Russia invaded Ukraine.Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
The verdict: Guilty.
Printable View
Russia invaded Ukraine.Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
The verdict: Guilty.
You are a fucking idiot. Vatnik trash bag.Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
They should have learned their lesson back in 2018...
How US Military SMOKED Russian Mercenaries... - YouTube
Actually, I haven't seen any confirmed reports of Russia using depleted Uranium shells either. Not in Ukraine, Syria or Afghanistan. There has been unconfirmed reports of their use in Ukraine and their capture. So, where is the confirmation Ohoh seeks?Quote:
Originally Posted by bsnub
The West hasn't used them in Ukraine yet, but did use them in Iraq, probably Afghanistan and Syria as well.
Radiation is very limited but depleted Uranium is poisonous and not good for an agricultural economy such as Ukraine.
The UK has APDSFS rounds using depleted Uranium for anti tank. It will likely supply HESH and HE rounds as well.
The Russians would not bother to disclose that they were using them, but it is well known that they have them. That said, I am not the one who brought up the topic of DU munitions. The comment of mine that you quoted was a response to the absurd gibberish that Ohoh posts.
You must be the only one on the forum who takes the sad vatnik propagandist seriously. There will be no response to him from me other than my raised middle finger. I have no patience for those that condone genocide and the killing of innocent civilians.Quote:
Originally Posted by Troy
Nor have I and I looked quite a bit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Troy
^^ In this case, use of depleted Uranium ammunition by Russia, I think OhOh has a point. There are times when I think his points should be taken seriously and times when they should be taken with a large pinch of salt. Much like many other posters that possess one sided views.
Sorry I do not see the things he posts as a "view" I see it as regurgitating state propaganda otherwise known as "shilling". Most of it is not at all based in truth, and many of the people who see and read it do not catch onto that fact. He like sabang is a useful idiot of the kremlin.Quote:
Originally Posted by Troy
It is one thing to have a different opinion from someone else if your view is fact based, when it is based on state propaganda it is just regurgitation. He is playing his typical game of west bad ruzzia good.
In this instance facts v propaganda. The 16% use the weapon and nobody else.Quote:
Originally Posted by bsnub
While it's understandable, your view of not believing a word of you own government's "statements", some countries leaders have a higher % of delivering their announcements.
The LORD airs his view on the topic.
MILITARY OPERATION IN UKRAINE
20:24, 25 march 2023
Putin said that the Russian Federation will be able to respond to the supply of ammunition with depleted uranium to Kiev.
There is an update from 20: 26 →
The Russian President announced plans to produce and modernize 1,600 tanks in three years
Moscow. March 25. INTERFAX:
"Russia has something to respond to possible supplies of depleted uranium shells to Ukraine: the Russian Federation has hundreds of thousands of such shells.Russian President Vladimir Putin said.
"I must say that Russia, of course, has something to respond with.
Without exaggeration, we have hundreds of thousands, hundreds of thousands of such shells. We haven't used them yet," Putin said, answering questions from the media in an interview on the Rossiya - 24 TV channel (VGTRK).
He was asked what would happen to the "famous Ukrainian black soil" in this case.
"This is a question waiting for a painstaking researcher in the person of those who initiate such steps that contradict the interests of normal logic and humanitarian law," Putin said.
He refuted the thesis that depleted uranium shells leave no trace and are harmless.
"This is certainly not the case. The fact is that they, of course, do not belong to the category of weapons of mass destruction, this is true. But the cores of shells with depleted uranium - there can be different materials used - it is used for armor-piercing purposes, it still somehow generates the so-called radiation dust. And in this sense, of course, it belongs to the most dangerous weapons, " Putin said.
Experts confirm, he continued, that after the use in the former Yugoslavia and Iraq, oncological diseases among local citizens increased many times.
"If we are talking about Ukraine, then those who will apply it should understand:
Do they consider those people who live in this territory to be their own? How will they use it against people who are actually their own? I mean, the leftovers will get dusty. In particular, they will pollute the sown areas, " Putin said.
In this sense, the President stressed once again, such weapons can be classified as the most harmful and dangerous for humans.
The Russian leader is convinced that Western countries, pumping Ukraine with weapons, are trying to prolong the conflict.
"From the point of view of the logic of those who provoked this conflict and are trying to save it at any cost, this is probably the right decision (to supply weapons).
In my opinion, this will only lead to a greater tragedy, " the President added"
????? ??????, ??? ?? ?????? ???????? ?? ???????? ??????????? ? ?????????? ?????? ?????
The problem with him is that there is so much bullshit that after a while finding some truths among this heaping dung of misinformation and lies becomes useless.Quote:
Originally Posted by Troy
Exactly, which is why I do not even bother. I am happy to have a civil conversation with the more balanced posters on here, and we can discuss and disagree all we like. But the likes of OhDoh is a lost cause.Quote:
Originally Posted by panama hat
The moral and legal case for sending Russia’s frozen $300 billion to Ukraine
By Lawrence H. Summers
,
Philip D. Zelikow
and
Robert B. Zoellick
March 20, 2023 at 7:30 a.m. EDT
A resident of a bombed building removes his belongings after a rocket strike in Kramatorsk, Ukraine, on Tuesday. (Wojciech Grzedzinski for The Washington Post)
Lawrence H. Summers, a professor at and past president of Harvard University, was treasury secretary from 1999 to 2001 and an economic adviser to President Barack Obama from 2009 through 2010. Philip D. Zelikow, a lawyer and a history professor at the University of Virginia, held foreign-policy posts in five administrations. Robert B. Zoellick has served as president of the World Bank, U.S. trade representative and deputy secretary of state.
Russia’s assault on Ukraine has become a brutal war of attrition — militarily but also economically and socially. Russian President Vladimir Putin recognizes the nature of this struggle. Ukraine, having lost one-third of its GDP, with one-third of its population already displaced and the lights flickering on and off, could win battles and still lose the war.
Ukraine’s allies have rallied to its aid with armaments, but they have faltered on the decisive economic front. Using the approximately $300 billion in Russian central bank assets that were frozen by Western governments at the war’s onset would show Putin he cannot outlast Ukraine and the West economically. There is elegant justice in using Russia’s state funds, now lying idle, to counter the costs of Moscow’s destruction. Plans have been prepared, with ways to avoid corruption and linked to the European Union. That would be a strategy of hope. Last month, the leaders of every state in the European Union, hosting millions of Ukrainian refugees, announced that the E.U. will “support Ukraine’s reconstruction, for which we will strive to use frozen and immobilised Russian assets in accordance with EU and international law.” They added measures to trace all those assets in their countries. Canada has already enacted its own legislation to move ahead.
In the Group of Seven, all now look for U.S. leadership. To its credit, the United States spends billions per month in emergency aid just to help Kyiv pay its monthly bills. But this is not sustainable, and it does not seriously begin the tasks of recovery and reconstruction. Transferring frozen Russian reserves would be morally right, strategically wise and politically expedient — particularly with a restive U.S. Congress.
Governments would have plenty of legal justification for moving ahead. On Nov. 14, 2022, the United Nations formally recognized that Russia must “bear the legal consequences of all of its internationally wrongful acts, including making reparation for the injury, including any damage, caused by such acts.” The United Nations called for creation of an institution, now, to implement this compensation.
In the last such case, after Iraq’s 1990 invasion of Kuwait, using the same emergency powers that President Biden has invoked in this crisis, an October 1992 executive order “directed and compelled” every bank holding Iraqi state funds to transfer them in compliance with a U.N. resolution that called for compensation of the victims of that aggression. More than $50 billion of Iraqi state funds from around the world were eventually paid out to injured countries, widening the supportive coalition. None of this required court action or the aggressor’s permission.
Those who hold Russian assets are entitled, under the international law of state countermeasures for a grave breach of international law, to cancel their obligations to the Russian state and apply Russian state funds to pay what Russia owes. This asset freeze should not be treated, as some think it should be, under a surreal “sanctions” paradigm, waiting upon a fantasy of Russian surrender. Ours is a wartime paradigm, and the compensation cannot wait. And applying the debtor's funds to pay its debts is a common way to encourage a settlement.
In addition to the unfortunate hesitations about deploying the frozen Russian central bank assets, public debate has been muddied by a mistaken focus on Russian oligarchs’ yachts and other seized assets. That involves a comparably minor amount of money, not very liquid, and is much more complicated legally.
In state action against another state’s property, there are no due process concerns. Russia is not a “person” under the U.S. Constitution, and the property being taken is not “private.” There is no sovereign immunity issue, because this is state-on-state; there are no private litigants.
Some warn of the precedent of embittering reparations imposed on a bankrupt Germany after World War I. It is a terrible analogy. Russia has received massive windfall oil profits, worth at least $100 billion, since the war started, and these are not frozen. Putin has likely already written off the frozen funds. It is hard to conceive the scenario in which he gets them back, with Ukraine still broke.
Some financial types will wring their hands about harming the U.S. dollar. This is an important issue. That is why it is so important for the G-7 to move in concert, including with euros and yen. This would deter aggressors but have little other effect, because countries that want to trade in dollars and euros and yen don’t have alternate liquid assets to hold.
European leaders have stepped up. The Biden administration has not yet followed suit. It should use Russia’s frozen funds and its diplomatic leverage now, while it can decide the outcome of the war. The time has arrived for President Biden to tell his advisers what FDR would have told them: This is the right thing to do. Find a way.
Russia ready for peaceful settlement of Ukrainian crisis but has a number of conditions
29.03.2023 14:48
Incidents
"Russia is ready for a peaceful settlement of the conflict in Ukraine, but Moscow has a number of conditions, Mikhail Galuzin, Deputy Foreign Minister of Russia, said in an interview with RTVI.
There are a number of conditions for which a "comprehensive,
just and sustainable peace" in Ukraine and Europe can be
possible, the diplomat said.
According to Galuzin:
- the West should stop supplying weapons to the Armed Forces of Ukraine;
- all armed formations must cease hostilities;
- foreign mercenaries should be withdrawn from the territory of Ukraine.
Galuzin also drew attention to mandatory neutral and non-bloc status of Ukraine:
- The republic must decline its intention to join NATO and the European Union;
- Kyiv must also confirm its non-nuclear status, he added.
Galuzin also voiced Moscow's requirements for the international community. Just like Kyiv, foreign governments must recognize the "new territorial realities", that is, the accession of Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics (DPR and LPR), as well as Zaporozhye and Kherson regions to Russia.
"It is important to restore Ukraine's contractual and legal base
with Russia and the CIS, as well as — at the expense of the West
— the civilian infrastructure that has been destroyed by
the Armed Forces of Ukraine after 2014,” Mikhail Galuzin
added.
It is also important for Ukraine and the West to lift anti-Russian sanctions, withdraw lawsuits, cease legal proceedings against Russia, Russian individuals and legal entities, Deputy Foreign Minister of Russia said.
Just a moment...
The current conditions, which maybe increased one presumes.
Here's one - just fuck off and pay reparationsQuote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
It is not a "crisis" it is an illegal invasion by ruzzia of a peaceful neighbor. No one cares about what ruzzia wants, they have been getting their teeth kicked for months. The best thing they could do at this point is to tuck tail and run back across the border, before the entire ruzzian army reaches culmination and collapses.Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
Apocryphal or not, there is no image in recorded history more evocative of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s madness in Ukraine than that of Emperor Nero fiddling during the Great Fire of Rome that left 70 percent of the ancient city in ruins in 64 CE. As Putin’s “special military operation” burns down around him, Russian forces in Bakhmut, Andriivka, Kreminna, Vuhledar and other small towns along the eastern front in the Donbas are nearing culmination. It is not just Ukraine that is burning. All of Russia is beginning to smolder because of Putin’s myopic fixation on inconsequential cities on a map.
Bakhmut, however, is emblematic of Putin’s obsession. The colossal military mistakes being made there are being repeated throughout the eastern front. The mounting costs to Russia are not limited to losses in Ukraine. They are devastating and, as a result, far-reaching and unending.
The highest cost is in lives. In February, the United Kingdom’s Ministry of Defense estimated Moscow by then had “suffered” more than 200,000 casualties, including as many as 60,000 dead. Given Russia’s declining population of 146 million, that level of loss is generational. It is only getting worse. The ministry last Saturday estimated Russia has racked up as many as 30,000 casualties trying to conquer the 16 square miles comprising Bakhmut.
The burn rate — be it in men, military equipment, or munitions — in Bakhmut alone is astounding. In nine months, Putin’s forces have advanced only 15 miles “west from Popasna to Bakhmut.” That is a mind-boggling 2,000 Russian casualties per mile. By comparison, it is 440 miles from Bakhmut to Kyiv. Fighting terrain varies, but purely as a hypothetical to demonstrate just how badly Putin is faring in Ukraine, crunching the numbers suggests Putin would incur 880,000 more casualties just to reach Saint-Sophia’s Cathedral in the heart of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s capital city.
Bakhmut is just one of four main ongoing battles in the Donbas. Putin — as is documented daily by Chuck Pfarrer, a former U.S. Navy Seal, on his Indications & Warnings Twitter account — is losing men just as rapidly in each of these battles. Six hundred reportedly were killed in action along the Andriivka axis on March 27 alone.
As Pfarrer’s battlefield tactical maps record, Putin’s burn rate of Russian equipment is equally high. On March 24, Pfarrer noted that Russian forces were “repelled in attacks at Serebryansk Forestry and Bilohorvika along the Kreminna battle line.” That singular Ukrainian action resulted in strikes on “Russian HQ elements, air defense sites, and Electronic Warfare equipment.”
This, on top of an “epic” mechanized armor battle in late February at the beginning of Putin’s spring offensive in Vuhledar, which resulted in the loss of 100 Russian tanks. As a war-time commander, Putin has learned nothing in the one-year, one-month-old war. The Kremlin is employing the same strategy as they did in Kyiv by repeatedly “advancing columns into ambushes.”
Taken together, it is not surprising that in 13 months of war, Ukraine estimates Putin has lost 3,595 tanks, nearly 7,000 armored combat vehicles, over 2,638 artillery pieces, 523 multiple rocket launchers, 277 air defense systems, 305 jets, and 291 helicopters.
And for what? A 15-mile eastward advance in the Donbas. At this crawling rate, it will take Putin’s forces nearly 22 years to reach Kyiv from Bakhmut.
Time and lives are not the only costs to Russia. Putin is also torching nearly every aspect of his country in chase of his ego. Russia has been in a recession since November 2022, with annualized GDP dropping nearly 4 percent. Yet even this is somewhat deceiving; non-oil and gas revenues precipitously declined “by 20 percent in October.” The shortfall this caused in GDP was largely backfilled by heavily discounted oil and gas sales to China and India.
That temporary windfall, however, is evaporating as the Brent crude oil benchmark price has dropped over time to $80 a barrel. The impact on Russia’s economy has been immediate. By January 2023, Russian oil export revenues had fallen by 40 percent year-over-year. Absent a global crude price recovery, an even bigger hit to Russia’s GDP is coming.
Meanwhile, Western sanctions continue to severely disrupt Russia’s commercial and military industrial-complex supply chains. The U.S. Treasury Department alone has globally targeted over 600 individuals, entities and “third-country providers” connected to the latter. While Moscow has found ways to avert sanctions by trading through countries such as Kazakhstan to access critical components such as semiconductors, the primary cost of maintaining the country’s supply chain is ever greater economic dependence on Beijing.
Putin is also destroying on a generational basis Russia’s future economic ability to innovate and compete in the post-war global marketplace — not just loss of resources, but brain drain as well. Even if Putin were to miraculously win his war in Ukraine, Russia will have lost economically for decades to come.
Paradoxically, in his desperation to obliterate Ukraine’s national independence, Putin is irrationally selling off his own. As repeatedly evidenced during Chinese President Xi Jinping’s recent visit to Moscow, Beijing is slowly beginning to fully subsume Russia’s independence economically, militarily and diplomatically.
Xi’s demands and stances during the summit should have been humiliating to Putin, who agreed to replace the Russian ruble with the Chinese yuan in trading with the Global South. Despite symbolic gladhanding, Xi offered nothing of military substance that would appreciably change the trajectory of the war in Ukraine. The net effect of Xi’s three days in Moscow, as King’s College professor Sam Greene noted: “China’s domination of Russia is complete.”
Putin blindly believes he has signed on to a multipolar world with Xi as a coequal, but in reality, he is only enabling the world to become a contest of two — Beijing and Washington — while Putin sits on the sidelines with about as much influence as Benito Mussolini had in World War II playing second fiddle to Nazi Germany.
Statesman-like Putin, if he ever really existed, has vanished. Gone are many of his grandiose plans for an economically resurgent Russia: Rapidly expanding the economic value of the Northern Sea Route. Dominating the North Pole. Checking, if not reversing, the growth of NATO in Europe. Diversifying Russia’s economy so Moscow no longer depends on being the world’s “gas station.”
Instead, Putin is ditching it all over a delusional, outsized need to win in Ukraine. Is trying to take Bakhmut and defeating Zelensky in an ego grudge match really worth selling out Moscow to Xi? Putin evidently believes that they are, and like a modern-day Nero, he keeps fiddling away in the Donbas as Russia burns out of control on his watch.
Burn, baby, burn.
https://thehill.com/opinion/national...-putins-watch/
So Finland is in Nato now. They have been preparing.
BBC article from 2020
Finland's air force quietly drops swastika symbol
Finland'''s air force quietly drops swastika symbol - BBC News
Until 1945 its planes bore a blue swastika on a white background - and this was not intended to show allegiance to Nazi Germany, though the two nations were aligned. (:rofl:)
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cp...64967.jpg.webp
^ What point are you trying to make Skiddy?
You do know the Finnish used this symbol from 1918, before it was used by Nazi Germany?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Backspin
You're a boring cretin.Quote:
Originally Posted by Backspin
He doesn't and he doesn't careQuote:
Originally Posted by Troy
No he doesn't !Quote:
Originally Posted by Troy
The little kid surfed the internet and found something he doesn't understand.
0h0h on the other hand is still stuck on the first page of "Das Kapital" :smileylaughing:
The point isQuote:
Originally Posted by Troy
"Putin warns UK against supplying depleted uranium to Ukraine"
that his is Putler"s warning/threat number #6432847, and 0h0h get his jollies posting BS.
Let's run 0h0h's posts through a TD Web filter, make him feel right at home :rolleyes:
https://web.eecs.umich.edu/~zmao/Pap...ship-pam11.pdf
And what did everyone do after they got up off the floor laughing.Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
Hopefully reinforced commitments to Ukraine. Which they did.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh Cow
Russia is getting its shit packed in. This shit is happening on a daily basis...
https://twitter.com/SerDer_Daniels/s...53073799053319