Ukraine Conflict - "Politics is war without bloodshed while war is politics with bloodshed"

[xzar_monty]

At this point, I would no longer be surprised if NATO did a pre-emptive non-nuclear strike that sunk the entire Black Sea fleet and demolished a significant proportion of the Russian military in and near Ukraine.

Edited October 10, 2022 by xzar_monty

[BruceVC]

2 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

At this point, I would no longer be surprised if NATO did a pre-emptive non-nuclear strike that sunk the entire Black Sea fleet and demolished a significant proportion of the Russian military in and near Ukraine.

I wish they would but I doubt it because that would be seen as an act of war and even though Im not worried the Russian military would last long against NATO I am worried that Putin  being the warmonger  and sociopath he is would use nukes 

[xzar_monty]

8 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

I wish they would but I doubt it because that would be seen as an act of war and even though Im not worried the Russian military would last long against NATO I am worried that Putin  being the warmonger  and sociopath he is would use nukes 

Russia has already said that it is at war against the West.

It is important to remember that is impossible not to provoke Russia. There is ample proof for this in history. Whenever a provocation is needed, it is found. It is the same logic that applies to purges, for instance: whenever a guilty person is needed, he will be found.

[BruceVC]

16 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

Russia has already said that it is at war against the West.

It is important to remember that is impossible not to provoke Russia. There is ample proof for this in history. Whenever a provocation is needed, it is found. It is the same logic that applies to purges, for instance: whenever a guilty person is needed, he will be found.

Yes but Russia says lots of things and most of them arent true

NATO\West is not at war with Russia because they haven't declared war. Putins comments like " we are at war with the West " is just part of his overall grandstanding and hyperbole and its aimed at people within Russia who support Putins War and those that are anti-Western and believe in globohomo conspiracy theories and who say they opposed to the " evil, Western, Capitalist system " 

If Russia attacks a NATO country then NATO must declare war  and bomb the Ruskie black sea fleet back to the Stone Age 

 

Edited October 10, 2022 by BruceVC

[pmp10]

Among targets hit today is a lot of energy infrastructure.

I expect Russians will use the bridge strike as an excuse to target power facilities Ukraine-wide.

Most likely a couple months ahead of schedule but this outcome was predictable. 

Edited October 10, 2022 by pmp10

[Mamoulian War]

As of 11:00 or so, Russia has launched 75 missiles, 41 of them was shot down by air defense systems. And as we can see many of the rockets, which hit the target, did not hit the crucial infrastructure. Yet.

https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2022/10/10/7371095/

 

Edit: so far critical infrastructure hit “only” in Lviv, Ivano-Frankivsk, Kharkiv and Khmelnitsky Oblast.

Edit2: as of 11:00 the UA confirmed critical infrastructure hit in 8 Oblasts. With the observations, that most of the missiles hit non-critical civilian objects. As you have seen above.

Edited October 10, 2022 by Mamoulian War

[Darkpriest]

3 hours ago, bugarup said:

Aaaaand russia retaliates - to the surprise of absolutely no one - by bombing civilians. 

I'm fairly sure it is more aimed to actually kill the infraatructure, like electricity, heating, waterpumps etc. Maybe also road structure in big cities. Given the past experiences, it is possible some of the offshots were either deflections from air defense strikes or just a poor aim. The number of casualties does not indicate a 'civilian terror killing'. If they would aim for that, they would hit apartmebt buildings. 

[Zoraptor]

2 hours ago, xzar_monty said:

At this point, I would no longer be surprised if NATO did a pre-emptive non-nuclear strike that sunk the entire Black Sea fleet and demolished a significant proportion of the Russian military in and near Ukraine.

You'd have a chub for half an hour thinking about all those dead russians. Then throw a wobbly when all those NATO bases go up in mushroom clouds.

That isn't quite as stupid as whoever it was suggested that the US nuking Moscow (the city, not the ship) wouldn't get any retaliation, but not far off.

You know you're off the deep end when Bruce is the voice of reason. Yeah Bruce, I think a direct attack on Russia might just be seen as an act of war.

 

[xzar_monty]

16 minutes ago, Zoraptor said:

That isn't quite as stupid as whoever it was suggested that the US nuking Moscow (the city, not the ship) wouldn't get any retaliation, but not far off.

Well the ship doesn't exist anymore. I think there's a world of difference between anything nuclear and anything non-, so say it's not far off is far off. Anyway, this was partly in reaction to what @kanisatha said about how "deterrence theory may be getting a serious workout soon".

We're in the realm of speculation, of course, but apparently NATO's response to a nuclear strike would be non-nuclear. Why do you automatically assume that Russia's response to a non-nuclear strike would be nuclear?

[Elerond]

25 minutes ago, Darkpriest said:

I'm fairly sure it is more aimed to actually kill the infraatructure, like electricity, heating, waterpumps etc. Maybe also road structure in big cities. Given the past experiences, it is possible some of the offshots were either deflections from air defense strikes or just a poor aim. The number of casualties does not indicate a 'civilian terror killing'. If they would aim for that, they would hit apartmebt buildings. 

As most missiles that weren't shot down by air defense didn't hit electricity, heating, waterpumps etc., but parks, busy streets etc. I would say that you are wrong in your assessment    

[Chilloutman]

6 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

Well the ship doesn't exist anymore. I think there's a world of difference between anything nuclear and anything non-, so say it's not far off is far off. Anyway, this was partly in reaction to what @kanisatha said about how "deterrence theory may be getting a serious workout soon".

We're in the realm of speculation, of course, but apparently NATO's response to a nuclear strike would be non-nuclear. Why do you automatically assume that Russia's response to a non-nuclear strike would be nuclear?

Because NATO would win non-nuclear strike, Russia as it seems now can hardly strike apartment building with non-nuclear option

[Darkpriest]

5 minutes ago, Elerond said:

As most missiles that weren't shot down by air defense didn't hit electricity, heating, waterpumps etc., but parks, busy streets etc. I would say that you are wrong in your assessment    

And how many casualties are reported? I think less than in your average carbombing? 

As for infrastructure, you might check your news again. Even @pmp10posted targets hit here

[Elerond]

3 minutes ago, Darkpriest said:

And how many casualties are reported? I think less than in your average carbombing? 

As for infrastructure, you might check your news again. Even @pmp10posted targets hit here

In Kiev alone there are over two dozen dead in one location.

I mean Russia shot over 80 missiles and less than dozen hit in infrastructure. Either they are absolute incompetent or they didn't target infrastructure 

 

Edited October 10, 2022 by Elerond

[xzar_monty]

The missiles are almost certainly aimed at infrastructure, but because the aim is poor, they end up being more terror strikes than anything else. Terror strike in the literal sense, i.e. causing terror in Ukrainians. With a smallish number of casualties, too.

 

EDIT: Kasparov on Putin.

https://www.spiegel.de/international/world/garry-kasparov-on-the-war-in-ukraine-everyone-who-is-still-in-russia-is-part-of-this-war-machine-a-ce9b5c68-7ba4-4b97-8bb2-6f71525486ea

Edited October 10, 2022 by xzar_monty

[Elerond]

4 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

The missiles are almost certainly aimed at infrastructure, but because the aim is poor, they end up being more terror strikes than anything else. Terror strike in the literal sense, i.e. causing terror in Ukrainians. With a smallish number of casualties, too.

Casualties aren't massive, because there are alarms and people hide in shelters.

Poor aim does not explain why missiles hit tens of kilometers away from any civilian infrastructure. Even if you make assumption that Russian's targeting systems are ****, you still would hit closer to the target. 

[Darkpriest]

1 hour ago, Elerond said:

Casualties aren't massive, because there are alarms and people hide in shelters.

Poor aim does not explain why missiles hit tens of kilometers away from any civilian infrastructure. Even if you make assumption that Russian's targeting systems are ****, you still would hit closer to the target. 

Hitting main city artery, attempt to destroy a bridge in Kiev, a storehouse, etc. Those are infrastructure hits. Poorly executed, but nevertheless they are such. 

Last I read confirmed numbers it was 10 dead and 60 wounded in all attacks. 

Maybe you have more accurate and more current news? 

Edited October 10, 2022 by Darkpriest

[Mamoulian War]

Well, 10 casualties and 60 wounded out of 75 missiles shot is pretty good statistics for Ukraine. If they blew up the bridge, they surely knew, what would happen, and they still did it, because strategically it was still worth for them. And I bet, they even have statistic numbers, how many Ukrainian lives they saved with slowing up the Russian GLOCs over Crimea…

Still no one has given a plausible explanation, how Ukraine was able to manage to fill a truck owned by Russian company deep inside Russian territory with tens of tons pf explosives, and pass all the control checkpoints on their way to Crimea…

[Darkpriest]

11 minutes ago, Mamoulian War said:

Well, 10 casualties and 60 wounded out of 75 missiles shot is pretty good statistics for Ukraine. If they blew up the bridge, they surely knew, what would happen, and they still did it, because strategically it was still worth for them. And I bet, they even have statistic numbers, how many Ukrainian lives they saved with slowing up the Russian GLOCs over Crimea…

Still no one has given a plausible explanation, how Ukraine was able to manage to fill a truck owned by Russian company deep inside Russian territory with tens of tons pf explosives, and pass all the control checkpoints on their way to Crimea…

Some have a theory, since it was an Azer driver, that it was CIA led action using Turkey's influence in the Azerbejan-Armenia conflict, where Turks support Azers and Russia supports Orminas. 

There is definately a lot of grey areas, although less so, than in the case of Nordstream piplines destruction, where two main beneficiaries are easily located, US, and anti-NS/German Poland

 

 

Edited October 10, 2022 by Darkpriest

[pmp10]

A couple of things of note about the recent attacks:

Russia has not run out of long range missiles, they were (are?) stockpiling them.
Lukashenko is claiming NATO/Ukraine is about to invade and is deploying mixed Belarusian/Russian units to defend.
Likely his arm is being twisted harder and harder to join in the fighting.

 

[BruceVC]

Putins  tried and tested military strategy, when you losing a war spread terror by targeting civilians and civilian infrastructure

Russia's truly craven and appalling approach never ceases to amaze me  

 

[Mamoulian War]

According to GRU (UA secret service) this missile strike was planned some time ago…
 

 

Edited October 10, 2022 by Mamoulian War

[Darkpriest]

Seems, per NYT, that it was Ukrainians orchestrating the Crimea bridge car bombing. 

------

A senior Ukrainian official corroborated Russian reports that Ukraine was behind the attack. The official, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of a government ban on discussing the blast, added that Ukraine's intelligence services had orchestrated the explosion, using a bomb loaded onto a truck being driven across the bridge

 

It was unclear if the driver of the truck, who died in the blast, was aware there were explosives inside

[Malcador]

6 hours ago, xzar_monty said:

At this point, I would no longer be surprised if NATO did a pre-emptive non-nuclear strike that sunk the entire Black Sea fleet and demolished a significant proportion of the Russian military in and near Ukraine.

NATO is run by smart people, so not going to happen

[Mamoulian War]

33 minutes ago, Darkpriest said:

Seems, per NYT, that it was Ukrainians orchestrating the Crimea bridge car bombing. 

------

A senior Ukrainian official corroborated Russian reports that Ukraine was behind the attack. The official, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of a government ban on discussing the blast, added that Ukraine's intelligence services had orchestrated the explosion, using a bomb loaded onto a truck being driven across the bridge

 

It was unclear if the driver of the truck, who died in the blast, was aware there were explosives inside

Someone was suggesting here few times that trusting “unnamed” officials giving their opinion to mass-media is not the brightest thing to do.

And he was right. After a while, it became clear, that a lot of unnamed American officials in a lot of media were just spreading bollocks. I think after this experience, it would be wise to take all opinions of any other unnamed official with a hefty portion of salt… Especially when they are from a country, where significant portion of the officials were already sacked due to collaboration with the enemy…

My own opinion  is, that UA did it. But without a proof to back up my claim, this opinion is still worth as much as few ounces of horse****…

Edited October 10, 2022 by Mamoulian War

[Valsuelm]

12 hours ago, BruceVC said:

Vals you should tell Putin that, he invaded Ukraine and started this carnage and war

And he is a liar, you cant trust him as far as you can throw him. Remember when he said " we aren't going to invade Ukraine, our troops are just doing a training exercise on the border of Ukraine" 

Also if you dont trust any of the current media  houses where do you get your information from, who can we trust if embedded journalists in Ukraine from numerous places report on the same stories?

The conflict in Ukraine predates Russia moving troops in earlier this year, by many years.

I don't know of a single politician that is a head of state of a nation that isn't a liar, though Putin is objectively a lot more honest and competent than most, at least when commenting on anything at the international level. This has been true for well over a decade.

Insofar as where I get my information. Primary sources whenever possible. Example: I don't take CNN's word for what Putin or whomever says, I actually take the effort to find the speech/interview and read/watch/listen to it myself. (warning: if you do this, you'll discover that most of the western media lies, all the time, about everything)

I also check a large variety of sources, including some which I'm sure you read. However when I check such publications as the WaPo, CNN, NYTimes, et al I'm more interested in what lies they're telling the gullible serfs than using them as reliable sources of information.

A very important question to ask yourself whenever you're consuming any media is 'Why am I seeing this?', 'Why is this being shown to people?', or 'Cui Bono?'. Few seem capable of asking this question objectively, and instead take almost everything they see and read at face value (if they bother to learn anything at all).

An incomplete list of information sources (on a variety of topics) that I've used within the last week or so (in no particular order):

Spoiler

CNN
AnandTech
FoxNews
TechRadar
RealClearPolitics
Newsmax
American Greatness
One American News Network
TomsHardware
Drudge Report (and random articles linked from there)
RT
MSNBC
NYTimes
Washington Post
ABC
NBC
CBS
PBS
Aljazeera
en.kremlin.ru
this forum
Tim Pool
Steve Turley
The Young Turks
Democracy Now
Der Spiegel
Mark Dice
Infowars
Dr. Berg
Dr Bergman
Church Militant
Linus Tech Tips
Redacted
Red Ice TV
Press for Truth
Computing Forever
Black Pigeons Speaks / Felix Rex
Guns & Gadgets
Gerald Celente
Rob Braxman
Ivor Cummins
Tony Heller
The Wall Street Journal
UCTV
Chris Hedges
The Highwire with Del Bigtree
Dr. Sten Ekberg
The Corbett Report
Richard Grove / Grand Theft World (about the only one on this list that I will say is almost always a very good source of information, but at a different level than most of the other sources even attempt)

 

Edited October 10, 2022 by Valsuelm