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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Caporegime
Joined
8 Sep 2005
Posts
29,982
Location
Norrbotten, Sweden.
Why not Russia? It was defunct and they get to use it as propaganda.
Because after 16 months of Swedish investigation if there was Russia evidence there wouldn't be hesitation to out them.

Something is probably being covered up.
I guess "we'll never know."

And yeah occams razor, I'll suspect the guys that very strangely said oh we can do it, easy peasy..... Bit weird, bit of a senile weird thing to sow a seed about.

But still "did Germany a favour...."
Maybe it was Gretta?
That's what Sweden is covering up :p

Oh sanctions ohhh no not more sanctions, plz stop sanctioning me sanctions me some more daddy.. just sell it all to China instead., which they have.
Its physical removal from the board was genius/insanity.
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
15 Nov 2020
Posts
475
Location
Switzerland
Which would make sense if Russia was a rational actor, but Russia isn't.

Sorry but that's a non existent argument. It would have to go through so many steps and risks of failure and self sabotage that even a idiot would self reflect.....when again all they had to do for leverage was flick it to the off switch.

For Russia there were only downsides.
For America there were only upsides.
For Europe it could be argued either way.

..
 
Soldato
Joined
25 Mar 2004
Posts
15,788
Location
Fareham
@HungryHippos I was thinking more of how we ended up here strategic mistakes. Germany’s rash embrace of German gas, the wilful ignorance of Russias strategic concerns. Loads of stuff. Obama and Iran, Bush and Iraq etc. The 21st Century has been a masterclass in strategic hubris and shortsightedness. Not specifically Nord Stream, although Europes embraces of self defeating sanctions and the US’s attack on its own hegemony of global finance are pretty dumb too.

Sure lots of issues in general but we can correct this still, and energy prices are going in the right direction. I think this has been more eye opening.
 
Caporegime
Joined
11 Mar 2005
Posts
32,197
Location
Leafy Cheshire
Sorry but that's a non existent argument. It would have to go through so many steps and risks of failure and self sabotage that even a idiot would self reflect.....when again all they had to do for leverage was flick it to the off switch.

For Russia there were only downsides.
For America there were only upsides.
For Europe it could be argued either way.

..

Russia's key mode of operation is to do something, deny it, deflect and blame others in an aim to sow discontent in other nations and try and fracture political relationships.

If blowing up the pipeline achieved all the above and stopped major support for Ukraine, Russia would have won the war and the overall costs would have been significantly less.

Either way whoever has blown up the pipeline has done everyone in Europe a long-term favor.
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
15 Nov 2020
Posts
475
Location
Switzerland
Russia's key mode of operation is to do something, deny it, deflect and blame others in an aim to sow discontent in other nations and try and fracture political relationships.

If blowing up the pipeline achieved all the above and stopped major support for Ukraine, Russia would have won the war and the overall costs would have been significantly less.

Either way whoever has blown up the pipeline has done everyone in Europe a long-term favor.

I'm sorry but the argument still doesn't make sense. There is a ton of other things they could have done without blowing up countless billions in architecture which took them countless hours to get the political will and sign off to do in the first place.

Why would they destroy that when they would know the response from everyone is lulz sucks to be you. In what world would it have stopped support rather than encourage it.

Per your own last comment it did Europe (well for now!) a "favour "......so exactly why would Russia have done it exactly?
 
Caporegime
Joined
11 Mar 2005
Posts
32,197
Location
Leafy Cheshire
I'm sorry but the argument still doesn't make sense. There is a ton of other things they could have done without blowing up countless billions in architecture which took them countless hours to get the political will and sign off to do in the first place.

Why would they destroy that when they would know the response from everyone is lulz sucks to be you. In what world would it have stopped support rather than encourage it.

Per your own last comment it did Europe (well for now!) a "favour "......so exactly why would Russia have done it exactly?

I like the idea that they would need political signoff to blow it up, one man makes those sort of choices in Russia and it isn't by committee.

Your apparent must defend Russia mindset has failed to notice i'm open minded about who blew the pipeline up and i'm absolutely not willing to rule Russia out for the reasons I mention.

If a country is willing to send wave after wave of unskilled men to die for basically no gain remind me again why blowing up a pipeline would even register on the scale of "give a ****".
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
10 May 2012
Posts
10,062
Location
Leeds

That was basically just not a very important or even interesting part of the interview which they've chosen to focus on. They haven't spoke about or mentioned the majority of the interview in which he spoke about controversial points that don't paint the West in a good light. They've also now buried the story on the front page despite the fact it has 100m impressions on Twitter in less than 24 hours. I'm so glad I cancelled my TV license.
 

XPE

XPE

Soldato
Joined
9 Jul 2005
Posts
5,530
So the end result of this interview is, that all the people that think we should help Ukraine, still think we should help Ukraine and the people that think we should not, still don't. Thank god we cleared that up.

Best thing about it is that it brought Ukraine back to the top of the new pile.
 
Joined
4 Aug 2007
Posts
21,432
Location
Wilds of suffolk
That was basically just not a very important or even interesting part of the interview which they've chosen to focus on. They haven't spoke about or mentioned the majority of the interview in which he spoke about controversial points that don't paint the West in a good light. They've also now buried the story on the front page despite the fact it has 100m impressions on Twitter in less than 24 hours. I'm so glad I cancelled my TV license.

Buried the story?
Its been on the front page all day.
You don't arf talk some drivel at times in your CT world
 
Soldato
Joined
28 May 2007
Posts
18,262

It was US the Navy.

Vladolf said it was the one armed man! But seriously it was the Russians.
Boris Johnson scuppering the deal wasn't mentioned a single time in the BBC article that was linked.

Because it never happened.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
13 Oct 2006
Posts
91,173
Definitely still on the front page for me.

Would be nice to see someone really break down the main part of the interview though - Putin acts wounded about a lot of things but surrounds them with just enough distortion of the truth it is difficult to really break down without a thorough background in foreign affairs, but there are large omissions of the other side of the story and where relevant how Russia was actually the instigator and they didn't just get a raw deal due to the West alone, etc. etc.
 
Soldato
Joined
3 Oct 2007
Posts
12,096
Location
London, UK
Because after 16 months of Swedish investigation if there was Russia evidence there wouldn't be hesitation to out them.

Something is probably being covered up.
I guess "we'll never know."

And yeah occams razor, I'll suspect the guys that very strangely said oh we can do it, easy peasy..... Bit weird, bit of a senile weird thing to sow a seed about.

But still "did Germany a favour...."
Maybe it was Gretta?
That's what Sweden is covering up :p

Oh sanctions ohhh no not more sanctions, plz stop sanctioning me sanctions me some more daddy.. just sell it all to China instead., which they have.
Its physical removal from the board was genius/insanity.

So Sweden are burying their evidence is what you are saying.

Trump said stuff like that all the time, in fact Trump told Germany not to rely on Russian gas, IIRC he mentioned sanctions. Why you think this automatically means it was them, the US president has many other levers to pull.

The rest is just silly.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom