To still believe that NATO interventions have been based on good intent given the destruction, civilian deaths, destroyed infrastructure, refugee crises and displacement caused by them is beyond naive. Are you unaware of the crimes committed in your name.
That you still make excuses for the countless millions of deaths brought by this genocidal, aggressive crime spree is wilful blindness. Your ignorance and failure to see is because you choose not to. Facts on the ground unfolding are going to force everyone to confront the realities of NATO and our governments criminal actions.
-
Ukraine was not a "peaceful nation".
For 8 years the Ukrainian Army has been shelling civilian areas in Donbass/Luhansk. This is in breach of the 2015 Minsk 2 accords, which are also a UNSC resolution. I know this is all over your head, but I'll explain anyway.
The ceasefire violations, lack of any attempt to negotiate with the separatists as stipulated in Minsk 2 and the continued shelling of civilian areas, killing thousands, all recorded by the OSCE necessitated Russia to intervene under the R2P doctrine.
The build up of Ukrainian troops on the borders of Donbass threatening invasion showed Ukraine to be anything but a peaceful nation. The 2014 coup has also ensured that they are anything but an "independent sovereign nation". They are clearly US/NATO vassals as evidenced by the amount of US/UK/NATO aid, arms and mercenaries? pouring in from the real leaders of this US vassal.
Your questions and the framing of them show that you have no understanding of world affairs and no interest in any real discussion about it. You just want to hear, "Putin bad, Russia bad".
In truth the western machinations to interfere in Ukraine have been ongoing for decades and if you knew anything about the matters you are attempting to discuss, you would already know this, but you don't.
2014 is when western plots went into overdrive with the Maidan coup. You are nowhere near understanding what is going on in Ukraine and seem to think it started only this year when,
"peaceful, sovereign and independent Ukraine who were just hanging around minding their own business shelling civilians and threatening, along with NATO, to put nuclear missiles next to Russia's border were suddenly invaded for no other reason than Putin just waking up and deciding one morning"
Do some reading!
So what do you sensibly think the end game of this is. Say the whole of Ukraine is under Russian occupation.
-
You are championing this invasion. When you know it is not going to ultimately cause any good in the slightest. I'm well aware of the donbar 14 -22 conflict. Forget NATO. You know full well the world can't stand by and appease this invasion. it can only be condemned
-
You are way off the mark.
You have no idea of what the long term agenda is. It can only cause destruction. And deaths of innocent civilians. How can you say for certain what the agenda is of vladamir in the long term?
-
So what do you sensibly think the end game of this is. Say the whole of Ukraine is under Russian occupation.
A more constructive question, ILB.
Initially, I think the Russians would have settled for the demands made in December. These are non membership of NATO for Ukraine and remaining neutral as well as a ban on further NATO expansion.
The removal of troops and weapon systems placed in countries who joined after 1997. There are 8 points but these are the main points. Read rest of it at the link for a fuller picture
https://intellinews.com/russia-issues-a-eight-point-list-of-demands-229829/
Escalations and interference by US/UK/NATO since then fuelling rather than trying to end the hostilities have hardened the position not just of the Russian leadership, but also the Russian public. The provocations via Lithuania towards Kaliningrad being one example of deliberately pouring fuel on the fire.
The sanctions and attempts to strangle Russia economically are another. Seizing the funds of a nation like Russia makes the world take notice. US and Western organisations are untrustworthy and thieves. These were suicidal moves. NATO attempts to weaken Russia have escalated what should have been a solvable regional security issue into an all encompassing war that will lead to the ultimate neutering of Western US/NATO dominance, militarily and economically.
I expect that NATO/US bases and illegal occupations around the world will come under increasing pressure. Everyone has cheap accurate missiles now making many bases and occupations ultimately non viable.
In terms of Ukraine itself. The entire Black Sea coast, including Odessa will be taken by Russia, DPR, LPR troops and referendums held in each oblast as to their status. NATO will be allowed no presence on the Ukrainian Black Sea coast. Kiev and parts of the west of the country such as Galicia may become part of a neutralised land locked rump Ukrainian state. Poland may stake claims on parts as well as others. Ukraine is finished. That is what it deserves after allowing themselves to be used as a spearhead into Russia. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
I expect further NATO provocations and fuelling of the fire and hope that our leaders are not insane enough to launch nuclear weapons. Provocations against China, via Taiwan are one possibility. It seems more likely that an "Iron Curtain 2.0" will come down at some point. This time we will be on the censored and poorer side of it. Western populations will hopefully eventually be awakened from their complacency and see the lies and crimes of our representatives. Our free ride in the West at the expense of other nations resources is over, one way or another.
-
You are way off the mark.
You have no idea of what the long term agenda is. It can only cause destruction. And deaths of innocent civilians. How can you say for certain what the agenda is of vladamir in the long term?
Given the NATO invasions and bombings of the last 3 decades, you should be more concerned with the agenda of NATO. No country comes near to the aggression and illegal behaviour of US/NATO.
-
You are championing this invasion. When you know it is not going to ultimately cause any good in the slightest. I'm well aware of the donbar 14 -22 conflict. Forget NATO. You know full well the world can't stand by and appease this invasion. it can only be condemned
So what do you think about the refusal of the Ukrainian govt. to negotiate with separatist leaders? Or the thousands of civilian Ukrainian deaths caused by the Ukrainian Army shelling them? If you are "well aware" of the Donbass conflict, what do you think the solution was?
-
Given the NATO invasions and bombings of the last 3 decades, you should be more concerned with the agenda of NATO. No country comes near to the aggression and illegal behaviour of US/NATO.
Reference the Iraq situation. I have Iraqi friends. And I have heard different scenarios reference Saddam's rule. He was brutal. But many Iraqis I know spoke well of him. He revolutionzed the country. The Iraq under Saddam was not like many other Arab countries. It was westernised
With alcohol freely I know of the US supporting Iraq in the Iraq Iran conflict 1980 to 1988.
-
Reference the Iraq situation. I have Iraqi friends. And I have heard different scenarios reference Saddam's rule. He was brutal. But many Iraqis I know spoke well of him. He revolutionzed the country. The Iraq under Saddam was not like many other Arab countries. It was westernised
With alcohol freely I know of the US supporting Iraq in the Iraq Iran conflict 1980 to 1988.
Saddam may have raised a glass to you ILB. He was a fan of single malts I believe.
-
Saddam may have raised a glass to you ILB. He was a fan of single malts I believe.
Uday was worse than Saddam. By a lot more.
-
Reference the Iraq situation. I have Iraqi friends. And I have heard different scenarios reference Saddam's rule. He was brutal. But many Iraqis I know spoke well of him. He revolutionzed the country. The Iraq under Saddam was not like many other Arab countries. It was westernised
With alcohol freely I know of the US supporting Iraq in the Iraq Iran conflict 1980 to 1988.
Not only did they support Iraq in their conflict with Iran, they also supplied the chemical weapons and the targeting for their use. Years later the US had the shameless effrontery to use this episode to demonstrate Saddam's brutality, conveniently forgetting their own supporting and enabling of the whole thing.
In the immediate aftermath of the Iranian 1979 revolution and overthrowing of the manipulable Pahlavi clan, the US would side with the devil himself to restore the status quo in Iran. Many thousands of Iranians were killed or permanently injured by chemical weapons. This fact was brought up by George Galloway in the oft referred to Senate hearings pointing out US sponsorship and complicity.
-
You are championing this invasion. When you know it is not going to ultimately cause any good in the slightest. I'm well aware of the donbar 14 -22 conflict. Forget NATO. You know full well the world can't stand by and appease this invasion. it can only be condemned
The world has stood by powerless while NATO has literally destroyed cities, Raqqa, Mosul, Fallujah, levelling them and everyone in them. The dead left under rubble uncounted. The world is fucking tired Of NATO/US/UK aggression and will happily appease NATO being confronted and taken down. In fact most of the world are cheering them on.
BRICS, SCO and other trading blocs are breaking free of the dollar. There is a lot going on in the economic sphere by countries who have had enough of the US abusing the world reserve currency status of the dollar. It's demise is imminent.
Outside the propagandised west, it isn't Russia that is seen as the threat.
-
Saddam may have raised a glass to you ILB. He was a fan of single malts I believe.
Yes roch Johnny walker black label I believe. Also he was a big fan of the Godfather movie series. And ran his regime based upon it.
-
So what do you think about the refusal of the Ukrainian govt. to negotiate with separatist leaders? Or the thousands of civilian Ukrainian deaths caused by the Ukrainian Army shelling them? If you are "well aware" of the Donbass conflict, what do you think the solution was?
I think we have to go back to the old question of " when will this cease" and the " the long-term future.
As a pacifist I would just like to see peace. I hesitate seeing British soldiers being sent into Ukraine. If that were to be the case. Ultimately you know if this conflict persists and Russia moves and advances further west. Western military intervention may take place. It's just a possibility.
Remember the Minsk agreement talks. First one fell at the hurdle. I believe the second one stalled with Russia blaming Ukraine for it.
Ultimately I would just like to see peace. It's that simple. This is not world war 2. Many of these conflicts are ultimately pointless. And nothing ever justifies civilians getting killed.
They need to come to a mutual agreement. Again we are not clear on Putin's agenda
-
The world has stood by powerless while NATO has literally destroyed cities, Raqqa, Mosul, Fallujah, levelling them and everyone in them. The dead left under rubble uncounted. The world is fucking tired Of NATO/US/UK aggression and will happily appease NATO being confronted and taken down. In fact most of the world are cheering them on.
BRICS, SCO and other trading blocs are breaking free of the dollar. There is a lot going on in the economic sphere by countries who have had enough of the US abusing the world reserve currency status of the dollar. It's demise is imminent.
Outside the propagandised west, it isn't Russia that is seen as the threat.
Unfortunately global power always champions.
-
Should the world have let NATO dismember Yugoslavia, bomb Belgrade?
Was this appeasement of US/NATO?
Should the world have allowed NATO to invade Afghanistan?
Was this appeasement?
Should the world have allowed NATO to invade Iraq?
Should the world have allowed NATO to bomb sovereign states like Syria, Yemen?
Should the world have allowed NATO to invade Libya?
Should the world allow NATO?
You have absolutely no idea of what NATO's ultimate agenda is. Although there are some fucking big clues.
Do you think that NATO are perhaps seeking world domination?
Did you make Hitler comparisons when any of the above was taking place, in your name?
Did you even give a shit? or is it only now? Indoctrinated much?
I wasn't going to answer this but I will. I'm not indoctrinated at all.
My question to you is have you ever lived under a dictatorship?
Not one country you have mentioned their were democracies
Take Iraq for a second. I didn't condone the Iraq war. They could have got him out in 1991. He was a tyrant. Are you aware in Iraq Saddam would get his secret police to go round schools and say to children " what's your daddy think of uncle Saddam? And if it was a negative answer. The entire family would be killed. His son went round schools and nightclubs kidnapping raping and killing women and young girls.
-
I wasn't going to answer this but I will. I'm not indoctrinated at all.
My question to you is have you ever lived under a dictatorship?
Not one country you have mentioned their were democracies
Take Iraq for a second. I didn't condone the Iraq war. They could have got him out in 1991. He was a tyrant. Are you aware in Iraq Saddam would get his secret police to go round schools and say to children " what's your daddy think of uncle Saddam? And if it was a negative answer. The entire family would be killed. His son went round schools and nightclubs kidnapping raping and killing women and young girls.
You should not have bothered answering. You are dealing with a Tankie of the highest order :))
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnATl-566sU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnATl-566sU)
-
I wasn't going to answer this but I will. I'm not indoctrinated at all.
My question to you is have you ever lived under a dictatorship?
Not one country you have mentioned their were democracies
Take Iraq for a second. I didn't condone the Iraq war. They could have got him out in 1991. He was a tyrant. Are you aware in Iraq Saddam would get his secret police to go round schools and say to children " what's your daddy think of uncle Saddam? And if it was a negative answer. The entire family would be killed. His son went round schools and nightclubs kidnapping raping and killing women and young girls.
You haven't answered anything.
Would it have been ok if China or Russia or any other country or self styled global police force invaded and bombed all of those sovereign nations?
What has our or your opinion on their governance to do with anything? Non western approved governance does not give us the moral right to bomb and subjugate the populations of those countries. Our invasions are straight up piracy and theft. You may be fooled by warm words of spreading freedumd and democracy via the novel means of sanctions and invasions but the world has had enough of this criminal behaviour. You wouldn't accept any other country/organisation acting this way. Why should the world accept US/NATO diktats.
Previously the military power of NATO and economic power of the dollar reserve guaranteed US/NATO powere. That has now been/is being neutralised.
NATO/US have no moral authority. The world has had enough and is neutralising them.
-
Unfortunately global power always champions.
If this is your rather glib response to the bombing and death of millions, as is typical amongst the populations of the warmongering west, then you will understand why most of the rest of world is happy to see that power neutralised.
-
Should the world have let NATO dismember Yugoslavia, bomb Belgrade?
Was this appeasement of US/NATO?
Should the world have allowed NATO to invade Afghanistan?
Was this appeasement?
Should the world have allowed NATO to invade Iraq?
Should the world have allowed NATO to bomb sovereign states like Syria, Yemen?
Should the world have allowed NATO to invade Libya?
Should the world allow NATO?
You have absolutely no idea of what NATO's ultimate agenda is. Although there are some fucking big clues.
Do you think that NATO are perhaps seeking world domination?
Did you make Hitler comparisons when any of the above was taking place, in your name?
Did you even give a shit? or is it only now? Indoctrinated much?
ILB or any of the other war apologists. ILB's claimed answer to this wasn't an answer at all. So let's frame it differently.
Would the world, including NATO, have allowed Russia, China to carry out all of the above?
Using the same justifications as NATO?
Had China invaded Iraq, would you now be justifying the invasion with stories about Uday and Saddam?
If China had bombed and invaded Libya, would that be ok?
Is it only ok if NATO act as judge, jury and executioner?
-
Remember the Minsk agreement talks. First one fell at the hurdle. I believe the second one stalled with Russia blaming Ukraine for it.
This kind of analysis demonstrates your indoctrination. Straight from the mouths of western media then repeated and believed without question.
Why do you think Minsk 2 failed? What were the obligations of the interested parties? Ukraine are undoubtedly responsible for their failures to even attempt to implement Minsk 2.
The Ukrainian leadership have confirmed publically since that they never had any intention of implementing Minsk 2 and used it to buy time. This is admitted. There is zero doubt who is responsible.
Who do you believe is to blame for the failure of Minsk 2? And why? What are the grounds for you beliefs?
-
Of course that was the reason, Steve. Many believed this at the time but ongoing aggression and the benefit of hindsight has disabused most of them and it is now seen, correctly, as the first blow in NATO's world domination tour.
The Taliban harbouring Osama Bin Laden is an even bigger joke. The US refused to show evidence through any extradition procedure. The US simply demanded that the Taliban(Afghani govt.) hand over Bin Laden without evidence. No sovereign state would agree to this evidence free non legal demand. They knew that the Taliban couldn't do this. You have to show the evidence before any extradition.
Country X demanding that country Y hand over a guest or else we will invade is not legal, Steve.
The US were always going to invade Afghanistan.
Every military invasion, bombing campaign by US/NATO has been based on later to be proven lies.
To still believe that NATO interventions have been based on good intent given the destruction, civilian deaths, destroyed infrastructure, refugee crises and displacement caused by them is beyond naive. Are you unaware of the crimes committed in your name.
That you still make excuses for the countless millions of deaths brought by this genocidal, aggressive crime spree is wilful blindness. Your ignorance and failure to see is because you choose not to. Facts on the ground unfolding are going to force everyone to confront the realities of NATO and our governments criminal actions.
Strange then that the Taliban offered to hand bin Laden over to a third country, the man who instigated the deaths of 3000 people.
-
Strange then that the Taliban offered to hand bin Laden over to a third country, the man who instigated the deaths of 3000 people.
Not that strange when you're getting bombed and attacked. It wasn't a legal request and the US have shown zero evidence of Bin Laden's responsibility.
You really are an apologist for any illegal invasion, bombing and sanctions by Empire.
-
Not that strange when you're getting bombed and attacked. It wasn't a legal request and the US have shown zero evidence of Bin Laden's responsibility.
You really are an apologist for any illegal invasion, bombing and sanctions by Empire.
NATO has made mistakes. But still no excuse for Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
-
Had China invaded Iraq, would you now be justifying the invasion with stories about Uday and Saddam?
I would justify almost any country invading Iraq with the intention to remove Saddam Hussein. His regime was unacceptable. In my opinion it was a failure of the global community that he remained in power so long.
Ideally the Arab league should have all launched a joined effort to remove him themselves. Much like Tanzania invaded Uganda to remove Idi Amin and Vietnam invading Cambodia to remove Pol-Pot.
-
You haven't answered anything.
Would it have been ok if China or Russia or any other country or self styled global police force invaded and bombed all of those sovereign nations?
What has our or your opinion on their governance to do with anything? Non western approved governance does not give us the moral right to bomb and subjugate the populations of those countries. Our invasions are straight up piracy and theft. You may be fooled by warm words of spreading freedumd and democracy via the novel means of sanctions and invasions but the world has had enough of this criminal behaviour. You wouldn't accept any other country/organisation acting this way. Why should the world accept US/NATO diktats.
Previously the military power of NATO and economic power of the dollar reserve guaranteed US/NATO powere. That has now been/is being neutralised.
NATO/US have no moral authority. The world has had enough and is neutralising them.
No. NATO will live on.
It's Russia who will ultimately suffer in the long-term
You know this
-
ILB or any of the other war apologists. ILB's claimed answer to this wasn't an answer at all. So let's frame it differently.
Would the world, including NATO, have allowed Russia, China to carry out all of the above?
Using the same justifications as NATO?
Had China invaded Iraq, would you now be justifying the invasion with stories about Uday and Saddam?
If China had bombed and invaded Libya, would that be ok?
Is it only ok if NATO act as judge, jury and executioner?
How is removing despot dictators acting as judge jury and executioner?
There is no good such thing as a good dictatorship. Every single country you have mentioned had an appalling history of human rights abuse. I care for people being able to have free speech. The right to live not in fear. I'm glad that these despots have been brought to book and overthrown
-
Who was responsible for the non implementation of Minsk 2 accords?
Minsk 2 has been raised a number of times now and each time, those accusing Russia of unprovoked aggression refuse to discuss apart from some glib repeated line from the media.
First of all, unless somebody can show otherwise(they can't) Minsk 2 puts obligations on the Ukraine government to negotiate with the leaders of the "rebel" oblasts.
In response to this the Ukrainian govt. refuse to meet or even recognise the leaders of these provinces. They did explicitly recognise the rebel leaders in the accords, however, because that is who also signed them.
Anyone dispute this?
Secondly an immediate ceasefire and pulling back of heavy weapons. Ignored by the Ukrainian govt.
In the years since Minsk 2 they increased the shelling of civilians (monitored and confirmed by the OSCE).
Is this disputed by anyone?
Finally, for now, given the stated intent by the Ukrainian govt. since then that they had no intention of abiding by Minsk 2, the increased shelling and troop build up threatening an invasion; what do you think should have been done?
Should the world have allowed a government to use its forces to shell and terrorise their own civilians in breach of Minsk 2, which also happens to be a UN Security Council resolution?
Russia have over the years taken all of this through the proper channels of the UN.
Ukraine were terrorising their own people, had zero intention of abiding by agreements and UN resolutions. How do you deal with this?
Below I have once again linked Minsk 2
https://peacemaker.un.org/sites/peacemaker.un.org/files/UA_150212_MinskAgreement_en.pdf
Read them and then, based on facts, tell me how Russia invaded a "peaceful, sovereign nation"
-
How is removing despot dictators acting as judge jury and executioner?
Who judges that any given leader is a "despot dictator"?
Who finds any given leader guilty of being a "despot dictator"?
Who carries out the sentence(execution)?
Your question makes itself look stupid. It is answered in your own question where you describe the act of being judge, jury and executioner.
-
Who was responsible for the non implementation of Minsk 2 accords?
Minsk 2 has been raised a number of times now and each time, those accusing Russia of unprovoked aggression refuse to discuss apart from some glib repeated line from the media.
First of all, unless somebody can show otherwise(they can't) Minsk 2 puts obligations on the Ukraine government to negotiate with the leaders of the "rebel" oblasts.
In response to this the Ukrainian govt. refuse to meet or even recognise the leaders of these provinces. They did explicitly recognise the rebel leaders in the accords, however, because that is who also signed them.
Anyone dispute this?
Secondly an immediate ceasefire and pulling back of heavy weapons. Ignored by the Ukrainian govt.
In the years since Minsk 2 they increased the shelling of civilians (monitored and confirmed by the OSCE).
Is this disputed by anyone?
Finally, for now, given the stated intent by the Ukrainian govt. since then that they had no intention of abiding by Minsk 2, the increased shelling and troop build up threatening an invasion; what do you think should have been done?
Should the world have allowed a government to use its forces to shell and terrorise their own civilians in breach of Minsk 2, which also happens to be a UN Security Council resolution?
Russia have over the years taken all of this through the proper channels of the UN.
Ukraine were terrorising their own people, had zero intention of abiding by agreements and UN resolutions. How do you deal with this?
Below I have once again linked Minsk 2
https://peacemaker.un.org/sites/peacemaker.un.org/files/UA_150212_MinskAgreement_en.pdf
Read them and then, based on facts, tell me how Russia invaded a "peaceful, sovereign nation"
Russia claims it's not inciting unrest in Donetsk and Luhansk when it's in it up to its neck. How do you think Malaysian Airlines Flight 17 was shot down?
-
How is removing despot dictators acting as judge jury and executioner?
Who judges that any given leader is a "despot dictator"?
Who finds any given leader guilty of being a "despot dictator"?
Who carries out the sentence(execution)?
Your question makes itself look stupid. It is answered in your own question where you describe the act of being judge, jury and executioner.
So what was Saddam Hussein then? Gadaffi etc?
Gadaffi was beaten to death by his own people.
Saddam went on trial and under Iraqi law was put to death in december 2006
-
Russia claims it's not inciting unrest in Donetsk and Luhansk when it's in it up to its neck. How do you think Malaysian Airlines Flight 17 was shot down?
As a reply to an invitation to discuss Minsk 2, this is pathetic diversion yet again.
Have you no reply to any of the questions regarding Minsk 2 and its non implementation by Kiev?
I have linked the document, again, for you. I challenge you and anyone who disputes Ukraine and NATO's culpability to show where Russia is to blame. Instead you come up with the above.
You repeatedly bring up MH17 when you have no answers to the whatever the current subject. I suspect very strongly that the Ukrainians brought it down. I have said before when you brought it up.
So tell me, what do you think should have been done about Ukraine's failure to implement Minsk 2 and their continued and undisputed shelling of civilians, killing thousands?
Read the agreements and get back to me on how Russia is to blame.
-
As a reply to an invitation to discuss Minsk 2, this is pathetic diversion yet again.
Have you no reply to any of the questions regarding Minsk 2 and its non implementation by Kiev?
I have linked the document, again, for you. I challenge you and anyone who disputes Ukraine and NATO's culpability to show where Russia is to blame. Instead you come up with the above.
You repeatedly bring up MH17 when you have no answers to the whatever the current subject. I suspect very strongly that the Ukrainians brought it down. I have said before when you brought it up.
So tell me, what do you think should have been done about Ukraine's failure to implement Minsk 2 and their continued and undisputed shelling of civilians, killing thousands?
Read the agreements and get back to me on how Russia is to blame.
I'm well aware of the Minsk-2 agreement. I'm aware that in that document Russia was never mentioned. That's why I stated Russia was in it up to its neck, yet purported to maintain that it was an independent arbiter.
-
So what was Saddam Hussein then? Gadaffi etc?
Gadaffi was beaten to death by his own people.
Saddam went on trial and under Iraqi law was put to death in december 2006
Your understanding of world affairs is childish and based on soundbites. You are incapable of discussion hence ridiculous fly by bullshit such as this.
Gaddafi's brutal murder was carried out by Islamist Jihadists after his convoy was bombed by NATO forces who then directed his killers to his hideout where he was brutally beaten, sodomised with a bayonet and shot a number of times. Or as you ignorantly put it "beaten to death by his own people". This is whose side you are on.
Saddam's show trial under US auspices was equally vile and illegal but ok by you cos Russia didn't do it.
Do you want to answer any of the questions that I have asked?
You are equally as incapable as the other two wise monkeys on here of any in depth discussion because your understanding is shallow.
-
Your understanding of world affairs is childish and based on soundbites. You are incapable of discussion hence ridiculous fly by bullshit such as this.
Gaddafi's brutal murder was carried out by Islamist Jihadists after his convoy was bombed by NATO forces who then directed his killers to his hideout where he was brutally beaten, sodomised with a bayonet and shot a number of times. Or as you ignorantly put it "beaten to death by his own people". This is whose side you are on.
Saddam's show trial under US auspices was equally vile and illegal but ok by you cos Russia didn't do it.
Do you want to answer any of the questions that I have asked?
You are equally as incapable as the other two wise monkeys on here of any in depth discussion because your understanding is shallow.
Let's cut to the chase gringo, since you seem obsessed with Minsk this evening. Russia wanted influence in Eastern Ukraine, namely Luhansk and Donetsk. What Ukraine, a sovereign state, could not accept was the formation of a people's militia in those provinces, effectively becoming its own police force, its own legal system and the power to conclude agreements with foreign states (i.e. Russia).
No independent state could have accepted these conditions.
-
I'm well aware of the Minsk-2 agreement. I'm aware that in that document Russia was never mentioned. That's why I stated Russia was in it up to its neck, yet purported to maintain that it was an independent arbiter.
As you are "well aware" of Minsk 2, could you tell me what Russia's role is in those agreements? How about France and Germany?. What were their roles?
Are they mentioned in the Minsk 2 accords?
All of the above are the guarantors of Minsk 2 and are to guarantee that each side fulfils its obligations. Russia are not "in it up to their neck" without authority. It is, as previously stated, a UNSC resolution. Russia made sure of this. They are the guarantors of one side of a UNSC resolution. The side that they are acting as guarantors for are not the side which has deliberately and admittedly never had any intention of abiding by them.
Are you "well aware" of that?
Do you dispute any of it or are you going to bring up MH17 again?
Which side has been the main transgressor of these agreements as observed by the OSCE monitors?
-
As you are "well aware" of Minsk 2, could you tell me what Russia's role is in those agreements? How about France and Germany?. What were their roles?
Are they mentioned in the Minsk 2 accords?
All of the above are the guarantors of Minsk 2 and are to guarantee that each side fulfils its obligations. Russia are not "in it up to their neck" without authority. It is, as previously stated, a UNSC resolution. Russia made sure of this. They are the guarantors of one side of a UNSC resolution. The side that they are acting as guarantors for are not the side which has deliberately and admittedly never had any intention of abiding by them.
Are you "well aware" of that?
Do you dispute any of it or are you going to bring up MH17 again?
Which side has been the main transgressor of these agreements as observed by the OSCE monitors?
The apportioning of blame on ordinary Ukrainians for the downing of Malaysian Airlines Flight 17 is beneath you. The aircraft was brought down by militia supported and armed by Russia. If Russia really cared about its Ukrainian cousins it would support the restoration of peace first in Donetsk and Luhansk, not push for reforms which Ukraine as an independent sovereign state could never accept.
-
Let's cut to the chase gringo, since you seem obsessed with Minsk this evening. Russia wanted influence in Eastern Ukraine, namely Luhansk and Donetsk. What Ukraine, a sovereign state, could not accept was the formation of a people's militia in those provinces, effectively becoming its own police force, its own legal system and the power to conclude agreements with foreign states (i.e. Russia).
No independent state could have accepted these conditions.
How can you know these conditions when no negotiations took place because the Ukrainians refused to negotiate despite agreeing to negotiate and that agreement being voted as a UNSC resolution?
You have just made all of that up and completely ignored that Ukraine govt. signed an agreement that they would negotiate. They refused to even recognise the leaders of the republics despite having explicitly already done so. Ukraine govt. breached from Day 1 and every other day since.
Far from being obsessed with Minsk, I am tired of it being raised in fly by comments by posters such as yourself who then refuse to answer any of the questions posed. Every time I offer to discuss it after it is raised then you divert elsewhere. It is clear that you have heard it on the news and Russia bad and then just repeat some context and fact free drivel soundbite that you have heard. You know nothing of Minsk 2 and if you did you wouldn't raise it a discussion where you are hoping to blame Russia.
What do you think should have been done about Ukraine's failure to ceasefire, negotiate and their build up of weaponry and troops near the contact line?
-
How can you know these conditions when no negotiations took place because the Ukrainians refused to negotiate despite agreeing to negotiate and that agreement being voted as a UNSC resolution?
You have just made all of that up and completely ignored that Ukraine govt. signed an agreement that they would negotiate. They refused to even recognise the leaders of the republics despite having explicitly already done so. Ukraine govt. breached from Day 1 and every other day since.
Far from being obsessed with Minsk, I am tired of it being raised in fly by comments by posters such as yourself who then refuse to answer any of the questions posed. Every time I offer to discuss it after it is raised then you divert elsewhere. It is clear that you have heard it on the news and Russia bad and then just repeat some context and fact free drivel soundbite that you have heard. You know nothing of Minsk 2 and if you did you wouldn't raise it a discussion where you are hoping to blame Russia.
What do you think should have been done about Ukraine's failure to ceasefire, negotiate and their build up of weaponry and troops near the contact line?
I prefer to take an overview of Minsk. I am not the chief negotiator and I have no wish to get bogged down in detail. It's quite clear to me that Russia regarded Minsk 2 as invasion of Ukraine by the back door.
Let's leave it at that.
-
not push for reforms which Ukraine as an independent sovereign state could never accept.
Ukraine had agreed to negotiate these reforms. They had agreed to, as a supposed sovereign state, negotiate these reforms.
You believe that it is unreasonable to expect them to do something that they agreed to do?
-
I prefer to take an overview of Minsk. I am not the chief negotiator and I have no wish to get bogged down in detail. It's quite clear to me that Russia regarded Minsk 2 as invasion of Ukraine by the back door.
Let's leave it at that.
It is two pages long. Two pages is too much detail for you?
As long as it's clear to someone who takes an overview but doesn't bother with detail.
-
Who judges that any given leader is a "despot dictator"?
Themselves. By their own admissions.
https://streamable.com/jfrs23 (https://streamable.com/jfrs23)
-
Themselves. By their own admissions.
If that video is admitting being a "despot dictator" then we have a lot of invading still to do.
NATO has no right to act as judge, jury and executioner. You know this really. NATO's crime spree is ending as is NATO.
-
Themselves. By their own admissions.
If that video is admitting being a "despot dictator" then we have a lot of invading still to do.
NATO has no right to act as judge, jury and executioner. You know this really. NATO's crime spree is ending as is NATO.
Have you ever lived under a dictatorship?
-
Themselves. By their own admissions.
If that video is admitting being a "despot dictator" then we have a lot of invading still to do.
NATO has no right to act as judge, jury and executioner. You know this really. NATO's crime spree is ending as is NATO.
Saddam had no right to murder his own people. Torture political opponents. And conduct show elections.
Uday had no right to kidnap and rape and kill innocent women and children.
The sportsmen of Iraq had the right to not get imprisoned and tortured because of competition losses
Iraqi people had the right to get their country back.
-
Saddam had no right to murder his own people. Torture political opponents. And conduct show elections.
Uday had no right to kidnap and rape and kill innocent women and children.
The sportsmen of Iraq had the right to not get imprisoned and tortured because of competition losses
Iraqi people had the right to get their country back.
He invaded Iran and Kuwait then planned to invade Saudi Arabia. He fired scud missiles into Israel, set oil fields ablaze and poured 11 million barrels of crude oil into the Persian gulf, probably the largest acts of ecoterrorism ever committed.
The guy was a threat to the whole world.
-
I am certain that if Russia, China or any other country had carried out those same actions (shock and awe) cities levelled, the utter destruction and death caused in those invasions, you would be calling out Russia, China or whoever for acting as world police.
You know it, I know it.
You would be right.
NATO's wars of aggression have been brutal. The civilian deaths, injuries, displacement and destruction were not a reasonable price to pay for removing anyone. They arm and sponsor dictators more brutal than Saddam, as well you know.
Your justifications for such brutality is acting as apologist for their genocidal criminality. You know that you would not justify those same actions by any other country.
-
He invaded Iran and Kuwait then planned to invade Saudi Arabia. He fired scud missiles into Israel, set oil fields ablaze and poured 11 million barrels of crude oil into the Persian gulf, probably the largest acts of ecoterrorism ever committed.
The guy was a threat to the whole world.
Indeed. Not forgetting the haljaba gas attack
Ironically,. He did do some good for Iraq. He built schools, hospitals, promoted women's rights and literacy. And gave the whole of Iraq electricity. But the whole regime was a brutal police state. Forced disappearances, torture, murder. You could get sentenced to death for dropping the Iraqi Dinah note ( which featured a picture of Saddam) on to the floor
-
He invaded Iran and Kuwait then planned to invade Saudi Arabia. He fired scud missiles into Israel, set oil fields ablaze and poured 11 million barrels of crude oil into the Persian gulf, probably the largest acts of ecoterrorism ever committed.
The guy was a threat to the whole world.
" Just wait till I become president. Il be crueller than my father ever was. Trust me you will yearn for the days of Saddam Hussein" quote by Uday hussein
-
" Just wait till I become president. Il be crueller than my father ever was. Trust me you will yearn for the days of Saddam Hussein" quote by Uday hussein
Where did you get this quote from?
-
Where did you get this quote from?
From a documentary about the regime. It stuck in my mind. You should be able to come across it
-
Why is Russia blocking Ukraine's grain exports? https://www.aol.co.uk/news/war-looms-large-over-g20-220456360-195620113.html
-
Nothing can justify this full scale invasion upon Ukraine.
NATO have made mistakes. But it is what it is. It is not about policing the world. It is about promoting and supplementing world stability. I back every NATO led invasion entirely. I back conclusively any disposal of a despot dictator. My own words. Not any " propaganda" I've read.
We have no idea about Russia's agenda. Does he plant spill over to Poland? Germany? How can we conclusively know? Gringo outlines Russia's aims. Be that as it may, but we cannot take the chance.
Anything further west than Ukraine will result in military action we all know this
-
Putin has already invaded Crimea, which gringo does not accept as an invasion. Medvedev has threatened nuclear war if this is not accepted.
-
Councillor sentenced to seven years in jail for opposing the Ukraine war.
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/07/russia-municipal-councillor-sentenced-to-seven-years-in-jail-for-opposing-the-ukraine-war/ (https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/07/russia-municipal-councillor-sentenced-to-seven-years-in-jail-for-opposing-the-ukraine-war/)
-
That's what you get for expressing your views----a bit the same as here if you say the wrong thing and this is supposed to be a democracy.
-
NATO have made mistakes. But it is what it is. It is not about policing the world. It is about promoting and supplementing world stability. I back every NATO led invasion entirely. I back conclusively any disposal of a despot dictator. My own words. Not any " propaganda" I've read .
He invaded Iran and Kuwait then planned to invade Saudi Arabia.
Indeed. Not forgetting the haljaba gas attack
Let's examine your non propagandised world view. Thought of it all by yourself, so you say.
Taking apart the above quotes, "I back every NATO led invasion entirely"
The invasion of Iran was NATO backed. Who armed and supported Saddam in this brutal war? It was the year after the overthrow of the Iranian Shah and his brutal police state. Do a quick search on the Savak. Then perhaps find out how the Shah came to power. When you are done with this, it may then be enlightening, for you, to do a little reading on the Halabja massacre where you will discover NATO's role in providing the chemical weapons, the means of delivery and the targeting.
Knowing that you are incapable of doing any of this(too much reading and cognitive dissonance for you) I will spell out the nature of your unequivocal support of NATO.
1) In 1953 you supported the overthrow in a coup led by intel services of NATO members US/UK of the Iranian democratically elected socialist government of Mohammed Mossadegh. You then, by inference, supported the brutal Shah regime and his police state. When they were overthrown in the revolution of 1979, you no longer supported Iran so;
2) In 1980 through to 1988 you supported Saddam Hussein's Iraq in invading Iran and also supported NATO in providing arms, training and support including the supply of chemical weapons as well as the means of delivery and the targeting for those weapons killing and injuring thousands of Iranians.
3) In 1991 you no longer supported Saddam's Iraq and now supported invading Iraq for its invasions of Kuwait and Iran!. So invading Iran using NATO supplied chemical weapons should be supported(until it is convenient to not support it) but invading Kuwait not supported.
And you support all of these actions. And you are not propagandised. And you do all of your thinking for yourself.
If you were really aware of the decades long crime spree of NATO you would realise that feigning concern for victims of war is hollow if you have supported the genocidal actions of NATO, which you inform us, you have.
-
NATO have made mistakes. But it is what it is. It is not about policing the world. It is about promoting and supplementing world stability. I back every NATO led invasion entirely. I back conclusively any disposal of a despot dictator. My own words. Not any " propaganda" I've read .
He invaded Iran and Kuwait then planned to invade Saudi Arabia.
Indeed. Not forgetting the haljaba gas attack
Let's examine your non propagandised world view. Thought of it all by yourself, so you say.
Taking apart the above quotes, "I back every NATO led invasion entirely"
The invasion of Iran was NATO backed. Who armed and supported Saddam in this brutal war? It was the year after the overthrow of the Iranian Shah and his brutal police state. Do a quick search on the Savak. Then perhaps find out how the Shah came to power. When you are done with this, it may then be enlightening, for you, to do a little reading on the Halabja massacre where you will discover NATO's role in providing the chemical weapons, the means of delivery and the targeting.
Knowing that you are incapable of doing any of this(too much reading and cognitive dissonance for you) I will spell out the nature of your unequivocal support of NATO.
1) In 1953 you supported the overthrow in a coup led by intel services of NATO members US/UK of the Iranian democratically elected socialist government of Mohammed Mossadegh. You then, by inference, supported the brutal Shah regime and his police state. When they were overthrown in the revolution of 1979, you no longer supported Iran so;
2) In 1980 through to 1988 you supported Saddam Hussein's Iraq in invading Iran and also supported NATO in providing arms, training and support including the supply of chemical weapons as well as the means of delivery and the targeting for those weapons killing and injuring thousands of Iranians.
3) In 1991 you no longer supported Saddam's Iraq and now supported invading Iraq for its invasions of Kuwait and Iran!. So invading Iran using NATO supplied chemical weapons should be supported(until it is convenient to not support it) but invading Kuwait not supported.
And you support all of these actions. And you are not propagandised. And you do all of your thinking for yourself.
If you were really aware of the decades long crime spree of NATO you would realise that feigning concern for victims of war is hollow if you have supported the genocidal actions of NATO, which you inform us, you have.
Iran is a rogue state on a par with Russia. I've lost count of the number of terrorist offences it has committed.
-
NATO have made mistakes. But it is what it is. It is not about policing the world. It is about promoting and supplementing world stability. I back every NATO led invasion entirely. I back conclusively any disposal of a despot dictator. My own words. Not any " propaganda" I've read .
He invaded Iran and Kuwait then planned to invade Saudi Arabia.
Indeed. Not forgetting the haljaba gas attack
Let's examine your non propagandised world view. Thought of it all by yourself, so you say.
Taking apart the above quotes, "I back every NATO led invasion entirely"
The invasion of Iran was NATO backed. Who armed and supported Saddam in this brutal war? It was the year after the overthrow of the Iranian Shah and his brutal police state. Do a quick search on the Savak. Then perhaps find out how the Shah came to power. When you are done with this, it may then be enlightening, for you, to do a little reading on the Halabja massacre where you will discover NATO's role in providing the chemical weapons, the means of delivery and the targeting.
Knowing that you are incapable of doing any of this(too much reading and cognitive dissonance for you) I will spell out the nature of your unequivocal support of NATO.
1) In 1953 you supported the overthrow in a coup led by intel services of NATO members US/UK of the Iranian democratically elected socialist government of Mohammed Mossadegh. You then, by inference, supported the brutal Shah regime and his police state. When they were overthrown in the revolution of 1979, you no longer supported Iran so;
2) In 1980 through to 1988 you supported Saddam Hussein's Iraq in invading Iran and also supported NATO in providing arms, training and support including the supply of chemical weapons as well as the means of delivery and the targeting for those weapons killing and injuring thousands of Iranians.
3) In 1991 you no longer supported Saddam's Iraq and now supported invading Iraq for its invasions of Kuwait and Iran!. So invading Iran using NATO supplied chemical weapons should be supported(until it is convenient to not support it) but invading Kuwait not supported.
And you support all of these actions. And you are not propagandised. And you do all of your thinking for yourself.
If you were really aware of the decades long crime spree of NATO you would realise that feigning concern for victims of war is hollow if you have supported the genocidal actions of NATO, which you inform us, you have.
If your response to that is,
Iran is a rogue state on a par with Russia. I've lost count of the number of terrorist offences it has committed.
then you show your ignorance. Iran is, by any objective measure, more sinned against than sinner. NATO have facilitated chemical weapons use against them, overthrown a democratically government and installed in its place a police state with brutal secret police, the Savak. Since the revolution overthrowing the Shah's despotic rule, NATO has sanctioned, threatened, sponsored invasions of Iran, murdered General Soleimani in another sovereign state where he had been invited on a diplomatic visit and you consider them a rogue state, but you're not indoctrinated.
-
That not one of the NATO apologists questions the "moral authority" of the self styled "defenders of human rights" to carry out any invasion, interference, coup, sanctions or bombing to enforce their rules is telling. The colonialist mindset and supremacism at the heart of that attitude is a cancer on the world and is being brought to an end.
-
Gringo:
Most of the people commenting on this thread would wear masks on their faces all day long and accept injections into their arms if somebody on TV told them to.
They believe what the TV tells them. That's before we get into the possibility of an ethnic bias. David admits he is Jewish. Nothing wrong with that, but he is obviously biased (to his credit, he has more or less accepted this in a previous thread on here). I believe one or two others here belong to that ethnicity as well. There is a perception among Jews that Putin is anti-Jewish or anti-Semitic or anti-Israel or something along those lines. This is clearly a load of rubbish, as is the demonisation and monsterisation of Putin, which is over-blown to a cartoonish level; but what you have to understand is that an unnuanced, Manichean approach to debate is to expected from people whose core essential identity is built around a self-perception of victimhood and persecution, etc.
Lookout, Steve and David are determined to make what happens in the Ukraine the business of Britain. To you and me and any other normal person, this is ludicrous, as we cannot possibly grasp the nuances and complexities of a foreign dispute, and it is deeply condescending (as well as dangerously stupid and ignorant) to pretend that we can. But they won't listen.
It's impossible to conduct a sensible discussion with such people. It is up to you, and for all I know you may be Jewish yourself, but in any event I think all the points that need to be made to counter their nonsense have been made in the thread. They just ignore it. You're wasting your own valuable time. Just let them talk to each other.
-
Gringo:
Most of the people commenting on this thread would wear masks on their faces all day long and accept injections into their arms if somebody on TV told them to.
They believe what the TV tells them. That's before we get into the possibility of an ethnic bias. David admits he is Jewish. Nothing wrong with that, but he is obviously biased (to his credit, he has more or less accepted this in a previous thread on here). I believe one or two others here belong to that ethnicity as well. There is a perception among Jews that Putin is anti-Jewish or anti-Semitic or anti-Israel or something along those lines. This is clearly a load of rubbish, as is the demonisation and monsterisation of Putin, which is over-blown to a cartoonish level; but what you have to understand is that an unnuanced, Manichean approach to debate is to expected from people whose core essential identity is built around a self-perception of victimhood and persecution, etc.
Lookout, Steve and David are determined to make what happens in the Ukraine the business of Britain. To you and me and any other normal person, this is ludicrous, as we cannot possibly grasp the nuances and complexities of a foreign dispute, and it is deeply condescending (as well as dangerously stupid and ignorant) to pretend that we can. But they won't listen.
It's impossible to conduct a sensible discussion with such people. It is up to you, and for all I know you may be Jewish yourself, but in any event I think all the points that need to be made to counter their nonsense have been made in the thread. They just ignore it. You're wasting your own valuable time. Just let them talk to each other.
I appreciate all of that, Gascoigne, and am under no illusions regarding the ability of ILB, David and Steve(aka the three wise monkeys) to see, hear or speak any evil when it comes to world affairs and NATO/US/UK criminality.
They are merely useful idiots and foils for raising relevant history and context to events. They will be the last to learn but the idiotic points they raise allow for more context to be added to ill understood events for those that are interested.
-
https://www.international.gc.ca/world-monde/issues_development-enjeux_developpement/response_conflict-reponse_conflits/crisis-crises/ukraine-fact-fait.aspx?lang=eng& (https://www.international.gc.ca/world-monde/issues_development-enjeux_developpement/response_conflict-reponse_conflits/crisis-crises/ukraine-fact-fait.aspx?lang=eng&)
-
https://www.international.gc.ca/world-monde/issues_development-enjeux_developpement/response_conflict-reponse_conflits/crisis-crises/ukraine-fact-fait.aspx?lang=eng& (https://www.international.gc.ca/world-monde/issues_development-enjeux_developpement/response_conflict-reponse_conflits/crisis-crises/ukraine-fact-fait.aspx?lang=eng&)
Pity we are not allowed to see Russian claims for ourselves. Even though we are arming Ukraine, officially we are not at war with Russia. But we are not allowed to read or watch Russian news? Sites blocked etc.
Why do I need somebody to block Russian claims and then tell me that the Russian claims being blocked are false?
Sorry but that is massive alarm bells for me.
-
Pity we are not allowed to see Russian claims for ourselves. Even though we are arming Ukraine, officially we are not at war with Russia. But we are not allowed to read or watch Russian news? Sites blocked etc.
Why do I need somebody to block Russian claims and then tell me that the Russian claims being blocked are false?
Sorry but that is massive alarm bells for me.
Knock yourself out.
https://wwitv.com/television/174.htm (https://wwitv.com/television/174.htm)
-
Pity we are not allowed to see Russian claims for ourselves. Even though we are arming Ukraine, officially we are not at war with Russia. But we are not allowed to read or watch Russian news? Sites blocked etc.
Why do I need somebody to block Russian claims and then tell me that the Russian claims being blocked are false?
Sorry but that is massive alarm bells for me.
Download Opera or Tor browser, Roch. Both come with VPN and allow access to all sites by hiding your IP and accessing sites from India or wherever. Internet and information controls are imposed mostly in the "free west".
-
Why do I need somebody to block Russian claims and then tell me that the Russian claims being blocked are false?
Answers itself doesn't it, Roch.
Julian Assange's predicament does the rest. He acts as a warning to others who might harbour ideas of doing proper journalism rather than acting as stenographers for Western Intel agencies.
-
Meanwhile in Stockholm. A protest against Sweden joining NATO. About 12 people showed up lol
(https://english.news.cn/europe/20220518/bf81c9692d2f455c86ff26604d1399a0/20220518bf81c9692d2f455c86ff26604d1399a0_20220518185e696ca7f542d980cb2ad404619a50.jpg)
-
Gringo:
Most of the people commenting on this thread would wear masks on their faces all day long and accept injections into their arms if somebody on TV told them to.
They believe what the TV tells them. That's before we get into the possibility of an ethnic bias. David admits he is Jewish. Nothing wrong with that, but he is obviously biased (to his credit, he has more or less accepted this in a previous thread on here). I believe one or two others here belong to that ethnicity as well. There is a perception among Jews that Putin is anti-Jewish or anti-Semitic or anti-Israel or something along those lines. This is clearly a load of rubbish, as is the demonisation and monsterisation of Putin, which is over-blown to a cartoonish level; but what you have to understand is that an unnuanced, Manichean approach to debate is to expected from people whose core essential identity is built around a self-perception of victimhood and persecution, etc.
Lookout, Steve and David are determined to make what happens in the Ukraine the business of Britain. To you and me and any other normal person, this is ludicrous, as we cannot possibly grasp the nuances and complexities of a foreign dispute, and it is deeply condescending (as well as dangerously stupid and ignorant) to pretend that we can. But they won't listen.
It's impossible to conduct a sensible discussion with such people. It is up to you, and for all I know you may be Jewish yourself, but in any event I think all the points that need to be made to counter their nonsense have been made in the thread. They just ignore it. You're wasting your own valuable time. Just let them talk to each other.
Being a former National Font member. I guess most your coverage of the Ukraine war is Nick Griffins live Templar Reports. The only UK politician that is supporting and praising the Russian invasion. ::)
-
Being a former National Font member. I guess most your coverage of the Ukraine war is Nick Griffins live Templar Reports. The only UK politician that is supporting and praising the Russian invasion. ::)
I haven't paid attention to Nick Griffin in something like 20 years. What's he up to nowadays? I once met him and wasn't impressed. Can't deny it though: he gave you lot a fright, didn't he.
My views about Russia and Ukraine are formed on my own, independently. I can think for myself. I don't outsource my thinking functions to celebrities, podcasters, left-liberals, and the mainstream media.
To be clear, again, I support neutrality. I do not see any British national interest engaged by the demonisation of Vladimir Putin or support for the Ukraine. Quite the opposite. I also recognise that ethnic Russians have suffered persecution under the Kiev government. I further recognise the historical complexity of the issue: many Russians and Ukrainians alike do not see the Ukraine as a separate country to Russia.
The Crimea keeps being brought up here, but the Crimea is Russian in character and Russia does have a solid claim to sovereignty over the Crimea. If it didn't, they wouldn't have re-occupied it.
Somebody mentioned a 'full-scale invasion' of the Ukraine, but the objective was not to occupy the entirety of the Ukraine. The primary issues for Putin are (i). the geopolitical threat of NATO to Russia (in blatant disregard of promises given by the United States in the early 1990s) and (ii). the persecution of Russian minorities in the eastern Ukraine. No doubt there are also more selfish objectives on Russia's part, such as access to energy resources and so on, but primarily this is about Russia's security and the treatment of Russian minorities in the Ukraine itself.
Now, here I want to emphasise two very important caveats!
1. I do NOT necessarily like or support Vladimir Putin and his style of government, but I am non-committal on the matter because I do not see how Putin is any more abusive or cynical than any other world leader, including any Western leader. Some of you are hypnotised by words like 'democracy' and 'equality' and fail to recognise the flaws in these systems.
2. I do NOT necessarily support Russia. Nor do I support the Ukraine. I don't need to support either. I take what - as far as I can see - is the rational position for a disinterested third party: neutrality. I would only add that if NATO prevails and continues to threaten Russia, we will have a very dangerous situation, and it will be down to people like we have on this thread who believe what the TV tells them.
I believe the core of this issue is not Russia or Ukraine itself, but Germany. Germany is a sleeping giant in defence and is projecting its geopolitical ambitions through the EU and NATO. I think it is inevitable that Germany (perhaps through the EU) and Russia will end up in a new cold war and this needs to be addressed head-on. The best outcome is for the Ukraine, the EU, NATO, the United States and Russia to come to a security agreement that limits NATO/EU defence ambitions for the next 50 years to western Europe, which I would define as the eastern borders of Germany, Austria, and Italy, while Russia confines its influence to the former CIS states, with a shared land border between Norway and Russia. The old Western European Union could be reformed for defence purposes and Eastern Europe, including its EU member states, would become a neutral bloc, in effect a buffer zone between Russia and Germany. Anyway, that's one suggestion. NATO and the EU won't agree to such a thing of course, as it would mean withdrawal of US/NATO facilities in eastern Europe.
I'm going against my own advice to Gringo. I expect this is a waste of time, but I suppose there's no harm in posting a rebuttal to your propaganda every now and then.
-
I haven't paid attention to Nick Griffin in something like 20 years. What's he up to nowadays? I once met him and wasn't impressed. Can't deny it though: he gave you lot a fright, didn't he.
My views about Russia and Ukraine are formed on my own, independently. I can think for myself. I don't outsource my thinking functions to celebrities, podcasters, left-liberals, and the mainstream media.
To be clear, again, I support neutrality. I do not see any British national interest engaged by the demonisation of Vladimir Putin or support for the Ukraine. Quite the opposite. I also recognise that ethnic Russians have suffered persecution under the Kiev government. I further recognise the historical complexity of the issue: many Russians and Ukrainians alike do not see the Ukraine as a separate country to Russia.
The Crimea keeps being brought up here, but the Crimea is Russian in character and Russia does have a solid claim to sovereignty over the Crimea. If it didn't, they wouldn't have re-occupied it.
Somebody mentioned a 'full-scale invasion' of the Ukraine, but the objective was not to occupy the entirety of the Ukraine. The primary issues for Putin are (i). the geopolitical threat of NATO to Russia (in blatant disregard of promises given by the United States in the early 1990s) and (ii). the persecution of Russian minorities in the eastern Ukraine. No doubt there are also more selfish objectives on Russia's part, such as access to energy resources and so on, but primarily this is about Russia's security and the treatment of Russian minorities in the Ukraine itself.
Now, here I want to emphasise two very important caveats!
1. I do NOT necessarily like or support Vladimir Putin and his style of government, but I am non-committal on the matter because I do not see how Putin is any more abusive or cynical than any other world leader, including any Western leader. Some of you are hypnotised by words like 'democracy' and 'equality' and fail to recognise the flaws in these systems.
2. I do NOT necessarily support Russia. Nor do I support the Ukraine. I don't need to support either. I take what - as far as I can see - is the rational position for a disinterested third party: neutrality. I would only add that if NATO prevails and continues to threaten Russia, we will have a very dangerous situation, and it will be down to people like we have on this thread who believe what the TV tells them.
I believe the core of this issue is not Russia or Ukraine itself, but Germany. Germany is a sleeping giant in defence and is projecting its geopolitical ambitions through the EU and NATO. I think it is inevitable that Germany (perhaps through the EU) and Russia will end up in a new cold war and this needs to be addressed head-on. The best outcome is for the Ukraine, the EU, NATO, the United States and Russia to come to a security agreement that limits NATO/EU defence ambitions for the next 50 years to western Europe, which I would define as the eastern borders of Germany, Austria, and Italy, while Russia confines its influence to the former CIS states, with a shared land border between Norway and Russia. The old Western European Union could be reformed for defence purposes and Eastern Europe, including its EU member states, would become a neutral bloc, in effect a buffer zone between Russia and Germany. Anyway, that's one suggestion. NATO and the EU won't agree to such a thing of course, as it would mean withdrawal of US/NATO facilities in eastern Europe.
I'm going against my own advice to Gringo. I expect this is a waste of time, but I suppose there's no harm in posting a rebuttal to your propaganda every now and then.
Your rebuttal is a waste of time for the 3 wise monkeys but other posters/lurkers also read. It is apparent to any neutral or undecided readers which posters have an understanding of what is going on . It is also apparent who are the posters incapable of debate.
You can at least articulate and support your opinion.
The 3 wise monkeys, on the other hand, simply repeat context free soundbites which are coincidentally the same context free talking points repeated ad nauseam in the media that they definitely aren't indoctrinated by.
-
You could get sentenced to death for dropping the Iraqi Dinah note - ILB
Got any examples of this ILB? People getting sentenced to death for dropping money?! Thought not.
And you are not indoctrinated.
" Just wait till I become president. Il be crueller than my father ever was. Trust me you will yearn for the days of Saddam Hussein" quote by Uday hussein
And a quote that you think you heard on a documentary.
Wars launched by Bush, Blair, Obama et al were far more brutal and destructive than anything Saddam ever did.
Should NATO invade US/UK?
-
You could get sentenced to death for dropping the Iraqi Dinah note - ILB
Got any examples of this ILB? People getting sentenced to death for dropping money?! Thought not.
And you are not indoctrinated.
" Just wait till I become president. Il be crueller than my father ever was. Trust me you will yearn for the days of Saddam Hussein" quote by Uday hussein
And a quote that you think you heard on a documentary.
Wars launched by Bush, Blair, Obama et al were far more brutal and destructive than anything Saddam ever did.
Should NATO invade US/UK?
I am well aware of the lifestyle of citizens under Saddam in Iraq. I have many good Iraqi friends one of whom happened to attend Baghdad international school with mr Uday hussein in the 1970s. Saddam's wife, sadjida was headmistress of the school.
Did bush or Blair..
Gas their own people?
Routinely kidnap women and little girls off the streets to brutally rape and kill them?
Eradicate any political party. ?
Torture political opponents?
Kill people for the slightest action that would be deemed disloyalty?
Torture sportsmen for competition losses?
Be thankful you live in a democracy son
The US supported Saddam in 1979 because they were worried about the revolution and khomeni. Saddam at the time although head defacto behind the scenes since the early 70s had only become president in an official capacity since July 79. He was officially a clean skin. And the invasion never got very far. The war which costs s high number of deaths over the eight year period was basically a warzone stalemate.
Do you even know why Saddam invaded kuwait in 1990? Forget because it's the 19th province of iraq
-
A head scratcher for Steve, David and ILB, the resident apologists for war criminals. Saudi Arabia last month executed 81 people in amass execution. Here is an excerpt from Amnesty about it below;
The Ministry of Interior on Saturday announced the execution of 81 people, all of whom had been convicted of a wide range of offences, including “terrorism”- related crimes, murder, armed robbery and arms smuggling. A number of those executed were also convicted of charges such as “disrupting the social fabric and national cohesion” and “participating in and inciting sit-ins and protests” which describe acts that are protected by the rights to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and association.
Forty-one of those executed on Saturday are from Saudi Arabia’s Shi’a minority, the latest demonstration of Saudi Arabia’s politicized use of the death penalty to silence dissent in the Eastern Province.
“This execution spree is all the more chilling in light of Saudi Arabia’s deeply flawed justice system, which metes out death sentences following trials that are grossly and blatantly unfair, including basing verdicts on “confessions” extracted under torture or other ill-treatment,” said Lynn Maalouf, Amnesty International’s Deputy Regional Director for the Middle East and North Africa.
They are also bombing one of the poorest countries in the world, along with the UAE and US/UK assistance arming training etc. This bombing campaign led to the a cholera outbreak because of the above named protagonists targeting vital civilian infrastructure leading to the "largest man made humanitarian crisis" according to the UN.
The UN estimate 377,000 deaths by the end of 2021. More than 60% of these deaths resulting from hunger, lack of healthcare and lack of access to clean water.
All caused by US sanctions and a brutal 8 year bombing campaign.
Read those numbers. Then ask yourselves why none of the above even registers in your tiny minds but you feign outrage at Russia's actions in Ukraine, which are not remotely comparable in terms of brutality.
Does this mean that NATO should immediately invade Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates?
It appears to pass the criteria that the resident 3 wise monkeys suggest should prompt an invasion by NATO.
Again NATO would also have to invade its own members. What elaborate webs they weave....
Would China and Russia be justified in invading US/UK for their crimes in Yemen?
Are they allowed to be judge, jury and executioner in punishing US/UK?
Can only NATO do this?
Show your reasoning!
-
A head scratcher for Steve, David and ILB, the resident apologists for war criminals. Saudi Arabia last month executed 81 people in amass execution. Here is an excerpt from Amnesty about it below;
The Ministry of Interior on Saturday announced the execution of 81 people, all of whom had been convicted of a wide range of offences, including “terrorism”- related crimes, murder, armed robbery and arms smuggling. A number of those executed were also convicted of charges such as “disrupting the social fabric and national cohesion” and “participating in and inciting sit-ins and protests” which describe acts that are protected by the rights to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and association.
Forty-one of those executed on Saturday are from Saudi Arabia’s Shi’a minority, the latest demonstration of Saudi Arabia’s politicized use of the death penalty to silence dissent in the Eastern Province.
“This execution spree is all the more chilling in light of Saudi Arabia’s deeply flawed justice system, which metes out death sentences following trials that are grossly and blatantly unfair, including basing verdicts on “confessions” extracted under torture or other ill-treatment,” said Lynn Maalouf, Amnesty International’s Deputy Regional Director for the Middle East and North Africa.
They are also bombing one of the poorest countries in the world, along with the UAE and US/UK assistance arming training etc. This bombing campaign led to the a cholera outbreak because of the above named protagonists targeting vital civilian infrastructure leading to the "largest man made humanitarian crisis" according to the UN.
The UN estimate 377,000 deaths by the end of 2021. More than 60% of these deaths resulting from hunger, lack of healthcare and lack of access to clean water.
All caused by US sanctions and a brutal 8 year bombing campaign.
Read those numbers. Then ask yourselves why none of the above even registers in your tiny minds but you feign outrage at Russia's actions in Ukraine, which are not remotely comparable in terms of brutality.
Does this mean that NATO should immediately invade Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates?
It appears to pass the criteria that the resident 3 wise monkeys suggest should prompt an invasion by NATO.
Again NATO would also have to invade its own members. What elaborate webs they weave....
Would China and Russia be justified in invading US/UK for their crimes in Yemen?
Are they allowed to be judge, jury and executioner in punishing US/UK?
Can only NATO do this?
Show your reasoning!
You are well aware of the US Saudi relationship
And this is without NATO.
We all know this
You are an apologist for Saddam Hussein!
-
Be thankful you live in a democracy son OK Dad!
Did bush or Blair..
Gas their own people?
They murdered hundreds of thousands more Iraqis than Saddam. Does that count?
Routinely kidnap women and little girls off the streets to brutally rape and kill them?
I doubt that is true.
Eradicate any political party. ?
This is true of many regimes that we are friendly with. It is not a justification for any country to take the law into their own hands killing hundreds of thousands, displacing millions, destroying infrastructure, allowing looting and destruction of priceless treasures and causing the turmoil that led to ISIS.
You are an apologist for war criminals. NATO crimes are greater by magnitudes than any of the crimes that they are supposedly bringing justice for.
-
Be thankful you live in a democracy son OK Dad!
Did bush or Blair..
Gas their own people?
They murdered hundreds of thousands more Iraqis than Saddam. Does that count?
Routinely kidnap women and little girls off the streets to brutally rape and kill them?
I doubt that is true.
Eradicate any political party. ?
This is true of many regimes that we are friendly with. It is not a justification for any country to take the law into their own hands killing hundreds of thousands, displacing millions, destroying infrastructure, allowing looting and destruction of priceless treasures and causing the turmoil that led to ISIS.
You are an apologist for war criminals. NATO crimes are greater by magnitudes than any of the crimes that they are supposedly bringing justice for.
So how do you describe Mr Saddam hussein
-
You are well aware of the US Saudi relationship
What is this supposed to mean? It appears that you are saying that the brutality is ok because the US have a relationship with them? What sort of fuck-wittery is this? 377,000 dead. Can you read? Do you have any conscience? Do you really care so little about the deaths and brutality taking place in your name? You still are ok with this because you are "well aware of the US Saudi relationship". This take alone shows that you actually support brutal wars on those whose natural wealth we wish to steal. You are a shameless war crime apologist.
Be thankful that there is someone to show you the error of your ways, sunshine.
-
You are well aware of the US Saudi relationship
What is this supposed to mean? It appears that you are saying that the brutality is ok because the US have a relationship with them? What sort of fuck-wittery is this? 377,000 dead. Can you read? Do you have any conscience? Do you really care so little about the deaths and brutality taking place in your name? You still are ok with this because you are "well aware of the US Saudi relationship". This take alone shows that you actually support brutal wars on those whose natural wealth we wish to steal. You are a shameless war crime apologist.
Be thankful that there is someone to show you the error of your ways, sunshine.
You haven't shown me shit you idiot just copy and pasting.
What do you think of the 1982 dujail massacre?
Or the 1988 Al anfwal campaign?
-
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=U9HgdVN9C_k what do you think of your mans 1979 public purge about a " conspiracy " in his newly erected government. Just an excuse to murder innocent politicians he didn't like
-
There's junior there just forcing a " friend " to go into to the river to retrieve a duck. While junior shoots at him https://youtu.be/7EbO0RdxKXA
-
Here's the thing though. I don't support Saddam or MBS or any other world leader. Whatever Saddam's crimes, they pale into insignificance compared to NATO. The death toll and destruction of infrastructure and entire countries is testament to this unarguable fact.
I don't believe that NATO had any right to invade Iraq and nor do I think they have any right to invade Saudi Arabia. The same applies to Syria and Yemen, the current stops on NATO/US/UK tour of the world sponsored by Raytheon and Lockheed Martin.
You however, seem to believe we were correct to invade Iraq for Saddam's brutality. We would be incorrect to invade Saudi Arabia despite Bin Salman's psychopathic brutality and support also our wars on Syria and Yemen, currently ongoing. You are in favour of all NATO invasions, as you previously informed us, but your criteria is clearly just NATO support, so why mention alleged crimes? You only care for victims if the perpetrator is not a friend of NATO. Your cynical use of the victims of Saddam's crimes to bolster your war apologist bullshit is noted.
-
It is also worth mentioning again to those claiming to be horrified by Saddam's crimes.
Arguably his greatest crime, the gassing at Halabja, was done with NATO supplied chemicals and NATO targeting. Or put more simply, NATO were co-conspirators in the Halabja gas attack.
-
You haven't shown me shit you idiot just copy and pasting.
You haven't learnt anything, but that is a reflection on you.
You are incapable of critical thinking or writing a coherent and cohesive reply.
Your position is simply that invasion by NATO depends on NATO's relationship with that country. You mention alleged crimes only to disguise your real criteria. You have admitted this. The world order is changing whether you like it or not. Facts on the ground are being created and no amount of propaganda will spin away the obvious inflation and lowered living standards that are coming.
You will amongst the last to see through the lies and crimes of the collective west, if you ever do.
-
Also worth pointing out, ILB, that rather than asking me to justify Saddam's crimes, you should be asking yourself the same question. As I observed earlier, your admitted support of all NATO interventions means that you supported the arming and facilitation of Saddam's crimes from 1980-88.
I have never expressed any support Saddam. You have.
-
This is all bullshit.
You spout this spiel against NATO. You're a champagne socialist version of a NATO aggressor. You would be the first to moan if you lived under these oppressive regimes that NATO sought to change. You live a democracy. A country where we can speak what we like. Choose to believe in what we like. Wear what we like, sleep with whom we like and within constraints do what we like. You are putting US UK in the warcrime barriers with people like Saddam. You are so far out. You don't even know it. America, The UK are democracies. You know this. It's junior me even stating it out to you.
The Iraq war of 2003 was a depressing scenario. The Bush administration spoke in 2001 of an axis of evil between NK, Iran and Iraq. I didn't believe it at first. I never believe he had weapons of mass destruction. America claimed he did. None was found l. but I knew full well he had be disposed.
In an ideal world. I'd have preferred that a squad was sent in pre 2003 undercover and arrested Saddam and brought him before the Hague. I think that would have been the best option. And it would have saved a lot of bloodshed. Preferably he should have been disposed of in 1991. Not subjected to US sanctions. Because however crippling. The people of Iraq ultimately suffered and he still clung into power in the 12 year interim.
Saddam was a tyrant. A man who killed his own people. An appalling human rights abuse record. A man who invaded a neighbour to pifler monetary assets. He was a pillager. Iraq had long since wanted democracy. But was unsure how to go about it. It new no other from Faisal 2, Abdul quasim, then the Baathists.
It was a police state. Forced disappearances, murders, torture, hangings. Any opinion other than what Saddam wanted was punishable by death. Do you know Iraqi regular citizens could not even hold a passport?
Give me Blair anyday of the week. You don't know you are born
-
Gringo, you give me one of these NATO states that you hate that runs their country in this way
-
You are the typical far left wing rich mummy and daddy student type. Protest on your parents money. And go ape shit when you have to cough up a fiver
I do agree though. That the Iraq war bloodshed could have been avoided. And Saddam disposed in a less bloodless way
-
You are the typical far left wing rich mummy and daddy student type. Protest on your parents money. And go ape shit when you have to cough up a fiver
I do agree though. That the Iraq war bloodshed could have been avoided. And Saddam disposed in a less bloodless way
I'm a far left mummy and daddy student with rich parents. That's news to me.
Protesting on their money?
Go ape shit at coughing up a fiver?
You sound like an unhinged Mystic Meg.
-
This is all bullshit.
You spout this spiel against NATO. You're a champagne socialist version of a NATO aggressor. You would be the first to moan if you lived under these oppressive regimes that NATO sought to change. You live a democracy. A country where we can speak what we like. Choose to believe in what we like. Wear what we like, sleep with whom we like and within constraints do what we like. You are putting US UK in the warcrime barriers with people like Saddam. You are so far out. You don't even know it. America, The UK are democracies. You know this. It's junior me even stating it out to you.
The Iraq war of 2003 was a depressing scenario. The Bush administration spoke in 2001 of an axis of evil between NK, Iran and Iraq. I didn't believe it at first. I never believe he had weapons of mass destruction. America claimed he did. None was found l. but I knew full well he had be disposed.
In an ideal world. I'd have preferred that a squad was sent in pre 2003 undercover and arrested Saddam and brought him before the Hague. I think that would have been the best option. And it would have saved a lot of bloodshed. Preferably he should have been disposed of in 1991. Not subjected to US sanctions. Because however crippling. The people of Iraq ultimately suffered and he still clung into power in the 12 year interim.
Saddam was a tyrant. A man who killed his own people. An appalling human rights abuse record. A man who invaded a neighbour to pifler monetary assets. He was a pillager. Iraq had long since wanted democracy. But was unsure how to go about it. It new no other from Faisal 2, Abdul quasim, then the Baathists.
It was a police state. Forced disappearances, murders, torture, hangings. Any opinion other than what Saddam wanted was punishable by death. Do you know Iraqi regular citizens could not even hold a passport?
Give me Blair anyday of the week. You don't know you are born
Champagne socialist?
Champagne? I'm more of a Marijuana Marxist, a cannabis communist if you like!
-
NATO's crimes as demonstrated, in terms of victims, destruction, torture (Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo plus various "black sites") are magnitudes greater than Saddam's and still ongoing. By any objective metric Saddam's crimes are a fraction of the criminality of NATO.
Saddam is long dead. NATO crimes, 377,000 and counting dead in Yemen, are occurring now. Why do you have no concern about that but are furious about decades old crimes of far less magnitude?
Rattling on about the brutality of a long dead Saddam, to avoid talking about the brutality that you support.
-
Champagne socialist?
Champagne? I'm more of a Marijuana Marxist, a cannabis communist if you like!
That certainly explains a lot. Over exposure to mind altering substances.
-
I'll stick with plain old fags I think,lolol. No alcohol.
-
NATO's crimes as demonstrated, in terms of victims, destruction, torture (Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo plus various "black sites") are magnitudes greater than Saddam's and still ongoing. By any objective metric Saddam's crimes are a fraction of the criminality of NATO.
Saddam is long dead. NATO crimes, 377,000 and counting dead in Yemen, are occurring now. Why do you have no concern about that but are furious about decades old crimes of far less magnitude?
Rattling on about the brutality of a long dead Saddam, to avoid talking about the brutality that you support.
Nobody supports brutality.
-
You supported the regime of Saddam Hussein
-
Nobody supports brutality.
You have already unequivocally stated that you support all NATO invasions. That is not me paraphrasing you. "I back every NATO led invasion entirely." Are you suggesting that the invasions and consequences of these invasions weren't brutal? Yemen? not brutal? Iraq, falluja, Abu Ghraib? not brutal? Afghanistan? Guantanamo? Torture sites? not brutal? Millions dead? Many more millions displaced? Illness and hunger killing many more?
You imagine that your support of these invasions doesn't, by any reasonable inference, also support the brutality unleashed by them?
Of course you support brutality, you are just too cowardly to admit it so you hide behind faux concern.
It is incoherent to unequivocally support "every NATO led invasion entirely" yet simultaneously claim that you don't support brutality.
You supported the regime of Saddam Hussein
No I didn't support Saddam Hussein, or any other Iraqi politician, leader. Why make this up? There is not a single statement of mine anywhere that supports your idiotic claim.
-
Do you believe Saddam Hussein was right to be disposed?
It's a simple question
-
Nobody supports brutality.
You have already unequivocally stated that you support all NATO invasions. That is not me paraphrasing you. "I back every NATO led invasion entirely." Are you suggesting that the invasions and consequences of these invasions weren't brutal? Yemen? not brutal? Iraq, falluja, Abu Ghraib? not brutal? Afghanistan? Guantanamo? Torture sites? not brutal? Millions dead? Many more millions displaced? Illness and hunger killing many more?
You imagine that your support of these invasions doesn't, by any reasonable inference, also support the brutality unleashed by them?
Of course you support brutality, you are just too cowardly to admit it so you hide behind faux concern.
It is incoherent to unequivocally support "every NATO led invasion entirely" yet simultaneously claim that you don't support brutality.
You supported the regime of Saddam Hussein
No I didn't support Saddam Hussein, or any other Iraqi politician, leader. Why make this up? There is not a single statement of mine anywhere that supports your idiotic claim.
I support NATO invasions in view of ridding despot evil dictators.
-
In 1991 after kuwait the US backed NATO invasion has more than ample power to go direct to Baghdad and remove Saddam and his two wanker sons. But they chose not to and instead used no fly zones and crippled the Iraqi economy to drown him out. He survived another 12 years. Which is much more than he ought
-
Saddam invaded his wealthy neighbour his tiny neighbour to pillage the little country. With limited military defence. To pillage its vast wealth. To help himself out because he was crippled with debt via the Iran Iraq war.
-
I was against the hunting and slaying of Saddam Hussein. What he did in his own country was his business and nobody should have interfered. Interfering causes wars.
What have we suffered since 2003 ? Terrorist attacks and a noticable suppression of our freedom by allowing many terrorists into this country ! This is my main concern as I've watched 13,000 illegal immigrants coming from God knows where, into this country, assisted by our own armed forces ?? What are they fleeing from when they've passed many countries, including France, where there are NO wars etc ? Then are smuggled here, truly insane. Putin must be laughing his head of at such a weak country as ours.
I'm not worried about other countries or how they're run, it's this country which concerns me most when we have to kow-tow to those who don't even have passports or papers ! It makes me sick. MP's know this is going on yet do nothing about it. Watch "TW Media Online" and weep at the loss of this country !!
I fear for the futures of my great-grandchildren !
-
I was against the hunting and slaying of Saddam Hussein. What he did in his own country was his business and nobody should have interfered. Interfering causes wars.
What have we suffered since 2003 ? Terrorist attacks and a noticable suppression of our freedom by allowing many terrorists into this country ! This is my main concern as I've watched 13,000 illegal immigrants coming from God knows where, into this country, assisted by our own armed forces ?? What are they fleeing from when they've passed many countries, including France, where there are NO wars etc ? Then are smuggled here, truly insane. Putin must be laughing his head of at such a weak country as ours.
I'm not worried about other countries or how they're run, it's this country which concerns me most when we have to kow-tow to those who don't even have passports or papers ! It makes me sick. MP's know this is going on yet do nothing about it. Watch "TW Media Online" and weep at the loss of this country !!
I fear for the futures of my great-grandchildren !
We had to get rid of Saddam. Iraq needed the foundations of a democracy.
If we hadn't we would have got qusay Hussein ( the heir apparent was originally Uday but he was deemed to be unsuitable by Saddam due to his erratic and vile ways) ( which tells you all you need to know)
Saddam was lucky to get a trial and a fair hearing. Justice which he denied for many many others
-
In 1991 after kuwait the US backed NATO invasion has more than ample power to go direct to Baghdad and remove Saddam and his two wanker sons. But they chose not to and instead used no fly zones and crippled the Iraqi economy to drown him out. He survived another 12 years. Which is much more than he ought
It was a UN coalition that involved Bangladesh, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Egypt also.
-
It was a UN coalition that involved Bangladesh, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Egypt also.
Apologies your absolutely correct David
-
China's going to have a crack at Taiwan any time soon ! Now that WILL be disastrous.
-
It was a UN coalition that involved Bangladesh, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Egypt also.
He was very lucky to cling on to power for a further 12 years.
Should have done away with him then
-
He was very lucky to cling on to power for a further 12 years.
Should have done away with him then
In hindsight yes.
-
Russia's economic problems: https://youtu.be/Zwi7AwF9o_w
-
Excellent video that debunks Russian government propaganda that ''Ukraine shelled and bombed civilians in Donbas for 8 years ''
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-YKRc_b7CE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-YKRc_b7CE)
-
Gorbachev has hit out at Putin for ruining all Gorbachev's good work when he was President. The man is 91 and not now in the best of health.
-
Here's a video I watched early on during the Russian Ukraine conflict.
It puts into perspective those who take a passing interest in the conflict, and then become armchair Geo political experts of the region.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OisJkpGYpAo
I then decided to share the video with a woman I know from the Ukraine.
Here's her reply.
This blogger is obviously 100% correct and I don't see how can anybody refute any of his arguments or say that he is wrong...
As for the westerners, well, being westerners, their anti-russian stance does not surprise me. They thought it was absolutely normal to genocide my people in LNR/DNR for all these years since 2014. Let's be honest, westerners are racist fucks including all your so-called lefties, greens and social justice worriers, "peace and love" Karens....To them my people are also "the niggers" and they can't relate to our pain. I am like a Lybian or Yemeni etc etc who's countries they also destroyed.
I know that to the Anglos my people are not white. It doesn't matter what they say, deep inside it's true.
I had my FB friends telling me straight up that Donbass people are "subhumans". And this was coming from educated middle class European millennials...
So, fuck these people, let them jab their kids and give their kids gender change surgeries. The West is degenarating at full speed and it doesn't bother me one bit. 😊 Fuck them
-
Here's a video I watched early on during the Russian Ukraine conflict.
It puts into perspective those who take a passing interest in the conflict, and then become armchair Geo political experts of the region.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OisJkpGYpAo
I then decided to share the video with a woman I know from the Ukraine.
Here's her reply.
I'm still waiting for evidence that the majority of the population in Luhansk and Donetsk wish to secede from Ukraine and join Russia.
-
I'm still waiting for evidence that the majority of the population in Luhansk and Donetsk wish to secede from Ukraine and join Russia.
Why don't you go there yourself and find out for sure, then you can inform us all.
-
More prominent people on Russia's blacklist: https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/starmer-blackford-and-cameron-among-latest-names-on-russia-s-sanctions-list/ar-AA10bCrC?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=4dc58f4beac24ca38e361d11f2a5afd8
KGB up to its old tricks: https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/former-putin-adviser-who-fled-russia-is-hospitalised-with-rare-symptoms/ar-AA10aXVQ?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=8303a6021be44356975b070c9e87eeeb
-
Yale Management Review: https://youtu.be/h-fdRlC7OHE
-
I follow a Russian chap and his family who live in Ufa, Saint Petersburg. He streamed his travels to Moscow which took him over 6 hours. In Moscow itself there's no sign whatsoever of anything like a war as throngs of people gathered for their weekend outdoor entertainment in Gorky park and outside the Red Square.
Families and youths were dancing in outdoor venues and enjoying the lovely surrounds and warm evenings.
Parks are illuminated and music pours from every direction. What is so noticeable is that there aren't any drunken fights, no litter/graffiti, no vandalism---just spotlessly clean streets/roads.
Shopping malls are illuminated and musicians on every corner with crowds around them. Nothing is disorderly whatsoever and seems to be very safe at night as families are out and about with children.
Eating venues are packed inside and outside and the Russian chap in question has a camera at all times with no restrictions. Okay, so they're missing some of the sanctions that the West have incurred but life is still well and truly going on regardless.
The family are heading to Sochi and from Moscow drove for another 7 hours or so to Krasnodar to stop off before their final journey to Sochi. The chap couldn't film from Krasnodar onwards as it's a mountainous region and the signal wouldn't be there so I'm looking forward to their final destination in Sochi, a seaside area which I'll watch at 5pm today on their arrival.
It's so difficult to understand that there is an invasion going on as everywhere is pristine and clean. Looking forward to seeing a different side to towns and cities in Russia. It's an eye-opener !
-
Soon they will be having "referendums" in occupied areas where millions of Ukrainians have fled and thus cannot vote, to give the whole thing a veneer of legitimacy.
-
Is he too frightened to attend the funeral? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-62756196
-
Is he too frightened to attend the funeral? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-62756196
Most likely Steve.
-
As predicted,sanctions aren't affecting Russia, with their enormous shopping mall in Moscow doing a roaring trade last Sunday. This mall looks like any other shopping area except that it's a lot bigger in space with parking areas underneath the building instead of cluttering up roads etc.
As for buildings and highways, the Russians have got us beaten hands down-----because they work hard at what they do and also have pride in their towns and cities, no litter/graffiti/vandalism/disorder !
The few companies that have pulled out of Russia are of no detriment such as Starbucks for one, where Russia has formed its own coffee areas naming them just Stars. There are plenty of large McDonalds in various areas in and around Moscow and also St.Petersburg. These again are spotlessly clean places with automatic requests for meals all put in a machine,a table number given out then waiter/waitress service----all to save long queues.
Everything is so orderly, thus avoiding any clashes within the various public arenas.
A lot has opened my eyes toward their lifestyles and way of living, a far cry from a lot that we imagined it to be. People of different ethnicities live side by side and follow their own religions quietly with beautifully built churches,places of prayer adding grace and structure to the architecture surrounding them.
The reason that many Russians were/are hostile towards Gorbachev were his Western opinions which Russia didn't want creeping into their country.The old USSR was slowly fizzling out and it was seen as weak to allow Western values etc. after the years of suppression under previous leaders. Having Gorbachev as leader back then was akin to having Thatcher sell off council houses which left part of that legacy to this day, and in Russia under Gorbachev, people also lost jobs etc and were left with hardships.
You can have too much of a good thing, but also too much of a bad thing too. It's finding that happy medium. Prosperity without the greed and a fairness to all citizens.
-
https://youtu.be/d2Eu52ZRwoY
-
Remember the Admiral Kuznetzov and how it was a source of great hilarity as it sailed through the English Channel billowing smoke on its way to the Med and Syria. The decrepit state of the ship, we were told, a metaphor for the state of the entire Russian Armed Forces.
In light of the debacle of the HMS Prince of Wales, we should perhaps wonder, if this is also a metaphor for the state and capability of the entire UK/NATO armed forces.
To be fair to the Admiral Kuznetzov, despite its appearance, it did in fact sail from the Barents Sea to the Med and completed its mission. That being so, a more reasonable description would be that it looks old and inefficient but is resilient, more efficient than appearances suggest and does everything asked of it.
Now let's do the HMS Prince of Wales :-[ :-[
Our 2 years old £3 billion + Aircraft carrier that has spent only 87 days at sea in 2 years, has no aircraft yet and broke down without making it out of the Solent on its "landmark mission" to "shape the future of stealth jet and drone operations", is now limping back to port and will likely have to go to Amsterdam for repairs, as we lack the dry dock facilities to repair our £3 billion + aircraft carrier.
The equivalent of me leaving my house in Hull, on my way to London, failing to make it beyond the top of my street driving a Ferrari whilst taking the piss out of my neighbours Skoda which goes to London and back problem free regularly.
And now I have to send my Ferrari to Italy for repair.
The state of the HMS Prince of Wales is a fitting metaphor for the UK and entire NATO armed forces. Over-priced, over-extended and over-rated.
-
Remember the Admiral Kuznetzov and how it was a source of great hilarity as it sailed through the English Channel billowing smoke on its way to the Med and Syria. The decrepit state of the ship, we were told, a metaphor for the state of the entire Russian Armed Forces.
In light of the debacle of the HMS Prince of Wales, we should perhaps wonder, if this is also a metaphor for the state and capability of the entire UK/NATO armed forces.
To be fair to the Admiral Kuznetzov, despite its appearance, it did in fact sail from the Barents Sea to the Med and completed its mission. That being so, a more reasonable description would be that it looks old and inefficient but is resilient, more efficient than appearances suggest and does everything asked of it.
Now let's do the HMS Prince of Wales :-[ :-[
Our 2 years old £3 billion + Aircraft carrier that has spent only 87 days at sea in 2 years, has no aircraft yet and broke down without making it out of the Solent on its "landmark mission" to "shape the future of stealth jet and drone operations", is now limping back to port and will likely have to go to Amsterdam for repairs, as we lack the dry dock facilities to repair our £3 billion + aircraft carrier.
The equivalent of me leaving my house in Hull, on my way to London, failing to make it beyond the top of my street driving a Ferrari whilst taking the piss out of my neighbours Skoda which goes to London and back problem free regularly.
And now I have to send my Ferrari to Italy for repair.
The state of the HMS Prince of Wales is a fitting metaphor for the UK and entire NATO armed forces. Over-priced, over-extended and over-rated.
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/russian-aircraft-carrier-towed-home-after-break-down/ (https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/russian-aircraft-carrier-towed-home-after-break-down/)
https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/navy-ships/a18141/towing-admiral-kuznetsov-video-tugboat/ (https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/navy-ships/a18141/towing-admiral-kuznetsov-video-tugboat/)
Oh dear. :-[
-
https://www.amnesty.org.uk/press-releases/ukraine-russian-soldiers-castration-video-must-face-justice (https://www.amnesty.org.uk/press-releases/ukraine-russian-soldiers-castration-video-must-face-justice)
-
As predicted,sanctions aren't affecting Russia, with their enormous shopping mall in Moscow doing a roaring trade last Sunday. This mall looks like any other shopping area except that it's a lot bigger in space with parking areas underneath the building instead of cluttering up roads etc.
As for buildings and highways, the Russians have got us beaten hands down-----because they work hard at what they do and also have pride in their towns and cities, no litter/graffiti/vandalism/disorder !
The few companies that have pulled out of Russia are of no detriment such as Starbucks for one, where Russia has formed its own coffee areas naming them just Stars. There are plenty of large McDonalds in various areas in and around Moscow and also St.Petersburg. These again are spotlessly clean places with automatic requests for meals all put in a machine,a table number given out then waiter/waitress service----all to save long queues.
Everything is so orderly, thus avoiding any clashes within the various public arenas.
A lot has opened my eyes toward their lifestyles and way of living, a far cry from a lot that we imagined it to be. People of different ethnicities live side by side and follow their own religions quietly with beautifully built churches,places of prayer adding grace and structure to the architecture surrounding them.
The reason that many Russians were/are hostile towards Gorbachev were his Western opinions which Russia didn't want creeping into their country.The old USSR was slowly fizzling out and it was seen as weak to allow Western values etc. after the years of suppression under previous leaders. Having Gorbachev as leader back then was akin to having Thatcher sell off council houses which left part of that legacy to this day, and in Russia under Gorbachev, people also lost jobs etc and were left with hardships.
You can have too much of a good thing, but also too much of a bad thing too. It's finding that happy medium. Prosperity without the greed and a fairness to all citizens.
Well said, Lookout. I think too many people see through the bullshit now. It ends when western populations remove the criminals from office. Huge protests all over Europe, barely covered in MSM, happening now. Blaming Russia and Putin for all of our ills is wearing thin and getting thinner.
-
https://unlimitedhangout.com/2022/07/investigative-reports/resetting-without-schwab-russia-the-fourth-industrial-revolution/
-
https://unlimitedhangout.com/2022/07/investigative-reports/resetting-without-schwab-russia-the-fourth-industrial-revolution/
Russia won't be leading the Fourth Industrial Revolution anytime soon..https://youtu.be/5XMrGlP6FcI
-
Russia won't be leading the Fourth Industrial Revolution anytime soon..https://youtu.be/5XMrGlP6FcI
Who do you imagine will lead the "Fourth Industrial Revolution"?
Any advantages the West had were exported away in the name of greed and profit. It is clear that the "Fourth industrial revolution" will be technology and science driven. This is a non controversial statement.
Any idea on which countries produce the most STEM (science, technology, engineering and maths) graduates? China, India, Russia, US and Iran. Most US Stem are foreign students. The combined west is nowhere on this.
Iran produce more STEM graduates than the UK does. We almost certainly outnumber them on Gender Studies graduates so we will have a more diverse Fourth Industrial Revolution, but the revolution will be driven from the East.
-
Who do you imagine will lead the "Fourth Industrial Revolution"?
Any advantages the West had were exported away in the name of greed and profit. It is clear that the "Fourth industrial revolution" will be technology and science driven. This is a non controversial statement.
Any idea on which countries produce the most STEM (science, technology, engineering and maths) graduates? China, India, Russia, US and Iran. Most US Stem are foreign students. The combined west is nowhere on this.
Iran produce more STEM graduates than the UK does. We almost certainly outnumber them on Gender Studies graduates so we will have a more diverse Fourth Industrial Revolution, but the revolution will be driven from the East.
It depends on where these technology graduates want to work and live. I suggest to you that the West has a more attractive environment and pays higher salaries.
-
It depends on where these technology graduates want to work and live. I suggest to you that the West has a more attractive environment and pays higher salaries.
That was true once, but is becoming less so. By exporting our manufacturing over the last few decades the whole Collective West has committed suicide. All of those countries mentioned (Iran, China, Russia) have a thriving industrial base around new technologies.
Any industrial base requires abundant, reliable and cheap energy to be competitive and successful. The West is cutting its own throat with its energy sanctions and New Green shit. The new world that is forming will not allow western domination by banking and finance and will be based on commodities, resources.
The Collective West has exported away any advantages it once had. We have grown rich exploiting the resources and labour of other poorer countries. Countries that have now been offered something better than Western exploitation that allows for their own development.
Our enemy is not Russia or China or Iran, it is the shady cabals that are the puppet-masters of our blackmailed, bribed, coerced and corrupt political and media class. Russia, China, Iran et al are also fully aware of who the real enemy is. The rest of the world has already taken sides, ignoring illegal western sanctions, and trading with Russia.
That is the real war, the economic war currently raging to wrest control of the global economy from the Western banking and corporate interests and guide the world into a truly multipolar future. Multiple huge deals between, India-Russia, Russia-Iran, China-Iran, all by passing the dollar and using their own currencies. The BRICS and ASEAN, SCO expanding and ever more trade bypassing the corrupted western systems. With nothing much to back them, western currencies will devalue to a level more in line with their real value. This will be determined by what it is backed by resource, commodity wise.
-
Over the last 5 days. Ukraine has broken through Russian lines and liberated over 800 square kilometers of territory near Karkhiv. And have retaken Izyum.
(https://thumbs.gfycat.com/WhichHelplessIslandcanary-size_restricted.gif)
-
Ukraine’s lightning advance near Kharkiv leaves Russian forces in disarray
https://www.ft.com/content/2a26a9d9-9866-4479-b2c5-aeee791e6e0e (https://www.ft.com/content/2a26a9d9-9866-4479-b2c5-aeee791e6e0e)
-
Suicidal, desperate attacks that will end as badly as the "Kherson counter offensive". The NATO planners behind this war are getting increasingly desperate in their attempts for a casus belli to more openly intervene. The advances by Ukraine will achieve no strategic objective, will inevitably be rolled back as they lack any air cover and will soon be caught in a cauldron when the salient is closed.
Russia is using minimal of its forces and as Putin said weeks ago, "We haven't started anything yet". They are using 10 to 15%(by most reasonable, fact based estimates) of their forces, have not mobilised for war but are decimating the NATO armed and trained proxy force of Ukraine.
Demilitarising and de-nazifying, as the Russians put it, is what it is. It is about decimating Ukraine militarily as a threat. Lines moving to and fro mean nothing. Ukraine are suffering horrendous losses or being demilitarised. If they come out and attack, as they have, it just means they are more likely to end up in the cauldrons that they specialise getting trapped in.
The Kherson counter offensive was celebrated in exactly the same way that this is now just over a week ago. That turned into a Turkey shoot with the trapped Ukrainian forces.
Shelling nuclear power plants and ill advised offensives are not the usual moves of a winning side. It reeks of desperation.
Things are about to escalate, in my opinion. NATO involvement is becoming more and more open and the threats and posturing towards Russia from NATO (particularly US and UK) countries is in danger of looking like an open declaration of war.
NATO seem desperate for escalation. Nothing like a war to blame the unavoidable economic collapse of the West on.
-
Kharkiv region is fully liberated
(https://i.redd.it/pf0dcfx01en91.jpg)
-
What will Russia's losses mean for Putin?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-62879367 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-62879367)
-
Russian City Deputies Petition for Putin's Resignation
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/09/12/russian-city-deputies-petition-for-putin-resignation-a78768 (https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/09/12/russian-city-deputies-petition-for-putin-resignation-a78768)
-
Us and them
And after all we're only ordinary men
Me
And you
God only knows
It's not what we would choose to do
Forward he cried from the rear
And the front rank died
And the general sat
And the lines on the map
Moved from side to side
(Pink Floyd - Us and Them from the Dark Side of the Moon)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=deU_uwlNpOo&ab_channel=HDPinkFloyd
Lines on the map moving from side to side mean nothing without considering the wider "strategic objectives" of all of the opposing factions involved in the Ukraine conflict and the wider economic and finance war that fuels it.
What are the strategic objectives of Russia?
What are the strategic objectives of Ukraine?
What about the rest of the world, who all have skin in this game?
Russia's objectives have been stated clearly enough and nothing that has happened so far contradicts those stated aims. Never have they stated any ambition to conquer and occupy territory. Russia have made clear that once Ukraine is demilitarised and any threat to Russia neutralised then each oblast can hold referenda to decide their own status.
The fact that Russia's objectives are being achieved is demonstrated in the ever more desperate and criminal escalations by the puppet Kiev regime at the behest of their real masters.
The most unfortunate aspect of the Kharkov withdrawal is those civilians seen as "collaborators" and the treatment and reprisals they are now receiving. The Ukrainian/NATO troops who have "liberated" Kharkov will soon be demilitarised, having left their fortified bunkers for the open steppe where they will be obliterated by Russian air and artillery power. As with every other "victory" they have celebrated over the last few months. Kherson being the last glorious victory that turned out to be a trap for the routed Ukrainians who found themselves in possession of new territory but suddenly cut off from support and supply lines. Minimal Russian losses and thousands of Ukrainian losses. Those behind this strategy are criminals and psychopaths caring nothing for the huge Ukrainian losses that are bound to result.
It isn't about capturing cities to Russia, it is demilitarisation and the removal of threat to their borders by NATO or their proxies. The oblasts can choose for themselves how to be governed.
Ukraine, or more accurately NATO's, strategic aims are wholly different to this. NATO are acting as usual on the behalf of corporate and financial interests. Zelensky and his TV production crew currently masquerading as the Ukrainian government have no agency. He was a comic actor and he still is.
Ukraine/NATO are adamant that those areas that have no desire to be part of what they consider a hostile government state run from Kiev (Crimea, Donbass, Luhansk + other probable oblasts), should not have the right of self determination. Ukraine is rich in natural wealth, not the least of which is their "black soil" agricultural land. The constitution makes illegal the privatising of this precious resource. Zelensky's criminal puppet regime sells it anyway to corporate behemoths Monsanto. Fossil fuel and mineral wealth. Western corporate interests again.
Crimea is also of huge strategic importance and value. The Ukrainian govt.(NATO) have no care for the population of Crimea though, just the land and the Black Sea access, from which they wish to threaten Russia. Who would support Crimeans being forced against their will to be governed by a regime they want no part of? Crimeans overwhelmingly and repeatedly have made clear their wishes.
https://mronline.org/2022/09/12/zelensky-is-literally-selling-ukraine-to-u-s-corporations-on-wall-street/
It is clear that the Ukrainian government is a criminal proxy of corporate and financial interests, of whom NATO are the military wing. They aren't really there to defend your freedom, David.
They have no interest in the wants and needs of the Ukrainian population, only the wants and needs of Blackrock, Monsanto, Exxon, Shell, Raytheon etc.
Russia offers referenda and self determination.
The Kiev regime currently sending conscripts to their certain death to defend this criminality, offers subjugation and the natural assets of the country sold to corporations.
There are more economically, politically and strategically significant events unfolding than the lines on a map moving side to side. There is a much wider picture and context, David. Ukraine is just the square on the board that has been chosen for now. You need to view the rest of the board.
-
https://sonar21.com/understanding-planning-orders-and-troop-movements-in-ukraine/
Ex CIA analyst Larry Johnson with a more balanced view of events.
-
Dude lasted 16 days.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-fires-berdnikov-commander-ukraine-war-kharkiv-b2165023.html? (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-fires-berdnikov-commander-ukraine-war-kharkiv-b2165023.html?)
-
Russian Death Toll in Ukraine Passes 50k as Putin's Army Pays High Price
https://www.newsweek.com/russia-ukraine-war-death-toll-50k-kherson-counteroffensive-1740202 (https://www.newsweek.com/russia-ukraine-war-death-toll-50k-kherson-counteroffensive-1740202)
-
"World must be ready for Russia’s disintegration, US general says"
https://www.yahoo.com/news/world-must-ready-russia-disintegration-172100396.html (https://www.yahoo.com/news/world-must-ready-russia-disintegration-172100396.html)
-
Ukraine war: Mass graves found in city recaptured from Russians - BBC News
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtNiXoKDc1U (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtNiXoKDc1U)
-
How much more evidence do the Russophiles need? https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/ivan-pechorin-the-latest-russian-oligarch-to-die-under-mysterious-circumstances/ss-AAXmizk?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=965de89cae004d39a6615db066c4b514#image=13
-
How much more evidence do the Russophiles need?
All facts contrary to their beliefs is "western propaganda".
-
heres what vlad has to say for himself https://english.pravda.ru/news/world/154029-putin_europeans/
-
heres what vlad has to say for himself https://english.pravda.ru/news/world/154029-putin_europeans/
It's blackmail pure and simple.
-
Id say Gringo is A.
Roch and NugNug are D.
(https://i.redd.it/9t98i8gb7mo91.jpg)
-
Id say Gringo is A.
Roch and NugNug are D.
(https://i.redd.it/9t98i8gb7mo91.jpg)
I'm not a genocide apologist. I just think the war was avoidable and the people playing the stakes at a high level behind the scenes chose war rather than peace. It's a tragedy.
Having distrust in Western media sources is not the same as having trust in Russian media sources. I don't believe in censorship. I think all media should be independent. When I read a UK newspaper, I don't want to be reading something that billionaires or MI5 have influenced. I want to be reading an honest investigation carried out without fear or favour, no matter how unpalatable the content may be to a UK audience.
-
I'm not a genocide apologist. I just think the war was avoidable and the people playing the stakes at a high level behind the scenes chose war rather than peace. It's a tragedy.
Having distrust in Western media sources is not the same as having trust in Russian media sources. I don't believe in censorship. I think all media should be independent. When I read a UK newspaper, I don't want to be reading something that billionaires or MI5 have influenced. I want to be reading an honest investigation carried out without fear or favour, no matter how unpalatable the content may be to a UK audience.
How could the war have been avoided? Russia already took Crimea in 2014 with no Western response, then Putin said he wasn't going to invade Ukraine. https://news.sky.com/story/ukraine-crisis-putin-says-military-drills-purely-defensive-and-not-a-threat-as-western-leaders-warn-invasion-imminent-12545284
-
How could the war have been avoided? Russia already took Crimea in 2014 with no Western response, then Putin said he wasn't going to invade Ukraine. https://news.sky.com/story/ukraine-crisis-putin-says-military-drills-purely-defensive-and-not-a-threat-as-western-leaders-warn-invasion-imminent-12545284
Who helped stir up things in Ukraine in the first place? It will have been David's old friends and compatriots.. USA.
-
In a mass burial near Izyum, the body of a man with traces of torture was discovered - his hands were tied and his scrotum was cut off.
https://graty.me/uk/news/u-masovomu-pohovanni-pid-izyumom-viyavili-tilo-cholovika-zi-slidami-tortur-u-nogo-zvyazani-ruki-ta-vidrizana-moshonka-oberezhno-czi-foto-dokazi-zlochinu/ (https://graty.me/uk/news/u-masovomu-pohovanni-pid-izyumom-viyavili-tilo-cholovika-zi-slidami-tortur-u-nogo-zvyazani-ruki-ta-vidrizana-moshonka-oberezhno-czi-foto-dokazi-zlochinu/)
Barbaric scum >:(
-
Who helped stir up things in Ukraine in the first place? It will have been David's old friends and compatriots.. USA.
I am not an American. Keep other forum members in your fantasy world to yourself.
-
I am not an American. Keep other forum members in your fantasy world to yourself.
Yeah, sure you're not David. I bet you're probably eating blueberry pie as we post.
-
Ukraine has been invaded. Do they have a right to self-defence?
-
unfortunute this keeps hapening https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34EMwP8xgFA
-
Ukraine has been invaded. Do they have a right to self-defence?
100% they do. And if Russia fall short, it's kind of tough shit on them isn't it. But.. could it have all been prevented? How long has it been playing out behind the scenes.. festering? Ukraine could have remained a buffer state. Would the USA allow Mexico to join an alliance between Russia, China, North Korea, Iran?
-
Does David ever protest that there were no war crimes tribunals for his country's actions in Vietnam? He's strangely quiet about the slaughter of civilians over there. As he is for Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya etc.
-
Does David ever protest that there were no war crimes tribunals for his country's actions in Vietnam?
Since my country was not involved in Vietnam I don't expect there to be any. ::)
-
"Russian President Vladimir Putin has announced that 300,000 reservists will be drafted into the army in a partial mobilisation, as he warned West he was not "bluffing" over nuclear weapons."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/09/21/ukraine-news-russia-war-putin-counter-offensive-mobilisation/ (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/09/21/ukraine-news-russia-war-putin-counter-offensive-mobilisation/)
-
"Russian President Vladimir Putin has announced that 300,000 reservists will be drafted into the army in a partial mobilisation, as he warned West he was not "bluffing" over nuclear weapons."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/09/21/ukraine-news-russia-war-putin-counter-offensive-mobilisation/ (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/09/21/ukraine-news-russia-war-putin-counter-offensive-mobilisation/)
Are you able to give us some insight in to what the US response might be to this? How will ordinary Americans, from Utah to Texas and from Maine to New Mexico view this? 😏
-
Are you able to give us some insight in to what the US response might be to this? How will ordinary Americans, from Utah to Texas and from Maine to New Mexico view this? 😏
I suspect quiet a few (specially in Texas) are category C
(https://i.redd.it/9t98i8gb7mo91.jpg)
-
Former head of Moscow Aviation Institute Anatoliy Geraschenko died as result of "falling from the high altitude inside institute"
https://russia.liveuamap.com/en/2022/21-september-former-head-of-moscow-aviation-institute-anatoliy (https://russia.liveuamap.com/en/2022/21-september-former-head-of-moscow-aviation-institute-anatoliy)
This is getting comical now. Last week another one of Putins cronies died from "falling off a boat" and now this guy falls down the stairs.
-
Former head of Moscow Aviation Institute Anatoliy Geraschenko died as result of "falling from the high altitude inside institute"
https://russia.liveuamap.com/en/2022/21-september-former-head-of-moscow-aviation-institute-anatoliy (https://russia.liveuamap.com/en/2022/21-september-former-head-of-moscow-aviation-institute-anatoliy)
This is getting comical now. Last week another one of Putins cronies died from "falling off a boat" and now this guy falls down the stairs.
As Cambridge Cutie might say... Accidents do happen.
-
As Cambridge Cutie might say... Accidents do happen.
(https://media1.giphy.com/media/l2Je3e7uIVOJTbJo4/giphy.gif)
-
"Russian President Vladimir Putin has announced that 300,000 reservists will be drafted into the army in a partial mobilisation, as he warned West he was not "bluffing" over nuclear weapons."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/09/21/ukraine-news-russia-war-putin-counter-offensive-mobilisation/ (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/09/21/ukraine-news-russia-war-putin-counter-offensive-mobilisation/)
It'll look like Dad's Army using reservists. Many are old and past it.
-
It'll look like Dad's Army using reservists. Many are old and past it.
It might help if we were allowed Russian translators on our TV. Unfortunately, we are treated like idiots. Mind you, taken at face value, it does look like Russia is on the back foot. I think it's pay back for their intervention in Syria, which made US/UK look stupid.
-
Russians flee to border after military call-up
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-62996212 (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-62996212)
-
Russians flee to border after military call-up
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-62996212 (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-62996212)
They probably don't want to fight a highly motivated Ukrainian army that no doubt has embedded NATO specialists and a tonne of western arms, plus all the satellite intelligence and decryption capabilities that's on offer.
Russia have seriously contributed to the making of their own trap. I can't see them getting anything out of this that's worth the price they've paid in destroyed manpower, equipment and economic costs. Then there's the huge questions now around their credibility and effectiveness as a cohesive fighting force. Then there's war crimes accusations. Can't see it ending well for Putin or Russia - but I think a cornered animal is highly dangerous. And let's face it, they will definitely have some wunderwaffen stored away somewhere.
-
Jordan Peterson on Putin..
https://youtu.be/BnxxELn00gk
-
It might help if we were allowed Russian translators on our TV. Unfortunately, we are treated like idiots. Mind you, taken at face value, it does look like Russia is on the back foot. I think it's pay back for their intervention in Syria, which made US/UK look stupid.
https://thesaker.is/address-by-the-president-of-the-russian-federation/
Putin's full address, with subtitles, here.
NATO is in its death throes. The growth of the SCO (Shanghai Co-operation Org.) BRICS+, OBOR(one belt one road) and many other collaborations in the Global South and East, eg. the Chinese developments and investments in Africa offer a win win deal rather than Western imperialism and looting backed by NATO threats. They are winning and will win. It is not Russia against Ukraine, But NATO against Russia and the rest of the world.
The exploitative Western system is dead. 80%+ of the world ignoring illegal Western sanctions and trading with Russia.
Shoigu's speech(also subtitled), following Putin below;
https://thesaker.is/sergei-shoigu-full-speech-in-english-on-september-21-2022/
Plenty more on there to chew on if you want honest and relevant commentary on world events. The ones that aren't discussed or even referred to if you watch any mainstream media in this country, or the west in general.
Putin's words can be heard in context. See if you can tell the difference between that and the hysterical "reporting" from our "News outlets".
-
https://thesaker.is/address-by-the-president-of-the-russian-federation/
Putin's full address, with subtitles, here.
NATO is in its death throes. The growth of the SCO (Shanghai Co-operation Org.) BRICS+, OBOR(one belt one road) and many other collaborations in the Global South and East, eg. the Chinese developments and investments in Africa offer a win win deal rather than Western imperialism and looting backed by NATO threats. They are winning and will win. It is not Russia against Ukraine, But NATO against Russia and the rest of the world.
The exploitative Western system is dead. 80%+ of the world ignoring illegal Western sanctions and trading with Russia.
Shoigu's speech(also subtitled), following Putin below;
https://thesaker.is/sergei-shoigu-full-speech-in-english-on-september-21-2022/
Plenty more on there to chew on if you want honest and relevant commentary on world events. The ones that aren't discussed or even referred to if you watch any mainstream media in this country, or the west in general.
Putin's words can be heard in context. See if you can tell the difference between that and the hysterical "reporting" from our "News outlets".
Thanks for the links 👍
-
"After Vladimir Putin announced a mobilization of reservists for Russia’s war in Ukraine, prices for international flights departing Russia this week skyrocketed and nearly every flight leaving Moscow or St. Petersburg sold out through the weekend"
https://www.flightradar24.com/blog/where-are-flights-leaving-russia-going/ (https://www.flightradar24.com/blog/where-are-flights-leaving-russia-going/)
-
https://thesaker.is/address-by-the-president-of-the-russian-federation/
Putin's full address, with subtitles, here.
NATO is in its death throes. The growth of the SCO (Shanghai Co-operation Org.) BRICS+, OBOR(one belt one road) and many other collaborations in the Global South and East, eg. the Chinese developments and investments in Africa offer a win win deal rather than Western imperialism and looting backed by NATO threats. They are winning and will win. It is not Russia against Ukraine, But NATO against Russia and the rest of the world.
The exploitative Western system is dead. 80%+ of the world ignoring illegal Western sanctions and trading with Russia.
Shoigu's speech(also subtitled), following Putin below;
https://thesaker.is/sergei-shoigu-full-speech-in-english-on-september-21-2022/
Plenty more on there to chew on if you want honest and relevant commentary on world events. The ones that aren't discussed or even referred to if you watch any mainstream media in this country, or the west in general.
Putin's words can be heard in context. See if you can tell the difference between that and the hysterical "reporting" from our "News outlets".
There is an alternative point of view. https://youtu.be/JkWtSeN_Zuo
-
There is an alternative point of view. https://youtu.be/JkWtSeN_Zuo
The rush for the border to escape mobilisation is just more idiotic propaganda. The videos that I linked to weren't a point of view. They were simply the unedited speeches of Putin and Shoigu, from which you can form your own view.
The video that you linked to is just someone bullshitting. AP themselves have even debunked the Finland/Russia border lies. They are countless videos of Russians en masse going to the recruiting stations to volunteer. The Chechnians were mobilising in their thousands. Believe the hopium and copium if you like but the reality is that the Russians are way more united and behind their president and armed forces than any NATO country.
The videos of Putin and Shoigu's speeches was a reply to Roch who had mentioned that the "lack of Russian translator on our TV" was not helpful. It was simply translated speeches, in full and in context. Your alternative link was exactly what Roch was taking issue with.
The narrative that Russians are fleeing, that you have been fed by your narrative managers, is demonstrably false. Many more are flocking to the recruiting centres to volunteer than are fleeing, by several magnitudes.
You would do better to view the speeches and discuss them rather than the ramblings of "Joe Blogs" the you-tuber.
-
Thanks for the links 👍
Do you think that the lack of Russian translators is a feature or a bug?
The banning of Russian media, however many months ago, was a notice of intent that lies were now to be the order of the day.
Truth-tellers aren't afraid of lies.
Liars are afraid of the truth.
The banning of "Russian misinformation and lies" in our Orwellian western dystopian world, means the banning of "Russian information and truth".
"War is peace, slavery is freedom and ignorance is strength."
-
The rush for the border to escape mobilisation is just more idiotic propaganda. The videos that I linked to weren't a point of view. They were simply the unedited speeches of Putin and Shoigu, from which you can form your own view.
The video that you linked to is just someone bullshitting. AP themselves have even debunked the Finland/Russia border lies. They are countless videos of Russians en masse going to the recruiting stations to volunteer. The Chechnians were mobilising in their thousands. Believe the hopium and copium if you like but the reality is that the Russians are way more united and behind their president and armed forces than any NATO country.
The videos of Putin and Shoigu's speeches was a reply to Roch who had mentioned that the "lack of Russian translator on our TV" was not helpful. It was simply translated speeches, in full and in context. Your alternative link was exactly what Roch was taking issue with.
The narrative that Russians are fleeing, that you have been fed by your narrative managers, is demonstrably false. Many more are flocking to the recruiting centres to volunteer than are fleeing, by several magnitudes.
You would do better to view the speeches and discuss them rather than the ramblings of "Joe Blogs" the you-tuber.
It's easy to mouth off when you control the mass media in a one-party state.
-
It's easy to mouth off when you control the mass media in a one-party state.
David, and maybe even yourself have often posted articles from Russian publications such as Moscow Times which are always critical of the government and Putin. They are all shadily funded western propaganda fronts and basically western propaganda but give the lie to the bullshit that you believe.
Russia is not a one party state by any interpretation. You are a lost cause.
-
David, and maybe even yourself have often posted articles from Russian publications such as Moscow Times which are always critical of the government and Putin. They are all shadily funded western propaganda fronts and basically western propaganda but give the lie to the bullshit that you believe.
Russia is not a one party state by any interpretation. You are a lost cause.
It is so. They've fiddled the elections and who gets the Presidency for donkey's years now.
-
Europe urged to accept Russians fleeing military draft as border crossings surge
https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2022/sep/24/russia-ukraine-war-latest-updates-kyiv-says-residents-coerced-to-vote-as-moscow-holds-referendums-in-parts-of-ukraine (https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2022/sep/24/russia-ukraine-war-latest-updates-kyiv-says-residents-coerced-to-vote-as-moscow-holds-referendums-in-parts-of-ukraine)
-
Truth-tellers aren't afraid of lies.
Liars are afraid of the truth.
2,987 websites have been blocked in Russia since Feb 24 due to content relating to the invasion of Ukraine.
https://www.top10vpn.com/research/websites-blocked-in-russia/ (https://www.top10vpn.com/research/websites-blocked-in-russia/)
touché gringo touché 👏 👏
-
There is no doubt about which side is the most censorious. The west undoubtedly started the censorship war by banning all Russia media.
Russian media don't censor or misrepresent western leaders. This should tell all you need to know. If Putin's words and speeches were reported honestly and in full context in the West, then Western populations would realise the duplicity of their own leaders and consign them to the historical footnote that this bunch of chancers and charlatans merit.
-
It is so. They've fiddled the elections and who gets the Presidency for donkey's years now.
Who do you imagine the Russians support in a "non fiddled election", Steve.
Navalny's mob? He is utterly insignificant in Russia. About 1 or 2% support.
The main opposition to Putin's United Russia party are the Communist Party or is that fiddled too?
What are your thoughts on this?
-
Who do you imagine the Russians support in a "non fiddled election", Steve.
Navalny's mob? He is utterly insignificant in Russia. About 1 or 2% support.
The main opposition to Putin's United Russia party are the Communist Party or is that fiddled too?
What are your thoughts on this?
My thoughts? Russians are new to democracy. The mass media is state-controlled. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/10/world/europe/putin-navalny-russian-opposition-crackdown.html
I rest my case. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-51120166
-
In case you have to log in to read, the article is here:
In Shadow of Navalny Case, What’s Left of the Russian Opposition?
Russian domestic politics took a flint-hard turn this year and much of the opposition leadership is now in exile or prison.
Give this article
A mural showing the opposition leader Aleksei A. Navalny is painted over in St. Petersburg last month.
A mural showing the opposition leader Aleksei A. Navalny is painted over in St. Petersburg last month.Credit...Anton Vaganov/Reuters
Andrew E. Kramer
By Andrew E. Kramer
Published June 10, 2021
Updated Oct. 20, 2021
Sign up for the Russia-Ukraine War Briefing. Every evening, we'll send you a summary of the day's biggest news. Get it sent to your inbox.
MOSCOW — A legal ban on Russia’s leading opposition group. The attempted assassination of a Kremlin critic followed by his imprisonment. Near-blanket prohibitions on street protests. A tightening crackdown on independent media.
Russian domestic politics have taken a hard turn over the past year — perhaps, as some say, because of the leadership’s fear of economic discontent or, as others suggest, a consolidation of power in the Kremlin by a clan of security officials.
President Biden has said he will object to the crackdown inside Russia when he meets with President Vladimir V. Putin for the two leaders’ first summit meeting, next week in Geneva.
Mr. Putin, for his part, has said Russia’s domestic affairs are not open for discussion, and in any case not so different from the political churn in other countries.
“Views on our political system can differ,” Mr. Putin told the heads of international news agencies last week. “Just give us the right, please, to determine how to organize this part of our life.”
What is the Russian opposition?
Image
Mr. Navalny, speaking from court in Moscow in February, narrowly survived a poisoning attempt last year.
Mr. Navalny, speaking from court in Moscow in February, narrowly survived a poisoning attempt last year.Credit...Alexander Zemlianichenko/Associated Press
Before this year, Russia’s political system had been described as “soft authoritarianism.” It allowed space for criticism and a mostly free internet, in contrast to China, but left no viable path for opposition figures to win power through elections.
Russian analysts and politicians alike had divided the opposition into two categories: “systemic” and “non-systemic.”
The “systemic” opposition comprises parties in Parliament widely understood to be controlled behind the scenes by Mr. Putin’s domestic political advisers in the Kremlin.
They champion local causes and even campaign aggressively against politicians in the governing party in local, regional and parliamentary elections. Politicians in these parties have at times swiveled to boldly challenge the Kremlin — but this typically leads to their expulsion from the parties, arrest or exile.
The smaller, beleaguered “non-systemic” opposition, in contrast, openly has challenged Mr. Putin’s rule and called for him to be voted out of office. Its members have struggled to get candidates on the ballot and have faced blacklisting by state media.
What changed this year was a sweeping away of the “non-systemic” opposition and its leader, Aleksei A. Navalny, who narrowly survived a poisoning attempt last year and was subsequently imprisoned.
When criticized, how does the Kremlin respond?
Image
Mr. Putin told heads of international news agencies last week that Russia’s domestic affairs are not open for discussion.
Mr. Putin told heads of international news agencies last week that Russia’s domestic affairs are not open for discussion.Credit...Pool photo by Vladimir Smirnov
Russian government officials typically point to the nominal opposition parties in Parliament that in fact support Mr. Putin. They have flourished. These parties hold 114 seats in Russia’s 450-seat Parliament.
The Communist Party, for example, openly espouses an even more thorough return to Soviet-style rule. The Liberal Democratic Party and its lightning-rod leader, Vladimir Zhirinovsky, promote a populist, nationalist agenda.
Such “systemic” parties also fill right-wing and pro-business niches and even promote policies that overlap with those promoted by the repressed true opposition.
A new party called New People, for example, has promoted reforms appealing to Russia’s emerging, urban middle class in much the same way Mr. Navalny’s group has, with the distinction that it does not directly criticize Mr. Putin or call for an end to his more than 20-year rule as president or prime minister.
In his comments to news agencies before the Geneva meeting, Mr. Putin suggested that he saw signs of the marginalization of opposition in America, too.
“Take a look at the sad events in the United States where people refused to accept the election results and stormed the Congress,” Mr. Putin said. “Why is it only our non-systemic opposition that you are interested in?”
What do opposition figures face in Russia?
Image
The opposition activist Vladimir Kara-Murza in Moscow in 2016. He was poisoned twice, which caused comas that lasted days and left him with neurological ailments.
The opposition activist Vladimir Kara-Murza in Moscow in 2016. He was poisoned twice, which caused comas that lasted days and left him with neurological ailments.Credit...Dmitri Beliakov/Associated Press
Prosecutors had for years harried Mr. Navalny and other opposition leaders and detained them for short terms under pretexts such as violation of rules on public gatherings or under laws unrelated to their political activities.
These legal screws have tightened for years. Mr. Navalny, for example, faced so many serial detentions for minor violations that once he walked out of jail to find police officers waiting to arrest him on another charge.
Behind the scenes, according to Western governments and rights groups, the Kremlin had gone further: assassinating or driving into exile journalists, dissidents and leaders of the political opposition.
The opposition activist Vladimir Kara-Murza, for example, was twice poisoned with still undetermined toxins that sent him into comas that lasted days, and left him with lingering neurological ailments.
Mr. Navalny narrowly survived an assassination attempt with a chemical weapon last summer. In 2015, another opposition leader and a former first deputy prime minister of Russia, Boris Y. Nemtsov, was shot and killed with a pistol. Officials deny any role in those actions.
Does the opposition stand a chance of unseating Mr. Putin?
Image
A supporter of Mr. Navalny is arrested during a demonstration in St. Petersburg in February.
A supporter of Mr. Navalny is arrested during a demonstration in St. Petersburg in February.Credit...Anatoly Maltsev/EPA, via Shutterstock
Not in the near future. Members of the opposition view the short-term prospects for political change as limited, but they keep alive the post-Soviet promise of a democratic Russia.
Midlevel opposition figures, including several in Mr. Navalny’s organization, remain active and defiant. Mr. Navalny himself chose imprisonment in Russia over exile when he returned from medical treatment in Germany this year, facing certain arrest.
A severe blow to Mr. Navalny’s movement came on the eve of the summit between Mr. Putin and Mr. Biden, all but certainly occurring with the approval of the Kremlin, in a signal that Mr. Putin will not bow to foreign pressure. A court in Moscow this week banned Mr. Navalny’s nationwide political organization as extremist.
The move will drive anyone supporting Mr. Navalny to cease their political activities or go underground or into exile. This legal dismantlement of an opposition group marked a new phase of a crackdown on dissent, relying on a formal process rather than on pretexts as before.
Mr. Putin has remained popular with many Russians, though independent polling has shown some slump in his ratings beginning in 2018, as the economy stagnated.
Hard-liners then sought to guarantee stability with an iron fist, some analysts say, a task made more urgent last year by the possibility of pandemic-related unrest and the looming parliamentary elections scheduled for September.
Still, the current crackdown, expected to come up at the summit meeting next week, is not a sharp break with history: Russia held its last national election deemed by international observers to be free and fair nearly 20 years ago, with a parliamentary vote in 2002.
-
It is so. They've fiddled the elections and who gets the Presidency for donkey's years now.
Do you think that elections in the UK, US or any western "democracy" are democratic? Do our systems of representation fairly represent voting intentions? Our systems are fiddled and have been for years to deny the will of the people and to offer a fake choice as an illusion of democracy. Pepsi or Coke?
Overwhelming majorities in the UK on 40% or less of votes cast. All kinds of shenanigans going on with postal votes. No choice or debate in foreign policy matters.
We should mend our own undemocratic, unrepresentative and militarily aggressive governments before worrying about others.
Your view of the UK/US NATO being benevolent democracy and freedom spreaders is long discredited. Only the hopelessly naive try to mount the Western "moral high ground" now. We don't get to berate the world with our fake, bullshit, hypocritical moralising anymore.
-
Do you think that elections in the UK, US or any western "democracy" are democratic? Do our systems of representation fairly represent voting intentions? Our systems are fiddled and have been for years to deny the will of the people and to offer a fake choice as an illusion of democracy. Pepsi or Coke?
Overwhelming majorities in the UK on 40% or less of votes cast. All kinds of shenanigans going on with postal votes. No choice or debate in foreign policy matters.
We should mend our own undemocratic, unrepresentative and militarily aggressive governments before worrying about others.
Your view of the UK/US NATO being benevolent democracy and freedom spreaders is long discredited. Only the hopelessly naive try to mount the Western "moral high ground" now. We don't get to berate the world with our fake, bullshit, hypocritical moralising anymore.
They are far more democratic than Russia or China. Our system got rid of Boris Johnson, who may well have turned out to be another Richard Nixon. But our system worked and he was dispatched politically. We had a choice in two General Elections of voting for Jeremy Corbyn. He was rejected in both. https://news.sky.com/story/general-election-evidence-shows-electoral-fraud-not-a-danger-to-british-democracy-11867533
-
My thoughts? Russians are new to democracy. The mass media is state-controlled. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/10/world/europe/putin-navalny-russian-opposition-crackdown.html
I rest my case. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-51120166
How much support do you imagine Navalny has?
He is utterly irrelevant in Russia. Do you not get the irony of resting your case of Russian media being state controlled by linking to the UK government controlled BBC?
Not your thoughts either are they? Funny how your "thoughts" so often match UK government controlled BBC.
The obsession with Navalny of these outlets is a big clue as to the seriousness with which their articles should be taken. That you don't know any of this is an indication of how serious your views, such as they can be discerned, should be taken.
You have no understanding of Russian politics if you are writing about or considering Navalny.
How serious would you take Russian media that regarded Tommy Robinson as the opposition to the UK government?
That would be the equivalent of taking Navalny seriously. Do you not know who the main opposition voices in Russia are? It's the Communists! Why don't western media talk to them if they want to talk to the Russian opposition?
Do you wonder why the Communists are not given the same platform as nobody Navalny in western media? Any ideas as to why the BBC, NYT and others you link to don't write articles about the main opposition, the Communist party? but do puff pieces on irrelevant Navalny? It's a mystery isn't it, Steve?
-
How much support do you imagine Navalny has?
He is utterly irrelevant in Russia. Do you not get the irony of resting your case of Russian media being state controlled by linking to the UK government controlled BBC?
Not your thoughts either are they? Funny how your "thoughts" so often match UK government controlled BBC.
The obsession with Navalny of these outlets is a big clue as to the seriousness with which their articles should be taken. That you don't know any of this is an indication of how serious your views, such as they can be discerned, should be taken.
You have no understanding of Russian politics if you are writing about or considering Navalny.
How serious would you take Russian media that regarded Tommy Robinson as the opposition to the UK government?
That would be the equivalent of taking Navalny seriously. Do you not know who the main opposition voices in Russia are? It's the Communists! Why don't western media talk to them if they want to talk to the Russian opposition?
Do you wonder why the Communists are not given the same platform as nobody Navalny in western media? Any ideas as to why the BBC, NYT and others you link to don't write articles about the main opposition, the Communist party? but do puff pieces on irrelevant Navalny? It's a mystery isn't it, Steve?
He's not allowed to gain traction though, is he? Don't you see a pattern here? https://youtu.be/vM04zNbsaJg
-
My thoughts? Russians are new to democracy. The mass media is state-controlled. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/10/world/europe/putin-navalny-russian-opposition-crackdown.html
I rest my case. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-51120166
When you reside in a country (UK) that still holds Julian Assange in a maximum security prison, you have forfeited your right to criticise press freedoms elsewhere.
-
He's not allowed to gain traction though, is he? Don't you see a pattern here? https://youtu.be/vM04zNbsaJg
Do you know his political views? Look them up.
He is a crook, fraudster, grifter and a tool of western agencies. This has been long apparent. His lack of traction is because of all of this. The Communist Party is the main opposition but that is inconvenient for the western "narrative" hence their promotion of nobodies like Navalny.
-
They are far more democratic than Russia or China. Our system got rid of Boris Johnson, who may well have turned out to be another Richard Nixon. But our system worked and he was dispatched politically. We had a choice in two General Elections of voting for Jeremy Corbyn. He was rejected in both. https://news.sky.com/story/general-election-evidence-shows-electoral-fraud-not-a-danger-to-british-democracy-11867533
Not really as we now have Liz Truss at the helm voted in by a small band of right wing extremists who have given her a mandate to implement policies that imo could well see the UK end up on par with Greece post financial crisis 07/08 :'(
-
Not really as we now have Liz Truss at the helm voted in by a small band of right wing extremists who have given her a mandate to implement policies that imo could well see the UK end up on par with Greece post financial crisis 07/08 :'(
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvH7cgbdazU&ab_channel=InContext
Seems she can't wait to launch nuclear weapons. How the f?@* did our political system become such a clown show? These people are not serious public servants and officials.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvH7cgbdazU&ab_channel=InContext
Seems she can't wait to launch nuclear weapons. How the f?@* did our political system become such a clown show? These people are not serious public servants and officials.
She has to say that, or the deterrent has no effect.
-
She has to say that, or the deterrent has no effect.
She said that in answer to the question about how she would feel. Truss is not serious states-person. Very few amongst our political class are. A serious person would not have answered as she did.
-
She said that in answer to the question about how she would feel. Truss is not serious states-person. Very few amongst our political class are. A serious person would not have answered as she did.
Of course Russians have feelings too, don't they..https://youtu.be/r4eJvwtQJu4
-
Not really as we now have Liz Truss at the helm voted in by a small band of right wing extremists who have given her a mandate to implement policies that imo could well see the UK end up on par with Greece post financial crisis 07/08 :'(
We live in a strange country. I can't fathom how there's not a serious backlash. I know it's dangerous to advocate for action in the streets, but when you look at what's happening in Iran right now, sometimes it's justified. I look at the courage being shown by the unions over here, and their confidence when being fielded stupid questions by seemingly pre-programmed interviewers. The public seems to have picked up on this. Yet I know that if there is a slight bounce in growth as a result of the budget, much of the press will tout the claim that things are looking up with Truss.. and a huge amount of voters will likely be swayed by it. It's as if the voters seem just as pre-programmed as the media interviewers.
-
The doom-mongers are out in force this weekend. https://facts4eu.org/news/2019_oct_economic_power#
-
5km to 15km queues of Russian cars have formed at the Kazak border also.
https://news.err.ee/1608726697/estonia-ambassador-queues-at-some-kazakh-russian-border-points (https://news.err.ee/1608726697/estonia-ambassador-queues-at-some-kazakh-russian-border-points)
-
Of course Russians have feelings too, don't they..https://youtu.be/r4eJvwtQJu4
Gringo probably creamed his pants while watching that.
-
A vote at gunpoint. https://www.foxnews.com/world/putin-losing-war-ukraine-forcing-annexation-referendum-secure-political-victory-keane-says
-
5km and 15km queues of Russian cars have formed at the Kazak border also.
https://news.err.ee/1608726697/estonia-ambassador-queues-at-some-kazakh-russian-border-points (https://news.err.ee/1608726697/estonia-ambassador-queues-at-some-kazakh-russian-border-points)
Do you really believe this drivel? AP debunked the Finland border nonsense themselves, admitting that the photos were from weeks beforehand and that the situation at the border was normal according to Finnish officials. You should be embarrassed being duped by such obvious narrative management.
The truth that the Russians are fully behind their country and president is undeniable. Far from Russians fleeing they are volunteering to be among those mobilised. There are queues and masses of men turning up voluntarily. Keep drinking the copium if you must but Russia win this war and NATO can do nothing about it. There has never been a doubt since Russia started the SMO about how this concludes. To believe otherwise is only an indication of limited reading and believing too much of the increasingly hysterical propaganda from the controlled western MSM.
Indian Minister of Foreign Affairs addressing the UNGA below;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-e_secPfW7U&ab_channel=UnitedNations
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi addressing the General Assembly
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdmKEx8mQWQ&ab_channel=UnitedNations
Lavrov savaging the West at General Assembly;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yats4seJaW0&ab_channel=FRANCE24English
It's intended as a warning rather than an instruction but it seems to be your motto;
War is peace,
Slavery is freedom,
Ignorance is strength
-
Russian SU-30 shot down by Ukrainian Forces in Kharkiv earlier today.
https://v.redd.it/fgzyhsx54xp91/DASH_720.mp4 (https://v.redd.it/fgzyhsx54xp91/DASH_720.mp4)
-
Do you really believe this drivel? AP debunked the Finland border nonsense themselves, admitting that the photos were from weeks beforehand and that the situation at the border was normal according to Finnish officials. You should be embarrassed being duped by such obvious narrative management.
The truth that the Russians are fully behind their country and president is undeniable. Far from Russians fleeing they are volunteering to be among those mobilised. There are queues and masses of men turning up voluntarily. Keep drinking the copium if you must but Russia win this war and NATO can do nothing about it. There has never been a doubt since Russia started the SMO about how this concludes. To believe otherwise is only an indication of limited reading and believing too much of the increasingly hysterical propaganda from the controlled western MSM.
Indian Minister of Foreign Affairs addressing the UNGA below;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-e_secPfW7U&ab_channel=UnitedNations
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi addressing the General Assembly
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdmKEx8mQWQ&ab_channel=UnitedNations
Lavrov savaging the West at General Assembly;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yats4seJaW0&ab_channel=FRANCE24English
It's intended as a warning rather than an instruction but it seems to be your motto;
War is peace,
Slavery is freedom,
Ignorance is strength
Nobody is buying your Tankie BS Gringo. All you are achieving on this thread is making an even bigger idiot out of yourself than you have over the last 7 years.
Posting a video of Lavrov? That's the same guy who said 7 months ago that Russia wasn't going to attack Ukraine. :)) :)) :))
-
Do you really believe this drivel? AP debunked the Finland border nonsense themselves, admitting that the photos were from weeks beforehand and that the situation at the border was normal according to Finnish officials. You should be embarrassed being duped by such obvious narrative management.
The truth that the Russians are fully behind their country and president is undeniable. Far from Russians fleeing they are volunteering to be among those mobilised. There are queues and masses of men turning up voluntarily. Keep drinking the copium if you must but Russia win this war and NATO can do nothing about it. There has never been a doubt since Russia started the SMO about how this concludes. To believe otherwise is only an indication of limited reading and believing too much of the increasingly hysterical propaganda from the controlled western MSM.
Indian Minister of Foreign Affairs addressing the UNGA below;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-e_secPfW7U&ab_channel=UnitedNations
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi addressing the General Assembly
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdmKEx8mQWQ&ab_channel=UnitedNations
Lavrov savaging the West at General Assembly;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yats4seJaW0&ab_channel=FRANCE24English
It's intended as a warning rather than an instruction but it seems to be your motto;
War is peace,
Slavery is freedom,
Ignorance is strength
Every time Lavrov appears he unites the West. China has no credibility whatsoever due to its human rights record on the Uighurs. India has benefitted from the war in Ukraine, and has its own problems. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/southasia/2019/05/10/the-new-indian-election-free-but-not-fair/
-
Unites the West?
Lavrov, whether you like it or not, is uniting everybody else against the rapidly diminishing west.
-
🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡
(https://media11.s-nbcnews.com/i/mpx/2704722219/2022_05/1651519650234_n_mitchell_ukraine_220502_1920x1080-ax1e41.jpg)
🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡
-
Unites the West?
Lavrov, whether you like it or not, is uniting everybody else against the rapidly diminishing west.
..and everyone else includes Iran I suppose. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/mahsa-amini-was-tortured-and-insulted-by-police-before-death-in-iran/ar-AA12ea66?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=3b5e8dfdfa2e49e5b819c4c7aecc1f43
-
..and everyone else includes Iran I suppose. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/mahsa-amini-was-tortured-and-insulted-by-police-before-death-in-iran/ar-AA12ea66?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=3b5e8dfdfa2e49e5b819c4c7aecc1f43
And the Saudi's, Brazil, Argentina, most of South America in fact, South Africa as well as almost the entirety of the African continent. Asia almost in its entirety. All of the countries who have the oil, gas, minerals, precious metals, ores, rare earths and everything else that the Western criminal enterprises masquerading as governments need to steal or exploit for their enterprise to continue are with Russia and their vision for a new multipolar world free of Western aggression and criminality.
BRICS+, SCO, ASEAN, trading in sovereign currencies backed by resources to end the abuse of the dollar as world reserve currency.
NATO are the ultimate enforcers of this criminal endeavour and have been called out and found wanting. The western ponzi scheme is over. That is what all the noise is about. The nukes threat is emanating from the West. They have been attempting a false flag at the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant for months with their shelling which they blame on Russians shelling themselves. NATO are desperate, have no cards left to play and only have their speciality false flag move left.(Gulf of Tonkin, 9/11, Syrian chemical attacks etc.)
The ROW is now so distrustful of the US and allies that it is doubtful that they would get much support or be believed.
The demonstrably untrue stories about Russians fleeing mobilisation, Russia losing are designed only to make the unwary believe that Russia would do something desperate. Western populations may fall for this but world leaders are fully aware of the arse handing that US/UK NATO are receiving.
-
While Gringo posts Tankie spam.
Zelensky naming the seven countries who voted against his speech and UN reaction.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/xnt4rn/zelensky_naming_the_seven_countries_who_voted/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/xnt4rn/zelensky_naming_the_seven_countries_who_voted/)
-
Russian are now forced to sign this document to flee to Georgia :))
(https://preview.redd.it/kxfzrmq2c2q91.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=2b9bca03d2bcffda2e09b7a7d52543f7882f31ad)
(https://preview.redd.it/k2d5plq2c2q91.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=64377018fc00257f327b22fcbd5aa1ced5227c8d)
-
Russian man shoots officer drafting residents for war in Ukraine. Another man sets himself on fire as protests at Putin’s partial mobilisation continue.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/sep/26/russia-man-shoots-commander-drafting-residents-for-war-in-ukraine (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/sep/26/russia-man-shoots-commander-drafting-residents-for-war-in-ukraine)
Unfortunately for Gringo, both these events were caught on film.
-
Unwilling conscript set himself on fire in Ryazan Russia.
https://meduza.io/en/news/2022/09/26/unwilling-recruit-set-himself-on-fire-in-ryazan (https://meduza.io/en/news/2022/09/26/unwilling-recruit-set-himself-on-fire-in-ryazan)
https://youtu.be/eEclXlPwdDc?t=12 (https://youtu.be/eEclXlPwdDc?t=12)
-
Ukraine's 79th airborne brigade artillery destroying several Russian armoured vehicles and the aftermath
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/xoh1cz/ukraines_79th_airborne_brigade_artillery/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/xoh1cz/ukraines_79th_airborne_brigade_artillery/)
-
Anger builds amid Russia's military call up
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAzfOYDssko (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAzfOYDssko)
-
https://thesaker.is/foreign-minister-sergey-lavrovs-remarks-at-a-meeting-of-the-un-security-council-on-ukraine-new-york/
Lavrov speech to UNSC today above. A few highlights transcribed(in red) below. The whole thing worth a read becaise this is the sort of thing our media hides from us. Raises too many questions for which we have no answer. Hence the relentless one sided propaganda from our government and media and amplified by flag waving half-wits like David.
The crimes committed in Maidan Square in February 2014 have gone unpunished to this day. Those guilty of the monstrous tragedy in Odessa on May 2, 2014 have not been found and punished. During this tragedy, about 50 people were burned alive and killed in the local House of Trade Unions. The political assassinations of Oles Buzina, Pavel Sheremet and other public figures and journalists are in the same category. Despite this, attempts are being made to impose on us a completely different narrative about Russian aggression as the prime cause for these problems.
For those seemingly bothered by the partial Russian mobilisation and what it indicates. As mentioned below, Ukraine has carried out total mobilisation. Many of those Ukrainian refugees are in reality males fleeing the draft. There was plenty of footage of Ukrainian press gangs and men being stopped fleeing the country. Ukraine is on its third or fourth wave of mobilisation. Women and old men. NATO propaganda neglects to mention any of this.
They called all those who objected to the results of the coup terrorists. For eight years, the Kiev regime conducted a “military operation” against peaceful civilians in Donbass. For a long time now, Ukraine has been carrying out the total mobilisation of adults, including women, to recruit them into nationalist battalions and the Ukrainian armed forces.
The following demonstrates the duplicity of Ukraine and its Western sponsors. They never intended to fulfil the Minsk accords and used them cynically to buy time and implement Plan B(the military brutally subduing and killing their own.
At some point, when he got tired of pretending, Zelensky said that the only thing the Minsk Package of Measures was needed for was to keep the sanctions on Russia in place. His predecessor in office and co-author of the Minsk agreements, Poroshenko, was even more outspoken. A couple of months ago, he publicly and proudly stated that neither he nor anyone in Ukraine planned on fulfilling the agreements he had signed. They were needed only to buy time to receive weapons from the Western countries for war with the Russian Federation. Ukraine’s National Security and Defence Council Secretary Aleksey Danilov spoke along the same lines.
The Kiev regime owes its impunity to its Western curators, primarily Germany and France, and of course, the United States. Instead of pressing Kiev into complying with the Minsk agreements, Berlin and Paris cynically turned a blind eye to Kiev’s open threats to resolve the “Donbass problem” forcefully, the so-called plan B.
-
Lavrov's closing remarks worth noting. The issues raised about Bucha are very telling. Any light shone on this or any investigation would immediately show that those Ukrainian citizens were murdered for the purpose of a false flag to blame on Russia. They were murdered by Ukrainian Nazis with the complicity of Western intel agencies.
Western silence and refusal of independent investigation shows this.
Once again, I would like you to take note of the following: Russian and Ukrainian negotiators almost agreed on the settlement terms proposed by Kiev in Istanbul in late March, but tragic events unfolded in Bucha a couple of days later. No one has any doubts that it was a staged performance. Right after this staged act became publicly known, our Western colleagues went hysterical and imposed another package of sanctions on the Russian Federation accusing us of killing civilians. No one has ever mentioned Bucha since the time this propagandistic effect was achieved. No one, but us. Once again, in the presence of the Secretary-General and esteemed ministers, I’m asking you to please get the Ukrainian authorities to take the elementary step of releasing the names of the people whose corpses were shown in Bucha. I’ve been asking for this for several months now. No one seems to hear me or is willing to respond.
Mr Secretary-General,
Please, use your authority to get this done. I think everyone will benefit from clearing up this episode.
The increased activity of international justice in relation to Ukraine has come to our attention. Obscure “efforts” to investigate crimes in Ukraine that are ascribed to the Russian military are being touted, which is undoubtedly a put-up job, which we clearly see.
No intelligible responses have been issued from the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the wake of the 2014 bloody coup in Kiev, the Odessa tragedy of May 2, 2014, the shelling of peaceful cities in Donbass, the bombing of Lugansk by warplanes on June 2, 2014, or multiple other incidents. Over 3,000 reports of crimes against residents of Donbass have been sent to the ICC. There was no response. Clearly, the senior officials from this “judicial body” have received a command from on high to step up their activities. This body has lost its credibility with us. For eight long years we have been hoping in vain for someone to start fighting the impunity in Ukraine. We are no longer counting on seeing justice from this or a number of other international agencies. We are finished waiting.
Everything I said goes to show once again that the decision to conduct a special military operation was unavoidable. We have said this more than once. We have presented volumes of factual evidence proving that Ukraine was preparing to play the role of the “anti-Russia” and was being used as a springboard for creating and implementing threats against Russia’s security. I am here to assure you that we will not let this happen.
-
Gringo, is the Russian guy who poured petrol over himself before setting himself on fire to avoid conscription a CIA actor? :))
-
Pepe Escobar's latest. A sobering view of the state the west is in.
The SCO in Samarkand and the UN General Assembly have demonstrated how virtually the whole Global South outside of NATOstan does not demonize Russia.
Geopolitical tectonic plates are reelin’ and rockin’, and the sound is heard all around the world, as the twin baby bears DPR and LPR plus Kherson and Zaporozhye vote on their referendums. Irretrievable fact: by the end of next week Russia most certainly will be on the way to add over 100,000 km2 and over 5 million people to the Federation.
Denis Pushilin, head of the DPR, summed it all up: “We’re going home”. The baby bears are coming to Mama.
Coupled with the partial mobilization of up to 300,000 Russian reservists – arguably just a first phase – the raise-the-stakes consequences are immense. Exit the previous soft format of the Special Military Operation (SMO): enter serious kinetic war, not hybrid, against any actor, vassal or otherwise, that dares to attack Russian territory.
There’s a very short window of Chinese-coined crisis/opportunity for the collective West, or NATOstan, to negotiate. They won’t. Even as anyone with an IQ over room temperature knows that the only way for the Empire of Chaos/Lies/Plunder to “win” – outside of the cover of The Economist – would be by launching a first-strike flurry of tactical nuclear weapons, which would meet a devastating Russian response.
The Kremlin knows it – President Putin has publicly alluded to it; the Russian General Staff (RGS) knows it; the Chinese know it (and have called, also publicly, for negotiations).
Instead, we have hysterical Russophobia reaching a paroxysm. And from the deer-caught-in-the-headlights vassals, an extra toxic sludge of fear and loathing.
Implications have been sharply and rationally addressed at The Saker and by Andrei Martyanov. On the realm of social network “influencing” – a key component of hybrid war – cheap entertainment has been provided by everyone from frightened Eurocrats to crappy retired U.S. generals threatening a “devastating strike” against the Black Sea Fleet “if Vladimir Putin uses nuclear weapons in Ukraine”.
One of these specimens is a mere P.R. front man for an Atlanticist think tank. He was properly disposed of by the now totally unplugged deputy head of Russia’s Security Council, Dmitry Medvedev: “Retired idiots with general’s stripes do not need to scare us with talk about a NATO strike on Crimea.”
Full article below:
https://thesaker.is/all-the-young-dudes-carry-the-russian-news/
-
While I was there, I saw the Iraqi soldiers come into the hospital with guns. They took the babies out of the incubators, [sniffs] took the incubators, and left the children to die on the cold floor.
Who can forget this gem? Part of the testimony of the young lady who introduced herself as Nayirah, "a volunteer nurse from Kuwait" to the, "United States Congressional Human Rights Caucus. Part of the war atrocity propaganda used to launch Gulf War 1.
Either no shame or a sick sense of irony, using a Human Rights Caucus as a platform for an aggressive war. Probably both.
It turned out that she was the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the US.
David would have definitely believed it and would believe its equivalent today, as he demonstrates with every single post.
This was widely believed by the vast majority of Western populations at the time despite it's obvious implausibility. Bullshit such as this has long been the MO of the criminal Western governments to give the "veil of legitimacy" to their already planned illegal wars of aggression. Now that hindsight has shown everybody the many lies previously told by western governments and media it should teach everyone to treat outlandish claims with somewhat more scepticism. We have no excuse now with so many previous lies exposed. The constant lessons requiring the benefit of hindsight should have taught us all to start applying a little more foresight.
Banning Russian media and then making outlandish claims about Russia and Russian behaviour, quickly dropped and never investigated, is so obviously propaganda that those falling for it will be embarrassed at having done so when enough time elapses for facts and the benefit of hindsight to expose what are obvious lies in the service of narrative control and the manufacturing of consent.
-
New satellite images showing large numbers of Russians fleeing to Georgia and Mongolia have been released after Vladimir Putin's order to mobilise hundreds of thousands of reservists for the conflict in Ukraine.
https://news.sky.com/story/ukraine-war-images-show-10-miles-of-queues-as-russians-flee-vladimir-putins-call-up-to-fight-12705978 (https://news.sky.com/story/ukraine-war-images-show-10-miles-of-queues-as-russians-flee-vladimir-putins-call-up-to-fight-12705978)
"And according to Maxar, which has been tracking the conflict from its satellites, the queue to cross into Georgia stretches for well over 10 miles (16km)."
-
quickly dropped and never investigated, is so obviously propaganda that those falling for it will be embarrassed at having done so when enough time elapses for facts and the benefit of hindsight to expose what are obvious lies in the service of narrative control and the manufacturing of consent.
Like all those alleged biological weapons labs in Ukraine?
https://news.un.org/en/story/2022/05/1118232 (https://news.un.org/en/story/2022/05/1118232)
-
Deputy Mufti of the Crimean Muftiat makes an appeal to Crimean Muslims and to all Muslims in Russia, who are facing mobilization - "Find various ways to surrender," "but if you cannot do this, then I know where you ought to shoot. And I think you also understand."
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/xoko1u/deputy_mufti_of_the_crimean_muftiat_makes_an/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/xoko1u/deputy_mufti_of_the_crimean_muftiat_makes_an/)
-
Many Muslims were some of the first to flee to Georgia. The rest I imagine fled to Turkey.
-
Many Muslims were some of the first to flee to Georgia. The rest I imagine fled to Turkey.
The Chechens could turn on Putin also.
-
Russian men flee country by the thousands to escape fighting in Ukraine
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUR6qWbqy0s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUR6qWbqy0s)
-
https://off-guardian.org/2022/09/27/multipolar-world-order-part-2/
-
https://off-guardian.org/2022/09/27/multipolar-world-order-part-2/
The question of whether China/Russia are in competition or cahoots with the West, raised in the article you linked, is less open to question than the author suggests, in my opinion.
The differences between the vision of the West vs. the Global South/East are huge compared to the superficial similarities raised by the author. In a nutshell, public finance vs private finance. Sovereignty vs One World government dictated by corporate and financial power.
Firstly the imposition of the green energy agenda by supranational bodies is not shared by the China/Russia axis who emphasise sovereignty over matters such as this. This is emphasised in the excerpt shown below.
As was announced several days ago, on 13th September, the second Russia-Africa Partnership Forum, with me having the privilege to be the Head of its Secretariat, was scheduled for the next summer of 2023. An Organizing Committee headed by Yuri Ushakov, aide of the President of the Russian Federation, was established to get ready therefor.
This summit is supposed to give a new impetus to the African-Russian political, trade and economic, investment, scientific and technical as well as humanitarian co-operation and thus, turn it even more integrated and comprehensive in nature.
Though a careful analysis of the information from other international actors within the framework of preparations for the Forum obliges us to state that there are forces in the world that stand against such a full-fledged and mutually beneficial cooperation of African States with Russia, and what is remarkable, those actors themselves are not Africans.
A statement of Josep Borrell, Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, that has been published on the EU website, as well as a number of his statements made during his recent travels to Mozambique, Kenya and Somali when he snatched an opportunity to accuse Russia of all the world troubles and called on the African partners to construct a closer cooperation with Europe have come into particular notice.
Mr. Borrell reduced his arguments to four postulates with each being worth of special mention.
The European diplomat claims that the Russian special military operation is an example of “the 19th century type of cruel imperialism that Africa suffered.” Now, says Josep Borrell, Europe, heaving dealt with its responsibility for what happened in Africa at that time, has a full moral right to fight against Russia hand-in-hand with the Africans that have been oppressed for decades, and build an “international rules-based order.”
What is more, as has always been the case with our Western opponents, they do not burden themselves with the explanation of the rules they have in mind while rapidly sliding over the UN Charter without clarifying in what way those rules differ from the universal norms of international law that have been regularly violated through the recent decades in Iraq, Libya or other regions and have not been zealously protected by them with regard to Syria and the Palestinians. It is obvious, however, that those rules are not the UN Charter if they are spoken of separately. A question arises, “Who has written those rules and for whom?” As far as they are not deciphered anywhere or presented as a sound document that would be signed by its authors and the States in agreement, then there is a steady perception that they are being made up by the Western countries to fit their own assigned tasks, and can be modified to their emerging convenience on any occasion.
The Western European agenda proposed along with the “rule-based world order” raises many questions. Together with declarative slogans about democracy and human rights, there are a gender “saga” with the rejection of the natural division of the sexes, which is ambiguously accepted in the world, a total digitalization without the necessary level of information security and more. We should also mention the universally imposed green agenda, which limits developing countries in their efforts to create a solid energy base for electrification and industrialization. For example, the European Parliament recently demanded that the construction of the East African oil pipeline be halted on the pretext of human rights violations and threats to the environment. It is indicative that the European Union, while calling on African states to reduce harmful gas emissions, is itself returning to “dirty energy” amid deepening energy shortages.
It is worth noting, any actor in international relations, which does not accept these attitudes, automatically falls into the category of “autocratic” and they try to isolate and weaken it as much as possible.
Today, using Russia as an example, we are witnessing how the West is trying to deprive sovereign states of their independence through the use of a system of collective punishment, violation of basic political and economic rights, and harsh illegitimate unilateral restrictions.
Secondly, the monetary and banking systems proposed could not be more different. The basket of currencies backed by resources/gold etc. ongoing in the rest of the world is incompatible with the Western vision.
There are more anomalies that would need addressing by those who believe that the Chinese/Russians et al. are dancing to the same WEF tune as the EU/NATO compromised governments but those two on their own show the incompatibility of the Western WEF goals and the goals of the Russian/Chinese multipolar and sovereign model.
The full piece from which the excerpt was taken is linked below;
https://thesaker.is/africa-has-its-sovereign-right-to-choose-partners/
-
China is paying lip service to global warming. https://www.newscientist.com/article/2317274-china-is-building-more-than-half-of-the-worlds-new-coal-power-plants/
-
China is paying lip service to global warming. https://www.newscientist.com/article/2317274-china-is-building-more-than-half-of-the-worlds-new-coal-power-plants/
Given that China represents about 1/5th of the world's population and is also the world's manufacturer, so what. Per capita, the US and Canada emit twice as much as China. The countries doing the criticising are much worse offenders than China so need to mend their own house before criticising others. Not taking into account the size of the population, it's status as global manufacturer/exporter and the necessity of the Chinese government to house and feed 1/5th of the world population whilst spouting raw numbers is disingenuous. The green agenda is built on sand anyway and has more to do with control than "saving the planet".
The green agenda is something supported by the WEF aligned compromised governments of the West. As the previous link showed, Net Zero, or whatever they call it, prevents the development of Africa and the Global South. This is not a bug, but a feature, designed to keep West dominant at others expense.
When the Western powers collapse, no-one will bother even paying lip service to anthropogenic global warming.
There are enough real problems in the world today of hunger, disease, massive inequalities in access to health, housing, food, energy. I could go on. These remain unsolved. We are instead to concentrate on an "emergency" that according to some ever evolving computer models suggest something bad will happen in 50 or 70 years maybe or something unless we give them some money and control now. Pretending to fix hypothetical and invisible future emergencies whilst ignoring real visible present day emergencies tells me that the hawkers of this have ulterior motives.
-
Given that China represents about 1/5th of the world's population and is also the world's manufacturer, so what. Per capita, the US and Canada emit twice as much as China. The countries doing the criticising are much worse offenders than China so need to mend their own house before criticising others.
Going by the Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research
In the year 2000, emissions per capita were
China - 2.7
United States - 20.2
United Kingdom - 9.2
In the year 2020, emissions per capita were
China - 8.0
United States - 16.1
United Kingdom - 5.6
There are enough real problems in the world today of hunger, disease, massive inequalities in access to health, housing, food, energy. I could go on. These remain unsolved.
I'm sure all the food markets, hospitals and properties in London will be very accessible once sea levels rise by four meters and thus the width of Thames river spans from Peckham to Covent Garden.
-
https://youtu.be/NwHH1RJxx1g
-
Putin today. His views on the West shared by the 80%+ of the world that isn't part of what the Western media laughingly call the "international community". An increasing number of those in the information controlled west also share Putin's views about the financial pirates that control western polities.
I want the authorities in Kiev and their real masters to hear me. People in the liberated regions become our citizens forever.
After the collapse of the USSR, the West decided that we would always have to put up with its dictates. It hoped that Russia would collapse. But Russia held on.
The West is trying to maintain the "hegemonic rent". It seeks to undermine processes beyond its control. It wants all countries to surrender their sovereignty to the United States. Some countries surrender their sovereignty voluntarily, while others are bought or destroyed. They don't care, as long as they get their own benefit.
The West wants to see us as a colony, they want to plunder us. For them, the direct threat is our thought and philosophy. Our development and prosperity is also a threat to them. The West does not need Russia. We need it.
We will defend both our values and our homeland even now. The West is counting on impunity, on getting away with everything.
All we hear from all sides is "the West upholds rules-based order". This is nonsense. Russia is a thousand-year-old civilization and will not live by such so-called rules.
Western elites brazenly divide the world into their vassals and everyone else - those who, according to Western racists, should join the list of barbarians and savages.
The West discriminates and divides people into first and second classes. What else but racism is Russophobia spreading around the world?
In the twentieth century, it was our country that led the anti-colonial movement. One of the reasons for centuries of Russophobia is that we did not allow ourselves to be robbed during the colonial conquests. We were able to create a strong centralized state in Russia.
In the 90's we were called "friends" and "partners" and were siphoned off trillions of dollars through various schemes. We remember everything. We have not forgotten anything.
They call "Euro-Atlantic solidarity" the orders and rude insulting shouts to their vassals. Now, they are taking bread out of Ukraine. Where is it going? To the same European countries. It's another trickery and deception.
The U.S. seeks to get their hands on the European market. The European elite is well aware of this.
Sanctions are not enough for the Anglo-Saxons, they have moved on to sabotage. In fact, they have begun to destroy the European energy structure.
By initiating a sanctions blitzkrieg against Russia, they believed that they could control everyone. But most states refuse to be controlled. The West clearly did not expect such disobedience from them.
In the West, the truth has been drowned in an ocean of myths, illusions and fakes. They lie like Goebbels.
You can't feed people with dollars and euros. And you can't use inflated capitalisation to heat your homes. You can't feed anyone with paper. You need food.
I would like to emphasize that there is every reason to believe that Western elites are not going to look for constructive solutions to the food and energy crisis that arose through their fault. There are fears that they are ready to use other recipes that are familiar to them.
To get out of the tangle of contradictions, they need to break Russia. They may try to bring the whole system to collapse, to reduce it to the form of "war will write it all off.
They have nothing to offer the world but the same system of robbery and racketeering. They have come to a radical denial of moral standards, religion, the family. Do we want us here in Russia to have "parent number 1, 2, and 3" instead of mom and dad? Do we want children to be taught that there are other "genders" besides men and women?
The world has entered a period of revolutionary transformation. They are fundamental in nature. New centers of development are being formed. All over the world, including Europe and the United States, we have many like-minded people, we see their support.
-
Your spaniel fawning over Putin's statement is an absolute disgrace. The Soviet Union was in existence for over 70 years, a terrorist state with no democratic legitimacy, starving its own citizens and putting them in gulags and dissidents in mental hospitals, forbidding Jews to emigrate to Israel, or anyone else to emigrate for that matter. It colluded with Nazi Germany under the Nazi-Soviet Pact of August 1939 and reaped the whirlwind. There is no principle whatsoever involved in the February 2022 invasion of Ukraine. If the latter were a Nazi-leaning state Russia would aim at advancing to Kiev; as it is they have annexed the four provinces nearest to Crimea, the plunder they took in 2014 to secure the naval base, yet if they think the rest of Ukraine will roll over they should study the history of Ireland. They will not blackmail the West with the oil supplies and gas pipeline they have recently sabotaged, the regime will fall sooner rather than later, and though I am sympathetic to family values they should be encouraged through debate, not the barrel of a gun.
-
Your spaniel fawning over Putin's statement is an absolute disgrace. The Soviet Union was in existence for over 70 years, a terrorist state with no democratic legitimacy, starving its own citizens and putting them in gulags and dissidents in mental hospitals, forbidding Jews to emigrate to Israel, or anyone else to emigrate for that matter. It colluded with Nazi Germany under the Nazi-Soviet Pact of August 1939 and reaped the whirlwind. There is no principle whatsoever involved in the February 2022 invasion of Ukraine. If the latter were a Nazi-leaning state Russia would aim at advancing to Kiev; as it is they have annexed the four provinces nearest to Crimea, the plunder they took in 2014 to secure the naval base, yet if they think the rest of Ukraine will roll over they should study the history of Ireland. They will not blackmail the West with the oil supplies and gas pipeline they have recently sabotaged, the regime will fall sooner rather than later, and though I am sympathetic to family values they should be encouraged through debate, not the barrel of a gun.
For any who doubt that 80%+ of the world are behind Russia and the rest of those countries that make up the multipolar axis in opposition to Western/NATO bullying, blackmail and illegal sanctions(abuse of dollar world reserve status, control of SWIFT etc.). Much was made of the meaningless and consequence free votes in the UN General Assembly condemning Russia earlier this year in feb/march. I pointed out at the time that the vote delayed for days whilst the US "loobbied" the reps of other countries. "Lobbied", for the uninitiated, is a euphemism for threatened, coerced, blackmailed and bullied other countries. Again the abuse of world reserve status etc.
That there were no consequences for Russia meant many countries voted with the West because it meant no consequences for their economies, and Russia understood perfectly well the situation.
Roll on six months and the same suspects attempt the same stunt. Six months that have shown the rest of the world that the multi-polar axis is making giant strides against western financial piracy and imperialism is finally being defeated.
Funnily enough we heard nothing in the media about this latest UN General Assembly "vote" on August 24th. Why might that be? Here's why;
The rest of the world can see in real time the ongoing defeat of the NATO/Western bloc. Outside of the propagandised west, NATO and the West are seen as the aggressors finally being confronted. So the latest stunt to bring a condemnatory vote of Russia to the UNGA couldn't even gather 1/3rd of the 193 countries of the UNGA, so instead of embarrassing themselves in a vote in the assembly, which they would have lost badly, they put out this pathetic "Joint statement".
https://www.eeas.europa.eu/delegations/un-new-york/joint-statement-six-months-russia%E2%80%99s-full-scale-invasion-ukraine_en?s=63
There are a few things of interest worth noting about this statement.
The 54 signatories can hardly be said to be any representation of "world" opinion. Zero African nations signed. Two (Colombia and Guatemala) from the whole of South and Central America. From Asia, only four countries(Japan, South Korea, Singapore and Turkiye).
It is basically NATO and its subservient lackeys.
Another noteworthy feature is the share of world population that NATO and its lackeys represent. The 54 signatories as a share of world population are just over 16%. How pathetic is this "international community".
To break it down further, 11 of the signatories have a population smaller than the county of Bedfordshire (pop. 653,000). Of those 11, six are counted in tens of thousands and are smaller than the town of Scunthorpe (pop. 82,000).
The "joint statement" that NATO and its stooges were reduced to settling for, and unreported for obvious reasons, demonstrates the real alliances in the world and that Africa, South America and Asia, aka everyone that isn't NATO, EU plus a few small towns ::), far from being with them are against them.
This 16% of the world population are the self styled "international community" of media lore.
Wonder why none of the other 80%+ were interested in signing, or threatened enough by the West to go along with a consequence free vote? What has changed?
-
For those interested, the full transcribed version of Putin's speech today. Cooler heads need to prevail sooner rather than later in the west. A long read, but necessary reading for all in the West;
President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Dear citizens of Russia, citizens of the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics, residents of Zaporizhzhya and Kherson regions, State Duma deputies and senators of the Russian Federation,
You know, referendums were held in the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics, Zaporizhzhya and Kherson regions. Their results have been summed up, the results are known. People made their choice, an unequivocal choice.
Today we are signing agreements on the admission of the Donetsk People's Republic, the Lugansk People's Republic, the Zaporizhzhya region and the Kherson region to Russia. I am confident that the Federal Assembly will support the constitutional laws on the adoption and formation of four new regions and four new regions of the Russian Federation in Russia, because this is the will of millions of people.
(Applause.)
And this, of course, is their right, their inalienable right, which is enshrined in the first article of the UN Charter, which explicitly states the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples.
Let me repeat: this is the inalienable right of people, it is based on historical unity, in the name of which generations of our ancestors, those who created and defended Russia from the origins of Ancient Russia for centuries, won. Here, in Novorossiya, Rumyantsev, Suvorov and Ushakov fought, catherine II and Potemkin founded new cities. Our grandfathers and great-grandfathers stood here to the death during the Great Patriotic War.
We will always remember the heroes of the "Russian Spring", those who did not reconcile themselves in 2014 with the neo-Nazi coup d'état in Ukraine, all those who died for the right to speak their native language, to preserve their culture, traditions, faith, for the right to live. These are the soldiers of Donbass, the martyrs of the "Odessa Khatyn", the victims of inhuman terrorist attacks staged by the Kiev regime. These are volunteers and militiamen, civilians, children, women, old people, Russians, Ukrainians, people of various nationalities. This is the real people's leader of Donetsk Alexander Zakharchenko, these are military commanders Arsen Pavlov and Vladimir Zhoga, Olga Kochura and Alexei Mozgovoy, this is the prosecutor of the Lugansk Republic Sergey Gorenko. This is the paratrooper Nurmagomed Gadzhimagomedov and all our soldiers and officers who died the death of the brave during a special military operation. They're heroes. (Applause.) Heroes of the Great Russia. And I ask you to honor their memory with a minute of silence.
(Minute of silence.)
Thank you.
Behind the choice of millions of residents in the Donetsk and Lugansk people's republics, in the Zaporozhye and Kherson regions is our common destiny and thousand-year history. People passed on this spiritual connection to their children and grandchildren. Despite all the trials, they carried through the years the love for Russia. And no one can destroy this feeling in us. That is why both older generations and young people, those who were born after the tragedy of the collapse of the Soviet Union, voted for our unity, for our common future.
In 1991, in the Belovezhskaya Pushcha, without asking the will of ordinary citizens, representatives of the party elites of that time decided to collapse the USSR, and people suddenly found themselves cut off from their homeland. This tore apart and dismembered our national community and turned into a national catastrophe. Just as once after the revolution the borders of the Union republics were cut behind the scenes, so the last leaders of the Soviet Union, contrary to the direct expression of the will of the majority of people in the referendum of 1991, destroyed our great country, put the peoples simply before the fact.
I admit that they did not even fully understand what they were doing and what consequences this would inevitably lead to in the end. But it doesn't matter. There is no Soviet Union, the past cannot be returned. And Russia does not need it today, we do not aspire to this. But there is nothing stronger than the determination of millions of people who, by their culture, faith, traditions, language, consider themselves part of Russia, whose ancestors lived for centuries in a single state. There is nothing stronger than the determination of these people to return to their true, historical Fatherland.
For eight long years, people in the Donbas were subjected to genocide, shelling and blockade, and in Kherson and Zaporozhye they tried to criminally cultivate hatred for Russia, for everything Russian. Now, already during the referendums, the Kiev regime threatened with reprisals, death to school teachers, women who worked in election commissions, intimidated with repression millions of people who came to express their will. But the unbroken people of Donbass, Zaporozhye and Kherson have spoken their word.
I want the Kiev authorities and their real masters in the West to hear me, so that everyone remembers this: people living in Lugansk and Donetsk, Kherson and Zaporozhye become our citizens forever. (Applause.)
We call on the Kiev regime to immediately cease fire, all hostilities, the war that it unleashed back in 2014, and return to the negotiating table. We are ready for this, it has been said more than once. But the choice of the people in Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporozhye and Kherson will not be discussed, it has been made, Russia will not betray it. (Applause.) And today's Kiev authorities should treat this free expression of the will of people with respect, and nothing else. This is the only way to peace.
We will defend our land with all the forces and means at our disposal and will do everything to ensure the safe life of our people. This is the great liberating mission of our people.
We will definitely rebuild the destroyed cities and towns, housing, schools, hospitals, theatres and museums, restore and develop industrial enterprises, factories, infrastructure, social, pension, healthcare and education systems.
Of course, we will work to improve the level of security. Together we will make sure that citizens in the new regions feel the support of the entire people of Russia, the whole country, all the republics, all the territories and regions of our vast Motherland. (Applause.)
Dear friends and colleagues!
Today I would like to appeal to the soldiers and officers who are participating in the special military operation, to the soldiers of Donbass and Novorossiya, to those who, after the decree on partial mobilization, join the ranks of the Armed Forces, fulfilling their patriotic duty, who themselves come to the military recruitment offices at the call of their hearts. I would like to appeal to their parents, wives and children about what our people are fighting for, what enemy is confronting us, who is throwing the world into new wars and crises, deriving their bloody benefits from this tragedy.
Our compatriots, our brothers and sisters in Ukraine – the native part of our united people – saw with their own eyes what the ruling circles of the so-called West are preparing for all of humanity. Here, in fact, they just threw off their masks, showed their true guts.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the West decided that the world, all of us, would forever have to put up with its dictates. Then, in 1991, the West hoped that Russia would not recover from such upheavals and would continue to fall apart on its own. Yes, it almost happened – we remember the 90s, the terrible 90s, hungry, cold and hopeless. But Russia has resisted, revived, strengthened, and regained its rightful place in the world.
At the same time, the West has been looking for and continues to look for a new chance to hit us, to weaken and destroy Russia, which has always been dreamed of, to fragment our state, to pit peoples against each other, to condemn them to poverty and extinction. It simply haunts them that there is such a great, huge country in the world with its territory, natural resources, resources, with a people who cannot and will never live by someone else's orders.
The West is ready to step over everything to preserve the neocolonial system that allows it to parasitize, in fact, plunder the world at the expense of the power of the dollar and technological dictates, collect real tribute from humanity, extract the main source of unearned well-being, the rent of the hegemon. The preservation of this rent is their key, genuine and absolutely self-serving motive. That is why it is in their interest to be completely de-sovereignized. Hence their aggression against independent states, traditional values and original cultures, attempts to undermine international and integration processes beyond their control, new world currencies and centers of technological development. It is critical for them that all countries surrender their sovereignty to the United States.
The ruling elites of some states voluntarily agree to do this, voluntarily agree to become vassals; others are bribed, intimidated. And if it does not work out, they destroy entire states, leaving behind humanitarian disasters, disasters, ruins, millions of ruined, distorted human destinies, terrorist enclaves, social disaster zones, protectorates, colonies and semi-colonies. They don't care, just to get their own benefit.
I want to stress once again that it is precisely in greed, in the intention to preserve its unrestricted power, that the real reasons for the hybrid war that the "collective West" is waging against Russia. They don't want freedom for us, they want us to be a colony. They do not want equal cooperation, but robbery. They want to see us not as a free society, but as a crowd of soulless slaves.
For them, the direct threat is our thought and philosophy, and therefore they encroach on our philosophers. Our culture and art are a danger to them, so they try to ban them. Our development and prosperity are also a threat to them – competition is growing. They don't need Russia at all, we need it. (Applause.)
I want to remind you that the claims to world domination in the past have been repeatedly broken by the courage and resilience of our people. Russia will always be Russia. We will still defend our values and our Motherland.
The West is counting on impunity, on the fact that it will get away with everything. As a matter of fact, I've gotten away with it so far. Agreements in the field of strategic security fly into the trash; agreements reached at the highest political level are declared fables; firm promises not to expand NATO eastward as soon as they were bought into by our former leaders turned into a dirty deception; treaties on missile defence and intermediate-range and shorter-range missiles have been unilaterally torn up under far-fetched pretexts.
All we hear from all sides is that the West is upholding a rules-based order. Where did they come from? Who has ever seen these rules? Who agreed? Listen, this is just nonsense, a complete deception, double or already triple standards! Fools are designed simply.
Russia is a great thousand-year-old power, a civilizational country, and it will not live by such manipulated, false rules. (Applause.)
It was the so-called West that trampled on the principle of the inviolability of borders, and now at its own discretion decides who has the right to self-determination and who does not, who is unworthy of it. Why they decide so, who gave them such a right is unclear. To themselves.
That is why they are wildly angry about the choice of people in Crimea, Sevastopol, Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporozhye and Kherson. This West has no moral right to evaluate him, not even to stutter about the freedom of democracy. No and never has been!
Western elites deny not only national sovereignty and international law. Their hegemony has a pronounced character of totalitarianism, despotism and apartheid. They brazenly divide the world into their vassals, into the so-called civilized countries and into all the others who, according to the plan of today's Western racists, should replenish the list of barbarians and savages. False labels – "rogue country", "authoritarian regime" – are already ready, they stigmatize entire peoples and states, and this is nothing new. There is nothing new in this: the Western elites as they were, remained so – colonialist. They discriminate, divide peoples into first and other varieties.
We have never accepted and will never accept such political nationalism and racism. And what, if not racism, is Russophobia, which is now spreading around the world? What, if not racism, is the categorical conviction of the West that its civilization, neoliberal culture is an indisputable model for the whole world? "Whoever is not with us is against us." It even sounds weird.
Even repentance for their own historical crimes is shifted by Western elites to everyone else, demanding that both the citizens of their countries and other peoples be responsible for something to which they have nothing to do at all, for example, during the period of colonial conquests.
It is worth reminding the West that it began its colonial policy in the Middle Ages, and then followed by the world slave trade, the genocide of Indian tribes in America, the plundering of India, Africa, the wars of England and France against China, as a result of which he was forced to open his ports to the opium trade. What they did was to hook entire nations on drugs, purposefully exterminate entire ethnic groups for the sake of land and resources, and arrange a real hunt for people as beasts. It is contrary to human nature itself, truth, freedom and justice.
And we are proud that in the twentieth century it was our country that led the anti-colonial movement, which opened up opportunities for many peoples of the world to develop, to reduce poverty and inequality, to defeat hunger and disease.
I would like to emphasise that one of the reasons for the centuries-old Russophobia and undisguised anger of these Western elites towards Russia is precisely that we did not allow ourselves to be robbed during the colonial conquests and forced the Europeans to conduct trade for mutual benefit. This was achieved by creating a strong centralized state in Russia, which developed, strengthened on the great moral values of Orthodoxy, Islam, Judaism and Buddhism, on Russian culture and Russian word open to all.
It is known that plans for interventions in Russia were repeatedly made, they tried to use both the Time of Troubles of the early XVII century, and the period of upheavals after 1917 – failed. The West still managed to get to the riches of Russia at the end of the XX century, when the state was destroyed. Back then, we were called friends and partners, but in fact they treated us like a colony – trillions of dollars were pumped out of the country according to a variety of schemes. We all remember everything, we have not forgotten anything.
And these days, people in Donetsk and Lugansk, in Kherson and Zaporozhye spoke in favor of restoring our historical unity. Thank you! (Applause.)
Western countries have been saying for centuries that they bring freedom and democracy to other peoples. Quite the opposite: instead of democracy, there is suppression and exploitation; instead of freedom, enslavement and violence. The entire unipolar world order is inherently anti-democratic and unfree, it is deceitful and hypocritical through and through.
The United States is the only country in the world that has twice used nuclear weapons, destroying the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. By the way, we set a precedent.
Let me also remind you that the United States, together with the British, turned Dresden, Hamburg, Cologne and many other German cities into ruins without any military necessity during the Second World War. And this was done defiantly, without any, I repeat, military necessity. There was only one goal: as in the case of the nuclear bombing in Japan, to intimidate both our country and the whole world.
The United States left a terrible trace in the memory of the peoples of Korea and Vietnam with barbaric "carpet" bombings, the use of napalm and chemical weapons.
They still actually occupy Germany, Japan, the Republic of Korea and other countries and at the same time cynically call them equal allies. Look, I wonder what kind of alliance this is? The whole world knows that the leaders of these countries are being monitored, the first persons of these states are installing listening devices not only in office, but also in residential premises. It's a real shame. Shame on those who do this, and on those who, like a slave, silently and meekly swallow this rudeness.
They call orders and rude, insulting shouts against their vassals Euro-Atlantic solidarity, the development of biological weapons, experiments on living people, including in Ukraine, noble medical research.
It was with their destructive policies, wars, and looting that they provoked today's colossal surge in migration flows. Millions of people suffer deprivation, humiliation, death by the thousands, trying to get to the same Europe.
Bread is being exported from Ukraine now. Where is he going under the pretext of "ensuring food security in the world's poorest countries"? Where is it going? Everything goes to the same European countries. There, five percent only went to the poorest countries in the world. Again, another swindle and outright deception.
The American elite, in fact, uses the tragedy of these people to weaken their competitors, to destroy nation-states. This also applies to Europe, this also applies to the identity of France, Italy, Spain, and other countries with a long history.
Washington is demanding more and more sanctions against Russia, and most European politicians dutifully agree with this. They clearly understand that the United States, pushing for the complete rejection by the EU of Russian energy and other resources, is working practically to deindustrialize Europe, to completely take over the European market – they understand everything, these elites are European, they understand everything, they prefer to serve other people's interests. This is no longer a lackey, but a direct betrayal of their peoples. But God is with them, it's their business.
But the Anglo-Saxons no longer have enough sanctions, they have moved to sabotage – incredibly, but a fact – having organized explosions on the international gas pipelines of Nord Stream, which pass along the bottom of the Baltic Sea, they actually began to destroy the pan-European energy infrastructure. It is obvious to everyone who benefits from this. Who benefits, he did, of course.
The dictate of the United States is based on brute force, on fist law. It is beautifully wrapped, it happens without any wrapping, but the essence is the same – fist right. Hence the deployment and maintenance of hundreds of military bases in all corners of the world, the expansion of NATO, attempts to put together new military alliances, such as AUKUS and the like. Active work is also underway to create a military-political link between Washington and Seoul and Tokyo. All those states that possess or aspire to possess genuine strategic sovereignty and are able to challenge Western hegemony are automatically designated as enemies.
It is on these principles that the military doctrines of the United States and NATO are built, requiring, no less than total domination. Western elites present their neocolonial plans just as hypocritically, even with a claim to peacefulness, talk about some kind of containment, and such a disingenuous word wanders from one strategy to another, and, in fact, means only one thing – the undermining of any sovereign centers of development.
We have already heard about containing Russia, China, Iran. I believe that other countries in Asia, Latin America, Africa, the Middle East, as well as current partners and allies of the United States, are also in the queue. We know that if they don't like it, they impose sanctions against their allies – sometimes against one bank, then against another; sometimes against one company, then against another. It's the same practice, and it will expand. They have everyone in their crosshairs, including our closest neighbors, the CIS countries.
At the same time, the West has clearly and for a long time been wishful thinking. So, starting a sanctions blitzkrieg against Russia, they believed that they could once again build the whole world on their own command. But, as it turned out, such a bright prospect does not excite everyone – except for complete political masochists and fans of other non-traditional forms of international relations. Most states refuse to "take under the visor", and choose a reasonable way of cooperation with Russia.
The West clearly did not expect such disobedience from them. They are just used to acting according to a template, taking everything by snoring, blackmail, bribery, intimidation, and convince themselves that these methods will work forever, as if ossified and frozen in the past.
Such overconfidence is a direct product not only of the notorious concept of one's own exceptionalism – although this, of course, is surprising simply – but also of a real "information hunger" in the West. The truth was drowned in an ocean of myths, illusions and fakes, using extremely aggressive propaganda, lying for nothing, like Goebbels. The more incredible the lie, the faster they will believe it – that's how they act, according to this principle.
But people cannot be fed printed dollars and euros. It is impossible to feed these pieces of paper, and it is impossible to heat the home with a virtual, inflated capitalization of Western social networks. All of this is important, what I'm talking about. But no less important is what has just been said: you can't feed anyone with papers – you need food, and you can't heat anyone with these inflated capitalizations either – energy is needed.
Therefore, politicians in Europe, for example, have to convince their fellow citizens to eat less, wash less often, and dress warmly at home. And those who begin to ask fair questions: "Actually, why is this so?" are immediately declared enemies, extremists and radicals. They turn the needle on Russia, they say: here, they say, who is the source of all your troubles. They lie again.
What I want to emphasize is that there is every reason to believe that the Western elites are not going to look for constructive ways out of the global food and energy crisis that arose through their fault, precisely through their fault, as a result of their long-term policy long before our special military operation in Ukraine, in Donbass. We do not intend to solve the problems of injustice and inequality. There is a fear that they are ready to use other, familiar to them, recipes.
And here it is worth recalling that from the contradictions of the early XX century, the West emerged through the First World War. Profits from the Second World War allowed the United States to finally overcome the consequences of the Great Depression and become the largest economy in the world, to impose on the planet the power of the dollar as a global reserve currency. And the overdue crisis of the 80s – and in the 80s of the last century the crisis also worsened – the West largely overcame it by appropriating the heritage and resources of the collapsed and collapsed Soviet Union. That's a fact.
Now, in order to get out of the next tangle of contradictions, they need to break Russia and other states that choose a sovereign path of development at all costs in order to further plunder other people's wealth and at this expense close and plug their holes. If this does not happen, I do not rule out that they will try to completely bring the system to collapse, to which everything can be blamed, or, God forbid, decide to use the well-known formula "the war will write everything off."
Russia understands its responsibility to the international community and will do everything to bring such hotheads to life.
Clearly, the current neocolonial model is ultimately doomed. But I repeat that its real owners will cling to it to the end. They simply have nothing to offer the world except to maintain the same system of looting and racketeering.
In fact, they spit on the natural right of billions of people, the majority of humanity, to freedom and justice, to determine their own future. Now they have completely moved to a radical denial of moral norms, religion, and family.
Let's answer very simple questions for ourselves. I would like to return to what I said, and I would like to address all the citizens of the country – not only the colleagues who are in this hall – all the citizens of Russia: do we really want us, here, in our country, in Russia, to have "parent number one", "number two", "number three" (completely crazy already there!)? Do we want perversions to be imposed on children from primary school in our schools that lead to degradation and extinction? That they were told that in addition to women and men, there were allegedly some other genders and offered to undergo sex reassignment surgery? Do we want all this for our country and our children? For us, all this is unacceptable, we have a different, our own future.
Let me repeat that the dictatorship of the Western elites is directed against all societies, including the peoples of the Western countries themselves. It's a challenge to everyone. Such a complete denial of man, the overthrow of faith and traditional values, the suppression of freedom acquires the features of a "religion on the contrary" – outright Satanism. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus Christ, denouncing the false prophets, says, "By their fruits ye shall know them." And these poisonous fruits are already obvious to people – not only in our country, in all countries, including for many people in the West itself.
The world has entered a period of revolutionary transformations, they are of a fundamental nature. New centers of development are being formed, they represent the majority – the majority! – the world community and are ready not only to declare their interests, but also to defend them, and in multipolarity they see an opportunity to strengthen their sovereignty, which means to gain true freedom, a historical perspective, their right to independent, creative, original development, to a harmonious process.
All over the world, including in Europe and the United States, as I have already said, we have many like-minded people, and we feel, we see their support. Within a wide variety of countries and societies, a liberation, anti-colonial movement against unipolar hegemony is already developing. Its subjectivity will only increase. It is this power that will determine the future geopolitical reality.
Dear friends!
Today we are fighting for a fair and free path, first of all for ourselves, for Russia, for the fact that dictate and despotism will forever remain in the past. I am convinced that countries and peoples understand that a policy built on the exceptionalism of anyone, on the suppression of other cultures and peoples, is essentially criminal, that we must turn this shameful page. The breakdown of Western hegemony that has begun is irreversible. And again, it won't be like it before.
The battlefield to which fate and history have called us is the battlefield for our people, for the great historical Russia. (Applause.) For the great historical Russia, for future generations, for our children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren.We must protect them from enslavement, from monstrous experiments that are aimed at crippling their consciousness and soul.
Today we are fighting so that no one will ever think that Russia, our people, our language, our culture can be taken and erased from history. Today we need the consolidation of the entire society, and such cohesion can only be based on sovereignty, freedom, creation and justice. Our values are humanity, mercy and compassion.
And I want to conclude my speech with the words of a true patriot Ivan Aleksandrovich Ilyin: "If I consider Russia to be my Motherland, it means that I love, contemplate and think in Russian, Sing and speak Russian; that I believe in the spiritual forces of the Russian people. His spirit is my spirit; his fate is my destiny; his suffering is my grief; its heyday is my joy."
These words are followed by a great spiritual choice, which for more than a thousand years of Russian statehood was followed by many generations of our ancestors. Today, this choice is made by us, made by the citizens of the Donetsk and Lugansk people's republics, residents of Zaporozhye and Kherson regions. They made the choice to be with their people, to be with the Motherland, to live its fate, to win with it.
Behind us – however, behind us – Russia!
-
https://dissidentvoice.org/2022/09/biden-and-nuland-promised-to-destroy-nordstream-before-the-russian-invasion/
-
Ukraine encircles Russian forces near Donetsk.
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/10/01/europe/ukraine-russia-lyman-donetsk-intl/index.html (https://edition.cnn.com/2022/10/01/europe/ukraine-russia-lyman-donetsk-intl/index.html)
For the first time in history, a country is claiming to annex territory it doesn't fully control and is retreating from. :))
-
Ignore Putin’s fake referendums and keep helping Ukraine. Phoney polls conducted at gunpoint do not make Ukrainian land Russian.
https://www.economist.com/leaders/2022/09/29/ignore-putins-fake-referendums-and-keep-helping-ukraine (https://www.economist.com/leaders/2022/09/29/ignore-putins-fake-referendums-and-keep-helping-ukraine)
-
Ukraine forces Russian troops out of city a day after Vladimir Putin's annexation
https://news.sky.com/story/ukraine-forces-russian-troops-out-of-city-a-day-after-vladimir-putins-annexation-12709224 (https://news.sky.com/story/ukraine-forces-russian-troops-out-of-city-a-day-after-vladimir-putins-annexation-12709224)
-
https://off-guardian.org/2022/10/01/nordstream-sabotage-deeper-dive/
-
weird speech from putin https://youtu.be/ArSWkugXr_8
-
weird speech from putin https://youtu.be/ArSWkugXr_8
Far from being a weird speech, it is the most important speech by a political leader in our lifetimes. Rather than watching analysis of the speech by someone else. Here is the speech, with subtitles
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VyCBe-iSXo&ab_channel=DjukiSan
-
Far from being a weird speech, it is the most important speech by a political leader in our lifetimes. Rather than watching analysis of the speech by someone else. Here is the speech, with subtitles
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VyCBe-iSXo&ab_channel=DjukiSan
There's so much wrong with this. What was the occupation of Eastern Europe 1945-89 if not colonialism?
-
Russian forces retreat from strategic city in Ukraine
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNZQwMEOMkA&t=39s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNZQwMEOMkA&t=39s)
-
There's so much wrong with this. What was the occupation of Eastern Europe 1945-89 if not colonialism?
As long as you don't call it colonialism but something else, then its OK. ::)
(https://preview.redd.it/vnefzc7a7cw21.jpg?auto=webp&s=e7e5060ecea2ef6c8c6d48ad2c5efa1ec3c81806)
-
https://youtu.be/Ba4HxCPa-g0
-
https://youtu.be/Ba4HxCPa-g0
I might retire to a country not on the hit list.
-
I might retire to a country not on the hit list.
Australia would be your best plan Steve.
-
Lyman retreat sparks rare criticism of Russian top brass
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-63127911 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-63127911)
-
'What next'?
It has 'all happened before', historically!
'History is repeating itself', 'signifying a huge change', [and that we are] 'on the verge of a massive transition' in what is known, as 'THE NEW WORLD ORDER'...
-
Australia would be your best plan Steve.
It's one of the countries where the State Pension is frozen, if there is a pension left to draw, that is, following nuclear war.
-
It's one of the countries where the State Pension is frozen, if there is a pension left to draw, that is, following nuclear war.
Well nothing would be left if a missile hit us in the UK, so it wouldn't matter about State Pension in Oz anyway. If it was the only continent unaffected they'd have to help. The way I see it.
-
(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/692842152333541479/1027484851030462484/unknown.png)
-
https://www.globalresearch.ca/did-uncle-sam-blow-up-wrong-pipeline/5795677
-
The Crimean bridge has been partially destroyed. Happy Birthday Vladolf Putler.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/08/crimea-kerch-bridge-explosions-russia-ukraine (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/08/crimea-kerch-bridge-explosions-russia-ukraine)
-
In whose interests would this have been ?
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3NtYEldZf8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3NtYEldZf8)
-
https://off-guardian.org/2022/10/08/russia-compulsory-military-vax-policy-is-it-a-hoax/
-
(https://i.imgur.com/56WFEud.jpg)
-
WOW what a speech.
David1819 (I advise you look away now.. you won't like this).
https://twitter.com/JamesEFoster/status/1578072302440284163?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1578072302440284163%7Ctwgr%5E073e5f21eb1c2777e487d0ed22e0e6719b3293b6%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.readytogo.net%2Fsmb%2Fthreads%2Fone-of-the-best-speeches-iE28099ve-seen-in-a-whileE280A6.1591056%2F
-
WOW what a speech.
David1819 (I advise you look away now.. you won't like this).
https://twitter.com/JamesEFoster/status/1578072302440284163?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1578072302440284163%7Ctwgr%5E073e5f21eb1c2777e487d0ed22e0e6719b3293b6%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.readytogo.net%2Fsmb%2Fthreads%2Fone-of-the-best-speeches-iE28099ve-seen-in-a-whileE280A6.1591056%2F
Ramblings from a sect of the Looney left promoting Russian propaganda. Whoever takes that stuff seriously?
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fc70ktFakAE0yZP.jpg)
-
https://twitter.com/dmytrokuleba/status/1579368316766150657 (https://twitter.com/dmytrokuleba/status/1579368316766150657)
-
WOW what a speech.
David1819 (I advise you look away now.. you won't like this).
https://twitter.com/JamesEFoster/status/1578072302440284163?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1578072302440284163%7Ctwgr%5E073e5f21eb1c2777e487d0ed22e0e6719b3293b6%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.readytogo.net%2Fsmb%2Fthreads%2Fone-of-the-best-speeches-iE28099ve-seen-in-a-whileE280A6.1591056%2F
A very good speech. It is a pity we have not heard similar in the House of Commons. There are some Labour MPs who would agree, but they are intimidated by Starmer and his gang.
-
A very good speech. It is a pity we have not heard similar in the House of Commons. There are some Labour MPs who would agree, but they are intimidated by Starmer and his gang.
The Republic of Ireland has a fine track record to boast about. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/10041215/Ireland-pardons-Second-World-War-soldiers-who-left-to-fight-Nazis.html
-
https://off-guardian.org/2022/10/13/russia-did-mandate-draftees-be-vaccinated-but-theyve-just-dropped-that-rule-thats-great-news/
-
https://off-guardian.org/2022/10/14/endless-tremendous/
-
Suicide or murder..https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/vladimir-putin-head-of-his-military-campaign-found-dead-under-mysterious-circumstances/ar-AA133Aj8?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=75c692048b18419a8599188756234ef0
-
Well nothing would be left if a missile hit us in the UK, so it wouldn't matter about State Pension in Oz anyway. If it was the only continent unaffected they'd have to help. The way I see it.
The triple lock has at least been guaranteed this year. https://news.sky.com/story/liz-truss-says-she-is-completely-committed-to-the-pensions-triple-lock-at-make-or-break-pmqs-12724415
The frozen pension list: https://britishpensions.org.au/archive/frozenindexed.htm
For those who have no interest in the subject please talk amongst yourselves.
-
Here we go..https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/moscow-s-elite-in-shock-as-another-close-putin-ally-suddenly-dies-gazprom-wonderkid-and-kremlin-insider-nikolay-petrunin-is-no-more/ar-AA132ELE?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=bb45672d5bfe44e282ac75df1c635e5b
-
https://youtu.be/EtKMOv2dNiY
-
Kherson residents told to leave city.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2022/10/22/russia-ukraine-live-news-kherson-residents-told-to-leave-city (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2022/10/22/russia-ukraine-live-news-kherson-residents-told-to-leave-city)
-
https://youtu.be/GEIFwLKlq1Q
-
https://youtu.be/E8jIVpyTIM4
-
Ukraine urges global ban of Russia Today after presenter calls for drowning of Ukrainian children.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-urges-global-ban-russias-rt-after-presenter-calls-drowning-ukrainian-2022-10-23/ (https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-urges-global-ban-russias-rt-after-presenter-calls-drowning-ukrainian-2022-10-23/)
-
Should we be preparing the population for war? https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/five-signs-that-russia-is-preparing-for-all-out-war/ar-AA13oewl?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=767912630b7b4834a633311b2e2cb21f
-
dont go to mosow https://off-guardian.org/2022/10/27/russia-building-safe-city-surveillance-grid/
-
Family secretly film life in Russian-occupied Ukraine
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSaxduOxogU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSaxduOxogU)
-
British navy accused of sabotage..
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/10/29/ukraine-russia-putin-war-news-latest-civilians-kherson-battle/
-
British navy accused of sabotage..
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/10/29/ukraine-russia-putin-war-news-latest-civilians-kherson-battle/
Moscow peddling more false claims to distract people from their epic failures in eastern Ukraine.
-
Moscow peddling more false claims to distract people from their epic failures in eastern Ukraine.
Yes I'm sure everything Moscow says are lies and everything we say is the truth. That's the way the world works.
-
Yes I'm sure everything Moscow says are lies and everything we say is the truth. That's the way the world works.
It certainly is.
-
European security officials observed Russian Navy support ships nearby where the leaks later occurred on 26 and 27 September. One week prior, Russian submarines were also observed nearby
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/09/28/politics/nord-stream-pipeline-leak-russian-navy-ships/index.html (https://edition.cnn.com/2022/09/28/politics/nord-stream-pipeline-leak-russian-navy-ships/index.html)
Finland's national public broadcasting company Yle compared the incident to the two explosions on a gas pipeline in North Ossetia in January 2006, which were caused by remote-controlled military-grade charges. The explosions halted Russian gas supply to Georgia after the country had started seeking NATO membership.
https://yle.fi/uutiset/3-12645401 (https://yle.fi/uutiset/3-12645401)
-
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FNjKGEaakAAJ3W7.jpg)
-
Inside Russia’s Military Collapse
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XATbBXqwKx4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XATbBXqwKx4)
-
Is Russia about to declare war on the UK ? Our government is saying, and has said, very little.?
-
Is Russia about to declare war on the UK ? Our government is saying, and has said, very little.?
David may get seconded from the US National Guard. Parachuted behind Russian lines in Ukraine 👊🪖
-
Quite a simple message from this video.Don't bite the hand that feeds you.
https://youtu.be/4os-nOVyo68
-
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/nov/02/kremlin-to-summon-british-ambassador-over-drone-attacks-on-black-sea-fleet
-
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-war-britain-too-deep-ukraine-b2217316.html
-
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-drone-strike-black-sea-b2217776.html
-
Inside Russia’s Military Collapse
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XATbBXqwKx4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XATbBXqwKx4)
and what are they going to do if there miltary collapses get the nukes out.
-
Russia’s Wagner Group founder admits to US election interference
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/11/7/wagner-group-founder-admits-to-us-election-interference (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/11/7/wagner-group-founder-admits-to-us-election-interference)
-
becouse amerca in anyones elections have they
-
its all bullshit https://youtu.be/S_H8p6NcEgg
-
Will he deploy nuclear weapons..https://www.msn.com/en-gb/cars/news/vladimir-putin-shocking-detail-of-conversation-between-him-and-emmanuel-macron-revealed/vi-AA13SDgH?category=foryou
-
https://off-guardian.org/2022/11/09/maternal-mortality-in-russia-tripled-in-2021/
-
In terms of Ukraine itself. The entire Black Sea coast, including Odessa will be taken by Russia, DPR, LPR troops and referendums held in each oblast as to their status. NATO will be allowed no presence on the Ukrainian Black Sea coast. Kiev and parts of the west of the country such as Galicia may become part of a neutralised land locked rump Ukrainian state.
🤡
-
Who is sabotaging pipelines..https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/uk-foils-putin-s-plot-to-sabotage-vital-south-atlantic-pipeline/ar-AA142QcL?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=702579c128f94beeb93f1bbba00d3028
-
https://youtu.be/yRF_mjMndHs
-
https://youtu.be/yRF_mjMndHs
This was quite a fair discussion, and I don't doubt the sincerity of the anti-war movement. If you believe Putin has no more territorial ambitions then Ukraine should sue for peace, but it's up to their government to decide.
-
This was quite a fair discussion, and I don't doubt the sincerity of the anti-war movement. If you believe Putin has no more territorial ambitions then Ukraine should sue for peace, but it's up to their government to decide.
Putin and Russia never had any territorial ambitions. It is the western countries who covet territory. Putin has been clear from the start that that the Ukrainians should decide their own status. Self determination. A lot of Eastern and Southern oblasts will vote to align with Russia. This has always been clear.
It is also unfortunate but true, Steve, that suing for peace in not in the gift of the "Ukrainian government" who cannot be seriously viewed as anything but a puppet of NATO. Whose interests are they serving by throwing more and more Ukrainians into the Russian meatgrinder. Zelensky has no agency and the western war propaganda is nauseating. They care only for the land and its resources, not the people.
Russia neither want nor need the resources of Ukraine. NATO does.
As an aside, I am surprised at you linking to Jimmy Dore. I think he is excellent and I know Nugs links to him often. Bizarre that you can get more honest news from a night club comedian than the actual News
-
Putin and Russia never had any territorial ambitions. It is the western countries who covet territory. Putin has been clear from the start that that the Ukrainians should decide their own status. Self determination. A lot of Eastern and Southern oblasts will vote to align with Russia. This has always been clear.
It is also unfortunate but true, Steve, that suing for peace in not in the gift of the "Ukrainian government" who cannot be seriously viewed as anything but a puppet of NATO. Whose interests are they serving by throwing more and more Ukrainians into the Russian meatgrinder. Zelensky has no agency and the western war propaganda is nauseating. They care only for the land and its resources, not the people.
Russia neither want nor need the resources of Ukraine. NATO does.
As an aside, I am surprised at you linking to Jimmy Dore. I think he is excellent and I know Nugs links to him often. Bizarre that you can get more honest news from a night club comedian than the actual News
Russia has regressed into a quasi-democratic state. Leaving aside the appalling record of the Soviet Union on human rights the rot started in 2008 with the incursion into Georgian territory: https://youtu.be/PXwDbDpsLDA
Putin was then emboldened to annexe Crimea (no link needed).
-
Russia has regressed into a quasi-democratic state. Leaving aside the appalling record of the Soviet Union on human rights the rot started in 2008 with the incursion into Georgian territory: https://youtu.be/PXwDbDpsLDA
Putin was then emboldened to annexe Crimea (no link needed).
Crimea voted overwhelmingly to join Russia. No annexation or link needed.
What do you think should happen to the Crimeans who want no part of a Ukrainian government? Do you not believe in the right of self determination for Crimeans? What would your solution to this quandary be? Would you support the Ukrainian government in whatever it is they would need to do to stop the Crimeans rebelling against a regime forced upon them?
Answer those questions, if you can. What are your proposals?
-
Russia has regressed into a quasi-democratic state. Leaving aside the appalling record of the Soviet Union on human rights the rot started in 2008 with the incursion into Georgian territory: https://youtu.be/PXwDbDpsLDA
Putin was then emboldened to annexe Crimea (no link needed).
Did you know, Steve, that Crimeans also voted to remain with Russia in 1991 in a union state. The Crimean parliament declared itself sovereign albeit not recognised.
The point being that any accusation of forced annexation is betrayed by even a brief awareness of the history of Crimea. They(the Crimean people) do not want to be part of Ukraine. Not now or ever. Here is the wikipedia link. There are better places for the unbiased history of Crimea but Wiki will do for you;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_Crimean_sovereignty_referendum
-
Crimea voted overwhelmingly to join Russia. No annexation or link needed.
What do you think should happen to the Crimeans who want no part of a Ukrainian government? Do you not believe in the right of self determination for Crimeans? What would your solution to this quandary be? Would you support the Ukrainian government in whatever it is they would need to do to stop the Crimeans rebelling against a regime forced upon them?
Answer those questions, if you can. What are your proposals?
Probably autonomy for the Crimeans, but they were part of Ukraine at the time of the illegal invasion by Russia.
-
Probably autonomy for the Crimeans, but they were part of Ukraine at the time of the illegal invasion by Russia.
They were only part of the Ukraine because of the messy break up of the USSR. Crimea and Crimeans are an integral part of Russian history.
If you believe in autonomy for the Crimeans, as you say, then tacitly you support the Russian position. Russia recognised the autonomy of the Crimeans, our governments don't. Your position seems confused.
-
Probably autonomy for the Crimeans, but they were part of Ukraine at the time of the illegal invasion by Russia.
Can you explain the contradictions in your answer and your stated position because they are incompatible?
1. You support the UK gov., NATO, EU(what our media laughably terms "The International Community") position that Crimea must be returned to Ukraine.
2. Russia believe in the right of self determination for the Crimeans.
3. Crimeans have made clear repeatedly that they want autonomy, have voted for it twice(1991 and 2014) and refuse to be part of Ukraine.
4. You also now support Crimean self determination(autonomy).
5. You are agreeing with the Russian and Crimeans position but support those who oppose it.
Are you sure that you are up to speed and know what is going on? You cannot hold both positions. You need to come out as a "Putin apologist" or whatever the term is now. Believing in self determination for Crimea is not in the western script. It is what started all the trouble and now it turns out you support the Russian position.
-
Putin was then emboldened to annexe Crimea (no link needed).
More than any other issue, the Crimean question demonstrates the priorities of the opposing sides. It also demonstrates which side is the malevolent actor in this.
Russia didn't recognise the initial claim of sovereignty by the Crimeans in 1991 despite the Crimeans holding a referendum. They only changed this stance in 2014 after the blatant coup by the US and others in Ukraine. The Crimeans understood that they and their culture, history and language were now to be outlawed and cleansed from the region.
It was Russia's duty to protect the Crimeans at this stage. The same is true in other Eastern and Southern oblasts in Ukraine. They will all now get to decide their own status. Russia is fighting to protect people, Ukraine is being used as a proxy by NATO, who covet only the rich and strategic land that the population are in the way of.
-
Putin was then emboldened to annexe Crimea (no link needed).
More than any other issue, the Crimean question demonstrates the priorities of the opposing sides. It also demonstrates which side is the malevolent actor in this.
Russia didn't recognise the initial claim of sovereignty by the Crimeans in 1991 despite the Crimeans holding a referendum. They only changed this stance in 2014 after the blatant coup by the US and others in Ukraine. The Crimeans understood that they and their culture, history and language were now to be outlawed and cleansed from the region.
It was Russia's duty to protect the Crimeans at this stage. The same is true in other Eastern and Southern oblasts in Ukraine. They will all now get to decide their own status. Russia is fighting to protect people, Ukraine is being used as a proxy by NATO, who covet only the rich and strategic land that the population are in the way of.
Why not have the referendum without sneakily invading Crimea? Wouldn't it have been fairer to invite international observers to all the referendums rather than march people to the polling booth at the other end of a rifle barrel?
From Steven Pifer 5/12/2019:
Since 2014, when Russia annexed Crimea from Ukraine, the United States has provided Ukraine with $3 billion in reform and military assistance and $3 billion in loan guarantees. U.S. troops in western Ukraine train their Ukrainian colleagues. Washington, in concert with the European Union, has taken steps to isolate Moscow politically and imposed a series of economic and visa sanctions on Russia and Russians.
The furor over President Donald Trump’s sordid bid to extort the president of Ukraine into investigating his potential 2020 political opponent raises an obvious question: Why should the United States care so much about Ukraine, a country 5,000 miles away? A big part of the reason is that U.S. officials told the Ukrainians the United States would care when negotiating the Budapest Memorandum on security assurances, signed 25 years ago this week.
In the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, the United States, Russia, and Britain committed “to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine” and “to refrain from the threat or use of force” against the country. Those assurances played a key role in persuading the Ukrainian government in Kyiv to give up what amounted to the world’s third largest nuclear arsenal, consisting of some 1,900 strategic nuclear warheads.
When the USSR broke up in late 1991, there were nuclear weapons scattered in the resulting post-Soviet states. The George H. W. Bush administration attached highest priority to ensuring this would not lead to an increase in the number of nuclear weapons states. Moreover, as it watched Yugoslavia break apart violently, the Bush administration worried that the Soviet collapse might also turn violent, raising the prospect of conflict among nuclear-armed states. Ensuring no increase in the number of nuclear weapons states meant that, in practice, only Russia would retain nuclear arms. The Clinton administration pursued the same goal. With the prospect of extending the Non-Proliferation Treaty indefinitely looming, an alternative course that allowed other post-Soviet states to keep nuclear weapons would have set a bad precedent.
Eliminating the strategic nuclear warheads, intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), and strategic bombers in Ukraine was a big deal for Washington. The ICBMs and bombers carried warheads of monstrous size — all designed, built, and deployed to attack America. The warheads atop the SS-19 and SS-24 ICBMs in Ukraine had explosive yields of 400-550 kilotons each — that is, 27 to 37 times the size of the atomic bomb that devastated Hiroshima. The 1,900 strategic nuclear warheads — more than six times the number of nuclear warheads that China currently possesses — could have destroyed every U.S. city with a population of more than 50,000 three times over, with warheads left to spare.
Before agreeing to give up this nuclear arsenal, Kyiv sought three assurances. First, it wanted compensation for the value of the highly-enriched uranium in the nuclear warheads, which could be blended down for use as fuel for nuclear reactors. Russia agreed to provide that.
Second, eliminating ICBMs, ICBM silos, and bombers did not come cheaply. With its economy rapidly contracting, the Ukrainian government could not afford the costs. The United States agreed to cover those costs with Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction assistance.
Third, Ukraine wanted guarantees or assurances of its security once it got rid of the nuclear arms. The Budapest Memorandum provided security assurances.
Unfortunately, Russia has broken virtually all the commitments it undertook in that document. It used military force to seize, and then illegally annex, Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula in early 2014. Russian and Russian proxy forces have waged war for more than five years in the eastern Ukrainian region of Donbas, claiming more than 13,000 lives and driving some two million people from their homes.
Some have argued that, since the United States did not invade Ukraine, it abided by its Budapest Memorandum commitments. True, in a narrow sense. However, when negotiating the security assurances, U.S. officials told their Ukrainian counterparts that, were Russia to violate them, the United States would take a strong interest and respond.
Washington did not promise unlimited support. The Budapest Memorandum contains security “assurances,” not “guarantees.” Guarantees would have implied a commitment of American military force, which NATO members have. U.S. officials made clear that was not on offer. Hence, assurances.
Beyond that, U.S. and Ukrainian officials did not discuss in detail how Washington might respond in the event of a Russian violation. That owed in part to then-Russian President Boris Yeltsin. He had his flaws, but he insisted that there be no revision of the boundaries separating the states that emerged from the Soviet collapse. Yeltsin respected Ukraine’s independence and territorial integrity. Vladimir Putin does not.
U.S. officials did assure their Ukrainian counterparts, however, that there would be a response. The United States should continue to provide reform and military assistance to Ukraine. It should continue sanctions on Russia. It should continue to demand that Moscow end its aggression against Ukraine. And it should continue to urge its European partners to assist Kyiv and keep the sanctions pressure on the Kremlin.
Washington should do this, because it said it would act if Russia violated the Budapest Memorandum. That was part of the price it paid in return for a drastic reduction in the nuclear threat to America. The United States should keep its word.
-
Why not have the referendum without sneakily invading Crimea? Wouldn't it have been fairer to invite international observers to all the referendums rather than march people to the polling booth at the other end of a rifle barrel?
You are all over the place. You are so indoctrinated with racist anti Russian propaganda that it has affected your ability to think straight. When was Crimea "sneakily invaded"? It didn't happen. If your tale requires inventions of events that didn't happen then you need to consider your position.
Russian and Ukrainian troops were stationed in Crimea at the the time of the Maidan coup. No-one invaded. Crimeans made clear they would not obey the writ of a government they considered illegitimate. Ukrainian troops refused to fight for the illegal govt.
Why outright lie about events? How many people died in the invasion of Crimea? How many Crimeans would have been ethnically cleansed by the Ukrainian regime if Russia hadn't accepted their responsibility to protect the Crimeans? Those shouting the loudest about Crimea care only for the land. The people are in the way. Stop supporting Nazis.
The rest of the diatribe/paid propaganda piece that you posted was just a repeat of the same tired lies. Ultimately you either support the Crimean right to self determination or you support the Nazis who want their land but not them.
You claim to do both. Your brain is puddled from years of indoctrination.
-
Why not have the referendum without sneakily invading Crimea? Wouldn't it have been fairer to invite international observers to all the referendums rather than march people to the polling booth at the other end of a rifle barrel?
You are all over the place. You are so indoctrinated with racist anti Russian propaganda that it has affected your ability to think straight. When was Crimea "sneakily invaded"? It didn't happen. If your tale requires inventions of events that didn't happen then you need to consider your position.
Russian and Ukrainian troops were stationed in Crimea at the the time of the Maidan coup. No-one invaded. Crimeans made clear they would not obey the writ of a government they considered illegitimate. Ukrainian troops refused to fight for the illegal govt.
Why outright lie about events? How many people died in the invasion of Crimea? How many Crimeans would have been ethnically cleansed by the Ukrainian regime if Russia hadn't accepted their responsibility to protect the Crimeans? Those shouting the loudest about Crimea care only for the land. The people are in the way. Stop supporting Nazis.
The rest of the diatribe/paid propaganda piece that you posted was just a repeat of the same tired lies. Ultimately you either support the Crimean right to self determination or you support the Nazis who want their land but not them.
You claim to do both. Your brain is puddled from years of indoctrination.
What nonsense gringo. Russian military personnel were allowed access to Crimea because of the bases, which they had access to until 2042. Thereafter with a westward-looking Ukraine who knows what would have happened? They established checkpoints at Armyansk and Chongar, dressed in Ukrainian military uniforms they had stolen. It's Russia that cared more about the Sevastopol base than the interests of Ukrainian citizens.
-
It's Russia that cared more about the Sevastopol base than the interests of Ukrainian citizens.
The "Ukrainian citizens" that you refer to do not consider themselves to be Ukrainian citizens. Why do you call them Ukrainians?
It is already established that NATO and its proxy coup government in Kiev don't care for the rights of the Crimean people to self determination. If they did then they would respect the choice that the Crimeans have made.
Crimea has only ever been part of Ukraine as a bureaucratic move by Khrushchev in the 1950's. It was added to Soviet State of Ukraine but still part of the Soviet Union. The culture, the language, the history and the inhabitants of Crimea are ethnic Russian, speak Russian, celebrate Russian culture and history.
The only time that Crimea has been considered part of an "Independent state called Ukraine" is since the break up of the Soviet Union in 1991. As I have already pointed out, the Crimeans organised a referendum at this time (1991) and declared themselves independent and sovereign from Ukraine. They (the Crimeans) have never been Ukrainians.
The successor state (Russia) to the Soviet Union did not recognise this referendum and nor did others. The reasons for this non recognition by Russia are complex and nuanced but to put it in a nutshell - The new Russian state was in no position to involve itself in the midst of its own messy break up and the plundering and looting of its wealth and resources by vulture capitalism, corporations and other interests?.
Anyway, back to the Crimeans(not Ukrainians).
So since being forced into the newly independent State of Ukraine in 1991, the Crimeans and their parliament voted on and declared independence from the newly independent State of Ukraine. Nothing to do with Russian annexation or Russian "fake referendum". A simple and overwhelmingly expessed desire (over 92%) since 1991 that they are not now or ever Ukrainian.
Russia acted correctly in 2014 protecting them from a regime that desires only their land.
You, Steve, appear to not understand that your position is inconsistent. You claim to believe in the right of self determination and then support the side that don't recognise this.
-
Gringo still trying to put a positive spin on Putins botched and embarrassing invasion in Ukraine. :))
-
Why Russia's Airforce is Grounded During War With Ukraine
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cGoHU8pR0RM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cGoHU8pR0RM)
-
https://off-guardian.org/2023/01/11/russias-biometric-nightmare/
-
https://youtu.be/4v_aC1ZTlOg
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-64274755 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-64274755)
Hopefully this is the beginning of an avalanche of advanced NATO weaponry to end this Russian invasion and drive them back to their shithole of a country.
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-64274755 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-64274755)
Hopefully this is the beginning of an avalanche of advanced NATO weaponry to end this Russian invasion and drive them back to their shithole of a country.
I'm not sure it's that simple. In 1941 the USA passed the Lend-Lease Act to assist us, but Nazi Germany was not a nuclear power. As for Russia's economy, when purchasing power parity is factored in you might be surprised at the results. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-64274755 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-64274755)
Hopefully this is the beginning of an avalanche of advanced NATO weaponry to end this Russian invasion and drive them back to their shithole of a country.
If NATO carry on supplying Ukraine with weaponry and China decide to side with Russia causing WW3, the war that follows will be fought with sticks and stones.
-
If NATO carry on supplying Ukraine with weaponry and China decide to side with Russia causing WW3, the war that follows will be fought with sticks and stones.
China are not supplying Russia hence they are resorting to being supplied by Iran.
Winnie the Pooh wants nothing to do with Vladolf Putlers war.
-
No amount of NATO weaponry will change the inevitable outcome in Ukraine. Outside of the western controlled and censored media, everyone who is taken seriously understands this. Ukrainian losses are horrendous and far exceed those of Russia and the Donbass, Luhansk militias. The current rate of attrition is horrendous and is somewhere around 8/10 to 1 according to Col. McGregor, Scott Ritter and most observers of this conflict.
Zelensky self evidently has no agency. He is a puppet of the NATO countries currently funding his senseless slaughter of Ukrainians. NATO have been in this war from the start and have been preparing for longer. They still face certain defeat and the break up of NATO after this ill advised step too far.
What happened to all of the other NATO wunderwaffen game changing weapons? What do you suggest that NATO should send next? Jets? Tanks? Air Defence systems? How long does it take to train crews for these new weapons? Would NATO crews man the tanks and AD systems and openly enter the conflict? Should they send jets-Who would crew them? Would NATO dare expose their flying turkeys to Russian AD? Of course they wouldn't. They would be fighting a real army now, not some kalashnikov wielding goat herders.
Russia have been preparing to fight NATO for decades. They understand that NATO is nothing more than the military muscle behind the bankers and financiers who control western "democracies". The bankers covet the control of Russia's unparalleled resources of oil, gas, gold, mineral wealth, vast agricultural resources etc. and a confrontation was inevitable. Russia have the backing of the rest of the globe. They are just the front man for the military dismantling of Western Empire. China, India, Iran, the Saudis along with others are busy working on the economic war, along with Russia, against the dollar. This is also going badly for Empire. The dollar is being sidelined in huge long term strategic deals between China,Iran, Saudis etc.
As I have said previously, on this thread, years ago. NATO are armed for last centuries wars against weak and powerless countries hence aircraft carriers, hundreds of jets. None of those would last 5 minutes against Russia, China or even Iran. They have spent their money and research and development time much more wisely and strategically than the corrupt and inept NATO leadership. The weapons that each of the opposed sides have chosen to develop also speaks volumes about the "intent" of each side.
Russia's weapon development and procurement has been on air defence and stand-off missile capability development which demonstrates an intent to defend.
NATO weapon development and procurement has centred on aircraft carriers, the flying turkey f35 and weapons which seem to demonstrate an intent to attack and dominate the entire globe rather than defending their bit of it.
Anyone being objective and honest can see this.
What would happen if US or Poland or any other NATO member claimed an attack and attempted to invoke Art. 5 (something Poland have already done after the alleged Russian missile hit Poland)? NATO leaders well understand that western missile technology and air defence is years behind Russia. They would do nothing. They would be as powerless as the US were when Iran attacked their bases in Iraq after General Soleimani's assassination. If they were powerless to retaliate against non nuclear armed regional power, Iran- then who in their right mind believes that they could realistically retaliate against nuclear armed, military superpower Russia in their own back garden. Russia have stand off missile capabilities way in excess of NATO capabilities, and ability to intercept, that means they can retaliate against anyone-from Russia. NATO have been in a series of forced checks for a number of years. Checkmate is inevitable. It is what you are witnessing now, hence the hysterical propaganda and censorship. There is an obvious reason why NATO will not openly intervene. The unity would be immediately exposed as a sham and they would be defeated militarily-embarrassingly and massively. The bully beaten would not be able to threaten anyone anymore.
NATO are toothless and falling apart. Turkey (2nd largest army in NATO as well as hosts of the strategically important Incirlik base) will soon leave. They have applied and been accepted provisionally to the SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organisation) which prohibits membership of alliances such as NATO. What armies and power can the rest of the motley rabble of NATO offer. Article 5 is meaningless in reality and NATO unity a myth. Most members are just vassals of the US and have little to nothing to offer militarily. There is already much dispute within NATO. Turkiye's rapprochement with Assad's Syria and Russia. Greece and Turkiye, both NATO members, making threats towards each other. Those who regard NATO as some unified, speak with one voice bloc are deluded. It is anything but and will be lucky to see out 2023 intact.
Turkiye's moves severely hinder US presence in Syria and the wider Middle East. Again, I have stated previously that US occupation in Syria will end with their being ousted. Russia, China as well as Iran and the wider "Axis of Resistance" have been planning and collaborating, cooperating on a long strategic initiative for many years. Slow boiling the frog.
We are in the end game now-NATO is in check, again-it's a zugzwang-checkmate is coming.
-
NATO leaders well understand that western missile technology and air defence is years behind Russia.
Which is why Russian air defences fail to intercept American HIMARS as they strike Russian military bases all across the Donbas, Crimea and even the Engels-2 air base in Russia. While the US and the UK is building a next generation laser based air defence system while Russia has no such thing in the pipeline. :))
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/11/10/british-missile-killing-laser-successfully-tested/ (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/11/10/british-missile-killing-laser-successfully-tested/)
-
Talking of Air-Defence. This Russian pilot :o
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBunRgIBH2I (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBunRgIBH2I)
-
Which is why Russian air defences fail to intercept American HIMARS as they strike Russian military bases all across the Donbas, Crimea and even the Engels-2 air base in Russia. While the US and the UK is building a next generation laser based air defence system while Russia has no such thing in the pipeline. :))
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/11/10/british-missile-killing-laser-successfully-tested/ (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/11/10/british-missile-killing-laser-successfully-tested/)
So is this technology being used now?
-
So is this technology being used now?
The only known ship that has one at present is the USS Portland. I am guessing they will be gradually phased in when ships get upgraded.
https://www.defensenews.com/industry/techwatch/2022/04/04/laser-weapons-development-should-involve-multiple-suppliers-says-northrop/ (https://www.defensenews.com/industry/techwatch/2022/04/04/laser-weapons-development-should-involve-multiple-suppliers-says-northrop/)
Things can move very quickly when there is some kind of arms race going on.
-
David, have you got a finger on the pulse stateside regarding the average US citizen's opinion on the war?
-
David, have you got a finger on the pulse stateside regarding the average US citizen's opinion on the war?
This is me
https://youtu.be/1dwlMeohLPI?t=167 (https://youtu.be/1dwlMeohLPI?t=167)
-
No amount of NATO weaponry will change the inevitable outcome in Ukraine. Outside of the western controlled and censored media, everyone who is taken seriously understands this. Ukrainian losses are horrendous and far exceed those of Russia and the Donbass, Luhansk militias. The current rate of attrition is horrendous and is somewhere around 8/10 to 1 according to Col. McGregor, Scott Ritter and most observers of this conflict.
Zelensky self evidently has no agency. He is a puppet of the NATO countries currently funding his senseless slaughter of Ukrainians. NATO have been in this war from the start and have been preparing for longer. They still face certain defeat and the break up of NATO after this ill advised step too far.
What happened to all of the other NATO wunderwaffen game changing weapons? What do you suggest that NATO should send next? Jets? Tanks? Air Defence systems? How long does it take to train crews for these new weapons? Would NATO crews man the tanks and AD systems and openly enter the conflict? Should they send jets-Who would crew them? Would NATO dare expose their flying turkeys to Russian AD? Of course they wouldn't. They would be fighting a real army now, not some kalashnikov wielding goat herders.
Russia have been preparing to fight NATO for decades. They understand that NATO is nothing more than the military muscle behind the bankers and financiers who control western "democracies". The bankers covet the control of Russia's unparalleled resources of oil, gas, gold, mineral wealth, vast agricultural resources etc. and a confrontation was inevitable. Russia have the backing of the rest of the globe. They are just the front man for the military dismantling of Western Empire. China, India, Iran, the Saudis along with others are busy working on the economic war, along with Russia, against the dollar. This is also going badly for Empire. The dollar is being sidelined in huge long term strategic deals between China,Iran, Saudis etc.
As I have said previously, on this thread, years ago. NATO are armed for last centuries wars against weak and powerless countries hence aircraft carriers, hundreds of jets. None of those would last 5 minutes against Russia, China or even Iran. They have spent their money and research and development time much more wisely and strategically than the corrupt and inept NATO leadership. The weapons that each of the opposed sides have chosen to develop also speaks volumes about the "intent" of each side.
Russia's weapon development and procurement has been on air defence and stand-off missile capability development which demonstrates an intent to defend.
NATO weapon development and procurement has centred on aircraft carriers, the flying turkey f35 and weapons which seem to demonstrate an intent to attack and dominate the entire globe rather than defending their bit of it.
Anyone being objective and honest can see this.
What would happen if US or Poland or any other NATO member claimed an attack and attempted to invoke Art. 5 (something Poland have already done after the alleged Russian missile hit Poland)? NATO leaders well understand that western missile technology and air defence is years behind Russia. They would do nothing. They would be as powerless as the US were when Iran attacked their bases in Iraq after General Soleimani's assassination. If they were powerless to retaliate against non nuclear armed regional power, Iran- then who in their right mind believes that they could realistically retaliate against nuclear armed, military superpower Russia in their own back garden. Russia have stand off missile capabilities way in excess of NATO capabilities, and ability to intercept, that means they can retaliate against anyone-from Russia. NATO have been in a series of forced checks for a number of years. Checkmate is inevitable. It is what you are witnessing now, hence the hysterical propaganda and censorship. There is an obvious reason why NATO will not openly intervene. The unity would be immediately exposed as a sham and they would be defeated militarily-embarrassingly and massively. The bully beaten would not be able to threaten anyone anymore.
NATO are toothless and falling apart. Turkey (2nd largest army in NATO as well as hosts of the strategically important Incirlik base) will soon leave. They have applied and been accepted provisionally to the SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organisation) which prohibits membership of alliances such as NATO. What armies and power can the rest of the motley rabble of NATO offer. Article 5 is meaningless in reality and NATO unity a myth. Most members are just vassals of the US and have little to nothing to offer militarily. There is already much dispute within NATO. Turkiye's rapprochement with Assad's Syria and Russia. Greece and Turkiye, both NATO members, making threats towards each other. Those who regard NATO as some unified, speak with one voice bloc are deluded. It is anything but and will be lucky to see out 2023 intact.
Turkiye's moves severely hinder US presence in Syria and the wider Middle East. Again, I have stated previously that US occupation in Syria will end with their being ousted. Russia, China as well as Iran and the wider "Axis of Resistance" have been planning and collaborating, cooperating on a long strategic initiative for many years. Slow boiling the frog.
We are in the end game now-NATO is in check, again-it's a zugzwang-checkmate is coming.
Some home truths and some propaganda. Which currency will replace the US dollar? The West are capitalist countries: get over it. Will Turkiye leave NATO? I doubt it. https://www.aei.org/op-eds/the-real-reason-turkey-will-never-voluntarily-leave-nato/
-
So is this technology being used now?
If the technology is ever put into use-then with near certainty it will be Russia who achieves it, Handyman. US military industrial complex is full of graft and corruption. Lots of money spent, magnitudes greater than the Russians, but less to show for it than Russia. Lots of rich shareholders though(and dead citizens in the countries that were the unfortunate recipients of US/NATO "interventions"), which is the name of the game in freedom and democracy loving USA. Profits, the bottom line. I know that you know this but David can't face realities like this so ignores all questions like yours.
Of course the US doesn't have this technology in use. Nor will it have any time soon. Plenty of people getting rich off the public teat to dish out hopium and copium about their future wonder weapons to gullible, unquestioning and indoctrinated drones, though.
-
Some home truths and some propaganda. Which currency will replace the US dollar? The West are capitalist countries: get over it. Will Turkiye leave NATO? I doubt it. https://www.aei.org/op-eds/the-real-reason-turkey-will-never-voluntarily-leave-nato/
That was an interesting article that you linked, Steve. The idea that Turkiye will not voluntarily leave is shared by many, largely for the reasons expressed in the link. The leverage that they have as a member does, as stated, give them power as a sort of Trojan Horse, which they would lose by leaving. There is no mechanism for expelling members so we have the quandary above.
All of the above is true but, "that was then and this is now"
Nobody would argue that events, especially over the last 9/10 years, are reshaping the Global Order. The US coup in Ukraine in 2014, which has ultimately led to the horror in Ukraine now. Also not to be forgotten is the attempted coup of Erdogan in 2016. Tanks on the streets, parliament bombed, arrests of many officials and military and Turkiye calling for the extradition from the US of Fethullah Gulen, the alleged instigator and protected by US intel(CIA). At around the same time the shooting down of the Russian jet by Turkiye and the killing of the Russian ambassador in Turkiye in the press conference. Whatever was going on has been memory holed by western media. Never mentioned since. Clearly western intel were neck deep in what appears an attempted coup.
Rather than retaliate against Turkiye, Russia restrained themselves and talked to the Turks coming to some "rapprochement". With Turkiye now having signed huge long term contracts with the Russians as a "gas hub" and application to the SCO(which disallows NATO membership) Turkiye's voluntary exit from NATO may be close.
Global power is visibly shifting East and waning in the West. Erdogan may be many things, but he is no fool. You don't survive and prosper as long as he has without razor sharp political instincts. The west has increasingly less to offer so there is little point in playing the balancing game any longer. He can see which way the wind is blowing. He also is fully aware of who was behind the shenanigans in 2016.
-
Some home truths and some propaganda. Which currency will replace the US dollar? The West are capitalist countries: get over it. Will Turkiye leave NATO? I doubt it. https://www.aei.org/op-eds/the-real-reason-turkey-will-never-voluntarily-leave-nato/
As to which currency will replace the dollar. Possibly the Yuan.
The move towards national currencies in trade between countries is also growing and the basket of currencies backed by resources promoted in BRICs etc. is gaining momentum. US has abused their position with the dollar(sanctions illegal under UN charter for starters) and there are enough powerful world powers who are determined to take this power from the USA due to their flagrant abuse of the privilege.
Whatever replaces the dollar, (Yuan, basket of nat. currencies, gold and silver, possible global currency) the dollar is getting replaced. All of the above, and more, have been suggested as the replacement.
I would lean more towards the basket of currencies. This would more accurately reflect relative values of commodities, products, services than the current corrupted system.
That things are changing and the dollar being dropped is the easy part of the prediction. Not even really a prediction-more an observation of events and seeing the writing on the wall. What comes next-your guess is as good as mine(unless your guess is that the dollar remains as reserve currency.)
-
If the technology is ever put into use-then with near certainty it will be Russia who achieves it, Handyman. US military industrial complex is full of graft and corruption. Lots of money spent, magnitudes greater than the Russians, but less to show for it than Russia. Lots of rich shareholders though(and dead citizens in the countries that were the unfortunate recipients of US/NATO "interventions"), which is the name of the game in freedom and democracy loving USA. Profits, the bottom line. I know that you know this but David can't face realities like this so ignores all questions like yours.
Of course the US doesn't have this technology in use. Nor will it have any time soon. Plenty of people getting rich off the public teat to dish out hopium and copium about their future wonder weapons to gullible, unquestioning and indoctrinated drones, though.
There is literally footage of the USS Portland using the laser that's been installed on it.
But according to you, a country that is deploying tanks and aircraft made in 70s whose economy is the size of Italy's will beat them to it.
I was eager to find out how the Su-57 and the T-14 would perform in combat. However neither of these have been deployed. They only have a dozen or so prototypes that appear in the red square parade.
-
There is literally footage of the USS Portland using the laser that's been installed on it.
But according to you, a country that is deploying tanks and aircraft made in 70s whose economy is the size of Italy's will beat them to it.
Russia has already beaten the USA in the development of modern weaponry so why wouldn't they beat them to lasers also.
Russia claim to have already developed laser weapons (Peresvet, Zadira)
According to you a country that is way behind Russia on hypersonic missiles, air defences, electronic warfare etc. will develop laser weapons before China and Russia.
Russia already have them. USA don't. China also claim to. You have nothing to add, as usual.
Do you really believe that Italy have a stronger economy and are richer than Russia? Based on the wholly non representative measure of GDP? You are a fool who is only able to regurgitate the crap fed to you without bothering to think what it means.
Russia is autarkic and has not only withstood wave after wave of sanctions designed to crush its economy-it has become stronger because of the sanctions. Those doing the sanctioning, on the other hand, have found that Russia is too big, too strong militarily, too important to the global economy and too rich in all resources to sanction. The same people who believe the crap about the weakness of the Russian economy(smaller than Italy lol!) maybe ought to be rethinking their conclusions based on actuality. Could Italy withstand and thrive under the kind of sanctions attempted on Russia? Of course not! GDP is meaningless as a measure to the strength of an economy. Something the fuckwits in Western governments are learning, in real time, to their own detriment.
Maybe Russia will announce counter sanctions on the countries illegally imposing them on Russia.
That would inflict real pain. Russia's economy is way more resilient than the Ponzi schemes in US/EU/UK.
-
The only thing propping up the GDP of the rich West is and was NATO. Any challenge to the dollar as reserve currency had the ultimate backing of NATO. As Major General Smedley Butler observed;
I wouldn't go to war again as I have done to protect some lousy investment of the bankers. There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket.
I spent 33 years and 4 months In active service as a member of our country's most agile military force – the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from a second lieutenant to Major-General. And during that period I spent most of my time being a high-class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer for capitalism.
NATO has been shown to be a paper tiger. It's supposed omnipotence now gone forever. The muscle behind the Ponzi scheme has been stood up to. The Ponzi scheme of Western corporatism is next, now without the muscle to save it.
-
Russia has already beaten the USA in the development of modern weaponry so why wouldn't they beat them to lasers also.
Because its your premise that Russia has "beaten the USA in the development of modern weaponry" is completely false.
For example, the Russian SU-57 has a radar signature -10dB. Whereas the F-35 has a radar signature -30dB and the F-22 has a radar signature -40dB.
Russia will always produce and design its hardware with a mentality of quantity over quality as It worked so well for them in WW2. But it comes at a price of losing many troops.
Russia claim to have already developed laser weapons (Peresvet, Zadira)
Russia claims to have a lot of things. But when it comes down to it, these weapons are not showing up when they are needed.
https://www.dw.com/en/russias-laser-weapon-in-ukraine-does-it-exist/a-61883096 (https://www.dw.com/en/russias-laser-weapon-in-ukraine-does-it-exist/a-61883096)
-
With regards to this war Russia v Ukraine (backed by NATO), it has seemed Russia has taken a real beating and been found wanting in so many areas. However, there has also been some quite severe censorship and one sided news reporting. Taking all things in to account, I'm wondering whether the censorship was necessary. If Russia was on the front foot it would be evident on the battlefield. It doesn't seem to be. It seems to taking one step forward and two steps back. If I was a Belarusian dictator, I would be extremely wary of committing to anything involving crossing the border, as it would likely result in mass slaughter for those crossing over. I think if Russia had any real good news about the war going their way, it would find itself in the news somehow, despite all the one sided reporting.
-
Russia is too big, too strong militarily, too important to the global economy and too rich in all resources to sanction.
Ah yes. So strong militarily it cannot successfully occupy a weaker country on its door step. So rich and important economically that 35 million of its population have no access to a flushing toilet or basic indoor plumbing.
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2019/04/02/indoor-plumbing-still-a-pipe-dream-for-20-of-russian-households-reports-say-a65049 (https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2019/04/02/indoor-plumbing-still-a-pipe-dream-for-20-of-russian-households-reports-say-a65049)
https://washmatters.wateraid.org/sites/g/files/jkxoof256/files/Its_No_Joke_2015_the_state_of_the_worlds_toilets.pdf (https://washmatters.wateraid.org/sites/g/files/jkxoof256/files/Its_No_Joke_2015_the_state_of_the_worlds_toilets.pdf)
A nation to behold ::)
-
With regards to this war Russia v Ukraine (backed by NATO), it has seemed Russia has taken a real beating and been found wanting in so many areas. However, there has also been some quite severe censorship and one sided news reporting. Taking all things in to account, I'm wondering whether the censorship was necessary. If Russia was on the front foot it would be evident on the battlefield. It doesn't seem to be. It seems to taking one step forward and two steps back. If I was a Belarusian dictator, I would be extremely wary of committing to anything involving crossing the border, as it would likely result in mass slaughter for those crossing over. I think if Russia had any real good news about the war going their way, it would find itself in the news somehow, despite all the one sided reporting.
Lukashenko knows that many people in his country don't like him and they can see through his fraudulent election results, he is a stale relic. If I was the Belarusian dictator, I would be extremely wary of committing to sending troops over the border, as it would likely result in them turning back around to overthrow me.
Putin and his cronies anticipated that Ukraine would fall like Afghanistan did to the Taliban. That was not considered bad judgment at the time. Putin is now stuck in a sunk-cost fallacy, he has to come out of it with at least something to show for it, because if he doesn't, that's his life and legacy over.
-
Lukashenko knows that many people in his country don't like him and they can see through his fraudulent election results, he is a stale relic. If I was the Belarusian dictator, I would be extremely wary of committing to sending troops over the border, as it would likely result in them turning back around to overthrow me.
Putin and his cronies anticipated that Ukraine would fall like Afghanistan did to the Taliban. That was not considered bad judgment at the time. Putin is now stuck in a sunk-cost fallacy, he has to come out of it with at least something to show for it, because if he doesn't, that's his life and legacy over.
hes the dictater who wins elections
and doesnt lockdown his country and doesnt give himself emergency powers whenhe could easly have done so
-
With regards to this war Russia v Ukraine (backed by NATO), it has seemed Russia has taken a real beating and been found wanting in so many areas. However, there has also been some quite severe censorship and one sided news reporting. Taking all things in to account, I'm wondering whether the censorship was necessary. If Russia was on the front foot it would be evident on the battlefield. It doesn't seem to be. It seems to taking one step forward and two steps back. If I was a Belarusian dictator, I would be extremely wary of committing to anything involving crossing the border, as it would likely result in mass slaughter for those crossing over. I think if Russia had any real good news about the war going their way, it would find itself in the news somehow, despite all the one sided reporting.
Your post demonstrates the need of the censorship, Roch. You wonder at the need of censorship because "it would be evident on the battlefield, if Russia were on the front foot". You only believe they aren't on the front foot because of the "one sided news reporting" and censorship. Your post actually demonstrates just how much the censorship is required and how well it works.
People such as Scott Ritter, Colonel Douglas MacGregor (hardly Russian disinformation) are brutally honest about the real state of affairs. The real Ukrainian losses. Neither of these could be regarded as Russian disinformation. Aside from these there are many informed and sane voices in the West but censorship means they will never be interviewed or their views sought by a corrupted and censored media. Hence the lack of any evidence "on the battlefield" of Russian success. To discern you have to seek out honest and unbiased reporting in times of censorship and propaganda yourself. The censors and the censored aren't going to show you it.
-
Your post demonstrates the need of the censorship, Roch. You wonder at the need of censorship because "it would be evident on the battlefield, if Russia were on the front foot". You only believe they aren't on the front foot because of the "one sided news reporting" and censorship. Your post actually demonstrates just how much the censorship is required and how well it works.
People such as Scott Ritter, Colonel Douglas MacGregor (hardly Russian disinformation) are brutally honest about the real state of affairs. The real Ukrainian losses. Neither of these could be regarded as Russian disinformation. Aside from these there are many informed and sane voices in the West but censorship means they will never be interviewed or their views sought by a corrupted and censored media. Hence the lack of any evidence "on the battlefield" of Russian success. To discern you have to seek out honest and unbiased reporting in times of censorship and propaganda yourself. The censors and the censored aren't going to show you it.
I did wonder along these lines Gringo. But I would be surprised if Russia actually has been successful to anywhere near the extent they could have been. The conscripts stories seem to have more than a ring of truth. It just looks like organised chaos born out of unexpected failure.
-
With regards to this war Russia v Ukraine (backed by NATO), it has seemed Russia has taken a real beating and been found wanting in so many areas. However, there has also been some quite severe censorship and one sided news reporting. Taking all things in to account, I'm wondering whether the censorship was necessary. If Russia was on the front foot it would be evident on the battlefield. It doesn't seem to be. It seems to taking one step forward and two steps back. If I was a Belarusian dictator, I would be extremely wary of committing to anything involving crossing the border, as it would likely result in mass slaughter for those crossing over. I think if Russia had any real good news about the war going their way, it would find itself in the news somehow, despite all the one sided reporting.
Here is a snippet of some less biased reporting for you, Roch;
Ukraine SitRep - Media Ignorance, Counter-Artillery War, Three Lost Armies
Yves Smith asks:
What if Russia Won the Ukraine War but the Western Press Didn’t Notice?
She points to several headlines which, despite decisive Russian victories like its taking of Soledar, present the Ukraine as winning the war:
Nevertheless, Soledar has fallen and the loss of Bakhmut looks baked in, absent horrific Russian errors. The so-called Zelensky line is breaking even before Russia has put its recently-mobilized forces to work in a serious way. Regular commentators are waiting for the Russian hammer to fall, although Russia may simply grind more forcefully by pressing harder at more points along the very long line of contact. Remember one concern on the Russian side is avoiding “winning” in a way that leads to NATO panic and desperate action ... not that the Collective West’s fragile emotional state can be readily managed.
With that context, you’d expect some members of the press to have worked out that things are not going very well for Ukraine and the classic cowboy movie rescue of the cavalry riding over the hill (here in the form of tanks and artillery) will be too little, too late.
Instead, the media seems to be trying to integrate snippets of facts on the ground with the heroic tale of inevitable Ukraine victory.
That is certainly correct for the wide majority of the stories, which claim that Soledar and Bahkmut, are irrelevant towns, but some pieces are creeping up that differ. A few days ago the Washington Post headlined:
Bloody Bakhmut siege poses risks for Ukraine
Ukraine faces difficult choices about how much deeper its military should get drawn into a protracted fight over the besieged city of Bakhmut, as Kyiv prepares for a new counteroffensive elsewhere on the front that requires conserving weapons, ammunition and experienced fighters.
Russia has escalated its assault in the area in recent days, unleashing savage fighting that has underscored the high cost of the battle. Russian mercenaries and released convicts from the Wagner group pushed into the neighboring salt-mining town of Soledar and inched closer to Bakhmut, the capture of which has eluded them for months despite an advantage in firepower and the willingness to sacrifice troops.
The piece quotes several Ukrainian soldiers which speak of huge losses on their side. But the U.S. is still egging them on:
The senior U.S. official cautioned against completely dismissing Bakhmut or neighboring Soledar as nonstrategic places that Kyiv can simply relinquish, noting that the salt and gypsum mines give the area economic significance. Theoretically, the Russians could use the deep salt mines and tunnels to protect equipment and ammunition from Ukrainian missile strikes. Moscow has also endowed the city with import.
“To some degree, Bakhmut matters to [Ukraine] because it matters so much to the Russians,” the senior U.S. official said, noting that control of Bakhmut is not going to have a huge impact on the conflict or imperil Ukraine’s defensive or offensive options in the country’s eastern Donbas region.
The official added, “Bakhmut is not going to change the war.”
I believe the senior U.S. official to be very wrong. Soledar and Bakhmut are bleeding the Ukrainian army dry. That is of relevance. Look at the insane number of Ukrainian units deployed on that only 50 kilometer (30mi) long sector of the front.
That is the opening to the article-full piece in the link below;
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2023/01/ukraine-sitrep-media-ignorance-counter-artillery-war-three-lost-armies-.html#comments
If you are seeking the truth of this conflict-it is not to be found in western media or on heavily censored social media. You are being shown irrelevant minutae without being given a wider picture.
The main war that is raging is the economic war between the emerging BRICS+, SCO etc aligned multipolar world and the colonialist uni-power West. This is not reported at all in the western media. The dollar is being dropped. The economic collapse of the western financial ponzi fraud is inevitable.
Gradually then suddenly. Ernest Hemingway's observation on how bankruptcy happens applies to the fraudulent financial system of the west.
The military confrontation in the Ukraine is a last throw of the dice to collapse Russia and gain control of its resources. NATO have provoked the "unprovoked" Russian "aggression" for years. They have found out that Russia are too strong.
The censorship is definitely required, Roch. Without it our leaders would already be ousted, EU and NATO broken up and our institutions and "free media" would not be servants to capital and corporate interests waging wars of piracy to steal others resources.
-
Here is a snippet of some less biased reporting for you, Roch;
Ukraine SitRep - Media Ignorance, Counter-Artillery War, Three Lost Armies
Yves Smith asks:
What if Russia Won the Ukraine War but the Western Press Didn’t Notice?
She points to several headlines which, despite decisive Russian victories like its taking of Soledar, present the Ukraine as winning the war:
Nevertheless, Soledar has fallen and the loss of Bakhmut looks baked in, absent horrific Russian errors. The so-called Zelensky line is breaking even before Russia has put its recently-mobilized forces to work in a serious way. Regular commentators are waiting for the Russian hammer to fall, although Russia may simply grind more forcefully by pressing harder at more points along the very long line of contact. Remember one concern on the Russian side is avoiding “winning” in a way that leads to NATO panic and desperate action ... not that the Collective West’s fragile emotional state can be readily managed.
With that context, you’d expect some members of the press to have worked out that things are not going very well for Ukraine and the classic cowboy movie rescue of the cavalry riding over the hill (here in the form of tanks and artillery) will be too little, too late.
Instead, the media seems to be trying to integrate snippets of facts on the ground with the heroic tale of inevitable Ukraine victory.
That is certainly correct for the wide majority of the stories, which claim that Soledar and Bahkmut, are irrelevant towns, but some pieces are creeping up that differ. A few days ago the Washington Post headlined:
Bloody Bakhmut siege poses risks for Ukraine
Ukraine faces difficult choices about how much deeper its military should get drawn into a protracted fight over the besieged city of Bakhmut, as Kyiv prepares for a new counteroffensive elsewhere on the front that requires conserving weapons, ammunition and experienced fighters.
Russia has escalated its assault in the area in recent days, unleashing savage fighting that has underscored the high cost of the battle. Russian mercenaries and released convicts from the Wagner group pushed into the neighboring salt-mining town of Soledar and inched closer to Bakhmut, the capture of which has eluded them for months despite an advantage in firepower and the willingness to sacrifice troops.
The piece quotes several Ukrainian soldiers which speak of huge losses on their side. But the U.S. is still egging them on:
The senior U.S. official cautioned against completely dismissing Bakhmut or neighboring Soledar as nonstrategic places that Kyiv can simply relinquish, noting that the salt and gypsum mines give the area economic significance. Theoretically, the Russians could use the deep salt mines and tunnels to protect equipment and ammunition from Ukrainian missile strikes. Moscow has also endowed the city with import.
“To some degree, Bakhmut matters to [Ukraine] because it matters so much to the Russians,” the senior U.S. official said, noting that control of Bakhmut is not going to have a huge impact on the conflict or imperil Ukraine’s defensive or offensive options in the country’s eastern Donbas region.
The official added, “Bakhmut is not going to change the war.”
I believe the senior U.S. official to be very wrong. Soledar and Bakhmut are bleeding the Ukrainian army dry. That is of relevance. Look at the insane number of Ukrainian units deployed on that only 50 kilometer (30mi) long sector of the front.
That is the opening to the article-full piece in the link below;
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2023/01/ukraine-sitrep-media-ignorance-counter-artillery-war-three-lost-armies-.html#comments
If you are seeking the truth of this conflict-it is not to be found in western media or on heavily censored social media. You are being shown irrelevant minutae without being given a wider picture.
The main war that is raging is the economic war between the emerging BRICS+, SCO etc aligned multipolar world and the colonialist uni-power West. This is not reported at all in the western media. The dollar is being dropped. The economic collapse of the western financial ponzi fraud is inevitable.
Gradually then suddenly. Ernest Hemingway's observation on how bankruptcy happens applies to the fraudulent financial system of the west.
The military confrontation in the Ukraine is a last throw of the dice to collapse Russia and gain control of its resources. NATO have provoked the "unprovoked" Russian "aggression" for years. They have found out that Russia are too strong.
The censorship is definitely required, Roch. Without it our leaders would already be ousted, EU and NATO broken up and our institutions and "free media" would not be servants to capital and corporate interests waging wars of piracy to steal others resources.
An interesting read, thank you Gringo.
-
I did wonder along these lines Gringo. But I would be surprised if Russia actually has been successful to anywhere near the extent they could have been. The conscripts stories seem to have more than a ring of truth. It just looks like organised chaos born out of unexpected failure.
All of the stories are carefully curated to support the narrative that is being pushed. The hundreds of stories that contradict the narrative don't get aired. It is that simple, Roch. Hence the censorship.
Colonel Douglas Macgregor from a few days ago below;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=izXkErjNybw&ab_channel=FINANCEMAIL
Scott Ritter interviews are excellent-brutally honest and informed. Below is one for you;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbD3hZ23XVY&ab_channel=THEDIVEINWITHRATTAN
BBC nor any western media would interview either of the above despite their obvious expertise and knowledge. Curated media is just propaganda-by definition.
-
This is me
https://youtu.be/1dwlMeohLPI?t=167 (https://youtu.be/1dwlMeohLPI?t=167)
I only just saw this :))
-
All of the stories are carefully curated to support the narrative that is being pushed. The hundreds of stories that contradict the narrative don't get aired. It is that simple, Roch. Hence the censorship.
Colonel Douglas Macgregor from a few days ago below;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=izXkErjNybw&ab_channel=FINANCEMAIL
Scott Ritter interviews are excellent-brutally honest and informed. Below is one for you;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbD3hZ23XVY&ab_channel=THEDIVEINWITHRATTAN
BBC nor any western media would interview either of the above despite their obvious expertise and knowledge. Curated media is just propaganda-by definition.
Douglas Macgregor is an antisemite conspiracy theorist and Scott Ritter spent four years in prison for Pedophilia.
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/12/12/politics/kfile-douglas-macgregor-west-point-board/index.html (https://edition.cnn.com/2020/12/12/politics/kfile-douglas-macgregor-west-point-board/index.html)
https://newsletters.theatlantic.com/deep-shtetl/6232acc89277230021b0891c/douglas-macgregor-jewish-tucker-carlson-purim/ (https://newsletters.theatlantic.com/deep-shtetl/6232acc89277230021b0891c/douglas-macgregor-jewish-tucker-carlson-purim/)
You find some really weird people to listen to.
-
I only just saw this :))
:))
-
Scott Ritter, who spent four years in prison for pedophilia
Douglas Macgregor is an antisemite conspiracy theorist and Scott Ritter spent four years in prison for Pedophilia.
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/12/12/politics/kfile-douglas-macgregor-west-point-board/index.html (https://edition.cnn.com/2020/12/12/politics/kfile-douglas-macgregor-west-point-board/index.html)
https://newsletters.theatlantic.com/deep-shtetl/6232acc89277230021b0891c/douglas-macgregor-jewish-tucker-carlson-purim/ (https://newsletters.theatlantic.com/deep-shtetl/6232acc89277230021b0891c/douglas-macgregor-jewish-tucker-carlson-purim/)
You find some really weird people to listen to.
thats from cnn so it cant possly be true
-
The idea that Russia is way ahead of the US in terms of modern weaponry is far from a false premise. Measuring the radar signature of two comparative jets has nothing to do with modern weapons development. It is an idiotic measure and shows how little you have in the way of convincing rebuttal to have chosen this arbitrary comparison. Russian air defences can see the "supposed" stealth jets and shoot them down. SU57 is faster(much), more manoeuvrable and easily as capable, if not more , than the F35. Why didn't you compare speed or manoeuvrability? The US problem, as I have stated many times previously, is that they have developed and produced weaponry for war against relatively defenceless countries. Their weapons development over the last decades has concentrated on weapons of attack rather than defence. Russian, as well as Chinese and Iranian, has concentrated on countering the US methods of aggression. They have done this successfully.
Now should Russia or Iran for that matter decide that they want to attack and invade the US, they would be ill equipped for the task. They don't want or need to do this though. They just need to keep the thieving western pirates from stealing their resources. For that task, they could not be better prepared. US/NATO could not "Shock and Awe"(their chosen method of war) Russia. Russia's way more modern and effective air defence and stand off missile capability would sink every carrier. Any jet that survived, none would, would have nowhere to land anyway. The F35 avoids airspace defended by Russian air defence. It would be too humiliating and damage the bottom line once it is shown up as the overhyped flying turkey that it is. Wouldn't last 5 minutes in a defended airspace. It's carrier would last even less time.
Iran demonstrated very publicly that US has no response to stand off missile capability. What if Iran had armed those missiles? So how do you imagine that US/NATO can defeat Russia militarily? They are incapable of invading and bombing Iran. They (US) didn't even retaliate against the Iranian missile attack on their bases. Why? We were promised that should Iran even harm one US soldier that the consequences would be like nothing seen before. They harmed well over 100 and nothing! Why?
NATO weakness has been exposed to the world. There is no going back. The world is moving on from Western colonialism.
-
im not really that bothred about who is in the right i would just rather not die in a nuclear war
-
The idea that Russia is way ahead of the US in terms of modern weaponry is far from a false premise. Measuring the radar signature of two comparative jets has nothing to do with modern weapons development. It is an idiotic measure and shows how little you have in the way of convincing rebuttal to have chosen this arbitrary comparison. Russian air defences can see the "supposed" stealth jets and shoot them down. SU57 is faster(much), more manoeuvrable and easily as capable, if not more , than the F35. Why didn't you compare speed or manoeuvrability? The US problem, as I have stated many times previously, is that they have developed and produced weaponry for war against relatively defenceless countries. Their weapons development over the last decades has concentrated on weapons of attack rather than defence. Russian, as well as Chinese and Iranian, has concentrated on countering the US methods of aggression. They have done this successfully.
Now should Russia or Iran for that matter decide that they want to attack and invade the US, they would be ill equipped for the task. They don't want or need to do this though. They just need to keep the thieving western pirates from stealing their resources. For that task, they could not be better prepared. US/NATO could not "Shock and Awe"(their chosen method of war) Russia. Russia's way more modern and effective air defence and stand off missile capability would sink every carrier. Any jet that survived, none would, would have nowhere to land anyway. The F35 avoids airspace defended by Russian air defence. It would be too humiliating and damage the bottom line once it is shown up as the overhyped flying turkey that it is. Wouldn't last 5 minutes in a defended airspace. It's carrier would last even less time.
Iran demonstrated very publicly that US has no response to stand off missile capability. What if Iran had armed those missiles? So how do you imagine that US/NATO can defeat Russia militarily? They are incapable of invading and bombing Iran. They (US) didn't even retaliate against the Iranian missile attack on their bases. Why? We were promised that should Iran even harm one US soldier that the consequences would be like nothing seen before. They harmed well over 100 and nothing! Why?
NATO weakness has been exposed to the world. There is no going back. The world is moving on from Western colonialism.
I simply don't trust nor have faith in Russian engineering. They don't have the domestic talent or the inventiveness. They simply produce second rate imitations of what is conceived elsewhere.
The Su-57 is a blatant rip off of the F-22 raptor. Much like the Buran is a blatant copy of the NASA space shuttle. Their MIG-29 is a blatant copy of the F-15 and the Tupolev Tu-144 is a blatant copy of Concorde.
It is substandard engineering built on corporate espionage.
-
So how do you imagine that US/NATO can defeat Russia militarily?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxywjhzCmVs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxywjhzCmVs)
-
I simply don't trust nor have faith in Russian engineering. They don't have the domestic talent or the inventiveness. They simply produce second rate imitations of what is conceived elsewhere.
The Su-57 is a blatant rip off of the F-22 raptor. Much like the Buran is a blatant copy of the NASA space shuttle. Their MIG-29 is a blatant copy of the F-15 and the Tupolev Tu-144 is a blatant copy of Concorde.
It is substandard engineering built on corporate espionage.
This is wishful thinking not serious analysis. Something does not become true just because it is believed. The differences between the F22 and SU57 make a mockery of the claim you make. Russian engineering and innovation has a long history and to claim that they are backwards is to ignore the historical record.
Russian missile, air defence, electronic warfare,rocket & space technology, nuclear power innovations are all way ahead of anything in the west. Who did they copy that off? Mocking alleged Russian shortcomings on "engineering, innovation or talent" is ignorant of both historical and current facts and a bit racist.
-
Latest interview with Col. Douglas MacGregor- 35 mins of sober and serious analysis. One American interviewing another American aka antisemitic Russian disinformation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZjQp8YA6UM&ab_channel=StraightCallswithDouglasMacgregor
-
Battle of Kyiv - Russian Invasion of Ukraine Documentary.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSSiPrF8GoM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSSiPrF8GoM)
-
Some home truths and some propaganda. Which currency will replace the US dollar? The West are capitalist countries: get over it. Will Turkiye leave NATO? I doubt it. https://www.aei.org/op-eds/the-real-reason-turkey-will-never-voluntarily-leave-nato/
Interesting moves happening geo-economically currency wise. Momentum against the dollar is unstoppable. Taster below;
The Central Banks of Iran and Russia are studying the adoption of a “stable coin” for foreign trade settlements, replacing the US dollar, the ruble and the rial. The crypto crowd is already up in arms, mulling the pros and cons of a gold-backed central bank digital currency (CBDC) for trade that will be in fact impervious to the weaponized US dollar.
A gold-backed digital currency
The really attractive issue here is that this gold-backed digital currency would be particularly effective in the Special Economic Zone (SEZ) of Astrakhan, in the Caspian Sea.
Astrakhan is the key Russian port participating in the International North South Transportation Corridor (INTSC), with Russia processing cargo travelling across Iran in merchant ships all the way to West Asia, Africa, the Indian Ocean and South Asia.
The success of the INSTC – progressively tied to a gold-backed CBDC – will largely hinge on whether scores of Asian, West Asian and African nations refuse to apply US-dictated sanctions on both Russia and Iran.
As it stands, exports are mostly energy and agricultural products; Iranian companies are the third largest importer of Russian grain. Next will be turbines, polymers, medical equipment, and car parts. Only the Russia-Iran section of the INSTC represents a $25 billion business.
And then there’s the crucial energy angle of INSTC – whose main players are the Russia-Iran-India triad.
India’s purchases of Russian crude have increased year-by-year by a whopping factor of 33. India is the world’s third largest importer of oil; in December, it received 1.2 million barrels from Russia, which for several months now is positioned ahead of Iraq and Saudi Arabia as Delhi’s top supplier.
‘A fairer payment system’
Third: South Africa holds this year’s rotating BRICS presidency. And this year will mark the start of BRICS+ expansion, with candidates ranging from Algeria, Iran and Argentina to Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the UAE.
South African Foreign Minister Naledi Pandor has just confirmed that the BRICS do want to find a way to bypass the US dollar and thus create “a fairer payment system not skewed toward wealthier countries.”
For years now, Yaroslav Lissovolik, head of the analytical department of Russian Sberbank’s corporate and investment business has been a proponent of closer BRICS integration and the adoption of a BRICS reserve currency.
Lissovolik reminds us that the first proposal “to create a new reserve currency based on a basket of currencies of BRICS countries was formulated by the Valdai Club back in 2018.”
Full article linked below
https://thecradle.co/article-view/20532/global-south-gold-backed-currencies-to-replace-the-us-dollar
-
From the same article linked in previous post;
Off the record, New York banking sources admit the US dollar would be “wiped out, since it is a valueless fiat currency, should Sergey Glazyev link the new currency to gold. The reason is that the Bretton Woods system no longer has a gold base and has no intrinsic value, like the FTX crypto currency. Sergey’s plan also linking the currency to oil and natural gas seems to be a winner.”
-
Gringo wants to live the Russian dream. Work 50 hours a week in an asbestos mine, watch state propaganda on TV all night. His conscripted grandchildren upgrading the towns only working toilet with one they stole from Ukraine is a family honour.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcNS4B58HsM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcNS4B58HsM)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwSNPTe2o1c (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwSNPTe2o1c)
-
https://youtu.be/1OcsBeYw9M4
nato admits it
-
Russia a year ago: we’ll take Ukraine in 3 days
Russia today: better put a Pantsir S1 on a roof in case a drone flies 500km into Moscow
https://defence-blog.com/russian-air-defense-systems-spotted-on-top-of-moscows-buildings/ (https://defence-blog.com/russian-air-defense-systems-spotted-on-top-of-moscows-buildings/)
-
Russia a year ago: we’ll take Ukraine in 3 days
Russia today: better put a Pantsir S1 on a roof in case a drone flies 500km into Moscow
https://defence-blog.com/russian-air-defense-systems-spotted-on-top-of-moscows-buildings/ (https://defence-blog.com/russian-air-defense-systems-spotted-on-top-of-moscows-buildings/)
Russia haven't said that they will take Ukraine in 3 days. Western media and government spokespeople have claimed that Putin "thought" this. They do this so that when it doesn't happen the stage is set for tales of Russian incompetence. You lack the ability to see through propaganda. Fact check yourself and find this claim made by an official Russian government source.
With its missiles, the Pantsir-S1 can engage tactical aircraft at a maximum range of 20 km and altitude of 10 km, subsonic cruise missiles at a range of 12 km and altitude of 6 km, and high-speed air-to-ground missiles at a range of 7 km and altitude of 6 km.
You are exceptionally gullible and lack any critical thinking skills whatsoever. The Pantsirs are for 5th columnist sabotage drone attacks not for drones launched 500km away. Anything launched 500km away would not enter Moscow airspace. How can a Pantsir with it's max 20 km range have anything to do with drones launched 500km away. Your ignorance shines through on every lie filled post you make.
-
Gringo wants to live the Russian dream. Work 50 hours a week in an asbestos mine, watch state propaganda on TV all night. His conscripted grandchildren upgrading the towns only working toilet with one they stole from Ukraine is a family honour.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcNS4B58HsM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcNS4B58HsM)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwSNPTe2o1c (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwSNPTe2o1c)
Have you got anything constructive to say? Are you this stupid in real life?
-
Ah yes. So strong militarily it cannot successfully occupy a weaker country on its door step. So rich and important economically that 35 million of its population have no access to a flushing toilet or basic indoor plumbing.- David, inevitably.
He basically repeats the same bullshit over and over but worded slightly differently. Whatever is being debated David's reply will contain one or more of-lack of flushing toilets- too weak to occupy Ukraine- running out of missiles- economy smaller than Italy blah blah... No matter the point being discussed this will be David's witless response.
For the truth on the supposed lack of access to flushing toilets;
https://www.quora.com/Why-do-so-many-Russians-live-without-indoor-plumbing
Turns out that it isn't true, obviously, or even close to the truth, again obviously. Something that sounds so absurd should lead to the reader checking this "fact". To simply repeat the claim, as David does, shows the readers limited critical thinking abilities (non existent in David's case).
That he believes it has any relevance(even if were true) to the subject being discussed shows just how far out of his depth that he is.
You may ask why David doesn't compare, say, home ownership rates, homeless rates or other measures if he imagines lies about flushing toilets is relevant.
Home ownership rates in Russia- over 90%. Nowhere near in UK/US/EU.
You are also many times more likely to be homeless in UK/US/EU.
Despite David's repeated, but non fact checked, lies-the homes have flushing toilets.
Does this make Russia more likely/less likely to achieve their objectives? Not the projected objectives of lying western governments and media.
David fails to understand Russia's objectives which are clearly laid out. Not the fake objectives projected in the west in order to be able to pronounce Russian failure.
-
https://youtu.be/1OcsBeYw9M4
nato admits it
Watched the Jimmy Dore link, Nugs.
To be honest anyone who still believes the official bullshit about "unprovoked aggression" by Russia is wilfully blind and/or stupid.
In the last few weeks we have had admissions by both Angela Merkel and Francois Hollande that there was never any intention to fulfil the 2015 Minsk 2 agreements and that it was to "buy time" to arm and attack the separatist oblasts and Crimea. An agreement that was then voted unanimously as a UN Security Council resolution. They had no intention of ever fulfilling their commitments and instead used the time to arm and attack Russia. The build up of troops and increased shelling of civilians in Donbass, all recorded by the OSCE, in the weeks prior to 24/02/22 being the precursor to a full on assault.
Just before the planned assault Russia launched their "unprovoked invasion".
NATO have been provoking and preparing for decades. Russia beat them to the punch and NATO haven't recovered since.
-
Hey bartender over here
Two more shots
And two more beers
Sir turn up the TV sound
The war has started on the ground
Just love those laser guided bombs
They're really great
For righting wrongs
You hit the target
And win the game
From bars 3, 000 miles away
3, 000 miles away
We play the game
With the bravery of being out of range
Time moves on but the song remains the same.
The incomparable Roger Waters with his re-working of, "The bravery of being out of range". From his 1992 album, "Amused to Death" but performed during lockdown. Just beautiful
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JamLmpVOgE0&ab_channel=RogerWaters
-
To continue the brief musical interlude, not really so far off topic given the prophecy of armageddon contained within. How come singing about impending nuclear armageddon can be so soothingly emotive.
Two Suns in the Sunset
The wire that holds the cork
That keeps the anger in
Gives way
And suddenly it's day again.
The sun is in the east
Even though the day is done.
Two suns in the sunset
Hmmmmmmmmmm
Could be the human race is run.
And as the windshield melts
My tears evaporate
Leaving only charcoal to defend.
Finally I understand the feelings of the few.
Ashes and diamonds
Foe and friend
We were all equal in the end.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_m2CZU9vdk&ab_channel=RogerWaters
-
From the same article linked in previous post;
Off the record, New York banking sources admit the US dollar would be “wiped out, since it is a valueless fiat currency, should Sergey Glazyev link the new currency to gold. The reason is that the Bretton Woods system no longer has a gold base and has no intrinsic value, like the FTX crypto currency. Sergey’s plan also linking the currency to oil and natural gas seems to be a winner.”
Do you mean akin to Chancellor of the Exchequer Winson Churchill's abortive gold standard of February 1925..
-
Watched the Jimmy Dore link, Nugs.
To be honest anyone who still believes the official bullshit about "unprovoked aggression" by Russia is wilfully blind and/or stupid.
In the last few weeks we have had admissions by both Angela Merkel and Francois Hollande that there was never any intention to fulfil the 2015 Minsk 2 agreements and that it was to "buy time" to arm and attack the separatist oblasts and Crimea. An agreement that was then voted unanimously as a UN Security Council resolution. They had no intention of ever fulfilling their commitments and instead used the time to arm and attack Russia. The build up of troops and increased shelling of civilians in Donbass, all recorded by the OSCE, in the weeks prior to 24/02/22 being the precursor to a full on assault.
Just before the planned assault Russia launched their "unprovoked invasion".
NATO have been provoking and preparing for decades. Russia beat them to the punch and NATO haven't recovered since.
But they weren't signatories to the agreement, which was ambiguous in character anyhow.
-
But they weren't signatories to the agreement, which was ambiguous in character anyhow.
They were the guarantors of an agreement which they later voted to make a UNSC resolution. Merkel and Hollande have revealed that they never had any intention of fulfilling their obligations and their intention was always to buy time to attack the would be breakaway republics.
Speaking in her interview for “Die Zeit”, published on December 7, German ex-Chancellor Merkel said the following: “The 2014 Minsk Agreement was an attempt to buy time for Ukraine. Ukraine used this time to become stronger, as you can see today. Ukraine in 2014-2015 and Ukraine today are not the same.” According to the ex-Chancellor, “it was clear for everyone” that the conflict was suspended and the problem was not resolved, “but it was exactly what gave Ukraine the priceless time.”
Full link below but there are plenty more;
https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2022/12/13/merkels-confession-could-be-a-pretext-for-an-international-tribunal/
If the agreement was so "ambiguous" then how come it became a Security Council Resolution? Makes no sense that it wouldn't be drafted satisfactorily before becoming a UNSC resolution. Much diplomatic haggling over drafting of resolutions takes place before being agreed by UNSC. Veto power of permanent 5 ensures this. There was nothing ambiguous at all.
NATO and their pet proxy have been provoking and lying for years. Even with unambiguous evidence to show this, people want to remain in denial.
Doesn't change your calculus on the alleged "Unprovoked Russian aggression" lie? They have admitted publicly that they used the agreements to buy time in order to arm and militarily conquer the territory that they had just agreed to negotiate autonomy with. A sure fire and deliberate provocation of Russia.
Hollande confirmed this when asked if he agreed with Angela Merkel's revelation. It blows a hole in the entire western narrative.
How do you fail to see this? Wilful blindness?
-
Do you mean akin to Chancellor of the Exchequer Winson Churchill's abortive gold standard of February 1925..
It isn't what I mean. It is what is being carried out by resource rich trading nations now. Saudi Arabia, the ultimate underpinning of the petrodollar, have announced that they are open to trade in currencies other than the dollar. A huge announcement but not reported much, if at all, in western media. Doesn't suit their sanctions are working-Russia is isolated bullshit. Trust in the dollar and western finance/banking has been irreparably damaged. I have linked to articles that directly quote the finance ministers and central bankers of countries in the expanding BRICS+. It isn't just some theory that I have made up. It is being discussed and implemented now.
-
They were the guarantors of an agreement which they later voted to make a UNSC resolution. Merkel and Hollande have revealed that they never had any intention of fulfilling their obligations and their intention was always to buy time to attack the would be breakaway republics.
Speaking in her interview for “Die Zeit”, published on December 7, German ex-Chancellor Merkel said the following: “The 2014 Minsk Agreement was an attempt to buy time for Ukraine. Ukraine used this time to become stronger, as you can see today. Ukraine in 2014-2015 and Ukraine today are not the same.” According to the ex-Chancellor, “it was clear for everyone” that the conflict was suspended and the problem was not resolved, “but it was exactly what gave Ukraine the priceless time.”
Full link below but there are plenty more;
https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2022/12/13/merkels-confession-could-be-a-pretext-for-an-international-tribunal/
If the agreement was so "ambiguous" then how come it became a Security Council Resolution? Makes no sense that it wouldn't be drafted satisfactorily before becoming a UNSC resolution. Much diplomatic haggling over drafting of resolutions takes place before being agreed by UNSC. Veto power of permanent 5 ensures this. There was nothing ambiguous at all.
NATO and their pet proxy have been provoking and lying for years. Even with unambiguous evidence to show this, people want to remain in denial.
Doesn't change your calculus on the alleged "Unprovoked Russian aggression" lie? They have admitted publicly that they used the agreements to buy time in order to arm and militarily conquer the territory that they had just agreed to negotiate autonomy with. A sure fire and deliberate provocation of Russia.
Hollande confirmed this when asked if he agreed with Angela Merkel's revelation. It blows a hole in the entire western narrative.
How do you fail to see this? Wilful blindness?
I see Russia calling a meeting to adopt a resolution on a conflict it had fuelled. Why did the rebels claim the resolution did not apply to Debaltseve? Why had Russia in Minsk II continued to arm the rebels in Donetsk and Luhansk, when this was a precondition before holding elections in Donbas? Why was the OSCE/ODIHR not respected by Russia? Why did Russia make further demands in May 2015?
-
I see Russia calling a meeting to adopt a resolution on a conflict it had fuelled. Why did the rebels claim the resolution did not apply to Debaltseve? Why had Russia in Minsk II continued to arm the rebels in Donetsk and Luhansk, when this was a precondition before holding elections in Donbas? Why was the OSCE/ODIHR not respected by Russia? Why did Russia make further demands in May 2015?
As you seem to miss the importance and relevance of the Minsk 2 accords being adopted as a Security Council resolution, I will spell it out for you.
"The UNSC is the only UN body with the authority to issue binding resolutions on member states"
Look it up yourself if you don't understand. It isn't the General Assembly, UNESCO, UNICEF- it has real legal authority. This is why it is the only UN body that doesn't use simple majority voting but allows a veto for the "Permanent 5". US/UK/France/Russia/China. Why would UK/US/FR not veto a resolution that you dismiss as "meeting called by Russia". Tell me that you know nothing about the working of the UN Security Council without telling me that you know nothing of the mechanisms of the UNSC.
Your first point requires you to ignore that the Ukrainian armed forces attacked the regions of Donetsk and Lugansk. It also requires the ignoring of public confessions by Merkel and Hollande that they had no intention of abiding by the Security Council resolution. This happened and is all a matter of record. Pretending that NATO and Ukraine are "innocent by-standers" is absurd. The US, UK and France all had the opportunity to veto the whole resolution. The acquiescence of US, UK and France to bring the vote and unanimously agree, no vetoes, also informs the answer to your other questions.
I have stated previously, some time ago, on this thread the reasons behind the acquiescence of US?UK/FR in the Security Council. Over a year ago now, from memory.
Anyway, a huge number of Ukrainian Army, and many NATO operatives(tut tut!) were trapped by separatist forces in a cauldron at Debaltseve. There only options were to surrender and be captured or die. The Russians and separatists used this leverage against NATO members UK/US/FR hence their acquiescence to Minsk 2 becoming a Security Council resolution.
The rebels felt deceived by having to release what were effectively captured soldiers knowing that they would return to fight again. Any Russian arming of rebels, especially given the admitted and documented use of Ukrainian military to quell their own citizens, would be legitimate self defence. Russia denied this however and no evidence has been shown to suggest any official arming of the rebels by Russia. Western arm sales and provision of them to various jihadi and rebel groups around the world(thousands of miles away) means that you don't get to feign offence anyway. We openly send billions of dollars of arms around the world to various groups attempting to overthrow sovereign governments.
Why don't you look up the reasons for the OSCE falling out of favour. The Russians are open about the reasons. Too much to summarise briefly. Lavrov has spoken extensively about it.
Russia didn't make extra demands in May 2015. Whatever this vague question refers to is with certainty some other lie that has been repeated often enough for you to believe without further question.
-
Do you mean akin to Chancellor of the Exchequer Winson Churchill's abortive gold standard of February 1925..
“China, already the largest buyer of oil and gas from GCC countries, will buy even more in the future, and wants to pay for all of it in renminbi over the next three to five years.” Pozsar also noted that the Chinese leader communicated this “not during the first day of his visit – when he met only the Saudi leadership – but during the second day of his visit – when he met the leadership of all the GCC countries.”
“GCC oil flowing East + renminbi invoicing = the dawn of the petroyuan,”
“Why do China’s gold purchases matter in the context of renminbi settlement? Because at the 2018 BRICS Summit, China launched a renminbi-denominated oil futures contract on the Shanghai International Energy Exchange, and since 2016 and 2017, the renminbi has been convertible to gold on the Shanghai and Hong Kong Gold Exchanges, respectively,” Pozsar explained.
Money is as money does, and convertibility to gold beats convertibility to dollars.”
Full link below;
https://www.greekmediagroup.com.au/zoltan-pozsar-the-dusk-of-the-petrodollar-the-dawn-of-petroyuan/
-
As you seem to miss the importance and relevance of the Minsk 2 accords being adopted as a Security Council resolution, I will spell it out for you.
"The UNSC is the only UN body with the authority to issue binding resolutions on member states"
Look it up yourself if you don't understand. It isn't the General Assembly, UNESCO, UNICEF- it has real legal authority. This is why it is the only UN body that doesn't use simple majority voting but allows a veto for the "Permanent 5". US/UK/France/Russia/China. Why would UK/US/FR not veto a resolution that you dismiss as "meeting called by Russia". Tell me that you know nothing about the working of the UN Security Council without telling me that you know nothing of the mechanisms of the UNSC.
Your first point requires you to ignore that the Ukrainian armed forces attacked the regions of Donetsk and Lugansk. It also requires the ignoring of public confessions by Merkel and Hollande that they had no intention of abiding by the Security Council resolution. This happened and is all a matter of record. Pretending that NATO and Ukraine are "innocent by-standers" is absurd. The US, UK and France all had the opportunity to veto the whole resolution. The acquiescence of US, UK and France to bring the vote and unanimously agree, no vetoes, also informs the answer to your other questions.
I have stated previously, some time ago, on this thread the reasons behind the acquiescence of US?UK/FR in the Security Council. Over a year ago now, from memory.
Anyway, a huge number of Ukrainian Army, and many NATO operatives(tut tut!) were trapped by separatist forces in a cauldron at Debaltseve. There only options were to surrender and be captured or die. The Russians and separatists used this leverage against NATO members UK/US/FR hence their acquiescence to Minsk 2 becoming a Security Council resolution.
The rebels felt deceived by having to release what were effectively captured soldiers knowing that they would return to fight again. Any Russian arming of rebels, especially given the admitted and documented use of Ukrainian military to quell their own citizens, would be legitimate self defence. Russia denied this however and no evidence has been shown to suggest any official arming of the rebels by Russia. Western arm sales and provision of them to various jihadi and rebel groups around the world(thousands of miles away) means that you don't get to feign offence anyway. We openly send billions of dollars of arms around the world to various groups attempting to overthrow sovereign governments.
Why don't you look up the reasons for the OSCE falling out of favour. The Russians are open about the reasons. Too much to summarise briefly. Lavrov has spoken extensively about it.
Russia didn't make extra demands in May 2015. Whatever this vague question refers to is with certainty some other lie that has been repeated often enough for you to believe without further question.
The Minsk agreements always were ambiguous in character. They offered Donetsk and Luhansk autonomy, but not independence from Kiev. This statement from the German ambassador three days before the invasion sums up my thoughts. https://new-york-un.diplo.de/un-en/news-corner/-/2512746
-
The Minsk agreements always were ambiguous in character. They offered Donetsk and Luhansk autonomy, but not independence from Kiev. This statement from the German ambassador three days before the invasion sums up my thoughts. https://new-york-un.diplo.de/un-en/news-corner/-/2512746
Tell me what was ambiguous about them instead of just repeating the claim. The link that you claim "sums up your thoughts" is from 2022 after the recognition of the independence of the oblasts. Nothing about ambiguity, just the German ambassador crying that Russia had breached Minsk 2 with this recognition. In truth, he was crying because Russia had pre-empted the plans that they have admitted to(the buying time to arm Ukraine to attack). Ukraine/NATO have admitted they had no intention ever of honouring Minsk, have breached it every day since its adoption and then cry that Russia are in breach when they finally act against this perfidy.
If they were "always ambiguous" then surely you have something to describe this ambiguity from 2015 onwards. Here are the Minsk 2 agreements below. There are only 13 points. All UNSC veto wielding members agreed to its adoption as a binding resolution. Tell us what is ambiguous;
https://peacemaker.un.org/sites/peacemaker.un.org/files/UA_150212_MinskAgreement_en.pdf
-
The Minsk agreements always were ambiguous in character. They offered Donetsk and Luhansk autonomy, but not independence from Kiev. This statement from the German ambassador three days before the invasion sums up my thoughts. https://new-york-un.diplo.de/un-en/news-corner/-/2512746
Why can't you sum up your own thoughts? German ambassador doesn't mention ambiguity. You are unwilling/unable to view any of this objectively and simply repeat the mantras that you have been trained to. Even faced with public confessions of Western perfidy, you still blame Russia.
-
Tell me what was ambiguous about them instead of just repeating the claim. The link that you claim "sums up your thoughts" is from 2022 after the recognition of the independence of the oblasts. Nothing about ambiguity, just the German ambassador crying that Russia had breached Minsk 2 with this recognition. In truth, he was crying because Russia had pre-empted the plans that they have admitted to(the buying time to arm Ukraine to attack). Ukraine/NATO have admitted they had no intention ever of honouring Minsk, have breached it every day since its adoption and then cry that Russia are in breach when they finally act against this perfidy.
If they were "always ambiguous" then surely you have something to describe this ambiguity from 2015 onwards. Here are the Minsk 2 agreements below. There are only 13 points. All UNSC veto wielding members agreed to its adoption as a binding resolution. Tell us what is ambiguous;
https://peacemaker.un.org/sites/peacemaker.un.org/files/UA_150212_MinskAgreement_en.pdf
You and Putin are living under the illusion that the Minsk agreements gave him carte blanche to dismember the Ukrainian state. Article 10 states a role for the OSCE in elections once all foreign troops and mercenaries had been removed from Ukrainian territory, with Article 12 proposing elections under the auspices of the OSCE/ODIHR.
Free elections not held under the barrel of a gun: of course Putin was not going to oblige.
-
Why can't you sum up your own thoughts? German ambassador doesn't mention ambiguity. You are unwilling/unable to view any of this objectively and simply repeat the mantras that you have been trained to. Even faced with public confessions of Western perfidy, you still blame Russia.
No country could allow part of its territory to de facto secede from its contol with its own courts, its own army and the ability to conclude pacts with foreign powers. It reminds me of the Anschluss of March 1938 and the carving up of Czechoslovakia in September of the same year.
-
It isn't what I mean. It is what is being carried out by resource rich trading nations now. Saudi Arabia, the ultimate underpinning of the petrodollar, have announced that they are open to trade in currencies other than the dollar. A huge announcement but not reported much, if at all, in western media. Doesn't suit their sanctions are working-Russia is isolated bullshit. Trust in the dollar and western finance/banking has been irreparably damaged. I have linked to articles that directly quote the finance ministers and central bankers of countries in the expanding BRICS+. It isn't just some theory that I have made up. It is being discussed and implemented now.
16% of world trade-big deal.
-
You and Putin are living under the illusion that the Minsk agreements gave him carte blanche to dismember the Ukrainian state. Article 10 states a role for the OSCE in elections once all foreign troops and mercenaries had been removed from Ukrainian territory, with Article 12 proposing elections under the auspices of the OSCE/ODIHR.
Free elections not held under the barrel of a gun: of course Putin was not going to oblige.
You sound hysterical and incoherent.
You refer to the Minsk agreements as being broken by Russia(they weren't) but as ambiguous when Ukraine/NATO admit to ignoring them from the beginning. You need to address this. You cannot have it both ways.
Minsk 2 implementation was ignored from the start by Ukraine/NATO. They have admitted this-Unambiguously!
The foreign troops and mercenaries weren't removed were they. NATO got their "mercenaries" out of the cauldron at Debaltseve(the reason they "agreed" with Minsk 2) but then spent the next seven years ignoring any of their obligations. They have admitted this.
Your position in a nutshell is this;
Ukraine/NATO countries admit that they never had any intention of abiding by Minsk 2 and would use the time to arm and prepare an attack- Steve- "Minsk 2 is ambiguous"
Russia act after 7/8 years just as Ukraine/NATO increase shelling and troop build up in preparation for an assault-Steve- Russia broke Minsk 2
This is the incoherence of your position.
-
No country could allow part of its territory to de facto secede from its contol with its own courts, its own army and the ability to conclude pacts with foreign powers. - Steve
Like NATO broke up Yugoslavia you mean. Kosovo/Serbia no referendum. Self determination is something that you previously claim to support. Why don't you support the self determination of those in Donetsk, Crimea etc. but you support the imposed separation in former Yugoslavia republics?
You have no consistency in your supposed analysis of geopolitics-just brainwashed Russia hate. There is a massive elephant in the room, Steve. NATO wars and aggression, especially since 1990, are ignored in your "analysis" and everyone but NATO blamed. Does it never occur to you that the one consistent theme is NATO aggression against another sovereign state-to uphold "peace"? Maybe it's NATO who are the threat to world peace rather than everybody else?
-
Wagner chief 'frees' Russian convicts who fought in Ukraine
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxbaU4IrI_Q (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxbaU4IrI_Q)
-
No country could allow part of its territory to de facto secede from its contol with its own courts, its own army and the ability to conclude pacts with foreign powers. - Steve
Like NATO broke up Yugoslavia you mean. Kosovo/Serbia no referendum. Self determination is something that you previously claim to support. Why don't you support the self determination of those in Donetsk, Crimea etc. but you support the imposed separation in former Yugoslavia republics?
You have no consistency in your supposed analysis of geopolitics-just brainwashed Russia hate. There is a massive elephant in the room, Steve. NATO wars and aggression, especially since 1990, are ignored in your "analysis" and everyone but NATO blamed. Does it never occur to you that the one consistent theme is NATO aggression against another sovereign state-to uphold "peace"? Maybe it's NATO who are the threat to world peace rather than everybody else?
You're forgetting the 1995 Srebrenica massacre of 8000 Muslim males. It was in this context to prevent further bloodshed that NATO intervened. It should not have been regarded as a precedent for the Russian invasion of Ukraine as the Foreign Affairs Select Committee subsequently admitted it was technically illegal. There is no such body in Russia which would ever challenge Putin's authority in this way.
-
You sound hysterical and incoherent.
You refer to the Minsk agreements as being broken by Russia(they weren't) but as ambiguous when Ukraine/NATO admit to ignoring them from the beginning. You need to address this. You cannot have it both ways.
Minsk 2 implementation was ignored from the start by Ukraine/NATO. They have admitted this-Unambiguously!
The foreign troops and mercenaries weren't removed were they. NATO got their "mercenaries" out of the cauldron at Debaltseve(the reason they "agreed" with Minsk 2) but then spent the next seven years ignoring any of their obligations. They have admitted this.
Your position in a nutshell is this;
Ukraine/NATO countries admit that they never had any intention of abiding by Minsk 2 and would use the time to arm and prepare an attack- Steve- "Minsk 2 is ambiguous"
Russia act after 7/8 years just as Ukraine/NATO increase shelling and troop build up in preparation for an assault-Steve- Russia broke Minsk 2
This is the incoherence of your position.
This was the ambiguity I referred to in earlier posts: Ukraine expected to assert full control over its territory before any autonomy for Luhansk and Donetsk, whereas Russia was never going to allow the OSCE/ODIHR to hold free and fair elections in the region.
-
Who are the Wagner mercenary group being led by ‘Putin’s chef’?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qq1P3qq4W18 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qq1P3qq4W18)
-
This was the ambiguity I referred to in earlier posts: Ukraine expected to assert full control over its territory before any autonomy for Luhansk and Donetsk, whereas Russia was never going to allow the OSCE/ODIHR to hold free and fair elections in the region.
Have you even read the agreements? There are only 13 points and it is barely more than a page. It is clear that full withdrawal was required first and then negotiations over autonomy. Not ambiguous at all. Ukraine/NATO admitting that there was no intention to negotiate or abide by the agreements is also a "problem" especially whilst simultaneously claiming their "expectations" were not fulfilled.
"Expectations" from a UNSC resolution, whose language is clear, that you never(admittedly) had any intention of abiding by. What kind of idiotic reasoning is this?
-
Who are the Wagner mercenary group being led by ‘Putin’s chef’?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qq1P3qq4W18 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qq1P3qq4W18)
Much the same as Academi, Mozart.
They are probably a GRU front. Gives distance and plausible deniability. Much the same as Academi etc. are fronts for CIA, Pentagon allowing for distance and plausible deniability. I don't remember your concern about shady "mercenary" groups when only US/NATO were using them in Libya, Iraq, Syria...
What has suddenly piqued your concern about PMC's?
It's just Russian ones isn't it?
And the fact that they are fucking up the Western mercs.
-
The True State of Russian Army
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KiII_2qabk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KiII_2qabk)
-
Have you even read the agreements? There are only 13 points and it is barely more than a page. It is clear that full withdrawal was required first and then negotiations over autonomy. Not ambiguous at all. Ukraine/NATO admitting that there was no intention to negotiate or abide by the agreements is also a "problem" especially whilst simultaneously claiming their "expectations" were not fulfilled.
"Expectations" from a UNSC resolution, whose language is clear, that you never(admittedly) had any intention of abiding by. What kind of idiotic reasoning is this?
But Russia had been aiding and abetting the separatists and continued so to do, confirmed by the weaponry used to shoot down the Malaysian airliner one month before the agreements were signed.
-
The True State of Russian Army
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KiII_2qabk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KiII_2qabk)
Literally lasted less than two months. lol
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FhSvy3UWYAEO6Yd.jpg:large)
-
You think Kherson will be governed by Ukrainian government? Separatists still control 70% of the oblast. Ukrainian "control" of Kherson city will end the same as the others. Everyone, who is honest and objective, understands this
Perhaps you ought to compare the Russian withdrawal from Kherson, orderly including tens of thousands of civilians. It was evacuated to preserve life, which it did.
Now the Ukrainian withdrawals from Soledar, Bakhmut etc., under fire taking massive losses.
Ukrainians are getting rolled back everywhere now and taking huge losses, NATO getting desperate.
NATO/Ukraine fight for territory whilst Russia fights for the rights of the inhabitants of those territories to self determination. It is front of you but you refuse to see past the propaganda.
None of you will ever answer the question- What about the people who live in those territories? What becomes of them when you impose upon them a government who are willing to use armed force against them?
Crimea is Ukraine is just a stupid slogan. Crimeans don't agree. Nor do citizens of various current Ukrainian oblasts. Those citizens of all the oblasts will decide on their own status - NATO/Ukraine will have no say or power to prevent it.
-
You think Kherson will be governed by Ukrainian government? Separatists still control 70% of the oblast. Ukrainian "control" of Kherson city will end the same as the others. Everyone, who is honest and objective, understands this
Perhaps you ought to compare the Russian withdrawal from Kherson, orderly including tens of thousands of civilians. It was evacuated to preserve life, which it did.
Now the Ukrainian withdrawals from Soledar, Bakhmut etc., under fire taking massive losses.
Ukrainians are getting rolled back everywhere now and taking huge losses, NATO getting desperate.
NATO/Ukraine fight for territory whilst Russia fights for the rights of the inhabitants of those territories to self determination. It is front of you but you refuse to see past the propaganda.
None of you will ever answer the question- What about the people who live in those territories? What becomes of them when you impose upon them a government who are willing to use armed force against them?
Crimea is Ukraine is just a stupid slogan. Crimeans don't agree. Nor do citizens of various current Ukrainian oblasts. Those citizens of all the oblasts will decide on their own status - NATO/Ukraine will have no say or power to prevent it.
But Russia got away with the spoils of Crimea. It seemed this wasn't enough for them.
-
https://twitter.com/i/status/1615138445051195392
Presidential advisor to Zelensky, Oleksiy Arestovych speaking rather candidly about the state of things in Ukraine a few days ago. Now resigned/sacked.
Here he is again;
https://twitter.com/i/status/1615122227157995521
Also 3 days ago the interior minister as well as his first deputy and secretary of state were killed in a helicopter crash in Kiev. There is chaos and bloodletting within the Ukie government and its foreign sponsors. But they are apparently winning.
-
But Russia got away with the spoils of Crimea. It seemed this wasn't enough for them.
Russia respected the wishes of the Crimeans. Ukraine/NATO wanted their land but not them. What is disputable about that? You frame things exactly as you have been trained to.
-
Russia respected the wishes of the Crimeans. Ukraine/NATO wanted their land but not them. What is disputable about that? You frame things exactly as you have been trained to.
I assume you have some respect for Scandinavian countries and their values, all of whom as far as I can discern have backed sanctions against Russia for its territorial incursion into the sovereign state which is Ukraine.
-
I assume you have some respect for Scandinavian countries and their values, all of whom as far as I can discern have backed sanctions against Russia for its territorial incursion into the sovereign state which is Ukraine.
Most EU governments are simply vassals of NATO/EU now and no longer representative of the views of their citizens. The model of western democracy is far too corrupted and in bed with corporate and financial behemoths.
Scandinavian governments can speak for themselves(or their paymasters). Their support of sanctions means nothing other than they did as instructed.
Having a differing view is not the same as lacking respect. It depends. I refuse to respect views that consider only selected "facts" because they are dishonest and/or ill informed. I won't agree with someone just because I respect them. That would be disrespectful of us both.
-
Most EU governments are simply vassals of NATO/EU now and no longer representative of the views of their citizens. The model of western democracy is far too corrupted and in bed with corporate and financial behemoths.
Scandinavian governments can speak for themselves(or their paymasters). Their support of sanctions means nothing other than they did as instructed.
Having a differing view is not the same as lacking respect. It depends. I refuse to respect views that consider only selected "facts" because they are dishonest and/or ill informed. I won't agree with someone just because I respect them. That would be disrespectful of us both.
You see we have had this before when the Austro-Hungarian empire collapsed in 1918, leaving ethnic Germans distributed amongst different states. I sometimes wonder whether Putin's advisors have schooled him in that period of history and the Nazi tactics employed, dripping the poison into his mouth that all ethnic Russians wish to be reunited with the Motherland.
-
You're forgetting the 1995 Srebrenica massacre of 8000 Muslim males. It was in this context to prevent further bloodshed that NATO intervened. It should not have been regarded as a precedent for the Russian invasion of Ukraine as the Foreign Affairs Select Committee subsequently admitted it was technically illegal. There is no such body in Russia which would ever challenge Putin's authority in this way.
On October 12, 2005, Johnstone discussed it in her CounterPunch article titled, "Srebrenica Revisited," remembering its summer 10th anniversary when the "dominant themes were 'nostra culpa:' 'we' let it happen, 'we' didn't want to know about it, and 'we' mustn't let it happen again."
Who are "we," she asked, and how accurate is the official story, questions to this day "virtually taboo" to preserve the official myth, including exaggerating Serb atrocities "whereas Muslim atrocities (such as the decapitations of Serb prisoners, fully documented) remained confidential.
Official accounts portrayed "a one-sided conflict between a Serbian 'fascist aggressor' and innocent victims, all unarmed civilians."
Unexplained was that Srebrenica was a Muslim military base, besides a refugee "safe area." Slobodan Milosevic, in fact, wanted Serb forces restrained from overrunning it. In addition:
-- before the July 1995 attack, Srebrebica-based Muslim forces "carried out murderous attacks on nearby Serb villages;"
-- Muslim Sarajevo officials withdrew their Srebrenica commanders, "leaving thousands of....soldiers (leaderless), without orders, and in total confusion when the foreseeable Serb attack occurred;"
-- when "Bosnian Serb forces captured (Srebrenica) on July 11, 1995," civilians wanted to leave because normality there didn't exist;
-- separating women and children from men was, in fact, done to find "the perpetrators of raids on Serb villages (to) take revenge;" and
-- yet only a small number "were detained at that point;" some, in fact, survived.
The alleged Srebrenica victim count reflected lies and half-truths based on what's known but omitted in official and major media accounts. The 8,000 number included the Red Cross estimate of 3,000 "witnesses," allegedly detained by Bosnian Serbs, as well as another 5,000 Red Cross accounts said "fled Srebrenica, some of whom reached Central Bosnia."
In other words, they fled. They weren't killed. Yet, they were added to the mythical death toll to inflate it. Years later, in fact, forensic teams discovered 2,361 bodies in the area where heavy fighting occurred, including combatants on both sides, not massacred civilians.
Johnstone explained that "(n)either the Bosnian Serbs nor the Muslims were ever forthcoming with whatever information they had, (yet) the '8,000' figure (became) an established total of 'Muslim men and boys executed by Serb forces.' "
Afterward, Washington exploited Srebrenica to:
-- conceal "the US-backed Croatian offensive," forcefully removing Serbs from Krajina, an operation approved and supported by Washington, perhaps killing larger numbers than the alleged Srebrenica numbers, including women and children ruthlessly; and
-- "implicate Bosnian Serb leaders in 'genocide' (to) disqualify them from negotiating the future of Bosnia-Herzegovina."
Exploiting the alleged Srebrenica massacre facilitated waging 1999 imperial war by blaming UN inability to protect it, so NATO's humanitarian war had to intervene. In addition, Milosevic was falsely criminalized for alleged genocidal killings "against non-Serbs for purely racist reasons."
Claiming Serbian caused genocide was, in fact, used "as an effective instrument (to) restructur(e) Yugoslavia," balkanizing it under US control. Official and media propaganda repeated fabrications, exaggerations, and half-truths about what happened, portraying victims as perpetrators to this day.
Heading for a Hague tribunal lynching, Ratko Mladic is already guilty by accusation before he arrives. Washington, of course, insists on it to perpetuate the official lie, a massacre invented out of whole cloth.
Yet most people still believe it, the same ones perhaps thinking Washington's led NATO war on Gaddafi is another humanitarian intervention, when, in fact, it's more imperial aggression, slaughtering civilians daily, not protecting them!
NATO governments lie, their countries media lie. Full article below;
https://countercurrents.org/lendman280511C.htm
-
You see we have had this before when the Austro-Hungarian empire collapsed in 1918, leaving ethnic Germans distributed amongst different states. I sometimes wonder whether Putin's advisors have schooled him in that period of history and the Nazi tactics employed, dripping the poison into his mouth that all ethnic Russians wish to be reunited with the Motherland.
The Russian motives are plain to see and spelled out. They will not tolerate a hostile state hosting nuclear weapons in its backyard. NATO will comply.
This is the problem with such a controlled media space.
Russia: We are going to do A & B to achieve C.
NATO govs & media: Putin wants to do X & Y to achieve Z
Russia: Do A & B- achieve C
NATO: Putin and Russia are too weak to do X & Y to achieve Z. We won!
-
On October 12, 2005, Johnstone discussed it in her CounterPunch article titled, "Srebrenica Revisited," remembering its summer 10th anniversary when the "dominant themes were 'nostra culpa:' 'we' let it happen, 'we' didn't want to know about it, and 'we' mustn't let it happen again."
Who are "we," she asked, and how accurate is the official story, questions to this day "virtually taboo" to preserve the official myth, including exaggerating Serb atrocities "whereas Muslim atrocities (such as the decapitations of Serb prisoners, fully documented) remained confidential.
Official accounts portrayed "a one-sided conflict between a Serbian 'fascist aggressor' and innocent victims, all unarmed civilians."
Unexplained was that Srebrenica was a Muslim military base, besides a refugee "safe area." Slobodan Milosevic, in fact, wanted Serb forces restrained from overrunning it. In addition:
-- before the July 1995 attack, Srebrebica-based Muslim forces "carried out murderous attacks on nearby Serb villages;"
-- Muslim Sarajevo officials withdrew their Srebrenica commanders, "leaving thousands of....soldiers (leaderless), without orders, and in total confusion when the foreseeable Serb attack occurred;"
-- when "Bosnian Serb forces captured (Srebrenica) on July 11, 1995," civilians wanted to leave because normality there didn't exist;
-- separating women and children from men was, in fact, done to find "the perpetrators of raids on Serb villages (to) take revenge;" and
-- yet only a small number "were detained at that point;" some, in fact, survived.
The alleged Srebrenica victim count reflected lies and half-truths based on what's known but omitted in official and major media accounts. The 8,000 number included the Red Cross estimate of 3,000 "witnesses," allegedly detained by Bosnian Serbs, as well as another 5,000 Red Cross accounts said "fled Srebrenica, some of whom reached Central Bosnia."
In other words, they fled. They weren't killed. Yet, they were added to the mythical death toll to inflate it. Years later, in fact, forensic teams discovered 2,361 bodies in the area where heavy fighting occurred, including combatants on both sides, not massacred civilians.
Johnstone explained that "(n)either the Bosnian Serbs nor the Muslims were ever forthcoming with whatever information they had, (yet) the '8,000' figure (became) an established total of 'Muslim men and boys executed by Serb forces.' "
Afterward, Washington exploited Srebrenica to:
-- conceal "the US-backed Croatian offensive," forcefully removing Serbs from Krajina, an operation approved and supported by Washington, perhaps killing larger numbers than the alleged Srebrenica numbers, including women and children ruthlessly; and
-- "implicate Bosnian Serb leaders in 'genocide' (to) disqualify them from negotiating the future of Bosnia-Herzegovina."
Exploiting the alleged Srebrenica massacre facilitated waging 1999 imperial war by blaming UN inability to protect it, so NATO's humanitarian war had to intervene. In addition, Milosevic was falsely criminalized for alleged genocidal killings "against non-Serbs for purely racist reasons."
Claiming Serbian caused genocide was, in fact, used "as an effective instrument (to) restructur(e) Yugoslavia," balkanizing it under US control. Official and media propaganda repeated fabrications, exaggerations, and half-truths about what happened, portraying victims as perpetrators to this day.
Heading for a Hague tribunal lynching, Ratko Mladic is already guilty by accusation before he arrives. Washington, of course, insists on it to perpetuate the official lie, a massacre invented out of whole cloth.
Yet most people still believe it, the same ones perhaps thinking Washington's led NATO war on Gaddafi is another humanitarian intervention, when, in fact, it's more imperial aggression, slaughtering civilians daily, not protecting them!
NATO governments lie, their countries media lie. Full article below;
https://countercurrents.org/lendman280511C.htm
Mr. Lendman sounds suspiciously like David Irving to me, but I will read further. https://youtu.be/lug4CxhRp_8
-
Mr. Lendman sounds suspiciously like David Irving to me, but I will read further. https://youtu.be/lug4CxhRp_8
Don't know about that(David Irving. There are many other accounts about Srebenica that show the official western version to be a collection of half truths and outright mis/dis-information.
As to the suspicions that the writer could be? David Irving. His views aside, which I don't know enough to care about, he is an excellent historian.
-
Mr. Lendman sounds suspiciously like David Irving to me, but I will read further. https://youtu.be/lug4CxhRp_8
It is not healthy to read only inside your own echo chamber. If nothing is challenged, no alternative views heard then there is zero likelihood that you will enlighten upon the truth.
We should all read views which challenge our own orthodoxy. Keeps things honest.
-
What happened to the air war in Ukraine?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuXwOM-2yq8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuXwOM-2yq8)
-
David Irving - Can you trust ANYTHING he wrote?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VsLW7VrOpA8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VsLW7VrOpA8)
-
Don't know about that(David Irving. There are many other accounts about Srebenica that show the official western version to be a collection of half truths and outright mis/dis-information.
As to the suspicions that the writer could be? David Irving. His views aside, which I don't know enough to care about, he is an excellent historian.
It wouldn't surprise me if you are a holocaust denier. Wouldn't surprise me if you attended the 2006 Iranian holocaust denial conference.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Crank_magnetism (https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Crank_magnetism)
-
It wouldn't surprise me if you are a holocaust denier. Wouldn't surprise me if you attended the 2006 Iranian holocaust denial conference.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Crank_magnetism (https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Crank_magnetism)
Your "interventions" on this thread add nothing at all. Just a series of irrelevant bullshit and name calling from the sidelines. You are incapable of discussion and instead just run interference. Akin to a child demanding attention whilst the grown ups are talking.
When you do raise a question-your follow up shows how willing and capable of discussion that you are. You asked about Wagner (a reasonable point to discuss). I answered you and it turns out that you didn't raise Wagner to discuss the use of these groups in wars by all sides-what it means-whys-wherefores. No. Your only point was "Russia bad". No discussion or response to the reply on a subject that you raised and seemingly wanted to discuss. Your next intervention is shown below.
Holocaust denier-probably attended 2006 conference in Iran.
Your previous intervention was;
Gringo wants to live the Russian dream. Work 50 hours a week in an asbestos mine, watch state propaganda on TV all night. His conscripted grandchildren upgrading the towns only working toilet with one they stole from Ukraine is a family honour.
You are way out of your depth on this thread so do yourself, and us all a favour, and go and play with your toys-the grown ups are talking.
-
from peter hitchens https://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2023/01/peter-hitchens-sending-ukraine-our-tanks-could-turn-europe-into-one-big-radioactive-graveyard.html
-
Bradley fighting vehicles being delivered to Ukraine
https://imgur.io/gallery/cBOpQ9t#6LDV8pT (https://imgur.io/gallery/cBOpQ9t#6LDV8pT)
-
It wouldn't surprise me if you are a holocaust denier. Wouldn't surprise me if you attended the 2006 Iranian holocaust denial conference.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Crank_magnetism (https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Crank_magnetism)
A lot of information about what happened in the camps came from the Russians. They were the first liberators of Auschwitz which appears to be the Gold standard for measuring the horrors of the holocaust...
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/liberation-of-nazi-camps
https://archive.org/details/DavidColeTheTruthBehindTheGatesOfAuschwitz1Of2
https://archive.org/details/DavidColeTheTruthBehindTheGatesOfAuschwitz2Of2
-
Your "interventions" on this thread add nothing at all. Just a series of irrelevant bullshit and name calling from the sidelines. You are incapable of discussion and instead just run interference. Akin to a child demanding attention whilst the grown ups are talking.
When you do raise a question-your follow up shows how willing and capable of discussion that you are. You asked about Wagner (a reasonable point to discuss). I answered you and it turns out that you didn't raise Wagner to discuss the use of these groups in wars by all sides-what it means-whys-wherefores. No. Your only point was "Russia bad". No discussion or response to the reply on a subject that you raised and seemingly wanted to discuss. Your next intervention is shown below.
Holocaust denier-probably attended 2006 conference in Iran.
Your previous intervention was;
Gringo wants to live the Russian dream. Work 50 hours a week in an asbestos mine, watch state propaganda on TV all night. His conscripted grandchildren upgrading the towns only working toilet with one they stole from Ukraine is a family honour.
You are way out of your depth on this thread so do yourself, and us all a favour, and go and play with your toys-the grown ups are talking.
For someone who made up claims about CCTV on Skripals front door, posting links to the works of a convicted pedophile and paleo conservative creationists to support your claims. Claiming NATO are behind certain things that the Russians themselves don't deny doing. You are in no position to criticize me.
You are an emperor with no clothes.
(https://preview.redd.it/vnefzc7a7cw21.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=2de19efbe100a85b9fe5bede290b2e8d6d80345d)
-
A lot of information about what happened in the camps came from the Russians. They were the first liberators of Auschwitz which appears to be the Gold standard for measuring the horrors of the holocaust...
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/liberation-of-nazi-camps
https://archive.org/details/DavidColeTheTruthBehindTheGatesOfAuschwitz1Of2
https://archive.org/details/DavidColeTheTruthBehindTheGatesOfAuschwitz2Of2
https://streamable.com/e16jc (https://streamable.com/e16jc)
-
https://streamable.com/e16jc (https://streamable.com/e16jc)
Can you link to the full speech?
(https://www.palestineremembered.com/images/DailyExpress-JewsBoycottNazis-March-1938.png)
(https://www.spectator.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Screen-Shot-2015-07-18-at-19.13.34.png)
-
A lot of information about what happened in the camps came from the Russians. They were the first liberators of Auschwitz which appears to be the Gold standard for measuring the horrors of the holocaust...
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/liberation-of-nazi-camps
https://archive.org/details/DavidColeTheTruthBehindTheGatesOfAuschwitz1Of2
https://archive.org/details/DavidColeTheTruthBehindTheGatesOfAuschwitz2Of2
yes while the ukriane was activly taking part in the holcolst
-
https://youtu.be/L5j1qQb-Ch0
-
https://youtu.be/L5j1qQb-Ch0
https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/ukraine-holocaust
The Nazi ideology of the Bandera followers in Western Ukraine and Galicia region never went away. It has festered since the end of WW2. Western Ukrainians/Galicians were savage and willing participants in the murder of communists, Bolshevik sympathisers, Jews and anyone else who wasn't "ideologically pure". The divisions in Ukraine have always been there-Nazis in the West who view the Eastern populations as sub-human mongol hordes. Twas ever thus.
What we are witnessing now is in many ways WW2 still playing out. The mongol hordes in the way of NATO/Nazi lebensraum. They want the rich land, the people on it a mere inconvenience to be cleansed/genocided. Russia, successor state to USSR, still standing in the way.
The fourth reich, NATO, pulling the strings this time.
Nazi,
NATO,
Tomah-to, Tomay-to
A few excerpts from the article linked above;
Based on present-day borders, one in every four Jewish victims of the Holocaust was murdered in Ukraine.
In the history of the Holocaust, the summer and fall of 1941 are especially significant because they represent a period of critical escalation. In a matter of months mobile Nazi killing units, which had begun shooting all adult male Jews during the invasion of the Soviet Union, expanded to include a genocide targeting women, children, and entire Jewish communities.
The mass shooting of Jewish victims in the summer and fall of 1941 represents the first phase of the Holocaust, often referred to by historians as “the Holocaust by bullets.” It was during this initial phase that special German killing squads (Einsatzkommandos) coordinated the mass murder of Jews by bullets with the help of the SS, Wehrmacht troops, the Romanian military, special “operational squadrons,” order police units, and local collaborators.
Just days before the invasion, the Nazi leadership also issued a memorandum entitled “Guidelines for the Conduct of Troops of Russia,” which directly linked Jews as a racial group to the broader category of political enemies. The “Guidelines” described Bolshevism as the deadliest threat to the German people’s existence; justified the killing of Bolshevik agitators, armed insurgents, saboteurs, and Jews; and encouraged the total elimination of active or passive resistance.
As the historian Wendy Lower argues, “the German military helped prepare for the invasion by drafting and distributing orders for the ruthless isolation or elimination of individuals broadly defined as Bolsheviks and resistors[sic] and more narrowly identified as Jews.”
The term “security measures,” encompassed a wide range of duties but, initially, the main focus was the murder of Soviet political functionaries and other perceived political enemies. In order to fulfill this goal, security task forces were instructed to kill all Jews occupying state and party positions and target Jewish able-bodied men who might foment serious resistance on the behalf of the Soviet state. Consequently, during the first weeks of the invasion, as German troops secured territory in Ukraine, large numbers of Jewish men were rounded up in cities and towns. Those who were deemed useful—skilled laborers, doctors, and specialists—were spared, while the rest were shot.
Read the full article, that is just a few excerpts to show the ideology that is being used to fuel the conflict.
-
https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/ukraine-holocaust
The Nazi ideology of the Bandera followers in Western Ukraine and Galicia region never went away. It has festered since the end of WW2. Western Ukrainians/Galicians were savage and willing participants in the murder of communists, Bolshevik sympathisers, Jews and anyone else who wasn't "ideologically pure". The divisions in Ukraine have always been there-Nazis in the West who view the Eastern populations as sub-human mongol hordes. Twas ever thus.
What we are witnessing now is in many ways WW2 still playing out. The mongol hordes in the way of NATO/Nazi lebensraum. They want the rich land, the people on it a mere inconvenience to be cleansed/genocided. Russia, successor state to USSR, still standing in the way.
The fourth reich, NATO, pulling the strings this time.
Nazi,
NATO,
Tomah-to, Tomay-to
A few excerpts from the article linked above;
Based on present-day borders, one in every four Jewish victims of the Holocaust was murdered in Ukraine.
In the history of the Holocaust, the summer and fall of 1941 are especially significant because they represent a period of critical escalation. In a matter of months mobile Nazi killing units, which had begun shooting all adult male Jews during the invasion of the Soviet Union, expanded to include a genocide targeting women, children, and entire Jewish communities.
The mass shooting of Jewish victims in the summer and fall of 1941 represents the first phase of the Holocaust, often referred to by historians as “the Holocaust by bullets.” It was during this initial phase that special German killing squads (Einsatzkommandos) coordinated the mass murder of Jews by bullets with the help of the SS, Wehrmacht troops, the Romanian military, special “operational squadrons,” order police units, and local collaborators.
Just days before the invasion, the Nazi leadership also issued a memorandum entitled “Guidelines for the Conduct of Troops of Russia,” which directly linked Jews as a racial group to the broader category of political enemies. The “Guidelines” described Bolshevism as the deadliest threat to the German people’s existence; justified the killing of Bolshevik agitators, armed insurgents, saboteurs, and Jews; and encouraged the total elimination of active or passive resistance.
As the historian Wendy Lower argues, “the German military helped prepare for the invasion by drafting and distributing orders for the ruthless isolation or elimination of individuals broadly defined as Bolsheviks and resistors[sic] and more narrowly identified as Jews.”
The term “security measures,” encompassed a wide range of duties but, initially, the main focus was the murder of Soviet political functionaries and other perceived political enemies. In order to fulfill this goal, security task forces were instructed to kill all Jews occupying state and party positions and target Jewish able-bodied men who might foment serious resistance on the behalf of the Soviet state. Consequently, during the first weeks of the invasion, as German troops secured territory in Ukraine, large numbers of Jewish men were rounded up in cities and towns. Those who were deemed useful—skilled laborers, doctors, and specialists—were spared, while the rest were shot.
Read the full article, that is just a few excerpts to show the ideology that is being used to fuel the conflict.
It is good that you post this gringo. The crawling adulation of the current Ukrainian regime, especially in the "liberal" press is nauseating. Ukrainian nationalism is a disgusting ideology, rooted in fascism. The cult of Bandera is beyond sick, and the idea that the Azov Battalion are defenders of liberal democracy is beyond ludicrous. The BBC and the Guardian hiding Nazi insignia in their images of "brave Ukranians" has been sickening. It is as bad as the eulogising of those "freedom fighting mujahidin" scumbags in Afghanistan, who with CIA backing defeated the only decent society that the people there experienced. Look where Afghanistan is now, compared to where it was in the 1970s.
-
Of course the Soviet Union was squeaky clean..https://youtu.be/yYdfpsd-Eh4
..and Putin is the legitimate leader of Russia. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/why-we-must-not-recognize-russias-fraudulent-election/
-
Of course the Soviet Union was squeaky clean..https://youtu.be/yYdfpsd-Eh4
..and Putin is the legitimate leader of Russia. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/why-we-must-not-recognize-russias-fraudulent-election/
Who said the Soviet Union was "squeaky clean" ? I agree the Katyn massacre was a crime and frankly unforgivable. It was made worse by the fact that for a long time good people were persuaded that the Soviet account was correct. However, overall the Soviet Union played a positive and progressive role internationally, throughout its existence. This is unlike the Roman Catholic Church, of which you are still apparently a loyal acolyte. The USSR opposed fascism and the Nazis throughout. This is in stark contrast to the Vatican, and in particular Pope Pius XII, who was not only an appeaser but an active supporter of Franco, Hitler, Mussolini and everything evil in the world. I do not see you condemn or renounce the Catholic Church and its dreadful record. Take the mote out of your own eye first.
-
Who said the Soviet Union was "squeaky clean" ? I agree the Katyn massacre was a crime and frankly unforgivable. It was made worse by the fact that for a long time good people were persuaded that the Soviet account was correct. However, overall the Soviet Union played a positive and progressive role internationally, throughout its existence. This is unlike the Roman Catholic Church, of which you are still apparently a loyal acolyte. The USSR opposed fascism and the Nazis throughout. This is in stark contrast to the Vatican, and in particular Pope Pius XII, who was not only an appeaser but an active supporter of Franco, Hitler, Mussolini and everything evil in the world. I do not see you condemn or renounce the Catholic Church and its dreadful record. Take the mote out of your own eye first.
Well what I have highlighted in bold certainly isn't true. Do you think Eastern Europe wished to be subjugated for 44 years? As for religion, I'm not a Roman Catholic but we are High Church admittedly. I have researched the issue and agree it was a mixed record but wonder given the situation what else the Pope could have done? https://www.vaticannews.va/en/church/news/2022-02/feldkamp-pope-pius-xii-holocaust-history-archives.html
-
It is good that you post this gringo. The crawling adulation of the current Ukrainian regime, especially in the "liberal" press is nauseating. Ukrainian nationalism is a disgusting ideology, rooted in fascism. The cult of Bandera is beyond sick, and the idea that the Azov Battalion are defenders of liberal democracy is beyond ludicrous. The BBC and the Guardian hiding Nazi insignia in their images of "brave Ukranians" has been sickening. It is as bad as the eulogising of those "freedom fighting mujahidin" scumbags in Afghanistan, who with CIA backing defeated the only decent society that the people there experienced. Look where Afghanistan is now, compared to where it was in the 1970s.
Couldn't have put it better, ngb. Many in the west of Ukraine see Bandera as a national hero. The whitewashing of who these people are has been, as you say, the most nauseating.
Whilst information starved westerners(self-styled international community) may still believe that the fight against Russia is "defending western values and democracy" the people they need to convince(rest of the world) see things as they are. The go slow of Russia's operations and the desperation of NATO helping to further expose NATO depravity. Supporting, arming, training and fighting alongside Nazis, makes one a Nazi. Therefore NATO are Nazis.
-
It is good that you post this gringo. The crawling adulation of the current Ukrainian regime, especially in the "liberal" press is nauseating. Ukrainian nationalism is a disgusting ideology, rooted in fascism. The cult of Bandera is beyond sick, and the idea that the Azov Battalion are defenders of liberal democracy is beyond ludicrous. The BBC and the Guardian hiding Nazi insignia in their images of "brave Ukranians" has been sickening. It is as bad as the eulogising of those "freedom fighting mujahidin" scumbags in Afghanistan, who with CIA backing defeated the only decent society that the people there experienced. Look where Afghanistan is now, compared to where it was in the 1970s.
It's last days in the bunkers stuff from NATO nazis now. They are falling apart whilst attempting to project unity. Hungary have just had a huge purge of military officers. DeNATOfication it is being referred to as. There is a lot of "chatter" around this. Big things are brewing. Hungarian article below. Use google translate.
https://telex.hu/belfold/2023/01/22/hadsereg-katonasag-honvedseg-tiszt-ezredes-tabornok-leepites-elbocsatas
Brief part of article below;
Some people talk about political cleansing
None of those we interviewed accepted the statement by name, and it was not easy to speak to some even anonymously. "I'll be fired tomorrow if I speak out," one of them said.
Everyone emphasized that they are far from having a complete view of the processes, so the emerging picture also shows in our article what explanations for the downsizing are circulating in military circles, it may become clearer later how close to the truth they are.
The sources speaking to us in the background can basically be divided into two groups. One group includes those who have heard that a primarily political purge is taking place. For them, such a downsizing during the large-scale war taking place next door is unjustified, they do not understand why the organic organizational change, which otherwise characterizes the national defense, is inappropriate. After all, obviously young people come here too, and older people leave the staff, even without a wave of layoffs.
There were those who heard that some people were called home from a NATO mission or mission abroad to inform them that they were no longer needed, but they did not yet know who would take their place. We also hear about high-ranking soldiers who "have been building themselves up for 20-30 years" and now they are "white-faced" waiting for their turn. It is also heard that it is easy to "get on the list of suspects" who has worked for a long time in a NATO command or in the foreign service. Previously, in connection with the firings, the former Secretary of State for National Defense Ágnes Vadai from DK also referred to "NATO exemption".
Also of note is piece quoted below;
Journalists from Hungary report that the Kiev regime is conducting ethnic cleansing by forcibly mobilizing Hungarians — Mass mobilization of Hungarians has begun in the Transcarpathian region of Ukraine.
Over the past few days, military enlistment offices have been on duty in public places, and also conducted house-to-house and apartment-by-apartment rounds with summonses in the cities of Beregovo,Vinogradov and in the village of Surte.These Settlements are places of compact residence for the Hungarian diaspora, whose share of the local population is 30-50%.
Orban has cleared out the military of potential coup plotters a la Turkey, it appears. It would not be surprising to see a future Hungarian move into Transcarpathia. There are many examples on social media of Ukrainians being forcefully conscripted-grabbed off the street and bundled into vans.
The longer that this drags on, contrary to western media and governments propaganda talking points, NATO weakness is exposed and Russian strength emphasised. The long war suits Russia far more than NATO.
Instead of attacking and taking land, as NATO planned for and expected, Russia have dragged NATO into WW2 style trench warfare. A war of attrition on Russia's terms where they are firing 6 times more artillery shells everyday than the Ukrainians. Losses of manpower also favours Russia massively- something like 8-1. NATO have no answer. Pour as many arms in as they want. Russia has way more to pour in yet. As Putin said a month or so back; "We haven't even started yet"
Turkiye, Hungary. The pathetic "Talinn nine" agreement exposing the disunity in NATO. The Talinn 9 probably some sort of pathetic attempt by the UK, who head it, to show some sort of updated "Coalition of the willing". No Germany, France, Italy. The cracks are becoming fissures. More like a pack of yapping poodles.
-
Former top FBI official Charles McGonigal arrested over ties to Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/former-fbi-official-charles-mcgonigal-arrested-ties-russian/story?id=96609658 (https://abcnews.go.com/US/former-fbi-official-charles-mcgonigal-arrested-ties-russian/story?id=96609658)
-
The Russian motives are plain to see and spelled out. They will not tolerate a hostile state hosting nuclear weapons in its backyard. NATO will comply.
This is the problem with such a controlled media space.
Russia: We are going to do A & B to achieve C.
NATO govs & media: Putin wants to do X & Y to achieve Z
Russia: Do A & B- achieve C
NATO: Putin and Russia are too weak to do X & Y to achieve Z. We won!
Alastair Crooke latest in Strategic Culture;
https://strategic-culture.org/news/2023/01/23/the-most-egregious-mistake/
Taster below;
It is the miscalculation of this era – one that may begin the collapse of dollar primacy, and therefore, global compliance with U.S. political demands, too. But its most grievous content is that it corners the U.S. into promoting dangerous Ukrainian escalation against Russia directly (i.e. Crimea).
Washington dares not – indeed cannot – yield on dollar primacy, the ultimate signifier for ‘American decline’. And so the U.S. government is hostage to its financial hegemony in a way that is rarely fully understood.
The Biden Team cannot withdraw its fantastical narrative of Russia’s imminent humiliation; they have bet the House on it. Yet it has become an existential issue for the U.S. precisely because of this egregious initial miscalculation that has been subsequently levered-up into a preposterous narrative of a floundering, at any moment ‘collapsing’ Russia.
What then is this ‘Great Surprise’ – the almost completely unforeseen event of recent geo-politics that has so shaken U.S. expectations, and which takes the world to the precipice?
It is, in a word, Resilience. The Resilience displayed by the Russian economy after the West had committed the entire weight of its financial resources to crushing Russia. The West bore down on Russia in every conceivable way – via financial, cultural and psychological war – and with real military war as the follow-through.
Yet, Russia has survived, and survived relatively handsomely. It is doing ‘okay’ – maybe better, even, than many Russia insiders were expecting. The ‘Anglo’ Intelligence services however, had assured EU leaders not to worry; it’s ‘slam dunk’; Putin cannot possibly survive. Rapid financial and political collapse, they promised, was certain under the tsunami of western sanctions.
Their analysis represents an Intelligence failure on a par with the non-existent Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. But instead of critical re-examination, as events failed to provide confirmation, they doubled down. But two such failures are just ‘too much’ to bear.
So why does this ‘failed expectation’ constitute such a world-shaking moment for our era? It is because the West fears that its miscalculation might well lead to the collapse of its dollar hegemony. But the fear extends well beyond that too – (bad as ‘that’ would be from the U.S. perspective).
-
International push for Nuremberg-style tribunal to hold Vladimir Putin responsible for war in Ukraine
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-01-24/push-to-hold-putin-criminally-responsible-for-ukraine-war/101882574 (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-01-24/push-to-hold-putin-criminally-responsible-for-ukraine-war/101882574)
-
International push for Nuremberg-style tribunal to hold Vladimir Putin responsible for war in Ukraine
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-01-24/push-to-hold-putin-criminally-responsible-for-ukraine-war/101882574 (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-01-24/push-to-hold-putin-criminally-responsible-for-ukraine-war/101882574)
Did you even read the article you posted? The contents don't match the headline.
The Kiev regime and some vague wishful thinking about a future General Assembly vote, which they admit would be difficult and unlikely to succeed, to put pressure on Russia or some copium. What an absolute fact free piece of drivel. Who gives a f#!k about anything coming from the about to collapse regime in Ukraine?
The real International community meanwhile are pushing back and US/UK and the rest of the NATO minions will be facing up to their own responsibility for their decades of aggression.
-
Polish PM @MorawieckiM:
“Ukraine and Europe will win this war, with Germany or without it”
More NATO and EU unity. Much to take apart for such a short statement.
The Polish PM declaring openly that "Europe" are at war with Russia. "With or without Germany"-EU and NATO member. The disunity in NATO and the EU is coming out into the open. They are in no state to take on Russia. Their statements of the imminent demise of Russia have less credibility than their statements from 2011 onwards predicting the imminent demise of Bashar al Assad.
All the bullshit about what Russia can't supposedly do and yet NATO/US failures and fiascoes litter recent history. They couldn't successfully take down Syria and imagine that they can take on Russia. Delusional. US presence will soon disappear forever from Syria and the wider Middle East. A typical piece of western journalism and analysis from 2012 below. The media and western governments were all as one on this and you can find countless articles making the same horseshit "analysis"at this time. All the same. Almost as if they are instructed ::)
https://carnegieendowment.org/2012/02/29/fall-of-bashar-al-assad-s-regime-is-inevitable-pub-47334
How's it going? Everyone promising Assad's demise have long gone while he is still there.
Good luck with Putin and Russia :))
-
The USSR opposed fascism and the Nazis throughout.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German%E2%80%93Soviet_Axis_talks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German%E2%80%93Soviet_Axis_talks)
(https://preview.redd.it/stalins-admiration-for-hitler-v0-d4nrwqu1vida1.jpg?auto=webp&s=fbc787b529f88414bb5bdc857f4df834d80e5347)
-
Who gives a f#!k about anything coming from the about to collapse regime in Ukraine?
About to collapse? Another one of your delusions like your claim that Russia would take the entire Ukrainian coast including Odesa. :))
-
About to collapse? Another one of your delusions like your claim that Russia would take the entire Ukrainian coast including Odesa.
Meanwhile, Ukrainian "governance"? continues to fall apart spectacularly. Realism is catching up with many who realise they are being used by western financial interests. Their blood and treasure being spent for the benefit of others. Reality has a way of forcing people to "wise up".
The latest to go, a matter of hours ago, Deputy Defense Minister Vyacheslav Shapovalov. This follows only hours after Kyrylo Tymoshenko. Deputy Head of Presidential Office resigned/was sacked.
Last week presidential adviser Oleksiy Arestovych resigned after revealing that Ukraine's air defense system was responsible for the Dnipro apartment strike. The heads of the Dnepropetrovsk, Zaporizhia, Kherson and Sumy regions of Ukraine have also resigned. Zelensky has banned officials from leaving the country in a supposed corruption crackdown.
All of this follows the helicopter crash in Kiev a week ago in which the entire leadership of the Ministry of Internal Affairs were killed. Arestovych, former Presidential adviser, has been making many interesting statements and admissions since his "resignation?" Latest revelation below;
https://twitter.com/i/status/1617176607478743040
This is only scratching the surface of the disarray in the supposed Ukrainian leadership. It will soon only exist only as a land-locked rump state, at best. Odessa will not be left to Ukrainian governance. Arestovych is manoeuvring himself for some position in a post NATO/Zelensky administration.
The losses and the lies are catching up and can't be hidden any longer. Only the hopelessly propagandised fail to read the writing on the wall now. It is no surprise that David is amongst them.
-
About to collapse? Another one of your delusions like your claim that Russia would take the entire Ukrainian coast including Odesa.
Meanwhile, Ukrainian "governance"? continues to fall apart spectacularly. Realism is catching up with many who realise they are being used by western financial interests. Their blood and treasure being spent for the benefit of others. Reality has a way of forcing people to "wise up".
The latest to go, a matter of hours ago, Deputy Defense Minister Vyacheslav Shapovalov. This follows only hours after Kyrylo Tymoshenko. Deputy Head of Presidential Office resigned/was sacked.
Last week presidential adviser Oleksiy Arestovych resigned after revealing that Ukraine's air defense system was responsible for the Dnipro apartment strike. The heads of the Dnepropetrovsk, Zaporizhia, Kherson and Sumy regions of Ukraine have also resigned. Zelensky has banned officials from leaving the country in a supposed corruption crackdown.
All of this follows the helicopter crash in Kiev a week ago in which the entire leadership of the Ministry of Internal Affairs were killed. Arestovych, former Presidential adviser, has been making many interesting statements and admissions since his "resignation?" Latest revelation below;
https://twitter.com/i/status/1617176607478743040
This is only scratching the surface of the disarray in the supposed Ukrainian leadership. It will soon only exist only as a land-locked rump state, at best. Odessa will not be left to Ukrainian governance. Arestovych is manoeuvring himself for some position in a post NATO/Zelensky administration.
The losses and the lies are catching up and can't be hidden any longer. Only the hopelessly propagandised fail to read the writing on the wall now. It is no surprise that David is amongst them.
If the Kyiv government didn't collapse when the Russian troops were just 19 miles away with saboteurs already in the city. It is certainly not going to happen now.
I will let the battlefield speak for itself. And you will continue to make up excuses for the Russian failure to hold onto an single key city. Your belief that Russia will somehow retake Kherson then go onto occupy Mykolaiv and Odesa is almost as crazy as your prediction three years ago that Assad will throw the Israelis out of the Golan heights.
Time will tell who is correct. And it will only make you look more and more delusional.
-
The Russian draft-dodgers who fled to Alaska in a dinghy
https://www.economist.com/1843/2023/01/23/the-russian-draft-dodgers-who-fled-to-alaska-in-a-dinghy (https://www.economist.com/1843/2023/01/23/the-russian-draft-dodgers-who-fled-to-alaska-in-a-dinghy)
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German%E2%80%93Soviet_Axis_talks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German%E2%80%93Soviet_Axis_talks)
(https://preview.redd.it/stalins-admiration-for-hitler-v0-d4nrwqu1vida1.jpg?auto=webp&s=fbc787b529f88414bb5bdc857f4df834d80e5347)
What is your point?
-
What is your point?
Joining into a non-aggression pact with Nazis. Negotiating to potentially become part of an alliance with Nazi's and showing approval for Hitler's night of the long knives, is not an entity that "opposed fascism and the Nazis throughout".
Nor does such entity attract fascist admirers. Such as Francis Yockey.
https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/rad/issue/23278/248454 (https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/rad/issue/23278/248454)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Parker_Yockey (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Parker_Yockey)
-
What is your point?
Barely any, if any, of David's posts on this thread have had any point other than childish trolling. His only point seems to be to run interference. He ruins the thread with his name calling, flag waving, meme laden idiocy. Never anything to add or any attempt at serious discussion. By a country mile-his posts on this thread are the least informative or interesting and most childish of all who post on it.
-
Joining into a non-aggression pact with Nazis. Negotiating to potentially become part of an alliance with Nazi's and showing approval for Hitler's night of the long knives, is not an entity that "opposed fascism and the Nazis throughout".
Nor does such entity attract fascist admirers. Such as Francis Yockey.
https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/rad/issue/23278/248454 (https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/rad/issue/23278/248454)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Parker_Yockey (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Parker_Yockey)
You are seriously out of your depth. You have no idea whatsoever.
-
Barely any, if any, of David's posts on this thread have had any point other than childish trolling. His only point seems to be to run interference. He ruins the thread with his name calling, flag waving, meme laden idiocy. Never anything to add or any attempt at serious discussion. By a country mile-his posts on this thread are the least informative or interesting and most childish of all who post on it.
I agree entirely.
-
Should Putin have pummelled housing estates, towns and cities? I think he lost any hope of any kind of moral argument for invading when Russia changed tactics. It's almost as if the Russians spat their dummy out because Ukraine didn't fold in the way it was supposed to right at the beginning. Brutal tactics bombarding dwellings. Turning whole apartment blocks in to burned out shells. That's my take on it. I think he's done a truly stupid thing for Russia in terms of global balance of power. The Americans must be creaming themselves. Pardon for using that expression but it looks to me that Russia is a shadow of what it was before Putin invaded.
-
Should Putin have pummelled housing estates, towns and cities? I think he lost any hope of any kind of moral argument for invading when Russia changed tactics. It's almost as if the Russians spat their dummy out because Ukraine didn't fold in the way it was supposed to right at the beginning. Brutal tactics bombarding dwellings. Turning whole apartment blocks in to burned out shells. That's my take on it. I think he's done a truly stupid thing for Russia in terms of global balance of power. The Americans must be creaming themselves. Pardon for using that expression but it looks to me that Russia is a shadow of what it was before Putin invaded.
None of that happened though, Roch. Former Presidential adviser Arestovych statements over the last few days have made pretty clear the lies being told by Ukraine/NATO and their compliant media. Outside of western media, these accusations don't exist.
Arestovych admitted the lie about the Russian missile hitting an apartment block, owning up to it being Ukrainian air defence. This is the case every single time. Arestovych has had enough of the obvious lies and is openly calling them out. Russia do not, unlike Ukraine and NATO, target civilian populations. This is outright projection.
Numbers, always a good guide, give a lie to the Russian brutality-targeting civilians projection from western propaganda outlets. Reuters (itself western propaganda) gave a number of 9,000 civilian deaths since the "invasion". Most of those, by any reasonable inference, would be of citizens loyal to Russia. Ukrainians have targeted civilians from the beginning. Terror being the age old tool of Nazis. Nazis gonna Nazi! It is NATO/Ukraine who run scorched earth policies.
Take a look at the reconstruction of Mariupol by Russia, in a matter of months during hostilities, and then find me a city destroyed by NATO after "reconstruction".
It is NATO who deliberately target civilians. They even film it-give it a name(Shock and Awe) and present it as entertainment. They have forfeited any right to be seen as honest witnesses to anything.
Far from Russia being a "shadow of what it was"-Russia has demonstrated to the rest of the world that they are the pre-eminent world military power. It is NATO, in the eyes of the world, who are a shadow of what they once were.
The world is at an epoch in history. The world order is being upended and no amount of western desperation can prevent it.
NATO bet the house on defeating Russia with unprecedented sanctions, propaganda and aggression. They believed their own propaganda, some still do, that Russia is weak. They lost the bet, we are watching that play out now. The result is not in doubt and nor are the trials for western war criminals.
-
Should Putin have pummelled housing estates, towns and cities? I think he lost any hope of any kind of moral argument for invading when Russia changed tactics. It's almost as if the Russians spat their dummy out because Ukraine didn't fold in the way it was supposed to right at the beginning. Brutal tactics bombarding dwellings. Turning whole apartment blocks in to burned out shells. That's my take on it. I think he's done a truly stupid thing for Russia in terms of global balance of power. The Americans must be creaming themselves. Pardon for using that expression but it looks to me that Russia is a shadow of what it was before Putin invaded.
From the same outlets, using the same sources that brought you;
1) A "Nurse" testifying in the UNSC that Iraqi troops threw babies from incubators(didn't happen-wasn't even a nurse but the Ambassador's daughter)
2) Gaddafi giving his soldiers Viagra to commit rapes(invented)
3) Saddam has weapons of mass destruction (lies)
4) Assad launching chemical weapon attacks on civilians(projection)
5) Russia launched an "unprovoked" invasion
6) Need I go on...
The unsurpassed in history criminal brutality of the NATO war machine over the last decades is never called out by this media They see no targeting of civilians by NATO ever. There have been no calls for those countries responsible for Fallujah/Raqqa/Mosul... to be banned from all international competition because of their war crimes. If a journalist does see these crimes, the same media then turn a blind eye as that journalist is jailed and persecuted(Assange, Craig Murray). They are the proverbial 3 wise monkeys. That is what their job is-misinforming anyone unfortunate enough to still take a blind bit of notice of people who have publicly demonstrated that they lie on behalf of power.
You have surely noticed by now that anyone willing to speak truth to power is sidelined, censored and criminalised if they are too brave. All that is left is the soul-less dregs who are more than willing to "tell lies on behalf of power"
Why do you imagine that their "reporting" on Ukraine is any more reliable than their previous "work"?
They are paid stenographers. Their paymasters are the biggest criminal organisation in history.
-
Barely any, if any, of David's posts on this thread have had any point other than childish trolling. His only point seems to be to run interference. He ruins the thread with his name calling, flag waving, meme laden idiocy. Never anything to add or any attempt at serious discussion. By a country mile-his posts on this thread are the least informative or interesting and most childish of all who post on it.
For someone who made up claims about CCTV on Skripals front door, posting links to the works of a convicted pedophile and paleo conservative creationists to support your claims. Claiming NATO are behind certain things that the Russians themselves don't deny doing. You are in no position to criticize me. If my posts are " least informative" then I wonder what that makes yours? ???
-
For someone who made up claims about CCTV on Skripals front door, posting links to the works of a convicted pedophile and paleo conservative creationists to support your claims. Claiming NATO are behind certain things that the Russians themselves don't deny doing. You are in no position to criticize me. If my posts are " least informative" then I wonder what that makes yours? ???
Thank you for proving the point.
Barely any, if any, of David's posts on this thread have had any point other than childish trolling. His only point seems to be to run interference. He ruins the thread with his name calling, flag waving, meme laden idiocy. Never anything to add or any attempt at serious discussion. By a country mile-his posts on this thread are the least informative or interesting and most childish of all who post on it.
Above is the rest of the post;
If the cap fits, David.
To address your name calling-running interference-flag waving idiocy. Not to mention your lack of attempt at serious discussion or passing on any interesting information.
Scott Ritter is a former US Marine officer and later a UN weapons inspector. If you fail to see that he is an informed voice then more fool you.
Andrei Raevsky(dismissed by you as a "paleo conservative creationist")-you pathetic child- is in fact a former military analyst with Swiss intelligence and then the UN Institute for Disarmament Research. His blog The Vineyard of The Saker is one of the best resources available for intelligent and informed geopolitical analysis. Plenty of excellent analysis from writers such as Pepe Escobar, Dmitri Orlov + many more. It's way over your head, David. Link to the Saker below;
https://thesaker.is/
Your favourite source-Bellingcat(aka Eliot Higgins) is a former underwear salesman from Leicester who gained his knowledge of weapons from video games. His "fake citizen Open Source Intelligence analysis" is so obviously a MI6 front that it is a joke. His analysis always, by massive coincidence, agrees with whatever MI6 want you to believe. And anyway, as stated, his background gives him no expertise in the subjects he comments on. The media trumpeting of his "investigations" also give you a big clue as to who he really is.
Ritter and Raevsky are experts and independent.
As are commentators such as Colonel Douglas MacGregor, Andrei Martyanov.
-
You are seriously out of your depth. You have no idea whatsoever.
Half of my great grandparents (the Jewish side of my family) were from the USSR and one was on Soviet of Workers Deputies in Smolensk at one point. I listened to what my Grandmother had to say.
A childhood friend of mine had two grandparents from the Ukrainian SSR. I listened to what they had to say.
I have worked with several people who grew up in Yugoslavia, The Latvian SSR and the Polish People's Republic. I spoke with them a lot.
The Latvian guy once told me about the time he was a child and he had a poster of the band KISS on his wall, one day the KGB came into his room ripped it down. Now, a poster might no seem much but that was a rarity he couldn't have replaced. His story left an impression on me.
What first hand experiences from the USSR have you come across?
-
Thank you for proving the point.
Barely any, if any, of David's posts on this thread have had any point other than childish trolling. His only point seems to be to run interference. He ruins the thread with his name calling, flag waving, meme laden idiocy. Never anything to add or any attempt at serious discussion. By a country mile-his posts on this thread are the least informative or interesting and most childish of all who post on it.
Above is the rest of the post;
If the cap fits, David.
To address your name calling-running interference-flag waving idiocy. Not to mention your lack of attempt at serious discussion or passing on any interesting information.
Scott Ritter is a former US Marine officer and later a UN weapons inspector. If you fail to see that he is an informed voice then more fool you.
Andrei Raevsky(dismissed by you as a "paleo conservative creationist")-you pathetic child- is in fact a former military analyst with Swiss intelligence and then the UN Institute for Disarmament Research. His blog The Vineyard of The Saker is one of the best resources available for intelligent and informed geopolitical analysis. Plenty of excellent analysis from writers such as Pepe Escobar, Dmitri Orlov + many more. It's way over your head, David. Link to the Saker below;
https://thesaker.is/
Your favourite source-Bellingcat(aka Eliot Higgins) is a former underwear salesman from Leicester who gained his knowledge of weapons from video games. His "fake citizen Open Source Intelligence analysis" is so obviously a MI6 front that it is a joke. His analysis always, by massive coincidence, agrees with whatever MI6 want you to believe. And anyway, as stated, his background gives him no expertise in the subjects he comments on. The media trumpeting of his "investigations" also give you a big clue as to who he really is.
Ritter and Raevsky are experts and independent.
As are commentators such as Colonel Douglas MacGregor, Andrei Martyanov.
Ritter declared in February that Russia will not invade Ukraine. After the invasion, Ritter said Ukraine will fall in a week. Ritter then got suspended from Twitter after claiming that the National Police of Ukraine is responsible for the Bucha massacre.
So why is a former U.S. Marine Corps intelligence officer peddling the line of Russian propaganda?
The most likely answer is that for a repeated sex offender (involving children) that has served time in prison, you have trouble finding employment.
Ritter works for and appears on Russia Today. And there is Russian money involved here. Everyone has a price.
-
Half of my great grandparents (the Jewish side of my family) were from the USSR and one was on Soviet of Workers Deputies in Smolensk at one point. I listened to what my Grandmother had to say.
A childhood friend of mine had two grandparents from the Ukrainian SSR. I listened to what they had to say.
I have worked with several people who grew up in Yugoslavia, The Latvian SSR and the Polish People's Republic. I spoke with them a lot.
The Latvian guy once told me about the time he was a child and he had a poster of the band KISS on his wall, one day the KGB came into his room ripped it down. Now, a poster might no seem much but that was a rarity he couldn't have replaced. His story left an impression on me.
What first hand experiences from the USSR have you come across?
Brilliant, you have got the double and proved ngb's point as well as mine in your last post. "First hand experience"- you are unintentionally hilarious.
You "listened to what your grandmother had to say". Did she pass this on from your great grandparents?
A childhood friend had grandparents from the Ukraine SSR. You were a child and yet you still count this alleged talk with the grandparents of your friend as part of your "first hand" experience of knowledge of the USSR.
You have "worked with people from Yugoslavia, Latvia and Poland" and "talked with them".
It sounds to me as if you have a very well rounded and informed view of the Soviet Union, David. What gibberish-you prove your idiocy with every post.
Maybe ngb can trump your "first hand experience" of the Soviet Union when it turns out he once had some Polish builders in and he knows a Russian guy at work.
-
You "listened to what your grandmother had to say". Did she pass this on from your great grandparents?
Correct.
A childhood friend had grandparents from the Ukraine SSR. You were a child and yet you still count this alleged talk with the grandparents of your friend as part of your "first hand" experience of knowledge of the USSR.
No, I actually spoke with this grandparents.
You have "worked with people from Yugoslavia, Latvia and Poland" and "talked with them".
Correct. You obtain information from people by talking to them. Asking them about their experiences involves talking and listening. You should try it some day, you might learn something.
So, how many ordinary people from the USSR/Warsaw pact you ever met and learned from their experiences?
-
Correct.
No, I actually spoke with this grandparents.
Correct. You obtain information from people by talking to them. Asking them about their experiences involves talking and listening. You should try it some day, you might learn something.
So, how many ordinary people from the USSR/Warsaw pact you ever met and learned from their experiences?
You are full of shit. The entirety of your knowledge displayed on this thread would fit on the back of a standard stamp and still leave room for the Lord's Prayer. Conversations as a child with your gran, a friends gran and some work colleagues!?- explains your complete ignorance if that is the source of your "knowledge".
All you do is post memes, ad-hom attacks and misinformation. Crap about lack of flushing toilets. Is that what they told you? What did you ask? You have displayed zero insight or knowledge in the entirety of this thread. Everyone knows people from the former USSR-it isn't the basis for a knowledge base of geopolitics.
These conversations that you allegedly had to give you your "extensive!?" knowledge of the USSR cannot have been much more than some bitchfest about "commies" and "Stalin" because that is all you post. You know nothing and prove it yourself with your insult-laden, meme heavy, flag waving childish nonsense.
-
when we have died in a nuclear war will it really matter.
-
You are full of shit. The entirety of your knowledge displayed on this thread would fit on the back of a standard stamp and still leave room for the Lord's Prayer. Conversations as a child with your gran, a friends gran and some work colleagues!?- explains your complete ignorance if that is the source of your "knowledge".
All you do is post memes, ad-hom attacks and misinformation. Crap about lack of flushing toilets. Is that what they told you? What did you ask? You have displayed zero insight or knowledge in the entirety of this thread. Everyone knows people from the former USSR-it isn't the basis for a knowledge base of geopolitics.
These conversations that you allegedly had to give you your "extensive!?" knowledge of the USSR cannot have been much more than some bitchfest about "commies" and "Stalin" because that is all you post. You know nothing and prove it yourself with your insult-laden, meme heavy, flag waving childish nonsense.
Getting salty now are we?
So, you decided to form a view on a highly censored and concealed society, based not on the experiences with those who lived in it as everyday people. But instead you based it primarily on its governments propaganda made for foreign consumption? :)) :))
I now realise that I have answered my own question as to how many everyday people from behind the Iron curtain you and NGB have met. The answer is likely zero, because if you had got to known such people and heard of their experiences, you simply would not hold the views that you do.
-
Getting salty now are we?
So, you decided to form a view on a highly censored and concealed society, based not on the experiences with those who lived in it as everyday people. But instead you based it primarily on its governments propaganda made for foreign consumption? :)) :))
I now realise that I have answered my own question as to how many everyday people from behind the Iron curtain you and NGB have met. The answer is likely zero, because if you had got to known such people and heard of their experiences, you simply would not hold the views that you do.
Based on your childhood interactions with a gran who never lived there but heard from her parents and some mates grandparents-you believe that to be extensive first hand knowledge of the Soviet Union.
Chrystia Freeland, the Deputy PM of Canada-home apparently to the largest Ukrainian diaspora outside of Russia is of similar background. Anyway, Freeland is very outspoken against Russia and a leading voice for arming Ukraine. She is very much a war-hawk and the likely next PM.
Much of her hatred for all things Russia no doubt comes from her own grandparents who she has spoken very fondly of. See below;
On Jan. 26, 2022, in the midst of Russia’s preparations to invade Ukraine, Canada’s Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland issued a statement outlining why Canada—home to the largest Ukrainian diaspora outside Russia—would support Ukraine unconditionally, outlining a Manichean view of a “struggle between democracy and authoritarianism.” “Canadians—our own parents and grandparents—fought and died,” she continued, “to establish a rules-based international order during and after the Second World War.”
Freeland’s Ukrainian grandfather on her mother’s side, Michael Chomiak, did nothing of the sort. During the War, he edited Krakivski Visti, a Nazi propaganda rag in occupied Krakow that was printed on a press confiscated from a Jewish newspaper. Freeland, of course, is not her grandfather, nor is she responsible for his actions. But she is responsible for bringing him up at every opportunity to portray him as a liberal democrat who profoundly influenced her politics.
Full article here;
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/chrystia-freeland-needs-to-come-clean-about-her-nazi-collaborationist-grandfather
The backgrounds of many of the current war-hawks have similar interesting backgrounds. Direct descendants of the fascists from WW2 who were welcomed into the west. Their grandchildren now wielding power and attempting to finish what their fascist grandparents started. Strange bedfellows you keep.
-
Based on your childhood interactions with a gran who never lived there but heard from her parents and some mates grandparents-you believe that to be extensive first hand knowledge of the Soviet Union.
So, you are saying that people who lived and grew up in Soviet union don't have first hand knowledge of the Soviet Union? The very place they grew up in and who lived and worked in its very institutions? ???
You remind me of Malcom Caldwell. A Tankie like yourself, he was rubbishing the Cambodian refugees claims of a genocide taking place. Went to Cambodia and was murdered by Pol Pots henchmen.
-
David, I hope you have booby trapped your Nebraskan homestead, in case any sleeper cell Russians are instructed to pay a visit.
-
So, you are saying that people who lived and grew up in Soviet union don't have first hand knowledge of the Soviet Union? The very place they grew up in and who lived and worked in its very institutions? ???
You remind me of Malcom Caldwell. A Tankie like yourself, he was rubbishing the Cambodian refugees claims of a genocide taking place. Went to Cambodia and was murdered by Pol Pots henchmen.
Learn to read and comprehend. I am saying that the people that you claim to have had conversations with all share the same views as Chrystia Freeland (grand-daughter of Nazi propagandist, Michael Chomiak) who considers her Nazi collaborating fascist grand-father to be a freedom fighter for liberal rules based international order;
"our own parents and grandparents—fought and died to establish a rules-based international order during and after the Second World War.”
Freeland’s Ukrainian grandfather on her mother’s side, Michael Chomiak, did nothing of the sort. During the War, he edited Krakivski Visti, a Nazi propaganda rag in occupied Krakow that was printed on a press confiscated from a Jewish newspaper.
You share the views of fascists.
-
I now realise that I have answered my own question as to how many everyday people from behind the Iron curtain you and NGB have met. The answer is likely zero, because if you had got to known such people and heard of their experiences, you simply would not hold the views that you do.
I have in fact met quite a few people who lived in the USSR and other eastern European countries you describe using the Cold War term "iron curtain". I also knew people from the UK who regularly visited those countries and in some cases worked there. I also know people who had a lot of experience of China, Vietnam and Cuba. I have had many interesting discussions over many years about life and politics in those countries, with positive and negative aspects openly discussed. It was nothing like the simplistic caricature you present as part of your CIA inspired propaganda.
-
Maybe ngb can trump your "first hand experience" of the Soviet Union when it turns out he once had some Polish builders in and he knows a Russian guy at work.
I thought it was a secret? Who told you gringo? This is a serious security breach and there will be consequences!
-
ive met mostly poles and hungrians who hated the comunist system i met an east german who thought it was great and a czech who dident like it at the time but on reflection thought it wasnt that bad
-
Learn to read and comprehend. I am saying that the people that you claim to have had conversations with all share the same views as Chrystia Freeland (grand-daughter of Nazi propagandist, Michael Chomiak) who considers her Nazi collaborating fascist grand-father to be a freedom fighter for liberal rules based international order;
"our own parents and grandparents—fought and died to establish a rules-based international order during and after the Second World War.”
Freeland’s Ukrainian grandfather on her mother’s side, Michael Chomiak, did nothing of the sort. During the War, he edited Krakivski Visti, a Nazi propaganda rag in occupied Krakow that was printed on a press confiscated from a Jewish newspaper.
You share the views of fascists.
Right, so my Jewish forefather's from the USSR would consider a Nazi collaborating fascist a freedom fighter. That would explain why I can find my family surname in documents naming detainees at Auschwitz concentration camp. It all makes sense now.
-
David, I hope you have booby trapped your Nebraskan homestead, in case any sleeper cell Russians are instructed to pay a visit.
I'm in Moscow right now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQdx8SSVg_U (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQdx8SSVg_U)
-
ive met mostly poles and hungrians who hated the comunist system i met an east german who thought it was great and a czech who dident like it at the time but on reflection thought it wasnt that bad
I have in fact met quite a few people who lived in the USSR and other eastern European countries you describe using the Cold War term "iron curtain". I also knew people from the UK who regularly visited those countries and in some cases worked there. I also know people who had a lot of experience of China, Vietnam and Cuba. I have had many interesting discussions over many years about life and politics in those countries, with positive and negative aspects openly discussed. It was nothing like the simplistic caricature you present as part of your CIA inspired propaganda.
Some have good recollections-some bad. Probably everyone has met people from former USSR. David mixes in very partisan circles. Despite this "knowledge" he has yet to post any information about USSR. Most of what he post is idiotic gifs, youtube videos by amateurish, ill informed, war porn addicted hacks and assessments by obvious intel fronts such as Bellingcat and ISW (institute for the Study of War). He obviously didn't learn much "first hand" knowledge.
-
The nature of evil..https://youtu.be/t--pNU9ZfVE
-
Right, so my Jewish forefather's from the USSR would consider a Nazi collaborating fascist a freedom fighter. That would explain why I can find my family surname in documents naming detainees at Auschwitz concentration camp. It all makes sense now.
I would hope not. You, however, are currently supporting the forces who consider Stepan Bandera, who was a "Nazi collaborating fascist", to be a freedom fighter though. This is undeniable. Bandera ideology is whitewashed by our media and governments.
Those in power most responsible for the provocations against Russia are the descendants and spiritual heirs of the Nazis.
Victoria Nuland (Under secretary of State for political affairs and a leading architect of the war)also has Jewish grandparents from Ukraine, but that fact doesn't mean that she isn't a war-mongering fascist supporting criminal. She is the one who expressed early in the hostilities that she was concerned that Russia would get control of their "biological research facilities" in Ukraine. She is steeped in war mongering throughout her career. See link below;
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2021/february/11/why-victoria-nuland-is-dangerous-and-should-not-be-confirmed/
Her husband Robert Kagan, also with Jewish grandparents from the former USSR, is also an anti-Russian war hawk, currently supporting Nazi worshipping fascists
Kagan's and Nuland's sister in law is Kimberly Kagan spouse of Frederick Kagan.
Kimberley Kagan, along with retired US general Jack Keane are the founders of ISW(Instiute for the Study of War). This "institute" is nothing more than a front for war-mongering NATO criminals. Quoted and relied upon for "information" by our media and the likes of David, as if it is some neutral legitimate institute.
All with the same backgrounds. The ethnicity of their forebears does not give them a free pass on holding fascist ideology now. Nor does yours.
-
I would hope not. You, however, are currently supporting the forces who consider Stepan Bandera, who was a "Nazi collaborating fascist", to be a freedom fighter though. This is undeniable. Bandera ideology is whitewashed by our media and governments.
Those in power most responsible for the provocations against Russia are the descendants and spiritual heirs of the Nazis.
The people you bring up do not represent the whole of Ukraine. A country full of Nazi's does not elect a Jewish comedian into office with a 73% landslide. Pay a visit to Neo-Nazi forums and see what they have to say about Zelensky.
Meanwhile, Below is Dmitry Utkin. Retired Russian military and now in the Wagner group. He has the Nazi SS symbols tattooed on his shoulders and a Nazi Eagle tattoo on his chest. I wonder what his ideology is?
If you want to bring up bad apples by finding a few Nazis and then apply their views to the entire country or side they are fighting for, two can play at that game.
(https://preview.redd.it/8fnnf4zy3ht81.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=cd274fea2b3abb872055a76c5b070f998af7a5d5)
-
The ISW (Institute for the Study of War
Dr. Kimberly Kagan founded ISW in May 2007, as U.S. forces undertook a daring new counterinsurgency strategy to reverse the grim security situation on the ground in Iraq . Frustrated with the prevailing lack of accurate information documenting developments on the ground in Iraq and the detrimental effect of biased reporting on policymakers, Dr. Kagan established ISW to provide real-time, independent, and open-source analysis of ongoing military operations and insurgent attacks in Iraq. General Jack Keane (U.S. Army, Ret.), the Chairman of ISW’s board, also played a central role in developing the intellectual foundation for this change of strategy in Iraq, and supported the formation of the Institute in 2007.
The above is from the ISW-themselves-from their home page.
For those incapable of reading between the lines (no names), below is the translation into straight talking truth-prior to translation into the spin above.
ISW spin; as U.S. forces undertook a daring new counterinsurgency strategy to reverse the grim security situation on the ground in Iraq .
Translation; U.S. Forces undertook brutal and criminally punitive crimes in order to quell citizen resistance to their brutal and savage invasion.
ISW spin; Frustrated with the lack of accurate information documenting developments on the ground in Iraq
Translation; Frustrated with the accurate information documenting US/NATO crimes and brutality on the ground...
ISW spin; Dr. Kagan established ISW to provide real-time, independent, and open-source analysis of ongoing military operations
Translation; ISW was established by Kagan in collaboration with US military to put a pretend neutral front by creating an independent sounding direct mouth-piece.
-
The people you bring up do not represent the whole of Ukraine. A country full of Nazi's does not elect a Jewish comedian into office with a 73% landslide. Pay a visit to Neo-Nazi forums and see what they have to say about Zelensky.
Meanwhile, Below is Dmitry Utkin. Retired Russian military and now in the Wagner group. He has the Nazi SS symbols tattooed on his shoulders and a Nazi Eagle tattoo on his chest. I wonder what his ideology is?
If you want to bring up bad apples by finding a few Nazis and then apply their views to the entire country or side they are fighting for, two can play at that game.
(https://preview.redd.it/8fnnf4zy3ht81.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=cd274fea2b3abb872055a76c5b070f998af7a5d5)
These people are at the top of the decision making processes of their countries. Nuland, Kagan, Freeland. The list goes on. They are supporting fascists now and calling them anti-fascists. They have whitewashed Azov and regard them as cuddly freedom fighting heroes.
Their views apply to the entire country when they are driving the aggression.
-
The nature of evil..https://youtu.be/t--pNU9ZfVE
He was a very reactionary and seriously unbalanced character. Some of his views were very hard to acknowledge.
-
These people are at the top of the decision making processes of their countries. Nuland, Kagan, Freeland. The list goes on. They are supporting fascists now and calling them anti-fascists. They have whitewashed Azov and regard them as cuddly freedom fighting heroes.
Their views apply to the entire country when they are driving the aggression.
None of the people you have mentioned are fascists, not even close.
-
What Putin is Telling Russian Citizens About War in Ukraine
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzSbpWiWasU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzSbpWiWasU)
-
British Colonel Richard Kemp drops a bomb.
"I think the first thing I'd say is not to take too much notice of what most of the mainstream media have to say about Ukraine-because most of them and I'm thinking really more here about what I watch in the UK, particularly the BBC, most of them are just regurgitating the Ukrainian General Staff's perspective on what is happening. They're not taking into account other perspectives...This leads to a distorted picture but I think in reality-the Russians are doing their best now to take the whole of the Donbass region in Eastern Ukraine and they're being quite successful at that. I think they're hammering the hell out of the Ukrainians, unfortunately, with artillery and then going in to mop them up. It's a slow long process but I think probably, unfortunately, they will eventually prevail in Eastern Ukraine"
https://twitter.com/i/status/1618579799483744260
The juxtaposition of Colonel Kemp pointing out the lies of the mainstream media whilst the same lies were appearing in banner headlines as he spoke some truth is unintentionally hilarious. Watch it! As he is talking the following banner headlines appear;
"MAJOR BLOW TO RUSSIAN CAMPAIGN IN UKRAINE"
"RUSSIA SUFFERS HEAVY LOSSES IN KHARKIV"
"REPORTS SOME RUSSIAN TROOPS WITHDRAWN"
These headlines are literally as Col Kemp says, " I think they're hammering the hell out of the Ukrainians, unfortunately, with artillery and then going in to mop them up."
Why is anyone still using these clowns as sources of information? They are propaganda fronts for the intel agencies and barely hiding it at all now.
-
While the US has invented over 346 human therapeutic medications (many of which can be obtained on the NHS), the incandescent light bulb, the personal computer, the electric hearing aid, the GPS system (which anyone and everyone uses for free), the solar energy panel and the MRI scanner to name a few.
Russian contribution to our society is cheap petroleum and deadly nerve agents.
-
While the US has invented over 346 human therapeutic medications (many of which can be obtained on the NHS), the incandescent light bulb, the personal computer, the electric hearing aid, the GPS system (which anyone and everyone uses for free), the solar energy panel and the MRI scanner to name a few.
Russian contribution to our society is cheap petroleum and deadly nerve agents.
David, you are a complete idiot.
-
While the US has invented over 346 human therapeutic medications (many of which can be obtained on the NHS), the incandescent light bulb, the personal computer, the electric hearing aid, the GPS system (which anyone and everyone uses for free), the solar energy panel and the MRI scanner to name a few.
Russian contribution to our society is cheap petroleum and deadly nerve agents.
Dribble, Dribble... Grrr! Russia... Dribble Dribble...
That is how your post reads to everyone but you. You may well believe you have made some brilliantly insightful comment-but really it just says Dribble Dribble...
Misinformed-Tick, Deranged hatred of Putin grrr!-Tick, Racist caricature of Russians generally-Tick.
You are too stupid to understand how stupid you are;
A quick scan of Russian contribution to society shows a huge Russian footprint in Space travel, Science, Metallurgy, Physics, Arts and Culture and on and on. No field of what we term "society" is without Russian influence. Here is a wikipedia link for you-I'll keep it as simple as I can.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_Russian_innovation
There are more extensive lists and articles about Russian innovation-but probably above your comprehension level.
Anyway your claimed Russian innovations are only half true and that was by accident.
Deadly nerve agents are a German innovation.
You are correct but in the wrong way in your first assertion. The modern oil well was indeed invented by a Russian, so they are in many ways responsible for the cheap petroleum that has driven 20th/21st century innovation- 11 page PDF linked below-too much for you, David.
http://noema.crifst.ro/ARHIVA/2018_04_04.pdf
-
Dribble, Dribble... Grrr! Russia... Dribble Dribble...
That is how your post reads to everyone but you. You may well believe you have made some brilliantly insightful comment-but really it just says Dribble Dribble...
Misinformed-Tick, Deranged hatred of Putin grrr!-Tick, Racist caricature of Russians generally-Tick.
You are too stupid to understand how stupid you are;
A quick scan of Russian contribution to society shows a huge Russian footprint in Space travel, Science, Metallurgy, Physics, Arts and Culture and on and on. No field of what we term "society" is without Russian influence. Here is a wikipedia link for you-I'll keep it as simple as I can.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_Russian_innovation
Nice to see the USSR built the largest ever nuclear bomb and the largest ever nuclear submarine, that must have really helped put food on the empty shelves. They also built the first working space toilet instead of addressing their peoples earthly lack of such things. I wonder what the USSR could have been had its government not put so much resources into those pretentious projects it couldn't afford. You know, it may have actually worked out well and still be around today.
The timeline of American innovation on Wiki is so extensive its been split into four separate articles. :-\
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_United_States_inventions (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_United_States_inventions)
-
Your record on here is 0 wins, 0 draws, uncountable losses
And sh## all over the board
According to you, the celestial and impartial arbiter of all that I have right or wrong. ::)
Cant argue with that score.
-
David, you are a complete idiot.
You realize this only now?
-
David what do you think of Jim Rickard's views at 3 mins in:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FHm7xcmSLj8&t=444s
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Rickards
Pity JR didn't sort out his hair for the vid :'(
-
'You Are Russian Now' - Ukrainian Family Recalls Deportation To Moscow
https://youtu.be/IayBFjt4KHY?t=18 (https://youtu.be/IayBFjt4KHY?t=18)
-
What its all about https://youtu.be/rdzaPSufpgw
-
Finland’s foreign minister hints that Russia may have been involved in last week’s Quran-burning protest that threatens to derail Sweden’s accession to NATO.
The fee for registering the protest was paid by a former RT presenter with known links to Russia.
-
Finland’s foreign minister hints that Russia may have been involved in last week’s Quran-burning protest that threatens to derail Sweden’s accession to NATO.
The fee for registering the protest was paid by a former RT presenter with known links to Russia.
If you and your cold warrior chums succeed in extending NATO, including allowing Ukraine to join, where do you think it will end? If Ukraine joins NATO and then a single Russian bomb lands on Ukraine, NATO countries are obliged to intervene and there will be WWIII. That will end in nuclear war and thus annihilation of civilisation as we know it. Is that what you and the rest of your allies want?
-
If you and your cold warrior chums succeed in extending NATO, including allowing Ukraine to join, where do you think it will end? If Ukraine joins NATO and then a single Russian bomb lands on Ukraine, NATO countries are obliged to intervene and there will be WWIII. That will end in nuclear war and thus annihilation of civilisation as we know it. Is that what you and the rest of your allies want?
A country at war and with unresolved territorial disputes is not allowed to join NATO. That rules out Ukraine joining any time soon. Should it join in the future once the war is over, its membership in NATO would deter any Russian irredentist government from bombing it in the first place.
-
Russia Is Refitting Old T-72 Tanks For The War In Ukraine. But It’s Running Out Of Optics.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2023/01/28/russia-is-refitting-old-t-72-tanks-for-the-war-in-ukraine-but-its-running-out-of-optics-for-their-crews/?sh=178cd8ff2eb5 (https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2023/01/28/russia-is-refitting-old-t-72-tanks-for-the-war-in-ukraine-but-its-running-out-of-optics-for-their-crews/?sh=178cd8ff2eb5)
-
If you and your cold warrior chums succeed in extending NATO, including allowing Ukraine to join, where do you think it will end? If Ukraine joins NATO and then a single Russian bomb lands on Ukraine, NATO countries are obliged to intervene and there will be WWIII. That will end in nuclear war and thus annihilation of civilisation as we know it. Is that what you and the rest of your allies want?
NGB1066 do you think the West will ever accept the Russian occupation of Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhia and Kherson, with the economic effects of sanctions hitting working-class Russians hardest?
-
NGB1066 do you think the West will ever accept the Russian occupation of Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhia and Kherson, with the economic effects of sanctions hitting working-class Russians hardest?
I think the West will not readily accept Russian control of any of them, but ultimately there will be some form of de facto acceptance, based partly upon the fact that sanctions against Russia have not had the desired effect (and in some ways have had unexpected consequences), but mainly upon the fact that Russia can only be pushed back at enormous financial cost, which is unlikely to continue indefinitely.
-
I think the West will not readily accept Russian control of any of them, but ultimately there will be some form of de facto acceptance, based partly upon the fact that sanctions against Russia have not had the desired effect (and in some ways have had unexpected consequences), but mainly upon the fact that Russia can only be pushed back at enormous financial cost, which is unlikely to continue indefinitely.
The West will have no say in the matter of the future of Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, Zaporizhzhia or Crimea. They are gone forever now. A more relevant question, in light of reality on the ground, is what will Russia allow NATO/Kiev to retain control of?
Ukraine will be, in my opinion, a land locked rump state-at best. Odessa will vote on their status-after the surrender of Kiev.
-
If you and your cold warrior chums succeed in extending NATO, including allowing Ukraine to join, where do you think it will end? If Ukraine joins NATO and then a single Russian bomb lands on Ukraine, NATO countries are obliged to intervene and there will be WWIII. That will end in nuclear war and thus annihilation of civilisation as we know it. Is that what you and the rest of your allies want?
I agree wholly with the sentiment expressed and the inherent danger in the actions currently being taken by dangerous "cold war warriors". Their aims are undoubtedly attempting to escalate to such a situation with their criminal provocations. That being said, however, i do not think that Article 5 is what it is portayed as, ngb. There is a widely held view that it is nothing more than hot air. The full text below with the relevant part highlighted;
Article 5
The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.
Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security .
In NATO's entire history Article 5 has been invoked only once, after the 9/11 attacks. "Such action as it deems necessary", renders it meaningless. The action deemed necessary, is decided by each member individually. Could be supplying bandages. Whatever "action as it deems necessary" is all each state is obliged to do.
Before Article 5 can be invoked - Article 4 must be launched.
Article 4
The Parties will consult together whenever, in the opinion of any of them, the territorial integrity, political independence or security of any of the Parties is threatened.
When Poland attempted to invoke Art. 5- a few weeks ago- after the "stray?" Ukrainian Air Defence missile landed in Poland, with the Ukrainians claiming it was a Russian missile- It was quickly slapped down.
The fractures within NATO showed in the last Ramstein meeting. The UK along with Poland, Denmark, Czech Republic, Netherlands, Slovakia and the three Baltic states of Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia signed a "statement" The Talinn Pledge. Where are all the other NATO countries?
Article 5 is spoken about in the media-encouraged by government and intel- in terms that are not true. An attack on a NATO state does not commit NATO countries to an automatic all out war. The Talinn 9 "statement" is a stark example of the fissures. There is no chance that Turkiye would join an attack on Russia. "Old Europe" is conspicuous by it's absence from the Talinn "agreement". As are the US. NATO is toothless without the US and Turkiye. The militaries of most of the NATO vassals are small and insignificant.
Let's imagine that Russia launch missiles to interdict arms in Poland. Does anyone believe that NATO dare openly go to war against Russia? There is a reason they use proxies for their provocations. The minute that NATO countries declare that they are at war with Russia is about 5 minutes before a few missiles start hitting military installations and decision making centres of any country willing to declare open war on Russia.
The NATO meeting at Ramstein tells all you need to know.
-
The "Talinn 9 statement" committed to much more than defence of Ukraine territory and explicitly called for escalation and a direct threat to the separatist oblasts and Crimea. Below from the Talinn statement;
We recognise that equipping Ukraine to push Russia out of its territory is as important as equipping them to defend what they already have. Together we will continue supporting Ukraine to move from resisting to expelling Russian forces from Ukrainian soil. By bringing together Allies and partners, we are ensuring the surge of global military support is as strategic and coordinated as possible. The new level of required combat power is only achieved by combinations of main battle tank squadrons, beneath air and missile defence, operating alongside divisional artillery groups, and further deep precision fires enabling targeting of Russian logistics and command nodes in occupied territory.
There is no NATO unity. Who will be the first to go? Hungary? Turkiye? Turkiye have made clear via many official statements that they will not be fighting Russia on behalf of NATO. Turkiye is the second largest military in NATO, behind only USA. The 3rd, 4th and 5th are Germany, France and Italy- all conspicuous by their absence from the "Talinn pledge".
It is UK and a bunch of pissy vassal states, no doubt at the behest of the US, issuing cheques their arses can't cash.
The inability of NATO to do anything is becoming increasingly obvious. Beyond delaying the inevitable by sacrificing ever more men and money, NATO are impotent.
-
Why Russia Miscalculated in Ukraine: A Self-Inflicted Disaster in Three Acts
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YkGrKQXZxE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YkGrKQXZxE)
-
Russia's new Ukraine commander cracks down on bloggers.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/01/29/russias-new-ukraine-commander-cracks-battle-bloggers/ (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/01/29/russias-new-ukraine-commander-cracks-battle-bloggers/)
-
I think the West will not readily accept Russian control of any of them, but ultimately there will be some form of de facto acceptance, based partly upon the fact that sanctions against Russia have not had the desired effect (and in some ways have had unexpected consequences), but mainly upon the fact that Russia can only be pushed back at enormous financial cost, which is unlikely to continue indefinitely.
Political will in Russia is just as important, Ukraine is fighting for survival, Russia is fighting for imperialism. If the Russian people are OK with 250,000 - 500,000 casualties then sure, Russia can hold its gains. But will it get that far before they revolt? We shall see.
-
The "Talinn 9 statement" committed to much more than defence of Ukraine territory and explicitly called for escalation and a direct threat to the separatist oblasts and Crimea. Below from the Talinn statement;
We recognise that equipping Ukraine to push Russia out of its territory is as important as equipping them to defend what they already have. Together we will continue supporting Ukraine to move from resisting to expelling Russian forces from Ukrainian soil. By bringing together Allies and partners, we are ensuring the surge of global military support is as strategic and coordinated as possible. The new level of required combat power is only achieved by combinations of main battle tank squadrons, beneath air and missile defence, operating alongside divisional artillery groups, and further deep precision fires enabling targeting of Russian logistics and command nodes in occupied territory.
There is no NATO unity. Who will be the first to go? Hungary? Turkiye? Turkiye have made clear via many official statements that they will not be fighting Russia on behalf of NATO. Turkiye is the second largest military in NATO, behind only USA. The 3rd, 4th and 5th are Germany, France and Italy- all conspicuous by their absence from the "Talinn pledge".
It is UK and a bunch of pissy vassal states, no doubt at the behest of the US, issuing cheques their arses can't cash.
The inability of NATO to do anything is becoming increasingly obvious. Beyond delaying the inevitable by sacrificing ever more men and money, NATO are impotent.
Hi gringo. I've recently been listening to some youtube vids from James Rickards which seem to offer a different view point from Western mainstream media. Are you familiar with him/his views? If so what do you think? Thanks.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Rickards
-
Political will in Russia is just as important, Ukraine is fighting for survival, Russia is fighting for imperialism. If the Russian people are OK with 250,000 - 500,000 casualties then sure, Russia can hold its gains. But will it get that far before they revolt? We shall see.
Hi David1819. I've recently been listening to some youtube vids from James Rickards which seem to offer a different view point from Western mainstream media. Are you familiar with him/his views? If so what do you think? Thanks.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Rickards
-
David what do you think of Jim Rickard's views at 3 mins in:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FHm7xcmSLj8&t=444s
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Rickards
Pity JR didn't sort out his hair for the vid :'(
Gave it a listen, CC. He is brutally realistic in his assessment-
"Talking about the US, UK, Europe generally- what do they not know? They don't know very much because we are being lied to incessantly" He then describes how the main media outlets are mouthpieces for the Whitehouse and intel agencies.
At 2 mins;
"Russia failed to achieve their initial gains, they didn't get Kiev, they didn't decapitate the regime, they're strung out, they're demoralised. Ukraine's on the advance, they took back Kherson... they've made major advances in the Donbass, they've got the US weapons, the Germans are sending tanks, the UK are sending some Challengers, keep sending in money, sending in arms, give it time and we'll take it(the territory) all back. Putin will be deposed, if he doesn't have cancer already. We're even going to take back Crimea and wave the flag- that's what you hear"
"...so what's actually going on? Russia's winning the war-They're winning it with something like 100,000 troops that conduct something like-bigger than a police operation-it was envisioned- that was provoked by the US. The US and UK have wanted this war since 2008. George Bush gave a speech in 2008 and he said Ukraine and Georgia should join NATO...Couple of months later Putin invaded Georgia...cut the country in half...demolish the military... they're not joining NATO."
"...come forward to 2014... CIA and MI6 precipitate one of those colour revolutions-the Maidan square revolution... I don't use the word Nazi lightly and no-one should but these are neo Nazis. They say so-look at their insignia, the Azov battalion. they were on the the Nazi side fighting the communists in WW2. They love the Nazis because they drove the communists back until Stalin took it back... so that's who you're supporting...It's one of the poorest countries in europe, it's the most corrupt, Zelensky is a puppet and behind him are some real hard core 21st century Nazi sympathisers-I'll put it that way. So that's who you're supporting..."
The truth is seeping out and it will become a deluge soon, CC. Russia's "unprovoked" invasion", has been provoked for a long time by the West. Russia have self evidently used the time to prepare much more wisely than the corrupt Western puppets. It only ends one way-NATO and the West will agree to the security guarantees put forward by Russia in December 2021.
A new multi-polar world is being born regardless of the attempts by NATO (enforcers for the current criminally abused system) to prevent it. The support and arming of Nazis demonstrates the moral degeneracy of the West.
-
Gave it a listen, CC. He is brutally realistic in his assessment-
"Talking about the US, UK, Europe generally- what do they not know? They don't know very much because we are being lied to incessantly" He then describes how the main media outlets are mouthpieces for the Whitehouse and intel agencies.
At 2 mins;
"Russia failed to achieve their initial gains, they didn't get Kiev, they didn't decapitate the regime, they're strung out, they're demoralised. Ukraine's on the advance, they took back Kherson... they've made major advances in the Donbass, they've got the US weapons, the Germans are sending tanks, the UK are sending some Challengers, keep sending in money, sending in arms, give it time and we'll take it(the territory) all back. Putin will be deposed, if he doesn't have cancer already. We're even going to take back Crimea and wave the flag- that's what you hear"
"...so what's actually going on? Russia's winning the war-They're winning it with something like 100,000 troops that conduct something like-bigger than a police operation-it was envisioned- that was provoked by the US. The US and UK have wanted this war since 2008. George Bush gave a speech in 2008 and he said Ukraine and Georgia should join NATO...Couple of months later Putin invaded Georgia...cut the country in half...demolish the military... they're not joining NATO."
"...come forward to 2014... CIA and MI6 precipitate one of those colour revolutions-the Maidan square revolution... I don't use the word Nazi lightly and no-one should but these are neo Nazis. They say so-look at their insignia, the Azov battalion. they were on the the Nazi side fighting the communists in WW2. They love the Nazis because they drove the communists back until Stalin took it back... so that's who you're supporting...It's one of the poorest countries in europe, it's the most corrupt, Zelensky is a puppet and behind him are some real hard core 21st century Nazi sympathisers-I'll put it that way. So that's who you're supporting..."
The truth is seeping out and it will become a deluge soon, CC. Russia's "unprovoked" invasion", has been provoked for a long time by the West. Russia have self evidently used the time to prepare much more wisely than the corrupt Western puppets. It only ends one way-NATO and the West will agree to the security guarantees put forward by Russia in December 2021.
A new multi-polar world is being born regardless of the attempts by NATO (enforcers for the current criminally abused system) to prevent it. The support and arming of Nazis demonstrates the moral degeneracy of the West.
Thanks gringo. I thought he probably talked a lot of sense about what's actually going on and the background to it. Its always good to get different perspectives and a positive of social media in that it is easy to access the likes of JR.
-
It only ends one way-NATO and the West will agree to the security guarantees put forward by Russia in December 2021.
How exactly is a country with an economy smaller than Texas, struggling to take the town of Bakhmut and unable to provide basic plumbing and sanitary means to 20% of its population, going achieve forcing NATO to withdraw membership to the 14 member states that joined after 1999?
-
Thanks gringo. I thought he probably talked a lot of sense about what's actually going on and the background to it. Its always good to get different perspectives and a positive of social media in that it is easy to access the likes of JR.
How has listening to people such as Jim Rickard changed your perspective, CC? I get the feeling, myself, that a few uncomfortable truths are getting a bit too difficult to cover up and whitewash and which is encouraging more people to dig a little deeper.
Highlighted in red- Nothing could be more true, CC. More people should venture outside of their own echo chamber and listen to views and opinions that challenge their own world view. Hold it all up to scrutiny. It is the only way.
-
How exactly is a country with an economy smaller than Texas, struggling to take the town of Bakhmut and unable to provide basic plumbing and sanitary means to 20% of its population, going achieve forcing NATO to withdraw membership to the 14 member states that joined after 1999?
Weak economy- tick
non flushing toilets- tick
struggling militarily- tick
you forgot the obligatory Stalin mention
None of the things that you say are true-they have no link to the conversation. Go and play with your toys. You're way out of your depth and not attempting to discuss anything.
-
Weak economy- tick
non flushing toilets- tick
struggling militarily- tick
you forgot the obligatory Stalin mention
None of the things that you say are true-they have no link to the conversation. Go and play with your toys. You're way out of your depth and not attempting to discuss anything.
In other words, you have no answer as to how Russia will achieve your ludicrously bold predictions. Just deny reality and fantasize about it happening.
-
In other words, you have no answer as to how Russia will achieve your ludicrously bold predictions. Just deny reality and fantasize about it happening.
I have answered many times on this thread how Russia will achieve their objectives. They are achieving them and anyone paying attention understands that.
Militarily, Russia have already destroyed the initial Ukrainian air force, navy and army. They have done this using about 10-15% of their forces and old Soviet stock. Ukraine-NATO have emptied the coffers of their vassal states old Soviet stocks, have sent countless "wonder weapons", "mercenaries", are being attrited at the rate of about 10-1, force conscripting off the streets. Russia have yet to deploy the 300,000 called up yet.
NATO is also, anything but, a unified force. They cannot take on Russia in Europe.(Every gamed scenario has shown NATO this uncomfortable truth) They have bitten off more than they can chew. They thought the "economic sanctions from hell" would break Russia. When Plan A didn't work-we found out they had no Plan B. Just double down on Plan A.
The weak Russian economy bullshit is exposed for what it is-bullshit. GDP tells you nothing useful about an economy.
Ask yourself if any of the supposed stronger economies than Russia that you often refer to(Italy, Texas etc.) would be able to not only survive but thrive under the crushing sanctions imposed on Russia. Believing their own propaganda and group-think prevented them from seeing an obvious truth that was always self evident. Russia is too big, too important to the world economy and too strong militarily to successfully sanction. You and the people you listen to are blinded by your own hubris.
The truth is seeping out, David. The failure too big to hide any longer. Even you will wake up soon and realise that.
-
ATGM targeting Russian infantry.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/10p4l4j/atgm_remove_ru_infantry/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/10p4l4j/atgm_remove_ru_infantry/)
-
I have answered many times on this thread how Russia will achieve their objectives. They are achieving them and anyone paying attention understands that.
Militarily, Russia have already destroyed the initial Ukrainian air force, navy and army. They have done this using about 10-15% of their forces and old Soviet stock. Ukraine-NATO have emptied the coffers of their vassal states old Soviet stocks, have sent countless "wonder weapons", "mercenaries", are being attrited at the rate of about 10-1, force conscripting off the streets. Russia have yet to deploy the 300,000 called up yet.
NATO is also, anything but, a unified force. They cannot take on Russia in Europe.(Every gamed scenario has shown NATO this uncomfortable truth) They have bitten off more than they can chew. They thought the "economic sanctions from hell" would break Russia. When Plan A didn't work-we found out they had no Plan B. Just double down on Plan A.
The weak Russian economy bullshit is exposed for what it is-bullshit. GDP tells you nothing useful about an economy.
Ask yourself if any of the supposed stronger economies than Russia that you often refer to(Italy, Texas etc.) would be able to not only survive but thrive under the crushing sanctions imposed on Russia. Believing their own propaganda and group-think prevented them from seeing an obvious truth that was always self evident. Russia is too big, too important to the world economy and too strong militarily to successfully sanction. You and the people you listen to are blinded by your own hubris.
The truth is seeping out, David. The failure too big to hide any longer. Even you will wake up soon and realise that.
Well, let me know when Russia has pushed NATO back to its 1999 borders. Do you have any dates penciled in your diary for when this is expected to happen?
-
ATGM targeting Russian infantry.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/10p4l4j/atgm_remove_ru_infantry/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/10p4l4j/atgm_remove_ru_infantry/)
Why do you constantly post links to war-porn? It is tasteless and says nothing good about you.
-
Why do constantly post links to war-porn? It is tasteless and says nothing good about you.
Its important see events unfold on the ground don't you think? That's what we are talking about after all.
Those Russians troops running round like headless chickens while being bombed are your soon to be conquerors of NATO.
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/10ku5h4/russian_attempt_to_build_a_bridge_near_vodyane/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/10ku5h4/russian_attempt_to_build_a_bridge_near_vodyane/)
-
Its important see events unfold on the ground don't you think? That's what we are talking about after all.
events unfold on the ground
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/10ku5h4/russian_attempt_to_build_a_bridge_near_vodyane/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/10ku5h4/russian_attempt_to_build_a_bridge_near_vodyane/)
You aren't documenting facts on the ground as they unfold as anyone can see. There are countless videos available showing forced conscriptions of Ukrainians, brutal war crimes of Ukrainian Nazis which they film and post to telegram channels and other social media, pro Russian or suspected pro Russian citizens being tied to lamp-posts and beaten etc.
Don't pretend that you are documenting, "events unfold on the ground". Anyone can see that it is one sided, curated war porn.
"Those Russians troops running round like headless chickens while being bombed are your soon to be conquerors of NATO." Do you get off on Russians being bombed?
-
Hi gringo. I've recently been listening to some youtube vids from James Rickards which seem to offer a different view point from Western mainstream media. Are you familiar with him/his views? If so what do you think? Thanks.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Rickards
A Russian perspective for you, CC. A very moving address to Olaf Scholz, in light of Germany's decision to send tanks, by Russian MFA Maria Zakharova. Dressed in black-a much more sombre address than usual-the mood and resolve of the Russian people unmistakable. When she speaks of her grandmother in the aftermath of WW2 giving bread to returning German POW's who had been "hell bent" on killing them-her sincerity and pain are plain to see. The whole address (15 mins) is very informative of Russian resolve mixed with sadness at once again having to defend Russia. Transcribed below the youtube link are Maria Zakhorova's moving and clearly heartfelt words about her grandmother;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hv7yEI5YRZc&ab_channel=iEarlGrey
"I'd like to remind Mr. Scholz...perhaps he doesn't know...But when German POW's were in the territory of the USSR after the end of the war. They weren't mistreated in a way that our soldiers, POW's and citizens were mistreated by Germans. They were-those German soldiers were fed by the very people who had nothing to eat for years. Those people fed them-Do you know Mr. Scholz-my grandmother for her entire life was looking at bread as the most precious dish. Told me how this post war bread which was scarce was used by the Soviet people to feed German POW's who had previously burned out villages and murdering our children. Getting them into houses and burning them.
When I asked her once, "Grandma, you didn't have enough bread for yourselves-How could you after going through it all, share your bread with those hell-bent on killing you?"
You Know Mr. Scholz, what my Grandma told me?
She told me, "Masha, we pitied them. Pity, not of the kind that you call tolerance. But we pitied them and we loved them. We had our spiritual force to share our bread, even with the enemy despite the fact that we lacked it ourselves."
You, in the West, have lost any idea of the true values that lie at the base of our humanity. Namely-Love. To believe that the West is supplying German tanks to the place that those German tanks have brought immense suffering to by destroying tens of millions of people. It is really impossible to imagine that in general you understand anything about Love, compassion, honour, conscience.
-
Well, let me know when Russia has pushed NATO back to its 1999 borders. Do you have any dates penciled in your diary for when this is expected to happen?
Russia are in no rush. NATO and their apologists seem more interested in time. Russia have plenty of it. The economic war, which is what informs and fuels the military conflict, favours Russia and the multi-polar world, the longer it goes on. The West is, to paraphrase Obama's, "Russia is just a gas station with nukes"- Just a casino bank with nukes.
Time, is not on NATO/Empire's side.
If you imagine that any of the pissy little Baltics or Poland will be hosting nukes- you are delusional. After defeating Ukraine/NATO in "the former Ukraine" any country daring to host NATO missiles will have those sites destroyed as well as any ability to do so again by Russia. NATO country or not, NATO will do nothing but bitch and moan.
-
Russia are in no rush. NATO and their apologists seem more interested in time. Russia have plenty of it. The economic war, which is what informs and fuels the military conflict, favours Russia and the multi-polar world, the longer it goes on. The West is, to paraphrase Obama's, "Russia is just a gas station with nukes"- Just a casino bank with nukes.
Time, is not on NATO/Empire's side.
If you imagine that any of the pissy little Baltics or Poland will be hosting nukes- you are delusional. After defeating Ukraine/NATO in "the former Ukraine" any country daring to host NATO missiles will have those sites destroyed as well as any ability to do so again by Russia. NATO country or not, NATO will do nothing but bitch and moan.
I think you're overreaching yourself again gringo. People are sick of this Nazi talk, when there were no Nazis to be found in civilian Germany post-May 1945, most remnants were punished at Nuremberg and a handful escaped to South America to end their days in oblivion. It's Putin who seems to be employing Nazi tactics of conquering by stealth. As a matter of interest I post a CND pamphlet. Whilst disagreeing with its conclusion it's useful for members to know where the USA has located nuclear weapons in Europe. https://cnduk.org/resources/united-states-nuclear-weapons-europe/
-
I think you're overreaching yourself again gringo. People are sick of this Nazi talk, when there were no Nazis to be found in civilian Germany post-May 1945, most remnants were punished at Nuremberg and a handful escaped to South America to end their days in oblivion. It's Putin who seems to be employing Nazi tactics of conquering by stealth. As a matter of interest I post a CND pamphlet. Whilst disagreeing with its conclusion it's useful for members to know where the USA has located nuclear weapons in Europe. https://cnduk.org/resources/united-states-nuclear-weapons-europe/
It is well known and documented that many Nazis were given new lives in the US and West. Have you never heard of "Operation Paperclip"?;
Operation Paperclip was a secret United States intelligence program in which more than 1,600 German scientists, engineers, and technicians were taken from the former Nazi Germany to the U.S. for government employment after the end of World War II in Europe, between 1945 and 1959. Conducted by the Joint Intelligence Objectives Agency (JIOA), it was largely carried out by special agents of the U.S. Army's Counterintelligence Corps (CIC). Many of these personnel were former members and some were former leaders of the Nazi Party.[1][2]
The full wiki link below. For a more complete picture-it is an easy thing to research in little time-there are lots of well researched articles about it;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Paperclip#:~:text=After%20more%20than%20two%20decades,Rudolph%2C%20and%20Wernher%20von%20Braun.
-
It is well known and documented that many Nazis were given new lives in the US and West. Have you never heard of "Operation Paperclip"?;
Operation Paperclip was a secret United States intelligence program in which more than 1,600 German scientists, engineers, and technicians were taken from the former Nazi Germany to the U.S. for government employment after the end of World War II in Europe, between 1945 and 1959. Conducted by the Joint Intelligence Objectives Agency (JIOA), it was largely carried out by special agents of the U.S. Army's Counterintelligence Corps (CIC). Many of these personnel were former members and some were former leaders of the Nazi Party.[1][2]
The full wiki link below. For a more complete picture-it is an easy thing to research in little time;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Paperclip#:~:text=After%20more%20than%20two%20decades,Rudolph%2C%20and%20Wernher%20von%20Braun.
But they weren't war criminals, but scientists and technicians. It wasn't possible for every professional who joined the Nazi Party to be incarcerated or there would have been no functioning West German state.
-
you're overreaching yourself again gringo. People are sick of this Nazi talk, It wasn't possible for every professional who joined the Nazi Party to be incarcerated or there would have been no functioning West German state.
Steve, has your position now changed from;
"you're overreaching yourself again gringo. People are sick of this Nazi talk, there were no Nazis to be found in civilian Germany post-May 1945, most remnants were punished at Nuremberg and a handful escaped to South America to end their days in oblivion."
to
"But they weren't war criminals, but scientists and technicians."?
Did you read the excerpt I posted? Here is the important bit again;
"it was largely carried out by special agents of the U.S. Army's Counterintelligence Corps (CIC). Many of these personnel were former members and some were former leaders of the Nazi Party."
Face the truth and stop acting as an apologist.
-
Steve, has your position now changed from;
"you're overreaching yourself again gringo. People are sick of this Nazi talk, there were no Nazis to be found in civilian Germany post-May 1945, most remnants were punished at Nuremberg and a handful escaped to South America to end their days in oblivion."
to
"But they weren't war criminals, but scientists and technicians."?
Did you read the excerpt I posted? Here is the important bit again;
"it was largely carried out by special agents of the U.S. Army's Counterintelligence Corps (CIC). Many of these personnel were former members and some were former leaders of the Nazi Party."
Face the truth and stop acting as an apologist.
Can you post a link to a Nazi who committed war crimes and was recruited by the USA? I thought they were all scientists and technicians.
-
Can you post a link to a Nazi who committed war crimes and was recruited by the USA? I thought they were all scientists and technicians.
That is a silly question, as you well know. Their recruitment would ensure the disappearance of any crimes by the intel agencies recruiting them. You know that, however;
Only one Paperclip scientist, Georg Rickhey, was formally tried for any crime, and no Paperclip scientist was found guilty of any crime, in the United States or Germany. Rickhey was returned to Germany in 1947 to stand at the Dora Trial, where he was acquitted.
The example below tells you how hard the intel agencies investigated any possible crimes. Seems the the "Boston Globe" had better access and intel than the intel agencies-unless...
In 1951, weeks after his U.S. arrival, Walter Schreiber was linked by the Boston Globe to human experiments conducted by Kurt Blome at Ravensbrück, and he emigrated to Argentina with the aid of the U.S. military.
-
That is a silly question, as you well know. Their recruitment would ensure the disappearance of any crimes by the intel agencies recruiting them. You know that, however;
Only one Paperclip scientist, Georg Rickhey, was formally tried for any crime, and no Paperclip scientist was found guilty of any crime, in the United States or Germany. Rickhey was returned to Germany in 1947 to stand at the Dora Trial, where he was acquitted.
The example below tells you how hard the intel agencies investigated any possible crimes. Seems the the "Boston Globe" had better access and intel than the intel agencies-unless...
In 1951, weeks after his U.S. arrival, Walter Schreiber was linked by the Boston Globe to human experiments conducted by Kurt Blome at Ravensbrück, and he emigrated to Argentina with the aid of the U.S. military.
We're diverging now quite conveniently from Russia's occupation of Ukraine, aren't we?
-
Can you post a link to a Nazi who committed war crimes and was recruited by the USA? I thought they were all scientists and technicians.
Kurt Heinrich Debus-Nazi party member and rocket scientist who worked on the V-weapons of the Third Reich. Given that the V-weapons were specifically designed to bomb and terrorise civilian populations in cities(unarguably a war-crime)-and that Debus was a flight test director and member of SchutzStaffel (SS).
Debus became the first Director of NASA Launch Operations Centre.
-
Kurt Heinrich Debus-Nazi party member and rocket scientist who worked on the V-weapons of the Third Reich. Given that the V-weapons were specifically designed to bomb and terrorise civilian populations in cities(unarguably a war-crime)-and that Debus was a flight test director and member of SchutzStaffel (SS).
Debus became the first Director of NASA Launch Operations Centre.
But they were scientists not politicians. You may as well argue that the guys who bombed Dresden on 13 February 1945 or the pilots who dropped the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were war criminals.
-
We're diverging now quite conveniently from Russia's occupation of Ukraine, aren't we?
You did ask.
There is no Russian occupation of Ukraine.
What you mean is- Russia acting on the Responsibility to Protect- under Article 51 of the UN charter.
Occupation is what US and NATO do to countries. How many foreign bases in countries where they haven't been invited do the US have again?
What do you think that the Ukrainian army that had massed behind the LOC (line of control) in the weeks prior to 24/02/22 were planning? The massive increase in shelling civilian areas, observed and documented by the OSCE, by the Ukrainians in the week prior to 24/02/22?
Do you think that the Russians had no right to invoke R2P for the civilians in Donetsk, Luhansk?
Do you still harbour the lie that Russia's actions were "unprovoked"?
-
You did ask.
There is no Russian occupation of Ukraine.
What you mean is- Russia acting on the Responsibility to Protect- under Article 51 of the UN charter.
Occupation is what US and NATO do to countries. How many foreign bases in countries where they haven't been invited do the US have again?
What do you think that the Ukrainian army that had massed behind the LOC (line of control) in the weeks prior to 24/02/22 were planning? The massive increase in shelling civilian areas, observed and documented by the OSCE, by the Ukrainians in the week prior to 24/02/22?
Do you think that the Russians had no right to invoke R2P for the civilians in Donetsk, Luhansk?
Do you still harbour the lie that Russia's actions were "unprovoked"?
The Minsk agreements were supposed to deal with all that. As for the USA military bases, I can only think of Guantanamo Bay and Diego Garcia where there is negativity. Don't US personnel boost the economy of the countries in which they are located?
-
The Minsk agreements were supposed to deal with all that. As for the USA military bases, I can only think of Guantanamo Bay and Diego Garcia where there is negativity. Don't US personnel boost the economy of the countries in which they are located?
The Minsk agreements were ignored from the start, as now openly admitted by Merkel and Hollande. You know this. Minsk agreements didn't deal with it because of Western lies and deceit. It is admitted.
Hence the need for Article 51 and Responsibility to protect.
You can only think of Guantanamo and Diego Garcia. At-Tanf in Syria-are they invited there? Bases in Deir Ezzor, Syria. Are they invited there? US will not be able to afford their Empire soon. Steve. Dollar reserve status is all that allows their endless money printing and extortion enforced by NATO. They boost their own economy at the expense of everyone else.
Far from boosting the economy of Syria-they are looting it.
Approx 750 bases across 80 countries. And you call Russia imperialist.
-
The Minsk agreements were supposed to deal with all that. - Steve.
It is ridiculous that you ignore the admitted Western deceit from the very start. You cannot claim that agreements that the West has admitted they ignored from the start could possibly deal with the issues in Donetsk, Luhansk. It is intellectually incoherent.
Given the admitted Western duplicity over this issue. What do you propose Russia should have done to protect the civilians being attacked by Ukrainian armed forces?
-
Alexander Rutskoy, a former Soviet general, accused Putin of 'senselessly' killing tens of thousands of Russian soldiers who have been used as cannon fodder in the war.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11691403/Putin-laughing-stock-says-Russias-former-vice-president.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11691403/Putin-laughing-stock-says-Russias-former-vice-president.html)
-
Alexander Rutskoy, a former Soviet general, accused Putin of 'senselessly' killing tens of thousands of Russian soldiers who have been used as cannon fodder in the war.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11691403/Putin-laughing-stock-says-Russias-former-vice-president.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11691403/Putin-laughing-stock-says-Russias-former-vice-president.html)
Vice President during Yeltsin's reign accuses Putin of surrounding himself with incompetents. Do you know who Rutskoy is? He was arrested in 1993 after being a main instigator of the constitutional crisis following the impeachment of Yeltsin. I am sure that even you will be able to use the following undisputed facts as clues to who and what, Rutskoy is.
Rutskoy was Vice President President of RSFSR/Russia from 10 July 1991 before arrest 4 October 1993. As vice president, he openly called for the independence of Transnistria and Crimea from Moldova and Ukraine.-from Wiki.
On the night of 21–22 September 1993, Rutskoy ascended the podium of the Russian parliament,[16] and assumed the powers of acting President of Russia at 00:25, in accordance with the above article.[17] He took the presidential oath, and said: "I am taking the authority of President. The anti-constitutional decree of President Yeltsin is annulled." Rutskoy's interim presidency, although constitutional, was never acknowledged outside Russia. After the two-week standoff, and the violence erupting on the streets of Moscow, on 4 October 1993, the Russian White House was taken by Yeltsin's military forces. Rutskoy and his supporters were arrested and charged with organization of mass disturbances. The day before, Yeltsin officially dismissed Rutskoy as vice president,
Rutskoy was imprisoned in the Moscow Lefortovo prison[19] until 26 February 1994,[20] when he and other participants of both the August 1991 and October 1993 crises were granted amnesty by the State Duma.[21]
Soon after his release, Rutskoy founded a populist, nationalist party, Derzhava, which failed in the 1995 legislative election to the State Duma, gathering only about 2.5% of the votes and thus not passing the 5% threshold.
Rutskoy was released as a POW in Islamabad, Pakistan, in 1988 after intervention by the CIA.
None of the above is in any way misrepresented or disputed.
Instead of Rutskoy becoming President and selling out, Crimeans, Transnistrians in 1993, Yeltsin hung on and appointed Putin in 1999.
The rest, as they say, is history.
Rutskoy is not the voice of Russia. He is a bitter selfish and extremely fringe figure.
-
Talking in English for YOU! Bakhmut soldier is almost surrounded - but stays focused and is in a good mood!
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/10pffz8/talking_in_english_for_you_bakhmut_soldier_is/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/10pffz8/talking_in_english_for_you_bakhmut_soldier_is/)
-
When you two play chess is it like Anatoly Yevgenyevich Karpov Vs Bobby Fischer?
This is how me and NGB play
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwPbDQPaah4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwPbDQPaah4)
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p0dlz7tz/putin-vs-the-west-series-1-1-my-backyard (https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p0dlz7tz/putin-vs-the-west-series-1-1-my-backyard)
-
This is how me and NGB play
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwPbDQPaah4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwPbDQPaah4)
Absolutely!
-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2005/08/30/us-to-aid-ukraine-in-countering-bioweapons/72059ed1-90ca-4381-ac6f-10f4e205f09e/
-
How has listening to people such as Jim Rickard changed your perspective, CC? I get the feeling, myself, that a few uncomfortable truths are getting a bit too difficult to cover up and whitewash and which is encouraging more people to dig a little deeper.
Highlighted in red- Nothing could be more true, CC. More people should venture outside of their own echo chamber and listen to views and opinions that challenge their own world view. Hold it all up to scrutiny. It is the only way.
Hi gringo. I must confess I didn't take much notice, if any, of Crimea and Georgia so when Russia invaded Ukraine I was somewhat surprised. But I take the view there's nearly always two sides to an argument! It didn't seem to fit that Putin woke up one morning and decided to grab some or all of Ukraine's land solely for territorial reasons. A lot of what I was hearing in the mainstream media didn't seem to make sense and/or was irrelevant eg attempting to draw parellels with Hitler/WW2, Putin's state of health, significant other(s) and fathering children. Also the clamping down on Oligarchs ie the West knew about all of this so why wait to take action? It seemed somewhat hypocritical. So I started to look for alternative views. Jim Rickards seems to make more sense to me and he's not some anti-establishment figure for the sake of it.
I am not condoning Putin's actions but I think Russia was provoked by the West's attempts to expand NATO. The whole thing could have, and should have imo, been avoided by leaders agreeing a neutral buffer zone.
-
Hi gringo. I must confess I didn't take much notice, if any, of Crimea and Georgia so when Russia invaded Ukraine I was somewhat surprised. But I take the view there's nearly always two sides to an argument! It didn't seem to fit that Putin woke up one morning and decided to grab some or all of Ukraine's land solely for territorial reasons. A lot of what I was hearing in the mainstream media didn't seem to make sense and/or was irrelevant eg attempting to draw parellels with Hitler/WW2, Putin's state of health, significant other(s) and fathering children. Also the clamping down on Oligarchs ie the West knew about all of this so why wait to take action? It seemed somewhat hypocritical. So I started to look for alternative views. Jim Rickards seems to make more sense to me and he's not some anti-establishment figure for the sake of it.
I am not condoning Putin's actions but I think Russia was provoked by the West's attempts to expand NATO. The whole thing could have, and should have imo, been avoided by leaders agreeing a neutral buffer zone.
I agree with you.
Don't know anything about Rickards but I expect you're probably right.
-
Hi gringo. I must confess I didn't take much notice, if any, of Crimea and Georgia so when Russia invaded Ukraine I was somewhat surprised. But I take the view there's nearly always two sides to an argument! It didn't seem to fit that Putin woke up one morning and decided to grab some or all of Ukraine's land solely for territorial reasons. A lot of what I was hearing in the mainstream media didn't seem to make sense and/or was irrelevant eg attempting to draw parellels with Hitler/WW2, Putin's state of health, significant other(s) and fathering children. Also the clamping down on Oligarchs ie the West knew about all of this so why wait to take action? It seemed somewhat hypocritical. So I started to look for alternative views. Jim Rickards seems to make more sense to me and he's not some anti-establishment figure for the sake of it.
I am not condoning Putin's actions but I think Russia was provoked by the West's attempts to expand NATO. The whole thing could have, and should have imo, been avoided by leaders agreeing a neutral buffer zone.
Thanks for the reply, CC. It is more telling to hear the views of someone like yourself on this- the majority of the country who pay little to no attention to wider geopolitics-who just want to get on with their lives. If the propaganda is starting to wear thin with them-then the whole enterprise is in trouble.
I am finding that lately, purely my own personal experience, that more people are seeing through the silly propaganda that calls itself, "The News".
The part highlighted in red- I think people are beginning to realise this. Public support is vital to realise their ambitions and this can only come from a successful propaganda campaign to demonise Russia and Putin personally. NATO do this with every intervention they make-demonise the leader. With people's heads full of propaganda about, Gaddafi, Assad, Saddam-NATO then bombs and destroys the lives of ordinary civilians and enough people in the West believe we are the good guys, the cavalry riding into town to save them from Gaddafi, Assad... that is why it hasn't changed in 30/40 years.
The destruction and lies have finally come up against Russia. And they are falling apart in front of our eyes. The plausible veneer being stripped away has led to the "silent majority" paying more attention. The greater the scrutiny-the more the narrative crumbles.
The only way this ends-short of armageddon- is Western publics calling to account NATO governments and aggression. Hopefully we are getting there. You have expressed the same sentiments that I am hearing from others who initially went along with the prevailing narrative. The "silent majority" are beginning to turn.
Thank you for your full reply.
-
This must be one of the longest threads on the forum.
-
This must be one of the longest threads on the forum.
Shows how long it's been going on, Roch.
Here are the BBC just over 8 years ago reporting on Ukraine-what they call Russian disinformation now;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SBo0akeDMY&ab_channel=BBCNewsnight
-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2005/08/30/us-to-aid-ukraine-in-countering-bioweapons/72059ed1-90ca-4381-ac6f-10f4e205f09e/
The bio-weapons labs scandal is not going away, Handyman. Russia have presented reams of evidence to the UN. Your link shows just how long this has been going on and how long the US/NATO plans go back. The WaPo story from 2005, seen in light of what we know now, raises more questions than it purports to answer.
-
Russia's visually confirmed losses in military equipment has now surpassed the 9000 milestone
destroyed: 5694
damaged: 242
abandoned: 306
captured: 2759
https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html (https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html)
-
This must be one of the longest threads on the forum.
The longest threat is "what makes Bamber innocent?" consisting of 246 pages.
-
The bio-weapons labs scandal is not going away, Handyman. Russia have presented reams of evidence to the UN.
Not true.
https://news.un.org/en/story/2022/10/1129952 (https://news.un.org/en/story/2022/10/1129952)
-
"Their accusations relate to real laboratories—ones that were performing epidemiological surveillance around the country, in Eastern Europe, and the Caucuses, and doing so transparently and in collaboration with neighboring countries and international partners such as the World Health Organization and the World Organization for Animal Health.
What the ambassador failed to mention was that Russian scientists visited these same laboratories in the past and never noted anything like what Russian officials now claim. Moreover, the United States had been collaborating with Russia in the same way—providing similar assistance to Russia to refocus the activities of former Soviet biological weapons laboratories, until Russia pulled out of the program in 2014, the same year it invaded Crimea.
Additionally, even Russian sources have said the accusations concerning biological weapons labs are false a group of independent Russian scientists who reviewed the documents the Russian government claimed to have seized that it said “proved” its case stated in an open letter to Russian media outlets that “the 'evidence' offered by the media is obviously false. It does not imply any development of biological weapons or even the use of particularly dangerous pathogens in the laboratories.”
"
https://www.rand.org/blog/2022/09/debunking-russian-lies-about-biolabs-at-upcoming-un.html (https://www.rand.org/blog/2022/09/debunking-russian-lies-about-biolabs-at-upcoming-un.html)
-
Not true.
https://news.un.org/en/story/2022/10/1129952 (https://news.un.org/en/story/2022/10/1129952)
"The UN’s High Representative for Disarmament Affairs, Izumu Nakamitsu, had previously informed ambassadors – first in March, and then again in May – that the UN had seen no evidence of biological weapons use in Ukraine."
“This remains the case today,” her Deputy, Adedeji Ebo, told the Council.
“I would also like to note that the United Nations currently has neither the mandate nor the technical or operational capacity to investigate this information,” he added.
At least read the links you post first before arriving at conclusions not supported by your link.
Understand the difference between declaring that "seen no evidence of biological weapons use" and "the United Nations currently has neither the mandate nor the technical or operational capacity to investigate this information,”
Nobody has made any allegations of "biological weapons use in Ukraine" It is denying something that hasn't been asked. They also clarify that the "UN has "neither the mandate nor the technical or operational capacity to investigate this information,”
The evidence has been meticulously gathered and presented. Your link proves that-you just don't know how to parse the information you are presented and draw false inferences and conclusions. You should read things over a bit more before arriving at conclusions not supported by your "presented evidence"
-
Quoting RAND, verbatim, is not evidence. RAND are not, by any stretch, impartial.
-
David, your own link from the UN proves exactly what I said. By admitting that they don't have the "mandate and technical know how to investigate this information" they are-by obvious inference to anyone who knows how to read-admitting that the evidence has been presented. Russia have made sure of this. It will be investigated by competent authorities in time-for now Russia will keep gathering and presenting the evidence.
The US were doing something in all of those admitted biolabs with Pentagon funding. They have been busy destroying stuff in the others to "prevent the Russians getting their hands on it"(Victoria Nuland-Senate-hearings). You would be interested if the boot was on the other foot. Your attempts to brush it away show your unwillingness to acknowledge truth. You are only interested in Russia bad. You need to open your eyes to uncomfortable truths.
-
The US biolabs are without any international oversight-the US will allow no independent investigation-and the admissions that have been wrought from them are inconsistent. Anyone objective should be alarmed by this secretive, militarily funded world wide network of biolabs operating outside of any oversight. If you're not alarmed-you really need to get your blinkers off :o
-
Quoting RAND, verbatim, is not evidence. RAND are not, by any stretch, impartial.
Yes, all facts contrary to your beliefs are western propaganda 🙄
https://www.science.org/content/article/russians-must-know-it-s-lie-ukrainian-bat-research-spun-false-tale-bioweapons (https://www.science.org/content/article/russians-must-know-it-s-lie-ukrainian-bat-research-spun-false-tale-bioweapons)
-
Yes, all facts contrary to your beliefs are western propaganda 🙄
https://www.science.org/content/article/russians-must-know-it-s-lie-ukrainian-bat-research-spun-false-tale-bioweapons (https://www.science.org/content/article/russians-must-know-it-s-lie-ukrainian-bat-research-spun-false-tale-bioweapons)
You haven't posted any facts. The article that you have just linked is just the person who has been caught at the centre protesting, incoherently and very badly, his innocence. Like a child, with his chocolate smeared face, denying even having ever seen the now missing chocolate bar.
Labs whose very existence was denied are now just doing innocent stuff. As I have said, David, if we were to imagine that it was a network of Russian or Chinese or Syrian biolabs funded by their military-we would be satisfied with nothing less than a full independent investigation. We wouldn't be satisfied with Russian - Chinese officials and media claiming that there is nothing for anyone else to worry about because we are only doing innocent stuff in our biolabs that we previously denied even existed. No nothing to concern yourselves with it's just US disinformation.
The evidence is being meticulously gathered and presented by Russia. The ever evolving excuses and denials of the US State Department only emphasise the need for transparency on what they are doing in this huge network of biolabs.
Get your blinkers off. Look at your own side more critically.
-
Hacker Group Releases 128GB Of Data Showing Russia's 'Wide-Ranging' Illegal Surveillance Of Citizens.
https://www.ibtimes.com/hacker-group-releases-128gb-data-showing-russias-wide-ranging-illegal-surveillance-citizens-3663530 (https://www.ibtimes.com/hacker-group-releases-128gb-data-showing-russias-wide-ranging-illegal-surveillance-citizens-3663530)
-
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/dec/27/indian-police-investigate-russian-politicians-hotel-death
-
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/dec/27/indian-police-investigate-russian-politicians-hotel-death
Russia pays lip service to human rights. It's a rogue state: https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-memorial-shutdown-confirmed/31728086.html
Discussion with Matt Frei: https://youtu.be/m28Ku5ezt9o
-
What have any of the above stories got to do with anything? What is the point being made? Western media outlets say something about Russia. And what?
Russian politician dies in mysterious circumstances in India? Are we just meant to infer without evidence that it was Putin or something?
That is the problem with this kind of evidence free propaganda masquerading as some sort of vanguard against Russian imperialism or some such. Nothing is stated. It is left to the readers own internal irrationality to infer that Russia must have done it. Probably Putin personally. It is idiotic drivel and doesn't even accuse Russia. What is the point of it?
Anyone dies anywhere- BBC, Guardian, Channel 4 report that the person was critical of Russian invasion or some other mealy mouthed bollocks and relies on your own pre-programmed bias after that.
Russia spies-what a revelation-who fucking knew that?- it's good that we would never resort to such tactics. All that Snowden, Vault 7, GCHQ visiting Guardian and smashing the hard drives, US denying airspace to presidential jets because they believed Snowden to be on board, Julian Assange.
Fuck off even pretending that Russia are even close to the global reach of the Western NATO surveillance state. You need to ignore all of that to feign revulsion at the IB Times hack piece-which offered no evidence of its central claim. Just some non attributable hacked materials and we are told to believe that they were hacked from the Russian government by an anonymous source. It is very light on actual evidence and is basically an anonymous source saying, "trust me".
Can anyone read with a critical eye?
What is the point that is being attempted to be made? Because none was.
Is Ukraine going to win now? Is Putin getting deposed? Does he die of cancer first? You all need to hold your own government and media to account-not other countries governments. That attitude is what got us where we are. The casual racism inherent in this western attitude- needing to sort out all those corrupt foreign governments-is why the rest of the world is uniting against us.
Posting irrelevant and pointless articles without articulating any wider point, or bothering to make one, adds nothing to anyone's understanding.
-
One of the alleged "bioweapons labs" in Ukraine is the Institute of Experimental and Clinical Veterinary Medicine in Kharkiv. The very same place that has done collaborative work with the Russian Institute of Cytology and Genetics.
http://iekvm.kharkov.ua/index.php (http://iekvm.kharkov.ua/index.php)
https://www.icgbio.ru/?s=ukraine (https://www.icgbio.ru/?s=ukraine)
Luhansk Regional Diagnostic Veterinary Laboratory and the Kherson Diagnostic Laboratory are also supposed to be part of the alleged bioweapons program. Which begs the question as to why Russia has never produced any tangible evidence despite taking control of these facilities. Did they forget to look? ::)
https://ua.usembassy.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/151/Kherson-DL-Fact-Sheet-Eng.pdf (https://ua.usembassy.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/151/Kherson-DL-Fact-Sheet-Eng.pdf)
https://ua.usembassy.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/151/130131-Luhansk-RDVL-Fact-sheet.pdf (https://ua.usembassy.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/151/130131-Luhansk-RDVL-Fact-sheet.pdf)
-
https://off-guardian.org/2023/02/03/the-patrushev-oversight/
-
More NATO unity. What is this intelligence of a security threat? Is it foreknowledge? Seems as if something is afoot in Turkiye. After the failed 2016 coup-have NATO/US got plans in place for the upcoming Turkish elections? Very strange. Below from RT; Full link to article on RTNews mirror site swentr.site below;
US should get ‘filthy hands’ off Türkiye – minister
Interior Minister Suleyman Soylu accused Washington of working to hurt his country amid consulate closure row
Turkish Interior Minister Suleyman Soylu accused US ambassador Jeffry Flake of trying to “confuse” people in the host nation and told him to get his “filthy hands” off of it. He has previously claimed that Western nations were waging “psychological warfare” to undermine tourism in Türkiye.
“I’m telling you very clearly, get your filthy hands off Türkiye. I know clearly what you have done, what steps you have taken, and how you want to confuse Türkiye,” the minister said in a speech on Friday.
Soylu claimed the first questions “every US ambassador” arriving in Türkiye was asked were “How can I stage a coup” and “How can I harm Türkiye.” The minister also stated that European nations were “run” by American diplomats.
The remarks came a day after the US and several EU nations decided to temporarily shut down their consulates in Istanbul due to “security considerations.” The foreign governments also advised their citizens to avoid tourist hotspots in Türkiye, citing a terrorist threat.[.]
Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said the nations involved failed to convey to Ankara any evidence that would justify the shutdowns.
“They tell us, ‘We have concrete information, there’s a threat. That’s why we’re closing’. Who did it come from? Where? Who will do it? There’s no information about that,” Cavusoglu said on Thursday.
The top diplomat described the move as “deliberate” and possibly designed to put the incumbent government into a “difficult situation” before the upcoming general elections.[.]
https://swentr.site/news/570910-t%C3%BCrkiye-minister-us-ambassador/
-
Nearly 200,000 Russian troops have been killed or injured in Ukraine, US officials say
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ukraine-war-russia-death-toll-b2274969.html (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ukraine-war-russia-death-toll-b2274969.html)
-
What have any of the above stories got to do with anything? What is the point being made? Western media outlets say something about Russia. And what?
Russian politician dies in mysterious circumstances in India? Are we just meant to infer without evidence that it was Putin or something?
That is the problem with this kind of evidence free propaganda masquerading as some sort of vanguard against Russian imperialism or some such. Nothing is stated. It is left to the readers own internal irrationality to infer that Russia must have done it. Probably Putin personally. It is idiotic drivel and doesn't even accuse Russia. What is the point of it?
Anyone dies anywhere- BBC, Guardian, Channel 4 report that the person was critical of Russian invasion or some other mealy mouthed bollocks and relies on your own pre-programmed bias after that.
Russia spies-what a revelation-who fucking knew that?- it's good that we would never resort to such tactics. All that Snowden, Vault 7, GCHQ visiting Guardian and smashing the hard drives, US denying airspace to presidential jets because they believed Snowden to be on board, Julian Assange.
Fuck off even pretending that Russia are even close to the global reach of the Western NATO surveillance state. You need to ignore all of that to feign revulsion at the IB Times hack piece-which offered no evidence of its central claim. Just some non attributable hacked materials and we are told to believe that they were hacked from the Russian government by an anonymous source. It is very light on actual evidence and is basically an anonymous source saying, "trust me".
Can anyone read with a critical eye?
What is the point that is being attempted to be made? Because none was.
Is Ukraine going to win now? Is Putin getting deposed? Does he die of cancer first? You all need to hold your own government and media to account-not other countries governments. That attitude is what got us where we are. The casual racism inherent in this western attitude- needing to sort out all those corrupt foreign governments-is why the rest of the world is uniting against us.
Posting irrelevant and pointless articles without articulating any wider point, or bothering to make one, adds nothing to anyone's understanding.
There has been a number of articles inferring that 'prominent' Russians who have expressed views divergent to Putin's current policy in Ukraine have died suddenly or mysteriously. I don't know whether it's propaganda or a good indicator of Russian actions against such people.
-
There has been a number of articles inferring that 'prominent' Russians who have expressed views divergent to Putin's current policy in Ukraine have died suddenly or mysteriously. I don't know whether it's propaganda or a good indicator of Russian actions against such people.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Russian_businessmen_suspicious_deaths#List_of_deaths (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Russian_businessmen_suspicious_deaths#List_of_deaths)
-
There has been a number of articles inferring that 'prominent' Russians who have expressed views divergent to Putin's current policy in Ukraine have died suddenly or mysteriously. I don't know whether it's propaganda or a good indicator of Russian actions against such people.
There are always articles "inferring" this. Why do you assume the "mysterious deaths" are down to Russia and Putin? When there are instances of "prominent" UK citizens dying or US citizens dying- do you infer that the government did that too, or just Russians? No evidence offered, just innuendo, you should be able to figure it out by now, Roch.
-
A factory inside Russia that was expected to help rebuild the Crimean bridge has gone up in flames in a suspected Ukrainian strike.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/02/04/russia-ukraine-war-russia-ukraine-war-latest-news-putin-germany/ (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/02/04/russia-ukraine-war-russia-ukraine-war-latest-news-putin-germany/)
-
There has been a number of articles inferring that 'prominent' Russians who have expressed views divergent to Putin's current policy in Ukraine have died suddenly or mysteriously. I don't know whether it's propaganda or a good indicator of Russian actions against such people.
The idea of Putin being some all controlling dictator ordering murders of his alleged rivals is too idiotic for words. It is a sad reflection of our media that it has become so infantilised. It doesn't even need debunking because there is nothing to debunk.
Somebody is killed in Russia.
Western media immediately link it in the most tenuous way with Putin.
The articles themselves make no accusations, realising there is nothing but innuendo to link it to Putin. Indoctrinated readers fail to see that no evidence is offered or accusation even made. Just lots of innuendo and the reader has to make the accusation themselves-they just don't realise it.
Nemtsov, the idiotic Navalny saga.
Do yourself a favour, Roch. Search for yourself the election results from Russia over the last couple of decades that this Putin obsession of the Western media has gone on.
None of the people called "The Opposition leader" are anything of the sort. This massive lie should alert you to the notion that everything that follows is probably bollocks.
Take a look yourself and search for the results;
United Russia (Putin's party) usually garner around 50% give or take.
The Communist Party garner around 25-30%
A number of smaller parties usually get anything between 1 and 5%
Navalny, Nemtsov and any other fringe figure touted in Western media as "opposition leader" is a false premise that is easily dismissed straight away by any discerning reader. If any foreign media described Tommy Robinson or Nick Griffin as "UK opposition leader", you would probably stop reading on the grounds of them being so poorly informed/straight up liars. Check their facts. Don't swallow everything they say whole without even a cursory check on the facts they use as their premise. Both of these figures were not rivals or a threat to Putin in any sense. The Communist Party leader is unarguably the opposition in Russia. That is a bit uncomfortable for Western media and leaders so they pretend that irrelevant fringe figures are "Putin's rival".
If Putin is "bumping off" opposition leaders then he is being remarkably lax because the prominent politicians and leaders of his main opposition(the Communists) have been left unharmed.
Western media outlets and politicians never refer to the Communist Party in Russia at all, never mind as "the opposition" to United Russia. If they either don't know or just ignore this fact-everything else they say after that is uninformed propaganda. This is not really arguable. Hold your sources of "information" to some standards.
Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus-one lie, all lies
You should be "marking" their work at all times not swallowing the dubious and un-evidenced claims whole. The whole edifice of lies is crashing around them now. The disinformation about Ukraine in Western media is off the scale and bears no resemblance to real events. Informed, knowledgable and sane experts will never be interviewed in western media.
None the less-cold hard reality is smashing into western propaganda. Truth is emerging, slowly at first-then a deluge is coming. NATO and the EU will be lucky to see 2023 out in one piece. The rest of the world will get on with creating a new multi-polar world, new means of trade bypassing the dollar- all ongoing. Putin will not be overthrown, die of cancer, BRICS+ will continue to expand. Western abuse of reserve status of the dollar-weaponising of SWIFT, illegal sanctions(abusing reserve status), theft of foreign reserves-it's all over.
NATO the ultimate enforcer of the above system is, despite western propaganda to the contrary, currently getting it's arse handed to it by Russia. It doesn't matter whether you believe this or not. The rest of the world (Africa, Asia, South America) believe it. They are turning to Russia and China because they have seen Russia demonstrate the weakness of NATO-who are powerless to turn the tide. Nobody gives a f#+k about western public opinion anymore. The West is no longer the "shining city on the hill" for the rest of the world.
The collapse of the current NATO enforced western financial system is going to shock western populations when cold hard reality hits. Outsourcing our manufacturing decades ago is about to bite us on the arse.
-
https://twitter.com/i/status/1621438853323132929
Above a simple graphic demonstrating Russian aggression against "democracy defending peace-loving" NATO
-
https://twitter.com/WarClandestine/status/1621590429396238338?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1621852527170912256%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es3_&ref_url=
Interesting thread on Putin/Trump/Zelensky and corruption in Ukraine. NATO backed Deep State v BRICS
-
Maria Zakhorova of the Russian MFA(Ministry of Foreign Affairs) today:
Question: Please comment on the EU-Ukraine summit held in Kyiv on February 3 and the joint statement adopted on its results.
Maria Zakharova: The February 3 event in Kiev once again confirmed that in order to weaken Russia and serve the hegemonic aspirations of the United States and NATO, the European Union continues to recklessly support the neo-Nazi regime in Kiev. Promising him a euro perspective in violation of its own standard requirements for European candidates and declaring the "common values" of the EU with it, it is in solidarity with the total suppression of dissent, the violation of freedom of speech and expression, and the gross violation of linguistic and religious rights in Ukraine. At the same time, he cynically "confirms" in a joint statement at the end of the summit "commitment to full respect for the rights of persons belonging to minorities." This completely negates the principles on which the EU was once built.
Equally hypocritical are the EU's calls for peace when they declare their readiness to invest in the continuation of hostilities "for as long as necessary." 12 billion euros have already been allocated at the expense of European taxpayers. Increasing funding for the conflict, new supplies of weapons and equipment, increasing training camps, expanding training programs of the Armed Forces of Ukraine - all this leads to an increase in the number of victims of the conflict, including among the civilian population.
Attempts in these conditions to launch the process of creating any quasi-structures to bring to justice for what is happening in Ukraine are absurd and immoral. As they say, who are the judges? Those who cheated with the Minsk agreements, covered up the war crimes of the Kiev regime against civilians in the Donbas since 2014, pumped Ukrainian criminals with weapons and money, who are trying to misappropriate Russia's state assets and the funds of our citizens?
It is once again confirmed that the leadership of the European Union and its member states has invested all political, financial and military resources in order to deploy a front in Ukraine against the formation of a multipolar world order, which Russia and the majority of the world community firmly support.
But Western efforts are in vain. As the Russian leadership has repeatedly stated, the goals and objectives of the special military operation of the Russian Armed Forces in Ukraine will be fully achieved. All participants of the Kiev gathering on February 3 of this year are waiting for a cruel disappointment. They will have to answer, among other things, to their own population, at the expense of whose funds the bloody geopolitical game "to the last Ukrainian" started by the West is financed.
-
It is noticeable that recently, more and more Foreign ministers and Diplomats are openly speaking about the replacement of the petrodollar as world reserve currency. US/NATO are no longer feared by anyone and this is obvious from the co-ordinated messages of an increasingly confident coalition forming around BRICS countries and applicants. Sergey Ryabkov Russian Deputy Foreign Minister earlier today;
Washington shouldn't expect the world to forget that it fabricated its justification for the 2003 Iraq invasion, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov told RIA Novosti on Saturday.
The Russian diplomat made the remark on the eve of the 20th anniversary of the now-infamous speech by then-US Secretary of State Colin Powell at the United Nations Security Council, during which he presented alleged evidence of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, including biological ones....
Powell’s UN stunt “has long become the epitome of hypocrisy and the conviction of the US ruling elite in its own impunity and its unchallenged right to arrogantly teach the rest of the world,” Ryabkov stated. He added that it was also emblematic of Washington’s willingness to “use force against an obviously weaker opponent in order to preserve its own global hegemony.”
However, the diplomat suggested that – unlike in the 2000s and during the 1999 NATO bombing campaign of Yugoslavia – Washington could not get away with “international banditry” under current conditions.
“In the rapidly changing geopolitical landscape, the US is now objectively unable to resort to a use-of-force scenario every time it feels like it, without facing serious consequences,” he noted, pointing to the “humiliating flight” of US troops from Afghanistan in 2021.
However, as Washington’s “meddling” in the Ukraine conflict has shown, this setback has not stopped the US from embracing its old ways, the diplomat continued.
“The Americans will have to adjust to the new rails and get rid of the impunity syndrome that so clearly manifested itself during the [anthrax] vial scandal. The same applies to taking into account Russia and China, as well as other major international players that are shaping a more just multilateral world order,” Ryabkov said.
The US should not cherish any hope that “the memories of what happened 20 years ago would be buried in the shifting sands of modern history,” he concluded.
The trajectory of history is being written in the Global East and Global South, increasingly confidently.
-
The idea of Putin being some all controlling dictator ordering murders of his alleged rivals is too idiotic for words. It is a sad reflection of our media that it has become so infantilised. It doesn't even need debunking because there is nothing to debunk.
Somebody is killed in Russia.
Western media immediately link it in the most tenuous way with Putin.
The articles themselves make no accusations, realising there is nothing but innuendo to link it to Putin. Indoctrinated readers fail to see that no evidence is offered or accusation even made. Just lots of innuendo and the reader has to make the accusation themselves-they just don't realise it.
Nemtsov, the idiotic Navalny saga.
Do yourself a favour, Roch. Search for yourself the election results from Russia over the last couple of decades that this Putin obsession of the Western media has gone on.
None of the people called "The Opposition leader" are anything of the sort. This massive lie should alert you to the notion that everything that follows is probably bollocks.
Take a look yourself and search for the results;
United Russia (Putin's party) usually garner around 50% give or take.
The Communist Party garner around 25-30%
A number of smaller parties usually get anything between 1 and 5%
Navalny, Nemtsov and any other fringe figure touted in Western media as "opposition leader" is a false premise that is easily dismissed straight away by any discerning reader. If any foreign media described Tommy Robinson or Nick Griffin as "UK opposition leader", you would probably stop reading on the grounds of them being so poorly informed/straight up liars. Check their facts. Don't swallow everything they say whole without even a cursory check on the facts they use as their premise. Both of these figures were not rivals or a threat to Putin in any sense. The Communist Party leader is unarguably the opposition in Russia. That is a bit uncomfortable for Western media and leaders so they pretend that irrelevant fringe figures are "Putin's rival".
If Putin is "bumping off" opposition leaders then he is being remarkably lax because the prominent politicians and leaders of his main opposition(the Communists) have been left unharmed.
Western media outlets and politicians never refer to the Communist Party in Russia at all, never mind as "the opposition" to United Russia. If they either don't know or just ignore this fact-everything else they say after that is uninformed propaganda. This is not really arguable. Hold your sources of "information" to some standards.
Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus-one lie, all lies
You should be "marking" their work at all times not swallowing the dubious and un-evidenced claims whole. The whole edifice of lies is crashing around them now. The disinformation about Ukraine in Western media is off the scale and bears no resemblance to real events. Informed, knowledgable and sane experts will never be interviewed in western media.
None the less-cold hard reality is smashing into western propaganda. Truth is emerging, slowly at first-then a deluge is coming. NATO and the EU will be lucky to see 2023 out in one piece. The rest of the world will get on with creating a new multi-polar world, new means of trade bypassing the dollar- all ongoing. Putin will not be overthrown, die of cancer, BRICS+ will continue to expand. Western abuse of reserve status of the dollar-weaponising of SWIFT, illegal sanctions(abusing reserve status), theft of foreign reserves-it's all over.
NATO the ultimate enforcer of the above system is, despite western propaganda to the contrary, currently getting it's arse handed to it by Russia. It doesn't matter whether you believe this or not. The rest of the world (Africa, Asia, South America) believe it. They are turning to Russia and China because they have seen Russia demonstrate the weakness of NATO-who are powerless to turn the tide. Nobody gives a f#+k about western public opinion anymore. The West is no longer the "shining city on the hill" for the rest of the world.
The collapse of the current NATO enforced western financial system is going to shock western populations when cold hard reality hits. Outsourcing our manufacturing decades ago is about to bite us on the arse.
But you don't understand how quasi-dictatorships work. There's no documentary evidence that Adolf Hitler was responsible for the Holocaust.
-
But you don't understand how quasi-dictatorships work. There's no documentary evidence that Adolf Hitler was responsible for the Holocaust.
You, demonstrably, lack understanding or even awareness of how indoctrination works. You require zero evidence to find Putin, Assad or whoever else guilty no matter how absurd the charges. Why is that, do you think?
-
You, demonstrably, lack understanding or even awareness of how indoctrination works. You require zero evidence to find Putin, Assad or whoever else guilty no matter how absurd the charges. Why is that, do you think?
It's a nod here, a wink there, make your boss-look-good syndrome or in the case of the oligarchs execute murder with no paper trail.
-
It's a nod here, a wink there, make your boss-look-good syndrome or in the case of the oligarchs execute murder with no paper trail.
It's a bit of innuendo here, a bit of propaganda there, no evidence there. You demonstrate with every post the points I made earlier.
-
You, demonstrably, lack understanding or even awareness of how indoctrination works. You require zero evidence to find Putin, Assad or whoever else guilty no matter how absurd the charges. Why is that, do you think?
I've told you that such dictators always get their willing lackeys to do the dirty work.
-
Nearly 200,000 Russian troops have been killed or injured in Ukraine, US officials say
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ukraine-war-russia-death-toll-b2274969.html (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ukraine-war-russia-death-toll-b2274969.html)
The numbers of Russian casualties and losses have been so wildly exaggerated in Western media and governments that to anyone reading critically (ie. thinking whilst reading) they fall apart on contact with air never mind basic reasoning.
It appears that some are starting to distance themselves from some of the wilder claims. In more informed and sane discussion and conversations regarding Russian and Ukraine losses-there has been a recognition of the true scale of losses on both sides. The fact that Ukraine started the war with with thousands of tanks, armoured vehicles, planes, Air Defence systems etc. etc., then emptied the stocks of all former Soviet Bloc countries of their tanks, armoured vehicles, planes... and now are begging for all of the above should already be alerting any discerning reader. (If they're winning then how come?...) Where has it all gone? How come Russia don't seem short despite us being told that they are running out of missiles, tanks whatever every other week.
Russia, despite assurances from Western governments and media, aren't running out of anything anytime soon.
All estimates, among unbiased and informed insiders, has recognised that Ukrainian losses are somewhere in the vicinity of 8 or 10 to 1 compared to Russian losses. This makes sense when one looks at the wider picture. Russian artillery along the whole line outnumbers Ukrainian by a factor of between 6 and 8 to 1. This is not an opinion-all recognise this. Russia have always been prepared to cede ground for men. Fighting defensive wars constantly with such strategic depth helps to understand a little more of Russian military doctrine. As a consequence places such as Soledar and Bakhmut, for the two most recent, have literally been meat grinders with horrendous Ukrainian losses. It suits Russia for Ukraine/NATO to pour ever more men into their meat grinder in their increasingly desperate attempt to retain territory.
So, as I say, with the shit about to hit the fan, we begin to see the first shoots of truth from western sources. Jockeying to distance themselves from the biggest foreign policy disaster in NATO history and that is likely to bring about its demise.
This is long enough already, so I will post the "leaked" field data as of January 14th 2023 according to MOSSAD (Israeli intelligence)
-
The promised "leaked" MOSSAD field report;
Claim: Ukrainian and Russian casualties according to MOSSAD
Allegedly, the field data of January 14, 2023, based on Israeli intelligence, is listed as follows:
RUSSIA:
Russian losses in the field with 418 thousand soldiers (plus 3,500,000 reservists) and the increasing number of Wagner mercenaries:
23 Planes
56 helicopter
200 (S)UAV
889 Tanks and armored vehicles
427 Howitzer (Artillery systems)
12 Air defense system
18,480 dead
44,500 Injured
323 Captive
UKRAINE:
The casualties of Ukraine, which was in the field with 734 thousand soldiers (plus 100 thousand reservists) and NATO officers, soldiers and mercenaries, are as follows:
302 Aircraft
212 Helicopter
2.750 (S)UAV
6,320 Tanks and armored vehicles
7.360 Howitzer (Artillery systems)
497 Air defense system
157,000 Dead
234,000 injured
17,230 Captive
234 Dead – NATO military trainers (US and UK)
2,458 Dead – NATO soldiers (Germany, Poland, Lithuania, ...)
5,360 Dead – Mercenaries
-
NATO Ukraine are in complete panic mode. Their plans and the Western military and financial structure falling apart.
"Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation: According to information confirmed by several sources, Kiev intends to carry out a large-scale provocation to accuse Russia of allegedly committing "war crimes."
According to reports, Kiev plans to carry out a controlled bombing of the buildings of several medical institutions in Kramatorsk in order to accuse the Russian Federation of an allegedly deliberate strike on civilian objects. It is known that, accompanied by SBU officers, foreign journalists have already arrived in Kramatorsk to cover the planned provocation."
-
Russian troops in Kreminna.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/10ue3br/russian_cope_offencive_in_kreminna/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/10ue3br/russian_cope_offencive_in_kreminna/)
-
The promised "leaked" MOSSAD field report;
Claim: Ukrainian and Russian casualties according to MOSSAD
Allegedly, the field data of January 14, 2023, based on Israeli intelligence, is listed as follows:
RUSSIA:
Russian losses in the field with 418 thousand soldiers (plus 3,500,000 reservists) and the increasing number of Wagner mercenaries:
23 Planes
56 helicopter
200 (S)UAV
889 Tanks and armored vehicles
427 Howitzer (Artillery systems)
12 Air defense system
18,480 dead
44,500 Injured
323 Captive
UKRAINE:
The casualties of Ukraine, which was in the field with 734 thousand soldiers (plus 100 thousand reservists) and NATO officers, soldiers and mercenaries, are as follows:
302 Aircraft
212 Helicopter
2.750 (S)UAV
6,320 Tanks and armored vehicles
7.360 Howitzer (Artillery systems)
497 Air defense system
157,000 Dead
234,000 injured
17,230 Captive
234 Dead – NATO military trainers (US and UK)
2,458 Dead – NATO soldiers (Germany, Poland, Lithuania, ...)
5,360 Dead – Mercenaries
Where on earth did you get this nonsense from? That's not from mossad, that's from some Russian troll in a basement somewhere. How can Ukraine lose 6,320 tanks and AFVs when they barely had 1500 to begin with? :))
There have been over 9000 Russian military vehicles lost, each case confirmed with photographs. Who knows what the figure is without photos.
https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html (https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html)
-
Where on earth did you get this nonsense from? That's not from mossad, that's from some Russian troll in a basement somewhere. How can Ukraine lose 6,320 tanks and AFVs when they barely had 1500 to begin with? :))
There have been over 9000 Russian military vehicles lost, each case confirmed with photographs. Who knows what the figure is without photos.
https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html (https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html)
Ukraine have emptied the stocks of old soviet weapons from ex Soviet countries. It has all been destroyed. Currently begging for yet more NATO tanks, planes, artillery etc. The numbers are in line with observed reality. Ritter, MacGregor, Alastair Crooke and other reliable military/geopolitical analysts have been reporting these figures from the start. The widely reported and filmed "press ganging" of new conscripts in Ukraine who are on their 9th or 10th wave of mobilisation also tells this tale.
Only indoctrinated and censored westerners believe the obvious lies being told by Ukraine/NATO.
Ukrainian losses are horrendous. Modern industrial warfare is an artillery war(lots of it) and Russia is firing 6 to 8 times more artillery than the Ukrainians can sustain. It is obvious that Ukraine are taking massive losses and those being sent to the front line now are ill prepared conscripts being used as fodder. NATO are criminals sending more and more Ukrainians into the Russian meat-grinder with no chance of success.
Open source intel from many sources all point to the same inevitable conclusion of unsustainable Ukrainian losses. The scale of defeat is becoming impossible to cover up. The scale of losses was reported by The Guardian(a propaganda outlet for MI6) from June of last year;
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/10/ukraine-casualty-rate-russia-war-tipping-point
Arestovych-Presidential adviser at the time, gives a casualty figure for the Ukrainians at that time of 1,000 casualties daily. That is the Ukraine government in June were admitting losses of 1,000 men per day.
They are currently on their 9th or 10th wave of conscription and there are countless videos on social media(twitter, telegram channels) of forced press ganging and summonses of people at work, restaurants. It is plain to see and has been for some time that Ukraine/NATO cannot defeat Russia.
Given all the begging of equipment and the emptying of the arsenals of former Soviet countries-what do you realistically believe their losses to be. The initial stocks of tanks, planes, Air defences, artillery pieces have been destroyed as well as all the old stuff they got and currently they are getting hammered and needing billions more dollars worth of Tanks, planes etc.
Where has all the initial stuff gone?
How do you imagine that Ukrainian losses are not magnitudes higher than Russia? There is zero dispute that the artillery duel is heavily stacked in Russia's favour(between 6 to 1 and 8 to 1). Their air force, navy and initial army destroyed. No objective serious analyst disputes this
It has reached a tipping point, David.
https://ussanews.com/2023/02/05/mossad-believes-157000-ukrainian-soldiers-are-kia-so-far-turkish-newspaper-claims/
The claims are in line with observed reality and the objective reporting since hostilities began.
Your source (ORYX) is a Bellingcat aligned funded by NATO propaganda source. Oryx is not an unbiased Open Source intel analyst. It is a paid and funded propaganda source masquerading as an independent OSINT analyst. It is not funded to give you a unbiased view of events. Oryx is just a Dutch Bellingcat and no informed person takes these people seriously. They aren't analysts-they are barely disguised propagandists.
It has reached the point where NATO either have to accept the Russian demands and reality on the ground or enter the war openly which leads to the same outcome-just a bit slower.
-
It has reached the point where NATO either have to accept the Russian demands and reality on the ground or enter the war openly which leads to the same outcome-just a bit slower.
Truth be told, NATO would not dare to openly intervene. Their alleged unity would be exposed and military weakness unequivocally demonstrated. Most of them (NATO countries) are sending no arms to Ukraine and want no part of any US/UK + vassals led war on Russia. If Poland or any other NATO country openly involves itself then Russia will strike military installations in Poland. NATO will not unify and intervene. Turkiye? Hungary? Croatia? NATO are fighting like "Rats in a sack" amongst themselves and in no position to be taking on Russia. They will end up negotiating on Russian terms before declaring victory.
-
Russian tank crewman runs away on fire after his tank was hit. Vuhledar 2023.
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/10vad2v/russian_tank_crewman_runs_away_on_fire_after_his/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/10vad2v/russian_tank_crewman_runs_away_on_fire_after_his/)
-
It has reached the point where NATO either have to accept the Russian demands and reality on the ground or enter the war openly which leads to the same outcome-just a bit slower.
Truth be told, NATO would not dare to openly intervene. Their alleged unity would be exposed and military weakness unequivocally demonstrated. Most of them (NATO countries) are sending no arms to Ukraine and want no part of any US/UK + vassals led war on Russia. If Poland or any other NATO country openly involves itself then Russia will strike military installations in Poland. NATO will not unify and intervene. Turkiye? Hungary? Croatia? NATO are fighting like "Rats in a sack" amongst themselves and in no position to be taking on Russia. They will end up negotiating on Russian terms before declaring victory.
It's up to the people of Ukraine whether they wish to join NATO. Didn't Macron offer Putin a compromise whereby Ukraine wouldn't join for twenty years? Russia wished to keep the spoils of Crimea with the naval base, which to my mind is the real reason for invading and creating the buffer zone. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jan/26/ukraine-and-russia-to-hold-paris-talks-in-latest-effort-to-ease-tensions
-
It's up to the people of Ukraine whether they wish to join NATO. Didn't Macron offer Putin a compromise whereby Ukraine wouldn't join for twenty years? Russia wished to keep the spoils of Crimea with the naval base, which to my mind is the real reason for invading and creating the buffer zone. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jan/26/ukraine-and-russia-to-hold-paris-talks-in-latest-effort-to-ease-tensions
The people of Ukraine will have their say on whether they wish to remain part of Ukraine, and what is left of it, or choose independence. Many will choose the latter.
They will have no say on joining NATO. That is Real geo-politik. If you don't understand this then you are out of your depth discussing it. Those pushing for Ukraine membership have different goals to the ones they are telling you. Ukraine is a failed state now. It isn't joining NATO. NATO will be losing, not gaining, members by the end of 2023.
-
The people of Ukraine will have their say on whether they wish to remain part of Ukraine, and what is left of it, or choose independence. Many will choose the latter.
They will have no say on joining NATO. That is Real geo-politik. If you don't understand this then you are out of your depth discussing it. Those pushing for Ukraine membership have different goals to the ones they are telling you. Ukraine is a failed state now. It isn't joining NATO. NATO will be losing, not gaining, members by the end of 2023.
When will they have this choice? Why not put a UN peacekeeping force in Crimea and the four other areas under Russian control until free and fair elections can be held under the auspices of OSCE?
-
When will they have this choice? Why not put a UN peacekeeping force in Crimea and the four other areas under Russian control until free and fair elections can be held under the auspices of OSCE?
Why do Crimeans need a UN peacekeeping force? They are Russian and have a Russian peacekeeping force. They have voted three times since 1991 to join Russia. Crimeans wanted to stay with Russia when the Soviet Union broke up in 1991. They voted overwhelmingly in a referendum to remain with Russia but Russia was in no position to recognise this.
They have voted twice since then, again overwhelmingly in favour of joining Russia. They neither need nor want outside interference. They are Russian. Why are you so concerned with a people you clearly know nothing about?
All Ukrainians will be given a vote when their country has been demilitarised. It's what happens when you live next door to a nuclear superpower and allow yourself to be used to provoke and antagonise your bigger stronger neighbour. They will be demilitarised and then choose who they are and who they wish to align with.
-
The promised "leaked" MOSSAD field report;
Claim: Ukrainian and Russian casualties according to MOSSAD
Allegedly, the field data of January 14, 2023, based on Israeli intelligence, is listed as follows:
RUSSIA:
Russian losses in the field with 418 thousand soldiers (plus 3,500,000 reservists) and the increasing number of Wagner mercenaries:
23 Planes
56 helicopter
200 (S)UAV
889 Tanks and armored vehicles
427 Howitzer (Artillery systems)
12 Air defense system
18,480 dead
44,500 Injured
323 Captive
UKRAINE:
The casualties of Ukraine, which was in the field with 734 thousand soldiers (plus 100 thousand reservists) and NATO officers, soldiers and mercenaries, are as follows:
302 Aircraft
212 Helicopter
2.750 (S)UAV
6,320 Tanks and armored vehicles
7.360 Howitzer (Artillery systems)
497 Air defense system
157,000 Dead
234,000 injured
17,230 Captive
234 Dead – NATO military trainers (US and UK)
2,458 Dead – NATO soldiers (Germany, Poland, Lithuania, ...)
5,360 Dead – Mercenaries
Scott Ritter on George Galloway's MOATS discussing the above
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkMzE1YR4ts&ab_channel=DouglasMacgregorCol
-
Documented equipment losses on both sides as of now.
Ukraine - 2917, of which: destroyed: 1837, damaged: 137, abandoned: 74, captured: 869
Tanks - (459, of which destroyed: 271, damaged: 29, abandoned: 17, captured: 144)
Russia - 9034, of which: destroyed: 5717, damaged: 243, abandoned: 310, captured: 2764
Tanks - (1679, of which destroyed: 994, damaged: 77, abandoned: 64, captured: 544)
https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-ukrainian.html (https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-ukrainian.html)
https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html (https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html)
-
Scott Ritter on George Galloway's MOATS discussing the above
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkMzE1YR4ts&ab_channel=DouglasMacgregorCol
Ritter declared in February that Russia will not invade Ukraine. After the invasion, Ritter said Ukraine will fall in a week. Ritter then got suspended from Twitter after claiming that the National Police of Ukraine is responsible for the Bucha massacre.
So why is a former U.S. Marine Corps intelligence officer peddling the line of Russian propaganda?
The most likely answer is that for a repeated sex offender (involving children) that has served time in prison, you have trouble finding employment.
Ritter works for and appears on Russia Today. And there is Russian money involved here. Everyone has a price.
As for Galloway
https://twitter.com/georgegalloway/status/1493282583068696579?lang=en (https://twitter.com/georgegalloway/status/1493282583068696579?lang=en)
-
Documented equipment losses on both sides as of now.
Ukraine - 2917, of which: destroyed: 1837, damaged: 137, abandoned: 74, captured: 869
Tanks - (459, of which destroyed: 271, damaged: 29, abandoned: 17, captured: 144)
Russia - 9034, of which: destroyed: 5717, damaged: 243, abandoned: 310, captured: 2764
Tanks - (1679, of which destroyed: 994, damaged: 77, abandoned: 64, captured: 544)
https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-ukrainian.html (https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-ukrainian.html)
https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html (https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html)
The trouble with the Oryx numbers, David, apart from their obvious bias, is that they defy known facts on the ground. It isn't Russia running out of all these things, is it? They are, as a matter of fact, firing 8 to 10 times more artillery fire than Ukraine. It is a one sided beat down. Those accepted and non-disputed facts don't square with the fantasy Oryx numbers.
Oryx are NATO funded and aligned and not in any way objective nor attempting to be. How come Ukraine need more of everything? They have emptied the stocks of previous Soviet countries of tanks, artillery and planes. How come Russia aren't running out? Despite claims from these same outlets(amplified by you)-it seems Russia has plenty of everything.
It is obvious which side is suffering huge casualties, David.
-
The trouble with the Oryx numbers, David, apart from their obvious bias, is that they defy known facts on the ground. It isn't Russia running out of all these things, is it? They are, as a matter of fact, firing 8 to 10 times more artillery fire than Ukraine. It is a one sided beat down. Those accepted and non-disputed facts don't square with the fantasy Oryx numbers.
Oryx are NATO funded and aligned and not in any way objective nor attempting to be. How come Ukraine need more of everything? They have emptied the stocks of previous Soviet countries of tanks, artillery and planes. How come Russia aren't running out? Despite claims from these same outlets(amplified by you)-it seems Russia has plenty of everything.
It is obvious which side is suffering huge casualties, David.
How can Oryx be fantasy when you can literally click each case for a photo?
For example
A Russian T-72
https://postlmg.cc/V001gzfr (https://postlmg.cc/V001gzfr)
A Ukrainian Humvee
https://postlmg.cc/BtTxxtXc (https://postlmg.cc/BtTxxtXc)
Are you saying all 15 thousand of these photos are fake?
-
Naftali Bennett, the latest to be distancing himself from the debacle of using Ukraine as a proxy by NATO. The rats are scurrying off the sinking ship;
On March 4, 2022, Bennett traveled to Russia to meet with President Vladimir Putin. In the interview, he detailed his mediation at the time between Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, which he said he coordinated with the US, France, Germany, and the UK.
Bennett said that both sides agreed to major concessions during his mediation effort.
...
But ultimately, the Western leaders opposed Bennet’s efforts. “I’ll say this in the broad sense. I think there was a legitimate decision by the West to keep striking Putin and not [negotiate],” Bennett said.
When asked if the Western powers “blocked” the mediation efforts, Bennet said, “Basically, yes. They blocked it, and I thought they were wrong.”
Bennett says the concessions each side was prepared to make included the renunciation of future NATO membership for Ukraine, and on Russia's end dropping the goals of "denazification" and Ukrainian disarmament. As DeCamp notes, this matches up with an Axios report from early March that "According to Israeli officials, Putin’s proposal is difficult for Zelensky to accept but not as extreme as they anticipated. They said the proposal doesn’t include regime change in Kyiv and allows Ukraine to keep its sovereignty."
Bennett is about as unsavory a character as exists in the world today, but Israel's complicated relationship with this war lends itself to the occasional release of information not fully in alignment with the official imperial line. And his comments here only add to a pile of information that's been coming out for months which says the same thing, not just regarding the sabotage of peace talks in March but in April as well.
In May of last year Ukrainian media reported that then-British prime minister Boris Johnson had flown to Kyiv the previous month to pass on the message on behalf of the western empire that "Putin is a war criminal, he should be pressured, not negotiated with," and that "even if Ukraine is ready to sign some agreements on guarantees with Putin, they are not."
In April of last year, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said that "there are those within the NATO member states that want the war to continue, let the war continue and Russia gets weaker." Shortly thereafter, US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin said that the goal in Ukraine is "to see Russia weakened."
Bennett's comments make clear that it is Putin and Russia-not NATO and the West-who are seeking peace. Full article below;
https://caitlinjohnstone.substack.com/p/more-evidence-that-the-west-sabotaged
-
How can Oryx be fantasy when you can literally click each case for a photo?
For example
A Russian T-72
https://postlmg.cc/V001gzfr (https://postlmg.cc/V001gzfr)
A Ukrainian Humvee
https://postlmg.cc/BtTxxtXc (https://postlmg.cc/BtTxxtXc)
Are you saying all 15 thousand of these photos are fake?
Not very imaginative are you? 15,000 photos?
It has been proven that many of these photos are the same picture from different angles, many are staged Ukrainian losses made to look Russian. All of this is known. Unverified pictures are not reliable Open Source Intelligence(OSINT) and that you fail to understand this doesn't surprise me.
Facts on the ground defy the alleged truth of Oryx numbers.
Where has all the equipment that Ukraine started with and the massive supplies from various countries gone? How come they are begging for even more? Can you figure it out, David?
-
It has been proven that many of these photos are the same picture from different angles,
Such as?
-
The Oryx blog receives £282 per month from 82 patrons. It has published a book on North Korea called "On The Path Of Songun"
https://www.patreon.com/oryxspioenkop (https://www.patreon.com/oryxspioenkop)
Certainly a NATO operation this ::)
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O10svZJ2Fps
-
The promised "leaked" MOSSAD field report;
Claim: Ukrainian and Russian casualties according to MOSSAD
Allegedly, the field data of January 14, 2023, based on Israeli intelligence, is listed as follows:
RUSSIA:
Russian losses in the field with 418 thousand soldiers (plus 3,500,000 reservists) and the increasing number of Wagner mercenaries:
23 Planes
56 helicopter
200 (S)UAV
889 Tanks and armored vehicles
427 Howitzer (Artillery systems)
12 Air defense system
18,480 dead
44,500 Injured
323 Captive
UKRAINE:
The casualties of Ukraine, which was in the field with 734 thousand soldiers (plus 100 thousand reservists) and NATO officers, soldiers and mercenaries, are as follows:
302 Aircraft
212 Helicopter
2.750 (S)UAV
6,320 Tanks and armored vehicles
7.360 Howitzer (Artillery systems)
497 Air defense system
157,000 Dead
234,000 injured
17,230 Captive
234 Dead – NATO military trainers (US and UK)
2,458 Dead – NATO soldiers (Germany, Poland, Lithuania, ...)
5,360 Dead – Mercenaries
Where on earth did you get this nonsense from? That's not from mossad, that's from some Russian troll in a basement somewhere. How can Ukraine lose 6,320 tanks and AFVs when they barely had 1500 to begin with? :))
Your comprehension and critical thinking leave much to be desired.
Mossad claim is 6,320 tanks and fighting vehicles.
Ukraine started the war with around 1,000 to 1,500 tanks.
They had an estimated 12,000 fighting vehicles at commencement of hostilities.
Since then they have been sent 2,000 fighting vehicles from US alone, hundreds more tanks and are currently begging for more.
Their air force and air defence was mostly destroyed in the opening weeks. Their Navy suffered the same fate.
How many do you think they have lost?
The numbers tell the tale.
If anything the numbers are conservative.
-
The Pentagon (Dept of Defence)appears to be the latest "agency" distancing itself from the factions within the intel agencies driving this war. Colonel MacGregor has claimed that General Zaluzhny (head of Ukraine Army) told Lloyd Austin and General Milley of real Ukrainian losses of 257,000.
That MacGregor has named Austin and Milley and their meeting with Zaluzhny hints that this "leak" is "authorised" by them. He could have said DoD or Pentagon sources. Directly naming those is suggestive that the military leadership is at odds with other intel agencies. No public denials of these numbers from the Pentagon.
The supposed "leaks" and accusations by the likes of Naftali Bennett show the increasing fractures within NATO and its allies, as their best laid plans meet Russian reality. There is a growing realisation in the West of the size of this foreign policy debacle.
-
Where on earth did you get this nonsense from? That's not from mossad, that's from some Russian troll in a basement somewhere. How can Ukraine lose 6,320 tanks and AFVs when they barely had 1500 to begin with? :))
Your comprehension and critical thinking leave much to be desired.
Mossad claim is 6,320 tanks and fighting vehicles.
Ukraine started the war with around 1,000 to 1,500 tanks.
They had an estimated 12,000 fighting vehicles at commencement of hostilities.
Since then they have been sent 2,000 fighting vehicles from US alone, hundreds more tanks and are currently begging for more.
Their air force and air defence was mostly destroyed in the opening weeks. Their Navy suffered the same fate.
How many do you think they have lost?
The numbers tell the tale.
If anything the numbers are conservative.
Mossad has not claimed anything. Numbers produced by some troll from a fictional local paper on the internet and claiming its from Mossad is not evidence of anything. According to the troll, Russia has lost only 18k troops, if that was the case they would not have conscripted and mobilised 300,000 men from their civilian lives last year.
The fact you have bought this hook, line and sinker shows its not me that lacks comprehension and critical thinking its you!
https://twitter.com/WashingtonPoint/status/1622475655815331845?s=20 (https://twitter.com/WashingtonPoint/status/1622475655815331845?s=20)
-
Mossad has not claimed anything. Numbers produced by some troll from a fictional local paper on the internet and claiming its from Mossad is not evidence of anything. According to the troll, Russia has lost only 18k troops, if that was the case they would not have conscripted and mobilised 300,000 men from their civilian lives last year.
The fact you have bought this hook, line and sinker shows its not me that lacks comprehension and critical thinking its you!
The 300k mobilised are only being deployed in numbers now. This is not a secret. That is why there is lots of activity all along the front now and Russia are pushing and probing all along the line. Ukraine armed forces are stretched and weakened. That is what the 300,000 were for. They didn't go straight to the front lines. They were training ready the big push now happening. How do you think that suddenly Ukraine's lines are breaking? Russian losses are easily a magnitude lower than Ukraine armed forces. Every other metric points to this. The equipment losses claimed are given credibility by the admitted number of donated equipment from NATO countries. If Ukraine haven't had those losses of equipment, then it needs to be explained where the initial equipment and additional weapons and equipment has gone, because they are still desperate for equipment. They have self evidently lost, at least, the numbers of equipment listed.
The acknowledged fact of artillery attrition rates, up to 10 to 1 in Russia's favour.
The waves of conscription in Ukraine. Utterly desperate for men and sending 18 year olds and 60 years old untrained conscripts to the front as fodder.
The above are all acknowledged numbers. How on earth given these huge imbalances do you imagine that attrition rates favour Ukraine?
-
Kremlin planning malign influence operations in Britain
https://lansinginstitute.org/2023/02/02/kremlin-planning-malign-influence-operations-in-britain/ (https://lansinginstitute.org/2023/02/02/kremlin-planning-malign-influence-operations-in-britain/)
-
Kremlin planning malign influence operations in Britain
https://lansinginstitute.org/2023/02/02/kremlin-planning-malign-influence-operations-in-britain/ (https://lansinginstitute.org/2023/02/02/kremlin-planning-malign-influence-operations-in-britain/)
You should be more concerned with the UK government planning "malign influence operations in Britain"
-
Do Tankies ever admit they are wrong?
(https://preview.redd.it/f3k0tujedwga1.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=ab1ad276e06f8b8cb84999f8f6424670d167b0e0)
-
Do Tankies ever admit they are wrong?
(https://preview.redd.it/f3k0tujedwga1.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=ab1ad276e06f8b8cb84999f8f6424670d167b0e0)
He was right. Russia acted under Article 51 of the UN Charter and the Responsibility to Protect doctrine. Ukraine were preparing to invade Donbass and had increased shelling. Russia under Art. 51 acted to prevent ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. I did a thread on the legalities in order for you to add meat to your accusations of illegal invasion. You failed, predictably, to challenge any part of Russia's legal case.
Russia have acted in accordance with the UN Charter in their attempts to solve the problems in regions of Ukraine ever since the 2014 Maidan coup. They acted only when all other avenues had been exhausted. Every one of those avenues was blocked because of the admitted bad faith of Ukraine and its Western backers. This is not disputable and has played out in front of the whole world throughout those years. Only deluded souls such as yourself give any credibility to the proven liars in Western media and governments.
There was no invasion. It is a SMO under Art. 51 of the UN Charter. You call it an illegal invasion but have failed to articulate your case despite an entire thread devoted to it.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,11616.0.html
-
A 2017 phone call with Putin.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/10x1ah9/investigators_at_a_press_conference_in_the_hague/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/10x1ah9/investigators_at_a_press_conference_in_the_hague/)
-
To re-frame the question that you keep avoiding. If you find the claimed losses of Ukrainian equipment not believable- then what do you believe them to be?
For instance, to take the tanks and fighting vehicles figure. Of the 1,000 to 1,500 tanks they started with and 12,000 fighting vehicles and the known donations (too many to list) of more tanks and fighting vehicles amounting to easily 4,000+. How many do you think are left of the 18,000+ tanks and fighting vehicles? They are asking for thousands more. all evidence supports that the figures given are conservative.
Now try the same with planes, air defence systems, artillery units. How many to start with? How many donated? How many still begging for? What is the inevitable conclusion?
-
He was right. Russia acted under Article 51 of the UN Charter and the Responsibility to Protect doctrine. Ukraine were preparing to invade Donbass and had increased shelling. Russia under Art. 51 acted to prevent ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. I did a thread on the legalities in order for you to add meat to your accusations of illegal invasion. You failed, predictably, to challenge any part of Russia's legal case.
Russia have acted in accordance with the UN Charter in their attempts to solve the problems in regions of Ukraine ever since the 2014 Maidan coup. They acted only when all other avenues had been exhausted. Every one of those avenues was blocked because of the admitted bad faith of Ukraine and its Western backers. This is not disputable and has played out in front of the whole world throughout those years. Only deluded souls such as yourself give any credibility to the proven liars in Western media and governments.
There was no invasion. It is a SMO under Art. 51 of the UN Charter. You call it an illegal invasion but have failed to articulate your case despite an entire thread devoted to it.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,11616.0.html
You are crazy!
-
To re-frame the question that you keep avoiding. If you find the claimed losses of Ukrainian equipment not believable- then what do you believe them to be?
Answer my question.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,6518.msg535901.html#msg535901 (https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,6518.msg535901.html#msg535901)
I find the stats backed by photos to be credible. You say its been proven many of these photos are duplicates, so I am awaiting your source for this alleged proof.
-
He was right. Russia acted under Article 51 of the UN Charter and the Responsibility to Protect doctrine. Ukraine were preparing to invade Donbass and had increased shelling. Russia under Art. 51 acted to prevent ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. I did a thread on the legalities in order for you to add meat to your accusations of illegal invasion. You failed, predictably, to challenge any part of Russia's legal case.
Russia have acted in accordance with the UN Charter in their attempts to solve the problems in regions of Ukraine ever since the 2014 Maidan coup. They acted only when all other avenues had been exhausted. Every one of those avenues was blocked because of the admitted bad faith of Ukraine and its Western backers. This is not disputable and has played out in front of the whole world throughout those years. Only deluded souls such as yourself give any credibility to the proven liars in Western media and governments.
There was no invasion. It is a SMO under Art. 51 of the UN Charter. You call it an illegal invasion but have failed to articulate your case despite an entire thread devoted to it.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,11616.0.html
Russia did a good job then. https://youtu.be/-sc4hW21UC0
The Budapest Memorandum commentary. https://theconversation.com/ukraine-war-what-is-the-budapest-memorandum-and-why-has-russias-invasion-torn-it-up-178184
-
A much simpler time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8IRLdGpr3Y (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8IRLdGpr3Y)
-
He was right. Russia acted under Article 51 of the UN Charter and the Responsibility to Protect doctrine. Ukraine were preparing to invade Donbass and had increased shelling. Russia under Art. 51 acted to prevent ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. I did a thread on the legalities in order for you to add meat to your accusations of illegal invasion. You failed, predictably, to challenge any part of Russia's legal case.
Russia have acted in accordance with the UN Charter in their attempts to solve the problems in regions of Ukraine ever since the 2014 Maidan coup. They acted only when all other avenues had been exhausted. Every one of those avenues was blocked because of the admitted bad faith of Ukraine and its Western backers. This is not disputable and has played out in front of the whole world throughout those years. Only deluded souls such as yourself give any credibility to the proven liars in Western media and governments.
There was no invasion. It is a SMO under Art. 51 of the UN Charter. You call it an illegal invasion but have failed to articulate your case despite an entire thread devoted to it.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,11616.0.html
Donbass was part of Ukraine until annexation by Russia.
-
Donbass is populated by ethnic Russians who want to be part of Russia, this was recently voted for overwhelmingly by those who reside there.
-
Donbass is populated by ethnic Russians who want to be part of Russia, this was recently voted for overwhelmingly by those who reside there.
You'd have to be extremely naive to believe the results of those "referendums". Independent polling prior to 2014 suggests that less than 20% of eastern Ukrainians were in favour of secession.
https://web.archive.org/web/20140509001422/http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2014/05/Pew-Global-Attitudes-Ukraine-Russia-Report-FINAL-May-8-2014.pdf (https://web.archive.org/web/20140509001422/http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2014/05/Pew-Global-Attitudes-Ukraine-Russia-Report-FINAL-May-8-2014.pdf)
Footage showed the streets of Kherson were empty when Russian troops entered. The Ukrainian forces were greeted with cheers when they forced the Russians out. The same population that allegedly voted 85% in favour of joining Russia several months prior. Go figure.
-
And during the following 8 years the ethnic Russians residing in the Donbass, were treated like royalty by their Ukrainian rulers.
-
Large group of Russian troops killed.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/10zn53o/another_orc_company_destroyed/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/10zn53o/another_orc_company_destroyed/)
-
Due to russia's endless human wave attacks, Ukrainians have to dig deeper trenches... as the current ones are filling up with machine gun bullet casings
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/10zgefz/due_to_russias_endless_human_wave_attacks/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/10zgefz/due_to_russias_endless_human_wave_attacks/)
-
Due to russia's endless human wave attacks, Ukrainians have to dig deeper trenches... as the current ones are filling up with machine gun bullet casings
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/10zgefz/due_to_russias_endless_human_wave_attacks/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/10zgefz/due_to_russias_endless_human_wave_attacks/)
Didn't the Iranians use human wave attacks against Iraq? I know very little about the Iran Iraq war. Think it was about 80/81. I expect your government supported Saddam's Iraq during that war, as they hated Iran for deposing the Shah.
-
Didn't the Iranians use human wave attacks against Iraq? I know very little about the Iran Iraq war. Think it was about 80/81. I expect your government supported Saddam's Iraq during that war, as they hated Iran for deposing the Shah.
I think this is a bit different. The Iranians used human waves consisting of kids and teenagers expecting martyrdom in heaven.
These are Russian prisoners recruited by Wagner and sent into the meat grinder. It's a win win for them as Wagner don't need to pay dead recruits and the Russian state has less prisoners to worry about in its overcrowded and underfunded prison system. There is method to the madness.
-
I think this is a bit different. The Iranians used human waves consisting of kids and teenagers expecting martyrdom in heaven.
These are Russian prisoners recruited by Wagner and sent into the meat grinder. It's a win win for them as Wagner don't need to pay dead recruits and the Russian state has less prisoners to worry about in its overcrowded and underfunded prison system. There is method to the madness.
When I read you Vs Gringo, I seem to think the truth is somewhere Inbetween or that that are several opposing truths.
-
When I read you Vs Gringo, I seem to think the truth is somewhere Inbetween or that that are several opposing truths.
Like most Geo political conflicts the real truth goes back decades or even centuries.
You're better off out of it, or do what ever you can to prevent WW3, because the following war will be fought with sticks & stones.
-
When I read you Vs Gringo, I seem to think the truth is somewhere Inbetween or that that are several opposing truths.
On planet Gringo, A country with an economy the size of Italy with its domestic plumbing resembling that of a third world country, that's been forced out of Kherson and been forced to withdraw its Navy from the Ukrainian coast after its flagship was sunk. Is soon going to take the entire Ukrainian coast and force a dozen countries out of NATO and create a new world order.
I am starting to wonder whether he is on the Kremlin payroll or just trolling us now. There is no way he keeps a straight face while tying these delusions.
-
On planet Gringo, A country with an economy the size of Italy with its domestic plumbing resembling that of a third world country, that's been forced out of Kherson and been forced to withdraw its Navy from the Ukrainian coast after its flagship was sunk. Is soon going to take the entire Ukrainian coast and force a dozen countries out of NATO and create a new world order.
I am starting to wonder whether he is on the Kremlin payroll or just trolling us now. There is no way he keeps a straight face while tying these delusions.
I travelled through Russia on the Trans Siberian Railway and spent 2 days in Moscow back in 1988, I can't recall running into any problems caused by shoddy plumbing.
And Italy to me appears to have quite a reasonable size economy given its large industrial output, via the large companies based there trading into global markets.
I've relocated and plumbed in the kitchen at our house, as well as the shower in the bathroom and laundry room. I'm more than happy to lend Mr. Putin my crimping tool if the technology is yet to reach Russia.
(https://www.hireline.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/buteline-crimper.jpg)
-
Russian Wagner mercenaries have executed their own fighter Dmitriy Yakushenko, after he was exchanged in a prisoners swap.
https://liveuamap.com/en/2023/13-february-russian-pmc-wagner-mercenaries-have-executed (https://liveuamap.com/en/2023/13-february-russian-pmc-wagner-mercenaries-have-executed)
-
I travelled through Russia on the Trans Siberian Railway and spent 2 days in Moscow back in 1988, I can't recall running into any problems caused by shoddy plumbing.
And Italy to me appears to have quite a reasonable size economy given its large industrial output, via the large companies based there trading into global markets.
I've relocated and plumbed in the kitchen at our house, as well as the shower in the bathroom and laundry room. I'm more than happy to lend Mr. Putin my crimping tool if the technology is yet to reach Russia.
(https://www.hireline.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/buteline-crimper.jpg)
That reminded me of Kraftwerk. Trans Siberian Express.
-
(https://i.ibb.co/3W0yvNx/Hypnosis.jpg)
-
The forced conscription in Ukraine being filmed by civilians and posted all over social media. All to be sent as fodder with a life expectancy of hours. Ukraine/NATO is losing and in fact lost this war long ago. The continued pouring of forced conscripts into this lost cause is a crime against humanity. The tipping point is very near. There are too many of these videos to count. NATO/Ukraine are desperate and literally kidnapping men off the street, at work, at train stations.
The huge Ukrainian losses are very real.
https://twitter.com/defnotfsb/status/1625877490236379136
https://twitter.com/MyLordBebo/status/1623333827618693120
https://twitter.com/JohnEdgarCarter/status/1625902277260193809
https://twitter.com/Quotment/status/1625809478279999488
https://twitter.com/DoctorGerhard/status/1624283151865372674
-
The forced conscription in Ukraine being filmed by civilians and posted all over social media. All to be sent as fodder with a life expectancy of hours. Ukraine/NATO is losing and in fact lost this war long ago. The continued pouring of forced conscripts into this lost cause is a crime against humanity. The tipping point is very near. There are too many of these videos to count. NATO/Ukraine are desperate and literally kidnapping men off the street, at work, at train stations.
The huge Ukrainian losses are very real.
https://twitter.com/defnotfsb/status/1625877490236379136
https://twitter.com/MyLordBebo/status/1623333827618693120
https://twitter.com/JohnEdgarCarter/status/1625902277260193809
https://twitter.com/Quotment/status/1625809478279999488
https://twitter.com/DoctorGerhard/status/1624283151865372674
"A pattern of deliberate attacks on civilians.." https://youtu.be/5vwlx68_IFM
-
Jens Stoltenberg today;
“It is clear that we are in a race of logistics,” he said. “The war in Ukraine is consuming an enormous amount of munitions and depleting allied stockpiles.”
Mr. Stoltenberg said Ukrainian troops are expending ammo at “many times higher” than the current rate of production for NATO members. The situation is putting pressure on allied defense industries.
He said the waiting time for large caliber ammunition — such as shells for the 155mm howitzers sent by the U.S. — has increased from 12 to 28 months, on average.
“Orders placed today would only be delivered 2½ years later. So we need to ramp up production and invest in our production capacity,” Mr. Stoltenberg told reporters at NATO headquarters.
In red above, tells the tale of the real state of affairs on the battlefield. It is not disputed that the rate of artillery fire heavily favours the Russians by something between 8 and 10 to 1. Stoltenberg admits that even that current rate of fire is more than can be produced by the entirety of NATO. Their stockpiles are massively depleted and they cannot even keep up a rate which is 1/10th of russia's current firing rate. Western intelligence, parroted by the usual suspects on here, have been telling us for months that Russia are running out of everything from ammo to tanks to missiles.
The promised imminent Russia about to run out of stuff never happened and here we are. NATO cannot even sustain 10% of Russian ammo production and are running out of tanks, ammo, men.
Seems as if Russia's go slow grinding has some strategic value after all. It is bleeding NATO dry-a complete reversal of NATO plans. This is not surprising. Just as the "sanctions from hell" have backfired spectacularly on the sanctioners, the sanctioned(Russia) are doing just fine.
NATO planners versus Russian General Staff is like David vs ngb at chess.
-
That reminded me of Kraftwerk. Trans Siberian Express.
You mean Trans Europe Express, Roch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_85fUIRlmU&ab_channel=Kraftwerk-Topic
Full album below-
https://music.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_mkw5lnHV_WtzF65IfSBTHqHcj_bvqiBU0
-
https://twitter.com/i/status/1625585040829603841
What a clown show. Talking about the ammunition crisis faced by NATO in Ukraine. Simple version- NATO are not prepared or equipped to take on Russia and are fucked. Russia didn't fight the way NATO planned for and NATO had no plan b. 20th century war instead of 21st century war? It would be hilarious if it wasn't real.
Plan A, rather than some comprehensively gamed strategy, was something between hope and wishful thinking. You are now slowly being prepared for the inevitable(all along)defeat of NATO and its proxy.
-
https://twitter.com/i/status/1625585040829603841
What a clown show. Talking about the ammunition crisis faced by NATO in Ukraine. Simple version- NATO are not prepared or equipped to take on Russia and are fucked. Russia didn't fight the way NATO planned for and NATO had no plan b. 20th century war instead of 21st century war? It would be hilarious if it wasn't real.
Plan A, rather than some comprehensively gamed strategy, was something between hope and wishful thinking. You are now slowly being prepared for the inevitable(all along)defeat of NATO and its proxy.
You are living in a complete fantasy world.
-
EU to ban sales of toilets to Russia on war anniversary - New sanctions meant to degrade Russia's war machine include symbolic items.
https://euobserver.com/world/156725 (https://euobserver.com/world/156725)
-
You are living in a complete fantasy world.
Did you watch the 4 minute interview?
"why has this shortfall come about? Well the West hadn't anticipated that there would be a war of this scale, this duration, of this ferocity to happen in Europe anytime soon and all of the defence planning assumptions were based on much smaller conflicts- much smaller in size, scale and ferocity and therefore war stocks that should have lasted for years are only lasting weeks and in some cases days."
No plan B. Hadn't anticipated- planning assumptions. This is a retired UK Air Vice Admiral. Anyway on it goes,
"Russia's mode of operation here-it's 20th century warfare, they have years worth of artillery rounds"
Pretty pathetic stuff. An extended cry about how Russia didn't play the way we had planned-Western 21st century precision warfare blah blah. Bottom line NATO cannot sustain a war against Russia.
Russia flipped the script on NATO and dragged them into a war of attrition that has only one winner. All the crying from NATO about how Russia couldn't take this or that town, are running out of missiles, artillery, men, tanks. Russia are not trying to conquer territory. They have no need to conquer territory. Demilitarisation is working just fine, as even NATO now grudgingly admit. They are not having threatening states on their border.
The running out of everything constant idiocy from western MSM looks dumb now doesn't it? Utter projection. They are probably lying about everything else too, don't ya think? NATO/Ukraine are running out of everything and now can sustain no longer. Russia still have years worth.
NATO wanted Russia to shock and awe Ukraine, occupy it and then a NATO trained insurgency would gradually bleed Russia dry(It is the only way NATO know). Russia have learnt the lesson of occupying hostile territory and want or need no part of it. Russia has everything it needs, and more, in terms of land and resources. The oblasts will all choose their own future and side with who they wish. No NATO presence will be allowed in any of them regardless of their choice.
-
Top Russian Military Official Marina Yankina Dead After Fall From 16th Floor | Marina Yankina handled cash flows for the Western Military District.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/top-russian-military-official-marina-yankina-dead-after-fall-from-16th-floor (https://www.thedailybeast.com/top-russian-military-official-marina-yankina-dead-after-fall-from-16th-floor)
-
another anti war rally https://youtu.be/uvAGQvg1KCs
-
Did you watch the 4 minute interview?
"why has this shortfall come about? Well the West hadn't anticipated that there would be a war of this scale, this duration, of this ferocity to happen in Europe anytime soon and all of the defence planning assumptions were based on much smaller conflicts- much smaller in size, scale and ferocity and therefore war stocks that should have lasted for years are only lasting weeks and in some cases days."
No plan B. Hadn't anticipated- planning assumptions. This is a retired UK Air Vice Admiral. Anyway on it goes,
"Russia's mode of operation here-it's 20th century warfare, they have years worth of artillery rounds"
Pretty pathetic stuff. An extended cry about how Russia didn't play the way we had planned-Western 21st century precision warfare blah blah. Bottom line NATO cannot sustain a war against Russia.
Russia flipped the script on NATO and dragged them into a war of attrition that has only one winner. All the crying from NATO about how Russia couldn't take this or that town, are running out of missiles, artillery, men, tanks. Russia are not trying to conquer territory. They have no need to conquer territory. Demilitarisation is working just fine, as even NATO now grudgingly admit. They are not having threatening states on their border.
The running out of everything constant idiocy from western MSM looks dumb now doesn't it? Utter projection. They are probably lying about everything else too, don't ya think? NATO/Ukraine are running out of everything and now can sustain no longer. Russia still have years worth.
NATO wanted Russia to shock and awe Ukraine, occupy it and then a NATO trained insurgency would gradually bleed Russia dry(It is the only way NATO know). Russia have learnt the lesson of occupying hostile territory and want or need no part of it. Russia has everything it needs, and more, in terms of land and resources. The oblasts will all choose their own future and side with who they wish. No NATO presence will be allowed in any of them regardless of their choice.
Most of Ukraine's military hardware is still of Russian/Soviet origin. NATO 120×570mm tank ammunition or 5.56×45mm NATO rounds or NATO artillery is not compatible. Most of their supplies during the last 12 months are from former eastern block legacy stock mainly from Poland. So no shit their is a shortage in supplies.
Moreover NATO is not a war with Russia. If it was the USAF would destroy the Russian army in Ukraine faster than they can steal the nearest toilet.
-
Most of Ukraine's military hardware is still of Russian/Soviet origin. NATO 120×570mm tank ammunition or 5.56×45mm NATO rounds or NATO artillery is not compatible. Most of their supplies during the last 12 months are from former eastern block legacy stock mainly from Poland. So no shit their is a shortage in supplies.
Moreover NATO is not a war with Russia. If it was the USAF would destroy the Russian army in Ukraine faster than they can steal the nearest toilet.
But you've been telling us that Russia are running out of all these things for months. Haven't you figured it out yet that you are being gas-lit?
NATO is most certainly, pretty openly, at war with Russia. The notion that the USAF would even be a factor is laughable. You understand nothing. Where are their planes taking off and landing from? How are they getting there? Remembering that precision stand off weaponry means that the USAF wouldn't be able to use their, now obsolete, Aircraft carriers and all airfields would be obliterated in any openly declared war with Russia. If those problems could be overcome(they can't), the USAF would then have the problem of the multi layered Russian air defences and it's stand off capability. Beyond the gas-lighting that you are fed-NATO understand this.
It is precisely those realities that make the NATO escalations dangerous. They cannot win without going nuclear-where nobody will win. Russia cannot be beaten in a European war and the USAF has no prospect of being a factor in such a hostile airspace. It isn't Top Gun, David.
Russian air defences are recognised as the best in the world and decades ahead of US/NATO. There is zero chance of NATO tangling with Russian air defence.
-
EU bans the export of toilets to Russia - where one in five households have no indoor plumbing
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11761377/EU-bans-export-toilets-Russia-bid-punish-Putin-Ukraine-invasion.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11761377/EU-bans-export-toilets-Russia-bid-punish-Putin-Ukraine-invasion.html)
-
EU bans the export of toilets to Russia - where one in five households have no indoor plumbing
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11761377/EU-bans-export-toilets-Russia-bid-punish-Putin-Ukraine-invasion.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11761377/EU-bans-export-toilets-Russia-bid-punish-Putin-Ukraine-invasion.html)
The Russian General staff and the Kremlin surely have no answer to the strategic geniuses at the EU. Maybe the EU are just feeling out a deal for some munitions that they lack. Or maybe they are desperate, have no answers and are just flinging anything about now.
-
They really need to sort out some safety measures for their window situation :-\
https://www.aol.co.uk/news/marina-yankina-russian-defence-official-174638767.html
-
They really need to sort out some safety measures for their window situation :-\
https://www.aol.co.uk/news/marina-yankina-russian-defence-official-174638767.html
Yeah, I know Gringo has expressed his views on these type of stories but there does seem to be a few balcony / window deaths.
-
Yeah, I know Gringo has expressed his views on these type of stories but there does seem to be a few balcony / window deaths.
It's frightening really. Who would risk their life in Russia by speaking out?
-
It's frightening really. Who would risk their life in Russia by speaking out?
Who would dare to speak out in Ukraine? Every opposition party is banned, trade unions severely restricted, newspapers and broadcasters closed down, vicious reprisals against those who are perceived to be opposed to the Zelensky and his corrupt gang.
-
Who would dare to speak out in Ukraine? Every opposition party is banned, trade unions severely restricted, newspapers and broadcasters closed down, vicious reprisals against those who are perceived to be opposed to the Zelensky and his corrupt gang.
The Ukrainian people have no problems with protesting against a corrupt government. As Victor Yanukovych found out. 8)
-
The Ukrainian people have no problems with protesting against a corrupt government. As Victor Yanukovych found out. 8)
Try doing it now!
-
Try doing it now!
There wont me many people supporting me.
-
Yeah, I know Gringo has expressed his views on these type of stories but there does seem to be a few balcony / window deaths.
You, nor anybody else, have any idea or any detail behind any of these deaths. The kneejerk reaction by most to any violent death/murder in Russia is to blame Putin and his henchmen or whatever. It is an infantile view propagated by reading and listening to infantile commentary. Russians-Putin-Bad. I fail to see the point being made. There is no point made. Typical colonialist attitude without even thinking about it.
Who would dare to speak out in Ukraine? Every opposition party is banned, trade unions severely restricted, newspapers and broadcasters closed down, vicious reprisals against those who are perceived to be opposed to the Zelensky and his corrupt gang.-ngb
What ngb wrote above is more worthy of your time than repeating MSM headlines. Why are none of you commenting on the excessive number of deaths of Ukrainian politicians and the political repression in Ukraine, of which there is an abundance of evidence?
Everyone doing as their training tells them? You shouldn't out-source your own thinking, especially to the same people who are oblivious to the killing and regime changing by their own governments. Repeating the talking points of dishonest hacks is unlikely to lead anywhere, Roch.
-
Gringo you said a month ago that Zelensky's government was "about to collapse" yet nothing has changed despite the renewed Russian offensive since then.
You said the same thing about Israel two years ago. :-[
-
Gringo you said a month ago that Zelensky's government was "about to collapse" yet nothing has changed despite the renewed Russian offensive since then.
You said the same thing about Israel two years ago. :-[
You think Zelensky's government isn't about to collapse? Ukraine as a state is already failed. Israel's survival is dependent on US presence and bases in the Middle East. Those days are numbered, as are Israel's.
-
Gringo you said a month ago that Zelensky's government was "about to collapse" yet nothing has changed despite the renewed Russian offensive since then.
You said the same thing about Israel two years ago. :-[
Are you really unaware that the world is going through momentous change? You may be easily distracted from the main events unfolding around you and ignore the multiple elephants now packed into the room but events have their own momentum now.
Western hegemony/NATO/Dollar reserve status/exploitation/imperialism/EU are all in their death throes. You can hear the rattling. The world knows and is moving on.
-
Are you really unaware that the world is going through momentous change? You may be easily distracted from the main events unfolding around you and ignore the multiple elephants now packed into the room but events have their own momentum now.
Western hegemony/NATO/Dollar reserve status/exploitation/imperialism/EU are all in their death throes. You can hear the rattling. The world knows and is moving on.
I suppose that's why migrants are flocking to the West. The Chinese economy is founded on slave labour, with no independent trades unions and no democracy. Ask the people of Hong Kong. The renminbi isn't even convertible. Germany will ensure the EU survives due to historical reasons.
-
You, nor anybody else, have any idea or any detail behind any of these deaths. The kneejerk reaction by most to any violent death/murder in Russia is to blame Putin and his henchmen or whatever. It is an infantile view propagated by reading and listening to infantile commentary. Russians-Putin-Bad. I fail to see the point being made. There is no point made. Typical colonialist attitude without even thinking about it.
Who would dare to speak out in Ukraine? Every opposition party is banned, trade unions severely restricted, newspapers and broadcasters closed down, vicious reprisals against those who are perceived to be opposed to the Zelensky and his corrupt gang.-ngb
What ngb wrote above is more worthy of your time than repeating MSM headlines. Why are none of you commenting on the excessive number of deaths of Ukrainian politicians and the political repression in Ukraine, of which there is an abundance of evidence?
Everyone doing as their training tells them? You shouldn't out-source your own thinking, especially to the same people who are oblivious to the killing and regime changing by their own governments. Repeating the talking points of dishonest hacks is unlikely to lead anywhere, Roch.
That being said, I struggle to be certain that Putin's Russia itself is not capable of being a malignant and oppressive state, with nefarious aims when it suits. I do take on board some of the points you advocate and I do have a healthy distrust of a number of states, as you are aware already. But I take in to account other states that surround Russia, like Poland, Sweden, Finland. I think if Russia really were the good guys, we might see more reticence from them with regards to their aims going forward. I don't think this is good guys Vs bad guys. I think it's something more complex.
-
That being said, I struggle to be certain that Putin's Russia itself is not capable of being a malignant and oppressive state, with nefarious aims when it suits. I do take on board some of the points you advocate and I do have a healthy distrust of a number of states, as you are aware already. But I take in to account other states that surround Russia, like Poland, Sweden, Finland. I think if Russia really were the good guys, we might see more reticence from them with regards to their aims going forward. I don't think this is good guys Vs bad guys. I think it's something more complex.
The likes of NGB and Gringo along with much of the western left (Chomsky and Mélenchon ect) have never forgiven Eastern European countries like Ukraine for rejecting/overthrowing communism and seeking to join the West. To them, the entire region must be subjugated again as punishment.
-
The likes of NGB and Gringo along with much of the western left (Chomsky and Mélenchon ect) have never forgiven Eastern European countries like Ukraine for rejecting/overthrowing communism and seeking to join the West. To them, the entire region must be subjugated again as punishment.
I suppose that's why migrants are flocking to the West. The Chinese economy is founded on slave labour, with no independent trades unions and no democracy. Ask the people of Hong Kong. The renminbi isn't even convertible. Germany will ensure the EU survives due to historical reasons.
You both sound bonkers. Indoctrinated to the point of incoherence.
-
That being said, I struggle to be certain that Putin's Russia itself is not capable of being a malignant and oppressive state, with nefarious aims when it suits. I do take on board some of the points you advocate and I do have a healthy distrust of a number of states, as you are aware already. But I take in to account other states that surround Russia, like Poland, Sweden, Finland. I think if Russia really were the good guys, we might see more reticence from them with regards to their aims going forward. I don't think this is good guys Vs bad guys. I think it's something more complex.
It is a fact(easily checkable, Roch) that the populations of those countries were against NATO membership until recently. Those that actually lived and experienced the cold war. NATO expansion instead of disbandment has led to where we are now. Massively propagandised western populations are so unquestioning that they will now believe any accusation against Russia.
Western populations are being led by compromised and traitorous politicians and lied to by an equally compromised media. Why are there so many rifts within NATO itself? if it is so popular?Public opinion in many NATO countries is against membership(Turkiye, Croatia, Hungary ...). Without censorship, that number would be even greater. NATO members siding with Russia? Is there really an appetite to join NATO? or is it manufactured by compromised politicians and media? Western media are not impartial observers and reporters of events.
The equally as bad argument is always weak in my opinion, Roch. It is "half of a confession" in truth. Yes, yes ok, we have illegally invaded too many countries to count, killed uncounted millions, displaced millions more, caused untold deaths through our use of depleted uranium weapons, atrocities such as Fallujah, Mosul, Raqqa, run illegal black sites such as Guantamo Bay, torture at Abu Ghraib + others, illegally sanction(abusing reserve status) and regime changed very brutally other nations. And that is just the last 20 years.
But how do we know that Russia/China won't be as bad...? Because we have set the bar so fucking high-that's why.
There is zero evidence of Russia or China seeking expansionist or imperialist ambitions. They sanction no-one illegally. They have launched no illegal aggressive wars against defenceless states across Africa and the Middle East. The world knows and is turning away en-masse away from the warmongering imperialist west.
Neither of Russia or China have stolen the gold and foreign reserves of any number of countries. NATO's rap sheet speaks for itself. Russia's and China's actions speak for themselves. The rest of the world (Africa, Asia, South America) is who needs convincing-not indoctrinated complacent western populations. Russia and China are bringing the world with them. Rest of the world have had enough of centuries of western imperialism. The crimes are too vast to list. "Balcony deaths" in Russia don't even register anywhere else in the world and nor should they here.
-
That being said, I struggle to be certain that Putin's Russia itself is not capable of being a malignant and oppressive state, with nefarious aims when it suits. I do take on board some of the points you advocate and I do have a healthy distrust of a number of states, as you are aware already. But I take in to account other states that surround Russia, like Poland, Sweden, Finland. I think if Russia really were the good guys, we might see more reticence from them with regards to their aims going forward. I don't think this is good guys Vs bad guys. I think it's something more complex.
Depends on how you define Good guys and Bad guys, Roch. Everything is relative. By any objective measure NATO and the West are definitely the bad guys. Everybody, bar a few western populations, recognise that unarguable fact.
-
Wagner chief openly blasts Russia’s official military leadership
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwdJ1xeSRjM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwdJ1xeSRjM)
-
The likes of NGB and Gringo along with much of the western left (Chomsky and Mélenchon ect) have never forgiven Eastern European countries like Ukraine for rejecting/overthrowing communism and seeking to join the West. To them, the entire region must be subjugated again as punishment.
I hope you are joking. That is an utterly ridiculous statement, as you must realise.
-
I hope you are joking. That is an utterly ridiculous statement, as you must realise.
He isn't. Yes it is and no he doesn't. In that order, NGB
-
He isn't. Yes it is and no he doesn't. In that order, NGB
Oh dear. :o
-
I hope you are joking. That is an utterly ridiculous statement, as you must realise.
Could be tongue in cheek.
-
I hope you are joking. That is an utterly ridiculous statement, as you must realise.
Not joking. I have not seen you condemn Russia's actions over the last year at all. Gringo is a western genocide apologist who is still denying any Russian wrongdoing, accusing Ukraine of staging the massacres and mass graves of its own people, and is even denying the invasion all together. This is the person who you claim to agree with "96.5%" of the time.
That's all I have to go on. So, do correct me if you position is different.
-
Gringo is a western genocide apologist who is still denying any Russian wrongdoing, accusing Ukraine of staging the massacres and mass graves of its own people, and is even denying the invasion all together.
I will leave Gringo to respond to that, as I am sure he will very effectively.
-
Oh dear. :o
[/quote]Could be tongue in cheek.
Not joking. I have not seen you condemn Russia's actions over the last year at all. Gringo is a western genocide apologist who is still denying any Russian wrongdoing, accusing Ukraine of staging the massacres and mass graves of its own people, and is even denying the invasion all together. This is the person who you claim to agree with "96.5%" of the time.
That's all I have to go on. So, do correct me if you position is different.
He isn't. Yes it is and no he doesn't. In that order, NGB
>:( >:( >:( "Western genocide apologist"? :)) :))
-
I will leave Gringo to respond to that, as I am sure he will very effectively.
Gringo is type A.
Roch was on there somewhere but seems to have come to his senses.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fc70ktFakAE0yZP.jpg)
-
Not joking. I have not seen you condemn Russia's actions over the last year at all. Gringo is a western genocide apologist who is still denying any Russian wrongdoing, accusing Ukraine of staging the massacres and mass graves of its own people, and is even denying the invasion all together. This is the person who you claim to agree with "96.5%" of the time.
That's all I have to go on. So, do correct me if you position is different.
Gringo's a bastard grrr! and a conspiritard and a commie grrr!, Putin/Assad apologist and probably changed his dog's name to Vlad (who he walks whilst sitting in his Z emblazoned mobility scooter) >:( >:( something about toilets and Stalin >:( >:( >:(
NGB, no doubt swayed by your compelling advocacy, is probably questioning his 96.5% agreement as we type. After your brilliant argument- I am expecting a raise.
-
Moving on from David's meltdown :-[
From the always excellent Bernhard Horst at Moon of Alabama;
There is some interesting news on the casualty count in the war in Ukraine.
Ivan Katchanovski translated bits from a Russian language BBC report:
"Based on open sources, the BBC managed to establish the names of 14,709 Russian soldiers who died in the war in Ukraine. Throughout 2022, Russian sources typically reported about 250-300 dead each week. In January, these figures doubled." #Russia 1/
"But in just two weeks in February, the BBC Russian Service, together with Mediazona (recognized as a "foreign agent" in Russia) and a team of volunteers, managed to confirm the names of 1,679 dead, which is five times more than the usual weekly numbers." #Ukraine #ukrainewar 2/
The war started in eighths week of 2022. There were thus 44 weeks in the rest of the year. With 300 dead per week the number of Russians killed until the end of 2022 was 13,200. (These numbers likely included the number of Wagner mercenaries killed but probably not those of the Donbas militia.)
The BBC then counts 2,400 killed in January and 1,700 in February.
The total is thus below 20,000 the number Col. MacGregor and others have estimated for the Russian side. The BBC says it estimates that it only catches half of the dead but gives no sound reason why that would be the case.
The daily losses on the Ukrainian side are much higher. The daily clobber list of the Russian Ministry of Defense mentions about 400 Ukrainians killed every day. This is consistent with the numbers Ukraine's government mentioned last summer and fall.
Over the 358 days of the war the total sums up to about 143,000. The Russian reports do not include the number of those who got killed by the Wagner mercenaries in the Bakhmut area. That number is by likely well above 20,000.
Full piece below in link.
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2023/02/ukraine-sitrep-casualty-numbers-lack-of-tanks-something-is-up.html#more
True losses and rates of attrition in this war are becoming too large to hide. The crushing defeat of what was a NATO trained proxy plus thousands of NATO operatives now being slowly admitted.
-
Moving on from David's meltdown :-[
From the always excellent Bernhard Horst at Moon of Alabama;
There is some interesting news on the casualty count in the war in Ukraine.
Ivan Katchanovski translated bits from a Russian language BBC report:
"Based on open sources, the BBC managed to establish the names of 14,709 Russian soldiers who died in the war in Ukraine. Throughout 2022, Russian sources typically reported about 250-300 dead each week. In January, these figures doubled." #Russia 1/
"But in just two weeks in February, the BBC Russian Service, together with Mediazona (recognized as a "foreign agent" in Russia) and a team of volunteers, managed to confirm the names of 1,679 dead, which is five times more than the usual weekly numbers." #Ukraine #ukrainewar 2/
The war started in eighths week of 2022. There were thus 44 weeks in the rest of the year. With 300 dead per week the number of Russians killed until the end of 2022 was 13,200. (These numbers likely included the number of Wagner mercenaries killed but probably not those of the Donbas militia.)
The BBC then counts 2,400 killed in January and 1,700 in February.
The total is thus below 20,000 the number Col. MacGregor and others have estimated for the Russian side. The BBC says it estimates that it only catches half of the dead but gives no sound reason why that would be the case.
The daily losses on the Ukrainian side are much higher. The daily clobber list of the Russian Ministry of Defense mentions about 400 Ukrainians killed every day. This is consistent with the numbers Ukraine's government mentioned last summer and fall.
Over the 358 days of the war the total sums up to about 143,000. The Russian reports do not include the number of those who got killed by the Wagner mercenaries in the Bakhmut area. That number is by likely well above 20,000.
Full piece below in link.
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2023/02/ukraine-sitrep-casualty-numbers-lack-of-tanks-something-is-up.html#more
True losses and rates of attrition in this war are becoming too large to hide. The crushing defeat of what was a NATO trained proxy plus thousands of NATO operatives now being slowly admitted.
You have now gone from fake Mossad reports back to an obscure forum full of drunks. :))
Any intelligence updates from the creationists at the blogmire?
-
Almost a year since Lukashenko said these famous words
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/115amn9/almost_a_year_since_lukashenko_said_these_famous/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/115amn9/almost_a_year_since_lukashenko_said_these_famous/)
-
You have now gone from fake Mossad reports back to an obscure forum full of drunks. :))
Any intelligence updates from the creationists at the blogmire?
It is a BBC report that is being discussed. The numbers are from the BBC. You really are a moron aren't you? Outside of the Western reporting/propaganda bubble that you inhabit, it is well understood that the casualty figures are skewed massively in favour of Russia and that Ukraine are suffering unsustainable losses of men.
It is also well understood that there is nothing NATO/Ukraine can do to reverse this.
The collapse of NATO/Western imperialism is happening in front of you in real time and you can't see it. Blowing up pipelines, sending F22 jets to shoot down weather balloons, making up idiotic UFO stories-it's over.
Terrorism and false flag attacks is all NATO have left. They cannot defeat Russia in a European land war. And now they want to fight China. NATO are being taught the real meaning of the "International Community" to which they often refer. Turns out NATO aren't even in it.
-
he refused to lockdown making him the most democratic leader in the world and one of the greatist he refused to destroy his countrys econemy to help the rich.
-
Ukrainian IFV Letting Loose Its Autocannon on a Russian Position in the Bakhmut Area
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/116a79c/ukrainian_ifv_letting_loose_its_autocannon_on_a/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/116a79c/ukrainian_ifv_letting_loose_its_autocannon_on_a/)
-
You can smell the desperation and panic within NATO. Beyond absurd;
Hobby Club’s Missing Balloon Feared Shot Down By USAF - Aviation Week
A small, globe-trotting balloon declared “missing in action” by an Illinois-based hobbyist club on Feb. 15 has emerged as a candidate to explain one of the three mystery objects shot down by four heat-seeking missiles launched by U.S. Air Force fighters since Feb. 10.
The club—the Northern Illinois Bottlecap Balloon Brigade (NIBBB)—is not pointing fingers yet.
But the circumstantial evidence is at least intriguing. The club’s silver-coated, party-style, “pico balloon” reported its last position on Feb. 10 at 38,910 ft. off the west coast of Alaska, and a popular forecasting tool—the HYSPLIT model provided by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)—projected the cylindrically shaped object would be floating high over the central part of the Yukon Territory on Feb. 11. That is the same day a Lockheed Martin F-22 shot down an unidentified object of a similar description and altitude in the same general area.
There are suspicions among other prominent members of the small, pico-ballooning enthusiasts’ community, which combines ham radio and high-altitude ballooning into a single, relatively affordable hobby.
“I tried contacting our military and the FBI—and just got the runaround—to try to enlighten them on what a lot of these things probably are. And they’re going to look not too intelligent to be shooting them down,” says Ron Meadows, the founder of Scientific Balloon Solutions (SBS), a Silicon Valley company that makes purpose-built pico balloons for hobbyists, educators and scientists.
The descriptions of all three unidentified objects shot down Feb. 10-12 match the shapes, altitudes and payloads of the small pico balloons, which can usually be purchased for $12-180 each, depending on the type.
China's top diplomat Wang Yi on Saturday blasted the United States's reaction to what Washington has called a Chinese spy balloon as "hysterical and absurd", in uncharacteristically strong remarks against the top Western power.
Addressing a gathering of world leaders at the Munich Security Conference, Wang said US President Joe Biden's administration has a "misguided" perception of Beijing.
...
"There are many balloons from many countries in the sky. Do you want to down each and every one of them?" Wang charged.
"We urge the United States not to do such preposterous things simply to divert attention from its own domestic problems."
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2023/02/more-ballooneey-news.html#more
-
Russians launched unsuccessful offensive near Vuhledar
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/116lyqr/russians_launched_unsuccessful_offensive_near/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/116lyqr/russians_launched_unsuccessful_offensive_near/)
-
Outgunned Ukrainian pilots take the fight to Russia
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVVRV75jDj8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVVRV75jDj8)
-
Russians launched unsuccessful offensive near Vuhledar
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/116lyqr/russians_launched_unsuccessful_offensive_near/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/116lyqr/russians_launched_unsuccessful_offensive_near/)
Larry Johnson earlier;
Got to give credit where credit is due. Simplicius76 is an unidentified Substack writer who has written the best analysis I have seen of the tactical and strategic dimensions of the war in Ukraine and the upcoming Russian offensive. Russia is doing what it has done through history in the major conflicts where it prevailed — i.e., maskirovka (disguising its plans and movements). Russia is moving troops and equipment on fronts in the north, the east and the south.
They are currently attacking in several different sectors, which is forcing Ukraine to redeploy frantically troops to try to counter new threats that are springing up like raging wild fires.
Here are links to four of Simplicius76’s recent articles. Must read material if you want to understand what has happened and what is about to unfold in the coming weeks:
The analysis that Larry Johnson was referring to below;
https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/the-coming-russian-offensive-2023
https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/all-seeing-eye-can-russia-break-through
https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/the-coming-russian-offensive-part
https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/sitrep-update-218-major-war-confirmed
Russia are about to drop the hammer, David. If you bothered to read any counter views rather than seeking confirmation bias, you would understand that.
-
Gringo is type A.
Roch was on there somewhere but seems to have come to his senses.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fc70ktFakAE0yZP.jpg)
If Gringo is type A what am I? I know your chart is just US right wing "humour" but it really is rubbish. Looking at A alone, I can assure you that communists do not consider that Russia is still communist. The major opposition party within Russia is the Communist Party, and not insignificant right wing nutters like Navalny. There is no love lost between the CP and Putin. However that does not mean that communists ally themselves with NATO against Russia or have any respect towards Zelensky and his corrupt gang.
-
NGB, no doubt swayed by your compelling advocacy, is probably questioning his 96.5% agreement as we type. After your brilliant argument- I am expecting a raise.
Absolutely, I can carrying out a careful recalculation.
-
If Gringo is type A what am I? I know your chart is just US right wing "humour" but it really is rubbish. Looking at A alone, I can assure you that communists do not consider that Russia is still communist. The major opposition party within Russia is the Communist Party, and not insignificant right wing nutters like Navalny. There is no love lost between the CP and Putin. However that does not mean that communists ally themselves with NATO against Russia or have any respect towards Zelensky and his corrupt gang.
You are type C (only kidding!)
You have not shown any support or condemnation for Russia's actions. So I cannot place on you on there, you may not belong on there at all. But if I had to guess it would be B.
-
I can assure you that communists do not consider that Russia is still communist.
That may be the case of your generation. But there are commies of my generation and younger that are really stupid.
For example
(https://i.redd.it/kaw251d705v61.jpg)
(https://preview.redd.it/0ng8vjgzu6ja1.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=7c4e4c3fb4b219e41887205fbf005cbc2057477c)
-
Russia are about to drop the hammer, David. If you bothered to read any counter views rather than seeking confirmation bias, you would understand that.
Yes. The toffee hammer is about to come down!
BTW I just read some of the archived material on the moonofalabama for last January and February. They were pouring scorn on reports of a potential Russian attack on Ukraine and ridiculing US intelligence reports for suggesting such a thing. Right up till Feb 23
What a clown show.
-
You are type C (only kidding!)
You have not shown any support or condemnation for Russia's actions. So I cannot place on you on there, you may not belong on there at all. But if I had to guess it would be B.
I am certainly not B. If the categories are based on the descriptions below them I am not any of them.
-
That may be the case of your generation. But there are commies of my generation and younger that are really stupid.
For example
(https://i.redd.it/kaw251d705v61.jpg)
(https://preview.redd.it/0ng8vjgzu6ja1.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=7c4e4c3fb4b219e41887205fbf005cbc2057477c)
I agree that there are a few communists who still idolise Stalin and there are some who broadly support Russia's position on Ukraine. Most of the rest, whilst critical of Russian action in relation to Ukraine, see it in its proper context, as has been well explained by Gringo. However, no communist anywhere believes that Russia is still communist (technically it never claimed to be, but that is a separate discussion) which is the key descriptor for your category A.
-
Gringo is type A.
Roch was on there somewhere but seems to have come to his senses.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fc70ktFakAE0yZP.jpg)
I don't think Roch is on there. I think he felt that the war could have been avoided and was (not) shocked by the hypocrisy of the US/UK. He thinks Gringo is too pro Russian and you are too anti-Russian. He suspects that the US (your country) are glad Russia invaded Ukraine and will make as much capital as it can from Russia's ham fisted debacle of an invasion.
-
I don't think Roch is on there. I think he felt that the war could have been avoided and was (not) shocked by the hypocrisy of the US/UK. He thinks Gringo is too pro Russian and you are too anti-Russian. He suspects that the US (your country) are glad Russia invaded Ukraine and will make as much capital as it can from Russia's ham fisted debacle of an invasion.
Just over a month since Gringo claimed Kyiv was "about to collapse" President Biden today has made a surprise visit to Kyiv. :))
(https://cloudfront-us-east-2.images.arcpublishing.com/reuters/KJQ76GG3GRJBRDAOMS5I47FSUA.jpg)
https://news.sky.com/story/us-president-joe-biden-visits-kyiv-marking-first-ukraine-trip-since-war-began-12815623 (https://news.sky.com/story/us-president-joe-biden-visits-kyiv-marking-first-ukraine-trip-since-war-began-12815623)
-
My position is well explained and is anti imperialist. NGB clearly is a more discerning reader than others. I am no more pro-Russia than I am pro-Iran or Syria or Libya. I don't have to support Assad or Ghaddafi or Raisi to recognise that the countries that they lead or led are the victims of Western aggression.
The both sides equally as bad approach is a cop out and weak fence sitting position. There is an aggressor and there is the victim of that aggression. Making pissy excuses for aggressive imperialism by claiming that the other side is as bad is to be an apologist for that aggression with no courage behind the conviction. There is no conviction in fact. And yet NATO aggression is undeniable.
I am pro-anyone who is the victim of aggression. How their country is governed is not my business. It has no bearing on who is the aggressor. NATO are an aggressive organisation. Every single piece of available evidence tells you this.
-
Truth is not pro Russian, pro Syrian, pro Iranian-it is just truth. NATO is an aggressive and criminal organisation acting at the behest of Imperialists/Colonialists. To not recognise that truth renders anything else claimed as false.
It should be an accepted premise by anyone claiming to want an honest conversation about geopolitics that NATO are criminally aggressive. Everything leads from that. Non recognition of that premise is dishonest. Any commentary that fails to recognise that premise is worthless.
-
My position is well explained and is anti imperialist. NGB clearly is a more discerning reader than others. I am no more pro-Russia than I am pro-Iran or Syria or Libya. I don't have to support Assad or Ghaddafi or Raisi to recognise that the countries that they lead or led are the victims of Western aggression.
The both sides equally as bad approach is a cop out and weak fence sitting position. There is an aggressor and there is the victim of that aggression. Making pissy excuses for aggressive imperialism by claiming that the other side is as bad is to be an apologist for that aggression with no courage behind the conviction. There is no conviction in fact. And yet NATO aggression is undeniable.
I am pro-anyone who is the victim of aggression. How their country is governed is not my business. It has no bearing on who is the aggressor. NATO are an aggressive organisation. Every single piece of available evidence tells you this.
In terms of dead children, destroyed infrastructure etc. Russia is the aggressor in Ukraine. I may be allowed to empathise with Russia's position in geopolitics but that doesn't mean I should excuse their actions in Ukraine.
-
Gringo July 2022 - "Russia will take the entire Ukrainian coast, including Odesa"
Four month later, Russia is forced to withdraw from Kherson and still have not returned.
Gringo January 2023 - "Kiev is about to collapse!"
One month later - Kyiv is safe and stable enough for the US president to come and visit.
Gringo February 2023 - "Russia is about to drop the hammer".
Stay tuned for another episode of Gringos looney predictions.
-
In terms of dead children, destroyed infrastructure etc. Russia is the aggressor in Ukraine. I may be allowed to empathise with Russia's position in geopolitics but that doesn't mean I should excuse their actions in Ukraine.
That is a bold statement based on no evidence. Russia's legal argument has been made clear. You don't have to support that position but you need a better argument than the un-evidenced. "In terms of dead children, destroyed infrastructure etc. Russia is the aggressor in Ukraine."
Were there no "dead children" before Russian intervention? There are a remarkably low(for the size of conflict) count of dead civilians in this conflict. This according to AP, Reuters etc.? Have Russia targeted children? Have Ukraine/NATO? Do NATO target civilians? Who destroyed which infrastructure? Did Russia blow up Nord-Stream(an act of terrorism against Russia and Germany, Netherlands, France who all had stakes in NS? You are guilty of looking at very one sided reportage and see only Russian "crimes". The crimes of the Ukrainian/NATO side are state sponsored and supported. The attempts to destabilise Russia using Ukraine as a proxy are already an act of war, as are the economic blockades(illegal sanctions). Russia, in the opinion of myself and most of the world outside of the censored, brainwashed, propagandised NATO states and vassals, was justified to act to prevent Ukraine/NATO aggression and preparations to invade and subjugate the civilian population.
The legal justification offered by Russia is the Responsibility to Protect(R2P) using Article 51 of the UN charter. The same legal argument put forth by NATO to justify their aggression in Serbia/Kosovo.
Which of Russia/NATO, Roch, being as objective as you can be, do you think has the more "convincing case"?
Is it Russia who helped draft agreements, took those agreements to the UNSC, made sure independent observers recorded all violations of both sides, constantly pushed for the implementation of those agreements over 8 years, saw those agreements ignored and admitted by NATO/Ukraine, saw that the shelling and troop build up had increased in preparation for more aggression(all recorded independently by OSCE -so non arguable). After the independently recorded massive increase in aggression -then and only then, Russia invoked Art 51 and R2P.
Or do NATO have a more compelling case for invoking R2P Art. 51 in Serbia? Let us dis-passionately look at the evidence to support NATO's humanitarian Art 51 R2P intervention.
There were reports in media, since proven to be, at best, a mis-representation.
So NATO went to the UNSC and...only joking-of course they didn't attempt to settle things diplomatically or get agreements to the UNSC. NATO unilaterally decided to intervene using Art. 51 R2P as their justification based on press reports.
Russia's foreign interventions since becoming the RF in 1991 speak for themselves. They are, at least, arguably justified and some(such as Syria) not even arguable and entirely legal and justified by any measure. NATO's interventions likewise, speak for themselves. It is difficult to justify any of them. The amount of death, destruction and displacement caused by NATO has no comparison. The crimes committed by NATO are many magnitudes greater than any combination of other countries. Anyone in NATO-land pointing at the "crimes" of other countries has most of the world shaking their heads in dis-belief at the entitled lack of self awareness. It would be akin to Ian Huntley calling for the death sentence for shoplifters and expecting to be taken seriously.
-
Gringo July 2022 - "Russia will take the entire Ukrainian coast, including Odesa"
Four month later, Russia is forced to withdraw from Kherson and still have not returned.
Gringo January 2023 - "Kiev is about to collapse!"
One month later - Kyiv is safe and stable enough for the US president to come and visit.
Gringo February 2023 - "Russia is about to drop the hammer".
Stay tuned for another episode of Gringos looney predictions.
All of those things will happen. I don't get your point. Ukraine will not be left with Odessa when this ends. The Kiev government is certain to collapse. Russia are about to drop the hammer. The 300,000 (+80,000 volunteers) reservists called up months back are building up everywhere across the lines, Putin giving speech tomorrow followed immediately by an extraordinary session of the Duma. This tells that something big is about to be announced that needs ratifying.
It is the one year anniversary of the last time this happened. 21/02/22. And you know what happened next. 21/02/23 -what comes next? Those troops, planes, tanks, artillery are building up ready to drop the hammer.
-
In terms of dead children, destroyed infrastructure etc. Russia is the aggressor in Ukraine. I may be allowed to empathise with Russia's position in geopolitics but that doesn't mean I should excuse their actions in Ukraine.
This is going on now and has been since 2014(about the same time span as Ukraine) and is not some historic crime;
The UN has estimated that the war in Yemen had killed 377,000 people by the end of 2021, through direct and indirect causes. Over 150,000 of these deaths were the direct result of the armed conflict, while far more have died due to hunger and disease as a result of the humanitarian crisis caused by the war. Nearly 15,000 civilians have been killed by direct military action, most of them in air strikes by the Saudi-led Coalition.
Air raids have frequently targeted civilian gatherings such as weddings and busy market places where there was no military target nearby, often with extremely deadly consequences. Many of these air raids appear to be clear violations of International Humanitarian Law.
Despite UK government claims that it provides training to the Coalition to avoid civilian casualties, there is no sign that this has reduced the deadly toll of the air raids. UK-manufactured weapons have been tied to individual attacks violating International Humanitarian Law.
There are somewhere between 8,000 and 9,000 civilian deaths in Ukraine. Most of them victims of Ukraine targeting, as it happens.
There are 377,000 deaths from war and the humanitarian crisis caused by the deliberate targeting of civilian infrastructure in Yemen. The UK government are co-conspirators in this ongoing brutal imperialist crime. You should be more concerned with what your government is doing-not concerning yourself with what our government is claiming someone else is doing.
What reporting have you heard on Yemen? It isn't less important just because our media don't talk about it. Shouldn't we all be more concerned with UK crimes/atrocities?
In Ukraine also the UK along with the US is committing crimes. What are they even doing there? What is UK/NATO justification for involvement now in Yemen, Syria, Somalia, Ukraine, interfering in Chinese affairs(Taiwan)? How is Russian intervention in Ukraine comparable to ongoing UK aggression/criminality?
They are not as bad as each other.
https://caat.org.uk/homepage/stop-arming-saudi-arabia/the-war-on-yemens-civilians/
-
Talking of Communism Neil. I am playing a new game that's been released today. Its based in an alternate 1955 Communist utopia with lots of robots!
(https://gamesiga.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/AtomicHeart_XboxWire_Location_Screenshot_06-87b2f2d3ff666174f0be-1024x576.webp)
(https://cdn.focus-home.com/fhi-fastforward-admin/custom/atomic-heart/panel-1.jpg)
(https://assets2.rockpapershotgun.com/atomic-heart_kyaWaFM.jpg/BROK/thumbnail/1200x600/atomic-heart_kyaWaFM.jpg)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_Heart_(video_game) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_Heart_(video_game))
-
This is going on now and has been since 2014(about the same time span as Ukraine) and is not some historic crime;
The UN has estimated that the war in Yemen had killed 377,000 people by the end of 2021, through direct and indirect causes. Over 150,000 of these deaths were the direct result of the armed conflict, while far more have died due to hunger and disease as a result of the humanitarian crisis caused by the war. Nearly 15,000 civilians have been killed by direct military action, most of them in air strikes by the Saudi-led Coalition.
Air raids have frequently targeted civilian gatherings such as weddings and busy market places where there was no military target nearby, often with extremely deadly consequences. Many of these air raids appear to be clear violations of International Humanitarian Law.
Despite UK government claims that it provides training to the Coalition to avoid civilian casualties, there is no sign that this has reduced the deadly toll of the air raids. UK-manufactured weapons have been tied to individual attacks violating International Humanitarian Law.
There are somewhere between 8,000 and 9,000 civilian deaths in Ukraine. Most of them victims of Ukraine targeting, as it happens.
There are 377,000 deaths from war and the humanitarian crisis caused by the deliberate targeting of civilian infrastructure in Yemen. The UK government are co-conspirators in this ongoing brutal imperialist crime. You should be more concerned with what your government is doing-not concerning yourself with what our government is claiming someone else is doing.
What reporting have you heard on Yemen? It isn't less important just because our media don't talk about it. Shouldn't we all be more concerned with UK crimes/atrocities?
In Ukraine also the UK along with the US is committing crimes. What are they even doing there? What is UK/NATO justification for involvement now in Yemen, Syria, Somalia, Ukraine, interfering in Chinese affairs(Taiwan)? How is Russian intervention in Ukraine comparable to ongoing UK aggression/criminality?
They are not as bad as each other.
https://caat.org.uk/homepage/stop-arming-saudi-arabia/the-war-on-yemens-civilians/
I am no fan of our foreign policy and arms sales etc. It is a disgrace what has happened in the countries you refer to. It's a disgrace that it isn't headline news over here.
I am very sceptical that Ukrainian forces are responsible for devastating whole built up areas in Ukraine that are populated by Ukrainians loyal to Ukraine etc. It's possible they have had some input in this.
I just don't see Russia in exactly the same favourable light as you do. There's an old saying: two wrongs don't make a right.
-
I am no fan of our foreign policy and arms sales etc. It is a disgrace what has happened in the countries you refer to. It's a disgrace that it isn't headline news over here.
I am very sceptical that Ukrainian forces are responsible for devastating whole built up areas in Ukraine that are populated by Ukrainians loyal to Ukraine etc. It's possible they have had some input in this.
I just don't see Russia in exactly the same favourable light as you do. There's an old saying: two wrongs don't make a right.
There aren't two wrongs. One is a reaction to the other. Is Russia's use of Art. 51 justified? You haven't answered the crucial point and that is the crux of it. If it isn't legal and justified, then point out how?
Both NATO and Russia have used the R2P doctrine under Article 51 of UN Charter. Were either legal and justified? If so-why? If not- why?
At least make your position clear if you are going to criticise my position. You are just basically saying, "Russia bad", Roch. Why, how? Spell out the flaws in their legal justification. If you can't then you need to check your too "pro-NATO position. Simply admitting that our foreign policy should be criticised more is weak.
Two wrongs is a joke coming from anyone in Natostan. Too many wrongs to count. The lack of self awareness behind a statement such as that is staggering. NATO crimes are without comparison. How do you, with a straight face, compare Russian actions unfavourably against NATO? It is delusional.
-
There aren't two wrongs. One is a reaction to the other. Is Russia's use of Art. 51 justified? You haven't answered the crucial point and that is the crux of it. If it isn't legal and justified, then point out how?
Both NATO and Russia have used the R2P doctrine under Article 51 of UN Charter. Were either legal and justified? If so-why? If not- why?
At least make your position clear if you are going to criticise my position. You are just basically saying, "Russia bad", Roch. Why, how? Spell out the flaws in their legal justification. If you can't then you need to check your too "pro-NATO position. Simply admitting that our foreign policy should be criticised more is weak.
Two wrongs is a joke coming from anyone in Natostan. Too many wrongs to count. The lack of self awareness behind a statement such as that is staggering. NATO crimes are without comparison. How do you, with a straight face, compare Russian actions unfavourably against NATO? It is delusional.
That's all very technical and I have no doubt you know what you're talking about. However, I simply don't believe that Russia should have invaded Ukraine. It has been a catastrophic decision. I expect that if we wound back the clock to over a year ago, and Russia was in possession of hindsight, all of the Russian forces would have been stood down. The invasion would never had went ahead.
-
How should we compare the crimes of Russia and NATO? What metric should we use? Just to make sure that they "are as bad as each other" and that NATO v Russia is a case of "two wrongs"- We need to have some objective way of measuring those wrongs.
Should we use death count from military interventions/invasions/bombings?
How about the amount of countries invaded/interfered in?
Maybe the number of countries that are illegally occupied by foreign troops?
The amount of ordnance and missiles is perhaps a reasonable metric?
Number of Presidents of sovereign states overthrown and/or murdered?
What about the amount of illegal (under UN Charter) sanctions imposed on countries amounting to economic blockades depriving children of food and medicine? Are there any interviews with Russian officials admitting to 500,000 deaths of Iraqi or any children because of their sanctions and saying that it was worth it?
By any metric, NATO crimes are without comparison. NATO need to be brought down for the sake of the world. Whilst Ukraine is ongoing NATO are at war all over the world still.
If you believe that Russia, China, Iran or anyone "are as bad" as NATO, then choose your metric.
-
How should we compare the crimes of Russia and NATO? What metric should we use? Just to make sure that they "are as bad as each other" and that NATO v Russia is a case of "two wrongs"- We need to have some objective way of measuring those wrongs.
Should we use death count from military interventions/invasions/bombings?
How about the amount of countries invaded/interfered in?
Maybe the number of countries that are illegally occupied by foreign troops?
The amount of ordnance and missiles is perhaps a reasonable metric?
Number of Presidents of sovereign states overthrown and/or murdered?
What about the amount of illegal (under UN Charter) sanctions imposed on countries amounting to economic blockades depriving children of food and medicine? Are there any interviews with Russian officials admitting to 500,000 deaths of Iraqi or any children because of their sanctions and saying that it was worth it?
By any metric, NATO crimes are without comparison. NATO need to be brought down for the sake of the world. Whilst Ukraine is ongoing NATO are at war all over the world still.
If you believe that Russia, China, Iran or anyone "are as bad" as NATO, then choose your metric.
Whataboutism. One of the oldest tricks in the Tankie book
(https://preview.redd.it/atw40by4bln61.jpg?auto=webp&s=4ada634bfa7b707e5137c278f9c87eef31c78029)
-
Whataboutism. One of the oldest tricks in the Tankie book
(https://preview.redd.it/atw40by4bln61.jpg?auto=webp&s=4ada634bfa7b707e5137c278f9c87eef31c78029)
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Whataboutism (https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Whataboutism)
-
That's all very technical and I have no doubt you know what you're talking about. However, I simply don't believe that Russia should have invaded Ukraine. It has been a catastrophic decision. I expect that if we wound back the clock to over a year ago, and Russia was in possession of hindsight, all of the Russian forces would have been stood down. The invasion would never had went ahead.
It isn't that technical, Roch. It isn't a difficult concept to understand. Simply "not believing" without knowing how or why, is no kind of position.
Art. 51 of the UN Charter is the right to self defence and collective self defence if attacked(in a nutshell)
R2P (Responsibility to Protect) is a doctrine which justifies intervention by other states to prevent crimes against humanity, genocide, ethnic cleansing and war crimes. Whilst a UN endorsed principle-it has no specific legal framework
R2P is controversial and undoubtedly has been abused as a principle in the past(but that is a different discussion). The breaching of the sovereignty of any nation, which R2P by definition must do, is what makes the invocation of R2P fraught with legal and ethical challenges under International Law. What are the limits of R2P? Again though, that is a different discussion.
The first time that Responsibility to protect doctrine was used to bomb and invade a country was in 1999 in Serbia. Although that is not quite true? NATO justified their bombing under that pretext. R2P was discussed at the UN, years after this in response. As I said, however there is no legal framework around the generally agreed principles of when R2P is justified(crimes against humanity, genocide, ethnic cleansing and war crimes).
NATO, to justify their use of a concept that they just produced from thin air, relied entirely on intelligence reports and stories in their own controlled press. This isn't my opinion. It is what happened. There were no attempts at diplomacy, independent observers being appointed by the UN-nothing. NATO decided without any UN authority or consultation, without even bothering to take it to the UN, that NATO had the authority and legal justification to "prevent genocide" based on media reports.
It is indefensible.
Russia did attempt diplomacy and agreements to solve issues first. Took it to the UN. Had the OSCE appointed to independently report and verify each sides efforts towards the agreements and breaches of those agreements. Look up the OSCE reports where you will be able to see which side was the aggressor and shelling civilians. It is independently recorded. Russia, at least, made sure that events of the last eight years are a matter of record.
All that I have stated above should be discussed in the media. In years past it would have been. At least it would then be an honest discussion. It could be argued that the whole R2P doctrine is flawed. I would agree. It interferes in a nations sovereignty arbitrarily. R2P has clearly been abused in the past by powerful countries/alliances to further their own interests whilst hiding behind humanitarianism.
All being said, Ukraine's crimes against their own citizens are undeniable and a matter of record(even though not discussed in censored Natostan).
Those are the differences between NATO and Russia invoking of R2P, Roch.
Should Russia have done nothing and allowed the crimes against humanity being committed by the Ukraine Armed Forces to continue and accelerate as they were undoubtedly about to do? OSCE reports make this clear. OSCE are not Russian mis-information.
Everyone knows now that the "Russian invasion" was most certainly not, "unprovoked".
Far from being a catastrophic decision for Russia-it has been a disaster for NATO. Russia would do some things differently, but they would have acted even with the benefit of hindsight. This moment has been building for years and is about much more than Ukraine. It is barely about Ukraine at all. It just happens to be the square on the board chosen to start hostilities. The real war-to end Western financial hegemony is going disastrously for NATO's puppet masters. Long in the planning by China, Russia and the burgeoning trading and economic blocs that they are the vanguard of. Preparations have been long in the making and it is pretty clear that Empire has been out manoeuvred.
Russia cannot have nuclear missiles aimed at them on their border, just like US wouldn't allow them on their border. Their status as the two nuclear superpowers dictates that this is the Real-Politik of the situation. It is criminally insane for NATO governments to act this aggressively towards Russia.
-
It could be argued that a UNSC resolution should be required to receive legal cover to act using R2P. Under some circumstances that would be a reasonable argument. The problem in this approach however is the veto wielding power held by the Permanent 5(P5) in the UN Security Council. This veto power would allow the P5 and allies to act with impunity, safe in the knowledge that they can veto any resolution put forward.
The argument used by NATO in not seeking Security Council prior to bombing Serbia(including the deliberate targeting of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade-killing 3 journalists) was that any resolution would be vetoed by China and Russia. China/Russia would have vetoed it but this was because NATO had no casus belli or justification.
Russia would also have been vetoed by UK/US and France(the other P5 members) if they had put forward a resolution to legally allow military intervention to prevent aggression from Ukraine.
It is a thorny problem. When is intervention justified? Who is the arbiter of what constitutes crimes against humanity and when military intervention is allowed? The Security Council is the obvious answer but comes up against the problem above. If one of the P5 has a "dog in the fight" then they will act out of self interest and can stop any action with their veto power.
Taking away veto power would seem the solution but is not the panacea it seems. Whilst often abused, veto power has also been used wisely to prevent conflicts on occasions. It has also traditionally acted as a restraint on competing power blocs-both with the ability to veto each other.
In the 2,000's a number of R2P resolutions were passed in the Security Council. This is largely what led to sanctions on governments, particularly in Africa. Used by NATO to abuse the no fly zone in Libya in 2011. China and Russia felt betrayed by this action and learnt their lesson. Since then NATO abuse Int'l law flagrantly and speak instead of the "International Rules Based Order"-a meaningless concept which they hide behind to justify their crimes to their own easily led citizenry.
Without trying to at least having a passing acquaintance with the issues at hand, it isn't possible to have a meaningful opinion. That is why I always ask, always forlornly, for posters to articulate their own response when claiming to debate. If a poster genuinely "believes" their position and claim that is what they personally "think"- then it should be simple to articulate that view. If they can't advocate their "own" argument then it is reasonable for me to assume that they are simply telling me what someone else told them, without knowing the details. "Thought" requires more effort.
Meaningful debate involves more than saying someone is wrong or misinformed. If you can't articulate how or why, then that should act as a stimulus to digging deeper yourself. If you don't have the answers then maybe you should be checking yourself.
-
David, you act and post like a child with ADHD.
-
David, you act and post like a child with ADHD.
You act and post like a Ghanaian employee in a Russian troll factory.
-
Talking of Communism Neil. I am playing a new game that's been released today. Its based in an alternate 1955 Communist utopia with lots of robots!
(https://gamesiga.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/AtomicHeart_XboxWire_Location_Screenshot_06-87b2f2d3ff666174f0be-1024x576.webp)
(https://cdn.focus-home.com/fhi-fastforward-admin/custom/atomic-heart/panel-1.jpg)
(https://assets2.rockpapershotgun.com/atomic-heart_kyaWaFM.jpg/BROK/thumbnail/1200x600/atomic-heart_kyaWaFM.jpg)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_Heart_(video_game) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_Heart_(video_game))
Ukraine are already calling for this game to banned.
https://thegamespoof.com/gaming-news/ukraine-calls-to-ban-the-sale-of-atomic-heart/ (https://thegamespoof.com/gaming-news/ukraine-calls-to-ban-the-sale-of-atomic-heart/)
Wont stop me playing it. Its really good.
-
Ukraine are already calling for this game to banned.
https://thegamespoof.com/gaming-news/ukraine-calls-to-ban-the-sale-of-atomic-heart/ (https://thegamespoof.com/gaming-news/ukraine-calls-to-ban-the-sale-of-atomic-heart/)
Wont stop me playing it. Its really good.
This is certainly Russian propaganda to an extent.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXSi4EcxnuY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXSi4EcxnuY)
-
I am no fan of our foreign policy and arms sales etc. It is a disgrace what has happened in the countries you refer to. It's a disgrace that it isn't headline news over here.
I am very sceptical that Ukrainian forces are responsible for devastating whole built up areas in Ukraine that are populated by Ukrainians loyal to Ukraine etc. It's possible they have had some input in this.
I just don't see Russia in exactly the same favourable light as you do. There's an old saying: two wrongs don't make a right.
Not being a fan of our foreign policy but then seamlessly segueing into criticism of other countries overlooks the inevitable premise that results from the "foreign policy" that you are no fan of, Roch. The Nuremberg Trials, although massively flawed, nonetheless established principles and precedents that are difficult to disagree with. Below, the reasoning that establishes aggression as the "supreme international crime".
Aggression is one of the core crimes in international criminal law, alongside genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. In 1946, the International Military Tribunal ruled that aggression was "the supreme international crime" because "it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole".
Many would, and do, argue that what we call, "foreign policy" is in fact the "supreme international crime" of aggression. I would certainly agree with this. We have committed countless crimes of aggression, especially since the break up of USSR, and any response to those crimes is "contained within itself the accumulated evil of the whole".
We have been committing the crime of aggression against Russia for decades. There is no need for Russia to be aggressive towards the West. Russia has all they need. Unfortunately the West sees this as "Russia has all the West needs". Hence the constant provocations.
It is, in my view, too short sighted to dismiss UK/NATO "foreign policy" with a sort of hand wave and then immediately discuss the so called "crimes" of others. Our "foreign policy" by any reasonable interrogation is the "supreme international crime" and has been for a long time.
-
https://twitter.com/i/status/1621516327528833025
The short video in the link gives quite a bit of detail in just over 2 mins about NATO invoking R2P under Art. 51. The press reports all fake. The photos staged. We don't have a foreign policy-it is an ongoing "supreme international crime" scene.
-
https://twitter.com/i/status/1621516327528833025
The short video in the link gives quite a bit of detail in just over 2 mins about NATO invoking R2P under Art. 51. The press reports all fake. The photos staged. We don't have a foreign policy-it is an ongoing "supreme international crime" scene.
Not only is Gringo a Russian imperialist he is also a genocide denier. Charming.
I know a Bosnian who fled to Sweden in the 1990s. I used to see him on a yearly basis from 2000 till 2005 whenever I visited family in Sweden. He flat out refused to talk about his experiences of the war. At the time I was too young to grasp the state of affairs. But makes sense in retrospect.
-
Not only is Gringo a Russian imperialist he is also a genocide denier. Charming.
I know a Bosnian who fled to Sweden in the 1990s. I used to see him on a yearly basis from 2000 till 2005 whenever I visited family in Sweden. He flat out refused to talk about his experiences of the war. At the time I was too young to grasp the state of affairs. But makes sense in retrospect.
This is an example of how debased and infantilised, debate has become in the UK and wider west.
Aside from posting various weak and childish insults about me-almost every post-Tankie, conspiritard, genocide denier, commie, something about Stalin, Nazi etc-various idiotic gifs-links to war porn-waving your dumb flag as if you are supporting a football team rather than commenting on the most serious geopolitical crisis in our lifetimes-you have contributed nothing of any note to this thread.
On the other hand, I have always been able to support and articulate my views and answer all serious questions(as well as many idiotic ones) fully and coherently when asked. My questions, though, are met with the above kind of nonsense.
You should spend more time informing yourself by reading opinions that challenge your world view and less time playing infantile war games before offering your "thoughts". You may have something to say then and you wouldn't need to fill your posts with Gifs, insults and cartoons. You need to realise that some things are too complicated to be understood in the two minute attention span that too many in the West now appear to have. World affairs are too complex to form a view on based on soundbites and two minute Good-guy/Bad-guy reporting. You, David, are nowhere near forming a coherent understanding of the world.
-
This is an example of how debased and infantilised, debate has become in the UK and wider west.
Aside from posting various weak and childish insults about me-almost every post-Tankie, conspiritard, genocide denier, commie
No, I am merely describing you, based on your own admissions. For example -
Genocide denier - You just made a post denying the Bosnian genocide and a few weeks ago you described notorious Holocaust denier David Irving as a "brilliant historian".
Tankie/Commie - By your own admission you described yourself as a "Marijuana Marxist" and "Cannabis Communist" and post quotes by Vladmir Lenin.
Conspiratard - You have entertained a wide range of ludicrous conspiracy theories from Skripal to the 9/11 attacks to name a few.
On the other hand, I have always been able to support and articulate my views and answer all serious questions(as well as many idiotic ones) fully and coherently when asked.
No, you do not. You either cite Russian propaganda or make things up on the spot. You claimed there was CCTV footage coverage of Skripals front door when there wasn't. You claimed there was "zero mentions" of Novichok in the OPCW reports. I looked, lo and behold it was there. You then started claiming the OPCW was corrupt. You then baselessly claimed the Western intelligence invented Novichok, I cited quotes from the Russian chemist who was involved in its production.
You rant about the treatment of Julian Assange yet turn a blind eye to or deny the fact that 82 journalists have been murdered in Russia since 1992.
You rant about the USA using dubious and fabricated claims about WMDs to invade Iraq (a valid point). Yet you support a Russian invasion using the same playbook. You rant about America going to war in Iraq while not having explicit authorization by the UN, yet here you are supporting a country that has done the exact same thing. You even rant about the US liberating Kuwait despite having explicit authorization by the UN (a resolution that Russia supported also).
You rant about how badly the Israelis treat their Muslim population (which is a valid point) yet you talk favourably about China, a country that has placed a million or so of its Muslim population in Xinjiang internment camps against their will. Then you deny the ethnic cleansing of Muslims in former Yugoslavia.
You are a walking talking hypocritical contraction, who's arguments are untenable in context as a whole. It makes no sense to debate with such a person. Hence you receive mocking gifs and memes that your comments aptly deserve in response.
-
trump admits it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3UT8RRI3i8
-
trump admits it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3UT8RRI3i8
It's fake news. https://voxukraine.org/en/the-maidan-in-2014-is-a-coup-d-etat-a-review-of-italian-and-german-pro-russian-media/
-
History repeating itself.
https://twitter.com/georgian_legion/status/1628891508488261632 (https://twitter.com/georgian_legion/status/1628891508488261632)
-
History repeating itself.
https://twitter.com/georgian_legion/status/1628891508488261632 (https://twitter.com/georgian_legion/status/1628891508488261632)
Yes we're heading into another world conflict, because the West likes to meddle and interfere with the geopolitics of other nations, that it should just stay out of.
But at least you're listening to Putin's speeches.
-
Yes we're heading into another world conflict, because the West likes to meddle and interfere with the geopolitics of other nations, that it should just stay out of.
But at least you're listening to Putin's speeches.
I listened to Putlers "three day special military operation" speech on the day of the invasion.
-
I listened to Putlers "three day special military operation" speech on the day of the invasion.
And what is it that he's said, that makes you think people like you & me in the West need to get involved with the Geopolitics of an area, we know nothing about or have experienced.?
-
And what is it that he's said, that makes you think people like you & me in the West need to get involved with the Geopolitics of an area, we know nothing about or have experienced.?
The majority of Ukraine wants to westernize and are calling for our help. Hence we are giving it to them.
-
The majority of Ukraine wants to westernize and are calling for our help. Hence we are giving it to them.
'What do you mean by Westernize' ? And is that a majority of 50%+1?
-
Putin admits to military "losses" as fighting rages in Ukraine
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUDfJ-vGEtM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUDfJ-vGEtM)
-
Crowd erupts in laughter at Russia's top diplomat after he claimed the Ukraine war 'was launched against us'
https://www.businessinsider.com/russia-diplomat-said-ukraine-war-launched-against-us-crowd-laughs-2023-3 (https://www.businessinsider.com/russia-diplomat-said-ukraine-war-launched-against-us-crowd-laughs-2023-3)
-
Exposing the real number of Russians killed in the war
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HMsXgdcYUA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HMsXgdcYUA)
-
Why Russia is Giving its Soldiers FAKE Gear
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8TWsl0bwok (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8TWsl0bwok)
-
Desperate Russian Forces Are Sticking 80-Year-Old Naval Guns On 70-Year-Old Armored Tractors
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2023/03/04/desperate-russian-forces-are-adding-80-year-old-naval-guns-to-70-year-old-armored-tractors/ (https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2023/03/04/desperate-russian-forces-are-adding-80-year-old-naval-guns-to-70-year-old-armored-tractors/)
-
Patriotic Alternative: Putin’s Fascist Sympathisers
https://hopenothate.org.uk/2022/03/25/patriotic-alternative-putins-fascist-sympathisers/ (https://hopenothate.org.uk/2022/03/25/patriotic-alternative-putins-fascist-sympathisers/)
-
In her line of work, my partner has had contact with a russian male employed as a support worker over here. He was a teacher in Russia but left to avoid the draft. He reckons that much of the news about the war over here is propaganda. He claims that Ukraine have used chemical weapons in the conflict but it's not being reported over here.
-
In her line of work, my partner has had contact with a russian male employed as a support worker over here. He was a teacher in Russia but left to avoid the draft. He reckons that much of the news about the war over here is propaganda. He claims that Ukraine have used chemical weapons in the conflict but it's not being reported over here.
Western media is pretty self evidently at this point co-opted and part of the security state. The treatment of Julian Assange, the final nail in the coffin of even a semblance of a free press in the UK/US West in general. The chemical weapon use by Ukrainians is posted by themselves-videos showing fridges full of chemical weapons in containers designed to be delivered by small drones as well as the drones used. Videos of their deployment. Western media ignores it. Everyone should ignore Western media.
-
Ukraine the head of the snake, as Black Rock the robber barrons
gear up for pecuniary gain.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1633556906995503105
-
(https://i.redd.it/x1ub09j88kma1.jpg)
-
OK so Stalin was a bad bugger & Hitler wasn't any better. So why not just leave them to fight each other instead of being allied to Russia?
-
OK so Stalin was a bad bugger & Hitler wasn't any better. So why not just leave them to fight each other instead of being allied to Russia?
Haven't you heard of Operation Sealion and the Blitz?
-
LONDON — Britain’s Ministry of Defence must rapidly grow local industrial capacity in order speed rebuilding weapon stockpiles, the parliamentary Defence Committee says in a report to be published Mar 7.
The committee said at the current rate of progress it will take 10 years to replace weapon stocks gifted to Ukraine and rebuild British weapon numbers to an acceptable level.
Defense industrial capacity in Britain has atrophied over the decades since the end of the Cold War and the British, along with their NATO allies, have been caught out ...
The report itself pointed up the growing problem. “It is clear that the U.K. and its NATO allies have allowed ammunition stockpiles to dwindle to dangerously low levels,” said the lawmakers. “It is clear that the manner in which Western governments procure armaments is not fit for purpose.”
Russia running out of missiles, ammo, tanks...
Russia weak militarily, old useless weapons...
Russia corrupt...weak economically, GDP smaller than...
NATO can easily defeat Russia, better weapons...
30 countries, outspend Russia by magnitudes in "defence" spending...
The entirety of NATO and their proxy(Ukraine) are running out of ammo, can't produce quickly enough to keep up with Russia, and this despite the combined budget of 30 NATO countries which is magnitudes higher than the "weak militarily, economically corrupt" Russia, and yet...
How corrupt must the arms industry be in NATO countries? A combined defence budget of $1.2 Trillion. 20 times larger than the Russian defence spending. Russia have already been using around 8 times more artillery than the Ukrainians. Human losses, despite western media lies to the contrary, have a similar rate of attrition. And now, NATO are running out of ammo! All of this against, what we are informed is, a militarily weak and financially corrupt Russia.
-
Haven't you heard of Operation Sealion and the Blitz?
Yeah my parents in London lived through the blitz. And I have a brief understanding of operation sealion. Just can't get my head around why Hitler didn't use the Luftwaffe to finish off the British Troops at Dunkirk.
Also with Germany invading Poland from the west & Russia invading from the East, I thought maybe you're better off out of it, and just let them get on with it.
-
New York Times today(archived link-no paywall) https://archive.ph/kPnrE
It is getting desperate for Empire(excerpt from article below;
So desperate is Ukraine for ammunition, it is firing considerably fewer artillery shells than it otherwise would, its defense minister says.
But it is still going through shells faster than the West can produce or supply them, and making more shells is expensive. If arms manufacturers are to increase production and build new factories, they want large orders with guaranteed money — and those factories can take two to three years or more to come online.
Arguing that their efforts to hold back current Russian attacks in the Donbas are being hampered by lack of ammunition, Ukraine’s defense minister, Oleksii Reznikov, told EU counterparts in a recent letter obtained by The Financial Times that, at a minimum, Kyiv needed 250,000 artillery shells a month. He also said that his forces were firing only about 120,000 a month, a fifth of the rounds they would ordinarily use.
But a senior European official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the topic, said that the 12 companies in 10 EU countries that make such artillery shells can currently produce only 650,000 a year — and that includes other types of ammunition that are in short supply, including 120-millimeter rounds needed for German Leopard 2 tanks and 105-millimeter rounds needed for the older Leopard 1 tanks.
The United States, too, does not make many 155-millimeter shells and is trying to increase its own production. It is ramping up from about 14,400 rounds a month to 20,000 a month this spring, with plans to be making 90,000 rounds a month by 2025.
Do the maths-all that remains is signing the surrender terms.
-
Yeah my parents in London lived through the blitz. And I have a brief understanding of operation sealion. Just can't get my head around why Hitler didn't use the Luftwaffe to finish off the British Troops at Dunkirk.
Also with Germany invading Poland from the west & Russia invading from the East, I thought maybe you're better off out of it, and just let them get on with it.
I think we probably did hope for some accommodation with Nazi Germany in the very early days. But after the so-called phoney war ended with the invasion of the Low Countries and France it became clear Britain was in it for the long haul. The Dunkirk incident was probably a gesture made by Hitler, who was all too focused on his invasion of the Soviet Union the following year.
-
Yeah my parents in London lived through the blitz. And I have a brief understanding of operation sealion. Just can't get my head around why Hitler didn't use the Luftwaffe to finish off the British Troops at Dunkirk.
Also with Germany invading Poland from the west & Russia invading from the East, I thought maybe you're better off out of it, and just let them get on with it.
My mother, now 94, was evacuated from Hull along with all children during WW2. The house that she was evacuated from was bombed and the house near York, where she was evacuated to, was also bombed. Perhaps the entirety of WW2 was Hitler after my mam. She is surely one of very few people to have had two homes bombed.
Hull also had it's own blitz and per capita was the most bombed city of the UK. It was also subject to a "D" notice, in that it was only ever referred to as a north eastern city or some such. The docks in Hull were vital in the UK war effort and any naming of Hull being bombed regularly was seen as damaging to the war effort. Many bombing raids heading back after bombing Liverpool or elsewhere would drop their remaining bombs on hull on the way back.
-
Haven't you heard of Operation Sealion and the Blitz?
Do you think that the crimes of Churchill are comparable to your favourite bogeymen Stalin and Hitler?
-
I think we probably did hope for some accommodation with Nazi Germany in the very early days. But after the so-called phoney war ended with the invasion of the Low Countries and France it became clear Britain was in it for the long haul. The Dunkirk incident was probably a gesture made by Hitler, who was all too focused on his invasion of the Soviet Union the following year.
This is a subject that has long fascinated me.
I've read numerous accounts that Hitler was an admirer of the British Empire and it was his model for a future Germany.
Using the Slavic Nations for German Industries to set up exploiting the cheap labour.
Somewhat naively, Hitler thought he could make peace with Britain and carry on with his plan.
-
My mother, now 94, was evacuated from Hull along with all children during WW2. The house that she was evacuated from was bombed and the house near York, where she was evacuated to, was also bombed. Perhaps the entirety of WW2 was Hitler after my mam. She is surely one of very few people to have had two homes bombed.
Hull also had it's own blitz and per capita was the most bombed city of the UK. It was also subject to a "D" notice, in that it was only ever referred to as a north eastern city or some such. The docks in Hull were vital in the UK war effort and any naming of Hull being bombed regularly was seen as damaging to the war effort. Many bombing raids heading back after bombing Liverpool or elsewhere would drop their remaining bombs on hull on the way back.
My Mother turns 95 in June. Her favorite story is that the first V-1 (doodle bug bombs) fell on London on her 16th birthday.
-
Just reading some of the posts on here. I find British fascism a fascinating topic. I read a book on it by some author called Dorrel. A lot of names in it and a bit haphazard but really enjoyed it.
-
Do you think that the crimes of Churchill are comparable to your favourite bogeymen Stalin and Hitler?
I'll let members make up their own minds. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-29701767
-
I'll let members make up their own minds. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-29701767
Have you made up your mind? A BBC apologia and whitewashing of Churchill's crimes, which literally begins;
The UK is marking the 50th anniversary of the death of Winston Churchill. He is regarded by many as the greatest Briton ever, but for some he remains an intensely controversial figure.
"Many" regard him as the "greatest Briton ever", whilst only "some" regard him as a "controversial figure". Sounds perfectly balanced to me? :o I have to say that the term, "controversial figure" is doing a lot of heavy lifting. If controversial is simply a euphemism for, "genocidal, white supremacist, working class hating bigoted drunkard and racist war criminal", then I agree that he was controversial. All of that is merely the printable things that Churchill's contemporaries said about him. The 10 "greatest controversies" that the BBC listed actually manages to miss out his "greatest controversies".
I look forward to the BBC article listing Stalin's "greatest controversies" ::)
Anyway a less flattering view of Churchill's "greatest controversies"/war crimes below;
https://medium.com/@write_12958/the-crimes-of-winston-churchill-c5e3ecb229b3
The BBC article forgot quite a few that definitely should be in the top 10,
Kenya-At least 150,000 men, women and children were forced into concentration camps. Children’s schools were shut by the British who branded them “training grounds for rebellion”. Rape, castration, cigarettes, electric shocks and fire all used by the British to torture the Kenyan people on Churchill’s watch.
Afghanistan-Churchill found his love for war during the time he spent in Afghanistan. While there he said “all who resist will be killed without quarter” because the Pashtuns need “recognise the superiority of race”. He believed the Pashtuns needed to be dealt with, he would reminisce in his writings about how he partook in the burning villages and peoples homes.
“We proceeded systematically, village by village, and we destroyed the houses, filled up the wells, blew down the towers, cut down the great shady trees, burned the crops and broke the reservoirs in punitive devastation.” — Churchill on how the British carried on in Afghanistan, and he was only too happy to be part of it.
Churchill would also write of how “every tribesman caught was speared or cut down at once”. Proud of the terror he helped inflict on the people of Afghanistan Churchill was well on the road to becoming a genocidal maniac.
Those two "controversies" didn't even make the BBC list :o :-[
The printable comments that I referred to above about Churchill are all from his contemporaries. A mixture of my grand-father, father and various uncles and aunties. I'm sure you can figure out the less printable ones.
-
Gloom Envelops Putin’s TV Propagandists
https://cepa.org/article/gloom-envelops-putins-tv-propagandists/ (https://cepa.org/article/gloom-envelops-putins-tv-propagandists/)
-
I'll let members make up their own minds. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-29701767
No mention of his incompetance over the slaughtering of the ANZAC troops at Gallipoli, & the fire bombing of Dresden, but apart from all that a really great guy.
-
No mention of his incompetance over the slaughtering of the ANZAC troops at Gallipoli, & the fire bombing of Dresden, but apart from all that a really great guy.
The BBC article reads like the "mitigation" his legal team could have read out at the War Crimes Trial that he should have faced.
-
"Russia’s attacks on Ukrainian cities have alienated even those who previously supported closer ties with Moscow. And even Odesa, a city with an historically pro-Russian outlook, has embraced the movement toward Ukrainization, further underlining the loss of influence of Russian imperialism."
https://www.politico.eu/article/fall-russia-odesa-ukraine-war-nationalism-catherine-great-statue-empire/ (https://www.politico.eu/article/fall-russia-odesa-ukraine-war-nationalism-catherine-great-statue-empire/)
-
Have you made up your mind? A BBC apologia and whitewashing of Churchill's crimes, which literally begins;
The UK is marking the 50th anniversary of the death of Winston Churchill. He is regarded by many as the greatest Briton ever, but for some he remains an intensely controversial figure.
"Many" regard him as the "greatest Briton ever", whilst only "some" regard him as a "controversial figure". Sounds perfectly balanced to me? :o I have to say that the term, "controversial figure" is doing a lot of heavy lifting. If controversial is simply a euphemism for, "genocidal, white supremacist, working class hating bigoted drunkard and racist war criminal", then I agree that he was controversial. All of that is merely the printable things that Churchill's contemporaries said about him. The 10 "greatest controversies" that the BBC listed actually manages to miss out his "greatest controversies".
I look forward to the BBC article listing Stalin's "greatest controversies" ::)
Anyway a less flattering view of Churchill's "greatest controversies"/war crimes below;
https://medium.com/@write_12958/the-crimes-of-winston-churchill-c5e3ecb229b3
The BBC article forgot quite a few that definitely should be in the top 10,
Kenya-At least 150,000 men, women and children were forced into concentration camps. Children’s schools were shut by the British who branded them “training grounds for rebellion”. Rape, castration, cigarettes, electric shocks and fire all used by the British to torture the Kenyan people on Churchill’s watch.
Afghanistan-Churchill found his love for war during the time he spent in Afghanistan. While there he said “all who resist will be killed without quarter” because the Pashtuns need “recognise the superiority of race”. He believed the Pashtuns needed to be dealt with, he would reminisce in his writings about how he partook in the burning villages and peoples homes.
“We proceeded systematically, village by village, and we destroyed the houses, filled up the wells, blew down the towers, cut down the great shady trees, burned the crops and broke the reservoirs in punitive devastation.” — Churchill on how the British carried on in Afghanistan, and he was only too happy to be part of it.
Churchill would also write of how “every tribesman caught was speared or cut down at once”. Proud of the terror he helped inflict on the people of Afghanistan Churchill was well on the road to becoming a genocidal maniac.
Those two "controversies" didn't even make the BBC list :o :-[
The printable comments that I referred to above about Churchill are all from his contemporaries. A mixture of my grand-father, father and various uncles and aunties. I'm sure you can figure out the less printable ones.
I don't excuse unnecessary loss of life. Churchill made some bad decisions.
-
https://twitter.com/i/status/1509513818191560709
-
https://twitter.com/i/status/1509513818191560709
That is a deepfake
-
That is a deepfake
It's funny.
-
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=736945007880321
https://youtu.be/DvHIbpy1LWM
"If you put Zelensky on Sunak's shoulders you wouldn't even get a Napoleon". That comment is gold.
-
https://youtu.be/68tBEE_bUYA
-
The international criminal court issue arrest warrant for Vladimir Putin.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/17/vladimir-putin-arrest-warrant-ukraine-war-crimes (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/17/vladimir-putin-arrest-warrant-ukraine-war-crimes)
-
The international criminal court issue arrest warrant for Vladimir Putin.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/17/vladimir-putin-arrest-warrant-ukraine-war-crimes (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/17/vladimir-putin-arrest-warrant-ukraine-war-crimes)
Pity they didn't have the courage to do the same for Bush: Blair; Netenyahu and a host of others.
-
Pity they didn't have the courage to do the same for Bush: Blair; Netenyahu and a host of others.
The charges are because of the abduction of Ukrainian children orphaned from the conflict. I don't recall any of those you name doing such thing :-\
-
The charges are because of the abduction of Ukrainian children orphaned from the conflict. I don't recall any of those you name doing such thing :-\
No they probably just oversaw them being bombed to death instead. Destabilising whole regions and unleashing untold misery and bloodshed.
-
How weak are NATO and the collective west that all they have left is this?
The ICC will never indict any US President even though all should be if the ICC were credible and legitimate. US are not members of the ICC and regard it as having, "no legitimacy, no jurisdiction and no authority". US even have a "Hague Invasion Act", which allows them to invade The Hague to protect US officials and personnel.
The prosecutor in this case against Putin is a British lawyer, Karim Asad Ahmed Khan- the case is a ridiculous interpretation of the law of "Forced deportation". It is clearly politically motivated and the ICC has shredded the last vestiges of its credibility.
It is also timed to divert the masses from the deteriorating situation in Ukraine and from the turmoil in their own countries as a direct blowback of their own criminal actions. Never mind that it's all going tits up at home and we are funnelling weapons and ammo into an unwinnable war, sacrificing hundreds of thousands of soldiers to a war they cannot win.
A pathetic and weak gesture which demonstrates only the powerlessness of those behind it.
-
Pity they didn't have the courage to do the same for Bush: Blair; Netenyahu and a host of others.
I agree. Total hypocrisy. I have no time for Putin but he is way down the list of war criminals. The USA does not even recognise the court - if they did it would be Americans who would fill the dock every day. It is a joke.
-
The ICC's de facto lack of jurisdiction against the US means it has no credibility. It is threatened, under US law, with violence/invasion if it investigates any alleged US crime. You really shouldn't take the ICC seriously and you certainly shouldn't regard it as an independent and legitimate body.
Russia are also not members of this partisan body making the decision even more obviously political and designed for propaganda optics rather than any serious attempt at seeking justice for "war crimes".
Only victors get to hold war crime trials so it is anyway irrelevant.
-
I agree. Total hypocrisy. I have no time for Putin but he is way down the list of war criminals. The USA does not even recognise the court - if they did it would be Americans who would fill the dock every day. It is a joke.
It is worse than that, NGB. They even have the "Hague Invasion Act".
https://www.hrw.org/news/2002/08/03/us-hague-invasion-act-becomes-law
-
The Russians even openly reported this war crime as they were committing it-below;
http://en.kremlin.ru/events/administration/69414
It is how warped the west is. Humanitarian acts are war crimes and our war crimes are humanitarian interventions.
-
US Sanctions on the International Criminal Court
On September 2, 2020, the United States government imposed sanctions on the International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, and another senior prosecution official, Phakiso Mochochoko. In addition, US Secretary of State Michael Pompeo announced that the United States had restricted the issuance of visas for certain unnamed individuals “involved in the ICC’s efforts to investigate US personnel.”
Under Executive Order 13928, the “Executive Order on Blocking Property Of Certain Persons Associated With The International Criminal Court,” US officials added Fatou Bensouda, the ICC prosecutor, and Phakiso Mochochoko, the head of a division within the prosecutor’s office, to the Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List (the SDN List). This list is maintained by the US Department of Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC).
Their designation had two immediate effects. First, any property held by Bensouda and Mochochoko (or the property of any entity of which they own 50 percent or more) in the United States became “blocked.” Although any property they might have in the US has not been seized, they would not be able to exercise any rights over it, including use or sale. In addition, US persons or entities located anywhere in the world would not be able to transact with or provide services to either Bensouda or Mochochoko, unless they received a license to do so from the US government. US “persons” are defined under the executive order as “any United States citizen, permanent resident alien, entity organized under the laws of the United States or any jurisdiction within the United States (including foreign branches), or any person in the United States.”
Second, all property that might belong to Bensouda or Mochochoko that comes within a US jurisdiction would be “blocked.” Because the vast majority of international trade is conducted via the US dollar this has potentially broad implications. US dollar-denominated transactions—even if they are between two non-US parties—usually require a bank under US jurisdiction to handle the transactions. Thus, any transaction that passes through them, even momentarily, would also be blocked.
In addition, Bensouda and Mochochoko, who were sanctioned as individuals, and their immediate family members are presumed to be subject to US visa restrictions under the terms of the executive order.
-
A little more background on the ICC prosecutor in this case. In 2021 the ICC, after some international pressure, re-opened it's investigations into war crimes in Afghanistan. Incredibly, Karim Asad Ahmed Khan, decided to stop investigating US war crimes due to "the limited resources available to my office relative to the scale and nature of crimes within the jurisdiction of the court" and focused only on possible crimes by the Taliban.
All they have to do is watch the "Collateral Murder" video released by Julian Assange. None of the perpetrators have been even charged with an offence despite the world having seen it and the guy who released it languishes still in a maximum security prison convicted of nothing but conveniently silenced.
https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/statement-prosecutor-international-criminal-court-karim-khan-qc-following-application
In preparing to resume my investigation, if authorisation is granted, I am cognizant of the limited resources available to my Office relative to the scale and nature of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court that are being or have been committed in various parts of the world. I have therefore decided to focus my Office's investigations in Afghanistan on crimes allegedly committed by the Taliban and the Islamic State – Khorasan Province ("IS-K") and to deprioritise other aspects of this investigation. The gravity, scale and continuing nature of alleged crimes by the Taliban and the Islamic State, which include allegations of indiscriminate attacks on civilians, targeted extrajudicial executions, persecution of women and girls, crimes against children and other crimes affecting the civilian population at large, demand focus and proper resources from my Office, if we are to construct credible cases capable of being proved beyond reasonable doubt in the courtroom.
Khan is not a credible impartial arbiter of anything- he is a political activist.
-
The international criminal court in The Hague has indicted the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, and children’s commissioner, Maria Lvova-Belova, for the mass abduction of Ukrainian children.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/17/vladimir-putin-war-crimes-icc-arrest-warrant-ukraine-children (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/17/vladimir-putin-war-crimes-icc-arrest-warrant-ukraine-children)
-
A little more background on the ICC prosecutor in this case. In 2021 the ICC, after some international pressure, re-opened it's investigations into war crimes in Afghanistan. Incredibly, Karim Asad Ahmed Khan, decided to stop investigating US war crimes due to "the limited resources available to my office relative to the scale and nature of crimes within the jurisdiction of the court" and focused only on possible crimes by the Taliban.
All they have to do is watch the "Collateral Murder" video released by Julian Assange. None of the perpetrators have been even charged with an offence despite the world having seen it and the guy who released it languishes still in a maximum security prison convicted of nothing but conveniently silenced.
https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/statement-prosecutor-international-criminal-court-karim-khan-qc-following-application
In preparing to resume my investigation, if authorisation is granted, I am cognizant of the limited resources available to my Office relative to the scale and nature of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court that are being or have been committed in various parts of the world. I have therefore decided to focus my Office's investigations in Afghanistan on crimes allegedly committed by the Taliban and the Islamic State – Khorasan Province ("IS-K") and to deprioritise other aspects of this investigation. The gravity, scale and continuing nature of alleged crimes by the Taliban and the Islamic State, which include allegations of indiscriminate attacks on civilians, targeted extrajudicial executions, persecution of women and girls, crimes against children and other crimes affecting the civilian population at large, demand focus and proper resources from my Office, if we are to construct credible cases capable of being proved beyond reasonable doubt in the courtroom.
Khan is not a credible impartial arbiter of anything- he is a political activist.
If you have guys on the streets with an RPG then they will be shot at, won't they?
-
"As for the charges Putin faces, there’s a real problem for the Russian leader — he appeared on television, smiling and nodding with Lvova-Belova as she spelled out her crimes and revealed that she had “adopted” a stolen Ukrainian child. It has proved hard in past war crime trials to find sufficient evidence. If Putin is ever arraigned, he will have a hard time defending himself."
https://cepa.org/article/wanted-for-crimes-against-children-vladimir-putin/ (https://cepa.org/article/wanted-for-crimes-against-children-vladimir-putin/)
-
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/17/vladimir-putin-arrest-warrant-ukraine-war-crimes
Last month, the Yale Humanitarian Research Lab published a report alleging that at least 6,000 children from Ukraine had been sent to Russian “re-education” camps in the past year. In a statement on Friday, the ICC prosecutor, Karim Khan, said: “Incidents identified by my office include the deportation of at least hundreds of children taken from orphanages and children’s care homes.”
It looks like the west is getting desperate in trying to demonise Russia & Putin.
There is no substance to this story. What exactly is it trying to say. When Russia troops invade Ukrainian towns, it has the audacity to not leave abandoned children in orphanages.
I think a lot of these news makers watch to many movies.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LehcJeNbFBw
-
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/17/vladimir-putin-arrest-warrant-ukraine-war-crimes
It looks like the west is getting desperate in trying to demonise Russia & Putin.
There is no substance to this story. What exactly is it trying to say. When Russia troops invade Ukrainian towns, it has the audacity to not leave abandoned children in orphanages.
I think a lot of these news makers watch to many movies.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LehcJeNbFBw
Russia troops invading Ukrainian towns is what made the children orphans in the first place.
-
If you have guys on the streets with an RPG then they will be shot at, won't they?
Do you even know what the "collateral murder" video is? No RPG's. There were Reuters journalists. You have no shame and seem willing even to justify blatant war crimes murdering civilians and journalists. Muttering about RPG's- you are utterly brainwashed and willing to ignore any amount of war crimes and brutality if it is done by "your side".
-
Do you even know what the "collateral murder" video is? No RPG's. There were Reuters journalists. You have no shame and seem willing even to justify blatant war crimes murdering civilians and journalists. Muttering about RPG's- you are utterly brainwashed and willing to ignore any amount of war crimes and brutality if it is done by "your side".
No I am repeating Julian Assange's own words.
-
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/17/vladimir-putin-arrest-warrant-ukraine-war-crimes
It looks like the west is getting desperate in trying to demonise Russia & Putin.
There is no substance to this story. What exactly is it trying to say. When Russia troops invade Ukrainian towns, it has the audacity to not leave abandoned children in orphanages.
I think a lot of these news makers watch to many movies.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LehcJeNbFBw
Russia troops invading Ukrainian towns is what made the children orphans in the first place.
It was Ukrainian shelling that made the children orphans.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfvFpT-iypw&ab_channel=PeopleOverPolitics
The collateral murder video for you, Steve. The alleged RPG is a camera. It speaks to how brainwashed you are. You are willing to overlook the murder of unarmed civilians and journalists but regard the humanitarian moving of orphans away from a war zone to be worthy of a war crimes trial-just because that is what you were told to do.
You are at least meant to apply some critical thinking as you read.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfvFpT-iypw&ab_channel=PeopleOverPolitics
The collateral murder video for you, Steve. The alleged RPG is a camera. It speaks to how brainwashed you are. You are willing to overlook the murder of unarmed civilians and journalists but regard the humanitarian moving of orphans away from a war zone to be worthy of a war crimes trial-just because that is what you were told to do.
You are at least meant to apply some critical thinking as you read.
Who made it a war zone?
-
If you have guys on the streets with an RPG then they will be shot at, won't they?
No RPG's, Steve. There was the bit where they circle around and shoot at the ambulance and stretcher bearers collecting the dead and wounded. Also the bit where our "freedom fighting" gunship heroes justify the killing of children in a casual jokey manner with the sick observation that, "you shouldn't bring your kids into a war zone". Only sick, perverted and twisted minds could justify the murder of civilians and children so casually and without remorse. This is who you condone with your ill informed indoctrination repeated mindlessly and uncritically.
They didn't "bring their kids to a war zone"- Warmongers, thieves and pirates brought a war to their home and then murdered reporters, civilians and their children. Then the warmongers murdered the stretcher bearers. Then they jailed the whistle-blowers and lied. You are wilfully blind to western aggression and warmongering.
-
Who made it a war zone?
The Ukrainian Armed Forces made it a war zone after the 2014 coup and were shelling civilian areas deliberately. This is all recorded by the OSCE. You already know this.
The not at all subtle shift noted.
"Russian invasion caused the deaths."
"But, it was Ukrainian shelling civilian ares that made them orphans."
"Russia made us kill the civilians."
Does it never occur to you that the mental gymnastics you perform and double standards you need to hold to demonise the "other" is because you are supporting an untenable position? You ignore the abundance of evidence of NATO/western warmongering, invasions, coups, theft and utter destruction of country after country and pretend to be concerned about the orphans that you have just been instructed to "care about". You are a mindless drone.
-
The Ukrainian Armed Forces made it a war zone after the 2014 coup and were shelling civilian areas deliberately. This is all recorded by the OSCE. You already know this.
The not at all subtle shift noted.
"Russian invasion caused the deaths."
"But, it was Ukrainian shelling civilian ares that made them orphans."
"Russia made us kill the civilians."
Does it never occur to you that the mental gymnastics you perform and double standards you need to hold to demonise the "other" is because you are supporting an untenable position? You ignore the abundance of evidence of NATO/western warmongering, invasions, coups, theft and utter destruction of country after country and pretend to be concerned about the orphans that you have just been instructed to "care about". You are a mindless drone.
I don't ignore the aggression as you call it. Saddam Hussein banned the UN weapons inspectors and paid the ultimate price. Gaddafi was feared to massacre civilians in Benghazi were he not removed. Putin could have requested a UN peacekeeping force to enter Crimea were he so concerned about violence against civilians. His future actions confirmed his intentions all along.
-
It was Ukrainian shelling that made the children orphans.
Ramblings of a mad man.
-
I don't ignore the aggression as you call it. Saddam Hussein banned the UN weapons inspectors and paid the ultimate price. Gaddafi was feared to massacre civilians in Benghazi were he not removed. Putin could have requested a UN peacekeeping force to enter Crimea were he so concerned about violence against civilians. His future actions confirmed his intentions all along.
It wasn't "aggression as I call it"- it was a war of aggression based on lies that everyone agrees now were lies. That you still act as an apologist for these blatant acts of aggression shows that you have learnt nothing. Your failure to recognise the ongoing western aggression for what it is, and always was, blinds you finding truth. You want comforting lies and will perform Olympian levels of mental gymnastics to ignore or downplay the decades of wanton destruction caused by NATO/The collective West.
Until you can face uncomfortable truths about your own government and those it allies with, you have no prospect of forming an objective view of the current state of affairs. You don't even question the self appointed role of Western nations and alliances to remove or invade whoever is in the way of their "Rules Based Order".
-
Russia troops invading Ukrainian towns is what made the children orphans in the first place.
I need to get my head around this. So the Russian troops invade the Ukrainian towns, round up the children, place them into the local orphanages and care homes, prior to taking them back to Russia.
So the local care homes and orphanages are used as some form of holding pens.
-
I need to get my head around this. So the Russian troops invade the Ukrainian towns, round up the children, place them into the local orphanages and care homes, prior to taking them back to Russia.
So the local care homes and orphanages are used as some form of holding pens.
Since your head is hollow, I cannot see that happening.
-
https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/situation-ukraine-icc-judges-issue-arrest-warrants-against-vladimir-vladimirovich-putin-and (https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/situation-ukraine-icc-judges-issue-arrest-warrants-against-vladimir-vladimirovich-putin-and)
"Mr Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, born on 7 October 1952, President of the Russian Federation, is allegedly responsible for the war crime of unlawful deportation of population (children) and that of unlawful transfer of population (children) from occupied areas of Ukraine to the Russian Federation (under articles 8(2)(a)(vii) and 8(2)(b)(viii) of the Rome Statute). The crimes were allegedly committed in Ukrainian occupied territory at least from 24 February 2022. There are reasonable grounds to believe that Mr Putin bears individual criminal responsibility for the aforementioned crimes, (i) for having committed the acts directly, jointly with others and/or through others (article 25(3)(a) of the Rome Statute), and (ii) for his failure to exercise control properly over civilian and military subordinates who committed the acts, or allowed for their commission, and who were under his effective authority and control, pursuant to superior responsibility (article 28(b) of the Rome Statute)."
-
It has now been a month since Gringo claimed "Russia is about to drop the hammer" and two month since he claimed "Kyiv and Zelensky's government is about to collapse". :))
-
Since your head is hollow, I cannot see that happening.
What makes you think my head is hollow ?
If you can't answer the simple line of questioning I put to you, it is you who has a hollow head.
Now explain, how are these children being rounded up and taken to Russia?
The most logical explanation, Putin is evacuating children from the Donbas region, so as to protect them from Ukrainian shelling.
-
What makes you think my head is hollow ?
If you can't answer the simple line of questioning I put to you, it is you who has a hollow head.
Now explain, how are these children being rounded up and taken to Russia?
The most logical explanation, Putin is evacuating children from the Donbas region, so as to protect them from Ukrainian shelling.
Maria Lvova-Belova brought orphans from the DPR to the Nizhny Novgorod Region for placement with foster families
During a trip to the Nizhny Novgorod Region, Presidential Commissioner for Children’s Rights Maria Lvova-Belova, Governor Gleb Nikitin and Adviser to the Head of the Donetsk People’s Republic on Children’s Rights Eleonora Fedorenko placed 24 children with foster families.
Orphans from among those who arrived from the Donetsk People’s Republic to Russia on September 16 have been placed, with Maria Lvova-Belova’s assistance, with nine foster families in the Nizhny Novgorod Region in groups of two to five siblings. The age of the children ranges from six to 17, with most of them being teenagers. Some have disabilities.
All the children have been granted Russian citizenship. They stayed in orphanages for a long time, and most of them had traumatic experiences due to the many years of hostilities in Donbass. Psychologists, social workers and other specialists have worked with the potential foster parents and children to get a sense of the mood, state of mind and readiness of the children to join foster families. The focus was on choosing the right parents for the children, not the other way round.
The orphans, 125 in all, who arrived in Russia from the DPR have been placed with Russian families in 13 regions, namely, the Astrakhan, Voronezh, Kursk, Moscow, Murmansk, Nizhny Novgorod, Omsk, Penza, Rostov, Ryazan, Samara and Chelyabinsk regions and Moscow. Work on placing orphans from the republics of Donbass began this spring at the initiative of the Commissioner for Children’s Rights. About 300 orphans from the DPR have already been placed with Russian foster families, and paperwork is in the works for another 104 children from the LPR.
As part of her working trip to the Nizhny Novgorod Region, Maria Lvova-Belova discussed with Governor Gleb Nikitin social practices designed to support families with children in difficult life circumstances and progress of the Commissioner’s strategic programmes in the region. She also held a meeting of the working group on the project to reduce the number of children under four years of age at children’s homes. They agreed that, if necessary, the region will support measures for social rehabilitation of the parents who have completed treatment for alcohol addiction.
In addition, the children’s ombudsman met with two mothers who had turned their children over to institutions. In both cases, the families were facing hardship. They were offered assistance in gathering documents to make them eligible for benefits, putting them on a waiting list for a flat, and finding employment. Both mothers showed readiness to take their children back from institutions soon.
http://en.kremlin.ru/events/administration/69414
It isn't a war crime at all and the hysteria coming from the West is off the scale. The Russians openly reported this at the time. Nobody has been rounded up. Bolded above from the article of 22 sept 2022, we can see that a whole range of psychologists, social workers, the orphanages and others were involved in this humanitarian action to re-home orphans from separatist held areas in Donetsk. It is a ridiculous trumped up charge and the ICC has signed itself into historical irrelevance. The largest powers are anyway non-signatories and don't recognise the jurisdiction of the ICC (US, Russia, China, India). Dozens of African and Asian states are non signatories. It was already regarded as partial - I suspect other countries will leave the ICC now the mask is fully ripped away.
The ICC has exposed itself as a Western tool so blatantly that it is impossible for the ROW to ignore. Convincing the unquestioning, thick as mince, limited attention span drones (such as David) is an irrelevance. The real propaganda war that the West/NATO need to win is with the 87% of humanity that isn't part of the collective west. It isn't going well for the West. Hence desperate "Hail Mary's" such as the latest nonsense.
Anything to distract from the crushing defeat of the NATO backed/armed /funded Ukrainian armed forces.
-
It has now been a month since Gringo claimed "Russia is about to drop the hammer" and two month since he claimed "Kyiv and Zelensky's government is about to collapse". :))
It is widely held that the "Siege of Stalingrad" was the pivotal battle of WW2 and that after the Nazi defeat there, the outcome of the war wasn't in doubt. The siege ended in February 1943. The war didn't end officially until 1945. It was lost for the Nazis in Feb 1943, though.
This war is also already lost by NATO and it's Ukrainian proxy(ironically the Nazis again :-[). The official end depends on how much blood the Nazis are prepared to sacrifice and how much treasure their sponsors are willing to waste, could be months-could be a year-could be several years. The outcome is already known. Just as the Nazis were defeated after Stalingrad-Ukraine is already defeated.
There is no path to victory for Ukraine. Crimea and the four oblasts are Russian and not coming back. The Ukrainian government and it's sponsors are toast as soon as this reality becomes officially recognised by them. They drag it out wasting lives and money because their(the supposed leaders) survival depends on the promise of a victory which can never come. Eventually this comes to a point where it can no longer be sustained. No government survives after that.
-
It wasn't "aggression as I call it"- it was a war of aggression based on lies that everyone agrees now were lies. That you still act as an apologist for these blatant acts of aggression shows that you have learnt nothing. Your failure to recognise the ongoing western aggression for what it is, and always was, blinds you finding truth. You want comforting lies and will perform Olympian levels of mental gymnastics to ignore or downplay the decades of wanton destruction caused by NATO/The collective West.
Until you can face uncomfortable truths about your own government and those it allies with, you have no prospect of forming an objective view of the current state of affairs. You don't even question the self appointed role of Western nations and alliances to remove or invade whoever is in the way of their "Rules Based Order".
I didn't agree with the Iraq war. However Saddam Hussein had invaded Kuwait and used poison gas on the Kurds. He sent mixed signals to the West. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/jul/02/saddam-hussein-fbi-iraq-iran
-
Maria Lvova-Belova brought orphans from the DPR to the Nizhny Novgorod Region for placement with foster families
During a trip to the Nizhny Novgorod Region, Presidential Commissioner for Children’s Rights Maria Lvova-Belova, Governor Gleb Nikitin and Adviser to the Head of the Donetsk People’s Republic on Children’s Rights Eleonora Fedorenko placed 24 children with foster families.
Orphans from among those who arrived from the Donetsk People’s Republic to Russia on September 16 have been placed, with Maria Lvova-Belova’s assistance, with nine foster families in the Nizhny Novgorod Region in groups of two to five siblings. The age of the children ranges from six to 17, with most of them being teenagers. Some have disabilities.
All the children have been granted Russian citizenship. They stayed in orphanages for a long time, and most of them had traumatic experiences due to the many years of hostilities in Donbass. Psychologists, social workers and other specialists have worked with the potential foster parents and children to get a sense of the mood, state of mind and readiness of the children to join foster families. The focus was on choosing the right parents for the children, not the other way round.
The orphans, 125 in all, who arrived in Russia from the DPR have been placed with Russian families in 13 regions, namely, the Astrakhan, Voronezh, Kursk, Moscow, Murmansk, Nizhny Novgorod, Omsk, Penza, Rostov, Ryazan, Samara and Chelyabinsk regions and Moscow. Work on placing orphans from the republics of Donbass began this spring at the initiative of the Commissioner for Children’s Rights. About 300 orphans from the DPR have already been placed with Russian foster families, and paperwork is in the works for another 104 children from the LPR.
As part of her working trip to the Nizhny Novgorod Region, Maria Lvova-Belova discussed with Governor Gleb Nikitin social practices designed to support families with children in difficult life circumstances and progress of the Commissioner’s strategic programmes in the region. She also held a meeting of the working group on the project to reduce the number of children under four years of age at children’s homes. They agreed that, if necessary, the region will support measures for social rehabilitation of the parents who have completed treatment for alcohol addiction.
In addition, the children’s ombudsman met with two mothers who had turned their children over to institutions. In both cases, the families were facing hardship. They were offered assistance in gathering documents to make them eligible for benefits, putting them on a waiting list for a flat, and finding employment. Both mothers showed readiness to take their children back from institutions soon.
http://en.kremlin.ru/events/administration/69414
It isn't a war crime at all and the hysteria coming from the West is off the scale. The Russians openly reported this at the time. Nobody has been rounded up. Bolded above from the article of 22 sept 2022, we can see that a whole range of psychologists, social workers, the orphanages and others were involved in this humanitarian action to re-home orphans from separatist held areas in Donetsk. It is a ridiculous trumped up charge and the ICC has signed itself into historical irrelevance. The largest powers are anyway non-signatories and don't recognise the jurisdiction of the ICC (US, Russia, China, India). Dozens of African and Asian states are non signatories. It was already regarded as partial - I suspect other countries will leave the ICC now the mask is fully ripped away.
The ICC has exposed itself as a Western tool so blatantly that it is impossible for the ROW to ignore. Convincing the unquestioning, thick as mince, limited attention span drones (such as David) is an irrelevance. The real propaganda war that the West/NATO need to win is with the 87% of humanity that isn't part of the collective west. It isn't going well for the West. Hence desperate "Hail Mary's" such as the latest nonsense.
Anything to distract from the crushing defeat of the NATO backed/armed /funded Ukrainian armed forces.
We have UN agencies to deal with this kind of thing, first and foremost amongst them being UNHCR. It should not involve unilateral action from Russia. https://youtu.be/znEYZZdPWFc
-
It is widely held that the "Siege of Stalingrad" was the pivotal battle of WW2 and that after the Nazi defeat there, the outcome of the war wasn't in doubt. The siege ended in February 1943. The war didn't end officially until 1945. It was lost for the Nazis in Feb 1943, though.
This war is also already lost by NATO and it's Ukrainian proxy(ironically the Nazis again :-[). The official end depends on how much blood the Nazis are prepared to sacrifice and how much treasure their sponsors are willing to waste, could be months-could be a year-could be several years. The outcome is already known. Just as the Nazis were defeated after Stalingrad-Ukraine is already defeated.
There is no path to victory for Ukraine. Crimea and the four oblasts are Russian and not coming back. The Ukrainian government and it's sponsors are toast as soon as this reality becomes officially recognised by them. They drag it out wasting lives and money because their(the supposed leaders) survival depends on the promise of a victory which can never come. Eventually this comes to a point where it can no longer be sustained. No government survives after that.
No and for some ( but not others) it began on 3 September 1939. https://youtu.be/c_sZSuoH5WI
Zelensky is Jewish. https://youtu.be/27arBrfZm5I
..and the real hero of this war. https://time.com/6257285/ukraine-war-victory/
You can't possibly claim this. Nobody knows whether Putin will remain in power, or indeed the Chinese Communist Party for that matter. You can't force labour to work flat out without it organizing into free trades unions sooner or later. I thought all those on the Left would have grasped this fact.
-
It is widely held that the "Siege of Stalingrad" was the pivotal battle of WW2 and that after the Nazi defeat there, the outcome of the war wasn't in doubt. The siege ended in February 1943. The war didn't end officially until 1945. It was lost for the Nazis in Feb 1943, though.
This war is also already lost by NATO and it's Ukrainian proxy(ironically the Nazis again :-[). The official end depends on how much blood the Nazis are prepared to sacrifice and how much treasure their sponsors are willing to waste, could be months-could be a year-could be several years. The outcome is already known. Just as the Nazis were defeated after Stalingrad-Ukraine is already defeated.
There is no path to victory for Ukraine. Crimea and the four oblasts are Russian and not coming back. The Ukrainian government and it's sponsors are toast as soon as this reality becomes officially recognised by them. They drag it out wasting lives and money because their(the supposed leaders) survival depends on the promise of a victory which can never come. Eventually this comes to a point where it can no longer be sustained. No government survives after that.
Pure fantasy, the four oblasts that are "not coming back" are not even fully under Russian control. lmao
-
Pure fantasy, the four oblasts that are "not coming back" are not even fully under Russian control. lmao
What is the Ukrainian/NATO path to victory, David? And how are they doing?
-
What is the Ukrainian/NATO path to victory, David? And how are they doing?
The answer of course is that Ukraine and their NATO sponsors are faring very badly. Russia, despite western reporting to the contrary, are achieving their strategic objectives.
In simple terms the Ukrainian/NATO strategic objectives are the conquering of Crimea and the four, now Russian, oblasts. After just over a year of hostilities, that they had long prepared for with the assistance of their NATO sponsors(openly admitted), how are they doing?
Well they lost their entire Navy and air force within days of hostilities beginning. They have also burnt through all the old Soviet planes, tanks, armoured vehicles of the former Soviet but now NATO countries. Hundreds of billions of assistance from NATO countries have also been destroyed by the Russians, who seemingly have an endless supply of everything. They have lost further territory-four oblasts have voted to leave and will not be returning, are almost encircled in both Adviivka and Bakhmut, are losing the war of attrition by 8/10-1, have run out of weapons and ammo and are now running NATO stocks dry. They have also lost hundreds of thousands of men, there are countless videos of forced conscription of teenagers and old men on social media channels and they have no realistic prospect of achieving any of their aims. The most economically productive part of the country is gone. They should have accepted and attempted to implement Minsk 2 agreements.
Russia's objectives have been stated clearly and are easily inferred anyway. The December 2021 proposal/ultimatum put forward by Russia to NATO is the ultimate aim.
https://www.dw.com/en/russia-demands-nato-leave-eastern-europe-limit-missile-deployment/a-60173879
Either through good faith talks or through force of arms. Those NATO countries currently on the Russian border will be facing a whole new dilemma when Ukraine is demilitarised, neutralised and no threat to Russia. Their publics facing rising inflation and reduced living standards will lose their appetite for confronting and threatening Russia. There will be no missiles in those countries that joined NATO after 1991. Ukraine's defeat will be a salutary lesson to any country. After Ukraine none will be willing to be the next to be used by NATO to poke the nuclear armed bear next door.
Russia, despite idiotic western reporting, are not attempting to conquer land. They are attempting to remove the military threat. There is no doubt that this is being achieved.
Ukraine are attempting to take land. There is no doubt that this is going very badly and has no prospect of success. They are going through men, arms and ammo at a rate that is now reaching it's limits. Anyone can see this if they remove the blinders.
NATO/US/UK/EU are criminal in pursuing their territorial ambitions at such human cost and doing all they can to prevent peace agreements. No matter how many lives are wasted, the outcome will not be affected. Those governments in the west pushing this war understand this. When it is over they will likely face their own reckoning, hence their constant doubling down in desperation to avoid the inevitable. European populations are restless and protesting. Mussolini's fate beckons.
-
The answer of course is that Ukraine and their NATO sponsors are faring very badly. Russia, despite western reporting to the contrary, are achieving their strategic objectives.
In simple terms the Ukrainian/NATO strategic objectives are the conquering of Crimea and the four, now Russian, oblasts. After just over a year of hostilities, that they had long prepared for with the assistance of their NATO sponsors(openly admitted), how are they doing?
Well they lost their entire Navy and air force within days of hostilities beginning. They have also burnt through all the old Soviet planes, tanks, armoured vehicles of the former Soviet but now NATO countries. Hundreds of billions of assistance from NATO countries have also been destroyed by the Russians, who seemingly have an endless supply of everything. They have lost further territory-four oblasts have voted to leave and will not be returning, are almost encircled in both Adviivka and Bakhmut, are losing the war of attrition by 8/10-1, have run out of weapons and ammo and are now running NATO stocks dry. They have also lost hundreds of thousands of men, there are countless videos of forced conscription of teenagers and old men on social media channels and they have no realistic prospect of achieving any of their aims. The most economically productive part of the country is gone. They should have accepted and attempted to implement Minsk 2 agreements.
Russia's objectives have been stated clearly and are easily inferred anyway. The December 2021 proposal/ultimatum put forward by Russia to NATO is the ultimate aim.
https://www.dw.com/en/russia-demands-nato-leave-eastern-europe-limit-missile-deployment/a-60173879
Either through good faith talks or through force of arms. Those NATO countries currently on the Russian border will be facing a whole new dilemma when Ukraine is demilitarised, neutralised and no threat to Russia. Their publics facing rising inflation and reduced living standards will lose their appetite for confronting and threatening Russia. There will be no missiles in those countries that joined NATO after 1991. Ukraine's defeat will be a salutary lesson to any country. After Ukraine none will be willing to be the next to be used by NATO to poke the nuclear armed bear next door.
Russia, despite idiotic western reporting, are not attempting to conquer land. They are attempting to remove the military threat. There is no doubt that this is being achieved.
Ukraine are attempting to take land. There is no doubt that this is going very badly and has no prospect of success. They are going through men, arms and ammo at a rate that is now reaching it's limits. Anyone can see this if they remove the blinders.
NATO/US/UK/EU are criminal in pursuing their territorial ambitions at such human cost and doing all they can to prevent peace agreements. No matter how many lives are wasted, the outcome will not be affected. Those governments in the west pushing this war understand this. When it is over they will likely face their own reckoning, hence their constant doubling down in desperation to avoid the inevitable. European populations are restless and protesting. Mussolini's fate beckons.
I don't know where you get these statements from. Five NATO countries border Russia and none of them have made incursions.
-
I don't know where you get these statements from. Five NATO countries border Russia and none of them have made incursions.
I don't know where you get your interpretations from. I didn't say that any had made incursions. what I did say is that those NATO countries that have joined since 1991 will be complying with Russia's December 2021 proposals/demands and will not be hosting missiles that threaten Russia. This will be via good faith talks or force of arms, but it will be the result of Ukraine/NATO defeat.
Ukraine has been used by NATO to provoke Russia. Your cognitive dissonance doesn't allow you to accept this truth, but any country asked to host NATO missiles/nukes understands that Russia sees this as an unacceptable threat. When the defeat of Ukraine is official, either via negotiation or surrender, the whole board changes instantly. This is why the West/NATO is still criminally extending this war by pouring in arms and men-it is desperation. Defeat has consequences everywhere-particularly for those who have fomented and escalated the hostilities. They(NATO govts) know that their own populations will turn on them after suffering so much economically for the vainglorious hubris of a corrupt political class. People are dying and suffering in a futile attempt to stop the inevitable.
-
I don't know where you get your interpretations from. I didn't say that any had made incursions. what I did say is that those NATO countries that have joined since 1991 will be complying with Russia's December 2021 proposals/demands and will not be hosting missiles that threaten Russia. This will be via good faith talks or force of arms, but it will be the result of Ukraine/NATO defeat.
Ukraine has been used by NATO to provoke Russia. Your cognitive dissonance doesn't allow you to accept this truth, but any country asked to host NATO missiles/nukes understands that Russia sees this as an unacceptable threat. When the defeat of Ukraine is official, either via negotiation or surrender, the whole board changes instantly. This is why the West/NATO is still criminally extending this war by pouring in arms and men-it is desperation. Defeat has consequences everywhere-particularly for those who have fomented and escalated the hostilities. They(NATO govts) know that their own populations will turn on them after suffering so much economically for the vainglorious hubris of a corrupt political class. People are dying and suffering in a futile attempt to stop the inevitable.
Rather ironic don't you think since Ukraine gave up a nuclear arsenal as a quid pro quo for security guarantees contained in the Budapest Memorandum of 1994 and it was Russia which suspended the new START treaty.
-
Rather ironic don't you think since Ukraine gave up a nuclear arsenal as a quid pro quo for security guarantees contained in the Budapest Memorandum of 1994 and it was Russia which suspended the new START treaty.
Ukraine never had nukes. The Soviet Union had nukes and Russia was the successor state to the Soviet Union. Ukraine were not signatories to the NPT (non proliferation treaty) and between 1991 and 1994 were effectively a nuclear power outside the NPT. The Budapest Memorandum (much misrepresented in western msm whose distortions are then repeated by indoctrinated drones) was not "Ukraine giving up it's nukes", as per western msm. You always completely ignore the context of the agreements and memorandums that you invoke. You also repeat verbatim the same distortions and misrepresentations that you have been fed.
The nukes could not be used by the Ukrainians because they couldn't break the Russian codes. They agreed to sign the NPT and transferred the nukes to be destroyed. The world wouldn't exist today if Ukraine had usable nukes and you should be careful what you wish for in your blind hatred of anything Russia. Ukraine, being the corrupt country that it is, set a price for giving back the nukes. This has since been spun to death in western media and the same one one line repeatedly quoted, "respect the independence...", as if that is the entire Budapest Memorandum.
Your mentioning of the START treaty demonstrates that you simply repeat MSM headlines. You are like a talking Action Man doll who has about 10 phrases when you pull the string on it's back.
The US pulled out of treaty after treaty and sabotaged START to such an extent (wanting access to Russian nuclear silos whilst denying quid pro quo access) that the failure of START, as with every other nuclear arms threat reduction treaty, is entirely at the feet of the US.
Do you believe that Ukraine should have been able to retain nuclear weapons despite being a non signatory of the NPT at the time? Should Russia have given it the codes? What do you think should have happened given the circumstances? A newly independent state that by accident of geography is left holding nuclear weapons.
Imagine, for instance, if Scotland had voted to leave the UK in 2014. Should Scotland keep it's nuclear missiles based there as part of the UK? Should Scotland become a nuclear armed state in these circumstances? Would Scotland be "giving up it's nukes" by agreeing to transfer for destruction the nukes that it couldn't use? Unless the successor state to the UK-did it ever have nukes to give up?
Ukraine, "gave up it's nukes" because it couldn't use them. Had Ukraine been able to use the nukes, it would have used them and definitely not agreed to their transfer and destruction. It still extracted a price for this because it is corrupt.
Would you trust those in control in Ukraine to act responsibly with nuclear weapons?
-
Wagner boss openly defies Kremlin Ukraine 'Nazi' narrative
https://www.euronews.com/2023/03/24/wagner-boss-openly-defies-kremlin-ukraine-nazi-narrative (https://www.euronews.com/2023/03/24/wagner-boss-openly-defies-kremlin-ukraine-nazi-narrative)
-
'NATO IS TREMBLING' - RUSSIANS ARE PREPARING ANCIENT T-34 FOR A FIGHT
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bNE3fbCYEQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bNE3fbCYEQ)
-
https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/f/britain-supply-infamous-depleted-uranium-shells-ukraine
-
https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/f/britain-supply-infamous-depleted-uranium-shells-ukraine
An insane escalation and provocation. Russians have warned UK against it and are pissed. Western "leaders" are self evidently servants of someone/thing other than the public they supposedly serve at this point. Any number of crises to deal with domestically-too many to list-that remain unresolved and/or ignored completely that require the governments undivided attention. Arming Nazis in Ukraine shouldn't make the top 100.
In fact, it is exactly this pattern of behaviour by successive UK (and other) compromised governments that leads to the litany of domestic problems, that are too numerous to list.
-
Putin’s propaganda about depleted uranium missiles
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebvfpqsSy2c (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebvfpqsSy2c)
-
What more to add?
Next-Generation Air Dominance.
The US Air Force's budget request for FY 24 is a banger. In it they envision retiring no fewer than 310 combat aircraft, including some of their most critical types, with no replacements immediately to hand. The aircraft they envision eventually procuring for replacements are generally old models. This is with historically high funding on what could be the eve of World War Three.
The USAF wants to retire no less than half of its E-3 Sentry fleet in FY 24, claiming that the aircraft is expensive to fly and antiquated. These 1970s-era 707-based AWACS aircraft will be replaced at some point in the 2030s by 1990s-era 737-based E-7 Wedgetails. The fact the USAF apparently let its premiere battle command and early warning platform degrade into obsolescence and may be replacing it with an off-the-shelf system approaching its 30th birthday speaks volumes.
More absurd is the fact the USAF wants to retire its 33 oldest F-22s (claiming they're "not combat-coded") and replace them with... F-15s. You heard that right. New F-15s. The Air Force in fact envisions retiring its F-22 fleet entirely in the next decade. They envision a sixth-gen fighter entering service at some point in the distant future, but these jets will likely be replaced by F-15s because there is a functioning assembly line for F-15s right now and Boeing has amazing lobbyists. An F-22 production restart is of course absolutely out of the question.
These two budget items are emblematic of my theme lately - the modern West doesn't make things and struggles to develop technology successfully. Here you have a critical system becoming obsolete overnight and being replaced by another old system, and one of America's national trump cards being retired and replaced by the exact same jet it was itself intended to replace in the 1990s. Meanwhile the leaders responsible for this fiasco are fantasizing about science fiction weapons coming online decades from now.
- Alcibiades[/i]
-
On the same subject as the above, ie. US/NATO lagging in weapons tech because of the bloated and corrupt weapons industry in the West. Some time back in 2021 the gap in missile and air defence was discussed on this thread.
We are entering, have entered, a multipolar world. Dollar trade is falling and will not long be replaced by countries trading in their own currencies again. This is happening now and will only accelerate. In terms of military power there is nothing the Western powers can do to defeat even Iran now, never mind China and Russia.
It is an observable reality that US/UK and the rest of their merry band of war criminals, otherwise known as NATO, have spent decades arming, preparing and strategising for war against weaker powers. As such they have built a military machine that can destroy the militaries of weak defenceless countries.
Whilst they have been on a 20 year rampage of unprecedented war crimes invading and subjugating weak but resource rich or strategically important countries, China, Russia and Iran have outplayed them and are turning the tide.
Whilst the US/UK NATO have spent 20/30 years bogged down in increasingly attritional wars, the bogging down being helped along by Iran, Russia and China, all who have played roles to keep Empire bogged down in conflicts that they expected to end swiftly. Yemen, Syria, Venezuela have all been able to resist. This time has allowed the same countries to prepare for a defensive war against a predictable enemy.
Aircraft Carrier Groups are now obsolete against modern air defence and missile tech. Russia and China are so far ahead in missile tech that it is literally a game changer. NATO cannot win. Their multi billion dollar aircraft carriers negated by missiles that cost a few thousand dollars. Likewise their military bases. 30,000+ US troops in Guam would be instantly killed. Every military base would be instantly vulnerable in any attack against China, Iran, Russia. NATO are equipped for the wrong war against the wrong adversaries and would be readily defeated if they fight those that are prepared for them. It's over. They are in check everywhere on the board.
In response to the above was the usual bullshit. I would say that analysis was accurate. The tech gap was disputed and minimised. US won't "allow" this gap to persist bla bla. David even linked to articles which he claimed showed successful hypersonic missile tests by the US. He also described how new US supercarriers anyway would be immune to these missiles. It's hilarious;
David- Back in 2005 the RAND think tank suggested that the next generation of carries have energy dissipating armour systems and electric armour. So I'm guessing the new carriers have this? We can only speculate as a lot of this is classified (since I cannot find any details). I also anticipate that these carriers will get upgraded with a system to intercept the hypersonic missiles that consist of directed-energy weapons like high energy lasers, microwaves or rail guns.
Normally I'd say that is somewhere between hope and wishful thinking. But that is way below even wishful thinking. It's below fantasy. Lasers, rail guns. Anyway last week this;
https://asiatimes.com/2023/04/us-hypersonic-failure-reveals-a-glaring-weakness/
Late last month, South China Morning Post (SCMP) reported on the failed second flight test of the ARRW. It said that although the ARRW was successfully launched from a B-52H bomber off the coast of southern California, with its warhead successfully separating from its booster and continuing flight, the data link transmitting in-flight telemetry information failed.
SCMP says that the data link failure resulted in the loss of data that could have helped the Pentagon understand the ARRW’s flight characteristics and that the flight team behind the test is working to determine whether the failure was caused by a faulty data link or a flaw in the ARRW’s warhead.
The report also said that the failed ARRW test was the second of four planned tests that had aimed to show the weapon had early operational capability and was thus worthy of putting it into production.
The ARRW’s first test succeeded. Last December, Air & Space Forces Magazine noted that the ARRW was launched from a B-52H bomber off the coast of southern California, with the missile accelerating to hypersonic speed, separating from its booster, flying at speeds beyond Mach 5 and detonating in the target area.
Late last month, South China Morning Post (SCMP) reported on the failed second flight test of the ARRW. It said that although the ARRW was successfully launched from a B-52H bomber off the coast of southern California, with its warhead successfully separating from its booster and continuing flight, the data link transmitting in-flight telemetry information failed.
SCMP says that the data link failure resulted in the loss of data that could have helped the Pentagon understand the ARRW’s flight characteristics and that the flight team behind the test is working to determine whether the failure was caused by a faulty data link or a flaw in the ARRW’s warhead.
The report also said that the failed ARRW test was the second of four planned tests that had aimed to show the weapon had early operational capability and was thus worthy of putting it into production.
The ARRW’s first test succeeded. Last December, Air & Space Forces Magazine noted that the ARRW was launched from a B-52H bomber off the coast of southern California, with the missile accelerating to hypersonic speed, separating from its booster, flying at speeds beyond Mach 5 and detonating in the target area.
Western missile tech, air defence and EW systems remain decades behind Russia, China et al. The writing has long been on the wall for anyone prepared to read it. The wrong tools for the wrong enemy in the wrong war.
-
Russia first deployed hypersonic missiles in 2019. US have yet to develop never mind produce and deploy any. US air defence and EW is likewise decades behind Russia. NATO weapons industry is too corrupt and not fit for purpose to catch up.
The attempts by the West to isolate Russia has to be the most spectacular foreign policy failure in my lifetime. Completely failed and achieved the opposite- the increasing isolation of the Western/NATO/EU blocs from Asia and the Global South, as well as the ongoing collapse of the entire dollar reserve currency system.
-
Russia first deployed hypersonic missiles in 2019. US have yet to develop never mind produce and deploy any. US air defence and EW is likewise decades behind Russia. NATO weapons industry is too corrupt and not fit for purpose to catch up.
The attempts by the West to isolate Russia has to be the most spectacular foreign policy failure in my lifetime. Completely failed and achieved the opposite- the increasing isolation of the Western/NATO/EU blocs from Asia and the Global South, as well as the ongoing collapse of the entire dollar reserve currency system.
Western/NATO "strategy" in every war relies on "air supremacy". They have no strategy beyond that. Russia, China and Iran have all removed this possible "strategy" from the board. NATO were all in on air supremacy & shock and awe. They have no other strategy nor the tools for any other strategy. It's over.
-
Finland to formally join Nato within days
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/31/finland-to-formally-join-nato-within-days-nato-announces (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/31/finland-to-formally-join-nato-within-days-nato-announces)
-
Finland to formally join Nato within days
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/31/finland-to-formally-join-nato-within-days-nato-announces (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/31/finland-to-formally-join-nato-within-days-nato-announces)
NATO are well and truly exposed as a paper tiger. The addition of Finland will hardly have Russia, China, Iran et al quaking in their boots. NATO have been removed from their perch as the dominant military power in the world. It is done. Finland doesn't alter that. The bigger picture is that the world is turning its back on Western/NATO exploitation and joining the SCO, BRICS+, ASEAN en masse.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1642097150283730945
Above is the Zambian opposition leader addressing Kamala Harris on her pathetic tour of Africa in an attempt to turn the tide. This is the reception the US is receiving all over Africa and South America. The world has had enough of US/NATO. Russia and China have provided the tools and means to end Western colonialism once and for all. It's a done deal. NATO will "run interference" for as long as possible to delay the birth of the multi-polar system but lack the means to prevent it.
The multi-polar bloc is growing at such a pace that it is out of Western/NATO control. Finland :-[ doesn't alter that equation.
"A country that has killed so many of our leaders in Africa and other parts of the world. The killers of Patrice Lumumba, those who toppled Kwqame Nkrumah, those who killed Nasser, those who killed Muammar Ghaddafi- today are coming to teach us about democracy. A country that has been built on brutal force, on enslavement of other human beings, on the humiliation of Africans, the exploitation of Africans, the plunder of Africa is today coming to teach us about democracy.
If you have no respect for the dignity of others, if you have no respect for the sovereignty of other countries-you cannot claim to be a champion of democracy"
When African leaders are addressing the US Vice President as above, directly, I think it's safe to say that Western colonialism is at the end of the road. Western wealth is based on the plunder of weaker countries. Those weaker countries now have options and means to resist Western exploitation and plunder. It is over.
-
NATO are well and truly exposed as a paper tiger. The addition of Finland will hardly have Russia, China, Iran et al quaking in their boots. NATO have been removed from their perch as the dominant military power in the world. It is done. Finland doesn't alter that. The bigger picture is that the world is turning its back on Western/NATO exploitation and joining the SCO, BRICS+, ASEAN en masse.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1642097150283730945
Above is the Zambian opposition leader addressing Kamala Harris on her pathetic tour of Africa in an attempt to turn the tide. This is the reception the US is receiving all over Africa and South America. The world has had enough of US/NATO. Russia and China have provided the tools and means to end Western colonialism once and for all. It's a done deal. NATO will "run interference" for as long as possible to delay the birth of the multi-polar system but lack the means to prevent it.
The multi-polar bloc is growing at such a pace that it is out of Western/NATO control. Finland :-[ doesn't alter that equation.
"A country that has killed so many of our leaders in Africa and other parts of the world. The killers of Patrice Lumumba, those who toppled Kwqame Nkrumah, those who killed Nasser, those who killed Muammar Ghaddafi- today are coming to teach us about democracy. A country that has been built on brutal force, on enslavement of other human beings, on the humiliation of Africans, the exploitation of Africans, the plunder of Africa is today coming to teach us about democracy.
If you have no respect for the dignity of others, if you have no respect for the sovereignty of other countries-you cannot claim to be a champion of democracy"
When African leaders are addressing the US Vice President as above, directly, I think it's safe to say that Western colonialism is at the end of the road. Western wealth is based on the plunder of weaker countries. Those weaker countries now have options and means to resist Western exploitation and plunder. It is over.
What else is happening in Tankie fantasy world?
-
What else is happening in Tankie fantasy world?
Glad you ask ::) ::)
Since "Tankie fantasy world" is an obvious euphemism for objective reality. A few more developments in the objective reality world.
The increasing diplomacy in the Middle East/West Asia is incredible and unfolding at breakneck speed. Syrian President, Bashar Al Assad, no longer isolated and renewing diplomatic relations with all the Arab states previously lined up with US attempts to isolate Iran and Syria. That ship has sailed. US/NATO days in the Middle east are numbered. China/Russia have upended Western Imperialism in West Asia.
https://consortiumnews.com/2023/03/28/us-occupiers-lash-out-as-syria-war-draws-to-an-end/
A few highlights from the above demonstrating the predicament that the US occupiers and by extension, the Zionist occupiers of Palestine also face;
Washington is worried about a peace between Damascus and its estranged Arab neighbors — as well as Turkey — that is marginalizing the U.S. and its allies, writes M.K. Bhadrakumar.
There is optimism that Syria stands to gain from the Saudi-Iranian rapprochement. Already, the Saudi Foreign Ministry has revealed that talks are going on with Syria for resuming consular services between the two countries, which will pave the way for the resumption of diplomatic relations, making it possible to reinstate Syria’s membership of the Arab League...
The backdrop is that the normalization of relations between Syria and its estranged Arab neighbors has accelerated. It must be particularly galling for Washington that these regional states used to be active participants in the U.S.-led regime change project to overthrow the government of President Bashar al-Assad. The Saudi-Iranian rapprochement badly isolates the U.S. and Israel.
From such a perspective, it stands to reason that the U.S. is once again stirring up the Syrian cauldron as Russian aircraft have been reported to be frequently flying over the U.S. military base At Tanf on the Syrian-Iraqi border where training camps for militant groups are known to exist...
Israel too is a stakeholder in keeping Syria unstable and weak. In the Israeli narrative, Iran-backed militia groups have been increasing their capability in Syria in the last two years and the continued U.S. occupation of Syria is vital for balancing these groups. Israel is paranoid that a strong government in Damascus might start challenging its illegal occupation of the Golan Heights.
A key factor in this matrix is the nascent process of Russian mediation between Turkey and Syria. With an eye on the forthcoming presidential and parliamentary election in Turkey in May, President Recep Erdogan is keen to achieve some visible progress in improving ties with Syria...
Turkey is a straggler when other the West Asian countries are normalizing their relations with Damascus. But Assad is demanding the removal of Turkish occupation of Syrian territory first for resuming ties with Ankara.
Now, there are growing signs that Erdogan may be willing to bite the bullet...
Significantly, Erdogan telephoned Russian President Vladimir Putin on Saturday and the Kremlin readout mentioned that amongst “topics concerning Russian-Turkish partnership in various fields,” during the conversation, “the Syrian issue was touched upon, and the importance of continuing the normalization of Turkish-Syrian relations was underlined. In this regard the President of Türkiye highlighted the constructive mediatory role Russia has played in this process.”
Earlier, last week, Turkish Defense Minister Hulusi Akar held telephone talks with his Russian counterpart Sergei Shoigu to discuss developments in Syria where he underscored that the “sole purpose” of its deployment in northern Syria is to secure its borders and fight terrorism.
It is entirely conceivable that Erdogan has sought Putin’s help and his intervention to reach a modus vivendi with Assad. Of course, this is a spectacular success story for Russian diplomacy — and for Putin personally — that the Kremlin is being called upon to broker the Turkish-Syrian normalization.
The China-brokered, Saudi-Iranian normalization hit Washington where it hurts. But if Putin now brokers peace between two other rival West Asian states, Biden will be exposed as hopelessly incompetent.
If Turkey ends its military presence in Syria, the spotlight will fall on the U.S.’ illegal occupation of one-third of Syrian territory and the massive smuggling of oil and other resources from Syria in American military convoys.
-
Why Finland Joining NATO Checkmates Russia
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=si9Phc9ArpU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=si9Phc9ArpU)
-
Why Russia is Scared of Finland Joining NATO
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAlfP_CzrfM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAlfP_CzrfM)
-
So you imagine that Russia can now be invaded from Finland. How would that happen? I watched 5 mins of your link and it was so shallow and lacking in any understanding it is laughable.
How would all these troops amass in Finland without being obliterated by stand off capacity? The commentator in your link seems to believe an invasion of Russia from Finland is a possibility. The only use Finland can serve to NATO is as an attempt to defeat and decapitate Russian nuclear deterrence with a first strike. Russia will destroy any missile silos/bases placed in Finland. We will see how the Finnish population feel about missiles on their territory threatening Russia when shit gets real. It won't happen. The Finns threatening Russia ;D ;D
Ukraine has already ceased to exist as a functioning state and will be at best a rump state. Those that have already left (millions) won't be returning. It is doomed to die a demographic death. Completely demilitarised and neutered as a threat as well as de-industrialised and having lost it's most productive and resource rich areas-Ukraine will be a salutary warning to anyone in the queue to threaten Russia.
There are way more important events happening in the world at the moment than Finland joining? NATO. There is a whole multipolar world being birthed at breathtaking speed. The turning away from the West towards the alliances created by China, Russia et al. is impossible to ignore.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/3/22/xi-tells-putin-of-changes-not-seen-for-100
It seems that President Xi (world's largest manufacturer and economy) and President Putin (world's pre-eminent military/nuclear superpower) are also inhabitants of "Tankie fantasy world".
“Right now there are changes – the likes of which we haven’t seen for 100 years – and we are the ones driving these changes together,” Xi told Putin as he stood at the door of the Kremlin to bid him farewell.
The Russian president responded: “I agree.”
-
It's always good to know what's happening in Tankie fantasy world. Readers here need a good laugh.
In Tankie fantasy world Russia was forcing NATO into withdrawing to its 1997 borders when in reality it expands its borders on Russia by 800 miles.
Comedy gold 😂
-
It's always good to know what's happening in Tankie fantasy world. Readers here need a good laugh.
In Tankie fantasy world Russia was forcing NATO into withdrawing to its 1997 borders when in reality it expands its borders on Russia by 800 miles.
Comedy gold 😂
Whats "Tankie fantasy world" ?
-
It's always good to know what's happening in Tankie fantasy world. Readers here need a good laugh.
In Tankie fantasy world Russia was forcing NATO into withdrawing to its 1997 borders when in reality it expands its borders on Russia by 800 miles.
Comedy gold 😂
In reality- Ukraine has lost its most resource rich and industrial areas accounting for about a third of the Ukrainian economy with zero chance of them returning to Ukraine. Millions have left the country to Europe and Russia-most unlikely to return. Hundreds of thousands dead and injured, indebted for billions, most industry and resources gone for good, army, navy, air force all destroyed.
Whilst all this unfolds the world outside of NATO are signing huge deals left, right and centre bypassing the dollar. The world is clearly flocking to the Chinese, Russian led world.
The bar for NATOstanis to claim some sort of victory seems to be getting lower. Finland have joined NATO. Rest of the world(China, Saudis, Iran, Russia, UAE, Syria, Turkiye, South Africa, Russia, Mexico, Argentina, Brazil and on and on) signing deals and cooperation agreements, queueing up to join BRICS+(now larger economically than G7-before coming expansions), SCO, ASEAN.
Africans kicking out the French and bringing in Russian Wagner group(eg. Mali, Central African Republic). Western imperialism is being ended globally. These are observable facts on the ground. Where are all the gains for the Western bloc. It is self evident who is expanding in influence and who is losing influence.
Finland joined NATO-you say. That'll show the rest of the world outside delusional NATOstan :-[ :-[
If Finland ;D ;D joining is your headline win-it is safe to say that NATO has already lost
-
It's always good to know what's happening in Tankie fantasy world. Readers here need a good laugh.
In Tankie fantasy world Russia was forcing NATO into withdrawing to its 1997 borders when in reality it expands its borders on Russia by 800 miles.
Comedy gold 😂
Is expanding to Russia's borders something that you support? Do you not consider it dangerously aggressive? What are the benefits for NATO members citizens to expand further towards the worlds largest nuclear superpower?
You must have a death wish if you support our "foreign policy". You are easily led for certain.
-
"Finland's accession is a setback for Russia's Vladimir Putin, who repeatedly complained of Nato's expansion before his full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
The length of Russia's border with Nato member states has now doubled."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65173043 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65173043)
-
Is this you on Twitter Gringo? :))
(https://preview.redd.it/w5z49pjkykra1.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=5e12e4a61519ecf5fab19194c689ef03641c895a)
-
Is expanding to Russia's borders something that you support?
Yes
Do you not consider it dangerously aggressive?
No
What are the benefits for NATO members citizens to expand further towards the worlds largest nuclear shithole?
They no longer have to fear Russian irredentism. Which is why they seek to join in the first place.
-
Yes
No
They no longer have to fear Russian irredentism. Which is why they seek to join in the first place.
You just demonstrate your stupidity with every post. Russia aren't playing your childish video war games. You don't get to reset and start again. Your views and opinions on serious matters demonstrate that you are a man-child. You need to grow up. Supporting aggression against the world's pre-eminent nuclear power shouldn't be supported by anyone who understands anything at all.
You should read more and play childish games less. You might have something constructive to add then. Your contributions so far have added nothing.
-
Whats "Tankie fantasy world" ?
"Tankie" is a term used by flag shagging right wing morons as an attempted insult to anyone vaguely left wing. It just means the person using the term has a childish mentality and thinks childish playground name calling is a substitute for debate/discussion. David has nothing to say so just trolls the thread with insults.
The term tankie has been used in English-language social media to describe communists, particularly those from the Western world, who uphold the legacies of communist leaders, such as Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin and Mao Zedong.
David just throws terms around like, Tankie, conspiritard to anyone he disagrees with but is incapable of challenging. The thread is full of David's witless contributions of the same insults and idiotic gifs repeatedly whilst waving his dumb flag as if it is a football match. All of David's contributions mean nothing.
-
A single childish gif that expresses the truth will always hold more value that a long winded essay of bullshit 8)
-
I'm surprised he hasn't called you a commutard.
-
I'm surprised he hasn't called you a commutard.
Forgot that one. He'll probably weave it into some comment involving lack of flushing toilets.
-
Below a comment from https://www.moonofalabama.org/ by "pacifica advocate . A succinct summation of where we are and what the world faces. Couldn't have put it better and fully concur;
M.K. Bhadrakumar made a point in one of his recent pieces that it has become clear, now, that Russia's SMO is a fight to stop WWIII before it happens.
I fully sympathize with your feelings about war, but while I tend towards pacifism in most things, I do believe there is such a thing as a "just war" that must be fought, or justice shall be denied.
The US Imperium has been responsible for all major conflicts around the planet for the last 45 years or so, going back to when it provoked the Soviet peacekeeping mission in Afghanistan (and then followed that up by supporting the Mujahideed in toppling the Afghan government). There may have been a few local conflicts which the US wasn't directly involved in either instigating or actively promoting, but I can't really think of any.
Putting an end to the US financial empire and its wanton use of force in subjugating foreign peoples and forcing them to accept neo-colonial servitude in the name of a "rules-based order" that is arbitrarily enforced (but always to the profit of Wall St. and The Pentagon/MIC) simply requires a violent response to the constant aggression and violence unleashed by the US elites. There is no other way to stop it, so I fundamentally disagree with you about "stopping this war" by any means possible.
I want it stopped when the US and NATO are entirely discredited on the international stage as the Global South sees the once-feared hegemon begging for terms from a victorious Russia. The war simply must continue until then, and not stop one moment before that point. Otherwise, the costs in human terms will simply be far greater than you or I can imagine, right now, should Russia stop its war before achieving its objectives.
The alternative--all those dead men, but with the US Imperium remaining in place, still running amok the world over causing pain and strife in pursuit of profits for its political and financial elites--that will be something we regret for generations more, and the costs in "blood and treasure" will have all been for naught. That would be an even greater horror than the one we see unfolding before us, now.
-
M K Bhadrakumar website, "Indian Punchline" linked below. The article in question being referred to in the above comment.
https://www.indianpunchline.com/author/inpunchline/
-
I'm surprised he hasn't called you a commutard.
It was recently brought to my attention, a communist on twitter who was collecting funko pop models. He asked his fellow comrades if funko pop models would still be produced post revolution and if not, should he stock up on his collection. Anticipating a revolution was round the corner
That is what I would call a Commutard". Gringo does not fall into that category at all.
Contrary to Karl Marx, Vladimir Lenin believed that the masses of the proletariat were not capable of leading and establishing a revolution alone. And thus there needed to be "professional revolutionaries" in place to guide and co-ordinate them. I think NGB and Gringo fall into the latter category.
If NGB still believes in the cause, I really do recommend he goes on twitter and other social media. There are many millennial commies my age and younger on twitter etc who are getting nowhere fast (In the same sense that Lenin described). They would lap up NGB rather quickly and he would have a platform and following he could only have dreamt of decades ago. :)
-
Supporting aggression towards Russia is becoming increasingly escalatory and dangerous. It is as if they are begging for a Russian attack in response. The article below raises worrying possible implications. The UK public are being used as pawns in dangerous escalations on matters that would not have public support.
https://consortiumnews.com/2023/04/03/significant-portion-of-uk-lethal-aid-for-ukraine-secret/
From the article above;
Other U.K. supplies include military systems with the potential to reach into Russia from bases in Ukraine.
This includes three M270 long-range multiple launch rocket systems, which have a range of up to 186 miles, putting Russian cities within range.
In April 2022, U.K. Defence Minister James Heappey backed Ukraine carrying out strikes inside Russia using weapons provided by Britain.
Heappey said it was “completely legitimate for Ukraine to be targeting in Russia’s depth in order to disrupt the logistics that if they weren’t disrupted would directly contribute to death and carnage on Ukrainian soil.”
Following UK Defence Minister Heappey's logic and reasoning-it would surely also be "completely legitimate" for Russia to strike into UK's depth "in order to disrupt the logistics that if they weren’t disrupted would directly contribute to death and carnage on Russian soil".
The UK has no legitimate business in Ukraine. It does nothing to serve the UK people, or for that matter, the Ukrainians. It ensures more death-and if UK carries out the supplying of weapons to target Russia's interior, then Russia would be justified in returning the favour.
We are led by donkeys.
-
It was recently brought to my attention, a communist on twitter who was collecting funko pop models. He asked his fellow comrades if funko pop models would still be produced post revolution and if not, should he stock up on his collection. Anticipating a revolution was round the corner
That is what I would call a Commutard". Gringo does not fall into that category at all.
Contrary to Karl Marx, Vladimir Lenin believed that the masses of the proletariat were not capable of leading and establishing a revolution alone. And thus there needed to be "professional revolutionaries" in place to guide and co-ordinate them. I think NGB and Gringo fall into the latter category.
If NGB still believes in the cause, I really do recommend he goes on twitter and other social media. There are many millennial commies my age and younger on twitter etc who are getting nowhere fast (In the same sense that Lenin described). They would lap up NGB rather quickly and he would have a platform and following he could only have dreamt of decades ago. :)
You really do not have a clue about communists or about me. I do follow some social media so I know generally what is around, but I do not participate in social media and do not rely on it for information or guidance. I do still believe in "the cause" but that is not what you identify, which is a caricature of what those who oppose US/NATO hegemony believe. I became active politically long before you were born and I have not changed my views. I have recently become actively involved again after a long gap, mainly as a result of horror at the way the world is progressing. I think we are in greater danger now than we have been since the worst days of the cold war.
-
Supporting aggression towards Russia is becoming increasingly escalatory and dangerous. It is as if they are begging for a Russian attack in response. The article below raises worrying possible implications. The UK public are being used as pawns in dangerous escalations on matters that would not have public support.
https://consortiumnews.com/2023/04/03/significant-portion-of-uk-lethal-aid-for-ukraine-secret/
From the article above;
Other U.K. supplies include military systems with the potential to reach into Russia from bases in Ukraine.
This includes three M270 long-range multiple launch rocket systems, which have a range of up to 186 miles, putting Russian cities within range.
In April 2022, U.K. Defence Minister James Heappey backed Ukraine carrying out strikes inside Russia using weapons provided by Britain.
Heappey said it was “completely legitimate for Ukraine to be targeting in Russia’s depth in order to disrupt the logistics that if they weren’t disrupted would directly contribute to death and carnage on Ukrainian soil.”
Following UK Defence Minister Heappey's logic and reasoning-it would surely also be "completely legitimate" for Russia to strike into UK's depth "in order to disrupt the logistics that if they weren’t disrupted would directly contribute to death and carnage on Russian soil".
The UK has no legitimate business in Ukraine. It does nothing to serve the UK people, or for that matter, the Ukrainians. It ensures more death-and if UK carries out the supplying of weapons to target Russia's interior, then Russia would be justified in returning the favour.
We are led by donkeys.
I totally agree, and we are in great danger as a result.
-
"Tankie" is a term used by flag shagging right wing morons as an attempted insult to anyone vaguely left wing. It just means the person using the term has a childish mentality and thinks childish playground name calling is a substitute for debate/discussion. David has nothing to say so just trolls the thread with insults.
The term tankie has been used in English-language social media to describe communists, particularly those from the Western world, who uphold the legacies of communist leaders, such as Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin and Mao Zedong.
David just throws terms around like, Tankie, conspiritard to anyone he disagrees with but is incapable of challenging. The thread is full of David's witless contributions of the same insults and idiotic gifs repeatedly whilst waving his dumb flag as if it is a football match. All of David's contributions mean nothing.
You are correct in your description of the current use of the slur "Tankie" by idiots. In fact although it is now a term of abuse used by right wing propagandists, its origins go back to the disputes within the CPGB in the late 1960s. Following the Warsaw Pact intervention in Czechoslovakia in 1968 there were deep divisions within the CPGB. The party leadership were very critical of the Soviet/Warsaw Pact action and this was endorsed at the congress of the party. However a significant minority of the CP supported the intervention and objected to the position taken. It led to internal conflict, with the term "Tankie" adopted as an insult by some who followed the majority position (referring to the tanks which rolled into Prague), and "Euro" used as a counter-insult by those who supported the intervention and opposed the growing "Eurocommunist" trend within the CPGB.
-
You are correct in your description of the current use of the slur "Tankie" by idiots. In fact although it is now a term of abuse used by right wing propagandists, its origins go back to the disputes within the CPGB in the late 1960s. Following the Warsaw Pact intervention in Czechoslovakia in 1968 there were deep divisions within the CPGB. The party leadership were very critical of the Soviet/Warsaw Pact action and this was endorsed at the congress of the party. However a significant minority of the CP supported the intervention and objected to the position taken. It led to internal conflict, with the term "Tankie" adopted as an insult by some who followed the majority position (referring to the tanks which rolled into Prague), and "Euro" used as a counter-insult by those who supported the intervention and opposed the growing "Eurocommunist" trend within the CPGB.
Got to say that "Euro" as a counter-insult sounds weak. The "Tankies" lacked imagination in their counter insults. Thanks for the little bit of history, always good to know background.
-
You really do not have a clue about communists
What makes you say that? I have read a lot of the works of Kim il Sung and Vladimir Lenin. I have also read a lot about Saloth Sar AKA Pol Pot.
What I do not understand is why many on the far left today support Vladmir Putin and his government. This is a man who while wearing a £10,000 Lorio Piani jacket over a £2,400 Italian Kilton roll neck jumper quotes from the Gospel of John 15:13 to justify a war.
Dressed head to toe in bourgeois apparel while invoking the opium of the people during a war rally. ???
There is nothing left-wing about Putin's Russia the opposite is the case. Matthew Heimbach American white supremacist leader and Nick Griffin the former BNP leader are all supporting the Russian war.
The stuff Nick Griffin is saying about Russia and NATO, you'd think he is reading it directly from Gringos posts on here :))
https://www.purged.tv/l/2757219355/Templar-Report-Live---March-22-2022 (https://www.purged.tv/l/2757219355/Templar-Report-Live---March-22-2022)
-
What makes you say that? I have read a lot of the works of Kim il Sung and Vladimir Lenin. I have also read a lot about Saloth Sar AKA Pol Pot.
What I do not understand is why many on the far left today support Vladmir Putin and his government. This is a man who while wearing a £10,000 Lorio Piani jacket over a £2,400 Italian Kilton roll neck jumper quotes from the Gospel of John 15:13 to justify a war.
Dressed head to toe in bourgeois apparel while invoking the opium of the people during a war rally. ???
There is nothing left-wing about Putin's Russia the opposite is the case. Matthew Heimbach American white supremacist leader and Nick Griffin the former BNP leader are all supporting the Russian war.
The stuff Nick Griffin is saying about Russia and NATO, you'd think he is reading it directly from Gringos posts on here :))
https://www.purged.tv/l/2757219355/Templar-Report-Live---March-22-2022 (https://www.purged.tv/l/2757219355/Templar-Report-Live---March-22-2022)
Anti-Imperialism is not a left/right issue. It is a right/wrong issue.
-
What makes you say that? I have read a lot of the works of Kim il Sung and Vladimir Lenin. I have also read a lot about Saloth Sar AKA Pol Pot.
What I do not understand is why many on the far left today support Vladmir Putin and his government. This is a man who while wearing a £10,000 Lorio Piani jacket over a £2,400 Italian Kilton roll neck jumper quotes from the Gospel of John 15:13 to justify a war.
Dressed head to toe in bourgeois apparel while invoking the opium of the people during a war rally. ???
There is nothing left-wing about Putin's Russia the opposite is the case. Matthew Heimbach American white supremacist leader and Nick Griffin the former BNP leader are all supporting the Russian war.
The stuff Nick Griffin is saying about Russia and NATO, you'd think he is reading it directly from Gringos posts on here :))
https://www.purged.tv/l/2757219355/Templar-Report-Live---March-22-2022 (https://www.purged.tv/l/2757219355/Templar-Report-Live---March-22-2022)
You understand nothing. Wars aren't supported or not based on the domestic politics of the participants. What you don't understand is that geopolitics is outside domestic politics and an entirely separate issue.
-
Students in a Japanese town planted a sunflower field, then made sunflower oil, sold it, and donated the proceeds to Ukraine.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/1274fy7/students_in_a_japanese_town_planted_a_sunflower/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/1274fy7/students_in_a_japanese_town_planted_a_sunflower/)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iz6uks2rNio (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iz6uks2rNio)
They raised 100,000 yen :)
-
Jimmy Dore talking about US "charm offensive" in Africa-funny ;D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-617EzlNYTI&ab_channel=TheJimmyDoreShow
-
Jimmy Dore talking about US "charm offensive" in Africa-funny ;D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-617EzlNYTI&ab_channel=TheJimmyDoreShow
I guess you believe HIV is an American conspiracy also.
https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2023/02/28/1159415936/george-w-bushs-anti-hiv-program-is-hailed-as-amazing-and-still-crucial-at-20 (https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2023/02/28/1159415936/george-w-bushs-anti-hiv-program-is-hailed-as-amazing-and-still-crucial-at-20)
$90 billion donated to date and 20 million African lives saved.
So, what conspiratorial shenanigans was Bush up to in Tankie fantasy world when he started PEPFAR in Africa? What has Putler done to tackle the HIV problem?
-
How George W. Bush saved millions of lives in Africa
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmsfSKlYzo8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmsfSKlYzo8)
-
Jimmy Dore talking about US "charm offensive" in Africa-funny ;D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-617EzlNYTI&ab_channel=TheJimmyDoreShow
Let's rebalance the picture a little. https://africacenter.org/spotlight/intervening-to-undermine-democracy-in-africa-russias-playbook-for-influence/
-
Let's rebalance the picture a little. https://africacenter.org/spotlight/intervening-to-undermine-democracy-in-africa-russias-playbook-for-influence/
Who We Are
The Africa Center is an academic institution within the U.S. Department of Defense established and funded by Congress for the study of security issues relating to Africa and serving as a forum for bilateral and multilateral research, communication, training, and exchange of ideas involving military and civilian participants.
That is from their home page, Steve. Didn't do your due diligence did you?
Doesn't really re-balance the picture does it?
Maybe check your sources before posting. The US Department of Defence.
The US DoD complaining about Russia in Africa on the one hand-African leaders calling out US Imperialism and crimes against Africa on the other hand. You really are clueless. If you seek confirmation bias-it is hardly surprising that you find some. It isn't credible and easily dismissed.
-
David and Steve's links in order to counter the "US not wanted in Africa" posts only serve to emphasise the point. David linked to a report on "Morning Joe" on MSNBC. It is the equivalent of "Loose Women". Steve linked to a US Department of Defence founded and funded institution.
You know what they say about self praise.
Imagine if I linked to RT and the Russian MOD in order to prove that Russia were doing good in Africa. It would only be evidence that Russians say they are helping Africa. All Steve and David have shown is Americans lavishing themselves in praise. The people the US supposedly helped clearly don't share their view.
-
Who We Are
The Africa Center is an academic institution within the U.S. Department of Defense established and funded by Congress for the study of security issues relating to Africa and serving as a forum for bilateral and multilateral research, communication, training, and exchange of ideas involving military and civilian participants.
That is from their home page, Steve. Didn't do your due diligence did you?
Doesn't really re-balance the picture does it?
Maybe check your sources before posting. The US Department of Defence.
The US DoD complaining about Russia in Africa on the one hand-African leaders calling out US Imperialism and crimes against Africa on the other hand. You really are clueless. If you seek confirmation bias-it is hardly surprising that you find some. It isn't credible and easily dismissed.
Why do you think Africans in the former French colonies are turning to Putin? Are they really in favour of his tyranny or maybe it's because they want perceived protection from Islamic extremism. Did you actually read the article posted and what is your response to the UN voting record of Russia on African issues?
-
Why do you think Africans in the former French colonies are turning to Putin? Are they really in favour of his tyranny or maybe it's because they want perceived protection from Islamic extremism. Did you actually read the article posted and what is your response to the UN voting record of Russia on African issues?
The reason that Africans generally are turning to Russia is because of the role played by the Soviet Union in gaining independence for the former colonies. The Russians are trusted because their track record there speaks for itself. As do the colonialist powers and histories in Africa speak for themselves.
Your premise of "Putin's Tyranny" is entirely false and a very Western view. Africans don't see Putin as a tyrant so they are not "in favour of his tyranny". The entire premise of the article is false and is just US DoD propaganda.
I stopped reading after a couple of paragraphs. It is unhinged propaganda. Then I went to their "About Us" page. Which explained the false premises and ridiculously loaded language.
Whatever the article had to say vis a vis voting records is missing context without even bothering to look at what was said. The politics of the constituent parts of the UN (Security Council-General Assembly) are complicated and the voting records of countries are not always a reflection of their views. Much arm twisting, coercion, economic threats and much more are employed by the US. This is well known and reported.
Would you consider an article by a Russian MOD sponsored institution as independent as long as it called itself "Africa Foundation"? You are taking the piss :-[
-
The reason that Africans generally are turning to Russia is because of the role played by the Soviet Union in gaining independence for the former colonies. The Russians are trusted because their track record there speaks for itself. As do the colonialist powers and histories in Africa speak for themselves.
Your premise of "Putin's Tyranny" is entirely false and a very Western view. Africans don't see Putin as a tyrant so they are not "in favour of his tyranny". The entire premise of the article is false and is just US DoD propaganda.
I stopped reading after a couple of paragraphs. It is unhinged propaganda. Then I went to their "About Us" page. Which explained the false premises and ridiculously loaded language.
Whatever the article had to say vis a vis voting records is missing context without even bothering to look at what was said. The politics of the constituent parts of the UN (Security Council-General Assembly) are complicated and the voting records of countries are not always a reflection of their views. Much arm twisting, coercion, economic threats and much more are employed by the US. This is well known and reported.
Would you consider an article by a Russian MOD sponsored institution as independent as long as it called itself "Africa Foundation"? You are taking the piss :-[
So you have forfeited your right to criticize. I don't consider Jimmy Dore as impartial, but I did the courtesy of listening to him.
-
Why do you think Africans in the former French colonies are turning to Putin? Are they really in favour of his tyranny or maybe it's because they want perceived protection from Islamic extremism. Did you actually read the article posted and what is your response to the UN voting record of Russia on African issues?
The Africans want sovereignty and the freedom to develop their countries free from Western tyranny, theft and interference. They trust the Chinese and Russians based on historical deeds and current actions. It is really simple, Steve. Western colonialists histories are biting them on the arse. We are facing the consequences of our own tyranny.
-
So you have forfeited your right to criticize. I don't consider Jimmy Dore as impartial, but I did the courtesy of listening to him.
Here are the first few paragraphs of your US Depatment of Defence article
Russia has systematically sought to undercut democracy in Africa, both to normalize authoritarianism as well as to create an entry point for Russian influence.
I should have stopped reading there. Levering three false premises into the opening sentence already shows that this is a straight up propaganda piece. It is directly from the US DoD. It isn't written to "inform" you Steve :-[ Anyway on it goes;
It is often said that since the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the abandoning of communism that Russian foreign policy lacks an ideology.
However, in reading Samuel Ramani’s methodical chronicling of Russian foreign policy in Africa under President Vladimir Putin, Russia in Africa: Resurgent Great Power or Bellicose Pretender, an explicit and consistent ideology is strikingly evident—to prop up and normalize authoritarian governments.
It is appallingly loaded language and not even disguised propaganda. There are so many lies and false premises levered into the opening three sentences that anything following them is already debunked on the basis of being built on false premises.
You would think that an article seeking to explain their own ongoing eviction from Africa might contain at least some critique of their own actions, behaviour. Americans-self awareness-No none of that. It's Russia to blame. Russia!! Putin!! Russia!!
-
So you have forfeited your right to criticize. I don't consider Jimmy Dore as impartial, but I did the courtesy of listening to him.
Jimmy Dore isn't calling himself AfricaCentre.org. Jimmy Dore is commenting as Jimmy Dore. He is open about his funding. It is already dishonest to call themselves AfricaCentre. There is no comparison to the biases of Jimmy Dore. He isn't pretending not to be partial. Why don't the US Department of Defence just put out the article you linked from a US DoD web address, do you think?
I finished reading the article anyway and it is just lies built on misrepresentations. There is nothing to glean from it because it is based on deliberate falsehoods in its entirety. A western colonial view that thinks it knows best for Africans. It fails to address any possible western failures and shortcomings for the mistrust towards the West and just blames Russia. The lack of any self awareness and absence of any self criticism makes any "analysis" coming from it, moot.
-
I really should stop pretending that Gringo is anything but a servile propagandist. Responding to him is like responding to a TV-ad. His posts are just a naked ruse to sell you on something.
-
"The key element in the tankie mindset is the simple-minded assumption that only the U.S. can be imperialist, and thus any country that opposes the U.S. must be supported."
https://web.archive.org/web/20220401103202/https://theintercept.com/2022/03/01/ukraine-russia-leftists-tankie/ (https://web.archive.org/web/20220401103202/https://theintercept.com/2022/03/01/ukraine-russia-leftists-tankie/)
-
"The key element in the tankie mindset is the simple-minded assumption that only the U.S. can be imperialist, and thus any country that opposes the U.S. must be supported."
https://web.archive.org/web/20220401103202/https://theintercept.com/2022/03/01/ukraine-russia-leftists-tankie/ (https://web.archive.org/web/20220401103202/https://theintercept.com/2022/03/01/ukraine-russia-leftists-tankie/)
So is Russia opposing the U.S. or NATO?
-
So is Russia opposing the U.S. or NATO?
The US is the lead member of NATO, which has never made incursions into Russian territory.
-
The US is the lead member of NATO, which has never made incursions into Russian territory.
So close, Steve. You're nearly there. NATO is meant to be a defensive alliance. Lead member? US calls all of the shots in NATO and a bunch of vassals jump when told to.
NATO is an attempt to give some kind of "international legitimacy" to US crimes. Every NATO intervention is at the behest of the US. Lead member of a defensive alliance is already a contradiction. How does a "defensive alliance" have a lead member? An aggressive alliance needs a leader. The world has always known this. Russia has broken the spell of NATO supremacy. The world, seeing that the Emperor is naked, are moving on.
A natural consequence of your answer to Handyman is that the US is leading the expansion of NATO towards Russia and currently supplying weapons to strike into the Russian interior. What, exactly, are this "defensive alliance" currently defending by supplying weapons to a non member capable of and being used to strike civilian centres inside Russia?
For a defensive alliance that has never been attacked-they have been involved in a lot of invasions and interventions. The only thing that NATO defends is the corrupt Western controlled Ponzi scheme whose grip on financial control is slipping daily.
-
Armenia will participate in NATO maneuvers, abandoning CSTO exercises.
https://www.easternherald.com/2023/04/06/armenia-will-participate-in-nato-maneuvers-abandoning-csto-exercises/ (https://www.easternherald.com/2023/04/06/armenia-will-participate-in-nato-maneuvers-abandoning-csto-exercises/)
-
The US is the lead member of NATO, which has never made incursions into Russian territory.
So if NATO relinquish it's presence in the Ukraine, McDonalds will be able to re-open in Moscow and Russia can then re-continue it's embrace of U.S. imperialism.
-
So if NATO relinquish it's presence in the Ukraine, McDonalds will be able to re-open in Moscow and Russia can then re-continue it's embrace of U.S. imperialism.
Angela Merkel blocked Ukraine entering NATO in 2008. She thought she had a special relationship with Putin, which is also why she shut nuclear plants, believing in cheap Russian gas.
-
Angela Merkel blocked Ukraine entering NATO in 2008. She thought she had a special relationship with Putin, which is also why she shut nuclear plants, believing in cheap Russian gas.
Angela Merkel had such a special relationship with Putin that she lied to the Russians for over 8 years over the Minsk accords. This has been openly admitted. It is the Net Zero and idiotic non-energy policies of the Western economies that are to blame for their crashing economies. That and sanctioning their most reliable provider of cheap energy. German economic woes are nothing to do with Putin or Russia.
What is wrong with "the belief in cheap Russian gas"? Germany now are facing massive inflation, soaring energy costs, industries leaving because of the high energy prices making them uncompetitive. This is because they no longer have access to "cheap Russian gas" because they refuse to buy it because of their own self defeating sanctions. Their supposed government seem uninterested in which so-called ally blew up their infrastructure, making sure that "cheap Russian gas" couldn't become available should Germany see the light and "make nice" with Russia.
The "cheap Russian gas" is now making its way to more reliable countries. This is all of Germany's own doing, albeit doing the bidding of their US masters.
-
Attitude of Ukrainians towards foreign countries.
(https://preview.redd.it/04oe80hzbwsa1.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=320fe7ac97b5b03b96647285dac1e8ab8822cb7c)
-
Attitude of Ukrainians towards foreign countries.
(https://preview.redd.it/04oe80hzbwsa1.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=320fe7ac97b5b03b96647285dac1e8ab8822cb7c)
If you tried to ask the same question to UK or USA, I expect the grey areas would be the biggest. Our two populations are not the most geopolitically astute David.
-
If you tried to ask the same question to UK or USA, I expect the grey areas would be the biggest. Our two populations are not the most geopolitically astute David.
(http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Q1-as-a-league-table-updated.png)
-
(http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Q1-as-a-league-table-updated.png)
Who's view?
-
I was probably labelled a conspiritard for suggesting this near the beginning of the conflict.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65245065
-
There is a video circulating of Russian mercenaries beheading a Ukrainian soldier ISIS-style.
https://twitter.com/michaeldweiss/status/1645926063380508673 (https://twitter.com/michaeldweiss/status/1645926063380508673)
-
Can anyone explain why all the magnificent architecture in St. Petersburg and Moscow is still untouched by artillery fire from Ukraine ? Ukraine is flattened in parts.
-
Can anyone explain why all the magnificent architecture in St. Petersburg and Moscow is still untouched by artillery fire from Ukraine ? Ukraine is flattened in parts.
I suppose because once escalated Russia would use its nuclear arsenal on Kiev.
-
I suppose because once escalated Russia would use its nuclear arsenal on Kiev.
Kiev would be no match for the same on the Kremlin though. Even their stations are like palaces inside. Would Putin risk his country being reduced to rubble ? I don't think so.
Sanctions haven't worked either, so what goes on ? I don't understand it at all.
-
Kiev would be no match for the same on the Kremlin though. Even their stations are like palaces inside. Would Putin risk his country being reduced to rubble ? I don't think so.
Sanctions haven't worked either, so what goes on ? I don't understand it at all.
When I visited Moscow in 1988 I was blown away by how clean and tidy the subway stations were,you turn a corner and see another bronze looking statue of some Russian luminary.
-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/04/14/gloom-united-states-outlook-ukraine-russia-outcome-leak/
-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/04/14/gloom-united-states-outlook-ukraine-russia-outcome-leak/
According to these leaks. The death toll is 120,000-130,000 Ukrainians and 180,000-230,000 Russians.
-
https://news.sky.com/story/vladimir-putin-closes-loophole-that-allowed-russian-men-to-avoid-military-service-12857532 (https://news.sky.com/story/vladimir-putin-closes-loophole-that-allowed-russian-men-to-avoid-military-service-12857532)
-
There's a lot to be said for freedom ! Although it's been abused in this country, sadly as many don't know or realise how lucky they are and take things for granted. A year in Russia would sort them ;D
There are a handful of Russian Youtubers in varying countries where they're allowed access, though that privilege will come to an end when Russia blocks youtube. I only know of one couple ( Russian ) who sought asylum in this country after they flew in at Stansted airport, desperate and with nowhere to go.
-
Putin admits he is facing ‘serious challenges’
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ukraine-russia-putin-latest-today-b2320295.html (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ukraine-russia-putin-latest-today-b2320295.html)
-
A RUSSIAN DISINFORMATION EMPIRE IN OAK HARBOR, WASHINGTON
https://malcontentment.com/a-russian-disinformation-empire-in-oak-harbor-washington/?amp (https://malcontentment.com/a-russian-disinformation-empire-in-oak-harbor-washington/?amp)
-
https://news.sky.com/video/ukraine-war-15-ukrainian-orphans-their-remarkable-escape-from-russia-and-the-fate-of-thousands-left-behind-12861467 (https://news.sky.com/video/ukraine-war-15-ukrainian-orphans-their-remarkable-escape-from-russia-and-the-fate-of-thousands-left-behind-12861467)
-
NATO allies 'agree Ukraine will become member'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjIaeJH57-Q (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjIaeJH57-Q)
-
https://www.facebook.com/reel/6148937115195816?s=yWDuG2&fs=e
-
https://www.facebook.com/reel/6148937115195816?s=yWDuG2&fs=e
Gotta love a bit of Candace.
-
Here is the CCTV footage of the bomb that Russia dropped on itself
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/12tumex/explosion_of_yesterdays_bomb_that_russia_dropped/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/12tumex/explosion_of_yesterdays_bomb_that_russia_dropped/)
-
Putin ‘struggling to maintain justification for invasion’
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ukraine-russia-war-nato-putin-nuclear-threat-b2324713.html (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ukraine-russia-war-nato-putin-nuclear-threat-b2324713.html)
-
If this Ukrainian spring offensive doesn't hurry up, they'll have to rename it. Have we seen the end of Russian folly on the battlefield?
-
If this Ukrainian spring offensive doesn't hurry up, they'll have to rename it. Have we seen the end of Russian folly on the battlefield?
Spring doesn't end until mid June.
-
What Is a Tankie? (What, Who, Why - and How To Handle)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lcBplljoD8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lcBplljoD8)
-
What Is a Tankie? (What, Who, Why - and How To Handle)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lcBplljoD8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lcBplljoD8)
There are several Trojan Horses on this site.
-
What Is a Tankie? (What, Who, Why - and How To Handle)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lcBplljoD8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lcBplljoD8)
Who cares !
-
this is intresting https://youtu.be/LJDevsbG4ns
-
this is intresting https://youtu.be/LJDevsbG4ns
I'm not sure the Trawnikis were exclusively Ukrainian. In any event you have made the case for the Jews to return to their own homeland.
-
I'm not sure the Trawnikis were exclusively Ukrainian. In any event you have made the case for the Jews to return to their own homeland.
The notion that "the Jews" have "their" homeland is indefensible horseshit. Given that anyone can convert and become a "Jew", how is that person now entitled to land that they have no connection to? Is "Jewishness" a race or a religion? It depends on the duplicitous argument being made.
I could argue that myself and all of my direct family are "entitled" to our own "homeland" in Ghana or Nigeria with a far more convincing and direct case than the bullshit entitlements of Zionists.
In 1834 slaves in Antigua and the wider Caribbean were emancipated. Amongst those emancipated slaves was one "William Jordan Rice Watson". This was obviously the slave owners name which was taken up by WJR Watson-the emancipated slave. WJR Watson ended up in Hull, eventually lost at sea on a whaling ship but not before marrying and having children. His eldest son, also William Jordan Rice Watson, was the father of my grandfather(my mother's dad).
The slaves on Antigua mostly came from the Gold Coast and the Bight of Biafra(now parts of Ghana and Nigeria). The emancipated slave WJR Watson, or his parents, were removed/stolen from their land in Africa and transported to the Caribbean.
To be clear, I don't think that I am entitled to any land in Ghana or Nigeria. Nor do I feel entitled to any part of Antigua, although we do plan to visit on a family holiday :)
My own, and my direct family's, connection to that land is far closer and more real and definable than the Zionist myth.
-
The notion that "the Jews" have "their" homeland is indefensible horseshit. Given that anyone can convert and become a "Jew", how is that person now entitled to land that they have no connection to? Is "Jewishness" a race or a religion? It depends on the duplicitous argument being made.
I could argue that myself and all of my direct family are "entitled" to our own "homeland" in Ghana or Nigeria with a far more convincing and direct case than the bullshit entitlements of Zionists.
In 1834 slaves in Antigua and the wider Caribbean were emancipated. Amongst those emancipated slaves was one "William Jordan Rice Watson". This was obviously the slave owners name which was taken up by WJR Watson-the emancipated slave. WJR Watson ended up in Hull, eventually lost at sea on a whaling ship but not before marrying and having children. His eldest son, also William Jordan Rice Watson, was the father of my grandfather(my mother's dad).
The slaves on Antigua mostly came from the Gold Coast and the Bight of Biafra(now parts of Ghana and Nigeria). The emancipated slave WJR Watson, or his parents, were removed/stolen from their land in Africa and transported to the Caribbean.
To be clear, I don't think that I am entitled to any land in Ghana or Nigeria. Nor do I feel entitled to any part of Antigua, although we do plan to visit on a family holiday :)
My own, and my direct family's, connection to that land is far closer and more real and definable than the Zionist myth.
Why don't you claim residency in Ghana if you feel you have a connection with the land? I assume it's because you lead a better life in the UK. The Jews led by Moses from Egypt into Canaan have been around for 4000 years, which I mentioned in an earlier post.
-
Why don't you claim residency in Ghana if you feel you have a connection with the land? I assume it's because you lead a better life in the UK. The Jews led by Moses from Egypt into Canaan have been around for 4000 years, which I mentioned in an earlier post.
How to spectacularly miss the point. Jews do not have an entitlement to Palestine because of some biblical story.
"Lead a better life in the UK" than where? I've never lived in Ghana. How could you or I know if that would be better or worse?
The point, Steve, was not that I am entitled to residency or land in Ghana/Nigeria-it was making clear that I don't think this. I can trace my direct connection, only five generations back, and don't think that I and my relatives have any entitlement to this. Why would people, whose connection to land is a thousands of years old bible story, have any entitlement to land based on such flimsy grounds?
-
How to spectacularly miss the point. Jews do not have an entitlement to Palestine because of some biblical story.
"Lead a better life in the UK" than where? I've never lived in Ghana. How could you or I know if that would be better or worse?
The point, Steve, was not that I am entitled to residency or land in Ghana/Nigeria-it was making clear that I don't think this. I can trace my direct connection, only five generations back, and don't think that I and my relatives have any entitlement to this. Why would people, whose connection to land is a thousands of years old bible story, have any entitlement to land based on such flimsy grounds?
But the West Bank is Judea and Samaria to Jews. I'm all for the two-state solution, but given the history of the Jews they are not going to allow a fully-fledged hostile Islamic state on their borders with an army which could at some future point in time be used to annihilate them.
-
For the first time, Armenia (along with Brazil, Kazakhstan and China, among others) voted in favour of a UN General Assembly resolution that condemns Russia aggression against Ukraine and Georgia.
https://twitter.com/metesohtaoglu/status/1653048677831770113 (https://twitter.com/metesohtaoglu/status/1653048677831770113)
-
Many Georgians aren't to happy about the influx of Russians ( refugees ) and feel as though their country is being taken over again. Especially those Russians who've fled with all their savings enabling them to purchase properties/nightclubs where only Russian is spoken, mainly by the older sector of Georgia.
One Georgian cafe/restaurant owner demands that any Russian going to his cafe, speaks English and is anti-Putin.
A lot of Russians have moved on from Tblisi and Georgia because of the possible problems erupting again.
Turkey won't give long-term visas to Russians, if at all in some cases, but there are still far-flung countries where visas are still permitted. Having a Russian passport isn't the best flavour of the month ;D
-
For the first time, Armenia (along with Brazil, Kazakhstan and China, among others) voted in favour of a UN General Assembly resolution that condemns Russia aggression against Ukraine and Georgia.
https://twitter.com/metesohtaoglu/status/1653048677831770113 (https://twitter.com/metesohtaoglu/status/1653048677831770113)
One day David, you might find yourself in a conversation with a gulag jailer in the Urals. Hopefully they will be able to play chess. And you can tell them all about the Bamber case, if you work on your Russian language skills.
-
One day David, you might find yourself in a conversation with a gulag jailer in the Urals. Hopefully they will be able to play chess. And you can tell them all about the Bamber case, if you work on your Russian language skills.
Check out my latest single 8)
https://youtu.be/3nGtoThx9Bk?t=51 (https://youtu.be/3nGtoThx9Bk?t=51)
-
Check out my latest single 8)
https://youtu.be/3nGtoThx9Bk?t=51 (https://youtu.be/3nGtoThx9Bk?t=51)
Is he supporting Russia? I'm not very bright 🫤
-
Is he supporting Russia? I'm not very bright 🫤
Yes, its this guy -
https://youtu.be/1dwlMeohLPI?t=167 (https://youtu.be/1dwlMeohLPI?t=167)
;D
-
Analysts says Russia ‘likely staged’ Kremlin drone attack it blamed on Ukraine and the West
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/05/04/did-russia-stage-the-kremlin-drone-attack-it-blamed-on-ukraine-.html (https://www.cnbc.com/2023/05/04/did-russia-stage-the-kremlin-drone-attack-it-blamed-on-ukraine-.html)
-
Analysts says Russia ‘likely staged’ Kremlin drone attack it blamed on Ukraine and the West
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/05/04/did-russia-stage-the-kremlin-drone-attack-it-blamed-on-ukraine-.html (https://www.cnbc.com/2023/05/04/did-russia-stage-the-kremlin-drone-attack-it-blamed-on-ukraine-.html)
50/50. Might be / might not.
Russia, UK, US and many others all capable of staging stuff.
If Putin had been took out, I wonder what would have happened.
-
Putin's threatened WW3 for his attempted " assassination ". What a farce !!
-
Putin's threatened WW3 for his attempted " assassination ". What a farce !!
Duck down if you see a bright flash.
-
Retired colonel analyzes video of alleged drone attack on Kremlin
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=icsGap07cVg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=icsGap07cVg)
-
Russia's Wagner leader threatens to withdraw forces from Bakhmut
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGTSolwSZi4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGTSolwSZi4)
-
UK should keep out of this Wagner group. We're famed for " the pot calling the kettle black " and it HASN'T worked !!.
-
Fuck that was loud. Military jets over Hull tonight heading out towards the North Sea :(
-
Was told that there were military jets out last night but didn't see or hear anything myself. Tonight they flew almost directly over my house. Really loud.
-
Ukraine used U.S.-made Patriot to down Russian hypersonic missile
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2023/may/9/pentagon-ukraine-used-us-made-patriot-down-russian/ (https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2023/may/9/pentagon-ukraine-used-us-made-patriot-down-russian/)
-
Ukraine used U.S.-made Patriot to down Russian hypersonic missile
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2023/may/9/pentagon-ukraine-used-us-made-patriot-down-russian/ (https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2023/may/9/pentagon-ukraine-used-us-made-patriot-down-russian/)
No they didn't. The missile parts shown are not a Kinzhal and the Ukrainians themselves admitted this. That you repeat this already debunked tale is not surprising. It belongs in the file with "Ghost of Kiev" and the rest of the idiotic propaganda tales. You are gullible.
-
Had they really intercepted a hypersonic missile we would have been shown the credible evidence of this. You are willing to believe anything that suits your bias no matter how ridiculous the claim.
The Patriot system isn't even very effective against ballistic and cruise missiles. Was the "Ghost of Kiev" operating the system? :-[
-
Was told that there were military jets out last night but didn't see or hear anything myself. Tonight they flew almost directly over my house. Really loud.
We get them frequently from RAF Valley,Anglesey flying over the Mersey. Last night/ early hours, a heavy plane was circling above for a while.
-
We get them frequently from RAF Valley,Anglesey flying over the Mersey. Last night/ early hours, a heavy plane was circling above for a while.
And again tonight, very unusual :-X
-
The internal affairs ministry in Luhansk has been destroyed by a UK supplied Storm Shadow missile! Russian State Duma MP Viktor Vodolatsky, 65, was reportedly injured in the attack also. 8)
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12079757/Russian-separatists-Ukraine-say-hit-UKs-Storm-Shadow-missiles.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12079757/Russian-separatists-Ukraine-say-hit-UKs-Storm-Shadow-missiles.html)
-
No they didn't. The missile parts shown are not a Kinzhal and the Ukrainians themselves admitted this. That you repeat this already debunked tale is not surprising. It belongs in the file with "Ghost of Kiev" and the rest of the idiotic propaganda tales. You are gullible.
They didn't in Tankie dream land. But on planet Earth they did.
https://youtu.be/RsZLJ59qtaU?t=2 (https://youtu.be/RsZLJ59qtaU?t=2)
-
They didn't in Tankie dream land. But on planet Earth they did.
https://youtu.be/RsZLJ59qtaU?t=2 (https://youtu.be/RsZLJ59qtaU?t=2)
https://twitter.com/i/status/1658287607938162690
Another Kinzhal "intercepted"-exactly 0 metres away. No Kinzhal has ever been intercepted and it is delusional copium to believe otherwise.
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2023/05/ukraine-air-defense-lessons-.html#comments
-
https://twitter.com/i/status/1657439050847100928
More Western military aid going up in a huge explosion. Strongly rumoured to contain a lot of the DU ammunition sent from the UK. Western countries are destroying themselves and flirting with catastrophe by continuing to fund and involve themselves in a war that they cannot win.
-
https://twitter.com/i/status/1658287607938162690
Another Kinzhal "intercepted"-exactly 0 metres away. No Kinzhal has ever been intercepted and it is delusional copium to believe otherwise.
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2023/05/ukraine-air-defense-lessons-.html#comments
Anything else happening in Tankie fantasy world that we should know about?
-
https://twitter.com/i/status/1657439050847100928
More Western military aid going up in a huge explosion. Strongly rumoured to contain a lot of the DU ammunition sent from the UK. Western countries are destroying themselves and flirting with catastrophe by continuing to fund and involve themselves in a war that they cannot win.
Maybe not, but they can transmit the message to Putin that crossing the Ukrainian border involved consequences.
-
https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-war-patriot-missile-system-4c79f9110899ca1880a61f2d1f328179
Latest wunderwaffen doesn't even last a month.
https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=568,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/138/005/591/original/ae11167b8530afbd.jpg
-
Russian hypersonic missile scientists arrested for treason
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/05/17/russian-hypersonic-missile-scientists-arrested-for-treason/ (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/05/17/russian-hypersonic-missile-scientists-arrested-for-treason/)
-
The Kremlin said Wednesday that three scientists face “very serious accusations” after a rare public outcry that comes as Ukraine claimed it had shot many of the missiles down.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/russia-hypersonic-missile-scientists-arrested-treason-patriots-ukraine-rcna84857 (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/russia-hypersonic-missile-scientists-arrested-treason-patriots-ukraine-rcna84857)
-
https://off-guardian.org/2023/05/19/answering-our-critics-on-the-russia-question/
-
"Reports have emerged earlier today that there have been several attacks on Russian positions in the Belgorod region by separate independent groups, namely the Freedom of Russia legion(FRL), who formed in Ukraine in opposition to the russian invasion of Ukraine, and the russian ultranationalist russian Volunteer Corps (RDK)."
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/13oojrq/whatever_is_happening_in_belgorod_megathread/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/13oojrq/whatever_is_happening_in_belgorod_megathread/)
-
"Reports have emerged earlier today that there have been several attacks on Russian positions in the Belgorod region by separate independent groups, namely the Freedom of Russia legion(FRL), who formed in Ukraine in opposition to the russian invasion of Ukraine, and the russian ultranationalist russian Volunteer Corps (RDK)."
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/13oojrq/whatever_is_happening_in_belgorod_megathread/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/13oojrq/whatever_is_happening_in_belgorod_megathread/)
A pathetic distraction from the collapse of the Bakhmut propaganda that western/NATO official media have been pushing for months. A NATO equipped army has just been beaten by, so we were told, a bunch of convicts armed only with shovels and using human wave attacks run by a restauranter.
The defeat of Western financial and military dominance is inevitable. The destruction of the Patriot System, the defeat in Bakhmut, the constant targeting and exploding of NATO ammo before it reaches the battlefield-NATO/Ukraine are reduced to meaningless provocations for PR purposes to cover for the humiliations.
NATO propaganda is just embarrassing now and by swallowing it wholesale, as you do, you simply demonstrate your lack of any critical thinking ability whatsoever.
NATO trained and armed an army for Counter-Insurgency. They provoked Russia to invade and occupy Ukraine in order to bleed Russia in a new Vietnam/Afghanistan. Russia refused the bait and flipped the script and instead of occupying Ukraine have drawn NATO/Ukraine into a war of attrition that is unsustainable for NATO. NATO have no plan B and are floundering. They lack the industrial capacity to produce armaments at a sufficient rate for such a war of attrition. NATO are not following a well thought out strategy-they are making moves from desperation.
Empire is being brought down in front of you, the Rest of The World is laughing at the nakedness of Empire. You must be one of the last people who are still admiring Empire's fine suit.
-
A pathetic distraction from the collapse of the Bakhmut propaganda that western/NATO official media have been pushing for months. A NATO equipped army has just been beaten by, so we were told, a bunch of convicts armed only with shovels and using human wave attacks run by a restauranter.
The defeat of Western financial and military dominance is inevitable. The destruction of the Patriot System, the defeat in Bakhmut, the constant targeting and exploding of NATO ammo before it reaches the battlefield-NATO/Ukraine are reduced to meaningless provocations for PR purposes to cover for the humiliations.
NATO propaganda is just embarrassing now and by swallowing it wholesale, as you do, you simply demonstrate your lack of any critical thinking ability whatsoever.
NATO trained and armed an army for Counter-Insurgency. They provoked Russia to invade and occupy Ukraine in order to bleed Russia in a new Vietnam/Afghanistan. Russia refused the bait and flipped the script and instead of occupying Ukraine have drawn NATO/Ukraine into a war of attrition that is unsustainable for NATO. NATO have no plan B and are floundering. They lack the industrial capacity to produce armaments at a sufficient rate for such a war of attrition. NATO are not following a well thought out strategy-they are making moves from desperation.
Empire is being brought down in front of you, the Rest of The World is laughing at the nakedness of Empire. You must be one of the last people who are still admiring Empire's fine suit.
So, that was today's news in Tankie fantasy world! I hope you guys enjoyed and see you tomorrow!
-
..and in the meantime the New World Order sanctioned by gringo shows its true colours yet again. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/russian-minister-who-criticised-vladimir-putin-over-ukraine-war-mysteriously-dies-after-falling-fatally-ill-on-flight-to-moscow/ar-AA1bxJ6s?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=558ce6e2c6e94c15a2861e42e3385b9e&ei=4
-
The "goofy officials of the UK.." https://youtu.be/3ZdmkQd2B0U
Ten years too late at least, surely? https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/nato-allies-agree-ukraine-will-become-a-member-says-jens-stoltenberg/ar-AA1bY78b?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=e2490e45cbec44b38d059eae57e21af9&ei=7
-
Putin's mother has died. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/woman-97-who-claimed-to-be-putin-s-real-mother-dies-in-poverty-in-georgia/ar-AA1c0J9o?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=49cd350aa1984084e7b099258a7335c6&ei=18
Gringo's prophecies are coming true. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/signs-of-de-dollarisation-emerging-wall-street-giant-jpmorgan-says/ar-AA1c8J1S?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=a2099f0f74dd413991f5d6aa4329a300&ei=8
-
Reminiscent of Iraqis pouring Kuwaiti oil into sea and setting all the Kuwaiti oil fields on fire prior to retreating. A malignant regime destroying what they are denied conquest of.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65838771 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65838771)
-
Ahh the BBC, Jimmy Saville's great protector.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65838771
-
What a terrible shame for all the wildlife and ecosystems destroyed by the floodwater. Totally innocent creatures and habitats destroyed. Humankind is really stupid. Possibly the only planet with intelligent lifeforms for billions of miles in space, and we spend our time trying to plot, scheme and destroy each other. What an absolute waste. Imagine how life could be if enough counties agreed to channel resources in to making life on Earth better for as many people as possible?
We should be at a stage were intelligent robots do so much work, that we effectively have time off to enjoy ourselves and pursue our interests.
-
What a terrible shame for all the wildlife and ecosystems destroyed by the floodwater. Totally innocent creatures and habitats destroyed. Humankind is really stupid. Possibly the only planet with intelligent lifeforms for billions of miles in space, and we spend our time trying to plot, scheme and destroy each other. What an absolute waste. Imagine how life could be if enough counties agreed to channel resources in to making life on Earth better for as many people as possible?
We should be at a stage were intelligent robots do so much work, that we effectively have time off to enjoy ourselves and pursue our interests.
And you actually tried to justify Putlers invasion in the beginning. :))
-
And you actually tried to justify Putlers invasion in the beginning. :))
And you still think it couldn't have been avoided, by NATO and the west acting differently. :))
-
And you still think it couldn't have been avoided, by NATO and the west acting differently. :))
Absolutely. NATO could have allowed Ukraine into the alliance back in 2004. And in hindsight they should have.
-
The Russian army have blown up the dam at Mokri Yaly river
https://liveuamap.com/en/2023/11-june-russian-army-have-blown-up-the-dam-at-mokri-yaly (https://liveuamap.com/en/2023/11-june-russian-army-have-blown-up-the-dam-at-mokri-yaly)
-
Russian frontline security unit executes retreating Russian soldiers.
https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/147m73o/russian_frontline_security_unit_executes/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/147m73o/russian_frontline_security_unit_executes/)
-
Putin's mother has died. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/woman-97-who-claimed-to-be-putin-s-real-mother-dies-in-poverty-in-georgia/ar-AA1c0J9o?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=49cd350aa1984084e7b099258a7335c6&ei=18
Gringo's prophecies are coming true. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/signs-of-de-dollarisation-emerging-wall-street-giant-jpmorgan-says/ar-AA1c8J1S?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=a2099f0f74dd413991f5d6aa4329a300&ei=8
They aren't prophecies per se, Steve. They are obvious conclusions to anyone in possession of enough of the facts. Reading exclusively western media or using Google exclusively as your search engine is to be misinformed-by definition. The views I have put forward are widely held, just less so in the censored and propagandised West.
De-dollarisation has been written about and discussed for a long time. The mechanisms to facilitate de-dollarisation have been nurtured, collaborated on and put into place over decades. To understand and appreciate the significance and obvious results of these many projects and initiatives requires stepping outside of Western media. If you really want to understand in some more depth about de-dollarisation and multipolarity then a trawl through some of the excellent Pepe Escobar's writings of the last 20 years is the ideal primer. He has written extensively on all developments of BRICS, SCO, ASEAN, INSTC, OBOR and how they all interlink in the burgeoning multi-polar world.
An appreciation of how the Rest of The World views the illegal (under the UN Charter) sanctions imposed by the US-directly abusing their position of World Reserve Currency is also helpful to understand the motivations for all of the above.
None of this happened or happens suddenly. Years, decades of collaboration, planning, positioning pieces and diplomacy to grow larger and stronger blocs. The current turmoil is US/UK/EU/NATO last desperate stand.
NATO/US/Western hegemony is finished. De-dollarisation will end US ability to fund bases all around the world. The means to impose sanctions removed from them. The Russian military proving to the world that NATO is a paper tiger and their wunderwaffen is overpriced junk.
The Corporate and financial interests that western governments really answer to have no option but to keep on doubling and tripling down but cannot turn back the inevitable tide.
Ukraine as a state is finished. The Ukrainian "PR" counter-offensive, currently ongoing, is a disaster. Massive losses of equipment and men and have yet to reach the first defensive line of three. Western MSM is now totally divorced from reality-it's grip was always tenuous.
For a more rounded and honest "sitrep" of the current counteroffensive have a read of this;
https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/sitrep-61123-ukraine-reorients-and?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2
or this;
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2023/06/ukraine-sitrep-destruction-of-its-third-army-issues-to-negotiate.html#more
-
Putin's mother has died. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/woman-97-who-claimed-to-be-putin-s-real-mother-dies-in-poverty-in-georgia/ar-AA1c0J9o?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=49cd350aa1984084e7b099258a7335c6&ei=18
Gringo's prophecies are coming true. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/signs-of-de-dollarisation-emerging-wall-street-giant-jpmorgan-says/ar-AA1c8J1S?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=a2099f0f74dd413991f5d6aa4329a300&ei=8
Latest from the previously mentioned Pepe Escobar on the Belt Road Initiative (BRI) and the inevitable economic defeat of the "West".
https://thecradle.co/article-view/25792
-
Strom Shadow strikes again!
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/10816029/british-storm-missile-kills-putin-general/ (https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/10816029/british-storm-missile-kills-putin-general/)
-
According to Forbes, Ukraine has already lost half of the German Leopard vehicles it was given.
-
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jun/14/ukraine-failed-assault-near-mala-tokmachka-raises-counteroffensive-challenges
-
According to Forbes, Ukraine has already lost half of the German Leopard vehicles it was given.
They only received 18 Leopards. I wonder how the Challenger 2 is performing? :-\
-
Commander of anti-aircraft gunners tells how they shot down Kinzhal hypersonic missiles over Kyiv.
https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2023/06/15/7406969/ (https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2023/06/15/7406969/)
-
A Russian unit was blasted by HIMARS while waiting 2 hours for their commander to give a motivational speech
https://www.businessinsider.com/russian-unit-waiting-for-commanders-speech-struck-by-himars-report-2023-6 (https://www.businessinsider.com/russian-unit-waiting-for-commanders-speech-struck-by-himars-report-2023-6)
-
Looks like the West's strategy is working great..
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65932700
-
Looks like the West's strategy is working great..
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65932700
So he could "theoretically" use nuclear weapons. Nobody in the West would ever threaten Russian territory: legitimate Russian territory that is. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/putin-says-he-was-forced-to-invade-ukraine-shrugging-off-western-sanctions-and-economic-downturn/ar-AA1cEktu?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=44980001f9dd4fe3897d49bcb4cf738d&ei=15
-
Attacks In Border Towns And Cities Bring The War To Russia's Doorstep
https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-belgorod-attacks-ukraine-war-/32463704.html (https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-belgorod-attacks-ukraine-war-/32463704.html)
-
Where’s Putin? The Russian leader is losing control
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-russian-leader-is-losing-control/ (https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-russian-leader-is-losing-control/)
-
Commander of anti-aircraft gunners tells how they shot down Kinzhal hypersonic missiles over Kyiv.
https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2023/06/15/7406969/ (https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2023/06/15/7406969/)
Let's examine one of your ridiculous claims. If the above were true then the consequences would be enormous, especially as the Ukrainians are now "claiming" to have shot down six more out of six! Russia claim that the hypersonic missiles, such as Khinzal, cannot be intercepted by any current air defence system. In other words, Russia admit that their own state of the art air defence cannot currently intercept hypersonics.
Raytheon would be shouting this from the rooftops. The only air defence system in the world able to intercept hypersonics. Can you imagine the orders that must be coming into Raytheon now for Patriot Systems-the only air defence system in the world capable of intercepting hypersonic missiles. None of this is happening and Raytheon are making no such claims-just some bloke in Ukrainian Pravda.
Why would this be-do you think?
The only Khinzal that the Patriot "intercepted" was at ground level. To believe otherwise shows how gullible and willing to believe anything you are.
-
Let's examine one of your ridiculous claims. If the above were true then the consequences would be enormous, especially as the Ukrainians are now "claiming" to have shot down six more out of six! Russia claim that the hypersonic missiles, such as Khinzal, cannot be intercepted by any current air defence system. In other words, Russia admit that their own state of the art air defence cannot currently intercept hypersonics.
Raytheon would be shouting this from the rooftops. The only air defence system in the world able to intercept hypersonics. Can you imagine the orders that must be coming into Raytheon now for Patriot Systems-the only air defence system in the world capable of intercepting hypersonic missiles. None of this is happening and Raytheon are making no such claims-just some bloke in Ukrainian Pravda.
Why would this be-do you think?
The only Khinzal that the Patriot "intercepted" was at ground level. To believe otherwise shows how gullible and willing to believe anything you are.
It is worth adding to the above that this would also surely be a first in Research and Development where the answer was developed before the question. To be able to nullify a threat- you first have to develop the threat.
The US have not got hypersonic missile technology-how credible is it that they have however developed anti-hypersonic defences. Because a Ukrainian bloke claims it.
Do you know how to apply critical thinking at all, David? This story falls apart on contact with air! ::)
-
The reality of the Ukrainian "Counter Offensive"- and the decisions facing NATO at their upcoming summit in July. M.K.Bhadrakumar - "Russia won’t let Ukraine be bleeding wound". Full article in link-short excerpt below;
https://www.indianpunchline.com/russia-wont-let-ukraine-be-bleeding-wound/
"With the Ukrainian offensive under way for a fortnight, all eyes are on the battlefields, and, crucially, Russia’s options ahead. In a little over three weeks from now, the NATO will be holding a summit in Vilnius and the West has choices to make too. We are arriving at a fork in the road.
The NATO expected the Ukrainian forces to punch through key Russian fortifications by now. In reality, they are struggling to get anywhere near the sprawling layered fortifications and in that desperate attempt, are taking massive losses, entrapped in minefields and taken to pieces by Russian artillery and missiles and the dreaded multi-role attack helicopters known as Alligator.
The signposts are best seen in Russian President Vladimir Putin’s Kremlin press conference on Tuesday, lasting over three hours, with war correspondents. In just a week’s time after Ukraine’s offensive began, “25–30 percent of the supplied equipment (from NATO) has been destroyed,” Putin said.
Putin underscored three things..."
-
The reality of the Ukrainian "Counter Offensive"- and the decisions facing NATO at their upcoming summit in July. M.K.Bhadrakumar - "Russia won’t let Ukraine be bleeding wound". Full article in link-short excerpt below;
https://www.indianpunchline.com/russia-wont-let-ukraine-be-bleeding-wound/
"With the Ukrainian offensive under way for a fortnight, all eyes are on the battlefields, and, crucially, Russia’s options ahead. In a little over three weeks from now, the NATO will be holding a summit in Vilnius and the West has choices to make too. We are arriving at a fork in the road.
The NATO expected the Ukrainian forces to punch through key Russian fortifications by now. In reality, they are struggling to get anywhere near the sprawling layered fortifications and in that desperate attempt, are taking massive losses, entrapped in minefields and taken to pieces by Russian artillery and missiles and the dreaded multi-role attack helicopters known as Alligator.
The signposts are best seen in Russian President Vladimir Putin’s Kremlin press conference on Tuesday, lasting over three hours, with war correspondents. In just a week’s time after Ukraine’s offensive began, “25–30 percent of the supplied equipment (from NATO) has been destroyed,” Putin said.
Putin underscored three things..."
Let's cut to the chase gringo: what will the settlement or the outcome of this war be?
-
Let's examine one of your ridiculous claims. If the above were true then the consequences would be enormous, especially as the Ukrainians are now "claiming" to have shot down six more out of six! Russia claim that the hypersonic missiles, such as Khinzal, cannot be intercepted by any current air defence system. In other words, Russia admit that their own state of the art air defence cannot currently intercept hypersonics.
Raytheon would be shouting this from the rooftops. The only air defence system in the world able to intercept hypersonics. Can you imagine the orders that must be coming into Raytheon now for Patriot Systems-the only air defence system in the world capable of intercepting hypersonic missiles. None of this is happening and Raytheon are making no such claims-just some bloke in Ukrainian Pravda.
Why would this be-do you think?
The only Khinzal that the Patriot "intercepted" was at ground level. To believe otherwise shows how gullible and willing to believe anything you are.
That was the latest ramblings from Tankie fantasy world folks. Hope you all had a good laugh and stay tuned for next week's update!
-
Raytheon are making no such claims
🤡
"A software tweak has enabled PATRIOT missile defense systems to intercept hypersonic missiles in Ukraine, according to Gregory J. Hayes, chairman and chief executive officer of Raytheon Technologies which manufactures the PATRIOT."
Gregory J. Hayes, chairman and chief executive officer of Raytheon (https://www.defensemirror.com/news/34353/Software_Tweak_Enabled_PATRIOT_Systems_to_Intercept_Hypersonic_Missiles_in_Ukraine__Raytheon_Chief)
-
To be able to nullify a threat- you first have to develop the threat.
🤡
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_F-117A_shootdown (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_F-117A_shootdown)
-
Let's cut to the chase gringo: what will the settlement or the outcome of this war be?
The security proposals put forward by Russia in December 2021 will, in my opinion, be the basis of any negotiated settlement. There is no doubt that Russia will achieve their goals in Ukraine and there never has been. Either militarily or via negotiation, the end result will be the removal of any NATO missiles from Russian borders. This includes Romania, Poland et al. The proposals are outlined below but were ignored by the US/NATO/EU who were all given the proposals and invited to respond. Their response was exactly as expected. They ignored and derided Russia for having the temerity to demand to speak as equals .
https://tass.com/politics/1421141
NATO belligerence via their proxy Ukraine means that the terms being offered will get worse each time. Where previously Russia would have settled for referenda and self determination in Donetsk, Luhansk and Crimea-that ship has sailed.
The speeches and pronouncements by Putin and other official Russian spokespersons have made clear that increasing belligerence by NATO are only leading to expanded Russian goals.
I expect that Odessa, Nikolaev, Kharkiv, Sumy, Zaporizhzhia along with Kherson, Crimea, Donetsk, Luhansk will all have referendums and separate from Ukraine.
The old scores to be settled in the west of Ukraine are a different kettle of fish. The Poles, Hungary, Romania-all may take previously Polish, Hungarian etc. land. There is much bad blood still simmering from WW2 and atrocities committed by the Ukrainian Nazis particularly in those areas(Galicia, Lvov). Ukraine will be, at best, a rump state with no coastal access and probably will cease to exist as a state.
When Ukraine is done, and Russia are in no rush, then the other matters of mutual security will be addressed. The world is changing, Steve. We are living through a moment of history that changes the world. The mutual security guarantees that Russia proposed in December 2021 will be implemented.
Russia's goals at the start of the SMO were made clear. The whole "can't take Kiev in 3 days" and other bullshit is a western invention to support their pre-ordained narrative of Russian failure. Russia have never stated that they would take Kiev in 3 days. They could. It would cause great destruction and cause massive civilian deaths. Which is why they don't. NATO have no such qualms about civilian casualties (collateral damage) and use shock and awe tactics on civilians. This mindset is projected onto everybody else.
Russia's goals were demilitarisating and de-Nazifying Ukraine. Not conquering territory. When Ukraine is demilitarised and de-Nazified(this is a euphemism for De-NATOfied by the way) then each oblast will decide for themselves via referenda what their future is. The true losses will no longer be able to be hidden or obfuscated in western media very soon. Ukraine/NATO are getting slaughtered and attrited at rates that they cannot sustain.
I have asked before but received no reply on this question. What do you think Ukrainian/NATO victory even is? Can you define it? Is a Ukrainian/NATO victory even possible? Does it include Crimea? Donetsk? etc. What happens to the now pro-Russian people that Ukraine would be governing?
There is no realistic scenario of Ukrainian/NATO victory that I can see that settles anything. The only way is self determination of the Ukrainians, oblast by oblast. Russia would not oppose this. A map of every Ukrainian election since 1991 shows quite clearly the divide between the largely ethnic Russian East and South and the west of Ukraine. Many oblasts would vote to join Russia or become independent but aligned with Russia. This is well known even though it isn't discussed in any western "analysis".
-
🤡
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_F-117A_shootdown (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_F-117A_shootdown)
The US threat wasn't as advertised was it? It wasn't stealth. It could be seen-it wasn't invisible to radar. So the point stands.
On the question of Patriots shooting down Khinzals. Do you believe this to be true? And if yes-based on what evidence. You are just attempting to distract from your own dumbness and gullibility as it sinks in how dumb your claim and evidence is.
Why aren't Raytheon making this claim?
-
Let's cut to the chase gringo: what will the settlement or the outcome of this war be?
Another outcome that I expect is that after NATO/Ukraine are defeated militarily that it will mark the beginning of the end for NATO. The fissures are already deep. Hungary nor Turkey would be joining any belligerence against Russia. Turkey is the second largest armed forces in NATO(behind only the US). Who honestly believes that US citizens would support US boots on the ground-in Ukraine against Russia? Given that-How can NATO get enough boots and secure supply lines on the ground and defeat Russia-on the Russian border. It has always been delusional.
NATO's purpose since the break up of the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact means it can no longer be seen as a defensive alliance. That it ever was anything but an offensive alliance is surely clear now. Since the break up of the Warsaw Pact Nato has shown it's "defensive" nature in Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Afghanistan and on and on. The mask is well and truly removed now, the world can see and is unafraid to speak out now against the NATO/Nazi machine.
After an unambiguous defeat by Russia-the power is gone.
-
Let's cut to the chase gringo: what will the settlement or the outcome of this war be?
From the earlier Bhadrakumar article;
Andres Rasmussen, former NATO chief and presently official advisor to Ukrainian President Zelensky, has threatened that a group of NATO countries may be willing to put troops on the ground in Ukraine if member states including the US do not provide tangible security guarantees to Kiev at the Vilnius summit.
Specifically, Rasmussen claimed that “Poles would seriously consider going in and assemble a coalition of the willing if Ukraine doesn’t get anything in Vilnius. We shouldn’t underestimate the Polish feelings, the Poles feel that for too long western Europe did not listen to their warnings.” The rhetoric took a heightened tone lately at the meeting of Heads of State and Government in the format “Weimar Triangle” (France-Poland-Germany) on June 12 in Paris where a consensus emerged that Ukraine should receive some security guarantees.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz declared, “It is evident that we need something like this, and we need it in a very concrete form.” French President Emmanuel Macron also called for a rapid agreement on “tangible and credible security guarantees.”
Indeed, this is all bluster. The idea of Poland “putting boots on the ground” is so patently absurd. The Polish military it will wither away in a confrontation with Russia. But what such theatrics show is that nerves are on edge as the spectre of defeat in Ukraine is endangering NATO’s unity.
So, Jens Stoltenberg, NATO secretary-general, stepped in to inject some realism into the discussion, pointing out that for the present what matters most is that Ukraine survives as a nation. Stoltenberg stated: “I believe it’s not possible to give precise dates (for Ukraine’s admission as NATO member) when we are in the midst of a war… the most urgent task now is to ensure that Ukraine prevails as a sovereign, independent nation… because, unless Ukraine prevails, then there’s no membership to be discussed at all, because it’s only a sovereign, independent, democratic Ukraine that can become a NATO member.”
Stoltenberg took the cue from Washington. In fact, he was speaking while on a visit to Washington, in an interview with PBS.
Russia is not taking the eyes off the battlefield. In reality, Moscow is shoving down the western throat a historic strategic defeat. The choice for the West narrows down to negotiating with Russia on its terms, or to expect a military solution, which might mean the obliteration of Ukraine as a nation and the eviction of NATO. [/b]
The above shows the hopelessness of NATO/Ukraine's position. There is no realistically achievable goal. The so-called "Sanctions from Hell" were meant to damage Russia and only worked to strengthen Russia and weaken the sanctioners. The military attempt is ending in the same way the economic sanctions "worked".
-
Russia charges hypersonic missile scientists with treason!?
https://youtu.be/xzCcvPvCXuI?t=3 (https://youtu.be/xzCcvPvCXuI?t=3)
-
Let's cut to the chase gringo: what will the settlement or the outcome of this war be?
A much more comprehensive answer to your question addressed on MOA today, Steve. Link below-it is well worth a read and deals directly with your question and much more;
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2023/06/us-admits-defeat-in-war-on-russia-and-china.html#more
-
The security proposals put forward by Russia in December 2021 will, in my opinion, be the basis of any negotiated settlement. There is no doubt that Russia will achieve their goals in Ukraine and there never has been. Either militarily or via negotiation, the end result will be the removal of any NATO missiles from Russian borders. This includes Romania, Poland et al. The proposals are outlined below but were ignored by the US/NATO/EU who were all given the proposals and invited to respond. Their response was exactly as expected. They ignored and derided Russia for having the temerity to demand to speak as equals .
https://tass.com/politics/1421141
NATO belligerence via their proxy Ukraine means that the terms being offered will get worse each time. Where previously Russia would have settled for referenda and self determination in Donetsk, Luhansk and Crimea-that ship has sailed.
The speeches and pronouncements by Putin and other official Russian spokespersons have made clear that increasing belligerence by NATO are only leading to expanded Russian goals.
I expect that Odessa, Nikolaev, Kharkiv, Sumy, Zaporizhzhia along with Kherson, Crimea, Donetsk, Luhansk will all have referendums and separate from Ukraine.
The old scores to be settled in the west of Ukraine are a different kettle of fish. The Poles, Hungary, Romania-all may take previously Polish, Hungarian etc. land. There is much bad blood still simmering from WW2 and atrocities committed by the Ukrainian Nazis particularly in those areas(Galicia, Lvov). Ukraine will be, at best, a rump state with no coastal access and probably will cease to exist as a state.
When Ukraine is done, and Russia are in no rush, then the other matters of mutual security will be addressed. The world is changing, Steve. We are living through a moment of history that changes the world. The mutual security guarantees that Russia proposed in December 2021 will be implemented.
Russia's goals at the start of the SMO were made clear. The whole "can't take Kiev in 3 days" and other bullshit is a western invention to support their pre-ordained narrative of Russian failure. Russia have never stated that they would take Kiev in 3 days. They could. It would cause great destruction and cause massive civilian deaths. Which is why they don't. NATO have no such qualms about civilian casualties (collateral damage) and use shock and awe tactics on civilians. This mindset is projected onto everybody else.
Russia's goals were demilitarisating and de-Nazifying Ukraine. Not conquering territory. When Ukraine is demilitarised and de-Nazified(this is a euphemism for De-NATOfied by the way) then each oblast will decide for themselves via referenda what their future is. The true losses will no longer be able to be hidden or obfuscated in western media very soon. Ukraine/NATO are getting slaughtered and attrited at rates that they cannot sustain.
I have asked before but received no reply on this question. What do you think Ukrainian/NATO victory even is? Can you define it? Is a Ukrainian/NATO victory even possible? Does it include Crimea? Donetsk? etc. What happens to the now pro-Russian people that Ukraine would be governing?
There is no realistic scenario of Ukrainian/NATO victory that I can see that settles anything. The only way is self determination of the Ukrainians, oblast by oblast. Russia would not oppose this. A map of every Ukrainian election since 1991 shows quite clearly the divide between the largely ethnic Russian East and South and the west of Ukraine. Many oblasts would vote to join Russia or become independent but aligned with Russia. This is well known even though it isn't discussed in any western "analysis".
But to my knowledge there aren't any nuclear missiles of NATO states on Russia's borders.
Funny that Russia wants self-determination for Donetsk and Luhansk, yet is frightened of free and fair elections in its own country.
Russia's goals were to hang on to the booty they took by force in March 2014, namely Crimea. They couldn't care less about the Ukrainian people, or indeed ethnic Russians in Ukraine's oblasts. They do care about the warm water port of Sevastopol, however.
Ukraine should prevail. Putin has implemented divide and rule in Moscow for 23 years, successfully. It's a less successful strategy when dealing with the military top brass, as we have witnessed in the conduct of the special military operation to date.
-
But to my knowledge there aren't any nuclear missiles of NATO states on Russia's borders.
Funny that Russia wants self-determination for Donetsk and Luhansk, yet is frightened of free and fair elections in its own country.
Russia's goals was to hang on to the booty they took by force in March 2014, namely Crimea. They couldn't care less about the Ukrainian people, or indeed ethnic Russians in Ukraine's oblasts. They do care about the warm water port of Sevastopol, however.
Ukraine should prevail. Putin has implemented divide and rule in Moscow for 23 years, successfully. It's a less successful strategy when dealing with the military top brass, as we have witnessed in the conduct of the special military operation to date.
To your first point, Steve, you have created a straw man. Your highlighted part of my post refers only to NATO missiles. Whether they are nuclear or non nuclear is not the issue. Any missile threat can become a nuclear missile threat.
As you asked the question, how about you speculate as to the outcome/settlement. You asked me a question, I answered your question, made clear it was my opinion of what the outcome would be. How does that exchange lead coherently to your reply?
You are wrong on every point anyway. Crimea wasn't taken by force. For the Ukrainian regime to control it they would have to take it by force even if the Russian military pulled out. Crimea is Russian and only became part of Ukraine in 1954 when Khrushchev added it to Ukraine's borders. As it was all part of the Soviet Union-it didn't seem to matter at the time. On the break up of the Soviet Union, Crimea held a referendum in 1991 and voted overwhelmingly (94%) to re-establish the autonomous Crimean Republic. This vote wasn't recognised by anyone including the newly created Russian Federation. It demonstrates quite clearly that Crimean people have never felt part of Ukraine. Sevastopol has been home to Russian/Soviet Black Sea fleet for longer than the USA has existed as a country. Russia didn't invade-they were already there with a supportive population. Ukraine would have to "deal with" that hostile population. How do you reasonably support Ukraine "liberating" Crimea? They want to "liberate" the territory from its current inhabitants.
Where do you think it leads to if NATO carries on arming and funding Ukraine towards this goal? Why do you think that the Ukrainian regime should even control Crimea? For whose benefit is this? Why do you even think the "liberation" or attacking of Crimea is justifiable?
-
This could get interesting..
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jun/23/wagner-chief-accuses-russias-military-of-attack-and-says-evil-leadership-must-be-stopped (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jun/23/wagner-chief-accuses-russias-military-of-attack-and-says-evil-leadership-must-be-stopped)
-
Looks like trouble for Putin now. All this Wagner carry on.
-
In Tankie fantasy world I guess Wagner has been part of the CIA all along ::)
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2023/6/24/russia-ukraine-live-news-russia-accuses-wagner-chief-of-mutiny (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2023/6/24/russia-ukraine-live-news-russia-accuses-wagner-chief-of-mutiny)
-
In Tankie fantasy world I guess Wagner has been part of the CIA all along ::)
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2023/6/24/russia-ukraine-live-news-russia-accuses-wagner-chief-of-mutiny (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2023/6/24/russia-ukraine-live-news-russia-accuses-wagner-chief-of-mutiny)
I have not contributed much to this thread but it seems to me that his 'beef' is with the senior military who he sees as incompetent and it is their hubris, mismanagement and failings including logistics problems which have led to setbacks and problems with the 'special military operation' that has wasted the lives of many Russians including his forces and wasted huge quantities of fighting assets.
-
I have not contributed much to this thread but it seems to me that his 'beef' is with the senior military who he sees as incompetent and it is their hubris, mismanagement and failings including logistics problems which have led to setbacks and problems with the 'special military operation' that has wasted the lives of many Russians including his forces and wasted huge quantities of fighting assets.
It looks like the hitherto pathetic spring offensive might gather pace now.
-
Prighozin and his Wagner forces are on the M4 highway towards Moscow!
(https://media.tenor.com/ksIcsQk-LDEAAAAM/zelenzelen.gif)
-
Prighozin and his Wagner forces are on the M4 highway towards Moscow!
(https://media.tenor.com/ksIcsQk-LDEAAAAM/zelenzelen.gif)
There must be more to it than meets the eye. He must have support among some of the official military. Putin might need a Mr Burns type escape pod?
-
There must be more to it than meets the eye. He must have support among some of the official military. Putin might need a Mr Burns type escape pod?
"A Kremlin spokesman has denied reports that Vladimir Putin has fled Moscow by plane.
One of several planes that Putin uses for official visits took off from Moscow at 2.15 pm local time, according to Flight Radar, which tracks aircraft in real-time."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/06/24/russia-ukraine-coup-wagner-kremlin-yevgeny-prigozhin/ (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/06/24/russia-ukraine-coup-wagner-kremlin-yevgeny-prigozhin/)
-
Former Russian PM: 'Putin has 48 hours to stop Prigozhin's rebellion'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4g6j7mQfp8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4g6j7mQfp8)
-
A belated April Fool.
-
A belated April Fool.
Looks like it.
-
Well whatever the entire theatre was about has now ended/moved on to Act II. The immediate response to this on here has been predictably knee jerk. It is reasonable to say that not everything is as seems, especially in war. I have no idea what the latest theatre was all about, but I am doubtful that it was a real attempted coup.
Prigozhin has been a source of much disinformation and distraction, most of it contradictory. Some of it, such as complaining about lack of shells in Bakhmut, worked so well that it encouraged the Ukrainian command to pour more fodder into the extremely efficient Bakhmut meat grinder. Anything uttered by or done by Prigozhin is only taken at face value by the uninformed. A quick run through his contradictory statements and actions throughout the war show that. Everything is a psyop with Prigozhin. He works for the GRU(their speciality).
That Wagner are a cut out of the GRU is not really a secret to anyone, or shouldn't be. Same as Academi and Blackwater were cut-outs of US intel. "Aegis Defence Services", one of a handful of UK "so called" PMC's(Private Military Contractors). All of these mercenary groups are in reality state operatives. The reason that they exist is that they can operate outside of state oversight and give some sort of "plausible deniability" to the state they are working for.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_private_military_contractors#US_companies
Wagner, are in effect, the GRU(military intelligence).
One of the effects of this whole coup/not coup could be the upgrading of the SMO(special military operation) to a CTO or ATO(Counter/Anti terrorist operation). Doing so removes some legal restraints on the use of armed forces. It frees the armed forces to operate outside of Russian territory. This has been a debate in Russia for some time with most Russians very hawkish. Was it set up for this purpose? Was it allowed to happen? Was it really an attempted coup?
Wagner are now returning to bases after talks with Belorussian leader, Lukashenko? All very odd. I would await judgement on what has occurred for a few days. What happens over the next few days may help to clear some of the "fog of war"/smokescreen?
-
https://off-guardian.org/2023/06/24/discuss-an-attempted-coup-in-russia/
-
Seems Putler and Claus von Preghozin have come to an agreement. The treason charges have been dropped.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/wagner-head-suggests-his-mercenaries-headed-moscow-take-army-leadership-2023-06-24/ (https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/wagner-head-suggests-his-mercenaries-headed-moscow-take-army-leadership-2023-06-24/)
-
Well whatever the entire theatre was about has now ended/moved on to Act II. The immediate response to this on here has been predictably knee jerk. It is reasonable to say that not everything is as seems, especially in war. I have no idea what the latest theatre was all about, but I am doubtful that it was a real attempted coup.
Prigozhin has been a source of much disinformation and distraction, most of it contradictory. Some of it, such as complaining about lack of shells in Bakhmut, worked so well that it encouraged the Ukrainian command to pour more fodder into the extremely efficient Bakhmut meat grinder. Anything uttered by or done by Prigozhin is only taken at face value by the uninformed. A quick run through his contradictory statements and actions throughout the war show that. Everything is a psyop with Prigozhin. He works for the GRU(their speciality).
That Wagner are a cut out of the GRU is not really a secret to anyone, or shouldn't be. Same as Academi and Blackwater were cut-outs of US intel. "Aegis Defence Services", one of a handful of UK "so called" PMC's(Private Military Contractors). All of these mercenary groups are in reality state operatives. The reason that they exist is that they can operate outside of state oversight and give some sort of "plausible deniability" to the state they are working for.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_private_military_contractors#US_companies
Wagner, are in effect, the GRU(military intelligence).
One of the effects of this whole coup/not coup could be the upgrading of the SMO(special military operation) to a CTO or ATO(Counter/Anti terrorist operation). Doing so removes some legal restraints on the use of armed forces. It frees the armed forces to operate outside of Russian territory. This has been a debate in Russia for some time with most Russians very hawkish. Was it set up for this purpose? Was it allowed to happen? Was it really an attempted coup?
Wagner are now returning to bases after talks with Belorussian leader, Lukashenko? All very odd. I would await judgement on what has occurred for a few days. What happens over the next few days may help to clear some of the "fog of war"/smokescreen?
Seems Putler and Claus von Preghozin have come to an agreement. The treason charges have been dropped.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/wagner-head-suggests-his-mercenaries-headed-moscow-take-army-leadership-2023-06-24/ (https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/wagner-head-suggests-his-mercenaries-headed-moscow-take-army-leadership-2023-06-24/)
As i said, David, I would wait for the fog to clear. You, predictably, are working from the premise that it was definitely what it said on the tin. Was there a coup attempt? Was it something else?
It looked like theatre. How many killed in this treason/mutiny? Stage managed pictures, footage of helicopters being shot down proven to be over a year old. I'm sure events over the next week or so will help towards enlightenment.
-
Current possibilities, in no particular order, feel free to add others;
1) A real coup attempt by Prigozhin and Wagner Group
2) A "maskirovka" operation to out fifth columnists and break up possible future plans
3) A "maskirovka" operation to give credence to already laid plans to change the definition of the SMO into a ATO allowing Russia to expand the parameters of their actions in Ukraine
4) A power struggle between Russian MOD and GRU
5) ???
Where we are now-Coup attempt ended-Prigozhin in Belarus, treason charges dropped, Wagner forces heading back to base starts to give some clues. The next week will give more!
-
Warlord Yevgeny Prigozhin to leave Russia as part of deal to end insurrection
https://www.ft.com/content/eb029083-ff02-4a8a-87ab-7813e5c01f11 (https://www.ft.com/content/eb029083-ff02-4a8a-87ab-7813e5c01f11)
-
Current possibilities, in no particular order, feel free to add others;
1) A real coup attempt by Prigozhin and Wagner Group
2) A "maskirovka" operation to out fifth columnists and break up possible future plans
3) A "maskirovka" operation to give credence to already laid plans to change the definition of the SMO into a ATO allowing Russia to expand the parameters of their actions in Ukraine
4) A power struggle between Russian MOD and GRU
5) ???
Where we are now-Coup attempt ended-Prigozhin in Belarus, treason charges dropped, Wagner forces heading back to base starts to give some clues. The next week will give more!
5) A "maskirovka" operation faking disunity/division in order to lure the Ukrainians and their Western sponsors into continuing their stalled and disastrous counter-offensive
6) ???
-
It is worth noting that a lot of Russian troop movement occurred under cover of all this. I'm sure there is an Act II yet to come!
-
Larry Johnson's take on the latest theatre (food for thought);
https://sonar21.com/russias-academy-award-winning-performance-for-best-coup-prigozhin-scores-best-actor/
I suspect that the massive troop movement that occurred under cover of this theatre will reveal itself in Act II shortly.
-
Larry Johnson's take on the latest theatre (food for thought);
https://sonar21.com/russias-academy-award-winning-performance-for-best-coup-prigozhin-scores-best-actor/
I suspect that the massive troop movement that occurred under cover of this theatre will reveal itself in Act II shortly.
The clown on that website wrote -
"How about this as an explanation? The entire coup narrative was generated to allow for the movement of Russian military forces to areas north and west of Voronezh without raising the alarm among NATO planners."
Does he not realise Putin made a televisised address condemning the armed mutiny? If he does then he wants readers to believe that Putin fabricated a challenge to his authority, risked a grass roots uprising and publicly dented his authority just so he can move troops around?
I know the creationists at the blogmire and Saker no longer support Russia and thus you have to sink lower into even more half baked, obscure corners of the internet. But that doesn't mean you have to embarrass yourself by posting it on here.
-
The clown on that website wrote -
"How about this as an explanation? The entire coup narrative was generated to allow for the movement of Russian military forces to areas north and west of Voronezh without raising the alarm among NATO planners."
Does he not realise Putin made a televisised address condemning the armed mutiny? If he does then he wants readers to believe that Putin fabricated a challenge to his authority, risked a grass roots uprising and publicly dented his authority just so he can move troops around?
I know the creationists at the blogmire and Saker no longer support Russia and thus you have to sink lower into even more half baked, obscure corners of the internet. But that doesn't mean you have to embarrass yourself by posting it on here.
The Saker closed his blog last February as he always said he would. He lives in USA and always stated that he would end the blog if/when Russia/US NATO confrontation began. He is married to A USA citizen and has family there which he doesn't want to jeopardise. Who said that he doesn't support Russia?
The Blogmire has never been a source of mine for any Ukraine/Russia/NATO reporting so I have no idea on his views about it. He was the best source for any Skripal related info, however. Criticism coming from you, who has the most retarded views on this subject of anyone writing on the thread, is hilarious. Everyone is a paedophile, paleo conservative, creationist, conspiritard or whatever according to you. Fortunately for you, taking this approach means that you never have to wrestle with the validity of any analysis. This suits you because you are incapable of critical thinking. If it goes against your programming you simply resort to the talking points you have been trained to(ie. ad-hom attacks).
Whatever happened will become clear in the next few days. I have made clear that in my opinion(a view shared by most informed observers) there are a few possibilities to explain events. Immediately assuming one scenario because it suits what you would like to believe is what dumb people do. Unsurprisingly you did just that.
The rest of us are watching events play out and it isn't getting any better for the NATO/Ukraine counter offensive.
-
Good interview with Scott Ritter on Redacted. It starts off with a warning about suicide/self harm which you have to "understand" before proceeding. Really good interview from one of the most informed commentators on the subject. His background speaks for itself as does the undoubted smear coming from our resident retarded conspiracy theorist, David, which I will preempt.
"Resorting to quoting paedophiles now-you are really scraping the barrel", or something like that but definitely the paedophile smear.
Scott Ritter was convicted of "sexual contact with a minor", a 15 year old girl via telephone. This is despite the fact that Ritter has never been known to have any sexual contact with any minors. There is one FBI agent, who definitely isn't 15, but no 15 year olds or any other minors were involved in the making of this conviction. Just one FBI agent, according to whom, Ritter believed she was 15. Ritter's wife and daughter stood by him in this and clearly also do not believe Scott Ritter to be a paedophile.
Ritter, for those old enough to remember, was the US whistleblower on the fabricated WMD lies told by US/UK governments in order to give "legal" cover for their illegal and disastrous intervention in Iraq. The UK whistleblower, Dr. David Kelly, ended up dead in the woods in mysterious circumstances that we are told was suicide. Ritter got off lightly in comparison by only being labelled "paedophile". It gives the simple minded an excuse to ignore uncomfortable truths. Just smear the messenger.
Of the two whistleblowers who exposed US/UK govt. lies about WMD- one ended up dead in the woods in a remarkably blood free wrist slashing suicide and the other was convicted of sexual contact with a minor despite no minors ever being involved.
Sexual smears are the go to of intel services to silence dissidents and dissuade others to support them. Julian Assange(rape), Alex Salmond(rape), Craig Murray(sexual assault). I could go on. Notice a pattern? Anyway here is that interview with "non paedophile" Scott Ritter;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ImjpzrsvLeM&ab_channel=Redacted
-
Storm Z Russian soldier unit slam Prigozhin for dismantling Wagner's convoy to Moscow
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PB5S275CAeg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PB5S275CAeg)
-
To your first point, Steve, you have created a straw man. Your highlighted part of my post refers only to NATO missiles. Whether they are nuclear or non nuclear is not the issue. Any missile threat can become a nuclear missile threat.
As you asked the question, how about you speculate as to the outcome/settlement. You asked me a question, I answered your question, made clear it was my opinion of what the outcome would be. How does that exchange lead coherently to your reply?
You are wrong on every point anyway. Crimea wasn't taken by force. For the Ukrainian regime to control it they would have to take it by force even if the Russian military pulled out. Crimea is Russian and only became part of Ukraine in 1954 when Khrushchev added it to Ukraine's borders. As it was all part of the Soviet Union-it didn't seem to matter at the time. On the break up of the Soviet Union, Crimea held a referendum in 1991 and voted overwhelmingly (94%) to re-establish the autonomous Crimean Republic. This vote wasn't recognised by anyone including the newly created Russian Federation. It demonstrates quite clearly that Crimean people have never felt part of Ukraine. Sevastopol has been home to Russian/Soviet Black Sea fleet for longer than the USA has existed as a country. Russia didn't invade-they were already there with a supportive population. Ukraine would have to "deal with" that hostile population. How do you reasonably support Ukraine "liberating" Crimea? They want to "liberate" the territory from its current inhabitants.
Where do you think it leads to if NATO carries on arming and funding Ukraine towards this goal? Why do you think that the Ukrainian regime should even control Crimea? For whose benefit is this? Why do you even think the "liberation" or attacking of Crimea is justifiable?
Why were Russian soldiers wearing unmarked uniforms during the annexation if they were so popular? I'm reminded somewhat of the Gleiwitz incident of August 31, 1939.
One solution might be to restore the autonomous Crimean Republic, to which you allude. But this would have to be subject to negotiation.
One view of Crimeans before the Russian intervention. https://www.lse.ac.uk/research/research-for-the-world/society/were-crimeans-really-pro-russian-before-annexation
-
Why were Russian soldiers wearing unmarked uniforms during the annexation if they were so popular? I'm reminded somewhat of the Gleiwitz incident of August 31, 1939.
One solution might be to restore the autonomous Crimean Republic, to which you allude. But this would have to be subject to negotiation.
One view of Crimeans before the Russian intervention. https://www.lse.ac.uk/research/research-for-the-world/society/were-crimeans-really-pro-russian-before-annexation
Militias were wearing uniforms. How do you know that the Russian army were wearing unmarked uniforms? There is zero doubt, despite the wishful thinking of the Economist article you posted, that Crimeans want to be part of Russia.
First of all-the 1991 referendum was unequivocal in its rejection of remaining part of Ukraine. Crimeans had never been asked if they wanted to join Ukraine. They wouldn't have voted for this. Khruschev simply made it so in 1954. Crimeans have never been Ukrainian. Link to 1991 referendum
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_Crimean_sovereignty_referendum
Secondly in 1994, there was another referendum in Crimea.
A three-part referendum was held in Crimea on 27 March 1994 alongside regional and national elections. Voters were asked whether they were in favour of greater autonomy within Ukraine, whether residents should have dual Russian and Ukrainian citizenship, and whether presidential decrees should have the status of laws. All three proposals were approved.[1]
Full link below;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_Crimean_referendum
Thirdly, in 2014, there was another referendum after the illegal Maidan Coup. Overwhelmingly(there's a pattern emerging isn't there, Steve) Crimeans given the choice of joining the Russian Federation or restore the 1992 constitution and restore Crimean status as part of Ukraine.
https://tass.com/politics/1589119
The Crimeans have made clear their feeling since the dissolution of the Soviet Union. There is no doubt about what Crimeans want. There is nothing to negotiate. Crimea is Russian.
-
One solution might be to restore the autonomous Crimean Republic, to which you allude. But this would have to be subject to negotiation.
The Autonomous Republic of Crimea, commonly known as Crimea, is an autonomous republic of Ukraine encompassing most of Crimea that was annexed by Russia in 2014. The Autonomous Republic of Crimea occupies most of the peninsula, while the City of Sevastopol (a city with special status within Ukraine) occupies the rest.
It already is an autonomous Republic within the Russian Federation. What is there to negotiate? Crimeans have no interest in negotiating anything with Ukraine or any other NATO stooge. Why should or would they?
-
One solution might be to restore the autonomous Crimean Republic, to which you allude. But this would have to be subject to negotiation.
The Autonomous Republic of Crimea, commonly known as Crimea, is an autonomous republic of Ukraine encompassing most of Crimea that was annexed by Russia in 2014. The Autonomous Republic of Crimea occupies most of the peninsula, while the City of Sevastopol (a city with special status within Ukraine) occupies the rest.
It already is an autonomous Republic within the Russian Federation. What is there to negotiate? Crimeans have no interest in negotiating anything with Ukraine or any other NATO stooge. Why should or would they?
What happened in February–March 2014 was a full-spectrum military operation executed on land and at sea and supplemented by sustained and targeted anti-Ukraine information operations. Finally, when a referendum was held – in effect at gunpoint – on 16 March 2014 to legitimize Russia’s takeover of Crimea, the Kremlin hijacked the principle of self-determination. Public opinion polling prior to Russia’s aggressive disinformation campaign spoke clearly in favour of Crimea remaining part of Ukraine. Yet ahead of the vote, those who supported remaining within Ukraine could not campaign freely. The ballot also excluded the option for Crimea to remain part of Ukraine as an autonomous republic, i.e. according to the constitution in force. Furthermore, the Kremlin substantially inflated voter turnout. While it said that 82 per cent of voters had cast their ballots, a member of Russia’s presidential Civil Society and Human Rights Council reported that turnout was likely to have totalled 30–50 per cent. Election fraud such as multiple voting was also reported.
Chatham House Report.
-
Steve, you are delusional. Chatham house-ffs.
You can't answer the questions I pose because you know the answers and they don't suit your narrative. Any transfer of Crimea into Ukraine would be against the wishes of the Crimeans and lead to civil war and genocide of Crimeans. You know this so avoid the questions and sound off about Russians in general.
Do Ukraine/NATO plan to allow a referendum in Crimea? or just to seize the land with no concern for the inhabitants? You know the answers and can't be honest because it shatters your narrative.
There is an abundance of evidence of the desires of Crimeans, which you choose to ignore and rely on a report by Chatham house (a UK intel mouthpiece).
Three referendums spread over 30 years. What are you still confused about?
Why did Ukrainians stay in their bases in Crimea in 2014? Why were there mass defections? NATO/Ukraine want to take Crimea against the will of the people. Why do you support this?
-
Steve, you are delusional. Chatham house-ffs.
You can't answer the questions I pose because you know the answers and they don't suit your narrative. Any transfer of Crimea into Ukraine would be against the wishes of the Crimeans and lead to civil war and genocide of Crimeans. You know this so avoid the questions and sound off about Russians in general.
Do Ukraine/NATO plan to allow a referendum in Crimea? or just to seize the land with no concern for the inhabitants? You know the answers and can't be honest because it shatters your narrative.
There is an abundance of evidence of the desires of Crimeans, which you choose to ignore and rely on a report by Chatham house (a UK intel mouthpiece).
Three referendums spread over 30 years. What are you still confused about?
Why did Ukrainians stay in their bases in Crimea in 2014? Why were there mass defections? NATO/Ukraine want to take Crimea against the will of the people. Why do you support this?
But there's a difference between annexation by Russia at gunpoint and the dual citizenship option. How about the United Nations peacekeepers come in and Russia withdraws, then free and fair elections under the auspices of OECD?
-
But there's a difference between annexation by Russia at gunpoint and the dual citizenship option. How about the United Nations peacekeepers come in and Russia withdraws, then free and fair elections under the auspices of OECD?
Steve, Ukraine/NATO have zero intention of offering this, as you well know. They know what the result will be but want the valuable real estate of Crimea.
The whole "referendum at gunpoint" story is bollocks. The result was exactly as previous referendums. Crimeans have never been Ukrainian and never will be. They want nothing to do with Ukraine and never have. So your "solution" has no chance of being implemented. If Ukraine/NATO seize Crimea-do you believe that they then intend to allow the Crimeans to have their say? Of course they don't. Knowing this-do you still support the attempted seizure of Crimea? This is without the added complication that it would be seen as an "existential threat to the state of Russia which triggers their nuclear deterrence.
They tried to seize it against the will of the Crimeans and Russia in 2014. Had they succeeded, there would have been no referendum. You are talking crap. Your supposed solution will never be on offer. Crimeans have already voted. It isn't a closely contested question.
At least be realistic in your interventions. You are all over the place on the Crimean question and unwilling to approach it honestly.
-
Steve, Ukraine/NATO have zero intention of offering this, as you well know. They know what the result will be but want the valuable real estate of Crimea.
The whole "referendum at gunpoint" story is bollocks. The result was exactly as previous referendums. Crimeans have never been Ukrainian and never will be. They want nothing to do with Ukraine and never have. So your "solution" has no chance of being implemented. If Ukraine/NATO seize Crimea-do you believe that they then intend to allow the Crimeans to have their say? Of course they don't. Knowing this-do you still support the attempted seizure of Crimea? This is without the added complication that it would be seen as an "existential threat to the state of Russia which triggers their nuclear deterrence.
They tried to seize it against the will of the Crimeans and Russia in 2014. Had they succeeded, there would have been no referendum. You are talking crap. Your supposed solution will never be on offer. Crimeans have already voted. It isn't a closely contested question.
At least be realistic in your interventions. You are all over the place on the Crimean question and unwilling to approach it honestly.
It wasn't a free and fair election. So I am delusional and you know the truth, despite rubbishing Chatham House and Dr. Eleanor Knott. Russia has form when it comes to general elections. https://www.voanews.com/a/russia-heading-for-least-free-elections-in-20-years-say-opposition-leaders-/6219574.html
-
It wasn't a free and fair election. So I am delusional and you know the truth, despite rubbishing Chatham House and Dr. Eleanor Knott. Russia has form when it comes to general elections. https://www.voanews.com/a/russia-heading-for-least-free-elections-in-20-years-say-opposition-leaders-/6219574.html
There have been three referendums(1991, 1994, 2014). Yes you are delusional and ignoring the truth. Do you think that the "solution" that you suggested is in Ukraine/NATO plans? Do they intend to hold a referendum? If not (they don't), why not? (they already know what the result would be).
Do you believe, Steve, that if a new referendum were held it would have a result any different from the historical trend? Do you believe Ukraine/NATO would offer one?
You can't/won't answer any of this. This is why your position is delusional. You ignore reality and this makes your position incoherent.
-
There have been three referendums(1991, 1994, 2014). Yes you are delusional and ignoring the truth. Do you think that the "solution" that you suggested is in Ukraine/NATO plans? Do they intend to hold a referendum? If not (they don't), why not? (they already know what the result would be).
Do you believe, Steve, that if a new referendum were held it would have a result any different from the historical trend? Do you believe Ukraine/NATO would offer one?
You can't/won't answer any of this. This is why your position is delusional. You ignore reality and this makes your position incoherent.
Of course I will answer, without making personal attacks. I have already told you I thought a compromise would be for United Nations peacekeepers to become involved, the removal of all Russian troops and a referendum on Crimea's future be held. The status quo ante would have to be restored, however.
-
Of course I will answer, without making personal attacks. I have already told you I thought a compromise would be for United Nations peacekeepers to become involved, the removal of all Russian troops and a referendum on Crimea's future be held. The status quo ante would have to be restored, however.
This is not on offer, Steve and nor will it ever be. Ukraine/NATO have no intention of offering this. So now answer the related questions. The "status quo" which you suggest returning to is that it is an autonomous republic already-re 1994 referendum with a Russian base that has existed since 1783. Crimeans have always, when given the opportunity, made clear that they want nothing to do with the government in Ukraine. Here is a quick rundown again just to show that your position is incoherent.
1991-referendum held in Crimea where they voted for the re-instatement of the autonomous republic of Crimea. Vote not recognised internationally. Result 94.3% yes 5.7% no.
1994- referendum held alongside Ukrainian elections. Crimeans voted on three questions;
To re-instate the autonomous republic of Crimea(giving greater autonomy)- 78.4% yes 21.6% no
The right of citizens of Crimea to dual citizenship- 82.8% yes 17.2% no
Edicts of the President of the Republic of Crimea to become law- 77.9% yes 22.1% no
2014- referendum 97% voted to rejoin Russian Federation as a sovereign state (Republic of Crimea)
Do you believe that the Ukraine/NATO plans for Crimea include a referendum?
If they don't and just intend to seize Crimea against the will of Crimeans and Russians-would you support this?
-
Yevgeny Prigozhin still faces charges, says Russian state media
https://www.ft.com/content/38ffbf18-9640-4694-9ebd-08f1bdb04de1 (https://www.ft.com/content/38ffbf18-9640-4694-9ebd-08f1bdb04de1)
-
It wasn't a free and fair election. So I am delusional and you know the truth, despite rubbishing Chatham House and Dr. Eleanor Knott. Russia has form when it comes to general elections. https://www.voanews.com/a/russia-heading-for-least-free-elections-in-20-years-say-opposition-leaders-/6219574.html
If it is "democracy" that you are concerned about, as you suggest, then why are you supporting the puppet Dictator "Zelensky"?
Zelensky has banned 11 opposition parties in March 2022
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/20/ukraine-suspends-11-political-parties-with-links-to-russia
After banning all opposition parties;
He had political opponents arrested and paraded on TV beaten and dishevelled (Medvedchuk)
He banned "unfriendly" media
He shut down Orthodox churches
Even after all of this he still has felt the need to cancel next years Presidential election.
What was it you were saying about free and fair elections, Steve?
No opposition, media banned, lack of religious freedom and no opportunity to vote.
Imagine getting elected on a promise to end the war and then doing all of the above and still having fuckwits defending you as a "Protector of Democracy". Surely no-one is that stupid?
-
If it is "democracy" that you are concerned about, as you suggest, then why are you supporting the puppet Dictator "Zelensky"?
Zelensky has banned 11 opposition parties in March 2022
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/20/ukraine-suspends-11-political-parties-with-links-to-russia
After banning all opposition parties;
He had political opponents arrested and paraded on TV beaten and dishevelled (Medvedchuk)
He banned "unfriendly" media
He shut down Orthodox churches
Even after all of this he still has felt the need to cancel next years Presidential election.
What was it you were saying about free and fair elections, Steve?
No opposition, media banned, lack of religious freedom and no opportunity to vote.
Imagine getting elected on a promise to end the war and then doing all of the above and still having fuckwits defending you as a "Protector of Democracy". Surely no-one is that stupid?
The parties are suspended. There would be no political campaigning in a time of war anyway, just as we suspended General Elections from 1935-45.
-
This is not on offer, Steve and nor will it ever be. Ukraine/NATO have no intention of offering this. So now answer the related questions. The "status quo" which you suggest returning to is that it is an autonomous republic already-re 1994 referendum with a Russian base that has existed since 1783. Crimeans have always, when given the opportunity, made clear that they want nothing to do with the government in Ukraine. Here is a quick rundown again just to show that your position is incoherent.
1991-referendum held in Crimea where they voted for the re-instatement of the autonomous republic of Crimea. Vote not recognised internationally. Result 94.3% yes 5.7% no.
1994- referendum held alongside Ukrainian elections. Crimeans voted on three questions;
To re-instate the autonomous republic of Crimea(giving greater autonomy)- 78.4% yes 21.6% no
The right of citizens of Crimea to dual citizenship- 82.8% yes 17.2% no
Edicts of the President of the Republic of Crimea to become law- 77.9% yes 22.1% no
2014- referendum 97% voted to rejoin Russian Federation as a sovereign state (Republic of Crimea)
Do you believe that the Ukraine/NATO plans for Crimea include a referendum?
If they don't and just intend to seize Crimea against the will of Crimeans and Russians-would you support this?
I've told you three times now that I would like to see a referendum in Crimea for the Crimeans to determine their own future, a referendum held under the auspices of the UN and OECD.
-
I've told you three times now that I would like to see a referendum in Crimea for the Crimeans to determine their own future, a referendum held under the auspices of the UN and OECD.
Ok.
The "solution" that you offer has no chance of being offered by Ukraine/NATO. The intention is to seize Crimea and "deal" with the hostile population. You know this and continue to ignore this inconvenient fact. So in the real world-one where the only options available are;
1) Accept that Crimeans have made their choice (3 times) and leave them to their own already decided (3 times) self determination to live as an autonomous republic within the Russian Federation. The first two of those referenda had no influence from Russia at all and it cannot be argued otherwise, so we do know the Crimeans wishes whatever you claim about 2014.
2) Invade and seize Crimea against the wishes of the Crimeans and allow Sevastopol to become a NATO base. Deal with the hostile population.
However many times you repeat that you would like to see a UN/OSCE monitored referendum-it isn't an option and nor will it be. The only options are those two shown above. This is the real world and the real situation. It matters not how many times you repeat your preferred outcome if it isn't on offer. The two choices are as I have just stated. There is no third choice.
Dealing purely in real world solutions-which of the two choices do you support?
Your thrice stated position doesn't deal with this. Ignoring the reality is not a serious position. Your answer is a non-answer.
The only realistic choices are 1 and 2 above. Which of the only two choices on offer do you support? Leave the Crimeans be or seize Crimea and impose a regime on them with no mandate or support?
-
Ok.
The "solution" that you offer has no chance of being offered by Ukraine/NATO. The intention is to seize Crimea and "deal" with the hostile population. You know this and continue to ignore this inconvenient fact. So in the real world-one where the only options available are;
1) Accept that Crimeans have made their choice (3 times) and leave them to their own already decided (3 times) self determination to live as an autonomous republic within the Russian Federation. The first two of those referenda had no influence from Russia at all and it cannot be argued otherwise, so we do know the Crimeans wishes whatever you claim about 2014.
2) Invade and seize Crimea against the wishes of the Crimeans and allow Sevastopol to become a NATO base. Deal with the hostile population.
However many times you repeat that you would like to see a UN/OSCE monitored referendum-it isn't an option and nor will it be. The only options are those two shown above. This is the real world and the real situation. It matters not how many times you repeat your preferred outcome if it isn't on offer. The two choices are as I have just stated. There is no third choice.
Dealing purely in real world solutions-which of the two choices do you support?
Your thrice stated position doesn't deal with this. Ignoring the reality is not a serious position. Your answer is a non-answer.
The only realistic choices are 1 and 2 above. Which of the only two choices on offer do you support? Leave the Crimeans be or seize Crimea and impose a regime on them with no mandate or support?
I don't accept the analysis fully, because in the January 1991 referendum Crimeans voted to remain in the Soviet Union, of which the Ukraine was a constituent part.
I don't accept the result of a referendum held at gunpoint at all. (2014).
-
"The Russian president described the weekend's rebellion as "a colossal threat" and vowed that those involved would be brought to justice."
https://news.sky.com/story/any-blackmail-is-doomed-to-failure-defiant-putin-warns-after-attempted-rebellion-12910112 (https://news.sky.com/story/any-blackmail-is-doomed-to-failure-defiant-putin-warns-after-attempted-rebellion-12910112)
-
Moscow ‘arrests’ General Armageddon over Wagner mutiny
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-ukraine-news-putin-pariah-wagner-group-b2366207.html (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-ukraine-news-putin-pariah-wagner-group-b2366207.html)
-
Office tasked with investigating the Russian invasion of Ukraine opens in The Hague.
https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2023/07/03/office-tasked-with-investigating-the-russian-invasion-of-ukraine-opens-in-the-hague (https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2023/07/03/office-tasked-with-investigating-the-russian-invasion-of-ukraine-opens-in-the-hague)
-
“Russia's invasion of Ukraine continues to bring unspeakable horrors, every day. Deeply worrying news about deliberate attacks against civilians, including children, have become a cruel daily reminder of the bloodshed that Putin brought back to our continent. Evidence of countless international crimes committed by Russia is piling up. The new international prosecution centre will play a key role in making sure that the perpetrators are brought to justice, including for the crime of aggression. We will leave no stone unturned to hold Putin and his henchmen accountable.”
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_23_3606 (https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_23_3606)
-
A Ukrainian Patriot Missile Crew Shot Down Five Russian Aircraft In Two Minutes—And Possibly Forced The Kremlin To Rethink Its Tactics
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2023/07/03/a-ukrainian-patriot-missile-crew-shot-down-five-russian-aircraft-in-two-minutes-and-possibly-forced-the-kremlin-to-rethink-its-tactics/ (https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2023/07/03/a-ukrainian-patriot-missile-crew-shot-down-five-russian-aircraft-in-two-minutes-and-possibly-forced-the-kremlin-to-rethink-its-tactics/)
-
Jenin/Ukraine
-
Jenin/Ukraine
Since 1948 till present, the Arab Israeli war has resulted in the death of 92,000 Arabs and 25,000 Israelis.
In less than two years the Russian invasion of Ukraine has resulted in an estimate 350,000 deaths so far.
The order of magnitude between the two conflicts makes this a rather silly comparison.
Both Israel and Russia claim territory for security reasons, however the latter is 78 times the size of the former. Israel has valid security concerns, while Russia sees any obstacle to its irredentism and imperialist agenda as a "security concern".
-
Since 1948 till present, the Arab Israeli war has resulted in the death of 92,000 Arabs and 25,000 Israelis.
In less than two year the Russian invasion of Ukraine has resulted in an estimate 350,000 deaths so far.
The order of magnitude between the two conflicts makes this a rather silly comparison.
Both Israel and Russia claim territory for security reasons, however the latter is 78 times the size of the former. Israel has valid security concerns, while Russia sees any obstacle to its irredentism and imperialist agenda as a "security concern".
Not sure about those figures. But I think Israel is the cause of its own security concerns. It's so used to behaving monstrously, that it has forgotten how to behave in any other way. I'm sure bulldozing homes, confiscating farms and spitting on people of other denominations is going to result in Israel feeling more secure.
-
The hypocrisy and selective outrage of the supporters of NATO/US/UK is nauseating. Their pretence at outrage over unproven and disputed "war crimes" by Russia, Syria or whoever the current "Enemy du jour" happens to be, contrasts sharply with their indifference towards proven and undisputed war crimes by NATO/US/UK.
If they were not outraged and demanding war crimes trials after the Abu Ghraib prison torture pictures were released, if they are indifferent to the current deliberate and blatant targeting of civilians by Israel now(in a refugee camp >:( ) and were equally silent when the illegal renditioning and torture of detainees at black sites and Guantanamo Bay was revealed-then I call bullshit on their pretence of shock and horror of "alleged" war crimes of Russia and others. Especially when the accusations are coming from the perpetrators, and their propagandists, who committed the above and more.
Proven US/NATO war crimes on the most colossal scale since the end of WW2 are unmatched in their brutality and frequency. Chemical and biological weapons use in Vietnam/Korea, Deaths squads in Latin America, the list is endless(all acknowledged true) and the deaths uncountable and unfathomable.
Since 9/11 alone;
The U.S. post-9/11 wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Syria, and Pakistan have taken a tremendous human toll on those countries. As of September 2021, an estimated 387,073 civilians in these countries have died violent deaths as a result of the wars. As of May 2023, an estimated 3.6-3.7 million people have died indirectly in post-9/11 war zones. The total death toll in these war zones could be at least 4.5-4.6 million and counting, though the precise mortality figure remains unknown. Civilian deaths have also resulted from U.S. post-9/11 military operations in Somalia and other countries. -
from https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/costs/human/civilians
That is just "violent deaths" since 9/11. Deaths such as the estimated 500,000 Iraqis who died because of sanctions on medicines and was regarded as "a price worth paying" according to Madeleine Albright, US Secretary of state at the time would not be included in "violent deaths". Nor would the 100,000's of Yemeni civilian deaths from starvation after deliberate bombing of civilian infrastructure by UK/US/Saudi coalition be included in "violent deaths". Outrage and demanding of war crimes trials by the perpetrators of the above is not to be taken seriously.
The false outrage over unverified reports and youtube footage from people who are completely indifferent to proven Western crimes which are by magnitudes greater renders any point they are trying to make, without merit.
-
Not sure about those figures. But I think Israel is the cause of its own security concerns. It's so used to behaving monstrously, that it has forgotten how to behave in any other way. I'm sure bulldozing homes, confiscating farms and spitting on people of other denominations is going to result in Israel feeling more secure.
And I am sure the three invasions, two Intifadas and supporting Iraqi scud missile strikes made the Palestinians seem like friendly and tolerant people the Israelis would feel safe being ruled by with no hard feelings.
-
And I am sure the three invasions, two Intifadas and supporting Iraqi scud missile strikes made the Palestinians seem like friendly and tolerant people the Israelis would feel safe being ruled by with no hard feelings.
You can't invade your own territory, it is called resistance. The invasion and original crime is the Nakba.
-
The U.S. post-9/11 wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Syria, and Pakistan have taken a tremendous human toll on those countries. As of September 2021, an estimated 387,073 civilians in these countries have died violent deaths as a result of the wars. As of May 2023, an estimated 3.6-3.7 million people have died indirectly in post-9/11 war zones. The total death toll in these war zones could be at least 4.5-4.6 million and counting, though the precise mortality figure remains unknown. Civilian deaths have also resulted from U.S. post-9/11 military operations in Somalia and other countries. -
from https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/costs/human/civilians
That is just "violent deaths" since 9/11. Deaths such as the estimated 500,000 Iraqis who died because of sanctions on medicines and was regarded as "a price worth paying" according to Madeleine Albright, US Secretary of state at the time would not be included in "violent deaths". Nor would the 100,000's of Yemeni civilian deaths from starvation after deliberate bombing of civilian infrastructure by UK/US/Saudi coalition be included in "violent deaths". Outrage and demanding of war crimes trials by the perpetrators of the above is not to be taken seriously.
The false outrage over unverified reports and youtube footage from people who are completely indifferent to proven Western crimes which are by magnitudes greater renders any point they are trying to make, without merit.
What a load of bullshit. The population deaths rates in Iraq and Afghanistan do not show any alternation in trends post 9/11 at all.
https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/IRQ/iraq/death-rate (https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/IRQ/iraq/death-rate)
https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/AFG/afghanistan/death-rate (https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/AFG/afghanistan/death-rate)
-
What do you imagine that your death rate link proves? It is a non answer. So be more clear, David. Can you give an estimate of post 9/11 deaths caused by NATO/US/UK "military interventions". If what I printed and linked is "bullshit", then what is your estimate of civilian death caused by NATO at al?
-
What a load of bullshit. The population deaths rates in Iraq and Afghanistan do not show any alternation in trends post 9/11 at all.
https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/IRQ/iraq/death-rate (https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/IRQ/iraq/death-rate)
https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/AFG/afghanistan/death-rate (https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/AFG/afghanistan/death-rate)
What happened to Yemen, Syria and Pakistan in your non answer anyway? The figures were for civilian deaths in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Syria and Pakistan. At least non answer the right question. I take back that your reply is a non answer-it is actually only 2/5 or 40% of a non answer.
-
What do you imagine that your death rate link proves? It is a non answer. So be more clear, David. Can you give an estimate of post 9/11 deaths caused by NATO/US/UK "military interventions". If what I printed and linked is "bullshit", then what is your estimate of civilian death caused by NATO at al?
I expect that David will rectify his non answer by removing the second n and giving no answer.
To give an honest assessment of civilian deaths caused by US/UK/NATO would expose the idiocy and hypocrisy of the "outraged by Russian/Syrian alleged war crimes mob".
Any "lowball" figure attempted is immediately open to instant debunking and ridicule. It is why no figure will be even attempted.
-
What do you imagine that your death rate link proves?
It proves that 9/11 has not caused the numbers of death claimed. In fact the death rate in Afghanistan actually fell soon after 9/11.
To find an already volatile region with impoverished populations where the life expectancy is low then claim 9/11 caused lots of indirect/direct deaths there after when the death rate shows no such thing, shows the author of that BS you posted in grossly attributing ordinary and non related deaths to the 9/11 attacks.
If you look at the Iraq chart. The death rate went up during the Iraq/Iran war thus we can infer that conflict caused many deaths. If the claims you posted about post 9/11 deaths was accurate, it would be reflected in the data, yet it is not. Because it is not true.
-
It proves that 9/11 has not caused the numbers of death claimed. In fact the death rate in Afghanistan actually fell soon after 9/11.
To find an already volatile region with impoverished populations where the life expectancy is low then claim 9/11 caused lots of indirect/direct deaths there after when the death rate shows no such thing, shows the author of that BS you posted in grossly attributing ordinary and non related deaths to the 9/11 attacks.
If you look at the Iraq chart. The death rate went up during the Iraq/Iran war thus we can infer that conflict caused many deaths. If the claims you posted about post 9/11 deaths was accurate, it would be reflected in the data, yet it is not. Because it is not true.
It proves nothing of the sort because it is a measure which doesn't account for any variables, of which there are many. It also only represented 2/5 of the countries in the wars mentioned. Also it was rhetorical as you should have easily inferred.
What do you imagine that your death rate link proves? It is a non answer. So be more clear, David. Can you give an estimate of post 9/11 deaths caused by NATO/US/UK "military interventions". If what I printed and linked is "bullshit", then what is your estimate of civilian death caused by NATO at al?
It is the second bolded part that is the question you will give no answer to. If the above numbers are bullshit-then you must have a number yourself, in order to know that? You can't call bullshit and offer nothing in return. It is all you ever have. How many civilian deaths caused by NATO/US/UK interventions since 9/11?
-
Russian state TV shows mutiny leader Prigozhin's 'palace' in move to discredit him.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6oHtTfMNuI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6oHtTfMNuI)
-
https://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/
https://www.statista.com/statistics/269729/documented-civilian-deaths-in-iraq-war-since-2003/
As you seem to be struggling to give an estimate of civilian deaths caused by NATO/US/UK interventions, I thought I would give you a little help, David. A couple of links above that give estimates, but only for Iraq. A starter for ten for you. From the above, a conservative estimate of 200,000 violent civilian deaths, from Iraq alone. Now how about Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Pakistan, Syria. What do you estimate the civilian death toll from these interventions to be?
Your failure to even acknowledge or admit to massive violent civilian deaths at the hands of NATO is evidence enough that you are incapable of honest discussion. The "non-violent" deaths caused by sanctions, disease as a result of NATO wars etc are not included in these figures. You are simply a cheerleader for all things NATO(even going so far as waving a flag) and lack any objectivity. You have a ridiculously comic view of the world between the NATO good guys fighting the comically evil Tyrants and Dictators. Like a Hollywood script of a Marvel story. You never answer difficult questions and simply avoid or distract. You have no confidence in your own world view. It is based on emotion, not facts.
-
Interesting article as day 500 of the "10 day special military operation" nears.
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2023/7/6/2179504/-Ukraine-Update-Russia-doesn-t-have-a-backup-plan-when-it-runs-out-of-artillery (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2023/7/6/2179504/-Ukraine-Update-Russia-doesn-t-have-a-backup-plan-when-it-runs-out-of-artillery)
-
Using 70 year old tanks on the modern battlefield
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2023/06/18/the-russians-packed-a-robotic-t-55-tank-with-explosives-and-rolled-it-toward-ukrainian-lines/ (https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2023/06/18/the-russians-packed-a-robotic-t-55-tank-with-explosives-and-rolled-it-toward-ukrainian-lines/)
-
Russia are running out of artillery :-[ It is and has always been self evident which side suffers from shortages. The acknowledged firing rate of each side makes this clear. You really are just wilfully blind to reality, David.
Let's examine your claim in some more detail ::) The article that you linked to estimated (we are not told how) that Russia produces 20,000 shells per month or 240,000 annually. For a more accurate appraisal of Russian shell production-Try this, that well known Russian disinformation spreader, "The Washington Post".
https://archive.is/sUoS4
According to US intel (I could link you to many official assessments by different state intel agencies) the estimate you believe is wrong by an order of magnitude, according to US intel and, well, everybody else. That is to say, RO37 from Daily Kos estimates a figure 10 times less than the figure that everybody else estimates.
2.5 million shells annually. Some estimates (Bulgarian intel for example) place this as high a 3.5 million. Nobody believes that it is 240,000, except you and that bloke from Daily Kos. Although I doubt that he does really believe it.
The 240,000 figure is however, the amount of shells that the US produce annually. This is a matter of record and beyond dispute. Don't you know how to interrogate any article that you read? Do you just take every claim at face value, as long as it confirms what you want to believe?
The above numbers are beyond dispute. You are gullible.
-
Russia are running out of artillery :-[ it is and has always been self evident which side suffers from shortages. The acknowledged firing rate of each side makes this clear. You really are just wilfully blind to reality, David.
Let's examine your claim in some more detail ::) The article that you linked to estimated (we are not told how) that Russia produces 20,000 shells per month or 240,000 annually. For a more accurate appraisal of Russian shell production-Try this, that well known Russian disinformation spreader, "The Washington Post".
https://archive.is/sUoS4
According to US intel (I could link you to many official assessments by different state intel agencies) the estimate you believe is wrong by an order of magnitude, according to US intel and, well, everybody else. That is RO37 from Daily Kos estimates a figure 10 times less than the figure that everybody else estimates.
2.5 million shells annually. Some estimates (Bulgarian intel for example) place this as high a 3.5 million. Nobody believes that it is 240,000, except you and that bloke from Daily Kos. Although I doubt that he does really believe it.
] The 240,000 figure is however, the amount of shells that the US produce annually. this is a matter of record and beyond dispute. Don't you know how to interrogate any article that you read. Do you just take every claim at face value, as long as it confirms what you want to believe?
The above numbers are beyond dispute. You are gullible.
From the article above;
Last year, the Ukrainian army was blasting through 180,000 artillery shell rounds per month. Before the war, U.S. production stood at 14,500 shells per month, and E.U. production was around the same. The United States has been faster to respond to depleting stockpiles, boosting domestic production to 20,000 rounds a month and investing in new capacity to eventually increase that to 90,000 rounds per month.
[ In race to arm Ukraine, U.S. faces cracks in its manufacturing might ]
But Ukraine is still expending 90,000 to 140,000 rounds a month, according to Watling, while the newly announced E.U. investments in production could take one to two years to come online, despite a call by Thierry Breton, the European commissioner for the internal market, to move into “war economy mode.”
“You don’t have to be a great military analyst to realize that European countries making major investments into artillery production 13 months into the war are a little bit late,” said Michael Kofman, director of the Russia Studies program at the Center for Naval Analyses. “What’s important is the U.S. has already significantly increased its artillery production. But there’s greater capacity in Europe. It is incumbent upon them to leverage their defense industries and to spend the money.”
Others argue that the recent E.U. announcements are still an important message to Russia. “Russia is betting on the fact it can wait out Western resolve. A months-long time frame sends the signal that solidarity holds and support will continue,” said a senior E.U diplomat who spoke on the condition of anonymity to brief the press. “The numbers [of shells] don’t have practical meaning. It’s that it is sustained.
“It sends the message to the Kremlin that, 'No matter what you think, our policy is set for longer,'” the diplomat continued.
Signs are emerging of a parallel effort in Russia to increase production, despite Western sanctions. Data recently published on Russia’s federal treasury website showed Moscow spent 2 trillion rubles ($26 billion) on defense in January and February alone, a 282 percent increase over the same period in 2021, Reuters reported on Monday. Russia is on course to produce 2.5 million artillery shell rounds this year, up from 1.7 million rounds before the war, Watling said.
In response to an E.U. pledge to supply Ukraine with 1 million artillery shells over the next twelve months, Russian President Vladimir Putin retorted in March that Moscow would produce three times as many shells over the same period.
“Russia has the capacity to mobilize its own economy in support of the armed forces and control its own destiny in a way that Ukraine can’t,” said Barrons. “The critical weakness” for Ukraine “is its reliance on Western inventory and industry.”
You literally believe the opposite of the truth. It is widely and generally acknowledged that Russian shell production is way in excess of the capacity of the entirety of NATO. Everyone knows this :-[
-
Using 70 year old tanks on the modern battlefield
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2023/06/18/the-russians-packed-a-robotic-t-55-tank-with-explosives-and-rolled-it-toward-ukrainian-lines/ (https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2023/06/18/the-russians-packed-a-robotic-t-55-tank-with-explosives-and-rolled-it-toward-ukrainian-lines/)
You will find zero evidence of Russia using these old tanks as Main Battle Tanks . It is just part of the idiotic, "Russia running out of everything", propaganda. Incredibly you still haven't seen through the bullshit yet and are part of the ever dwindling minority to believe NATO propaganda.
The old tanks are being used as very effective protected and buried in extra artillery guns (I already told you this) and also improvised for stunts such as loading with explosives and sent to Ukrainian trenches, as above. Where are the pictures or footage of Russia using these 70 year old tanks as MBT's.
Since you brought up shell stocks and production, what do you think of the US sending cluster munitions? The reason given is that they have no other stocks to give so are now breaking their own laws in sending banned cluster weapons. But you reckon that Russia are running out and can't keep up.
-
Interesting article as day 500 of the "10 day special military operation" nears.
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2023/7/6/2179504/-Ukraine-Update-Russia-doesn-t-have-a-backup-plan-when-it-runs-out-of-artillery (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2023/7/6/2179504/-Ukraine-Update-Russia-doesn-t-have-a-backup-plan-when-it-runs-out-of-artillery)
Where is your "10 day special military operation" quote from? Which Russian official stated this? or have you invented it?
-
Do you stand by the shell production figure you gave earlier, David, in order to "prove" your contention that Russia are running out of shells? Apart from the no name anonymous hack in Daily Kos, is there any supporting evidence for your claim that Russia only produce 20,000 shells per month. This in contrast to the abundance of evidence that puts this figure as ten times, at least, greater. The entire article is based on this provably false contention. Garbage in, Garbage out.
It is also acknowledged that the shell production of the entirety of NATO is about 10 times less than Russia alone. This isn't a contentious point to anyone except you. If the conclusions of the article are based on such demonstrably false figures, it is entirely without merit and unworthy of consideration.
How many shells do you think are produced annually by Russia?
Are you sticking with 200,000?
Then do NATO.
Then explain to us how Russia will run out of shells.
-
Do you stand by the shell production figure you gave earlier, David, in order to "prove" your contention that Russia are running out of shells? Apart from the no name anonymous hack in Daily Kos, is there any supporting evidence for your claim that Russia only produce 20,000 shells per month. This in contrast to the abundance of evidence that puts this figure as ten times, at least, greater. The entire article is based on this provably false contention. Garbage in, Garbage out.
It is also acknowledged that the shell production of the entirety of NATO is about 10 times less than Russia alone. This isn't a contentious point to anyone except you. If the conclusions of the article are based on such demonstrably false figures, it is entirely without merit and unworthy of consideration.
How many shells do you think are produced annually by Russia?
Are you sticking with 200,000?
Then do NATO.
Then explain to us how Russia will run out of shells.
The amount of shells Russia produces in Tankie fantasy world is not relevant as its just a fantasy. Its no secret that Russia is having to purchase shells from North Korea now.
NATO doctrine does not put much emphasis on artillery like Russia does. It focuses on more precise and longer range weapons like guided surface to ground and guided air to ground missiles. To use antiquated artillery as a sole data-point in comparing NATO to Russia just shows how myopic you are.
-
Destruction of battery of Russian BM-27 Uragan 220 mm MLRS on the Zaporizhzhia front by AFU strikes.
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/14u1iut/destruction_of_battery_of_russian_bm27_uragan_220/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/14u1iut/destruction_of_battery_of_russian_bm27_uragan_220/)
-
Ukrainian M2 Bradley firing a TOW II at a Russian tank
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/14s1d3d/ukrainian_m2_bradley_firing_a_tow_ii_at_a_russian/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/14s1d3d/ukrainian_m2_bradley_firing_a_tow_ii_at_a_russian/)
-
NATO doctrine does not put much emphasis on artillery like Russia does. It focuses on more precise and longer range weapons like guided surface to ground and guided air to ground missiles. To use antiquated artillery as a sole data-point in comparing NATO to Russia just shows how myopic you are.
You raised the subject of artillery and the "fact" that Russia were running low and only produced 240,000 shells annually. You have been shown to be wrong by a whole magnitude and now pretend that it is me who is "myopic". I have written often about Russia's superior tech in missile technology, air defence and electronic warfare. These are well known. The truth is that contrary to your bullshit, it is not even denied that Ukraine/NATO have run out of shells-in an artillery war that Russia have dragged them into. Strategies that are playing out in front of you just sail way over your head.
The controversy over the cluster munitions now being sent is precisely because they have nothing more to send. What is NATO's next card to play? F16's, F35's - doesn't matter. Russia have lots of tech just waiting for the day that NATO escalate. It isn't disputed by impartial, serious military experts that Russia are way ahead of the US in game changing military technology.
They have now emptied NATO/Ukraine stocks of shells bare whilst outfiring them 10 to 1 in a war that NATO weren't equipped to deal with. Much like Ali's famous "rope a dope", but with the added twist that Ali is raining down ten blows to one at the same time as exhausting his opponent.
Read some Andrei Martyanov, David, he will clue you in to some of the military strategies and calculations that are always at play. Your concentration on the minutiae, such as storm shadows, himars, dumb stories about Russian generals or whatever(which have zero bearing on understanding the wider picture) is misplaced. It isn't important. Understanding complex matters requires asking critical questions and more than a 3 minute attention span.
Running out of shells in an artillery war is "pretty important", David. Do you think, perhaps, this was already gamed out ahead by Russia? Like as a strategy(having done the maths?) Or do you think it just serendipitous?
What do you think happens next?
Questions, questions...
What answers do Ukraine/NATO have to this quandary?
-
NATO doctrine does not put much emphasis on artillery like Russia does.
Turns out that NATO should have put more emphasis on artillery. Russia knowing this have dragged them into exactly that and disarmed NATO/Ukraine at a way faster rate than they can replenish.
The missile tech that you claim US concentrate on is mythical. From Politico, hardly Russian disinfo, quoting US General from Space Force below;
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/11/20/hypersonic-technology-us-behind-china-russia-523130
HALIFAX, Nova Scotia — A top Space Force official admitted on Saturday that the U.S. has “catching up to do very quickly” to match Beijing’s hypersonic capability, one week after China successfully launched a missile that circled the globe before striking a target.
Russia also launched a hypersonic missile from a warship in the Arctic this week, underscoring how quickly Washington, D.C.’s two primary competitors are racing ahead in this technology.
“We’re not as advanced as the Chinese or the Russians in terms of hypersonic programs,” Gen. David Thompson, vice chief of space operations, said during his appearance at the Halifax International Security Forum.
That is from 2021. Since then neither China nor Russia have stood still and US are still struggling to even field one hypersonic missile.
-
Ukrainian HIMARS taking out a battery of russian MSTA-S self-propelled howitzers
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/14memm0/ukrainian_himars_taking_out_battery_of_russian/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/14memm0/ukrainian_himars_taking_out_battery_of_russian/)
-
Gringo and NGB... I have two spare VIP tickets your names on them!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frL1oTvYe5Y (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frL1oTvYe5Y)
-
Gringo and NGB... I have two spare VIP tickets your names on them!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frL1oTvYe5Y (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frL1oTvYe5Y)
I will really look forward to it! :( :(
-
I see Joe Biden's on there. He's like a corpse that needs propping up. They must be sick to death of picking him up and redirecting him. How can you have somebody who is deteriorating so fast as president? He's just a puppet.
-
I see Joe Biden's on there. He's like a corpse that needs propping up. They must be sick to death of picking him up and redirecting him. How can you have somebody who is deteriorating so fast as president? He's just a puppet.
There seemed to be a rush to support him if only to defeat Bernie Sanders.
-
I see Joe Biden's on there. He's like a corpse that needs propping up. They must be sick to death of picking him up and redirecting him. How can you have somebody who is deteriorating so fast as president? He's just a puppet.
So who are the puppeteers, Roch? Who or what interests are the ones pulling the strings?
Are these VIP Crimea party tickets +1's, David? My better half (or babushka, if you prefer) will not be happy at missing out :(
-
The NATO summit in Vilnius and the weak statement on Ukraine "membership" and what it means dissected by the excellent, Bernhard, on MOA today below;
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2023/07/natos-big-climb-down.html#comments
From the article, the official Communique of the NATO Heads of State is copied below;
"11. We fully support Ukraine’s right to choose its own security arrangements. Ukraine’s future is in NATO. We reaffirm the commitment we made at the 2008 Summit in Bucharest that Ukraine will become a member of NATO, and today we recognise that Ukraine’s path to full Euro-Atlantic integration has moved beyond the need for the Membership Action Plan. Ukraine has become increasingly interoperable and politically integrated with the Alliance, and has made substantial progress on its reform path. In line with the 1997 Charter on a Distinctive Partnership between NATO and Ukraine and the 2009 Complement, Allies will continue to support and review Ukraine’s progress on interoperability as well as additional democratic and security sector reforms that are required. NATO Foreign Ministers will regularly assess progress through the adapted Annual National Programme. The Alliance will support Ukraine in making these reforms on its path towards future membership. We will be in a position to extend an invitation to Ukraine to join the Alliance when Allies agree and conditions are met."
[/b]
It sounds to me that the date for Ukraine's admittance to NATO has been made clear. All the bla bla above means, in more clear terms, Ukraine will become full members of NATO on the Twelfth of Never.
-
The NATO summit in Vilnius and the weak statement on Ukraine "membership" and what it means dissected by the excellent, Bernhard, on MOA today below;
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2023/07/natos-big-climb-down.html#comments
From the article, the official Communique of the NATO Heads of State is copied below;
"11. We fully support Ukraine’s right to choose its own security arrangements. Ukraine’s future is in NATO. We reaffirm the commitment we made at the 2008 Summit in Bucharest that Ukraine will become a member of NATO, and today we recognise that Ukraine’s path to full Euro-Atlantic integration has moved beyond the need for the Membership Action Plan. Ukraine has become increasingly interoperable and politically integrated with the Alliance, and has made substantial progress on its reform path. In line with the 1997 Charter on a Distinctive Partnership between NATO and Ukraine and the 2009 Complement, Allies will continue to support and review Ukraine’s progress on interoperability as well as additional democratic and security sector reforms that are required. NATO Foreign Ministers will regularly assess progress through the adapted Annual National Programme. The Alliance will support Ukraine in making these reforms on its path towards future membership. We will be in a position to extend an invitation to Ukraine to join the Alliance when Allies agree and conditions are met."
[/b]
It sounds to me that the date for Ukraine's admittance to NATO has been made clear. All the bla bla above means, in more clear terms, Ukraine will become full members of NATO on the Twelfth of Never.
The expected outcome of the war in Tankie fantasy world has greatly been diminished in the last 16 month.
First it was the "End of the empire of lies"
Then it was reduced to "NATO would withdraw to its 1993 borders"
Then it was reduced to "Russia would take Odesa and the whole Ukrainian coast"
Then it was reduced to "Zelenskys government is about to collapse"
Then it was reduced to "The flour Oblasts are not returning" (despite two of the four Oblast capitals not being in Russian hands).
Now its merely "Ukraine wont join NATO".
:))
-
The expected outcome of the war in Tankie fantasy world has greatly been diminished in the last 16 month.
First it was the "End of the empire of lies"
Then it was reduced to "NATO would withdraw to its 1993 borders"
Then it was reduced to "Russia would take Odesa and the whole Ukrainian coast"
Then it was reduced to "Zelenskys government is about to collapse"
Then it was reduced to "The flour Oblasts are not returning" (despite two of the four Oblast capitals not being in Russian hands).
Now its merely "Ukraine wont join NATO".
:))
None of the expected outcomes have changed. It is NATO whose demands and belligerence are being toned down. The End of the Empire of Lies is happening at an increasing pace, David. Where do you get the notion that "Tankie Fantasy World" (aka realistic and impartial observers of international relations and wider geopolitical picture) is toning down any expectations.
The entirety of NATO were claiming some months ago that the only result was to defeat Russia militarily. Now the talk is only of a "negotiated" settlement. Remember the last "negotiated settlement"?
Minsk 2 was the last "negotiated settlement". As previously discussed and now openly acknowledged, Russia dictated the terms of the negotiation. All of NATO veto wielding UNSC members(US/UK/France) acquiesced to the Russian dictated "negotiated settlement". When you understand and acknowledge why and how Russia were able to do this, it will go some way to informing who the next "negotiated settlement" will favour.
-
None of the expected outcomes have changed. It is NATO whose demands and belligerence are being toned down. The End of the Empire of Lies is happening at an increasing pace, David. Where do you get the notion that "Tankie Fantasy World" (aka realistic and impartial observers of international relations and wider geopolitical picture) is toning down any expectations.
The entirety of NATO were claiming some months ago that the only result was to defeat Russia militarily. Now the talk is only of a "negotiated" settlement. Remember the last "negotiated settlement"?
Minsk 2 was the last "negotiated settlement". As previously discussed and now openly acknowledged, Russia dictated the terms of the negotiation. All of NATO veto wielding UNSC members(US/UK/France) acquiesced to the Russian dictated "negotiated settlement". When you understand and acknowledge why and how Russia were able to do this, it will go some way to informing who the next "negotiated settlement" will favour.
I can't see the West compromising. Biden won't. Trump wouldn't if elected. Zelensky won't cede territory.
-
I can't see the West compromising. Biden won't. Trump wouldn't if elected. Zelensky won't cede territory.
What they would prefer to do and what the actual choices will be, with a metaphorical gun held to their head, is going to be decided by the Russian leadership. NATO/Ukraine have zero prospect of achieving any of their aims. The populace of the regions that they seek to "liberate" don't want "liberating" by Ukraine. You should question, but won't, who exactly the lands are to liberated for. The answer is Corporate and Financial interests. It isn't the inhabitants of those regions that NATO want to "liberate", just the land and resources.
-
Stormshadow strike on Russian ammo depot in Luhansk
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/150ztvy/ukrainian_cruise_missile_strike_on_russian_depot/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/150ztvy/ukrainian_cruise_missile_strike_on_russian_depot/)
-
What they would prefer to do and what the actual choices will be, with a metaphorical gun held to their head, is going to be decided by the Russian leadership. NATO/Ukraine have zero prospect of achieving any of their aims. The populace of the regions that they seek to "liberate" don't want "liberating" by Ukraine. You should question, but won't, who exactly the lands are to liberated for. The answer is Corporate and Financial interests. It isn't the inhabitants of those regions that NATO want to "liberate", just the land and resources.
But that's a separate debate about the role of capitalism in modern society. It's surely up to the Ukrainian people to decide their own fate, under free and fair elections under the auspices of OSCE.
-
Destruction of another 2 Russian 2A65 Msta-B howitzers with HIMARS
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1515itt/destruction_of_2_russian_2a65_mstab_howitzers/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1515itt/destruction_of_2_russian_2a65_mstab_howitzers/)
-
But that's a separate debate about the role of capitalism in modern society. It's surely up to the Ukrainian people to decide their own fate, under free and fair elections under the auspices of OSCE.
You should question, but won't, who exactly the lands are to liberated for. The answer is Corporate and Financial interests. It isn't the inhabitants of those regions that NATO want to "liberate", just the land and resources.
Your post was in response to the above.
There is a separate debate about the role of capitalism, Steve, I agree with that. In this instance though that question is also central to the morality of arming and funding the continuation of the slaughter. It is only Russia who are offering self determination to the people of each region. The Ukraine regime have already sold the economic rights of resources and land to the likes of Blackrock. Free and fair elections are not on their agenda and they make no secret of this.
If your desire is free and fair elections then you are supporting the wrong side. The Ukrainians have openly stated this. Such as Kyrylo Budanov, Chief of Main Directorate of Intelligence of the Ukraine MOD. His words reported below;
“The majority of the radical pro-Russian population, upon the arrival of Ukrainian units in Crimea through any form of advancement, be it offensive or otherwise, will promptly depart for the Russian Federation via the ferry crossing,” Budanov believes.
“No one will remain here.”
In response to inquiries regarding the crossing, Budanov dismissed the necessity of the Crimean Bridge.
“They will vacate this territory — they are not suicidal, believe me,” he said.
Does that sound to you as if the intention is free and fair elections, Steve?
It sounds like a threat of genocide to me.
-
In response to inquiries regarding the crossing, Budanov dismissed the necessity of the Crimean Bridge.
“They will vacate this territory — they are not suicidal, believe me,” he said.
What is the Chief of the Main Directorate of Intelligence of the Ukrainian MOD suggesting here, do you think, Steve? Why would it be "suicidal" to be pro Russian in Crimea? Where is the suggestion of free and fair elections? If your support of Ukraine/NATO is based on giving people the right to self determination, as you claim, then you need to familiarise yourself with the intent of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and their NATO sponsors. You will be disappointed.
-
Chechens fighting on Ukrainian side ambush a Russian Ural truck. Location and date unknown but presumed recent.
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/151v32i/chechens_fighting_on_ukrainian_side_ambush_a/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/151v32i/chechens_fighting_on_ukrainian_side_ambush_a/)
-
Russian equipment destroyed with artillery. Zaporizhia, 2023
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/151q1rc/piece_of_russian_equipment_destroyed_with/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/151q1rc/piece_of_russian_equipment_destroyed_with/)
-
But that's a separate debate about the role of capitalism in modern society. It's surely up to the Ukrainian people to decide their own fate, under free and fair elections under the auspices of OSCE.
More about the Ukrainian plans, Steve. I would say they are definitely not having the referendums that is the basis of your support. Blacklists and forced expulsions.
Tamila Tasheva—who since April 2022 has served as President Volodymyr Zelensky's permanent representative for Crimea—told Newsweek that Kyiv expects to blacklist some 10,000 Ukrainians who have collaborated with Russian authorities, though will not punish those it deems "victims" of the occupation.
Hundreds of thousands of Russians are believed to have moved to Crimea since the peninsula was seized by President Vladimir Putin's forces in 2014. Estimates vary, but Tasheva has said the figure is between 500,000 to 800,000 newcomers. All those Russians who have entered illegally, she said, will be subject to "forced expulsion."[/b]
The Ukrainian regime are fully aware that they would be occupying the land against the will of the inhabitants. As if they will be offering a referendum. You often suggest the illegitimacy of the referendum in Crimea. Despite it being pointed out that the Crimeans have voted to leave Ukraine several times. There is no doubt that the population are very pro-Russia something even admitted in pro Ukraine Western media. From the same Newsweek article below;
"Tasheva and other Ukrainian leaders are trying to win back the hearts and minds of Crimeans who have lived for nearly a decade under Russian control. Even before the annexation, polls and election results suggested more pro-Moscow sympathies than elsewhere in the country, not least due to the influence of, and Russian migration associated with, the Kremlin's naval base in Sevastopol."
-
Ukrainian kamikaze drone destroys Russian self-propelled mortar
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1520ies/ukrainian_kamikaze_drone_destroys_russian_tulip/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1520ies/ukrainian_kamikaze_drone_destroys_russian_tulip/)
-
Russian Su-25 jet falling into the Azov Sea earlier today
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/15218xr/a_video_showing_the_russian_su25_jet_falling_into/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/15218xr/a_video_showing_the_russian_su25_jet_falling_into/)
-
Best air defence in the world at work again protecting the Kerch Bridge. :))
(https://opoyi.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Crimeabridge_100822_AP.webp)
-
Best air defence in the world at work again protecting the Kerch Bridge. :))
(https://opoyi.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Crimeabridge_100822_AP.webp)
It was attacked by submersible drones. What does that have to do with air defence? What happened to the Ukrainian Air Force, by the way? How is it that they are gone and Russian Air Force intact and firing missiles into the Ukrainian deep rear at will?
NATO/US daren't put up any of their F16's, F35's or any other airframe up against Russian Air Defences. The US military are aware of Russia's air defence capabilities. They are also aware that they will come across what Donald Rumsfeld referred to as "known unknowns and unknown unknowns".
It isn't seriously disputed that Russia have the world's best air defence.
-
The likely source of the submersible drone, the Port of Odessa, is currently being hammered by Kaliber missiles and drones. Ukrainian air defence doing it's usual job of falling back down to earth and exploding. From reports and footage it is clear that high value targets are being struck.
https://twitter.com/search?q=odessa&src=recent_search_click
There will be no more attacks on Kerch Bridge coming from Odessa.
-
Let's start today with a destroyed Russian 2S7 Pion self propelled 203mm cannon. Work by the 72nd mechanized brigade.
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/152t2s1/lets_start_today_with_a_destroyed_russian_2s7/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/152t2s1/lets_start_today_with_a_destroyed_russian_2s7/)
-
Why Is Russia Not Dragging The T-14 Armata Tank In Its War With Ukraine Until Now
https://youtu.be/a8cjAWfChlo?t=12 (https://youtu.be/a8cjAWfChlo?t=12)
-
South African President Cyril Ramaphosa has asked permission from the International Criminal Court not to arrest Russia’s Vladimir Putin.
https://www.reuters.com/article/safrica-russia-icc-idUSKBN2YY1E7 (https://www.reuters.com/article/safrica-russia-icc-idUSKBN2YY1E7)
-
The likely source of the submersible drone, the Port of Odessa, is currently being hammered by Kaliber missiles and drones. Ukrainian air defence doing it's usual job of falling back down to earth and exploding. From reports and footage it is clear that high value targets are being struck.
https://twitter.com/search?q=odessa&src=recent_search_click
There will be no more attacks on Kerch Bridge coming from Odessa.
For the second night running Odessa facing a massive missile and drone barrage, largest of the whole war according to many. Huge explosions. Weapons, fuel dumps and the port getting obliterated. Attacking the Kerch Bridge from there not looking such a "success" now.
No doubt tomorrow the Ukrainians will report shooting down 12 out of 10 missiles and neutralising all targets. The video footage posted all over social media tells the real story. Ukraine/NATO are teetering on the edge. Running out of material and men, the situation is becoming desperate. The forced conscriptions, dragging men from the street, from work, off buses are prevalent on Twitter accounts every day. Without direct NATO intervention(boots on the ground) Ukraine will soon having nothing left to resist with.
Any "coalition of the willing" prepared to enter Ukraine will merely slightly prolong hostilities.
-
Russian Strela-10 Air defense system destroyed with Ukrainian GMLRS
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/153vmrf/russian_strela10_air_defense_system_was_destroyed/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/153vmrf/russian_strela10_air_defense_system_was_destroyed/)
-
Best air defence in the world at work again protecting the Kerch Bridge. - David
It was attacked by submersible drones. What does that have to do with air defence?- part of my earlier reply
The "Ukraine winning", "Russia weak" narrative relies entirely now on such "PR victories" and is exposed as such to those with an attention span and memory of more than seconds.
Let's examine the attack on the bridge and its aftermath. Does it show Russian weakness? Does it support the notion that Russia is losing? Can't even defend Kerch Bridge?
The first response by Russia was to attack the source of the attack. Odessa has been ended as a port facility for Ukraine/NATO. Fuel dumps, weapons dumps and the source of the submersible drone all destroyed. From videos, Ukrainian air defence was next to non-existent. Huge secondary explosions make clear that targets hit were militarily significant.
The second response, arguably way more significant, is Russia's announcement today that effectively turns the Black Sea into a Russian lake.
"From tomorrow, all ships sailing to Ukrainian ports in the Black Sea will be considered as potential carriers of military cargo, and the flag countries of these ships will be considered as taking part in the conflict on the side of the Ukrainian Government."
- Russian MoD
[/b]
The response from Ukrainian officials is informative;
Not a single cargo ship will call at the ports of Ukraine on the Black Sea after the termination of the grain deal, Mykhailo Podolyak, adviser to the head of Zelensky's office, admitted. His words are quoted by the Ukrainian media.
"No country will dare to send its ships [to the ports of Ukraine]. And this is not a question of ships, this is a question of insurance companies," Podolyak said.
The already stuttering and inadequate supply of weapons to the Ukraine Armed Forces hit with a terminal blow. There will still be those who cling to the narrative but the above demonstrates very clearly which side has "escalation dominance".
The attack on the bridge has been beneficial to Russia in many ways. It gave them justification to effectively cut off Ukraine from Black Sea access and to destroy the facilities at Odessa used to launch attacks on Kerch. Wouldn't surprise me if it was "allowed" to hit.
-
Third night running that Odessa Port getting hammered. Ukraine/NATO are bled out.
-
Very ironic clip from a Soviet Cartoon from 1970s.
https://youtu.be/g5GlDj016Io?t=16 (https://youtu.be/g5GlDj016Io?t=16)
-
"Igor Strelkov, former Russian military commander, found guilty for MH17 shootdown, was arrested in Moscow on charges of extremism(critics of Russian government)"
https://liveuamap.com/en/2023/21-july-igor-strelkov-former-russian-military-commander-found (https://liveuamap.com/en/2023/21-july-igor-strelkov-former-russian-military-commander-found)
-
Bradley is covering soldiers of the 47th Brigade, as they clear a Russian trench and take POWs.
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/15502vu/bradley_is_covering_soldiers_of_the_47th_brigade/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/15502vu/bradley_is_covering_soldiers_of_the_47th_brigade/)
-
Ukrainian troops are clearing a path through a minefield before the assault
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1553mbm/ukrainian_troops_are_clearing_a_path_through_a/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1553mbm/ukrainian_troops_are_clearing_a_path_through_a/)
-
German arms manufacturer Rheinmetall announced it will protect it's newly built Tank factory in Ukraine with it's own, self-procured Skynex Air-Defence System, after Russian threats to strike the facility.
https://gagadget.com/de/283831-rheinmetall-will-in-der-ukraine-eigene-flugabwehrsysteme-zum-schutz-kunftiger-werke-einsetzen/ (https://gagadget.com/de/283831-rheinmetall-will-in-der-ukraine-eigene-flugabwehrsysteme-zum-schutz-kunftiger-werke-einsetzen/)
-
Eyes on Syria for the coming days/weeks? The ramifications of the Iran/Saudi rapprochement and Syria being welcomed back in to the Arab League are playing out now on the changing global chess board. US/Empire position in these hotspots seems to be becoming increasingly isolated and unsustainable.
https://twitter.com/MyLordBebo/status/1682838030791450630
"Russia increases pressure on the US in Syria.
The “drama” with the Russian general Popov seems to slowly make sense. Popov was sent Syria to confront the US. Previously he was commanding the Russian units that repelled the counteroffensive and produced the famous “Leopard and Bradley” pile.
So they’re basically sending their best man to Syria. While there are constant News popping up of some kind if encounters between Russian and US aircraft.
Now it is clear, that the Russian retaliation towards the US is carried out in Syria.
The steps:
1) Russia has put a big effort to reestablishing Syria and Assad internationally.
2) Syria/Assad joined the Arab league
3) The Arab state are uniting now behind Assad
4) Iran has for a long time supported rebels that oppose the US in Syria and recently there were attacks on US personnel in Syria.
5) For the first time Russia stopped avoiding a direct confrontation with the US in Syria.
-> Russia with its allies in the region seem to increase the military pressure on the small occupying force of the US.
1/ - next on Turkey
In this equation you must not forget Turkey. Turkey’s enemies the Kurds are the only serious US allies in Syria and Erdogan wants to get rid of them.
1) The Kurds have foreseen this development and seek talks with Assad:
“We affirm our readiness to meet and talk with the Syrian government and with all Syrian parties to hold discussions and present initiatives for a solution,” the Kurdish authorities said.
Now it is even possible that the Kurds switch sides and unite with Assad, under some kind of autonom region within Syria.
2) Turkey was fighting Assad and the Kurds. Now Erdogan announced that he wants to talk to Assad. This is also thanks to the increasing pressure, since essentially the whole Arab world has united behind Assad now. So the smart thing for Erdogan is to follow.
So this all chaos is slowly shifting to a big peace realignment. Except the US is there, occupying the Syrian oil fields.
And this now seems to be the moment where the Arab world finally starts to support the push against the US in Syria.
It is unclear how it will manifest. But the political and military pressure on the US to leave is growing.
Meanwhile america has recently sent additional 2.500 troops up the region.
We all know the neocons will not just accept a defeat. "
-
The missile strikes on weapons facilities and the Odessa port are not letting up either. Misfiring S300's as usual plummeting back to earth and "intercepting" buildings. NATO's lack of industrial capacity and stocks of ammunition make them ill equipped or able to handle the ever expanding fronts of this world altering confrontation.
Enemies appear to sense the weakness and slowly escalate.
"Ukrainian channel Legitimny writes:
Literally everything is flying towards Odessa. Arrivals continue. Already more than a dozen in different parts of the city and suburbs. Now the launch of “Calibres”. Another long night awaits the region.
Odessa is being hit for two reasons:
1. Due to the cancellation of the grain deal;
2. Because of the launches of drones/ missiles from Odessa towards Crimea."
More are already on their way. But surely Russia must be running out of missiles soon? Western pundits and media have been promising this months ago ???
-
Destruction of a Russian Zoopark-1 1L219 counter-battery radar system with the help of a Excalibur 155 mm extended-range guided artillery shell.
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/157a3h5/destruction_of_a_russian_zoopark1_1l219/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/157a3h5/destruction_of_a_russian_zoopark1_1l219/)
-
A convoy of Ukrainian "Bradley" BMPs and Leopard 2A6 tanks sets out to storm Russian Army positions in the Zaporizhzhia direction.
https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/157b2tl/a_convoy_of_ukrainian_bradley_bmps_and_leopard/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/157b2tl/a_convoy_of_ukrainian_bradley_bmps_and_leopard/)
-
Day 515 of the 10 day special military operation. Cargo plane full of Russian troop coffins to be flown back.
(https://preview.redd.it/4efy4h91fndb1.jpg?width=320&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=638c4a33662744e3a99fa8978a65144db645b30e)
-
Day 515 of the 10 day special military operation. Cargo plane full of Russian troop coffins to be flown back.
(https://preview.redd.it/4efy4h91fndb1.jpg?width=320&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=638c4a33662744e3a99fa8978a65144db645b30e)
Didn't you previously post that Russian dead were burned by mobile cremation units?
-
Didn't you previously post that Russian dead were burned by mobile cremation units?
That was during the beginning. That equipment is probably long gone.
The families of those forced to sign up want their sons back.
-
Photos showing the extensive destruction of the UNESCO World Heritage Spaso-Preobrazhensky Cathedral in Odesa.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/1575hrw/photos_showing_the_extensive_destruction_of_the/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/1575hrw/photos_showing_the_extensive_destruction_of_the/)
-
Photos showing the extensive destruction of the UNESCO World Heritage Spaso-Preobrazhensky Cathedral in Odesa.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/1575hrw/photos_showing_the_extensive_destruction_of_the/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/1575hrw/photos_showing_the_extensive_destruction_of_the/)
In Tankie fantasy world, Ukraine have blown up their own UNESCO World Heritage site.
-
A Russian Buk-M1/2 air defense system is hit and destroyed by a Ukrainian HIMARS strike somewhere on the Zaporizhzhia front.
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1588qpg/a_russian_bukm12_air_defense_system_is_hit_and/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1588qpg/a_russian_bukm12_air_defense_system_is_hit_and/)
-
Ukrainian artillery strikes on a bunch of Russian vehicles around the Bakhmut front such as electronic warfare vehicles, BM-21 Grad, radio-, group of 4 BMPs, D-30 howitzer
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1590st6/ukrainian_artillery_strikes_on_a_bunch_of_russian/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1590st6/ukrainian_artillery_strikes_on_a_bunch_of_russian/)
-
Ukrainian artillery strikes on a bunch of Russian vehicles around the Bakhmut front such as electronic warfare vehicles, BM-21 Grad, radio-, group of 4 BMPs, D-30 howitzer
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1590st6/ukrainian_artillery_strikes_on_a_bunch_of_russian/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1590st6/ukrainian_artillery_strikes_on_a_bunch_of_russian/)
David the links don't work unless you create an account.
-
Russian unit fell into Ukrainian ambush in Bakhmut
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTk-W62MCHY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTk-W62MCHY)
-
Russian air strike to grain elevator and wheat storage of Nibulon company in Kozacke town, Kherson region (video from Russian media)
https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/15a8wlm/russian_air_strike_to_grain_elevator_and_wheat/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/15a8wlm/russian_air_strike_to_grain_elevator_and_wheat/)
-
Russia is inflicting as much damage as it can in Russian-speaking areas because to Putin they are all traitors if they don't support his ideology. Discuss.
-
Russia is inflicting as much damage as it can in Russian-speaking areas because to Putin they are all traitors if they don't support his ideology. Discuss.
If you want to discuss it, Steve, I would start a separate thread if I were you. Any discussion on this thread is derailed by David spamming it with endless videos of Russian stuff being blown up. He has rendered discussion on this thread pointless. Four of the six posts prior to this post on this page, 11 of 15 on the last page and 9 of 15 the page before that.
Start a thread on it, I'm sure there will be a response. Discuss it on this thread and it will be three posts of discussion followed 5 spamming videos and then an odd post here and there after swimming through posts and posts of videos of Russian stuff blowing up.
-
If you want to discuss it, Steve, I would start a separate thread if I were you. Any discussion on this thread is derailed by David spamming it with endless videos of Russian stuff being blown up. He has rendered discussion on this thread pointless. Four of the six posts prior to this post on this page, 11 of 15 on the last page and 9 of 15 the page before that.
Start a thread on it, I'm sure there will be a response. Discuss it on this thread and it will be three posts of discussion followed 5 spamming videos and then an odd post here and there after swimming through posts and posts of videos of Russian stuff blowing up.
The last one I posted was of Ukrainian grain silos being blown up.
-
The last one I posted was of Ukrainian grain silos being blown up.
Ok then;
If you want to discuss it, Steve, I would start a separate thread if I were you. Any discussion on this thread is derailed by David spamming it with endless videos of Russian stuff(with perhaps the odd silo thrown in-for variety) being blown up. He has rendered discussion on this thread pointless. Four of the six posts prior to this post on this page, 11 of 15 on the last page and 9 of 15 the page before that.
Is that better?
-
Ok then;
If you want to discuss it, Steve, I would start a separate thread if I were you. Any discussion on this thread is derailed by David spamming it with endless videos of Russian stuff(with perhaps the odd silo thrown in-for variety) being blown up. He has rendered discussion on this thread pointless. Four of the six posts prior to this post on this page, 11 of 15 on the last page and 9 of 15 the page before that.
Is that better?
Footage from the conflict in question is very relevant.
Russia sending conscripts into the meat grinder and blowing up food supplies is worrying. Hence you find it in the thread " Russia - worrying?"
-
a thread for footage that contradicts the tankie fantasy world narrative.in question is very relevant.
Russia sending conscripts into the meat grinder and blowing up food supplies is worrying. Hence you find it in the thread " Russia - worrying?"
You spam the thread with them, as you well know. If you thought they were as relevant as you claim, then you would have the courage of your convictions and be happy to have a dedicated thread constantly updated in real time with your important updates.
I suggested it to you some time back which just made you increase the spamming. I opened a thread for you to have a real time "footage from the conflict" thread. This again made you increase your spamming. Shall I ask ngb to change the name of the thread currently called, "a thread for footage that contradicts the tankie fantasy world narrative." to the shortened title " a thread for footage".
You could be the Jeremy Bamber Forum version of Oryx. Given that Oryx Osint are closing on the 1st October, you could be a ready made replacement, David. If it is relevant then you can post all of it in one place without it being interrupted by other discussions and everyone can find all of your relevant explosions in one place. Seems a win win to me.
24 out of 36 posts when none of them are offering anything to debate is spamming. You know it, I know it.
-
Footage from the conflict in question is very relevant.
Russia sending conscripts into the meat grinder and blowing up food supplies is worrying. Hence you find it in the thread " Russia - worrying?"
Do you imagine that this thread would have lasted as long as it has, if it was members just posting endless videos of people and equipment being blown up as a means of discussion with each other? We can all find war porn if we want to. You are the only one who endlessly posts this crap, whilst waving your silly flag, as if we were discussing a sports match and not the most significant geopolitical confrontation and re-ordering in our lifetimes. If you have the courage of your own convictions and believe your videos are important, then embrace a thread dedicated to that.
You are filling the thread with them. You do it deliberately to derail discussion.
-
Had I responded to Steve's request, "Russia is inflicting as much damage as it can in Russian-speaking areas because to Putin they are all traitors if they don't support his ideology. Discuss.", it is guaranteed that you would then have derailed that discussion with a handful of videos. That you use one post for each video, rather than just sticking 5 on the one post betrays your real motive.
It is ironic that my response to Steve, pointing out your spamming, was the only reply that even you couldn't spam to. Had I attempted to "discuss" Steve's offering, we all know how you would have responded.
-
That you use one post for each video, rather than just sticking 5 on the one post betrays your real motive.
Here's the thing, David. As you know I read https://www.moonofalabama.org/ on a regular basis. It is a very long standing international community of the informed, connected and interested in geopolitics. The comments section always throws up some very interesting sub-plots and intrigues. The worldwide community of "barflies" link to agreements, articles, declassified papers that may be relevant to any discussion. It is way deeper and more informative than anything you will ever see in any mainstream source.
There are the odd commenters who post regularly videos. However, when they do, they don't need a new post for every video. You will get someone post 5 or 6 videos in one post and then leave it at that. They would be removed by Bernhard anyway if they posted in the manner that you do.
24 out of 36 posts, all spamming videos, tells its own story, David. Those 24 posts could easily have been just four. But that wouldn't derail discussion, so you choose to post 24, because that is your aim.
-
African leaders shunned Vladimir Putin’s summit
https://www.economist.com/middle-east-and-africa/2023/07/26/why-african-leaders-shunned-vladimir-putins-summit (https://www.economist.com/middle-east-and-africa/2023/07/26/why-african-leaders-shunned-vladimir-putins-summit)
-
African leaders shunned Vladimir Putin’s summit
https://www.economist.com/middle-east-and-africa/2023/07/26/why-african-leaders-shunned-vladimir-putins-summit (https://www.economist.com/middle-east-and-africa/2023/07/26/why-african-leaders-shunned-vladimir-putins-summit)
49 of 54 African nations have delegations at the summit. This even after the concerted pressure from the US to not attend. This was spoken about by African leaders who were contemptuous of the Us and its bullying. In truth the summit is a great success and an example of the emerging multipolar world to replace the current, "Rules based International Order" that all western leaders speak of. It is just poor cope coming from Western media. Only 17 leaders, Russia shunned blah blah is nonsense. 49 of 54 African nations are there, lots of important business. The Putin shunned story is the best spin that Western media can put on what is another huge step for Russia and Africa on the world stage.
Lots of important deals and agreements are being concluded. The reception that US representatives have been getting in their own tour of Africa, in order to attempt to disrupt the growing collaboration with Russia by African states, has been less than warm. Kamala Harris and Anthony Blinken lectured by African leaders.
Where is the Africa Summit being held in the US?, UK? EU? Are any of them hosting delegations from 49 of 54 African states?
-
That you use one post for each video, rather than just sticking 5 on the one post betrays your real motive.
Here's the thing, David. As you know I read https://www.moonofalabama.org/ on a regular basis. It is a very long standing international community of the informed, connected and interested in geopolitics. The comments section always throws up some very interesting sub-plots and intrigues. The worldwide community of "barflies" link to agreements, articles, declassified papers that may be relevant to any discussion. It is way deeper and more informative than anything you will ever see in any mainstream source.
There are the odd commenters who post regularly videos. However, when they do, they don't need a new post for every video. You will get someone post 5 or 6 videos in one post and then leave it at that. They would be removed by Bernhard anyway if they posted in the manner that you do.
24 out of 36 posts, all spamming videos, tells its own story, David. Those 24 posts could easily have been just four. But that wouldn't derail discussion, so you choose to post 24, because that is your aim.
I post each video when it's uploaded to Reddit the same day around the same time. How can I possibly combine videos into one post when that would require having links to footage that does not yet exist depicting events that have not yet happened.
There is not much discussion here anyway. Long winded fan fiction from Tankie fantasy world is not a discussion point. Since in Tankie fantasy world the Russian army is invincible, no wonder you complain about footage from reality.
-
49 of 54 African nations have delegations at the summit. This even after the concerted pressure from the US to not attend. This was spoken about by African leaders who were contemptuous of the Us and its bullying. In truth the summit is a great success and an example of the emerging multipolar world to replace the current, "Rules based International Order" that all western leaders speak of. It is just poor cope coming from Western media. Only 17 leaders, Russia shunned blah blah is nonsense. 49 of 54 African nations are there, lots of important business. The Putin shunned story is the best spin that Western media can put on what is another huge step for Russia and Africa on the world stage.
Lots of important deals and agreements are being concluded. The reception that US representatives have been getting in their own tour of Africa, in order to attempt to disrupt the growing collaboration with Russia by African states, has been less than warm. Kamala Harris and Anthony Blinken lectured by African leaders.
Where is the Africa Summit being held in the US?, UK? EU? Are any of them hosting delegations from 49 of 54 African states?
I am not concerned about what transpired in Tankie fantasy world.
-
"Kremlin blames west for small number of leaders due at Russia-Africa summit"
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jul/26/kremlin-blames-west-for-small-number-of-leaders-russia-africa-summit-ukraine-war-grain-deal-vladimir-putin (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jul/26/kremlin-blames-west-for-small-number-of-leaders-russia-africa-summit-ukraine-war-grain-deal-vladimir-putin)
-
49 of 54 African nations have delegations at the summit. This even after the concerted pressure from the US to not attend. This was spoken about by African leaders who were contemptuous of the Us and its bullying. In truth the summit is a great success and an example of the emerging multipolar world to replace the current, "Rules based International Order" that all western leaders speak of. It is just poor cope coming from Western media. Only 17 leaders, Russia shunned blah blah is nonsense. 49 of 54 African nations are there, lots of important business. The Putin shunned story is the best spin that Western media can put on what is another huge step for Russia and Africa on the world stage.
Lots of important deals and agreements are being concluded. The reception that US representatives have been getting in their own tour of Africa, in order to attempt to disrupt the growing collaboration with Russia by African states, has been less than warm. Kamala Harris and Anthony Blinken lectured by African leaders.
Where is the Africa Summit being held in the US?, UK? EU? Are any of them hosting delegations from 49 of 54 African states?
Putin has scuppered the Black Sea Grain Initiative, which targeted help where it was needed most. Didn't Blair and Brown write off billions of Africa's debt? I read Russia's aid to African nations has fallen in recent years.
-
Putin has scuppered the Black Sea Grain Initiative, which targeted help where it was needed most. Didn't Blair and Brown write off billions of Africa's debt? I read Russia's aid to African nations has fallen in recent years.
If you believe that the "Black Sea Grain Initiative(BSGI)...targeted help where it was needed most", then you need to check the figures and get back to us with them. As is usual with the "Empire of Lies", the facts and figures don't support their narrative. To be more accurate, the facts and figures don't have even a passing acquaintance with the Western concocted narrative.
Ukraine/NATO have failed throughout the entirety of the BSGI to uphold their side of the deal regarding Russian fertilisers and SWIFT access to facillitate transactions. NATO have abused the "humanitarian corridor" to attack the Kerch Bridge and also abused the corridor for weapons shipments.
Read the link below, Steve. Tell me all about BSGI targeting help where it was most needed when you have. It is the data from the UN telling you exactly where the shipments went. It is not an opinion. Then tell me how the "narrative" that you are repeating has any relationship with those figures.
https://www.un.org/en/black-sea-grain-initiative/vessel-movements
-
To break down some of those figures, Steve. The figures that you don't bother looking into first before repeating what you are told, but ultimately the figures upon which your repeated narrative either stands or falls.
Spoiler alert; it falls
Just shy of 33,000,0000 metric tonnes have been shipped under the BSGI. Of those 33m tonnes-
8m to China
6m to Spain
3.2m to Turkey
2m to Italy
2m to the Netherlands
Those are the 5 largest recipients.
Poor nations account for a tiny percentage of the total and were never the beneficiaries of the initiative anyway, nor were they intended to be. NATO/Ukraine invoked the poor nations plight only out of hypocrisy and self interest.
-
Putin has scuppered the Black Sea Grain Initiative, which targeted help where it was needed most. Didn't Blair and Brown write off billions of Africa's debt? I read Russia's aid to African nations has fallen in recent years.
Do you know who the largest exporters of grain are, Steve? How big a percentage of world grain trade that Ukraine represents? I doubt it, because you wouldn't repeat the obvious propaganda that you do repeat if you knew the numbers. You would realise that the narrative being promoted has no credibility and falls apart immediately on contact with air and reason.
The 2022 figures show that Ukraine grain represents about 4% of the total grain exported worldwide. The grain sent by Ukraine to poor counties is a tiny fraction of that 4%.
If the concern of NATO et al is making sure that the poor nations receive enough grain then they can easily facilitate this. The Top 4 exporting nations in 2022 were the US, Canada, France and Australia who between them account for just over half of all grain exports in 2022.(51.5% of all grain exported)
The 5th largest, down from 1 in 2020, is Russia. Western sanctions bringing their export total down. They are already replacing the tiny amount of grain lost by this initiative anyway. The top 4 could easily do likewise if the starving were really their chief concern.
-
Ukraine moves Christmas to December 25, distancing itself from Russian tradition
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/07/29/europe/ukraine-christmas-date-change-intl/index.html (https://edition.cnn.com/2023/07/29/europe/ukraine-christmas-date-change-intl/index.html)
-
If you believe that the "Black Sea Grain Initiative(BSGI)...targeted help where it was needed most", then you need to check the figures and get back to us with them. As is usual with the "Empire of Lies", the facts and figures don't support their narrative. To be more accurate, the facts and figures don't have even a passing acquaintance with the Western concocted narrative.
Ukraine/NATO have failed throughout the entirety of the BSGI to uphold their side of the deal regarding Russian fertilisers and SWIFT access to facillitate transactions. NATO have abused the "humanitarian corridor" to attack the Kerch Bridge and also abused the corridor for weapons shipments.
Read the link below, Steve. Tell me all about BSGI targeting help where it was most needed when you have. It is the data from the UN telling you exactly where the shipments went. It is not an opinion. Then tell me how the "narrative" that you are repeating has any relationship with those figures.
https://www.un.org/en/black-sea-grain-initiative/vessel-movements
There are still some poor countries on that list. China became a major beneficiary after it abstained on votes condemning the invasion at the United Nations.
-
Ukraine moves Christmas to December 25, distancing itself from Russian tradition
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/07/29/europe/ukraine-christmas-date-change-intl/index.html (https://edition.cnn.com/2023/07/29/europe/ukraine-christmas-date-change-intl/index.html)
Patriarch Krill was a member of the KGB. How he reconciled that with churchman I do not know.
-
There are still some poor countries on that list. China became a major beneficiary after it abstained on votes condemning the invasion at the United Nations.
Do you think that those numbers support the Western narrative? It is a lie that the BSGI can have any effect on feeding the hungry. The numbers tell the story, which explains why the numbers aren't in the western MSM.
-
Do you think that those numbers support the Western narrative? It is a lie that the BSGI can have any effect on feeding the hungry. The numbers tell the story, which explains why the numbers aren't in the western MSM.
You know full well the USA is the most generous aid donor in the world. How did scuppering the Black Sea Grain Initiative help the Third World? https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2023/7/21/concern-mounts-in-east-africa-over-halted-black-sea-grain-deal
-
You know full well the USA is the most generous aid donor in the world. How did scuppering the Black Sea Grain Initiative help the Third World? https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2023/7/21/concern-mounts-in-east-africa-over-halted-black-sea-grain-deal
US Aid is not a "generous aid donor" in any meaningful sense. Administrated by the well known humanitarian/warmonger Samantha Power, USAid is simply a vehicle promoting US hegemony. The "aid" always has many "conditions" applied.
This, however has nothing to do with the misrepresentations regarding the Black Sea Grain Initiative.
-
Day 522 of the 10 day special military operation. Moscow targeted again as Kyiv steps up drone attacks inside Russia.
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/07/30/world/moscow-city-drone-attack-sunday-russia-ukraine-intl-hnk/index.html (https://edition.cnn.com/2023/07/30/world/moscow-city-drone-attack-sunday-russia-ukraine-intl-hnk/index.html)
-
Day 522 of the 10 day special military operation. Moscow targeted again as Kyiv steps up drone attacks inside Russia.
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/07/30/world/moscow-city-drone-attack-sunday-russia-ukraine-intl-hnk/index.html (https://edition.cnn.com/2023/07/30/world/moscow-city-drone-attack-sunday-russia-ukraine-intl-hnk/index.html)
When was it claimed that the SMO was for 10 days? Just like the Kiev in three days bullshit, it is invented by Western media. They invent a claim and then call Russia weak for failing to achieve X or Y. Meanwhile, the world and its dog can see that the slow grinding SMO is weakening NATO whilst Russia only grows in strength.
Some claims that were made and have turned out to be the complete opposite of the truth include the repeatedly made claim over many months that Russia were running out of (insert weapon here). This was amplified by all Western media and governments. It is probably why the 10 day SMO claim was made. So confident were they in their "intelligence assessments" on Russian weapon inventories and production capacity that they imagined that Russia needed it wrapped up quick.
As it turns out, Russia have seemingly endless stocks and production capacity and can sustain for much longer than NATO who have been caught completely unprepared for what is now unfolding. NATO along with their proxies have been humiliated.
The world is changing and power is shifting whether the overlords and denizens of NATOstan like it or not. There is nothing that NATO can do to stop the inevitable power shift. The conflict is prolonged and fed by NATO to put off the inevitable day of reckoning. Western institutions are creaking, EU, NATO, IMF etc. and will not survive in their current form once the defeat of NATO/Ukraine is complete.
There never was Kiev in 3 days or 10 day SMO. There only ever was, the demilitarisation and de-Nazification(a euphemism for de-NATO-fy-same thing anyway) of Ukraine. The goal actually set by Russia(not the made up NATO shit) is proceeding to plan.
-
Russian Buk SAM and its radar are destroyed by 2 accurate Ukrainian strikes
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/15dgn9e/russian_buk_sam_and_its_radar_are_destroyed_by_2/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/15dgn9e/russian_buk_sam_and_its_radar_are_destroyed_by_2/)
-
Ukrainian paratroopers performing clearing operations in Klishchiivka
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/15dpiqb/ukrainian_paratroopers_performing_clearing/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/15dpiqb/ukrainian_paratroopers_performing_clearing/)
-
The source of the 3 days to take Kiev, 3 day SMO is none other than well known Russian General ??? and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley. It was the US, not Russia, who expected a swift SMO leading to the fall of Kiev in three days. It should be obvious to all by now that Russia flipped the script on the US, not vice versa. Russia would have preferred a short SMO but were prepared for a long attritional war. US couldn't see beyond the 3 day script and were unprepared for the attritional war that Russia suckered them into.
https://www.heritage.org/defense/commentary/why-gen-milleys-ukraine-war-prediction-missed-mile
-
War crimes. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/torture-sexual-violence-commonly-used-by-russian-forces-in-ukraine-say-experts/ar-AA1eF7wY?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=211d8bc6bb3c4e7db45750d8145a15d3&ei=23
The start of things to come. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/alarm-in-russia-attack-on-military-office-in-saint-petersburg/ar-AA1eFBvk?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=1bcb5f79b3804124a465cc9ed2e5ecb2&ei=36
https://zlive-network.com/in-just-a-few-hours-russia-loses-hundreds-of-soldiers/
-
The source of the 3 days to take Kiev, 3 day SMO is none other than well known Russian General ??? and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley.
General Mark Milley is a "well known Russian General"? That's news to me. What extraordinary
sequence of events transpired in Tankie fantasy world to allow this situation?
Anyway, it was Lukashenko who said on a televised speech "This war will last a maximum of three or four days"
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/115amn9/almost_a_year_since_lukashenko_said_these_famous/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/115amn9/almost_a_year_since_lukashenko_said_these_famous/)
-
It must be April 1. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/aug/04/russian-court-extends-alexei-navalny-sentence-in-penal-colony
-
General Mark Milley is a "well known Russian General"? That's news to me. What extraordinary
sequence of events transpired in Tankie fantasy world to allow this situation?
Anyway, it was Lukashenko who said on a televised speech "This war will last a maximum of three or four days"
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/115amn9/almost_a_year_since_lukashenko_said_these_famous/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/115amn9/almost_a_year_since_lukashenko_said_these_famous/)
What do you think the "Huh" face meant? I know who Mark Milley is. He is the source of Kiev in 3 days narrative. Putin nor any Russian spokesperson said it. It is an entirely made up "goal" of the Russians, made by US officials. When they don't achieve the thing that they never set out to achieve, dimwits like you can believe that Russia have failed. Propaganda 101. You're too stupid to even recognise irony.
-
Serhii Plokhy..https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/serhii-plokhy-interview-putin-wants-control-of-ukraine-but-he-is-prepared-to-go-for-plan-b/ar-AA1f55Ni?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=510cc8d5a7fd4d4bbbf6f3f79ff2b274&ei=7
-
One thing i did see coming and it's the way Drones have played a critical role in the war, it's going to have a massive impact on the pleasure Drone flying in the UK and the rest of the World. Changes will be made and iv'e recently heard they are being looked into by the CAA, Civil Aviation Authority who control the air space in the UK. My fear is that the sub 250g Drone with a camera the most popular Drone could be moved out of the open Cat into a more restictive Cat? The sub 250g Drone with a camera has very few restrictions except flying over Prisons and airports.
-
I suppose some people just go along with the Russian narrative, as usual. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/russian-general-who-knew-secrets-of-putin-s-palace-dies-suddenly-in-prison/ar-AA1fsv7V?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=5c6b450a6a7e42ca90beb3f411c21648&ei=13
-
Well that didn't take long..
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ukraine-russia-war-putin-robotyne-latest-b2397719.html
-
Well that didn't take long..
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ukraine-russia-war-putin-robotyne-latest-b2397719.html
I lost my bet though Roch, i said he would fall out of a window. Don't get me wrong, i have a feeling that if Russia or China was encroaching terrority around USA they wouldn't like it. i don't like wars mate, i always feel for the Families left behind waiting for that dreaded knock on the door with bad news, it's horrible feeling, we had it with son in Law in Para's in Iraq and Afganistan and Macedonia.
-
Well that didn't take long..
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ukraine-russia-war-putin-robotyne-latest-b2397719.html
Must have been a bird strike? ;D
-
Has the penny dropped yet..
-
Has the penny dropped yet..
It should have Steve. It's the same with us isn't it. Dr David Kelly; and in the US Epstein.
-
It should be realised by now that whatever you are being led to believe is the least likely explanation of events. According to western media, Putin is guilty of every suspicious death in Russia and of every Russian anywhere in the world. It is a comical media driven caricature. Does everyone think that there is only one possible person who might have wanted Prigozhin dead? What do we really know about the whole coup/not coup and Putin's relationship with Prigozhin?
Could there be other actors who might also want Prig dead? Would Putin, if it were him, choose such a messy and headline grabbing spectacular? Who would choose a method like that?
The ridiculous western media and establishment created comic book caricature of Putin is the propaganda that few see beyond and it is this caricature that has been indoctrinated into western media consumers that causes them to unquestioningly believe any crime attributed to him. Ask questions, lots of questions, of every premise and "fact" in western reporting. The accusations and reporting on Putin is bizarre and fantastical. Without the pre-existing premise that many in the west have(ie. it goes without saying that Putin is a tyrannical, murderous thug and probably eats babies) these stories would be dismissed if about anyone else as simply not believable or remotely credible.
In the grand scheme of things, it is also largely irrelevant. Nothing changes. The BRICS summit in South Africa and what is coming from that is of way more significance to geopolitical events than the sideshow of Prig's death. The catastrophe of the Ukrainian/NATO counter-offensive and the inevitability of Ukraine/NATO defeat in Ukraine are also ignored by Western media. Look back a few weeks at the predictions of how this much trumpeted Counter-oink was going to cut the land bridge to Crimea and bla bla. The longer this is propped up by NATO then the worse the terms will be. Minsk 2 is going to look like the deal of the century in comparison.
-
It should be realised by now that whatever you are being led to believe is the least likely explanation of events. According to western media, Putin is guilty of every suspicious death in Russia and of every Russian anywhere in the world. It is a comical media driven caricature. Does everyone think that there is only one possible person who might have wanted Prigozhin dead? What do we really know about the whole coup/not coup and Putin's relationship with Prigozhin?
Could there be other actors who might also want Prig dead? Would Putin, if it were him, choose such a messy and headline grabbing spectacular? Who would choose a method like that?
The ridiculous western media and establishment created comic book caricature of Putin is the propaganda that few see beyond and it is this caricature that has been indoctrinated into western media consumers that causes them to unquestioningly believe any crime attributed to him. Ask questions, lots of questions, of every premise and "fact" in western reporting. The accusations and reporting on Putin is bizarre and fantastical. Without the pre-existing premise that many in the west have(ie. it goes without saying that Putin is a tyrannical, murderous thug and probably eats babies) these stories would be dismissed if about anyone else as simply not believable or remotely credible.
In the grand scheme of things, it is also largely irrelevant. Nothing changes. The BRICS summit in South Africa and what is coming from that is of way more significance to geopolitical events than the sideshow of Prig's death. The catastrophe of the Ukrainian/NATO counter-offensive and the inevitability of Ukraine/NATO defeat in Ukraine are also ignored by Western media. Look back a few weeks at the predictions of how this much trumpeted Counter-oink was going to cut the land bridge to Crimea and bla bla. The longer this is propped up by NATO then the worse the terms will be. Minsk 2 is going to look like the deal of the century in comparison.
I'm not convinced he is Dead Gringo? The Russians wasn't the Masters of Chess for know reason.
-
I'm not convinced he is Dead Gringo? The Russians wasn't the Masters of Chess for know reason.
I agree, HB. I'm not convinced that he is dead, but regardless it is irrelevant to the wider scheme of things. The chess board is very active at the moment and everyone is focusing on an exchange of pawns.
-
I agree, HB. I'm not convinced that he is dead, but regardless it is irrelevant to the wider scheme of things. The chess board is very active at the moment and everyone is focusing on an exchange of pawns.
I tend not to get too involved in the Discussion about the War Gringo, although i think the Guard in Russia Has changed, i'll never forget the Help the Russians gave the miners during the Miners Strike when Thatcher wanted them to eat Grass.
-
I tend not to get too involved in the Discussion about the War Gringo, although i think the Guard in Russia Has changed, i'll never forget the Help the Russians gave the miners during the Miners Strike when Thatcher wanted them to eat Grass.
Our real enemies are the same people attempting to convince us our Putin (or whoever the current boogeyman is) is our enemy. He is the President of Russia- the media are meant to hold our governments to account- not Russia's.
-
I tend not to get too involved in the Discussion about the War Gringo, although i think the Guard in Russia Has changed, i'll never forget the Help the Russians gave the miners during the Miners Strike when Thatcher wanted them to eat Grass.
The politicians and "leaders" we have now even make Thatcher and her ilk look like a "golden age", HB.
-
The politicians and "leaders" we have now even make Thatcher and her ilk look like a "golden age", HB.
Ha Ha, it Probably works South of the Coal Fields. I took a family from the South Coast a visit to the Coal mine i worked at about, 6 months before it closed, they had never heard that the miners had been on Strike in 85.
-
Our real enemies are the same people attempting to convince us our Putin (or whoever the current boogeyman is) is our enemy. He is the President of Russia- the media are meant to hold our governments to account- not Russia's.
He's been dying for two years. It will only end when they get around the Table, there will have to be concessions from a lot of people. Some Countries are fed up with the Power of the Greenback and it's sanctions an it's starting to show.
-
He's been dying for two years. It will only end when they get around the Table, there will have to be concessions from a lot of people. Some Countries are fed up with the Power of the Greenback and it's sanctions an it's starting to show.
There is more truth in your succinct summing up of the situation than will ever be told in any mainstream outlet. Everyone knows-and still they lie.
-
He's been dying for two years. It will only end when they get around the Table, there will have to be concessions from a lot of people. Some Countries are fed up with the Power of the Greenback and it's sanctions an it's starting to show.
At the moment everyone is getting round the table, whilst the collective west still refuse to accept reality, and creating new systems without the West. It would be better if your advice of accepting concessions and talking was understood by our "leaders". In truth our so-called "leaders" do understand exactly what you have said. Their actions now display for all to see who it is they really serve.
-
At the moment everyone is getting round the table, whilst the collective west still refuse to accept reality, and creating new systems without the West. It would be better if your advice of accepting concessions and talking was understood by our "leaders". In truth our so-called "leaders" do understand exactly what you have said. Their actions now display for all to see who it is they really serve.
I would think Gringo, feelers have and are being put about, i do think there is a lot of discussions at lower levels. I see Nato Sec, put something out the other week about concessions of Ukraine land for Ukraine Membership to Nato? I know it will have to be at higher level, but they are put out for a reason, sometimes for a cushioning effect.
-
The World has to have Balance, it cannot just be dominated by one Country, this Guy in Charge of USA abolutly hates us anyway and he doesn't hide the fact.
-
..this Guy in Charge of USA..
I'm not a fan of Trump and wouldn't have him back. But Biden is like some weird corpse that they have somehow managed to make walk and talk. Is he a real live human being? It's hard to tell.
The truth is, there never will be any good option for president just like there won't ever be any good option for PM. It's not allowed.
But Biden - I can't believe what I'm seeing.
-
I would think Gringo, feelers have and are being put about, i do think there is a lot of discussions at lower levels. I see Nato Sec, put something out the other week about concessions of Ukraine land for Ukraine Membership to Nato? I know it will have to be at higher level, but they are put out for a reason, sometimes for a cushioning effect.
NATO are looking for a way out and feelers are being put out but my feeling is that any terms that would be acceptable to Russia are less than being currently offered. There is zero doubt that Russia are effectively dictating the terms of any surrender(which for diplomacy will be called an agreement). After Minsk the next terms offered by Russia will be much harsher to Ukraine/NATO.
Defeat in Ukraine will have huge consequences going forward in NATO/EU countries. I suspect that Russia will give the West a "diplomatic" way out-but the security proposal put forward by Russia in December 2021 will be "agreed" to. NATO media can claim they prevented Russia from invading Europe, then declare victory and go home.
https://www.reuters.com/world/russia-unveils-security-guarantees-says-western-response-not-encouraging-2021-12-17/
-
I'm not a fan of Trump and wouldn't have him back. But Biden is like some weird corpse that they have somehow managed to make walk and talk. Is he a real live human being? It's hard to tell.
The truth is, there never will be any good option for president just like there won't ever be any good option for PM. It's not allowed.
But Biden - I can't believe what I'm seeing.
I simply don't get it Roch, a Country like USA and those are the best two? It's absolutly Bonkers, he's semi consciuos and reminds me of one of those from Thunderbirds puppets in the 1960s but an older version.
-
I simply don't get it Roch, a Country like USA and those are the best two? It's absolutly Bonkers, he's semi consciuos and reminds me of one of those from Thunderbirds puppets in the 1960s but an older version.
I think you're being harsh on the Thunderbird puppets
-
I would think Gringo, feelers have and are being put about, i do think there is a lot of discussions at lower levels. I see Nato Sec, put something out the other week about concessions of Ukraine land for Ukraine Membership to Nato? I know it will have to be at higher level, but they are put out for a reason, sometimes for a cushioning effect.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/08/22/ukraines-army-is-running-out-of-men-to-recruit/
An unthinkable headline in the Telegraph even a month or so back, reality is seeping through;
"Ukraine's Army is running out of men to recruit, and time to win"
"Victory may be in sight for Vladimir Putin"
-
I think you're being harsh on the Thunderbird puppets
;D ;D ;D He does though, look how the puppets jaws used to move and their body movement........... i love to watch him when he's boarding the Plane up the steps. He hates the UK Gringo and iv'e no time for him, our Government's sucks up to them, i wish they would tell him to do one, all this shit about Closest ally, yeh right only when it suits them.
-
It should be realised by now that whatever you are being led to believe is the least likely explanation of events. According to western media, Putin is guilty of every suspicious death in Russia and of every Russian anywhere in the world. It is a comical media driven caricature. Does everyone think that there is only one possible person who might have wanted Prigozhin dead? What do we really know about the whole coup/not coup and Putin's relationship with Prigozhin?
Could there be other actors who might also want Prig dead? Would Putin, if it were him, choose such a messy and headline grabbing spectacular? Who would choose a method like that?
The ridiculous western media and establishment created comic book caricature of Putin is the propaganda that few see beyond and it is this caricature that has been indoctrinated into western media consumers that causes them to unquestioningly believe any crime attributed to him. Ask questions, lots of questions, of every premise and "fact" in western reporting. The accusations and reporting on Putin is bizarre and fantastical. Without the pre-existing premise that many in the west have(ie. it goes without saying that Putin is a tyrannical, murderous thug and probably eats babies) these stories would be dismissed if about anyone else as simply not believable or remotely credible.
In the grand scheme of things, it is also largely irrelevant. Nothing changes. The BRICS summit in South Africa and what is coming from that is of way more significance to geopolitical events than the sideshow of Prig's death. The catastrophe of the Ukrainian/NATO counter-offensive and the inevitability of Ukraine/NATO defeat in Ukraine are also ignored by Western media. Look back a few weeks at the predictions of how this much trumpeted Counter-oink was going to cut the land bridge to Crimea and bla bla. The longer this is propped up by NATO then the worse the terms will be. Minsk 2 is going to look like the deal of the century in comparison.
No it's a pattern of events throughout Putin's term of office. https://youtu.be/vM04zNbsaJg
-
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/08/22/ukraines-army-is-running-out-of-men-to-recruit/
An unthinkable headline in the Telegraph even a month or so back, reality is seeping through;
"Ukraine's Army is running out of men to recruit, and time to win"
"Victory may be in sight for Vladimir Putin"
I thought at first putin had made some mistakes, i now think he's set his defence up really well and without any air superiority it will be hard to break through his defence, winter soon comes to that part of the world and it will be status quo again. It's stalemate and Putin knows this, i think if Ukraine doesn't regain by Autumn [which i very much doubt] they will not regain at all? The thing that everyone doesn't realise or forgets, he has the weapons to blow Ukraine off the map.
-
I thought at first putin had made some mistakes, i now think he's set his defence up really well and without any air superiority it will be hard to break through his defence, winter soon comes to that part of the world and it will be status quo again. It's stalemate and Putin knows this, i think if Ukraine doesn't regain by Autumn [which i very much doubt] they will not regain at all? The thing that everyone doesn't realise or forgets, he has the weapons to blow Ukraine off the map.
A more accurate assessment in my opinion HB, if we are using chess analogies, is that NATO/Ukraine are in Zugzwang.
Zugzwang-a situation in which the obligation to make a move in one's turn is a serious, often decisive, disadvantage.
What is zugzwang in real life?
Any real life situation where you have choices, all of them bad, and you have no choice but to choose. Where you cannot wait, but are forced to act.
-
No it's a pattern of events throughout Putin's term of office. https://youtu.be/vM04zNbsaJg
There is only a pattern of western media linking every death in Russia to Putin using insinuation, innuendo and relying on the average western media consumer doing the rest. The comical infantilised caricature of Putin presented to western media audiences allows them to believe that every murder/suspicious death that occurs in Russia or to any Russian anywhere was planned by Putin from his Kremlin lair like some comic book villain.
Whilst plotting the death of every possible rival he may have, having several terminal illnesses, personally planning all military operations and dictating over every aspect of life(judiciary etc) in Russia, we are also told that he is weak and hiding in a basement to avoid being overthrown.
There is definitely a pattern of behaviour, Steve. That pattern of behaviour is that Western media outlets will say whatever they are told to by their paymasters. Unbelievably there are people who believe this contradictory nonsense :o
-
A more accurate assessment in my opinion HB, if we are using chess analogies, is that NATO/Ukraine are in Zugzwang.
Zugzwang-a situation in which the obligation to make a move in one's turn is a serious, often decisive, disadvantage.
What is zugzwang in real life?
Any real life situation where you have choices, all of them bad, and you have no choice but to choose. Where you cannot wait, but are forced to act.
HA HA i'd never heard of that term before, i can remember being put in a Zugzwang on more than a few occasions by NGB at Chess.
I think the Nato Countries have a get out clause though Gringo, they can always put the Zugzwang in Ukraine's hands and pretend they haven't a say? I notice it is of German Origin, the fact that Germany is out of step with the US on Ukraine/Russia says alot
-
HA HA i'd never heard of that term before, i can remember being put in a Zugzwang on more than a few occasions by NGB at Chess.
I think the Nato Countries have a get out clause though Gringo, they can always put the Zugzwang in Ukraine's hands and pretend they haven't a say? I notice it is of German Origin, the fact that Germany is out of step with the US on Ukraine/Russia says alot
What you say is correct HB, the consequences of this abandonment though are what constitutes the Zugzwang that NATO are in. In a scenario where NATO do abandon Ukraine, obviously the Ukraine stage of this civilisational war ends almost immediately. There is no Ukraine without NATO/US money. But then what?
NATO having put everything they had into defeating Russia via Ukraine and being defeated will have huge ramifications. Who would want defending by NATO in light of this. The complete destruction of a country and its manpower to just walk away. Defeat in Ukraine would be the first significant step in ending the NATO alliance. Exposed as weak and merely the muscle for corporate and financial interests. NATO can't walk away from Ukraine without being shown as weak, powerless and humiliated by those actions. Also NATO cannot continue supporting Ukraine without being shown as weak, powerless and humiliated by those actions. They have no good move to make but must make a move.
That is the NATO zugzwang.
Russia have time and resources to spare.
-
There is only a pattern of western media linking every death in Russia to Putin using insinuation, innuendo and relying on the average western media consumer doing the rest. The comical infantilised caricature of Putin presented to western media audiences allows them to believe that every murder/suspicious death that occurs in Russia or to any Russian anywhere was planned by Putin from his Kremlin lair like some comic book villain.
Whilst plotting the death of every possible rival he may have, having several terminal illnesses, personally planning all military operations and dictating over every aspect of life(judiciary etc) in Russia, we are also told that he is weak and hiding in a basement to avoid being overthrown.
There is definitely a pattern of behaviour, Steve. That pattern of behaviour is that Western media outlets will say whatever they are told to by their paymasters. Unbelievably there are people who believe this contradictory nonsense :o
It's a totalitarian state now, akin to Hitler's Germany and more accurately, Stalinist Russia. No tactics are off the table to retain the grip on power. Of course there's no paper trail, just as there's no documentary evidence that Hitler was responsible for the Holocaust.
-
It's a totalitarian state now, akin to Hitler's Germany and more accurately, Stalinist Russia. No tactics are off the table to retain the grip on power. Of course there's no paper trail, just as there's no documentary evidence that Hitler was responsible for the Holocaust.
That is quite bonkers, Steve, and demonstrates the state you have been whipped into.
Totalitarianism?, Hitler :-[, Stalinist(yawn), Holocaust, grip on power aaaghhh!
You really put everything you had into that post, shame about your lack of any supporting evidence which can no doubt be blamed on the despotic tyrant Putin (insert evil laugh here) making sure that no evidence or paper trail is left :-[
-
That is quite bonkers, Steve, and demonstrates the state you have been whipped into.
Totalitarianism?, Hitler :-[, Stalinist(yawn), Holocaust, grip on power aaaghhh!
You really put everything you had into that post, shame about your lack of any supporting evidence which can no doubt be blamed on the despotic tyrant Putin (insert evil laugh here) making sure that no evidence or paper trail is left :-[
There is no paper trail is there? Putin lets his henchmen do the dirty work with no questions asked: political rivals such as Boris Nemtsov and Alexei Navalny, to name but two, opponents of the war in Ukraine thrown out of office windows, Russia oligarchs abroad hanged or poisoned, as are journalists who ask difficult questions. No independent police process, no independent judiciary or mass media.
It's a totalitarian state.
-
There is no paper trail is there? Putin lets his henchmen do the dirty work with no questions asked: political rivals such as Boris Nemtsov and Alexei Navalny, to name but two, opponents of the war in Ukraine thrown out of office windows, Russia oligarchs abroad hanged or poisoned, as are journalists who ask difficult questions. No independent police process, no independent judiciary or mass media.
It's a totalitarian state.
There is no paper trail or any trail at all to link Putin to the incidents that you list, Steve. All there is to link Putin to any of your list is the delusional, paranoia fuelled innuendo in western media. You are indoctrinated to the point that you will believe any bat-shit accusation, no matter how implausible, as long as it is about Putin and Russians generally. Your critical faculties are shot.
-
There is no paper trail or any trail at all to link Putin to the incidents that you list, Steve. All there is to link Putin to any of your list is the delusional, paranoia fuelled innuendo in western media. You are indoctrinated to the point that you will believe any bat-shit accusation, no matter how implausible, as long as it is about Putin and Russians generally. Your critical faculties are shot.
On the contrary. I have studied Hitler's Germany and to some extent Stalin's Russia (remember the show trials of the 1930s), as has Putin. It's quite clear to me that Putin's Russia manifests many of the same traits.
-
On the contrary. I have studied Hitler's Germany and to some extent Stalin's Russia (remember the show trials of the 1930s), as has Putin. It's quite clear to me that Putin's Russia manifests many of the same traits.
Many of what same traits?
-
Many of what same traits?
One man in charge practising divide and rule, no free press, no independent mass media, killing of political opponents, corruption on a large scale amongst Putin's coterie, no free and fair elections and no accountability.
-
One man in charge practising divide and rule, no free press, no independent mass media, killing of political opponents, corruption on a large scale amongst Putin's coterie, no free and fair elections and no accountability.
None of which is true. The people that you refer to as "Putin's political opponents" aren't his political opponents. His real political opponents meanwhile are alive and well. Nemtsov and Navalny were no more Putin's political rivals than Screaming Lord Sutch is a political opponent than whoever the UK government of the day is. They were/are both utterly irrelevant political figures in Russia.
The Communist Party are easily the second largest opposition in Russia. They are Putin's political opponents and alive and well. They freely criticise Putin and United Russia, have a solid base of support and stand and win in all elections winning many seats.
Navalny's support never rose above 3% or so and he is relevant only in western media. Putin undeniably has widespread and overwhelming support in Russia, way more than our dubiously elected "leaders".
Whether you like it or not, Putin is by magnitudes the most significant World leader of the 21st century and it isn't close. The support that Russia has, along with China, across the non western world is plain to see. 80% + of Russia support Putin, 80% + of the world are backing Putin/Russia.
All of the above is objectively and provably true. Your pathetic whinge-fest is believed only by gullible consumers of western reporting or what you call, "studying Stalin's Russia" or something.
-
None of which is true. The people that you refer to as "Putin's political opponents" aren't his political opponents. His real political opponents meanwhile are alive and well. Nemtsov and Navalny were no more Putin's political rivals than Screaming Lord Sutch is a political opponent than whoever the UK government of the day is. They were/are both utterly irrelevant political figures in Russia.
The Communist Party are easily the second largest opposition in Russia. They are Putin's political opponents and alive and well. They freely criticise Putin and United Russia, have a solid base of support and stand and win in all elections winning many seats.
Navalny's support never rose above 3% or so and he is relevant only in western media. Putin undeniably has widespread and overwhelming support in Russia, way more than our dubiously elected "leaders".
Whether you like it or not, Putin is by magnitudes the most significant World leader of the 21st century and it isn't close. The support that Russia has, along with China, across the non western world is plain to see. 80% + of Russia support Putin, 80% + of the world are backing Putin/Russia.
All of the above is objectively and provably true. Your pathetic whinge-fest is believed only by gullible consumers of western reporting or what you call, "studying Stalin's Russia" or something.
None of Putin's political opponents can get established. It's a bit like killing the Gang of Four SDP in the 1980s, or assassinating Nigel Farage now, except Putin gets away with it and no repercussions. You mention the Belt and Road Initiative: all built with Chinese labour paid peanuts with no free trades unions.
Of course we never hear any of this from the Left.
-
None of Putin's political opponents can get established. It's a bit like killing the Gang of Four SDP in the 1980s, or assassinating Nigel Farage now, except Putin gets away with it and no repercussions. You mention the Belt and Road Initiative: all built with Chinese labour paid peanuts with no free trades unions.
Of course we never hear any of this from the Left.
There is nothing but the fevered imaginations of western media that links those deaths to Putin. Most of the money and wealth looted from Russia in the post-Soviet period is parked in City of London banks. The looted wealth has distorted the economy there. Many of those Russian expats are wanted in Russia for fraud and embezzlement but remain here protected by the UK. Putin ended that looting and Russia's economic performance, increase in living standards since Putin first took office is phenomonal and undeniable.
Navanly, Nemtsov have plenty of enemies- I doubt Putin ever gave them a fleeting thought. Both of them would have invited in the Western corporations and financiers to continue their looting of Russia's vast resources and wealth. This explains why they have no support in Russia but are treated in the West as if they are the legitimate opposition to Putin's United Russia party.
You have been informed before but just ignore inconvenient facts. The opposition to United Russia are the Communist Party. This doesn't suit any western narrative so they are ignored and also alive and well despite being Putin's real political rivals. You don't even know the name of the leader of the Communist Party but you have name recognition for the Russian equivalent of the leader of Britain First and the Reform party. Imagine a foreign media reporting UK politics in such a way.
It's Gennady Zyuganov by the way, Steve. Leader of the opposition in Russia. The Communists. The state of Western media is embarrassing.
-
There is nothing but the fevered imaginations of western media that links those deaths to Putin. Most of the money and wealth looted from Russia in the post-Soviet period is parked in City of London banks. The looted wealth has distorted the economy there. Many of those Russian expats are wanted in Russia for fraud and embezzlement but remain here protected by the UK. Putin ended that looting and Russia's economic performance, increase in living standards since Putin first took office is phenomonal and undeniable.
Navanly, Nemtsov have plenty of enemies- I doubt Putin ever gave them a fleeting thought. Both of them would have invited in the Western corporations and financiers to continue their looting of Russia's vast resources and wealth. This explains why they have no support in Russia but are treated in the West as if they are the legitimate opposition to Putin's United Russia party.
You have been informed before but just ignore inconvenient facts. The opposition to United Russia are the Communist Party. This doesn't suit any western narrative so they are ignored and also alive and well despite being Putin's real political rivals. You don't even know the name of the leader of the Communist Party but you have name recognition for the Russian equivalent of the leader of Britain First and the Reform party. Imagine a foreign media reporting UK politics in such a way.
It's Gennady Zyuganov by the way, Steve. Leader of the opposition in Russia. The Communists. The state of Western media is embarrassing.
Did Putin take on the criminals inside Russia or become an oligarch himself? If you can't beat them, join them..https://youtu.be/cIocvcfH-hI
How about taking them on by legal means or is that not Putin's way? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suspicious_deaths_of_Russian_businesspeople_(2022%E2%80%932023)
Russia's economic performance post-sanctions: https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/04/the-uk-recession-will-be-almost-as-deep-as-that-of-russia-economists-predict.html#:~:text=Economy-,The%20UK%20recession%20will%20be%20almost%20as,that%20of%20Russia%2C%20economists%20predict&text=In%20its%202023%20macro%20outlook,a%200.9%25%20expansion%20in%202024.
Zyuganov is no threat. Had he been he would have been poisoned by a Novichok by now. https://jacobin.com/2022/09/putin-war-ukraine-communist-party-russia-gennady-zyuganov-kprf-history
-
Goebbels-like propaganda in Putin's Russia. https://youtu.be/j1C8awu_d6Y
-
A barbaric attack from a barbaric Russian regime led by a barbaric Russian leader. https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/russia-missile-attack-kostiantynivka-ukraine-war-zelensky-putin-b1105270.html
-
A barbaric attack from a barbaric Russian regime led by a barbaric Russian leader. https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/russia-missile-attack-kostiantynivka-ukraine-war-zelensky-putin-b1105270.html
There's no balance in any of the reporting though Steve. There's no alternative version or Russian version or counter opinion from experts. For all we know it could be exactly what it says in our media. But what if it isn't?
-
A barbaric attack from a barbaric Russian regime led by a barbaric Russian leader. https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/russia-missile-attack-kostiantynivka-ukraine-war-zelensky-putin-b1105270.html
You sound unhinged. The opinion of most of the world is that the Western Imperialists(US, NATO, UK, EU) are the barbarians and that Russia/Putin along with China offer the opportunity to remove the Imperialist boot from the neck of the World.
Russia's "defanging" of NATO is crucial for the world to move on from centuries of Western colonialism, imperialism, warmongering and exploitation. You carry on sucking up the last breaths of pathetic propaganda coming from the extremely ill and dying West but ignore the wars, invasions, destruction and millions of deaths caused by those same regimes. It won't change anything.
NATO, the ultimate enforcer of the Western, "Rules Based Order", has been shown to be a paper tiger in the eyes of the world. This is what the world sees, not the propagandised and censored nonsense that you consider news.
-
A barbaric attack from a barbaric Russian regime led by a barbaric Russian leader. https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/russia-missile-attack-kostiantynivka-ukraine-war-zelensky-putin-b1105270.html
An example of what Roch referred to as the one sided view for you Steve. In Raqqa(Syria) the US used phosphorous munitions on civilians, massively and deliberately, killing countless thousands;
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/6/14/un-staggering-civilian-deaths-in-raqqa-offensive
Here are the BBC reporting on the same;
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-40271450
Missing is any condemnation or use of words such as barbaric from the reporting which is a whitewash. To be clear, the brutal bombing of Raqqa was the deliberate targeting of civilians. They were targeted with white phosphorous which is indiscriminate and causes horrific injuries for those not killed. It is by magnitudes more horrific than the example you gave which is enough, for you, to label the entirety of Russia as barbarians.
Raqqa is not an aberration. I could have named many places, too many to bother to list, all equally or even more brutal victims of Western military "interventions". There are no equivalents in the world to Western barbarism which is apparently invisible to you.
-
A barbaric attack from a barbaric Russian regime led by a barbaric Russian leader. https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/russia-missile-attack-kostiantynivka-ukraine-war-zelensky-putin-b1105270.html
This is all "according to Ukrainian officials". Or in other words, bullshit. It was almost certainly a Ukrainian air defence missile, as usual. A "manufactured atrocity" like so many others. Most of the world and increasingly the West have realised that the Western media is the "boy who cried wolf". Most have also realised that all the previous "wolves" that the west cried about turned out not to be real wolves at all. In an added twist, it turns out the western media are spokespersons for real wolves.
In other words, the western media is now seen by most of the world as, "the wolf who cried wolf". The world knows who the wolves are now, whilst western media still pretends that wolves are shepherds.
-
An example of what Roch referred to as the one sided view for you Steve. In Raqqa(Syria) the US used phosphorous munitions on civilians, massively and deliberately, killing countless thousands;
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/6/14/un-staggering-civilian-deaths-in-raqqa-offensive
Here are the BBC reporting on the same;
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-40271450
Missing is any condemnation or use of words such as barbaric from the reporting which is a whitewash. To be clear, the brutal bombing of Raqqa was the deliberate targeting of civilians. They were targeted with white phosphorous which is indiscriminate and causes horrific injuries for those not killed. It is by magnitudes more horrific than the example you gave which is enough, for you, to label the entirety of Russia as barbarians.
Raqqa is not an aberration. I could have named many places, too many to bother to list, all equally or even more brutal victims of Western military "interventions". There are no equivalents in the world to Western barbarism which is apparently invisible to you.
Bu this was to destroy Islamic State. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_linked_to_the_Islamic_State
-
A barbaric attack from a barbaric Russian regime led by a barbaric Russian leader. https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/russia-missile-attack-kostiantynivka-ukraine-war-zelensky-putin-b1105270.html
The evolution of this story contains many lessons, Steve, the taking on board of which would benefit you. The "New York Times" yesterday reported the results of their "investigation" of the "missile attack on Kostiantynivka market". The same "missile attack" that previously you had already, without any evidence, blamed Russia. All the "evidence" that you required was all the media that you trust said so. No dissent from that opinion was allowed. The "investigation" by NYT below;
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/18/world/europe/ukraine-missile-kostiantynivka-market.html
RT reporting the same investigation;
https://swentr.site/russia/583187-konstantinovka-missile-nyt-investigation/
The truth is still somewhat murkier still, Steve, in my opinion. The evidence of the missile attack on the market was, thanks to some eagle eyed members of the hive mind that thrives on the internet, already very public via social media and alternative news sources. This is where it gets interesting for those prepared to think critically. The "missile attack" initially reported was it seems reported both accurately and inaccurately. Let's delve. It was a deliberately targeted missile attack. This is true, but there also now exists public and undeniable evidence that the direction that the missile came from proves that it wasn't the Russians.
The evidence that the missile arrived from a direction that is inconsistent with Russian culpability was undeniable. This thanks to eagle eyes spotting, in footage taken and posted online, the reflection of the missile on the roof of parked cars, travelling from Ukrainian held territory. People on the ground also could be seen to look to in the same direction moments before the impact.
For those who want to escalate and attack Russia directly this was a gift. Ukraine would be supplied with longer range missiles to attack inside Russian population centres in response. It is a false flag gone wrong (the released footage contained clues which blew the narrative). They can't admit that the missile attack was correctly reported as deliberate because that would implicate NATO directly, hence the "strayed off course" air defence missile bullshit story.
The evidence suggests it was a US AGM-88 HARM missile.
You should learn to wait for actual evidence, Steve, and be way more objective. you are easy prey for any propagandist. Your comical caricature of Putin, Xi, Assad or any world leader considered an enemy of NATO clouds any reasonable judgement and allows you to believe the most outlandish claims with absolutely no evidence. You need to way more sceptical/cynical when reading the reports you link.
-
A barbaric attack from a barbaric Russian regime led by a barbaric Russian leader. https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/russia-missile-attack-kostiantynivka-ukraine-war-zelensky-putin-b1105270.html
More on the atrocity at Kostiantynivka, which was definitely a targeted Russian attack until evidence accidentally released debunked that possibility, when it became obviously a stray missile and completely unintentional. MoA today;
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2023/09/new-york-times-acknowledges-ukrainian-origin-of-deadly-strike-.html
-
It should be clear by now, even to the most committed NATO Kool Aid drinker, that the Kostiantynivka market attack was a deliberately targeted attack by NATO/Ukraine. The attack was immediately and without evidence blamed on Russia by every NATO government official and all western media. The attack was to be used to justify the ever increasing NATO involvement in Ukraine to their own indoctrinated masses.
In a nutshell, a false flag attack. The deliberate targeting of civilians in a market to be blamed on Russia, but they were found out and had to change narrative quickly. The stray air defence missile story is demonstrably untrue and the NYT "investigation" is simply a cover up to take eyes away from the fact that NATO deliberately targeted civilians in Ukraine.
It should cause a rethink amongst believers of many other evidence free accusations from NATO against Russia.
Bucha, MH17, Kramatorsk station attack, blowing up NS2, bombing their own POW camp, Skripals, chemical weapons in Syria, Russiagate and on and on...
What really happened in Kostiantynivka is obvious to anyone who cares about evidence. Its implications are also obvious to anyone prepared to deal with the evidence in front of them. NATO are a criminally aggressive warmongering axis. They are guilty of all the crimes listed above plus many more too numerous to list. Only the easily manipulated and gullible still believe the lies about Putin, Russia, Syria, Assad, Libya, Ghaddafi, China, Xi, Iran, The "Ayatollah", freedom, democracy, covid, climate emergency and on...
-
It should be clear by now, even to the most committed NATO Kool Aid drinker, that the Kostiantynivka market attack was a deliberately targeted attack by NATO/Ukraine. The attack was immediately and without evidence blamed on Russia by every NATO government official and all western media. The attack was to be used to justify the ever increasing NATO involvement in Ukraine to their own indoctrinated masses.
In a nutshell, a false flag attack. The deliberate targeting of civilians in a market to be blamed on Russia, but they were found out and had to change narrative quickly. The stray air defence missile story is demonstrably untrue and the NYT "investigation" is simply a cover up to take eyes away from the fact that NATO deliberately targeted civilians in Ukraine.
It should cause a rethink amongst believers of many other evidence free accusations from NATO against Russia.
Bucha, MH17, Kramatorsk station attack, blowing up NS2, bombing their own POW camp, Skripals, chemical weapons in Syria, Russiagate and on and on...
What really happened in Kostiantynivka is obvious to anyone who cares about evidence. Its implications are also obvious to anyone prepared to deal with the evidence in front of them. NATO are a criminally aggressive warmongering axis. They are guilty of all the crimes listed above plus many more too numerous to list. Only the easily manipulated and gullible still believe the lies about Putin, Russia, Syria, Assad, Libya, Ghaddafi, China, Xi, Iran, The "Ayatollah", freedom, democracy, covid, climate emergency and on...
It may have been fired accidentally by untrained personnel, who are trying to reclaim their own territory in the Donbas. Let's not forget why this war started and who is ultimately responsible for the half a million fatalities and five million internally displaced in Ukraine. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/sep/19/ukrainian-market-tragedy-may-have-been-caused-by-errant-missile-fired-by-ukraine
-
It may have been fired accidentally by untrained personnel, who are trying to reclaim their own territory in the Donbas. Let's not forget why this war started and who is ultimately responsible for the half a million fatalities and five million internally displaced in Ukraine. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/sep/19/ukrainian-market-tragedy-may-have-been-caused-by-errant-missile-fired-by-ukraine
You are missing the forest for the trees, Steve. your bias against Russia and towards NATO prevents you from seeing NATO criminality and collusion even when it is in front of you, in flashing neon lights.
Ask yourself where the Guardian and NYT "investigations" were when the market was hit. Let's have a look shall we. I'm sure that the articles written in the immediate aftermath by the "Guardian" and "NYT" will be guarded in attributing blame in this "yet to be investigated" incident.
The Guardian first;
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/sep/06/russian-strike-on-crowded-ukraine-market-leaves-many-dead-blinken-visit
The first paragraphs give the general flavour, Steve, copied below;
A Russian strike has hit a crowded market in the Ukrainian city of Kostiantynivka, killing at least 17 people, as the US secretary of state, Antony Blinken, was in Kyiv for an unannounced visit, his first for a year to the Ukrainian capital.
Ukrainian officials said a further 32 people were wounded in the attack, one of Russia’s deadliest attacks in months, 12 miles (20km) from the frontlines in the Donetsk region of eastern Ukraine.
Video of the aftermath showed fires raging in destroyed buildings and soldiers carrying body bags away from the scene. The Ukrainian prime minister, Denys Shmyhal, said a child was among those killed.
“A regular market. Shops. A pharmacy. People who did nothing wrong. Many wounded,” the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, wrote in a post on Telegram.
He called the strike “a terrorist attack” and said in a later press conference that it reflected the situation on the battlefield. “Whenever there are any positive advances by Ukrainian defence forces in that direction, Russians always target civilian people and civilian objects.”
Oh dear! Not very balanced reporting is it? What suddenly brought about their "investigation" after such opening certainty? Could it have been the fact that publicly available open source intel was widely disseminated which proved that the missile came from a direction which ruled out Russian culpability? The Guardian and NYT "investigations " are self evidently cover ups of an attempted false flag attack which they have to now explain away as no longer deliberate. That the missile hit the most population dense part of the city(ie. the market at busy period) is now a mere unfortunate coincidence. You would not believe this crock of shit if the roles were reversed and Russian media were reporting such inconsistent drivel.
In a nutshell, Steve, here is what happened in a few easy steps as your bias seems to be preventing you from seeing what is glaringly obvious.
1) NATO fire deliberately targeted missile at market in Kostiantynivka
2) All of western media report the attack as unquestionably, A "Russian strike has hit a crowded market in the Ukrainian city of Kostiantynivka, killing at least 17 people, as the US secretary of state, Antony Blinken, was in Kyiv for an unannounced visit, his first for a year to the Ukrainian capital."
3) The footage released inadvertently contained evidence that blew the Russian culpability narrative( there were attempts to remove the footage and new "cleaned up" footage was released, but the cat was out of the bag)
4) Houston we have a problem!!
5) Western media now have a deliberately targeted attack on civilians but need to somehow spin the facts because Russia, have been ruled out as the culprit. What to do?
6) "Respected papers of record" ::) :-[ the Guardian and NYT carry out "investigations".
7) The result of the hastily and shoddily written MI5/6/CIA cover story Guardian and NYT "investigations" reassures us that the deaths are now an unfortunate accident which "may" have been caused bla bla...
8) All of the other attacks that have been reported with such certainty previously were still definitely done by the Russians though and require no further investigation.
Steve, they got caught in an attempted false flag that was debunked. The Guardian and NYT, as well as all other western MSM, have outed themselves as mere propagandists. The small time frame between setting up the false flag, having media sing off the same hymn sheet, and that narrative falling apart is small enough that the "reporting" of these paid propagandists is well and truly exposed. It is impossible not to see.
You cannot read their initial reporting and take seriously their new "investigation".
-
Lavrov has rejected a ceasefire. https://youtu.be/9yb36pEmT7E
-
Lavrov has rejected a ceasefire. https://youtu.be/9yb36pEmT7E
All NATO and Western officials were stating unequivocally that Russia must be defeated militarily until very recently. NATO/Ukraine are in no position to dictate the terms of any ceasefire and never have been nor ever will be. This has always been entirely predictable and predicted by many realistic observers of geopolitics and arms/weapons development and procurement. It will end when NATO/Ukraine accept reality and agree to Russian terms/demands. I am surprised to see you linking to the two Alex's at the Duran. What did you make of their analysis/view of the situation?
Unfortunately the UK government/establishment are set on escalating and are now sending "advisors" to work on the ground in Ukraine and making claims of sending ships to the Black Sea. Things are getting desperate in NATOstan and it is becoming clearer to many that much remains to be uncovered in Ukraine and final defeat threatens many "interests". The desperation of some NATO members to continue, no matter the cost in lives and money, hints at the extent of the crimes being covered up with increasingly reckless escalation.
It is also becoming increasingly difficult to pretend not to see the huge Nazi problem, not just in Ukraine but in NATO more widely. Canada recently inviting and honouring a Waffen SS member to Parliament where he was honoured as a "freedom fighter who fought the Russians in World War 2". Cue wild applause. Zelensky, Trudeau, Freeland cheering, applauding and beaming with joy. I'm sure you have seen it as the whole episode went viral(not surprisingly) and the pathetic "apologies" after the event tells all you need to know. Unbelievable.
It was never an "unprovoked Russian invasion", Steve. It is and has always been Operation Barbarossa 2.
-
All NATO and Western officials were stating unequivocally that Russia must be defeated militarily until very recently. NATO/Ukraine are in no position to dictate the terms of any ceasefire and never have been nor ever will be. This has always been entirely predictable and predicted by many realistic observers of geopolitics and arms/weapons development and procurement. It will end when NATO/Ukraine accept reality and agree to Russian terms/demands. I am surprised to see you linking to the two Alex's at the Duran. What did you make of their analysis/view of the situation?
Unfortunately the UK government/establishment are set on escalating and are now sending "advisors" to work on the ground in Ukraine and making claims of sending ships to the Black Sea. Things are getting desperate in NATOstan and it is becoming clearer to many that much remains to be uncovered in Ukraine and final defeat threatens many "interests". The desperation of some NATO members to continue, no matter the cost in lives and money, hints at the extent of the crimes being covered up with increasingly reckless escalation.
It is also becoming increasingly difficult to pretend not to see the huge Nazi problem, not just in Ukraine but in NATO more widely. Canada recently inviting and honouring a Waffen SS member to Parliament where he was honoured as a "freedom fighter who fought the Russians in World War 2". Cue wild applause. Zelensky, Trudeau, Freeland cheering, applauding and beaming with joy. I'm sure you have seen it as the whole episode went viral(not surprisingly) and the pathetic "apologies" after the event tells all you need to know. Unbelievable.
It was never an "unprovoked Russian invasion", Steve. It is and has always been Operation Barbarossa 2.
Read it this morning Gringo.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-12579411/PETER-HITCHENS-SS-veteran-proved-war-never-simple-battle-good-versus-evil.html
-
All NATO and Western officials were stating unequivocally that Russia must be defeated militarily until very recently. NATO/Ukraine are in no position to dictate the terms of any ceasefire and never have been nor ever will be. This has always been entirely predictable and predicted by many realistic observers of geopolitics and arms/weapons development and procurement. It will end when NATO/Ukraine accept reality and agree to Russian terms/demands. I am surprised to see you linking to the two Alex's at the Duran. What did you make of their analysis/view of the situation?
Unfortunately the UK government/establishment are set on escalating and are now sending "advisors" to work on the ground in Ukraine and making claims of sending ships to the Black Sea. Things are getting desperate in NATOstan and it is becoming clearer to many that much remains to be uncovered in Ukraine and final defeat threatens many "interests". The desperation of some NATO members to continue, no matter the cost in lives and money, hints at the extent of the crimes being covered up with increasingly reckless escalation.
It is also becoming increasingly difficult to pretend not to see the huge Nazi problem, not just in Ukraine but in NATO more widely. Canada recently inviting and honouring a Waffen SS member to Parliament where he was honoured as a "freedom fighter who fought the Russians in World War 2". Cue wild applause. Zelensky, Trudeau, Freeland cheering, applauding and beaming with joy. I'm sure you have seen it as the whole episode went viral(not surprisingly) and the pathetic "apologies" after the event tells all you need to know. Unbelievable.
It was never an "unprovoked Russian invasion", Steve. It is and has always been Operation Barbarossa 2.
You really do overegg the pudding. Anthony Rota blundered with the ex-Nazi, he lost his job and the Prime Minister apologized on television. Canada is a Western democracy, which is why when mistakes are made they make amends.
Sergei Lavrov has been touted by supporters as a world statesman, a force for good, and other such rubbish. He has shown himself in his true colours, a puppet of Putin, a Ribbentrop to use your Nazi analogy.
The justification for not honouring the Minsk Accords is again bogus, because they were ambiguous in the first place. It's evident Putin was fomenting violence and dissent in the Donbas, attested by the downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17.
The best thing that can be hoped for now is partitioning the country and a ceasefire to save lives. To reject this is criminal.
-
Ukraine latest, summing up at 27:00 onwards. https://youtu.be/BGVSS-Wf7tI
-
You really do overegg the pudding. Anthony Rota blundered with the ex-Nazi, he lost his job and the Prime Minister apologized on television. Canada is a Western democracy, which is why when mistakes are made they make amends.
Sergei Lavrov has been touted by supporters as a world statesman, a force for good, and other such rubbish. He has shown himself in his true colours, a puppet of Putin, a Ribbentrop to use your Nazi analogy.
The justification for not honouring the Minsk Accords is again bogus, because they were ambiguous in the first place. It's evident Putin was fomenting violence and dissent in the Donbas, attested by the downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17.
The best thing that can be hoped for now is partitioning the country and a ceasefire to save lives. To reject this is criminal.
Give your head a wobble, Steve. You are seriously suggesting that they invited a "Waffen SS Nazi", introduced as, "fighting against the Russians in WW2", by accident. Do you hear yourself? I will give you a little more background on the "accidental" inviting of a Nazi to Canada's parliament. It requires a new thread which I will start in the next few days. You are currently, unwittingly or otherwise, acting as an apologist for Nazism. It is in your face, but so blinded are you by your hatred for Russia and all things Russian that you have lost your mind and all reason.
You bring the Minsk accords and their alleged ambiguity and the downing of MH17 into every post despite knowing the square root of fuck-all about either. I started a thread to discuss the Minsk Accords where you had the opportunity to put up or shut up. I started it only because of your continued drive by mentions which lacked any depth or even understanding. You demonstrated on that thread your ignorance of the Minsk Accords. As my Dad was fond of saying, you could fit your entire knowledge on the back of a standard postage stamp and still leave room for the Lord's Prayer. You failed dismally to put up any coherent understanding of Minsk and the "ambiguities" that you claim exist. They don't exist and all you do is repeat the non specific allegations of others. You are incapable of fleshing out your position because it isn't "your position". You are just repeating the vague accusations of others. It is now about time that you shut up about Minsk. You have no coherent understanding of the whole process and it shows.
I ask you this, Steve. Imagine the whole scenario of a Waffen SS Nazi being honoured in any other parliament(let's say for example, Hungary or Serbia). Would you accept an explanation that it was all a mistake? Would you believe that the speaker made a mistake and that all the applauding MP's were unaware? How about ISIS members or Al Qaeda members being honoured by (choose a govt. we are trained to hate)? Would you believe it was all a mistake and we should all move on-Russian propaganda?
Wake up!! Stop acting as an unthinking apologist for Nazis.
-
Give your head a wobble, Steve. You are seriously suggesting that they invited a "Waffen SS Nazi", introduced as, "fighting against the Russians in WW2", by accident. Do you hear yourself? I will give you a little more background on the "accidental" inviting of a Nazi to Canada's parliament. It requires a new thread which I will start in the next few days. You are currently, unwittingly or otherwise, acting as an apologist for Nazism. It is in your face, but so blinded are you by your hatred for Russia and all things Russian that you have lost your mind and all reason.
You bring the Minsk accords and their alleged ambiguity and the downing of MH17 into every post despite knowing the square root of fuck-all about either. I started a thread to discuss the Minsk Accords where you had the opportunity to put up or shut up. I started it only because of your continued drive by mentions which lacked any depth or even understanding. You demonstrated on that thread your ignorance of the Minsk Accords. As my Dad was fond of saying, you could fit your entire knowledge on the back of a standard postage stamp and still leave room for the Lord's Prayer. You failed dismally to put up any coherent understanding of Minsk and the "ambiguities" that you claim exist. They don't exist and all you do is repeat the non specific allegations of others. You are incapable of fleshing out your position because it isn't "your position". You are just repeating the vague accusations of others. It is now about time that you shut up about Minsk. You have no coherent understanding of the whole process and it shows.
I ask you this, Steve. Imagine the whole scenario of a Waffen SS Nazi being honoured in any other parliament(let's say for example, Hungary or Serbia). Would you accept an explanation that it was all a mistake? Would you believe that the speaker made a mistake and that all the applauding MP's were unaware? How about ISIS members or Al Qaeda members being honoured by (choose a govt. we are trained to hate)? Would you believe it was all a mistake and we should all move on-Russian propaganda?
Wake up!! Stop acting as an unthinking apologist for Nazis.
As my Dad was fond of saying, you could fit your entire knowledge on the back of a standard postage stamp and still leave room for the Lord's Prayer. Ha Ha, that used to be a saying in the mines as well.
-
As my Dad was fond of saying, you could fit your entire knowledge on the back of a standard postage stamp and still leave room for the Lord's Prayer. Ha Ha, that used to be a saying in the mines as well.
The old ones are always the best, HB. Happy to have given you a chuckle :)
-
The old ones are always the best, HB. Happy to have given you a chuckle :)
Ha Ha i know, my Dad's favourite when we used to play tricks on him was "If tha catche's me asleep tha can Piss in me tab"
-
Give your head a wobble, Steve. You are seriously suggesting that they invited a "Waffen SS Nazi", introduced as, "fighting against the Russians in WW2", by accident. Do you hear yourself? I will give you a little more background on the "accidental" inviting of a Nazi to Canada's parliament. It requires a new thread which I will start in the next few days. You are currently, unwittingly or otherwise, acting as an apologist for Nazism. It is in your face, but so blinded are you by your hatred for Russia and all things Russian that you have lost your mind and all reason.
You bring the Minsk accords and their alleged ambiguity and the downing of MH17 into every post despite knowing the square root of fuck-all about either. I started a thread to discuss the Minsk Accords where you had the opportunity to put up or shut up. I started it only because of your continued drive by mentions which lacked any depth or even understanding. You demonstrated on that thread your ignorance of the Minsk Accords. As my Dad was fond of saying, you could fit your entire knowledge on the back of a standard postage stamp and still leave room for the Lord's Prayer. You failed dismally to put up any coherent understanding of Minsk and the "ambiguities" that you claim exist. They don't exist and all you do is repeat the non specific allegations of others. You are incapable of fleshing out your position because it isn't "your position". You are just repeating the vague accusations of others. It is now about time that you shut up about Minsk. You have no coherent understanding of the whole process and it shows.
I ask you this, Steve. Imagine the whole scenario of a Waffen SS Nazi being honoured in any other parliament(let's say for example, Hungary or Serbia). Would you accept an explanation that it was all a mistake? Would you believe that the speaker made a mistake and that all the applauding MP's were unaware? How about ISIS members or Al Qaeda members being honoured by (choose a govt. we are trained to hate)? Would you believe it was all a mistake and we should all move on-Russian propaganda?
Wake up!! Stop acting as an unthinking apologist for Nazis.
My head has passed more examinations over the decades than you could only dream about. I have told you many times that the Minsk agreements are difficult to comprehend and to a large extent attempted to paper over the cracks between conflicting Ukraine's and Russia's positions. For Ukraine the most important part of the agreement was the withdrawal of Russian-backed forces to its own border, which of course would give the game away, so never happened.
I now note Putin is holding court at the Valdai conference, preaching about the equality of other regimes around the world, ignoring his own despotism of chemical poisonings, throwing opponents out of high-storey buildings and planting bombs on planes, Xi's security law on Hong Kong or the re-education camps of the Uighurs, fraud in India's elections and the politicization of its armed forces, or Cyril Ramaphosa allegedly losing $500,000 stuffed under a sofa cushion.
Yes, the Nazi guest at the Canadian parliament was a diplomatic blunder, but the Speaker has lost his job. Why the conspiracy theory? Do you think Zelensky, who is himself Jewish, would have applauded the man had he known his military history?
-
I'm fully against any kind of war, but these things happen and are totally out of our control.. But sometimes you have to ask yourself, how would the Yanks Respond again if Russia started arming and putting bases in Cuba again, how would the Uk respond if Russia started putting missile defence systems in the Republic of Ireland who are not a part of Nato?
This is why Russia has took the action they have, i don't agree with wars or the killings of humans with any Country, but Russia has a duty to protect it's own citizens, It see's Nato as a threat and the thought of Ukraine joining will be an even bigger threat, they're also fed up with the domination of the Greenback and think it's time to change their reliance of such, who can blame them, why should one Country dominate world order. You also have to understand, if Russia was so minded and evil, they have the total power and arsenal to totally wipe Ukraine off the face of this earth without loss of life and face whatever happens.
We can all pick faults with any Regime in Power and look to what happened in the Past, No one can tell me the UK and the Yanks French and German's are Squeeky clean, but that's upto the Public to decide not us, but the only way through this now, is Diplomacy at the highest level taking into account what Russia want and Ukraine and the encroachment of Nato.
-
I'm fully against any kind of war, but these things happen and are totally out of our control.. But sometimes you have to ask yourself, how would the Yanks Respond again if Russia started arming and putting bases in Cuba again, how would the Uk respond if Russia started putting missile defence systems in the Republic of Ireland who are not a part of Nato?
This is why Russia has took the action they have, i don't agree with wars or the killings of humans with any Country, but Russia has a duty to protect it's own citizens, It see's Nato as a threat and the thought of Ukraine joining will be an even bigger threat, they're also fed up with the domination of the Greenback and think it's time to change their reliance of such, who can blame them, why should one Country dominate world order. You also have to understand, if Russia was so minded and evil, they have the total power and arsenal to totally wipe Ukraine off the face of this earth without loss of life and face whatever happens.
We can all pick faults with any Regime in Power and look to what happened in the Past, No one can tell me the UK and the Yanks French and German's are Squeeky clean, but that's upto the Public to decide not us, but the only way through this now, is Diplomacy at the highest level taking into account what Russia want and Ukraine and the encroachment of Nato.
I hope Hamas remember that in Gaza.
-
I hope Hamas remember that in Gaza.
Yes i get what your saying Steve, but the worrying state of affairs is, no Super Power would have to send any troops in to any Battle now days. Hopefully it will never come to that, but a Super Power Country will only take so much.
-
I hope Hamas remember that in Gaza.
I'm surprissed they was allowed to do such Damage Steve, i thought Israel had super air defences and would have been on the alert for such dangers, they've been caught with their pants down.
-
I'm surprissed they was allowed to do such Damage Steve, i thought Israel had super air defences and would have been on the alert for such dangers, they've been caught with their pants down.
I wonder how Jeremy Corburn would have adressed the situation, this from Keir Starmer
Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer said he 'utterly condemned' the attacks, adding: 'There is no justification for this act of terror which is being perpetrated by those who seek to undermine any chance for future peace in the region. Israel has a right to defend herself.'
-
I wonder how Jeremy Corburn would have adressed the situation, this from Keir Starmer
Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer said he 'utterly condemned' the attacks, adding: 'There is no justification for this act of terror which is being perpetrated by those who seek to undermine any chance for future peace in the region. Israel has a right to defend herself.'
Par for the course for Starmer. Did you see the video about him on Double Down News.
-
Par for the course for Starmer. Did you see the video about him on Double Down News.
No i haven't Roch, i personaly think he's full of'sh IT.
-
Yes i get what your saying Steve, but the worrying state of affairs is, no Super Power would have to send any troops in to any Battle now days. Hopefully it will never come to that, but a Super Power Country will only take so much.
Israel is a regional superpower. https://youtu.be/QRiya8iEaOs
-
No i haven't Roch, i personaly think he's full of'sh IT.
Peter Oborne on Kier Starmer
https://www.doubledown.news/watch/2023/september/25/exposed-keir-starmer-liar-murdochs-man-candidate-mi5-peter-oborne
-
Israel is a regional superpower. https://youtu.be/QRiya8iEaOs
Oh i know, they have Nuclear Steve, it's worrying and hopefully it will not be used, just like Russia has shown restrain in that field of Battle.
-
The Hamas thing is a bit strange. Maybe Israel did know something was afoot, but decided to let it happen. Decided to let it happen, in the knowledge that extremely strong action could be taken, on the back of international empathy, against Palestine.
-
The Hamas thing is a bit strange. Maybe Israel did know something was afoot, but decided to let it happen. Decided to let it happen, in the knowledge that extremely strong action could be taken, on the back of international empathy, against Palestine.
Makes me wonder too Roch, they was supposed to have one of the best air defence's out? The Iron Drome?
Israel deploys a layered air and missile defense architecture built to counter a wide variety of air and missile threats emanating from state and non-state regional adversaries. This threat spectrum includes rockets, mortars, drones, ballistic missiles, and cruise missiles. Reflecting this diverse set of threats, Israel today deploys a tiered missile defense architecture. Iron Dome
Not good enough to stop Paragliders though, looks like they travelled deep into Israel territory as well?
-
Makes me wonder too Roch, they was supposed to have one of the best air defence's out? The Iron Drome?
Israel deploys a layered air and missile defense architecture built to counter a wide variety of air and missile threats emanating from state and non-state regional adversaries. This threat spectrum includes rockets, mortars, drones, ballistic missiles, and cruise missiles. Reflecting this diverse set of threats, Israel today deploys a tiered missile defense architecture. Iron Dome
Not good enough to stop Paragliders though, looks like they travelled deep into Israel territory as well?
It's very strange HB. I expect we'll see horrific levels of retaliation.
-
The Hamas thing is a bit strange. Maybe Israel did know something was afoot, but decided to let it happen. Decided to let it happen, in the knowledge that extremely strong action could be taken, on the back of international empathy, against Palestine.
Israeli ambassador to Germany sees Iran behind Hamas attacks
"It is clear to us that Iran is behind this," the ambassador said. Iran is trying everything to bring the region into a state of war, he added.
-
It clearly was a security failure, unless it was allowed to happen to make good to esculate and justify strong action from themselves?
Israel has suffered an “enormous security failure” with attacks by Palestinian militants from the Gaza Strip.
Defence expert Con Coughlin told GB News that Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu faces an “enormous challenge” after he stated “we are at war”.
The country’s military have begun their response by striking targets in Gaza after the attack which was branded “horrific” by UK Foreign Secretary James Cleverly.
The Daily Telegraph’s defence editor Con Coughlin spoke on the “serious” action by Hamas, warning Israeli will be issuing a heavy-handed response.
-
The Hamas thing is a bit strange. Maybe Israel did know something was afoot, but decided to let it happen. Decided to let it happen, in the knowledge that extremely strong action could be taken, on the back of international empathy, against Palestine.
I think your Spot on Roch, they have known about these threats for decades, yet they allow Paragliders deep into their own Country.
https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2023/10/07/12/76274815-12604497-image-a-93_1696678313596.jpg
-
Peter Oborne on Kier Starmer
https://www.doubledown.news/watch/2023/september/25/exposed-keir-starmer-liar-murdochs-man-candidate-mi5-peter-oborne
Labour did some good things 1997-2001: Minimum Wage, NHS investment, Freedom of Information Act. But they overspent and took us into the Iraq war.
-
My head has passed more examinations over the decades than you could only dream about. I have told you many times that the Minsk agreements are difficult to comprehend and to a large extent attempted to paper over the cracks between conflicting Ukraine's and Russia's positions. For Ukraine the most important part of the agreement was the withdrawal of Russian-backed forces to its own border, which of course would give the game away, so never happened.
I now note Putin is holding court at the Valdai conference, preaching about the equality of other regimes around the world, ignoring his own despotism of chemical poisonings, throwing opponents out of high-storey buildings and planting bombs on planes, Xi's security law on Hong Kong or the re-education camps of the Uighurs, fraud in India's elections and the politicization of its armed forces, or Cyril Ramaphosa allegedly losing $500,000 stuffed under a sofa cushion.
Yes, the Nazi guest at the Canadian parliament was a diplomatic blunder, but the Speaker has lost his job. Why the conspiracy theory? Do you think Zelensky, who is himself Jewish, would have applauded the man had he known his military history?
You know neither the amount of "qualifications" that I have nor how many I "dream about", but moving on. You have again simply listed a number of unconnected and politicised accusations. Your referral again to Minsk. Read the thread that I started on the Minsk Accords in which you unsuccessfully attempted to defend your baseless beliefs about the Minsk Accords. You ended up unwittingly agreeing to the one fact which makes every accusation about Russia's alleged role redundant. Bad faith from day one of Ukraine and its NATO backers. You were incoherent on that thread and demonstrated your extremely shallow knowledge.
I have no care for whatever qualifications you have, but given the schooling that you received on the Minsk thread and your abject failure to even recognise that schooling, I don't rate them. They don't require any critical thinking or ability to develop and flesh out an argument, self evidently.
Inviting a Nazi isn't a diplomatic blunder. The sound that you hear in the background is our grandparents/great grandparents spinning in their graves at the honouring of Nazis as resistance fighters against the Russians in WW2 and then crassly dismissing the ensuing revulsion by describing the whole episode as a "diplomatic blunder". Your continued apologism for Nazis/Imperialists and unwillingness to acknowledge their crimes and aggression would appal those who fought against it.
-
My head has passed more examinations over the decades than you could only dream about. I have told you many times that the Minsk agreements are difficult to comprehend and to a large extent attempted to paper over the cracks between conflicting Ukraine's and Russia's positions. For Ukraine the most important part of the agreement was the withdrawal of Russian-backed forces to its own border, which of course would give the game away, so never happened.
I now note Putin is holding court at the Valdai conference, preaching about the equality of other regimes around the world, ignoring his own despotism of chemical poisonings, throwing opponents out of high-storey buildings and planting bombs on planes, Xi's security law on Hong Kong or the re-education camps of the Uighurs, fraud in India's elections and the politicization of its armed forces, or Cyril Ramaphosa allegedly losing $500,000 stuffed under a sofa cushion.
Yes, the Nazi guest at the Canadian parliament was a diplomatic blunder, but the Speaker has lost his job. Why the conspiracy theory? Do you think Zelensky, who is himself Jewish, would have applauded the man had he known his military history?
I passed my cycling proficiency test. Does that count? You absolute melt :-[ An appeal to authority is always weak, an appeal to your own authority is laughable. You have been consistently dismantled and shown to have a shallow understanding throughout this thread and others. Nobody is impressed by your bragging about your qualifications on an online forum. Develop an argument coherently and you won't need to "appeal to the authority" of your list of qualifications, "beyond my dreams" ::)
-
You know neither the amount of "qualifications" that I have nor how many I "dream about", but moving on. You have again simply listed a number of unconnected and politicised accusations. Your referral again to Minsk. Read the thread that I started on the Minsk Accords in which you unsuccessfully attempted to defend your baseless beliefs about the Minsk Accords. You ended up unwittingly agreeing to the one fact which makes every accusation about Russia's alleged role redundant. Bad faith from day one of Ukraine and its NATO backers. You were incoherent on that thread and demonstrated your extremely shallow knowledge.
I have no care for whatever qualifications you have, but given the schooling that you received on the Minsk thread and your abject failure to even recognise that schooling, I don't rate them. They don't require any critical thinking or ability to develop and flesh out an argument, self evidently.
Inviting a Nazi isn't a diplomatic blunder. The sound that you hear in the background is our grandparents/great grandparents spinning in their graves at the honouring of Nazis as resistance fighters against the Russians in WW2 and then crassly dismissing the ensuing revulsion by describing the whole episode as a "diplomatic blunder". Your continued apologism for Nazis/Imperialists and unwillingness to acknowledge their crimes and aggression would appal those who fought against it.
I'm well aware of the Minsk Agreements. Article 10 of Minsk 2 states:
Article 10: Removal of all foreign troops and equipment from Ukraine (with OSCE supervision) and disarmament of illegal groups.
Of course this was never implemented, because the Donetsk People's Republic and the Luhansk People's Republic would have crumbled without Putin's covert support.
I am sick and tired of the Nazi slur on Zelensky's government. He's a Jew himself, so you've been hoisted by your own petard. Putin's crimes are legion, to which any impartial reader of this thread will attest.
-
I passed my cycling proficiency test. Does that count? You absolute melt :-[ An appeal to authority is always weak, an appeal to your own authority is laughable. You have been consistently dismantled and shown to have a shallow understanding throughout this thread and others. Nobody is impressed by your bragging about your qualifications on an online forum. Develop an argument coherently and you won't need to "appeal to the authority" of your list of qualifications, "beyond my dreams" ::)
I don't brag about my qualifications. It's you who are intimidated by them.
-
I passed my cycling proficiency test. Does that count?
What it does mean Gringo, your on the Tandem with me now ;D ;D ;D
-
I don't brag about my qualifications. It's you who are intimidated by them.
I don't know them, aren't interested in them and nor do you know mine. You have a whole lot of assumption going on there. The notion that I am "intimidated" by your qualifications(which I neither know nor care about) is deflection on your part. I demonstrate your lack of qualification to comment intelligently on world events and geopolitics generally every time you enter the discussion.
Read through the Minsk thread from the start. You were embarrassingly lacking in knowledge, got schooled to the point where you defeated your own reasoning and still failed to take any lessons from it. You seek confirmation bias not truth.
-
What it does mean Gringo, your on the Tandem with me now ;D ;D ;D
;D ;D Hope its one of those new electric ones
-
I'm well aware of the Minsk Agreements. Article 10 of Minsk 2 states:
Article 10: Removal of all foreign troops and equipment from Ukraine (with OSCE supervision) and disarmament of illegal groups.
Of course this was never implemented, because the Donetsk People's Republic and the Luhansk People's Republic would have crumbled without Putin's covert support.
I am sick and tired of the Nazi slur on Zelensky's government. He's a Jew himself, so you've been hoisted by your own petard. Putin's crimes are legion, to which any impartial reader of this thread will attest.
As you demonstrated on the thread devoted specifically to discussing Minsk, your "awareness" of Minsk has not led to any coherent understanding of Minsk.
It isn't a Nazi "slur" when they are honouring Nazis as freedom fighters. Your apologism is appalling.
-
As you demonstrated on the thread devoted specifically to discussing Minsk, your "awareness" of Minsk has not led to any coherent understanding of Minsk.
It isn't a Nazi "slur" when they are honouring Nazis as freedom fighters. Your apologism is appalling.
It was a mistake, for goodness' sake. I've made hundreds in my life, but it seems you are pure as the driven snow.
-
It was a mistake, for goodness' sake. I've made hundreds in my life, but it seems you are pure as the driven snow.
Here is a link to the list of Nazi monuments in Canada, for you Steve,
https://en.everybodywiki.com/List_of_Nazi_monuments_in_Canada
From the above;
"The International Military Tribunal's verdict at the Nuremberg Trials declared the entire Waffen-SS a "criminal organization" guilty of war crimes.[8] Monuments to members of the Ukrainian Waffen-SS have been vandalized by activists at differing times as "Nazi monuments", as have monuments to members of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army. Canadian police apologized in 2020 for originally stating that the anti-Nazi vandalism of those monuments is motivated by hate.[9][10] Leaders of the Canadian Ukrainian community said the Ukrainian monuments are not related to Nazism.[11]
The bronze bust[12] of Nazi collaborator Roman Shukhevych was built in 1973 by Ukrainian World War II veterans on private land near the Ukrainian Youth Unity Complex in Edmonton, Alberta.[13][14][15] The statue was vandalised in 2019 when someone added the words "Nazi scum".[16] It was vandalised again in 2021 when someone added the words "Actual Nazi" in red paint.[13]"
Who, Steve, do you think these "Leaders of the Canadian Ukrainian community" that are commemorating Nazis in Ukraine. Could they be the Nazi war criminals referred to here do you think?
https://canadiandimension.com/articles/view/canadas-nazi-war-criminal-past-can-no-longer-be-ignored
From that article;
"The stereotype of Nazi-embracing Latin American dictatorships is a common one, but it distracts attention from the myriad ways in which the US and Canada welcomed thousands more Nazi veterans and allowed their ideology to fester, untouched, amongst many far-right diaspora groups.
In 1997, war crimes investigator and private detective Steven Rambam said, “Canada is where the Nazis are. Canada is the unknown haven for Nazis. Everybody knows about Argentina, but nobody knows about Canada.”
In Winnipeg, the largest city near my hometown, a man named Alexander Laak lived openly, unbothered by police. He was a Nazi lieutenant and the commander of the Jägala concentration camp in Estonia. Thousands of Jewish people were murdered at Jägala from 1942 to 1943, and Laak himself was reported to have kept female prisoners as sex slaves.
After the war, Laak lived comfortably in suburban Winnipeg. He was a member of a national diaspora group called the Estonian Central Council (ECC), and from 1955 onward, he worked for Canada’s Department of National Defence.
The Russian news agency TASS claimed that Laak had bought his house in Winnipeg with proceeds from valuables stolen from victims of mass executions in Estonia. The RCMP had apparently “talked to Laak and found nothing to incriminate him.” Nevertheless, Laak admitted that he “was in the Estonian army and fought against the Russians.”
In September 1960, Laak was found dead in his garage. The official cause of death was suicide by hanging, but there are theories that he was tracked down and killed by a so-called “Jewish Avenger” squad of Holocaust survivors.
Following Laak’s death, Canadian media reported that he had undergone and passed a police check before entering Canada. Another article in the Ottawa Citizen used scare quotes when reporting Laak’s crimes, aiming to discredit Soviet accusations that he had participated in the Holocaust.
One article reads: “A 53-year-old immigrant accused by Russia as a ‘Nazi war criminal’ sought by the Communists for ‘mass murders’ in Estonia committed suicide last night by hanging himself from a garage rafter.” The article also gave Laak the space to discredit his accusers: “Laak said he was the man the Russians were talking about but labelled the story ‘99 percent lies… It is only Communist propaganda.’”
Get your head out of the sand, Steve.
-
From 1997, an investigation by "60 minutes" on CBC about the Nazi war criminal collaborating past of Canada;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIit7NP0wyU&ab_channel=AndThat%27stheWayItWasNewsArchives
The notion of "accidentally" honouring Nazis is beyond preposterous and stretches credulity well beyond breaking point.
"Accidentally honoured the Nazis" sounds more like a line from a Monty Python sketch than a serious explanation. That you believe this to be credible says a lot :-[
-
A very detailed and informative article detailing the open Nazi past of Canada. Full link at the bottom but I will highlight the passages that detail Chrystia Freelands background and beliefs over the next few posts. Illuminating, and shatters the "invited Nazis by accident" nonsense. It is crystal clear that Freeland knows exactly who and what Hunka represents. Her huge beam and enthusiastic applause of Hunka was no accident. Without further ado;
Yaroslav Hunka was among the post-war wave of Ukrainian Nazi veterans welcomed by Canada. According to the city council website of Berezhany, he arrived in Ontario in 1954 and promptly “became a member of the fraternity of soldiers of the 1st Division of the UNA, affiliated to the World Congress of Free Ukrainians.”
Also among the new generation of Ukrainian Canadians was Michael Chomiak, the grandfather of Canada’s second-most-powerful official, Chrystia Freeland. Throughout her career as a journalist and Canadian diplomat, Freeland has advanced her grandfather’s legacy of anti-Russian agitation, while repeatedly exalting wartime Nazi collaborators during public events.
Throughout the Nazi German occupation of Poland, the Ukrainian journalist Michael Chomiak served as one of Hitler’s top propagandists. Based in Krakow, Chomiak edited an antisemitic publication called Krakivs’ki visti (Krakow News), which cheerled the Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union – “The German Army is bringing us our cherished freedom,” the paper proclaimed in 1941 – and glorified Hitler while rallying Ukrainian support for the Waffen-SS Galicia volunteers.
Chomiak spent much of the war living in two spacious Krakow apartments that had been seized from their Jewish owners by the Nazi occupiers. He wrote that he moved numerous pieces of furniture belonging to a certain “Dr. Finkelstein” to another aryanized apartment placed under his control.
In Canada, Chomiak participated in the Ukrainian Canadian Committee (UCC), which incubated hardcore nationalist sentiment among diaspora members while lobbying Ottawa for hardline anti-Soviet policies. On its website, the UCC boasted of receiving direct Canadian government assistance during World War Two: “The final and conclusive impetus for [establishing the UCC] came from the National War Services of Canada which was anxious that young Ukrainians enlist in military services.”
The UCC’s first president Volodymyr Kubijovych, had served as Chomiak’s boss back in Krakow. He also played a part in the establishment of the 14th Grenadier Division of the Waffen-SS Galicia, announcing upon its formation, “This historic day was made possible by the conditions to create a worthy opportunity for the Ukrainians of Galicia, to fight arm in arm with the heroic German soldiers of the army and the Waffen-SS against Bolshevism, your and our deadly enemy.”
Freeland nurtures media career as undercover regime change agent in Soviet-era Ukraine
Following his death in 1984, Chomiak’s granddaughter, Chrystia Freeland, followed in his footsteps as a reporter for various Ukrainian nationalist publications. She was an early contributor to Kubijovych’s Encyclopedia of Ukraine, which whitewashed the record of Nazi collaborators like Stepan Bandera, referring to him as a “revolutionary.” Next, she took a staff position at the Edmonton-based Ukrainian News, where her grandfather had served as editor.
A 1988 edition of Ukrainian News (below) featured an article co-authored by Freeland, followed by an ad for a book called “Fighting for Freedom” which glorified the Ukrainian Waffen-SS Galician division.
[/b]
https://thegrayzone.com/2023/09/26/canadas-ukrainian-nazi-ottawas-policy/
-
More about Freeland who accidentally applauded but obviously played no part in the inviting of Nazi war criminal, Yaroslav Hunka, from the Grayzone article;
"During Freeland’s time as an exchange student in Lviv, Ukraine, she laid the foundations for her meteoric rise to journalistic success. From behind cover as a Russian literature major at Harvard University, Freeland collaborated with local regime change activists while feeding anti-Soviet narratives to international media bigwigs.
“Countless ‘tendentious’ news stories about life in the Soviet Union, especially for its non-Russian citizens, had her fingerprints as Ms. Freeland set about making a name for herself in journalistic circles with an eye to her future career prospects,” the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) reported.
Citing KGB files, the CBC described Freeland as a de facto intelligence agent: “The student causing so many headaches clearly loathed the Soviet Union, but she knew its laws inside and out – and how to use them to her advantage. She skillfully hid her actions, avoided surveillance (and shared that knowledge with her Ukrainian contacts) and expertly trafficked in ‘misinformation.'”
In 1989, Soviet security agents rescinded Freeland’s visa when they caught her smuggling “a veritable how-to guide for running an election” into the country for Ukrainain nationalist candidates.
She quickly transitioned back to journalism, landing gigs in post-Soviet Moscow for the Financial Times and Economist, and eventually rising to global editor-at-large of Reuters – the UK-based media giant which today functions as a cutout for British intelligence operations against Russia.
Canada trains, protects Nazis in post-Maidan Ukraine
When Freeland won a seat as a Liberal member of Canada’s parliament in 2013, she established her most powerful platform yet to agitate for regime change in Russia. Milking her journalistic connections, she published op-eds in top legacy papers like the New York Times urging militant support from Western capitals for Ukraine’s so-called “Revolution of Dignity,” which saw the violent removal of a democratically elected president and his replacement with a nationalist, pro-NATO government in 2014.
In the midst of the coup attempt, a group of neo-Nazi thugs belonging to the C14 organization occupied Kiev’s city council and vandalized the building with Ukrainian nationalist insignia and white supremacist symbols, including a Confederate flag. When riot police chased the fascist hooligans away on February 18, 2014, they took shelter in the Canadian embassy with the apparent consent of the Conservative administration in Ottawa. “Canada was sympathizing with the protesters, at the time, more than the [Ukrainian] government,” a Ukrainian interior ministry official recalled to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation."
Are you still buying the "it was a simple mistake" horseshit, Steve?
-
;D ;D Hope its one of those new electric ones
;D ;D ;D Iv'e had one of those Gringo, pedal assist, great way of getting around without fear of getting back.
-
More about Freeland who accidentally applauded but obviously played no part in the inviting of Nazi war criminal, Yaroslav Hunka, from the Grayzone article;
"During Freeland’s time as an exchange student in Lviv, Ukraine, she laid the foundations for her meteoric rise to journalistic success. From behind cover as a Russian literature major at Harvard University, Freeland collaborated with local regime change activists while feeding anti-Soviet narratives to international media bigwigs.
“Countless ‘tendentious’ news stories about life in the Soviet Union, especially for its non-Russian citizens, had her fingerprints as Ms. Freeland set about making a name for herself in journalistic circles with an eye to her future career prospects,” the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) reported.
Citing KGB files, the CBC described Freeland as a de facto intelligence agent: “The student causing so many headaches clearly loathed the Soviet Union, but she knew its laws inside and out – and how to use them to her advantage. She skillfully hid her actions, avoided surveillance (and shared that knowledge with her Ukrainian contacts) and expertly trafficked in ‘misinformation.'”
In 1989, Soviet security agents rescinded Freeland’s visa when they caught her smuggling “a veritable how-to guide for running an election” into the country for Ukrainain nationalist candidates.
She quickly transitioned back to journalism, landing gigs in post-Soviet Moscow for the Financial Times and Economist, and eventually rising to global editor-at-large of Reuters – the UK-based media giant which today functions as a cutout for British intelligence operations against Russia.
Canada trains, protects Nazis in post-Maidan Ukraine
When Freeland won a seat as a Liberal member of Canada’s parliament in 2013, she established her most powerful platform yet to agitate for regime change in Russia. Milking her journalistic connections, she published op-eds in top legacy papers like the New York Times urging militant support from Western capitals for Ukraine’s so-called “Revolution of Dignity,” which saw the violent removal of a democratically elected president and his replacement with a nationalist, pro-NATO government in 2014.
In the midst of the coup attempt, a group of neo-Nazi thugs belonging to the C14 organization occupied Kiev’s city council and vandalized the building with Ukrainian nationalist insignia and white supremacist symbols, including a Confederate flag. When riot police chased the fascist hooligans away on February 18, 2014, they took shelter in the Canadian embassy with the apparent consent of the Conservative administration in Ottawa. “Canada was sympathizing with the protesters, at the time, more than the [Ukrainian] government,” a Ukrainian interior ministry official recalled to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation."
Are you still buying the "it was a simple mistake" horseshit, Steve?
It was cock up rather than conspiracy. https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/chrystia-freeland-acknowledges-that-mps-ignorance-of-history-made-nazi-controversy-even-worse/article_1acb3e88-89e9-56f8-abe4-702802bf8bfc.html
-
It was cock up rather than conspiracy. https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/chrystia-freeland-acknowledges-that-mps-ignorance-of-history-made-nazi-controversy-even-worse/article_1acb3e88-89e9-56f8-abe4-702802bf8bfc.html
It is not possible to believe Freeland's claim of ignorance, and you only do so because facing the truth and the evidence shatters your world view.
Freeland directly quoted from the article you linked;
“None of us understood, none of us recognized what was happening,” Freeland said during an unrelated news conference on Thursday. “That compounds the very grave error and that makes it really painful for all of us.”
Freeland is the grand daughter of a Nazi propagandist who she credits with shaping her politics. She majored in Russian Literature at Harvard, was an exchange student in Lvov, Ukraine and wrote for the same nationalist publications as her grandfather had contributed to;
Freeland nurtures media career as undercover regime change agent in Soviet-era Ukraine
Following his death in 1984, Chomiak’s granddaughter, Chrystia Freeland, followed in his footsteps as a reporter for various Ukrainian nationalist publications. She was an early contributor to Kubijovych’s Encyclopedia of Ukraine, which whitewashed the record of Nazi collaborators like Stepan Bandera, referring to him as a “revolutionary.” Next, she took a staff position at the Edmonton-based Ukrainian News, where her grandfather had served as editor.
A 1988 edition of Ukrainian News (below) featured an article co-authored by Freeland, followed by an ad for a book called “Fighting for Freedom” which glorified the Ukrainian Waffen-SS Galician division.
Freeland is steeped in the history of who and what the Ukrainian Nazis are. She is a Nazi. She shares the views of her Nazi grandfather and wrote for Nazi publications. This is all a matter of record, Steve. Those views, that she shares with her Nazi grandfather, regard Stepan Bandera as a hero. She helpfully made this clear when she contributed to the "Encyclopedia of Ukraine" published by the Nazi Volodomyr Kubijovyc in which she whitewashed Bandera as heroic freedom fighter;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volodymyr_Kubijovy%C4%8D#:~:text=After%20the%20collapse%20of%20Nazi,Paris%20on%202%20November%201985.
Freeland is steeped in and very knowledgeable of the history of all of this. She has made clear her views and knowledge over the years by helpfully writing her vile whitewashing and support of Nazis. She doesn't get to claim with that background that;
"None of us understood, none of us recognised what was happening"
It is her life's work. She understood very well. Your credulous buying of this pathetic apologia demonstrates your shallowness and lack of critical thought. The article that you linked just begged questions to anyone capable of critical thought. you just took it at face value despite the fact that the whole premise is absurd. That premise being, the idea that Freeland is somehow ignorant of this history.
-
Is Russia arming Hamas? https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/shocking-statement-from-ukraine/ar-AA1i5LSm?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=b64c1ccd92524d7e92cb35c734b7a961&ei=8
-
bullshit debunked https://youtu.be/lX-GhMxuVi0
-
How Ukraine and Russia Are Both Adapting To Ukraine's Offensive
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlkpwTTR1wU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlkpwTTR1wU)
-
How Long Does Russia Have Left? Number of Tanks, Each Type, and Their Decline This Year
https://youtu.be/0B_4M5dTHIU?si=9jKh_J1YJo08CtqM&t=110 (https://youtu.be/0B_4M5dTHIU?si=9jKh_J1YJo08CtqM&t=110)
-
How Long Does Russia Have Left? Number of Tanks, Each Type, and Their Decline This Year
https://youtu.be/0B_4M5dTHIU?si=9jKh_J1YJo08CtqM&t=110 (https://youtu.be/0B_4M5dTHIU?si=9jKh_J1YJo08CtqM&t=110)
Leaders of totalitarian states pay lip service to the welfare of their citizens. 50,000 Russian troops have already met their deaths in Ukraine. They can switch domestic production to military when required, no questions asked by the rubber-stamping State Duma.
-
How Long Does Russia Have Left? They have all the time in the world, David. The slow grind and attrition is working just fine for them, NATO/Ukraine, not so much! Stoltenberg, NATO head, recently admitted that NATO no longer had enough weapons and ammo for a war against Russia. For those who have been paying attention to the unhinged NATO propaganda, this is hilarious.
For the past , coming up two years, we have been told that Russia are running out of various items. Missiles, shells, tanks, planes, generals etc etc. We have also been told that NATO are definitely not fighting Russia in Ukraine and that Russia are too weak to defeat even Ukraine!! Should NATO enter, then Russia would last 5 minutes, a week or whatever. Anyway, they would definitely be crushed if NATO were to enter according to all media outlets and talking head "experts" allowed in Western media.
However, despite not fighting Russia, it turns out that NATO have emptied their stocks of shells and ammo while "Not fighting Russia". If your weapon stocks to fight Russia turned out to not even be enough to not fight Russia then it is only going one way if hostilities do start. Russia are still going strong even according to Stoltenberg;
Russia is not giving up in Ukraine and its warring capacity must not be underestimated, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg warned on Wednesday (29 November), amid a stalling Ukrainian counter-offensive and signs of Western fatigue after 640 days of war.
“Russia has amassed a large missile stockpile ahead of winter and we see new attempts to strike Ukraine’s power grid and energy infrastructure, trying to leave Ukraine in the dark and cold,” NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg told reporters in Brussels.
“We must not underestimate Russia,” he warned, speaking after NATO foreign ministers met with their Ukrainian counterpart Dmytro Kuleba in the new cooperation format to discuss Kyiv’s path to membership.
Kyiv’s Western allies have been pledging that financial and military support will not falter as other crises in the Middle East have recently diverted part of their attention.
However, securing orders of weapons, especially missiles and ammunition, with the defence industry and pushing for faster production is not going quite as planned, three NATO diplomats told Euractiv, raising the question of whether the West can hold the line in the next months.
-
How Long Does Russia Have Left? They have all the time in the world, David. The slow grind and attrition is working just fine for them, NATO/Ukraine, not so much! Stoltenberg, NATO head, recently admitted that NATO no longer had enough weapons and ammo for a war against Russia. For those who have been paying attention to the unhinged NATO propaganda, this is hilarious.
For the past , coming up two years, we have been told that Russia are running out of various items. Missiles, shells, tanks, planes, generals etc etc. We have also been told that NATO are definitely not fighting Russia in Ukraine and that Russia are too weak to defeat even Ukraine!! Should NATO enter, then Russia would last 5 minutes, a week or whatever. Anyway, they would definitely be crushed if NATO were to enter according to all media outlets and talking head "experts" allowed in Western media.
However, despite not fighting Russia, it turns out that NATO have emptied their stocks of shells and ammo while "Not fighting Russia". If your weapon stocks to fight Russia turned out to not even be enough to not fight Russia then it is only going one way if hostilities do start. Russia are still going strong even according to Stoltenberg;
Russia is not giving up in Ukraine and its warring capacity must not be underestimated, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg warned on Wednesday (29 November), amid a stalling Ukrainian counter-offensive and signs of Western fatigue after 640 days of war.
“Russia has amassed a large missile stockpile ahead of winter and we see new attempts to strike Ukraine’s power grid and energy infrastructure, trying to leave Ukraine in the dark and cold,” NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg told reporters in Brussels.
“We must not underestimate Russia,” he warned, speaking after NATO foreign ministers met with their Ukrainian counterpart Dmytro Kuleba in the new cooperation format to discuss Kyiv’s path to membership.
Kyiv’s Western allies have been pledging that financial and military support will not falter as other crises in the Middle East have recently diverted part of their attention.
However, securing orders of weapons, especially missiles and ammunition, with the defence industry and pushing for faster production is not going quite as planned, three NATO diplomats told Euractiv, raising the question of whether the West can hold the line in the next months.
Firstly NATO is not directly at war with Russia. Such a conflict would be over rather quickly. The amount of military aid the US has given Ukraine equates to just 5% of the US annual military budget. If Russia cannot defeat Ukraine and resorts to forcibly mobilizing it population just to hold ground against a much weaker neighbour. Then they sure has hell wont defeat NATO in any event.
What ever is transpiring in your Tankie fantasy world is not relevant unless one is looking for amusement.
-
Firstly NATO is not directly at war with Russia. Such a conflict would be over rather quickly. The amount of military aid the US has given Ukraine equates to just 5% of the US annual military budget. If Russia cannot defeat Ukraine and resorts to forcibly mobilizing it population just to hold ground against a much weaker neighbour. Then they sure has hell wont defeat NATO in any event.
What ever is transpiring in your Tankie fantasy world is not relevant unless one is looking for amusement.
NATO is incapable of fighting Russia as is being demonstrated in Ukraine. The notion that NATO aren't involved is laughable and bears zero scrutiny. NATO AWACS planes, satellites, training, mercs?, weapons, ammunition. It is a NATO war and they are being humiliated. Russia made clear their aims at the beginning. It is nothing to do with conquering territory (that will eventually take care of itself) and everything to do with removing the military threat of NATO from their border by "de-militarising Ukraine. A war of attrition suits Russia fine and that is what they have dragged NATO into. You fail to see it because it shatters your world view and it is easier to bury your head in the sand than face the truth.
There are long term strategies at play which I have explained previously that clearly sail over your two minute soundbite, gif sized intellect. Empire of Lies thread sums it up. Ongoing events tend to support the prognosis outlined in that thread.
Who do you think would join this NATO war on Russia? What would happen in any of these scenarios? I don't think that you have thought any of this through. War is not a game of Top Trumps. US/NATO Aircraft carriers would not be a factor, just for starters. Russia aren't Iraq or Libya-Russia can sink the entire fleet as NATO well know. How are the long logistic lines going to work out in this NATO war on Russia? Russia won't be moving from their own front garden, whereas NATO will have easily interdicted supply lines of thousands of miles in length.
NATO defeating Russia is a pipe dream, David. It might happen in Top Trumps and NATO's wet dreams, but not in real life. Russia have no intention of playing away from home, as it were, and they are never defeated with home advantage. It makes a difference which you fail to factor.
-
NATO is incapable of fighting Russia as is being demonstrated in Ukraine. The notion that NATO aren't involved is laughable and bears zero scrutiny. NATO AWACS planes, satellites, training, mercs?, weapons, ammunition. It is a NATO war and they are being humiliated. Russia made clear their aims at the beginning. It is nothing to do with conquering territory (that will eventually take care of itself) and everything to do with removing the military threat of NATO from their border by "de-militarising Ukraine. A war of attrition suits Russia fine and that is what they have dragged NATO into. You fail to see it because it shatters your world view and it is easier to bury your head in the sand than face the truth.
There are long term strategies at play which I have explained previously that clearly sail over your two minute soundbite, gif sized intellect. Empire of Lies thread sums it up. Ongoing events tend to support the prognosis outlined in that thread.
Who do you think would join this NATO war on Russia? What would happen in any of these scenarios? I don't think that you have thought any of this through. War is not a game of Top Trumps. US/NATO Aircraft carriers would not be a factor, just for starters. Russia aren't Iraq or Libya-Russia can sink the entire fleet as NATO well know. How are the long logistic lines going to work out in this NATO war on Russia? Russia won't be moving from their own front garden, whereas NATO will have easily interdicted supply lines of thousands of miles in length.
NATO defeating Russia is a pipe dream, David. It might happen in Top Trumps and NATO's wet dreams, but not in real life. Russia have no intention of playing away from home, as it were, and they are never defeated with home advantage. It makes a difference which you fail to factor.
Ramblings of a mad man.
-
Ramblings of a mad man.
I posed some fairly simple questions for you David which you fail to answer. All you have is childish insults, which demonstrates your lack of answers to how NATO will conduct this war on Russia. Some months back, Stoltenberg and other western officials made clear that Russia must be defeated militarily. They have put everything they have into that effort and are further away from their goal. They now talk openly of negotiations and their inability to defeat Russia. Remember the Crimea Summer Party that you invited NGB and myself too. Is that now cancelled?
Anyway, if my post is the ramblings of a mad man then you will be able to easily either answer or point out the fallacy of the questions posed. Such as,
Who do you think would join this NATO war on Russia? (I mean which NATO members to be clear)
US/NATO Aircraft carriers would not be a factor, just for starters. Russia aren't Iraq or Libya-Russia can sink the entire fleet as NATO well know. How are the long logistic lines going to work out in this NATO war on Russia?
When you can answer who is in this "fantasy war", we can start to figure out how exactly the logistics of it all is supposed to work. As I say, I am fairly certain that you haven't thought this one through.
-
I posed some fairly simple questions for you David which you fail to answer. All you have is childish insults, which demonstrates your lack of answers to how NATO will conduct this war on Russia. Some months back, Stoltenberg and other western officials made clear that Russia must be defeated militarily. They have put everything they have into that effort and are further away from their goal. They now talk openly of negotiations and their inability to defeat Russia. Remember the Crimea Summer Party that you invited NGB and myself too. Is that now cancelled?
Anyway, if my post is the ramblings of a mad man then you will be able to easily either answer or point out the fallacy of the questions posed. Such as,
Who do you think would join this NATO war on Russia? (I mean which NATO members to be clear)
US/NATO Aircraft carriers would not be a factor, just for starters. Russia aren't Iraq or Libya-Russia can sink the entire fleet as NATO well know. How are the long logistic lines going to work out in this NATO war on Russia?
When you can answer who is in this "fantasy war", we can start to figure out how exactly the logistics of it all is supposed to work. As I say, I am fairly certain that you haven't thought this one through.
Questions that have already been answered in the video I have posted on here before
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ek-F8OMD6EM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ek-F8OMD6EM)
-
Questions that have already been answered in the video I have posted on here before
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ek-F8OMD6EM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ek-F8OMD6EM)
But which you are unable to articulate yourself. You never answer questions and it is obvious why you don't. A 13 minute cartoon video is not a serious response but you are not a serious person so it is to be expected.
-
what russia is doing now https://off-guardian.org/2023/11/28/russia-bludgeoning-the-proles-with-public-health/
-
Europe is not ready for war with Russia and could be “washed away” in the same way that the Holy Roman Empire was destroyed by Napoleon, said Professor of Military History at the University of Potsdam Sönke Neitzel, quoted by The Times.
The publication calls him "the leading academic authority on modern German military forces."
At a high-level defense conference in Berlin, several German generals also suggested that NATO may not be able to win the “first battle” in the event of aggression in eastern Europe because it would struggle to move enough troops and equipment quickly enough.
Neitzel called European logistics a “nightmare” and said Germany needed at least 15 years to prepare for war.
“It is absolutely clear: if our armed forces are going to fight, they will die without drones, without air defense, without sufficient supplies. Is our message [to German leaders] clear enough? They will die and that is your responsibility,” he said at the Berlin Security Conference.
It appears that, "Professor of Military History at the University of Potsdam Sönke Neitzel and the leading academic authority on modern German military forces", obviously hasn't seen your 13 minute cartoon video, David.
-
Europe is not ready for war with Russia and could be “washed away” in the same way that the Holy Roman Empire was destroyed by Napoleon, said Professor of Military History at the University of Potsdam Sönke Neitzel, quoted by The Times.
The publication calls him "the leading academic authority on modern German military forces."
At a high-level defense conference in Berlin, several German generals also suggested that NATO may not be able to win the “first battle” in the event of aggression in eastern Europe because it would struggle to move enough troops and equipment quickly enough.
Neitzel called European logistics a “nightmare” and said Germany needed at least 15 years to prepare for war.
“It is absolutely clear: if our armed forces are going to fight, they will die without drones, without air defense, without sufficient supplies. Is our message [to German leaders] clear enough? They will die and that is your responsibility,” he said at the Berlin Security Conference.
It appears that, "Professor of Military History at the University of Potsdam Sönke Neitzel and the leading academic authority on modern German military forces", obviously hasn't seen your 13 minute cartoon video, David.
I foresee an uneasy modus vivendi, whereby the Crimea, Luhansk, Donetsk, Mykolayiv and Zaporizhzhya provinces remain under Russian hegemony whilst Kiev stays in the Western sphere.
-
I foresee an uneasy modus vivendi, whereby the Crimea, Luhansk, Donetsk, Mykolayiv and Zaporizhzhya provinces remain under Russian hegemony whilst Kiev stays in the Western sphere.
Crimea and the four oblasts are not up for negotiation. Kiev will probably remain in whatever rump state of Ukraine is left. The south of Ukraine and specifically Nikolaev and Odessa regions will become either independent states or regions of the Russian Federation, in my view. Without the status of Odessa changing in some way, it would be a constant threat to Crimea's Sevastopol base and Russia's Black sea fleet and Crimea generally. This is something that I don't expect Russia to tolerate. A demilitarised Odessa is a possibility but Russia will not allow any threat to linger on the Black Sea coast.
What remains of Ukraine, if anything, will be land locked or at best have some limited access to the Black Sea. I expect, and always have, that a series of referenda will decide the status of each oblast when hostilities eventually cease. Russia has no interest in occupying territory with a hostile population and has no need of it. They will not tolerate a hostile neighbour being used as a cats paw by NATO either. All of this has always been predictable.
-
Crimea and the four oblasts are not up for negotiation. Kiev will probably remain in whatever rump state of Ukraine is left. The south of Ukraine and specifically Nikolaev and Odessa regions will become either independent states or regions of the Russian Federation, in my view. Without the status of Odessa changing in some way, it would be a constant threat to Crimea's Sevastopol base and Russia's Black sea fleet and Crimea generally. This is something that I don't expect Russia to tolerate. A demilitarised Odessa is a possibility but Russia will not allow any threat to linger on the Black Sea coast.
What remains of Ukraine, if anything, will be land locked or at best have some limited access to the Black Sea. I expect, and always have, that a series of referenda will decide the status of each oblast when hostilities eventually cease. Russia has no interest in occupying territory with a hostile population and has no need of it. They will not tolerate a hostile neighbour being used as a cats paw by NATO either. All of this has always been predictable.
I don't disagree with the analysis, but we were told initially that Ukraine was a Nazi state (despite Zelensky being of the Jewish faith), so it seems incredible that were that the case any remnant of the Ukrainian state would be allowed to remain standing. I'm afraid Putin and Lavrov have very little credibility in my eyes now, and should similarly be treated as the war criminals Bush and Blair undoubtedly are.
-
Crimea and the four oblasts are not up for negotiation.
They don't even control all the oblast capitols (Kerson and Zaporizhzhia) and only 50% of Donetsk.
Hiding behind the Denipro river and mine fields. They won't be accumulating any more territory.
-
They don't even control all the oblast capitols (Kerson and Zaporizhzhia) and only 50% of Donetsk.
Hiding behind the Denipro river and mine fields. They won't be accumulating any more territory.
They don't need to. All they wanted was to protect the spoils of February 2014, namely Crimea.
-
I don't disagree with the analysis, but we were told initially that Ukraine was a Nazi state (despite Zelensky being of the Jewish faith), so it seems incredible that were that the case any remnant of the Ukrainian state would be allowed to remain standing. I'm afraid Putin and Lavrov have very little credibility in my eyes now, and should similarly be treated as the war criminals Bush and Blair undoubtedly are.
The Ukrainian state that will be left standing will be de-nazified and demilitarised. The nazi language policies etc will be consigned to the dustbin. Putin and Lavrov probably won't lose too much sleep over their credibility in the eyes of indoctrinated westerners. In world wide terms it isn't the Russian leadership whose credibility is shot. The ridiculous notion that being Jewish prevents you from holding Nazi supremacist beliefs is false.
Your comparison of Putin/Lavrov to Bush/Blair is also false but you are at least getting on the right track. Bush/Blair and every US president since and UK PM since their Iraq crimes are also war criminals and have carried on with the same orders. Obama, Trump, Biden, Cameron, Johnson and on and on.
Putin, Xi and Lavrov and co are the antidote to the western criminal governments. It is impossible to honestly compare the actions of Russian leadership with those of the US/UK. Their running dogs in the EU/NATO also warrant a dishonourable mention.
-
The Ukrainian state that will be left standing will be de-nazified and demilitarised. The nazi language policies etc will be consigned to the dustbin. Putin and Lavrov probably won't lose too much sleep over their credibility in the eyes of indoctrinated westerners. In world wide terms it isn't the Russian leadership whose credibility is shot. The ridiculous notion that being Jewish prevents you from holding Nazi supremacist beliefs is false.
Your comparison of Putin/Lavrov to Bush/Blair is also false but you are at least getting on the right track. Bush/Blair and every US president since and UK PM since their Iraq crimes are also war criminals and have carried on with the same orders. Obama, Trump, Biden, Cameron, Johnson and on and on.
Putin, Xi and Lavrov and co are the antidote to the western criminal governments. It is impossible to honestly compare the actions of Russian leadership with those of the US/UK. Their running dogs in the EU/NATO also warrant a dishonourable mention.
But where is the democratic legitimacy for those governments? How do you know Putin didn't deliberately foment insurrection in Donetsk and Luhansk? Why does Xi ignore court rulings on the South China Sea and what would you say to a Taiwan invasion? https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/12/philippines-wins-south-china-sea-case-against-china
-
But where is the democratic legitimacy for those governments? How do you know Putin didn't deliberately foment insurrection in Donetsk and Luhansk? Why does Xi ignore court rulings on the South China Sea and what would you say to a Taiwan invasion? https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/12/philippines-wins-south-china-sea-case-against-china
Their "democratic legitimacy" as you call it, is simply a talking point that you have fallen for. It is for you, and me, to concern ourselves with the legitimacy of "our own" governments. It is simple western arrogance and colonial white mans burden thinking to appoint ourselves as arbiters of which governments have "legitimacy" and who doesn't. This all comes from the governments who are responsible for wars and invasions that have destroyed countries and killed millions. Democratic legitimacy :-[ :-[
Your concerns are not valid. Putin didn't need or want to "foment insurrection" in Ukraine and it is a bizarre question. The South China Sea is an issue that is provoked and fomented by outsiders from the West, as is the Taiwan issue. Both of these will be solved and the only threat of war is the west provoking and fomenting it. The veil is well and truly removed from the western governments whose own legitimacy is way more open to question than those that you name.
-
But where is the democratic legitimacy for those governments? How do you know Putin didn't deliberately foment insurrection in Donetsk and Luhansk? Why does Xi ignore court rulings on the South China Sea and what would you say to a Taiwan invasion? https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/12/philippines-wins-south-china-sea-case-against-china
Does it occur to you, Steve, that the same people whipping up your concern about China "invading" Taiwan are the same people who actually do plan and carry out invasions of other sovereign states? Do the Chinese state have a track record of invasions? What about our own governments-do they have a track record of invading and bombing other countries?
Instead of concerning yourself with hypothetical invasions(with no basis) and what we should think/do about them- you would do better by concerning yourself with the real invasions/bombings of Vietnam, Korea, Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Yugoslavia, Libya, Syria and on and on. Those were all done by the same governments whose words you still repeat. You need to break the programming and realise that the greatest "fomenter" of wars and unrest aren't China, Russia or Iran, it is our government.
-
Two Ukrainian servicemen decided to surrender to representatives of the Russian forces. Then get executed.
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1890xkl/russians_continue_to_commit_atrocities_in_ukraine/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1890xkl/russians_continue_to_commit_atrocities_in_ukraine/)
-
Does it occur to you, Steve, that the same people whipping up your concern about China "invading" Taiwan are the same people who actually do plan and carry out invasions of other sovereign states? Do the Chinese state have a track record of invasions? What about our own governments-do they have a track record of invading and bombing other countries?
Instead of concerning yourself with hypothetical invasions(with no basis) and what we should think/do about them- you would do better by concerning yourself with the real invasions/bombings of Vietnam, Korea, Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Yugoslavia, Libya, Syria and on and on. Those were all done by the same governments whose words you still repeat. You need to break the programming and realise that the greatest "fomenter" of wars and unrest aren't China, Russia or Iran, it is our government.
But the one doesn't excuse the other. You would never get the following report emanating from a Russian or a Chinese parliamentary organ: https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2000/06/kos1-j14.html
Everyone knows Xi is itching to invade Taiwan..https://www.reuters.com/world/us/xi-told-biden-taiwan-is-biggest-most-dangerous-issue-bilateral-ties-us-official-2023-11-16/
..and everyone knows Iran is a state sponsor of terrorism, funding Hezbollah, just as a handful of Qatari billionaires enjoy their sport funding Hamas.
-
Two Ukrainian servicemen decided to surrender to representatives of the Russian forces. Then get executed.
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1890xkl/russians_continue_to_commit_atrocities_in_ukraine/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1890xkl/russians_continue_to_commit_atrocities_in_ukraine/)
How shocking. No democratic accountability. They will never be brought to justice.
-
But the one doesn't excuse the other. You would never get the following report emanating from a Russian or a Chinese parliamentary organ: https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2000/06/kos1-j14.html
Everyone knows Xi is itching to invade Taiwan..https://www.reuters.com/world/us/xi-told-biden-taiwan-is-biggest-most-dangerous-issue-bilateral-ties-us-official-2023-11-16/
..and everyone knows Iran is a state sponsor of terrorism, funding Hezbollah, just as a handful of Qatari billionaires enjoy their sport funding Hamas.
As I say, Steve, you need to concentrate your gaze nearer to home. The death and destruction caused by our own government along with other co-conspirators is unparalleled and your above links don't even challenge that. Who have China actually invaded? or Iran? You allow yourself to be sucked in by propaganda fed to you by the people who are guilty of the most horrendous crimes against humanity, whose actual crimes you ignore whilst concentrating on the hypothetical fantasies of war criminals.
-
Ukrainian drone wounds Russian invader. The pain proves to be to much for him.
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/189qw6s/ukrainian_drone_wounds_russian_invader_the_pain/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/189qw6s/ukrainian_drone_wounds_russian_invader_the_pain/)
-
300,000 casualties?
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-ukraine-news-putin-health-counter-offensive-b2463751.html
-
300,000 casualties?
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-ukraine-news-putin-health-counter-offensive-b2463751.html
Attrition and supressing all descent is the only thing preventing Putins humiliation. Forcing young Russians into the meat grinder.
With the election next year, he has nothing to worry about. Anyone capable of gaining widespread support against him is either dead or in prison.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEFARtihpY4
-
An analysis of the current war situation. https://youtu.be/kYHeR93JzLE
-
An analysis of the current war situation. https://youtu.be/kYHeR93JzLE
What do you think the end game looks like, Steve?
It is clear to any impartial observer that Ukraine/NATO have no chance of achieving any of their declared aims(the retaking of territory). It is also clear that Ukraine/NATO are out of equipment, men and ideas and conversely that Russia have a battle hardened and rotated army much stronger than at the start of hostilities. The West simply cannot produce the weaponry to fight Russia as even Bell admits although he tries to spin it. It isn't really analysis, Steve. Bell is way too biased and he is spouting NATO copium. Russia has humiliated NATO and the rest of the world can see.
At one point Bell tells us that although Russia may have won tactically, they have lost strategically. He bases this conclusion on the fact that the ICC have an arrest warrant out for Putin and the rest of the world can see that he can't travel. If that is the extent of your claims of success, it is as good as an admission of defeat. Pathetic.
The NATO plan of over-extending Russia and giving them another "Afghanistan" has backfired spectacularly. It is the US and their not so merry band of thieves who are being drawn into multiple conflicts and being bled white. All the money and arms poured into Ukraine all for nothing. Ukraine and their sponsors will end up with less than if they had stuck to the Minsk Accords.
All of this was entirely predictable and predicted from the beginning by anyone with any knowledge. Too many in the West, especially in media and government, ended up believing their own propaganda. Russia was weak economically and militarily, we were told, and Putin would be over thrown by Navalny or some such as soon as the "sanctions from hell" destroyed the "weak Russian economy". The Russian military was weak and would be crushed by the NATO armed, trained and funded Ukrainian Army plus assorted mercs. How's all that going?
If anything at all is left of Ukraine as a state, it will be a demilitarised rump state. It is like watching a suicide by cop incident. Ukraine has committed suicide by Russia, at the behest of the interests of those that NATO protects(bankers and corporate financial interests). NATO have weakened themselves, not Russia. Ukraine has committed suicide by Russia.
Ask yourself, Steve, outside of the Western media bubble, how do you think the ROTW sees things? African countries are increasingly moving away from the Western imperialists and turning to Russia and China. Do you think the Africans see a "weakened Russia" and "strong NATO"? How about South America and the Middle Eastern states? Objectively it is plain to see that power is shifting from the West and that NATO, the enforcers of the old world order, are no longer the pre-eminent military power in the world.
Realistically, the Ukrainian Army was the strongest army that NATO could muster and Russia have destroyed it several times over. Ukraine's casualty figures are horrendous, as you would expect from an army so hopelessly outgunned on every level and attempting to take territory from a well dug in enemy. NATO simply can't produce an army to defeat Russia in Ukraine. This has always been obvious to those not drunk on Western propaganda.
-
Russians filled a 60 year old tank with explosives and tried to remote control it into Ukrainian positions :))
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/18nl8yr/russians_packed_an_mtlb_with_explosives_and_sent/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/18nl8yr/russians_packed_an_mtlb_with_explosives_and_sent/)
-
What do you think the end game looks like, Steve?
It is clear to any impartial observer that Ukraine/NATO have no chance of achieving any of their declared aims(the retaking of territory). It is also clear that Ukraine/NATO are out of equipment, men and ideas and conversely that Russia have a battle hardened and rotated army much stronger than at the start of hostilities. The West simply cannot produce the weaponry to fight Russia as even Bell admits although he tries to spin it. It isn't really analysis, Steve. Bell is way too biased and he is spouting NATO copium. Russia has humiliated NATO and the rest of the world can see.
At one point Bell tells us that although Russia may have won tactically, they have lost strategically. He bases this conclusion on the fact that the ICC have an arrest warrant out for Putin and the rest of the world can see that he can't travel. If that is the extent of your claims of success, it is as good as an admission of defeat. Pathetic.
The NATO plan of over-extending Russia and giving them another "Afghanistan" has backfired spectacularly. It is the US and their not so merry band of thieves who are being drawn into multiple conflicts and being bled white. All the money and arms poured into Ukraine all for nothing. Ukraine and their sponsors will end up with less than if they had stuck to the Minsk Accords.
All of this was entirely predictable and predicted from the beginning by anyone with any knowledge. Too many in the West, especially in media and government, ended up believing their own propaganda. Russia was weak economically and militarily, we were told, and Putin would be over thrown by Navalny or some such as soon as the "sanctions from hell" destroyed the "weak Russian economy". The Russian military was weak and would be crushed by the NATO armed, trained and funded Ukrainian Army plus assorted mercs. How's all that going?
If anything at all is left of Ukraine as a state, it will be a demilitarised rump state. It is like watching a suicide by cop incident. Ukraine has committed suicide by Russia, at the behest of the interests of those that NATO protects(bankers and corporate financial interests). NATO have weakened themselves, not Russia. Ukraine has committed suicide by Russia.
Ask yourself, Steve, outside of the Western media bubble, how do you think the ROTW sees things? African countries are increasingly moving away from the Western imperialists and turning to Russia and China. Do you think the Africans see a "weakened Russia" and "strong NATO"? How about South America and the Middle Eastern states? Objectively it is plain to see that power is shifting from the West and that NATO, the enforcers of the old world order, are no longer the pre-eminent military power in the world.
Realistically, the Ukrainian Army was the strongest army that NATO could muster and Russia have destroyed it several times over. Ukraine's casualty figures are horrendous, as you would expect from an army so hopelessly outgunned on every level and attempting to take territory from a well dug in enemy. NATO simply can't produce an army to defeat Russia in Ukraine. This has always been obvious to those not drunk on Western propaganda.
The endgame will be the annexation of Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia provinces. But isn't it a Pyrrhic victory? https://www.reuters.com/world/us-intelligence-assesses-ukraine-war-has-cost-russia-315000-casualties-source-2023-12-12/
-
Another rigged election awaits in 2024: https://youtu.be/w6Q8xk0oBCw
-
The forthcoming Presidential elections are a complete farce. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/anti-war-candidate-barred-from-running-against-putin-lodges-appeal/ar-AA1m3jyj?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=105fc555a66f4f0c93d517bf3a4803dd&ei=8
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/putin-critic-alexei-navalny-found-in-most-isolated-place-on-earth-after-weeks-missing/ar-AA1m0LXf?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=ba17a79f0302411cbbf8bfdba94ece5f&ei=22
-
Day 673 of the "10 day special military operation". Another black see fleet ship destroyed.
https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-ukraine-war-naval-losses-photos/32674787.html (https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-ukraine-war-naval-losses-photos/32674787.html)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_landing_ship_Novocherkassk (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_landing_ship_Novocherkassk)
-
30 killed by Russian strikes. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-67843312
-
30 killed by Russian strikes. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-67843312
That is a tragedy for all involved. However, where is your concern for the innocent people murdered in their thousands by the Israeli criminals you support?
-
The endgame will be the annexation of Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia provinces. But isn't it a Pyrrhic victory? https://www.reuters.com/world/us-intelligence-assesses-ukraine-war-has-cost-russia-315000-casualties-source-2023-12-12/
"US intelligence assesses" ::) :-[
There will be nothing Pyrrhic about the defeat facing Ukraine and by extension, their guarantors and sponsors- NATO. Tensions within NATO are public and it is anything but a unified alliance. The ability of NATO to throw its weight around on behalf of Wall St is also severely diminished. Those countries in the cross-hairs of NATO are turning to Russia and China for development and defence. I'm not sure that you really understand the significance of the events you are currently living through.
The outcome of the conflict in Ukraine will not be counted in "US intelligence assessments" of dead Russians. It will be assessed by NATO ability/inability to enforce the "Rules Based Order" that they oft refer to. That ability has gone. Russia has severely disarmed NATO and destroyed the mythology of NATO superiority.
US intelligence assessments are of no relevance to anything other than making us aware of the story they are using to "declare victory". I also think that you are wrong about the final shape of Ukraine. I do not believe that Russia will allow Black Sea access to a hostile entity that threatens Crimea. Odessa, by hook or by crook, will become Russian or an independent neutral state. Ukraine/NATO will not be allowed to keep Odessa. There will be other oblasts that Ukraine will lose but Odessa, in my view, is certain. Ukraine should have abided by Minsk and not believed NATO propaganda about Russian weakness and NATO potency.
Russia's victory is the opposite of Pyrrhic, Steve.
-
The forthcoming Presidential elections are a complete farce. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/anti-war-candidate-barred-from-running-against-putin-lodges-appeal/ar-AA1m3jyj?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=105fc555a66f4f0c93d517bf3a4803dd&ei=8
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/putin-critic-alexei-navalny-found-in-most-isolated-place-on-earth-after-weeks-missing/ar-AA1m0LXf?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=ba17a79f0302411cbbf8bfdba94ece5f&ei=22
Both Navalny and Duntsova are so irrelevant, it is a joke that you take this nonsense seriously. The equivalent would be Tass or RT entertaining their readers with tales of farcical UK elections from Tommy Robinson and Nick Griffin and passing it off as serious political commentary. This is not serious reporting on Russian politics, Steve. Duntsova is less than irrelevant, as the story admits, and Navalny is irrelevant and a fraudster and criminal. At least use credible sources.
-
That is a tragedy for all involved. However, where is your concern for the innocent people murdered in their thousands by the Israeli criminals you support?
Had Ukraine unilaterally advanced into Russian territory and killed the equivalent of Hamas' murders in Israel on October 7 (roughly 15,000 citizens or 1000 murders per 9 million population) you would have had a point. The fact that Putin and Lavrov attacked a sovereign state, whose borders they signed to protect in the Budapest Memorandum of 1994, makes a mockery out of your question, as does their call for a ceasefire in Gaza yet refusing one for the country they invaded.
As for some member's avatar involving profanity towards a state which attacked nobody and to which on a previous occasion I made an objection in private, says more about the moderators of this site than it does about the individual member in question, who has been given more leeway due to his mental state than in my opinion is warranted.
-
"US intelligence assesses" ::) :-[
There will be nothing Pyrrhic about the defeat facing Ukraine and by extension, their guarantors and sponsors- NATO. Tensions within NATO are public and it is anything but a unified alliance. The ability of NATO to throw its weight around on behalf of Wall St is also severely diminished. Those countries in the cross-hairs of NATO are turning to Russia and China for development and defence. I'm not sure that you really understand the significance of the events you are currently living through.
The outcome of the conflict in Ukraine will not be counted in "US intelligence assessments" of dead Russians. It will be assessed by NATO ability/inability to enforce the "Rules Based Order" that they oft refer to. That ability has gone. Russia has severely disarmed NATO and destroyed the mythology of NATO superiority.
US intelligence assessments are of no relevance to anything other than making us aware of the story they are using to "declare victory". I also think that you are wrong about the final shape of Ukraine. I do not believe that Russia will allow Black Sea access to a hostile entity that threatens Crimea. Odessa, by hook or by crook, will become Russian or an independent neutral state. Ukraine/NATO will not be allowed to keep Odessa. There will be other oblasts that Ukraine will lose but Odessa, in my view, is certain. Ukraine should have abided by Minsk and not believed NATO propaganda about Russian weakness and NATO potency.
Russia's victory is the opposite of Pyrrhic, Steve.
If it was your son who had been killed you might have an alternative point of view. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/18/us/politics/ukraine-russia-war-casualties.html
-
Both Navalny and Duntsova are so irrelevant, it is a joke that you take this nonsense seriously. The equivalent would be Tass or RT entertaining their readers with tales of farcical UK elections from Tommy Robinson and Nick Griffin and passing it off as serious political commentary. This is not serious reporting on Russian politics, Steve. Duntsova is less than irrelevant, as the story admits, and Navalny is irrelevant and a fraudster and criminal. At least use credible sources.
So why not let them stand? It makes me think the Russian propaganda machine is so fragile that it has to bar any serious contender lest momentum be accrued and Putin heaven forbid loses to them.
-
I'll say one thing about the former Soviet Union, tyrannical and despotic as it was: they always kept the legal agreements they signed.
-
So why not let them stand? It makes me think the Russian propaganda machine is so fragile that it has to bar any serious contender lest momentum be accrued and Putin heaven forbid loses to them.
Why do you think that they are not allowed to stand? Do you think they are serious people? Communists are the largest opposition bloc and "allowed" to stand. Why aren't they banned? People like Navalny and Duntsova are western media promoted irrelevances. They get barred on purpose by failing to comply with the rules for candidacy. This is then spun to the gullible as "tyrannical Putin banning opposition parties". It is nonsense and obvious agitprop rather than serious analysis or commentary. I am not surprised that you gulp down such obvious propaganda.
Does it never occur to you, Steve, that Putin has high approval in Russia? He has no need to ban serious opposition. If he did, Duntsova and Navalny wouldn't be banned, they would be allowed to run to give the facade of choice. They are fringe nutcases and not taken seriously by anyone but other fringe nutcases.
-
As for some member's avatar involving profanity towards a state which attacked nobody and to which on a previous occasion I made an objection in private, says more about the moderators of this site than it does about the individual member in question, who has been given more leeway due to his mental state than in my opinion is warranted.
Once again you have been unable to resist attacking the moderation team here and you do not limit yourself to criticism of a decision made, but have to make it personal. The avatar to which you refer is not one I would choose and we did consider whether action was necessary in the light of objections, but the difficulty is that the avatar was in direct response to another here and if we insisted on removal of one we would feel it necessary to insist upon the other being removed. We do not want to censor members more than absolutely necessary. It is at times difficult to know where to draw the line but we do our best.
I also think you you refrain from making personal comments about another member, as you have done in your post. It is inappropriate.
-
Once again you have been unable to resist attacking the moderation team here and you do not limit yourself to criticism of a decision made, but have to make it personal. The avatar to which you refer is not one I would choose and we did consider whether action was necessary in the light of objections, but the difficulty is that the avatar was in direct response to another here and if we insisted on removal of one we would feel it necessary to insist upon the other being removed. We do not want to censor members more than absolutely necessary. It is at times difficult to know where to draw the line but we do our best.
I also think you you refrain from making personal comments about another member, as you have done in your post. It is inappropriate.
That avatar does put the forum in a bad light. There are far more appropriate ways of getting your views across.
-
Why do you think that they are not allowed to stand? Do you think they are serious people? Communists are the largest opposition bloc and "allowed" to stand. Why aren't they banned?
Because they are controlled and systemic opposition. They are given sanction purely because they don't pose a threat to the status quo. Much like the the North Korean KSDP.
https://www.reddit.com/r/communism101/comments/d28ay6/russias_communist_party_real_or_controlled/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3 (https://www.reddit.com/r/communism101/comments/d28ay6/russias_communist_party_real_or_controlled/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
-
Does it never occur to you, Steve, that Putin has high approval in Russia?
Wow. I guess Ceausescu's 98% percent of the vote actually reflected his peoples private sentiments just five years prior to revolting against him en masse.
I guess Saddam Hussein's 99% from a 100% turnout in 1995 actually reflected his peoples private sentiments also. Despite mass murdering tens of thousands of Shia's and Kurds just four years prior for insubordination ::)
You are either naive in the extreme or taking us for complete idiots.
-
That avatar does put the forum in a bad light. There are far more appropriate ways of getting your views across.
I agree there are, but that does not mean censorship is the answer. I am not keen on your strapline but I have not stopped you using it. The avatar complained about was in response to your strapline and I understand the sentiment behind it, even though I would not myself use something like that.
-
Whose avatars are being referred to here?
-
Wow. I guess Ceausescu's 98% percent of the vote actually reflected his peoples private sentiments just five years prior to revolting against him en masse.
I guess Saddam Hussein's 99% from a 100% turnout in 1995 actually reflected his peoples private sentiments also. Despite mass murdering tens of thousands of Shia's and Kurds just four years prior for insubordination ::)
You are either naive in the extreme or taking us for complete idiots.
Putin's current government style is straight out of Napoleon Bonapartes play book - an iron fist in a velvet glove.
Try challenging him and his cronies directly or disputing your nullified election candidacy. You will either find yourself facing a pile of bogus criminal charges suddenly appearing in the district attorneys office. Sick in hospital with doctors too afraid to produce an honest toxicology report. Falling out a window in an "accident" or falling from 15,000ft in an aircraft "malfunction". Case closed.
-
Whose avatars are being referred to here?
nugnug and David1819
-
nugnug and David1819
Ah, I see. Thanks.
-
Wow. I guess Ceausescu's 98% percent of the vote actually reflected his peoples private sentiments just five years prior to revolting against him en masse.
I guess Saddam Hussein's 99% from a 100% turnout in 1995 actually reflected his peoples private sentiments also. Despite mass murdering tens of thousands of Shia's and Kurds just four years prior for insubordination ::)
You are either naive in the extreme or taking us for complete idiots.
David, the popularity of Putin is not disputed even by western media. Do you think that your concern with domestic politics should be closer to home? You know nothing but agitprop about Russia. I make no comment on their electoral system but it is simply objectively true that Putin enjoys high poll ratings. What has Ceausescu got to do with anything? And Saddam. You just prove you have nothing of any value to add.
That you consider the Communist Party as "controlled opposition" is based on nothing other than your ignorance. You regard the likes of Navalny and Nemtsov as credible opposition leaders/voices when they are nothing of the sort.
I have no opinion and nor do I care about the intricacies of the Russian electoral system. I am more concerned with the shortcomings of our own system because that affects me. I'm not gullible enough to get worked up by fake anger of western propagandists, unlike you. The fact that you ever refer to Navalny as some credible politician outs you as ill informed. Gullible, ill informed and a sucker for whatever propaganda is being served up to you.
-
So why not let them stand? It makes me think the Russian propaganda machine is so fragile that it has to bar any serious contender lest momentum be accrued and Putin heaven forbid loses to them.
They could stand if they were serious people who filled out paperwork correctly. Duntsova's application to stand because of mistakes in the paperwork is the work of people who aren't seriously trying to stand. There is more value for propagandists in the story of Putin stopping "rivals" from standing hence the deliberate sabotaging of her own application. It is laughable. See below;
"Duntsova said that she planned to appeal the decision in court, although she did not dismiss claims that there had been errors in the filed paperwork, saying the application had been put together on short notice and she had difficulty finding a lawyer to assist her in certifying the paperwork"
"She also said that she intended to ask the Yabloko party to nominate her as a candidate.
Later that day, Yabloko party leader Grigory Yavlinsky said in an interview that he was unsure if the party would consider Duntsova's nomination"
[/i]
She is allowed to stand, Steve. She just needs to act in a professional manner expected of a Presidential candidate. Her own admitted failure to even provide the paperwork correctly tells all you need to know. As I say, any presidential run would show the deep unpopularity of idiots such as Navalny, Nemtsov and now Duntsova. It is better for western propaganda purposes to manufacture a story whereby the tyrannical Putin has prevented candidates from running. Only the hard of thinking fail to see through such childish nonsense.
-
They could stand if they were serious people who filled out paperwork correctly. Duntsova's application to stand because of mistakes in the paperwork is the work of people who aren't seriously trying to stand. There is more value for propagandists in the story of Putin stopping "rivals" from standing hence the deliberate sabotaging of her own application. It is laughable. See below;
"Duntsova said that she planned to appeal the decision in court, although she did not dismiss claims that there had been errors in the filed paperwork, saying the application had been put together on short notice and she had difficulty finding a lawyer to assist her in certifying the paperwork"
"She also said that she intended to ask the Yabloko party to nominate her as a candidate.
Later that day, Yabloko party leader Grigory Yavlinsky said in an interview that he was unsure if the party would consider Duntsova's nomination"
[/i]
She is allowed to stand, Steve. She just needs to act in a professional manner expected of a Presidential candidate. Her own admitted failure to even provide the paperwork correctly tells all you need to know. As I say, any presidential run would show the deep unpopularity of idiots such as Navalny, Nemtsov and now Duntsova. It is better for western propaganda purposes to manufacture a story whereby the tyrannical Putin has prevented candidates from running. Only the hard of thinking fail to see through such childish nonsense.
Please don't insult members' intelligence. Boris Nemtsov was a Professor of Physics at Moscow University. Some idiot. https://youtu.be/vM04zNbsaJg
They tried to kill Navalny. Now he's been arrested on trumped up charges. https://youtu.be/mQUGx0JBE9E
I don't know much about Yekaterina Duntsova. Maybe she was a lightweight. Or maybe Putin didn't want a repeat of the Belarussian election in 2020, which many claim Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya won. https://youtu.be/v5lrRikWWzI
-
Please don't insult members' intelligence. Boris Nemtsov was a Professor of Physics at Moscow University. Some idiot. https://youtu.be/vM04zNbsaJg
They tried to kill Navalny. Now he's been arrested on trumped up charges. https://youtu.be/mQUGx0JBE9E
I don't know much about Yekaterina Duntsova. Maybe she was a lightweight. Or maybe Putin didn't want a repeat of the Belarussian election in 2020, which many claim Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya won. https://youtu.be/v5lrRikWWzI
Nemtsov wasn't barred from running in the Presidential election. He withdrew in 2008 because he had no support. He was a fringe candidate and never had any popular support.
Navalny is a fraudster, embezzler and obvious western agent. The notion that Putin tried to have him killed is believed by you despite only propaganda supporting this "theory". Likewise his "candidacy" was promoted despite knowing that it would be rejected because of his fraud conviction from 6/7 years previously. As with Duntsova, there is more propaganda value in Navalny "being barred" from running. He would be unlikely to poll over 2% in an election, which is embarrassing and cannot be spun.
Duntsova also "ran a campaign" that was obviously deliberately sabotaged by her own hand. Again her poll numbers would be low, even lower than Navalny. Again more propaganda value lies in "being barred" than actually running.
All of the above were/are also obvious paid agents of western agencies. They have no following or popularity in Russia and are unknowns. Their prominence in western media is in stark contrast to their anonymity in Russian politics. Which should tell you all you need to know.
It isn't that you only "don't know much about Duntsova". You know only what you have been instructed to know by western media about all of them. Which is to say, you don't much about any of them. You are simply indoctrinated and trained to say as your training tells you. You should ask more questions of the "articles" you read. All of the above were/are political lightweights and nonentities. They are relevant only in western media.
-
Nemtsov wasn't barred from running in the Presidential election. He withdrew in 2008 because he had no support. He was a fringe candidate and never had any popular support.
Navalny is a fraudster, embezzler and obvious western agent. The notion that Putin tried to have him killed is believed by you despite only propaganda supporting this "theory". Likewise his "candidacy" was promoted despite knowing that it would be rejected because of his fraud conviction from 6/7 years previously. As with Duntsova, there is more propaganda value in Navalny "being barred" from running. He would be unlikely to poll over 2% in an election, which is embarrassing and cannot be spun.
Duntsova also "ran a campaign" that was obviously deliberately sabotaged by her own hand. Again her poll numbers would be low, even lower than Navalny. Again more propaganda value lies in "being barred" than actually running.
All of the above were/are also obvious paid agents of western agencies. They have no following or popularity in Russia and are unknowns. Their prominence in western media is in stark contrast to their anonymity in Russian politics. Which should tell you all you need to know.
It isn't that you only "don't know much about Duntsova". You know only what you have been instructed to know by western media about all of them. Which is to say, you don't much about any of them. You are simply indoctrinated and trained to say as your training tells you. You should ask more questions of the "articles" you read. All of the above were/are political lightweights and nonentities. They are relevant only in western media.
I'm not sure you quite understand the nature of a totalitarian state, which Russia sadly has become. Why did she ask a multitude of lawyers to approve the application, who all refused? What do you think would happen to any of the lawyers who processed her application? https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/dec/23/anti-war-candidate-barred-russia-presidential-election-yekaterina-duntsova
-
I'm not sure you quite understand the nature of a totalitarian state, which Russia sadly has become. Why did she ask a multitude of lawyers to approve the application, who all refused? What do you think would happen to any of the lawyers who processed her application? https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/dec/23/anti-war-candidate-barred-russia-presidential-election-yekaterina-duntsova
I understand perfectly well the nature of totalitarianism but, unlike you, I also understand perfectly well the nature of propaganda and indoctrination. Nothing would have happened to any lawyers who processed her application except in the fevered imagination of the indoctrinated. From the Guardian article which spins the story as much as they can but facts are stubborn things;
"Duntsova, 40, told reporters her team had assembled the application in a hurry and had trouble finding a lawyer to certify the bid, after dozens of others declined.
She said she had approached the veteran liberal politician Grigory Yavlinsky about the possibility of submitting a new application to stand as a representative of his Yabloko party.
“I hope there will be some kind of reaction … We have similar values in principle,” Duntsova said.
But Yavlinsky said in an interview on YouTube that Yabloko would not back her “because we don’t know her”.
Duntsova had presented papers to the electoral commission less than 72 hours earlier in support of her bid. It was largely ignored by pro-Kremlin state media, which also failed to report on her disqualification."
Instead of repeating paranoid fantasies about Putin barring Duntsova because...tyrant bla bla, you should ask a few more questions of such articles rather than simply parroting their demonstrably flawed conclusions.
She is not a serious person or candidate for president. The application was done in a hurry :-[ She has acknowledged that it contained errors :-[ The liberal politician who widely, "shares her views", according to Duntsova refused to back her in standing for the party that he is a member of because, "he doesn't know her" :-[
But you choose to believe that the unknown whose attempts at running for president are serious, despite those efforts so far having included submitting an error strewn application(by her own admission) followed by unsolicited offers to stand for a party who "don't know her".
And all of this reported in western media as Putin silencing his rivals. She never intended to run, Steve. Are you really this naive that you cannot see she is a useful idiot for western intel and media? Her prominence in western media is ridiculously disproportionate for such a fringe unknown idiot. This western media reporting alone tells you who and what she is.
-
Worth repeating at every Russian election.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNqN0yvkq-M (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNqN0yvkq-M)
-
https://youtu.be/schn6z26hkY
-
Maybe there should be a few more individuals in the dock at The Hague. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/lavrov-s-controversial-statement-offensive-in-ukraine-cleansed-russian-society/ar-AA1nbZnv?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=ca19ad2d60f44c959aa1c225c6948f00&ei=12
-
"The Genocide Convention governs neither the use of force between States nor the recognition of States, so the subject of Ukraine's claim and request falls outside the Convention.."
"The military operation (Steve says: Russia means the invasion of Ukrainian sovereign territory and the tearing up of the 1994 Budapest Memorandum) was not legally based on the Genocide Convention but on Article 51 of the UN Charter-on exercising the right of self-defence in the event of armed attack-and customary international law."
Discuss.
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/ATAG/2022/729350/EPRS_ATA(2022)729350_EN.pdf
-
"The Genocide Convention governs neither the use of force between States nor the recognition of States, so the subject of Ukraine's claim and request falls outside the Convention.."
"The military operation (Steve says: Russia means the invasion of Ukrainian sovereign territory and the tearing up of the 1994 Budapest Memorandum) was not legally based on the Genocide Convention but on Article 51 of the UN Charter-on exercising the right of self-defence in the event of armed attack-and customary international law."
Discuss.
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/ATAG/2022/729350/EPRS_ATA(2022)729350_EN.pdf
Everything that you have asked to discuss already has been. A thread specifically started to correct your constant misinterpretation and infantile understanding of the Budapest Memorandum below;
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,11882.0.html
And a thread started on the Minsk Accords where I have already laid out Russia's case based on Article 51 of the UN charter and the doctine of Responsibility to Protect(R2P). Another thread started specifically to correct your non understanding of the issues surrounding the legal arguments and justifications. You had nothing of note to add in either thread and obviously nothing went in. Thread on Minsk and Article 51 below;
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,11616.0.html
If you have anything to add to the discussions, then do so.
-
Everything that you have asked to discuss already has been. A thread specifically started to correct your constant misinterpretation and infantile understanding of the Budapest Memorandum below;
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,11882.0.html
And a thread started on the Minsk Accords where I have already laid out Russia's case based on Article 51 of the UN charter and the doctine of Responsibility to Protect(R2P). Another thread started specifically to correct your non understanding of the issues surrounding the legal arguments and justifications. You had nothing of note to add in either thread and obviously nothing went in. Thread on Minsk and Article 51 below;
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,11616.0.html
If you have anything to add to the discussions, then do so.
I'll let members judge for themselves whether they believe Russia was acting in self-defence when it crossed the Ukrainian border in February 2022.
-
A Russian defense plant engineer committed suicide after a missile he developed killed his grandmother in Ukraine.
https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/1acznl7/a_russian_defense_plant_engineer_committed/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/1acznl7/a_russian_defense_plant_engineer_committed/)
-
Putin's video diary
https://youtu.be/ZB3ND_54cP8?si=zeJKtIJ2AlTNeUOG (https://youtu.be/ZB3ND_54cP8?si=zeJKtIJ2AlTNeUOG)
-
This case brings shame on Russia: https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/navalny-s-call-to-outsmart-the-system-in-russian-presidential-election/ar-BB1hEkAz?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=71aa0dd5a58c40b2aa984d1dda34753e&ei=13
A possible solution: https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/us-state-department-if-russia-wants-demilitarized-zone-in-ukraine-it-should-remove-its-own-troops/ar-BB1hFDYp?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=cc251d35d5d34d2c9dbc905f2f57cd69&ei=15
-
Is this a true story? https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/occupants-prepare-mass-resettlement-of-russian-citizens-in-zaporizhzhia-region/ar-BB1hJ3i4?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=276a290cc69b4c199fd46c882d0d238d&ei=10
-
Russia "a state sponsor of terrorism.." https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/russia-announces-intention-to-leave-osce-parliamentary-assembly/ar-BB1ie1tU?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=fa32e2039b0248f29fa430a35c04c748&ei=8
Is nobody safe..https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/vladimir-putin-hikes-age-of-military-personnel-to-70-in-move-which-smacks-of-desperation/ar-BB1ie1y9?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=4a83f5b8540c4bd3ad4c7b3b712436c9&ei=17
-
This is a terrible tragedy; unbelievably sad. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news
-
This is a terrible tragedy; unbelievably sad. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news
What is particularly, "terribly tragic" and "unbelieving sad" about a two bit crook and obvious asset of western intelligence agencies dying. I can think of much more tragic and unbelievably sad events currently ongoing in the world much more deserving of your attention. There is real evidence that massive crimes against humanity killing hundreds of civilians daily daily are ongoing which you are happy to whitewash but you find the death of a crook, traitor and hustler like Navalny tragic. You're a sucker for western propaganda and concern yourself about exactly the things that you are instructed to concern yourself with.
-
This is a terrible tragedy; unbelievably sad. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news
https://news.yahoo.com/pro-russian-blogger-gonzalo-lira-170300542.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbJI_GP1IGo
But you didn't find it tragic nor sad when US citizen and journalist, Gonzalo Lira was killed by the Ukrainian authorities in prison. You were probably unaware of it because you hadn't been instructed to care about Gonzalo Lira. You act as an apologist for the disgraceful imprisonment of Julian Assange. You don't find Navalny's death tragic or sad really, you are simply following your training.
-
https://www.workers.org/2021/02/54546/
If you want to know what it is you were unwittingly supporting then read the above. Navalny didn't stand for any kind of values that you imagine. An extract below;
"Navalny is not a political unknown. For many years he has been in the limelight, in the media, on video and in the streets in fascist mobilizations that call for expelling all non-Russian peoples from Russia. Navalny was a driving force in the annual anti-Muslim, anti-Semitic, anti-immigrant “Russian March” in Moscow. Its central themes are “Take Back Russia,” “Russia for Russians” and “Stop Feeding the Caucasus” — the latter a demand to end federal subsidies to poorer, less-developed, largely Muslim regions of Russia.
The Russian March rallies were gatherings of Nazi elements, monarchists and religious Orthodox groups. On display were swastikas, confederate flags, religious insignia and calls for “white revenge.” These ultranationalist rallies were countered most years by left-wing demonstrations led by Russian Anti-Fascist Front, progressive street activists and young communists.
Navalny is the organizer of the “Movement Against Illegal Immigrants” and “Great Russia,” and he has called for the breakup of Russia. He has demanded the expulsion of all peoples from the Caucasus and Asia, whether they are citizens living in what is still part of the Russian Federation or are from surrounding Central Asian republics, which were severed after the Soviet Union collapsed. On video Navalny has whipped up sectarian violence by labeling people of the Caucasus “rotten teeth, to be extracted” and “cockroaches that must be exterminated.”[/b]
-
Here he is in his own words
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hT0tCSaWZ9Q
-
What is particularly, "terribly tragic" and "unbelieving sad" about a two bit crook and obvious asset of western intelligence agencies dying. I can think of much more tragic and unbelievably sad events currently ongoing in the world much more deserving of your attention. There is real evidence that massive crimes against humanity killing hundreds of civilians daily daily are ongoing which you are happy to whitewash but you find the death of a crook, traitor and hustler like Navalny tragic. You're a sucker for western propaganda and concern yourself about exactly the things that you are instructed to concern yourself with.
No scintilla of evidence he was a crook. It's terribly tragic and his death will reverberate around the world for decades to come. https://youtu.be/guS87gDs5vg
-
https://news.yahoo.com/pro-russian-blogger-gonzalo-lira-170300542.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbJI_GP1IGo
But you didn't find it tragic nor sad when US citizen and journalist, Gonzalo Lira was killed by the Ukrainian authorities in prison. You were probably unaware of it because you hadn't been instructed to care about Gonzalo Lira. You act as an apologist for the disgraceful imprisonment of Julian Assange. You don't find Navalny's death tragic or sad really, you are simply following your training.
I don't know the full circumstances surrounding the death of Gonzalo Lira and neither do you. In times of war a country does intern Lord Haw Haw-type figures. As for Navalny, his death follows a pattern, as you well know, and marks the beginning of the end of the Putin regime.
-
I don't know the full circumstances surrounding the death of Gonzalo Lira and neither do you. In times of war a country does intern Lord Haw Haw-type figures. As for Navalny, his death follows a pattern, as you well know, and marks the beginning of the end of the Putin regime.
You know the circumstances of Gonzalo Liras death much better than those of Navalny. You know nothing, literally, of the circumstances of Navalny's death but still comment with your ill informed drivel. You have been predicting Putin's demise for years and demonstrate only your total lack of any understanding of anything, as usual.
The Ukrainians are in total disarray as are the NATO alliance members behind this. General Zaluzhny out and Syrsky in-a disaster unfolding at Adveevka. Russia are slow grinding Ukraine and NATO into ignominious defeat. Ukrainian troops hate Syrksy and he is referred to as "the butcher" because of his disregard for Ukrainian soldiers lives at the expense of land. Zaluzhny, on the other hand is respected by the UAF(Ukraine Armed Forces). The whole shit show of bringing down Russia has failed spectacularly and inevitably into their own demise.
You need to learn to discern the difference between Western propaganda and factual reporting. You have been consistently wrong in your analysis throughout the entirety of this and other related threads. Putin has been dying/about to be overthrown for the last ten years. Russia about to collapse economically and militarily for the last ten years. Instead the west (EU and UK) officially in recession whilst Russia grows to the biggest economy in Europe. Militarily Russia are gaining strength whilst NATO/Ukraine are flailing and failing in a war of attrition that they have no hope of winning.
NATO are defeated in Ukraine, this was always inevitable. Anyone who understands anything about geopolitics and military matters always knew this. The rest of the world also see NATO's defeat. It was a huge strategic error by NATO to provoke Russia. The end of this war will see NATO, not Russia, defanged forever.
-
I don't know the full circumstances surrounding the death of Gonzalo Lira and neither do you. In times of war a country does intern Lord Haw Haw-type figures. As for Navalny, his death follows a pattern, as you well know, and marks the beginning of the end of the Putin regime.
Tell us more of the "pattern" that Navalny's death follows. Instead of repeating your meaningless fact free mantra-tell the facts about this pattern. When you have done this, perhaps you will also explain how and why Navalny's death marks the beginning of the end of Putin.
You are like a trained dog, responding on command to your training and your outrage is exactly per your training. You will not be able to explain any pattern nor how Putin's rule is at its end.
-
You know the circumstances of Gonzalo Liras death much better than those of Navalny. You know nothing, literally, of the circumstances of Navalny's death but still comment with your ill informed drivel. You have been predicting Putin's demise for years and demonstrate only your total lack of any understanding of anything, as usual.
The Ukrainians are in total disarray as are the NATO alliance members behind this. General Zaluzhny out and Syrsky in-a disaster unfolding at Adveevka. Russia are slow grinding Ukraine and NATO into ignominious defeat. Ukrainian troops hate Syrksy and he is referred to as "the butcher" because of his disregard for Ukrainian soldiers lives at the expense of land. Zaluzhny, on the other hand is respected by the UAF(Ukraine Armed Forces). The whole shit show of bringing down Russia has failed spectacularly and inevitably into their own demise.
You need to learn to discern the difference between Western propaganda and factual reporting. You have been consistently wrong in your analysis throughout the entirety of this and other related threads. Putin has been dying/about to be overthrown for the last ten years. Russia about to collapse economically and militarily for the last ten years. Instead the west (EU and UK) officially in recession whilst Russia grows to the biggest economy in Europe. Militarily Russia are gaining strength whilst NATO/Ukraine are flailing and failing in a war of attrition that they have no hope of winning.
NATO are defeated in Ukraine, this was always inevitable. Anyone who understands anything about geopolitics and military matters always knew this. The rest of the world also see NATO's defeat. It was a huge strategic error by NATO to provoke Russia. The end of this war will see NATO, not Russia, defanged forever.
I have never stated that Ukraine is going to win the war. I have always argued for a negotiated solution, but that is up to the democratically-elected leader of Ukraine to decide, not myself.
Russia is experiencing a boom due to oil exports and increased military spending, but it may find it's storing up problems for the future. https://www.omfif.org/2024/02/russian-economic-resilience-is-not-what-it-seems/
-
Tell us more of the "pattern" that Navalny's death follows. Instead of repeating your meaningless fact free mantra-tell the facts about this pattern. When you have done this, perhaps you will also explain how and why Navalny's death marks the beginning of the end of Putin.
You are like a trained dog, responding on command to your training and your outrage is exactly per your training. You will not be able to explain any pattern nor how Putin's rule is at its end.
The murders of Alexander Litvinenko, Boris Nemtsov, the many Russian oligarchs living in exile, the downing of the plane carrying Yevgeny Prigozhin, the attempted murders of the Skripals. https://youtu.be/vM04zNbsaJg
I don't want ordinary Russians to suffer. It's incredibly difficult to remove a dictator once entrenched. Look at Adolf Hitler, who led a cultured nation to disaster for twelve years. I'm afraid Putin is descending into madness, dragging his entourage down with him.
You simply don't understand how a totalitarian state works. It's you who is the rookie commentator.
-
The murders of Alexander Litvinenko, Boris Nemtsov, the many Russian oligarchs living in exile, the downing of the plane carrying Yevgeny Prigozhin, the attempted murders of the Skripals. https://youtu.be/vM04zNbsaJg
I don't want ordinary Russians to suffer. It's incredibly difficult to remove a dictator once entrenched. Look at Adolf Hitler, who led a cultured nation to disaster for twelve years. I'm afraid Putin is descending into madness, dragging his entourage down with him.
You simply don't understand how a totalitarian state works. It's you who is the rookie commentator.
The only "pattern" that Navalny's death follows is that Putin is getting blamed for any death of any Russian despite the lack of any evidence. Your view of Russia and Putin is infantile nonsense and bears no relation to reality. Your lack of knowledge of Lira's death in Ukrainian custody is due to the fact that it wasn't reported in the biased western media that you limit yourself to. It doesn't really suit the narrative so is ignored completely. If you were at all intellectually curious and interested in finding the truth in complex propagandised issues then you would have easily and readily found many articles about US citizen and journalist Gonzalo Lira's death from deliberate medical neglect;
https://thegrayzone.com/2024/01/12/gonzalo-lira-dies-ukrainian-prison/
You know little because your research is limited. You seek confirmation bias rather than truth. Your poor history of analysis throughout the years of this thread where you have been consistently wrong and proven to be wrong in your "analysis" by time and later events should give you pause for thought, but it doesn't. According to you Russia should already be crushed economically and militarily. The total opposite is true but you still haven't woken up to the fact that you are swallowing lies and propaganda.
-
No scintilla of evidence he was a crook. It's terribly tragic and his death will reverberate around the world for decades to come. https://youtu.be/guS87gDs5vg
He was a convicted fraudster and embezzler. His death will not reverberate around the world. It will only register in the western world whose intelligence asset he was. To the majority of the world and Russia he was insignificant. The only thing reverberating around the world is the genocide in Palestine and western complicity in that genocide. Nobody but the genocidaires give a fuck about Navalny. As expected, you are with the genocidaires.
-
The only "pattern" that Navalny's death follows is that Putin is getting blamed for any death of any Russian despite the lack of any evidence. Your view of Russia and Putin is infantile nonsense and bears no relation to reality. Your lack of knowledge of Lira's death in Ukrainian custody is due to the fact that it wasn't reported in the biased western media that you limit yourself to. It doesn't really suit the narrative so is ignored completely. If you were at all intellectually curious and interested in finding the truth in complex propagandised issues then you would have easily and readily found many articles about US citizen and journalist Gonzalo Lira's death from deliberate medical neglect;
https://thegrayzone.com/2024/01/12/gonzalo-lira-dies-ukrainian-prison/
You know little because your research is limited. You seek confirmation bias rather than truth. Your poor history of analysis throughout the years of this thread where you have been consistently wrong and proven to be wrong in your "analysis" by time and later events should give you pause for thought, but it doesn't. According to you Russia should already be crushed economically and militarily. The total opposite is true but you still haven't woken up to the fact that you are swallowing lies and propaganda.
He was an overweight, chain-smoking misogynist, though I did not wish him dead. Members can make up their own minds here: https://youtu.be/4nyvrMYGEz4
-
He was a convicted fraudster and embezzler. His death will not reverberate around the world. It will only register in the western world whose intelligence asset he was. To the majority of the world and Russia he was insignificant. The only thing reverberating around the world is the genocide in Palestine and western complicity in that genocide. Nobody but the genocidaires give a fuck about Navalny. As expected, you are with the genocidaires.
By whose rules: Putin's?
Navalny in his own words: https://youtu.be/O6zdi6Q6p7o
-
I don't know the full circumstances surrounding the death of Gonzalo Lira and neither do you. In times of war a country does intern Lord Haw Haw-type figures. As for Navalny, his death follows a pattern, as you well know, and marks the beginning of the end of the Putin regime.
Gonzalo Lira was not a "Lord Haw Haw-type figure". For a start he was not a Ukrainian citizen so could not be accused of treason. He was courageous in expressing his opinion about Ukraine and exposing what was going on and as a result, as predicted, he was murdered by the fascism scum you support there. This is not going to end well for your chums and I predict Zelensky will meet an unpleasant end at the hands of those he has served in Ukraine. He is close to outliving his usefulness and they will dispose of him.
-
Gonzalo Lira was not a "Lord Haw Haw-type figure". For a start he was not a Ukrainian citizen so could not be accused of treason. He was courageous in expressing his opinion about Ukraine and exposing what was going on and as a result, as predicted, he was murdered by the fascism scum you support there. This is not going to end well for your chums and I predict Zelensky will meet an unpleasant end at the hands of those he has served in Ukraine. He is close to outliving his usefulness and they will dispose of him.
Lord Haw-Haw was an Irish American. No country in a state of war can tolerate propaganda disseminated in such a manner. Did you watch the video in #3177? I doubt it.
-
Lord Haw-Haw was an Irish American. No country in a state of war can tolerate propaganda disseminated in such a manner. Did you watch the video in #3177? I doubt it.
I know who Lord Haw-Haw was. Are you really suggesting that Gonzalo Lira deserved to be killed because he disseminated "propaganda" against the corrupt Ukrainian regime?
-
I know who Lord Haw-Haw was. Are you really suggesting that Gonzalo Lira deserved to be killed because he disseminated "propaganda" against the corrupt Ukrainian regime?
No, I'm suggesting that he died due to underlying health conditions and deficient treatment from Ukrainian hospitals, given that they are subject to Russian bombardment and a shortage of adequate medical supplies.
-
No, I'm suggesting that he died due to underlying health conditions and deficient treatment from Ukrainian hospitals, given that they are subject to Russian bombardment and a shortage of adequate medical supplies.
But Navalny was murdered? You are unbelievable.
-
But Navalny was murdered? You are unbelievable.
Of course he was murdered. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/georgian-president-navalny-s-death-announcement-no-coincidence/ar-BB1isTrj?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=50cfbf3e355f4bf690c08c943602e6fb&ei=9
-
Of course he was murdered. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/georgian-president-navalny-s-death-announcement-no-coincidence/ar-BB1isTrj?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=50cfbf3e355f4bf690c08c943602e6fb&ei=9
But Gonzalo Lira was not?
-
But Gonzalo Lira was not?
No, his double pneumonia was probably brought on by his chain-smoking. Navalny was beaten to death, hence the bruising and non-disclosure of his body.
-
From the Metro newspaper:
PUTIN PLANNED MURDER DOWN TO THE SECOND
Vladimir Putin planned the killing of rival Alexei Navalny in minute detail, say supporters-pointing to a series of sinister events.
The anti-corruption campaigner died at a bleak jail in the Arctic Circle two days after officers of the FSB intelligence service visited to dismantle CCTV and listening devices, it is said. Critics pointed to the speed of officials' announcement of his death on Friday-saying a prepared statement was put out within two minutes. Four minutes later, state-controlled social media claimed the cause of death was a blood clot. And just seven minutes after that Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov was giving details to the media.
"This rapid timing can only mean one thing," human rights group Gulagu.net said. "Everything was pre-planned and co-ordinated. Minute by minute. Second by second."
Yesterday the 47-year-old's body was finally located at a mortuary 30 miles from the remote Polar Wolf penal colony in Kharp, where he died-two days after his mother, Lyudmila Navalnaya, 69, arrived to be told it was not there.
First informed he died of a blood clot, she was later handed a death certificate blaming "sudden death syndrome".
News outlet Novaya Gazeta quoted a medic as saying the body showed bruising probably "from cardiac massage", adding: "So they did try to resuscitate him, and he probably died of cardiac arrest. But nobody is saying why he had a cardiac arrest." Four years ago the anti-corruption campaigner was poisoned with nerve agent Novichok, then given 30 years in jail on his return to Moscow.
Aide Kira Yarmysh insisted: "Alexei was murdered. The whole world knows the president of Russia personally gave this order." Dozens were arrested across Russia as they left flowers at shrines.
Foreign Secretary Lord Cameron has promised sanctions, and US President Joe Biden directly blamed Mr Putin.
-
Another death as predictable as Prigozhin's.
Navalny returned to Russia knowing death was likley. Hopefully it wont be in vain
-
Another death as predictable as Prigozhin's.
Navalny returned to Russia knowing death was likley. Hopefully it wont be in vain
I do not know why or how Navalny died and nor do you. If he was murdered that is obviously unacceptable and should be condemned, but we do not currently have the information. What is clear is that Navalny was corrupt, a traitor and fully deserving of proper legal action in Russia as well as a thoroughly nasty racist and fascist. He was certainly not a leader of the democratic opposition to Putin, the suggestion that he was such as promulgated by the MSM including the BBC being laughable.
-
I do not know why or how Navalny died and nor do you. If he was murdered that is obviously unacceptable and should be condemned, but we do not currently have the information. What is clear is that Navalny was corrupt, a traitor and fully deserving of proper legal action in Russia as well as a thoroughly nasty racist and fascist. He was certainly not a leader of the democratic opposition to Putin, the suggestion that he was as promulgated by the MSM including the BBC being laughable.
as promulgated by the MSM including the BBC is laughable.
He was not a Western liberal democrat by any means. He supported the annexation of Crimea and the invasion of Georgia.
It was his high profile campaigns against corruption and his consistent demands for free and fair elections in Russia that got him sympathy.
He was seen as a potential threat to status quo in the Kremlin. Hence he has been eliminated and made an example of.
-
I do not know why or how Navalny died and nor do you. If he was murdered that is obviously unacceptable and should be condemned, but we do not currently have the information. What is clear is that Navalny was corrupt, a traitor and fully deserving of proper legal action in Russia as well as a thoroughly nasty racist and fascist. He was certainly not a leader of the democratic opposition to Putin, the suggestion that he was such as promulgated by the MSM including the BBC being laughable.
Navalny, has served his last useful service to his western paymasters. Jailed and of no more use except as a martyr, he coincidentally became a martyr. The western media who share the same employers as Navalny were ready within minutes with their "Putin killed Navalny" headlines and stories complete with demands for more sanctions. Navalny's "wife" also by huge coincidence had been invited to the Munich Security conference where she spoke to the gathered "dignitaries"/stooges.
It also dominated western news preventing any reporting from Adveevka which was an unmitigated disaster for the Ukraine and their western sponsors.
Steve and David have got nothing right through the many years of this and other related threads and have learnt nothing. It has been noticeable, to me anyway NGB, that many more people are seeing through the obvious lies of Western governments and their PR arm in the media. People are not buying the obvious lies and the double standards are becoming too huge to ignore. David and Steve are becoming figures of mockery with their idiotic repeating of obvious lies. Believing western media, governments and intel agencies (all the same agency in reality) is the adult equivalent of the childish and unquestioning belief in Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy of a five year old.
They learnt nothing from the schooling that you just gave them. Same as always.
-
Gunmen sent by Moscow killed defector sheltering in Alicante, Spanish intelligence services say
https://english.elpais.com/international/2024-02-22/gunmen-sent-by-moscow-killed-defector-sheltering-in-alicante-spanish-intelligence-services-say.html# (https://english.elpais.com/international/2024-02-22/gunmen-sent-by-moscow-killed-defector-sheltering-in-alicante-spanish-intelligence-services-say.html#)
-
"Western leaders are experiencing two stunning events: defeat in Ukraine, genocide in Palestine. The first is humiliating, the other shameful. Yet, they feel no humiliation or shame. Their actions show vividly that those sentiments are alien to them – unable to penetrate the entrenched barriers of dogma, arrogance and deep-seated insecurities. The last are personal as well as political. Therein lies a puzzle. For, as a consequence, the West has set itself on a path of collective suicide. Moral suicide in Gaza; diplomatic suicide – the foundations laid in Europe, the Middle East and across Eurasia; economic suicide – the dollar-based global financial system jeopardized, Europe deindustrializing. It is not a pretty picture. Astoundingly, this self-destruction is occurring in the absence of any major trauma – external or internal. Therein lies another, related puzzle.
Some clues for these abnormalities are provided by their most recent responses as deteriorating conditions tighten the vise – on emotions, on prevailing policies, on domestic political worries, on ginger egos. Those responses fall under the category of panic behavior. Deep down, they are scared, fearful and agitated. Biden et al in Washington, Macron, Schulz, Sunak, Stoltenberg, von der Leyen. They lack the courage of their stated convictions or the courage to face reality squarely. The blunt truth is that they have contrived to get themselves, and their countries, in a quandary from which there is no escape conforming to their current self-defined interests and emotional engagement. Hence, we observe an array of reactions that are feckless, grotesque and dangerous. "
https://scheerpost.com/2024/03/08/michael-brenner-the-wests-reckoning/
Read the full article linked above, Brenner nails it
-
I do not know why or how Navalny died and nor do you. If he was murdered that is obviously unacceptable and should be condemned, but we do not currently have the information. What is clear is that Navalny was corrupt, a traitor and fully deserving of proper legal action in Russia as well as a thoroughly nasty racist and fascist. He was certainly not a leader of the democratic opposition to Putin, the suggestion that he was such as promulgated by the MSM including the BBC being laughable.
There was no legal basis for Navalny's conviction. So says the ECHR and Amnesty International. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/02/russia-prisoner-of-conscience-aleksei-navalny-kremlins-most-vocal-opponent-dies-in-custody/
-
Navalny, has served his last useful service to his western paymasters. Jailed and of no more use except as a martyr, he coincidentally became a martyr. The western media who share the same employers as Navalny were ready within minutes with their "Putin killed Navalny" headlines and stories complete with demands for more sanctions. Navalny's "wife" also by huge coincidence had been invited to the Munich Security conference where she spoke to the gathered "dignitaries"/stooges.
It also dominated western news preventing any reporting from Adveevka which was an unmitigated disaster for the Ukraine and their western sponsors.
Steve and David have got nothing right through the many years of this and other related threads and have learnt nothing. It has been noticeable, to me anyway NGB, that many more people are seeing through the obvious lies of Western governments and their PR arm in the media. People are not buying the obvious lies and the double standards are becoming too huge to ignore. David and Steve are becoming figures of mockery with their idiotic repeating of obvious lies. Believing western media, governments and intel agencies (all the same agency in reality) is the adult equivalent of the childish and unquestioning belief in Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy of a five year old.
They learnt nothing from the schooling that you just gave them. Same as always.
On the contrary. You and ngb1066 have overegged the pudding so many times you have no credibility left. Had you stuck to NATO's mistakes you might have been taken more seriously, instead of trying to justify a terrible, despotic, illegal regime, which is Putin's Russia.
Now listen and learn: https://youtu.be/wMiFNSZg6hE
-
On the contrary. You and ngb1066 have overegged the pudding so many times you have no credibility left. Had you stuck to NATO's mistakes you might have been taken more seriously, instead of trying to justify a terrible, despotic, illegal regime, which is Putin's Russia.
Now listen and learn: https://youtu.be/wMiFNSZg6hE
As I have made clear many times, I am not a supporter of Putin and in fact support the main opposition to Putin in Russia. However, I do not accept that Navalny was in any way a hero, he was a thoroughly reactionary and unpleasant element on the fringes of Russian politics.
-
On the contrary. You and ngb1066 have overegged the pudding so many times you have no credibility left. Had you stuck to NATO's mistakes you might have been taken more seriously, instead of trying to justify a terrible, despotic, illegal regime, which is Putin's Russia.
Now listen and learn: https://youtu.be/wMiFNSZg6hE
In common with every single post that you have made on this thread, your latest adds nothing to anyone's understanding. This is unsurprising since you have no understanding of the "Realpolitik" of world affairs. The fact that you use terminology such as ""terrible, despotic, illegal regime which is Putin's Russia" instead of explaining to anyone reading exactly how the Russian government is "terrible, despotic or illegal" is telling. You have a childish understanding of world affairs and speak in soundbites and mantras.
By any reasonable metric, Putin is the most respected world leader on the planet. The fact that indoctrinated western media consumers believe him to be the second coming of Hitler, Genghis Khan and probably the Devil himself is testament only to the shallowness and lack of any real knowledge or insight of those still dumb enough to read western mainstream media and still take it seriously.
It is perfectly clear to anyone who can read that the analysis put forward by both me and NGB has stood the test of time on this now 9+ years long thread. On the other hand, according to your long running commentary Russia should have been crushed long ago. You have been consistent only in your proven to be wrong headed "analysis". I placed analysis in inverted commas because when applied to you it is a euphemism for, "simply repeating the headlines from the Daily Telegraph, BBC, Independent et al". Read through the thread, Steve. You should be embarrassed to be still posting this drivel after being proven wrong time and time again.
All of this aside, what are you even trying to say in your witless and pointless post. Putin is the President of The Russian Federation. He is elected democratically and is supported by the vast majority of Russians. These are the facts that you have to deal with honestly. I have no say nor investment in Russian domestic politics. That is for Russians to decide and I have made this clear numerous times in this thread. How Putin acts geopolitically is all that I am concerned with. It is you who constantly raises the issue of Russian domestic politics, albeit in the above mentioned soundbites and mantras lifted directly from what the BBC or Telegraph say. To be kind, your understanding of Russian domestic politics, is no worse than your understanding of geopolitics. To be less kind, you have nothing of truth or value to say about either.
-
On the contrary. You and ngb1066 have overegged the pudding so many times you have no credibility left. Had you stuck to NATO's mistakes you might have been taken more seriously, instead of trying to justify a terrible, despotic, illegal regime, which is Putin's Russia.
Now listen and learn: https://youtu.be/wMiFNSZg6hE
Or if you prefer the shorter reply,
"You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it think"
-
In common with every single post that you have made on this thread, your latest adds nothing to anyone's understanding. This is unsurprising since you have no understanding of the "Realpolitik" of world affairs. The fact that you use terminology such as ""terrible, despotic, illegal regime which is Putin's Russia" instead of explaining to anyone reading exactly how the Russian government is "terrible, despotic or illegal" is telling. You have a childish understanding of world affairs and speak in soundbites and mantras.
By any reasonable metric, Putin is the most respected world leader on the planet. The fact that indoctrinated western media consumers believe him to be the second coming of Hitler, Genghis Khan and probably the Devil himself is testament only to the shallowness and lack of any real knowledge or insight of those still dumb enough to read western mainstream media and still take it seriously.
It is perfectly clear to anyone who can read that the analysis put forward by both me and NGB has stood the test of time on this now 9+ years long thread. On the other hand, according to your long running commentary Russia should have been crushed long ago. You have been consistent only in your proven to be wrong headed "analysis". I placed analysis in inverted commas because when applied to you it is a euphemism for, "simply repeating the headlines from the Daily Telegraph, BBC, Independent et al". Read through the thread, Steve. You should be embarrassed to be still posting this drivel after being proven wrong time and time again.
All of this aside, what are you even trying to say in your witless and pointless post. Putin is the President of The Russian Federation. He is elected democratically and is supported by the vast majority of Russians. These are the facts that you have to deal with honestly. I have no say nor investment in Russian domestic politics. That is for Russians to decide and I have made this clear numerous times in this thread. How Putin acts geopolitically is all that I am concerned with. It is you who constantly raises the issue of Russian domestic politics, albeit in the above mentioned soundbites and mantras lifted directly from what the BBC or Telegraph say. To be kind, your understanding of Russian domestic politics, is no worse than your understanding of geopolitics. To be less kind, you have nothing of truth or value to say about either.
This sums up Putin's regime. To quote the old joke: someone broke into the Kremlin yesterday and stole next week's election results. The death of Alexei Navalny has taught you nothing: you know nothing of the workings of a totalitarian society, you know nothing of the terror instilled into the population and how it's achieved. One day there will be a statue of Navalny erected in Red Square.
I just hope I live to see it.
-
This sums up Putin's regime. To quote the old joke: someone broke into the Kremlin yesterday and stole next week's election results. The death of Alexei Navalny has taught you nothing: you know nothing of the workings of a totalitarian society, you know nothing of the terror instilled into the population and how it's achieved. One day there will be a statue of Navalny erected in Red Square.
I just hope I live to see it.
Totalitarianism is just a term that you bandy around with no understanding of yourself. To call Russia a totalitarian state simply makes the term meaningless. You employ hyperbole as a substitute for substance and it shows.
Why would Navalny have a statue erected in Moscow? Which of his "policies" were you most supportive of? Was it his overt fascism and racism that attracted you to support him?, as you self evidently do.
-
I've just read this, it gives some very good insights into what/ whom really benefits from the Ukrainian/ Russian conflict.
https://gpja.org.nz/2024/03/15/unsustainable-war-machine-u-s-imperialism-in-crisis/#like-7356
-
I've just read this, it gives some very good insights into what/ whom really benefits from the Ukrainian/ Russian conflict.
https://gpja.org.nz/2024/03/15/unsustainable-war-machine-u-s-imperialism-in-crisis/#like-7356
I've heard all this Marxist rubbish before. Ironic that China took 800 million people out of extreme poverty through the capitalist economy, yet 30 million starved to death from 1959-61 under the Communist system. I agree about the American armaments industry, though if that country is not to act as world policeman I can't see any other country taking on that role.
-
This is such a tragedy: https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2024/mar/22/moscow-concert-attack-crocus-city-hall-shooting-russia-live-updates
-
I've heard all this Marxist rubbish before. Ironic that China took 800 million people out of extreme poverty through the capitalist economy, yet 30 million starved to death from 1959-61 under the Communist system. I agree about the American armaments industry, though if that country is not to act as world policeman I can't see any other country taking on that role.
I don't profess to be an expert or a follower of Marxism. Who in my eyes is simply a critique of Capitalism.
Elites who are part of the powerful Industrial, Banking, Capitalist class, would be foolish not to beware of some of the preaching of Marx, because it would give good insights as to when Capitalism is in trouble, acting as a barometer for when a fix needs to be put in place..
Such as when a situation of surplus is reached. Whereby lots of differing antidotes could be unleashed onto the unsuspecting general population.
Capitalists produce goods and services only for profit and not for need. Production is disrupted when commodities can no longer be sold at a profit. Capitalist production can be effectively expanded, but the markets respond slowly, if at all. The overproduction is relative; that is, it’s not that more is produced than is needed. It’s that more is produced than can be sold at a profit.
-
Moscow attack latest: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-68642036
Further update: https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/moscow-concert-hall-attack-death-toll-rises-to-115-as-suspects-are-detained-live-updates/ar-BB1kovwu?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=e9c675ae410d492ba67682bf75a70d1f&ei=7
-
https://twitter.com/MyLordBebo/status/1778477764640690386
“Very soon the only topic for international meeting on Ukraine will be the unconditional surrender of the Kiev regime”
— Nebenzya, UN representative for Russia
-
https://twitter.com/MyLordBebo/status/1778477764640690386
“Very soon the only topic for international meeting on Ukraine will be the unconditional surrender of the Kiev regime”
— Nebenzya, UN representative for Russia
The unravelling of NATO will begin with the EU not far behind, in my view. NATO have staked their existence on Ukraine. NATO officials have explicitly stated on numerous occasions that a defeat for Ukraine is a defeat for NATO and here we are. Long ago I described the situation that the "Collective West" was in, as being in check everywhere on the board. Can't move and in zugzwang and this is becoming increasingly apparent. The lashing out of their vassal colony in Occupied Palestine desperate to draw the US into war to save their own skins only emphasises the dilemma that the West faces. US are powerless to intervene. The development of accurate and un-interceptable hypersonic missiles has made their isolated bases all over the Middle East indefensible. Likewise their Naval Carrier Groups. Currently the US are suing for peace against the Houthis who have humiliated the US/UK and are not interested in the bribes/concessions offered by the US in order that Ansarallah desist from their blockade. The AnsarAllah blockade ends when the blockade and occupation of Gaza ends. If US/UK/NATO are powerless against Yemen's AnsarAllah movement, which they are, then I don't rate their chances against Iran-never mind their allies.
The weakness of the West is becoming more and more exposed. NATO's total defeat in Ukraine is the beginning of their end.