[litwin]

I smell a deja vu ...

Girkin :



and

[litwin]

[Rich]

@litwin I'm very busy right now, so I haven't got time to study in the front in detail. Regular updates on captured settlements would be welcome. You say the rats on the run. I presume you mean, by this the Russians are in a full scale rout. Are you absolutely sure about this? If the Russians are really running full speed in retreat, then presumably the Ukrainian s should reach the Azov coast in the next few days if not the next few hours.

You say Moscow sucks at war. Again are you absolutely sure about this? Ukraine has been armed with some of the best weapons that have existed in the history of humanity. Ukraine's weapons are supposedly 50 or 60 sixty years ahead of the Russians. If Russia sucks at war as you say then Russia could not even hope to delay let alone halt the Ukrainian offensive.

[skinster]

This thread, it won't be a long one.

[GandalfTheGrey]

The alleged WSJ article referred to in that tweet doesn't actually exist. Nowhere did the WSJ publish any article saying anything like "The counteroffensive is over" or that Ukraine suffered "huge losses". The person who posted that on twitter literally just made it up - presumably relying on the fact that not many people would have a WSJ subscription and wouldn't bother checking it. And not surprisingly Russia fanbwoys like skinster lap it up without bothering to do any sort of fact checking.

Needless to say, what the WSJ actually wrote is completely different. The actual article can be accessed here:
https://archive.md/MqGVP

Presumably, this is the quote from the article that the tweeter butchered to make it sound the exact opposite of what was actually said:

After the first probing attacks yielded mixed results, Ukrainian forces have mostly paused their assaults in recent days as commanders draw lessons from the past two weeks and try to figure out how to punch through Russian lines without taking huge losses

[Rugoz]

Apropos, imagine having to sit in that chair and present that drivel.

[late]

Mosquitos..

The mosquitos hold you down while the moose flies strip the flesh off you like piranhas...

[skinster]

The alleged WSJ article referred to in that tweet doesn't actually exist. Nowhere did the WSJ publish any article saying anything like "The counteroffensive is over" or that Ukraine suffered "huge losses".

The writer of the tweet wrote "The counter-offensive is over" and then went onto refer to Ukraine's stalling in their so-called counter-offensive in order to avoid "huge losses", which is mentioned in the WSJ article. Ukrainians also beg for more weapons in the same article, but sure Gandalf, your counter-offensive is going very well.

And not surprisingly Russia fanbwoys like skinster lap it up without bothering to do any sort of fact checking.

Yeah I - like the vast majority of the world - defend Russia. And I ain't afraid to say it. Stay mad.

More on your spring summer offensive that is apparently going super well, from a popular pro Ukrainian source:

[Negotiator]

I'm not interested in "defending" anyone.

I'm only interested in whats actually going on.

If at all, I want to snap people out of this stupid "its us against them" mindset that clouds their judgement and makes them uninterested in evidence and facts.

Thats the thing people who still "support Ukraine" dont understand. You're objectively wrong. Its not "us against them". You're not defending some sort of truth or whatever. You're defending a counterproductive, hopeless, barbaric slaughter of people, and the destruction of their nation. If thats your idea of supporting a nation, what the hell will you do to Ukraine once you dont support it anymore, anyway ?

This is a superflous and futile war. Anyone who wanted to look at the facts knew from the beginning that Russia would win. Admittedly nobody I know expected they would win this descisively, but that Russia wins was always obvious, and that conditions for Ukriane will only get worse the longer the war takes was also always obvious.

Obama told us in 2016 already that Russia would win any conflict in Ukraine against NATO, and he did it on a very limited set of obvious insights:

- Russia has escalatory dominance. They literally live next door. No matter how much the west escalates the conflict, Russia can escalate even more.

- Russia has a high emotional connection to Ukraine, after all the Rus started with Kiev as the capital. They sees this as a thread to their existence. That means they wont stop except they would be totally defeated, which isnt a possibility.

And that of course turned out to be still an extremely optimistic analysis compared to reality. Because Obama still assumed the west could actually hurt Russia badly this way.

[Rugoz]

Admittedly nobody I know expected they would win this descisively

[skinster]

I'm not interested in "defending" anyone.

I'm only interested in whats actually going on.

Both of these things can happen at the same time. But yes, I am firmly on the side of Russia against NATO's proxy war against the Russians and you know, it's okay to pick a side. Being neutral or whatever is liberal bs IMHO.

Thats the thing people who still "support Ukraine" dont understand. You're objectively wrong. Its not "us against them". You're not defending some sort of truth or whatever. You're defending a counterproductive, hopeless, barbaric slaughter of people, and the destruction of their nation. If thats your idea of supporting a nation, what the hell will you do to Ukraine once you dont support it anymore, anyway ?

They never cared about the Ukrainians any more than the United States of - "to the last Ukrainian" - Amreeka did. It's all about winning against Russia who they either hate for whatever reasons of their own or were brainwashed to hate because they are cucks for empire.

Still, they will lose. And as we saw with how they acted re: the war in Syria - in a very similar way - they will then pretend none of it ever happened and move onto the next Western war to cuck for. Rugoz is one of those people and his posts on the topic amount to emoticons or butthurt bitching about people who don't support NATO's war on Russia.

Thankfully it is a minority of the world that thinks this way, but they believe the hype because they don't venture out of understanding the world beyond Western corporate media..

[GandalfTheGrey]

The writer of the tweet wrote "The counter-offensive is over" and then went onto refer to Ukraine's stalling in their so-called counter-offensive in order to avoid "huge losses"

The writer said the counter-offensive stalled due to "huge losses" and attributed the quote to the WSJ. Whereas what the WSJ actually said was the Ukrainians were taking measures to avoid "huge losses".

But hey, nothing dishonest about that according to the fanbwoys

[skinster]

The writer said the counter-offensive stalled due to "huge losses" and attributed the quote to the WSJ. Whereas what the WSJ actually said was the Ukrainians were taking measures to avoid "huge losses".

But hey, nothing dishonest about that according to the fanbwoys

To avoid further losses, yes. Why do you think they stalled their spring offensive so quickly into it?

[GandalfTheGrey]

I'm not interested in "defending" anyone.

I'm only interested in whats actually going on.

Laughable. The only contribution you have ever made here is to try and prove the pro-Ukrainians wrong and justify the war as some legitimate Russian defence against western conspiracy. Thats all you ever do. You are never "interested in whats actually going on" when its Russians committing atrocities (apart from whitewashing them).

Of course no one denies that America and the west are shamelessly using this war as a way to try and destroy Russia for their own ends - thats to be expected. But it only came about in the first place because of Russia's initial act of unjustifiable aggression. If this ends up destroying Russia, then no one is to blame but Putin. No one. Why are you guys just so incapable of acknowledging naked aggression - when its done by someone other than the west? You're just as bad as the freaking republicans and the right rejecting climate change and what not - for no other reason than because the left believe it. They don't care about the actual science, they only care about sticking it to the left. You guys are every bit as bad.

Jesus, even Noam Chomsky acknowledges what Russia did was monumentally stupid and completely morally unjustified.

[GandalfTheGrey]

https://twitter.com/KhersonFrom/status/1670480426794725376



To avoid further losses, yes. Why do you think they stalled their spring offensive so quickly into it?

You still not going to acknowledge such a blatant misquoting of the WSJ? He literally claimed the WSJ said it stalled because of the "huge losses" - whereas the WSJ used the quote in a completely different way.

[Szabo]

Jesus, even Noam Chomsky acknowledges what Russia did was monumentally stupid and completely morally unjustified.

Same goes for Yanis Varoufakis, another prominent western leftist. No intelligent and/or decent person would try to excuse what Russia did.

[skinster]

Laughable. The only contribution you have ever made here is to try and prove the pro-Ukrainians wrong and justify the war as some legitimate Russian defence against western conspiracy.

NATO's increasing provocations with expansion towards Russia are a conspiracy?

The U.S.-led coup from 2013/2014 in Ukraine under neocon savage Victoria Nuland that armed fascists within the government and military is a conspiracy?

Bombing the Donbass regions from 2014 onwards killing over 14,000 ethnic Russians in Ukraine is a conspiracy?

The build up along the Eastern and Southern regions of Ukraine by the Ukrainian army in order to go beyond the shelling and do a ground invasion a fortnight before Russia entered Ukraine is a conspiracy? Despite being confirmed by Swiss NATO intel guy Jacques Baud is a conspiracy?

The facade of going along with the two Minks Accords - the peaceful option - in order to build the Ukrainian military that both German and French leaders recently admitted were a charade and trick against the Russians in order to prepare for this inevitable war is a conspiracy?

Russian attempts for a peaceful settlement a year ago after the war had escalated (when Russians entered) is a conspiracy?

Thats all you ever do. You are never "interested in whats actually going on" when its Russians committing atrocities (apart from whitewashing them).

I've just shown above that I have been paying attention to what's going on. As yet, your position is Russia = BAD!!! like an average Western news consumer lacking entirely in context like some of what I described above.

Do better.

Of course no one denies that America and the west are shamelessly using this war as a way to try and destroy Russia for their own ends - thats to be expected.

So if you understand this, why would you expect the Russians to not do anything?

There are many of us who believe the Russians should've entered in 2014 to protect the people in the Donbass as soon as they came under fire by their own government. What about those Ukrainians, any comment on their lives living under terrorism for 8 years before Russia entered the war?

But it only came about in the first place because of Russia's initial act of unjustifiable aggression.

And what was that? Don't tell me you're one of those people that believes war in Ukraine began last February? I know we have a lot of perpetual amnesiacs on this board but I recall you being better than this.

If this ends up destroying Russia, then no one is to blame but Putin. No one.

Not to worry, I doubt it will.

Why are you guys just so incapable of acknowledging naked aggression - when its done by someone other than the west?

What is this naked aggression?

You guys are every bit as bad.

Not too bothered about your feelings about me, maybe you would be more interesting if you actually said more on this war rather than crying like a babby.

Jesus, even Noam Chomsky acknowledges what Russia did was monumentally stupid and completely morally unjustified.

He also tells you to vote blue no matter who ever four years so probably not worth listening to much of what he says these days.

Anyway, you didn't explain why the Ukrainian counter-offensive is stalled. Have you been paying attention to any of it or are you only here to do the equivalent of waiving a yellow and blue flag around without knowing much about what's been happening in this war and what continues to? Why do you defend the US and NATO's war in Ukraine?

[skinster]

[Rich]

If this ends up destroying Russia, then no one is to blame but Putin. No one.

Why, why, why do liberals keep having to personalise these conflicts? We heard the same nonsense in Syria. We heard similar talk in Serbia, Iraq and Libya. This imagining that conflicts of tribe, nation and religion that often date back hundreds upon hundreds of years are some how all the fault of one man.

Jesus Christ! It took over a thousand years to settle the Franco German border. We still haven't finalised the border between Britain and Ireland. Surely in 1992 anyone with half a brain and just a modicum of history could have predicted that there was a high chance of violent ethnic conflict between Russians and Ukrainians at some point.

Who knows if Putin had been run over by a car in 1999, we might possibly be an even more extensive, violent and destructive conflict that the one we're in now.

[Rugoz]

Why, why, why do liberals keep having to personalise these conflicts? We heard the same nonsense in Syria. We heard similar talk in Serbia, Iraq and Libya. This imagining that conflicts of tribe, nation and religion that often date back hundreds upon hundreds of years are some how all the fault of one man.

In personalist regimes it often comes down to the decision of one man. I think Putin could have steered Russia in a completely different direction. Not in 2022 maybe, but earlier.