kraze
-
Posts
1,362 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Posts posted by kraze
-
-
34 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:
Yeah, we have to use quotation marks about Russian "journalists". They are propagandists directly employed by the state to produce material used for the state's illicit purposes. In reality they are no more journalists than a uniformed soldier conducting PR activities.
But aside from that, the rules of war are very clear. Journalists are not to be deliberately targeted. If they die because they are embedded with a combat unit that was attacked as part of standard warfare, that's not illegal.
If Ukraine deliberately targeted these "journalists" then that is theoretically a war crime. However, if there was a trial the defense would quite understandably ague that these guys weren't journalists. I think they would be successful in their defense.
Steve
The guy was fighting in this war since 2014. That photo isn't just him posing with an RPK.
They just give some of their more 'media-friendly' soldiers a press ID and they suddenly get to be "journalists".
Not even talking propaganda here.
-
This is why I hate "human rights" organizations.
https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/unesco-director-general-deplores-death-journalist-rostislav-zhuravlev-ukraine
One thing that I don't quite understand is "Journalists serve a critical role in informing the world about conflict situations and must be protected."
The guy looks pretty protected to me.
-
So hopefully both Girkin and Navalny will have another live debate quite soon. Now about who sleeps near the toilet.
-
37 minutes ago, The_Capt said:
Then where is it? Ukraine is pecking away and all we hear about are RA artillery shortfalls and tepid responses. I have yet to see a single crushing indirect fire response from the RA side yet. I can understand the UA keeping a lid on these sorts of things but the Russians are feeding every success story they can into the info-verse, they would not be shy about crowing on major c-fires successes...yet we do not see them. Something in the RS fires system is off.
I think it also has to do with the math.
Russia has occupied a lot of territories. Not only what is internationally recognized - but also quite a few along their borders.
Now take the total length of their borders, borders of occupied regions, optionally add a length of certain internal borders, and divide by arty units they have.
How much arty is there per 100 km? They have to make sure countries like Georgia and Azerbaijan don't get funny ideas and execute them.
-
1 hour ago, Lethaface said:
Which is historically correct. But history != future, but then we now have NATO exactly for this reason.
Also to be fair, it's not like other (European) countries have been fairies historically. For my country we don't have to go back very far, even for officially known/recognized 'mishaps'. We have our 'politionele acties' in Indonesia directly after WW2, for example. So personally I don't think history is that relevant today, I mean it is interesting but one doesn't need history to declare the facts on the ground today. As a matter of fact, extrapolating history is often a fallacy used for predicting the future.And that's the point.
-
43 minutes ago, Butschi said:
To be fair, @panzermartin specifically mentioned Western Europe. None of those countries are in western Europe.
Again, there is enough to discuss that people actually post, so can we all please reduce the number of strawmen a bit? They are multiplying like rabbits of late.
Western Europe should exhale with ease then because historically Russia had trouble reaching any of it.
-
50 minutes ago, panzermartin said:
Historically Russia went deeper into Western Europe only after Western Europe attacked Russia. Napoleon, Hitler etc.
Yes, let's pretend 1939 didn't happen. Or I guess Poland attacked Russia first. And then Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia. And even Finland attacked Russia.
I guess you get to occupy 1/6 of the landmass by being constantly invaded by everyone around you. Because everyone just wanted a piece of your precious Siberian eternal frost. I can just see how somebody in Warsaw thought "goddamn this warm weather in summer and fertile lands. That's it, Ogniezhka, we are capturing Yakutsk! Our kids will get to live in the swampy lebensraum!" -
9 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:
I live very comfortable with the fact that my opinions have zilch influence to the tragic war. They will use it to breach the Russian defenses. I hope it works the message is the tempo to clear the trenches is found wanting. The biggest objection is clusters have too many duds and to clear them post war is the responsibility of the Ukraine.
pretty sure those duds will cause much less issues long term than what russians did by mining every single meter of the frontlines with the whole USSR stock of AP mines. Breaches through that crap will be only meters wide and who knows how deep and maybe a hundred meters around them will be cleared, but a 1000 km line will not and walking through fields of Zaporizhya will cause dead and wounded for decades to come.
Dropping clusters in there is like dropping a stick of wood into a burning forest. -
7 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:
They are saying a lot. Here's a very detailed report documenting the Russian cluster munitions attack at the Kramatorsk train station that killed 58 civilians.
Russia repeatedly tried to blame Ukraine for this warcrime, but it's clear from the HRW fact finding work that it was Russia.
You cannot honestly read this and still claim that HRW keeps quiet about Russia's crimes.
well, at least that's some kind of an upgrade over them calling russian invasion a "civil war" for 8+ years.
still doesn't excuse them protesting cluster munitions for Ukraine. -
54 minutes ago, dan/california said:
I was mostly just hoping that Prig's seizure of Rostov would result in a complete and epic seizure of Russian logistic support for for their forces in Ukraine. I am still bummed that didn't happen.
considering that Prig is in Petersburg and there's no sign of punishment for him apart from 180 degree flip flop on TV regarding Wagner and a rumor of Surovikin getting screwed - I'd say they may have just "settled it out of court".
Whoever (quite possibly the real owner of Wagner - Utkin, among others) that could've gained anything from showing putin that Moscow is a very easy fair game should someone tries - probably gained something. At the same time the price was burning Wagner that was going to be burnt anyway. Remember - on June 24th it was to stop existing completely. But now it got to actively exist (and extort) in Africa and stuffs. The lack of people walking out of a window en masse 2 weeks down the line backs up an argument about this "settlement". -
18 hours ago, Teufel said:
Hold on, if openly supporting Prigozjin makes one liar and unreliable then half of us in this thread are guilty as charged. Seriously, how many posts did in one way or another express approval for the coup in Russia? Not joking, are we using double standards here?
because when a russian, who himself was a part of the problem due to being an oligarch, supports another russian, who is a war criminal responsible for horrible warcrimes without count and who is uprising because Ukrainians aren't being killed effectively enough - means that that russian is perfectly fine with the war, warcrimes and he isn't ok only with putin because they had a falling out at some point in the past. Not even a big one seeing as how Khodorkovsky is alive.
Khodorkovsky supported the immediate "regime change", which would possibly have led to a more "effective" war on a russian part. And this is exactly what makes him no better than putin or prig or whoever else. Or did you somehow think Prig winning was a better deal? Or that it was an "anti-war" coup? -
15 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:
Battlefront said something like if you protect your kin in your own home everything is permitted. I apologize in case I misinterpreted their statement.
Nah it's OK. I'm just genuinely interested why "human rights" got somehow mentioned in a tweet about Ukraine getting cluster munitions and these are bad, because, you know, they are going to be used in probably the most mined area in the world right now and that's bad. Using cluster munitions where russians put 3 AP mines every meter may hurt some Ukrainians.
-
5 hours ago, FancyCat said:
what do Human Rights say about russians employing cluster munitions since 2014?
-
1 hour ago, Teufel said:
That is new information for me, not arguing you are wrong, but could you please elaborate? And secondly, does it mean that what he says is not true (because he doesn’t like Putin after spending decade in Russian prison)?
in his twitter he basically dropped all pretense and openly supported Prig's "coup", urging people to join him. Of course he is pissed off about putin's jailtime, but supporting another putin very much shows that his only problem with the "evil regime" is only personal. He's perfectly fine if filth is running Russia as long as it's his filth.
-
46 minutes ago, Teufel said:
Please see this interview for perspectives from someone who was bullied by Putin.
Khodorkovsky is Prigozhin's camp. I wouldn't put much trust in his words.
-
14 minutes ago, The_Capt said:
That is not really how it works. Anything short of nuclear weapons in Ukraine is not going to give strategic deterrence. Ukraine is waging an epic war right now but no weapons we can give Ukraine are going to deter Russia from the big nasty stuff.
What is deterring Russia from the use of nuclear weapons on Kyiv is that it would raise our level of uncertainty about Russia as a rational state to a crisis point - the worse thing any revisionist power can do is get the West to get off the couch. If we are being brutally honest, we in the West would feel very bad about Kyiv on the receiving end of a nuclear device but that is not what would cause the reaction…it would be the uncertainty of nukes in New York or Toronto (well maybe not so much Toronto).
That uncertainty would demand a response, and even Russia does not want to see what that would look like. We brought them to their knees in a proxy war with a small power that was supposed to fall in a few days. Do you think that maybe what happens if we really get involved isn’t in the Russian calculus? I argue that the evidence that they have tied themselves into knots to avoid direct escalation with NATO proves that they are very concerned.
I do not think Russia has outpaced anything. They are on the freakin defensive right now while managing whatever that freakin thing was a couple weeks ago. No one serious is talking about Russian victory, we are too concerned with Russian full blown collapse. They are barely able to conduct coherent anything right now, let alone a game of escalation dominance. Most of the energy is trying to figure out how to prevent a Russian spiral, up or down because they are a complete hot mess.
Syria, Georgia, Chechnya, we talked ourselves into a status quo lie, that much is true. We embraced our certainty to the point that it became a blindfold. Russia’s biggest mistake, and it is one for the history books, was tearing that blindfold off with this war.
Yes and my point here is that no weapons that can be realistically provided to Ukraine would deter Russia from using nukes. It's a fact, shouldn't be even discussed. However the point here is that by "outpacing" the escalation (e.g. we are still not allowed to strike targets within russian territory using storm shadow despite huge escalation on russian part as an example) russians may get an impression (and I'm not saying a legit one or not) that the West is hitting the breaks in this run - and they may consider using actual WMDs to get what they want.
If they are using exactly the same tactic as the West - boiling the frog slowly - and it works - e.g. ZNPP gets blown up, this makeshift dirty bomb irradiates large chunks of land and no real escalation happens in turn (as in - now you can absolutely smash russians anywhere with ATACAMS, oh and here have our 500 km storm shadows, blow all their **** up ASAP - for example) - so what would it tell russians if we get neutral "let's not get ahead of ourselves" reaction to an act of nuclear terrorism. If the West doesn't get off the couch and downplays the thing?
Are you certain possible terrorist act using ZNPP won't be downplayed resulting in de-escalation instead of escalation?
A year ago I myself would claim that no way, that would trigger the response. In fact we saw several countries take a similar stance a year ago. Even Stoltenberg hinted it's an Article 5 case. A year ago.
But right now - there's silence. Only Russia can be heard. And that's what makes me worried the frog is being boiled slowly and it may just work.
As for russians being on the defensive - sure, it's true. Nobody even remotely considers russians winning this war. But they may do enough damage for Ukraine to not win it either. We are already denied most of our industrial regions by them being wiped off the face of the earth - if the same happens to our agrarian lands - will there even be a victory for us save for being able to remain Ukraine? -
40 minutes ago, The_Capt said:
Ah so somewhat more complex…now we are getting somewhere. So what you are saying is that western deterrence is at risk of failing as Russia continues to prod along red lines. As we have failed to escalate in the past it shows our hand in not really planning to escalate in the future.
Of course it really did not quite happen that way did it? We did escalate in scope, scale and effectiveness of capabilities sent to the UA. Hell you guys got Patriots…only Israel gets Patriots. We know it was viewed as an escalation as Russia came right out and declared it.
Now Russia is definitely playing silly buggers at the dam, and may even have a “soft nuclear incident” as they continue to play footsy with the west - it is kinda on brand. And we will reply by finally giving the UA ATACMS and other higher end capabilities. Moreover, I suspect we will get more comfortable with footsy of our own - precise military strikes into Russia itself - will start non-kinetic and go from there. They have already started with SOF and partisan looking stuff (aside: Russia has also shown its cards on this one as these are “technically” direct attacks on the “motherland” but somehow we are also not in WW3 yet). We will (and should) get nervous at all this as if we escalate too far we not only risk “the big one” we also risk driving support in Putin’s direction - which is not what it was about a month ago.
As to “narratives”, look I get the sentiment. I am pretty sure that a younger and idealistic kraze did not join Amnesty International or volunteer for the White Helmets when Russia was doing worse in Syria…and now Ukraine is basically Syria. But the good news is that unlike Syria, the West actually did get its act together and decided to “do something”.
Of course I am not sure what you and a few others are expecting to gain by shaming or insulting the West writ large, especially on this thread. I mean what is your theory of change here? Do you expect us to riot in the streets? Write our government and advocate…what exactly? Do you not see the risk of alienating your biggest supporters? I get the need to vent, I really do but maybe we aren’t the bad guys here. The situation is all hell and sh#tty but the way out is going to be slow, no getting past that.As to consequences for Russia. Well beyond the obvious daily warcrimes and whatever comes next. Russia did this: https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/special-resources/preliminary-lessons-russias-unconventional-operations-during-russo-ukrainian-war-february-2022
That is the real dark stuff. Pre-meditated and planned in egregious detail. I think normalization with Russia may be a generation away after this. Which is very good news for Ukraine after this war because it puts you on the “front line of freedom” and that is a good place to be...unlike Syria.
Of course the West escalates. That's what I mentioned. Too slow for my taste as Leos would've been absolutely amazing about a year ago before russians mined our lands to hell and back - but that's my personal opinion. And of course defensive stuff is top notch. Problem is that at some point russians seem to have outpaced this escalation.
Because let's be realistic here and ask ourselves a serious question - if the only deterrent for russians from dropping tactical nukes on Kyiv after much of our crop lands being irradiated for the next few centuries - would be providing us with ATACAMS on a condition we never use them anywhere within a russian territory - how long would it take for a tactical nuke to get from its new shiny launch pad in Belarus to the sky over Kyiv?
As for Syria:
I had no illusions about russians once I started seeing their reaction towards their second invasion of Georgia back in 2008. Syria? I thought Aleppo is a very good indication of what russians will do to our cities once they are able to (after all they already invaded Ukraine at that point).
I just couldn't be too vocal or too idealistic about it because everyone would just look at me and tell me I'm being "russophobic", "hateful" or something. Pretty sure I'd be even quickly banned here if it was 2016 for my opinions about russians - as a bonus. Being right actually sucks. -
10 minutes ago, DesertFox said:
It is UK in July and US in August...
Security Council Presidency | United Nations Security Council
sigh, russians can't just do a coup properly, they also ruin somewhat OK jokes by presiding only a month
well at least we now know a single location on planet Earth where russians follow the international law. -
Just now, DesertFox said:
We all know it, well everyone knows it. However now it is formally recognized:
Definitely need comments from the head of UN security council about this recognition.
-
3 minutes ago, The_Capt said:
The two of you have two narratives -
The Russians are savages who will stop at nothing to destroy Ukraine.
And
The West is sitting around and do nothing while the first one happens, and will continue to do so no matter what.
So if these are true…why hasn’t Russia simply used nuclear/chemical/whatever since day 1? Why is this war even still happening? Is Ukrainian resolve and resistance an effective deterrence to strategic nuclear strikes?
If the West is so useless and, clearly ready to let Russia do whatever it wants (and you can come read justifications of this right here on this thread)…why do we even still have this thread? Russias are genocidal savages who are being deterred from escalation…by what exactly? Because we certainly know it is not the bumbling western powers.
Of course if this is the case then why are we spending billions to assist Ukraine? Symbolism? Boredom?
Look, if you guys want to go bask in narratives that call for bloodbaths and holy crusades/WW3 there is a big ol Internet out there that will tell you exactly what you want to hear.
If you want something that resembles a grown up conversation, stick around. But if you are advocating that we all jump on whatever crazy train that seems to float your boat right now: nope.
What is it gonna take for the West to directly intervene in this war? You do not want to know. And frankly this thread won’t matter if that happens because a lot of us will already be dead.
Obviously it's not that simple:
See - the West didn't know what would "escalate" too much - first the consensus was that sending any western made weapons bar ATGMs and MANPADS could "escalate" and then, gradually, as the West called russian bluff, first "dumb" arty started pouring in, then "smart" arty started pouring in, then tanks and missiles, now "escalation" sits at planes.
And just like the West didn't know what would "escalate" too much - so did russians. But I think they started playing this "game" too. By gradually calling West's "bluff" more and more. We went from "russians aren't ever doing this" to "russians doing this" in just a few months with Kakhovka dam, itself a "bluff calling", being a logical step in between. With Kakhovka dam russians most likely killed a 5 digit number of people in one night but there was zero reaction. Even less than usual.
So russians didn't use chemical weapons or nuclear terrorism because they didn't know if it will trigger more reaction than they can handle because they certainly would not be able to fight NATO being exhausted in Ukraine. But now they are themselves "escalating". "Two can play that game" and all.
And that's where the "narrative" comes from. More like a bitter, gloomy observation about something out of one's hands. -
17 minutes ago, Letter from Prague said:
I mean we have seen enormous scale terrorism with no reaction. And just today we saw chemical weapons and we might see nuclear before the day is over.
I'm expecting Russians to start nuking residential districts of cities out of spite and I can read in this thread a very well written explanation why doing nothing about it is in fact the best choice.
"we will not stand by idly and watch these horrible warcrimes take place with cities being leveled using nukes - and promise that an international tribunal will eventually bring everyone responsible to justice"
I just hope I'll not see any BS like above while not seeing it because I get to live and not otherwise. -
7 minutes ago, Letter from Prague said:
Yeah the West won't do anything. The dam non-reaction is a clear green light to Russia.
yep - after zero reaction (not even the token "deeply concerned") I realized everybody in the West very much clocked out of every genocidal warcrime russians are going to do - and ZNPP attack is only a matter of time.
It's possible that after tonight we may see not only T-55s employed at the frontlines by russians, but also tactical nukes in a month or two.
After all tactical nukes cause much less wind spread radiation than a nuclear power plant blown up open and it won't even be an "escalation". -
16 minutes ago, dan/california said:
It is time for NATO to make the redlines even clearer, and MEAN IT. If anything, happens at the plant, and i do mean anything, Article 5 should be declared, and NATO planes should start killing every Russian soldier in Ukraine. And they should keep dong it until they all are dead or gone. If Russia wants a wider war, give it to them, and sink every surface ship in the Russian navy, just for starters.
yeah, not happening.
-
14 minutes ago, dan/california said:
The elite considers the rest of the population to be herd of domestic animals to be managed for profit, and if anything, cares less for their welfare than most ranchers do their cattle.
Post-Prigs half assed coup so called "elite" and their desires and world view do not matter anymore.
More and more russians now openly voice support for wagnerites because "they get s-it done" (e.g. kill Ukrainians "properly"), it's a delayed time bomb with timer dependent entirely on AFU's successes. In a state where a year ago one would go to jail for a bad retweet - now absolutely nothing happens to people who openly support "terrorists".
Unless "elites" win somehow - that cattle is going to start the Animal Farm.
See, Orwell depicted totalitarian societies really spot on - you run that farm while the cattle is afraid/respectful of your power. But the moment the farmer is seen as weak - well... you read the book, I'm sure.
How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted
russians are producing missiles and they aren't using them again, so these estimates will become outdated next month. They will have enough to strike energy system this autumn is what really matters.