Russia-Ukraine War 2022 - Page 887 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#15324921
Rugoz wrote:The very notion that countries with nuclear weapons should be spared defeat in foreign wars must be rejected in the strongest way possible. It's geopolitical idiocy.

You're the one spouting the idiocy. Take the Cuban missile crisis. International Law is surly clear on that one. The United States had absolutely no right to dictate to Cuba's government what weapons it could have on its sovereign territory. But at the end of the day no one really cares about international law, when it becomes majorly inconvenient. The Soviet leadership had to accept that Cuba was a part of the US's back yard. They had to accept that the US cared a lot more about Cuba than they did. You presumably think that Khrushchev and the politburo should have rode straight through Kennedy's red lines and called his bluff on a nuclear war.

By the same token the Soviet Union had no right to dictate what weapons Turkey had on its soil. But again the US recognised that Turkey was in the SU's backyard and withdrew nuclear weapons from Turkey. We see a similar pattern with Communist China. Ultimately we accepted that Tibet was part of China's back yard and China could go in and destroy Tibet's culture. Also in Vietnam, recognition of China's interest in North Vietnam severely hampered the US war effort.

Some people like Meersheimer hide their anti American hatred behind a cloak of realism. His attitude to Israel has exposed him as the fraud he is, an anti American idealist posing as a realist. Israel's nculear weapons are a fact that allows them to get away with a much greater level of bullying of their neigbours. The fact that people use realism as a cover for their real views does not negate the fact that nuclear powers can not be militarily defeated in their immediate neighbourhood without taking an insane risk.
#15324931
ingliz wrote:@litwin

Image

The US poodle is very foolish if it thinks it can go to war.

The General Staff say the UK has given so much shit to Ukraine (it didn't have much to begin with) that it can't defend itself.





:lol:


the story of the day, any comment on this ? i think its the czarist shitt ever :lol:

"Legendary" Muscovite drone operator Dmitry "Goodwin" Lysakovsky was allegedly sent on a high-risk assault mission :lol: where he was killed after criticizing the command.

https://iz.ru/1759161/2024-09-14/belous ... t-i-gudvin


Image

https://x.com/wartranslated/status/1834 ... 5994945728
By Rich
#15324935
The first thing to note about the West's response to Russia's medium scale incrusion into Ukraine is not just that it economic rather military, but set against the Hitlerian rhetoric it was a complete joke. If you are serious about an all out conflict, the first thing you do before you send any weapons let alone troops it to cut off all trade dead. The West was no where near ready for this, of course these narcissistic Liberal sociopaths expected the rest of the world to stop trading with Russia. The West thought it was entitled to carry on trading with Russia, but now expected Russia to sell its resources at a discount and that Russia would not be allowed to use the money from this trade.

All parts of the western alliance were engaged in this delusional self entilement. THE US thought it could just make massive profits out of Europe through hiked energy prices. Western Europe wanted Russian energy at a discount and front line countries like Poland and Romania didn't want to compete with Ukrainian farmers and truckers. Yes standing up to Russia was very popular but none of the populations of Europe were prepared to make any real economic sacrifices for the war and none of the politicians were prepared to tell them the truth. British Prime Ministers liked shouting Slava Ukraini but weren't even willing to consider rejoining the EU, in order to share the massive costs of integrating Ukraine into the EU. Politicians tried to hide the cost of the war at least in Britain by introducing massive energy subsidies. I remember the fanaticism with which Liz truss followed her economic heroes, her heroes obviously being Mummar Qaddafi, Hugo Chavez and Nicolas Maduro.
#15324936
Rich wrote:You're the one spouting the idiocy. Take the Cuban missile crisis. International Law is surly clear on that one. The United States had absolutely no right to dictate to Cuba's government what weapons it could have on its sovereign territory. But at the end of the day no one really cares about international law, when it becomes majorly inconvenient. The Soviet leadership had to accept that Cuba was a part of the US's back yard. They had to accept that the US cared a lot more about Cuba than they did. You presumably think that Khrushchev and the politburo should have rode straight through Kennedy's red lines and called his bluff on a nuclear war.

By the same token the Soviet Union had no right to dictate what weapons Turkey had on its soil. But again the US recognised that Turkey was in the SU's backyard and withdrew nuclear weapons from Turkey. We see a similar pattern with Communist China. Ultimately we accepted that Tibet was part of China's back yard and China could go in and destroy Tibet's culture. Also in Vietnam, recognition of China's interest in North Vietnam severely hampered the US war effort.

Some people like Meersheimer hide their anti American hatred behind a cloak of realism. His attitude to Israel has exposed him as the fraud he is, an anti American idealist posing as a realist. Israel's nculear weapons are a fact that allows them to get away with a much greater level of bullying of their neigbours. The fact that people use realism as a cover for their real views does not negate the fact that nuclear powers can not be militarily defeated in their immediate neighbourhood without taking an insane risk.


2 likes for this drivel :lol:.

You completely missed the point. The US was defeated in Vietnam, the SU in Afghanistan. Russia should be defeated in Ukraine, just as every imperial power was (occasionally) defeated in conventional (proxy) wars. It's not about international law, it's realpolitik. What you and other morons here are suggesting is that we literally should let Russia take Ukraine or parts of it because Russia has nukes. What kind of precedent do you think this sets? If nuclear weapons guarantee victory in expansionist wars, it will do wonders for nuclear proliferation. Nukes are first and foremost a defensive weapon. That must never change.

The Cuban missile crisis is irrelevant in this context. For starters, it must be seen in the context of nuclear delivery platforms/warning systems at the time. Moreover, there are no nukes in Eastern Europe and there won't be in Ukraine. Unless of course we fail to defend Ukraine, in which case Poland for example is pretty much guaranteed to get them.
User avatar
By litwin
#15324955
https://x.com/i/status/1832284619892302034
Mutiny/coup gets closer with every punishment dealt by superiors. :lol: 8)

A russian lieutenant colonel of the 83rd Airborne Assault Brigade has been detained on charges of fraud. The officer denies guilt, claiming that his arrest is related to the exposure of corruption schemes in the brigade command.

The video shows the commander of the sniper group of the 83rd airborne assault brigade, Lieutenant Colonel Konstantin Olegovich Frolov , born June 13, 1987, call sign “Executioner”, personal number: X-514218. The officer was awarded five Orders of Courage, as well as the title of Hero of Russia.

On September 5, Frolov was detained in the hospital where he was after another injury, and taken to Moscow's pretrial detention center No. 4. He is accused of fraud under Article 159.4 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, stating that he knew about the brigade commander's illegal actions, but did not take any measures.

The officer denies his guilt, stating that his detention is connected with the fact that he exposed corruption schemes in the brigade command. According to him, the brigade commander, Colonel Gorodilov Artem Igorevich, extorted money from the personnel for the registration of due payments and compensation for injuries received.


https://x.com/i/status/1833092999036731888
User avatar
By litwin
#15325014
litwin wrote:the story of the day, any comment on this ? i think its the czarist shitt ever :lol:

"Legendary" Muscovite drone operator Dmitry "Goodwin" Lysakovsky was allegedly sent on a high-risk assault mission :lol: where he was killed after criticizing the command.

https://iz.ru/1759161/2024-09-14/belous ... t-i-gudvin


Image

https://x.com/wartranslated/status/1834 ... 5994945728

part 2 :lol:

Image

https://x.com/PStyle0ne1/status/1835238578755887199
User avatar
By Skynet
#15325165
Killing journalists is a warcrime in myü eyes but we can discuss if embedded journalists are neutral reporters (on both sides).

I am idelogically close to Tsar Putin but he is allied with our enemies...
#15325167
Skynet wrote:I am idelogically close to Tsar Putin but he is allied with our enemies...


Then what ideology does Putin have ? Because I'm unaware he has one. He kind of wanted to join the west for decades and recently he now leans into BRICS because the west clearly has no use for Russia as a friend, and any number of uses for Russia as an enemy. Thats not an ideology though.
By Rich
#15325169
Negotiator wrote:Then what ideology does Putin have ?

Putin is a Russian nationalist. Russian nationalists have a problem. Its no where near as a big a problem as the Arab nationalists face. The Arab nationalists faced the insurmountable problem of how do you disentangle Arab nationalism from Islam. No successful solution was found and Arab nationalism has been an almost completely total failure. The Russian problem is how do you disentangle Russian nationalism from Soviet Communism. The Communist Party was anti Russian nationalism while being pro the so called imperialised nationalisms. In the same way that American Communists hate America and lord the nationalism of anyone that is in conflict with America. The difference being that the American Communists never got to rule America for seventy four years.

Imagine if people like @Pants-of-dog had got to run America for seventy years. I think we might have trouble making sense of it. I think we might have trouble creating a coherent narrative.
User avatar
By litwin
#15325177
Skynet wrote:Killing journalists is a warcrime in myü eyes but we can discuss if embedded journalists are neutral reporters (on both sides).

I am idelogically close to Tsar Putin but he is allied with our enemies...


What do you think about this sort of punishment of the own solders in putin´s "army" ? VIDEO

"Let us begin with this evident fact: Muscovy does not belong at all to Europe, but to Asia. It follows that judging Muscovy and the Muscovites by our European standards is a mistake to be avoided."—gonzague de reynold, 19501 In methodological terms, one should de-Europeanise any analysis of Muscovy policy.— thomas gomart, 20062 "




https://x.com/i/status/1836012638419005606

BACKGROUND :

https://x.com/albafella1/status/1810664 ... _&ref_url=
  • 1
  • 885
  • 886
  • 887
  • 888
  • 889
  • 897

@Hakeer , you said: . The Jews that have fait[…]

National debt…

Yet many have. He’s talking about monetizing th[…]

Origina of Value

Sorry Philosopher King TtP, I didn't comprehend t[…]

Anybody have a good calculator? What is 6.2% of 2[…]