Russia / Ukraine thread

[Icono]

Here {Gary}, tell me what you see:

Some of Us don't think the Russian Invasion was 'Aggression.' Here's why.

Here are some excerpts, but the author creates a scenario that's fairly good. Go read it.

Imagine if the Mexican army started bombarding American ex-pats living in Mexico with heavy artillery-rounds killing thousands and leaving thousands more wounded. What do you think Joe Biden would do?


Would he brush it off like a big nothingburger and move on or would he threaten the Mexican government with a military invasion that would obliterate the Mexican Army, level their biggest cities, and send the government running for cover?


Which of these two options do you think Biden would choose?


There’s no doubt what Biden would do nor is there any question what the 45 presidents who preceded him would do. No US leader would ever stand by and do nothing while thousands of Americans were savagely slaughtered by a foreign government. That just wouldn’t happen. They’d all respond quickly and forcefully.


But if that’s true, then why isn’t the same standard applied to Russia? Isn’t the situation in Ukraine nearly identical?

“We are not threatening anyone.… We have made it clear that any further NATO movement to the east is unacceptable. There’s nothing unclear about this. We aren’t deploying our missiles to the border of the United States, but the United States IS deploying their missiles to the porch of our house. Are we asking too much? We’re just asking that they not deploy their attack-systems to our home…. What is so hard to understand about that?” Russian President Vladimir Putin, YouTube, Start at :48 seconds

This map is the key to understanding how the war in Ukraine started. It tells us who did the provoking and who was being provoked. It tells us who was dropping the bombs and who was getting bombed. It tells us who was causing the trouble and who was being blamed for the trouble-making. The map tells us everything we need to know.


Can you see the yellow dots? Those dots represent the artillery strikes that were documented in daily summaries by “observers of the Organization for Security and Co-operation (OSCE), positioned at the frontlines.” The vast majority of the strikes were in the area inhabited by Russian-speaking people who have been under military siege for the last 8 years. (14,000 ethnic Russians have been killed in the fighting since 2014.) The Minsk Agreements were drawn up to resolve the issues between the warring parties and end the hostilities, but the government in Kiev refused to implement the agreement. In fact, the former President of Ukraine, Petro Poroshenko, even admitted that the treaty was just a vehicle for buying time until another full-scale offensive on the Donbas could be launched.

Donbas, NOT Crimea, but that was coming....

Read on:

On February 16—a full 8 days before the Russian invasion—the shelling of the Donbas increased dramatically and steadily intensified for the next week “to over 2,000 per day on February 22.” As we said, these blasts were logged in daily summaries by observers of the OSCE who were on the frontlines. Think about that for a minute. In other words, these are eyewitness accounts by trained professionals who collected documented evidence of the Ukrainian Army’s massive bombardment of areas inhabited by their own people.

Check out this summary of ceasefire violations posted on podcast host Martyr Made’s twitter account:

Martyr Made @martyrmade
On Feb 15, the OSCE recorded 41 ceasefire violations as Kiev’s forces began shelling Donbas.
Feb 16: 76 violations
Feb 17: 316
Feb 18: 654
Feb 19: 1,413
Feb 20-21: 2,026
Feb 22: 1,484
…virtually all by the Kiev side. Feb 24: Russian forces intervene

Notice how the shelling of the Donbas increased every day before the invasion?


I’d call that a thoroughly-calculated provocation, wouldn’t you?

Biden issued his warning on February 18; that’s two days after monitors from the OSCE reported an intensification of the bombing in the Donbas. In other words, Biden already knew that his buddies in the Ukrainian army were bombing the shit out of east Ukraine when he tried to make it look like he was privy to some sensitive, insider information about the upcoming invasion.

Must be propaganda, huh?

 

[Icono]

Your opinion again. Doesn't make you correct.

Absolutely. Do you ever hear yourself?

 

[Icono]

From the article above (posted before), it's from December 2021, but worth the watch again:

 

[D_JEEPER]

Must be propaganda, huh?

NO, they call that Russian Disinformation. PreDebonked.

 

[Redrider]

 

[SanDiegoCJ]

NO, they call that Russian Disinformation. PreDebonked.

Putin claiming that the U.S./NATO were going to invade/destroy Russia is THE BIG LIE and only the truly stupid would buy into it.
All of Putin's so-called justifications for invading Ukraine are pure bullshit. Sorry to see so many believe it.

 

[Thumping]

Putin claiming that the U.S./NATO were going to invade/destroy Russia is THE BIG LIE and only the truly stupid would buy into it.
All of Putin's so-called justifications for invading Ukraine are pure bullshit. Sorry to see so many believe it.

So, you think we should have done nothing when Russia was looking to set up their missiles in Cuba?

 

[Sandy Johnson]

Putin claiming that the U.S./NATO were going to invade/destroy Russia is THE BIG LIE and only the truly stupid would buy into it.
All of Putin's so-called justifications for invading Ukraine are pure bullshit. Sorry to see so many believe it.

There is propaganda flying around from both sides of the conflict and it would be a mistake to by into what either side is claiming at face value. It's not a black and white issue where one side is right and the other is wrong. Like a school yard fight, Russia just happens to be the one that finally threw a punch and got blamed for it even though both parties were escalating the situation leading up to that punch. In a global power struggle however, I'll take our western culture over Russia any day, so since neither side is a squeaky clean angel, I'll root for the west.

All that said, the way the US is going about providing support is fawked. Let other western countries closer to the conflict with more of a stake in the matter deal with the issue.

 

[Thumping]

There is propaganda flying around from both sides of the conflict and it would be a mistake to by into what either side is claiming at face value. It's not a black and white issue where one side is right and the other is wrong. Like a school yard fight, Russia just happens to be the one that finally threw a punch and got blamed for it even though both parties were escalating the situation leading up to that punch. In a global power struggle however, I'll take our western culture over Russia any day, so since neither side is a squeaky clean angel, I'll root for the west.

All that said, the way the US is going about providing support is fawked. Let other western countries closer to the conflict with more of a stake in the matter deal with the issue.

Yep. Both are known liars. I wouldn't put much faith into what Putin says but I damn sure wouldn't put any (absolutely zero) into what the Us government says.

 

[clodhopper]

There is propaganda flying around from both sides of the conflict and it would be a mistake to by into what either side is claiming at face value. It's not a black and white issue where one side is right and the other is wrong. Like a school yard fight, Russia just happens to be the one that finally threw a punch and got blamed for it even though both parties were escalating the situation leading up to that punch. In a global power struggle however, I'll take our western culture over Russia any day, so since neither side is a squeaky clean angel, I'll root for the west.

All that said, the way the US is going about providing support is fawked. Let other western countries closer to the conflict with more of a stake in the matter deal with the issue.

Pretty close to how I view the whole shitshow. I can only assume our extensive cash support for Ukraine is mostly about hiding certain politicians dirty laundry.

 

[Sandy Johnson]

Yep. Both are known liars. I wouldn't put much faith into what Putin says but I damn sure wouldn't put any (absolutely zero) into what the Us government says.

Pretty close to how I view the whole shitshow. I can only assume our extensive cash support for Ukraine is mostly about hiding certain politicians dirty laundry.

Yep. One thing we as Americans forget is that this one is an all out war, not some sort of Afghanistan or Iraq conflict where one side is trying to win hearts and minds.

Both sides are trying to fawk each other up as much as they can and the least of their worries are ethical problems with publishing outright lies to the world. If it helps them get ahead, they will do it in a heartbeat.

 

[TRINDU]

Pretty close to how I view the whole shitshow. I can only assume our extensive cash support for Ukraine is mostly about hiding certain politicians dirty laundry.

Absolutely.

Putin claiming that the U.S./NATO were going to invade/destroy Russia is THE BIG LIE and only the truly stupid would buy into it.

How high are you flying the corrupt Ukraine flag?

 

[Icono]

There is propaganda flying around from both sides of the conflict and it would be a mistake to by into what either side is claiming at face value. It's not a black and white issue where one side is right and the other is wrong. Like a school yard fight, Russia just happens to be the one that finally threw a punch and got blamed for it even though both parties were escalating the situation leading up to that punch. In a global power struggle however, I'll take our western culture over Russia any day, so since neither side is a squeaky clean angel, I'll root for the west.

All that said, the way the US is going about providing support is fawked. Let other western countries closer to the conflict with more of a stake in the matter deal with the issue.

Remind me where this happened again?

 

[Icono]

Absolutely.



How high are you flying the corrupt Ukraine flag?

Higher than Eagle pussy, apparently.

I mean, I like all these people flying these flags that support Blockbuster Video.

 

[87manche]

It's always interesting to see the homegrown expedient vehicles. Some real marder vibes here.
They done cut the top off of a APC and slapped some towed artillery on top.

 

[Icono]

All that said, the way the US is going about providing support is fawked. Let other western countries closer to the conflict with more of a stake in the matter deal with the issue.

Hell yes, this.

And you'll see exactly how those affected by this will suddenly wake up.

Won't be how you think.

 

[Icono]

It's always interesting to see the homegrown expedient vehicles. Some real marder vibes here.
They done cut the top off of a APC and slapped some towed artillery on top.

I'm sure the Marder II from 1940 is going to rock.

 

[87manche]

I'm sure the Marder II from 1940 is going to rock.

I said interesting, not good


I sure as shit wouldn't want to be in anything open topped when there's quadcopters dropping hand grenades out of the skies on errrryone.

 

[Sandy Johnson]

Remind me where this happened again?

TLDR; Basically, Ukraine flirted with allying themselves with the west, Russia didn't like how that would change the balance of power in the region and used their influence with the Ukrainian government to stop that, there was a revolution(most probably kicked off by the west in response to Russia stopping the EU membership) to install a pro western government, Russia invaded crimea.

More detailed timeline that says the same as above follows:

2012, Ukraine works with the EU and an EU association agreement started. Russia was not a fan for obvious reasons. Yanukovich, the current president and good friends with Putin, put the kibosh on it in Nov 2013. Then some shady business happens, and I'm not gonna say the US was probably behind it, but we were probably behind it, Yanukovich gets the boot during the orange revolution in Feb. 2014, and a pro western government(filled with some very suspect characters) takes power. Putin convenes an emergency meeting to figure out how to get Yanukovich out and during that meeting they also decide Crimea needs to be part of Russia. Late Feb and Russia rolls soldiers into Crimea.

 

[Mikel]

TLDR; Basically, Ukraine flirted with allying themselves with the west, Russia didn't like how that would change the balance of power in the region and used their influence with the Ukrainian government to stop that, there was a revolution(most probably kicked off by the west in response to Russia stopping the EU membership) to install a pro western government, Russia invaded crimea.

Show me a small nation bordering Russia and I'll show you a nation that desperately wants to get into NATO. Sure, Ukraine is as corrupt as it gets, but that Russia's neighbors want nothing to do with Russia, is all Russia's fault.

 

[Sandy Johnson]

Show me a small nation bordering Russia and I'll show you a nation that desperately wants to get into NATO. Sure, Ukraine is as corrupt as it gets, but that Russia's neighbors want nothing to do with Russia, is all Russia's fault.

I don't disagree. In 2012 just economically, you'd rather be aligned with EU and the west than Russia.

All I'm saying is that there was dirty pool being played on both sides. I personally think we did Ukraine a disservice with who we got into power during the orange revolution. Most of their resumes prior were as thugs and criminals. Shoulda vetted our puppet government people better.

 

[aczlan]

So, you think we should have done nothing when Russia was looking to set up their missiles in Cuba?

IMO there is a significant difference between setting up a nuclear ICBM launch site and a ICBM interceptor system.
Cuba was slated to get nuclear ICBMs.
Europe is/was slated to get launch/radar installations for missiles to intercept ICBMs.
Kind of like the difference between having a aggressive dog on a chain (or in a picket fence) in your yard and putting up an electric fence around your yard.
One has a risk to people outside of your property if something goes wrong, the other does not.

Aaron Z

 

[Sandy Johnson]

IMO there is a significant difference between setting up a nuclear ICBM launch site and a ICBM interceptor system.
Cuba was slated to get nuclear ICBMs.
Europe is/was slated to get launch/radar installations for missiles to intercept ICBMs.
Kind of like the difference between having a aggressive dog on a chain (or in a picket fence) in your yard and putting up an electric fence around your yard.
One has a risk to people outside of your property if something goes wrong, the other does not.

Aaron Z

The thing about those interceptors is that they would pretty much render the icbms useless and unbalance the thread to mutually assured destruction in the west's favor.

 

[SanDiegoCJ]

Absolutely.



How high are you flying the corrupt Ukraine flag?

That's irrelevant and far from a valid reason to invade. If we used that as a reason we would have invaded Mexico many times since 1848.
You need to live in the real world.

 

[SanDiegoCJ]

There is propaganda flying around from both sides of the conflict and it would be a mistake to by into what either side is claiming at face value. It's not a black and white issue where one side is right and the other is wrong. Like a school yard fight, Russia just happens to be the one that finally threw a punch and got blamed for it even though both parties were escalating the situation leading up to that punch. In a global power struggle however, I'll take our western culture over Russia any day, so since neither side is a squeaky clean angel, I'll root for the west.

All that said, the way the US is going about providing support is fawked. Let other western countries closer to the conflict with more of a stake in the matter deal with the issue.

I look at it this way. Russia is the one that invaded a sovereign country. Ukraine didn't invade Russia. The reasons Russia used to justify that invasion are pure bullshit. End of story. The claims, probably true, that Ukraine's .gov is corrupt is not a valid reason to invade.

 

[87manche]

The thing about those interceptors is that they would pretty much render the icbms useless and unbalance the thread to mutually assured destruction in the west's favor.

this.

we left the anti ballistic missile treaty in 2002.
a treaty that existed to keep the soviets and us from nuclear proliferation in a bid to maintain our nuclear strike, and thus deterrence, capabilities trying to outpace missile defense systems.

If we nullify russia nuclear weapons they are no longer a deterrent to our own nuclear weapons use.
Are we planning on nuking the world? Probably not.
Should you want to be at a large disadvantage in the nuclear arms race? Also probably not.

 

[Icono]

Show me a small nation bordering Russia and I'll show you a nation that desperately wants to get into NATO. Sure, Ukraine is as corrupt as it gets, but that Russia's neighbors want nothing to do with Russia, is all Russia's fault.

Spoken like a died in the wool indoctrinated from birth, Pole.

 

[clodhopper]

The claims, probably true, that Ukraine's .gov is corrupt is not a valid reason to invade.

Hasnt the US done the same thing in other places?

 

[Icono]

I look at it this way. Russia is the one that invaded a sovereign country. Ukraine didn't invade Russia. The reasons Russia used to justify that invasion are pure bullshit. End of story. The claims, probably true, that Ukraine's .gov is corrupt is not a valid reason to invade.

You seem to forget a WHOLE lot of illegal invasions, when it suits you.

You didn't leave California, they kicked you out for being more of a fucking delusional **** than they could handle.

Unbelievable.

 

[Filthy McChevy]

I look at it this way. Russia is the one that invaded a sovereign country. Ukraine didn't invade Russia. The reasons Russia used to justify that invasion are pure bullshit. End of story. The claims, probably true, that Ukraine's .gov is corrupt is not a valid reason to invade.

I look at you as being like this ostrich.