Russian invasion of Ukraine

[Steven W]

Just now, Richey Edwards said:

I heard a rumour that Putin is hiding in a bunker, and has been since this started.

He done a big eff off 'gig' at the Luznikhi last Friday did he not? 

[Richey Edwards]

Just now, Steven W said:

He done a big eff off 'gig' at the Luznikhi last Friday did he not? 

That was Phil Collins.

[Billy Jean King]

* Plenty of evidence including footage and information as to what kind of weapons are being used against what kind of targets.
** It's a fucking invasion of a sovereign country, not some equal footing conflict on neutral ground. Civilian casualties, by the very nature of an invasion, will tend to be from the local population - you know, the awkward bastárds defending their homes, families and livelihoods. 
*** "We"? I'd be interested to know who you think you're speaking on behalf of here, because it certainly isn't me or anyone I know. War, by its very nature, cannot be pursued according to a set of rules. Aggressors will use whatever tactics, weapons and methods will achieve their aims. Defenders will resort to desperation when in extremis. It is never pretty, and cannot be parcelled up neatly in discussions divorced from the reality.
**** It would, however, be a start. Once you get Putin and the like convicted, we can maybe, just maybe, start asking those bastions of decency like Blair, Bush, Brown, Trump and Obama how their implementation of Foreign Policy were acceptable.

Virg is coming across as one of those utter weirdos you occasionally saw at a school fight who went round trying to prevent folk breaking it up screaming "let them fight"

[welshbairn]

Ukraine are down to evens to win Eurovision, could have got 9/1 on the first day of the invasion, and 33/1 last year. 

Edited March 24, 2022 by welshbairn

[ICTChris]

12 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

Ukraine are down to evens to win Eurovision, could have got 9/1 on the first day of the invasion, and 33/1 last year. 

Their entry last year was a banger.

[welshbairn]

Translation:

State TV channels showed (without sound) footage of allegedly today's meeting of the Security Council, where Shoigu was present (he is in the upper left corner of Putin's monitor).

 Roller - 100% canned.
 Just note: the first 4 seconds and the last 4 seconds of the video are the SAME frames.
 

[Sergeant Wilson]

1 minute ago, welshbairn said:

Translation:

State TV channels showed (without sound) footage of allegedly today's meeting of the Security Council, where Shoigu was present (he is in the upper left corner of Putin's monitor).

 Roller - 100% canned.
 Just note: the first 4 seconds and the last 4 seconds of the video are the SAME frames.
 

The Russian version  of Celebrity Squares looks pish.

[vikingTON]

2 hours ago, WhiteRoseKillie said:

* Plenty of evidence including footage and information as to what kind of weapons are being used against what kind of targets.

** It's a fucking invasion of a sovereign country, not some equal footing conflict on neutral ground. Civilian casualties, by the very nature of an invasion, will tend to be from the local population - you know, the awkward bastárds defending their homes, families and livelihoods. 

*** "We"? I'd be interested to know who you think you're speaking on behalf of here, because it certainly isn't me or anyone I know. War, by its very nature, cannot be pursued according to a set of rules. Aggressors will use whatever tactics, weapons and methods will achieve their aims. Defenders will resort to desperation when in extremis. It is never pretty, and cannot be parcelled up neatly in discussions divorced from the reality.

**** It would, however, be a start. Once you get Putin and the like convicted, we can maybe, just maybe, start asking those bastions of decency like Blair, Bush, Brown, Trump and Obama how their implementation of Foreign Policy were acceptable.

I've no idea what your argument is supposed to be here. It is just a Catherine wheel of self-righteous outrage without a salient point. 

Save that pish for Twitter. 

[vikingTON]

28 minutes ago, Billy Jean King said:

2 hours ago, WhiteRoseKillie said:

 

Virg is coming across as one of those utter weirdos you occasionally saw at a school fight who went round trying to prevent folk breaking it up screaming "let them fight"

Who exactly is breaking up the fight in this very stupid analogy? You armchair chumps by screaming for NATO escalation? 

[williemillersmoustache]

VT has some interesting points and if there were no clear aggressor or Ukrainian and Russian forces were equivalent in power then they would be more credible in my opinion.

However, field artillery is an area fire weapon. Be it gun or rocket, it is not designed to be accurate. It is designed to saturate, deny or f**k up an area. Not a discrete target. And if you use it in an area you know to contain civilians, it's you, either giving the orders, pulling the trigger or pressing the button that is the bad guy. 

Even if the Ukrainians were using their population as human shields and I don't believe they are, that doesn't give licence for the use of inherently indiscriminate weapons.

Russia also has precision weapons in its arsenal and their limited use has been noted by a number of commentators.

It may not matter a f**k to the Russians, it may not amount to anything, I doubt anyone will ever see the inside of a court room, but if we're sliding towards unstable times globally I think it should matter to "us" in the West what is and isn't a war crime. 

And what's happening to Ukrainian cities unequivocally definitely is.

 

Edited March 24, 2022 by williemillersmoustache

[Billy Jean King]

Who exactly is breaking up the fight in this very stupid analogy? You armchair chumps by screaming for NATO escalation? 

If you can point out where I have ever done that I'd appreciate it. I haven't once advocated NATO involvement.

[vikingTON]

The idea that dropping bombs or launching drone strikes from another continent is in any way more discriminate than field weapons (unless you think that all those Middle East wedding parties were the real targets all along) does not stand up to real world scrutiny. The international order has set rules to persuade itself that war is somehow a precise and manageable conflict. It isn't and never has been in modern history. 

What you are witnessing on TV is the grim reality of any urban conflict zone - whether it was caused by Western or non-Western forces is irrelevant. 

[Salt n Vinegar]

In related news, the cost of shares in BAE Systems is up 17% in a month. 

Missed the boat... 

[Detournement]

16 minutes ago, williemillersmoustache said:

But if we're sliding towards unstable times globally I think it should matter to "us" in the West what is and isn't a war crime. 

 

And who is going to take this seriously if this investigation into what is a war crime doesn't begin with self criticism?

If the definition of a 'war crime' in the West only applies to non western actors the the rest of the world is going to say get to f**k.

[welshbairn]

24 minutes ago, williemillersmoustache said:

Russia also has precision weapons in its arsenal and their limited use has been noted by a number of commentators.

The West rarely uses them unless the cameras are rolling, they're hugely expensive. As George Dubya said immediately after 9/11, "When I take action, I’m not going to fire a $2 million missile at a $10 empty tent and hit a camel in the butt. It’s going to be decisive.”.

[Granny Danger]

22 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

The West rarely uses them unless the cameras are rolling, they're hugely expensive. As George Dubya said immediately after 9/11, "When I take action, I’m not going to fire a $2 million missile at a $10 empty tent and hit a camel in the butt. It’s going to be decisive.”.

Oh, if only he had had the intelligence to think of that line himself rather than a script writer and six hours of coaching.

[williemillersmoustache]

48 minutes ago, virginton said:

The idea that dropping bombs or launching drone strikes from another continent is in any way more discriminate than field weapons (unless you think that all those Middle East wedding parties were the real targets all along) does not stand up to real world scrutiny. The international order has set rules to persuade itself that war is somehow a precise and manageable conflict. It isn't and never has been in modern history. 

What you are witnessing on TV is the grim reality of any urban conflict zone - whether it was caused by Western or non-Western forces is irrelevant. 

 

It's the difference between targeting a vehicle or a house or targeting the 100x100m (or more) square the house or vehicle is in. I think that's a significant difference.

The West repeatedly choosing the wrong house in other conflicts is neither here nor there. 

26 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

The West rarely uses them unless the cameras are rolling, they're hugely expensive. As George Dubya said immediately after 9/11, "When I take action, I’m not going to fire a $2 million missile at a $10 empty tent and hit a camel in the butt. It’s going to be decisive.”.

Hmm, they do love to spend a bit of money on shiny new missiles tho. And I think in this case Dubya Dubyas scriptwriter was meaning you can't win a war at arms length, which is correct but, it didn't end well. 

 

[Dan Steele]

3 hours ago, Mark Knopfler said:

Boris wants to pocket Putin's stash of gold.

Surely he'd want Love Over Gold?

[welshbairn]

12 minutes ago, williemillersmoustache said:

Hmm, they do love to spend a bit of money on shiny new missiles tho. And I think in this case Dubya Dubyas scriptwriter was meaning you can't win a war at arms length, which is correct but, it didn't end well. 

I remember seeing all the smart weapons in the first Iraq war, the Kuwait one, cruise missiles going along the road and turning at the traffic lights and going down chimneys and the like. Then a TV crew filmed RAF bombers getting loaded up at Farnham or somewhere, with pallets and pallets of WW2 style gravity bombs. They banned them from filming after that.

[Granny Danger]

1 minute ago, welshbairn said:

I remember seeing all the smart weapons in the first Iraq war, the Kuwait one, cruise missiles going along the road and turning at the traffic lights and going down chimneys and the like. Then a TV crew filmed RAF bombers getting loaded up at Farnham or somewhere, with pallets and pallets of WW2 style gravity bombs. They banned them from filming after that.

How much would the average person in the U.K. save if we weren’t subsidising a bloated and corrupt arms industry?