Russia's invasion of Ukraine: Part 5

Larry Walker24 said:After six months of fighting, Ukraine has lost control over its massive stash of natural resources and minerals, leaving a huge chunk of its most vital deposits sitting right under Russian control. Everyone keeps obsessing over how Ukraine is basically the world's breadbasket, but they’re totally overlooking the fact that this place sits on some of the biggest titanium and iron ore reserves on the planet, plus untouched lithium fields and massive coal deposits. We're talking tens of trillions of dollars in value here. It’s pretty obvious that once the dust settles, the war profiteers are going to pivot hard toward mining and energy sectors.

Russia has made its biggest push in the far east, right in the Donbas region. This area is legendary for its mineral wealth, and you can see that history everywhere—cities like Donetsk and Luhansk were practically built by miners, which says everything you need to know about the soul of this territory.

Honestly, Russia won't see much actual benefit from these minerals. As long as they refuse to pull out of Ukraine, they'll be stuck dealing with suffocating sanctions, while Ukraine stays constantly flooded with weaponry.

Noticing a lot of silence on this thread, but I should probably weigh in since this is such a massive talking point over in the West.
Thousands are walking out on Amnesty International because of that report regarding the war in Ukraine.

Even that little mercenary gang funded by big capital has shown up to join the fray. They played too much at being "flower children" before wandering off into some candy-coated, unicorn-filled fantasy land.

Between that and how much the British scum has been making my life difficult lately, this whole situation is becoming an absolute headache.

Terry Green3 said:Noticing a lot of silence on this thread, but I should probably weigh in since this is such a massive talking point over in the West.
Thousands are walking out on Amnesty International because of that report regarding the war in Ukraine.

Even that little mercenary gang funded by big capital has shown up to join the fray. They played too much at being "flower children" before wandering off into some candy-coated, unicorn-filled fantasy land.

Between that and how much the British scum has been making my life difficult lately, this whole situation is becoming an absolute headache.

Do you honestly believe their report is fabricated?
Weren't photos released a while back showing Ukrainians using shopping malls to house armored vehicles?
The point isn't that people are lying or being deceptive.
If the Ukrainians are using civilian infrastructure for military purposes—which they likely are—it doesn't change the fact that Russia is the aggressor, nor does it make them right.

Without organizations like these, without the UN, Doctors Without Borders, and similar groups, war would be even more devastating than it already is.
Whether you like them or not is irrelevant.
Just because Russia is the clear aggressor, clearly in the wrong, and has clearly unleashed a wave of atrocities, doesn't mean we should turn a blind eye to everything else.

Matthew Young35 said:Do you honestly believe their report is fabricated?
Weren't photos released a while back showing Ukrainians using shopping malls to house armored vehicles?
The point isn't that people are lying or being deceptive.
If the Ukrainians are using civilian infrastructure for military purposes—which they likely are—it doesn't change the fact that Russia is the aggressor, nor does it make them right.

Without organizations like these, without the UN, Doctors Without Borders, and similar groups, war would be even more devastating than it already is.
Whether you like them or not is irrelevant.
Just because Russia is the clear aggressor, clearly in the wrong, and has clearly unleashed a wave of atrocities, doesn't mean we should turn a blind eye to everything else.

No one can convince me that Russia wouldn't target civilian sites regardless of where Ukrainians park their hardware. That logic is for children. They systematically level everything in their path. By that reasoning, Ukrainians would have to keep an armored vehicle in every single backyard on the Russian fascists' route. You actually believe that?

crimsoncyclist71 said:No one can convince me that Russia wouldn't target civilian sites regardless of where Ukrainians park their hardware. That logic is for children. They systematically level everything in their path. By that reasoning, Ukrainians would have to keep an armored vehicle in every single backyard on the Russian fascists' route. You actually believe that?

No, I simply trust the reports from Amnesty International stating that Ukrainians have used civilian sites for military purposes.
It is 99.99% certain that the Russians do the same.
I realize many people would love to believe in a world where lies are told and stories are spun about how Ukrainians fight without breaking a single "rule," but that isn't reality.
And yes, I believe the Russians would target civilian sites even if they didn't. But why attack Amnesty International if they are telling the truth?

Matthew Young35 said:No, I simply trust the reports from Amnesty International stating that Ukrainians have used civilian sites for military purposes.
It is 99.99% certain that the Russians do the same.
I realize many people would love to believe in a world where lies are told and stories are spun about how Ukrainians fight without breaking a single "rule," but that isn't reality.
And yes, I believe the Russians would target civilian sites even if they didn't. But why attack Amnesty International if they are telling the truth?

The AI report is nonsense and absurd. Its only real effect is providing ammunition to apologists for the Russian invasion. We're in the middle of brutal urban warfare, and now someone wants to highlight that those defending themselves are using civilian structures for cover? What exactly are they supposed to do? Walk out into an open field and wait to be hit? 🤦

crimsoncyclist71 said:The AI report is nonsense and absurd. Its only real effect is providing ammunition to apologists for the Russian invasion. We're in the middle of brutal urban warfare, and now someone wants to highlight that those defending themselves are using civilian structures for cover? What exactly are they supposed to do? Walk out into an open field and wait to be hit? 🤦

I wouldn't, but then again, we shouldn't be complaining either when Russia strikes a shopping mall if there happen to be armored vehicles stationed inside.
War is a dirty business, but facts are facts.
I completely agree that the Russians need to be pushed back as hard as possible and driven out of Ukraine, but accusing someone of being pro-Russian simply because they state a difficult truth is wrong.

Matthew Young35 said:No, I simply trust the reports from Amnesty International stating that Ukrainians have used civilian sites for military purposes.
It is 99.99% certain that the Russians do the same.
I realize many people would love to believe in a world where lies are told and stories are spun about how Ukrainians fight without breaking a single "rule," but that isn't reality.
And yes, I believe the Russians would target civilian sites even if they didn't. But why attack Amnesty International if they are telling the truth?

It’s mostly because they were way too arrogant about interpreting military law and just refuse to admit they got it wrong.

Everything kind of hit the fan after the UN lead investigator for war crimes violations called them out for misinterpreting what actually counts as permissible versus prohibited military operations in urban combat zones during wartime.

After that, things just spiraled because you could clearly see the bias in the reporting. You saw all those tweets and other journalists jumping on it when the story broke, coming at it with a massive slant, desperately digging for dirt just to make Ukrainians look exactly like the Russians.
Then, of course, it came to light that they had even interviewed Russian guards from that prison where the Russians swapped prisoners with the Ukrainians.
To top it off, they tried to pull that stunt claiming only 30% of the aid actually reaches the front lines, implying the Ukrainians are pocketing the other 70% (if that were true, man, those Ukrainians would basically be superheroes for doing anything with just 30%). Then the U.S. State Department stepped in and shut that down, stating they track exactly where all the donated gear goes and that this "only 30%" nonsense isn't true. After all that, public frustration just exploded, and now they're dealing with a massive shitstorm they totally cooked up themselves, so they can enjoy that.

Matthew Young35 said:I wouldn't, but then again, we shouldn't be complaining either when Russia strikes a shopping mall if there happen to be armored vehicles stationed inside.
War is a dirty business, but facts are facts.
I completely agree that the Russians need to be pushed back as hard as possible and driven out of Ukraine, but accusing someone of being pro-Russian simply because they state a difficult truth is wrong.

What AI is doing is wrong. Civilians aren't being put at risk by the actions of the Ukrainian military; they are at risk solely because of the Russian invasion. Hopefully, that explanation is simple enough for you to grasp.

Honestly, they never seem to shut up when it comes to stuff like this.

https://mobile.twitter.com/bayraktar...22609843556353

A Russian city is firing salvos from right out of a local park over in Nova Kakhovka.

Or like when they were hiding tanks and transport vehicles in Irpin, tucked away right between civilian high-rises.

https://mobile.twitter.com/WarMonito...03878420975621

Or even this, where they’re stashing gear right near the Kherson hospital.

But strangely enough, I can't find a single article about it from Amnesty International.

And man, did they really think they played it perfectly? Just look at what the Russian Ministry tweeted.

https://mobile.twitter.com/mission_r...62879563669507

Now, every time they hit a civilian target, they can just shrug and say, "Oh, it was a military objective, and hey, Amnesty International agrees with us."

They've gone so far down that rabbit hole of Western hatred that they don't even realize they've posted this—probably just intoxicated by their own sense of self-importance and righteousness—and now they're acting all surprised by the massive backlash.

Matthew Young35 said:I wouldn't, but then again, we shouldn't be complaining either when Russia strikes a shopping mall if there happen to be armored vehicles stationed inside.
War is a dirty business, but facts are facts.
I completely agree that the Russians need to be pushed back as hard as possible and driven out of Ukraine, but accusing someone of being pro-Russian simply because they state a difficult truth is wrong.

This report is total nonsense.
Whether there was military hardware at the theater in Mariupol or not doesn't even matter—those missiles were going to hit regardless.

crimsoncyclist71 said:What AI is doing is wrong. Civilians aren't being put at risk by the actions of the Ukrainian military; they are at risk solely because of the Russian invasion. Hopefully, that explanation is simple enough for you to grasp.

And whatever happened with our own defense forces back then...
Sirens would go off the second things started heating up at the borders.
That meant our troops would be slowly pushing forward while the paramilitaries were busy targeting civilians in places like San Diego, Tampa, or Kansas City...

You could just as easily argue that we, as civilians, were put in danger because of our own military's actions too.

Nathan Thomas12 said:This report is total nonsense.
Whether there was military hardware at the theater in Mariupol or not doesn't even matter—those missiles were going to hit regardless.

Precisely.

Terry Green3 said:Noticing a lot of silence on this thread, but I should probably weigh in since this is such a massive talking point over in the West.
Thousands are walking out on Amnesty International because of that report regarding the war in Ukraine.

Even that little mercenary gang funded by big capital has shown up to join the fray. They played too much at being "flower children" before wandering off into some candy-coated, unicorn-filled fantasy land.

Between that and how much the British scum has been making my life difficult lately, this whole situation is becoming an absolute headache.

Oh yes, I am reading it and I am glad because they are digging themselves deeper and deeper into a hole.
The naughty Ukrainians fighting in urban combat are fighting in neighborhoods, in cities... Shame on them.
Anyway, all those reports from "donor associations" should be read with a massive dose of skepticism; one shouldn't give them the leverage to manufacture public opinion.

Gerald Torres84 said:Oh yes, I am reading it and I am glad because they are digging themselves deeper and deeper into a hole.
The naughty Ukrainians fighting in urban combat are fighting in neighborhoods, in cities... Shame on them.
Anyway, all those reports from "donor associations" should be read with a massive dose of skepticism; one shouldn't give them the leverage to manufacture public opinion.

The whole time, the pro-Russian crowd keeps hammering on about how Ukrainians are to blame for everything because—get this—people are actually defending themselves instead of just surrendering so the Russians wouldn't have a reason to kill anyone. 😲 😠

Matthew Young35 said:Do you honestly believe their report is fabricated?
Weren't photos released a while back showing Ukrainians using shopping malls to house armored vehicles?
The point isn't that people are lying or being deceptive.
If the Ukrainians are using civilian infrastructure for military purposes—which they likely are—it doesn't change the fact that Russia is the aggressor, nor does it make them right.

Without organizations like these, without the UN, Doctors Without Borders, and similar groups, war would be even more devastating than it already is.
Whether you like them or not is irrelevant.
Just because Russia is the clear aggressor, clearly in the wrong, and has clearly unleashed a wave of atrocities, doesn't mean we should turn a blind eye to everything else.

Where are they supposed to stay? Maybe in military bases so your Russian buddies can hit them more easily?

Matthew Young35 said:I wouldn't, but then again, we shouldn't be complaining either when Russia strikes a shopping mall if there happen to be armored vehicles stationed inside.
War is a dirty business, but facts are facts.
I completely agree that the Russians need to be pushed back as hard as possible and driven out of Ukraine, but accusing someone of being pro-Russian simply because they state a difficult truth is wrong.

That’s what I call selective truth. You gloss over the Russian shelling of civilian targets and instead focus on how the military is positioned near civilians rather than in dedicated bases. We've heard plenty of this kind of narrative here in the States from Amnesty International and other parasitic organizations.

James Phillips92 said:That’s what I call selective truth. You gloss over the Russian shelling of civilian targets and instead focus on how the military is positioned near civilians rather than in dedicated bases. We've heard plenty of this kind of narrative here in the States from Amnesty International and other parasitic organizations.

It is called cherry-picking whatever suits your agenda.🙂
I am currently reading through reports from Amnesty International... they start lecturing Israelis when they strike Hamas fighters located in apartment buildings or neighborhoods (where civilians are naturally present), yet they turn a blind eye when Ukrainians defend themselves within a city while the Russians literally level an entire district... WTF?
They are being completely hypocritical.

James Phillips92 said:Where are they supposed to stay? Maybe in military bases so your Russian buddies can hit them more easily?

They’ll be stationed in the wilderness far from urban centers, because cities essentially have to surrender to the aggressors without a fight to prevent civilian casualties. That is precisely how the Amnesty International peacekeepers view the situation.

Melissa Rivera5 said:The whole time, the pro-Russian crowd keeps hammering on about how Ukrainians are to blame for everything because—get this—people are actually defending themselves instead of just surrendering so the Russians wouldn't have a reason to kill anyone. 😲 😠

It’s not just the Ukrainians. Americans are part of this too. If we weren't flooding them with weapons, this war would have ended ages ago, and we wouldn't be staring down an energy crisis right now.🤦