VladimirTarasov
-
Posts
817 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by VladimirTarasov
-
-
7 minutes ago, IICptMillerII said:
Illegal is illegal. No matter what "view" or "lens" or whatever you look at it from, breaking law is still breaking law.
I'm sick of repeating the same things over and over now. If you do not see any other illegal things other than the Crimean referendum then that's that arguing with you.
8 minutes ago, IICptMillerII said:By this logic, the entire Western world has complete justification in invading and toppling the Putin government. Talk about calling the kettle black. The Putin government is probably the least legitimate government in Eastern Europe right now. Is that really the logic train you want to be riding?
Jesus Christ... Come save me! I voted for Putin but he's illegitimate because he won!
9 minutes ago, IICptMillerII said:You still never answered my point earlier. There are Russian speakers in the US. Hell, a Russian family (the husband was a construction contractor in Moscow) bought my old house. If a Russian, or a Russian speaker was mugged in the US does that give Russia the right to annex Alaska? If a group of Russians or Russian speakers are mugged/attacked/whatever crime does THAT give Russia the right to annex Alaska?
Read my Estonia example where Russia intervening there is not justified by any thing, and if you'd remember there was a very intense hype up of Russia threating the Baltics. Again exaggerations, not more different than some things the Russian government says. Russia sold Alaska, there's no Russians there, the US is a completely legitimate government, nothing there for any threat to Russian people to take place. I don't get why you are bringing those totally irrelevent claims up, it has nothing to do with the way Russia reacted in Ukraine, and for what reasons. I'm sure in Crimea quite a few Russian people have been mugged so by your standards Russia should have annexed way before lol... Irony
16 minutes ago, IICptMillerII said:Literally everything you are saying is hypocrisy, so its not that hard. Thanks for the gold star though.
Okay sure.
17 minutes ago, IICptMillerII said:The US cares enough to impose disastrous sanctions on a nuclear armed country. Sanctions which are supported by Europe. Sanctions that are annihilating the Russian economy. To say that the US, or Europe does not care about Ukraine is obviously untrue.
The US definitely cares but not in the way I was talking about.
20 minutes ago, IICptMillerII said:You can continue to try to 'justify' or 'excuse' Russia's actions in Ukraine, but no one in the world is buying it. No one believes you're in the right, and no one believes any of the junk spewed by the Kremlin. The proof of this? The continuing sanctions.
Harsh words, sanctions on behalf of the EU and US doesn't count as the world, but it is a considerably large population sure lol.
22 minutes ago, IICptMillerII said:Really, Russia has already lost, spectacularly. So go ahead, continue to try and justify whats happening. It really makes no difference. The sanctions will continue, as will the universal condemnation. You harvest what you plant, and boy did you plant a turd.
So be it, if Russians must endure sanctions for another decade we'll take it.
-
6 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:
And it make sense. Russia can not challenge the West in normal conventional ways because Russia doesn't have the resources or allies to do so. Therefore, it is resorting to old Soviet tricks in new form. And I agree with the second article that Putin is simply taking advantage of real internal problems within Western countries, not causing them (though making them worse for sure)
I'd also agree with you however let's not forget that politicians can use this for PR on a variety of topics. In other cases, exaggerations and false claims. But of course Russia does try to influence whatever it can, same as other nations.
-
6 minutes ago, Sublime said:
How are things over there with you anyways friend?
Fine thanks friend how about you? Looking for someone to shoot a CMBS match with on the weekend possibly if you're interested
-
Just now, Sublime said:
I dont know if I am. I dont think thats what abouting since the two events are happening at the same time? And im sure Steve who knows a lot more than me can provide relevant links to Russian money and far right groups in Europe.
They destabilize the country. Become nationalistic.. perhaps even a threat to Russia eh?
There are Neo-Nazis in Russia, and they at some point were an issue before. However tough policies have since come into place. I dare a far right group to attack anyone around my town lol...
-
1 minute ago, Sublime said:
Vlad I find it funny youce brought up far right groups and their menace in Ukraine considering theres been a lot of evidence that Russia is funneling money into far right groups in almost all of Europe and America.
Our government in no way or form has ever officially supported Neo-Nazis. BTW aren't you what abouting?
-
Looking forward to this update!
-
51 minutes ago, IICptMillerII said:
We are ripping Vlad because, after 53 pages and over 1,000 responses, he is STILL spouting the same tired drivel attempting to excuse what Russia is doing. If he said, "Yeah what we're doing is wrong but I still support it because I'm Russian" well then fine. Thats his opinion, and I can have my opinion on that, but thats all it is. But he isn't doing that. He is trying to excuse and justify the actions of his country. That is what has led to such a long thread, and the 'ripping of Vlad.'
You stay going by international law, or what say you, and look at what I'm trying to say through a narrow view. If Russia were to go to even Estonia to secure Russian rights in the region it is not justified. However Ukraine is a total different ball game. The hype of a Russian threat to baltics was put to shame after a while, but anyways beside that fact. Our Estonian neighbors have a democratic president which was legally elected. Russia has no justification in the regions, on top of that, Estonia has not abused Russians any where near the scale the Ukrainian crisis did. Anyways, I brought Estonia in as an example of what I've been getting at.
36 minutes ago, hattori said:Cry me a river about having to put up with Vlad having a different opinion than you. I had to put up with MURICA!!!! for like a decade after 2003 before the majority of you guys finally started coming around to your senses and realized, "oh crap, maybe we were in the wrong there".
I also suppose you don't see the irony of
I appreciate that you've been defending me it's nice not to have 5 plus people just aggressively type to you(Steve usually being the polite one), and ignore a bunch of what I've saying and refer to stuff like "Russia is now Nazi Germany" "steal a part of the shop" and have your whole points ignored. The largest point that I've been making is the legitimacy of the Ukrainian government after the violent ousting of Yanukovich. But of course people who like to curse at the Kremlin and shout off the wrongs that we have done, that I've acknowledged, ignore that Ukraine lost all control to random groups not just the people, to far right groups, who've demonized Russians in the country.
But you know, all those claims are illegitimate, Russia cannot in response to the ousting of Yanukovich without the say of Russian people in Eastern Ukraine, cannot come in and secure Crimea and let a voting process happen, while securing the rights of the Crimean population no matter what was behind Russia taking Crimea, it is still very much justified. Let's look at videos like this first to show you what threat Russia came in against to secure the voting process:
And many other very graphic links I can provide, however I will keep it clean. How can one think a government that bans anything Russian, and lets Neo-Nazi vermin attack elder world war 2 veterans, be considered legitimate by any circumstance? I would understand if this attack was purely on behalf of a bandit group, however the police do nothing against it. There are many other very violent cases, however I'm not sure if it would be breaking forum rules if I were to link it, it's very graphic and I'd rather not link my other examples.
But again, thank you for calling out hypocrisy.
1 hour ago, IICptMillerII said:Well, Hitler caused the Holocaust and invaded like 6 countries man, so the US invasion of Iraq is ok because Hitler did it way worse. 500,000 dead Iraqis isn't even close to 11,000,000 killed in concentration camps, so it was totally justified because it wasn't as bad as what Hitler did. Also, there was an English speaker in Baghdad, so we had to invade in order to protect a fellow English speaker. (/s)
Am I justified enough for you now?
Neither the conflict in Ukraine nor conflict in Iraq, can be compared to what Hitler has done on any scale. But to sanction Russia and scream in horror at what we've done by your claims, is so funny. Because and I will whatabout now: who will sanction other countries who actively without denial support illegitimate terrorist bandits, with a huge record of beheading, "jihadying" killing innocents, and breaking humanitarian rights. Don't act as if you have the moral high ground here, obviously these sanctions are perfect for the US's goal of hurting Russia. The US doesn't care in the first place about Ukraine, John McCain shaking hands with far right groups with single digit support in the nation can hint at this.
56 minutes ago, shift8 said:Secession can only be done legitimately if either the formation of the nation was not originally self determined, or if the nation state as a whole agrees with the secession.
Ehem....
-
Okay thats whay you can believe in, unlike hitler I dont hate anyone and I support a defensive role in the crisis. A legitimate voting process where majority voted to join Russia, if you dont believe go do some searches on the internet. So dont come to me with "OMG YOUR HITLER" demonization. Quite irrelevant.
-
What you want me to say we didn't break international laws? You can condemn us all you want and ignore every little event up to the Russian intervention if you'd like. You do know violent coupes are illegal by international law too? IF you will play with the rights of my people who've been living in your country for centuries I will defend them no matter what. There is no international law that can justify this other than morality. I'd also love to condem a bunch of countries for destroying the middle east. I'm sick of this attitude grow up and face the reality, Russia is not gonna let its people get abused like that.
-
I'm not suggesting Ukrainians are Russians I'm suggesting we come from the same place, and obviously the Tsars have had horrible policies not only to Ukrainians but to everyone, let's not call it Russification but the evilness of Tsars, why do you think the communist revolution happened...
-
11 minutes ago, IICptMillerII said:
"Its morally just for me to walk into this store and take jewelry without paying. The store owner and the police consider this to be breaking the law, so I'm forced to be covert about taking the jewelry. I have to change my tactics from 'buy with money' to 'smuggle under my shirt and don't get caught.'"
"Oh its still ok for me to do this, the guy who owns the store is Italian, and my grandmother was Italian so we're basically related. Can't steal from family right?!?!"
You have literally got to be kidding me. Are you for real? I'm not one to grade a nation/people on the tongue in cheek stereotypes made up about them, but you are enforcing every single one about Russians right now.
Gotta hand it to ol' Vlad, if this is all a troll, it is the most elaborate long con I've ever seen. Just the patience alone...
Of course you can interpet it that way instead of discuss in detail a true face of reality. You cannot use that and compare it to what happened in Ukraine, for many reasons I've listed. But anyways, lets use totally different analogies not pertaining to any similarity on the history of what happened in Ukraine. But go ahead run me by the stereo types.
-
9 minutes ago, kinophile said:
For Russia to expect and demand that of the Ukraine is pretty pointless and uncaring of the damage and lives it destroys. But it won't stop those kleptocratic c#nts in the Kremlin from trying.
You sound very hurt, you obviously are a very biased person. I'd hate to use offensive language on here, I'm trying very hard to be civil when I read stuff like this.
11 minutes ago, JUAN DEAG said:Explain Russian Tsars throughout history issuing decrees banning the use of the Ukrainian language. Explain the repression of Ukrainian churches during Soviet rule. Explain a systematic famine targeting Ukrainian villages in the 1930s followed by a mass migrations of Russians to the territories in which millions of Ukrainians died. Explain the complete removal of the Ukrainian language from government institutions (schools, transportation, etc.) in later Soviet rule. Explain the fact that Ukraine has the largest group of Russian speakers that are not ethnically Russian. Some might call this "Russification".
Hmm, please study on Kievan-Rus. Don't make me go whatabout again! Russification has happened. just not to Ukrainians. That's like saying explain to me why conquered Native lands of the US in school are educated mainly in English. And even then are not comparable to why many Ukrainians speak Russian.
-
2 minutes ago, Wicky said:
"I'm by definition of Ukrainian descent, however I consider myself to be Russian historically I think of each other as the same."
Plus you said Russia's motives in being in Ukriane was for the reason of looking out for the Russian speakers - What have you to say about the enforced Russification of Ukraine over decades that played its part in creating you?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russification_of_Ukraine
In the 1960s, the Ukrainian language began to be used more widely and frequently in spite of these policies. In response, Soviet authorities increased their focus on early education in Russian. After 1980, Russian language classes were instituted from the first grade onward.
On a literary note if you get the chance read a play by Irish playright Brian Friel, called 'Translations' that's set in early 19th century > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Translations that has interesting themes of imperialism of language and culture.
The Ukrainian region was influenced by many factors, just like the Turks of Kazakhstan or Uzbekistan, speaking varied versions of their language. they speak a varied version of slavic languages, in some areas we lose word connections with each other, in other terms compatibility. Also, majority of Ukrainians speak Russian. Any Ukrainian I know (including relatives if you'd consider them Ukrainian anyways) speak Russian, but this does not point to "Russification" there is a song called "Tachanka" very commie but it says "Эх, тачанка-киевлянка, наша гордость и краса, Украинская тачанка, все четыре колеса" Ukraine is apart of our history the same way we are for them. It is a shame because of politics regardless who is wrong who is right, we face hatred towards each other. I hope that Ukraine and Russia will once again open arms to each other after all this blood filled history passes.
-
35 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:
I can't say in the past because there are no accurate records. But in recent years it is absolutely the majority of the Ukrainian population that wish to be independent of Russia.
This link you've provided shows the discontent of Ukrainians with Mr.Poroshenko and Yatsenyuk, and against the new system's court and what say you. I'd think the people now are more discontent with the Ukrainian economy than before with Mr. Yanukovich
I don't like to dismiss polls, but I'd like to know alot of the factors ranging on how much people, and what region was asked this poll. However, it wouldn't be hard for me to believe this honestly. Not like the Ukrainian government before this new one was perfect. However, looking back speaking on behalf of my Ukrainian neighbors I'd say they were doing way better before.
39 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:Ukrainians have revolted against Russia rule more times than that. Two significant uprisings in the 1800s, the struggle against Russian Bolsheviks, and the fight against Soviet forces 1941 through the early 1950s. For sure there has been a lot more small scale opposition to Russian rule than that.
Again we'd have to look into detail. There are Chechens who hate Russia with all their guts, who've rebelled against Russian forces in wars. And there were loyalist Chechens who chose the Russian government side. I'd think you know that we'd have to look into many other factors. But I get the point you are putting across.
43 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:Anyway, the point here is that you said that Ukrainians are a part of Russia
Misunderstanding, or a goof off on my part. But Ukrainians definitely "were" apart of Russia. I'm by definition of Ukrainian descent, however I consider myself to be Russian historically I think of each other as the same. My point was that Russia has a sphere of influence in Ukraine, because we have a size-able force of Russian people, and Ukrainians who consider themselves "pro-Russia" and also we are obliged to support Russians there. We can argue that the Russian intervention caused deaths militarily then if it weren't to, and that fact is not deniable of course, but this does not justify one bit the hell ATO brought to the region. DPR/LPR obviously started off as a pure rebellion by the populace, later leading to Russian involvement. But again if we were to just look at the event with one side, it would not be correct to do so. I'm trying to point out why Russia is not bad in "saving" the last pro-Russian thing in the country. Ukraine did a radical 180 degree turn and we cannot deny this. They destroyed statues of Soviet heroes who've fought against Fascism the same way our US colleagues have. It is very apparent that the new system brought into Ukraine has many faults, mainly being a discriminatory system against Russians or things of Russian influence. If you'd like for me to elaborate on that I can. That is just a small piece of why I think it is not fair the Maidan revolution is not fair.
53 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:The enforced famine certainly was the biggest part of it, but Ukrainian citizens (as well as those of other republics) were murdered and terrorized in large numbers throughout the Stalin years in particular. As for the more sympathetic explanation of the famine, I'm certainly familiar with it. There might even be some truth to the claim that it was simply bad management and bad timing more than deliberate Soviet action. But the fact remains that the Soviet state was responsible for the deaths of millions of Ukrainians. Given Stalin's other documented cases of targeted mass murder, I don't think it's unfair to suggest that the famine was at least partially deliberate.
Well I like to contribute the famine to bad management, the USSR obviously would not have gained anything from such a horrible act. It is very horrible that people had to die that way, unimaginable on my part.
55 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:Yup, I'm aware of this. McCain is "old school" Republican in many ways. Cold War concepts of support the enemy of your enemy no matter how bad they are. As you can see from the article, there were many in the West that did not approve of this any more than Russia did. With Svoboda's support being in the single digit %, it's pretty obvious that McCain wasn't talking to the right people anyway.
McCain is not the only one who's done things like this. The US government out right supported the ousting of the government in many ways, however I will not point fingers at anyone in particular, but I'd like to think even if you think it is justified Western nations did support the revolts. Svoboda isn't very popular however far right groups are not only limited to this party. There are many other groups that have done terrible acts in Ukraine, I won't blame the whole revolution for the things they've done, but what they did do justifies my view on the crisis.
59 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:However, the more logical explanation, which fits the facts and history of Ukraine and Russia, is that... Ukrainians were sick and tired of being poorly ruled. They saw the EU as a way to force their government to perform to higher standards and Yanukovych agreed.
Sure the EU on paper could have "forced" Ukraine into higher standards, but just because a sizeable portion of the country was upset by what Yanukovich did does not make it right that the other sizeable portion was looked over. I don't think it was a balanced process, and the people who were upset had the spot light.
1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:Despite the weather and violence against their protests, they got stronger.
I'd like to point out that even in Ukraine, the protests were looked at wrongly in quite a few cases. Especially when the protesters were violating laws. Berkut forces being burnt to a crisp because young Mikhail wants the Euro dream, he'd rather his country go into total disarray. The violence against the protests were justified in cases where government officials, and government sites were under threat. It is horrible 100 protesters had to die, but again we must not focus on only the protester's side.
1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:No, I'm not. And Human Rights groups and economic evidence clearly shows this is the case. Sure, it's not as bad as before Putin got into power and it is definitely better than under most of the Soviet years, but Russians are suffering because of Putin's corrupt and autocratic rule.
Putin is not corrupt to majority of Russians. But anyways this is not a productive part of our discussion.
1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:Yanukovych fled Ukraine. There is nothing in the Ukrainian Constitution that allows it's President the authority to rule from a foreign country. Yanukovych could have stayed in Kiev, but he chose to leave.
I believe he wrote the letter to the Russian government asking for restoring of constitutional order before he was ousted, Russia only intervened to land grab Crimea however. Selfish sure, but again Russian troops in Kiev where thousands of thousands of pro EU protesters are brutally hunting old government guys was not going to work out. Instead, the Russian government seized Crimea. Even Yanukovich was against this, but sadly no Russian soldier was going to change what happened in Kiev.
1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:Also, there was no violent revolution. The Yanukovych government chose to use force against protestors and the government collapsed as a result. A violent revolution, by contrast, is something like what happened in Romania.
One would be a fool to deny that the government did crack down on the protesters, but what led them to do so? If you remember, the protesters were throwing rocks and using bats hitting the Berkut police forces helmets, fighting them, in some cases bringing firearms. We also cannot deny that, I can elaborate on this if you'd please.
1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:Er, no you can not. Unless you classify Russian Armed Forces as an NGO.
Russian NGOs did provide aid to Donbas, even equipment for the Donbas militia was bought by Oligarchs or from peoples. But again, we can't deny the Russian government's involvement in the region to provide the necessary advisory and training and in some cases equipment to the Militia.
1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:Yet the US and other countries go this route even when Russia and China are for sure going to veto. If Russia doesn't think there's a reason to be in the UN, then it should give up its seat on the Security Council to someone that does.
United Nations can be arguably not needed, but they are needed. UN has many good sides to it. However, relying on the UN to get stuff done takes too long, and Russia went in for the initiative in securing Crimea.
1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:Encouraging Ukrainians to stand up against a corrupt and autocratic regime is not against international law or any decent morale view of life.
Correct I absolutely agree, however the way it was done is immoral and very corrupt. And only one side's case was taken into play.
1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:Invading a country, taking its land by force, killing thousands of people, and increasing the chance of another world war while at the same time lying about it every single day doesn't seem like a "fair trade".
In no way is taking Crimea by popular vote, and supporting Russian rebellions in Donbas alive making us closer to world war 3. What is making us closer to world war 3 is you not releasing the modules for Combat Mission Black Sea. Jokes aside back to the seriousness of the topic without offending(hopefully) anyone, I've told you my case on why I think it is justified, but I'm not throwing your arguments into the trash, I actually give you credits in some of your arguments, but I also see that you are lopsidedly criticizing one side, and taking input only from the new Ukrainian government, which leads to some bias views. I won't deny I have had quite a few bias looks before and I probably still do sometimes. But there are many things wrong about the revolution in Ukraine, and the crisis that has evolved from it.
1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:This is an important point. If Russia's position is a morale and legal one, then why does it put so much energy into lying about it? Normally lying is used when actions are not morale and/or legal. Do you not agree?
It is morally just, however internationally we are still considered breaking laws, hence why EU and the US is sanctioning us and demonizing us(every day
), so this leads the Kremlin to new forms of tactics. Covert operations, and denying involvement in the region (Donbas) and arguably the Ukraine and US in some cases do exaggerate Russian involvement in the region. Going as far as to saying 12,000 plus Russian soldiers being deployed, and that GRU operatives are the only reason for the people uprising in Donbas. But anyways, this leads to many confusions in the Russian masses, quite a few of Russians do not think Russia was involved, but still alot of Westerners think brigades of Russian troops poured in and they are the only "rebels" in Donbas. More so Russian troops probably arrived in critical zones to propel the Militia forces, and in complete support/advisory or training roles.
1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:Yes, and I thank you for that.
My pleasure, it is very rare to have discussions with people on the internet like this. Especially on a forum
and especially with the owner of it.
-
5 hours ago, Sublime said:
Stalin made the Ukraine suffer millions dead in the 30s famines.
Not to say Stalin was a good guy, but there's more to it then that. But I am not willing to go into that off topic.
5 hours ago, Sublime said:As a side note do you not think it odd that American board members here know all about theGPW includint even obscure stuff such as Vatutins demise, yet you had never heard of Op Market Garden and Varsity?
I am grateful there are people with great knowledge on here, however that is more of a individual basis, let's not collectively assume stuff. No offense but that is very ignorant.
5 hours ago, Sublime said:Basic American history classes dont give a great in depth account of ww2 but its truthful and acknowledges the Red Army foufht the brunt of the Germans and lost millions.
Russian history books don't pretend that we were the only ones fighting the AXIS powers. Let's not jump to conclusions.
5 hours ago, Sublime said:Examples of Russian texts range from soviet era that implied we helped the nazis and were tryn for a seperate peace with them all along to more modern readings that still basically say the west deliberately let russians die to make it easier for them.to invade western europe and completely glosses over lend lease.
I'd like to catch a fool to say that when I'm around, I will lay down the facts very quickly to him
in no way was I taught in school anything like that.
5 hours ago, Sublime said:But still Vlad it hasnt struck you how very much we know about your country and its history compared to your lack of ours?
I'd wager I'm also familiar with American history. Why do you think I know English and speak it so well. I'm intrigued by US history.
4 hours ago, kinophile said:Or maybe he just missed that class.
Probably, maybe I was too busy learning squad/platoon based tactics.
-
16 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:
See, this is the whole problem. Ukrainians do not share this view. They have revolted, numerous times, against Moscow's control.
The majority of the population or a portion of the Ukrainian population? In world war 2 there were Ukrainian fascists who've joined the German army against their own motherland, however this does not mean by any means that Ukrainians enjoyed killing Jews, and Russians collectively. It sounds as if you're judging the whole Ukraine.
16 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:In response Moscow has murdered millions of Ukrainians.
Elaborate on that? If you're talking about the famine then you need to do a little more research on that.
16 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:And in 1991 when Ukraine was finally given a choice to remain ruled by Moscow and being independent, what did it choose? Independence.
I'm not saying Russia owns Ukraine, the government of Ukraine got their independence because the USSR collapsed however you cannot just throw centuries of history out the window because of that. We were still very much tied to each other in many things. Anyways, I that's beside the point, I wasn't arguing wether Ukraine is independent or not. Of course Ukraine is its own country now... But you are twisting what I'm saying, I was listing reasons on how Russia is justified to protect Russian rights in Ukraine. Over night a historical ally of Russia is essentially chased out of power, by foreign influenced riots my evidence being this btw:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/15/john-mccain-ukraine-protests-support-just-cause
In the article it doesn't mention him meeting the far right leader however this article on the same story does
http://www.businessinsider.com/john-mccain-meets-oleh-tyahnybok-in-ukraine-2013-12
Anyways I'm sure if you do your research you can find many more articles, with pictures, and evidence showing Western support for far right groups in Ukraine, but you know beside that fact, we all know why this event took place. Russia gave Ukraine 2 billion dollars which Yanukovich accepted out of the 15 billion dollar deal, and you know some guys in Ukraine especially some Oligarchs weren't happy. Add in Western support, and wallah you have a mini Syria in Kiev. The president escapes fearing for his life because some extremist EU groups want to be apart of the almighty EU. I pity this very much the more it comes to my mind.
16 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:How the Tzar or Stalin treated Russians is not relevant. Russians today suffer under Putin, so does that somehow excuse what Putin is doing to Ukraine? No.
You've got to be joking or something.
16 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:You have been conditioned to hold this belief, just as a battered wife believes that it would be worse to leave her husband
Oh yes it is in my genetic codes, because I am a Russian poor me.
16 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:Oh, I'm aware of what Russian propaganda states, but I am also aware it is as much of a lie as "there are no Russian soldiers in Crimea".
President Yanukovich before escaping asked Russia to reinstall constitutional order in Ukraine, before those pro EU people ousted him. Him being the legitimate leader, gave Russia all the right especially since Putin issued an order, and the Russian parliament permitted it before doing so. Crimea was secured, a voting process among the people were established voting choices being. Remain in Ukraine or join the Russian federation. Sevastopol and Crimea voted join Russia, not shocking... majority are pro-Russia over there anyways. But you of course will say "it broke Ukraine's constitution" show me where in Ukraine's constitution it shows you can violently overthrow your elected president because he wasn't pro-EU. Lol...
16 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:Of course Western NGOs and other groups encouraged Ukrainians to stand up for their rights and to oppose an autocratic and corrupt government. Why shouldn't they?
I wish it was just Western NGOs, but anyways I can use this same argument against you in case of Donbas.
16 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:Yes, you are stupid for saying this.
Thanks I don't get that alot.
16 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:Let's see what other options Russia had...
1. Wait and see if there really was a problem to worry about. Putin waited about 12 hours before signing the orders to invade Ukraine. Surely you don't think that in 12 hours Ukraine's military could form a credible threat to Russian security even if it was motivated to?
God's sake.... wait and see about any problems. What else was there to see?
16 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:Go to the UN and make a case for some form of action. Raise the issue of security for Russian speaking Ukrainians and have a credible monitoring force put in place.
Swift veto by any other nation to impose any policy, because the US and UK fully supported the EU revolts. Great choice!
16 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:3. Not invade and steal territory.
Seems like a fair trade off that you stole the Russians and Ukrainians president and government they voted for from them.
16 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:4. Not lie about everything it is doing.
Somewhat could agree here only in the case of the covert intervention of course. Sanctions took their toll.
16 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:Which is why you deny so much and so hard. I've said this before... I think you are at heart a good person who doesn't want to question his love of country.
I also think you are a good person, politics would never change my mind on an individual. We're just having civil discussions.
-
5 minutes ago, JUAN DEAG said:
This is kind of off topic but, why does the Russian military have such an aversion to bar armor (slat armor, cage armor, whatever you call it)? I haven't seen it used on any Russian vehicles and once saw a Russian TV show Voyenna Priemka (can't find the name in Cyrillic) that did a segment on the ineffectiveness of bar armor, basically writing it off as useless. This division is seen in Ukraine were Ukrainian security forces cover their vehicles with bar armor as soon as they learned it provided limited protection from shaped charges. The separatists on the other hand remove the bar armor from captured Ukrainian vehicles, claiming that it is only good for breaking neck when dismounting. Interestingly enough, when Ukrainians repatriate the stolen vehicles they reinstall the bar armor; if the vehicle was supplied by Russia they also install the bar armor. You're in the Russian army, right? Why does your army hate bar armor so much?
Juan, it's because ever since world war 2 bar/cage armor was useless. Nazis were putting nice little holes in our tanks with panzerfausts. Then more advanced cage armor was attempted with farther distance than before. It is still useless... Cage armor is a no choice add on IMO. In Syria, government forces have cage armor extending out half a meter, and even then I'd question it's stand off capability against RPG warheads. Cage armor can be useful in putting distance away from the HEAT projectile, but armored vehicles especially APCs or BMP type IFVs have weak side armors even with the cage armor.
-
10 minutes ago, Erwin said:
I hesitate to join this very interesting discussion, but I do have a couple of questions as am genuinely puzzled by the situation. Am no particular fan of Russia, but 1) What would be the difference be between Texas and Ukraine, and what would the US do, if the Texans suddenly decide that they want to be return to be part of Mexico again since they have a very long history of being part of Mexico until invaded by US forces? 2) Ditto for the English vs Scotland if Scotland "came to its senses" and decided it wanted to join the Warsaw Pact after centuries of exploitation by the English?
Well honestly those scenarios still can't be compared to what happened in Ukraine, however they are quite interesting. I don't think the current world situation in those regions permit Texas going to Mexico, because first off Mexico faces many internal issues, secondly Texas is just fine being a US state.
-
1 hour ago, kinophile said:
I blame donut corruption and Russian agents bribing BFC staff with Pavlova for the Oplot's bug!
You know too much.
26 minutes ago, c3k said:Patches are for the weak.
LOL
-
7 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:
Every country has an inherent right to a "sphere of influence", even if it is limited to just the border areas. However, how great a sphere, how strong a sphere, and how abusive the sphere is where the debate comes in. The US, for example, has a long border with Mexico. Millions of people and immeasurable quantities of drugs illegally come over that border.
Truly, the only sphere of influence the US is involved is Mexico, and not every corner in the world.
7 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:Russia has a long border with Ukraine and Ukraine speaks Russian quite well. Ukrainian media which highlights how corrupt and repressive Russia is has a negative effect within Russia, therefore Russia wants to claim a right to exert influence over its borders. Likewise, Russians have profited from exploiting Ukraine for its own economic, political, and military benefit so any change in that status negatively affects Russia. Unlike the US example, Russia has neither the moral nor legal justifications for counter acting these things in the first place, which means *ANY* activity it engages in is unjustifiable.
Let's also not forget the fact Ukraine was not a independent state until the 1900s, and was Russian. Anyways following up I'm going to get into greater detail on why you are completely wrong.
7 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:For centuries Ukraine has been an abused and impoverished vassal state of Russia under both the Tzars and the Soviet systems. Western influence in Ukraine has been almost zero until 1991.
Ukraine for centuries was Russia, and Russia was Ukraine. A large portion of Ukraine is where Russians have originated from. Ukraine was given independence as a Ukrainian state during the Soviet times. But you know, let's pretend that Ukrainians are not connected to Russia, and that prior to 2014, we weren't tied to each other militarily, economically, and politically.
7 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:In reality it continued to be an exploited state for Russia's sole benefit. As with Soviet and Tzarist practices of the past, this exploitation was accomplished by keeping corrupted locals in charge of the government. The only difference is that because Ukraine is a recognized independent country its corrupt leaders had more leverage to extract more from Russia than for the past few hundred years.
Okay you assume that Ukraine is the only victim of the Tsar's practices. Russians suffered immensely, the same way Ukrainians did. Hence why the Communist Revolution had many Russians and Ukrainians together against the Tsar. You forget all the industry capabilities as brothers Ukrainians and Russians built together. It is still very apparent in their military. But let's forget this, and just narrowly view a Russian intervention and not take into account anything else other than Russian intervention.
7 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:Over time Ukrainians have realized how bad the situation is in their country because they can see their neighbors prospering under Western influence. Rule of law is strong, personal wealth is definitely higher, and overt corruption is very difficult to see on a daily basis.
It is only Ukraine who have seen the brutality of the Tsar, not the Russians and many other ethnic groups. But anyways beside the fact, Ukraine is willing to cooperate with the EU and go fully into US sphere. The other countries like Belarus, and the Russian Federation who do not violently over throw the voted president, destroy all kinds of control, and cause chaos among the nation are clearly not smart like the Ukrainians that were in Kiev. I truly fear Putin and his FSB cronies! Come on Steve, you bring out a bunch of dirt against Russian intervention (which I've agreed to) but fail to see this coupe is supported by foreign countries. You accuse the Ukrainian government of the time being corrupt (which is true in minor cases, corruption exists in Russia, and people point this out to the government and are trying to get it abolished) yet you do not comment on about Yanukovich not signing an order to crack down, or control the nation state. Also, you ignore the fact that before Yanukovich escaping, he was being hunted down for his head! Show's to me you ignore the brutality of this Maidan revolution. And many other minor details, like the US supporting obviously far right groups, which have at most had the support of a small portion of the population.
7 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:Maidan happened because the majority of Ukrainians wanted a better life than the one offered under Russia's "sphere of influence".
European Union?! Brexit says enough against this claim, people got to vote fairly. In Ukraine's case, violent overthrows take place. If you've been following on this, you'll notice all the western influence in the maidan revolts. But you know, "whataboutism" at play. Russia is evil, and we are very ignorant dumb downed folks.... That's the impression I get from you sometimes.
7 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:The result of Yanukovych was no head of state in Ukraine and an immediate Russian invasion. Putin had absolutely no legal right to launch such an invasion, either according to the Russian Constitution or International Law.
Putin had no legal right true, but if Ukraine has no head of state and everything is in disarray, anti-Russian right wingers coming into power. Russia will secure Russian rights in the region. Again, you keep looking at the intervention part, and nothing else... Am I stupidly saying something different? There is no other two nations, with a significant history, and tie together like Russia and Ukraine, so I cannot make any comparisons.
7 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:Russians will continue to equate the West's non-violent influence in Ukraine
Yep, non violent influence, supporting far right groups, and unfair revolutions in Ukraine helped the region so much. Russia supporting Russians in the region in response to having their ally, economical, and military ally ripped away from them, is far worse. Also considering the fact if there was no ATO, and a political solution by the Ukrainian government was sought out in Donbas(recognizing the Russian population's disgust in not having any role in Kiev), a conflict on that scale would not have happened, also no Russian intervention would not have taken place. Do not pin the thousands of dead Russians and Ukrainians on Russia. Pin it on whoever caused the Maidan revolts to happen.
7 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:Vlad, if you're OK with this then please just say so and stop relying upon lies and bad logic to create a false world view. You can't control what your government does/says, but you can control how your own mind works. Give it a shot and see how it goes.
I'm a very patriotic person not towards my government more so to Russia as a people, and before I felt the same for Ukraine. If I knew Russia was the oppressor and the sole reason for the thousands of deaths, I would not hesitate to show my disgust, and even protest. However, I like to look at the crisis for what it is, and not in a narrow view point. I've accepted the wrongs Russia has did in Ukraine (Tsars, corruption) I've accepted that Russia has intervened at some point in Donbas, but I won't forget what caused this bloody war, directly effecting my ancestral origins, as well as effecting my nation in many ways. (Sanctions, demonized on the world stage, Cold War hatred) Not only that, but effecting the centuries of history Russians and Ukrainians have had together, use to being one people, going through the same hardships and fighting for each other.
-
4 hours ago, JUAN DEAG said:
Vlad and his people want to overthrow the oppressive pro-Ukrainian government of Putin which has embezzled billions of rubles. They protest peacefully, but soon the protests turn violent and Putin still refuses to step down.
You forget to put the part where the main protest only happens in Kiev, and the protests are supported by western countries.
5 hours ago, JUAN DEAG said:Eventually the people gain the upper hand and Putin is deposed
Leaves the country than rather use force on his people. (Yanukovich did not sign an order where he could have easily contain the situation, since it was a coup)
5 hours ago, JUAN DEAG said:Accept your new yoke Vlad! How could you possibly complain? They were justified in protecting ethnic Cossacks in Kuban. They are of Ukrainian Cossack heritage!
Accept my yoke that I've had no say in? You can catch me in the nearest rebellion group in event of such wrongfulness.
4 hours ago, JUAN DEAG said:Sorry if I sound confrontational. Not trying to start anything with Vlad. I just want him to see through his government's smoke and mirrors and come to face with the reality of his government.
No it's not confrontational however I'd say we should go back into topic before the thread gets locked because we have gone a bit too far
if you get what I mean.
As for the VDV: someone release the VDV modules, because the Russian army is under equipped without'm
-
2 hours ago, panzersaurkrautwerfer said:
Considering the Soviet Union killed a few hundred people for same, that's really not funny broham.
Let's just say getting "lost" is probably the most embarrassing thing a unit can do... Especially the given circumstances of the conflict in Ukraine. Of course war is no joke, I wasn't joking about anyone dying or anything. That's not funny at all.
-
2 hours ago, sburke said:
Okay so you have a unit that is easily transportable to a theater where you already have established military bases and units. The air mobile force is gonna drop and marry up with a force hopefully including more than BMDs to fight in a country right on your border.... still looks like a force looking for a mission as opposed to a mission looking for a force. You already have forces positioned to do the very mission you are citing as an example for VDV units. Sounds more like what we would call here "pork barrel politics", something created with some excuse or another just to provide budget money. We tend to have a lot of that, but mostly for keeping military bases that don't have much function or military industries that could be done cheaper elsewhere.
And just to say it, their recent experiences crossing that border haven't always been very good. Getting "lost" and captured tends to tarnish ones reputation.
GPS malfunction, navigation mistakes happen sometimes
-
8 hours ago, sburke said:
really - you think the Russian army can go 100km past the FEBA and do an air drop? Might want to define who you think the Russian army could pull that off against first and then why you'd bother doing an air drop.
Sorry, I was braindead sleepy when I wrote that and did not be specific. Like my previous scenario, we're talking about conflict in Ukraine. Before US forces can deploy their main assets into Ukraine, it's more than possible to drop VDV units in the Russian territories, and cross into Ukraine in large scale. Of course on their own the VDV is not going to be launching offensives. They can secure the routes, set up positions, limited probes ect. Even then if Ukraine has AD units nearby, paradropping onto their territories are not going to work. SEAD operations have to take care of those. However, again the VDV can be deployed very rapidly to a region.
3 hours ago, Sublime said:I actually played DCS quite a bit in missions with full realism where you had to penetrate Russian ADA and air power to strike say an A50 AWACs or tankers. Its not easy at all. Youve got sams from the deck all the way up fla kers etc. (But DCS also doesnt have F22s nor b2s nor the latest Russian aircraft either.)
Also the Kavkaz map ( and the regions terrain ) helps. You can really sneak around flying literally 100 ft off the ground in valleys etc to escape air planes and ADA.
Yeah DCS is fun
just wanted to mention it, because even with a bunch of stuff missing for both sides, it shows the intensity of such wars.
16 minutes ago, Sublime said:Also vlad consodering there are forum.members who are active in military aviation i feel compelled to say using any video game as credentials for experience on a military subject is laughable. Im competent at best at dcs and anyone such as Duchess would have hundreds more hours of real basic flying before ever even getting to sit in an F18 and train and fly combat. Meaning US pilots and US airpower id ALWAYS the first thing to show up in modern times and can react within a few hrs or less if needed that badly.
Of course DCS is nothing like reality. I was just using an example since you've played that game.
17 minutes ago, Sublime said:Meaning whilst US ground troops who wont even really be there in numbers wont initially habe a lot of CAS Russian SAMs would be getting hit by tomahawks jdams everything almost instantly.
Let me go into detail of Russian ADs. Firstly you have long range assets like S-300s and S-400s, Then comes the medium range stuff, BUKs for example, then short range stuff like Tunguskas, Panstir-S1s, TORs, ect. Short range AA assets are capable of engaging cruise missiles, and even guided missiles from attack jets. Then, to supplement the SAMs we have our air force to plug in holes, and operate under the umbrella. It isn't just SAMs by itself.
), so this leads the Kremlin to new forms of tactics. Covert operations, and denying involvement in the region (Donbas) and arguably the Ukraine and US in some cases do exaggerate Russian involvement in the region. Going as far as to saying 12,000 plus Russian soldiers being deployed, and that GRU operatives are the only reason for the people uprising in Donbas. But anyways, this leads to many confusions in the Russian masses, quite a few of Russians do not think Russia was involved, but still alot of Westerners think brigades of Russian troops poured in and they are the only "rebels" in Donbas. More so Russian troops probably arrived in critical zones to propel the Militia forces, and in complete support/advisory or training roles.
if you get what I mean.
just wanted to mention it, because even with a bunch of stuff missing for both sides, it shows the intensity of such wars.
Russian army under equipped?
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted
It's up to you, you can play as the US if you'd like. I would like to keep it a realistic battle, no APS and that's about it. If you want to play as Ukraine sure thing. I'd rather play as redfor because I'm a dirty commie, but it wouldn't matter if I was Blufor either.
Okay I'll PM you now.