Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar

Status
Not open for further replies.
Minusorange said:
He's not wrong, apart from nukes why are we afraid ? If he's really capable of using nukes then surely we should be stopping him at any cost ?
Click to expand...


Nukes are the only reason we are afraid of him.
If we attack him then all that does is raise the possibility of him using nukes against us, it does not reduce it.
 
faceman123 said:
Whilst I don't agree with RT it's crazy they've banned it. So much for freedom of speech/free news.

Hopefully this stops at Ukraine, and NATO wakes up and stops pointless oil wars/regime changes. It's all hypocritical.

Nuclear weapons need eradicated.
Click to expand...

"So much about free speech" comes a few notches under the sovereignty of your a country. I am sure if we are going to rank things, not getting invaded is higher than free speech. If they can't keep their army inside their borders then we are allowed keep their propaganda off our television.

It's not about free speech, they can have their free speech propaganda INSIDE Russia, they are not free to spew their crap in our country.
 
Last edited:
Firestar_3x said:
Putin is far from an idiot so he would have been expecting and no doubt planned for a range of responses.

Thing is what we are doing is just pushing the people closer to him and enabling him to operate a closed off state dependent country, but at the end of the day what else can we do, we have to respond in some fashion.
Click to expand...
And there in lies the conundrum. He'll play the crazed dictator as long as it benefits him. At this point I feel we have already crossed the point of where the majority of ordinary Russians will start to back the home team over the western aggressors. but we'll see. I hope the Russian population can still yet be won over but that hope dwindles every time their liberties are taken away from them. The Russian people are just as much victims as the Ukrainians all because of one stupid dictator and his allies.
 
Raymond Lin said:
"So much about free speech" comes a few notches under the sovereignty of your a country. I am sure if we are going to rank things, not getting invaded is higher than free speech. If they can't keep their army inside their borders then we are allowed keep their propaganda off our television.

It's not about free speech, they can have their free speech propaganda INSIDE Russia, they are not free to spew their crap in our country.
Click to expand...

Thing is RT had freedom of speech for a very long time, however like anyone in the UK freedom of speech does not shield you from the consequences of what you say. RT are now finally seeing the consequences of what they say, which is we do not want your garbage spouted in this country.
 
Firestar_3x said:
Thing is RT had freedom of speech for a very long time, however like anyone in the UK freedom of speech does not shield you from the consequences of what you say. RT are now finally seeing the consequences of what they say, which is we do not want your garbage spouted in this country.
Click to expand...

Yes I agree, I'm Anti RT however, let's be clear, we no longer allow free speech, or free media. There's no two ways about it, it usually during incidents and major events that we lose our freedoms, slowly.
 
Firestar_3x said:
Thing is RT had freedom of speech for a very long time, however like anyone in the UK freedom of speech does not shield you from the consequences of what you say. RT are now finally seeing the consequences of what they say, which is we do not want your garbage spouted in this country.
Click to expand...

They have freedom of speech right up until they invaded another country, "very long" time….it does not mean indefinitely.

As you noted, Free Speech is not boundless, under Art 10 of the Human Rights Act, section 2. I highlighted the important section, RT fall foul of this section and therefore….rightly got taken off.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/schedule/1/part/I/chapter/9

"Freedom of expression
1 Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This Article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.

2 The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary."
 
Last edited:
faceman123 said:
Yes I agree, I'm Anti RT however, let's be clear, we no longer allow free speech, or free media. There's no two ways about it, it usually during incidents and major events that we lose our freedoms, slowly.
Click to expand...

Read my post above, they fall foul of the law…Free Speech is not boundless, it's not "FREE", there are limits, this is not the US.

People make assumption that it is because they watch too much American television, if you start a hate speech or smear campaign against someone, you will get prosecuted or sued for defamation. Free speech has boundaries.

Try starting a website tomorrow spreading lies about a MP having a paedophile trafficking ring out of a pizza shop basement and see how long before you will get arrested and sued for defamation, and see if you can try "free speech" and get out of that.

You won't. Hence why sometimes papers lose court cases and have to pay damages. You can't spread lies in this country and call it free speech, it doesn't work that way, and rightly so. We never had the American version of Free Speech here, I have no idea where people got that idea from?
 
Last edited:
MagicBoy said:
Irrelevant. Ukraine aren't a member of NATO, therefore there's not obligation for NATO to defend them. Putin knows that, which is why he invaded.

NATO are stuck between a hard place and a full blown WW3 if they intervene past the assistance already provided to Ukraine.
Click to expand...

The US & the UK signed the Budapest memorandum promising security assurances against threats or force against territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, twice now they have both failed to honour that agreement when Russia annexed Crimea and now with the full on invasion, they are legally bound to come to Ukraine's aid NATO or not.
They hide behind the "NATO is a defensive force" excuse while completely ignoring that they should be helping Ukraine as individual countries and not as the NATO alliance, they're just weak leaders scared to act

Robbo said:
I suppose it all depends on how you view it. NATO is an ironclad defensive alliance with clear red lines.

I’m also dubious as to whether nukes would start flying over small Eastern European NATO countries, but I suppose we’ll have to review that if we get to that point…
Click to expand...

There's only really 2 realities, he's either bluffing and knows how weak we are or he's crazy enough to actually use them, both reality is absolutely insane, his bluff needs to be called, time to be on the right side of history, because if he takes Ukraine and we do nothing, those Ukrainians will end up hating the West for our inaction and drive them closer to Russia.
 
Believe it or not there will be a war with NATO and Russia if NATO gets involved in Ukraine.

And then you can write all this crap about being on the right side of history when your stuck in a cave dying of radiation poisoning.

Load of utter horsecrap, almost as bad as religious people thinking there crusade or jihad is the right side of history.
 
Nerusy said:
Ironic because you are the one being obtuse here.

Never did I claim I have proof or evidence that Ukrainians have military equipment in civilian buildings. I saw a video of Ukrainian military deployment between two residential tower blocks but not military stuff in residential blocks. I've seen ukrainian solders in schools but schools are not being used and as I understand are often used by the military in conflict zones.

What you are doing is called a strawman. You claim that I made some statements that needs evidence whereas my only claim was that I doubt Russian forces intent to target civilians. Read that sentence over and over again until you understand what it means. I even said that it may be a possibility, maybe Russian forces do target civilians but I personally doubt it.

The ad hominem at the end in a way does show that you are not out there to have an honest discussion.
Click to expand...


Ahleckz is more honest than you will ever be. Lmao.

Your reply is basically just a “no u”.
 
I can't believe there are posters who say Putin is crazy enough to use nukes and then say we need to provoke him into using those nukes....Putin isn't the only crazy one.
 
I don't believe the US government sometimes, like after imposing loads of over the top sanctions that make everyday Russians suffer while doing nothing to the Russian government just so thye can appear to be doing something they finally decide "You know what, maybe we should think about possibly not giving billions to Putin for his oil?"

usa.png
 
faceman123 said:
Yes I agree, I'm Anti RT however, let's be clear, we no longer allow free speech, or free media. There's no two ways about it, it usually during incidents and major events that we lose our freedoms, slowly.
Click to expand...
You seem to be confusing a real thing - "freedom of speech" - with some made-up rights such as "freedom to have my view broadcast far and wide".

Anyone is free to stand on a street corner and say what was being said on RT. They just can't now have that nonsense amplified and broadcast nationally.
 
ubersonic said:
I don't believe the US government sometimes, like after imposing loads of over the top sanctions that make everyday Russians suffer while doing nothing to the Russian government just so thye can appear to be doing something they finally decide "You know what, maybe we should think about possibly not giving billions to Putin for his oil?"

usa.png
Click to expand...

Well reducing supply just pushes up the price of oil/gas which minimises the impact on the government and maximises it on everyone else, it would be symbolic at best.
 
Last edited:
Minusorange said:
He's not wrong, apart from nukes why are we afraid ? If he's really capable of using nukes then surely we should be stopping him at any cost ?
Click to expand...

If NATO get properly involved, i.e. declaring and policing a no-fly zone over Ukraine for instance, then it won't be nukes that mad Vlad uses but rather the assets he has ready to **** around with our subsea internet and communication cables. Good luck trying to live daily life without the internet.
 
Firestar_3x said:
It was still online but they gradually started to shut some of the reactors down.

Totally crazy and just shows the lack of any backend support or logistics, all the money has been piled into simply fielding large numbers of some stuff.
Click to expand...
It ties in quite well with a lot of known, long term issues the Russian army has with money that is meant to be used for maintenance etc simply "disappearing", and the thing about moving the trucks isn't even expensive, hard, or technically difficult to do, it's basically get someone (even a conscript with a days training on driving one) and tell them "drive it around the yard for 10 minutes, then press the buttons", it's a problem almost any civilian truck driver will understand, the only "new" bit is knowing to run the tyre inflator system through it's settings.

IIRC not to long ago someone went to one of the "active" military bases near Moscow and basically drove onto the base to find that it was deserted and left to rot, not a sign of any of the personal that on paper were living and working there, and it had obviously been like that for a long time.

On the flip side I was watching a video (from about 2015) of some Ukrainians who were moving a WW2 era Russian tank destroyer that had been sat in a field for ~65 years, they got it up and running well enough that it could put itself onto a transporter fairly quickly with basic tools.
I wonder if a lot of the Russian senior officers who are in charge of maintenance and making sure that the stockpiled equipment works are still of the mindset that such things are simple, and will just work after years of not being used* so see no issue with letting the maintenance go (and pocketing much of the money), and no one has the courage/ability to persuade them otherwise.



*Old equipment of all sorts tends to be far more able to just be started up relatively easily after years, if just because it tends to be far simpler and built to less precise tolerances, whilst newer stuff might break down just because an impurity in the fuel (or the fuel being old) results in a blocked injector, or one of a hundred gaskets/rubber pipes has perished or been nibbled by a mouse.
 
Last edited:
muon said:
So what's your judgement if you are going to criticise the title? What does it look like to you?

You are going to throw into the mix that it could be Ukrainians firing at their own residential towers?

It's easy to ask questions and try and sound intelligent with no value provided.
Click to expand...


If there was even one military person or maybe even civilian armed and firing out of one of those windows at Russian soldiers on the ground, what do you expect their response to be?

It would be EXACTLY the same response as any other soldier of any other country in that situation, call up artillery onto the target where you are getting fired upon from.

That is exactly what happens when your government calls upon civilians to arm themselves and fight back.
Said civilians instantly become targets, along with all other civilians, because now as an agressor you have no idea who is armed, and who is not, so shoot first check it out after.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom