Putin: "Stick to the timeline!"

[stilgar]

16 minutes ago, brainscour said:

Tread lightly with those words

[brainscour]

Just now, stilgar said:

...no I don't think I will loosen ties with my strongest ally today.

[brainscour]

3 minutes ago, scoobdog said:

Also, lol at Nabs yelling at people to educate themselves on what genocides are.  Yes, he's actually yelling at his computer.

He's trying to say it's not cultural.

It is.  It's the Orthodox Church.

Second. He's not trying to justify anything.  He's trying to explain rationally that these people's strife is extradition more than murder.  I mean I only say this through my deepest insight at a glance from outside the sandbox but they're not idiots.  

[Winter_Rain]

On 4/11/2022 at 8:59 AM, Jman said:

Beat me to it.  Yeah, things are about to go south economically for Russia very quickly.

Things were already getting worse in Russia economically even before the war happened (although sanctions are accelerating it obviously).  At least for common people in the regions outside Moscow and St. Petersburg, who have always been ignored by the Russian government.  The pandemic took a big toll on them.  Cost of living and food prices were already rising (and their salaries/pensions are much lower than here, so stuff like that has a big impact).  

Sanctions could cause pain comparable to the late 80s and 90s though --- shortages, very high levels of poverty and sharp increases in associated social ills (crime, suicide, alcoholism, etc).  Ironically, playing off of Russians' fears of returning to that era is a factor in how Putin has remained in power.  

[Winter_Rain]

7 hours ago, Nablonsky said:

Unless de-nazified means killed, then no that quote does not indicate that a genocide is under way. Can you explain why you disagree?

...that pretty much is what "de-nazified" means, it's a dog whistle.  Saying "Ukraine does not exist",which Putin has, is also a dog whistle.  

Russian media is very good at using this kind of doublespeak.  (Like how it's a "special operation" and not a war).  

[brainscour]

30 minutes ago, Winter_Rain said:

...that pretty much is what "de-nazified" means, it's a dog whistle.  Saying "Ukraine does not exist",which Putin has, is also a dog whistle.  

Russian media is very good at using this kind of doublespeak.  (Like how it's a "special operation" and not a war).  

You can't stand in the way of authority and those victims in your are in America under worse pressure than the threat of a gun.  Only a tryrannistcal bastard wouldn't surrender to Putin at NATOs bluff.  Ukraine stood it's face up at a

[Nablonsky]

2 hours ago, Winter_Rain said:

...that pretty much is what "de-nazified" means, it's a dog whistle.  Saying "Ukraine does not exist",which Putin has, is also a dog whistle.  

Russian media is very good at using this kind of doublespeak.  (Like how it's a "special operation" and not a war).  

I don't believe it is a dog whistle for the kind of mass extermination program that rises to the level of genocide -- it is not apparent to me that  killing as many Ukranians as possible for the sake of their deaths is a pointed military objective of Russia. That is not what we are seeing. Wanting control over the region for strategic or imperial aims does not necessarily mean wanting the deaths of a significant number of people who live there. Their lives and deaths seem largely irrelevant to Russia. They are doing their military operation that consists of invading another country and trying to change its military and leadership -- just as the US and its allies do whenever we bump up against the limits of our soft power to shape other """sovereign""" nations. Large numbers of people die over the course of this military operation, as they do when any country attacks another -- this is not 'genocide.'

How did the consensus on this go from "wow, Russia really thought it would be quick and easy and relatively painless for them to take over Ukraine, haha they sure bungled it and didn't expect the Ukranians to fight so hard and now are in a protracted war" to "Russia is invading Ukraine to do genocide on the people living there." This is absurd, it is without merit, it is claimed for political purposes, and does not accurately describe the situation. 

Edited April 13, 2022 by Nablonsky

[wacky1980]

17 minutes ago, Nablonsky said:

I don't believe it is a dog whistle for the kind of mass extermination program that rises to the level of genocide -- it is not apparent to me that  killing as many Ukranians as possible for the sake of their deaths is a pointed military objective of Russia. That is not what we are seeing. Wanting control over the region for strategic or imperial aims does not necessarily mean wanting the deaths of a significant number of people who live there. Their lives and deaths seem largely irrelevant to Russia. They are doing their military operation that consists of invading another country and trying to change its military and leadership -- just as the US and its allies do whenever we bump up against the limits of our soft power to shape other """sovereign""" nations. 

How did the consensus on this go from "wow, Russia really thought it would be quick and easy and relatively painless for them to take over Ukraine, haha they sure bungled it and didn't expect the Ukranians to fight so hard and now are in a protracted war" to "Russia is invading Ukraine to do genocide on the people living there." This is absurd, it is without merit, it is claimed for political purposes, and does not accurately describe the situation. 

i'm not about to argue with nabs when he's obviously not bringing anything of merit to the table. so i'ma just leave a few recent headlines here and let him "educate" himself a bit.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/03/world/europe/ukraine-russia-war-civilian-deaths.html - In the Kyiv Suburb of Bucha, ‘They Shot Everyone They Saw’
https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2022/apr/13/ukraine-21000-civilians-estimated-killed-in-mariupol-says-mayor-video - 21,000 civilians estimated killed in Mariupol, says mayor (that's just 1 city)
https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/11/europe/ukraine-demining-russian-bombs-intl/index.html - "They deliberately did everything to ensure that the return to these areas after de-occupation was as dangerous as possible."
https://theweek.com/russo-ukrainian-war/1012441/russian-troops-systematically-raped-25-women-girls-as-young-as-14-in-a - Russian troops 'systematically raped' 25 women, girls as young as 14 in a Bucha basement
https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-rape-ukraine-allegations-war-crimes/31800013.html - 'Part Of Russia's Arsenal': Allegations Of Rape By Russian Forces In Ukraine Are Increasing
https://www.businessinsider.com/russia-to-fast-track-adoption-of-deported-ukraine-orphans-kyiv-officials-2022-4 - Ukrainian officials say more than 121,000 children have been forcibly deported to Russia

now let's look at those headlines in the context of "genocide" per nabs' dismissal on his very strict definition:
https://www.vox.com/23020696/ukraine-russia-genocide-allegations - Is what’s happening in Ukraine “genocide?”

“Genocide” is not merely a word for mass killing in general. In international law, per the 1948 Genocide Convention, it refers to any of the following five acts if they are “committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group:”

(a) Killing members of the group; ✓
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; ✓
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; ✓
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; ✓
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. ✓

[Nablonsky]

1 minute ago, wacky1980 said:

i'm not about to argue with nabs when he's obviously not bringing anything of merit to the table. so i'ma just leave a few recent headlines here and let him "educate" himself a bit.

Good to see you wacky. A link dump, ok well here's a voxplainer on why most people aren't calling it genocide. 

https://www.vox.com/23020696/ukraine-russia-genocide-allegations

If Biden wants to take the lead here and reframe and label any other wars and illegal occupations as genocide then I would be happy to listen to the arguments in this new context and then consider whether the term now applies to Ukraine, but in the meantime no people like Drone Master Brandon do not get to use the politically loaded buzzword term of genocide to whip up public sentiment against Russia because it happens to be one of America's enemies doing 'genocide' for a change instead of one of our own, in which case we always vociferously disagree that anything remotely comparable to genocide is happening and use our domineering power to strike down any attempts to officially recognize it as such and insist that it is definitely not genocide that is happening. 

[Master-Debater131]

 

 

NATO speed run intensifies. Sweden is going to be a NATO member by the end of the year.

[wacky1980]

12 minutes ago, Nablonsky said:

Good to see you wacky. A link dump, ok well here's a voxplainer on why most people aren't calling it genocide. 

https://www.vox.com/23020696/ukraine-russia-genocide-allegations

If Biden wants to take the lead here and reframe and label any other wars and illegal occupations as genocide then I would be happy to listen to the arguments in this new context and then consider whether the term now applies to Ukraine, but in the meantime no people like Drone Master Brandon do not get to use the politically loaded buzzword term of genocide to whip up public sentiment against Russia because it happens to be one of America's enemies doing 'genocide' for a change instead of one of our own, in which case we always vociferously disagree that anything remotely comparable to genocide is happening and use our domineering power to strike down any attempts to officially recognize it as such and insist that it is definitely not genocide that is happening. 

so you're using my own link to justify some more word salad. k.

y'know, just because the u.s. may have made some very bad decisions over the years, that doesn't mean you need to excuse the bad decisions being made by other countries in real time. it's your thing, i get it, but it's tiresome. 

[1pooh4u]

I thought Sweden was a neutral country.  I guess that does not mean what I think it means. I thought that meant they weren’t a part of any treaties with any countries because that’s basically not neutrality. So I thought. 

[wacky1980]

Just now, 1pooh4u said:

I thought Sweden was a neutral country.  I guess that does not mean what I think it means. I thought that meant they weren’t a part of any treaties with any countries because that’s basically not neutrality. So I thought. 

i believe the point they're making is that neutrality is no longer a responsible position.

[1pooh4u]

Just now, wacky1980 said:

i believe the point they're making is that neutrality is no longer a responsible position.

After all this time?  Shit must be worse than I thought.  Do they even have a military other than the weird hat people they send to watch the Vatican?

ya know what maybe I’m confusing Sweden and Switzerland?  
 

Anywho, Putin’s not gonna like Sweden joining NATO 

[Master-Debater131]

2 minutes ago, 1pooh4u said:

I thought Sweden was a neutral country.  I guess that does not mean what I think it means. I thought that meant they weren’t a part of any treaties with any countries because that’s basically not neutrality. So I thought. 

Both Sweden and Finland have been neutral countries for a while now.  That has clearly changed thanks to the war in Ukraine. Last I saw support in both countries for joining was above 70%.

 

In the span of just a month Putin did what NATO couldn't do in 70 years, convince Sweden and Finland to join.

[wacky1980]

Just now, 1pooh4u said:

After all this time?  Shit must be worse than I thought.  Do they even have a military other than the weird hat people they send to watch the Vatican?

ya know what maybe I’m confusing Sweden and Switzerland?  
 

Anywho, Putin’s not gonna like Sweden joining NATO 

any additions to NATO that encroach on RUS' western border are taken by the kremlin as signs of aggression. i don't know the exact terms of the agreement, but i want to say putin takes the baltic expansion of NATO as a violation of the agreement (that was actually enacted before the fall of the USSR so the treaty was already outdated in the early 90's). sweden isn't actually on the border of russia, but sweden's status shift will be taken as a clear offensive gesture towards russia. 

why sweden chose this particular conflict as its last straw? i don't have that answer. perhaps it has something to do with the notion that neutrality is no longer the apolitical position it once was. if you're not specifically in favor of [x], then you effectively support its opposition. i just love this brave new world.

[Top Gun]

18 minutes ago, 1pooh4u said:

After all this time?  Shit must be worse than I thought.  Do they even have a military other than the weird hat people they send to watch the Vatican?

ya know what maybe I’m confusing Sweden and Switzerland?  
 

Anywho, Putin’s not gonna like Sweden joining NATO 

Yeah, you're thinking of Switzerland. Both Sweden and Finland joined the EU in 1995 (although Sweden isn't part of the Eurozone). Sweden does have a policy of neutrality and was officially neutral during the two World Wars, though it had close cultural ties with the Allies and just how "neutral" it was is a bit hand-wavey. Finland was invaded by the Soviet Union during WWII and fought alongside German soldiers against them, but then wound up fighting against them by the end of the war (shit got complicated). They had some ties with the Soviet Union after the war but also had trade ties with the West even before the Soviet Union fell. Switzerland has been officially neutral in most international affairs for centuries; they only voted to join the United Nations in 2002, which is pretty wild. Of note is that even Switzerland decided to send aid to Ukraine. And that's about where my interest in Wiki-diving checked out.

Edited April 13, 2022 by Top Gun

[Ginguy]

Sweden is expressing concern over Russia sending armed planes into their airspace. I kinda don't blame them.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10668961/Russian-fighter-jets-violated-Swedish-airspace-earlier-month-equipped-NUKES.html

 

 

[scoobdog]

6 hours ago, 1pooh4u said:

I thought Sweden was a neutral country.  I guess that does not mean what I think it means. I thought that meant they weren’t a part of any treaties with any countries because that’s basically not neutrality. So I thought. 

It wouldn't mean that at all.  The existing treaties don't have to mandate military response; they could allow information sharing or joint defense exercises. That being said, joining NATO would mean they're giving up neutrality.

[1pooh4u]

1 hour ago, scoobdog said:

It wouldn't mean that at all.  The existing treaties don't have to mandate military response; they could allow information sharing or joint defense exercises. That being said, joining NATO would mean they're giving up neutrality.

Isn’t that what I said?  
 

Lol idk I can’t even tell the difference between Sweden and Switzerland. 😬

[stilgar]

Just now, 1pooh4u said:

Isn’t that what I said?  
 

Lol idk I can’t even tell the difference between Sweden and Switzerland. 😬

Switzerland is landlocked and Sweden is the dick to Finland's balls.

[scoobdog]

32 minutes ago, 1pooh4u said:

Isn’t that what I said?  
 

Lol idk I can’t even tell the difference between Sweden and Switzerland. 😬

lol.   I thought you were referring to the fact they were previously part of treaties.

 So, yes, you’re right.

[Seight]

2 hours ago, 1pooh4u said:

Isn’t that what I said?  
 

Lol idk I can’t even tell the difference between Sweden and Switzerland. 😬

Sweden - Zlatan Ibrahimovic

Switzerland - Haris Seferovic

Yes, I know I'm the only possible person who could post this, please carry on.

[Jman]

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-says-major-ship-black-sea-fleet-badly-damaged-blast-interfax-2022-04-13/?utm_source=reddit.com
 

Russia’s flagship was crippled by a country with no navy.

[1pooh4u]

44 minutes ago, Seight said:

Sweden - Zlatan Ibrahimovic

Switzerland - Haris Seferovic

Yes, I know I'm the only possible person who could post this, please carry on.

Who did what, in the where now, how? 😬😆

[Top Gun]

Their "most serious ship" in the Black Sea was launched in 1983? Woof.

[Master-Debater131]

9 hours ago, Top Gun said:

Their "most serious ship" in the Black Sea was launched in 1983? Woof.

Not only that but it was made in modern day Ukraine.

So its really a bigger slap in the face than first thought.

[Master-Debater131]

 

[Jman]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/siladityaray/2022/04/14/ukrainian-military-claims-it-has-blown-up-a-bridge-carrying-a-russian-convoy-in-kharkiv/?sh=60998ed475ca
 

More bad news for Russian convoys.

[Master-Debater131]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10718247/Putins-defence-minister-Sergei-Shoigu-massive-heart-attack-not-natural-causes.html

 

Putin's defence minister Sergei Shoigu has had a 'massive heart attack not from natural causes' and TWENTY generals 'have been arrested' over bungled invasion

 

I dont really trust this source that much, but its at least worth flagging in case it turns out to be true. Its not completely far fetched to think that Putin is starting to poison his own men either. Hes completely lost his marbles and is paranoid that hes going to meet the same fate as so many of his political rivals.

[Master-Debater131]

Its officially sunk.

 

I was reading an article earlier(wish I could find it again, was on my phone) that said that this may actually be a bigger loss for Russia than first thought.  This ship is apparently the only one in the Black Sea Fleet that has sophisticated enough anti-air to target Drones. None of the other ships will be able to target drones. 

 

That means Ukraine now has the ability to use their wildly successful drone tactics against the Russian navy. Thats puts the entire Russian naval and amphibious strategy at risk.

Russia also cant bring in a replacement ship because Turkey has closed their waters to Russia.

Its remarkable how successful Ukraine has been in this war.

[Master-Debater131]

https://www.newsweek.com/russia-moves-ships-safer-location-ukraine-missile-attack-1698097

""Russia has lost a significant part of its naval capability in the Black Sea, and its ability to hit targets in Ukraine," independent Russian military analyst Pavel Luzhin told English-language publication The Moscow Times. "Without the Moskva, it would seem that a marine operation against Odessa or Mykolaiv is impossible right now.""

 

Immediate impacts from the sinking, and this was before it actually sunk.  The rest of the Navy has had to put more distance between them and Ukraine. That seriously hurts the Russian ability to provide cover when trying to attack.

Also, for the military nerds, this is apparently the largest tonnage sinking since the end of WW2. It eclipses a sinking during the Falkland war.

[Master-Debater131]

 

 

 

[Jman]

8 minutes ago, Master-Debater131 said:

 

 

 

That is insanity.  I know Putin has sacked pretty much everyone with half a brain there, but a nuclear strike?  He would start World War III.  Then there’s China, who at that point would sever all ties just to avoid the crossfire.
 

Not even Nixon at the height of his influence and paranoia could convince his cabinet to launch a tactical nuclear strike in Vietnam (he apparently proposed it but was quickly shot down by Henry Kissinger).

Edited April 15, 2022 by Jman

[Sawdamizer]

7 minutes ago, Jman said:

That is insanity.  I know Putin has sacked pretty much everyone with half a brain there, but a nuclear strike?  He would start World War III.  Then there’s China, who at that point would sever all ties just to avoid the crossfire.
 

Not even Nixon at the height of his influence and paranoia could convince his cabinet to launch a tactical nuclear strike in Vietnam (he apparently proposed it but was quickly shot down by Henry Kissinger).

Ghostreks boner can only get so big and hard

[Hajime]

43 minutes ago, Sawdamizer said:

Ghostreks boner can only get so big and hard

....yall know when you post stuff like this that it's sexual harrassment? 

[Sawdamizer]

Just now, Hajime said:

....yall know when you post stuff like this that it's sexual harrassment? 

Like when you post pics of MHs tiny pp?

[Hajime]

1 minute ago, Sawdamizer said:

Like when you post pics of MHs tiny pp?

No because he gave consent ahead of time. Not here to argue. Do you.

Edited April 15, 2022 by Hajime

[Sawdamizer]

1 minute ago, Hajime said:

No because he gave consent ahead of time. Not here to argue. Do you.

Lol, your leash is so short.

 

[mthor]

1 minute ago, Hajime said:

No because he gave consent ahead of time. Not here to argue. Do you.

You're actually harassing those of us who aren't here to view that content. When I want porn, I go to pornhub. I don't come here for that, and to come upon it out of context and without warning is disturbing and might be considered an act of aggression.

[Master-Debater131]

59 minutes ago, Jman said:

That is insanity.  I know Putin has sacked pretty much everyone with half a brain there, but a nuclear strike?  He would start World War III.  Then there’s China, who at that point would sever all ties just to avoid the crossfire.
 

Not even Nixon at the height of his influence and paranoia could convince his cabinet to launch a tactical nuclear strike in Vietnam (he apparently proposed it but was quickly shot down by Henry Kissinger).

I dont necessarily think it would start WW3.  It may start a complete and total isolation of Russia though. Even China couldnt avoid the pressure at that point. If it happens it could potentially win the war for Russia, but the cost would likely be Russia itself. I could easily see the entire federation collapsing due to a complete and total isolation from the international community. 

 

I also still dont entirely think it will happen. The odds are low, but not 0.

[Hajime]

9 minutes ago, mthor said:

You're actually harassing those of us who aren't here to view that content. When I want porn, I go to pornhub. I don't come here for that, and to come upon it out of context and without warning is disturbing and might be considered an act of aggression.

Me? Maybe check who youre talking to because I dont even know that which you are referring to.

[scoobdog]

17 minutes ago, mthor said:

You're actually harassing those of us who aren't here to view that content. When I want porn, I go to pornhub. I don't come here for that, and to come upon it out of context and without warning is disturbing and might be considered an act of aggression.

This isn't porn hub?!

[scoobdog]

7 minutes ago, Hajime said:

Me? Maybe check who youre talking to because I dont even know that which you are referring to.

Shut up Benji

[mthor]

Just now, scoobdog said:

This isn't porn hub?!

No - pornhub has a better search function.

 

[scoobdog]

2 minutes ago, mthor said:

No - pornhub has a better search function.

 

Like hell it does.

[mthor]

Just now, scoobdog said:

Like hell it does.

I don't know - I find it more user-friendly, but my tastes are simple.

 

[André Toulon]

So is the r word still off the table

[Jman]

https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-ato/3458568-production-of-tanks-halts-in-russia-intel-reports.html
 

So not only is Russia losing armor in battle and to Ukrainian farmers, they lack the means to replace it.

[Master-Debater131]