Russo-Ukrainian War - 2022 Edition - Part 7

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Mirai

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 21, 2017
Messages
11,243
MiW said:
www.pravda.com.ua

Children’s torture chambers found in liberated territories

During the occupation of Kharkiv and Kherson Oblasts, the Russian military set up torture chambers for children who, in their opinion, offered resistance.Source: Dmytro Lubinets, Ukrainian Parliament Commissioner for Human Rights, during a briefing at Ukraine-Ukrinform media centre on 14 December
www.pravda.com.ua www.pravda.com.ua



"These are children who, according to the occupiers, offered resistance," added Lubinets.
Click to expand...

Viper13 says, no threat to Europe. I suppose Europeans would be happy to have their kids in Russian torture chambers then?
 
V

viper13

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2015
Messages
513
Mirai said:
Nobody is speaking about assassination. What some Russians themselves are saying is that they think US will strike the city where the Russian leadership is with a nuke if Russia uses a nuke on a Western town. And that has been passed on to the Russian leadership so the Russian leadership understands this. The other thing they said in the past was that St Petersburg would be vaporised if a NATO city was hit with a nuclear strike. This is what the Russians themselves say and it's useful to know because this is how Russians think, dissident or not.

You do know that in the case of al all out nuclear war Moscow and the Kremlin will be 1st targets as would Washington DC? Decapitation strikes are common in all modern means of warfare. That's what the Russians try to do when they went for Kyiv and Hostomel. You didn't know that multiple teams were sent to kill Zelensky?

Why are you talking about assassination? West isn't going to assassinate Putin or anyone else.

Secondly you're giving some guy's opinion about it. It's not clear cut that a crime. Killing anybody is a crime as you know but it happens all the time. If Russia attacks NATO, NATO has at its disposal any means it deems necessary because a line has been crossed, otherwise the West should just surrender if we consider your bizarre explanations here.
Click to expand...
Everybody knows that multiple teams were sent to capture or kill Zelensky. At the very least they wanted the head of the Ukrainian government to flee. I've heard the rumors also that Zelensky almost did that except he was forced to stay. I've also heard the opposite. So we will never really know what happened on the ground those couple of days.

I am also not referring to a nuclear strike when I say assassinate. Why would I since that is not the same thing. If Russia were to launch a first strike then Moscow and St. Petersburg would be 2 places the Russian leadership would not be. They would likely be scattered into multiple bunkers long before any strike is ordered.

Earlier when I mentioned assassination it was to demonstrate that it is not an option due to what it would trigger. Now if somebody in the Russian hierarchy were to take out Putin that would be a different option because it would not trigger the same response an assassination would but like I said it may then also result in a full-blown coup d'etat which is a more terrifying thought.

Assassination is seen as a crime and is against international law. Just because it doesn't state it in clear black and white as you would want it doesn't mean it is not against international law. Hence, the legal interpretation I posted earlier from the Yale law report on international law. You will find some countries fo specifically mention it during armed conflict such as the US and Israel but most countries don't yet evne though they all share the same opinion that it is against international law.
 
V

viper13

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2015
Messages
513
Mirai said:
No threat to Ukraine?

Please stop posting this Russian propaganda kuk.



You don't need too much logistic planning to kill civilian men, women and children.



Your comment is a load of hogwash. See how easy it is to refute nonsense.



How do you know?



Lavrov told the Americans to get out of former Warsaw Pact countries. So you're wrong there. Many experts, people like Bartosiak, think that if Ukraine folded, Russians AND Ukrainians would be preparing to take on Warsaw and the Baltics and then the the whole West would have to become involved.



I have trust for NATO. Who are you and why should we care what you wish? Do you live in Europe? I don't think so. So why should your liking or disliking something based on ignorance or pro-Russian stance matter? It's nice you think NATO is too big, but you're neither paying for it nor are a member of it. And who gives you the right to decide for others if they should join it or not?

I suspect you're jealous that a well oiled like alliance such as NATO exists.
Click to expand...
Are you 12 or have you jsut lost the ability to read and comprehend English? Read my comments again because you don't seem to understand what I'm saying.

If I say that Russia is not a threat except to their direct neighbors then obviously Ukraine would be threatened. They are a direct neighbor. What you are meant to read in my statement is that Russia would not be able to expand beyond Ukraine or any of their direct neighbors because they could not logistically manage such an expansion. An expansion/escalation of hostilities further into Europe would need Russia to also supply and re-arm their troops. It has nothing to do with killing civilians so your comment is clearly devoid of any substance or application and is completely off topic other than to try and distract.

Lavrov has said many things and based on your comments if Ukraine folded then they would have fought side by side with the Russians against the Baltic states. Really? The same Ukrainians that are being proclaimed to be heroes and fighting valiantly against the Russians would have actually fought with the Russians? Do you see the silliness in your statement??? If the Ukrainian government had folded then the Ukrainian people would have resisted in all likelihood triggering a running battle for many years to come. Much like in Northern Ireland during the 70's, 80's and 90's.

As for NATO, yes, I am a nobody but so are you. Just because you like NATO doesn't mean anybody else needs to. If you want to swallow their lies and drivel then that is your prerogative just as mine would be not to trust them due to the lies spewed before by their main member the US. And if you live in Europe then why are you on a south african forum discussing a conflict in an eastern bloc country? What would your agenda be?

NATO is not the well oiled alliance you want me to believe. There are quite a few differences of opinions and some of the member states don't quite go along with everything as you would think. They do seem to be pushing very hard for member states to up their defense spending and to buy a lot more weapons. I wonder who would be the main suppliers of those weapons.

I am very happy not being in a country that has to pay any dues to NATO thank you.
 
Sneeky

Sneeky

Honorary Master
Joined
May 5, 2004
Messages
12,129
viper13 said:
Are you 12 or have you jsut lost the ability to read and comprehend English? Read my comments again because you don't seem to understand what I'm saying.

If I say that Russia is not a threat except to their direct neighbors then obviously Ukraine would be threatened. They are a direct neighbor. What you are meant to read in my statement is that Russia would not be able to expand beyond Ukraine or any of their direct neighbors because they could not logistically manage such an expansion. An expansion/escalation of hostilities further into Europe would need Russia to also supply and re-arm their troops. It has nothing to do with killing civilians so your comment is clearly devoid of any substance or application and is completely off topic other than to try and distract.
Click to expand...
Nope, Ukraine first then whats next? Do you for one second think that by some miracle that would satisfy their desires and not just transfer the risk onto their new neighbors alongside annexed territory?

And besides, while its fun to debate this nonsense for shieets and giggles, the bottom line is that Ukraine is a sovereign country and they (Russian) just decided to try and take it for themselves., by any means possible, including slaughtering the population in the process indiscriminately.
Those are the facts, none of which is acceptable, and the rest of the 'what if's' are just conjecture and irrelevant to the actual situation in Ukraine.
 
The Trutherizer

The Trutherizer

Executive Member
Joined
May 20, 2010
Messages
8,263
Sneeky said:
Nope, Ukraine first then whats next? Do you for one second think that by some miracle that would satisfy their desires and not just transfer the risk onto their new neighbors alongside annexed territory?

And besides, while its fun to debate this nonsense for shieets and giggles, the bottom line is that Ukraine is a sovereign country and they (Russian) just decided to try and take it for themselves., by any means possible, including slaughtering the population in the process indiscriminately.
Those are the facts, none of which is acceptable, and the rest of the 'what if's' are just conjecture and irrelevant to the actual situation in Ukraine.
Click to expand...
Yep. The reality is that it would be foolish in the extreme to risk it. Especially in light of Russia's MO before and during this senseless invasion. The world cannot exactly rely on Russian honesty and altruism. (lol the very notion has become preposterous - by Russia's own hands)
On the other side of the coin. Russia already has had NATO countries right on their borders. For a long time. They know NATO is not a threat to them in any way except rhetorically to Russian ambitions for territorial expansion. And carte blanche for that was and will never be on the table for Russia.
 
M

Major Boredom

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2005
Messages
3,134
viper13 said:
Are you 12 or have you jsut lost the ability to read and comprehend English? Read my comments again because you don't seem to understand what I'm saying.

If I say that Russia is not a threat except to their direct neighbors then obviously Ukraine would be threatened. They are a direct neighbor. What you are meant to read in my statement is that Russia would not be able to expand beyond Ukraine or any of their direct neighbors because they could not logistically manage such an expansion. An expansion/escalation of hostilities further into Europe would need Russia to also supply and re-arm their troops. It has nothing to do with killing civilians so your comment is clearly devoid of any substance or application and is completely off topic other than to try and distract.

Lavrov has said many things and based on your comments if Ukraine folded then they would have fought side by side with the Russians against the Baltic states. Really? The same Ukrainians that are being proclaimed to be heroes and fighting valiantly against the Russians would have actually fought with the Russians? Do you see the silliness in your statement??? If the Ukrainian government had folded then the Ukrainian people would have resisted in all likelihood triggering a running battle for many years to come. Much like in Northern Ireland during the 70's, 80's and 90's.

As for NATO, yes, I am a nobody but so are you. Just because you like NATO doesn't mean anybody else needs to. If you want to swallow their lies and drivel then that is your prerogative just as mine would be not to trust them due to the lies spewed before by their main member the US. And if you live in Europe then why are you on a south african forum discussing a conflict in an eastern bloc country? What would your agenda be?

NATO is not the well oiled alliance you want me to believe. There are quite a few differences of opinions and some of the member states don't quite go along with everything as you would think. They do seem to be pushing very hard for member states to up their defense spending and to buy a lot more weapons. I wonder who would be the main suppliers of those weapons.

I am very happy not being in a country that has to pay any dues to NATO thank you.
Click to expand...
Your mask is slipping ...
 
M

Major Boredom

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2005
Messages
3,134
Ukrainian forces estimate Moscow has so far suffered some 284,280 injured and another 1,000 captured.

So there is something interesting in this from a pure numbers pov
Total casualties are ~ 380000 ( Dead and wounded )
also they have a less than 1:3 ratio of dead to wounded. Speaks volumes about the lack of medic support.
From other reading was doing it is expected that it should be in the region of 1:5 to 1:7

www.newsweek.com

Russia loses 24 tanks in a day as 100,000 death toll nears: Ukraine

Ukraine's armed forces claim to have destroyed nearly 3,000 Russian battle tanks since February, and killed more than 94,000 troops.
www.newsweek.com www.newsweek.com
 
Cray

Cray

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 11, 2010
Messages
34,549
viper13 said:
We do not want to be sitting here in 20 years time facing a Russian army that are all autonomous and can be produced in the 1000's overnight. Or to face weapons that have no moving parts but release unbelievable amounts of energy that virtually vaporizes whatever it is aimed at. Or a weapon that has an effectiveness window of 24 hours but can be deployed to a hostile area and render all combatants (organic material) incapacitated allowing for easy capture/disposal (not talking chemical or biological weapons either). And these are just some of the ideas in the west so not even thinking about the nightmares that the Russians can come up with over a bottle of Count Pushkin.
Click to expand...
This reads like a fantasy, to be honest... Do you really think an authoritarian regime that stifles the free exchange of ideas is suddenly going to outstrip the west in terms of technological advancement?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top