Russia's invasion of Ukraine: Part 5

By the way, this guy is explicitly stating they were ordered to commit war crimes—specifically, to execute prisoners.
When someone asks him what happens if one of them actually tries to surrender, he just coldly replies that they’ll be shot.
So, there's your confirmation of a war crime:

rowdytiger13 said:By the way, this guy is explicitly stating they were ordered to commit war crimes—specifically, to execute prisoners.
When someone asks him what happens if one of them actually tries to surrender, he just coldly replies that they’ll be shot.
So, there's your confirmation of a war crime:

I’d love for someone to lock me in a room with those two and toss the key.

rowdytiger13 said:By the way, this guy is explicitly stating they were ordered to commit war crimes—specifically, to execute prisoners.
When someone asks him what happens if one of them actually tries to surrender, he just coldly replies that they’ll be shot.
So, there's your confirmation of a war crime:

Honestly, this is just wild on so many different levels.

just some shady business

rowdytiger13 said:Sure, those lazy EU politicians and bureaucrats, practically swimming in Russian money, figured Putin wasn't crazy enough to launch a full-scale, long-term invasion. God forbid they had hoped it would all wrap up in three days.
Now everyone is paying the bill, though there is a certain irony in watching everyone scramble to distance themselves from Russian cash.
This was necessary. A painful amputation. Thanks, Putin; they never would have done it themselves.

I can't shake the feeling that the West handed Putin a window of opportunity to wrap up his business in Ukraine—maybe seven to ten days. That’s likely why they call it a "special operation." If he actually pulls it off, it would validate everything he's saying and suggest he has massive support within the Ukrainian people. Let's not forget that the West even offered to evacuate Zelensky & Co. out of there.
Zaheb hit the nail on the head. Zelensky & Co. held their ground, and the Ukrainian people put up a hell of a fight. But the Russians blew right through that grace period, and now we’re all stuck dealing with the fallout.
Don't get me wrong here—I am firmly on Ukraine's side. I truly believe the West needs to step up and provide them with every bit of support they need.

feralhawk45 said:I can't shake the feeling that the West handed Putin a window of opportunity to wrap up his business in Ukraine—maybe seven to ten days. That’s likely why they call it a "special operation." If he actually pulls it off, it would validate everything he's saying and suggest he has massive support within the Ukrainian people. Let's not forget that the West even offered to evacuate Zelensky & Co. out of there.
Zaheb hit the nail on the head. Zelensky & Co. held their ground, and the Ukrainian people put up a hell of a fight. But the Russians blew right through that grace period, and now we’re all stuck dealing with the fallout.
Don't get me wrong here—I am firmly on Ukraine's side. I truly believe the West needs to step up and provide them with every bit of support they need.

I wouldn't be surprised if there was a secret Putin-Scholz-Macron agreement behind the scenes.
Furthermore, I am convinced that nobody bothered to consult the WH or London about it, which is likely why that deal fell through.

feralhawk45 said:I can't shake the feeling that the West handed Putin a window of opportunity to wrap up his business in Ukraine—maybe seven to ten days. That’s likely why they call it a "special operation." If he actually pulls it off, it would validate everything he's saying and suggest he has massive support within the Ukrainian people. Let's not forget that the West even offered to evacuate Zelensky & Co. out of there.
Zaheb hit the nail on the head. Zelensky & Co. held their ground, and the Ukrainian people put up a hell of a fight. But the Russians blew right through that grace period, and now we’re all stuck dealing with the fallout.
Don't get me wrong here—I am firmly on Ukraine's side. I truly believe the West needs to step up and provide them with every bit of support they need.

I'm with you on this. My take? They probably wanted Ukraine to end up like Belarus, with someone like Lukashenko in charge. The big question is whether Russia had intel suggesting most Ukrainians were on their side—which was a total miscalculation, by the way—and that things would go down without much pushback. Sure, Zelensky refused to leave, but resistance happened. It makes me wonder what was going on in Western political circles back then. Maybe they were just waiting for Kyiv to fall? There were endless headlines claiming Kyiv would drop in a day or two... once the capital falls, they grab or kill Zelensky, install a puppet, and the "special operation" is over.
We even saw statements from people like Macron, suggesting we shouldn't humiliate Putin and that concessions should be made to Russia. Those sentiments have vanished. I'm still sitting here wondering why the narrative shifted so fast. You still see the articles, but it's all "confidential sources" and hearsay now, whereas before, you'd hear someone like Scholz saying how much the times have changed.

Richard Wilson4 said:Russia occupied Crimea back in 2014.

Germany pulled the plug on Nordstrea 2 THIS YEAR...

That isn't being naive, man, it's being shady...

The Schwabo crowd would literally whip America over election laws in Canada, all while cutting deals with the Russians just to line their own pockets...

Crimea was the massive blunder here—Russia got hit with some symbolic sanctions, but they basically pulled off a full-scale heist. It isn't like the situations with Mexico or Taiwan; regardless of what anyone thinks of them, they function as independent states—some recognize them, some don't. But nobody is physically annexed to them. With Crimea, it was simple: troops moved in, territory was seized, there was a referendum, and then annexation. Period. Crimea is part of Russia now, Russia got some sanctions that look good on paper but barely bite in reality, and that's the long and short of it.

In my view, Crimea wasn't even the biggest blunder. The real failure was what happened in Georgia, where everyone just sat there twiddling their thumbs, acting like it had absolutely nothing to do with them. That’s just how this world works, isn't it? We just flip them the bird, shrug our shoulders, and go back to scrolling through news photos while pretending nothing actually happened. It feels too far away, like it doesn't touch our lives. Besides, we don't have much skin in the game over there—it's not like we're fighting over food supplies, oil, or natural gas. Honestly, who gives a damn? If the Russians want to tear it down, let them.

Kevin Hughes2 said:In my view, Crimea wasn't even the biggest blunder. The real failure was what happened in Georgia, where everyone just sat there twiddling their thumbs, acting like it had absolutely nothing to do with them. That’s just how this world works, isn't it? We just flip them the bird, shrug our shoulders, and go back to scrolling through news photos while pretending nothing actually happened. It feels too far away, like it doesn't touch our lives. Besides, we don't have much skin in the game over there—it's not like we're fighting over food supplies, oil, or natural gas. Honestly, who gives a damn? If the Russians want to tear it down, let them.

Yeah, it was the exact same deal with Georgia. And back in 2004, you were already hearing talk about Donetsk becoming its own thing if Viktor Yanukovych could somehow snatch the win. That was the era of the poisoning of Viktor Yushchenko, the elections being declared invalid, Yanukovych claiming victory, and then the actual vote having fake results before they had to redo it and Yushchenko finally won. Only difference is, the public support wasn't quite as massive back then. Then came Georgia in 2008—success—then Ukraine in 2013—success—leading up to that messy situation that lasted until 2022. Moldova is in the same boat, too.

In my last post, I was strictly looking at the Russia-Ukraine situation.

Kate Cook27 said:Yeah, it was the exact same deal with Georgia. And back in 2004, you were already hearing talk about Donetsk becoming its own thing if Viktor Yanukovych could somehow snatch the win. That was the era of the poisoning of Viktor Yushchenko, the elections being declared invalid, Yanukovych claiming victory, and then the actual vote having fake results before they had to redo it and Yushchenko finally won. Only difference is, the public support wasn't quite as massive back then. Then came Georgia in 2008—success—then Ukraine in 2013—success—leading up to that messy situation that lasted until 2022. Moldova is in the same boat, too.

In my last post, I was strictly looking at the Russia-Ukraine situation.

The global momentum was simply different during that era. By 2014, the world's attention was fixated on Syria and the Middle East, especially with the rapid rise of ISIS as a major global threat. At the helm in the US was Barack Obama, who, while arguably a great president in several other respects, often seemed hesitant or lacked that decisive edge needed to directly confront such blatant agitators in foreign policy.
Back in 2008, it was George W. Bush in charge, a man who seemed to be more interested in engaging in little sing-alongs and dance-offs with certain bad actors than anything else. Back then, the world still swallowed Russian propaganda quite readily, and honestly—much to our regret—who actually cared about what was happening in Georgia?

steelheron25 said:The global momentum was simply different during that era. By 2014, the world's attention was fixated on Syria and the Middle East, especially with the rapid rise of ISIS as a major global threat. At the helm in the US was Barack Obama, who, while arguably a great president in several other respects, often seemed hesitant or lacked that decisive edge needed to directly confront such blatant agitators in foreign policy.
Back in 2008, it was George W. Bush in charge, a man who seemed to be more interested in engaging in little sing-alongs and dance-offs with certain bad actors than anything else. Back then, the world still swallowed Russian propaganda quite readily, and honestly—much to our regret—who actually cared about what was happening in Georgia?

Yeah, the big stories on the world stage were ISIS and Syria. The US wasn't stepping in much, and as for Europe? Angela Merkel was basically asking why anyone would bother arming Ukraine. Everyone was chasing peace, but it never really stuck. You had Minsk 1 and Minsk 2, but those territories stayed occupied—leaving zero hope for getting back into those cities.

Kate Cook27 said:Yeah, the big stories on the world stage were ISIS and Syria. The US wasn't stepping in much, and as for Europe? Angela Merkel was basically asking why anyone would bother arming Ukraine. Everyone was chasing peace, but it never really stuck. You had Minsk 1 and Minsk 2, but those territories stayed occupied—leaving zero hope for getting back into those cities.

That's an oversimplification. Her main concern was, what would happen to Germany's own defense capabilities?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...on-iss-ukraine

Kate Cook27 said:Yeah, the big stories on the world stage were ISIS and Syria. The US wasn't stepping in much, and as for Europe? Angela Merkel was basically asking why anyone would bother arming Ukraine. Everyone was chasing peace, but it never really stuck. You had Minsk 1 and Minsk 2, but those territories stayed occupied—leaving zero hope for getting back into those cities.

But let’s be honest, Angela Merkel and Germany aren't synonymous with all of Europe, and I really think it’s a mistake to expect them to maintain some sort of unwavering, ironclad stance against Russia. After all, wasn't Gerhard Schröder the Chancellor not all that long ago? In many ways, he was effectively a Russian asset.
In the broader European context, the only truly firm reaction we saw came from the United Kingdom—though, even then, in 2014, weren't they mostly preoccupied with their own internal debates regarding Brexit?
Back in 2014, Russia still held a certain amount of geopolitical credit; I mean, everyone knew the guy was a crook, but he was still tolerated as a necessary evil, and Russia was far too valuable a trading partner to alienate. The world simply hadn't matured enough to mount the kind of decisive, collective response we finally saw in 2022.

rowdytiger13 said:By the way, this guy is explicitly stating they were ordered to commit war crimes—specifically, to execute prisoners.
When someone asks him what happens if one of them actually tries to surrender, he just coldly replies that they’ll be shot.
So, there's your confirmation of a war crime:

Just take a look at the comments and see how many likes each one is pulling. I honestly don't get why these people are so desperate to join the European Union—and more importantly, why on earth should we be expected to support them in doing so?

loneskipper3 said:Just take a look at the comments and see how many likes each one is pulling. I honestly don't get why these people are so desperate to join the European Union—and more importantly, why on earth should we be expected to support them in doing so?

It's pretty obvious that for some people, this war and the Russian narrative are just a way to get revenge for the nineties.

Kate Cook27 said:Yeah, the big stories on the world stage were ISIS and Syria. The US wasn't stepping in much, and as for Europe? Angela Merkel was basically asking why anyone would bother arming Ukraine. Everyone was chasing peace, but it never really stuck. You had Minsk 1 and Minsk 2, but those territories stayed occupied—leaving zero hope for getting back into those cities.

German politics since the days of Gerhard Schröder has been all about pivoting East—drifting away from the USA and playing a little flirtation game with Russia. Angela Merkel just took that playbook and perfected it. The payoff at the time? A massive economic boost for Germany and total economic dominance within the European Union.
I'm trying to dig through my memory for even one move by Angela Merkel that wasn't basically handing favors to Vladimir Putin and Russia.

feralhawk45 said:German politics since the days of Gerhard Schröder has been all about pivoting East—drifting away from the USA and playing a little flirtation game with Russia. Angela Merkel just took that playbook and perfected it. The payoff at the time? A massive economic boost for Germany and total economic dominance within the European Union.
I'm trying to dig through my memory for even one move by Angela Merkel that wasn't basically handing favors to Vladimir Putin and Russia.

Look, no one serious in Germany actually wants to "drift away from the USA" just to "flirt with Russia"—that’s a bit of an oversimplification, isn't it? It’s more that Germans favor maintaining decent relations with Russia, primarily for economic reasons. It isn't just about their own bottom line; there's also the matter of regional stability within Russia itself. Besides, culturally and ethnically speaking, Germany is essentially one of the foundational pillars of the USA and an inseparable part of the West.

loneskipper3 said:Just take a look at the comments and see how many likes each one is pulling. I honestly don't get why these people are so desperate to join the European Union—and more importantly, why on earth should we be expected to support them in doing so?

I honestly feel the exact same way because it makes zero sense why the Mexicans are being coddled, pampered, and pressured so heavily to join the European Union when they don't actually have to, and frankly, I'd be pretty happy if they never decided to jump in at all.☕