Here we go again-Ukraine once again

[les green01]

Originally Posted by tmccarthy

Being taken prisoner seems like one of the worst fates possible. That's why I think putting POWs on TV and interviewing them and broadcasting their statements is pointless(and illegal). Whatever they say it's coming from a defeated man and very likely not what he would have said before he was captured.

-Tim

that in a way depends look at wake island during ww2 the Marines was handing the Japanese their backsides when they landed when the Naval officer order them to lay down their arms Marines couldn't figure out why they was winning just cause they become pows don't mean they don't still have the spunk some American pows will flip off the enemy and tell them its the good luck sign or something or send info with blinks of the eye lids even give names

[August]

Originally Posted by tmccarthy

I don't like either side! And why is everybody so with the Ukrainians? Just because they are fighting the guys we traditionally don't like? Ukraine has some serious bad issues to.

Well name the country that doesn't serious issues, of some sort, we apparently have white supremacists behind every tree and bush if you believe the corporate media but you have to agree that Ukraine for all it's warts at least didn't send an army to invade their neighbors.

*edit: I had to come back and add this: Shooting Prisoners of War in the knees is "wounding"?

Wounding means to inflict a an injury. I don't understand your problem with the definition of the word.

[tmccarthy]

Originally Posted by les green01

that in a way depends look at wake island during ww2 the Marines was handing the Japanese their backsides when they landed when the Naval officer order them to lay down their arms Marines couldn't figure out why they was winning ..... just cause they become pows don't mean they don't still have the spunk some American pows will flip off the enemy and tell them its the good luck sign or something or send info with blinks of the eye lids even give names

“oorah! - Semper Fi !”. I also remember the US Airmen and US Marine POW's on Iwo Jima who were killed and had their livers eaten by Major General Yoshio Tachibana.

Boy, has my posting become fun

-Tim

[tmccarthy]

Originally Posted by August

Well name the country that doesn't serious issues, of some sort, we apparently have white supremacists behind every tree and bush if you believe the corporate media but you have to agree that Ukraine for all it's warts at least didn't send an army to invade their neighbors.

Well this is where it gets difficult because I believe we/ America are responsible for Ukraine being invaded. Putin basically said either take Ukraine membership in NATO off the table or I will wreck the Ukraine. The US said "No" and Ukraine is being wrecked. And I'm willing to bet that whatever the outcome of this war is Ukraine will not be joining NATO, not as long as Putin is alive.
The other thing is that this war is not about Putin. Any leader of Russia would have reacted the same way to the US trying to bring Ukraine into the NATO military alliance. That would have allowed the US Army, German Army, Polish Army any army in NATO to move its forces into Ukraine right on Russia's borders. And allow the deployment of US nuclear missiles in Ukraine with a flight time of about 7 minutes to Moscow. What do we think we are doing?

As far as countries with serious issues in the parking lot at the mall by my house there are people who are having to live in their cars and are sleeping in their cars at night. A few nights ago late at night when I went to the convenience store for some smokes there was a lady standing out front with a tray of homemade chocolates selling them to make some money! So let's try and fix our problems at home and not spend billions of dollars trying to change Russian culture and change who Russia has as a leader which is what started all this. Russia invading Ukraine is an aftereffect of our 20 years of misguided foreign policy in Europe. I say America first. Ukraine would have been better off if they had never known us.

[/QUOTE]Wounding means to inflict a an injury. I don't understand your problem with the definition of the word.[/QUOTE]

Shooting POW's in the knees is just "wounding"? My brain can't answer that one...

I did check up on the story and one of the Russian POW's died. This happened a month ago long before the current headlines of war crimes. And it's going to continue to get worse as long as the war continues...

-Tim

[em2nought]

Originally Posted by tmccarthy

What do we think we are doing?
-Tim

We don't think, we're mostly dumb as rocks. Most Americans, including our sitting President, probably couldn't correctly label more than five foreign countries on a globe. No way they know which countries have been invaded by who, or how often, and why they might be a little touchy about that sort of thing. We need a "pathetic" emoji.

[Catfish]

Originally Posted by tmccarthy;2802077 [...

because I believe we/ America are responsible for Ukraine being invaded.

Really? Why and how? What about Russia?

Putin basically said either take Ukraine membership in NATO off the table or I will wreck the Ukraine.

That would have been blackmail and the answer would have been given instantly. Putin said nothing of the kind beforehand. Lavrov: "No one intends to invade the Ukraine". Next Putin claimed he would draw back his forces from the Ukraine border, that it was only a manoeuvre, again an obvious lie directly in our face. He just waited a bit and acted after his good friend Xi Jin Ping had ended his winter games, to not spoil it.

The US said "No" and Ukraine is being wrecked. And I'm willing to bet that whatever the outcome of this war is Ukraine will not be joining NATO, not as long as Putin is alive.

You are willing to bet, so you say it is effectively the US which wrecked Ukraine. I see your point but it is of course bullsh!t. Regarding Ukraine will not be joining NATO as long as Putler is alive .. we will see .. This war is about Putin and only about Putin and his lies. Lavrov is usually the man to speak tacheles, he must be fuming to have to officiall spread his boss's lies all the time.
Ukraine was neither allowed to join NATO nor to join the EU. Even if it had joined NATO in 2008 there would have been no missiles stationed there, and everyxone knows that.
This war happens to make an egomaniac a$$hole's wet dream true, to make Russia great again like in the borders of 1989. Won't happen.
You will not blackmail the whole world, just so Russia can invade any country under the threat of a nuclear war.


Regarding Russia asking for "guarantees" i do not see why and how. Every independent country like Ukraine can choose its own path and membership of course. And Putin does not care for guarantees as we saw, from Georgia, Chechenia, Krim to Belarus and so on. So Lavrov is talking about security and guarantees for Russia, and only for Russia. What about the world? Who tf is Putin to lecture the whole world about his opinion on history and demand the rest of the world to kowtow?



The rest of your post indicates how bad the people have to live, in this poor USA:

As far as countries with serious issues in the parking lot at the mall by my house there are people who are having to live in their cars and are sleeping in their cars at night. A few nights ago late at night when I went to the convenience store for some smokes there was a lady standing out front with a tray of homemade chocolates selling them to make some money!

How nice, i now think the russians are much better off, are they eating caviar the whole day?

So let's try and fix our problems at home and not spend billions of dollars trying to change Russian culture and change who Russia has as a leader which is what started all this. Russia invading Ukraine is an aftereffect of our 20 years of misguided foreign policy in Europe. I say America first. Ukraine would have been better off if they had never known us.

I don't know but this is the russian side of views, and i think you are a troll.

[Skybird]

I have long time argued that when NATO gives Ukraine an explicit timetable for membership, that would be the time when Russia with 100% probability would attack - BEFORE membership and thus article 5 become an issue for Russia. I did not expect that Russia would attack without a imminent causal trigger.

Obviously that assumption was wrong. I now think Russia wants its sovjet empire back anyway - no matter what the US would do. So, the US in my view is relieved of the accusation that it pressed or provoked the Russian attack.



The US has made it its hobby to push its own system in other places, and got recently repeatedly some bloody nose. But regarding Russia this US missionising maybe plays less a role than previously thought. The Russian desire is what it is, it stands independent from American action. Preventing Russian aggression is thus only possible by the fielding of superior combat power. In other words: by military deterrance.

[ET2SN]

Some stuff I was thinking about last month.
Its great to have debates about conspiracies and what-about-isms when your town isn't getting shelled.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by ET2SN

Now, after the needed correction of assumptions that was enforced by Russia's invasion and its behaviour in its victim's country, the man in the video probably is right.

I also have started moving towards thinking that NATO must intervene in the Ukraine. A Russian victory of any sort there is only an encouraging of an attack against Poland, the most likely target. Thats not an issue of national pride or principle. It is simply an essential need of survival.

Russia still has immense military ressources, by material it is aabsolutely superior to the ukriane, and in the nlong run, in a war of attrition, it will be found that Russia could afford that while the Ukraine cannot. So, a Russian victory in the Ukraine still is absolutely possible, depsite recent Ukrainian battle victories. Russian still has a fearsome ammount of artillery and missile firepower and obviously has fallen back to what it already did in Syria: keeping distance and start shelling cities from a distance.

And the Russians will learn from what they have seen in the past 6 weeks, and will try to adapt. They will not blindly and optimistically rush into Poland again, but will prepare, and to their best understanding: improve their approach to things, if they can.

Lets not forget there also is Hungary with a quite Russia-friendly Victor Orban who just has secured an absolute majority in elections and now starts his fourth term, much to Brussel's despair. Russia maybe must not even strike Hungary to get it back.

And then there is Bulgaria, maybe even more Russia-friendly than Orban is.

[Skybird]

The value is rather symbolic, but still:

https://beta.dw.com/en/german-presid...icy/a-61362153

Note that he said normalisation of ties is impossible with a Russia under Putin. Which implies the illusion of that without Putin, Russia would be something better. I predict it does not matter that much, but that Russia will not change at all if Putin is gone.

Especially in the German economy, which is heavily invested in Russia, there seems to be the hope that after the war and a settling of things sanciton would go away soon and there could be business as usual again, at least business closer to a former normal state. Quite some companies still refuse to prepare cutting ties completely. Inexcusable. The german compoanies are not alone in this however, intenraitonal companies also are hesitent to completekly cut ties, and just put their activities in a temporary freeze.

[Skybird]

Der Spiegel, Reuters:

The EU Commission wants to ban all coal imports from Russia. This was reported by SPIEGEL, and earlier by the news agency Reuters and the "Süddeutsche Zeitung".

According to the report, the import ban is to become part of the next sanctions package against Russia. More specifics, such as when and to what extent coal imports from Russia could be stopped, were not initially known. According to diplomats, the Commission intends to present the sanctions package to the EU countries on Tuesday. They will then have to vote on it.

According to a report by the Reuters news agency, the import of wood, cement, rubber, chemicals and luxury foods such as caviar and spirits such as vodka will also be banned. This would involve a total volume of five billion euros annually. Russian trucks and ships should also no longer be allowed into the EU. The export of semiconductors, high-tech machinery, certain liquefied gas technology and other equipment is also to be banned. The export ban would have a volume of ten billion euros.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

[Skybird]

Alexander Vindman became famous as a key witness in Donald Trump's Ukraine affair. Even after his expulsion from the White House, he remains an important voice as an expert on Eastern Europe. He fears a failure of Western policy on Ukraine. From the Neue Zürcher Zeitung:

Mr. Vindman, you emigrated from what was then still Soviet Ukraine more than 40 years ago as a child. What goes through your mind when you see millions fleeing that country now?

It is tragic that Ukraine is facing such a brutal attack. Putin's dangerousness was not recognized in time. For too long, people clung to wishful thinking about Russia. This is now outdated in view of the barbarity of the Kremlin leadership. However, its character had been recognized earlier, in Syria, in the Donbass war from 2014, in Georgia and also in the Chechen war more than 20 years ago.

Can the current war be stopped before it turns into a long-term conflict with total destruction?

Yes, but I don't think that will happen. Because the politicians in the EU and America will not have the courage to take the necessary measures. They are afraid to provide Ukraine with enough weapons. Moreover, courageous decisions are needed in terms of new sanctions. Europe could impose energy sanctions despite its energy dependence on Russia. That every house is heated should be ensured, but it could be decided, for example, that industry has to cut back. Then this war would end more quickly.

Back to military aid. You are a lieutenant colonel and a war veteran yourself. What do you think the Ukrainian armed forces need?

The Ukrainians are doing well, but they are not winning fast enough. Russia, as a country of nearly 150 million people, has enormous resources. Despite its losses, it still has much more military equipment in its arsenals. It is taking too long for Putin to realize that he cannot achieve his goals. His calculus could change if he lost his power in airspace. This would require modern air defense systems on the Ukrainian side, but much more. Long-range combat drones would be crucial. With them, the Ukrainians could attack Russian air bases or destroy missile sites.

In other words: What the U.S. government is doing you think is totally insufficient.

It is not nearly enough. It is not enough to help Ukraine win this war. To be sure, the Biden administration has done a lot of things right. It laid the groundwork early on for a united Western response to the invasion. For that, it deserves a lot of credit. But it is not enough to funnel anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles into Ukraine. Much more powerful systems are needed - ones that can take out even high-flying Russian fighter-bombers.

The counterargument is that supplying certain weapons would invite escalation with nuclear power Russia. That's why the U.S. opposed the delivery of Polish MiG fighter jets to Ukraine. You criticize this?

Yes, because with such a step we would not be anywhere near the threshold of war. After all, it wouldn't be us flying those jets. It would be Ukrainian pilots striking back with Soviet-era fighters. We must not forget that there are many precedents for proxy wars from the Cold War era. In the Korean War, Soviet pilots flew MiG fighters and killed Americans with them. In Vietnam, the Soviets operated anti-aircraft systems that shot down American jets. During the Soviet military intervention in Afghanistan, we armed the mujahedin. None of this ever led to a major war.

So what specifically are you proposing?

The Turks have long provided Ukraine with Bayraktar combat drones. Why shouldn't the U.S. do the same? Instead, we provide only the very small Switchblade drones, which have limited capabilities and achieve little against armored vehicles. We act as if this is an important step. But it isn't. Delivering capable drones would be significant. The same goes for air defense. Ukraine should receive systems like the S-300 defense missiles.

In the background, there is always the concern that the West could somehow trigger a nuclear war.

This is the wrong basic assumption. The balance of terror still applies - the fact that in a nuclear war, mutual destruction is guaranteed and no one can win. That is an immutable principle. Russia, therefore, has no incentive for nuclear war. And a conventional strike against NATO would be equally problematic, because the Russians are already facing enormous difficulties in Ukraine. The hurdle for a confrontation with the West is therefore extremely high.

Putin is a person who sits at a huge distance from his closest advisors because he doesn't want to come down with covid. Such a person is not a suicidal person who wants to plunge into a destructive nuclear war.

But how can we be sure that Putin will not use a tactical nuclear weapon in Ukraine?

Ukraine is a different case. It does not have nuclear weapons. It gave up its nuclear arsenal inherited from the Soviet Union in the 1990s - in exchange for useless Russian security guarantees. Faced with a threat of nuclear weapons, what options do the Ukrainians have? They will not capitulate. They will go as far as they have to in order to preserve their freedom and independence. We can make it clear to Putin that the use of weapons of mass destruction would have an immediate impact on the security of the West. That could deter him.

Putin will also be wary of deployment for other reasons. He calls Kiev the cradle of Russian civilization. Using a nuclear weapon against a "brother nation" would be difficult to justify. The use would also show weakness and make it clear to the Russian people that Russia is not winning, as is always claimed. Nuclear bombs are a weapon of last resort.

More likely, Putin will one day simply declare victory. He will destroy Ukrainian cities and Ukrainian military industry, but then congratulate his army and withdraw.

In your book "Here, Right Matters," you write that the U.S. has struggled to understand the mindset of the Russian leadership. What are the biggest misconceptions?

As a former intelligence officer, Putin is a master psychologist. For decades, he has manipulated world leaders. He capitalized on our hopes as well as our fears - hopes for a successful relationship with Russia, but also fears of a nuclear power. There is no doubt that the West should try to maintain good relations with Moscow. But we made the mistake of prioritizing Russia even when Russia had long since proved to be an unusable partner.

Instead, we should have set new priorities: closer relations with Ukraine, a willing partner. By subordinating Ukraine policy to Russia's considerations, progress was hampered.

Is there anything that even the Selensky government could have done differently to prevent the war?

Of course. The fact that the war was not prevented justifies criticism on all sides. The main blame certainly lies with the bellicose Putin. The West bears responsibility for not exerting enough pressure on the Kremlin in the run-up. And Selensky could have carried out more extensive reforms and fought corruption more vigorously. If he had shown the same courage in doing so as he has now in the war, he would have strengthened Ukraine in this way. Selenski also deserves criticism for his wishful thinking that Russia would not attack. He could have done more to prepare his country.

Why didn't he take the U.S. warnings seriously?

I think it was a kind of mental block. Despite the eight-year war in eastern Ukraine, he could not imagine that a historically close-knit country like Russia would launch a major attack with tens of thousands of casualties. He probably also wanted to keep the population calm and not scare the markets.

You became famous in 2019 as a key witness against President Donald Trump in the Ukraine affair. Trump blocked military aid to Ukraine at the time in order to get Selenski to investigate the Biden family. How do you view the affair in flashback?

The current events show why Trump's behavior was so damaging. Even then, I feared that blocking military aid to Ukraine might make war more likely. To me, Trump has blood on his hands. He made sure, with his behavior, that Ukraine became an issue in Washington that no one wanted to have anything to do with. To the last, Trump also praised Putin's "brilliance." But he will pay for it. The vast majority of Americans support Ukraine and will not overlook the fact that Trump encouraged Putin to go to war.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

[Skybird]

Poland buys 250 M1 Abrams MBTs. Value of the deal: around 4.6 bn. First tanks should be delivered this year.

Poland also invites, demands, wants the statiuoning of US nuclear weapons on its soil - in a bid to establish an American tripwire deterring Russia.

Germany has shut down Hydra, the world's biggest and Russian-run darknet marketplace. The servers for Hydra were located in Germany.

Several more European nations have expelled dozens of Russian diplomats, or should I say: spies.


And after reading somehting today, I wonder: how will the ukraine dela with loosing billions and billions of transfer fees for Russian gas in Ukrainian pipelines if gas would be boycotted completely? They get 2.60-2.70 dollars per 1000 m3 gas from Gazprom Russia, even now, while the war is raging. Another amongst several absurdities of this war. To say the economical constellations of this war, internationally, are absurd, is even an understatement.

[mapuc]

I....I...Shake my head wondering is this a new way of fighting a war-where fight your enemy with one hand, while you trade goods and other thing with this enemy with the other hand.

Markus

[Catfish]

^ happened already in WW2 and sure earlier .. Ford Motor Company, IBM..


Bucha: "The executions are definitely wanted"

"The war in Ukraine has been causing horror for weeks. However, the alleged massacre in Bucha surpasses everything else that has been committed in terms of atrocities.
In an interview with ntv.de, the Potsdam contemporary historian Juliane Fürst describes why something like this is not so unexpected."

https://www-n--tv-de.translate.goog/..._x_tr_pto=wapp