Ukraine discussion

[obyknven]

Meanwhile in Sweden. Memorial plate about evil Russians.

http://pixs.ru/showimage/1280pxRyss_9713334_14376468.jpg

Oh My God! The Swedes yet have butthurt from times of Northern war! They are just unbelievable slowpoke's!

 

Moar Swedish craziness.

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/supreme-commander-of-swedish-forces-on-mystery-sub-its-1649327284

 

"This is very serious, I would go so far as... well, I won't use Scanian [southern dialect of Swedish]. But I will say that but it's purely and simply fu**ed up that something or someone has entered this way into Swedish territory."Sverker Göransson, General of the Swedish Army, Supreme Commander of the Swedish Armed Forces

Few hours later after this interview search of imaginary Russian sub has been canceled.

 

More sucessful Swedish hunts for Russian sub's in near past.

http://www.sunnhordland.no/article/20141022/NYHENDE/141029879

http://ekstrabladet.dk/nyheder/samfund/article5259396.ece

 

Poor Swedes, even their neighbors (and ex-masters  ) troll them.

[obyknven]

Bodies of 286 Women Discovered, 400 Listed Missing in East Ukraine

 

 

Around 400 women between the ages of 18 and 25 have gone missing in Krasnoarmeisk where [ukrainian forces] Dnepr-1 was based. The bodies of 286 women around Krasnoarmeisk who had been raped have been discovered.

What a surprise! Ukrainian Nazi acts as... Ukrainian Nazi!

[obyknven]

Ukrwanda. Is Hohlutu land. No Rutsi!

 

 

 

Message to the Western artists. Portraying of modern Russia ( Putin for example ) with Soviet symbols is same way as portray of G. Washington as British patriot (and this pic show how this is stupid looks like).

[Chilloutman]

 

Message to the Western artists. Portraying of modern Russia ( Putin for example ) with Soviet symbols is same way as portray of G. Washington as British patriot (and this pic show how this is stupid looks like).

 

 

Wait what? like Putin is/was not comunist? So KGB was imperialist agency, i see...

[obyknven]

 

Message to the Western artists. Portraying of modern Russia ( Putin for example ) with Soviet symbols is same way as portray of G. Washington as British patriot (and this pic show how this is stupid looks like).

 

Wait what? like Putin is/was not comunist? So KGB was imperialist agency, i see...

Wait what? like G. Washington is/was not royalist? So British Army was revolutionary agency, i see...

 

[Chilloutman]

 

 

Message to the Western artists. Portraying of modern Russia ( Putin for example ) with Soviet symbols is same way as portray of G. Washington as British patriot (and this pic show how this is stupid looks like).

 

Wait what? like Putin is/was not comunist? So KGB was imperialist agency, i see...

Wait what? like G. Washington is/was not royalist? So British Army was revolutionary agency, i see...

 

Probably problem with translation, I dont have too much info about murican history. Clearly you should translate texts if you put them here, you know at least into readable alphabet

[Zoraptor]

George Washington fought for the British (in the 7 years war, iirc) before he turned traitor and fought for the continentals. So he was both a British soldier and their implacable foe as circumstances changed.

[Namutree]

George Washington fought for the British (in the 7 years war, iirc) before he turned traitor and fought for the continentals. So he was both a British soldier and their implacable foe as circumstances changed.

That's right. 

 

Over here it's usually called the French and Indian war.

[Chilloutman]

George Washington fought for the British (in the 7 years war, iirc) before he turned traitor and fought for the continentals. So he was both a British soldier and their implacable foe as circumstances changed.

 

So both pictures are ok, donst see what he want to say by that then..

[obyknven]

 

Hey my lovely unicorns, my Name is Amely Rose and I am an Artist, Model and Photographer from Germany.

http://thebizarrebirdcage.blogspot.ru/

 

[Walsingham]

Still adding value to the community. Brings a tear, don't it?

[Gorgon]

Looks photoshoppy. 

 

 

Correction, IS photoshoppy. Of course it's possible that she is using an amateur aesthetic on purpose. So the family should be worried about the Ukrainian airforce and not the Russian SAMs who actually shot one down.  

[obyknven]

So the family should be worried about the Ukrainian airforce and not the Russian SAMs who actually shot one down.  

Vanga detected! :3

 

Meanwhile in citadel of TRUTH.

http://youtu.be/CL7TrncSf2k

They say rebel fighters is Ukrainain army and Ukrainian army is invading Russian army lol.

 

Original video from rebels, how they defended against attack of Ukrainian Army

http://youtu.be/nUJvNkX5LAY

[Gorgon]

Sounds like a really cool old bat. I'm fine with being her. 

[Mr. Magniloquent]

Looks photoshoppy. 

 

 

Correction, IS photoshoppy. Of course it's possible that she is using an amateur aesthetic on purpose. So the family should be worried about the Ukrainian airforce and not the Russian SAMs who actually shot one down.  

 

Wow. Where to begin? What possible motive could Russia have for shooting down a civilian airline? To manically laugh as they strangle kittens and invite The West to finally get WWIII started? Why was the flight diverted over a warzone? Why were two Ukrainian jets "escorting" that plane? Why haven't the air-traffic control recordings been released? Why was there never any massive rocket plume seen by anyone, even when the falling wreckage was? Why hasn't the USA released its incontrovertible proof they supposedly have? Why was the airline's fuselage riddled with cannon fire matching the openly Neo-Nazi Ukrainian jet fighter's armaments?

 

After all, it's not like the USA has ever staged a false-flag to incite war have they? How many should I even bother listing? You must not "remember the Maine". What should we have called this event? Gulf of Tonkinsky? Grow up.

[Agiel]

 

Looks photoshoppy. 

 

 

Correction, IS photoshoppy. Of course it's possible that she is using an amateur aesthetic on purpose. So the family should be worried about the Ukrainian airforce and not the Russian SAMs who actually shot one down.  

 

Wow. Where to begin? What possible motive could Russia have for shooting down a civilian airline? To manically laugh as they strangle kittens and invite The West to finally get WWIII started?

 

First of all you have quite readily shown your colours by making no distinction between the Separatists and Russia.

 

Secondly, you obviously haven't heard of a little something called "Hanlon's Razor" to suggest that *anyone* would have knowingly shot down a civilian airliner out of pure malevolence.

Edited November 16, 2014 by Agiel

[BruceVC]

 

 

Looks photoshoppy. 

 

 

Correction, IS photoshoppy. Of course it's possible that she is using an amateur aesthetic on purpose. So the family should be worried about the Ukrainian airforce and not the Russian SAMs who actually shot one down.  

 

Wow. Where to begin? What possible motive could Russia have for shooting down a civilian airline? To manically laugh as they strangle kittens and invite The West to finally get WWIII started?

 

First of all you have quite readily shown your colours by making no distinction between the Separatists and Russia.

 

Secondly, you obviously haven't heard of a little something called "Hanlon's Razor".

 

 

 I like Occams Razor as far as this tragedy is  concerned, the plane was indeed shot down mistakenly by the separatists thinking it was a Ukrainian plane. And the military armament was supplied by Russia

[Gorgon]

The SAMs were Russian, the rest is all you gentlemen. 

[Zoraptor]

Technically, the SAMs (allegedly) used were ex-Soviet rather than Russian, since both Russia and Ukraine have them.

[Darkpriest]

I have mixed feelings about all this.

 

On the one hand there reall never was Ukraine as the nation and the Ukraine in it's current form is an artificial creation (no real cohesivness in terms of traditions and cultrue over the whole country). It was also quite obvious that if the new government will be heavily anti-russian the Russian government will not just look as their biggest military asset near the middleeast and africa is taken away (Black Sea Fleet military base) as it has too big of a global strategic value.

 

On the other hand allowing for militant actions and change of borders with brute force is dangerous and can lead to some nasty outcomes and bringing demons of war from the past.

 

Probably it would be a different scenario and Ukraine would allow for secession if the eastern Ukraine was not rich in natural resources and industry....

 

The act from russains that there are no russians armed forces in Ukraine is rather silly and simply makes them look stupid, the whole conflict just leads to unnecessary civilian collaterals, and it's all about the free and unrestricted access for Russians to their crimea military base. Putin does not give a sht about russians there who were living in the artificial country, it's all about the strategic position of Russia an its military on the world map.

[Mr. Magniloquent]

 

 

Looks photoshoppy. 

 

 

Correction, IS photoshoppy. Of course it's possible that she is using an amateur aesthetic on purpose. So the family should be worried about the Ukrainian airforce and not the Russian SAMs who actually shot one down.  

 

Wow. Where to begin? What possible motive could Russia have for shooting down a civilian airline? To manically laugh as they strangle kittens and invite The West to finally get WWIII started?

 

First of all you have quite readily shown your colours by making no distinction between the Separatists and Russia.

 

Secondly, you obviously haven't heard of a little something called "Hanlon's Razor" to suggest that *anyone* would have knowingly shot down a civilian airliner out of pure malevolence.

 

 

Very nice. I like you omitting all of the other circumstance written in my response. Let's reinsert it.

 

 

 

Why was the flight diverted over a warzone? Why were two Ukrainian jets "escorting" that plane? Why haven't the air-traffic control recordings been released? Why was there never any massive rocket plume seen by anyone, even when the falling wreckage was? Why hasn't the USA released its incontrovertible proof they supposedly have? Why was the airline's fuselage riddled with cannon fire matching the openly Neo-Nazi Ukrainian jet fighter's armaments?

 

After all, it's not like the USA has ever staged a false-flag to incite war have they? How many should I even bother listing? You must not "remember the Maine". What should we have called this event? Gulf of Tonkinsky? Grow up.

[Zoraptor]

Shifted this from the Modern War topic since it seems a better fit here.

 

 

 And I fail to see how the claim that the tank came from Russian stocks is totally debunked.

 

It doesn't have to be totally debunked, ie proven that it wasn't a Russian tank. That is impossible since it is proving a negative; but as with the earlier 'proof' tanks they (T64s which were mislabelled as T72s which it was claimed Ukraine had none of at all) could have come from Russia (they've retired that model, but they'll inevitably have some sitting around) that T72B also could be Russian. But, that wasn't what the article stated, it stated it as proof positive- and it clearly isn't that at all.

 

The export designation itself is not important, it merely illustrates that the IISS 'expert' was incorrect on everything substantive since we both agree that whatever the designation they were exported; and it is pretty clear that Ukraine would have had T72Bs amongst the ~6500 mbts inherited from the SU. If wikipedia is to be trusted (heh) they had 1000+ T72s in Ukraine. Most of those would have been older models certainly, but in the convoy shown in the original youtube video the still is taken from most of the tanks are indeed older models with that still being of the single T72B.

 

So to sum up, the tank pictured quite clearly appears to be a T72B, which were manufactured before the SU's breakup, was exported, and which Ukraine would have had some of in their 6500 (1000+ T72) inherited arsenal. The 'expert' appears to have conflated the picture of the T72B and information from the T72B2/BM in claiming that Russia was sole operator, either way he is factually wrong and as such, the claim that it proves anything is debunked. It is plausible that the tank came from Russia certainly, but it is also plausible that it came from Ukraine.

[obyknven]

Resurrection of fascism become a mainstream in the West.

http://youtu.be/UCYEyIbA0dY

 

 

When is a bad book important? When it tackles an important topic, for one thing, something meaty and emotional such as, say, Nazism and the Holocaust. Another is when its arguments resonate, when they capture the imagination of a segment of the reading public and shape thinking in some significant way.

One such book was Daniel Goldhagen’s 1996 Hitler’s Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust, which argued that the real reason for the death of six million Jews was not Nazism per se but an “eliminationist” mindset that had taken hold of the German psyche decades earlier and that only Americanization could expunge — music to the ears, needless to say, of fans of “the indispensable nation.”

A more recent example is Timothy Snyder’s Bloodlands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin, a high-voltage account of Eastern Europe’s bloody travails between 1933 and 1945. Bloodlands made it onto the bestseller lists in America, Germany, and Poland, racked up numerous awards, and has been translated into some twenty-six languages. The praise has been lavish. Anne Applebaum called it “brave and original” in the New York Review of Books, Samuel Moyn said that it was “a remarkable, even triumphant accomplishment” in the Nation, Adam Hochschild described it as “immensely valuable” in Harper’s, while Neal Ascherson lauded Snyder in the Guardian as “a noble writer as well as a great researcher.”

Continue here.

 

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2014/09/timothy-snyders-lies/

[Agiel]

Shifted this from the Modern War topic since it seems a better fit here.

 

 

 And I fail to see how the claim that the tank came from Russian stocks is totally debunked.

 

It doesn't have to be totally debunked, ie proven that it wasn't a Russian tank. That is impossible since it is proving a negative; but as with the earlier 'proof' tanks they (T64s which were mislabelled as T72s which it was claimed Ukraine had none of at all) could have come from Russia (they've retired that model, but they'll inevitably have some sitting around) that T72B also could be Russian. But, that wasn't what the article stated, it stated it as proof positive- and it clearly isn't that at all.

 

The export designation itself is not important, it merely illustrates that the IISS 'expert' was incorrect on everything substantive since we both agree that whatever the designation they were exported; and it is pretty clear that Ukraine would have had T72Bs amongst the ~6500 mbts inherited from the SU. If wikipedia is to be trusted (heh) they had 1000+ T72s in Ukraine. Most of those would have been older models certainly, but in the convoy shown in the original youtube video the still is taken from most of the tanks are indeed older models with that still being of the single T72B.

 

So to sum up, the tank pictured quite clearly appears to be a T72B, which were manufactured before the SU's breakup, was exported, and which Ukraine would have had some of in their 6500 (1000+ T72) inherited arsenal. The 'expert' appears to have conflated the picture of the T72B and information from the T72B2/BM in claiming that Russia was sole operator, either way he is factually wrong and as such, the claim that it proves anything is debunked. It is plausible that the tank came from Russia certainly, but it is also plausible that it came from Ukraine.

 

Closer inspection of the image shows equipment that is certainly not of Cold War vintage:

 

Circled is the commander's panoramic sight for the T-72B giving it a hunter-killer capability. A fairly new development for tanks today (even the panoramic sight for the Leopard 2A4 from the late 80s was fairly primitive; it lacked its own thermal imaging system) and very new for today's tanks in service of the CIS:

 

According to Military Today:

 

 

 

Some T-72B3 demonstrator tanks were fitted with commander's panoramic sight. This sight might appear on later models.

(source: http://www.military-today.com/tanks/t72b3.htm)

 

Upgraded Ukrainian T-72, mostly for foreign customers.

 

Export T-72B modernised by Ukraine. Note that it is equipped with Kontakt-1 bricks in this picture, not Kontakt-5.

Edited November 19, 2014 by Agiel

[obyknven]

Closer inspection of the image shows equipment that is certainly not of Cold War vintage:

 

Circled is the commander's panoramic sight for the T-72B giving it a hunter-killer capability. A fairly new development for tanks today (even the panoramic sight for the Leopard 2A4 from the late 80s was fairly primitive; it lacked its own thermal imaging system) and very new for today's tanks in service of the CIS:

Psaki detected

PNK-6 Panoramic Tank Sighting Complex

 

http://photopribor.ck.ua/en/products/defense/equipment_for_armored_vehicles_control_systems/pnk-6_panoramic_tank_sighting_complex/

 

The sight is mounted in the T-84 tank fire control system and can also be used to upgrade the T-64B, T-72 and T-80 tanks.

 

here moar debunking  of Murican/Ukranazi propaganda 

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=657539.msg7442377#msg7442377

 

Such accusations from side of kids (or profanes) who cant recognize T-64BV looks hilarious.