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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Soldato
Joined
30 Jan 2007
Posts
15,450
Location
PA, USA (Orig UK)
Anyone watch the Speak the Truth video from today where Matt is over the video (audio mostly) of SOF commander saying they will stay in the city against orders. Unsure if he made it, but he was found heavily wounded when a counter attack went in.

God, I hate the fact that we have failed to give a suitable response to Russia and drip fed aid.
 
Soldato
Joined
25 Sep 2009
Posts
9,708
Location
Billericay, UK
The situation in Avdiyivka sounds crazy, the Russian's are throwing everything at it by all accounts. A couple of reports are saying even though Ukraine sent in this 3rd Assault Brigade to stabilise the situation they find themselves outnumbered 7/8 to 1 this in on top of 100 air strikes using glide bombs and white phosphorus. The problem for Ukraine is if they lose Avdiyika the land behind the town is flat and not very defensible.
 
Caporegime
Joined
29 Dec 2007
Posts
32,002
Location
Adelaide, South Australia
I'm sure a lot of people will jump to the "He says he want's Biden so that must mean he wants Trump!" conclusion but to be honest he's probably being truthful.

If you look at it from his viewpoint, for four years Biden has been a constant yet ineffective thorn in his side, however for four years Trump flip flopped between praising him in interviews one minute to militarily humiliating him in front of his allies the next.

I think there's a quite considerable chance he would rather spend the next four years dealing with an adversarial yet consistent Biden than having a loose cannon wrecking his plans again.

But Trump didn't wreck any of Putin's plans. He was the perfect useful idiot.
 
Soldato
Joined
28 May 2007
Posts
18,573
The situation in Avdiyivka sounds crazy, the Russian's are throwing everything at it by all accounts. A couple of reports are saying even though Ukraine sent in this 3rd Assault Brigade to stabilise the situation they find themselves outnumbered 7/8 to 1 this in on top of 100 air strikes using glide bombs and white phosphorus. The problem for Ukraine is if they lose Avdiyika the land behind the town is flat and not very defensible.

Artillery and Smerch rocket attacks are one thing, but gliding 1500kg bombs and phosphorus are a whole different level.

Ukraine desperately need those F16s, GLSDB and 155 shells.
 
Soldato
Joined
3 Oct 2007
Posts
12,131
Location
London, UK
Of course I do, yet didn't a US citizen just die in a Ukrainian jail after he tried to leave the country on his bike? Was that not also political?



Wanting a Journalist dead for political reasons? Colour me shocked.

What do you think would happen to you if you went to a country being invaded and then gave away defensive details to the invader? Not that long we'd have put you up against a wall and shot you. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

Journalist :cry: :cry: You mean propagandist. Though I guess you could call Joseph Goebbels a "journalist".
 
Soldato
Joined
28 May 2007
Posts
18,573
I can't think of a single Australian Prime Minister who's given an order for someone to be killed.

It wouldn’t matter anyway to Roar. Idi Amin did, so all other world leaders are barbaric lunatics. Just as long as they don’t blow up the Kursh bridge or a 5 billion dollar Russian submarine. That would be over stepping the mark, you see.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
3 Oct 2007
Posts
12,131
Location
London, UK
The 26,000 Australian troops in Afghanistan where just on holiday then?

That is a elected leader commanding its military and going to the defence of an ally after it was attacked on 9/11. Couldn't be further away from that leader using the power of the state to murder his political rivals or journalists he doesn't like. That is what the person talking to Tucker was talking about, Roar just put a spin on it because he wants to compare Putin to our leaders. To him he's no worse.
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
30 Jun 2007
Posts
68,785
Location
Wales
That is a elected leader commanding its military and going to the defence of an ally after it was attacked on 9/11. Couldn't be further away from that leader using the power of the state to murder his political rivals or journalists he doesn't like. That is what the person talking to Tucker was talking about, Roar just put a spin on it because he wants to compare Putin to our leaders. To him he's no worse.

Both projections are dishonest really. Much of that war was extrajudicial killings and assassinations via drone strike rather than open combat. Where leaders made the decision "yes we will kill civilians but this is when we know where the target is so yes blow up the wedding".

To say its different because its a war, a war you started when you're the invading army killing people who have zero capacity to ever reach you or your army if you just stayed home is pushing it.

Afganistan didn't attack america on 9/11, america did not need "defending" and our decade long war left the taliban better armed, equiped and empowered than when we started.
 
Caporegime
Joined
30 Jun 2007
Posts
68,785
Location
Wales
No, they were fighting a war. We're talking about a political leader ordering the death of a specific person. You're dishonestly changing the subject. Care to try again?
So say "no Australian pm has had a political rival assasinated" less dramatic sure but its actually accurate.
 
Associate
Joined
2 Jul 2003
Posts
2,437
He said leadership requires killing people, which is why he doesn't want to be a leader, yet from that you've come to the conclusion he's a scumbag? What leader hasn't had to give the order to kill someone?
The difference, which I know doesn’t elude you, but being a shill/full time contrarian you have to tow this line, is that: leaders of countries sometimes order the death of others to protect their country. They don’t order the deaths of others to protect their leadership.

Only a moron wouldn’t be able to figure this out though.
 
Soldato
Joined
28 May 2007
Posts
18,573
Both projections are dishonest really. Much of that war was extrajudicial killings and assassinations via drone strike rather than open combat. Where leaders made the decision "yes we will kill civilians but this is when we know where the target is so yes blow up the wedding".

To say its different because its a war, a war you started when you're the invading army killing people who have zero capacity to ever reach you or your army if you just stayed home is pushing it.

Afganistan didn't attack america on 9/11, america did not need "defending" and our decade long war left the taliban better armed, equiped and empowered than when we started.

No, but the man behind these attacks proclaiming to commit more was in Afghanistan. The point is, murder and War is the default position to anyone Putin sees as a threat. The question put to Carlson, was why he didn’t put the question of the treatment of opponents to Putin. Carlson reason was pathetic. Carlson might as well said because Pinochet committed atrocities.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom