In case any of you freakout people think it was Russia that bombed the civilian train station, the missile was an obsolete Tochka-U that they don't use anymore. Yet another Ukrainian false flag.
Of course you'll insist the Russians dug up an old one or something
They have been using their good missiles to blow up Ukrainian military targets at train stations, but it's up to Ukraine to keep civilians away from that.
In case any of you freakout people think it was Russia that bombed the civilian train station, the missile was an obsolete Tochka-U that they don't use anymore. Yet another Ukrainian false flag.
Of course you'll insist the Russians dug up an old one or something
They have been using their good missiles to blow up Ukrainian military targets at train stations, but it's up to Ukraine to keep civilians away from that.
I was wondering what the pro-Putin spin you guys would put on this latest war crime would be. I thought fake train station or fake dead people would be it. Didn't seriously think you guys would claim Ukraine bombed their own train station to get sympathy. You should try out claiming that the paint used for "For our children" was clearly Ukrainian paint that Russia never uses. Maybe its even CIA paint?
In case any of you freakout people think it was Russia that bombed the civilian train station, the missile was an obsolete Tochka-U that they don't use anymore. Yet another Ukrainian false flag.
Of course you'll insist the Russians dug up an old one or something
They have been using their good missiles to blow up Ukrainian military targets at train stations, but it's up to Ukraine to keep civilians away from that.
At first, I thought, this is pretty far-fetched.
Ukrainians launching missiles into a city they control?! Why would they?
Then I did some checking.
You know, because I don't blithely digest headlines as facts.
Only the Ukraine side has been documented having or using Tochka U missiles in this war, having launched at least 4.
The Russian side is accused of launching one Tochka - but not "U" model, but a 9M79.
Until today, it was accepted the Russian military retired and sold their Tochka U missiles.
What really sets this up as a possible false flag is a missile being painted with the words "For Children" on the side.
Given the bad press Russia's been receiving, it would be lunacy to paint that.
But if it were fired in a false-flag operation, painting such cruel words would serve to further villainize the Russian side.
Ukraine is working furiously to goad international military intervention and leverage maximum sanction hurt against the Russian side. This bombing is fresh log on that bonfire.
The strike would also have the effect of turning Kramatorsk citizens against the Russians. The city is in the Donbass and will soon be contested. It has a large number of citizens identifying as "Russian". The strike serves to switch that allegiance.
If it is a false flag, that's some pretty evil stuff...
In case any of you freakout people think it was Russia that bombed the civilian train station, the missile was an obsolete Tochka-U that they don't use anymore. Yet another Ukrainian false flag.
Of course you'll insist the Russians dug up an old one or something
They have been using their good missiles to blow up Ukrainian military targets at train stations, but it's up to Ukraine to keep civilians away from that.
I was wondering what the pro-Putin spin you guys would put on this latest war crime would be. I thought fake train station or fake dead people would be it. Didn't seriously think you guys would claim Ukraine bombed their own train station to get sympathy. You should try out claiming that the paint used for "For our children" was clearly Ukrainian paint that Russia never uses. Maybe its even CIA paint?
Tired of posting links to "Appeal to Ridicule". Not a single fact in this post. Just smear.
In case any of you freakout people think it was Russia that bombed the civilian train station, the missile was an obsolete Tochka-U that they don't use anymore. Yet another Ukrainian false flag.
Of course you'll insist the Russians dug up an old one or something
They have been using their good missiles to blow up Ukrainian military targets at train stations, but it's up to Ukraine to keep civilians away from that.
At first, I thought, this is pretty far-fetched.
Ukrainians launching missiles into a city they control?! Why would they?
Then I did some checking.
You know, because I don't blithely digest headlines as facts.
Only the Ukraine side has been documented having or using Tochka U missiles in this war, having launched at least 4.
The Russian side is accused of launching one Tochka - but not "U" model, but a 9M79.
Until today, it was accepted the Russian military retired and sold their Tochka U missiles.
What really sets this up as a possible false flag is a missile being painted with the words "For Children" on the side.
Given the bad press Russia's been receiving, it would be lunacy to paint that.
But if it were fired in a false-flag operation, painting such cruel words would serve to further villainize the Russian side.
Ukraine is working furiously to goad international military intervention and leverage maximum sanction hurt against the Russian side. This bombing is fresh log on that bonfire.
The strike would also have the effect of turning Kramatorsk citizens against the Russians. The city is in the Donbass and will soon be contested. It has a large number of citizens identifying as "Russian". The strike serves to switch that allegiance.
If it is a false flag, that's some pretty evil stuff...
Russia says they aren't using them but there is no claim that the 'out of service missiles were destroyed. Defense Blog says they have been brought back into service. It certainly is at least as possible that Russia lied about not intending to use them to be able to claim "false flag" after using them. It seems more plausible that Ukraine launching one at its own citizens.
No! You are incorrect. What is going on in Ukraine is not simply Ukrainians Fighting for Their Freedom, there would be no fight from Ukraine lasting more than one week without U.S. gift of ammunition, weapons and U.S. acting as a real time Forward Observer. U.S. has gotten people killed in Ukraine for U.S. Military Industrial Complex geo-political concerns.
* People of then Soviet Union were not fighting and dying a proxy war for others, WW2.
* People of Great Britain, WW2, were suffering direct attacks from nightly bombing missions by German air force, WW2. No proxy war on the part of Great Britain.
* U.S. Capitol was burned and severely damaged, War of 1812, no proxy war.
***** You just made a fool out of yourself with Japan and WW2 comparison. Japan was far more aggressive to their Asian neighbors in 1930's, 1940 and up to December 6th, 1941 than Russia was to Ukraine before U.S. involvement in Ukraine. U.S. STAYED OUT OF JAPANESE AND ASIAN AFFAIRS EXCEPT U.S. SANCTIONED JAPAN AND CEASED OIL EXPORTS TO JAPAN. U.S. DID NOT ENTER WW2 AS A FIGHTING MILITARY UNTIL JAPAN DIRECTLY ATTACKED A U.S. NAVAL BASE AND DIRECTLY ATTACKED A THEN U.S. TERRITORY, Hawaii.
You are an attorney, am I correct? Do you walk right into traps like this on your day job?
There are people dead, as I stated in Ukraine who would not be dead except for the actions of U.S. politicians urged on by their handlers in M.I.C. It is mathematically impossible for Ukraine to win this without N.A.T.O. &/or U.S. personnel fighting on the ground in Ukraine or N.A.T.O. &/or U.S. flying over Ukrainian skies.
Saying I walked into a trap or made a fool of myself doesn't mean that either are true. The fool is the person that suggests that Japan's aggression against its Asian neighbors has any relevance to my point. You had suggested Ukraine should surrender, and my response was to list other attacked nations that declined to surrender even though lives were lost.
Both a proxy war by the West and a Ukraine desire to fight can exist in parallel, without contradiction. Whether NATO provides assistance for Ukraine's resistance and whether that assistance is necessary for Ukraine to hold out for a prolonged period of time is irrelevant to the core question of whether Ukraine wishes to fight. Ukraine could have said 'thanks but no thanks, we will surrender now. What NATO is doing is making it possible for Ukraine to do what it wants to do.
Your last two sentences could not have been crafted any better.
No pro-Putin spin. Ukraine can do a negotiated surrender today or surrender without negotiation months from now.
For this to end, one of two men have to back down. Putin, I think we can all agree is closer to a Czar than a president or prime minister. Zelenskyy is an actor, clown comedian. Zelenskyy can retire, spin it that he stood up to Russia for 6 or 7 weeks and go back to being a full-time clown.
Zelenskyy is not fighting for the people of Ukraine. Ukraine looks like a Mad Max movie. Zelenskyy is fighting because his handlers in U.S. are encouraging Zelenskyy to fight. Ukraine will be a western territory of Russia one way or the other. Did shrill U.S. politicians push M.I.C. into this or did M.I.C. push emotional & feminine U.S. politicians into this fight? More likely emotional & feminine U.S. politicians pushed M.I.C. into this since there were a bunch of feminine politicians crying for No Fly Zone over Ukraine a month ago. Bottom line, this will end with an Ukraine loss. You (mostly) guys aren't even debating progress of the conflict anymore. Now you are debating if Russia has a mean leader &/or does Russia have mean generals.
In case any of you freakout people think it was Russia that bombed the civilian train station, the missile was an obsolete Tochka-U that they don't use anymore. Yet another Ukrainian false flag.
Of course you'll insist the Russians dug up an old one or something
They have been using their good missiles to blow up Ukrainian military targets at train stations, but it's up to Ukraine to keep civilians away from that.
Ukrainians launching missiles into a city they control?! Why would they?
Then I did some checking.
You know, because I don't blithely digest headlines as facts.
Only the Ukraine side has been documented having or using Tochka U missiles in this war, having launched at least 4.
The Russian side is accused of launching one Tochka - but not "U" model, but a 9M79.
Until today, it was accepted the Russian military retired and sold their Tochka U missiles.
What really sets this up as a possible false flag is a missile being painted with the words "For Children" on the side.
Given the bad press Russia's been receiving, it would be lunacy to paint that.
But if it were fired in a false-flag operation, painting such cruel words would serve to further villainize the Russian side.
Ukraine is working furiously to goad international military intervention and leverage maximum sanction hurt against the Russian side. This bombing is fresh log on that bonfire.
The strike would also have the effect of turning Kramatorsk citizens against the Russians. The city is in the Donbass and will soon be contested. It has a large number of citizens identifying as "Russian". The strike serves to switch that allegiance.
If it is a false flag, that's some pretty evil stuff...
Russia says they aren't using them but there is no claim that the 'out of service missiles were destroyed. Defense Blog says they have been brought back into service. It certainly is at least as possible that Russia lied about not intending to use them to be able to claim "false flag" after using them. It seems more plausible that Ukraine launching one at its own citizens.
Oh come on. You really believe that, do you? Did the Union forces fire on Fort Sumter also? I suppose Poland fired on Germany first to start WWII?
I was wondering what the pro-Putin spin you guys would put on this latest war crime would be. I thought fake train station or fake dead people would be it. Didn't seriously think you guys would claim Ukraine bombed their own train station to get sympathy. You should try out claiming that the paint used for "For our children" was clearly Ukrainian paint that Russia never uses. Maybe its even CIA paint?
Tired of posting links to "Appeal to Ridicule". Not a single fact in this post. Just smear.
Yeah, it was pretty much ridicule. Did the post I was responding to deserve anything else? I'll bet you are aware of the whacked out stories that poster has made up to explain things in the past. I can see above that you are striving hard to promote that Ukraine bombed their own civilians on purpose, but you at least do it with loose inferences and unspoken speculation, from relatively untethered facts. Your pal Wigins there just flat out makes stuff up and claims victory.
Tired of posting links to "Appeal to Ridicule". Not a single fact in this post. Just smear.
Yeah, it was pretty much ridicule. Did the post I was responding to deserve anything else? I'll bet you are aware of the whacked out stories that poster has made up to explain things in the past. I can see above that you are striving hard to promote that Ukraine bombed their own civilians on purpose, but you at least do it with loose inferences and unspoken speculation, from relatively untethered facts. Your pal Wigins there just flat out makes stuff up and claims victory.
Wigins is not my "pal". I read almost none of his/her posts.
I call'em the way I see'em.
The bombing of the Train Station. It doesn't make sense.
The Russians are facing heavy condemnation for war crime claims against civilians, a good many of which have merit. They'd be keeping a low profile, not raising it.
Targeting a train station full of people makes no sense militarily. Hitting it would only serve to make them more of a pariah.
Painting "For Children" on a missile. It strains belief Russians would do that.
But if you wanted to draw horns and a spike tail on the Russians, may as well give them a pitchfork, too.
The missile is one the Ukraine side is known to have used 4 times already in the conflict, and which the Russian side has not used and was acknowledged not to have - until today, it's said.
As sickening as it seems, a Ukraine false flag makes the most sense.
Russia says they aren't using them but there is no claim that the 'out of service missiles were destroyed. Defense Blog says they have been brought back into service. It certainly is at least as possible that Russia lied about not intending to use them to be able to claim "false flag" after using them. It seems more plausible that Ukraine launching one at its own citizens.
Oh come on. You really believe that, do you? Did the Union forces fire on Fort Sumter also? I suppose Poland fired on Germany first to start WWII?
Appeal to Ridicule seems the Go-To M.O. hereabouts.
What happened at Fort Sumter 161 years ago or in Poland 83 years ago does not determine or explain events in the Ukraine today.
one of the nihilists on board claimed that the Russians didn't do foolish, dangerous, pro-radioactive things around Chernobyl. That it was just propaganda.
Here's confirmation that they did, per the NYT:
CHERNOBYL, Ukraine — As the staging ground for an assault on the Ukrainian capital of Kyiv, the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone, one of the most toxic places on earth, was probably not the best choice. But that did not seem to bother the Russian generals who took over the site in the early stages of the war. “We told them not to do it, that it was dangerous, but they ignored us,” Valeriy Simyonov, the chief safety engineer for the Chernobyl nuclear site, said in an interview. Apparently undeterred by safety concerns, the Russian forces tramped about the grounds with bulldozers and tanks, digging trenches and bunkers — and exposing themselves to potentially harmful doses of radiation lingering beneath the surface. In a visit to the recently liberated nuclear station, site of the world’s worst nuclear disaster in 1986, wind blew swirls of dust along the roads, and scenes of disregard for safety were everywhere, though Ukrainian nuclear officials say no major radiation leak was triggered by Russia’s monthlong military occupation. At just one site of extensive trenching a few hundred yards outside the town of Chernobyl, the Russian army had dug an elaborate maze of sunken walkways and bunkers. An abandoned armored personnel carrier sat nearby. The soldiers had apparently camped out for weeks in the radioactive forest. While international nuclear safety experts say they have not confirmed any cases of radiation sickness among the soldiers, the cancers and other potential health problems associated with radiation exposure might not develop until decades later.