Ukraine-Russia War Take 2
Here is what the preliminary take on the Ukraine thread disappearing is:
The site was hit with a massive spam attack where hundreds of spam threads were created. In the case where, for example, I see a single spam thread and delete it, that is called a soft delete, and mods can still see them but forum members cannot. Those deletion can be undone.
When a massive attack hits with hundreds of threads, an admin uses a different procedure where the hundreds of spam threads are merged and then hard deleted, where the threads are gone, and no note is left behind. As I have mentioned with my own experience of just soft deleting a large number of posts, sometimes a post or thread gets checked or merged accidentally and is deleted by mistake. Dealing with hundreds of spam threads takes a sledgehammer, not a scalpel.
It appears that our Ukraine thread may have gotten caught up in that recent net of spam threads. If so, it is likely gone for good. I cant say this for sure, and am awaiting comments from admins on this issue. Yes, this sucks. And hopefully there was some other software glitch that caused the disappearance, and we may recover it in the future.
But in the meantime, I have created this new Ukraine-Russia War thread to enable the conversation to continue. Obviously continuity with earlier discussions will be lost. There is no way around that. So as best as possible, let's pick up the conversation with recent events and go from there.
If you have any questions about this, please post them in the mod thread, not here. Let's keep this thread going with posts about the war, not the disappearance of the old thread.
Thanks.
To begin with the iron cross was not a "Nazi symbol", even if it was used by the Nazis.
https://www.adl.org/resources/hate-symbo...
The Iron Cross is a famous German military medal dating back to the 19th century. During the 1930s, the Nazi regime in Germany superimposed a swastika on the traditional medal, turning it into a Nazi symbol. After World War II, the medal was discontinued but neo-Nazis and other white supremacists subsequently adopted it as a hate symbol and it has been a commonly-used hate symbol ever since.
In the United States, however, the Iron Cross also became one of several Nazi-era symbols adopted by outlaw bikers, more to signify rebellion or to shock than for any white supremacist ideology. By the early 2000s, this other use of the Iron Cross had spread from bikers to skateboarders and many extreme sports enthusiasts and became part of the logo of several different companies producing equipment and clothing for this audience. Consequently, the use of the Iron Cross in a non-racist context has greatly proliferated in the United States, to the point that an Iron Cross in isolation (i.e., without a superimposed swastika or without other accompanying hate symbols) cannot be determined to be a hate symbol. Care must therefore be used to correctly interpret this symbol in whatever context in which it may be found.
It's not even clear that that is an iron cross though:
I have no idea what the second picture is showing.
I'm sure these images were deeply disturbing to you, sorry for making you dig them up again.
its showing a neo-Nazi. its ok tho, bc its a Western supporting neo-Nazi and so long as they keep their genocidal rhetoric directed at Russians and brown people then its totally cool.
its just an ancient hindu symbol guize
Is it half of an SS bolt?
I see, well we should all wish that her husband/bf die a violent death in Ukraine, that she too suffer a violent death, and that all of Ukraine suffers violent deaths. We should then make fun of them.
I'm not too sure what her potentially being single has to do with any of this though or why we should refer to he using a sexist acronym.
It's truly a shame that a small % of Ukrainians aren't the perfect victims, and they have ruined it for all of Ukraine. I just hope Russia's next victim can pass the purity test.
Wow that's pretty bad! I think I'm still going with my initial assessment that I'm not ok with killing anyone, celebrating the death of anyone, or celebrating the death of people close someone, based on the tattoos or shirts they wear though. And I'm definitely not ok with withholding aid, or supporting genocide narratives, because a small percentage of people in a country have certain tattoos or shirts. You guys do you though.
"Ukrainians have t-shirts and tattoos which contain nazi symbols" seems like a point which needs 0 verification whatsoever. Coming from the guy who is willing to state as fact that Euromaidan was a Nazi coup, that there were Euromaidan snipers, that leading historians are propagandists with handlers, that martial law is a ruse to keep Zelenskyy in power etc, I wonder why this was the point he had to verify lest he accidentally spread misinformation/disinformation. Also strange he never actually posted his research until now and instead suggested that others do their own research, mentions that a lot of the research subjects are newly single, and also uses a sexist term to refer to them.
Don't get me wrong, I hope going forward he continues to verify first with the same zeal.
Anyways... this is really crazy:
To begin with the iron cross was not a "Nazi symbol", even if it was used by the Nazis.
If people think the Iron Cross is a hate symbol, they are pretty clueless. Then again, I have seen of people outraged by the Cossack Cross, so who knows.
Of course, it is an important subject. Perhaps in 5-6 years when this vital topic has come to fruition, people driven to outrage by the sight of ancient military heraldry might become slightly peeved or perhaps even mildly unnerved by
.
I don't see the need to counter a narrative that would imply there are nazis fighting for a jewish president and obeying his orders.
It's so non-sensical and semantically absurd that imho it doesn't require a proper answer, like flat-earthers don't.
A few of my posts on the subject before I gave up completely since any time facts get brought up the propagandists disappear for a bit and then just come back and restate the same bullshit. No one stops them.
What you are doing is exactly an ideological purity test. There is a country suffering from the things I listed in my previous post, and when deciding if they should receive aid you are pausing to say, "Well do they have any people who I might not like in their country though?"
I assumed most people do not like Nazis because of things like their racism, ethnic persecution, genocide, aggression, war crimes, totalitarianism etc. All of these are things which Russia is currently doing. If you don
That part of the world has many neo-nazi elements. When Putin really went to work with his propaganda that all of Western Ukraine is neo-nazi, that propaganda was so effective that a Spanish "anti-fascist" paramilitary joined the separatist movement and fought next to American, Swedish, and Russian neo-nazis against the fake neo-nazi threat. After Crimea was annexed one of the Russian neo-nazi groups, the night wolves, held a celebration where they danced in the formation of a swastika while hig
I have never ignored that they are influential. I have noted that you drastically exaggerate their influence, suggesting that neo-nazis are key members in the government. In fact, I just had a series of posts where I point out their influence in defending Mariupol and other parts of Ukraine. The point was that since Putin kept attacking Ukrainian citizens, people with guns were needed. Neo-nazis like guns, so they had guns, which they used to defend their cities. Then Putin exaggerated the neo-nazi influence, and used that as evidence to continue attacking Ukrainian citizens, which resulted in more people turning to neo-nazis that were saving them from death. This created a loop of Putin creating more justifications for his violence by committing violence; a loop that you happily buy into and perpetuate with your repeating of this propaganda.
Is it half of an SS bolt?
I see, well we should all wish that her husband/bf die a violent death in Ukraine, that she too suffer a violent death, and that all of Ukraine suffers violent deaths. We should then make fun of them.
I'm not too sure what her potentially being single has to do with any of this though or why we should refer to he using a sexist acronym.
It's truly a shame that a small % of Ukrainians aren't the perfect victims, and they have ruined it for all of Ukraine. I just hope Russi
nobody said the bolded. but I just cant be arsed to care to much about her dude, you know bc he was a neo-Nazi.
and the whole point of mentioning her as single was to say that her neo-Nazi bf died. its a joke. a little sarcasm. like, you really gotta work on your comprehension. I mean that seriously.
I see, well we should not care that her husband/bf die a violent death in Ukraine, or if she too suffers a violent death, or that all of Ukraine suffers violent deaths. We should make fun of them if do.
I'm not too sure why we should refer to her using a sexist acronym.
It's truly a shame that a small % of Ukrainians aren't the perfect victims, and they have ruined it for all of Ukraine. I just hope Russia's next victim can pass the purity test.
Fixed it for you.
no I just dont care about those 2 in particular. thats that reading comprehension thing.
but really, Id prefer all of Ukraine including those twats and their friends be safe and not at war. thats why I support peace talks and a negotiated end to the war. but we all know how White Empire and its adherents feel about war.
no I just dont care about those 2 in particular. thats that reading comprehension thing.
but really, Id prefer all of Ukraine including those twats and their friends be safe and not at war. thats why I support peace talks and a negotiated end to the war. but we all know how White Empire and its adherents feel about war.
Eh, and in order to do so Russia has to been convinced to stop present and future aggression.
Stopping this current war leaving too much on the table for Russia, will only motivate Russia to do more wars (in ukraine and elsewhere) down the line. The game doesn't end with this specific instance of combat, do you understand that part?
You want THIS war to end , and i might even believe you on that, but you don't even try to follow the logic of what would happen if Russia is allowed to keep the Donbas after this.
An invasion of the Baltics would be pretty much guaranteed at some point, following a similar pattern to Euromaidan / 2014 little green men. They'd also likely invade Moldova and either annex Belarussia or invade it under the pretext of peacekeeping.
Though, at some point a full scale European war would not be unlikely, so that might take presedence.
right its liberal logic. gotta do war to prevent war.
An invasion of the Baltics would be pretty much guaranteed at some point, following a similar pattern to Euromaidan / 2014 little green men. They'd also likely invade Moldova and either annex Belarussia or invade it under the pretext of peacekeeping.
Though, at some point a full scale European war would not be unlikely, so that might take presedence.
I am thinking more about Georgia/Moldova/more pieces of Ukraine (he really really really wants Odessa), attacking NATO is still not a probable outcome even if we let him run over pieces of Ukraine at will and keep them imo.
Looking more and more likely that Georgia will turn into a Belarus.
Invading a Baltic state is more about escalation and dismantling NATO than taking on NATO.
Yes, sometimes countries follow an imperialist and nationalist creed and start invading neighboring countries, nations and regions with the intention of conquest, eradicating nations and subjugating ethnicities.
This is what Putin means when he says Ukraine does not exist and is Russian, and is what ultra-nationalist Russians think when they use the term "hohol" to refer to Ukrainians. They view themselves as a master race and culture with the right to destroy the Ukrainian nation and send any Ukrainian who disagrees to concentration camps.
This is the ideology of the Russian totalitarian regime which has made it illegal to criticize themselves, the military or the war.
Not defending yourself and not stopping this is not a peacekeeping measure, regardless of how clever you think your oneliner sounds.
Just let him have [strike]The Sudetenland[/strike] Ukraine and he will stop invading countries, seems like a trustworthy fellow.
Yes, sometimes countries follow an imperialist and nationalist creed and start invading neighboring countries, nations and regions with the intention of conquest, eradicating nations and subjugating ethnicities.
This is what Putin means when he says Ukraine does not exist and is Russian, and is what ultra-nationalist Russians think when they use the term "hohol" to refer to Ukrainians. They view themselves as a master race and culture with the right to destroy the Ukrainian nation and send any U
Im well aware. Ive lived through Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Palestine, El Salvador and probably a bunch I forgot.
Looking more and more likely that Georgia will turn into a Belarus.
Invading a Baltic state is more about escalation and dismantling NATO than taking on NATO.
Pretty much, yes. The ideal scenario for Russia would be a fallen Ukraine, an isolationist US and an EU without France or Germany.
In such a scenario, the attacked NATO country might invoke article 5, but it actual support from other NATO nations would be unlikely. The Russian gambit would be that this leads to even further disillusionment and the effective end of NATO.
Without such a confrontation, the current ambitions of the Russian regime could not be reached. The ultra-nationalists waiting in the wings to hold the reigns for themselves instead of just supporting Putin won't be any better.
The theory floated around earlier which seems likely is that Russia takes an area of land which isn't particularly valuable which puts Europe in a position where they need to go to war and risk nukes over a pretty worthless area.
If countries decide that no, they do not want to risk it, then NATO collapses and the smaller countries do whatever they can to avoid war with Russia, including dealing with Russia.
If NATO does successfully invoke article 5 then Russia just retreats and threatens nukes.
Add this on top of something drastic like China attacking Taiwan at the same time, and N Korea getting aggressive with S Korea and it quickly spirals.
India invades China. GG
The enemy managed to gain a foothold in the area of the village of Novy Put, Glushkovsky district, Kursk region. The rolls continue. Units of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation and border guards inflict fire damage, the enemy has losses in personnel and equipment. The enemy is pulling reserves.
From a Russian. This is 3km past the front line in Kursk which is extremely strange. Counterattacking the counterattack and have a pretty big success.
Just let him have [strike]The Sudetenland[/strike] Ukraine and he will stop invading countries, seems like a trustworthy fellow.
The thing about the much misrepresented munich deal is that hitler wasn't remotely trusted and yet britain got what it wanted from the deal which was time to prepare for a war they now belived was inevitable. The rights and wrongs of britains stragey are very arguable but it definitely wasn't a case of trusting hitler. How much the munich scenario translates to now is unclear but if there is a deal then it also wont be about trusting putin. What matters is what we do after the deal. Given the relative military/economic strengths this should be in our favour not putins - but do we have the will.
There is another lesson from munich which is that just because 'red lines' evaporate into thin air it desn't remotely imply that a later red line wont be very real.
(This is not me advocating for a deal because I think we should back ukraine properly to winbut its still seems to me that this ending with a deal is most likely.)
