Putin announces 'military operation' in Ukraine.

[JohnfromUK]

4 minutes ago, Stonepark said:

Germany has now been forced down a route not of it's own choosing as there is now no way to lift the sanctions mid winter and turn the pipelines back on......

Germany did not intend to "lift the sanctions mid winter" and there was no suggestion that Putin would "turn the pipelines back on......" anyway.

A question to you, McHughcb and Serrac, who are all "NATO sceptics" (my terminology).  What will be your defence of Putin when he detonates a nuclear device in Ukraine (or for that matter elsewhere)?

[Stonepark]

11 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

Germany did not intend to "lift the sanctions mid winter" and there was no suggestion that Putin would "turn the pipelines back on......" anyway.

A question to you, McHughcb and Serrac, who are all "NATO sceptics" (my terminology).  What will be your defence of Putin when he detonates a nuclear device in Ukraine (or for that matter elsewhere)?

Falling for the old WMD lies again I see, just like Iraq.

In case you haven't noticed Russia has been extremely consistent with it's Nuclear doctorine and has stated and restated if they are attacked with  nukes they will respond with nukes but that they do not see a reason to use Nukes in Ukraine.

Their conventional forces are doing just fine ripping the Ukranian army to shreds with artillery (90%+ of all deaths and hospitalisations in Ukraine Army is being caused by sharpnel, not bullets)

The Nuke scenario is the Neocons trying to ramp up the rhetoric to justify USA involvement just like Iraq first with Kuwait, even though it was Kuwait stealing the oil from underneath Iraq that caused the invasion in the first instance and nothing to do with WMD's which did not exist in the second instance.

In case you have forgotten the only country ever to use nuclear weapons in war (on an already defeated country) is the USA!

 

 

 

[Gordon R]

Quote

In case you have forgotten the only country ever to use nuclear weapons in war (on an already defeated country) is the USA!

I think you need to brush up on your history.

[JohnfromUK]

6 minutes ago, Stonepark said:

Falling for the old WMD lies again I see, just like Iraq.

I'm not "falling for" any lies. 

I'm merely asking because many of Putin's supporters have mentioned nuclear including Dmitry Medvedev (https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russias-medvedev-warns-west-that-nuclear-threat-is-not-bluff-2022-09-27/) and Putin himself according to the Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/sep/25/nuclear-threat-might-change-the-mood-in-russia-itself-stoking-widespread-fear) and PBS (https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/how-real-are-putins-nuclear-threats-to-ukraine)

Russian TV also regularly threatens nuclear attacks here and there randomly  https://www.businessinsider.com/russia-lawmaker-makes-nuclear-threat-against-uk-germany-state-tv-2022-9?r=US&IR=T

 

[Stonepark]

27 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

I'm not "falling for" any lies. 

I'm merely asking because many of Putin's supporters have mentioned nuclear including Dmitry Medvedev (https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russias-medvedev-warns-west-that-nuclear-threat-is-not-bluff-2022-09-27/) and Putin himself according to the Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/sep/25/nuclear-threat-might-change-the-mood-in-russia-itself-stoking-widespread-fear) and PBS (https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/how-real-are-putins-nuclear-threats-to-ukraine)

Russian TV also regularly threatens nuclear attacks here and there randomly  https://www.businessinsider.com/russia-lawmaker-makes-nuclear-threat-against-uk-germany-state-tv-2022-9?r=US&IR=T

 

If you are quoting Reuters, Guardian and PBS you are falling for lies... Go read Putin's actual speech instead of getting 2nd hand information loaded with spin or quoting 3rd parties who have their own spin and do not represent the view of the Russian parliament who give Putin his marching orders.

Russian nuclear doctorine has not changed and would require authorisation by their parliament to do so.

[oowee]

4 minutes ago, Stonepark said:

If you are quoting Reuters, Guardian and PBS you are falling for lies... Go read Putin's actual speech instead of getting 2nd hand information loaded with spin or quoting 3rd parties who have their own spin and do not represent the view of the Russian parliament who give Putin his marching orders.

Russian nuclear doctorine has not changed and would require authorisation by their parliament to do so.

The parliament is just a puppet of Putin and cannot order a pizza without Putin agreeing it. 

[Mungler]

This is a conspiracy nut's wet dream.

When the evidence comes out no one will accept it (a la Salisbury) anyway so this is futile.

Given that the taps had been turned off / no one should be buying from Putin's despotic regime anyway, blowing the pipes up has to be for show.

 

[JohnfromUK]

6 minutes ago, Stonepark said:

Go read Putin's actual speech

No thank you.  The man is a liar.  He makes even Blair look truthful.  The Russian Parliament has no control over Putin.  Putin - the man who said through his foreign minister and Ambassador he had no plans to invade Ukraine  (

)  (https://www.euronews.com/2022/01/27/russia-has-no-plans-to-invade-either-ukraine-or-any-other-country-says-moscow-s-top-eu-dip)

I deliberately picked Reuters, Guardian and PBS because they are centre or in the Guardian's case, left of centre - but since you won't even believe them, there is really no point in going further. 

[Mungler]

4 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

No thank you.  The man is a liar.  He makes even Blair look truthful.  The Russian Parliament has no control over Putin.  Putin - the man who said through his foreign minister and Ambassador he had no plans to invade Ukraine  (

)  (https://www.euronews.com/2022/01/27/russia-has-no-plans-to-invade-either-ukraine-or-any-other-country-says-moscow-s-top-eu-dip)

I deliberately picked Reuters, Guardian and PBS because they are centre or in the Guardian's case, left of centre - but since you won't even believe them, there is really no point in going further. 

 

Nailed it.

[12gauge82]

At the end of the day, who cares who blew up the pipeline, the cause of all this is an illegal Russian invasion of Ukraine. 

[serrac]

7 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

At the end of the day, who cares who blew up the pipeline, the cause of all this is an illegal Russian invasion of Ukraine. 

The thing is, if the US did this then it's effectively an act of war against Europe.

~~~

"Very bad things are likely inbound for Europe this winter, all on the basic fact that all modern civilization progress has come from carbon-based fuels.  I don't care if you like this or not; it's fact.  All the WEF-maven sorts fly around in planes fueled with..... carbon.  Equally-seriously modern agriculture is absolutely dependent on this, in particular natural gas which is the major feedstock for modern fertilizers, and European farming uses far more of them on a per-acre basis than we do in the US.  It's how they get their yields and without them, well...... yeah.

Never mind industry which, if forced to shut down cannot simply be turned back on.  Plants that run on a continuous basis frequently have "hot sections" that, if cooled, require weeks or months of refurbishment and a graduated restart procedure; it is not a "light switch" sort of operation.

Be careful thinking this is no big deal folks -- you're likely very wrong about that."

Karl Denninger

[mchughcb]

This in from the Professor. Only one country could have pulled it off. Russia.

Professor also said Ukraine could field a million army to counter offensive in Kherson.

 

 

[mchughcb]

17 minutes ago, serrac said:

The thing is, if the US did this then it's effectively an act of war against Europe.

~~~

"Very bad things are likely inbound for Europe this winter, all on the basic fact that all modern civilization progress has come from carbon-based fuels.  I don't care if you like this or not; it's fact.  All the WEF-maven sorts fly around in planes fueled with..... carbon.  Equally-seriously modern agriculture is absolutely dependent on this, in particular natural gas which is the major feedstock for modern fertilizers, and European farming uses far more of them on a per-acre basis than we do in the US.  It's how they get their yields and without them, well...... yeah.

Never mind industry which, if forced to shut down cannot simply be turned back on.  Plants that run on a continuous basis frequently have "hot sections" that, if cooled, require weeks or months of refurbishment and a graduated restart procedure; it is not a "light switch" sort of operation.

Be careful thinking this is no big deal folks -- you're likely very wrong about that."

Karl Denninger

I suppose it could be an act of terrorism.

 

37 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

At the end of the day, who cares who blew up the pipeline, the cause of all this is an illegal Russian invasion of Ukraine. 

We don't know who did it or why, so its a big leap to say that the invasion is the cause of it. 

[Stonepark]

2 hours ago, mchughcb said:

This in from the Professor. Only one country could have pulled it off. Russia.

Professor also said Ukraine could field a million army to counter offensive in Kherson.

 

 

250lbs of explosive does not produced a 2.9 Richter scale earth quake. He clearly doesn't know what he is talking about with regards operational issues.

The 'Professor' is an academic whose job was running a think tank and about as much use as Neil Ferguson was during COVID, trying to make facts fit his theories rather than the other way around.

 

It all comes down to information quality, it is quite clear from his previous papers he accepts the MSM norm on Ukraine, COVID, Syria etc.

 

[Gordon R]

Quote

In case you have forgotten the only country ever to use nuclear weapons in war (on an already defeated country) is the USA!

Stonepark - any history update?

[ditchman]

Greta Thunberg.................she what done it...

[Rewulf]

4 hours ago, 12gauge82 said:

At the end of the day, who cares who blew up the pipeline, the cause of all this is an illegal Russian invasion of Ukraine. 

I think its very important who blew up the pipeline, what if it wasn't Russia, or Ukraine? 

Bearing in mind no one can think of any tactical or economic advantage why Russia would do it, everyone's going a bit quiet on this, and whistling to themselves in an innocent manner 😂

And if it was Ukraine, they must have had it sanctioned by NATO  first? 

Aaaand if it was NATO.... 

No doubt in the end, it'll just get left as one of those dark clouds that drift away from peoples attention, to be quietly forgotten, like who was really shelling the power station, or mass graves, massacres? 

I mean, in all seriousness, I'd like to see this over, and the Russians to leave, some kind of peace restored... But the powers that be seem to keep upping the ante, and western defence budgets are climbing... Ask yourself, do we want to go all out, conventional or otherwise, can we afford it economically? 

9 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

Stonepark - any history update?

I'm struggling to think of anyone else Gordon to be honest, and my 'war' history is pretty concise? 

[oowee]

30 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

I think its very important who blew up the pipeline, what if it wasn't Russia, or Ukraine? 

Bearing in mind no one can think of any tactical or economic advantage why Russia would do it, everyone's going a bit quiet on this, and whistling to themselves in an innocent manner 😂

And if it was Ukraine, they must have had it sanctioned by NATO  first? 

Aaaand if it was NATO.... 

No doubt in the end, it'll just get left as one of those dark clouds that drift away from peoples attention, to be quietly forgotten, like who was really shelling the power station, or mass graves, massacres? 

I mean, in all seriousness, I'd like to see this over, and the Russians to leave, some kind of peace restored... But the powers that be seem to keep upping the ante, and western defence budgets are climbing... Ask yourself, do we want to go all out, conventional or otherwise, can we afford it economically? 

I'm struggling to think of anyone else Gordon to be honest, and my 'war' history is pretty concise? 

Looks like its been blown up again. 

[Gordon R]

Quote

I'm struggling to think of anyone else Gordon to be honest, and my 'war' history is pretty concise? 

Quote

In case you have forgotten the only country ever to use nuclear weapons in war (on an already defeated country) is the USA!

At the time the USA dropped the bombs, Japan was still fighting and didn't regard itself as defeated. The USA dropped them to curtail casualties clearing an island at a time. Then again, Stonepark isn't one to let facts cloud the issue.

[ordnance]

7 hours ago, Stonepark said:

Falling for the old WMD lies again I see, just like Iraq.

In case you haven't noticed Russia has been extremely consistent with it's Nuclear doctorine and has stated and restated if they are attacked with  nukes they will respond with nukes but that they do not see a reason to use Nukes in Ukraine.

Their conventional forces are doing just fine ripping the Ukranian army to shreds with artillery (90%+ of all deaths and hospitalisations in Ukraine Army is being caused by sharpnel, not bullets)

The Nuke scenario is the Neocons trying to ramp up the rhetoric to justify USA involvement just like Iraq first with Kuwait, even though it was Kuwait stealing the oil from underneath Iraq that caused the invasion in the first instance and nothing to do with WMD's which did not exist in the second instance.

In case you have forgotten the only country ever to use nuclear weapons in war (on an already defeated country) is the USA!

 

 

 

How do you know 90% of Ukraine soldiers casualties are caused by artillery ?

[Stonepark]

7 minutes ago, ordnance said:

How do you know 90% of Ukraine soldiers casualties are caused by artillery ?

That is the reports from the Ukranian authorities......

24 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

At the time the USA dropped the bombs, Japan was still fighting and didn't regard itself as defeated. The USA dropped them to curtail casualties clearing an island at a time. Then again, Stonepark isn't one to let facts cloud the issue.

The stark fact is that the Japanese leaders, both military and civilian, including the emperor, were willing to surrender in May of 1945 if the emperor could remain in place and not be subjected to a war crimes trial after the war. This fact became known to President Truman as early as May of 1945. The Japanese monarchy was one of the oldest in all of history, dating back to 660 BC. The Japanese religion added the belief that all the emperors were the direct descendants of the sun goddess, Amaterasu.

The reigning Emperor Hirohito was the 124th in the direct line of descent. After the bombs were dropped on August 6 and 9 of 1945, and their surrender soon thereafter, the Japanese were allowed to keep their emperor on the throne and he was not subjected to any war crimes trial. The emperor, Hirohito, came on the throne in 1926 and continued in his position until his death in 1989. Since President Truman, in effect, accepted the conditional surrender offered by the Japanese as early as May of 1945, the question is posed, "Why then were the bombs dropped?"

Edited September 29, 2022 by Stonepark

[12gauge82]

I stick to my point, Russia (or one could argue Putin) started this illegal war and is ultimately responsible for the consequences now, no matter how many words are used to dress it up. 

[ordnance]

20 minutes ago, Stonepark said:

That is the reports from the Ukranian authorities......

The stark fact is that the Japanese leaders, both military and civilian, including the emperor, were willing to surrender in May of 1945 if the emperor could remain in place and not be subjected to a war crimes trial after the war. This fact became known to President Truman as early as May of 1945. The Japanese monarchy was one of the oldest in all of history, dating back to 660 BC. The Japanese religion added the belief that all the emperors were the direct descendants of the sun goddess, Amaterasu.

The reigning Emperor Hirohito was the 124th in the direct line of descent. After the bombs were dropped on August 6 and 9 of 1945, and their surrender soon thereafter, the Japanese were allowed to keep their emperor on the throne and he was not subjected to any war crimes trial. The emperor, Hirohito, came on the throne in 1926 and continued in his position until his death in 1989. Since President Truman, in effect, accepted the conditional surrender offered by the Japanese as early as May of 1945, the question is posed, "Why then were the bombs dropped?"

Have you a quote or link to the Ukraine army casualty figures caused by artillery?

[timps]

3 hours ago, Rewulf said:

Bearing in mind no one can think of any tactical or economic advantage why Russia would do it, everyone's going a bit quiet on this, and whistling to themselves in an innocent manner 😂

Plenty ideas on the MSM opinion  peaces about motives, how accurate they are, well just the same as it’s the USA and NATO.

But they range from its a sabre rattling to the EU if the rumoured further economic sanctions are applied they can hit other pipelines from other countries.

Trying to destabilise the stock markets with panic.

Try to cause conspiracy theories and accusations.

Why their own pipeline?  well blowing up their own pipeline isn’t going to cause WWIII if actually caught.

The above is no way my view just pointing out unproven conspiracies can come from both sides.

This conspiracy rabbit hole can be fun 😂

[Rewulf]

5 minutes ago, timps said:

But they range from its a sabre rattling to the EU if the rumoured further economic sanctions are applied they can hit other pipelines from other countries

That doesn't really carry weight if all they had to do was switch it off, or complain a turbines broken? 

And don't forget hitting a NATO members pipeline, would bring instant blame to Russia instantly. 

7 minutes ago, timps said:

Why their own pipeline?  well blowing up their own pipeline isn’t going to cause WWIII if actually caught

Lets not forget, Nordstram is only 51 % owned by Russia, its a joint venture between the EU and them, a deal they were happy to enter into. Which kind of nullifies the whole act of war thing, unless it was another party completely unconnected with said deal? 

Maybe a party that never really liked those pipes? 

But that would be, like really underhand wouldn't it?