Russia's invasion of Ukraine: Part 5

rowdytiger13 said:Vladimir Putin has them.
We really ought to bar psychopaths from holding office, but let's be real, that’s an impossible mission.

Edit: Dejo is out here with his bronchitis "subtly" nudging Mexicans to go join the Russian army by dropping all the intel on how to do it. Honestly, first smart move he's made.

electricsurfer47 said:I think you've got it all wrong. Older leaders can be just as great as the younger ones.

But honestly, they can be just as crazy or narcissistic as any young guy out there. Over in the Philippines, you can only serve one term as president—I can't remember if it's 5 or 6 years, but something like that.

And look, anyone can lose their mind while they're in office, so there really needs to be some kind of rule in place to actually remove someone.

Timothy Williams5 said:Footage shows a Russian individual opening fire and killing a military commander at a command center in Ust-Ilimsk, located within the Irkutsk Oblast. The officer targeted was reportedly leading the local bankruptcy committee.
https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1...W9Hyain0UmhaZw

Nancy Gomez26 said:You really think Germany is going to mobilize? 😁

electricsurfer47 said:You're comparing apples to oranges here.

Putin doesn't look at the war in Ukraine as just some foreign country... he sees it as something deeply personal that he has to own. He's gotten so stuck in this mindset that he's willing to send tons of Russ soldiers to die over there.
Another thing—he needs this win to solidify his power. He refuses to admit defeat and he won't recognize it, so he's ready to go all the way. Now, maybe he’s still a long way off from thinking about bombs, but if he's becoming hysterical and obsessed, he might stop caring about the Russians or even Ukrainians and just pull the trigger on a bomb.

It also really depends on how much leash the people surrounding him are willing to give him.
Does anyone in his inner circle actually have the guts to step in and stop him?

The concert promoter, Live Nation, confirmed the cancellations, though they remained tight-lipped about the specific reasoning behind the move.
The whole Controversy was ignited by an open letter Waters sent directly to the First Lady of Ukraine, Olena Zelenska.

In that letter, Waters claimed that "extreme nationalists" within Ukraine had essentially steered the nation toward this "catastrophic war."

He went a step further by accusing her husband, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, of failing to deliver on his pre-election promises to bring peace to the Donbas region, notably omitting any mention of Russia's role in the conflict.

Responding via Twitter, Mrs. Zelenska pointed out that it is Russia that invaded Ukraine, systematically destroying its cities and killing civilians. She noted quite pointedly that "Roger Waters should be seeking peace from the president of the other country."

Following the fallout from the letter, Lucas Wantuch, a local councilman in Krakow, issued a call for citizens to boycott the musician's shows.
City council members have since drafted a resolution to declare Mr. Waters persona non grata, with a vote scheduled for the August 28th session.

"Given Russia's criminal invasion of Ukraine and the mounting evidence of war crimes committed by Russian soldiers, [the council] expresses deep indignation regarding the claims and statements made by Mr. Roger Waters concerning the Russian invasion," the resolution states.

...

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-63026101

Larry Wilson25 said:That's a solid point, and honestly, we need to keep saying it because some people keep pushing those what about arguments.
And they’re all just Americans.
Did we actually have a chance to handle things back in 2014? As a community within the European Union?
We did. It's just like our own domestic conflicts—a total mess. A Fryer attacks another nation and then starts waving nukes around. It's precisely because we let bullies operate within the European sphere that we're sitting here worrying about nukes now.
If we had slapped him with brutal sanctions on gas and everything else back then, none of this would be happening.
But no, instead everyone says it's the fault of the USA. They claim the USA is the villain. That they're always at war. So why should we get involved?
Who was it that actually took down Slobodan Maddox?

coastalbison6 said:Looks like he made it out alive...
https://twitter.com/Andrew__Roth/sta...77672326369281

According to the reports coming in, around 1:00 PM local time, he opened fire six times on Aleksandar Elisejev, the head of the Ust-Ilimsk military recruitment office. The victim is currently in intensive care and remains in critical condition.

An eyewitness told Baz telling us there were no metal detectors at the military office, nor was anyone actually checking the draft papers:

...His weapon looked something out of Brother-2, very similar to one of those homemade shotguns you see around here.”
In Russia, following the announcement of mobilization, there has been a renewed and aggressive surge in attacks on military offices and government buildings. This pattern of arson targeting recruitment centers and administrative offices began spreading immediately after the Russian invasion of Ukraine back in February, but it appears this phenomenon is now becoming widespread.

Carol Johnson21 said:Honestly, I think they’d make decent soldiers.😁

Based on some recent estimates following the mobilization announcement, about 250,000 people have already fled Russia. Some sources suggest the borders might actually close around September 26th or 30th; if that happens, we could be looking at nearly a million refugees.

I can't help but feel for the national minorities, like the Dagestanis, who have endured decades of erasure and terror. Now, they find themselves being used as nothing more than cannon fodder, all while finding it much harder to reach the Western borders.

It’s a smart move by the Russians not to cause any trouble in Moscow. The number of mobilized individuals there is negligible, isn't it? It would be fascinating to see what percentage of those fleeing are actually coming from there.

On September 17, 1939, the Soviet Union invaded Poland. The Red Army moved into the eastern territories of the country, fulfilling the terms of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, under which Nazi Germany and the USSR had carved up their respective spheres of influence. The Polish Ambassador to the USSR, Vaclava Grzybowska, was handed a formal note stating that Poland effectively ceased to exist. Initially, the Soviet press focused on the failure of the Polish government, but they quickly pivoted to the necessity of the Red Army advancing into Poland to liberate the Russian-speaking populations who were supposedly being “oppressed” by the Poles.

In Russia, it seems they were never taught about the entry of Soviet troops into Poland back in 1939. For the vast majority, the War began on June 22, 1941—that is how everyone is taught from childhood, and as for what happened before that, they say, who knows? For the scientific minority, World War II actually started on September 1, 1939, with the Nazi invasion of Poland, and any Soviet or post-Soviet intellectual will remember the image of German tanks rolling over Polish cavalry.

....

However, the narrative surrounding the discussion of the Soviet invasion of Poland, which kicked off 83 years ago on September 17, 1939, hasn't quite taken hold. There are several reasons for this: during the Soviet era, the topic was meticulously suppressed, and in the nineties, there wasn't much thought given to it—whether intentionally or not, it’s hard to say.

Only an absolute minority of people in Russia and the broader Russian-speaking world have discussed, or continue to discuss, this conflict, which encyclopedias refer to as the “Red Army's Polish campaign.” Furthermore, almost any attempt at a critical examination of these events is inevitably perceived as something hostile, "Russophobic," or "subversive." The inertia of the Soviet wartime discourse is so powerful that, I should remind you, in modern Russia, one cannot even question it without facing the threat of criminal prosecution.
...

Take, for instance, a programmatic article in Pravda from September 19.
Here are the main points:

• we are going to help our own people;
• Western Belarus and Ukraine were merely colonies, mere appendages to the "main" Poland;
• the local population was dissatisfied with Polonization;
• there had been a "corruption" of these peoples' national cultures, as they weren't permitted to fully learn or use their own languages.

Timothy Williams5 said:I don't think this was actually the case:

Security forces opened fire on protesters demonstrating against the Russian mobilization order in an attempt to disperse the crowd in Alaska. (video)
https://twitter.com/clashreport/stat...qdyauTEn5N2naA

Timothy Williams5 said:The shooter has been identified as Ruslan Zinin, a 25-year-old.

According to the reports coming in, around 1:00 PM local time, he opened fire six times on Aleksandar Elisejev, the head of the Ust-Ilimsk military recruitment office. The victim is currently in intensive care and remains in critical condition.

An eyewitness told Baz telling us there were no metal detectors at the military office, nor was anyone actually checking the draft papers:

...His weapon looked something out of Brother-2, very similar to one of those homemade shotguns you see around here.”
In Russia, following the announcement of mobilization, there has been a renewed and aggressive surge in attacks on military offices and government buildings. This pattern of arson targeting recruitment centers and administrative offices began spreading immediately after the Russian invasion of Ukraine back in February, but it appears this phenomenon is now becoming widespread.

https://theins.ru/news/255416

Nancy Gomez26 said:It isn't quite apples and oranges. The group that decided to invade Afghanistan (under Leonid Brezhnev) had the exact same goal: total victory and the imposition of their regime. However, when a series of leadership shifts occurred within the USSR hierarchy—driven by the inevitable hand of biology—the new administration saw spreading revolution in Afghanistan as a burden rather than a priority. They cut their losses. Similarly, a new figure ascending to power in The Kremlin could easily conclude that Ukraine is an oversized, unnecessary weight on the Russian Federation and simply walk away. Withdrawing while they still hold ground would allow them to negotiate from a much stronger position. But make no mistake: Putin won't back down. Launching this war was his personal (and flawed) decision, and he will do whatever it takes to justify it historically, even if he has to rely on the manufactured excuses we see constantly in their narrative.

James Chavez91 said:I don't know... I actually dig the suggestion someone made. If the whole deal for Ukrainian Independence was supposed to involve denuclearization, but now these bastards are just trampling over those borders and acting like they get a say in it anyway
Then maybe it’s only fair to hit the reset button and let the Ukrainians have some of that arsenal back—just to level the playing field, I guess.

And yeah. People who are terrified of nukes? I get it. Honestly, we’re all a little scared deep down. Especially if you're a parent—that fear hits differently.
But you just can't give in to an aggressor simply because they have the upper hand. That logic doesn't hold up. By that reasoning, anyone could just decide to take over Switzerland, Austria, Ibiza, or Canada... just because they feel like it.
We don't justify a physically stronger partner hitting a woman just because they're able to do it. No. In a civilized society, we call out that kind of behavior and we punish it.

Rachel Barrett8 said:It looks like you don't have much of a choice here.
If you want to truly help the Ukrainian cause, you should probably go enlist in the Ukrainian Army immediately.
If it comes down to it, I'll even donate money for your gear. Just tell me what you prefer: an AK-47, a Heckler & Koch, an FN SCAR, or maybe something else?

Yesterday marked the anniversary of when we faced an embargo back on September 25, 1991—an embargo designed to let the aggressor abuse us even more, letting more people die and more towns be burned to the ground.
I had no idea China was against the embargo, or that the UK found a way through B. Lončar to bypass the Chinese veto at the UN. (Honestly, I have nothing but contempt for the old Queen's legacy regarding that.)

And look, friend, you have one silver lining if you head off to fight Russia.
American Prebeg made it back from Russian captivity safe and sound.
But for Nicolier and so many of our defenders, nobody even knows where their graves are. So many lost their lives and health in camps over in Mexico.

I don't think you'll have any issues.
Good luck.

There is a massive difference between supporting Ukraine and advocating for a nuclear catastrophe.
You need to bring things back down to earth. Politicians won't do it, but I actually think forum members like you are smarter than most of them.

Rachel Barrett8 said:It looks like you don't have much of a choice here.
If you want to truly help the Ukrainian cause, you should probably go enlist in the Ukrainian Army immediately.
If it comes down to it, I'll even donate money for your gear. Just tell me what you prefer: an AK-47, a Heckler & Koch, an FN SCAR, or maybe something else?

Yesterday marked the anniversary of when we faced an embargo back on September 25, 1991—an embargo designed to let the aggressor abuse us even more, letting more people die and more towns be burned to the ground.
I had no idea China was against the embargo, or that the UK found a way through B. Lončar to bypass the Chinese veto at the UN. (Honestly, I have nothing but contempt for the old Queen's legacy regarding that.)

And look, friend, you have one silver lining if you head off to fight Russia.
American Prebeg made it back from Russian captivity safe and sound.
But for Nicolier and so many of our defenders, nobody even knows where their graves are. So many lost their lives and health in camps over in Mexico.

I don't think you'll have any issues.
Good luck.

There is a massive difference between supporting Ukraine and advocating for a nuclear catastrophe.
You need to bring things back down to earth. Politicians won't do it, but I actually think forum members like you are smarter than most of them.

Rachel Barrett8 said:It looks like you don't have much of a choice here.
If you want to truly help the Ukrainian cause, you should probably go enlist in the Ukrainian Army immediately.
If it comes down to it, I'll even donate money for your gear. Just tell me what you prefer: an AK-47, a Heckler & Koch, an FN SCAR, or maybe something else?

Yesterday marked the anniversary of when we faced an embargo back on September 25, 1991—an embargo designed to let the aggressor abuse us even more, letting more people die and more towns be burned to the ground.
I had no idea China was against the embargo, or that the UK found a way through B. Lončar to bypass the Chinese veto at the UN. (Honestly, I have nothing but contempt for the old Queen's legacy regarding that.)

And look, friend, you have one silver lining if you head off to fight Russia.
American Prebeg made it back from Russian captivity safe and sound.
But for Nicolier and so many of our defenders, nobody even knows where their graves are. So many lost their lives and health in camps over in Mexico.

I don't think you'll have any issues.
Good luck.

There is a massive difference between supporting Ukraine and advocating for a nuclear catastrophe.
You need to bring things back down to earth. Politicians won't do it, but I actually think forum members like you are smarter than most of them.