Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

NicolaSacco said:
Can you explain how you ‘actively wish’ for something? Like, what do you do? What’s passive wishing?
You’ve acknowledged that there are people whose deaths you would celebrate. So you want them dead. Or, wish them dead, actively or not. The rest is just invented nonsense, because you cannot ever, in any scenario, concede any point. It’s a weird hill to die on, and everyone can see it.
Click to expand...
Dunno, seems pretty self-explanatory. You either want someone dead or you don't. I personally don't.

I want them being brought to justice and answer for their crimes. If they don't and leave a happy life ever after, I'll piss on their grave when they pass on, if given the chance. Petty and meaningless in the grand scheme of things, but plenty for me. You can wear the hero's cape and wield the sacred sword of revenge, then go on a crusade to get them if that's your thing.

I love weird hills to die on. Especially when everybody can see it.
 
Last edited:
TwoSheds said:
But they wouldn't be alright to shoot Putin, even though he's the one that invaded them?
Click to expand...
He's the one who ordered the invasion. If they think that it could stop the war and can get to him, more power to them.

I repeat for the tone deafs and occasional wums, the Ukrainians are militarily invaded and therefore empowered by international law (and basic common sense) to resist the invasion by any means necessary, excluding direct attacks on civilians. That's about it.

But that's not really the point I'm trying to make and you know it.
 
That_Bloke said:
He's the one who ordered the invasion. If they think that it could stop the war and can get to him, more power to them.

I repeat for the tone deafs and occasional wums, the Ukrainians are militarily invaded and therefore empowered by international law (and basic common sense) to resist the invasion by any means necessary, excluding direct attacks on civilians. That's about it.

But that's not really the point I'm trying to make and you know it.
Click to expand...

I actually don't know what point you're trying to make at all. Is Putin a civilian then? He's allowed to send untold thousands of young Russian men to die but he has to go up in court or you're as bad as the Russians?
 
TwoSheds said:
I actually don't know what point you're trying to make at all. Is Putin a civilian then? He's allowed to send untold thousands of young Russian men to die but he has to go up in court or you're as bad as the Russians?
Click to expand...
The point I'm trying to make is that I despise RedCafé Joe from Southern California ranting about fake links on YouTube preventing him to watch people die in a war he has zero link with, for his own entertainment.

That's where it all started, and it's absolutely hilarious to see so many people jumping at my throat because I questioned his bloodthirst. As if there's a legitimate and illegitimate one depending on the weather.

You're as bad as any piece of shit trampling on human lives, and that's by far not exclusive to Russia. The US is a strong contender when it comes to it. And yeah, if possible and when given the choice, I'd rather see Putin who's the president of Russia and not exactly your average civilian, judged rather than summarily killed. That's why laws have been written.

As I've already said, when you start making exceptions because it doesn't go your way, everything goes to shit.
 
Last edited:
That_Bloke said:
That's because you are no god to dish out death and judgment.

Death is permanent and always should be the last resort.
Click to expand...

Im agnostic atheist so couldnt care less of gods and its farytales or past judgements.

Millions of deaths had been decided by people like netanyahu and putin and this permanent decision would help to save thousands i would press the trigger happily
 
Carolina Red said:
As an example of why this line of thought is absurdly flawed…

The folks who overthrew and killed the guards at Sobibor were just as bad as the guards that were killing them?
Click to expand...

Man, on this topic the number of people (read: Wehraboo's) who defend Prison guards that were "just poor locals who needed a job to feed their family and were following orders" fecking astounds me.

The thing is, there were clean elements of the Wehrmacht, the Kreigsmarine held itself surprisingly admirably (no pun intended), up to the standard of the Western Allies, but nobody ever mentions them

But the camp guards? Nah feck them, 10 million Ukrainians died in WW2 and a significant chomp of them died in concentration/death/work camps. Einzatgruppen and SS Camp Guards were usually voluntary so anyone who were there, wanted to be there.

They all deserve to get drawn and quartered and then put back together and then redrawn and requartered for every single victim of those horror camps.
 
Carolina Red said:
They took part in atrocities in the Baltics, but I digress.
Click to expand...

Probably should be part of another thread, but which period are you referring to? The evacuation period post 44 or the 41 use of Kriegsmarine sailors to conduct rear-echelon duties?

I haven't read all that much on 41' so feel free to tell me more!

Regarding 44-45, it's why the qualifier of "up to the standard of the Western allies" was added. There were loads of cases of U-boats abandoning floating live sailors after their ship had been sunk and not rescuing them. Of all the bullshit, crackpot defences at Nuremburg, Admiral Doenitz actually made a convincing argument:

His argument was that

a) Rescue operations were usually at the whim of individual ship level commanders, and most of the case the Kriegsmarine commanders did indeed rescue merchant sailors. In many cases, they were even returned as they were not deemed active war participants. Another example would be Admiral Hipper rescuing the sailors of HMS Gloworm.

b) The force structure of the Kriegsmarine meant that the emphasis on A) was even more critical because unlike the Allies, the Germans had no real Fleet in being, the majority of their actions were in U-boats and small clusters of rapid pocket cruisers. Many of the times the ships simply weren't in a position to rescue sailors, like for example a U-boat simply does not have the capacity to rescue hundreds of sailors.

c) The most telling argument is that in the Pacific, the Americans had gigantic fleets, with huge supporting cast of auxilliary ships, hospital ships and even then, orders came from the very top in multiple occasions to not rescue Japanese sailors in the sea. Many occasions arose of F6F pilots doing strafing runs on Japanese sailors in the sea.

So Admiral Doenitz made a very valid point in, "despite having much more capacity to do so, The Americans did the exact same thing we did."

Hence the qualifier of "Up to the standard of the Western Allies."

EDIT - For context, Doenitz was found not guilty of these crimes at Nuremberg , as his legal defence teams had dug up huge amounts of evidence of the allies doing the same, hence all charges relating to merchant sailors treatment, unrestricted U-Boat campaigns and treatment of survivors were dropped by the prosecutors. He was ultimately found not guilty of War Crimes for his leadership and conduct as head of the Kriegsmarine.
 
Last edited:
Carolina Red said:
As an example of why this line of thought is absurdly flawed…

The folks who overthrew and killed the guards at Sobibor were just as bad as the guards that were killing them?
Click to expand...
The only thing absurdly flawed is you and your lot ganging up on me for advocating to follow the rule of law, although I've stated many times that I am on the Ukrainian side.

And I'll never accept a bunch of random, pampered Caftards, with the exception of AfonsoAlves, telling me what war is and looks like.
 
Last edited:
That_Bloke said:
The only thing absurdly flawed is you and your lot ganging up on me for advocating to follow the rule of law, although I've stated many times that I am on the Ukrainian side.

And I'll never accept a bunch of random, pampered Caftards, with the exception of AfonsoAlves, telling me what war is and looks like.
Click to expand...
You posted your thoughts on an online forum. People responded. That’s not ganging up on you, that’s a forum functioning as designed.
 
Carolina Red said:
You posted your thoughts on an online forum. People responded. That’s not ganging up on you, that’s a forum functioning as designed.
Click to expand...
That I did and will do it again.

Yes they did, judging by how everyone's harping on the slightest word out of place instead of focusing on the main point.
 
That_Bloke said:
That I did and will do it again.

Yes they did, judging by how everyone's harping on the slightest word out of place instead of focusing on the main point.
Click to expand...
You posted an opinion that many people disagreed with. Those people responded. That’s also a forum functioning as designed. You’re not a victim here.
 
4bars said:
Im agnostic atheist so couldnt care less of gods and its farytales or past judgements.

Millions of deaths had been decided by people like netanyahu and putin and this permanent decision would help to save thousands i would press the trigger happily
Click to expand...
You can't be both.

You don't have to be a believer (I'm not) to understand the concept of godhood.

You don't know that, none of us does. Hence the laws.
 
Last edited:
Carolina Red said:
You posted an opinion that many people disagreed with. Those people responded. That’s also a forum functioning as designed. You’re not a victim here.
Click to expand...
Oh boy, they absolutely did.

Never claimed otherwise and I am particularly glad that it still works that way.

People are trying to pin me down because I called out a random, infuriated American about his morbid kicks being spoiled by YouTube trolls, and I refused to outright see Putin or Netanyahu being unceremoniously killed. The same applies to the countless, active war criminals still on the market.

I'm not appealing for victimhood, just pointing at the ever present human bias and stupidity.
 
Last edited:
That_Bloke said:
The point I'm trying to make is that I despise RedCafé Joe from Southern California ranting about fake links on YouTube preventing him to watch people die in a war he has zero link with, for his own entertainment.

That's where it all started, and it's absolutely hilarious to see so many people jumping at my throat because I questioned his bloodthirst. As if there's a legitimate and illegitimate one depending on the weather.

You're as bad as any piece of shit trampling on human lives, and that's by far not exclusive to Russia. The US is a strong contender when it comes to it. And yeah, if possible and when given the choice, I'd rather see Putin who's the president of Russia and not exactly your average civilian, judged rather than summarily killed. That's why laws have been written.

As I've already said, when you start making exceptions because it doesn't go your way, everything goes to shit.
Click to expand...

:lol: you should have a bath.
 
That_Bloke said:
You can't be both.

You don't have to be a believer (I'm not) to understand the concept of godhood.

You don't know that, none of us does. Hence the laws.
Click to expand...

What you mean i cant have both?

You can be agnostic or gnostic and theist or atheist. Atheist doesnt cancel gnosticism or agnosticism

The probability that finishing of awful people would translate in less pain for the world, even as for a deterrent for others has nothing to do with. Not for sure but is a likely scenario. Also the perk that they dont deserve to live which you would celebrate as per past posts

And spare about the law. Slavery was law, the nazis had laws, SA apartheid had laws, israel has laws that that treat others as inferior. So spare me
 
I wonder how big of a forum you have to be for Russia to send professional propagandists in.
 
Beans said:
I wonder how big of a forum you have to be for Russia to send professional propagandists in.
Click to expand...

For every propagandist there are unfortunately dozens of contrarians who delight in taking an unpopular point view and arguing it to death.
 
NicolaSacco said:
For every propagandist there are unfortunately dozens of contrarians who delight in taking an unpopular point view and arguing it to death.
Click to expand...
Thankfully with the promotion system they're less likely to be here.

The contrarians seem to be getting their talking points from the KGB (FSB) though, which has been a theory of mine for a while.

It's the way they all say the same thing, you never see such uniformity of opinion among liberal politicians. It's like republicans wake up each day and read the same memo.

And who besides Russia would run such a large propaganda operation? Chinese propaganda is terrible, but the Russians are masters.
 
Beans said:
Thankfully with the promotion system they're less likely to be here.

The contrarians seem to be getting their talking points from the KGB (FSB) though, which has been a theory of mine for a while.

It's the way they all say the same thing, you never see such uniformity of opinion among liberal politicians. It's like republicans wake up each day and read the same memo.

And who besides Russia would run such a large propaganda operation? Chinese propaganda is terrible, but the Russians are masters.
Click to expand...
I certainly agree on the source of the talking points. Russia does an exceptional job of getting a really rather obscure and one-sided point of view out to the wider world.
 
harms said:
Girkin? I'm pretty sure that his communication options with the outside world are quite limited now, where did you read his opinion on the matter?
Click to expand...

Not sure, but think it was from "Wartranslated" channel on twitter, as he usually has the tweets with sentiments from russian side.

Cba to dig through to find the one I was talking about now, as it was from around the time, when Kursk op started, but here's a recent one he posted from Strelkov:



EDIT: Actually just saw in this tweet, he underscores the possible main front in southern Ukraine in his 2nd point.
 
ShoePolish said:
Not sure, but think it was from "Wartranslated" channel on twitter, as he usually has the tweets with sentiments from russian side.

Cba to dig through to find the one I was talking about now, as it was from around the time, when Kursk op started, but here's a recent one he posted from Strelkov:



EDIT: Actually just saw in this tweet, he underscores the possible main front in southern Ukraine in his 2nd point.
Click to expand...

Interesting. Didn’t know that he kept updating his telegram-channel using the prison mail service!
 
harms said:
Interesting. Didn’t know that he kept updating his telegram-channel using the prison mail service!
Click to expand...
I've seen the claim that his wife keeps his account running and occasionally uses it. But I have no idea if that's the truth.
 
stefan92 said:
I've seen the claim that his wife keeps his account running and occasionally uses it. But I have no idea if that's the truth.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it’s entirely possible. “ФСИН-письмо” (Russian prison mail service) is available for every prisoner, including political ones*, even though every (both in- and outgoing) letter goes through censorship so you wouldn’t be able to write something drastic in it.

I just figured that he wouldn’t continue posting since his channel was the foundation of the criminal case against him but looks like I was wrong.

* I think you’re only denied this right when you’re put in a solitary confinement… but then again, there’s the law and then there’s practice. Yet we’re able to use this service to communicate with most political prisoners even though it’s often slow and some stuff gets censored out
 
That_Bloke said:
People are trying to pin me down because I called out a random, infuriated American about his morbid kicks being spoiled by YouTube trolls, and I refused to outright see Putin or Netanyahu being unceremoniously killed. The same applies to the countless, active war criminals still on the market.
Click to expand...

Who said anything about unceremoniously killed? The premise was "hoping Putin dies". I think you have a way of getting into furious arguments with figments of your own imagination, vaguely based on something someone may or may not have said. You're tilting at windmills, and when you're challenged about it you claim the windmills started it.

I don't know how much of it is completely sincere, and how much is devil's advocate, Internet slapfight sort of thing. You show some awareness of it, so I suspect it's at least a mix. But no wonder people get wound up and pile on.

Edit: and it goes without saying that the argument has long since left behind your original point about looking up war porn, which had some truth to it but was phrased in a way that got us... well, here.
 
nimic said:
Who said anything about unceremoniously killed? The premise was "hoping Putin dies". I think you have a way of getting into furious arguments with figments of your own imagination, vaguely based on something someone may or may not have said. You're tilting at windmills, and when you're challenged about it you claim the windmills started it.

I don't know how much of it is completely sincere, and how much is devil's advocate, Internet slapfight sort of thing. You show some awareness of it, so I suspect it's at least a mix. But no wonder people get wound up and pile on.

Edit: and it goes without saying that the argument has long since left behind your original point about looking up war porn, which had some truth to it but was phrased in a way that got us... well, here.
Click to expand...

"Do you think it would be legitimate to shoot a Russian soldier if you are Ukrainian?"

"A bullet would be more just than them wandering free committing more war crimes wouldn't you say?"

"But they wouldn't be alright to shoot Putin, even though he's the one that invaded them?"

"I never understood the rational of not wanting that a person that objectively benefits from actively killing people directly or indirectly in the thousands through orders doesnt deserve to be killed."

These statements are indeed vague figments of my own imagination I love to furiously argue with.

No, people are getting wound up because I am not on the "Kill them all" train, which they in turn take as a betrayal of the cause they deem to be just. The irony being that we actually share the same one, although just slightly differing on how to defend it. What they seek is an unconditional validation which is something I'll never be onboard with. And if you don't fufill their self-righteous criteria, you're either a contrarian or a Russian bot.

There's now a poster writing about pro-Russia propagandists affiliated to the FSB no less, trolling a RedCafé thread, and you're talking to me about fighting windmills.

Edit: That was exactly what I meant from the get go. Nothing more, nothing less and it carries a lot more truth than you care or want to admit. People got uncomfortable with it because looking for Russians being killed can't be that bad, even drawing WWII analogies and that got us... well, here.
 
Last edited:
As a (now retired) psychiatrist that has found themselves in the position of knowing deaths on both sides of this conflict, I've found the "war porn/online military bro" sort of engagement with it, at least from those with no obvious personal stake in things, depressing and disturbing at times too. However, ultimately, it's an inevitability of basic human nature to get a significant element of that in any conflict that is so obviously black and white in terms of who the unjustified aggressor is. People want to see those they perceive as unjustified invaders/colonisers/oppressors being defeated...watching war footage is an extension of that, though some will take it further than others; it doesn't make people "as bad" as actual willing perpetrators, even if it does point to a clear degree of dehumanisation at the more extreme end - those regularly seeking out footage of mangled corpses, executions, hand to hand combat, soldiers being blown to pieces by drones, etc.

It doesn't take a qualified person to realise any of this, especially in a world where we're all culturally very, very far away from moving beyond viewing warfare as a legitimate means to an end and by extension see military as just and necessary institutions, rather than something inherently dehumanising/destabilising that we should all be working toward making obsolete. It will probably take a nuclear war/WW3 before we get even close to that.
 
Demyanenko_square_jaw said:
As a (now retired) psychiatrist that has found themselves in the position of knowing deaths on both sides of this conflict, I've found the "war porn/online military bro" sort of engagement with it, at least from those with no obvious personal stake in things, depressing and disturbing at times too. However, ultimately, it's an inevitability of basic human nature to get a significant element of that in any conflict that is so obviously black and white in terms of who the unjustified aggressor is. People want to see those they perceive as unjustified invaders/colonisers/oppressors being defeated...watching war footage is an extension of that, though some will take it further than others; it doesn't make people "as bad" as actual willing perpetrators, even if it does point to a clear degree of dehumanisation at the more extreme end - those regularly seeking out footage of mangled corpses, executions, hand to hand combat, soldiers being blown to pieces by drones, etc.

It doesn't take a qualified person to realise any of this, especially in a world where we're all culturally very, very far away from moving beyond viewing warfare as a legitimate means to an end and by extension see military as just and necessary institutions, rather than something inherently dehumanising/destabilising that we should all be working toward making obsolete. It will probably take a nuclear war/WW3 before we get even close to that.
Click to expand...
I can't thank you enough for your post.

It's always nice to see humanity and common sense shining through the widespread cloud of ignorance and imbecility.
 
Last edited:
How is this war still going? Just go in and save Ukraine or give up. It can't just go on forever.

Russia won't do shit.
 
I was sad to see David Knowles die at 32. I hope the others find a way to keep the “Ukraine the latest” podcast going. One of the most important sources for updates on the war.
 
foolsgold said:
I was sad to see David Knowles die at 32. I hope the others find a way to keep the “Ukraine the latest” podcast going. One of the most important sources for updates on the war.
Click to expand...
Tragic. Died of a heart attack at 32 while holidaying in Gibraltar…

He’s worked tirelessly these last few years reporting on the Ukrainian plight, was obviously more than a job for him.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.