Ukraine Conflict - Das Himmelfahrtskommando

[xzar_monty]

It's amazing to find Russia apologists in a situation where the mere mention of war on the street can lead to you being taken away instantly, or the mere mention of things not being quite right can lead to a sentence of up to 15 years.

I mean, if things are NOT very wrong, then why would bringing this stuff up be a problem for Russia or Putin?

Russia's attitude is also evident in the way its embassies in its neighboring countries have specifically asked Russian nationals to report all negative treatment of or comments about Russians to their respective embassies.

Edited March 28, 2022 by xzar_monty

[bugarup]

44 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

It's amazing to find Russia apologists in a situation where the mere mention of war on the street can lead to you being taken away instantly, or the mere mention of things not being quite right can lead to a sentence of up to 15 years.

You don't even need to mention war now, people have been taken away and fined for holding signs saying "*** *****", "The 5th commandment: thou shalt not kill" and my personal favorite, "Fascism shall not pass", complete with the reason for fine being that, I kid you not, it discredits russian army. 

 

 

[xzar_monty]

An officer who supports the war was also shut up for daring to suggest that people may be dying. It's beyond Orwell. Check it out:

 

[Darkpriest]

 

Interesting observation, but I'd say it's more of a result that Russian combat communication system basically failed on day one, this it led to use of old tech and also led to consolidation of units instead of them operating in small combat groups with infantry support. 

Also the corruption level that been made apparent in the state of equipment and supplies, where a few heads will roll. 

Russians have manpower to learn on their mistakes, and they will now most likely start operating in small groups with strong artilery and air support and some portable anti-drone eq. 

[BruceVC]

34 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

An officer who supports the war was also shut up for daring to suggest that people may be dying. It's beyond Orwell. Check it out:

 

" the triumph of the Russian army " ...I was going to make a joke but its too tragic to laugh 

[Chilloutman]

On 3/27/2022 at 12:55 PM, Zoraptor said:

Going to be very interesting to see if a certain Ukrainian video released a couple of hours ago gets mentioned at all in the media.

so you can sleep well. It just hit our mainstream media

https://www.idnes.cz/zpravy/zahranicni/ukrajina-video-rusti-zajatci-strileni-do-nohou-muceni-valka-rusko.A220328_103103_zahranicni_kha

So I guess now you have to ask how fighting for Mariupol is displayed on Russian side now

 

[213374U]

10 hours ago, kanisatha said:

Way to remove context so you can again grandstand against me.

But given your obvious anti-Americanism, go ahead and count up all the Al Qaeda, Taliban, and ISIS killed by the US too. After all, they were "civilians" too, right?

There isn't any context to remove because you didn't provide any. The statement that comment was in reference to was a gratuitous, unsourced and blanket insinuation that Iraqi civilian casualty figures aren't to be taken seriously because they could have been soldiers in disguise. An insinuation, rather than a clear assertion, so you could easily claim "that's not what I meant" when called on it, as you predictably have. Feel free to provide context and sources so we can have a nuanced and constructive discussion about it. No grandstanding -- just calling bull.

I also like how you think my "obvious anti-Americanism" is of any relevance. Previously it was Russian apologism, was it? I wear my political leanings on my sleeve. Over the course of 15+ years of discussions here I've railed against the EU, the Soviet Union, China, Saudi Arabia and, of course, my own country. But it's my anti-Americanism that is unacceptable. Heh. Your exceptionalism is showing.

[213374U]

29 minutes ago, Chilloutman said:

so you can sleep well. It just hit our mainstream media

https://www.idnes.cz/zpravy/zahranicni/ukrajina-video-rusti-zajatci-strileni-do-nohou-muceni-valka-rusko.A220328_103103_zahranicni_kha

That's not it.

edit: nevermind, it is, it wasn't showing the first part for whatever reason

Edited March 28, 2022 by 213374U

[Chilloutman]

I don't know what 'It' is but from speculations here I thought its about torture of russian POW (which itself is silly as there is no war there right?)

[BruceVC]

Just now, 213374U said:

There isn't any context to remove because you didn't provide any. The statement that comment was in reference to was a gratuitous, unsourced and blanket insinuation that Iraqi civilian casualty figures aren't to be taken seriously because they could have been soldiers in disguise. An insinuation, rather than a clear assertion, so you could easily claim "that's not what I meant" when called on it, as you predictably have. Feel free to provide context and sources so we can have a nuanced and constructive discussion about it. No grandstanding -- just calling bull.

I also like how you think my "obvious anti-Americanism" is of any relevance. Previously it was Russian apologism, was it? I wear my political leanings on my sleeve. Over the course of 15+ years of discussions here I've railed against the EU, the Soviet Union, China, Saudi Arabia and, of course, my own country. But it's my anti-Americanism that is unacceptable. Heh. Your exceptionalism is showing.

Oh your obvious  anti-Western\anti-Americanism is very relevant. Its the reason your rely on  whataboutism to handwave the constant failures and criticisms  of Putins War on a sovereign country 

 

[BruceVC]

33 minutes ago, Chilloutman said:

so you can sleep well. It just hit our mainstream media

https://www.idnes.cz/zpravy/zahranicni/ukrajina-video-rusti-zajatci-strileni-do-nohou-muceni-valka-rusko.A220328_103103_zahranicni_kha

So I guess now you have to ask how fighting for Mariupol is displayed on Russian side now

 

Also this has been raised on CNN, sorry Zora I guess the Western media is more transparent than you think. Back to the drawing board

https://edition.cnn.com/europe/live-news/ukraine-russia-putin-news-03-27-22/h_6e158d3fc5bc5efe7fc3f10b69b7aeee

 

[213374U]

4 minutes ago, Chilloutman said:

torture of russian POW (which itself is silly as there is no war there right?)

I don't know man, tell that to Oleksiy Arestovich. 

'Adviser to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky Oleksiy Arestovich said he would focus on the published cases. "We take them extremely seriously. We'll investigate. We do not torture prisoners of war, "he said.'

[Chilloutman]

well its war from Ukraine point of view. But from Russian point of view its 'special operation' so I am not sure if rules of war should apply to them? I think they don't even official declared war to Ukraine?

[213374U]

I don't think they have, no. That somehow makes Ukrainian servicemen shooting restrained Russians better, or...?

Let me ask again: what is the agenda?

[Chilloutman]

4 minutes ago, 213374U said:

I don't think they have, no. That somehow makes Ukrainian servicemen shooting restrained Russians better, or...?

Let me ask again: what is the agenda?

No not at all, I condemn those actions fully. I am just pointing out that Russia is so cowardly they can't even declare war properly and I am asking question if rules of war in that case apply, thats all. Not sure what agenda you mean.

 

I am also sure IF Ukraine 'win' they will punish such actions if proven true. Even Ukraine spokesmen stated that those will be punished. (albeit might be just some scapegoats) because they want to maintain their image in western eyes. I doubt you can say same for Russian side of things

[bugarup]

36 minutes ago, 213374U said:

Over the course of 15+ years of discussions here I've railed against the EU, the Soviet Union, China, Saudi Arabia and, of course, my own country. But it's my anti-Americanism that is unacceptable. Heh. Your exceptionalism is showing.

Curious how's there is sovietistan in your list, but no russia, when putler pretty openly wants to mold it into new sovietistan. Unless you criticized sovietistan for being, I dunno, not enough of a corrupt, hypocritic, oppressive ****hole built on lies and fear? 

[kanisatha]

10 hours ago, Bartimaeus said:

Brandolini's Law:

The DailyMail is tabloid and has a stupendously terrible track record - it is no surprise nobody else wants to even read it, much less try to determine whether the particular article's contents have any connection to reality. Fool me once, shame on you...and so on.

That's your subjective take, and that's fine. I could say exactly these same things about such sources as the NYT and the Guardian, which to me routinely come across as tabloids.

The bottom line is this. For some in this forum (don't know if that includes you), they see news sources as either entirely credible or entirely not credible. It's a convenient mental heuristic that most people develop to make things easy for them by ONLY trusting a handful of sources they have subjectively decided are "good," while completely rejecting anything that comes from any other source. I don't see things that way. For me, with every single news source anywhere in the world, some of what they say may be true and some false. And it is up to me to sift through these news stories and separate the wheat from the chaff. That's why even though in general I don't consider the BBC, NYT, Guardian, and Bloomberg to be truthful or credible sources, I still went ahead and linked articles here from exactly those sources. Because sometimes even they can get something right.

[Malcador]

35 minutes ago, kanisatha said:

That's your subjective take, and that's fine. I could say exactly these same things about such sources as the NYT and the Guardian, which to me routinely come across as tabloids.

The bottom line is this. For some in this forum (don't know if that includes you), they see news sources as either entirely credible or entirely not credible. It's a convenient mental heuristic that most people develop to make things easy for them by ONLY trusting a handful of sources they have subjectively decided are "good," while completely rejecting anything that comes from any other source. I don't see things that way. For me, with every single news source anywhere in the world, some of what they say may be true and some false. And it is up to me to sift through these news stories and separate the wheat from the chaff. That's why even though in general I don't consider the BBC, NYT, Guardian, and Bloomberg to be truthful or credible sources, I still went ahead and linked articles here from exactly those sources. Because sometimes even they can get something right.

It's not really that subjective that the Mail lies/exaggerates to the point you really shouldn't rely on them for more than noting they said something that you can look on to see the real story.  Have you ever read the paper on a consistent basis ? Definitely worse than reading the NYT, Guardian or BBC. 

[kanisatha]

10 hours ago, Zoraptor said:

Context like "No credible effort was ever made by those who were supposedly counting civilian deaths to verify whether a person in civilian clothing was in fact a civilian"?

What do you want, a nuanced and detailed response to your- what else can you call it- unsupported and nuance free blanket assertion of bad faith or gross incompetence? It actively invites out of hand dismissal.

No. Let's be clear on how things happened. You posted numbers for civilian deaths in both Iraq and Ukraine, with no source attribution to the claimed Iraqi number. I then posted calling you out on your numbers, very clearly laying out my rationale for why those numbers are suspect and lacking credibility. Then, someone else decided to grossly mischaracterize that as my saying ALL civilian deaths anywhere are not really civilians, completely ignoring that I said what I said very specifically about civilian death numbers in Iraq, in the 2003 war and not even the 1991 war, and not any place else.

In the 2003 Iraq war, about a day or so after the war started, Hussein issued a proclamation broadcast openly on all Iraqi military and media communication sources, ordering his military forces to remove their uniforms, put on civilian clothing, and mingle within the civilian population while attacking US forces. This is widely known, and well documented.

[kanisatha]

3 minutes ago, Malcador said:

It's not really that subjective that the Mail lies/exaggerates to the point you really shouldn't rely on them for more than noting they said something that you can look on to see the real story.  Have you ever read the paper on a consistent basis ? Definitely worse than reading the NYT, Guardian or BBC. 

Again, that's fine. That's exactly why I always insist on casting a wide net for the sources I read, precisly because someone will always view certain sources as suspect.

And no, I don't read the Daily Mail on a regular or even irregular basis. I saw on a TV broadcast an interview that was done, I believe by a Polish TV station, of the Ukrainian vice prime minister who talked extensively, providing specific details, about how Ukrainian citizens were being taken away by the Russians to locations unknown inside Russia, essentially being kidnapped, and this includes children. The interview was in Ukrainian, with English subtitles. I then went and did a Google search to see if I could come up with a print version of that interview so that I could share it here. And the first article that popped up in the search was the Daily Mail article, which I then first read to make sure it was saying the same things I had seen in that interview, and then I linked that article here.

[Chilloutman]

well lets be real, most sources in war are scatchy at best. A lot of them are propaganda for either side and winners usually will be painted as the righteous ones in the end. I have my subjective opinions about lot of things happening there but the main one is that Russians are trying to occupy sovereign nation (which I guess no-one argue is not true) and change their leadership as they did many time in past including my country and/or take over strategical or valuable territory. Another subjective hot take is they don't care about Russian population on those territories at all and are using them only as scapegoat to justify their intentions. That being demonstrated by basically jailing anyone who disagree with them in their own country for many years, not just recently. I also think that Russian jails seen more torture of opposition than what we would probably see on Ukraine side from even soldiers at war whose families are being shelled by same soldiers they are fighting against (depending on how long this war will last).

[Malcador]

Yes but if you link a Mail article, you are going to have to rely on everyone to assume you've done that much diligence for some reason. I try to not lead out with stuff that sounds like FOAF, well ok other than Twitter posts of people that don't seem like liars.

 

 

[Darkpriest]

And so it begins... 

When you have cut all the ties, aside of one sector you need, what will you do, when the other party will target that specific sector?

There is near zero leverage left, when the politicians talk in absolutes and declared Putin a second coming of Hitler. There is also clear message, that economies will not be returning to pre-sanctions era and will look to slowly exit all economic relations in vital parts of the trade exchange. Why would Russia and Putin then care at all? You cant take more from them, when you've already frozen assets and withdrew all the business... 

[BruceVC]

22 minutes ago, Malcador said:

Yes but if you link a Mail article, you are going to have to rely on everyone to assume you've done that much diligence for some reason. I try to not lead out with stuff that sounds like FOAF, well ok other than Twitter posts of people that don't seem like liars.

 

 

Malc their is a huge difference between RT, and other Russian similar media houses, and BBC which is  funded by tax payers in the public sector space. But  its not the same as being the mouthpiece of the state which is what RT is 

[BruceVC]

8 minutes ago, Darkpriest said:

And so it begins... 

When you have cut all the ties, aside of one sector you need, what will you do, when the other party will target that specific sector?

There is near zero leverage left, when the politicians talk in absolutes and declared Putin a second coming of Hitler. There is also clear message, that economies will not be returning to pre-sanctions era and will look to slowly exit all economic relations in vital parts of the trade exchange. Why would Russia and Putin then care at all? You cant take more from them, when you've already frozen assets and withdrew all the business... 

Yes, this is no surprise 

Putin cant trade effectively  in $ so he wants to trade in worthless Rubles