|
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. |
On August 19 2024 03:36 a_ch wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2024 03:12 Jones313 wrote:On August 19 2024 02:42 a_ch wrote:On August 19 2024 02:24 Jones313 wrote:On August 19 2024 02:13 a_ch wrote:On August 19 2024 02:03 Excludos wrote:On August 19 2024 00:57 a_ch wrote:On August 19 2024 00:40 Jones313 wrote:On August 18 2024 20:16 a_ch wrote:On August 18 2024 18:34 jodljodl wrote:To the proponents of negotiations with Putin Russia: From 2014 until February 24, 2022, negotiations took place almost continuously in various formats. Shortly before Putin Russia launched the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine in response to and in the midst of negotiations, there were intensive negotiations between Russia, the USA and NATO, which were apparently intended by Russia to remain without agreement. This was because Russia consistently insisted on its maximum demands, which were virtually impossible for the “Western” side to accept. With the Russian invasion of Ukraine, these diplomatic negotiations were implicitly ended unilaterally by the Russian side. On the other hand, at the same time as the attack on Ukraine, Russia put forward a proposal for a diplomatic “solution”: A de facto subjugation of Ukraine under Russian rule: The Russian Demands on Ukraine: - Ukraine laying down its arms - Abandonment of any ambitions to join NATO - Permanent neutral status - Introduction of Russian as the official state language - Recognition of Crimea as Russian - Recognize the so-called Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics as independent - “denazification” and ‘demilitarization’ of Ukraine; in other words, Ukraine must install a regime at Russia's mercy. Anyone who, after listing these facts, is still of the opinion that diplomatic negotiations with Putin Russia are a way to create peace and security in Europe should now know better. After a decade of war and a multitude of diplomatic attempts to find some kind of amicable solution for peace, it is obvious that Putin Russia is seeking goals other than peace and solutions acceptable to all sides. Sources: www.swp-berlin.org, www.swp-berlin.organd many many more you can easily find, have access to and confirm everything stated in the above sources. First, you (actually, the propagandist that you quote) aptly conceal here, that in return for these mild requirements (most of these terms like neutrality, language issue, army size - is how Ukraine used to be before the coups, with neutrality being a key condition of its formation in 1991 in the first place) Ukraine would get back 90 thousand sq km of territories, lost in the spring campaign, which is close to the size of South Korea. Second, it is generally a bad taste to quote one of the main propaganda centers instead of giving your own reasons Third, your sentence on “denazification and demilitarization of Ukraine" smells of racism, because its "denazification" part implies that Ukraine cannot be self-sufficient without reliance on paramilitary nazi groups like Azov in its internal\external policy. I skip here the demilitarization part, because there is enough evidence that countries with limited armies can live well in this world. Ukraine and her western allies would be more than willing to end the war. All it would take is the withdrawal of Russian troops from the sovereign territory of Ukraine and the recognition of Bilhorod and Kursk People's Republics (both have sizable Ukrainian-speaking populations) as independent states. These people have had to suffer under the Moscow regime for decades, their rights and culture slowly being eradicated. God forbid you even try to speak Ukrainian or fly the BPR flag (horizontal bicolor of black and yellow) in public anymore. Also good luck trying to find a Ukrainian school there, let alone a political party that represents these people. Complete demilitarization of the Russian armed forces would of course also be necessary to ensure security of the Russia-BPR/KPR border and Ukrainian-speaking citizens in the region. In return, some of the sanctions against Russia would be lifted and Russia would be given back some of its frozen assets. This would mean - more or less - going back to how things used to be. The people of BPR/KPR don't want anything to do with the Moscow regime, which is why there's no resistance to Ukraine's Special Military Operation and local forces are surrendering by the thousands to join their Ukrainian brothers. Why is the Moscow regime the only party against peace and these very mild requirements, choosing instead to keep sacrificing thousands of reluctant Russian kids in a desperate attempt to maintain their oppression of these pro-Ukrainian territories? -the difference is, Ukraine has no power to bring this to life, and among its allies only US has enough power to make a war with Russia a draw, but I bet you would not like it. So the rest of this is you self-indulgence On August 19 2024 00:41 jodljodl wrote:
Very cute :>
-don't push yourself if you have nothing substantial. If you look through this thread you'll realize that what you write here has been said to me at least a hundred times, I couldn't care less of another one clowning around - this just shows me your level Are you making the argument that what Russia is doing is ok because you believe they have/had the power to do it? Or am I misunderstanding something? Might makes right and all that? No, this is not it. My answer is related to the position, which have several times been stated here, "the west needs to put a little more effort/supplies/own troops to win", which indicates a complete misunderstanding of the current balance of power. In regards of might makes right I have the same position as you; regretfully you don't want to take seriously my arguments on the reasons and timeline of the war. On August 19 2024 02:13 Jones313 wrote:
What this is is holding up a mirror to your bullshit. I wasn't kidding about Ukrainian schools or representation, though.
And there it is. Beneath all the "Russian culture being removed" and LDPR nonsense is "because we can". That would be the only difference. Straight up might makes right. This from someone who insists on not being a fascist and calls other posters unserious. Just don't try to get on a high horse about people wishing harm on Russians again.
-get yourself educated a bit; you don't bring any value to the discussion "I'm educated, you're not". Handy catch-all to default to every time your arguments blow up in your face. Alas, I've grown up lacking opportunities to get the Russian education you've had. -but you literally have brought zero meaningful arguments. All that you post here is either a Ukrainian PR slogans (Kursk National Rebublic! Bilhorod!) or your own wet dreams of Karelia and Kaliningrad. Good thing the web format keeps you from throwing a Roman salute here. ed: omg, I shouldnt have drank tea while re-reading you; the phrase "every time your arguments blow up in your face" combined with your battle grunt made me almost choke from laughter. I bet it did. I bet you're just rolling on the floor laughing as they say. I don't know what battle grunts you're talking about, I'm on the side of peace. I proposed a simple question: why is it that Russia will not dismantle their army, withdraw from Ukraine and grant independence to the people of Kursk and Bilhorod in order to secure peace and get some of their frozen assets back, but insists on having thousands more of your fellow Russians killed? I've already provided my arguments for why this should be done. For a lasting peace, these requirements are mild. So far I've not received an answer. Because you're like a 6 year kid, who takes each word at face value. The reality is Donetsk/Luhansk people had a will to fight against Uraine on their own; mustered an army of tens of thousand people, of which ~10 thousand had been killed later, while the whole armed opposition in Russia is the RDK and LFR which together make up less than 1000 men, so the mirroring argument doesn't work at all. The frozen asset case is damaging to the both sides of the conflict, as it exposes the European financial system making it less appealing to the rest of the world. The asset sum is big, but not even comparable to the stakes taken. Ukraine has agreed to be the tool in "inflicting a strategic defeat to Russia", so apparently the Russian government believes this to be a serious threat, and wants to get rid of it once and for all - and many people here agrees with it, and dont mind to risk their life for that goal. ed: >>don't know what battle grunts you're talking about this is a local meme, боевой нахрюк https://neolurk.org/wiki/Нахрюк (in Russian)
Ah, yes, so eager to fight that Russians have to torture them into obedience...
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1824501968821256208.html
But don't worry. At least your comrades will have plenty of experience when it's your turn and you need a nudge. ;-)
|
Russian Federation240 Posts
-this is what relying on Ukrainian newssources does; their strategy from the start has been PR-centric, and they have no problem throwing away any outrageous nonsense; google a story of Lyudmila Denisova for example.
|
United States41984 Posts
On August 19 2024 03:36 a_ch wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2024 03:12 Jones313 wrote:On August 19 2024 02:42 a_ch wrote:On August 19 2024 02:24 Jones313 wrote:On August 19 2024 02:13 a_ch wrote:On August 19 2024 02:03 Excludos wrote:On August 19 2024 00:57 a_ch wrote:On August 19 2024 00:40 Jones313 wrote:On August 18 2024 20:16 a_ch wrote:On August 18 2024 18:34 jodljodl wrote:To the proponents of negotiations with Putin Russia: From 2014 until February 24, 2022, negotiations took place almost continuously in various formats. Shortly before Putin Russia launched the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine in response to and in the midst of negotiations, there were intensive negotiations between Russia, the USA and NATO, which were apparently intended by Russia to remain without agreement. This was because Russia consistently insisted on its maximum demands, which were virtually impossible for the “Western” side to accept. With the Russian invasion of Ukraine, these diplomatic negotiations were implicitly ended unilaterally by the Russian side. On the other hand, at the same time as the attack on Ukraine, Russia put forward a proposal for a diplomatic “solution”: A de facto subjugation of Ukraine under Russian rule: The Russian Demands on Ukraine: - Ukraine laying down its arms - Abandonment of any ambitions to join NATO - Permanent neutral status - Introduction of Russian as the official state language - Recognition of Crimea as Russian - Recognize the so-called Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics as independent - “denazification” and ‘demilitarization’ of Ukraine; in other words, Ukraine must install a regime at Russia's mercy. Anyone who, after listing these facts, is still of the opinion that diplomatic negotiations with Putin Russia are a way to create peace and security in Europe should now know better. After a decade of war and a multitude of diplomatic attempts to find some kind of amicable solution for peace, it is obvious that Putin Russia is seeking goals other than peace and solutions acceptable to all sides. Sources: www.swp-berlin.org, www.swp-berlin.organd many many more you can easily find, have access to and confirm everything stated in the above sources. First, you (actually, the propagandist that you quote) aptly conceal here, that in return for these mild requirements (most of these terms like neutrality, language issue, army size - is how Ukraine used to be before the coups, with neutrality being a key condition of its formation in 1991 in the first place) Ukraine would get back 90 thousand sq km of territories, lost in the spring campaign, which is close to the size of South Korea. Second, it is generally a bad taste to quote one of the main propaganda centers instead of giving your own reasons Third, your sentence on “denazification and demilitarization of Ukraine" smells of racism, because its "denazification" part implies that Ukraine cannot be self-sufficient without reliance on paramilitary nazi groups like Azov in its internal\external policy. I skip here the demilitarization part, because there is enough evidence that countries with limited armies can live well in this world. Ukraine and her western allies would be more than willing to end the war. All it would take is the withdrawal of Russian troops from the sovereign territory of Ukraine and the recognition of Bilhorod and Kursk People's Republics (both have sizable Ukrainian-speaking populations) as independent states. These people have had to suffer under the Moscow regime for decades, their rights and culture slowly being eradicated. God forbid you even try to speak Ukrainian or fly the BPR flag (horizontal bicolor of black and yellow) in public anymore. Also good luck trying to find a Ukrainian school there, let alone a political party that represents these people. Complete demilitarization of the Russian armed forces would of course also be necessary to ensure security of the Russia-BPR/KPR border and Ukrainian-speaking citizens in the region. In return, some of the sanctions against Russia would be lifted and Russia would be given back some of its frozen assets. This would mean - more or less - going back to how things used to be. The people of BPR/KPR don't want anything to do with the Moscow regime, which is why there's no resistance to Ukraine's Special Military Operation and local forces are surrendering by the thousands to join their Ukrainian brothers. Why is the Moscow regime the only party against peace and these very mild requirements, choosing instead to keep sacrificing thousands of reluctant Russian kids in a desperate attempt to maintain their oppression of these pro-Ukrainian territories? -the difference is, Ukraine has no power to bring this to life, and among its allies only US has enough power to make a war with Russia a draw, but I bet you would not like it. So the rest of this is you self-indulgence On August 19 2024 00:41 jodljodl wrote:
Very cute :>
-don't push yourself if you have nothing substantial. If you look through this thread you'll realize that what you write here has been said to me at least a hundred times, I couldn't care less of another one clowning around - this just shows me your level Are you making the argument that what Russia is doing is ok because you believe they have/had the power to do it? Or am I misunderstanding something? Might makes right and all that? No, this is not it. My answer is related to the position, which have several times been stated here, "the west needs to put a little more effort/supplies/own troops to win", which indicates a complete misunderstanding of the current balance of power. In regards of might makes right I have the same position as you; regretfully you don't want to take seriously my arguments on the reasons and timeline of the war. On August 19 2024 02:13 Jones313 wrote:
What this is is holding up a mirror to your bullshit. I wasn't kidding about Ukrainian schools or representation, though.
And there it is. Beneath all the "Russian culture being removed" and LDPR nonsense is "because we can". That would be the only difference. Straight up might makes right. This from someone who insists on not being a fascist and calls other posters unserious. Just don't try to get on a high horse about people wishing harm on Russians again.
-get yourself educated a bit; you don't bring any value to the discussion "I'm educated, you're not". Handy catch-all to default to every time your arguments blow up in your face. Alas, I've grown up lacking opportunities to get the Russian education you've had. -but you literally have brought zero meaningful arguments. All that you post here is either a Ukrainian PR slogans (Kursk National Rebublic! Bilhorod!) or your own wet dreams of Karelia and Kaliningrad. Good thing the web format keeps you from throwing a Roman salute here. ed: omg, I shouldnt have drank tea while re-reading you; the phrase "every time your arguments blow up in your face" combined with your battle grunt made me almost choke from laughter. I bet it did. I bet you're just rolling on the floor laughing as they say. I don't know what battle grunts you're talking about, I'm on the side of peace. I proposed a simple question: why is it that Russia will not dismantle their army, withdraw from Ukraine and grant independence to the people of Kursk and Bilhorod in order to secure peace and get some of their frozen assets back, but insists on having thousands more of your fellow Russians killed? I've already provided my arguments for why this should be done. For a lasting peace, these requirements are mild. So far I've not received an answer. Because you're like a 6 year kid, who takes each word at face value. The reality is Donetsk/Luhansk people had a will to fight against Uraine on their own; mustered an army of tens of thousand people, of which ~10 thousand had been killed later, while the whole armed opposition in Russia is the RDK and LFR which together make up less than 1000 men, so the mirroring argument doesn't work at all. The frozen asset case is damaging to the both sides of the conflict, as it exposes the European financial system making it less appealing to the rest of the world. The asset sum is big, but not even comparable to the stakes taken. Ukraine has agreed to be the tool in "inflicting a strategic defeat to Russia", so apparently the Russian government believes this to be a serious threat, and wants to get rid of it once and for all - and many people here agrees with it, and dont mind to risk their life for that goal. ed: >>don't know what battle grunts you're talking about this is a local meme, боевой нахрюк, basically what a warpig does - which has been attributed to agressive pro-ukrainian propaganda, since there's a lot of it in many Russian-speaking forums
The reality is that the Kursk People’s Republic raised an indigenous army and threw out their Russian oppressors.
|
On August 19 2024 04:08 a_ch wrote:-this is what relying on Ukrainian newssources does; their strategy from the start has been PR-centric, and they have no problem throwing away any outrageous nonsense; google a story of Lyudmila Denisova for example.
The fact that they've been using airforce personell is proven. For instance, one of the guys who was wounded in the column that was attacked was stationed at the heavy bomber airbase in Ukrainka.
I don't mind pointing out clear partisan sources, but something you'll quickly find is that they aren't in the habit of lying through their teeth. Their "lies" will be what they don't tell, rather than what they do. Everything reported here, for instance, is (and has been) easily verifiable. Russia did use airforce personell in their front lines in Kursk, and you do not do that out of anything other than pure desperation. These are people with incredibly little infantry training, because that's not what they're supposed to be doing. And every personell you move away from your airbases are now one less than can work on keeping your planes air worthy
But I will give you props for throwing out the idea that partisan sources could be PR-centric, and yet somehow not entertain the idea that your own sources could be
|
On August 19 2024 03:36 a_ch wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2024 03:12 Jones313 wrote:On August 19 2024 02:42 a_ch wrote:On August 19 2024 02:24 Jones313 wrote:On August 19 2024 02:13 a_ch wrote:On August 19 2024 02:03 Excludos wrote:On August 19 2024 00:57 a_ch wrote:On August 19 2024 00:40 Jones313 wrote:On August 18 2024 20:16 a_ch wrote:On August 18 2024 18:34 jodljodl wrote:To the proponents of negotiations with Putin Russia: From 2014 until February 24, 2022, negotiations took place almost continuously in various formats. Shortly before Putin Russia launched the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine in response to and in the midst of negotiations, there were intensive negotiations between Russia, the USA and NATO, which were apparently intended by Russia to remain without agreement. This was because Russia consistently insisted on its maximum demands, which were virtually impossible for the “Western” side to accept. With the Russian invasion of Ukraine, these diplomatic negotiations were implicitly ended unilaterally by the Russian side. On the other hand, at the same time as the attack on Ukraine, Russia put forward a proposal for a diplomatic “solution”: A de facto subjugation of Ukraine under Russian rule: The Russian Demands on Ukraine: - Ukraine laying down its arms - Abandonment of any ambitions to join NATO - Permanent neutral status - Introduction of Russian as the official state language - Recognition of Crimea as Russian - Recognize the so-called Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics as independent - “denazification” and ‘demilitarization’ of Ukraine; in other words, Ukraine must install a regime at Russia's mercy. Anyone who, after listing these facts, is still of the opinion that diplomatic negotiations with Putin Russia are a way to create peace and security in Europe should now know better. After a decade of war and a multitude of diplomatic attempts to find some kind of amicable solution for peace, it is obvious that Putin Russia is seeking goals other than peace and solutions acceptable to all sides. Sources: www.swp-berlin.org, www.swp-berlin.organd many many more you can easily find, have access to and confirm everything stated in the above sources. First, you (actually, the propagandist that you quote) aptly conceal here, that in return for these mild requirements (most of these terms like neutrality, language issue, army size - is how Ukraine used to be before the coups, with neutrality being a key condition of its formation in 1991 in the first place) Ukraine would get back 90 thousand sq km of territories, lost in the spring campaign, which is close to the size of South Korea. Second, it is generally a bad taste to quote one of the main propaganda centers instead of giving your own reasons Third, your sentence on “denazification and demilitarization of Ukraine" smells of racism, because its "denazification" part implies that Ukraine cannot be self-sufficient without reliance on paramilitary nazi groups like Azov in its internal\external policy. I skip here the demilitarization part, because there is enough evidence that countries with limited armies can live well in this world. Ukraine and her western allies would be more than willing to end the war. All it would take is the withdrawal of Russian troops from the sovereign territory of Ukraine and the recognition of Bilhorod and Kursk People's Republics (both have sizable Ukrainian-speaking populations) as independent states. These people have had to suffer under the Moscow regime for decades, their rights and culture slowly being eradicated. God forbid you even try to speak Ukrainian or fly the BPR flag (horizontal bicolor of black and yellow) in public anymore. Also good luck trying to find a Ukrainian school there, let alone a political party that represents these people. Complete demilitarization of the Russian armed forces would of course also be necessary to ensure security of the Russia-BPR/KPR border and Ukrainian-speaking citizens in the region. In return, some of the sanctions against Russia would be lifted and Russia would be given back some of its frozen assets. This would mean - more or less - going back to how things used to be. The people of BPR/KPR don't want anything to do with the Moscow regime, which is why there's no resistance to Ukraine's Special Military Operation and local forces are surrendering by the thousands to join their Ukrainian brothers. Why is the Moscow regime the only party against peace and these very mild requirements, choosing instead to keep sacrificing thousands of reluctant Russian kids in a desperate attempt to maintain their oppression of these pro-Ukrainian territories? -the difference is, Ukraine has no power to bring this to life, and among its allies only US has enough power to make a war with Russia a draw, but I bet you would not like it. So the rest of this is you self-indulgence On August 19 2024 00:41 jodljodl wrote:
Very cute :>
-don't push yourself if you have nothing substantial. If you look through this thread you'll realize that what you write here has been said to me at least a hundred times, I couldn't care less of another one clowning around - this just shows me your level Are you making the argument that what Russia is doing is ok because you believe they have/had the power to do it? Or am I misunderstanding something? Might makes right and all that? No, this is not it. My answer is related to the position, which have several times been stated here, "the west needs to put a little more effort/supplies/own troops to win", which indicates a complete misunderstanding of the current balance of power. In regards of might makes right I have the same position as you; regretfully you don't want to take seriously my arguments on the reasons and timeline of the war. On August 19 2024 02:13 Jones313 wrote:
What this is is holding up a mirror to your bullshit. I wasn't kidding about Ukrainian schools or representation, though.
And there it is. Beneath all the "Russian culture being removed" and LDPR nonsense is "because we can". That would be the only difference. Straight up might makes right. This from someone who insists on not being a fascist and calls other posters unserious. Just don't try to get on a high horse about people wishing harm on Russians again.
-get yourself educated a bit; you don't bring any value to the discussion "I'm educated, you're not". Handy catch-all to default to every time your arguments blow up in your face. Alas, I've grown up lacking opportunities to get the Russian education you've had. -but you literally have brought zero meaningful arguments. All that you post here is either a Ukrainian PR slogans (Kursk National Rebublic! Bilhorod!) or your own wet dreams of Karelia and Kaliningrad. Good thing the web format keeps you from throwing a Roman salute here. ed: omg, I shouldnt have drank tea while re-reading you; the phrase "every time your arguments blow up in your face" combined with your battle grunt made me almost choke from laughter. I bet it did. I bet you're just rolling on the floor laughing as they say. I don't know what battle grunts you're talking about, I'm on the side of peace. I proposed a simple question: why is it that Russia will not dismantle their army, withdraw from Ukraine and grant independence to the people of Kursk and Bilhorod in order to secure peace and get some of their frozen assets back, but insists on having thousands more of your fellow Russians killed? I've already provided my arguments for why this should be done. For a lasting peace, these requirements are mild. So far I've not received an answer. Because you're like a 6 year kid, who takes each word at face value. The reality is Donetsk/Luhansk people had a will to fight against Uraine on their own; mustered an army of tens of thousand people, of which ~10 thousand had been killed later, while the whole armed opposition in Russia is the RDK and LFR which together make up less than 1000 men, so the mirroring argument doesn't work at all. The frozen asset case is damaging to the both sides of the conflict, as it exposes the European financial system making it less appealing to the rest of the world. The asset sum is big, but not even comparable to the stakes taken. Ukraine has agreed to be the tool in "inflicting a strategic defeat to Russia", so apparently the Russian government believes this to be a serious threat, and wants to get rid of it once and for all - and many people here agrees with it, and dont mind to risk their life for that goal. ed: >>don't know what battle grunts you're talking about this is a local meme, боевой нахрюк, basically what a warpig does - which has been attributed to agressive pro-ukrainian propaganda, since there's a lot of it in many Russian-speaking forums Dude even Russia itself no longer pretends like Donetsk and Luhansk were an actual civil uprising.
your script is out of date, you should ask for the latest revision.
|
Russian Federation240 Posts
On August 19 2024 04:35 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2024 04:08 a_ch wrote:-this is what relying on Ukrainian newssources does; their strategy from the start has been PR-centric, and they have no problem throwing away any outrageous nonsense; google a story of Lyudmila Denisova for example. The fact that they've been using airforce personell is proven. For instance, one of the guys who was wounded in the column that was attacked was stationed at the heavy bomber airbase in Ukrainka. I don't mind pointing out clear partisan sources, but something you'll quickly find is that they aren't in the habit of lying through their teeth. Their "lies" will be what they don't tell, rather than what they do. Everything reported here, for instance, is (and has been) easily verifiable. Russia did use airforce personell in their front lines in Kursk, and you do not do that out of anything other than pure desperation. These are people with incredibly little infantry training, because that's not what they're supposed to be doing. And every personell you move away from your airbases are now one less than can work on keeping your planes air worthy But I will give you props for throwing out the idea that partisan sources could be PR-centric, and yet somehow not entertain the idea that your own sources could be
-so who this guy was, a technician, a pilot, a security personnel? Was this event episodic due to the initial chaos, or he still is in an infantry unit?
I follow one strictly pro-Ukrainian analytic source (besides general forum discussion stuff where pro-Ukrainian guys are common) - but this event didn't seem to be of something indicative to any of them
You may skip the part on the lie types etc., because my speciality in math is statistics, so I'm quite good at understanding how things like this can be done
Edit: also, you recently wrote about the fire at Zaporozhye Nuclear Plant being caused by some random batshit like burning tires. The IAEA has recently been there. How do you think, did they find any traces of burnt tires or anything that would confirm this version?
|
On August 19 2024 04:41 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2024 03:36 a_ch wrote:On August 19 2024 03:12 Jones313 wrote:On August 19 2024 02:42 a_ch wrote:On August 19 2024 02:24 Jones313 wrote:On August 19 2024 02:13 a_ch wrote:On August 19 2024 02:03 Excludos wrote:On August 19 2024 00:57 a_ch wrote:On August 19 2024 00:40 Jones313 wrote:On August 18 2024 20:16 a_ch wrote:
[quote]
First, you (actually, the propagandist that you quote) aptly conceal here, that in return for these mild requirements (most of these terms like neutrality, language issue, army size - is how Ukraine used to be before the coups, with neutrality being a key condition of its formation in 1991 in the first place) Ukraine would get back 90 thousand sq km of territories, lost in the spring campaign, which is close to the size of South Korea.
Second, it is generally a bad taste to quote one of the main propaganda centers instead of giving your own reasons
Third, your sentence on “denazification and demilitarization of Ukraine" smells of racism, because its "denazification" part implies that Ukraine cannot be self-sufficient without reliance on paramilitary nazi groups like Azov in its internal\external policy. I skip here the demilitarization part, because there is enough evidence that countries with limited armies can live well in this world.
Ukraine and her western allies would be more than willing to end the war. All it would take is the withdrawal of Russian troops from the sovereign territory of Ukraine and the recognition of Bilhorod and Kursk People's Republics (both have sizable Ukrainian-speaking populations) as independent states. These people have had to suffer under the Moscow regime for decades, their rights and culture slowly being eradicated. God forbid you even try to speak Ukrainian or fly the BPR flag (horizontal bicolor of black and yellow) in public anymore. Also good luck trying to find a Ukrainian school there, let alone a political party that represents these people. Complete demilitarization of the Russian armed forces would of course also be necessary to ensure security of the Russia-BPR/KPR border and Ukrainian-speaking citizens in the region. In return, some of the sanctions against Russia would be lifted and Russia would be given back some of its frozen assets. This would mean - more or less - going back to how things used to be. The people of BPR/KPR don't want anything to do with the Moscow regime, which is why there's no resistance to Ukraine's Special Military Operation and local forces are surrendering by the thousands to join their Ukrainian brothers. Why is the Moscow regime the only party against peace and these very mild requirements, choosing instead to keep sacrificing thousands of reluctant Russian kids in a desperate attempt to maintain their oppression of these pro-Ukrainian territories? -the difference is, Ukraine has no power to bring this to life, and among its allies only US has enough power to make a war with Russia a draw, but I bet you would not like it. So the rest of this is you self-indulgence On August 19 2024 00:41 jodljodl wrote:
Very cute :>
-don't push yourself if you have nothing substantial. If you look through this thread you'll realize that what you write here has been said to me at least a hundred times, I couldn't care less of another one clowning around - this just shows me your level Are you making the argument that what Russia is doing is ok because you believe they have/had the power to do it? Or am I misunderstanding something? Might makes right and all that? No, this is not it. My answer is related to the position, which have several times been stated here, "the west needs to put a little more effort/supplies/own troops to win", which indicates a complete misunderstanding of the current balance of power. In regards of might makes right I have the same position as you; regretfully you don't want to take seriously my arguments on the reasons and timeline of the war. On August 19 2024 02:13 Jones313 wrote:
What this is is holding up a mirror to your bullshit. I wasn't kidding about Ukrainian schools or representation, though.
And there it is. Beneath all the "Russian culture being removed" and LDPR nonsense is "because we can". That would be the only difference. Straight up might makes right. This from someone who insists on not being a fascist and calls other posters unserious. Just don't try to get on a high horse about people wishing harm on Russians again.
-get yourself educated a bit; you don't bring any value to the discussion "I'm educated, you're not". Handy catch-all to default to every time your arguments blow up in your face. Alas, I've grown up lacking opportunities to get the Russian education you've had. -but you literally have brought zero meaningful arguments. All that you post here is either a Ukrainian PR slogans (Kursk National Rebublic! Bilhorod!) or your own wet dreams of Karelia and Kaliningrad. Good thing the web format keeps you from throwing a Roman salute here. ed: omg, I shouldnt have drank tea while re-reading you; the phrase "every time your arguments blow up in your face" combined with your battle grunt made me almost choke from laughter. I bet it did. I bet you're just rolling on the floor laughing as they say. I don't know what battle grunts you're talking about, I'm on the side of peace. I proposed a simple question: why is it that Russia will not dismantle their army, withdraw from Ukraine and grant independence to the people of Kursk and Bilhorod in order to secure peace and get some of their frozen assets back, but insists on having thousands more of your fellow Russians killed? I've already provided my arguments for why this should be done. For a lasting peace, these requirements are mild. So far I've not received an answer. Because you're like a 6 year kid, who takes each word at face value. The reality is Donetsk/Luhansk people had a will to fight against Uraine on their own; mustered an army of tens of thousand people, of which ~10 thousand had been killed later, while the whole armed opposition in Russia is the RDK and LFR which together make up less than 1000 men, so the mirroring argument doesn't work at all. The frozen asset case is damaging to the both sides of the conflict, as it exposes the European financial system making it less appealing to the rest of the world. The asset sum is big, but not even comparable to the stakes taken. Ukraine has agreed to be the tool in "inflicting a strategic defeat to Russia", so apparently the Russian government believes this to be a serious threat, and wants to get rid of it once and for all - and many people here agrees with it, and dont mind to risk their life for that goal. ed: >>don't know what battle grunts you're talking about this is a local meme, боевой нахрюк, basically what a warpig does - which has been attributed to agressive pro-ukrainian propaganda, since there's a lot of it in many Russian-speaking forums Dude even Russia itself no longer pretends like Donetsk and Luhansk were an actual civil uprising. your script is out of date, you should ask for the latest revision.
Please elaborate on this, I must be behind on the latest dog avatar conspiracy theories but this one has potential to be amusing 
|
United States41984 Posts
Russia’s Duma passed a law in 2023 that recognized the Russian proxies in the Donbas as Russian soldiers for the purpose of giving state veteran benefits.
Russia and Putin specifically have also ceased pretending that the special forces deployed to Crimea weren’t army regulars.
https://www.rferl.org/amp/from-not-us-to-why-hide-it-how-russia-denied-its-crimea-invasion-then-admitted-it/29791806.html
So we have a situation in which eastern Ukraine is suddenly overrun by Russians wearing Russian uniforms, holding Russian weapons, and commanded by Russian officers. The Kremlin maintained that they were enthusiastic tourists who probably got their stuff at a military surplus store. After achieving their goals in Crimea the Kremlin backtracked on its prior denials and admitted that the little green men in Crimea were actually regular Russian military. But we’re supposed to believe the ones in the Donbas were not? Despite their access to Russian anti aircraft missile batteries? And despite being Russians in official Russian uniforms? And despite it counting for Russian army combat veteran status?
I’d sooner believe in the independent indigenous Kursk People’s Republic forces.
|
Russia is the most unhappy country in europe, ukraine is also at the bottom of least happy, and this was before the war. All of russias neighbors are in nato, no one wants to be part of russia.
I think happiness in russia increased after the war, I don't have any data to support this, but war brings people togheter and in the russian mentality is that they have lost absolutely nothing in this war, only gained more territory, so in the eyes of russians this war is a pure win so far, territory is everything in their society.
Imagine US trying to annex mexico, mexico would be like yes please annex us and make the country 10x richer. Because US is the richest country in the world. Similar to Malta wanted UK to annex them and they didn't want to. Point is that russia is such a miserable failed country that no one would even consider for one millisecond to voluntarily join them.
|
Russian Federation240 Posts
On August 19 2024 20:25 sertas wrote:
Russia is the most unhappy country in europe, ukraine is also at the bottom of least happy, and this was before the war. All of russias neighbors are in nato, no one wants to be part of russia.
I think happiness in russia increased after the war, I don't have any data to support this, but war brings people togheter and in the russian mentality is that they have lost absolutely nothing in this war, only gained more territory, so in the eyes of russians this war is a pure win so far, territory is everything in their society.
Imagine US trying to annex mexico, mexico would be like yes please annex us and make the country 10x richer. Because US is the richest country in the world. Similar to Malta wanted UK to annex them and they didn't want to. Point is that russia is such a miserable failed country that no one would even consider for one millisecond to voluntarily join them.
This is such a wild imagination, I don't know how even to react to this. Rudyard Kipling in a poem in 1899 characterized the colonized native Phillipineans as "half-devils and half-childs", and I don't know a better characterization to you and some other users here for what they regularly say.
You have literally zero comprehension of any word you say, trusting any authority that aligns with your view. If you check these so-called 'happiness indices', you'll realize how random they are, but you are uncapable to - because of poor education. Your explanation of the "territory is everything in their society" is even worse, as it directly contradicts the fact that Russia tries to impose the attritional style of the current war, but again, you lack the ability of critical reasoning.
FYI - the info on the US being the #1 rich country in the world in also false, be it by per capita wealth, or by price-adjusted overall production; still less idiotic than the other claims.
In todays world it takes 5 minutes to search for any relevant information you need, get aquainted with different views and lifestyles, and you still prefer to be fed by such a low-quality media crap.
I would not react so hard to things like this, if I didn't know that the reason for such massive brainwashing could be only one - and it is war.
|
as it directly contradicts the fact that Russia tries to impose the attritional style of the current war,
Russia tried a diffrent style of war and failed in absolutely humiliating fashion.
Turns out defending by laying landmines and digging trenches like it's WW1, carpet bombing and flattening entire cities, kidnapping women and children and sending waves and waves of soldiers is all it's "capable" of doing.
|
United States41984 Posts
On August 19 2024 21:02 Velr wrote:Show nested quote +as it directly contradicts the fact that Russia tries to impose the attritional style of the current war, Russia tried a diffrent style of war and failed in absolutely humiliating fashion. Turns out defending by laying landmines and digging trenches like it's WW1, carpet bombing and flattening entire cities, kidnapping women and children and sending waves and waves of soldiers is all it's "capable" of doing.
Correct. If both sides were attempting maneuver warfare then Ukraine would have Moscow by now after the Ka52s wiped out all the Russian armour. After the Kharkiv counteroffensive Russia stopped trying anything more complicated than meat waves and artillery.
|
Finland916 Posts
So if Russia doesn't care about territory that much, why are they spending massive amounts of resources and manpower to try to slowly gain more territory. Seems like priorities.
|
Russian Federation240 Posts
On August 19 2024 21:02 Velr wrote:Show nested quote +as it directly contradicts the fact that Russia tries to impose the attritional style of the current war, Russia tried a diffrent style of war and failed in absolutely humiliating fashion. Turns out defending by laying landmines and digging trenches like it's WW1, carpet bombing and flattening entire cities, kidnapping women and children and sending waves and waves of soldiers is all it's "capable" of doing.
-since I've alreay posted recently my opinion on goals and results of the initial campaign, lets hear your argumented view: why do you think that Russia has "failed in absolutely humiliating fashion", e.g. what was its goals, what evidence supports your view, what could be possible faults in your reasoning, and why do you think they do not matter. And similarly, about the 2nd part of your statement.
|
Because that is what Russia very obviously tried to do and does? Why should I search some statements if we allready know and see what actually happened and is happening?
Both go for both parts of my statements. You can also add raping and pillaging of whats left after the artillery barrages if you like.
If not directly from Putins jizzed over your face, you aren't willing to believe anything anyway. I dearly hope you get paid.
|
Russian Federation240 Posts
On August 19 2024 21:34 hexhaven wrote:
So if Russia doesn't care about territory that much, why are they spending massive amounts of resources and manpower to try to slowly gain more territory. Seems like priorities.
-not exactly; as I said before, the current goal in my opinion is a strategic defeat of the Ukrainian state - which includes degrading its industrial and economic base, and of course requires cutting territories, - but they are of secondary importance on their own.
|
Russian Federation240 Posts
On August 19 2024 21:44 Velr wrote:
Because that is what Russia very obviously tried to do and does? Why should I search some statements if we allready know and see what actually happened and is happening?
Both go for both parts of my statements. You can also add raping and pillaging of whats left after the artillery barrages if you like.
If not directly from Putins jizzed over your face, you aren't willing to believe anything anyway. I dearly hope you get paid.
is that all your reasoning? You didn't formulate any meaningful goal in the first place.
Well, I didn't expect much from you, but still
And don't worry, I get paid significantly better than you in all likelihood
|
What more reasoning do you need than look at what Russia tried to do and failed and is still doing?
What Putin or whoever sais or openly states as a goal, plain doesn't matter, actions matter.
|
Russian Federation240 Posts
On August 19 2024 22:32 Velr wrote:
What more reasoning do you need than look at what Russia tried to do and failed and is still doing?
What Putin or whoever sais or openly states as a goal, plain doesn't matter, actions matter.
-to try and fail something one needs an aim. What was it in your opinion?
Agree on the 2nd part
|
They tried to take Kiev and either install a puppet to control all of Ukraine or outright take it.
They sent a very big invasion force towards kiev, launched airstrikes and meanwhile dropped paratroopers at the airport.
Due to Russias incompetence it didn't work out. The paratroopers became sitting ducks at the airport due to the "conventional" ground offensive getting stalled and then stuck in the mud.
Meanwhile they also attacked other cities with more success, but these also stalled soon after and got pushed back significantly during Ukraines first counter offensive. After that Russia dug itself in and the second Ukraine offensive failed, thats pretty much it until recently when Ukraine attacked Kursk catching Russia with its pants down (again).
"Special military operation for denazification of Ukraine" allways was pure BS, it was the biggest offensive on european soil since WW2...
Now Russia is struggling to somehow try to make this look like any sort of win, while only being capable of making any noteworthy gains by sending waves of meat and flattening cities with artillery barrages.
It was a bad plan, badly executed lead by bad leaders from a corrupt, evil empire. May it burn to the ground.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
