How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[womble]

34 minutes ago, panzermartin said:

 

You don't have an idea what it was like to be under the Nazi boot. You go to a country to exterminate certain "species" with 25 million dead and you expect they will handle you like porcelain in return. Now thats ROFL. You reap what you saw. Germans accepted that, time for you to accept it as well. 

 

Ever heard the saying "Two wrongs don't make a right"?

You said:

"But nobody will object that they had every right to do this in german territory as retaliation ."

Which is categorically untrue. Lots of people object that they had this right for "retaliatory" purposes. It doesn't matter what living under the Nazi boot was like. They did not have that right.

Now, that doesn't mean it's impossible to understand why they felt great rage. Understanding their state of mind isn't the same as condoning their behaviour, though.

Edited May 8, 2022 by womble

[Battlefront.com]

29 minutes ago, panzermartin said:

You don't have an idea what it was like to be under the Nazi boot. You go to a country to exterminate certain "species" with 25 million dead and you expect they will handle you like porcelain in return. Now thats ROFL. You reap what you saw. Germans accepted that, time for you to accept it as well. 

You are forgetting that Russia's Army was responsible for mass murder before the Germans invaded in 1941.  They engaged in mass murder during the war, they engaged in mass murder after the war.  They supported a regime that killed more people than Nazi Germany did.  They were an instrument of oppression over hundreds of millions of people over almost 50 years.  They were involved in exporting war to other countries and aiding them in their own domestic mass murders and destruction.  Can't explain that way with your "eye for an eye" logic.

Not that it really matters.  Both Nazi Germany and Soviet Union were mass scale murder and misery machines.  But unlike the Germans, Russians haven't accepted that fact.

Steve

[FancyCat]

The supply base attack was geolocated to: notably to see Ukraine being able to strike targets north of Iyzum consistently. 

 

 

[Cederic]

It's interesting to see the discussion on traitors from someone whose country was founded by traitors. Tea party anybody? But for clarity I was referring to war memorials and war graves (the Soviet one in Tiergarten is both) and not monuments.

As a reminder, Ukrainian soldiers fought for the Soviets in World War 2 and are almost certainly also buried in Tiergarten.

That means that they share culpability for the crimes of the Soviet armies. I find it prejudiced and dehumanising to try and label an entire people though for the acts of a few. Whatever the war crimes - rape, pillage, torture, shooting POWs in the leg - I fully support prosecuting all of them, whoever committed them, but prosecute the individuals, don't go blaming the innocent people near them.

As Ukraine regains Donbas that's going to be important. Western support will vanish rapidly if Ukrainians embark on a spree of revenge instead of adopting an evidence based approach to actual justice.

[Aragorn2002]

1 hour ago, danfrodo said:

Interesting night of posts from y'all, just got caught up.  I don't post anything until I've reviewed them all, which took a while this morning.  My takeaways:

1.  Yet more utterly pointless discussions of "who was worse", Hitler or Stalin.  Please, just stop.  It's about as useful as arguing Superman vs Dr Strange (note, when I die and go to hell, these gawd awful superhero movies will be playing non stop, I am sure, which will be infinitely more punishing to me than burning in an eternal lake of fire)

2.  Amazing footage of UKR drone hitting RU Mi8, squad of bad guys obliterated also. 

3.  Ukraine must have quite a thriving music industry.  All the videos have this epic, super cool music that's a mix of metal, hip hop and traditional -- I'm assuming they are all singing in Ukrainian?

4.  Not much news today on the front, though hoping more will filter in over (my) day.  Looks like Kharkiv offensive picking off a few more villiages.  And in the south the russians attacked for some pointless reason and are reported to have lost ~300 casualties in a defeat.

5.  From Huba's post above quoting UKR general staff: I think the west should send hundreds of millions of dollars of aid to RU.  In the form of hard alcohol. 

6.  We saw an interesting post comparing first aid kits of RU & UKR soldiers, w UKR looking much better equiped.  The RU kit didn't even have ivermectin, no wonder RU readiness is low. 

 

Haha, great points, Dan.

[Probus]

10 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

You are incorrect.  Taking down monuments that were erected by traitors (all Southerners who fought for the Confederacy are, by definition, traitors) and racist overlords in order to maintain psychological domination over "lesser races" should be removed because they should never have been allowed to be erected in the first place.  Taking them down is not an act of "political correctness", it is righting a wrong. 

Why the US military allowed its bases to be named after traitors who fought against the US military is astonishing.  Especially because some of those generals weren't even good at their jobs.  Purging those names was long overdue.

Steve, I think you are being sarcastic so prolly ignore what I'm about to say...

RANT BEGINS:

Otherwise... this is pure history revisionism by WOKE elements of our society.  We may not like this history (whether we are leftwing or rightwing) but by your reasoning we should knock down/deface practically every monument erected over our civilization's history.  Why, because practically every person who has lived until very recently has been some sort of racist.  (and many still alive are some sort of racist, just misinformed/unenlightened, but may still be good people).  You can't go around defacing historical sites because you disagree with their politics.  That's happened throughout history and is disgusting.  We would have no history if you burned every temple or book, knocked down every statue because you don't agree with some segment of that belief.  And as for the USA (or any country) naming a ship or a base after a US historical figure, it can't.  Why? Because by your reasoning, none of them are perfect by today's standards.

:RANT ENDS

This thread is really not the place to discuss this anyway.  If you disagree with me Steve, I would be glad to discuss this using your PM system.  Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you are trying to say.

[dan/california]

 

51 minutes ago, Kraft said:

I am unsure if part one of the artillery attack on Russian vehicle depot? supposedly near Izyum has been posted, but here is part 2  

They were obviously expecting shelling as half the vehicles were dug in. One might still wonder why you'd park those in artillery range in the first place. And I always thought those collections of defenseless vehicles parked in some field were unrealistic in DCS & IL-2 Simulator

The ONLY rationale I can come up with for the Russian's inability to disperse rationally under endlessly repeated Ukrainian attacks on concentrated targets is that NOTHING happens once troops are out of sight of a company grade officer. It might even be a battalion level officer.  Keeping everyone close enough together that a major can walk around and boot people in the ^$#^ hourly must be absolutely necessary. The nothing getting done otherwise probably extends to complete intoxication, and desertion, not necessarily in that order. 

[dan/california]

Double post

Edited May 8, 2022 by dan/california

[Kraft]

48 minutes ago, panzermartin said:

Now thats ROFL. You reap what you saw. Germans accepted that, time for you to accept it as well. 

I wonder if you'd use the same expression if we got news that UA troops are conducting mass executions in Russian villages.

War crimes dont make war crimes in retaliation legal. Simple as.

Also Soviet Army was capable of mass executions long before German boots stepped on their territory. Their glorification is just as offending to some as the swastika or the Japanease sun is.

Edited May 8, 2022 by Kraft

[Grey_Fox]

3 minutes ago, Probus said:

We may not like this history (whether we are leftwing or rightwing) but by your reasoning we should knock down/deface practically every monument erected over our civilization's history.

Why would you fight so hard to keep monuments for people who fought for the right to keep other people as slaves?

[billbindc]

54 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

This is something I've been seeing all over the place, but this video shows it to the extreme.

A standard Russian defensive tactic is to dig in their vehicles with berms around at least 3 sides.  The concept is that a direct hit is rare, so the berms will protect the vehicle from the blast effect.  However, there are two fundamental flaws with this:

1.  It seems Ukraine is able to land rounds directly on target with great regularity.

2. The closer the positions are to each other the greater the chance that there's going to be a direct hit.  Or in the case of this video, lots of direct hits.

True to Russia's nature, it continually repeats rote drills without anybody taking responsibility for adjusting them to conform to battlefield reality.

Contrast this with the US Army in Normandy when they found hedgerows to be a huge problem.  In a fairly short period of time soldiers on the ground discovered a work around, proved its effectiveness, and next thing you know they were in mass production by frontline units and put into action within days or weeks.  This is exactly the sort of thing that the Russians have demonstrated they are incapable of doing.

Steve

I'm curious watching these videos why we don't see vehicles scattering once rounds start dropping. Is that not doctrine?

[panzermartin]

9 hours ago, chuckdyke said:

You excused the behaviour of Soviet forces because the allies carpet bombed German cities. From hindsight we can say both tactics are useless. Contrary to the west Russia has not learned anything from WW2. They flatten cities and target civilians with the theory it will undermine the Ukrainian will to fight. With their numbers a competent military would have won this special mission. It is a classic case fighting WW2 in 2022. WW2 the British bombed German cities first, the strategy worked because it diverted the Luftwaffe away from military targets. Had to Luftwaffe concentrated on the British radar stations and airbases the Battle of Britain might have ended differently. Churchill needed to increase the British will to fight in 1940. In this the Blitz served its purpose, a considerable number in the British parliament didn't rule out a negotiated settlement. 

No, I understand what you are saying but I'm sorry it's a misunderstanding of my initial post. I didn't excuse and I don't consider this as a viable tactic. I could understand though their rage when committing revenge actions. If I was there and had the courage I would probably say stop you freaking animals. But from a "historical" distance and context it seems like a punishment that was inevitable.

 

8 hours ago, kraze said:

Red army was equally evil to SS and Wehrmacht. In fact they were so equally evil - they started WW2 together as allies and fought in Poland as allies and even traded captured territories as allies, like it was an open lebensraum market.

Red army soldiers raped Polish and Finnish women, looted, tortured and mass murdered civilians in newly occupied cities and that was before they and their SS brothers had a falling out over who gets to occupy rest of Europe.

And when they did - Red army soldiers raped, looted and murdered not only in Poland (again), Czechoslovakia and Germany, but also in Ukraine and Belarus - because they couldn't give an F. Yes - Red Army was filled with such human filth that they committed war crimes against their own. In Ukraine alone Red army proceeded to kill 300.000 civilians in 1946, after the war was over. And during the war they committed countless war crimes resulting in the deaths of at least as many.

So if you think russians and their collaborators from previously occupied countries came to Germany to fight Nazi ideology - ask yourself a question why millions went to concentration camps and died there in the following 45 years of half of Europe being occupied by the glorious Red army.

Just because one barbaric army fought the other, equally barbaric army - doesn't make one of them the good guys. Real life is not a high fantasy book.

Kraze, I don't feel comfortable to debate you because of the current situation and your (just) feelings against Russia. You have a more personal view of history that is perfectly understandable. I don't ignore the facts and your points when I don't reply though. 

Last time Im writing about this, I never said Red Army were saints. I'm not in a fantasy world. But is a dangerous path to equalize them with the illness of Nazi Germany. A key difference is that Nazi army was much more disciplined but the atrocities were a calculated wider fascist plan and policy we all know about. I can't repeat it every time, these aren't on the same weight and most historians will tell us this. Nazi Germany was a greater threat to the World at that time than USSR that's why the free powers of planet earth back then sided with them and provided aid of millions to defeat Hitler. Doesn't this make sense? 

 

[sross112]

11 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

This is interesting.  Some decently valid opinions expressed on Russian media:

 

 

10 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

It could be the beginning of a new push by Putin to lower expectations for full mobilization.  Prior to this the messaging is "we don't need to because we're already winning the war", now it might be shifting to "we don't need to because it won't help us win the war".  Since the first message was obviously intended to keep various Russian segments from thinking mobilization is around the corner, but with the war so obviously failing maybe he's finding that messaging isn't working.  Though this particular media assessment goes way beyond that and suggests that Russia's at a military dead end.  I see how that message helps Putin at all, so it could be this guy's views went too far or they are the views of some group looking to replace Putin.

Whatever the case might be, it certainly is an interesting thing to see on Russian state media.  Therefore, it must have significance.

Steve

I think it does a couple things. Like you said, it alleviates the fear of a full mobilization as that doesn't make a difference in this modern conflict right away and he points out what we've said before that they don't have the equipment in storage to properly kit it out. So he logically says that they need to figure out how to produce modern competitive platforms that can defeat the NATO standard stuff coming in. As we have discussed here that will take a long time for them to figure out how to do that. 

So this says stalemate. Basically the beginning of a new Cold War. Which makes sense. Putin and the Kremlin are realizing the RA is beat and isn't going to be able to do much more offensively. I think that they still think they can hold on to most of what they have taken, but that is also probably a pipe dream. Even if they can't, they don't have to surrender or go to the negotiating table. They know that Ukraine and the west aren't going to drive on Moscow. Ukraine at the most will clear her land but she won't invade. 

The narrative for the Kremlin is simple. They had to invade to free the Russian people living under oppression and tyranny and destroy the UA. They can claim that they completed this and then NATO came in with all it's might and attacked them. After a fierce patriotic struggle they were able to stop the NATO invasion at the border and no Russian lands were lost. This settles into a 38th Parallel DMZ type situation along the border and Putin plays the same game as Kim.

Expand the military and have really big numbers of stuff that can't compete but looks good on paper. Russia does have the people and resources to build their own industrial base and supply itself, however they will technologically never be able to compete with the west. They will be coming from too far behind and not have access to the cutting edge developments in a quick enough time frame to stay abreast. They become the big paper bear but that doesn't matter as long as they stick to the defending the motherland narrative. It becomes an eternal conflict of us vs them and keeps the status quo in power. 

It is really sad for the people of Russia as the same path as Kim leads to the same results as Kim. The other news comment about needing a new Beria coincides with this as the Kremlin will need a new gulag archipelago to suppress and oppress the people who will not want to go along with the ride to hell. All this leads back to if the Russian people want a better Russia they are going to have to change it themselves but it looks like their window to act is going to get smaller and smaller if the Kremlin starts swinging back to the Beria days. 

[billbindc]

49 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Yeah, for sure the major personalities behind alliances with Russia are active participants in short term, self-serving financial/power benefits.  That kinda puts them outside of the "useful idiot" concept because they are aware they are participating.  However, they still fall into the "useful idiot" concept exactly because they are helping Russia with its selfish aims without questioning the long term benefit to themselves.  In other words, idiots

I do think that Chinese political class has a much better process of decision making than in Russia.  They seem to have a better handle on reality, more akin to Russia in the early days of Putin.  However, it does seem that China is drifting more down the same autocratic road that Putin went down.  History makes it pretty clear that this road is generally a dead end.

Steve

Agree on that point. China had an opportunity to open up political space and create a more open, diffuse system. Unfortunately, the Party just wasn't able to let go of power and since then has moved towards personal rule in a way that hasn't existed since Mao. In the not too distant future, they are going to discover the benefits they could have gained from of a non-distributed power structure in distributing blame for policies that haven't worked.

[dan/california]

 

51 minutes ago, Kraft said:

I am unsure if part one of the artillery attack on Russian vehicle depot? supposedly near Izyum has been posted, but here is part 2  

They were obviously expecting shelling as half the vehicles were dug in. One might still wonder why you'd park those in artillery range in the first place. And I always thought those collections of defenseless vehicles parked in some field were unrealistic in DCS & IL-2 Simulator

The ONLY rationale I can come up with for the Russian's inability to disperse rationally under endlessly repeated Ukrainian attacks on concentrated targets is that NOTHING happens once troops are out of sight of a company grade officer. It might even be a battalion level officer.  Keeping everyone close enough together that a major can walk around and boot people in the ^$#^ hourly must be absolutely necessary. The nothing getting done otherwise probably extends to complete intoxication, and desertion, not necessarily in that order. 

In addition to the now NORMAL daily loss of well over BTG per day, The Russian UAV losses have spiked enormously.  Is this because the Ukr have gotten better at something, or because the Russians are so desperate they are using them in ways that they are far more likely lose them.

[kraze]

1 hour ago, db_zero said:

I'm curious to hear your take on a few things. I see you consistently post statements like "you view things through western eyes"

I agree with that. I'm an American but lived overseas and one of the things I learned quickly was the way Americans view themselves, their country and how others perceive America is often at odds with how everyone else views America.

Aside from the divergent attitudes there is the fact America is surrounded by 2 massive oceans and hasn't had a modern war fought on our territory. Wars are fought in far off places using massive American firepower and money. When you look at the placement and reach of US military bases and outposts its truly amazing. Nothing past history rivals it.

The existing world order is one that arose out of 1945 where basically America imposed a global set of rules predicated on free trade, dominance of the USD and backed by the US military, primary to promote US economic growth and dominance.

I'm hearing from knowledgeable people who think this whole notion that Russia will come to it senses willingly or unwillingly is fantasy based on western bias. In western thinking losses already suffered, the failure to achieve even basic objectives and the cost would logically lead to finding a way to exit. That is a western way of thinking.

Russia on the other hand they believe is not that way. Russia will continue this fight even if they suffer losses in the hundreds of thousands and they have a history of enduring losses that are incomprehensible to the west. Russia has food, oil, natural gas and the basic resources to continue to fight a primitive style of war. Just use massive artillery and back it up by massive manpower.

I've heard all the arguments for Russia to cry uncle and they are logical and based on some sound reasoning, but once again is this western biased thinking?

I've also heard a retired US general say that summer is the key period. Ukraine has to win or make big gains then otherwise once winter come around things will start to move away from Ukraine's favor. He believes the long war strategy is the wrong on for Ukraine.

 

 

 

Russian mentality is akin to primitive tribes - meaning that their will to fight is tied to them gaining something materialistic - that includes not just territory on global level, but looting on a personal one*. So if they will just keep getting killed without any new toilets to steal (both literal and proverbial) - their morale will suffer quickly and it will be another collapse like the one that happened near Kyiv. That primitive tribal mentality is also the cause for rape of children and elders - as a means to dominate their victim.

That primitive mentality is why you can't reason with them and is also a hard one to grasp for way more civilized cultures. Russians have no concept of humanity or cooperation with anyone, their mental level is largely that of small children - so that's why they are fanatically convinced of own superiority, to them everybody exists only to give them stuff (or rather have it taken), it's why Russians go "lies lies lies I don't hear you la la la" when presented with evidence they don't like, constantly cry about "russophobia" abroad (even though nobody oppresses them ever) and before you say "woah dude don't you exaggerate?" - look at their leaders. One is raging about how Ukraine was invented by Lenin and the other one is raging about how Jews did Holocaust. Leaders, which are the best people they have, spewing nonsense you hear from some kid in Call of Duty online.

And unfortunately these children have weapons that kill.

*looting got decriminalized in Russia in March literally for that very reason.

Edited May 8, 2022 by kraze

[Battlefront.com]

1 minute ago, Cederic said:

It's interesting to see the discussion on traitors from someone whose country was founded by traitors. Tea party anybody?

All nations start from a previous incarnation.  History is messy.  However, generally the thin line between "traitor" and "patriot" has a lot to do with what alternatives were available to them at the time.  The colonies in what became the United States had legitimate grievances over self rule that were repressed by force from across an ocean.  The south broke away because they couldn't get their way democratically within a government system that afforded them equal (some could argue unequal) say in how the government conducted itself.  Breaking away after losing a debate is very different than breaking away from something that didn't recognize the ability to have that debate in the first place.

Canadians, Australians, New Zealanders, South Africans, and others did not have to go down this route because the United States taught the British a lesson.  And, to their great credit, they became more realistic and pragmatic about their response to demands for more autonomy.  Well, as long as they were white.  The dark skinned subjects had to wait until India to get that ball rolling.

1 minute ago, Cederic said:

But for clarity I was referring to war memorials and war graves (the Soviet one in Tiergarten is both) and not monuments.

As a reminder, Ukrainian soldiers fought for the Soviets in World War 2 and are almost certainly also buried in Tiergarten.

That means that they share culpability for the crimes of the Soviet armies. I find it prejudiced and dehumanising to try and label an entire people though for the acts of a few.

I don't think you'll find many who disagree with you.  However, it is also prejudiced and dehumanizing to force symbols of decades of oppression onto an entire people just because their grandfathers were part of it.

1 minute ago, Cederic said:

Whatever the war crimes - rape, pillage, torture, shooting POWs in the leg - I fully support prosecuting all of them, whoever committed them, but prosecute the individuals, don't go blaming the innocent people near them.

The principles established as a result of WW2 acknowledge that collective support of an institution that commits crimes is at least culpable.  That doesn't mean they get prosecuted and strung up by their necks, but it is unhealthy to excuse collaboration as if it doesn't matter.

1 minute ago, Cederic said:

As Ukraine regains Donbas that's going to be important. Western support will vanish rapidly if Ukrainians embark on a spree of revenge instead of adopting an evidence based approach to actual justice.

Absolutely agree.  I don't think there is too much to worry about there, though, as I think most of the people of significance will either have died in the fighting or fled to Russia.  That makes sorting things out infinitely easier.

Steve

[keas66]

On the earlier Poll ... seriously whats up with the Greeks ? Still smarting from the economic sledgehammer they got hit with by the EU a few years back ?  I understanding holding a grudge  but didn't think it was that serious to get them rooting for Putler .

[billbindc]

15 minutes ago, Cederic said:

It's interesting to see the discussion on traitors from someone whose country was founded by traitors. Tea party anybody? But for clarity I was referring to war memorials and war graves (the Soviet one in Tiergarten is both) and not monuments.

 

The argument made at the time was that the colonists were provided the rights of and as Englishmen and those rights were then abrogated by HMG in order to force us to pay taxes to which we did not agree. As a resident of the District of Columbia, I can tell you it's a hell of a good reason to rebel. Cheers. 

[Battlefront.com]

25 minutes ago, Probus said:

Steve, I think you are being sarcastic so prolly ignore what I'm about to say...

RANT BEGINS:

Otherwise... this is pure history revisionism by WOKE elements of our society.  We may not like this history (whether we are leftwing or rightwing) but by your reasoning we should knock down/deface practically every monument erected over our civilization's history.  Why, because practically every person who has lived until very recently has been some sort of racist.  (and many still alive are some sort of racist, just misinformed/unenlightened, but may still be good people).  You can't go around defacing historical sites because you disagree with their politics.  That's happened throughout history and is disgusting.  We would have no history if you burned every temple or book, knocked down every statue because you don't agree with some segment of that belief.  And as for the USA (or any country) naming a ship or a base after a US historical figure, it can't.  Why? Because by your reasoning, none of them are perfect by today's standards.

:RANT ENDS

This thread is really not the place to discuss this anyway.  If you disagree with me Steve, I would be glad to discuss this using your PM system.  Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you are trying to say.

The world is not black and white.  While I GENERALLY am opposed to the destruction of historical monuments, there are times when the monuments need to go so that society can move on.  Or do you think Jews in modern Germany should have to walk by busts of Hitler and plaques of Swastikas every day?  Do you think people in countries repressed by the Soviets should have to have their limited public spaces taken up by monuments to their former oppressors or drive down roads named for foreigners who kept them repressed?  I sure as Hell do not.

And I do think there's a difference between naming something after a flawed individual by current societal norms (e.g. George Washington) and naming something after someone who, even at the time the monument was created, was clearly unworthy of such a thing  (e.g. Robert E Lee).

Steve

[Aragorn2002]

4 minutes ago, keas66 said:

On the earlier Poll ... seriously whats up with the Greeks ? Still smarting from the economic sledgehammer they got hit with by the EU a few years back ?  I understanding holding a grudge  but didn't think it was that serious to get them rooting for Putler .

Remarkable indeed. Unpredictable country, Greece. Perhaps they miss the Russian tourists...

[danfrodo]

deleted

Edited May 8, 2022 by danfrodo
vacation avoidance...

[panzermartin]

5 minutes ago, Kraft said:

I wonder if you'd use the same expression if we got news that UA troops are conducting mass executions in Russian villages.

War crimes dont make war crimes in retaliation legal. Simple as.

Also Soviet Army was capable of mass executions long before German boots stepped on their territory. Their glorification is just as offending to some as the swastika or the Japanease sun is.

To be honest. If Russians crimes are so widespread as the Ukrainians imply, I'm expecting this. I don't think there is much logic when things go out of hand in war. I'm afraid we will see people here justificating it and I will probably be out of words to counter them. 

No glorification but respect to the people that perished fighting. I don't have red banners in my home and I and I debate with passion people with one sided view of history, even my father who was very emotional about the Soviet Army, because these were the people in 1944 that made the occupation army withdraw from the Balkans and his country. 

[keas66]

12 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

All nations start from a previous incarnation.  History is messy.  However, generally the thin line between "traitor" and "patriot" has a lot to do with what alternatives were available to them at the time.  The colonies in what became the United States had legitimate grievances over self rule that were repressed by force from across an ocean.  The south broke away because they couldn't get their way democratically within a government system that afforded them equal (some could argue unequal) say in how the government conducted itself.  Breaking away after losing a debate is very different than breaking away from something that didn't recognize the ability to have that debate in the first place.

Canadians, Australians, New Zealanders, South Africans, and others did not have to go down this route because the United States taught the British a lesson.  And, to their great credit, they became more realistic and pragmatic about their response to demands for more autonomy.  Well, as long as they were white.  The dark skinned subjects had to wait until India to get that ball rolling.

I don't think you'll find many who disagree with you.  However, it is also prejudiced and dehumanizing to force symbols of decades of oppression onto an entire people just because their grandfathers were part of it.

The principles established as a result of WW2 acknowledge that collective support of an institution that commits crimes is at least culpable.  That doesn't mean they get prosecuted and strung up by their necks, but it is unhealthy to excuse collaboration as if it doesn't matter.

Absolutely agree.  I don't think there is too much to worry about there, though, as I think most of the people of significance will either have died in the fighting or fled to Russia.  That makes sorting things out infinitely easier.

Steve

So  I don't claim to be an expert in these matters but I did get the impression from alternate readings of American History that things were not so cut and dry as you describe   ( ie A Peoples History  , by Howard Zinn )  . I don't think there was quite as much money to be made in either of Australia or New Zealand back in the foundation of both those places to warrant the  locals getting  feisty  about paying taxes to the home land - No  defenses to be paid for against the Rampaging French for instance . ( Edit -  And I think the problems in South Africa were much much more significant than   your brief dismissal alludes to  - The Zulu Wars , The Boer War  - were all major events .  The Maori Wars  in NZ concluded in a manner which did not quite equate to the ethnic cleansing seen in Australia  or  America/Canada - making it less of a land of opportunity then one might imagine  . So the rest of us in the Commonwealth had our own set of issues to deal with - none of which lead directly to any sort of civil revolt against English authority  - but not because the Americans had taught the British a Lesson . ) 

Edited May 8, 2022 by keas66

[chrisl]

20 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

The supply base attack was geolocated to: notably to see Ukraine being able to strike targets north of Iyzum consistently. 

 

 

Same location, different attack.

The farmhouse that was the target of the round that was subject to the precision vs. dumb luck discussion is behind the second "bump" in the band of forest.  You can see it in the lower right of the most recent video at about 0:19 and it's a) visibly had some HE go through the roof  and b)  no longer smoking.  If you compare the scraped up/"fully developed" regions in the two videos plus google earth satellite view, the "parking lot" was much smaller in the video of the first MLRS barrage that got the EW guy and now it extends all the way between the two bands of forest and encompasses the spot where the house got hit.

The house is also clearly visible on the left side of  "part 1" of the same video at 0:06.  It looks like it's actually a pair of adjacent houses that each have a close-on outbuilding or addition, and one of the houses took the direct hit.