Can anyone provide,IDK,EVIDENCE of laughing and looting by rebels?
Because,you see,you do not need to be a rebel to loot stuff from the plane.
Especially considering THE DEATH PENALTY FOR SUCH THINGS.
Seriously,one rebel fighter was executed by firing squad for stealing pants,for God's sake!
But then,rebels suck because they do not provide acceptable security of crash site.
They can track cell phone and credit card usage. And the terrorists are using them.
Anyway,
Al-Jazeera is backed-up by Arabian Emirates scarred by the shia (ennemy) growing power that is Iran.
I'm not sure one report (or investigation) from them is enough to change the "official" point of view.
Thank you, Citizen Spawn, I never would have known that AJ was a biased purveyor of Qatari (Qatarish?) propaganda if you hadn't told me.
I found a, hopefully, non-Islamist nor non-Qatari propaganda source that covers the same ground for those who would like to investigate further. I'm not quite sure what city this Telegraph from, so I'm guessing London.
As for good vs evil.
Lets take a different scenario:
Say a man was driving down the road and accidentally ran over a small child and his mother.
Good: Takes full responsibility, and does anything he can for the victims and their family.
Neutral: Actively or Passively tries to dodge blame. But doesn't necessarily leave them like that.
Evil: Goes and riffles his victims pockets and purse for their valuables before leaving them there.
Now change this to an airliner shot by a missile and you can see the difference. The neutral response is self preservation, the evil one is callus disregard for human life.
Pro-Russian separatists brag about shooting down a Ukrainian military plane, discover it is a civilian airliner, cover their asses: evil incarnate.
The United States shoots down an Iranian airliner, refuses to apologize and awards the commander of the Vincennes the Legion of Merit: good guys?
Oh, someone else in the history of the world has been a douche, I guess that makes it alright then!
I'm sorry I teased you before, Citizen Aranna, but I really don't think we need an alignment derail in here.
Oh, someone else in the history of the world has been a douche, I guess that makes it alright then!Pro-Russian separatists brag about shooting down a Ukrainian military plane, discover it is a civilian airliner, cover their asses: evil incarnate.
The United States shoots down an Iranian airliner, refuses to apologize and awards the commander of the Vincennes the Legion of Merit: good guys?
Really, that's the best you've got?
Have fun discussing the differing alignments of Putin, Kerry, the right-wing pro-Russian separatists and the right-wing Ukrainian government.
Really, that's the best you've got?
I didn't realize we were having a competition.
For reference, the alternatives were going "Objection your honour, relevance?" Or a long tirade about the bombing of Copenhagen in 1807, ending on a snarky "good guy??"
So, to answer your question: Yes, that was the best I got. And I thought you were better than this, too. Guess it's a day for disappointment!
I don't know where you're from Citizen Slaunyeh--I've always had the sense that you were European of some sort but maybe that's because you used to have the same avatar as someone else--but the propaganda machine of the United States is so one-sided, so selective of what they report, so misleading on many things, that people can come into a thread about the horrors of what is going on in Ukraine and declare that one side is completely evil because they, according to the American press, bragged about shooting down a civilian airliner and looted it while laughing.
Not only that, but they went from being evil rebels to American media boogieman phrase of choice "terrorists" in the space of about three posts.
I know the Russian media is just as bad. I know the Russian government is just as bad. I know the pro-Russian separatist leadership in Luhansk and Donetsk are just as bad as the, yes, fascist-infested Ukrainian army and government.
Shooting down a civilian airliner while under the false understanding that it is a military plane is a tragic, but, alas, not terribly unique phenomenon. The differing ways the stories are reported depending on who did it is a source of endless fascination for me and, I hope, a relevant topic.
But, as an American, although not a proud one, I cringe when I read posts like that and worry about what non-Americans think about us.
However, I apologize for being mean and snarky to you, Citizen Aranna. I don't know you, unlike the rest of the imperialist running-dog stooges in here, and it was rude and unhelpful.
]
They can track cell phone and credit card usage. And the terrorists are using them.
SOMEONE is using them.
Also,check your facts.Rebels are not terrorists by definition.They do not use fear as a weapon.They use weapon as a weapon!
In other news,yesterday's battle near Shakhtersk was GLORIOUS.
Reports upwards from 200 tanks and APCs used from both sides.
City,somehow,still there.
Battle is real people dying and being crippled.
Who cares?It's not WW2,they are barely a statistic.People always die.
You know what's rare?Massed tank battles.
You see,in all this there is only one easily avoidable tragedy.
This one.
All others are consequences,and there is no point horrifying about it.Too late.
People call downing of the plane a tragedy,but it's one day of casualties in this war.
Shakhtersk battle?Two at most.
So,casualties are normal.But exceptional events still happen.
Downing of the plane is important not because of people,but because it's the first time in years civilian airliner was shot down.And this time,perpetrator is unclear.Which is HIGHLY unusual.Maybe even unique.
Shakhtersk battle,obviously,not important because of people,but because it is no doubt will be taught in military classes.And maybe even some tech will come from it.
Oh,and talking about war-related stuff,sponsors of my today's posts are manufacturers of bear-sized MREs,whoever they are.Feels good!Tastes good!Mighty good!Good for you!Good for me!
I don't know where you're from Citizen Slaunyeh--I've always had the sense that you were European of some sort but maybe that's because you used to have the same avatar as someone else--but the propaganda machine of the United States is so one-sided, so selective of what they report, so misleading on many things, that people can come into a thread about the horrors of what is going on in Ukraine and declare that one side is completely evil because they, according to the American press, bragged about shooting down a civilian airliner and looted it while laughing.
It is not just the US press comrade. I think most of the posters on this forum are smart enough to get their information from a range of sources and then separate the wheat from the chaff to form an informed position on the issues.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
]
They can track cell phone and credit card usage. And the terrorists are using them.
SOMEONE is using them.
Also,check your facts.Rebels are not terrorists by definition.They do not use fear as a weapon.
They use weapon as a weapon!In other news,yesterday's battle near Shakhtersk was GLORIOUS.
Reports upwards from 200 tanks and APCs used from both sides.
City,somehow,still there.
Every time I read one of your posts I think you can't stoop any lower, but with this one you have managed to do so.
The definition of terrorism does not revolve around whether a group uses fear or not as a "weapon".
There is nothing glorious about large bodies of troops fighting in an area where thousands of innocent civilians live. There is nothing glorious about many of those troops dying. There is nothing glorious at all about war.
You sit there at your computer watching what is going on and then jumping on this forum to denigrate the dead, defend the indefensible, provide commentary of warfare like some armchair sports commentator. All you are doing is getting your rocks off on what to you is just a game at best and a real-time snuff movie at worst.
We get it. You think Russia = good, Ukraine = bad. Western media = bad, your own special sources = good. Soldiers dying = good, 290 civilians dying from a missile strike = who cares.
Every time I read one of your posts
In other news,yesterday's battle near Shakhtersk was GLORIOUS.
Sometimes when i read your posts i can't understand how you finished elementary school.You can't even read.
Or maybe you think that battle of this proportion,with artillery used on both sides can possibly have the city it happens IN standing.That's,IMO,worse.
There is nothing glorious at all about war.
That's your opinion.I was raised differently.
You think
Are you some kind of telepath?Because it's kinda not working.
Russia = good, Ukraine = bad
Nnnnever said that.
Western media = bad, your own special sources = good.
My own?I do not own news sources.I use what's available,but i'm good at searching beyond first page of yahoo or whatever.
Soldiers dying = good, 290 civilians dying from a missile strike = who cares.
Soldiers dying=no-one cares,three hundred civilians on a plane=no-one cares,any number of civilians under MRLS strike-NO.ONE.CARES.
No-one cared in December,when this whole show could be stopped before it's started,and anyone with one functioning eye saw it coming from a mile away,and no-one cares now.World is not black and white,it's grey at best.
Are you some kind of paladin?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Every time I read one of your posts
In other news,yesterday's battle near Shakhtersk was GLORIOUS.
Sometimes when i read your posts i can't understand how you finished elementary school.You can't even read.
Or maybe you think that battle of this proportion,with artillery used on both sides can possibly have the city it happens IN standing.
That's,IMO,worse.
Umm…… who's the one who can't read? Please point out where in my post I made any reference at all to that particular battle and where it was? I guess you are just projecting aspects of your own education when you try to make claims about mine.
There is nothing glorious at all about war.That's your opinion.I was raised differently.
Obviously. Have you ever been in a conflict zone and seen it firsthand? I have - mass graves, bullet marks on church walls where people were lined up and murdered, entire communities burnt to the ground. And that was a low level conflict. Factor in the scale of fighting in the Ukraine and the types of weaponry and no sane person could ever see war as glorious.
You thinkAre you some kind of telepath?Because it's kinda not working.
Russia = good, Ukraine = badNnnnever said that.
Well, dozens of your posts would suggest otherwise. I don't need to be a telepath to understand the common tone throughout your posts in this thread.
Western media = bad, your own special sources = good.My own?I do not own news sources.I use what's available,but i'm good at searching beyond first page of yahoo or whatever.
Here is another common aspect of all your posts. You quite happily respond to a comment someone makes but conveniently twist what the person says it make them appear inconsistent or wrong.
My saying "your own special sources" is not saying you own sources. See what you have done there? You have been quite open in previous posts about your own sources "on the ground" and how you don't rely on the MSM for your information. So it is ok for you to refer to your "own sources", but as soon as someone refers to your "own sources" you try to deftly twist it into "own[ing] news sources". Not deft enough though as it stands out for what it is.
Are you some kind of paladin?
No. I'm an atheist. Roy is more my style. I guess that would make you Belkar without any of his endearing attributes.
particular battle and where it was?
There is nothing glorious about large bodies of troops fighting in an area where thousands of innocent civilians live.
Right after my post about Shakhtersk battle.You can't possibly interpret it any other way,because i don't mentioned any battles in densely populated areas as glorious,like,for example,battle for Avdeevka village in north Donetsk suburbs.
Have you ever been in a conflict zone and seen it firsthand?
Yep.No big deal.What's more,Abkhaz i spoke to who fought in wars that cost them like...err..10?percent of adult male population also weren't horribly psychologically scarred by these events.
no sane person could ever see war as glorious
By your definition of sanity.And glory.You see,a hundred years from now no-one probably will remember you or me.But one of the largest tank battles of early 21st century and not in Africa?Will be studied in military schools.Maybe even in history classes!
dozens of your posts would suggest
I suggest stop trying reading my mind.Our cultures are so different it may lead to charisma damage.
I never said,or even thought,that Ukraine=bad.That would be stupid.What passes for central government,OTOH...
make them appear inconsistent or wrong
That's because they are misinformed,inconsistent or wrong.
You have been quite open in previous posts about your own sources "on the ground" and how you don't rely on the MSM for your information
They are not
your own special sources
,anyone can use them.
I guess that would make youBecause,you see,i do not enjoy stabbing people,or see them suffer.
I just do not care.Because caring for a few hundred dead when there are a few hundred THOUSAND refugees(who are still alive) is pointless.
And stupid.
Instead i spend substantial amount of my disposable income to support both the rebels and refugees.
Because that makes sense.
After all,not everyone can drive a tank
His usual nonsense.
Congratulations, you have done it again. Claiming I said something I didn't say. I made no reference to specific battles in response to your claim, yet twice you have responded as though I have. It's like a case study in how not to communicate in a forum like this.
Try following this if you can. Note how you left off most of what I said prior to "particular battle and where it was?". It changes what I was saying to try and support your point. Then you link it with an unrelated quote from a separate post "nothing glorious…". You can mix and match my posts to your heart's content but it is intellectually dishonest to do what you are trying to do.
particular battle and where it was?There is nothing glorious about large bodies of troops fighting in an area where thousands of innocent civilians live.Right after my post about Shakhtersk battle.You can't possibly interpret it any other way,because i don't mentioned any battles in densely populated areas as glorious,like,for example,battle for Avdeevka village in north Donetsk suburbs.
I could give you lots of other examples but I suspect it would just go over your head.
Talking about psychological scarring - again not something I raised, but feel free to try and link it with whether war is glorious or not.Whether a battle will be studied in the future or not has nothing to do with it being glorious. Professionals study battles to examine a wide range of military things - tactics, logistics, equipment, morale, training etc - glory is not one of them. Amateur historians and wannabe glory hounds on the other hand…..
Given you are so keen on the rebels and think war is so glorious, why don't you go off to the conflict zone so you can really experience it, not just send money and salivate at your computer screen as reports of deaths and destruction come in, but experience it firsthand. Maybe, just maybe, you'll have an epiphany.
If you want to respond to my comments, please do, but do try not to deliberately misquote, respond to issues not raised or avidly use non-sequitors.
Oh, and as a final comment, if you really think, and I mean really think the battle you refer to, in the context of being the opening the opening battle of WW3, is "glory" then your own words condemn your more than anything I could think of saying.
Professionals study battles to examine a wide range of military things - tactics, logistics, equipment, morale, training etc - glory is not one of them
Big battle of any sort will be studied.Especially now that they are so rare.This,BY VERY DEFINITION,makes the battle glorious.
This stands out because lots of armor without air support.war is so glorious
Nnnnever said that.STOP TRYING TO READ MY MIND!
why don't you go off to the conflict zone so you can really experience it
This question was expected.
Because i'm far more useful to the war effort here.My officer's specialty pretty useless in this war,so i'll remain here,sending money.Also,you can't possibly know
walivate at your computer screen as reports of deaths and destruction come in,
how i actually feel about them,unless you are spying on me.
But i tell you,just because i like you a lot.I do not care about people i do not know and will never know.It's normal
MY relatives are in Crimea anyway.
What do you ask?Why i support the war in this case?
Because if these....ukrainians finish off rebels,they WILL come after Crimea.I do not think ukrainian officials are lying in this particular case.
opening battle of WW3
But with those stupid idiots launching ballistic missiles around,who knows?
I really tracked some panic on loyalists's side a few days ago about russians using nuclear weapon against some unit near border.Probably was FAE.
Big battle of any sort will be studied.Especially now that they are so rare.This,BY VERY DEFINITION,makes the battle glorious
That's not what glorious means. Something that is well-known and studied and whatever is simply famous. "Glory" means, more or less, "praiseworthy fame" and is used to express admiration of the event or person described.
Big battle of any sort will be studied.Especially now that they are so rare.This,BY VERY DEFINITION,makes the battle gloriousThat's not what glorious means. Something that is well-known and studied and whatever is simply famous. "Glory" means, more or less, "praiseworthy fame" and is used to express admiration of the event or person described.
I think he is confusing his era of warfare. Maybe he actually thinks there are prettily dressed cavalrymen galloping around with polished breastplates, bobbing horse hair plumes and pants so tight you need to grease your legs to put them on. Rank upon rank of men bravely marching into cannon fire with muskets perfectly aligned or broad shoulders. Officers with enough gold braid to pay off a small country's national debt.
That could be, by some literary definition at least, be considered "glorious".
(PS Vlad - I'm being ironic, or maybe sarcastic. They can be so similar sometimes).
General Bosquet summed it up nicely: C’est magnifique, mais ce n’est pas la guerre: c'est de la folie.
That's not what glorious means.
I am pretty sure there are more than one definition
This raises,again,interesting point about languages.You see,in russian,direct translation would be "slava",which is related to,yes,praise.But "slava"can be positive or negative,depending on usage.Oh well.First example in said dictionary "to win glory on the field of battle".
I think he is confusing his era of warfare. Maybe he actually thinks there are prettily dressed cavalrymen galloping around with polished breastplates, bobbing horse hair plumes and pants so tight you need to grease your legs to put them on. Rank upon rank of men bravely marching into cannon fire with muskets perfectly aligned or broad shoulders. Officers with enough gold braid to pay off a small country's national debt.
General Bosquet summed it up nicely: C’est magnifique, mais ce n’est pas la guerre: c'est de la folie.
Yep.Which is why i specifically singled out Shakhtersk battle.
Minimal civilian casualties(or no witnesses),comparable tech level from both sides,light human casualties overall,but HUGE scale.Nothing like two or three bloodbaths elsewhere in the region at the same time.
I'm being ironic, or maybe sarcastic. They can be so similar sometimes
That would be sarcasm.
I'm being ironic, or maybe sarcastic. They can be so similar sometimesThat would be sarcasm.
Well done. You finally didn't misinterpret, wilfully or accidentally, something I posted.
That could be, by some literary definition at least, be considered "glorious".
Sweet and fitting, too, no doubt.
So, what exactly is the current situation over there?
Well done.
Oh,roman and greek philosophers were my favorite reads until fire that i accidentally cause at the age of nine.Stupid Rubin TV set.
And,yes,seeing thousand of books burn makes deaths of people i don't know kinda pale by comparison.So, what exactly is the current situation over there?
Rebels slowly,but surely,losing ground.They lost...err..three?villages in the past week,and loyalist forces are six clicks from Donetsk.
Most of rebel forces are still busy trying to eliminate surrounded Ukrainian forces in the south.If and when they accomplish it,the tide will turn.Probably.No,there is no end of this war in sight.
That could be, by some literary definition at least, be considered "glorious".Sweet and fitting, too, no doubt.
Indeed. I doubt Wilfred Owen would describe what is happening in the Ukraine as glorious.
I think the third and fourth last lines are very fitting.
Bent double, like old beggars under sacks,
Knock-kneed, coughing like hags, we cursed through sludge,
Till on the haunting flares we turned our backs
And towards our distant rest began to trudge.
Men marched asleep. Many had lost their boots
But limped on, blood-shod. All went lame; all blind;
Drunk with fatigue; deaf even to the hoots
Of tired, outstripped Five-Nines that dropped behind.
Gas! Gas! Quick, boys! – An ecstasy of fumbling,
Fitting the clumsy helmets just in time;
But someone still was yelling out and stumbling,
And flound'ring like a man in fire or lime . . .
Dim, through the misty panes and thick green light,
As under a green sea, I saw him drowning.
In all my dreams, before my helpless sight,
He plunges at me, guttering, choking, drowning.
If in some smothering dreams you too could pace
Behind the wagon that we flung him in,
And watch the white eyes writhing in his face,
His hanging face, like a devil's sick of sin;
If you could hear, at every jolt, the blood
Come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs,
Obscene as cancer, bitter as the cud
Of vile, incurable sores on innocent tongues,
My friend, you would not tell with such high zest
To children ardent for some desperate glory,
The old Lie; Dulce et Decorum est
Pro patria mori.
Now admitadly that dosent mean looting hasent happend but the two main visual sources of looting that I know of seem to have been disproved.
These are just my ideas,but if you loot something from that plane,you will NEVER tell anyone about it.
Because rebels know where are you living.They will straight up kill you for looting.And let's not forget that at the very least it's stealing with aggravated circumstances.Up to...err...seven?years in prison.
My point is,while stealing from the plane is more or less logical,bragging
about it isn't.
Also,about cell phones.I'm pretty sure looters will not use original SIM cards for various reasons.
Mostly because there is absolutely no point in doing so.Except maybe they are unable to change it?
Is it possible?
In other news:war tax.
Because not everyone can drive a tank.
No war bonds,sadly.There is no war.
I think it deserves to mention that deposits in local currency have interest rates UPWARDS from 25%.
With these rates,government can't possibly issue war bonds.
Time is playing against separatists.
I'm not entirely sure.Rebels have problems,but loyalists...let's just say they recently declared another round of mobilization.Third.They are running out both of people and of money.
=he EU was taking the strongest ever sanctions toward Russia, which mean they're changing their attitude toward Russia.=
Did you read them?Because they are funny.
Ukraine would be smart to accept to sell it to Russia
I agree.Unfortunately,that's highly unlikely.
Anyway, Ukraine's hardest fight will be the restructuration of its economy and society.
Yep.Seps are minor problem compared to ukrainian trade balance.
EU tell to Russia they will not accept this behavior anymore
Yes,but those sanctions are irrelevant.Seriously,they affect nothing of importance.This is not a warning.And it's pretty obvious why:EU and RF are interdependent.
Basically EU and RF are agreed to disagree.And then RF kicks Poles in the apples,just for the hell of it.
Because,you see,Germany is more or less ally,but Poland,Latvia and Lithuania...
it won't have any bad consequences for Russia.
It will.But i'm being optimistic.
accepting deploy of US anti-missiles system
I fail to see what it can possibly accomplish.And,France,for example,already have really awesome military.Hell,Crazy Ivans buy from them,you can't get any more awesome!
In addition, countries fully dependent from Russian gas will slowly manage to reduce that dependency.
Who said alternative will be cheaper....or even will be?
Lybia
Wait,what?
Crimea invasion
What?
It's a decade conclusion:
Good thing then that strategical projects are more long-term
It's funny to see that Russians forgot they lost the Cold War so pitifully they had not enough of money
You do realize that cold war had literally nothing to do with Crazy Ivans economic problems in 80-90s,right?
And no,neither were petroleum prices at the time.
It's funny to see that Russians forgot they lost the Cold War so pitifully they had not enough of moneyYou do realize that cold war had literally nothing to do with Crazy Ivans economic problems in 80-90s,right?
Really?
I don't know where you're from Citizen Slaunyeh
The made-up country of Denmark!
However, I apologize for being mean and snarky to you, Citizen Aranna. I don't know you, unlike the rest of the imperialist running-dog stooges in here, and it was rude and unhelpful.
My work here is done. ;)
*vanishes in a poof of rainbow sparkles*
Really?
Yep.Long story short,USSR had dual economic structure.One for the government,one for the people,and money in one can't be spend on another.Not a bad system,really.Well,it is far better than what passes for
state-run economics in North Korea.The problem is IT HAD ABSOLUTELY NO SAFEGUARDS.So,when stupid uneducated(and average US citizen knew more about how more or less real market economics work) idiots decided USSR needs a reform,delicate machinery was crushed and all went to hell.
Because of course they would not think what happens when you actually allow some conversion of money between those two economics.
Rebels are starting to ask questions
Very important questions.
Questions like:what DPR and Novorossia will look like from political,economical and social standpoint?
What about ownership of the means of production?
About time.I've been asking these questions since April,but no-one answers!
So,here's my theory:
However, I apologize for being mean and snarky to you, Citizen Aranna. I don't know you, unlike the rest of the imperialist running-dog stooges in here, and it was rude and unhelpful.My work here is done. ;)
*vanishes in a poof of rainbow sparkles*
Although, after reading through Citizen Aranna's linked website, and, in particular, the article attacking Glenn Beck from the right for wanting to provide "Christian humanitarianism" to the Central American border refugees, I felt like I was justified and considered withdrawing the apology.
But manners are getting the better of me, so I will not.