The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread

[vikingatespam]

The problem becomes this, once a government has the ability to conduct extrajudicial killings, all they have to do to kill you without a trial or any kind of due process, is to put you into those circumstances. Want to execute an undesirable? Kidnap them, drop them on a boat with no fishing gear or lights, on a well known drug smuggling path, and then kill them.

Im pretty sure if the government wants me dead, there are far easier ways to do it that put me on a boat in the Carribean. Far too much effort for too little gain, and to be honest I dont think the government is that competent.

Color me a cynic.

 

[vikingatespam]

what nonsense don't you understand, you willing to bet against me? you don't know what a bet is? i intentionally use the word BET? if you dont know what bet is, i rest my case

If you are willing to best your last (whatever it was) on a 50/50 outcome, you are a fool.

Stop weaseling and answer the question.

 

[vikingatespam]

Assuming they are 100% drug dealers, the US does not prescribe death sentences to the drug dealers they prosecute in the country. Even the most notorious ones get life, which is usually accompanied by additional charges of various severity. Mules (who these people allegedly are) get few years with a possibility of parole. How does sinking boats in another country or international waters reconcile with that then? I do not think it does.

But, as Feanor had already mentioned, I believe due process is a key.

I understand how many would disagree in principle. To be honest I think if you are caught dealing in certain items you should get death penalty charges. Carfentanyl and the like are already about as lethal as nerve agents. They are WMD, and its only going to get worse.

Due process is wonderful, but in this case, how are you going to get a conviction with no evidence ? You would have to stage Tier-1 efforts on each and every boat just to have a chance at getting the evidence. It just wont work.

 

[vikingatespam]

Well, if you want to avoid the point...

The point: >>>>>> declares

??? Are trying to pretend to be illiterate ?

Allow me to summarize:

Me: Istanbul 2022 was surrender, like Czechoslovakia 1938
You: what about something Poland did in 1938
Me: that has no meaning wrt the point that Istanbul 2022 would invite the same outcome as Czech.1938
You: See ! you didnt answer

Clearly.....you are not as clear as you think you are.

 

[vikingatespam]

Then your 1938 is irrelevant.
"Will lead to" Is that fortune telling? If you can make current affairs that simple... Congratulations!
There is no agreement, there is no army level. You can use was too. You can also add guaranties and Ukraine's respect for the Minsk accords.

Nothing in that exchange supports what you are claiming ("irrelevant").

All we can see is that you, once again, avoid a clear and simple clarification (that would be the YES/NO question you avoided).

"Army level" ? "was too" ? Your total lack of context is truly amazing.

 

[vikingatespam]

I have to say, you are very good at avoiding the point.
My point:
"Trying to go back to the actual fighting...
You mean now? What if in ten years time China decides that it in its best interest to keep Russia "in the fight"? NATO has been supporting Ukraine for those ten years and Ukraine has been able to find men to fight for ten more years.
Russia will collapse... All right. How many more hits can Ukraine take? How many more billions is NATO providing in how many years? That Ukrainian general was talking of 9 months, not 9 years. Is the end of the world going to happen in those 6-9 months?
Edit.
Why has NATO extended a line of credit to Ukraine? Who said anything about free?"

No mention of "free".
I didn't say that you said "Russia will collapse", that was an introduction for an hypothetical about that Ukrainian general; like his 9 months, my "end of the world".
"Gift" instead of "free". Is Ukraine paying interests?
You can apply your answer to the hypothetical Chinese line of credit.

If you don't want to understand "Trying to go back to the actual fighting" as actually "trying to go back to the actual fighting"...
Edit
Yes, I was using the same post to answer some of your points and for something else, but you probably heard this before... "It's nothing personal".

blah blah blah....usual stream of consciousness from rsemmes with no context, no formatting and apparently no point.

Bor-ing

 

[vikingatespam]

I don't think Russia is going to collapse, I don't think Russia will collapse; in a a far distant future, China may want to keep Russia "in the fight". I don't think it's going to happen, I think that, at that time, China may consider that its interests will be best served by a continuation of the war in Ukraine.
In the present, I don't think that NATO (I'm calling it "NATO") is in this war for Ukraine, I don't think it is in the best interest of the Ukrainian people.

That was simply, the best, most clear post you have made in some time.

Thank you.

To clarify, I agree (as I have said before), I dont think RU will collapse. It will suffer, but not collapse. China is making big money off the conflict and has no reason for it to stop.

The UKR people would seem to disagree with you about their best interests, but neither of us is Ukrainian, living in UKR, so either of us may be wrong.

 

[deyhere]

If you are willing to best your last (whatever it was) on a 50/50 outcome, you are a fool.

Stop weaseling and answer the question.

I am willing to bet now then, lets check it out.. i guess all gamble men are fools then. i normally bet on underdogs where the win percentage is lower than 25% and i win sometimes. i have also placed bets on 70 80% win probability and still lost. i bet like that because that's where you win good money. you guys like to use language like, FOOL, YOU DONT KNOW ENGLICH OR YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOUR WRITING, i think this is offensive, if you don't like my opinion just say your wrong, no need calling names.
i also don't agree with most of the things you said here but that does not warrant me to call you a fool or other names but i see that, that's what you do to people you don't agree with in the whole trend so am not going to waste my time with you. WISE MAN

 

[Redshift]

Trying to go back to the actual fighting...

You mean now? What if in ten years time China decides that it in its best interest to keep Russia "in the fight"? NATO has been supporting Ukraine for those ten years and Ukraine has been able to find men to fight for ten more years.

Russia will collapse... All right. How many more hits can Ukraine take? How many more billions is NATO providing in how many years? That Ukrainian general was talking of 9 months, not 9 years. Is the end of the world going to happen in those 6-9 months?

Edit.
Why has NATO extended a line of credit to Ukraine? Who said anything about free?

While NATO itself facilitates, coordinates, and backs these financial pledges, the bulk of direct financial aid, weapons, and economic recovery money comes directly from individual NATO member countries (such as the United States, UK, and European allies) through bilateral agreements.

In short NATO does not supply credit to Ukraine as it effectively has no credit to extend, NATO is an alliance and is not really capable of taking unilateral action of this sort on behalf of its members . This is one of the many reasons why NATO was not, in of itself, any real threat to Russia.

 

[rsemmes]

deyhere... I think you are missing the point. (And you should read a little about the Vietnam war.)

There is corruption in Russia and in Ukraine (and in the UK, look at the water companies), Russia launches missiles made in Russia and Ukraine launches drones made in Ukraine (and I still get drinking water).
For inspection, everything is "Spit & polished" and the next day everything goes back to normal (South Vietnam). It is irrelevant if 2 or 200 foreign engineers set a line production or supervise it (doubtful that an unskilled worker is going to move to Ukraine, millions of Ukrainians are not coming back), he will follow the party line, he is being paid for it; and not even in SVN they were stealing "it all".
If you are happy looking at that little stroke... Enjoy! It happens a lot around here, but it is not the point.

At the beginning of this year Ukraine did not have 40% of its budget, that was foreign money, promises, Indochina again; and I think it was the same thing (+/-) in 2024 and 2025.
The argument that Ukraine is making Bogdanas (for example) is a bit less than correct. Ukraine doesn't have the money to run the country and fight the war, Ukraine can make 60% of every Bogdana or pay for all the materials and wages and then, somewhere else, some teachers will not get paid.

Instead of betting, you could bring some interviews from some engineering magazines about what we are doing in Ukraine. Still, it will be irrelevant, but I guess "betting" is easier.
Irrelevant because we all know that the Robotine offensive used NATO shells, NATO armour, NATO trained soldiers and was NATO planned; not "it all". Russia invaded Ukraine and Russia is fighting NATO and Ukraine, but not 40/60.

 

[Redshift]

As reliable as the Minsk accords and our good faith? Or as Nixon in Vietnam and towards South Vietnam?

Who is the "our" in that sentence referring to?

 

[rsemmes]

While NATO itself facilitates, coordinates, and backs these financial pledges, the bulk of direct financial aid, weapons, and economic recovery money comes directly from individual NATO member countries (such as the United States, UK, and European allies) through bilateral agreements.

In short NATO does not supply credit to Ukraine as it effectively has no credit to extend, NATO is an alliance and is not really capable of taking unilateral action of this sort on behalf of its members . This is one of the many reasons why NATO was not, in of itself, any real threat to Russia.

And you don't have to take "line of credit" literally as if you were signing a document in a bank.
Support?

Edit
Nor "NATO": (I'm calling it "NATO").

Who is the "our" in that sentence referring to?

Merkel, for one. "We", "NATO", "Western democracies", "the West"... You got "Nixon" but you don't get this? Our European behaviour has been posted profusely here.
"European"/"EU", two more.

BTW...
We (meaning this forum) all read about the Hungarian minority rights (old story, unlike the "UPA Heroes). We also read about turning Ukrainians into Russians, what about turning Hungarians into Ukrainians? Russians into Ukrainians? Some minorities are more minorities than others? In the news?

 

[rsemmes]

That was simply, the best, most clear post you have made in some time.

Thank you.

To clarify, I agree (as I have said before), I dont think RU will collapse. It will suffer, but not collapse. China is making big money off the conflict and has no reason for it to stop.

The UKR people would seem to disagree with you about their best interests, but neither of us is Ukrainian, living in UKR, so either of us may be wrong.

I would rather say that you did want to understand this one... But just another opinion.

 

[personaldesas]

You said, 'Besides the questionable statement, “Only boots on the ground” is a strange way to dismiss the people paying the highest price in this war'.
was just trying to understand what you meant by paying the highest prize? prize for what, for EU or NATO?

I was talking about the human cost paid by Ukrainians themselves. They are not freeloaders, as you insinuate, when they are paying with blood.
Not sure why you think I was talking about the EU or NATO.

 

[Redshift]

And you don't have to take "line of credit" literally as if you were signing a document in a bank.
Support?

Edit
Nor "NATO": (I'm calling it "NATO").


Merkel, for one. "We", "NATO", "Western democracies", "the West"... You got "Nixon" but you don't get this? Our European behaviour has been posted profusely here.
"European"/"EU", two more.

BTW...
We (meaning this forum) all read about the Hungarian minority rights (old story, unlike the "UPA Heroes). We also read about turning Ukrainians into Russians, what about turning Hungarians into Ukrainians? Russians into Ukrainians? Some minorities are more minorities than others? In the news?

If you self define "NATO" and it is different from reality how do you expect anyone to understand what you mean?

 

[Redshift]

If you self define "NATO" and it is different from reality how do you expect anyone to understand what you mean?

I'm sorry but those entities are all entirely different no single term defines them all and definitely not NATO

 

[deyhere]

deyhere... I think you are missing the point. (And you should read a little about the Vietnam war.)

There is corruption in Russia and in Ukraine (and in the UK, look at the water companies), Russia launches missiles made in Russia and Ukraine launches drones made in Ukraine (and I still get drinking water).
For inspection, everything is "Spit & polished" and the next day everything goes back to normal (South Vietnam). It is irrelevant if 2 or 200 foreign engineers set a line production or supervise it (doubtful that an unskilled worker is going to move to Ukraine, millions of Ukrainians are not coming back), he will follow the party line, he is being paid for it; and not even in SVN they were stealing "it all".
If you are happy looking at that little stroke... Enjoy! It happens a lot around here, but it is not the point.

At the beginning of this year Ukraine did not have 40% of its budget, that was foreign money, promises, Indochina again; and I think it was the same thing (+/-) in 2024 and 2025.
The argument that Ukraine is making Bogdanas (for example) is a bit less than correct. Ukraine doesn't have the money to run the country and fight the war, Ukraine can make 60% of every Bogdana or pay for all the materials and wages and then, somewhere else, some teachers will not get paid.

Instead of betting, you could bring some interviews from some engineering magazines about what we are doing in Ukraine. Still, it will be irrelevant, but I guess "betting" is easier.
Irrelevant because we all know that the Robotine offensive used NATO shells, NATO armour, NATO trained soldiers and was NATO planned; not "it all". Russia invaded Ukraine and Russia is fighting NATO and Ukraine, but not 40/60.

Russia and Ukraine are both corrupt no doubt, but Russia still manages to build weapons systems that work (expensive ones for that matter) without begging anyone for anything, the problem i have is this, how can you know that a man is corrupt and still give him huge amounts of money?
it doesn't make any sense except your ready to take certain measures to mitigate theft which might involve some complicated procedures, e.g., employing trusted foreigners in the supply chain to make sure supplies get to their destination so that someone don't pocket the money or sell the good then lie that it got struck by a Russian missile. Ukraine is corrupt down to the grassroot.

oh yes, betting is easier, when the stake is on, am sure we will find evidence in abundance, the most interesting thing is that, someone will lose money and someone might win.

 

[deyhere]

I was talking about the human cost paid by Ukrainians themselves. They are not freeloaders, as you insinuate, when they are paying with blood.
Not sure why you think I was talking about the EU or NATO.

i know for sure you wasn't talking about EU or NATO, i was asking, why pay such a prize with blood? is it to join EU or NATO?

 

[personaldesas]

i know for sure you wasn't talking about EU or NATO, i was asking, why pay such a prize with blood? is it to join EU or NATO?

Their motivation for fighting the war is a different point altogether and not related to my statement. My point was simply that diminishing Ukraine’s contribution as “only boots on the ground” is bizarre.

 

[rsemmes]

I'm sorry but those entities are all entirely different no single term defines them all and definitely not NATO

Because I expect people reading this thread being familiar with "different countries supporting different projects at different levels". Was SK invited to the planning of the Robotine offensive? Its shells were used there or the US replaced them one by one?