Messages

No acknowledgement that bringing an army up to a border (after years of US backed revolution and conflict in that said country) is an act of aggression. 

One side good ..... the other side bad

Ok then, let's deal with the NATO nonsense once and for all.

First of all Ukraine isn't in NATO and wasn't about to join anytime soon. It had neutral status which it's parliament only voted to end in December 2014 AFTER Russia invaded. A pretty good reason if you ask me. Ukraine's road to NATO was not guaranteed in any case with all member stated having to agree (Hungary anyone?).

Is NATO a threat to Russia? Russia loves reminding everyone it has nuclear weapons and it's not afraid to use them. Yet somehow we are all expected to believe that NATO was planning to attack Russia. Russia has had NATO on it's borders since 1999 (Poland) and again in 2004 (Baltics). When is this aggressive attack coming Skull? Finland joined NATO and Russia couldn't really care less. In fact they removed some of their military equipment from the Finnish border to Ukraine such is the grave danger of Finland's NATO membership. 

Free thinking 'researchers' love to cite that the US has broken a 'promise' to Russia regarding NATO not expanding. Two points about this which you can tell the 'researchers' again and again and again but they always forget and repeat it anyway.

First a conservation over dinner is not an international agreement (unlike the actual agreements Ukraine had with Russia to respect it's borders).

Second - the discussion was specifically about the reunification of Germany and NATO expansion into former DDR territory after reunification. James Baker told Gorbachev not one inch (which they have stuck to). The other countries weren't even considered as the Warsaw pact was still in place and the USSR hand't yet collapse. Why would it even be discussed or considered. Gorbachev even confirms all this in an interview later. 'Researchers' can easily find this interview online but they don't seem to be able to for some reason.

As it happens - the USSR collapsed and the former Warsaw Pact countries one after another all applied to join NATO. Democratic governments. Mearsheimer with his morally bankrupt theories of Russian power would deny the NATO security blanket to millions of people. The Baltics would already have had the Ukraine and Georgia treatment if not for NATO.

Which brings us to the question of why does Russia REALLY not want Ukraine to join NATO. It's simple really - once inside they're untouchable. Not because of a fictional NATO attack, not because of Nazis (we can go there if you want) and certainly not because of any fictional ethnic cleansing of Russians in the Donbas region (and now fictional ethnic cleansing in Transcarpathia according to 'researcher' Horsebox).

So yes Skull, One side good, one side bad. That's the status you reserve only for 'Palestine - Israel' but in your denial of the Ukrainian right to be free from Russian aggression once and for all you only expose yourself as a hypocrite.

Edit: I forgot to add, such was NATOs desire for aggression and confrontation with Russia that one of the leaders of NATO (Germany) was pursuing a policy of economic cooperation and mutual benefit with Russia, even going so far as to build another direct gas pipeline with them.

Poor, brave, righteous, Ukraine is going to win the war. The incompetent, corrupt, and conscripted Russians are using 'human-wave' assaults, and medieval tactics. We must stop Putin before he starts WWIII/ invades the EU.
Also, I'm sure quite a few of the "civilian targets" were not civilian targets, at all. Ukraine is a master of propaganda itself. Perfectly understandable in a war, of course, but it doesn't mean we should report and believe everything Zelensky says as gospel.

Whoa let all that bile out there Burdizzo, let it out. Maybe you'll feel better and lay off of the refugees for a while.

The mainstream 'narrative' shifts and changes as the war changes. Remember when Ukraine wouldn't last 3 weeks against Russia?

Can you point me to a mainstream news source that says Ukraine is definitely going to win this war? The best I've seen is that they 'can' win. Nobody is under any illusion of the difficulty of achieving that.

The Russian army has shown vast levels of incompetence but it's acknowledged that they have learned, adapted and gotten better as the war progressed.

Are you denying Russia is corrupt? Was Alexei Navalny deluded about the levels of corruption in Russia?

Are you denying Russia uses conscription and shows callous disregard for the welfare of their soldiers?

Quite a few civilian targets, weren't civilians targets? Which ones? The shopping malls, maternity hospitals or the civilian apartment blocks?

Can't wait to get over to History Legends and do some 'research'

No bile in my post, Lubo. And, no, I don't deny that Russia is corrupt, or that they have conscripts. However, the same is true of Ukraine - but I would say Ukraine is probably more careless with the lives of its soldiers, throwing poorly trained conscripts into 'cauldrons' and hopeless situations to hold the line while the more elite units retreat.
Of course, Russia tells lies, too - and I realise Putin is not our friend - but to depict Ukraine as the all-virtuous one is too much to swallow.

Oh yeah - I do believe one of the "civilian targets" was in fact a military meeting. Also, Ukraine blamed Russia for an attack on a marketplace that turned out to have been their own missile. I realise it's war, so propaganda and lies are part of it all, but you really should take a lot of it with a pinch of salt.

Welcome to the upside down world of Russian propaganda. This is what the 'researchers' come up with when they set off on their missions for the 'truth'.  I've a feeling I'm going to hear the word 'cauldron' a lot when I finally get round to visiting 'History Legends, but let's see.

Not one single Ukrainian would have been conscripted (or Russian) if Russia had not invaded. Not one single Ukrainian (or Russian) would have died if Russia had not invaded. And still, over two years later, we still have this delusional rubbish.

So out of hundreds of attacks on civilians and thousands of deaths you have managed two examples. Military meeting? Was that like the Hamas military meeting in the Rafah camp two nights ago?

The marketplace - I think I remember the one you mean - there's been so many it's hard to know. Something vague about a 'shadow' meaning it was definitely the Ukrainians (in the eyes of a Blumenthal). Even if it was a stray air defense, ask yourself, why is the firing of air defense missiles necessary in the first place.

Word on the streets is that in North Down Alex Easton will be the "unified" Unionist candidate (i.e. TUV/Reform and DUP), but if he gets in he'll allocate his Stormont MLA post to a certain Donaghadee Bin Orator..

Alliance maybe planting this seed to scare anyone with a titter of wit away from him.

Tim "Nice but dim" Collins won't cause much of a wave in this area. Doug Beattie has made a major faux pas here in picking a fellow army buddy.

Please anybody win but Tim Collins, even the DUP. Imagine 4-5 years of listening to that ego bloviating on the radio. No thanks.

Edit: that surely can't be serious about the Binman.

Poor, brave, righteous, Ukraine is going to win the war. The incompetent, corrupt, and conscripted Russians are using 'human-wave' assaults, and medieval tactics. We must stop Putin before he starts WWIII/ invades the EU.
Also, I'm sure quite a few of the "civilian targets" were not civilian targets, at all. Ukraine is a master of propaganda itself. Perfectly understandable in a war, of course, but it doesn't mean we should report and believe everything Zelensky says as gospel.

Whoa let all that bile out there Burdizzo, let it out. Maybe you'll feel better and lay off of the refugees for a while.

The mainstream 'narrative' shifts and changes as the war changes. Remember when Ukraine wouldn't last 3 weeks against Russia?

Can you point me to a mainstream news source that says Ukraine is definitely going to win this war? The best I've seen is that they 'can' win. Nobody is under any illusion of the difficulty of achieving that.

The Russian army has shown vast levels of incompetence but it's acknowledged that they have learned, adapted and gotten better as the war progressed.

Are you denying Russia is corrupt? Was Alexei Navalny deluded about the levels of corruption in Russia?

Are you denying Russia uses conscription and shows callous disregard for the welfare of their soldiers?

Quite a few civilian targets, weren't civilians targets? Which ones? The shopping malls, maternity hospitals or the civilian apartment blocks?

Can't wait to get over to History Legends and do some 'research'

Your caricatured description of 'do your own researchers' Lubo is laughable.

The majority of 'do you're own researchers' suspend belief of anything/anybody until they spend time consuming information from multiple unaligned sources before taking a position and even then keep an open view.

On this topic I listen to the thinking of Glenn Greenwald (System Update), Jeffrey Sachs & John Mearsheimer mainly and compare this to what the main stream want me to think. 

Do your own research folks

The problem with your conclusion to your vast meticulous research is that nothing Mearsheimer (it's all NATOs fault), Greenwald or Sachs says stands up to any scrutiny. (That you even entertain Sachs is laughable).

Can you name a single pro-Ukrainian scholar or source that you 'researched' that provided a counter viewpoint to the opinions of those three?

I'm sure there were actually many since you've done your own 'research'.

I would have thought nothing was irrelevant if doing "research". Don't know this Max man, meself, but I do dip into "History Legends" for news on the war. It's not Russian propaganda - far from it - but it does pour ridicule on the mainstream narrative.

What is the 'mainstream narrative'?

How exactly is watching pro-Russian propagandist Max Blumenthal's YouTube videos 'doing your own reseatch'?

Distrust the MSM, but swallow everything Max has to tell you (straight from the Kremlin). Sure Skull, great research there buddy.

Why not find out a little about Max Blumenthal first (religion irrelevant). . Start your research there.

Deadly strike on Rafah a tragic mishap, Netanyahu says MSM (actually it hasnt even happened on MSNBC)

I believe them

Not sure what your point is - the 'Mainstream media' print and repeat Russian denials and bullshit as well.

Wrong thread?

Some of the pictures from the latest Israeli atrocity are really beyond words.

Western media going with 'Israel takes out 2 Hamas leaders' and 'used precision munitions' as their headline is beyond despicable.

Yeah, absolutely deplorable.

Anyone still sticking up for Israel at this point must be dead inside.

It's sponsored genocide. Netenyahu and his cohorts no better than Hitler's Nazis..

I agree but I never use that comparison. You're playing straight into their hands, allows Israeli supporters to divert the conversation straight away to 'anti-semetism'.

On the other hand, the people who are 'too clever to believe the MSM' and 'do their own research' - remember when they were telling us that Putin was stepping in to sort a Nazi problem, or rescuing Ukraine from joining NATO.

Strange how tankies and 'both siders' have gone quiet about these justifications?
Now imagine if Putin had been able to topple Ukraine in 3 days, with a few rusty tanks on the road to Kyiv, as he originally thought.
Would he have realistically have stopped there? I expect he'd already be sorting out Moldova's problem by now.

They've been quiet but they're still there,  believing the same tired old rubbish but mostly too embarrassed to spout it now, after everything Russia has done (and said) these past 2 years.

On my 'newsfeed' a minute ago was "What countries will Putin invade next?". Some people gobble this rubbish up.

Absolutely , people buy what the Mainstream Media tell you or some Clown will put a Video up on Youtube like the example you have given ( I`ve come across it ) , people are too lazy to do research themselves and see what the reality of the situation is .

Oh yeah and the open-minded non-lazy people's 'own research' typically involves watching a few Max Blumenthal 'investigations' and swallowing his bullshit hook, line and sinker.

Heard of him? I know you have. Skull definitely has. 

Some of the pictures from the latest Israeli atrocity are really beyond words.

Western media going with 'Israel takes out 2 Hamas leaders' and 'used precision munitions' as their headline is beyond despicable.

Yeah, absolutely deplorable.

Anyone still sticking up for Israel at this point must be dead inside.

Everyone completely comfortable with the dichotomous notion that one side is the goodie and the other side the baddie here?

I'm not

No it seems you've reserved the dichotomous notion of 'goodie and baddie' status for the Palestine-Israel conflict. And not only you either.

For some reason you don't believe Israeli lies as quickly as you swallow Russian lies. Why is that do you think?

Well let's see, tactics over the years with various conflicts or wars have used indiscriminate bombs to create fear..

Doesn't mean it will impact change from the aggressors, in fact might have the opposite

You don't need to wait and see, Russia has been hitting civilians targets intentionally for over 2 years now. Including double tap strikes to kill first responders and those coming to help the wounded.

Ukraine hasn't adopted their 'strategy' and they aren't going to. In fact, every time Ukraine hits a high value Russian military target such as an airfield or ship watch out for the next shopping mall or marketplace packed with civilians to get obliterated. They think they can break the will of the Ukrainian civilian population, they are wrong.

Since some on this board seem to be in doubt, deliberate Russian targeting of civilians continues, as it has done since Feb 2022. The slaughter continues, as in Kharkiv yesterday:

https://x.com/IuliiaMendel/status/1794372449628471315

Russia, Israel - zero difference, two blood soaked fascist regimes.

There is some difference, one of the regimes is supported and funded by Western countries, many of whom are our allies. The other is despised by these same countries. Another difference is that media in the West attempts to give balance/equivalence to Israel v Palestine but makes no attempt to do the same in Russia v Ukraine.

Well first of all, the Ukrainian government isn't a regime, it's the democratically elected government of Ukraine. I suppose Israel isn't technically a 'regime' either but it's most definitely blood-soaked and fascist in nature. 

It is right that Ukraine is supported by other countries in their fight against Russian aggression. By the way the civilian slaughter in Ukraine would be many, many times greater if it wasn't for western supply of air defences to shoot down Russian missiles and Iranian drones.

Also, support given to Ukraine doesn't alter the nature of Russia's deliberate and indiscriminate attacks on civilians. See Syria, Georgia and Chechnya also. Just like Israel in Gaza, deliberate murder.

The media doesn't attempt to make a balance/equivalence between Ukraine and Russia because there is none.

I agree with you that it's unfair and hypocritical to equate Palestine with Israel in their fight against aggression. I agree with you it's shameful that western countries supply Israel with weapons and that Israel hasn't been sanctioned and kicked out of all sporting and international events (like SA was back in the day).

You misread my post. Regime 1 = Israel, Regime 2 = Russia.

Ah, yes I took it up wrong, I thought you were referencing Ukraine and Russia.