Russia invading Ukraine (NEWS/UPDATES)

[elder]

What damage could Microsoft do to Russia? If they wanted.

@Hair Flick... over to you?

 

[Hbk69]

Basically the above article isn't totally pro-Ukraine and people won't give it the time of day.

Meanwhile Ukraine propaganda are grossly exaggerating their successes, the number given by their MoD are even treble that of US estimates and wildly out of sync with Russian statistics as you'd expect.

Propaganda?! Do you even know what that word means?! Misinformation to help save innocent people is what it is. And I'm all for it.

 

[Hugh Gains]

I didn’t say it.

BUT, there have been several intentional attacks on high civilian occupancy, non-military buildings.

So what would you describe that as?


Did you follow your own advice and explore the source then?

The Ukrainians are embedded in dense areas, it's a cross country war. Find me a war were civilians haven't been collateral damage. It's terrible either way but it's not the indiscriminate killing of civilians.

The truth will be somewhere in the middle I expect.

Ukraine is surpassing expectations, no doubt on that at all, how long they can hang on is another matter, drone strikes will make a big difference as more drones are supplied.

Best Ukraine can do is play for time I feel and hope internal pressures hit Putin hard and force him to the table.

Finally a fair take.

 

[Hbk69]

I didn’t say it.

BUT, there have been several intentional attacks on high civilian occupancy, non-military buildings.

So what would you describe that as?


Did you follow your own advice and explore the source then?

I did and it looks absolute nonsense but I don't know that for sure but because it looks like unverified nonsense I'm choosing to give it zero credibility. I may be wrong, it's my opinion, in no way a fact.

 

[Hbk69]

What damage could Microsoft do to Russia? If they wanted.

Destroy the PS5 supply lines.

 

[Hugh Gains]

Are you just intent on looking thick, or are you actually so one eyed that you can't see what's happening?

Why you have to get personal?

You're calling me one dimensional, you're out here telling me there's systematic killing of civilians going on and I don't see that at all.

Are civilians caught up and unfortunately being killed? Yes. Is it systematic? No.

You must be logged on to see media items

Oh look RT saying Ukrainians are killing civilians. Must be true!

You must be logged on to see external links

The NATO bombing killed about 1,000 members of the Yugoslav security forces in addition to between 489 and 528 civilians. It destroyed or damaged bridges, industrial plants, hospitals, schools, cultural monuments, private businesses as well as barracks and military installations.

 

[elder]

posted before but this site list all documented equipment losses for both sides. if there's no evidence it's not included:

You must be logged on to see external links

 

[sonson]

Just trying to show someone posting anti US nonsense and (almost?) pro China and Russia propoganda, citing a few facts to back up nonsense, has zero credibility. I can put up with this nonsense normally but there are real people losing their lives and you're posting uneducated crap about Russia and China and trying to argue the US are warmongers. Maybe the US are, maybe they're aren't but make no mistake, you don't need any degree to know the Russian and Chinese governments are evil.

Must admit I missed that bit in my Masters, about who the goodies abd baddies are. And that included being taught by Sir Ian Kershaw on the Nazis for a semester. He said it serves no purpose saying that historical figures, regimes etc are evil or monsters. It tells you nothing about what they did/do. You look at *what* they did, *what* they believe and you will naturally apply your own morality anyway . Kershaw wrote the seminal biography of Hitler but he dosent once say in however many thousand pages that Hitler was evil, because he dosent need to. If you read about all he did and don't come to that conclusion yourself, you never will, theres no helping someone there.

But hey, I'm not sure if he had two degrees like you.

Re the US- existed for less than 250 years, fought in 102 wars, not included the wars against the people they took the land from in the first place, currently involved in 3 in Yemen, Somalia and Syria. I don't need to argue they're addicted to war.

I just explained an outlook from two different perspectives ie non western ones. It is a fact that Russia and China have a different perspective on their imperialism than we do, just as it is a fact that most of the territories of the British Empire has a different perspective on that than the British or the subjects of Rome did to the Romans etc.

The absence of me saying afterwards "and therefore they're evil" dosen"t mean I think they're good. Although for what irs worth I'm morally opposed to all imperialism, and I've said that dozens of times on here. On this thread I've condemned Russia multiple times.

But rather than establishing that context, you took *one post* as am opportunity to take offence, believe that my explanation if a historical outlook was the same as my moral stance, and to try and beat me over the head with your two degrees.

Which just goes to show you can have two degrees and still be completely ignorant I suppose.

 

[OzzyMac]

There is a distinguishable difference between 'systematically' murdering civilians and civilians dying in a conflict.

Ukrainian rocket have hit apartment buildings whilst attempting to shoot things down. It's unfortunate and unavoidable.

Did NATO target civilians in Yugoslavia?

What a crock of shit.

How do you explain the tank shooting at the civilian filming from his window? The strike in freedom square? The mass strikes on Kharkiv? The ckuster weapons near apartment buildings?

Don't think any of them were "attempting to shoot things down"

 

[Cow]

Why you have to get personal?

You're calling me one dimensional, you're out here telling me there's systematic killing of civilians going on and I don't see that at all.

Are civilians caught up and unfortunately being killed? Yes. Is it systematic? No.

You must be logged on to see media items

Oh look RT saying Ukrainians are killing civilians. Must be true!

You must be logged on to see external links

The NATO bombing killed about 1,000 members of the Yugoslav security forces in addition to between 489 and 528 civilians. It destroyed or damaged bridges, industrial plants, hospitals, schools, cultural monuments, private businesses as well as barracks and military installations.

Good post

 

[brandon]

The Ukrainians are embedded in dense areas, it's a cross country war. Find me a war were civilians haven't been collateral damage. It's terrible either way but it's not the indiscriminate killing of civilians.

.

I don’t have to, because I didn’t make the point that there has been.

The question of ‘murder’ was brought up and you challenged that, the term is being used widely (including in the House of Commons today) and of course that is to do with the threshold for War Crimes and whether Putin has committed and can be prosecuted for doing it.

Interesting turn of phrase you used however when you said ‘collateral damage’, it almost serves to attempt to justify what the Russians are doing. So answer me this; would you describe the intentional shelling and cluster bombing of schools, hospitals, television and council buildings as justified in a war?

It seems like you’re aligning yourself with this individual with that line of defence:

You must be logged on to see media items

Or would you instead agree with me that the above targets are exactly what you would describe as indiscriminate?

Bearing in mind indiscriminate means ‘at random or without careful judgement’.

If those targets are being bombed WITH careful judgement and not simply at random then that is without doubt proof of systematic killing and evidence of war crimes being committed.

 

[Cow]

Must admit I missed that bit in my Masters, about who the goodies abd baddies are. And that included being taught by Sir Ian Kershaw on the Nazis for a semester. He said it serves no purpose saying that historical figures, regimes etc are evil or monsters. It tells you nothing about what they did/do. You look at *what* they did, *what* they believe and you will naturally apply your own morality anyway . Kershaw wrote the seminal biography of Hitler but he dosent once say in however many thousand pages that Hitler was evil, because he dosent need to. If you read about all he did and don't come to that conclusion yourself, you never will, theres no helping someone there.

But hey, I'm not sure if he had two degrees like you.

Re the US- existed for less than 250 years, fought in 102 wars, not included the wars against the people they took the land from in the first place, currently involved in 3 in Yemen, Somalia and Syria. I don't need to argue they're addicted to war.

I just explained an outlook from two different perspectives ie non western ones. It is a fact that Russia and China have a different perspective on their imperialism than we do, just as it is a fact that most of the territories of the British Empire has a different perspective on that than the British or the subjects of Rome did to the Romans etc.

The absence of me saying afterwards "and therefore they're evil" dosen"t mean I think they're good. Although for what irs worth I'm morally opposed to all imperialism, and I've said that dozens of times on here. On this thread I've condemned Russia multiple times.

But rather than establishing that context, you took *one post* as am opportunity to take offence, believe that my explanation if a historical outlook was the same as my moral stance, and to try and beat me over the head with your two degrees.

Which just goes to show you can have two degrees and still be completely ignorant I suppose.

I really hope you dropped a mic after typing that, tremendous post.

 

[Hair Flick]

As far as I’ve read folk in this convoy are demoralised and have abandoned it Due to lack of food and basic rations. You have to think after 5 days where are these shitting and showering. Their morale must be low they even been sat in a a traffic jam for days without a clue what’s going on. Of course there’s likely not a lot of truth in that but if they are indeed running out of food etc it would suggest the convoy is full of munitions.

The boots on the ground seem totally out of their depth and clueless. The strategy seems piss poor. I just wish they didn’t have nukes as if our army went in without the threat of nukes we’d have taken them to the cleaners.

The good news is they’re now trained and prepped for conditions as Cross Channel HGV drivers should they be looking for a career change.

 

[coyneeee_s]

Putin supports Wycombe Wanderers.

 

[Georgewhitt]

Why you have to get personal?

You're calling me one dimensional, you're out here telling me there's systematic killing of civilians going on and I don't see that at all.

Are civilians caught up and unfortunately being killed? Yes. Is it systematic? No.

You must be logged on to see media items

Oh look RT saying Ukrainians are killing civilians. Must be true!

You must be logged on to see external links

The NATO bombing killed about 1,000 members of the Yugoslav security forces in addition to between 489 and 528 civilians. It destroyed or damaged bridges, industrial plants, hospitals, schools, cultural monuments, private businesses as well as barracks and military installations.

Apologise for appearing to be be personal, but I find it beyond comprehension that you don't understand that the Russians, with their precision targeting ability, could not take out military targets without as much " collateral damage" as they are inflicting. They are deliberately targeting " strategic" positions in civilian areas to cause as much damage as they can.
And are you seriously comparing the BBC with RT?

 

[elder]

a good thread for the many tire enthusiasts on the board...

basically if the Russian's can't be bothered to maintain expensive equipment like Pantsir-S1's (even basics like tires) then they certainly won't give a fuck about a 40 year old t-72 and so on

You must be logged on to see media items

 

[UpTheDuff]

This war is an extension of a particular type of Russian outlook on the world and Russia's place with it that is several hundred years old. Even though Putin is old and irrational, his policies are informed by an old tradition and explain much of what is going on.

This is the case with China but to a far greater degree. With the exception of the past 300 years or so China has been the wealthiest and most powerful country in the world for basically as long as it has existed. It was wealthier, more sophisticated, populous and powerful than the Roman Empire at its height in the Antiquity era. It had crossbows and gunpowder 1000 years before Europeans did. It has cocieved of itself as a single political entity for about 4000 years.

There is a very compelling and well researched theory that both World Wars occured when they did because China was at its weakest point in history and unable to maintain the global balance It has done for millenia. It sees its purpose as being fulcrum to the world, its centre around which things evolve. Harmony and balance and maintenance are key in a way westerners simply can't understand because pretty much all those things we consider expedient. Whereas to the Chinese Political order they have guaranteed its wealth and longevity for far longer than any other civilisation in history. So they're deadly serious about it.

It is very much its own thing. It's vision of superiority is not expansionist in the way Western Powers are. If it were China would have comfortably run over pretty much anyone it liked for most of the history of civilization.

It's as foolish to project Western values onto them as it was to believe societies in the middle east want to be secular and democratic. China obviously has political ambitions as does any super power but their motives are not informed by remedial expansionism.

The US on the other hand is a civilisation born out of war and which has basically waged war against someone for its entire existence and seems to basically require it to justify its existence. Alternatively, if it dosent start wars, it agressivley fronts up to other nations it believes are encroaching on its interests, and conveniently Americas interests are wherever they pervueve them to be. Outside of Russia, they ate far my biggest concern to world peace, and us as their lap dogs if our government continues to be as supine as it has this century.

Sorry, who cares. All that matters now is Russia have, without provocation, invaded an independent sovereign nation and are bombing civilians and hospitals and have to be stopped.

 

[brandon]

I did and it looks absolute nonsense but I don't know that for sure but because it looks like unverified nonsense I'm choosing to give it zero credibility. I may be wrong, it's my opinion, in no way a fact.

To be fair the article is only an opinion piece in any case.

The organisation claim to be ‘non-partisan’ (they all say that). According to Wikipedia they’re an American neo-Conservative think tank with more than a passing penchant for warhawking (I had to Google that phrase too although I had a fair idea).

The guys opinion was probably worth no more than anyone on here in reality.

 

[Hair Flick]

Postage fees will be extortionate.

The Hermes drop off point I use never check the package size or weight. Put it on next day delivery, should be no more than £4.99 I’d guess.

 

[Slim999]

A fascinating France 24 interview below with ex Yukos Oligarch Mikhail Khordorcovsky - a very Intelligent and thoughtful man who knows Putin very well....
He believes Ukraine to be a collossal mistake which will end Putin ..and bring about a Revolution in Russia "within 2 years "

You must be logged on to see media items

Also worth watching tonight was Newsnight - which looked back at Putin's career -
... they interviewed Lord David Owen , Katherine Belton (a Reuters journo who had written a book on VP) , & Bill Browder financier / political activist.

All 3 thought Putin was toast . ...

Belton cheered me up when she explained that Putin's nuclear threat was a bluff as he was running out of other options - and to get to the buttons he would need to go through seversl ranks of military Generals (... all of whom would know explicitly that it meant certain death for them & their families - therefore they would never ever do it )

David Owen put Putin's recent changed demeanour and behaviour down to an addiction to anabolic steroids...

- which left me musing whether that was true , or whether Lord Owen himself was getting a bit of dementia ( he is getting on a bit )