Ukraine War: Poor put upon Russia… why will the world not just let it rape, kill, and steal toilets from Ukraine… in peace?

[butterweedstrover]

2 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Not a deconstruction of my point of you can find any person or group having light hearted fun-

Though it’s nice to see you reiterate your selective predisposition to genetic destiny.

No comparison or analogies between a Russian soldier and a Nazi because (eventually after initially siding with them to trade and conquer poleland) Russians fought the Nazis—this logic doesn’t work for Ukrainians though 

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna4916

 

Where is the UN panel’s proof? Do they have footage, eye witnesses testimony? Who were these witnesses? 

So many lies and fabrications about this war come from the Ukrainian side: the bombing of Poland, the drone strike on the Kremlin, the torture of ‘calibrators’ in Kherson, the murder of Children in Donetsk, human shields in Mariupol, fascist militias in Kharkov, the Ghost of Kiev. 

The government lies about everything, so what do we have beyond their word? 
 

Russians. Do. Not. Rape. Children.

Edited July 12 by butterweedstrover

[A Horse Named Stranger]

https://wartranslated.com/intercepted-call-they-raped-three-girls-in-belgorod/

 

[Corvinus85]

1 hour ago, butterweedstrover said:

Russians. Do. Not. Rape. Children.

In WWII my great-grandmother hid my grandmother and her sister who were just teenagers when the Russian soldiers passed through their town for fear of them being raped. My other grandmother left her house with her mother to go live in an isolated cabin in the hills for similar fears.

Now maybe modern day Russian soldiers are better, more humane, but all reports seem to be to the contrary.

Edited July 12 by Corvinus85

[A wilding]

But the Ukrainians apparently told lies about those two drones that apparently got shot down over Moscow!

[SeanF]

3 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Not a deconstruction of my point of you can find any person or group having light hearted fun-

Though it’s nice to see you reiterate your selective predisposition to genetic destiny.

No comparison or analogies between a Russian soldier and a Nazi because (eventually after initially siding with them to trade and conquer poleland) Russians fought the Nazis—this logic doesn’t work for Ukrainians though 

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna4916

 

Lies!  Putin says it never happened.

[SeanF]

1 hour ago, butterweedstrover said:

Where is the UN panel’s proof? Do they have footage, eye witnesses testimony? Who were these witnesses? 

So many lies and fabrications about this war come from the Ukrainian side: the bombing of Poland, the drone strike on the Kremlin, the torture of ‘calibrators’ in Kherson, the murder of Children in Donetsk, human shields in Mariupol, fascist militias in Kharkov, the Ghost of Kiev. 

The government lies about everything, so what do we have beyond their word? 
 

Russians. Do. Not. Rape. Children.

It’s the way you tell ‘em.

[Zorral]

I am the first to take the wait and see skepticism of babies on bayonets, preemies ripped from their life support stories, which historically, have been disproved.

But Russians (like just about everybody else) there is no disproving, even historically, that those soldiers have done and do such things.

That said, it's all too easy to believe this about them for they have done such things, it has been proven, just like their torture and rape.  When it comes to the torture and rape there are too many survivors from the soldiers' retreats to doubt that they have tortured and raped -- if not babies, at least children.

[butterweedstrover]

3 minutes ago, Zorral said:

I am the first to take the wait and see skepticism of babies on bayonets, preemies ripped from their life support stories, which historically, have been disproved.

But Russians (like just about everybody else) there is no disproving, even historically, that those soldiers have done and do such things.

That said, it's all too easy to believe this about them for they have done such things, it has been proven, just like their torture and rape.  When it comes to the torture and rape there are too many survivors from the soldiers' retreats to doubt that they have tortured and raped -- if not babies, at least children.

So you just run with it then: 

Russian soldiers rape babies. I didn’t know the babies could survive and tell that tale, let alone speak.

51 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

https://wartranslated.com/intercepted-call-they-raped-three-girls-in-belgorod/

 

Yeah, in Belgorod (inside Russia) some soldiers stationed there raped three innocent girls and were arrested. 
 

The story I’m being told is that Russian troops can freely rape BABIES! without repercussion and this is so wide-spread there are multiple instances. 
 

And all because Ukrainian authorities (massive liars about everything) say the found corpses and you decide to believe it. 
 

Also, 14-17 year olds aren’t babies. And those men weren’t the brave ones serving in the front, they were criminals who were promptly arrested.

[Varysblackfyre321]

6 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

Russian soldiers rape babies.

Got it at least a couple years old.

7 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

The story I’m being told is that Russian troops can freely rape BABIES! without repercussion

Would you prefer very small children? 

[Varysblackfyre321]

7 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

And those men weren’t the brave ones raping and murdering and looting  in the front,

Fixed that for you.

[butterweedstrover]

11 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Got it at least a couple years old.

Would you prefer very small children? 

 

10 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Fixed that for you.

You and everyone else made the claim the Russian army is raping babies AND that they were free from repercussion in doing so.  

Without even a shred of evidence. 

[Spockydog]

For the love of god, make it stop.

 

[Padraig]

butterweedstrover, i'm not sure where you are going with all this.  You said earlier that "countries deserve to fight to survive", which is obviously true from the perspective of Ukraine fighting off an invasion.  But you are using it to justify the invasion.  Because Ukraine moving away from Russia is viewed as an existential threat.  I get that part.  Ukraine moving out of Russia''s orbit is obviously bad for Russia but nobody is going to win an argument saying that is a justification for invasion. 

You also said that Zelensky’s main worry is western demands, not his own people.  But then you "clarified" that statement by saying that Zelensky is worried about western support abating and he is worried his people will force him to compromise (per Bakhmut).  The latter part of that sentence clearly contradicts your first statement.  And western demands is different from western support.  I'd love to see info about "western demands" but you wouldn't show us anything.

And you said that Russia offered Ukraine a better deal in 2014 but when asked to give details, you talk about cheaper petrol.  Sure, if Russia couldn't even offer cheaper petrol, that would be a bit insulting.   Russia isn't a rich country (in the economic sense).  It couldn't compete with the EU (except for the odd thing like petrol).  That's unfortunate from a Russian point of view but Ukraine had to look out for its best interests.  Russia could still have made the best of things but it refused to compromise.

And you also said that the West also used hard power between 2014-22.  In so far as hard power is a spectrum, sure.  But obviously the two countries that expended the most hard power are Russia and Ukraine, since they were actually at war with each other.

You suggest that people are brainwashed.  But if you really wanted to change minds, you'd be putting forward actual evidence of your POV rather than just throwing out random declarations.  Do the research and show your work.  Otherwise, poor show.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

 

 

Perfectly normal behaviour (for Russian soldiers)

[Zorral]

A high-profile Russian general in command of forces in occupied southern Ukraine said he was dismissed from his post after accusing the defense ministry of betraying Russian soldiers by not providing sufficient support.

General Ivan Popov was the commander of the 58th Combined Arms Army, which has been involved in heavy fighting in the Zaporizhzhia region. He is one of the most senior officers involved in the Russian campaign in Ukraine.

The public resignation or dismissal of such a senior officer amid an open dispute over the conduct of the Russian campaign is unprecedented, according to analysts. 

https://www.cnn.com/europe/live-news/russia-ukraine-war-news-07-12-23/index.html

 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

3 hours ago, Spockydog said:

For the love of god, make it stop.

 

I’m ignoring him… for a reason.

[The Anti-Targ]

7 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

When all Butter has is solipsism… he’s losing.

I wonder if RussiaGPT could come up with better content?

Also, not keeping up with every post in these threads, am curious to know if anyone actually has actually written "babies" other than them (not assuming gender, don't know if confirmed)? Rape, including of minors, and  a degree of tolerance of it by superior officers, is completely believable for invading soldiers, because it's happened down through the ages and there is no reason to presume significant difference just because of a current year argument. But actual babies? That's hard to credit.

Killing babies, that has also happened in every war in history. Always disgusting and reprehensible, but typical and expected, and just another reason to find war utterly abhorrent, and the instigators of it even moreso.

Edited July 13 by The Anti-Targ

[The Anti-Targ]

17 hours ago, Erik of Hazelfield said:

As a Swede, the NATO membership comes with mixed feelings. It’s probably the right thing to do in terms of making Sweden safer. It also makes the Baltic countries safer, as it will further deter Russia from attacking them. Sweden doesn’t have the biggest army in Europe, but we do have a rather large and modern airforce with over 100 JAS Gripen fighter jets. We also have a small but modern fleet of stealth corvettes and submarines designed to operate in the Baltic Sea. Furthermore, we have rather advanced intelligence and anti-air systems. All this is good news for NATO’s capability of repelling attacks in the Baltic Sea region. 

 

Objectively safer, I think is debatable. A perception of feeling safer, yes, probably.

Russia is impotent to do anything to Sweden with any kind of measurable strategic or tactical success. So a petty / petulant attack on Sweden for...reasons...would have a context that likely makes membership or not of NATO irrelevant to Russia's motivation to specifically target Sweden. And it seems unlikely any other non-NATO country in the region could or would attack Sweden for any reason other than as a Russia ally in a conflict that has already engaged NATO members. And for countries further afield (China, India(?), Pakistan(?) Iran(?)), to attack Sweden would not be the first shot fired in what would no doubt be some kind of global conflagration in which NATO is already well involved.

[JGP]

9 hours ago, butterweedstrover said:

Russians. Do. Not. Rape. Children.

Men do, predominantly. 

 

Are. Russians. Not. Men.

 

 

 

[Erik of Hazelfield]

1 hour ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Objectively safer, I think is debatable. A perception of feeling safer, yes, probably.

Russia is impotent to do anything to Sweden with any kind of measurable strategic or tactical success. So a petty / petulant attack on Sweden for...reasons...would have a context that likely makes membership or not of NATO irrelevant to Russia's motivation to specifically target Sweden. And it seems unlikely any other non-NATO country in the region could or would attack Sweden for any reason other than as a Russia ally in a conflict that has already engaged NATO members. And for countries further afield (China, India(?), Pakistan(?) Iran(?)), to attack Sweden would not be the first shot fired in what would no doubt be some kind of global conflagration in which NATO is already well involved.

Yes, that’s more or less my take on it too. We were quite safe before and we’re quite safe now. 

The possibility that has been floated is that Russia could, probably as a strategic move in part of a larger conflict, launch a surprise attack on the island of Gotland. Gotland is right in the middle of the Baltic Sea so has great strategic importance. Given the lessons from the 2014 occupation of Crimea, it’s that it’s not so easy for the international community to respond to a fait accompli. A NATO membership could help in that regard, according to this theory. I don’t know.