I get the aim of having "rules". We don't want Anthrax floating around and the wholesale murder of whatever minority that's currently to blame for all the worlds woes, but yeah - it's bollocks.
The winner gets to write the story and will airbrush out any shady shit. Hi Tony.
The Loser... is the fucking loser. They're in a world of shit whether they committed any war crimes or not.
Exactly, for example the allies merrily raping their way across the continent in the latter stages of WW2.
What's the alternative? Some sort of MAD game theory where nuclear conflict is unavoidable because 'the other guy's a lunatic'?Originally Posted by Yevrah
Getting Vlad to retire to his Black Sea palace is the best end game for all sides.
Did the yanks ever make their missile shield fully working?
There are substantial laws of war. The Wikipedia page alone will keep you entertained for a while.
Obvious examples are not posing as the enemy and not using emergency response vehicles to gain entry to target zones, both of which the Russians have done already. But using similar underhand tactics “just because they did” is not a good reason.
The idea of Mutually Assured Destruction has been the plan for 70 odd years now and it still appears to be. If Russia didn't have Nukes we wouldn't be sat watching.
I was talking more mutually assured destruction through the Shafted paradigm.
Toggle Spoiler
I have it on good authority she's a favourite of the back door entry.
Is this still on the books?
Considering the Palestinian 8 year old shouting at Israeli solders who went to jail is currently being portrayed as a brave Ukrainian. Yes.
So now Ukrainian pilots are in Poland picking up fresh airplanes to return to combat with. This whole NATO vs. Russian forces thing is kinda silly isn't it? Like what is the practical difference here to some Polish dude taking the skies?
I guess the theory is that the NATO resource pool is more of a token force. If Poland were to declare for this, they'd be sending proper numbers, basically.
I meant more as in what does it mean for forces to be engaged in official combat for something like article 5 to trigger. I get that NATO is "defensive", but if you can have fighter pilots take off from Warsaw to join engagements as long as at least part of their passport reads Ukrainian, and US troops wipe out Russian PMCs in Syria who were trained at Russian bases, you've taken the gray area to a ridiculous extrem.
Again, it’s law of war. Might not be sensical, but in real terms it means Poland, EU and NATO aren’t active. Putin just wants an excuse and while he doesn’t really play by the rules, he needs the other side to cross the lawful line too to have any sort of excuse to “retaliate”, hence stupid twats like Truss should zip it.
The idea that there'd be any excuse for him launching a nuke or that Liz Truss could start WWIII is absolutely farcical.
"I wasn't going to push the button, but a British MP who likes it up the shitter has spoken strong to the motherland, launch the nukes"
It does seem like day after day, they're sending bigger punches Kiev's way. Bald and bankrupt's out of there now. His video was surprisingly good although it was way too cheery for a man trying to get out of dodge. Especially when his previous video was, "Lol, let's visit the border and look at some old soviet soldiers."
How lovely
Apparently they used these already in Ukraine in 2016...
The vacuum bomb in my imagination involved a lot more dust.
What makes it a vacuum bomb? There’s not much in the video.
I'm guessing there's a vacuum (a space without air) involved which is why the explosion domes out. Presumably the air rushes into the empty space allowing the explosion to quickly expand.
It uses a lean fuel that requires the oxygen in the atmosphere to create an even bigger blast, and then pressure differential sucks the air out of everything and bursts any nearby lungs.
ROFL
https://7news.com.au/sport/swimming/...ssia-c-5866458Swimming Australia announces boycott of major event amid ‘appalling’ invasion
All this talk of military aid, someone somewhere needs to get the Ukranians a few A-10s to roll up these enormous columns of Russian armour. You could probably delete half of their armed forces with a few unopposed runs.
(Former) General Sir Richard Barrons was on Newsnight earlier saying that NATO could have a serious decision to make by the end of the week regarding a no-fly zone if public opinion turns when we see Russia upping the slaughter of civilians in cities.
Said this a few times over the course of the thread. The argument against it appears to be yet another example straight from the "rules of war" playbook, but as Barrons says, not sure how long that playbook holds up when grim as fuck images start emerging from Ukraine.
From the BBC now.
It's going to be an absolute bloodbath.A huge convoy of Russian armour, about 40 miles long, is advancing on Ukraine's capital Kyiv, satellite images show
https://www.businessinsider.com/ukra...22-2?r=US&IR=T
You don't need a visa if you fancy taking on some Russians.
Time for your sequel.
I'm a lover not a fighter.
From what I read, that was due to hitting a chemical plant/store. Same gear that blew to Beirut.
It sucks oxygen from the air to fuel the explosion. Including the oxygen in your lungs if you're unlucky enough to be there.
Is that in the video or do people just know by the explosion shape? All I seen was an explosion and a camera moving about a lot.
I've no idea. They said no the Radio this morning that they had used one and it was going to be "investigated" though. I don't know if that's the one though.
Everyone calling for a no fly zone needs to be thrown in a pit to cool off for a bit.
If it really comes to it, get Zelensky out to form a government in exile, and sanction Russia to death over a period of years.
Last edited by Jimmy Floyd; 01-03-2022 at 07:21 AM.
There's already a no fly zone, isn't there? Or do they want it extend to here?
There is not a no fly zone.
That seems the most likely outcome at this point.
I saw this the other day
There certainly seems to me an informal one. I guess it's the airlines not wanting to get MH17'd.
There's a no fly zone for planes not involved in the conflict or more precisely, no neutral plane will go over that air space. Russian and Ukrainian air forces are active.
So they want a no fly zone to stop Russia flying over and bombing them? I can see a slight flaw in this plan.
And enforced by presumably NATO forces. You can see some factors that may make this escalate.
That's commercial planes. It's not a strict no-fly zone, just a heavy dose of self-preservation when there's rockets flying about.
Have they considered a Nato enforced No Invasion Zone?
I think a lot of people think a no fly zone is just something we declare and then Russia has to abide by it. The general on Newsnight though fucking hell. Let's risk a nuclear exchange to save civilians. You can see how these people spent twenty years banging their heads against a wall in Afghanistan.
Why is Tobias Ellwood going around cheering for one with a degree of desperation in his tone? Surely with both forces and political experience he should know better.
Biden is playing this superbly as we continue to embarrass ourselves on the global stage.
This could be the vacuum bomb.
It's what we do. In terms of actions on this, we've actually been pretty good, actively helping Ukraine a lot longer than Germany for instance who were basically strongarmed into it. But fuck me, when Tories open their mouths, anything can happen.
The masters of rhetoric.
Not that it'll make a difference, but in a semi-surprising move, Belarus have announced they're not taking part actively. Obviously they can just be lying to avoid sanctions, but the evidence will come pretty quick if they are indeed in Ukraine.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote