DMC Posted June 8 Share Posted June 8 8 hours ago, Makk said: When in the entire history of warfare has a dam been blown by the side about to conduct an offensive in that area? Well, in Two Towers the ents destroy the dams around Isengard and then engage in an offensive against the orcs invading Rohan. Gaston de Foix, The hairy bear, Matrim Fox Cauthon and 4 others 1 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted June 8 Share Posted June 8 2 minutes ago, DMC said: Well, in Two Towers the ents destroy the dams around Isengard and then engage in an offensive against the orcs invading Rohan. Ents don’t like smoking either… DMC and Spockydog 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted June 8 Share Posted June 8 Just now, Ser Scot A Ellison said: Ents don’t like smoking either… I dunno, just basing this off the movies because I don't remember the books that well, but Treebeard seemed to turn a blind eye to Merry and Pippen getting high as fuck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted June 8 Share Posted June 8 3 minutes ago, DMC said: I dunno, just basing this off the movies because I don't remember the books that well, but Treebeard seemed to turn a blind eye to Merry and Pippen getting high as fuck. Yeah… but burning trees caused by random careless smokers is likely to result in sqwashing… and slow running smokers… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Week Posted June 8 Share Posted June 8 5 minutes ago, DMC said: I dunno, just basing this off the movies because I don't remember the books that well, but Treebeard seemed to turn a blind eye to Merry and Pippen getting high as fuck. Pipes are much less of a fire hazard than butts, I would think. Ser Scot A Ellison 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted June 8 Share Posted June 8 11 minutes ago, Week said: Pipes are much less of a fire hazard than butts, I would think. Not really. It's ultimately the same thing in terms of throwing out the cherry. It's just a matter of being responsible about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeanF Posted June 8 Share Posted June 8 (edited) 39 minutes ago, DMC said: I dunno, just basing this off the movies because I don't remember the books that well, but Treebeard seemed to turn a blind eye to Merry and Pippen getting high as fuck. I reckon Merry and Pippin were smoking crystal meth. That's how they came to imagine things like talking, walking trees. Edited June 8 by SeanF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted June 8 Share Posted June 8 Just now, SeanF said: I reckon Merry and Pippin were smoking crystal meth. I dunno at least in the film they were playing it like they were smoking weed. Meth would've made that scene much more interesting I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorral Posted June 8 Share Posted June 8 5 hours ago, Week said: Pipes are much less of a fire hazard than butts, I would think. Plenty of stable fires were caused by guys putting their pipes down too close to flammable hay, straw and grain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThinkerX Posted June 8 Share Posted June 8 Starting to wonder if there is something to this... 'entire regiments being wiped out? Really? Are Bolgorods defenders that stupid and incompetent? Especially interesting - or maybe frightening (?) is the 'March on Moscow' quote. Russian Soldiers Complain That 'Entire Regiments' Are Being Wiped Out (msn.com) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Anti-Targ Posted June 8 Share Posted June 8 10 hours ago, Padraig said: mcbigski has his own sources of news, which are undoubtedly impeccable, but he never shares with us. So, we'll never know why he alone can be 100% sure. In the absence of anything to confirm otherwise I'm going to assume Tucker Carlson on Twitter. To whit in the end the truth of who did it doesn't matter unless someone ends up in a court charged with a war crime. Until then it's about who wins the PR war to convince the most and the right people what is true. Padraig and Prince of the North 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Horse Named Stranger Posted June 8 Share Posted June 8 (edited) Spacelasers anyone? Edited June 8 by A Horse Named Stranger Zorral 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorral Posted June 8 Share Posted June 8 5 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said: Spacelasers Somebody's fixated. It's a conspiracy yearning to happen, amirite? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clueless Northman Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 3 hours ago, ThinkerX said: Starting to wonder if there is something to this... 'entire regiments being wiped out? Really? Are Bolgorods defenders that stupid and incompetent? Especially interesting - or maybe frightening (?) is the 'March on Moscow' quote. Russian Soldiers Complain That 'Entire Regiments' Are Being Wiped Out (msn.com) Believing these dudes is like believing Chalabi back in 2003 that all of Iraq would greet the American army with flowers and gratitude. 11 hours ago, Tongue Stuck to Wall said: No, "mainstream" media has not been saying the a) the Ukrainians are not capable of culpability; and b) you can degrade a dam selectively to control the level of flooding that occurs: Indeed. First US official reactions were basically "We don't know how it happened or who did what there around". Mainstream media is still in "we're not 100% sure about it". Though obviously Ukraine and Russia blamed each other from the very first hour, and some other countries and people put the blame on Russia. The US is more careful than it's usually been during this war not to accuse Russia without some kind of evidence (might also be due to the fact US media announced, the day the dam broke, that US administration is convinced Ukraine did destroy Nordstream, which could make the administration and media a bit more cautious for now). It took a full day before rumors of "US agencies have some kind of proof Russia is behind it" appeared, and I don't think it's already the official position of the administration. 11 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: You mean “Russian occupied villages”. Not “Russian aligned”. Being occupied by Russian troops doesn’t mean you agree with Russian occupation. Sure, but I tend to think top Russian leaders are quite close to considering that area as genuinely Russian territory. Though that's not a guarantee of safety obviously. Also, I wouldn't be surprised if half the people living there were pro-Russia - at least thos still living there, many pro-Ukraine ones probably left in the last 15 months. Bottom-line: I don't think any side considers this area as more expendable, they both want it as part of their country (notwithstanding the international legal status of the Southern part of Kherson province). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcbigski Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 6 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said: In the absence of anything to confirm otherwise I'm going to assume Tucker Carlson on Twitter. To whit in the end the truth of who did it doesn't matter unless someone ends up in a court charged with a war crime. Until then it's about who wins the PR war to convince the most and the right people what is true. Haven't ever seen Tucker live, though I did read his second twitter feed was today. I no longer trust any mass media to be anything but Pravda. Plenty of actual reporters working online for now at least, that don't just follow the establishment line. I'd list them, but human nature is such that most of you want to be liked more than you want to be correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted June 9 Author Share Posted June 9 43 minutes ago, mcbigski said: I'd list them, but human nature is such that most of you want to be liked more than you want to be correct. Since you're not doing it to be liked or be correct, what's your reason? SeanF, Week and Ser Scot A Ellison 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varysblackfyre321 Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 2 hours ago, mcbigski said: I no longer trust any mass media to be anything but Pravda. Plenty of actual reporters working online for now at least, that don't just follow the establishment line. Many Alternative media outlets often even less safety guards than the traditional mainstream media outlets you’d rail against and 9/10 whatever “reporting” done by alternative media outlets that’s legitimate comes from more mainstream outlets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mormont Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 1 hour ago, Kalnestk Oblast said: Since you're not doing it to be liked or be correct, what's your reason? Vanity. DMC 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toth Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 (edited) 6 hours ago, Clueless Northman said: (might also be due to the fact US media announced, the day the dam broke, that US administration is convinced Ukraine did destroy Nordstream, which could make the administration and media a bit more cautious for now) That's just not true. The US administration has not said anything whatsoever about being "convinced" that Ukraine destroyed Nordstream. Where did you hear that? I have been debating this nonsense for days now and not even those who claim with utter conviction that it was Ukraine had provided any source saying that. So what do we know: - a source in Ukraine that the CIA considered not trustworthy stated that Ukraine made plans for a sabotage three months before it happened and the information has been relayed to German authorities - there was a chartered sailing yacht with six Ukrainian nationals passing two of the three explosion sites a few days before the explosion ... ... ... And that's it. That's the smoking gun. At the same time three Russian war ships with their transponders off and one carrying a mini-sub had lurked in the area as well. Maybe some intelligence services know more and don't tell for whatever reason, but as it stands now, we as the public have no information to base our finger pointing on. I personally need someone to explain to me how six guys on a sailing boat without a pressure chamber managed to dive 80 meters and apply a notable amount of explosives to crack a pipeline designed to withstand stray blasts from leftover WW2 ammunition. The "how" is too me somehow a far better indicator to judge who might have done it than any "why", because the "why" makes no sense for either faction. Ukraine has lots to loose attacking infrastructure of an ally that just got around to increase their commitment while Russia would put a lit on this point of pressure on Germany and make it easier for it to justify weapons deliveries. Then again, you could also argue that Germany at the time of the explosion already diversified and the pipeline became worthless, so blowing it up may have been a statement of threat towards other maritime infrastructure, as well a way to sow discord. I also vividly remember how the internet was carpet bombed with accusations into every conceivable direction in the days after explosion. So... Once again... the Russians had the mini-sub, the Ukrainians didn't. And Russia has had a history of short-sighted acts of cruel pettiness, so while I admit I don't know anything, I still find it somewhat more plausible for Russia to be the culprit there and am very annoyed about the media blowing up every kernel of news that's saying that investigations are still going into every direction, including the two Ukrainian leads. I should also note, I'm looking at the dam with a similar "how" mindset. And have to think of the Antonivskyi bridge near Kherson as a comparison: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonivka_Road_Bridge The Ukrainians shelled it numerous times to bring it down, but only managed to put holes into it that the Russians then managed to fix up and continue to use it as a supply route. Artillery simply wasn't able to catastrophically bring it down. However when the Russians retreated, THEN they allegedly blew it up themselves successfully. If bringing down a bridge is this difficult with artillery, how difficult would be blowing up a concrete structure that is designed to withstand ludicrous amounts of water pressure for decades, if not centuries? And that in a single night and so swiftly that the Russians weren't able to point a camera at it and immediately use it to condemn Ukraine in their propaganda? The dam was in the hands of the Russians, they had all the time in the world to place as much explosives as they want, so I also see here a much more likely culpability. Not to mention that drowning the people you want to liberate and shortening the areas you could possibly advance into just seems extremely unlikely to be considered minor arguments for Ukrainian strategic thinking. Edited June 9 by Toth Padraig, Tongue Stuck to Wall, Ser Scot A Ellison and 3 others 5 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 7 hours ago, mcbigski said: Haven't ever seen Tucker live, though I did read his second twitter feed was today. I no longer trust any mass media to be anything but Pravda. Plenty of actual reporters working online for now at least, that don't just follow the establishment line. I'd list them, but human nature is such that most of you want to be liked more than you want to be correct. Whose Twitter feed did you read? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts