NarrowBandFtw
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2008
- Messages
- 27,726
More emoji's please.... You seem to be slackingseems @Dave has resorted to nonsense animal memes to outright lie
good luck with that, is it some sort of entry requirement to your nonsense OSINT club?
![]()
perhaps it's brought up time and again because you lot keep repeating a lie time and again ... ever considered if you stop lying nobody would need to bring it up?Nah. Not even going to debate it with the scum lovers. Not worth the time or trouble. All they do is bring up old **** time and time again. The last few topics have been rehashed by them more than a few times in the threads
your second nonsense source quotes some random dumbass from Estonia, again, the official Russian plan can only come from official Russian sources ... there is NO SUCH SOURCE that says any bullcrap about 3 or 5 days or any timeframe for that matter
We going to have a 3 day "debate" about the 3 day war.
RIA Novosti bragging about some outcome prematurely is not the Russian government publishing their planHere you go:
A Russian state-run news agency prematurely published an article that said Russia has taken back Ukraine.
"Ukraine has returned to Russia," said the article, which ran on RIA Novosti and has since been taken down. "The West sees the return of Russia to its historical borders in Europe."
A copy of the original RIA Novosti article can be seen on the WayBack Machine, a tool that documents changes across websites over time. The article had an 8AM timestamp and was scheduled to run on February 26, according to the archive.
![]()
Russian state news accidentally publishes article saying Russia has defeated Ukraine and restored its 'historical borders' | Business Insider
"Ukraine has returned to Russia," the article, which ran on RIA Novosti and has since been taken down, said.www.businessinsider.co.za
ironically in this case that statement would be true, the 3 days bullshyte has been debunked, there is literally no official Russian government source whatsoever after the war began that says anything about 3 days, that is just a simple fact
So what law is the yacht breaking that warrants interception by the US Navy then?Nowhere does the US curtail sanctions offences to just cargo.
Here's a rather convoluted explanation, basically the US doesn't restrict action unless restricted specifically by US law:
However, despite the U.S’s ratification of the 1958 Convention, courts considering it must still confront whether the relevant treaty provisions are “self-executing.” This distinction, which has perennially fuzzy edges, is instrumental to determining whether courts have jurisdiction to hear treaty law claims. Self-executing treaty provisions are those that can operate without implementing legislation. U.S. courts generally regard such provisions as equivalent to federal statutes when the treaty clearly authorizes executive action in “pursuance of its provisions” and where existing legislation is adequate to enforce the treaty provision.
Provisions that are not self-executing may create international commitments but are not binding federal law absent associated implementing legislation. The vast majority of treaty provisions are non-self-executing.
U.S. courts maintain that their jurisdictional bounds are exclusively constitutional or statutory and that customary international law is insufficient to restrict their authority on the high seas absent Congress explicitly abdicating jurisdiction.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit tackled self-execution of 1958 Convention Article 6—curtailing jurisdiction over foreign vessels in international waters—in United States v. Postal, which involved a drug-runner seized in the southern Caribbean. The Postal court found Article 6 not to be self-executing and therefore that it could not restrict the jurisdiction of U.S. courts.
Because Defense personnel are prohibited from directly engaging in law enforcement activities, the ship had on it a Coast Guard law enforcement detachment.
more bullshyte from your media brainwashing btw, cite a single official Russian source stating that and I will gladly admit defeatThe troops that were supposed to take Kyiv were only issued with only enough rations and fuel for three days. The rest of their luggage consisted of parade uniforms.
LMFAO, yeah that's complete kak, try againThis was corroborated by CCTV footage of widespread looting of supermarkets and convenience stores (and even chicken coops) as well as the statements by RU POW's that were intervieved.
so do you it seems ...Statements by Russian officials are pointless because when Russia speaks, Russia lies.
You know Narrowband is serious when he breaks out the all caps and bold text.lmao, and you just proved my point, thank you
ZERO, it has been debunked ZERO times, given that ZERO proof has been offered other than your nonsense medic training and nonsense opinion to "debunk" it![]()
and @Cray means to debate the facts when he chucks red herrings in all directions rather than face said factsYou know Narrowband is serious when he breaks out the all caps and bold text.![]()
ooh ooh I know the answer!How many time was Kiev hit today
more bullshyte from your media brainwashing btw, cite a single official Russian source stating that and I will gladly admit defeat
LMFAO, yeah that's complete kak, try again
so do you it seems ...
did I ever say they would? I said they haven't and until they do, every single one of you retards repeating the 3 day plan lie is simply doing that: lyingWhy would Russia admit they screwed up?
It's like that "Kherson offensive over" guy coming back and admitting what a complete dunce he is.