Geo-Strategic Crisis Over Ukraine Happening Now?

[John Kettler]

Got a tip about an important time urgent geo-strategic analysis written by one Hal Turner, who has a well-respected for its veracity radio show. If even a fraction of this is right, then BFC had better have CMBS 2022 done and ready for immediate release, because what's in this analysis that's being updated very rapidly as events unfold, appears to indicate something much worse than the Cuban Missile Crisis may be happening, while the news in the US is saturated with anything but this potential outbreak of general war. Per the analysis, the proximate cause is that Ukraine has allegedly massed around half of its forces opposite Luhansk and Donetsk, as a prelude to moving to crush those Separatist states in a operational-strategic drive to retake all territory under Separatist control.. Russia reportedly will not permit this and has urgently sought security guarantees from NATO/EU and been rebuffed repeatedly, resulting in Russia talking darkly of other means. This overall situation is apparently further tied to what's happening in Kazakhstan and why. K'stan is vital to Russia because that's where its critical space facilities are.

Two things of particular concern to me are a list of disturbing NATO/US/EU military activities which have taken place and/or are planned, coupled with information Biden went to that highly secure Nevada base to be briefed on the US's most advanced weaponry (flight info in article) and info that Russia has deployed strategic materials (5 planeloads) to its sprawling deep underground complex beneath a mountain (shown in a satellite photo), preparatory to moving the government to that site. Have NO direct confirmation or disproof of ANY of strategic crisis over Ukraine presently and would like to request input from Haiduk, IMHO, Kalugin and anyone else who can provide insights, evidence pro or con, to one or more of the items mentioned in the article. If what Hal Turner is reporting is even partially true...

In the limit, and choosing to believe  that if there really is a full-blown crisis, cooler heads will prevail and humankind will again step back from the abyss, if nothing else, it offers some fascinating contexts for future CMBS developments, including a drastically different AO (Area of Operations) and a raft of possible new scenarios. Hope this all codswallop, but my guts were instantly in a knot, I felt as though I'd been run over, and the threat analyst in me, who's worked strategic missile defense and other related issues, finds the situation described to be altogether too plausible, consistent with a whole series of things I know to be true. Knew nothing of Hal Turner before today. If what he wrote is fiction, (which I fervently hope, but why do so, given the nature of his show?), then his work makes Tom Clancy's works those of a tyro by comparison. And as I said in a different CM Forum thread. powerful interests have been beating the war drums regarding Russia and Ukraine. Russia has ever been highly reactive when it comes to its wraparound front porch, if you will, and has a newish nuclear doctrine, directly stated by Russian high officials, in which it can and will execute a first strike if the threat is dire enough.  Given NATO's enormous expansion post-Cold War, Russia is practically surrounded and could face attacks against it. while having very little warning or time to react. As a frame of reference, during the Cold War, Soviet boomers off the East Coast could strike Washington, DC in 7 minutes, and an ICBM strike from the Soviet Union would take 30. The article cites locations such as Romania as having more than just BMD, but offensive weapons, too. If so, we're talking flight times of 5 minutes to Moscow and 7 to Russia's ICBM complexes. What Russia does have, though, that the US doesn't, is a considerable BMD capability over and above its immense capabilities vs atmospheric aerospace threats. Don't know what the US has in space, though, for BMD. And if we're to believe repeated Russian statements and outside reports, Russia has fully operational nuclear armed hypersonic strike weapons. To provide a frame of reference, during the Cold War, per the SECRET and change level briefing we got at the Soviet Threat Technology Conference in 1985, the Soviets had 7 hypersonic wind tunnels and the US 1--one!

As I said several times earlier in this post, I have NO independent verification or disproof of either the main report or the slew of subsequent updates.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Bufo]

It's russian sh1ttalking.

Edited January 11, 2022 by Bufo

[Bulletpoint]

10 hours ago, John Kettler said:

Knew nothing of Hal Turner before today. If what he wrote is fiction, (which I fervently hope, but why do so, given the nature of his show?), then his work makes Tom Clancy's works those of a tyro by comparison.

I never knew about Hal Turner either before now, but let's see what Wikipedia has to say about him:

"ld Charles' "Hal" Turner (born March 15, 1962) is an American far-right political commentator and convicted felon from North Bergen, New Jersey.

Turner's viewpoints typically encompass Holocaust denial,[1] conspiracy theories,[citation needed] white supremacy,[2] and have included calls for assassination of government officials. In August 2010, he was convicted for making threats against three federal judges with the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, for which he spent two years in prison.

Turner has sporadically hosted The Hal Turner Show, usually on shortwave radio station WBCQ, since 2002, as well as a corresponding blog, which has changed URLs frequently and has spread hoaxes and fake news."

 

Edited January 11, 2022 by Bulletpoint

[ZPB II]

When active measures meet grifting.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

6 hours ago, Bufo said:

It's russian sh1ttalking.

Nope.....It's JK, s**tpoasting (again). 

[John Kettler]

Bulletpoint,

Thanks for the info. Shall have to dig more when in less rocky shape. Was far too busy dealing with what was in the article proper and the updates, in the context of other knowns relevant to the purported crisis--not to mention considerably distressed, to go dig into him. People don't realize how many times the use of nuclear weapons was threatened since we nuked Japan. If you combine the US and the Soviets alone, it's over 100 times, and each time, had a nuclear weapon or weapon been used, we could easily have been in World War III, and that doesn't count other schemes, either, such as the KGB op that put the HOTEL-class K-129. way out of its patrol box and in striking range of Pearl Harbor during the Vietnam War. Before the K-129 sailed and later seemingly went rogue, some 7 KGB spooks came aboard the already crowded sub. The attack was to be blamed on China, causing the US to pulverize China in retaliation, solving two Russian major problems practically at a stroke. Pearl Harbor was the very soul of US operations in the Pacific when it came to fighting in Vietnam, thus protecting Soviet client North Vietnam, and this was also when Russia was fighting the Chinese at the Amur/Ussuri River. Things there got so bad that the Army commander, without consulting Moscow, on his own authority unleashed the then TOP SECRET BM-21 on the Chinese, with shattering effect.Read the excellent and bonechilling Red Star Rogue for the harrowing story. 

Regards,

John Kettler

[Bearstronaut]

That is all incredibly wrong. Ukraine isn't massing for an attack of the eastern territories and Crimea which were illegally stolen from them in 2014 by the original Russian invasion. Russia has gathered over 100,000 soldiers on the border and are the ones who initiated and continued this crisis. 

[evilman222]

Thought I'll chime in here. I wouldn't go as far as to call myself an expert, but I am about a semester away from an MA in International Relations with a focus on Eastern European security, so I'm not exactly talking out of my ass here.

First off, Hal Turner is a bumbling idiot. That's probably the least credible source out there. If you see anything by him, COMPLETELY disregard it. He peddles in conspiracy theories, instead of doing any kind of "analysis".

With that out of the way, what's going on in Eastern Europe right now is still concerning, and I would go as far as to say that this is the most dangerous crisis that we've seen since Able Archer. Even if we strip away the whole NATO-Russia angle, there is a realistic chance of war between the two largest military forces in Europe. If that turns into a full on conflict it would not be crazy to imagine a six figure death toll. That said, I am growing increasingly convinced that this is just Russia trying to increase pressure on the West and roll back their expansion to a state that Russia would feel more comfortable with. In fact, I don't think the Russian buildup has as much to do with Ukraine as it does with Belarus. One of the main areas where Russian equipment is being stockpiled is Yelnya. Most analysts that I've seen works from or talked to personally agree that Russian forces in Yelnya (even prior to this current buildup) serve two purposes: for a rapid drive on Kyiv should the situation in Ukraine devolve into open warfare, or to transit through Belarus and cut off the Baltic states in the event of hostilities with NATO. Given the fact that most of the rhetoric from Russia about this mess has been about NATO (instead of Ukraine), I find it hard to believe that they'd build up forces there, then use them to attack Ukraine, removing one of their main assets in conflict with NATO from the board, so to speak. Instead, I think they're building up forces so that they can establish a military presence, including a large portion of the 41st CAA as well as ballistic missiles, in Belarus should this week's talks fail. This isn't necessarily a preparation for war, but is instead Russia's way of saying "NATO expanded uncomfortably close to our borders, so we'll do the same thing and send our troops uncomfortably close to your borders as well". They could also up the intensity of their efforts in Donbas, but the most aggressive move I can see Russia making in the near future would be a move for Mariupol, MAYBE Kharkiv, but the latter is incredibly unlikely.

 

A couple other notes about crap from the Turner piece

I have not seen any good evidence for a Ukrainian buildup in preparation for a military operation to retake the Temporarily Occupied Territories. Can't say 100% that it doesn't exist, but I suspect that at least someone I know would have heard about it. Plus it Zelensky has been fairly passive regarding the war, and such an operation would be out of character for him.

I have also not seen any evidence that the mess in Kazakhstan is related to the Ukraine/NATO-Russia situation. Timing seems to have been a coincidence. That said, Central Asia is a bit out of my wheelhouse so I can't comment much beyond that.

The whole "NATO missiles in Romania" thing is mostly BS. The US Army has been developing a ground-launched version of the Tomahawk, possibly to be deployed to Europe, but those are not yet operational, and despite all the complaints from Moscow, there is no good evidence that the Aegis Ashore system in Romania is anything but defensive in nature.

There is also no evidence that the US has deployed tanks to Europe (Moving that number of vehicles without somebody noticing is nearly impossible), nor is there evidence of American aircraft being moved to Ukraine. Russia would be publicly freaking out if either of those happened.

 

 

[Sgt.Squarehead]

Here's an extract from this erudite (not), well informed (not) & non-partisan (ROFL!) source:

2 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

Then in 2016, all the troubles just . . . stopped.   It was like someone flipped a switch.   That switch was the November, 2016, US Presidential election, wherein Donald Trump won and Hillary Clinton lost.  Like magic, most of the troubles in Ukraine simply just stopped.

For the four years of the Trump Administration, Ukraine remained quiet. 

The November 2020 US election rolled around and the Democrats in the US stole the election through rampant and brazen election fraud.

 Either JK didn't actually read the article he linked to, or he just chose to ignore this particular aspect of its content.....Same ****, different post. 

 

 

Edited January 11, 2022 by Sgt.Squarehead

[John Kettler]

evilman222,

Many thanks for your insights and analysis input, very much including what you have to say about Hal Turner. Have no dog in the hunt ref him, other than responding to what he what he wrote. 

Sgt.Squarehead, 

I read the article in its entirety, but I wasn't in great shape when I did and was frankly in overwhelm early on and worsening as I proceeded. The chief point of my post was to seek information to confirm or refute the various claims made in order to properly assess the true situation. While doing the OP, I realized that the alleged crisis offered some intriguing possibilities for a potential future timeframe CMBS, in terms of storyline, Area of Operations, forces involved, weaponry and possible scenarios.

All,

Initiated some research to see what I might be able to find pro or con on a number of matters directly discussed in the article or arising from it. Was not a happy camper when I unearthed the below. Why? Because it independently supported a number of deeply disturbing things in the article! Also, you might say that some of this essentially found me, rather than the other way around. This is something that's happened to me many times when conducting research. 

Preliminary Research Results  

A chronicle of Russian strategic exercises, analysis of them and Russian nuclear war doctrine. Of major concern, because it shows ever greater scale of exercises, rapidly growing command expertise, new tactics, use of new weapons and from new platforms.

https://www.19fortyfive.com/2022/01/russia-plans-for-a-nuclear-war-are-nothing-but-terrifying/

Russian national level order for mass graves. Discussions of statements by Russia and US/NATO/EU support evidence of a major crisis unfolding. Russian demands to deescalate situation and Western response. Firing of Russian ZIRCON hypersonic weapons and production of same. 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/17121278/russia-approves-plans-urgent-mass-graves-ukraine-invasion/

Mass graves: specs, requirements, building procedures and special protective arrangements on mass graves because of interred CBRN dead. Requirement is to bury 1000 corpses in 3 days! Defenders of the requirement assert this is for COVID, but the requirements fairly scream nuclear war, despite the fact the translated documents speak in terms of the destruction of enterprises and percent of destruction of a city from conventional weapons. COVID can't destroy cities, and neither, other than nukes, can anything but the use of conventional weapons over an extended period cause such destruction to a city. Also, the documents focus, not on military casualties ,but civilian ones. For example, the killing of 55% of the workers at an enterprise (think factory complex like Kalashnikov) will be considered total destruction of that enterprise. Be advised some of the comments are incendiary.

https://coercioncode.com/2021/12/16/russia-adopts-protocols-for-burying-the-population-in-mass-graves-in-case-of-catastrophic-event/

There is a great deal of material here that supports a considerable chunk of what was said in the article that triggered my OP. The below article talks about the relentless expansion of NATO post SU collapse, legitimate Russian security concerns and their being ignored, Russia's publicly declared red line, etc. NATO has apparently serially broken every promise made to Russia about how it wouldn't expand its membership and pose a threat to Russia.

https://mltoday.com/the-escalating-crisis-in-ukraine/

Overall,  there is an ever growing amount of material I'm finding to support many of the claims made in the analysis that formed the reason and basis of my OP. My assessment is that what's going on is way past saber rattling, to the point where full-blown war--up to and including strategic nuclear warfare--could easily occur. Russian nuclear doctrine deems the use of a nuclear strike or strikes to restore the status quo, in which the threat to Russia is again tolerable, to be perfectly acceptable and logical.

Regards,

John Kettler

P.S.

In my haste to get out my OP, I missed something important. There is NO direct proof that either President Biden or Vice President Harris was on the two aircraft listed in the analysis. What can be said with certainty is that where those planes went is very much an active facility at which extremely advanced US weaponry is not just kept but is operated. How advanced? Here is aerospace historian Michael Schratt's two hour presentation on black project aerospace craft. It's extraordinary, superbly documented and well worth your time. Bear in mind, too, this was given in 2014. To give you some perspective on how advanced advanced is, think of it this way. If it's 50 years ahead of the perceived tech level, then when the Wright brothers first flew in 1903, in the black world the aircraft is an F-86 Sabre. If the technology is 75 years ahead, then the aircraft is a F-4 Phantom II. Mind, this presumes no stupendous fundamental scientific, engineering or both breakthroughs, either.

Edited January 12, 2022 by John Kettler

[Sgt.Squarehead]

JK, you are now resorting to reposting articles from The Sun.....FFS play some CM or something, you'll give yourself a nervous breakdown! 

[LukeFF]

9 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

Nope.....It's JK, s**tpoasting (again). 

So, in other words, a typical JK post. 

[evilman222]

@John Kettler

A couple points on what you found.

Russian Nuclear Exercises: This is concerning, but I wouldn't freak out just yet. The 2019 exercise was simply an exercise (although any large-scale nuclear exercise is concerning, of course), and I suspect that what happened in March was just a you-know-what measuring contest to show the new president what kind of toys Russia has available. Russia wants to continually show off their new equipment, as it would, in theory, give them an advantage over the US in a nuclear exchange. What a lot of people don't get, however, is that these new toys may not actually mean much. Despite all the hype about the S-500 and other ABM systems, a US nuclear strike/retaliation on Russia would convert the overwhelming majority of the country to a parking lot, even if Russia manages to strike first with their various fancy missiles, torpedoes, unnecessarily large warheads, etc. Putin's obsessed with getting his name in the history books. This requires a few people to be around to read those history books. You must remember that simply possessing a capable nuclear stockpile (even if you have no intention of ever using them) is of massive strategic value.

Mass Graves: After talking to a few friends and colleagues from Russia and who focus on Russian governance, I'm reasonably certain that preparations for mass graves were strictly COVID related. It's an open secret that Russia's official covid fatality numbers only cover a fraction of the true number of deaths. Hell, just about every Russian I know has lost a family member due to covid. If I remember correctly, the document was released shortly after the Omicron variant of COVID was discovered, when we knew it was more transmittable but did not know that it caused less severe illness. If the Russian government expected a new, more dangerous covid wave, it makes sense to begin preparations for the digging of mass graves as was necessary as previous waves threatened to overwhelm morgues across the country. Further, while the number of burials detailed in the manual may be useful in the event of casualties due to a conventional war, 1000 a day is a joke when you've got millions dead in a single city alone as you would during a nuclear exchange. The document mentions CRBN dead, but I suspect that the N in this case is something like a Chernobyl- type incident, rather than a nuclear detonation. Hell, if there's a nuclear detonation due to a strategic nuclear exchange, burying the bodies is probably pretty low on the to-do list.

 

There's a lot of evidence that indicates that Russia could be launching an invasion of Ukraine, and there's no professional consensus as to whether or not Russia will do anything. Time will tell about that part. But I don't see a nuclear exchange any time soon being a realistic possibility.

[John Kettler]

Sgt.Squarehead,

If you don't like what I post, why not just block me? I don't appreciate the continual sniping from you, especially the patently false and insulting assertion that I'm posting feces! Haven't got the energy, desire or remotest inclination to do that and never have done such posting anywhere. The research is the research, and The Sun is a place with a useful article--and that doesn't require registration and other stuff, resulting in not listing a number of articles because I wasn't able to read more than a paragraph. The real meat on mass graves is in the Coercion Code article immediately below The Sun piece. 

LukeFF,

You're welcome to block me, too. You've been doing the same tiresome stuff toward me for some two decades now. Maybe take up knitting or decoupage instead of ragging on me.

evilman222,

My second and last job in military aerospace was at Rockwell International, North American Aerospace Operations. Interviewed for, and was accepted as a Soviet Strategic Analyst in the Operations Analysis Department, only to be undone by a departmental reorg between when I was accepted and when I reported for work, so I had the traumatic experience of suddenly finding myself in a wholly different section, with a new boss and working OR&S (Operational Readiness and Supportability for Rockwell's entry into the competition that led to the F-22.We had high hopes of winning with our beautiful F-23, but losing out was what gradually got me the chance to do strategic work, including B-1B escape analysis against the SA-10, B-1B conventional attacks against strategic targets at/near the Soviet border, and the MPA (Maritime Patrol Aircraft, the program that ultimately produced the P-8 Poseidon). In turn, the last got me into study aerial ASW and investigating the then new bastion concept for Soviet boomers. The bastions were areas in the Arctic where, heavily guarded from the air, by surface ships and subs (now likely including SAMs of various sorts, too), the boomers could operate and , if needed, surface and fire. The bastions back then held a boomer each. But what the article was describing simultaneous launch from multiple boomers in one bastion. That's a major change and escalation from where things stood, say, 1985. There is no doubt that having even a small capable nuclear force can and does have real impact, starting with exerting a strong sobering effect on anyone contemplating attacking. Firing off a volley of SLBMs was very expensive for Russia and was, I'm sure, not undertaken lightly. Granted the ones fired from the DELTA SSBNs were relatively cheap, but that is certainly not true of the missile/s fired from the BOREI boomer. Firing uch a missile or missiles would've been horribly expensive. As far as I'm concerned, this was a small scale dress rehearsal for a massive simultaneous launch in the event of nuclear war breaking out.

Understand what you're saying about COVID, but I refer you to the translation of the order ref mass graves. It specifically ties weapon use to destruction of enterprises and major destruction  inflicted upon cities, so clearly we're not talking COVID doing that. And as I said, the only way conventional weapons could inflict major destruction  on a city is for lots of heavy conventional weapon strikes being carried out over a protracted period. Clearly, there is a major disconnect between what's ostensibly being said and the underlying realities. I absolutely agree that a single nuclear strike could utterly eclipse the mass grave requirements for processing and burial. But the major point ref mass graves is that Russia is preparing for heavy fatalities to the civilian population as a result of warfare. Therefore, I attach great significance to the fact that Russia is not only doing this, but has put the word out officially. Am sure a lot of consideration went into what the officially promulgated fatalities should amount to, but the number can always be changed. The larger point is that what the Russians are doing ref mass graves is clear evidence Russia is preparing for mass civilian fatalities in the homeland should war break out. And if only conventional weapons are used, then why the special CBRN contamination containment requirements? Offhand, I don't recall seeing anything like this during the Cold War. What we did see, though, was a massive Soviet civil defense effort helmed, I believe by a full general. 

Regards,

JOhn Kettler

[Megalon Jones]

Bad source.  Turner is a felon/Nazi apologist/conspiracy theorist.

It's like taking investment advice from a crackhead.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

7 hours ago, John Kettler said:

If you don't like what I post, why not just block me? I don't appreciate the continual sniping from you, especially the patently false and insulting assertion that I'm posting feces!

Nah, here's a much better idea.....Why don't you stop posting political c**p on a games forum, eh? 

Edited January 12, 2022 by Sgt.Squarehead

[HUSKER2142]

27 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

Nah, here's a much better idea.....Why don't you stop posting political c**p on a games forum, eh? 

It is better to prohibit discussion of politics altogether, the Black Sea sub-forum has become "Russia will attack soon in 201x", "Russia will attack", etc. Where the hell is the discussion of the vision of how we want to see CMBS, where is the talk about how it would be nice to add the US and Russian Marines, etc. 

 

I would very much like the administration to remove all these topics. I think there are other forums for this. 

[Sgt.Squarehead]

2 minutes ago, HUSKER2142 said:

I would very much like the administration to remove all these topics. I think there are other forums for this. 

My point entirely.....If JK really must make these posts, IMHO he should try to keep them to General Discussion, don't f**k up the game forum.

But this is very far from the first time we have had this discussion.

[HUSKER2142]

2 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

My point entirely.....If JK really must make these posts, IMHO he should try to keep them to General Discussion, don't f**k up the game forum.

But this is very far from the first time we have had this discussion.

He is not the only one, there are other users who also create topics that are not related to the game not for the first time. 

@BFCElvis Please close topics that are not related to gaming topics. 

[BFCElvis]

22 minutes ago, HUSKER2142 said:

He is not the only one, there are other users who also create topics that are not related to the game not for the first time. 

@BFCElvis Please close topics that are not related to gaming topics. 

For now, I just moved it. 

[fireship4]

47 minutes ago, HUSKER2142 said:

Please close topics that are not related to gaming topics.

No thanks, at least for me the political/strategic/tactical/historical/doctrine discussion is all part of the same stuff and is what keeps this part of the forum alive.  To break off the political part would fragment discussion that is on the same subject.  There is plenty of room on an otherwise quiet forum.  People keep discussing Russian moves because Russia keeps making moves, it is not out of proportion (bang on subject in my opinion, it is precisely what the game is about after all) and I like to hear about it.  Doesn't mean we hate Russians, nor should anyone feel victimised by it.

 

58 minutes ago, HUSKER2142 said:

It is better to prohibit discussion of politics altogether

Or maybe like in Transnistria, LPR, DPR, and Russia proper, if we don't see it the same way as the Russian government we can go to jail?  I don't mean to attack you personally Husker, I value these discussions, and criticism of the behaviour of Russia, a rogue state if the phrase is to have any meaning.  Feel free to criticise other states, as it pertains to these discussions!  It all leads to more learning.  Criticism at all levels of institution is essential to their wellbeing.

Furthermore, political discussion on the topic of Crimea, etc., apart from being something I personally like to see, is specifically sanctioned in this post: https://community.battlefront.com/topic/116643-politics-discussion-and-black-sea/

 

 

58 minutes ago, HUSKER2142 said:

It is better to prohibit discussion of politics altogether

This is found on this forum, very often! 

I don't think quoting things at each other usually gets very far, it is perhaps better to share each person's ideas and let people absorb what they will from them, but if you two are suggesting people don't want that discussion here, I want it noted I'm on the other side.

 

24 minutes ago, BFCElvis said:

For now, I just moved it.

A mistake in my opinion, the discussion (resulting in the premise being rejected, due to being based on an unreliable source, nevertheless prompting some interesting posts) is clearly focused on Ukraine and the Crimea situation, and belongs in general discussion as much as the T-34 videos do!  Again political discussion of states moves are specifically allowed in this forum as mentioned above, and have made this place the most interesting part of the forums by far during the... dry spell.

Edited January 12, 2022 by fireship4

[Sgt.Squarehead]

What a load of utter cobblers! 

Your reading of that post from @ChrisND seems to be rather selective.

[fireship4]

12 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

What a load of utter cobblers! 

Your reading of that post from @ChrisND seems to be rather selective.

 

Quote

Given the current events and the setting of our next Modern Warfare game, we realize that it is impossible to completely disentangle the game and politics on this forum. We also realize that discussing politics on internet forums usually leads to heated discussion (to put it mildly). So here is where we stand on the issue.

 

Discussing geopolitics as relevant to our upcoming game is fine. Arguing over which side is dirtier or which poster is the bigger misguided fool is not.

 

Examples of OK discussions:

- Potential strategic/operational/political actions each nation could take.

- Motivations of each nation/party in this event.

- How geopolitical circumstances and events should influence the game.

- Speculating on future events as relevant to the game.

 

Examples of unacceptable discussions:

- Insulting other posters for their beliefs; or insulting posters at all, ever!

- Making the discussion personal. This forum is for discussing the game, not other posters. Attack the argument, not the arguer

- Turning the discussion into a "USA sucks" or "Russia sucks" flame war.

- Arguing over which nation or party is dirtier, more evil, more corrupt, etc.

 

We need to keep this forum a civil place for calm discussion that is relevant to our game, so please keep that in mind when you post here.

 

Edited January 12, 2022 by fireship4

[Sgt.Squarehead]

22 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

Here's an extract from this erudite (not), well informed (not) & non-partisan (ROFL!) source:

 Either JK didn't actually read the article he linked to, or he just chose to ignore this particular aspect of its content.....Same ****, different post. 

 

[LukeFF]

9 hours ago, John Kettler said:

You're welcome to block me, too. You've been doing the same tiresome stuff toward me for some two decades now. Maybe take up knitting or decoupage instead of ragging on me.

Here's a better idea: actually take a serious look at the articles you want to quote and discuss before actually submitting them here for discussion. This old "I didn't know so-and-so was such a terrible person" is inexcusable - especially considering what you claim you did for work not so long ago. When you start doing that and stop posting sensationalist, click-bait headlines based on discredited sources, then I'll stop pointing out your nonsense. Deal?

Edited January 12, 2022 by LukeFF