How should west respond to potential (likely) Russian invasion of Ukraine?

[Loren Pechtel]

The rest of us are just helping out a bit.

That's cute. No, you were made to believe that crap. In reality what we have here is neocons waging a war on Russia. They don't care about ukrainian idiots. They pay them money to hurt Russia and die.

If Putin hadn't invaded, there wouldn't be a war. Is Putin one of these neocons?

NATO invaded first

Which Russian oblast or territory did NATO invade?

EastAsia.

 

[barbos]

And if Russia is losing, then by the same logic, it's not far fetched that Russia might use chemical weapons. You're basically arguing against yourself here, if you think that the chemical attacks in Syria were "staged" by the losing side.

Except Russia is not losing. And yes, BBC staged chemical attack footage and banned RT for reporting it
The same way they stage heroic reporting from Ukraine.

You are the bad guys, have been for a very long time. It just finally blows in your face.

 

[barbos]

The rest of us are just helping out a bit.

That's cute. No, you were made to believe that crap. In reality what we have here is neocons waging a war on Russia. They don't care about ukrainian idiots. They pay them money to hurt Russia and die.

If Putin hadn't invaded, there wouldn't be a war. Is Putin one of these neocons?

NATO invaded first

Which Russian oblast or territory did NATO invade?

EastAsia.

NorthSouth!

 

[Jayjay]

But eventually, the findings will be published.

Nope. In fact, Germany already promised not to reveal it.

US/GB blew it up, period.

Germany hasn't said they have any conclusion yet. And the Swedish investigation might very well have the same conclusion. But that doesn't mean Russia didn't do it. Or that Americans did it.

The prime suspect is Russia, but US and GB are way down in the list. The Americans can't keep anything a secret for long, and they know it, so it would be idiotic for Biden to risk ruining relations to its European allies over a pipeline that wasn't being used anyway. UK has its own internal problems and couldn't be bothered, and they don't have much stake in LNG business anyway. If it was someone other than Russia, Ukraine is probably the second most likely suspect.

You really think that Russia would do it? what for?
Blow their bridge too? Really?

No, I don't think Russia blew up their own bridge. Because it's important for logistics, and was Putin's pet project.

The Nordstream pipes were not currently delivering any gas, and that was by Russia's choice, not Germany's. And it looks very likely that they won't be for many years. Putin sabotaging them is just finding a new use for useless infrastructure: a distraction, propaganda, warning that sudden explosions might happen to Norwegian pipeline or communication cables, force majeure for not delivering gas, excuse for military presence in the Baltic... who knows what that madman has in mind.

 

[barbos]

But eventually, the findings will be published.

Nope. In fact, Germany already promised not to reveal it.

US/GB blew it up, period.

Germany hasn't said they have any conclusion yet. And the Swedish investigation might very well have the same conclusion. But that doesn't mean Russia didn't do it. Or that Americans did it.

The prime suspect is Russia, but US and GB are way down in the list. The Americans can't keep anything a secret for long, and they know it, so it would be idiotic for Biden to risk ruining relations to its European allies over a pipeline that wasn't being used anyway. UK has its own internal problems and couldn't be bothered, and they don't have much stake in LNG business anyway. If it was someone other than Russia, Ukraine is probably the second most likely suspect.

You really think that Russia would do it? what for?
Blow their bridge too? Really?

No, I don't think Russia blew up their own bridge. Because it's important for logistics, and was Putin's pet project.

The Nordstream pipes were not currently delivering any gas, and that was by Russia's choice, not Germany's. And it looks very likely that they won't be for many years. Putin sabotaging them is just finding a new use for useless infrastructure: a distraction, propaganda, warning that sudden explosions might happen to Norwegian pipeline or communication cables, force majeure for not delivering gas, excuse for military presence in the Baltic... who knows what that madman has in mind.

That's a load of crap.
Biden is on record promising to fucking end NordStream, whereas Putin could simply turn it on and off at any moment.

 

[Jayjay]

Which "american military people"? Source, please.

The ones which have alternative view and are not paid by neocon think tanks.
You should try sometimes getting out of state media bubble.

So you got nothing, as usual?

Russian shills peddling bullshit you saw on some Russian propaganda channel.

Are you OK? You don't sound like yourself, am I getting to you?
I said american military. The fact that you have not heard about it tells me that you choose to consume CNN shit exclusively.

I don't follow Russian propagandists, so I don't hear about all their kooky claims.

"American military" is not a source. Give me names, or articles they wrote and said so, or links to youtube where they make these claims, whatever. But don't expect that you're going to convince anyone by referring to an amorphous blob called "the military" as your source.

 

[Jayjay]

If they wanted to protect the statue, they could just take it to a bunker or something.

Or do what they did.

Or not. Russia knows that the statues wouldn't be shelled. But they also know that if Ukraine takes the city back, then Russian historical figures may disappear from the public streets, like they have in many other cities. So they're nicking what they can while fleeing. They're also taking whatever valuables they can find from museums and shops.

And I notice you didn't explain why Russia is taking fire trucks and ambulances.

And don't forget that according to US/Ukraine narrative crimean bridge was blown damaged by ..... Russia

Ukraine is just trolling everyone while winking. Obviously everyone knows it was Ukraine, but because it was a cell inside Russia, they're obviously not going to make a goddamn documentary about how it was done.

Good, so, ukrainian millitary used terrorism and murdered a civilian driver to achieve their objective.

Unfortunately so. I lamented the civilian collateral damage already in my first reaction:

And they got it on camera:



Sweet.

(Except not for the likely civilian car that got torched. That's sad, but wars tend to have collateral damage.)

This is why wars should be avoided and countries shouldn't invade their neighbors.

 

[barbos]

Which "american military people"? Source, please.

The ones which have alternative view and are not paid by neocon think tanks.
You should try sometimes getting out of state media bubble.

So you got nothing, as usual?

Russian shills peddling bullshit you saw on some Russian propaganda channel.

Are you OK? You don't sound like yourself, am I getting to you?
I said american military. The fact that you have not heard about it tells me that you choose to consume CNN shit exclusively.

I don't follow Russian propagandists, so I don't hear about all their kooky claims.

"American military" is not a source. Give me names, or articles they wrote and said so, or links to youtube where they make these claims, whatever. But don't expect that you're going to convince anyone by referring to an amorphous blob called "the military" as your source.

No, I am not giving you name.
The source is a former american military and white house adviser. And fairly well known person.
The fact that you have not come across him is a proof that you are willing recipient of official propaganda shit coming from neocon controlled media.

You are the bad guys!

 

[barbos]

Unfortunately so. I lamented the civilian collateral damage already in my first reaction:

Oh really?
Where the fuck were you when ukrainian AirForce was shooting civilians in the center of Donetsk? I don't remember you lamenting about that.I remember you lamenting about fake footage of Kharkov city hall bombing, but not about ukro-nazi airforce murdering bystanders just for fun.

 

[Jayjay]

The thing about Kosovo is that I don't have to adcovate for anything. Even if there was something fuzzy about Kosovo's independence, even though there wasn't, it still wouldn't justify Russia's invasion and genocide.

Actually Russian invasion is much more justified than anything US NATO ever did.
Well, Afghanistan invasion was justified, i give you that, the rest was not.

Even if Iraq or Libya or whatever else NATO did was wrong, that doesn't justify Russia doing the same. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Russia's invasion is nothing but Putin's delusional dream of restoring the Russian empire. The best historical analogue for it is Hitler's annexation of Sudentenland and later rest of Czhechoslovakia. And nobody thinks it was justified now.

And Kosovo is, in fact, used as precedent for justification for russian "invasion".
So it is relevant here, even though it was not justified.

It's only relevant to show Russia's hypocricy. If Russia was saying "USA/NATO did bad in Kosovo, no civilized country should do such a thing, and we will not do it either" then I bet many, if not most people in the west would respect you for it. But instead the Russian argument is: "USA/NATO did bad in Kosovo, so we can do badder in Ukraine and Georgia and Moldova and Kazakhstan and ..."

That's a pretext, not a precedent.

 

[Jayjay]

Show me one piece of evidence that Ukraine is using "western operators", rather than just having been trained to use the equipment?

LOL. Last time I checked you needed 6 months to learn how to operate HIMARS.
Poles are operating it.
Ukrainians complained that they had to use google fucking translate to read instructions for these useless anti-tank systems in the early days of war.

And here you want to translate HIMARS to russian and then teach ukrainians to use them in a matter of weeks.

6 months to teach a basic recruit to use HIMARS. However, they were teaching people who already knew how to put artillery on target, the only training needed was on how the HIMARS system itself worked--and that's much less training. Especially as HIMARS uses a sealed-pod system, the people using them do not need to know anything about the missiles themselves, merely how to load the pods onto the launcher.

6 months! and it has to be native speaker, not some random ukrainian idiot.
Ukraine/Russia are not Netherlands, they barely speak english.

Another racist caricature that Russians have of Ukrainians. No wonder they don't like you.

Fact is that Ukrainian military, while starting with the same Soviet background as Russia, has been making great strides in recent years. They've been training with NATO troops and participated in joint operations abroad. Not all of them, but certainly some have had prior contact with American and other trainers, and they don't have to pick "some random idiot" but can just take the ones who know artillery, and can speak English.

 

[barbos]

That's a pretext, not a precedent.

Nope, according to lawyers, it's a precedent.
Russia used the same justification that NATO used in their Yugoslavia bombing.
From a law stand point it's pretty solidly legal.

 

[barbos]

Show me one piece of evidence that Ukraine is using "western operators", rather than just having been trained to use the equipment?

LOL. Last time I checked you needed 6 months to learn how to operate HIMARS.
Poles are operating it.
Ukrainians complained that they had to use google fucking translate to read instructions for these useless anti-tank systems in the early days of war.

And here you want to translate HIMARS to russian and then teach ukrainians to use them in a matter of weeks.

6 months to teach a basic recruit to use HIMARS. However, they were teaching people who already knew how to put artillery on target, the only training needed was on how the HIMARS system itself worked--and that's much less training. Especially as HIMARS uses a sealed-pod system, the people using them do not need to know anything about the missiles themselves, merely how to load the pods onto the launcher.

6 months! and it has to be native speaker, not some random ukrainian idiot.
Ukraine/Russia are not Netherlands, they barely speak english.

Another racist caricature that Russians have of Ukrainians. No wonder they don't like you.

Fact is that Ukrainian military, while starting with the same Soviet background as Russia, has been making great strides in recent years. They've been training with NATO troops and participated in joint operations abroad. Not all of them, but certainly some have had prior contact with American and other trainers, and they don't have to pick "some random idiot" but can just take the ones who know artillery, and can speak English.

It's operated by poles, and the ukrainian millitary which was making great strides is mostly dead now. And no, they never spoke english at the level necessary to read these manuals, and they are dead or captured.

Poles are operating it, or even americans, again according to us military colonel and former White House adviser.

 

[Jayjay]

Unfortunately so. I lamented the civilian collateral damage already in my first reaction:

Oh really?
Where the fuck were you when ukrainian AirForce was shooting civilians in the center of Donetsk? I don't remember you lamenting about that.I remember you lamenting about fake footage of Kharkov city hall bombing, but not about ukro-nazi airforce murdering bystanders just for fun.

The fact that you keep bringing up this one airborne attack in Donetsk that happens 8 years ago shows that it doesn't happen often. And the death toll for that attack was something like 6 people. I could probably list equivalent attacks by Russia against Ukrainian civilians for every day of past week.

War always has collateral damage and I don't pretend that Ukraine is somehow the first military in the world that doesn't sometimes kill innocent civilians or commit war crimes. But Russia is so, so much worse in every possible regard that there's no question in my mind at all which side I'd rather see win (even if it is unlikely).

 

[barbos]

There are plenty of former US millitary people willing to get paid $2000/day to go to Ukraine to run HIMARS.
I really don't understand this fixation on who operates these HIMARS systems.

Is it because you know that HIMARS are being used for terrorism?

 

[Jayjay]

That's a pretext, not a precedent.

Nope, according to lawyers, it's a precedent.
Russia used the same justification that NATO used in their Yugoslavia bombing.
From a law stand point it's pretty solidly legal.

You want to run Russia's invasion by lawyers now? Go on, any expert on international law will tell you that it was illegal.

But the point with wars is that there's no international police, or international courts, where Russia could be held responsible for its crimes. Only way to do that is to give Ukraine weapons, so they can fight back. It's not a legal matter.

 

[barbos]

The fact that you keep bringing up this one airborne attack in Donetsk that happens 8 years ago shows that it doesn't happen often

It was happening pretty much daily for 8 years - artillery.

 

[Jayjay]

There are plenty of former US millitary people willing to get paid $2000/day to go to Ukraine to run HIMARS.
I really don't understand this fixation on who operates these HIMARS systems.

Is it because you know that HIMARS are being used for terrorism?

No, it's because it's a lie made up by Russian propaganda that's not backed up by any evidence.

 

[barbos]

You want to run Russia's invasion by lawyers now?

Don't bet on it.

 

[Jayjay]

The fact that you keep bringing up this one airborne attack in Donetsk that happens 8 years ago shows that it doesn't happen often

It was happening pretty much daily for 8 years - artillery.

Artillery fire on both sides. Which had subsided a lot.