I wasn’t trying to downplay Ukraine but rather pointing out that it’s not quite the same as stripping away Yorks or Lancs. Scotland was more clearly Scotland before 1707 than Ukraine has ever been Ukraine In its modern sense. But, if there is one thing Putin has achieved, it has firmly solidified Ukraine’s modern sense of nationhood and destroyed feelings of kinship towards their Eastern neightbours.
Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion
- Thread starter Wednesday at Stoke
- Start date
I wasn’t trying to downplay Ukraine but rather pointing out that it’s not quite the same as stripping away Yorks or Lancs. Scotland was more clearly Scotland before 1707 than Ukraine has ever been Ukraine In its modern sense. But, if there is one thing Putin has achieved, it has firmly solidified Ukraine’s modern sense of nationhood and destroyed feelings of kinship towards their Eastern neightbours.
They might well have done so, and why not? Russia and Ukraine are neighboring countries and the Russian propaganda always liked to paint a picture that they are quite close to each other (or at least should be). So if some of these guys aren't aware of the tensions they might well think that the exercise was simply extented to Ukraine - why not, a lot of them were in Belarus anyway and it wasn't a war there, so where is the difference for an uneducated young Russian soldier?
Can only imagine. Are you from there, or lived there previously?
Sorry you've become sort of a default tag for so many questions, but - would the military leadership share his view of greater Russia/lost glory enough that they'd want to continue? I know the defence minister is delusional in that respect, same with the generals?
Yeah i don't disagree with you. I just find it hard to muster too much sympathy when these firms know who their clients are and are still trying to silence journalists on their behalf.
They're making themselves part of a very dirty war.
A horrific journey, but like so many of these accounts, hang on. He first says people are split into white people and non-white people. He then says only Ukrainians are let through (which would be exclusively compromised of women, children, pensioners and people with disabilities). Those are two very different scenarios.
You keep on trying to defend what is clearly a racist policy of only allowing white / Ukrainians through. The non-white people are probably there on student or work visas. Why shouldn’t they be let through?
The debate here between what Ukraine should do is, in my view, being taken the wrong way by some people. Suggesting Ukraine gives up some land isn’t the same as saying that it’s the right thing to do. Ultimately the country must decide, on balance, whether it takes a hard-no stance and simply fights until the end. Or, in exchange for less life lost and less disruption in the country (in the short term) lose part of what is rightly theirs. It’s easy for us to sit there and say that might be cowardly, or not a viable option, and there’s plenty of debate about long term vs short term, as well as which option is better, but it’s just basic thinking to assume there isn’t a choice for Ukrainians. It may be that the population doesn’t want to give an inch. It may be they just want to end now even if it means giving something up. It may be that over time that sentiment changes. But that’s obviously a decision for Ukrainians first and foremost. But this is a discussion forum - passing an opinion of what your view would be in that scenario, whilst obviously meaningless and easy to do from wherever we are is literally what happens.
So on a scale from 1 to 10, how likely is a nuclear winter? I honestly dont see it happening. Though I also didntt hink Phtin would invade Ukraine. Mutually assured destruction though. It seems mutually pointless.
No it's not. It's about bloody time people who accept Russian money from those who have royally ripped off the people of their country are named and shamed if only to make them think twice (i.e. decide not to) about representing these scumbags.
Guys, what is the orthodox church's postion on this conflict?
Wouldn’t be surprised if battlefield nukes are somewhere close to the border, but we are a ways off from a nuclear exchange.
That could also turn on a dime, unfortunately.
There’s only one @rpitroda
Bartholomew apparently supports Ukraine’s territorial integrity. I guess Russian Orthodox Church supports Russian aggression.
I don’t think that any other Orthodox Church has said anything about this.
No idea, there aren't any generals with coherent public profile. I somehow doubt that anyone who is directly involved with military action is as eager to proceed with whatever that is... but that's purely a speculation.
The Ukrainian Orthodox Church split from Moscow relatively recently: https://apnews.com/article/russia-u...-nationalism-ff22c6c17784674a5eaad0f0a1ff17ca
The Ukraine Orthodox leader likened Putin to the Antichrist. Meanwhile, Russian Orthodox Patriarch Kirill of Moscow appeared to decry Russia’s opponents in Ukraine as 'evil forces.'
https://religionnews.com/2022/02/28/ukraine-orthodox-leader-likens-putin-to-the-antichrist/
So you’re saying there are no non-white women, children etc?….
There are also plenty of Ukrainian men crossing the border by the way.
Not one JJ12 though, because you definitely are also Nicky Moore 100%
That's an outrageous take in a civilized country. Everyone should be able to have the best defence possible, even the worst of the worst, that's a cornerstone of any decent judicial system. Unless these lawyers committed malpractice or crimes, they shouldn't be singled out. And if the law doesn't suit some representatives, they should just change it.
The bigger issue is that successive governments have laundered Russian dirty money for at least 20 years. Starting to name and shame a fewer lawyers grossly misrepresents our political class's complicity in raising money for Putin.
Thanks for this, I had no idea Ukraine's church had split from Moscow.
Russia have just stopped the broadcast of our only relatively opposition-leaning radio station (Echo Moscow) & also restricted access to its website.
Dozhd', the only independent news TV channel that hadn't been allowed to broadcast TV for years now, & switched to their website and YouTube also had their website blocked.
Roskomnadzor had issued a warning to Wikipedia, threatening to block it, because of the article about this war.
Dozhd', the only independent news TV channel that hadn't been allowed to broadcast TV for years now, & switched to their website and YouTube also had their website blocked.
Roskomnadzor had issued a warning to Wikipedia, threatening to block it, because of the article about this war.
My only worry is that Putin is eventually backed into an unwinnable corner (he is already obviously) and just going down with the whole fecking ship. You'd think that the people around him would stop. Him, but after so many years in plwer Im not sure whether they have any individual thinking capacity left.
It feels as if you’ll be so bored soon that you will be left with nothing to do but revolt!
What is this putin's name stuff about?
Thanks.
In terms of concentrated power and visibility as a single individual, it seems Putin could match Stalin or the Tsars.
Exactly, they're just strawmen. Sue those who broke the law even if they're lawyers or politicians but don't go after lawyers just because they're lawyers. It's cheap scapegoating.
Makes me fecking livid reading that. People never fecking change when it all boils down to it
It's incredible to think a nuclear warhead and mutual destruction are a potential reality. The mentality of nationalism/exceptionalism being so great that it's literally worth annihilating billions of lives (human and animal) is utter insanity.
I'd like to know as well, some mod must have changed something because all I can see are posts that say you can't call him Putin and must instead call him Putin..
Company names would have been acceptable imho, personal names not. Though I suppose it might be too hard to separate one from the other in legal firms
Surely some of the Russian soldiers must be thinking like this by now:
In principle they deserve protection. In reality, they are not standing for justice but simply using the justice system to enrich themselves and have the system favour the wealthy and corrupt. So I deplore it in principle and in reality they can go feck themselves.
The amount of human tragedy that has already happened, and will only get worse. I dread to think what will happen before this stops, and I can imagine it will only get worse from here. Now, it feels awful to do this, but my head turns to strategy when I see this.
Maybe someone of military background can enlighten me, but we keep on reading about Russia having logistical problems with vehicles running out of fuel, why are they bombing the fuel depots rather than commandeering them? Is it as senseless as the bombing of schools and hospitals, or do they have reasons for it? Do they expect the fuel to be damaged/ruined before they can take control of the site? Is the strategy as bad as it seems, or is there a rationale to this?
It also makes me concerned they have no intention of getting vehicles/manpower into position to take the cities,, and that we will maybe see a lot more bombs and missiles fired into the cities, given they don't seem too bothered about the resources.
Oh damn, them germans were really serious about it, good for them. Massive shift in the energy market, might be time to invest in nuclear sectors (just kidding, I hate the idea of taking advantage of a war to make money).
Times of war are when we need strong democratic foundations the most, it's what differentiates us from barbarians.
Everyone in Groningen better move. I sense a lot of earthquakes in their future.
Any chance we can get all Russian oligarchs deported along with any politician taking their donations. and bring in more Ukrainian refugees instead. And by deported I mean randomly dropped somewhere in the Atlantic.