Russia invading Ukraine (NEWS/UPDATES)


Status
Not open for further replies.
On the green screen subject read this comment, might explain a little it’s definitely been edited in some way though.

Let me clarify the poor explained title.

Looks like Putin was not there with that people, but that he was filmed with a green screen of background and they added the people and environment later. To make it more realistic, you can crop parts of the background and put them in foreground, so you will have background: ladies, middle layer: Putin with the green screen cropped, foreground layer: mic.

In a part looks like Putin's hand goes through the mic body, it can be because that's where the cropped mic of the foreground layer ended, thus the hand didn't have anything in front.

This would imply that Putin is hidden in a bunker and making all the public appearances fake with a green screen.

But it's not 100% as it should. Something is off here. It can be also a real video edited to look like this in order to imply what I said before. In the era of deep fake you can never be sure.

Edit: when you want to see if a video is edited, look for things like shadows, indirect shadows, reflections, environment, following people's eyes, etc. Things that should be there but they are not the focus of the video/scene

In this video I think Putin was truly there, you can see some reflections of his hand in the glass teapot?bottle?, And it would be reaaaaally strange for a professional editor to add that level of detail and forget the error of the mic. As I said before, there is something off in that part, can't say what
 
Last edited:
So what? If the underlying ethical dilemma is that standing up to Putin directly would risk nuclear war, a piece of paper doesn’t alter the situation at all. The argument for not doing anything would be exactly the same as it is now.
Putin knows attacking a NATO member will result in his / everyone's demise. He knew we wouldn't commit to defend Ukraine as not part of NATO. There is the difference. Its a defensive alliance, its not, or never was set up to attack.

If we go in now to help, it's gambling on human existence vs the response of a madman. As bad as it is, we have to wait to see how it plays out. If he attacks NATO then game over for us all anyway.
 
I don't mean to be condescending but you do not appear to have any idea what the Nato agreement is or who the members are. Given that Nato membership and it's movement eastwards is the underlying reason Putin is doing what he is you might benefit from reading up on the history, growth, Article 5.

I get that this is a discussion board and all are welcome to make their opinions known but you might have a better understanding of the geopolitical situation if you go and do some research on Nato. There are most likely some short Youtube videos that explain all about it.

I know very well what article 5 is and how it operates.

What I’m asking is why the argument against direct action would magically fall away, if it was Estonia next. Surely the argument would simply become “well breaking the NATO treaty is better than risking nuclear war”, rather than “leaving the Ukrainian civilians to die is better than risking a nuclear war”?
 
I don’t think this is really a question of any logical prelude to using nuclear weapons for Putin. He is not going to use them strategically or to win a scenario. Because the second they are launched it likely sets off a chain reaction that doesn’t have any rationale winnable scenario for anyone.

If he launches them ever it’s because he can’t accept his lifetime vision of reestablishing the Tsarist empire is going to happen and he is selfish enough that he is willing to take a scorched Earth approach in anger
 
It would be illegal for allied forces to enter Ukrainian territory, at the formal request of an elected Ukrainian government? Really?

And you’re seriously telling me that reservations about direct conflict with Putin - on the grounds that such a conflict may end up nuclear - magically wouldn’t apply if it were a NATO ally that’s attacked? Again, really?

And I need to “grow up”?

You’re on a roll here mind.
The Russians entered Afghanistan at the request of the then communist Afghan leader.
 
Blimey just caught up on my reading, I haven't been able to be on much today as my head is all over the place (more than usual).
Just found out my cousin died earlier today so my head is a bit battered tbh.
Please hug your loved ones and tell them you love them, fuck man 😪.
Sorry about your cousin I hope you are as good as you can be in that situation,

I know you get invested in this thread and get angry and upset maybe this is one you need to just peek into now and then till your in a better place!

I’m not meaning to sound patronising here but family time is more important than this x
 
The Western powers have found it difficult to predict Putins next move thus far.

If Russia can pacify Ukraine they can easily force a wedge through Poland / Lithuania cutting off the Baltic states.

I'm not saying all of this is likely to happen immediately but the strategic goals of a greater Russia will likely include a 'corridor' to Kalingrad which automatically cuts the 3 Baltic states adrift.

they're making little headway so far in pacifying Ukraine, and you think they'll easily force a wedge through Poland / Lithuania

that seems to completely ignore the current capabilities of Russia, to say nothing about Article 5 commitments

despite some posters on here thinking 'Biden is weak, why wont he do something' - Russia aggression against Poland would see them roflstomped - you dont fly B52's around the area with transponders on unless you're making a point

this is the big difference between defending Ukraine and defending Poland - without the treaty commitments IRO Ukraine it would be spun as 'warmongering Uncle Sam upto his old tricks', but supporting treaty commitments is 'protecting the free world'

whether we like it or not there are political realities to consider..
 
Grow up. There is no dilemma. If Putin invades a NATO member, NATO will respond. Ukraine is not a member so any show of force will be as illegal as Putins actions. 2 wrongs don’t make a right. The “west” must do all it can with regards to sanctions and censure, but will not wade in to start WW3 just to please keyboard warriors like you.
So those frightened of nukes say risking nuclear war is fine if he invades a NATO country but not if he invades a country which was having talks about joining NATO. Nuclear weapons are no less dangerous because NATO take on Putin in Poland rather than in Ukraine. Not sure I see your logic…either you are happy to defend against Putin and risk nuclear war, or you’re not.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top