This is Chris, Conor, and Jim's war.
Link: https://twitter.com/KyleJGlen/status/1508033135853903878
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
Staying neutral is one of conditions when Ukraine became independent in 1992. Removing it from constitution lays the path to join NATO. Minsk agreement is what Ukraine promised to do to Russian speaking population in eastern Ukraine, but Ukraine didn't do since 2014/2015.
Even as late as February of this year before the war Russia wanted Ukraine/US promise (words) that Ukraine won't join NATO, Ukraine/US rejected Russia's request.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
represent post-modern thinking. To them, territory thinking is backward, every country should open border. We American already set a good example in our southern border for the world. We all should become borderless country. How dare you Russia have this kind of backward territory thinking in 21st century?
(no message)
They are in denial of the reality they are a buffer state between the powers. It is just reality of this world that small neighbors of a power have to be neutral, if not a friend to it's powerful neighbor.
Just ask Vietnam. They learned a hard lesson of not being neutral between USSR and China. Between 1975 (right after Vietnam war) and 1989, Vietnam made alliance with USSR, became hostile to it's neighbor China. Vietnam allows USSR to build navy base which is very close to China, and even had a month long war with China. What did Vietnam learn from this bad experience? Unnecessary suffering.
(no message)
Not like you to fall victim to Kremlin disinformation. So I’m sure it’s legit.
(no message)
NATO expansion was a major mistake. I’ve been making that case for 25 years.
It does not justify Putin’s horrific blunder.
This is not a morally complex situation.
eligibility to become NATO. Russia has been saying for more than 10 years that Ukraine's NATO membership is Russia's red line. If you break the red line you take the consequence. Russia's action makes perfect sense from their stand. They won't allow georgia and Ukraine to join NATO. That's their red line.
(no message)
There were wars between 2 sides of Georgia before, one in 1992, another was 2004. Russia didn't directly send troops in those 2 conflicts. It is Georgia's NATO anouncement from Bucharest summit that made Russia send the troops and permanently stay in Georgia's Russian population area. This move disqualified Georgia to become a NATO member since NATO requirement for it's member is that no military conflict with other countries on it's soil.
You need to learn more.
(no message)
I've seen some other stuff of guys with blue tape doing stuff. In this case, some of the victims don't have proper Russian uniforms. This looks like a wait and see thing to me.
And, by the way, I'm not saying that Ukrainians won't or can't do that kind of stuff. I would be shocked if they haven't already done stuff like that. They have a lot of untrained, non-professional, newly enlisted military personnel (including civilian militias) defending their own neighborhoods (not just their homeland), in a war in which the aggressor is shelling civilians homes on purpose. Lots of women and children dying. I would be shocked if the Ukrainians showed 100% military professionalism when they get their hands on the perpetrators.
Funny how a good ole war brings back the creeps of wars past, living or dead, on both sides.
(no message)
a fake POW video and neglect to put the actors in genuine uniforms.
You raise the point that their could be actors in the video. I doubt there are actors involved (but I suppose time will tell). I guess I assume these are actual combatants shooting other combatants. I do see that the Ukrainians are using blue and yellow tape to separate themselves from the Russians, who seem to have similar camouflage. Unfortunately, that is easy to fake. And, we do know that Putin has no problem swapping out uniforms, which makes me rethink my earlier point about the uniforms, though. Putin takes his troops and puts them into combat without proper uniforms to cover himself. There were "green men" invading the Crimea and other regions of Ukraine during the last go around...no Russian patches, but they clearly came from somewhere, and I assume you agree that it is likely they came from Russia. So, the fact that the victims don't have proper uniform does not clearly mean that these were not Russian soldiers being shot by Ukrainians, so I take that point back.
Uri Gellersky.
(no message)
Propaganda made Ukraine a model of democracy. That's propaganda BS.
As I always do when we fire up another good guys vs. bad guys war to end all wars.
Hmmmm...need more butter on this popcorn.
I do tend to doubt that those are fake wounds, not that I would put it past Putin to shoot some of his own men for propaganda.
So, you agree with me that we don't know whether this is legitimate or not?
I am certainly not believing everything I see...from either side.
Of course I can't know at this point for certain.
Biden basically said we have the capability to use chemical weapons, which I don't think we actually have. Bush renounced chemical weapon retaliation; Biden reversed that this weekend, but I think that was unintentional on his part. He likely didn't know that we cannot do it, and likely didn't know that our policy is to retaliate with nukes if our soldiers are hit with a chemical attack, and not retaliate with chemical weapons. But, he certainly opened the door for the Russians to claim that we have that capability to use chemical weapons.
I simply can't accept that assumption. No way.
I was in the artillery. We would have been the ones training on delivery of chemical weapons (along with the Air Force). We did have special units who trained on nuclear artillery shells. I was unaware of any units trained on delivery of chemical weapons.
If Biden is going to reverse our policy on chemical weapons, he should probably notify the military, and maybe withdraw us from the conventions prohibiting the use of those weapons.
There is no way he knew what he was saying--his statement was nonsensical given the reality in which we exist. If I am to assume the best, then I must assume he meant something other than what he said. He must not have meant "in kind."
Or, if "in kind" meant "other unconventional weapons like nukes," that might make some sense. But, if he meant that, he should have said it. It has zero deterrent value if he is not clear on our intent to use nukes. He just puts us in an awful situation in which the other side isn't sure what he meant, and they think he probably meant something less than nukes, so they feel free to do what the want. Imbecile.
know what he's talking about.
Edit: I don't think his handlers are most concerned about the many times he has said something that isn't true. I think they're most concerned when he reveals something that is true, like the other day, when he acknowledged that food shortages are coming.
(no message)
I wouldn't be surprised if it was Ukrainians.
I wouldn't be surprised if it was Russians with blue tape.
(no message)
You wont hear any about it here in U.S.
Link: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2014/09/ukraine-must-stop-ongoing-abuses-and-war-crimes-pro-ukrainian-volunteer-forces/
(no message)
Noted.
Plenty of awful shit on both sides. Maybe sympathize with the victims of the aggression.
(no message)
on either side of any of these stupid wars. Merely pointing out one of Zelensky's lies here prompted some of this same garbage. The truth matters and should not be swept under the rug because some cannot handle nuanced views on matters of war and insist on black and white characterizations. This mindset has given birth to mindless accusations that those skeptical of some of the claims about Ukraine are Russian agents/"assets"/sympathizers. In other words, moronic demagoguery. That's why it matters. We should always be skeptical of what our government and dominant media tell us, along with the entrenched class within those institutions.
Putin has always been a KGB thug, and I've never had any illusions about what he is. He is the aggressor. As his forces become more bogged down in Ukraine, I hope he decides to retreat, sparing both Ukrainian soldiers and Russian soldiers, and, of course, civilians.
That was fast. Kudos
A pivot to, "This probably didn't really happen anyways." Rather Basilian. What's next, "Well, were you there? Did you see it, personally?"
How many times here have you voiced similar skepticism about video or other evidence or claims offered up by the Ukrainians? Or have they been on the level, the whole time? I would just preemptively add that a possible World War III is on the line, and lies have pulled us into war, before, so, yes, this is an important question.
Maybe try the search function, chief?
Chuckling
There have been many. Some have been false. They should be noted. Noting them does not render one a red sympathizer. The end.
Really? That’s just weird, dude.
1. "you think you saw." Beautiful.
2. "false claims" You just divulged that you haven't seen me offer any examples, but you know that they were false? Aces!
Naturally, if the video is authenticated, you will retract some of this, right? Sure, sure...
Put the wine bottle down, chief.
Your passive-aggression. If this turns out to be another example of Ukrainian misbehavior, then my question turns out to be more like a logical question than, like, "weird." I mean, wouldn't a thinking person governed by reason voice skepticism by that point?
Keep going with the Russkie sympathizer accusations. Personally, I think Cole is a budding, 21st century Lindbergh when it comes to autocratic creeps. You got him dead to rights.
(no message)
This hot take aged poorly, no?
Link: https://forum.uhnd.com/forum/index.php?action=display&forumid=2&msgid=59074
Is this a war crime? If so, how should it be addressed, both presently, and after this is over? Is, "This happens in every war" a sufficient political and moral response?
Nobody has any idea what this shows or who these people are. I hope if this actually happened, that whoever did it is charged.
One side assumes every accusation about the rival tribe is true, while deflecting or rejecting any accusations about their own tribe.
30,000 foot view and all that.
(no message)
(no message)