News War with Russia

[Scouse]

Lol:

Poland missile ‘unlikely’ to have been fired from Russia, Biden says

US president says trajectory of missile suggests it was not launched by Russian forces waging war in Ukraine but will await results of investigation

www.theguardian.com

I've only heard this line applied to Russians and Donald Trump:

Ukraine’s president Volodymyr Zelenskiy said Russian missiles hit Poland in a “significant escalation” of the conflict. He did not provide evidence

"He did not provide evidence" is a line used by the papers and media to say "you should not believe this". It was used against Trump a lot (but never towards the Dems when they said something controversial) and has been used against Russia a lot - but this is the first time it's been used against Ukraine.

Why is that? Could it be that we don't want to get involved, so the first attack on NATO soil isn't automatically laid at Russia's feet. Suddenly we demand evidence of who did it and their "level of intent" - when we haven't really required that evidence before (because other attacks were much more politically convenient to blame on Russia, even if it was perfectly feasible that Ukraine was behind it).

We only want this "evidence" when we are potentially required to act.

All this stuff is dirty shitty propaganda.

 

[Wij]

Lol:

Poland missile ‘unlikely’ to have been fired from Russia, Biden says

US president says trajectory of missile suggests it was not launched by Russian forces waging war in Ukraine but will await results of investigation

www.theguardian.com

I've only heard this line applied to Russians and Donald Trump:


"He did not provide evidence" is a line used by the papers and media to say "you should not believe this". It was used against Trump a lot (but never towards the Dems when they said something controversial) and has been used against Russia a lot - but this is the first time it's been used against Ukraine.

Why is that? Could it be that we don't want to get involved, so the first attack on NATO soil isn't automatically laid at Russia's feet. Suddenly we demand evidence of who did it and their "level of intent" - when we haven't really required that evidence before (because other attacks were much more politically convenient to blame on Russia, even if it was perfectly feasible that Ukraine was behind it).

We only want this "evidence" when we are potentially required to act.

All this stuff is dirty shitty propaganda.

Let's just forget that Russia is boasting about firing over 100 cruise missiles at Ukrainian civilian infrastructure, leaving large parts of the country without power just as winter sets in, and concentrate on what may (but as yet unconfirmed) be a Ukrainian anti-air missile, fired in response to the Russians' brutal attacks, going astray.

That seems like a good perspective, sure.

Let's let Poland decide what it wants to do.

 

[Scouse]

What's that got to do with anything @Wij?

My whole point is we have processes in place telling us to "believe" Ukraine when it's on their territory but as soon as it's on our territory we get NATO chiefs - and our press - going "woah, this doesn't look like it was Russia, hold your horses, lets check it out".

I've been complaining about tub-thumping tribalism from Day 1 - and this is (yet more) direct evidence of it.

 

[Wij]

What's that got to do with anything @Wij?

My whole point is we have processes in place telling us to "believe" Ukraine when it's on their territory but as soon as it's on our territory we get NATO chiefs - and our press - going "woah, this doesn't look like it was Russia, hold your horses, lets check it out".

I've been complaining about tub-thumping tribalism from Day 1 - and this is (yet more) direct evidence of it.

No, it isn't. There's been no credible evidence for any of Russia's claims that Ukraine attacked itself in the past and plenty of of evidence that Russia did them.

Russia lies about everything all the time. Ukraine doesn't. There's no reason to treat their competing claims as equal unless and until proved otherwise. That's not tribal. That's a rational response to past events.

 

[Scouse]

Russia lies about everything all the time. Ukraine doesn't.

So black-and-white. So tub-thumpingly tribal.

There's no reason to treat their competing claims as equal

I'm not saying we should - Russia is the aggressor and bear the vast majority of any blame. I previously changed my sig just to make that clear I think like that.

That's not tribal. That's a rational response to past events

I'm sorry - but absolutely we're acting tribally. And my original post is proof of that. Our response is completely tribal - until it may mandate us to act in a way we really don't want to - and then we're suddenly not tribal any more.

The language used by our media outlets shows that very clearly.

 

[Wij]

No. As I said, believing Russia is probably responsible for anything is a perfectly valid position based on evidence of past events.

Wanting Ukraine to succeed and Russia to fail is also a perfectly valid moral position based on who is the aggressor.

Not tribal, rational.

 

[Gwadien]

No, it isn't. There's been no credible evidence for any of Russia's claims that Ukraine attacked itself in the past and plenty of of evidence that Russia did them.

Russia lies about everything all the time. Ukraine doesn't. There's no reason to treat their competing claims as equal unless and until proved otherwise. That's not tribal. That's a rational response to past events.

Ukraine doesn't lie? Hahaha, I could probably find a dozen or so examples.

Hitting targets outside of Ukrainian territory for example.

 

[Wij]

Ukraine doesn't lie? Hahaha, I could probably find a dozen or so examples.

Hitting targets outside of Ukrainian territory for example.

Ooh. Show me some Ukrainian lies then.

 

[Scouse]

As I said, believing Russia is probably responsible for anything is a perfectly valid position based on evidence of past events.

Tribal, tub-thumping idiocy. We all want Ukraine to win, but it's 100% wrong to blind yourself to actual reality.

Oh btw:

There's been no credible evidence for any of Russia's claims that Ukraine attacked itself in the past.

In August Ukraine repeatedly shells a nuclear power plant that has been under Russian control since March? Nah, "it's the fucking Russians shelling themselves...."

...yeah right. Get real. That's denialist madness that makes it impossible for us to respond in any rational fashion.

 

[Gwadien]

Ooh. Show me some Ukrainian lies then.

Top of my head?

Bombing nuclear power station.
Saying they won't force men to fight then did.
The death counts - for both sides.
Hitting targets outside of Ukraine and then denying responsibility.

Scouse is right, and it's not just here, it's nationally that people are fooling themselves into things that aren't actually reality, as if we've completely forgotten what war actually is.

I was actually speaking to a former soldier yesterday who was in NI and Bosnia who was saying the press the Russian soldiers get (ie death porn on the front page of tabloid websites) is crazy.

I'd love to see how western young people will respond to being shoved into a war, whilst going in thinking it would be like Cod, much like Russians youts.

 

[Wij]

Tribal, tub-thumping idiocy. We all want Ukraine to win, but it's 100% wrong to blind yourself to actual reality.

Oh btw:

In August Ukraine repeatedly shells a nuclear power plant that has been under Russian control since March? Nah, "it's the fucking Russians shelling themselves...."

...yeah right. Get real. That's denialist madness that makes it impossible for us to respond in any rational fashion.

We went through this at the time. Russians weren't shelling themselves. They were blowing up parts of the infrastructure.

 

[Scouse]

We went through this at the time. Russians weren't shelling themselves. They were blowing up parts of the infrastructure.

You're lying to yourself @Wij.

That's not what the IAEA said. for example shells landed next to spent fuel storage.

Whilst I'd very much like to see your proof of this, it's not really needed is it? If Russia wanted to "blow up" shit (rather than simply cut power lines to systems they want to exclude and have full control over) they wouldn't use fucking artillery.

It's wilful, tribal blindness.

 

[Wij]

Bombing nuclear power station.

Again, where's some solid evidence? Ukraine NEEDS that power. Russia doesn't want it to have power.

Saying they won't force men to fight then did.

It's war, things change. That's not a lie. That's changing circumstances. Plus anyway:

Ukraine scraps conscription for compulsory military service in wartime

The Verkhovna Rada has abolished conscription for compulsory military service while martial law is in effect, Member of Parliament from the Holos (Voice) parliamentary faction Yaroslav Zheleznyak said on Telegram on Oct. 18.

news.yahoo.com

The death counts - for both sides.

Ukraine's death tolls of Russian soldiers have held up pretty well. They don't claim they must be 100% accurate. It's based on reports from the field.

They certainly probably have a better idea than Russia does as they don't know how many have just deserted.

Hitting targets outside of Ukraine and then denying responsibility.

Specifically?

 

[Wij]

You're lying to yourself @Wij.

That's not what the IAEA said. for example shells landed next to spent fuel storage.

Whilst I'd very much like to see your proof of this, it's not really needed is it? If Russia wanted to "blow up" shit (rather than simply cut power lines to systems they want to exclude and have full control over) they wouldn't use fucking artillery.

It's wilful, tribal blindness.

It wasn't artillery.

 

[Raven]

And remember, folks, that Russian chap explained it all. The shells span around when they landed, they just look like they were fired from the direction of the Russian artillery.

 

[Scouse]

It wasn't artillery.

Now I want your proof. And any sort of argument against the obvious.

It wasn't the fucking Russians. It was Ukranians putting all of Europe at risk of nuclear meltdown.

 

[Wij]

And remember, folks, that Russian chap explained it all. The shells span around when they landed, they just look like they were fired from the direction of the Russian artillery.

Absolutely.

If people are deliberately going to conflate lots of different incidents, at different targets, using different munitions then it's easy to come to the erroneous conclusion that just because Ukraine has done some fighting around the plant then 'Ukraine is shelling the plant' is a reasonable take. It's not. I don't doubt that Ukraine has fired at Russians positions near the plant that were firing at them but you can't then just say that Ukraine must be responsible for all explosions. Ukraine has every reason not to want the plant up in flames. Russia on the other hand, as per the above, has been caught in some outrageous lies about it.

 

[Wij]

Now I want your proof. And any sort of argument against the obvious.

It wasn't the fucking Russians. It was Ukranians putting all of Europe at risk of nuclear meltdown.

We went through this at the time. Depending on which incident you are referring to then there was no claim it was an artillery shell. It was rockets.

 

[Wij]

Now I want your proof. And any sort of argument against the obvious.

It wasn't the fucking Russians. It was Ukranians putting all of Europe at risk of nuclear meltdown.

Ah, the Ukrainians decided to start a fight in a nuclear power plant did they? The Russians were just gay couples getting lost whilst looking for a cathedral?

 

[Embattle]

We've been here before but just to restate the basics, Ukraine is no snow white and can and will bend the truth at times....but besides a couple of people on this forum they aren't viewed anywhere near equal when compared to Russia and can't be used to hide the basic fact that Russia is the invader.

 

[Scouse]

We went through this at the time. Depending on which incident you are referring to then there was no claim it was an artillery shell. It was rockets.

Rockets are a form of artillery. And listen to yourself - it's the Russians because rather than simply cut cables (none of which are by fucking spent fuel ponds) or planting charges Russians would use rockets??!

You're insane. The fucking Ukranians were shooting at the Russians and hit nuclear infrastructure - putting all of us at risk.

That's how it was unless you can bring evidence to your swivel-eyed tub-thumping argument.

 

[BloodOmen]

I'm still holding out that a world leader walks up to Larov and headbutts him tbfh.

As for Poland triggering article 4 - its one step closer to nuclear war and dare I say it, if it DOES (IF) come to Nuclear war, I really hope American drops them before Russia gets a chance to do anything.

 

[Wij]

Rockets are a form of artillery. And listen to yourself - it's the Russians because rather than simply cut cables (none of which are by fucking spent fuel ponds) or planting charges Russians would use rockets??!

You're insane. The fucking Ukranians were shooting at the Russians and hit nuclear infrastructure - putting all of us at risk.

That's how it was unless you can bring evidence to your swivel-eyed tub-thumping argument.

I mean, just as one example:

KYIV, Ukraine — Europe’s largest nuclear plant was knocked off Ukraine’s electricity grid Monday after its last transmission line was disconnected as a result of a fire caused by Russian shelling, the facility’s operator and the U.N. atomic watchdog said.

Ukraine says nuclear plant offline after Russian shelling

Europe’s largest nuclear plant has been knocked off Ukraine’s electricity grid after its last transmission line was disconnected as a result of a fire caused by Russian shelling. The International Atomic Energy Agency said it was informed Monday by Ukrainian authorities that the reserve line was...

www.pbs.org

 

[Wij]

I'm still holding out that a world leader walks up to Larov and headbutts him tbfh.

As for Poland triggering article 4 - its one step closer to nuclear war and dare I say it, if it DOES (IF) come to Nuclear war, I really hope American drops them before Russia gets a chance to do anything.

Article 4 isn't article 5. There won't be an article 5.

 

[Embattle]

Article 4 is in essence let's have an official chat.

 

[DaGaffer]

Top of my head?

Bombing nuclear power station.
Saying they won't force men to fight then did.
The death counts - for both sides.
Hitting targets outside of Ukraine and then denying responsibility.

Scouse is right, and it's not just here, it's nationally that people are fooling themselves into things that aren't actually reality, as if we've completely forgotten what war actually is.

I was actually speaking to a former soldier yesterday who was in NI and Bosnia who was saying the press the Russian soldiers get (ie death porn on the front page of tabloid websites) is crazy.

I'd love to see how western young people will respond to being shoved into a war, whilst going in thinking it would be like Cod, much like Russians youts.

Most of the time Ukraine doesn't say anything at all about operations or casualties; not commenting isn't the same as lying. Russia too seems to be finally learning the art of shutting the fuck up, but they find it hard to avoid the big obvious lies, like the annexation justifications for instance.

 

[Wij]

I mean, just as one example:

Ukraine says nuclear plant offline after Russian shelling

Europe’s largest nuclear plant has been knocked off Ukraine’s electricity grid after its last transmission line was disconnected as a result of a fire caused by Russian shelling. The International Atomic Energy Agency said it was informed Monday by Ukrainian authorities that the reserve line was...

www.pbs.org

And this:

News - War with Russia

Oh and a couple of B52's have arrived in the UK this week :)

forums.freddyshouse.com

 

[Scouse]

I mean, just as one example:

Ukraine says nuclear plant offline after Russian shelling

Europe’s largest nuclear plant has been knocked off Ukraine’s electricity grid after its last transmission line was disconnected as a result of a fire caused by Russian shelling. The International Atomic Energy Agency said it was informed Monday by Ukrainian authorities that the reserve line was...

www.pbs.org

Isn't related to the issue of Ukraine shelling a nuclear power plant. Russia and Ukraine can lob their shit wherever they like - electrical substations, whatever. As long as it's not AT the power plant itself and the fuel storage pools.

Ukraine shelled the actual Nuclear power plant. Ukraine did that.

 

[Scouse]

As for this utter twaddle:

News - War with Russia

Oh and a couple of B52's have arrived in the UK this week :)

forums.freddyshouse.com

You really *really* need to get off twitter feeds from Ukranian politicians as a source of your "news" @Wij (and twitter more generally). Of course the fucking Ukranians said it was Russia ffs.

 

[Wij]

As for this utter twaddle:

News - War with Russia

Oh and a couple of B52's have arrived in the UK this week :)

forums.freddyshouse.com

You really *really* need to get off twitter feeds from Ukranian politicians as a source of your "news" @Wij (and twitter more generally). Of course the fucking Ukranians said it was Russia ffs.

It was in the Telegraph amongst others. Russians trying to convince the IAEA that shells that appear to have come from the direction of their forces came from the absolute opposite direction, somehow.