1. #8676
    Days Work Done! Norton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Last Online
    Today @ 06:49 AM
    Location
    Roiet
    Posts
    33,477
    Quote Originally Posted by misskit View Post
    What could happen if Putin used nuclear weapons in Ukraine?
    Putin can order nucs be used but the real question is, will his orders be followed by the heads of the military who actually push the buttons? This analyst says no fucking way.

    End of.

  2. #8677
    Thailand Expat HermantheGerman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 09:16 PM
    Location
    Germany/Satthahip
    Posts
    6,951
    Russian history, politics and economy explained in a few sentences.


    Interview with a Russian: (before the war and not afraid to talk)

    So what what do you think of the North Stream gas pipeline?
    We still don't have gas in our city (not small), so what do you think my opinion is? All the money that they are making selling our resources goes to those people upstairs. Voting or protesting will not help. The results are always the same.


    So what has Putler achieved so far:

    The world is afraid of us again, especially the U.S. The difference is that now my pants are gone but I still have my hat on.

  3. #8678
    In Uranus
    bsnub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    29,954
    Quote Originally Posted by sabang View Post
    Your answer will be provided by, and is being provided by, developments on the ground.
    Developments on the ground are that Putin is having his ass handed to him on a plate.

  4. #8679
    Chinese spy sabang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Online
    Today @ 08:23 AM
    Location
    BackinOz
    Posts
    39,303
    I agree with norts on this- this nuclear talk is all bullshit. This conventional war is bad enough.

  5. #8680
    Chinese spy sabang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Online
    Today @ 08:23 AM
    Location
    BackinOz
    Posts
    39,303

  6. #8681
    In Uranus
    bsnub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    29,954
    Pictures do not change the reality on the ground over the last month. Russia is losing the war.

  7. #8682
    Chinese spy sabang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Online
    Today @ 08:23 AM
    Location
    BackinOz
    Posts
    39,303
    Yeh right- as the pictures clearly show you.

  8. #8683
    Thailand Expat HermantheGerman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 09:16 PM
    Location
    Germany/Satthahip
    Posts
    6,951
    Quote Originally Posted by sabang View Post
    No, I mean Ukrainian democracy.

    According to your comment and logic Putler should not be afraid then.
    So just another stupid comment from our Putler troll.

  9. #8684
    In Uranus
    bsnub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    29,954
    Quote Originally Posted by sabang View Post
    Yeh right- as the pictures clearly show you.
    I just see territory that is being held by a thread, a tapped out shell of a Russian army, and that it is only getting worse and worse for the Russians with winter coming.

    You have a lot more humiliation coming.

  10. #8685
    Thailand Expat HermantheGerman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 09:16 PM
    Location
    Germany/Satthahip
    Posts
    6,951
    Quote Originally Posted by Norton View Post
    Putin can order nucs be used but the real question is, will his orders be followed by the heads of the military who actually push the buttons? This analyst says no fucking way.

    End of.
    He might just need 1-2 Putler fans on his side. He probably has already arranged a short cut to press that button. You know those dictators like Putler, Xi, Lukashenko etc. have somehow found a way to be re-elected forever and achieve perfect results. They are very creative....think about it...or better not.

  11. #8686
    Thailand Expat misskit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Chiang Mai
    Posts
    42,842
    Russia Introduces Harsh Punishment for Wartime Desertion, Refusal to Serve

    Russian President Vladimir Putin on Saturday signed into law a bill introducing lengthy jail terms for wartime acts including desertion and "voluntary" surrender.


    The move comes three days after Putin declared a “partial” military mobilization for the war in Ukraine.


    The legal changes introduce the concepts of “mobilization, martial law and wartime” to the Russian Criminal Code for the first time.

    Under the law, "voluntary" surrender is punishable by up to 15 years in prison. But a first-time offender “may be exempted from criminal liability if he took measures for his release, returned to his unit or place of service and did not commit other crimes while in captivity," according to the bill published on the State Duma website.


    Desertion during a period of mobilization or wartime will be punished by up to 10 years in jail, while conscientious objectors will risk up to three years in prison.


    The law also mandates a punishment of up to 15 years in prison for looting during wartime and mobilization.


    The bill — which was introduced by lawmakers from all parties represented in parliament in July — was swiftly passed by both chambers of the Russian parliament this week.


    Many observers saw its quick passage through parliament as a precursor to Putin's partial mobilization announcement.

    Russia Introduces Harsh Punishments for Wartime Desertion, Refusal to Serve - The Moscow Times

  12. #8687
    Thailand Expat misskit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Chiang Mai
    Posts
    42,842
    Just what dictators do Russian-staged ‘referendums’ on Ukrainian soil pursue an illusion of legitimacy

    In Zaporizhzhia, votes will be collected by special police-accompanied “brigades,” who will visit the households. Yevhen Balytskyi, the Russian-appointed head of the region’s administration, chalked up this plan to safety precautions.


    Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky made clear that these “referendums” would have no effect at all on Ukraine’s efforts to regain control of its occupied territories. Deputy Prime Minister Iryna Vereshchuk urged residents not to cooperate with the invaders, and not to take part in Russian-orchestrated “referendums,” adding that that such actions might qualify as “endangering Ukraine’s territorial integrity and inviolability,” punishable by up to five years in prison. “Once again, I strongly advise the residents: do not take a [Russian] passport; do not go to the referendums; do not cooperate with invaders; if possible, leave.”


    The West is already in agreement to consider the “cynical” Russian-staged “referendums” on Ukrainian soil entirely fictitious. Their supposed results will make no difference to the current policies of Ukraine’s international partners.


    On Sept. 21, Vladimir Putin announced the mobilization in Russia. In his spoken address, he reminded “the collective West” and Ukraine itself of Russia’s nuclear arsenal. Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu then said that Russia plans to draft 300,000 new troops from its current military reserve of 25 million.


    Meduza’s sources close to the Kremlin suggest that Moscow is not concerned about making the referendums appear legitimate: “there is no such expectation.” What, then, is the purpose of these “referendums”? Our analysis might surprise you.


    The Russian law understands a referendum to be “a form of direct expression of the people’s will,” appropriate for deciding major questions on federal and local levels. Of course, the law — even in Russia — makes no provisions for conducting referendums on foreign soil.


    A legal referendum is a decision made directly by the voters. This means that the results of a referendum are binding. The government and the people alike must implement whatever has been decided by referendum.


    The Russian 2020 constitutional amendment vote, for example, was not a referendum. Those amendments were voted on in both parliament chambers, and then signed by the President. No general vote was necessary — but it took place all the same, clearly for political reasons. A decision had been made — that decision being, first and foremost, a freeze on Putin’s presidential term limit. Still, a demonstration of public support was wanted, and the vote took place. This kind of political process is sometimes referred to as “acclamation” — following the Roman and Byzantine models of greeting a new emperor with cheering and boisterous applause.

    This brings up a concept often used interchangeably with “referendum,” but actually different — namely, the concept of a plebiscite. In simplest terms, their difference boils down to the fact that a plebiscite’s outcome is not binding — that is, no one is obligated to implement the results of a plebiscite vote. In this way, a plebiscite resembles a special kind of opinion poll.


    Both referendums and plebiscites are the tools of a direct democracy — something that is hard to implement, but easy to manipulate.


    What dictators like are not referendums but plebiscites. But even a plebiscite must meet certain criteria to be legitimate.


    Here, the “referendums” taking place on occupied Ukrainian territories differ even from a typical authoritarian plebiscite. To conduct a so-called “referendum” on the territory of another country violates the principle of state sovereignty, which Putin himself supposedly holds so dear. This, however, did not stop him from annexing the Crimea, also by means of a staged “referendum.” The Crimean “referendum” remains unlawful by international standards, and the Crimean peninsula retains its status of occupied Ukrainian territory. (An earlier issue of our Signal newsletter discussed this in detail.)


    Authoritarian regimes like to preserve an appearance of a working democracy. In that setting, plebiscites are a useful instrument of stifling the internal struggles among the elites. They help prevent government coups. They demoralize and fracture the opposition. Consider this list: Bonaparte, Napoleon III, Hitler, Mussolini, Asad, Ayatollah Khomeini, Nazarbayev. What do these figures have in common? They’re all dictators, but that’s not all. All of them carried out plebiscites in their countries. Statistically, every fourth authoritarian leader does just that.


    The typical result of an authoritarian plebiscite is, predictably, unequivocal victory. According to the Swiss Centre for Research on Direct Democracy, 876 plebiscites were conducted between 1945 and 2005, with autocratic leaders receiving, on average, 70 percent support with 77.3 percent voter turnout. What helps in achieving these results is the toolkit that includes propaganda, censorship, and a variety of manipulations and falsifications in the course of voting.


    It might appear that referendums and plebiscites are intended to make a society more democratic, or to consolidate the vote. New research reverses this picture, showing that plebiscites are mainly used to suppress the opposition and freedom of thought. Plebiscites dominated by a conformist majority demoralize the dissidents and the critics of the regime, dampen protest, and assure everyone that nothing can be changed. Following a typical plebiscite, law enforcement systems “tighten the bolts,” and the state becomes more repressive than before.

    Political theorists used to think that a plebiscite legitimizes an authoritarian regime. If legitimacy meant nothing more than an absence of organized opposition, that might have been true. Russian political theorists often say that the effect of a plebiscite is to create an illusion of unity. Current research suggests that, in authoritarian states, electoral processes of any kind not so much consolidate the public around a leader as simply lessen the leader’s public disapproval.


    What a plebiscite does is affect the dynamics among the ruling elites. A democratic head of state derives political power from her or his electoral success. In authoritarian contexts, state leaders are more interested in strengthening the consensus within the elites. Victories in referendums, too, are aimed primarily at impressing the elites and consolidating the status quo. They can help push through unpopular legislation, and to reduce friction at the top.


    As a result, regimes with fractious and competitive elites are the ones that favor plebiscites. When they sense that their stability is under threat, personalist autocracies like Putin’s Russia conduct a “referendum.”


    Even in an autocracy, an election must preserve at least an illusion of competition and the presence of alternatives. This is why not only organized opposition but also independent candidates often figure in elections. This makes elections quite inconvenient to dictators and autocrats. The format of a referendum solves that problem. The yes-or-no structure of a referendum effectively leaves the opposition without any means of expressing its true wishes. A referendum leaves the dissidents without a voice.

    What are, then, Putin’s motives for conducting the current sham “referendums”? Meduza’s political analyst Andrey Pertsev sees several factors that might play a part. Putin’s first motive, Pertsev thinks, is to legitimize the mobilization, which he sees as the necessary condition for victory in Ukraine. (Being necessary does not make it sufficient.)


    Second, Ukraine’s successful counteroffensive under Kharkiv worries the Kremlin and various members of the ruling elite. They fear that the Ukrainian army will regain control in other occupied territories, too. Kyiv will then come back to punish the collaborators, who will see themselves as “left behind” by Russia, disproving the propaganda motto that effectively started the war.


    At the Shanghai Cooperation Organization’s mid-September summit in Samarkand, Putin understood that China and Turkey cannot be expected to stand by him in the war with Ukraine. A number of state leaders advised him to stop the war as quickly as possible. In that context, the abrupt mobilization and “referendums” may be a reaction to the cool atmosphere at the summit.


    It remains mysterious why Putin would go through the motions of the several “referendums,” instead of annexing the regions he wants by force and without preliminaries. Pertsev speculates that Putin does believe — or wants to believe — in the public’s support for his conquest. What illusion of consent is manufactured by means of the state’s budget, institutions, and instruments, is experienced by Putin as real. What’s odd is that he is the master builder of a Potemkin village that deludes him.


    Andrey Pertsev expects that the self-proclaimed “LNR” and “DNR” will support the Russian annexation with 80 percent of the “vote.” The percentage of their residents who currently support joining the Russian Federation is unknown; but as of last May, less than a quarter of the population carried Russian passports. Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, Pertsev thinks, may produce more modest results — 75 percent, perhaps.


    Regardless of what numbers might be conjured by the organizers of these “referendums” on Ukrainian territory, what matters is their absolute unlawfulness.


    Kremlin is moved by the same motive that inspires authoritarian plebiscites anywhere in the world: to produce an illusion of public consent, and to demoralize those members of Russia’s own elites who do not support the war and the annexations. Putin wants to show them that they’re going against the will of the people.


    https://meduza.io/en/feature/2022/09...t-dictators-do

  13. #8688
    In Uranus
    bsnub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    29,954
    Ukraine war mega thread-zt5vm1t-jpg

    So true!

  14. #8689
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    88,984
    Quote Originally Posted by sabang View Post
    I agree with norts on this- this nuclear talk is all bullshit. This conventional war is bad enough.
    And which fucking war criminal started it, you thicko?

  15. #8690
    In Uranus
    bsnub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    29,954
    Quote Originally Posted by harrybarracuda View Post
    And which fucking war criminal started it, you thicko?
    The dunce still hasn't figured it out.

    There is a lot of butthurt coming his way, though.

  16. #8691
    Thailand Expat
    Troy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Online
    Today @ 02:36 AM
    Location
    In the EU
    Posts
    11,165
    Quote Originally Posted by misskit View Post
    The West is already in agreement to consider the “cynical” Russian-staged “referendums” on Ukrainian soil entirely fictitious. Their supposed results will make no difference to the current policies of Ukraine’s international partners.
    I don't think it matters in the eyes of the Russian Government. Once the referendums have taken place and the regions have voted in favour of coming under Russian protection then Russia can use all means to protect them.

    That is the point of Putin's threat last week.

    It is clear that Putin and his advisors failed to understand the sentiments in Ukraine, they expected a walk-in victory and it's led to a humiliating defeat on the battlefield. Putin needs to save face and hence the rushed referendums and the hope that his nuclear threat will force a peace initiative in his favour.

    The problem is do you gamble that Russia won't use such an option. What if Putin used tactical nukes to push for peace with Russia keeping the Donbas? Who is going to take the responsibility of retaliation. The rules may prevent him using them now but once these areas are declared Russian the rules allow him.

  17. #8692
    In Uranus
    bsnub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    29,954
    Lyman will fall in the next 48 hours. Svatove will be next.

  18. #8693
    In Uranus
    bsnub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    29,954
    Quote Originally Posted by Troy View Post
    What if Putin used tactical nukes to push for peace with Russia keeping the Donbas?
    The entire concept of a "tactical nuke" is a misconception. There is no such thing. All use of nukes will constitute a strategic response from the United States. Where do you propose the Russians use this nuke? Kyiv? There is no tactical location that a nuke could be used without blowback into Russia itself or its own troops.

    Waste of time to even entertain this possibility.

  19. #8694
    Chinese spy sabang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Online
    Today @ 08:23 AM
    Location
    BackinOz
    Posts
    39,303
    I am afraid the russkies take the same cavalier attitude to 'the Rules' as the yanks. Because they can.

  20. #8695
    In Uranus
    bsnub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    29,954
    Quote Originally Posted by sabang View Post
    I am afraid the russkies take the same cavalier attitude to 'the Rules' as the yanks. Because they can.
    What nonsense are you spewing now?

    The war crimes the Russians have committed in this war far eclipses anything that the US has ever done. Even attempting to draw a comparison is pure idiocy. What is happening in Ukraine is genocide, pure and simple.

    Thankfully, the tide is turning and Russia will now lose this war.

  21. #8696
    Thailand Expat OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 08:41 PM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    25,197
    Quote Originally Posted by Shutree View Post
    Ukraine is a globally recognised sovereign state. End of.
    So is Russia. End of.

    Quote Originally Posted by bsnub View Post
    The overwhelming majority are pro-Ukriane,
    We shall have the results of a referendum in a few days. Then we will know the real figures/facts, rather than your opinion.

    Quote Originally Posted by bsnub View Post
    Russian appointed puppet leaders.
    One presumes you have a verifiable source to corroborate your opinion.

    Quote Originally Posted by bsnub View Post
    everyday Ukraine gets stronger and Russia gets weaker
    Care to share your source of both countries' wealth, GDP, available military weapons and manpower, xxx data, to corroborate your opinion?

    Quote Originally Posted by bsnub View Post
    it has been stated that the first soldiers will be given one week of training before being sent to the front equipped with WW2 era gear and weapons.
    You have a link from the RMD to corroborate your opinion, of the weapons they will be issued with and the length of time they will be retrained for?
    Last edited by OhOh; 25-09-2022 at 07:34 PM.
    A tray full of GOLD is not worth a moment in time.

  22. #8697
    In Uranus
    bsnub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    29,954
    Quote Originally Posted by bsnub View Post
    Lyman will fall in the next 48 hours. Svatove will be next.
    Looks like the entire Russian defense line on the left bank of the Oskil River is collapsing as we speak.

    Slava Ukraini!

  23. #8698
    Thailand Expat OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 08:41 PM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    25,197
    Quote Originally Posted by bsnub View Post
    Looks like
    If your source is as good as your sources I queried, which you failed to substantiate, why would this further opinion be valid.

  24. #8699
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    88,984
    Quote Originally Posted by Troy View Post
    I don't think it matters in the eyes of the Russian Government. Once the referendums have taken place and the regions have voted in favour of coming under Russian protection then Russia can use all means to protect them.

    That is the point of Putin's threat last week.

    It is clear that Putin and his advisors failed to understand the sentiments in Ukraine, they expected a walk-in victory and it's led to a humiliating defeat on the battlefield. Putin needs to save face and hence the rushed referendums and the hope that his nuclear threat will force a peace initiative in his favour.

    The problem is do you gamble that Russia won't use such an option. What if Putin used tactical nukes to push for peace with Russia keeping the Donbas? Who is going to take the responsibility of retaliation. The rules may prevent him using them now but once these areas are declared Russian the rules allow him.
    "Use all means to protect them"?

    That's what they've been trying to do.

    It's just bullshit to try and con the people back home, but they are getting wise to the war criminal's lies.

  25. #8700
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    88,984
    Quote Originally Posted by Troy View Post
    The rules may prevent him using them now but once these areas are declared Russian the rules allow him.
    And what rules?

    He doesn't care about rules at all. The only thing that can stop the demented psycho starting a nuclear war is that the people around him don't want to die.

Page 348 of 428 FirstFirst ... 248298338340341342343344345346347348349350351352353354355356358398 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 5 users browsing this thread. (1 members and 4 guests)

  1. qwerty

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •