Ukrainian victory over Russia is inevitable

[Anonymous]

Why did NATO with UN authorization intervene in Bosnia?
https://www.icty.org/en/cases/judgement-list

To whataboutski: what's the difference between an intervention and an invasion? If intervention is so bad then why is invasion good? Ethnic cleansing, rape as an instrument of war, and targeting civilians is very bad stuff. Arguing that it's ok, which to be clear is exactly what you are doing, because the US negligently unleashed a sectarian civil war in Iraq is despicable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why did NATO with UN authorization intervene in Bosnia?
https://www.icty.org/en/cases/judgement-list

To whataboutski: what's the difference between an intervention and an invasion? If intervention is so bad then why is invasion good? Ethnic cleansing, rape as an instrument of war, and targeting civilians is very bad stuff. Arguing that it's ok, which to be clear is exactly what you are doing, because the US negligently unleashed a sectarian civil war in Iraq is despicable.

LOL interventions and invasions are only bad when committed by not-America.

When committed by America, they are righteous. Or, at their worst, regrettable but innocent mistakes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why did NATO with UN authorization intervene in Bosnia?
https://www.icty.org/en/cases/judgement-list

To whataboutski: what's the difference between an intervention and an invasion? If intervention is so bad then why is invasion good? Ethnic cleansing, rape as an instrument of war, and targeting civilians is very bad stuff. Arguing that it's ok, which to be clear is exactly what you are doing, because the US negligently unleashed a sectarian civil war in Iraq is despicable.

LOL interventions and invasions are only bad when committed by not-America.

When committed by America, they are righteous. Or, at their worst, regrettable but innocent mistakes.

Well based on your own words they seem to all be bad but at the same time you are using those criticisms to claim an invasion for territorial gain characterized by ethnic cleansing, widespread strategic rape, and the intentional targeting of civilians by the aggressor is a good tbing. It's easy to see why one could get confused.

But anyway, as you point out, Russia's invasion of Ukraine has unleashed a lot of forces within Russia that will inevitably lead to its downfall. It has also unified Ukraine in opposition such that it could never be integrated or peacefully controlled. Using Iraq as an example, the ethnic divisions within Russia will become more pronounced and antagonistic while the normalization of mass violence will leave a legacy of sociopathy among the population such that normalcy cannot be returned to in the near term. If the best case scenario for post-war Russia is Iraq then what is the worst case?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why did NATO with UN authorization intervene in Bosnia?
https://www.icty.org/en/cases/judgement-list

To whataboutski: what's the difference between an intervention and an invasion? If intervention is so bad then why is invasion good? Ethnic cleansing, rape as an instrument of war, and targeting civilians is very bad stuff. Arguing that it's ok, which to be clear is exactly what you are doing, because the US negligently unleashed a sectarian civil war in Iraq is despicable.

LOL interventions and invasions are only bad when committed by not-America.

When committed by America, they are righteous. Or, at their worst, regrettable but innocent mistakes.

Well based on your own words they seem to all be bad but at the same time you are using those criticisms to claim an invasion for territorial gain characterized by ethnic cleansing, widespread strategic rape, and the intentional targeting of civilians by the aggressor is a good tbing. It's easy to see why one could get confused.

But anyway, as you point out, Russia's invasion of Ukraine has unleashed a lot of forces within Russia that will inevitably lead to its downfall. It has also unified Ukraine in opposition such that it could never be integrated or peacefully controlled. Using Iraq as an example, the ethnic divisions within Russia will become more pronounced and antagonistic while the normalization of mass violence will leave a legacy of sociopathy among the population such that normalcy cannot be returned to in the near term. If the best case scenario for post-war Russia is Iraq then what is the worst case?

No, I never claimed it's a good thing, are you insane? that's you talking to voices in your head.

Using Iraq as an example, Ukraine is Iraq, not Russia. Divisions within Iraq (other than Kurds) are religious, not ethnic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why did NATO with UN authorization intervene in Bosnia?
https://www.icty.org/en/cases/judgement-list

To whataboutski: what's the difference between an intervention and an invasion? If intervention is so bad then why is invasion good? Ethnic cleansing, rape as an instrument of war, and targeting civilians is very bad stuff. Arguing that it's ok, which to be clear is exactly what you are doing, because the US negligently unleashed a sectarian civil war in Iraq is despicable.

LOL interventions and invasions are only bad when committed by not-America.

When committed by America, they are righteous. Or, at their worst, regrettable but innocent mistakes.

Well based on your own words they seem to all be bad but at the same time you are using those criticisms to claim an invasion for territorial gain characterized by ethnic cleansing, widespread strategic rape, and the intentional targeting of civilians by the aggressor is a good tbing. It's easy to see why one could get confused.

But anyway, as you point out, Russia's invasion of Ukraine has unleashed a lot of forces within Russia that will inevitably lead to its downfall. It has also unified Ukraine in opposition such that it could never be integrated or peacefully controlled. Using Iraq as an example, the ethnic divisions within Russia will become more pronounced and antagonistic while the normalization of mass violence will leave a legacy of sociopathy among the population such that normalcy cannot be returned to in the near term. If the best case scenario for post-war Russia is Iraq then what is the worst case?

No, I never claimed it's a good thing, are you insane? that's you talking to voices in your head.

Using Iraq as an example, Ukraine is Iraq, not Russia. Divisions within Iraq (other than Kurds) are religious, not ethnic.

You have by implication since otherwise it has absolutely zero relevence to this thread or any of the others about Russia's invasion of Ukraine in a war of territorial agression. By all means analyze and compare the impact but you haven't.

Divisions are divisions. There is nothing unique about religion or ethnicity. It's about how demographic differences get pushed to the forefront and then cause splintering. You should also know that the ethnic differences in Russia are also religious.

But let's look at what the failed intervention led to in the US. Dynamics that would be of far less impact in the US than Russia owing to the sheer mass of Russian casualties, sanctions, preexisting baselines, autocracy and geographic distance. In the US it's led to a militarization of civilian institutions like the police, an increasing normalization of societal violence, and the rise of right wing isolatinist populism. The US even had an attempted coup. War always opens Pandora's box. The Russia of 2020 is a dead man walking and Ukraine will need help from the world to return to normal after the Russians are kicked out..

[Anonymous]

Orlando Bloom has just touched down in Kiev/Kyiv. This surely spells the end of Russia. Ben Stiller's previous visit powered the Ukraine offensive that recaptured Kherson.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Ukraine will have to cede territory to Russia and guarantee non nato status.

What's ironic is that if Russia had simply left Ukraine alone in 2014, Ukraine today would likely be a pliant pro-Russia state as it was throughout the 90s and early 2000s. Sure it was a corrupt state - like Russia itself - but it was firmly in the Russian orbit.

That was before the US instigated a coup to remove the pro-Russian leader. Putin wanted to keep the base in Crimea whose lease was expiring.

The Revolution of Dignity / Ukrainian Maidan was 100% organic to Ukraine.

It is laughable for you to suggest the US had any part in it.

As in: everyone is laughing at you for such a stupid suggestion. I feel sorry for how badly you are embarrassing yourself.

Is that you Victoria?

[Anonymous]

Zelensky called for the West to adopt renewable energy.
Now a factory in the Netherlands is unable to make ammunition for Ukraine. The reason is there is a nearby data center that stores Tiktok videos, and this data center is using up all the available energy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Zelensky called for the West to adopt renewable energy.
Now a factory in the Netherlands is unable to make ammunition for Ukraine. The reason is there is a nearby data center that stores Tiktok videos, and this data center is using up all the available energy.

Why would tiktok get precedence over national defense?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Zelensky called for the West to adopt renewable energy.
Now a factory in the Netherlands is unable to make ammunition for Ukraine. The reason is there is a nearby data center that stores Tiktok videos, and this data center is using up all the available energy.

That has nothing to do with renewable energy. It's about distribution and overall generative capacity. The Dutch NIMBYs don't want wind farms either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You weren't arguing the killing experience. You were arguing righteousness, and you failed. Thanks, though, for the acknowledgement that "might means right" is really your motto..

On the contrary. You're making stuff up trying to shore up your weak and feeble point. The US and Iraq were in a military conflict. My argument is that the US military does indeed neutralize it's targets; with as minimal civilian casualties as possible.

Anonymous wrote:That's bullshit and you know it. Support for the illegal invasion of Iraq in the US was universal across the aisle. That includes all mainstream liberal media, not one of which has issued a mea culpa, by the way. No surprise. America loves itself a good war. ... Wait, you're arguing that America has a right to invade anywhere anytime, and if people choose to resist the invader, it's on them? You're the best example of arrogant, ignorant American thuggery.

Again, your desperation to assign labels gives away your emotions and animosity. Your opinion is noted. Irrelevant, but noted.

Anonymous wrote:On Bosnia. This is a memorial to Milica Rakic. She was a three-year old girl blown to bits by a NATO rocket as she was sitting on her training potty. One of 89 children (official count) killed by the NATO campaign. Her death is not listed among the victims the US acknowledges. It wasn't covered in any Western media. Her parents never received compensation from NATO.

Sadly, you do not acknowledge the NATO led de-mining operation in Bosnia? Or the fact the mines were used to stop the Serbians from committing genocide? Quite a myopic and one-sided argument, don't you think? You don't quote "Romeo or Juliet Bridge" or the snipers who shot civilians standing in line for water?
https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/2020/12/pdf/201204-sps-mine-clearance.pdf

Anonymous wrote:This gels with what our relatives in Iraq say. Saddam was not loved. But for America, people have nothing but pure, unadulterated hatred. Hatred that the Arabs describe as "I'll pay someone to shit on your mother's grave every day of their life." I await, though, your dismissals of this as "stuck in the past"-ness. Anything to avoid responsibility for the misery America rains on people.

I believe that you are possibly mentally disturbed. If you have not hurt someone already, I believe that you should seek mental help and counseling.

Anonymous wrote:I'm a proud Arab so I have no idea what you're saying.

I'm sorry, but I don't believe you're an Arab at all. A true Arab would said something different. I can't tell you how I know, because it will help you to improve your technique.

But let's play a game to test your linguistic skills. If you really want to pretend you're an Arab, then you'll understand this immediately.

I was in the Middle East in a bookstore. With my poor Arabic, I said to the clerk, اريد اسهال. The clerk laughed, مرة تانية. He called over his brother who laughed as well who figured it out.

What was the word I was looking for?

[Anonymous]

"They have arrived! Strykers and Cougars from 🇺🇲, Challengers from 🇬🇧, Marders from 🇩🇪 have officially joined the Air Assault Forces of the #UAarmy"
https://twitter.com/DefenceU/status/1640419664818782222

"The same [Russian 155th Naval Infantry Brigade] has been destroyed and reconstituted 8 times since the start of the war."
https://news.yahoo.com/elite-russian-brigade-5-000-145618825.html

"We are not creating any military alliance with China," Putin said in televised remarks, "Yes, we have cooperation in the sphere of military-technical interaction. We are not hiding this,"
https://news.yahoo.com/putin-hits-back-claims-jealous-151044378.html

Xi’s parting words to Putin – oracular and ominous – that referred to “changes coming, such as haven’t been seen for a century”, which “we can push forward together”
https://news.yahoo.com/xi-jinping-plan-annex-russian-190000385.html

“Take care, dear friend,” Xi said to Putin as he left Moscow.
https://twitter.com/clashreport/status/1638263817502162944

“Power of Siberia 2” (POS2) – a massive pipeline project to pump gas from Western Siberia to China via Mongolia
https://news.yahoo.com/xi-jinping-plan-annex-russian-190000385.html

"Putin: Russia to station tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus"
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/we-too-mean-business-russian-civilian-reacts-to-putin-s-latest-nuclear-strategy/vi-AA199aEt?ocid=winp1taskbar&cvid=b84de37bf8674c2896f779108f15e24c&ei=21

Mao Ning, an official representative of the Chinese Foreign Ministry. Quote from Ning: "The leaders of the five nuclear-weapon states issued a joint statement in January last year stating that it is impossible to win or wage a nuclear war."
https://news.yahoo.com/china-comments-russias-nuclear-weapons-130051414.html

[Anonymous]

The Bulgarian Defense Ministry will supply munitions to Ukraine with 175 million Euros for use in Ukraines Soviet era artillery. Ukraine will not face any shortage of artillery during the coming Spring offensive.

Tick tock, Ivan. Do you have your bags packed yet?

You won’t be in Ukraine for much longer . . .

[Anonymous]

* worth

[Anonymous]

Poland announced its increasing artillery munition production by several hundred percent, with most of it going to Ukraine:

Russians: get out of Ukraine now, while you still can.