Jump to content

News Forum - Ukraine’s Zelensky defies Russia’s ultimatum to lay down weapons


Thaiger
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, NorskTiger said:

The dollar share of world markets is getting closer to 50%. What effect long-term oil price and Middle-East following Iran and accepting other payments is anyone's guess. 

   For sure, the US empire cannot afford to grow the deficit forever, when the number of financiers decrease. 

    Me, I still think in Gold, Bitcoin, property, skillset and some cash at hand. 

That's better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, NorskTiger said:

As far as "hollow threat", I think you have to listen to the actual quotes in Russian to understand the real meaning. Then again, the Anglified world wants everyone to think there is no language besides English and anything is easy to translate into it. 

You keep saying what Putin says in Russian isn’t the same as what the western media reports. However you never explain the difference or give a better translation. Personally I don’t really care as I watch what he does, not what he says. When I say hollow threat it’s because not once since the war has started have Russian rocket forces changed their posture. They have never actually raised their alert level, or moved weapons. Rational people don’t normally make claims to do irrational things and then continue to do rations ones. It’s called crying wolf when there is no wolf. Doesn’t mean the West shouldn’t take notice, just they shouldn’t worry until things actually do change on the ground. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

Oh they know about them. And the prospect of being taken to Russia as a hostage is probably not what they want.

It's good that you asked all of them.  

but in real life, not in your fantasy, most would choose to survive, even at the risk of being taken hostage.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, KRLMRX said:

It's good that you asked all of them.  

but in real life, not in your fantasy, most would choose to survive, even at the risk of being taken hostage.

So why did some of them have to end up in Archangelsk?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/18/2022 at 9:38 AM, EdwardV said:

How is NATO being aggressive? If anything they have been too passive. NATO is hardly an American mouthpiece, Biden has clearly been leading from behind since day one. Ukrainian suffering can only be attributed to one person and that’s Putin. 

NATO is an offensive organization not a defensive anymore since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Would go as far as calling them terrorists, downright criminal and corporate warmongers, Their purpose for existing expired long ago and should be dismantle.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Shishi said:

NATO is an offensive organization not a defensive anymore since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Would go as far as calling them terrorists, downright criminal and corporate warmongers, Their purpose for existing expired long ago and should be dismantle.

You quoted me, but you didn’t answer the question. How is NATO being aggressive? Please don’t tell me about Kosovo or Libya, that’s ancient history. We are talking about Ukraine, how are they being aggressive in connection to Ukraine? 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Alavan said:

So why did some of them have to end up in Archangelsk?

You want to be in a war zone or a peace zone? It’s that simple. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fanta said:

You want to be in a war zone or a peace zone? It’s that simple. 

"It's that simple" so forcing an ethnic group into another country is that simple, well I hope that never happens to you. I haven't spoke to these people that are being bombed or starved to death, but I'd bet that most of them would prefer to live in their own country in peace and have the Russians leave their country and let them to get on with their own lives. 

Sometimes Fanta I just don't know if you ignore the obvious just to be awkward or are you such a big fan of Putin, your liking of the Putin apologists posts would suggest the latter. 

Could the forced transfer of the Ukrainians to another country be classed as a war crime, some might even say it is another form of genocide, but hey, "it's that simple" 

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Marble-eye said:

"It's that simple" so forcing an ethnic group into another country is that simple, well I hope that never happens to you. I haven't spoke to these people that are being bombed or starved to death, but I'd bet that most of them would prefer to live in their own country in peace and have the Russians leave their country and let them to get on with their own lives. 

Sometimes Fanta I just don't know if you ignore the obvious just to be awkward or are you such a big fan of Putin, your liking of the Putin apologists posts would suggest the latter. 

Could the forced transfer of the Ukrainians to another country be classed as a war crime, some might even say it is another form of genocide, but hey, "it's that simple" 

You should ask vlad for his thoughts on the matter. His concern was that previous Mariupol evacuees who were relocated further inside Ukraine had been moved “out of the frying pan into the fire” as he put it. If the last 2 months of my life had been spent living in fear of my life I’d be relieved to go pretty much anywhere safe. Anywhere except for your and Rookiescot’s head, I’ve been living there rent free for way too long already. Please forcibly evacuate me.

Ps: have you ever considered this is a humanitarian effort that will save the lives of noncombatants, not genocide? Or that accusations of hostage taking/human shields could also be leveled at the Azov regiment in the steelworks who are holding 1,000+ old men, woman and children? The civilians are now safe from war and receiving the basics necessities of life and isn’t that the most important thing? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Fanta said:

Ps: have you ever considered this is a humanitarian effort that will save the lives of noncombatants, not genocide?

Problem is it’s Russia defining what is a safe area. The same people who were bombing them. If Russia was allowing them to transit to a third country (plenty of organizations like the Red Cross would love to help), or immediately leave Russia on their own I would agree. However taking their passports (allegedly) and sending them deep into Russia is looks a lot like hostage taking at best, kidnapping at worse.
 

A lot of bad things can come from this policy. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, EdwardV said:

Problem is it’s Russia defining what is a safe area. The same people who were bombing them. If Russia was allowing them to transit to a third country (plenty of organizations like the Red Cross would love to help), or immediately leave Russia on their own I would agree. However taking their passports (allegedly) and sending them deep into Russia is looks a lot like hostage taking at best, kidnapping at worse.
 

A lot of bad things can come from this policy. 

I am not excusing or condemning this, just trying to form my own opinion. Moving them deep inside Russia can be seen at suppressing the plight of innocents in war from ordinary Russians. Passports, ID cards - I don’t know. Taking them without issuing a replacement ID means tens of thousands undocumented people in country. Evacuate by a 3rd party? Neither side, understandably, trusts the any side and the Russians have clearly decided to take these matters into their own hands. The Russians will claim it is a humanitarian gesture while the MSM will claim it is hostage taking. There are pro Russia allegations that Azov soldiers attacked a known humanitarian convoy in Mariupol. If the Russians believe that how can they be expected to trust the Ukrainians to evacuate non combatants? I wouldn’t. Question:  Why burden yourself with 40,000+ of “the enemy” if you can just abandon them on their own soil? That’s the bit I don’t understand if we are expected to believe the MSM’s portrayal of this as a heinous act.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Fanta said:

Question:  Why burden yourself with 40,000+ of “the enemy” if you can just abandon them on their own soil? That’s the bit I don’t understand if we are expected to believe the MSM’s portrayal of this as a heinous act.

Why would Russia faciltate the return of 'enemy civilians' for intelligence gathering, morale booster and so on.

Putin repeatedly lied leading up to the invasion, so his word is worth nothing. Remember the Russians have continually failed to keep their promisses for evacuation corridors.  Would not the Russians keep enemy civilians as high value assets for bargining a future peace / ceasefire agreement. One thing you can be sure of, as a peace / ceasefire agreement nears Russian agression will increase in tempo to increase pressure on Ukraine government.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Fanta said:

Question:  Why burden yourself with 40,000+ of “the enemy” if you can just abandon them on their own soil? That’s the bit I don’t understand if we are expected to believe the MSM’s portrayal of this as a heinous act.

Good question, no doubt getting them out of the conflict zone is a plus regardless. It’s just the optics look bad and Russia has a long history of forced relocation. Since it considers Ukraine not a country but part of Russia … you can see the rabbit hole this runs down. 

  • Like 1
  • Cool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, PBS said:

Why would Russia faciltate the return of 'enemy civilians' for intelligence gathering, morale booster and so on.

And what meaningful intelligence could civilians provide that satellites do not provide already? Any morale boost is negligible. Relief is a better word. There can be no triumphant claims of “We did!” etc Ukrainian has no “claim to fame” in any evacuation of civilians into Ukraine from inside Russian held territory. Look at the civilians in the steelworks situation at the moment and Zelenskyy’s response. That does my head in. The only explanations that seems plausible to me is fear of a Russian massacre/collateral damage of the civilians or the Azov commanders are ignoring orders and not forcing the non combatants to leave. Using civilians as bargaining chips in peace talks seems, at best, unlikely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Alavan said:

So why did some of them have to end up in Archangelsk?

As I understand it, new information has appeared, "which everyone knows about."  

And can you confirm with references that documents are being taken away from civilians from Ukraine and forcibly taken to Arkhangelsk?  

I know one refugee from Ukraine who lives in New York, another in Istanbul, and a third in Naples.  Maybe some refugees go to places where they have the opportunity to stay (relatives, friends, acquaintances)?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, EdwardV said:

You quoted me, but you didn’t answer the question. How is NATO being aggressive? Please don’t tell me about Kosovo or Libya, that’s ancient history. We are talking about Ukraine, how are they being aggressive in connection to Ukraine? 

 

NATO aka (The Alliance of coward bullies) is fighting Russia through Ukraine, a proxy war, sacrificing people and a country that isn’t theirs to sacrifice just for the sake of military industrial complex, They don’t have the guts to fight Russia directly.

NATO is defensive force when they face a powerful country, offensive when it comes to small country.

 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fanta said:

Using civilians as bargaining chips in peace talks seems, at best, unlikely.

Forgive me, IMO, you comment is niave. maximum pressure is applied during peace / ceasefire negotiations. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Shishi said:

NATO aka (The Alliance of coward bullies) is fighting Russia through Ukraine, a proxy war, sacrificing people and a country that isn’t theirs to sacrifice just for the sake of military industrial complex, They don’t have the guts to fight Russia directly.

NATO is defensive force when they face a powerful country, offensive when it comes to small country.

Very funny, keep it up, most amusing.....😜

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Shishi said:

They don’t have the guts to fight Russia directly.

Be careful what you wish for, Russia has failed so far meeting any of its objectives, the mighty bear turns out to be just a big pussy albeit a cruel and sadistic one, and the Brave Putin will fight till every last Russian is dead, himself excluded of course. 😂

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Shishi said:

NATO aka (The Alliance of coward bullies) is fighting Russia through Ukraine, a proxy war, sacrificing people and a country that isn’t theirs to sacrifice just for the sake of military industrial complex, They don’t have the guts to fight Russia directly.

NATO is defensive force when they face a powerful country, offensive when it comes to small country.

So that means Russia is a small country? 
 

Your post would make more sense had NATO started the war. Of course we know Putin did back in 2014 and has been keeping it hot ever since. If anything, it’s been NATOs passivity and appeasement that’s emboldened Putin. Their lack of aggression if you will.

Is it a proxy war, most certainly. However that was Putin’s choice when he attacked. Ahhh the old classic “military industrial complex” card. Again would make more sense had Putin not been the one to force conflict. Never mind it’s the Ukrainians who are demanding more and more weapons. Don’t have the guts? Considering Putin has threaten nuclear war if NATO were to enter the conflict, you are suggesting WW3 is a good thing?

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Fanta said:

I am not excusing or condemning this, just trying to form my own opinion. Moving them deep inside Russia can be seen at suppressing the plight of innocents in war from ordinary Russians. Passports, ID cards - I don’t know. Taking them without issuing a replacement ID means tens of thousands undocumented people in country. Evacuate by a 3rd party? Neither side, understandably, trusts the any side and the Russians have clearly decided to take these matters into their own hands. The Russians will claim it is a humanitarian gesture while the MSM will claim it is hostage taking. There are pro Russia allegations that Azov soldiers attacked a known humanitarian convoy in Mariupol. If the Russians believe that how can they be expected to trust the Ukrainians to evacuate non combatants? I wouldn’t. Question:  Why burden yourself with 40,000+ of “the enemy” if you can just abandon them on their own soil? That’s the bit I don’t understand if we are expected to believe the MSM’s portrayal of this as a heinous act.

Maybe they want this 40,000+ (or whatever the number really is) to go  through advanced filtration?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Shishi said:

NATO aka (The Alliance of coward bullies) is fighting Russia through Ukraine, a proxy war, sacrificing people and a country that isn’t theirs to sacrifice just for the sake of military industrial complex, They don’t have the guts to fight Russia directly.

NATO is defensive force when they face a powerful country, offensive when it comes to small country.

Ah! So NATO must have bribed Putin to invade and start the war! Brilliant.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2
  • Cool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would appear the US is selling some weapons to Ukraine, not donating them. 

Top envoy Antony Blinken and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin on Sunday local time told Ukraine's president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and his advisers that the US would provide more than $US300 million ($417 million) in foreign military financing and had approved a $US165 million sale of ammunition.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-04-25/us-announces-military-aid-diplomatic-surge-for-ukraine/100932760

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Fanta said:

You want to be in a war zone or a peace zone? It’s that simple. 

I suggest you look at google maps and check the location of Arkangelsk. Is there realy nothing closer?

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By posting on Thaiger Talk you agree to the Terms of Use