Ukraine: As it happens.

Gatling

Egginacup wrote: »

So Russia hasn't fired a sigle rocket. Hasn't flown a single sortie to support the ground forces. They just parked 9000 troops inside Eastern Ukraine and left them there and Kiev pummelled them? And that's your hypothesis, Rommel?

More howls of laughter from the gallery.

20,000 and yet no annilation pretty amateur don't you think after a year of fighting with better equipment and fire power .

So much for Kiev in a week

robindch

darkpagandeath wrote: »

To be fair the Propaganda guy is having the same problem in the article I linked.

Fun article here from the Moscow Times on how the old Soviet terms are beginning to infest the Russian language again.

The most useful political term is провокация ("provocation") and it's used, lazily, just about everywhere now to justify just about every madcap adventure the Russian government chooses to engage in these days.

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/opinion/article/how-soviet-terms-are-creeping-back-into-russian/517069.html

Can't help but see the Russian government now as a jilted, plastered bride or groom left standing at the altar and lashing out at everybody and everything through a drunken haze.

gandalf

robindch wrote: »

every madcap adventure the Russian government chooses to engage in these days.

LOL I have a image now of Putin having a rubber Stalin mask pulled off his face saying "I would have gotten away with it too, if it wasn't for those pesky Westerners" .

Egginacup

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Care to comment on the article linked ?

Yes I would care to comment on that article. I'd like to ask you what that article has to do with the claims that Russia has invaded Eastern Ukraine?

You can continue to try and shift away from your obligation to provide proof of a Russian invasion of Eastern Ukraine by bringing up Crimea. But it only makes you look like you belong in kindergarten.

Tell you what. I'll state that the British have invaded the Republic of Ireland and here's my proof:

https://www.google.ie/search?q=british+soldiers+northern+ireland&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=2WoQVbjJKeyv7Aad14CgCQ&ved=0CDIQsAQ&biw=1366&bih=634


Now if you question it then you're just in denial. You're a troll for Whitehall. A Britbot or a Downingstreet-ista.....or something.

darkpagandeath

Egginacup wrote: »

Yes I would care to comment on that article. I'd like to ask you what that article has to do with the claims that Russia has invaded Eastern Ukraine?

You can continue to try and shift away from your obligation to provide proof of a Russian invasion of Eastern Ukraine by bringing up Crimea. But it only makes you look like you belong in kindergarten.

Tell you what. I'll state that the British have invaded the Republic of Ireland and here's my proof:

https://www.google.ie/search?q=british+soldiers+northern+ireland&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=2WoQVbjJKeyv7Aad14CgCQ&ved=0CDIQsAQ&biw=1366&bih=634


Now if you question it then you're just in denial. You're a troll for Whitehall. A Britbot or a Downingstreet-ista.....or something.

:pac: Yes random guys off their own bat are trying to create a land bridge to Crimea......

Egginacup

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Care to comment on the article linked ?

I've asked you about your Crimea article now is it your hypothesis that Russia invaded Eastern Ukraine, left 9000 troops there with tanks and artillery and whatnot and Ukraine just destroyed them?

Egginacup

darkpagandeath wrote: »

:pac: Yes random guys off their own bat are trying to create a land bridge to Crimea......

Are you going to provide proof of a Russian invasion of Eastern Ukraine or not? Don't give me any nonsense about Crimea. Are you going to show any evidence of a Russian invasion of Eastern Ukraine? Yes or no?

darkpagandeath

Egginacup wrote: »

Are you going to provide proof of a Russian invasion of Eastern Ukraine or not? Don't give me any nonsense about Crimea. Are you going to show any evidence of a Russian invasion of Eastern Ukraine? Yes or no?

Even if I did somehow it would be dismissed immediately as false and propaganda.

Egginacup

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Even if I did somehow it would be dismissed immediately as false and propaganda.

Well, it seems we're finally getting somewhere.

An admission, albeit reluctant, that you don't have any such proof or evidence.

Thank you.
I commend your strength of character in admitting this, darkpagandeath. It's more than a lot on here have displayed.

robindch

darkpagandeath wrote: »

[...] random guys off their own bat are trying to create a land bridge to Crimea.

"Random guys"? No, no, no! The Kremlin-approved terms are "concerned citizens", "self-defence forces", "little green men" and of course, the famous "polite people":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_green_men_%282014_Crimean_crisis%29

Keep with the script, darkpagandeath or you'll never receive your rubles while they still have any value!

darkpagandeath

robindch wrote: »

"Random guys"? No, no, no! The Kremlin-approved terms are "concerned citizens", "self-defence forces", "little green men" and of course, the famous "polite people":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_green_men_%282014_Crimean_crisis%29

Keep with the script, darkpagandeath or you'll never receive your rubles while they still have any value!

Sorry, Sorry. ahem yes yes. They are merely Foo fighters or moon pigeons reflected off swamp gas.

SamHarris

Egginacup wrote: »

Are you going to provide proof of a Russian invasion of Eastern Ukraine or not? Don't give me any nonsense about Crimea. Are you going to show any evidence of a Russian invasion of Eastern Ukraine? Yes or no?

https://news.vice.com/video/russias-ghost-army-in-ukraine-part-2 just holidaying I take it?

How many times are you going to believe the Kremlins line when they say they have no troops in such a such an area until it is politically expedient for them to no longer deny it? Fool me once...

SamHarris

Egginacup wrote: »

Well, it seems we're finally getting somewhere.

An admission, albeit reluctant, that you don't have any such proof or evidence.

Thank you.
I commend your strength of character in admitting this, darkpagandeath. It's more than a lot on here have displayed.

You're fully aware there has been numerous links to various organisations showing just that - they are all dismissed as propaganda by you. So it is pretty clear his statement is correct.

So you honestly think a rebel group can organize itself in a matter of months and fight toe to toe with a modern military, in a conventional war, without foreign support? Can you give another example of this happening in any other part of the world in modern times? Do you think anti-tank and anti-aircraft weaponry was widely available in Ukraine before the war and these people just collected them quietly before making their move?

Or that Russia, of all places, would not want to support pro THEM rebels in a now enemy state on their borders? How passive do you think anyone (but the West, obviously, who are always up to some nefarious plot to make other people look bad) is?

Egginacup

SamHarris wrote: »

You're fully aware there has been numerous links to various organisations showing just that - they are all dismissed as propaganda by you. So it is pretty clear his statement is correct.

So you honestly think a rebel group can organize itself in a matter of months and fight toe to toe with a modern military, in a conventional war, without foreign support? Can you give another example of this happening in any other part of the world in modern times? Do you think anti-tank and anti-aircraft weaponry was widely available in Ukraine before the war and these people just collected them quietly before making their move?

Or that Russia, of all places, would not want to support pro THEM rebels in a now enemy state on their borders? How passive do you think anyone (but the West, obviously, who are always up to some nefarious plot to make other people look bad) is?

Are you now shifting from a Russian "invasion" to "support"?

Which is it now? I'm having a hard time keeping track of the constant changing of the story.

If there is such ironclad evidence of a Russian invasion of Eastern Ukraine, then why, when I requested this evidence, was I constantly fed irrelevant pictures of Russian soldiers in Crimea which is NOT Eastern Ukraine.

Poroshenko has insisted that there was an invasion by Russia of Eastern Ukraine featuring 9000 Russian troops and hundreds or tanks, armoured vehicles, artillery pieces and STILL I haven't seen a shred of evidence.
Darkpagandeath said that "even if he had" this evidence, that I would deny it. Whether that is true or not is irrelevant. He stated that he DID NOT have it. I have been asking for this proof/evidence for quite some time and dpd has admitted he cannot provide it.

You can dance around the issue all you want. You can sling names and you can harp on about how anyone who wants proof is an "america hater" or a "putinbot" or whatever you like but at the end of the day this is just petulance over not being able to con people or prove something you want to be true or have been fooled into thinking is true yet can't prove.

It was your mistake, not mine.

pcardin

Egginacup wrote: »

You can dance around the issue all you want. You can sling names and you can harp on about how anyone who wants proof is an "america hater" or a "putinbot" or whatever you like but at the end of the day this is just petulance over not being able to con people or prove something you want to be true or have been fooled into thinking is true yet can't prove.

It was your mistake, not mine.

ha ha I think you just lost yourself in whatever paralel dimensions your're sailing. Go back and read your own posts and you will see where "America hater" assumption comes from.

robindch

Egginacup wrote: »

I'm having a hard time keeping track of the constant changing of the story.

There's no changing of the story. Russia invaded Crimea which it then annexed illegally, then it invaded East Ukraine which turned out to be a disaster.

The basic facts are fairly simple really.

robindch

robindch wrote: »

The playbook is satirized fairly accurately I think, in a graphic that's been doing the rounds for a while now - the five stages being something like denial, anger, equivocation, paranoia and fightback and this discussion seems to be stuck at stages one and two at the moment.

Ah, here's that graphic, with a little tidying-up.

https://us.v-cdn.net/6034073/uploads/attachments/25807/342955.png

Nodin

Egginacup wrote: »

................

Poroshenko has insisted that there was an invasion by Russia of Eastern Ukraine featuring 9000 Russian troops and hundreds or tanks, armoured vehicles, artillery pieces and STILL I haven't seen a shred of evidence.
.

I doubt you'd see a shred of evidence if they all ran ye over at this stage.

robindch

Partially-relevant talk on this evening at six in Trinity College -

http://www.tcd.ie/trinitylongroomhub/events/details/2015/2014-11-11europesviolentmemories.php

24 March 2015 | 18:00 | Trinity Long Room Hub
The Post-Soviet Space: Memories and Experiences of Violence from Afghanistan to Ukraine
Jan C. Behrends (Centre for Contemporary Historical Research ZZF, Potsdam)

Trinity College wrote:

The cult of the “Great Fatherland War” occupies state-sponsored memory in Russia and, to a lesser degree, the former republics of the USSR. It is often overlooked that the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 constitutes the starting point for an alternative memory culture in the post-Soviet realm: the experience of irregular, wild wars is essential for any understanding of these societies. “Goriachye tochki” or hot spots is the term that describes wild wars from Afghanistan, Karabakh, Central Asia, the Kaukasus to Ukraine. Neither the narrative about them nor the experience in them fits the heroic model of the Second World War. Rather, violence is remembered as the foremost resource in these conflicts. Ever since, the men that served in Afghanistan have played a role in (post-) Soviet history. During the putsch of 1991 they defended Moscow’s White House, they served in Chechnya and they organized the resistance on Kiev’s Maidan during the last winter. Thus, we may detect and discuss continuities of violence from Afghanistan to Ukraine that will help us better to understand the often violent history of the post-Soviet space.

Gatling

robindch wrote: »

Partially-relevant talk on this evening at six in Trinity College -

http://www.tcd.ie/trinitylongroomhub/events/details/2015/2014-11-11europesviolentmemories.php

24 March 2015 | 18:00 | Trinity Long Room Hub
The Post-Soviet Space: Memories and Experiences of Violence from Afghanistan to Ukraine
Jan C. Behrends (Centre for Contemporary Historical Research ZZF, Potsdam)

I'd love to make that actually

pcardin

robindch wrote: »

Ah, here's that graphic, with a little tidying-up.

https://us.v-cdn.net/6034073/uploads/attachments/25807/342955.png

illustrates perfectly!

Gatling

pcardin wrote: »

illustrates perfectly!

That Americans actually sank the Kursk

Egginacup

robindch wrote: »

There's no changing of the story. Russia invaded Crimea which it then annexed illegally, then it invaded East Ukraine which turned out to be a disaster.

The basic facts are fairly simple really.

Now in light of the article in Forbes magazine, which I might add is hardly a rag that spouts Kremlin propaganda:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2015/03/20/one-year-after-russia-annexed-crimea-locals-prefer-moscow-to-kiev/

And in light of the Gallup Poll by the Broadcasting Board of Governors:

http://www.bbg.gov/wp-content/media/2014/06/Ukraine-slide-deck.pdf

which illustrates categorically that 83% of Crimeans (of ALL ethnicities) responded that the referendum to secede from Ukraine was legitimate but that also they are happier and better off being again part of Russia,

And in light of a February 2015 poll conducted in Crimea by the German polling firm GfK, which found that 93% of Crimeans gave a positive response to the secession from Ukraine and the rejoining of Crimea with Russia...

In light of all this do you think then that the Crimeans should be forced, against their will, and in violation of the UN Charter on Self-Determination, to be ruled by a government that they have voted from which to secede and continue to express this will or should their decision to re-join Russia be respected?

Egginacup

robindch wrote: »

There's no changing of the story. Russia invaded Crimea which it then annexed illegally, then it invaded East Ukraine which turned out to be a disaster.

The basic facts are fairly simple really.

When did this happen? 1991?

Egginacup

Nodin wrote: »

I doubt you'd see a shred of evidence if they all ran ye over at this stage.

Well come on then Nodin. You're a big boy. I'm sure you can find some evidence regarding this Russian Invasion of Eastern Ukraine that robindch is screeching about.

Repeating something that is patently false is not going to make it true. That goes for the existence of Santa, The Tooth Fairy and a plethora of other things in which you want to believe but just can't prove.

Thus far I have seen NO evidence of anything being claimed on here, just a fusillade of "Ah you wouldn't believe us anyway!" after pictures of Russians INSIDE Russia or Russians in Crimea (who have been there for decades) have been used to try and bullsh1t everyone that Russia actually invaded Eastern Ukraine.

robindch

Egginacup wrote: »

When did this happen? 1991?

No, during the 1990-98 Iran-Iraq war when the CIA-backed puppet Saddam Khomenei invaded Malta with the support of Slattery's Mounted Fut, Pocahontas and evil Prince Hans from "Frozen" who, at the time, was an agent of Mossad and a double-agent for Bambi.

BoJack Horseman

Egginacup wrote: »

Thus far I have seen NO evidence

Well obviously you haven't, nor would you ever.

Posters see you as some sort of oddity at this point.

Somewhere between fervent fanatic & play-acter, taking us all for mugs.

robindch

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Posters see you as some sort of oddity at this point.

An oddity amongst the reality-based community but very much par for the course amongst people who take a pro-Kremlin/pro-Putin line - egg's flat-earth style posts are straight out of the Kremlin's media playbook and are as predictable as they are tiresome:

http://www.li.com/events/nothing-is-true-and-everything-is-possible-adventures-in-modern-russia

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrCgC3xWZBI

pcardin

Gatling wrote: »

That Americans actually sank the Kursk

ah yes, of course, who else...dem durty nazi bastards

Egginacup

robindch wrote: »

Partially-relevant talk on this evening at six in Trinity College -

http://www.tcd.ie/trinitylongroomhub/events/details/2015/2014-11-11europesviolentmemories.php

24 March 2015 | 18:00 | Trinity Long Room Hub
The Post-Soviet Space: Memories and Experiences of Violence from Afghanistan to Ukraine
Jan C. Behrends (Centre for Contemporary Historical Research ZZF, Potsdam)

Completely irrelevant talk. Not "partially relevant".
Does Jan Claas Behrends provide any proof of your insistence that Russia has invaded Eastern Ukraine?