Jump to content


Advanced Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by air1975

  1. I'm sure Putin is surprised at how long the Ukrainian resistance has lasted and that he has been unable to capture the whole of Ukraine. 


    I just wonder how long Ukraine can keep up the resistance though. I also shudder at the thought of so many people in Ukraine without power and water, with the winter months coming up. Its absolute genocide, what Putin is doing. 


    Sadly, I don't see a resolution of this conflict anytime soon. I think the war is just going to keep grinding month after month after month.. I really don't know what the eventual outcome will be... 

  2. 12 hours ago, Andra said:

    Meghan always seemed chill to me and like a kind person, I don't really understand the hate that she gets. What did she ever do, apart from "stealing" Harry from his beloved family which he wanted to get away from anyway. What is everyone's problem with her?

    I am not a fan of either Meghan or Harry. The biggest reason why is that they left the royal family because they said it was traumatic, which I can understand. 

    However - they then proceeded to do media interviews bashing the royals. Who does that?!? To go to Oprah Winfrey and bitch about your in laws publicly to the entire world is absolute douchebaggery. 

  3. This is just so saddening and disheartening to me. 

    It seems so simple: you don't want to have an abortion? Then don't. But the fact that these motherfuckers are trying to take the choice away from others is outrageous. 


    I predict if this shitshow comes to pass, then there will be a 2 tier system. Republican, conservative states will outlaw abortion - leading to more unwanted kids, child abuse, poverty etc in those places. Democrat states will continue to offer access, and may start getting out of state folks. 


    With news like this, it really does make me toy with the idea of moving out of the US. The amount of political division, fighting and posturing, and viciousness (eg. Florida trying to fuck Disney over simply for its viewpoint) is just exhausting. 



  4. 15 hours ago, Kilt said:

    On March 21 Putin had a video conference with Secretary of the Security Council Patrushev, Minister of Defence Shoigu, Chief of the General Staff Gerasimov and Director of the Federal Security Service Bortnikov.

    During the discussion of the current situation at the front, the conversation turned to the losses of Russian troops and Gerasimov characterized the losses as "substantial".

    Putin interrupted Gerasimov and continued saying that these losses are acceptable and it is nothing compared to the goals that will be achieved after the victory.

    That is so fucked up.

    I wonder what his endgame is... what are the goals that he wants to achieve? 

    Does he want to annex Ukraine? Install a puppet regime there? Break it up into a pro Russia and pro West region? Does he plan on annexing other countries? WWIII?


  5. 52 minutes ago, runa said:

    No matter on what side you are, no matter what you think about is, Ukrenian, Russian, it’s absolutely tragic 🙁 

    So true. It is so very sad for all the humans involved in this tragedy. I think of the Ukrainians who all of a sudden are losing their homes and country and lives; Ukranian families' separation from the sons/fathers/brothers who are forced to fight; to the young Russian men (really boys) who are being told to fight for a war they probably do not understand; to the Ukranian and Russian mothers and fathers worried sick for their kids in the army; to the Russian people losing their jobs/savings. Its still almost surreal that in 2022 this could happen. 

  6. A photographer reflects on what he saw at Lviv's train station as thousands said goodbye to their home

    From CNN's Sandi Sidhu


    "The true victims of war are people that have nothing to do with the conflict and whose lives are turned upside down by war after they cross a frontier from their homeland, have suddenly lost everything that relates to their existence," he continued. 

    Turnley shared what he saw in the refugees he encountered. 

    (Courtesy Peter Turnley)
    (Courtesy Peter Turnley)

    Turnley said many of the individuals departing are women and children, as men under the age of 60have been banned from leaving the country. 

    "They've been separated from their husbands, their fathers, their young men, and they have no idea when they may return home," he told CNN. 

    (Courtesy Peter Turnley)
    (Courtesy Peter Turnley)


    (Courtesy Peter Turnley)
    (Courtesy Peter Turnley)

    "It occurred to me that for many of the very, very young that this is a moment that they will never completely remember and at the same time, it's a moment that they will certainly never forget," Turnley continued. 


    (Courtesy Peter Turnley)
    (Courtesy Peter Turnley)


    (Courtesy Peter Turnley)
    (Courtesy Peter Turnley)



    (Courtesy Peter Turnley)
    (Courtesy Peter Turnley)



    (Courtesy Peter Turnley)
    (Courtesy Peter Turnley)



    (Courtesy Peter Turnley)
    (Courtesy Peter Turnley)


    (Courtesy Peter Turnley)
    (Courtesy Peter Turnley)
  7. 20 minutes ago, runa said:


    Also, I think he’s desperately waiting for NATO to interfere. I think he has more than Ukraine in mind. If Nato does something, he’ll have his reasons to attack Poland and move West.

    That is frightening. If he moves into Poland, that would really be the start of WWIII. 

  8. 10 hours ago, Jazzy Jan said:

    If Putin invaded Canada,  would you want Canada to negotiate with him and most likely be forced to give him much of your land or would you want to fight to protect your country ?  Seeing so much footage of people from Ukraine despairing about Putin and Russia changing their entire lives with his cruel and undemocratic regime,  why should they negotiate with a brutal cruel dictator.  It is their country,  not Putin's to invade.  

    So true. 

    If countries with weaker militaries should just give up their lands - then where would be the end of this? 

  9. 3 hours ago, CzarnaWisnia said:

    Well, first of all I don't trust any political leader to their word. I believe any state leader mixes lies with the truth all the time and that whatever they publicly disclose is always meant to create an effect. I mostly find suspicious how any political figure is suddenly the object of frenzied adulation, mostly from Western people who did not know his name three weeks ago, nor, for the most part, did they know anything at all about the country he's the leader of. I see t-shirts with Zelensky posing as a Marvel super-hero, I see memes all over the internet with thousands of likes, and gushing praise on Twitter. I mean, c'mon. I bet you can find some wine mom having his face tattoed on her boob RIGHT NOW. I understand one can find him courageous and responsible, but... c'mon.

    Secondly, I think any information broadcast during war time is suspicious. Motives for people's actions, etc., that's all suspicious. Thirdly, I disapprove of certain political decisions he has made before the war started, and others since, but I won't say anymore than that.

    Thanks for the response. I definitely agree about wartime info (and even non-wartime news) is not always accurate. Most things have some sort of agenda or political leaning.

    I have to say - the bit about the wine mom having his face tattooed on her boob is hilarious. I can totally picture it. lol

  10. Russia increases censorship with new law: 15 years in jail for calling Ukraine invasion a 'war'

    “War” and “invasion” are two words that can land someone in prison for up to 15 years under a new Russian law. Those words are “fake news" in the eyes of Russian lawmakers and President Vladimir Putin, who last week passed a law criminalizing the intentional spread of information that goes against the government’s narrative about what the country prefers to call a “special military operation” in Ukraine.


    Vyacheslav Volodin, the speaker of the lower house of parliament, said the measure “will force those who lied and made statements discrediting our armed forces to bear very grave punishment.”

    Under the new legislation, individuals can be punished with up to 15 years of prison for publishing information that runs counter to Russia's narrative. That person could be a journalist who spoke negatively of Russia in a years-old tweet — the law is retroactive — or a Russian citizen who posts a TikTok about the country’s military invasion in Ukraine.


  11. I think Putin is realizing that this invasion is more costly than he had anticipated (length of time, Russian casualties, stiff resistance, significant sanctions resulting in economic difficulties and possible unrest in Russia). 

    I am afraid he will become more and more ruthless, as he may be like a poker player who has bet too much money to pull out now. 


  12. 5 hours ago, ULIZOS said:

    You were being passive aggressive and you know it. 


    Initially you said I was twisting your words. I asked you to specify where exactly I twisted your words. You are unable to do so.

    Now you are making a bullshit/vague claim that I was being passive aggressive. I have no problems being upfront - so there really is no need for me to be passive aggressive. But its your opinion - you're entitled to it. I disagree w. your opinion. 

  13. 3 minutes ago, CzarnaWisnia said:

    There were no immediate plans, but these things don't happen overnight. Membership takes years and is prefaced by many gestures of solidarity that imply future membership. Trump even sent weapons to Ukraine. If the US was trying to influence Americans or pro-American citizens living in Mexico, wanting a part of their land as well, and France sent weapons to Mexico, it would be seen as absolutely hostile towards the US. I know the comparison is kind of bogus, but I'm trying to get the point across that it's not just a matter of membership but of the behavior and actions of various countries, which are understood to mean certain things (whether true or false).

    1. Its an interesting point - you say that Russia saw Western's Europe and US's help to Ukraine as hostile acts -  I am sure he did. (just like many in the US saw Russia's interference in US elections as a hostile act). But what of it? Just because he knew that US/Western Europe is more supportive of Ukraine (more so after the Crimea annexation); just because he knows that US/Western Europe do not want him to annex Ukraine - THAT cannot be a logical reason to actually move forward with an invasion.

    2. Even with your hypothetical example - the US is not trying to annex anyone's lands. Russia had already annexed Crimea and wanted to swallow the rest of the Ukraine. 


    Personally, I fully believe Russia would have tried to annex Ukraine even if Ukraine made a declaration of not joining NATO for the next 15 years. I think that Putin saw that Ukraine was leaning more towards Western European philosophy in some ways - and Putin felt like the Russian sphere of influence was decreasing. If not the NATO situation, he would have found some other pretext to invade. I think the only way he would not have invaded was if he had been able to install a very pro-Russian puppet-like regime in Ukraine. 

  14. 9 minutes ago, CzarnaWisnia said:

    Just because a country chooses to join an international body doesn't give it any right to do so. The process for joining the EU for instance is long and complex, and the EU has a string of conditions that have to be met in order to accept a new member. Same for NATO I suppose. These bodies have to consider, among other things, what geopolitical consequences each new membership will have, in the immediate region especially. For instance, before Poland joined, the country made sure to cultivate cordial relations with its neighbours (especially Ukraine). After 1989 (fall of communism in Poland), the country was fucked up but they aimed at EU and NATO membership. The knew it would help their application if they cultivated stability with their neighbours. They also wanted to insure the safety of Poles living in those countries. Poland also confirmed its existing borders, telegraphing that it had no intention of claiming territories that had been Polish in the past, before the war for instance (Western Ukraine used to be Polish). Also, the country was rather stable when it was finally added to the EU in 2004. So no, it's not counter to international law for international bodies to negotiate the membership of any given country. Ukraine has been unstable for years and years, there's even been internal military conflict for years, and it has had bad relations to its immediate neighbour (Russia). I don't see how NATO or the EU would have effectively accepted it as a member in these circumstances. 

    Exactly. There was no immediate plan or path for Ukraine to join NATO. Thus, I agree with the following excerpt from another opinion piece (Alexander Motyl writing for The Hill):


    "Most importantly, Russia’s repeated claims that it genuinely feared NATO membership for Ukraine were a canard, as Washington, Moscow and NATO — as well as Kyiv — knew full well that Ukraine’s chances of joining the alliance in the next 20 years were nil. Ukraine posed no imaginable security threat to Russia, the largest country in the world, possessing a huge army, thousands of nuclear weapons and enormous natural resources. "

  • Create New...