Russia invades Ukraine Feb 2022

[Hand of God]

I'm sure you'd love to categorise the piece as a 'smear article' (while not having read it) but the author is working class and Ukrainian. Working class Ukrainians - Betrayed by the western tankie class like Catherine Connolly and Zarah Sultana.

The fact you don't see an issue with you trying to put forward a reprehensible right wing, neo liberal war hawk editorial as somewhat credible is wild.

Do you not find it odd an editorial can be so partisan in it's defence of a nation who is committing a genocide of the native minority in an apartheid state while conversely being so partisan in it's support of Ukraine in its resistance against a Russian invasion under the guide of freedom and democracy?

Why would a working class Ukrainian think a right wing Tory warhawk editorial is a good outlet to convince working class people of her opinion being authentic?

No help needed numbSkull. I'm more than happy to cut through your bullshit, it's easy, though tiring at times.

1. It's an opinion piece, not an editorial.

2. Everything through the prism of Israel-Palestine as usual. At least you're managing to keep your overt anti-semitism in check under your latest incarnation. For the time being anyway, I'm sure the 'you know whos' are lurking at the back of your mind somewhere, ready to jump out anytime.

3. Point no 2 above results in your usual faulty logic, i.e. the Spectator's stance on Israel-Palestine invalidates any output from that publication on any other topic.

4. Point no 3 is convenient for you as it allows you to ignore what the author, a working class Ukrainian, has to say. In doing so you demonstrate the very tankie qualities she cites in her article:

'..leftist who would do anything for the world's working class except listen to them'

5. She is doing well to be published in the Spectator, what would you suggest, she try to get published in the 'Morning Star' so that a bunch of braindead tankies can insult her and treat her experience with derision.

6. Your arrogance is astounding in that you think a working class Ukrainian has to convince you that her voice is 'authentic'.

7. Your response to the article proves the point she is making about British (and Irish) leftists. Since you probably didn't even read the article I'll summarise for you:

Your views on the Ukrainian conflict are an 'egregious, pompous luxury belief' to working class Ukrainians fighting for their survival in a war of attempted annihilation of their nation.

You 'would do anything for the world's working class except listen to them'

In Ukraine, your pathetic 'class-war politics just don't apply.'

Like Sultana, you are 'enjoying lecturing about peace under the safe skies protected by the Nato alliance she despises'

8. I'll go one further, you and those like you are charlatans. I've said it before. You're not anti-war or anti-imperialist. You hate the west and the USA. That's it.

p.s. Have you managed to find any agreements with Russia that Ukraine has broken? If not, perhaps you can withdraw the claim here.

You are putting forward an article from The Spectator which attacks a left wing politician as a credible and valid piece

You seemingly subscribe to The Spectator as you were able to post up the full article.

Of course The Spectators stance on Gaza, their links to the Tories, their backing of the Iraq war shows them to be completely devoid of credibility or objectivity in geopolitical matters.

The reason they have given that "working class" Ukrainian a platform is to attack a left wing politician for daring to criticize NATO and Zelensky and for calling out the complicity of the UK and the West in the genocide of Gaza.

You should actually listen more to what people like Zara Sultana have to say thank swallowing the right wing propaganda published in The Spectator.

I suppose you were a big fan of Thatcher too?

[Banks of the Bann]

I'm sure you'd love to categorise the piece as a 'smear article' (while not having read it) but the author is working class and Ukrainian. Working class Ukrainians - Betrayed by the western tankie class like Catherine Connolly and Zarah Sultana.

The fact you don't see an issue with you trying to put forward a reprehensible right wing, neo liberal war hawk editorial as somewhat credible is wild.

Do you not find it odd an editorial can be so partisan in it's defence of a nation who is committing a genocide of the native minority in an apartheid state while conversely being so partisan in it's support of Ukraine in its resistance against a Russian invasion under the guide of freedom and democracy?

Why would a working class Ukrainian think a right wing Tory warhawk editorial is a good outlet to convince working class people of her opinion being authentic?

No help needed numbSkull. I'm more than happy to cut through your bullshit, it's easy, though tiring at times.

1. It's an opinion piece, not an editorial.

2. Everything through the prism of Israel-Palestine as usual. At least you're managing to keep your overt anti-semitism in check under your latest incarnation. For the time being anyway, I'm sure the 'you know whos' are lurking at the back of your mind somewhere, ready to jump out anytime.

3. Point no 2 above results in your usual faulty logic, i.e. the Spectator's stance on Israel-Palestine invalidates any output from that publication on any other topic.

4. Point no 3 is convenient for you as it allows you to ignore what the author, a working class Ukrainian, has to say. In doing so you demonstrate the very tankie qualities she cites in her article:

'..leftist who would do anything for the world's working class except listen to them'

5. She is doing well to be published in the Spectator, what would you suggest, she try to get published in the 'Morning Star' so that a bunch of braindead tankies can insult her and treat her experience with derision.

6. Your arrogance is astounding in that you think a working class Ukrainian has to convince you that her voice is 'authentic'.

7. Your response to the article proves the point she is making about British (and Irish) leftists. Since you probably didn't even read the article I'll summarise for you:

Your views on the Ukrainian conflict are an 'egregious, pompous luxury belief' to working class Ukrainians fighting for their survival in a war of attempted annihilation of their nation.

You 'would do anything for the world's working class except listen to them'

In Ukraine, your pathetic 'class-war politics just don't apply.'

Like Sultana, you are 'enjoying lecturing about peace under the safe skies protected by the Nato alliance she despises'

8. I'll go one further, you and those like you are charlatans. I've said it before. You're not anti-war or anti-imperialist. You hate the west and the USA. That's it.

p.s. Have you managed to find any agreements with Russia that Ukraine has broken? If not, perhaps you can withdraw the claim here.

You are putting forward an article from The Spectator which attacks a left wing politician as a credible and valid piece

You seemingly subscribe to The Spectator as you were able to post up the full article.

Of course The Spectators stance on Gaza, their links to the Tories, their backing of the Iraq war shows them to be completely devoid of credibility or objectivity in geopolitical matters.

The reason they have given that "working class" Ukrainian a platform is to attack a left wing politician for daring to criticize NATO and Zelensky and for calling out the complicity of the UK and the West in the genocide of Gaza.

You should actually listen more to what people like Zara Sultana have to say thank swallowing the right wing propaganda published in The Spectator.

I suppose you were a big fan of Thatcher too?

1. Not a subscriber, don't even read the Spectator. Followed a link from X.

2. Not a fan of Thatcher.

3. You don't like the Spectator, got it. Care to address the opinions based in the article? You're very happy to address the Spectator itself, but not the article. Convenient for you.

4. I have listened to Zarah Sultana's opinions on Ukraine and NATO. Like the author of the piece, I think Sultana is full of shit.

5. Do you have the details of any agreements with Russia that Ukraine has broken?

[Hand of God]

You don't subscribe to The Spectator or read it yet you are putting forward articles from it to support your viewpoints. A full article you linked and posted from behind a paywall. Hmmmm you must be telling some porkies here.

I find Sultana to be a politician of immense courage and integrity. You are smearing her just like you did Catherine Connolly and you are using a hit piece from a disgraced, islamaphobic right wing editorial to do so - for the sole reasons you do not like Western war mongering being called out.

You clearly value the views and opinions offered by Douglas Murray and co while you engage in smear on Catherine Connolly and Zara Sultana. That's why you have no credibility here, anything to the left of your hard right wing position needs smearing.

[Banks of the Bann]

You don't subscribe to The Spectator or read it yet you are putting forward articles from it to support your viewpoints. A full article you linked and posted from behind a paywall. Hmmmm you must be telling some porkies here.

I find Sultana to be a politician of immense courage and integrity. You are smearing her just like you did Catherine Connolly and you are using a hit piece from a disgraced, islamaphobic right wing editorial to do so - for the sole reasons you do not like Western war mongering being called out.

You clearly value the views and opinions offered by Douglas Murray and co while you engage in smear on Catherine Connolly and Zara Sultana. That's why you have no credibility here, anything to the left of your hard right wing position needs smearing.

1. I'm not a subscriber to the Spectator. I can read that full article by going onto their website which I followed from X.

2. It wouldn't make a difference to the substance of the article, even if I was. It's mere deflection on your part.

3. You refuse to comment because the article shames you and those like you, for your egregious, pompous luxury tankie belief system.

4. Valid criticism of a politician is not a hit piece.

5. Valid criticism of a politician is not a smear.

6. Why you mention Douglas Murray beyond me, the "how do ya does" whispering in your head again?

7. Any update on the agreements Ukraine has broken with Russia?

[Hand of God]

Of course the source makes an impact on article. You can't credibly pick out points of views from Mein Kampf and go I don't agree with his some of his views but this is a good point.

You seem to be effectively aligned with The Spectator on most sources. That article is behind a paywall so I don't know how you have access to it. You must subscribe to her the unhinged views of Douglas Murray and co.

The reason the article is nonsense is that it's from a hard right neo-liberal editorial which has held some ghastly views right from its origins to its present day stances. It has voiced some reprehensible views, it has incited hatred against Muslims. It has supported genocide and unjust wars so how could anyone who wants to be taken with credibility cite a source so disgraced as The Spectator.

The article served one purpose, a hit piece against Zara Sultana to try and misrepresent and smear her. Much like you have done to Catherine Connolly the past few months.

You are a right wing neo liberal. You don't care about freedom and democracy in Ukraine, you only care about Western supremacism and control.

[Banks of the Bann]

Of course the source makes an impact on article. You can't credibly pick out points of views from Mein Kampf and go I don't agree with his some of his views but this is a good point.

You seem to be effectively aligned with The Spectator on most sources. That article is behind a paywall so I don't know how you have access to it. You must subscribe to her the unhinged views of Douglas Murray and co.

The reason the article is nonsense is that it's from a hard right neo-liberal editorial which has held some ghastly views right from its origins to its present day stances. It has voiced some reprehensible views, it has incited hatred against Muslims. It has supported genocide and unjust wars so how could anyone who wants to be taken with credibility cite a source so disgraced as The Spectator.

The article served one purpose, a hit piece against Zara Sultana to try and misrepresent and smear her. Much like you have done to Catherine Connolly the past few months.

You are a right wing neo liberal. You don't care about freedom and democracy in Ukraine, you only care about Western supremacism and control.

The source is a Ukrainian working class journalist called Svitlana Morenets.

Appearing in the Spectator does not make the content of an article 'nonsense', no matter how hard you may wish it so.

More faulty logic from you. In fact it's beyond faulty logic, it's idiotic.

According to your idiocy, if Svitlana Morenets had published the article on her private substack it would be worthy of consideration, but if the same article was published in the Spectator, the content is magically transformed and becomes 'nonsense'.

Idiotic.

As for me being a right-wing neo-liberal. Sorry to disappoint numbSkull. Unlike you I'll condemn aggression and genocide from every quarter, be it Russia or Israel/USA. I don't make excuses, unlike tankies. Like yourself, like Zarah Sultana, like Catherine Connolly.

Almost forgot, any update on the agreements that Ukraine has broken with Russia?

[Hand of God]

Of course the source makes an impact on article. You can't credibly pick out points of views from Mein Kampf and go I don't agree with his some of his views but this is a good point.

You seem to be effectively aligned with The Spectator on most sources. That article is behind a paywall so I don't know how you have access to it. You must subscribe to her the unhinged views of Douglas Murray and co.

The reason the article is nonsense is that it's from a hard right neo-liberal editorial which has held some ghastly views right from its origins to its present day stances. It has voiced some reprehensible views, it has incited hatred against Muslims. It has supported genocide and unjust wars so how could anyone who wants to be taken with credibility cite a source so disgraced as The Spectator.

The article served one purpose, a hit piece against Zara Sultana to try and misrepresent and smear her. Much like you have done to Catherine Connolly the past few months.

You are a right wing neo liberal. You don't care about freedom and democracy in Ukraine, you only care about Western supremacism and control.

The source is a Ukrainian working class journalist called Svitlana Morenets.

Appearing in the Spectator does not make the content of an article 'nonsense', no matter how hard you may wish it so.

More faulty logic from you. In fact it's beyond faulty logic, it's idiotic.

According to your idiocy, if Svitlana Morenets had published the article on her private substack it would be worthy of consideration, but if the same article was published in the Spectator, the content is magically transformed and becomes 'nonsense'.

Idiotic.

As for me being a right-wing neo-liberal. Sorry to disappoint numbSkull. Unlike you I'll condemn aggression and genocide from every quarter, be it Russia or Israel/USA. I don't make excuses, unlike tankies. Like yourself, like Zarah Sultana, like Catherine Connolly.

Almost forgot, any update on the agreements that Ukraine has broken with Russia?

There you have it. A right wing rag with an utterly deplorable history and present editorial line. A newspaper that has justified and whitewashed a genocide sought out s Ukrainian "working class" person to right a hit piece on a left wing British politician because she was critical of NATO and Zelensky.

Somehow in your crazy world view that is credible.

As I said from the outset. You are obsessed with Ukraine but don't care about an actual genocide in Gaza. Weird.

[Banks of the Bann]

Of course the source makes an impact on article. You can't credibly pick out points of views from Mein Kampf and go I don't agree with his some of his views but this is a good point.

You seem to be effectively aligned with The Spectator on most sources. That article is behind a paywall so I don't know how you have access to it. You must subscribe to her the unhinged views of Douglas Murray and co.

The reason the article is nonsense is that it's from a hard right neo-liberal editorial which has held some ghastly views right from its origins to its present day stances. It has voiced some reprehensible views, it has incited hatred against Muslims. It has supported genocide and unjust wars so how could anyone who wants to be taken with credibility cite a source so disgraced as The Spectator.

The article served one purpose, a hit piece against Zara Sultana to try and misrepresent and smear her. Much like you have done to Catherine Connolly the past few months.

You are a right wing neo liberal. You don't care about freedom and democracy in Ukraine, you only care about Western supremacism and control.

The source is a Ukrainian working class journalist called Svitlana Morenets.

Appearing in the Spectator does not make the content of an article 'nonsense', no matter how hard you may wish it so.

More faulty logic from you. In fact it's beyond faulty logic, it's idiotic.

According to your idiocy, if Svitlana Morenets had published the article on her private substack it would be worthy of consideration, but if the same article was published in the Spectator, the content is magically transformed and becomes 'nonsense'.

Idiotic.

As for me being a right-wing neo-liberal. Sorry to disappoint numbSkull. Unlike you I'll condemn aggression and genocide from every quarter, be it Russia or Israel/USA. I don't make excuses, unlike tankies. Like yourself, like Zarah Sultana, like Catherine Connolly.

Almost forgot, any update on the agreements that Ukraine has broken with Russia?

There you have it. A right wing rag with an utterly deplorable history and present editorial line. A newspaper that has justified and whitewashed a genocide sought out s Ukrainian "working class" person to right a hit piece on a left wing British politician because she was critical of NATO and Zelensky.

Somehow in your crazy world view that is credible.

As I said from the outset. You are obsessed with Ukraine but don't care about an actual genocide in Gaza. Weird.

The Ukrainian working class journalist wrote an article criticising Zarah Sultana, because like you, Sultana has her head full of shit when it come to Ukraine.

In your arrogance you now deny that she is 'working class' despite her description of her background in Ukraine. How very typical of the champagne socialists of the west.

I note you are now engaging in genocide denial with regard to Ukraine. Not surprising. Nothing new there, since as numbSkull you briefly flirted with holocaust denial (the truth will come out some day, wasn't it?) before shitting it when challenged on your remarks.

As for the genocide in Gaza, I have condemned it. And I don't make excuses for the murderers like you do.

p.s. Any updates on the agreements Ukraine has broken with Russia?

[Banks of the Bann]

Nobel peace prize laureate Oleksandra Matviichuk (@avalaina)  on Russian war crimes against civilians. Worth reading.

"I watched the video where a Russian drone attacked a man, a woman, and their dog in the Kharkiv region. The Russians saw that they were civilians. The people were walking along the road with a white flag. Unfortunately, all of them died. The dog was still convulsing for a few seconds.

It's worth repeating once again. The main target of the Russians in this war is civilians. War crimes are a deliberate policy of the Russians. This is how they fight. In Chechnya, Georgia, Syria, Mali, Libya, Ukraine. Pain is their tool of subjugation. The Russians deliberately inflict pain on the civilian population to break people's resistance and occupy the country.

In 2014, we asked survivors from captivity what had caused their arrest. Yes, there were targeted groups they hunted deliberately. But many people who ended up in the basements couldn't name a single reason. I'll say more: you can be an ardent supporter of Russia, but if you're a civilian on territory captured by Russia, your life means nothing.

Our mobile teams that arrived in the Kyiv region right after liberation heard people speak about the Russians with horror. They said they simply couldn't believe the Russians were capazes of such things. And this was after the brutal torture-murders of Volodymyr Rybak in Horlivka and Reshat Ametov in Simferopol. After the cynical shooting of the green corridor near Ilovaisk.

It's time to believe your own eyes. Sadly, there are still people who for some reason think that if they're "apolitical," nothing will happen to them. The Russians don't care. When they shelled residential buildings in Mariupol with tanks, they weren't particularly interested in the political views of the people who lived there.
Yes, you can deny reality for a while. But in war, the price of such denial can be very high."

[Hand of God]

You're quoting The Spectator ffs. You don't even acknowledge that. A right wing war hawk editorial that has a disgusting history of islamaphobia and has a disgusting history of whitewashing and supporting genocide.

You have lost all credibility here.

My first engagement with you was because you took issue with a post I made on the Irish President thread. I read a few posts from you and others which sought to completely misrepresent and smear the Irish President due to the fact she is quite rightly critical of Western foreign policy. You smeared her with utterly baseless allegations because you disagree with her perfectly valid points.

You are now putting forward articles for a disgraced right wing editorial that looks to further smear a left wing politician of the utmost integrity because she is also critical of the Wests neo liberal war hawk policy.

Further to that I have exposed you of being utterly obsessed with Ukraine but completely ambivalent to a genocide in Gaza. You have taken to putting forward the views of genocide deniers as credible, as we have seen with your referencing of The Spectator as credible. You have relentlessly and baselessly smeared left wing politicians who have been a great advocate for Palestine and have also been consistent with their condemnation and objection to Putin.

You are not sincere. How on earth could any decent human being think that what is happening in Ukraine is worse than the Genocide in Gaza.. you're like Piers Morgan - just a right wing troll who believes in nothing.

I will leave you to this thread now and your fascist rantings.

[seafoid]

https://www.ft.com/content/b6d493dc-bd36-4140-bff8-c1bcdf992364

Russia has started using jet-powered glide bombs to hit targets far beyond the frontline, an upgrade to Moscow's arsenal that poses further strains on Ukraine's stretched air defences. Retrofitted Soviet-era bombs known as KABs have hit targets in the southern Ukrainian regions of Odesa and Mykolayiv, as well as the eastern region of Poltava, for the first time in October. Up until then, the guided projectiles lobbed from Russian Su-34 jets had a range of up to 80km and were used mainly in the proximity of the frontline. But some of these glide bombs are now fitted with a jet engine — an upgrade that increases their range up to 200km, according to Vadym Skibitsky, the deputy head of Ukraine's GUR military intelligence service.

[Wildweasel74]

The old VE1. Russia gone real retro!

[Banks of the Bann]

You're quoting The Spectator ffs. You don't even acknowledge that. A right wing war hawk editorial that has a disgusting history of islamaphobia and has a disgusting history of whitewashing and supporting genocide.

You have lost all credibility here.

My first engagement with you was because you took issue with a post I made on the Irish President thread. I read a few posts from you and others which sought to completely misrepresent and smear the Irish President due to the fact she is quite rightly critical of Western foreign policy. You smeared her with utterly baseless allegations because you disagree with her perfectly valid points.

You are now putting forward articles for a disgraced right wing editorial that looks to further smear a left wing politician of the utmost integrity because she is also critical of the Wests neo liberal war hawk policy.

Further to that I have exposed you of being utterly obsessed with Ukraine but completely ambivalent to a genocide in Gaza. You have taken to putting forward the views of genocide deniers as credible, as we have seen with your referencing of The Spectator as credible. You have relentlessly and baselessly smeared left wing politicians who have been a great advocate for Palestine and have also been consistent with their condemnation and objection to Putin.

You are not sincere. How on earth could any decent human being think that what is happening in Ukraine is worse than the Genocide in Gaza.. you're like Piers Morgan - just a right wing troll who believes in nothing.

I will leave you to this thread now and your fascist rantings.

1. You haven't been able to rebut a single thing in the article by the Ukrainian journalist -> you resort instead to cry about the Spectator. Deflection, pure and simple.

2. You haven't been able to rebut any of the valid criticism I made about president elect CC -> you resort instead to baseless claims about 'smears'.

3. CC's points aren't valid and I outlined why - you and others were unable to rebut what I said - > you resort then to just repeat your baseless claims about 'smears'.

4. You make various claims and then when challenged you are unable to rebut -> You are unable to provide a single example of an agreement Ukraine has broken with Russia. (And ignore that Russia has broken EVERY agreement with Ukraine.

5.I am not ambivalent to the genocide in Gaza -> I have condemned it. I don't need to post about it. There are no braindead genocide deniers and apologists mucking up the Gaza thread.

6. I have never once stated that what is happening in Ukraine is worse than Gaza -> more made up shite from you.

7. Your first engagement with me..., aye no worries numbSkull.

8. Run along then. If you don't to engage with me don't make piss poor attempts at trolling on this thread.

[seafoid]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2025/11/06/russia-sends-disabled-soldiers-slaughter-ukraine-war-army/

A wounded man lies in a muddy ditch, stripped of his uniform and too weak to stand. His ribs protrude beneath the chain of his dog tags, the only trace of the soldier he once was. He murmurs incoherently, clearly too mentally incapacitated to communicate or move.
The man in the video is one of several mentally disabled men reportedly sent to the front line by Russia, The Telegraph has been told.
Ukrainian officials say it is a strategy that reflects Moscow's growing reliance on vulnerable recruits and its willingness to deploy an almost limitless supply of manpower to make gains on the front lines, regardless of the human cost.

[Genocide Organ]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2025/11/06/russia-sends-disabled-soldiers-slaughter-ukraine-war-army/

A wounded man lies in a muddy ditch, stripped of his uniform and too weak to stand. His ribs protrude beneath the chain of his dog tags, the only trace of the soldier he once was. He murmurs incoherently, clearly too mentally incapacitated to communicate or move.
The man in the video is one of several mentally disabled men reportedly sent to the front line by Russia, The Telegraph has been told.
Ukrainian officials say it is a strategy that reflects Moscow's growing reliance on vulnerable recruits and its willingness to deploy an almost limitless supply of manpower to make gains on the front lines, regardless of the human cost.

Yes, as if Ukraine only recruits young, fit, and enthusiastic soldiers. Such tripe. Sadly war is a nasty business, and neither side can cover itself in glory. The sooner it's over the better, but those who think that can happen without major territorial concessions from Ukraine are living in loo-lah land.