Russo-Ukrainian War - 2022 Edition - Part 8

Status
Not open for further replies.
:ROFL: Is this guy on drugs?


Dmitry Medvedev, Deputy Secretary of the Security Council of Russia, has said in an interview with Russian propagandists that to achieve "goals" in the war, the Russian army may go not only to Kyiv but also to Lviv.

Source: Kremlin-aligned news outlets

Quote from Medvedev: "Nothing can be ruled out here. If we have to go to Kyiv, then we have to go to Kyiv, if we have to go to Lviv, then we have to go to Lviv in order to destroy this infection."

Details: According to Medvedev, the Russian leadership wants to achieve all "goals" in the war against Ukraine. Medvedev calls this the "defence" of the territories. "In the broadest sense of the word, [it is necessary – ed.] to create a sanitary strip," he said.

Medvedev pointed out once again that Russia is not fighting against Ukraine, but against NATO. "I will say only one thing, something that is already obvious – the Russian Federation is not at war with Ukraine... our country is at war with NATO’s 3.6 million-strong army," he said.

Background: Previously, Medvedev lied in an interview that Ukraine is part of Russia and that the West underestimated the Kremlin's determination to start a war.
 

Five people have been killed as a result of Russian strikes on the town of Kostiantynivka in Donetsk Oblast on the night of 23-24 March, when one of the missiles hit an invincibility centre [a heated premises stocked with food and power banks to assist residents facing hardships due to power cuts -ed.].

...........

According to the prosecutor's office, three women died under the rubble. They were internally displaced people from Bakhmut, Chasiv Yar and the village of Opytne in the Pokrovsk district.
 
:ROFL: Is this guy on drugs?


Details: According to Medvedev, the Russian leadership wants to achieve all "goals" in the war against Ukraine. Medvedev calls this the "defence" of the territories. "In the broadest sense of the word, [it is necessary – ed.] to create a sanitary strip," he said.
It's what I said from the beginning. It's the obvious objective.
 
It's still wait and see for me, children will say whatever they have been coached to say.
Why lie?

We have seen time and time again, no amount of evidence will ever convince a pro-Russian that Russia has done something wrong.

Mh-17 - here are dozens of photographs tracking a BUK from Russia to its launching spot, picture of thr missile contrail, pictures of the same BUK leaving and heading back to Russia, missing 1 missile, admissions from Russia that they shot a plane down - all fake.

Bucha massacre - photos, satellite footage showing dead bodies that match the photos - all fake.
 
Because children lie when their elders expect them to lie. It's hardly the most difficult kind of coercion.

You lot have even said the following "people under Russian occupation agree with Russians because of it".... why would the same not be true for Ukraine even more so with children?

We have seen time and time again, no amount of evidence will ever convince a pro-Russian that Russia has done something wrong.
Nonsense, your bar for evidence is merely exceptionally low. Give actual proper evidence and it will be considered. All you ever give is tabloid reporting with no granularity or long opinion pieces that weigh heavily on emotionalism... all you ever give is propaganda.

Mh-17 - here are dozens of photographs tracking a BUK from Russia to its launching spot, picture of thr missile contrail, pictures of the same BUK leaving and heading back to Russia, missing 1 missile, admissions from Russia that they shot a plane down - all fake.

Bucha massacre - photos, satellite footage showing dead bodies that match the photos - all fake.
Both sides have a history of faking atrocities of the other side.... and doing atrocities themselves.

If Ukraine never engaged in obvious deception to bolster foreign support I would believe their claims easier, now it's merely a case of he said she said a lot of the time because the same bombings have literally been blamed on both sides at the same time for example.
 
In wartime WWF is still a foreign agent. No russian government are not refusing to turn of the lights for earth hour because they don't like earth hour, it is rather because WWF is "foreign agent™".



Some more tass news: Dmitry Medvedev, Deputy Chairman of the Security Council of the Russian Federation, is sure that there is no threat of militarization for the domestic economy, the authorities will not allow it:


Tass is probably going to wonder why their russian twitter is getting more traffic from africa loool. They should say thank you to mybb forums.
 
Last edited:
It's a 35-minute video, how much of what he says is actually factual versus his opinion? He makes predictions on what might happen which is entirely about his own speculation. If people are going to give opinion-based analysis then their background is very much relevant in assessing their credibility.

I mean the video is titled "Ukraine is trapped in a Russian crossfire", that is clearly an opinion, another military analyst might describe it totally differently so it begs the question, if this is a commonly held position of military analysts, why would you choose to speak to the one guy with a criminal record for soliciting underage sex?
Because his sexual offence has ZERO bearing on the subject matter of his opinions in relation to the Ukraine situation.

Scott Ritter has a wealth of expertise on wars and war strategies.
He is former United States Marine Corps intelligence officer (with the rank of Major).
He served as the lead analyst for the Marine Corps Rapid Deployment Force concerning the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and the Iran–Iraq War.
He is a former Chief Weapons Inspector for the United Nations Special Commission in Iraq.
 
Last edited:
Because his sexual offence has ZERO bearing on the subject matter of his opinions in relation to the Ukraine situation.
It's about credibility, if the only person you can find to say something happens to be a sexual predator, then I reckon there is pretty decent chance that what that person is talking BS.
 
Because his sexual offence has ZERO bearing on the subject matter of his opinions in relation to the Ukraine situation.

Scott Ritter has a wealth of expertise on wars and war strategies.
He is former United States Marine Corps intelligence officer (with the rank of Major).
He served as the lead analyst for the Marine Corps Rapid Deployment Force concerning the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and the Iran–Iraq War.
He is a former Chief Weapons Inspector for the United Nations Special Commission in Iraq.
He may be an expert on weapons inspections, but his expertise in military tactics is lacking.

He predicted that the US would not be able to defeat the Iraqi Army and would not be able to seize Baghdad.

He got that very, very wrong.

He also falsely claimed that Bush had signed off to bomb Iranian nuclear facilities. When that prediction failed, he doubled down and claimed the US was in a secret war with Iran.
 
Because his sexual offence has ZERO bearing on the subject matter of his opinions in relation to the Ukraine situation.

Yes it does. Because we're supposed to believe he is being honest here, but someone who takes advantage of a child is another sort of human with different sorts of values.

Scott Ritter has a wealth of expertise on wars and war strategies.
He is former United States Marine Corps intelligence officer (with the rank of Major).

There are 100s of such people.

He served as the lead analyst for the Marine Corps Rapid Deployment Force concerning the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and the Iran–Iraq War.

And there were many people like that and even more superior people. Also many people got the Russians wrong. For example they did not expect the Russians to be this poorly prepared for this war.

He is a former Chief Weapons Inspector for the United Nations Special Commission in Iraq.

A career guy with many an axe to grind.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X