Ukraine War Watch Thread

User avatar
ººº
Posts: 359
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2022 3:54 am

Re: Ukraine War Watch Thread

Post by ººº »

Yuli Ban wrote: Thu Sep 29, 2022 8:37 pm
As I said previously: What would they gain from this? Apparently they only have to resist until Ukraine is exhausted.
User avatar
Outlook
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon May 17, 2021 10:20 pm

Re: Ukraine War Watch Thread

Post by Outlook »

wjfox wrote: Thu Sep 29, 2022 9:23 pm
Yuli Ban wrote: Thu Sep 29, 2022 8:37 pm

Hard to believe Russia would do something this reckless.

But then, we've been living in this weird timeline since 2016 or so, and 2022 has itself been crazy... so who knows. If they really do this, it will take the conflict to an entirely new and unpredictable level.
Yea, it could become a scorpion and frog situation.
User avatar
raklian
Posts: 1747
Joined: Sun May 16, 2021 4:46 pm
Location: North Carolina

Re: Ukraine War Watch Thread

Post by raklian »

Is the USA's threat of "horrific consequences" any of these? I wonder...

To know is essentially the same as not knowing. The only thing that occurs is the rearrangement of atoms in your brain.
User avatar
Yuli Ban
Posts: 4631
Joined: Sun May 16, 2021 4:44 pm

Re: Ukraine War Watch Thread

Post by Yuli Ban »

And remember my friend, future events such as these will affect you in the future
Xyls
Posts: 689
Joined: Sun May 16, 2021 9:20 pm

Re: Ukraine War Watch Thread

Post by Xyls »

BREAKING: FALL OF LYMAN IMMINENT



The city which has been the main point of resistance against the Ukrainians marching into Luhansk is now encircled. It's fall is imminent and could literally happen tomorrow whilst Putin is trying to have his party...

Russia's situation is rapidly deteriorating, mobilization will not save Russia. Tactical nukes won't save Russia.
User avatar
erowind
Posts: 544
Joined: Mon May 17, 2021 5:42 am

Re: Ukraine War Watch Thread

Post by erowind »

https://tass.com/world/1515617

It's rather interesting that I can't find any mentions of the Putin Administration's threats of nuclear holocaust on Russian news agencies and websites. Which, of course, pro-NATO people here would say, "That's clearly propaganda." To which I say, when you don't trust both governments and their respective allies it all looks like propaganda.

This phenomena supports my claims that NATO and Russia are both manufacturing consent for nuclear war. I don't need to post the claims being made in western media, we're all familiar with them. But coming from TASS, which is the most reliable ear into the Kremlin's narrative for cross-referencing purpose, the Russian narrative is claiming that it is fact NATO that is making statements on the use of nuclear weapons against Russia and threatening to break the nuclear non-proliferation treaty.

"Russian President Vladimir Putin said in a televised address last week that Washington was pushing Kiev towards moving military actions to Russian territory, with "nuclear blackmail" coming into play. The issue is not only about the shelling of the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant, which risks a nuclear disaster, but also about statements made by certain high-ranking representatives of major NATO states on the possibility and acceptability of using weapons of mass destruction, namely nuclear weapons, against Russia, Putin said."

This isn't to say I trust the Russian claim. But it does call into question the validity of the western claim. If MADMAX SOCIOPATH PUTIN were actually threatening nuclear arms the official transcript would say so explicitly, it would be something overt, otherwise; where exactly would western media be sourcing a supposedly public statement on behalf of Putin's administration from? The fact of the matter is that the speech that western outlets are pushing does not exist in the form it is portrayed. So a different conclusion that is more realpolitik and accurate to geopolitics at large must be drawn.

That conclusion being, both sides of this war are now blaming their enemies for threatening to use nuclear weapons. Neither side has made overt statements that they desire a first strike, rather, both sides are psychologically prepping their populations to blame the enemy in the event that a nuclear strike were to occur. This further supports the concept that both parties are interested in opening the door to first strike capabilities, otherwise what motive would they have to move the overton window this way?

Is anyone here really that trusting of their governments that should a bomb go off we will really be told accurately who shot first? What if two bombs go off within 20 minutes of each other one scorching a Russian army and the other a Ukrainian army? Don't you think it's reasonable to expect that NATO would blame Russia for firing first and Russia in turn would blame NATO? I find it hard to believe that either party would want to take credit for launching an offensive nuclear strike given the immense public backlash they would instantaneously receive.

And this is still crazy to sane people, but if either party can convince their people that their nuclear operations, should they occur, are purely defensive and retaliatory in nature, they can maintain consent of the governed in light of launching an offensive nuclear attack. Where, either party would otherwise instantly start courting revolution. It seems apparent to me that there are enough rabid nationalists on both sides of the war that enough people may simply begrudgingly accept a new horrid nuclear reality and obey their government if both governments are strategic with their control of information and press. Those nationalists are in this very room.
User avatar
ibm9000
Posts: 364
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2022 9:24 am

Re: Ukraine War Watch Thread

Post by ibm9000 »

With his officer training, apart from WW3, what does
Pfarrer
think that US would do if:

- Ships start to sink worldwide (all, instantly, like... magic?)
- Its airplanes are attacked
- Its ports are blockaded
...

The risk of any nuclear strike risks escalation: WW3. Horrific consequences... only for Russia?
The risk of a conventional response to a nuclear attack, (lets say against the Pacific Fleet and ports) risks a response: that the defender
will choose
, proportionate or not.
Is any US Fleet ready, right now, to launch a heavy attack against any port?, because if it has to prepare, Russia will prepare; escalation, again.
Any Russian submarine on patrol?, any radar active?, Russia is "at war" right now (if not very efficiently).
User avatar
ibm9000
Posts: 364
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2022 9:24 am

Re: Ukraine War Watch Thread

Post by ibm9000 »

It's rather interesting that I can't find any mentions of the Putin Administration's threats...
You have a point there, we just take it from western media, their version... like that story about WMD. Still, I think it's more about politics,
sending a message, negotiating than about "consent".

"Putin has made veiled references... to nuclear/chemical weapons if threatened."
Wouldn't any other country?

"Amid ominous signals from Moscow about escalating the war, including hinting at the use of nuclear weapons..."
What are we selling here?, a call for help?

"While this uncertainty is destabilizing, it is also a crucial aspect of nuclear deterrence strategies and so is difficult to escape. Putin’s threat was deliberately vague, leaving room for doubt about where the red lines might lie." (Deterrence works for both sides). "It is important to understand Putin’s repeated nuclear threats have always been directed towards NATO, and not against Ukraine itself. Indeed, the emphasis in the media indicates that they would be targeted at the UK."
Now I am living in the UK.

"...and implied Russia was ready to use nuclear weapons."
I cannot speak Russian, how accurate and partial was that translator or the version provided to the press?, does the CIA and The Times read the same "implications"?

"If the territorial integrity of our country is threatened, we will, of course, use all means at our disposal to protect Russia and our people,"
A translation of Putin's words. Any leader of any western democracy would say anything different?

Can anybody provide a direct threat to use nukes against Ukraine from Putin? Who is selling what and what are we swallowing?, WMDs again?
User avatar
caltrek
Posts: 6509
Joined: Mon May 17, 2021 1:17 pm

Re: Ukraine War Watch Thread

Post by caltrek »

caltrek wrote: Wed Sep 28, 2022 8:55 pm
ibm9000 wrote: Wed Sep 28, 2022 8:05 pm
The U.S. "lost"
What do you mean by those " " ?
That was a war they could have never won and the US Government knew that.

You mean the joke? "You put all the South Vietnamese in boats and you move them to the middle of the China Sea, then you bomb North Vietnam until they are in the Stone Age, and then you sink the boats".
I think that initially Pentagon planners had a different conclusion in mind. One in which a puppet government would have prevailed in both the north and the south. A reason that I to this day regard as coming from a place of moral bankruptcy.

I put "lost" in quotations because Vietnam ultimately morphed into a society willing to carry on trade relations with other countries, including "capitalist" and "democratic" countries, etc.
Don't mourn, organize.

-Joe Hill
User avatar
wjfox
Site Admin
Posts: 8732
Joined: Sat May 15, 2021 6:09 pm
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: Ukraine War Watch Thread

Post by wjfox »

Remember folks, NATO are the bad guys.

/s


Post Reply