The Ukraine thingy


Off-Topic Discussions

1,951 to 2,000 of 2,002 << first < prev | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | next > last >>

Finally,someone sees the truth about the Dark One!
Problem is,as usual,is you'll be hard pressed to find greater heresy than ukrainian orthodox church,and said Filaret was excommunicated years ago,so where does he get his information?
In other news,i saw that "peace plan"that was signed in Minsk.
What can i say...
I will be very surprised if full-scale action will not resume in a week.Of which three days are already passed.


So,i read peace plan very thoroughly.
A few highlights:
a)First of all,this is memorandum of understanding at best,it is by no means binding.
b)Second,according to wording,it's a memorandum between OCSE and Russia,mediated by Ukraine and with two witnesses.I know that because signatories are:
1)OCSE ambassador
2)Something called Second President of Ukraine,which is not an official position that allows the man to sign anything.
3)Russian ambassador
4 and 5)Two names without positions.I assume they are witnesses and not in any way represent rebels,because document doesn't say that.
b1)Document is presented in russian language only.You know,the language that is NOT ukrainian state language.
c),and i love this one
10th point:Extract illegal armed units,MILITARY EQUIPMENT and also fighters and mercenaries from entire Ukrainian territory.

So,basically,OCSE and RF agreed that Ukraine needs to be disarmed entirely.
I don't even have a clip for this.
Update:I have!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Since Ukraine seems to be becoming the latest installment of American Freedom Through Dictatorship, I thought this would be a fitting topic to post this video:
Top 10 US-Backed Atrocities and Authoritarian Regimes.
Warning though, it is not for the faint of heart, you really feel sick of watching it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I just love how MSM are trying to weasel their way out of MH17 thingie.
No dice!Because,you see,you do not have to be rocket scientist to know that SA-11 has a HE warhead(there are some shrapnel,but it's secondary),while number of high energy objects would be continuous rod
warhead(NOT available on SA-11,but available for substantial amount of AA missiles)...or a gun kill.

Well,thanks for clearing THAT up.


Vlad Koroboff wrote:

I just love how MSM are trying to weasel their way out of MH17 thingie.

No dice!Because,you see,you do not have to be rocket scientist to know that SA-11 has a HE warhead(there are some shrapnel,but it's secondary),while number of high energy objects would be continuous rod
warhead(NOT available on SA-11,but available for substantial amount of AA missiles)...or a gun kill.

Well,thanks for clearing THAT up.

Or a fragmentation warhead, which is available for the SA-11. HE, yes, but the fragments do the primary damage.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
thejeff wrote:
HE, yes, but the fragments do the primary damage.

No,that would be blast wave with secondary damage of fragments.Fragments are useful for high-speed targets(not civilian airliner at cruise speed less than 1m)

And while i'm personally do not have SAM operator degree,they were taught more or less the in same building.


Gaberlunzie wrote:

Since Ukraine seems to be becoming the latest installment of American Freedom Through Dictatorship, I thought this would be a fitting topic to post this video:

Top 10 US-Backed Atrocities and Authoritarian Regimes.
Warning though, it is not for the faint of heart, you really feel sick of watching it.

Very disturbing, but well worth watching. Thanks for posting this.


Vlad Koroboff wrote:

I just love how MSM are trying to weasel their way out of MH17 thingie.

No dice!Because,you see,you do not have to be rocket scientist to know that SA-11 has a HE warhead(there are some shrapnel,but it's secondary),while number of high energy objects would be continuous rod
warhead(NOT available on SA-11,but available for substantial amount of AA missiles)...or a gun kill.

Well,thanks for clearing THAT up.

I just read that article a few minutes ago as part of my wake-up and laugh a little routine. Talk about weasel-like word choice! "High energy objects", indeed.

"He said the report gave no indication whether the missile had been fired from the ground or from another aircraft, but it likely came from the ground as there were no military aircraft known to have been flying at the time." -- Bold faced lie. Where are the air traffic tapes? Civilian eye witnesses at the site have already said there were military aircraft in the air as well.

"However, just three hours before the plane was shot down above rebel-held territory in eastern Ukraine, the Associated Press reported on the passage of a Buk M-1 missile system — a machine the size of a tank bearing four ground-to-air missiles — driving through the rebel-held town of Snizhne, near the crash site." They can tell this with such precision, but can't tell us where the legions of Russian invaders are crossing the border, or what units they belong to, or provide photographic proof? B##&%!##.


JohnLocke wrote:

Civilian eye witnesses at the site have already said there were military aircraft in the air as well.

Who cares about them?We have russian civilian radars that picked it.


Vlad Koroboff wrote:
JohnLocke wrote:

Civilian eye witnesses at the site have already said there were military aircraft in the air as well.

Who cares about them?We have russian civilian radars that picked it.

Ukrainian ATC picked them up as well - that's why they were seized by military intelligence within moments of all this going down.


JohnLocke wrote:

Ukrainian ATC picked them up as well - that's why they were seized by military intelligence within moments of all this going down.

You see,they do not exist now,so they can't be used as evidence.

Russians are still there:)


Vlad Koroboff wrote:
JohnLocke wrote:

Ukrainian ATC picked them up as well - that's why they were seized by military intelligence within moments of all this going down.

You see,they do not exist now,so they can't be used as evidence.

Russians are still there:)

The mainstream media doesn't want your "proof" Vlad. They've got a story to tell, dammit, and facts and evidence just get in the way. How are they supposed to demonize Russia if they just stick to the facts?

Now be a good lad and admit the Putin shot down MH 17 himself, shirtless and marked with pentagrams, on the back of a black winged steed, as he led legions of savage Russian barbarians over the border to attack poor, defenseless Ukraine. A land of milk and honey, their wise and benevolent leader, the lord of chocolates, begs the armies of the west, bringers of freedom and peace, to aid them. A sad tale :-(


An eye-opening article about the IMF and Ukraine.

“Further supporting the ‘natural gas motive’ is the fact that it was Vice President Joe Biden who demanded that President Yanukovych pull back his police on Feb. 21, a move that opened the way for the neo-Nazi militias and the U.S.-backed coup. Then, just three months later, Ukraine’s largest private gas firm, Burisma Holdings, appointed Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, to its board of directors.”

Bloody hell how transparent can America's imperial ambitions be? Plus, nepotism at it's finest.

Also, speaking of American proxy wars: Interesting things Sotloff and Foley were reporting.

Check out the tweet from Sotloff on 30 May 2013. I think we all know the answer to that question, now. At least those of us not blinded by the good ol' stars and stripes.


Vlad Koroboff wrote:
thejeff wrote:
HE, yes, but the fragments do the primary damage.

No,that would be blast wave with secondary damage of fragments.Fragments are useful for high-speed targets(not civilian airliner at cruise speed less than 1m)

And while i'm personally do not have SAM operator degree,they were taught more or less the in same building.

Are you seriously suggesting that the "secondary" fragmentation effect would not have an effect on a civilian airliner because they fly slower?


Gallo wrote:
Are you seriously suggesting that the "secondary" fragmentation effect would not have an effect on a civilian airliner because they fly slower?

I am seriously suggesting that damage from the blast wave looks differently than described.It not "multiple high-energy penetrators",it's "ENTIRE nose of the plane crushed to pulp in the blink of an eye from a single,powerful blast,oh,and maybe there were some shrapnel".

Should i really describe difference between piercing and bludgeoning damage on THESE forums?
Gods...


Vlad Koroboff wrote:
Gallo wrote:
Are you seriously suggesting that the "secondary" fragmentation effect would not have an effect on a civilian airliner because they fly slower?

I am seriously suggesting that damage from the blast wave looks differently than described.It not "multiple high-energy objects",it's "nose of the plane crushed to pulp in the blink of an eye from a single,powerful blast,oh,and maybe there were some shrapnel".

Should i really describe difference between piercing and bludgeoning damage on THESE forums? ".

Oh? You examined the wreck? You know how close the explosion was to the plane? You know the pattern of the damage? How it spread? The angle of impact of the "multiple high-energy objects"?

Because the entire point of making a fragmentation warhead is to do damage with the fragments, not just the blast.

Of course it doesn't matter what they say, because they're just lying, right?


thejeff wrote:
You know how close the explosion was to the plane?

Close enough to trigger explosion,duh.

thejeff wrote:

You know the pattern of the damage? How it spread? The angle of impact of the "multiple high-energy objects"?

I don't need to.Nose(including cocpit),huge,sub-1M target.If it was tail i COULD buy SA-11 at works,but not in these circumstances.

thejeff wrote:


Of course it doesn't matter what they say, because they're just lying, right?

No,what they say means that MSM were lying.As were those politicians who were too trigger-happy to assign the blame.

Well,duh.I didn't learn anything new.

What else i don't buy...i don't actually buy gun-kill.Not according to disclosed radar data.
So my money is on AA missile.Close-range,because AA-9 has stupidly powerful warhead,and from 20 meters effects would be about as scary as hit from SA-11.

Liberty's Edge

Vlad Koroboff wrote:


I am seriously suggesting that damage from the blast wave looks differently than described.It not "multiple high-energy penetrators",it's "ENTIRE nose of the plane crushed to pulp in the blink of an eye from a single,powerful blast,oh,and maybe there were some shrapnel".
Should i really describe difference between piercing and bludgeoning damage on THESE forums?
Gods...

I honestly can never tell when you are joking, but just in case, it turns out that when large objects break apart in midair, fall approximately 10,000 meters, and slam into the ground.... They take some bludgeoning damage.


Vlad Koroboff wrote:
thejeff wrote:
You know how close the explosion was to the plane?
Close enough to trigger explosion,duh.

Right. Close enough to explode and spray the target with fragments. Which is what fragmentation warheads are designed to do.

Vlad Koroboff wrote:
thejeff wrote:

You know the pattern of the damage? How it spread? The angle of impact of the "multiple high-energy objects"?

I don't need to.Nose(including cocpit),huge,sub-1M target.If it was tail i COULD buy SA-11 at works,but not in these circumstances.

thejeff wrote:


Of course it doesn't matter what they say, because they're just lying, right?

No,what they say means that MSM were lying.As were those politicians who were too trigger-happy to assign the blame.

Well,duh.I didn't learn anything new.

Of course you didn't learn anything new. Your mind was made up and anyone who tells you anything different is lying.


thejeff wrote:
Which is what fragmentation warheads are designed to do.

I'm starting to suspect that you are actually do not know what you are talking about.

There are 40something kilograms of explosive,and not of black powder kind in that warhead,and it detonates within 15 meters from target(you know,the nose of the plane in this case).
Fragmentation is for fast,maneuvering,and speeding away targets.
Usagi Yojimbo wrote:
They take some bludgeoning damage.

It's capped at 20d6.

Numerically speaking,blast speed far exceeds collision speeds.Which provides different picture of damage.


Vlad Koroboff wrote:
Gallo wrote:
Are you seriously suggesting that the "secondary" fragmentation effect would not have an effect on a civilian airliner because they fly slower?

I am seriously suggesting that damage from the blast wave looks differently than described.It not "multiple high-energy penetrators",it's "ENTIRE nose of the plane crushed to pulp in the blink of an eye from a single,powerful blast,oh,and maybe there were some shrapnel".

Should i really describe difference between piercing and bludgeoning damage on THESE forums?
Gods...

Nice try, fail. Look at the pictures of the damage to the cockpit. Fragmentation damage.


Vlad Koroboff wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Which is what fragmentation warheads are designed to do.
I'm starting to suspect that you are actually do not know what you are talking about.

As opposed to you, who has repeatedly demonstrated you don't know what you are talking about…...

Vlad Koroboff wrote:
There are 40something kilograms of explosive,and not of black powder kind in that warhead,and it detonates within 15 meters from target(you know,the nose of the plane in this case). Fragmentation is for fast,maneuvering,and speeding away targets.

Point in case.


Gallo wrote:
Point in case.

No offense,but i'll take word(or,rather,notebooks) of people that actually had SAM operator degree higher than yours.

Gallo wrote:
Fragmentation damage

And this is why this was neither SA-11 nor AA-9.

Q.E.D.
Could be SA-10,though,it has a little more tricky targeting system and
rangefinder.

Silver Crusade

Russia doesn't exactly have a good history in Ukraine (see the Holodomor, et. al.). I don't think their motives here are much better.

If only countries actually acknowledged their international obligations. The Budapest Memorandum should have prevented all of this, but at least the UK and US are finally recognizing their obligations instead of letting Russia run rampant.


|dvh| wrote:
The Budapest Memorandum should have prevented all of this

It by no means does not prevent internal movements for independence,even if someone actually ratified it.

And of course no-one did.
I do not exactly understand why UK and US are obliged to transform Ukraine to its pre-russian form,but OK.
They're doing great,in any case.


JohnLocke wrote:


As for the wreckage of MH 17 - I wasn't aware we had so many experts in our midst!

I'm no expert,but in Soviet Russia either you obtained military degree in college,or you were drafted.As a private.


Vlad Koroboff wrote:
JohnLocke wrote:


As for the wreckage of MH 17 - I wasn't aware we had so many experts in our midst!

I'm no expert,but in Soviet Russia either you obtained military degree in college,or you were drafted.As a private.

You do sound knowledgeable, my friend. I was just surprised Jeff and Gallo would grace us with their considerable knowledge in this field, as well.


JohnLocke wrote:
Vlad Koroboff wrote:
JohnLocke wrote:


As for the wreckage of MH 17 - I wasn't aware we had so many experts in our midst!
I'm no expert,but in Soviet Russia either you obtained military degree in college,or you were drafted.As a private.
You do sound knowledgeable, my friend. I was just surprised Jeff and Gallo would grace us with their considerable knowledge in this field, as well.

Anyone can be an expert on the Internet.

I don't distrust Vlad's expertise as much as his impartiality. I'm sure the Dutch Safety Board has experts too, as well as actual access to the evidence. But it's all a massive conspiracy.

But mostly I'm baffled by the insistence that the fragmentation damage proves it wasn't a fragmentation warhead.


I haven't really been paying attention to what you guys have been arguing about, but a new Jacobin piece came across my FB feed that isn't exactly on topic, but goblins have short attention spans:

Timothy Snyder's Lies

I haven't actually, you know, read it yet, but I like the pictures.

Vive le Galt!


thejeff wrote:


But mostly I'm baffled by the insistence that the fragmentation damage proves it wasn't a fragmentation warhead.

And i thought you don't need to be a rocket scientist to understand that.

Okay,i'll try again.
We have huge-ass target flying at a straight line at subsonic speeds,that's literally the best target imaginable.
Under these circumstances,explosion occurs within 15 meters of the target.There's one hundred pounds of explosive(a bit more and a few times more powerful than tnt,but whatever) in the warhead.At this range,PRIMARY damage would be from explosion.Sure there would be fragments,but a few hundred holes doesn't matter when entire front of the plane collapses like accordion.
Fragments in this case,for example,will rip the wings apart.
But plane,according to report,was taken down(!)by high-energy objects,which rule out SA-11.
But AA-11,for example has about four pounds of explosive in the warhead,fifteen
pounds of sharp objects propelled by said explosion,and proximity fuse that triggers at roughly the same distance.

Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

I haven't really been paying attention to what you guys have been arguing about

And this thing calls itself Da Goblin?

What kind of goblin isn't interested in the things go boom?!

Liberty's Edge

Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

I haven't really been paying attention to what you guys have been arguing about, but a new Jacobin piece came across my FB feed that isn't exactly on topic, but goblins have short attention spans:

Timothy Snyder's Lies

I haven't actually, you know, read it yet, but I like the pictures.

My favorite thing! I get to say, "You are wrong, you horrible green person!"

... It actually is on topic. So... Thanks.

It's more towards the end of the article, which is more interesting in any event. Apparently this Snyder guy is involved in a lot of the propaganda against Russia. It is NOT REASSURING at all to read the excerpts from his book and then think that people might be listening to him.

Also, whatever one's politics, that first picture is amazing.


Usagi Yojimbo wrote:


Also, whatever one's politics, that first picture is amazing.

One of the things that make me proud for absolutely no reason is that i have a few of these,originals,at my house.

Family artifacts are awesome!

In other news,
Dark One lights a few candles for fallen defenders of Novorossia.

Liberty's Edge

JohnLocke wrote:
Vlad Koroboff wrote:
JohnLocke wrote:


As for the wreckage of MH 17 - I wasn't aware we had so many experts in our midst!

I'm no expert,but in Soviet Russia either you obtained military degree in college,or you were drafted.As a private.

You do sound knowledgeable, my friend. I was just surprised Jeff and Gallo would grace us with their considerable knowledge in this field, as well.

I won't speak to the politics of who may have fired the missile, but it doesn't take much expertise to notice that Vlad is contradicting himself in different posts and at least once in the same post. It was that bit about how the large warhead wasn't large enough, so the missile must have been a smaller one with the same type of warhead.

There's also the 'it was like an AA-9' and 'it couldn't have been an AA-9' with just twelve hours between the posts.

I just saw a new post where he's claiming that the ~2kg warhead on an AA-11 was the only thing powerful enough to do the job, and that the ~70kg or ~50kg warheads on the other missiles would be too weak.

Does that sound plausible?


Usagi Yojimbo wrote:


There's also the 'it was like an AA-9' and 'it couldn't have been an AA-9' with just twelve hours between the posts.

Never happened.I'll even quote myself,because i like you a lot.

Vlad Koroboff wrote:


So my money is on AA missile.Close-range,because AA-9 has stupidly powerful warhead,and from 20 meters effects would be about as scary as hit from SA-11.
Vlad Koroboff wrote:
this was neither SA-11 nor AA-9.

Maybe you were reading with the wrong eye?

Usagi Yojimbo wrote:

I just saw a new post where he's claiming that the ~2kg warhead on an AA-11 was the only thing powerful enough to do the job, and that the ~70kg or ~50kg warheads on the other missiles would be too weak.

Oh,so you almost managed to read right this time.

Usagi Yojimbo wrote:

I just saw a new post where he's claiming that the ~2kg warhead on an AA-11 was the only thing weak enough to do the job, and that the ~70kg or ~50kg warheads on the other missiles would be too powerful.

Here.Fixed that for you.

I'm starting to understand why modern movies are explaining EVERYTHING to the audience.
That's because it's required.


An article about US aggression in Ukraine.

“It’s Uncle Sam who’s pushing us into this slaughter. And let’s be frank, many politicians in Ukraine are just following his orders.”
– Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko

Words of truth.


JohnLocke wrote:
Vlad Koroboff wrote:
JohnLocke wrote:


As for the wreckage of MH 17 - I wasn't aware we had so many experts in our midst!

I'm no expert,but in Soviet Russia either you obtained military degree in college,or you were drafted.As a private.

You do sound knowledgeable, my friend. I was just surprised Jeff and Gallo would grace us with their considerable knowledge in this field, as well.

Given Vlad claims at least part of his "knowledge" from what can best be described as osmosis based on how far away he was sitting from the air defence training during his military training, I'd prefer to go with my own experience as a army intelligence officer and defence intelligence analyst, as well as a couple of interesting chats with a former air defence officer and a retired F-111 pilot.


Gallo wrote:
how far away he was sitting from the air defence training during his military training

In the same building.But then,i asked questions during that time a lot,and also read like five conspects,because my military speciality is pretty close,and i hoped sometime in the future WW3 to stab one of the operators and take his place.

Because i'm obviously better qualified,you see.
It was some time ago,but in the conspects there were pictures,and in one case even colored.


Vlad Koroboff wrote:
Gallo wrote:
how far away he was sitting from the air defence training during his military training

In the same building.But then,i asked questions during that time a lot,and also read like five conspects,because my military speciality is pretty close,and i hoped sometime in the future WW3 to stab one of the operators and take his place.

Because i'm obviously better qualified,you see.
It was some time ago,but in the conspects there were pictures,and in one case even colored.

Very droll.

PS. What is conspect?


Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

Who Is Provoking the Unrest in Ukraine? A Debate on Role of Russia, United States in Regional Crisis

Amy talks to Ray McGovern of crypto-Putinesque propaganda and ex-CIA conspiracy theory fame and Timothy Snyder of of Yale

Yup, Professor Snyder gets around.

Found another article by Ambassador Nuland's husband,

Superpowers Don't Get to Retire

which is amusing because I read about in a--surprise, surprise--commie newspaper, googled it, found it on the Brookings Institute page, wandered over to Democracy Now! where they ran a story the other day-- Think Tanks as Lobbyists: Exposé Shows U.S. Groups Receive Millions to Push Foreign Nations’ Agendas--which has a screenshot of a very fetching stooge of the plutocracy speaking at a podium underneath a sign reading "Brookings".


Gallo wrote:


PS. What is conspect?

I believe correct translation is lecture notes.

Silver Crusade

JohnLocke wrote:

An article about US aggression in Ukraine.

“It’s Uncle Sam who’s pushing us into this slaughter. And let’s be frank, many politicians in Ukraine are just following his orders.”
– Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko

Words of truth.

Not really, no.


Victoria Nuland makes a phone call that gets leaked talking about who should be in the goernment and who shouldn't. Lo and behold, it comes true.

CIA director John Brennan visits Kiev, next day, Potreschenko orders attacks against Luhansk and Donetsk.

Seem like words of truth to me.

Silver Crusade

Biased language, lack of citations, non-credible source, etc.


|dvh| wrote:
Biased language, lack of citations, non-credible source, etc.

Feel free to provide counter points, then. Preferably with unbiased language, citations, a credible source, etc.


I counted over five citations in the Mike Whitney article, not including the one from the World Socialist Website.

[Nudges Usagi-san]

Silver Crusade

JohnLocke wrote:
|dvh| wrote:
Biased language, lack of citations, non-credible source, etc.
Feel free to provide counter points, then. Preferably with unbiased language, citations, a credible source, etc.

Why? I don't have any obligation to do so.


|dvh| wrote:

Why?

You misunderstood.Locke allows you to..

It's not like he send ninja pirate goblin squad to your house if you didn't do so.

1,951 to 2,000 of 2,002 << first < prev | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / The Ukraine thingy All Messageboards