The Vladimir Putin appreciation thread.

Roger Hassenforder

WakeUp wrote: »

clearly it was..but you still havent named your gang/alter egos which is what Im interested in..you said "we know" who is we?....

we're a collective, I'm the spokesperson.
Again, whats the provenance of the madness; that if the US provides weapons to Ukraine, the place will descend into Armageddon?

WakeUp

Originally Posted by WakeUp View Post
I clearly don't know what I'm talking about here thats a bit of honesty . clearly Im wrong on boards.ie phuck phuck phuck yeah spunkfest for me and fellobots ,I think Ill stick one dont you dont you dont ... finish so soon it's my turn

Gatling wrote: »

That's not legal in russia is it ........

seriously Gatling what are you doing here do you know how pathetic that is. making up posts on my behalf and putting my name too it..what are you doing?...

WakeUp

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

we're a collective, I'm the spokesperson.
Again, whats the provenance of the madness; that if the US provides weapons to Ukraine, the place will descend into Armageddon?

answer the question will you please. who were you talking on behalf of? spit it out will you....

Roger Hassenforder

WakeUp wrote: »

answer the question will you please. who were you talking on behalf of? spit it out will you....

I've answered, now it's your turn.
I'll consider providing more information thereafter.
And watch the dots on your ellipsis...

Egginacup

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Are there Russian army troops in Ukraine?

I haven't seen evidence of any. I've heard politicians claiming that they have evidence but are very reluctant to provide it. I've seen US generals try to pawn off fake photos as evidence only to be sussed and scorned by outraged European leaders. I've read of EX-Russian military personnel fighting with Novirussian forces. But I haven't seen a shred of evidence of Russian troops and equipment deployed in Eastern Ukraine.

WakeUp

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

I've answered, now it's your turn.
I'll consider providing more information thereafter.
And watch the dots on your ellipsis...

no you didnt answer the question actually. you said "we know" so,,,who is "we"?..its your gang right...but who is in the gang thats the question....

Roger Hassenforder

Egginacup wrote: »

I haven't seen evidence of any. I've heard politicians claiming that they have evidence but are very reluctant to provide it. I've seen US generals try to pawn off fake photos as evidence only to be sussed and scorned by outraged European leaders. I've read of EX-Russian military personnel fighting with Novirussian forces. But I haven't seen a shred of evidence of Russian troops and equipment deployed in Eastern Ukraine.

it would be very surprising if there were though wouldn't it?

Roger Hassenforder

WakeUp wrote: »

no you didnt answer the question actually. you said "we know" so,,,who is "we"?..its your gang right...but who is in the gang thats the question....

I'm doing what your father should have done, pulling out.
Good evening young man, & good luck in the junior certificate.

WakeUp

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

I'm doing what your father should have done, pulling out.
Good evening young man, & good luck in the junior certificate.

:pac::pac::pac::D lol whatever number there are of you are beyond phuckin pathetic.:D farewell for now indeed. though Im gona be sticking around.;)

Egginacup

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

we're a collective, I'm the spokesperson.
Again, whats the provenance of the madness; that if the US provides weapons to Ukraine, the place will descend into Armageddon?

Ukraine have a rather respectable air force. Why aren't Ukrainian migs strafing the sh1t out of these tens of thousands of Russian troops that have invaded and are occupying the east of their country?

NZT73

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

He has to be one of the greatest leaders the world has ever known, not just a stuffed suit like his wooden American counterpart. His steadfast resolve in the face of a proxy war being waged in Ukraine has to be admired, a war that would never have happened if billions weren't poured into Ukraine to kickstart a coup.

Like him or loathe him there is no doubt that Vladimir Putin is a very shrewd operator who is consistently one step ahead of the game.

I like that he's not afraid to defend his culture against certain elements who would seek to distort it.

In case people didn't realize, Putin is considered a moderate

Egginacup

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

it would be very surprising if there were though wouldn't it?

But if there IS evidence, Roger, as so many assure us, then why hide it? Why not produce this evidence of a Russian invasion of East Ukraine and settle the matter?

JacquesDeLad

Arming Ukraine with modern equipment is a bad move.

Right now Putin has no idea how Russian equipment will perform against NATO front line units. For all the improvements made since the Georgian debacle the best Russian equipment has only been tested against obsolete Soviet stuff in Ukraine. NATO on the hand has a pretty good idea of Russian capabalities. As long as that knowledge gap remains even the most hawkish Russian generals would be fearful of a direct engagement against a modern NATO force.

cnocbui

WakeUp wrote: »

I mean really is that all you got. you still havent answered my question though...do you support German lead efforts to find a diplomatic solution to what is happening or do you support American calls to arm Ukraine and escalate the conflict?...

You seem to be very big on posing questions of others while not answering those put to you.

I'll put it another way - why do you say that Ukraine - an independent country - should not be allowed to join the EU or NATO if it wishes to? Do you think Russia should have some sort of veto? When Ireland chose to join the EU, should the UK have had a say in that decision and had a veto? Would it have been justified for the British Army to invade Ireland to impose the wishes of the UK?

I will answer your question if you will answer the one I posed to you earlier.

Egginacup

JacquesDeLad wrote: »

Arming Ukraine with modern equipment is a bad move.

Right now Putin has no idea how Russian equipment will perform against NATO front line units. For all the improvements made since the Georgian debacle the best Russian equipment has only been tested against obsolete Soviet stuff in Ukraine. NATO on the hand has a pretty good idea of Russian capabalities. As long as that knowledge gap remains even the most hawkish Russian generals would be fearful of a direct engagement against a modern NATO force.

Have you not seen how Hezbollah decimated the Israeli tanks using Russian guided missiles when Israel invaded Lebanon. Just watch the documentary "God's Chariot". It's on YT.
Russian missile technology is formidable. But leaving all that aside, Russia doesn't need to fight Ukraine nor do they want to. They just want to keep NATO out. And sensibly so.

Egginacup

cnocbui wrote: »

You seem to be very big on posing questions of others while not answering those put to you.

I'll put it another way - why do you say that Ukraine - an independent country - should not be allowed to join the EU or NATO if it wishes to? Do you think Russia should have some sort of veto? When Ireland chose to join the EU, should the UK have had a say in that decision and had a veto? Would it have been justified for the British Army to invade Ireland to impose the wishes of the UK?

I will answer your question if you will answer the one I posed to you earlier.

Should Mexico be allowed to join a Chinese or Russian military alliance the against the US?

Roger Hassenforder

Egginacup wrote: »

But if there IS evidence, Roger, as so many assure us, then why hide it? Why not produce this evidence of a Russian invasion of East Ukraine and settle the matter?

what would be held as conclusive proof though.
we'll agree to ignore US/NATO/Ukraine "spin", and equally Russian official denials, but rely on local and Russian evidence:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/19/russia-official-silence-for-families-troops-killed-in-ukraine

http://www.dw.de/evidence-mounting-of-russian-troops-in-ukraine/a-18294255

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28934213

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/journalists-find-mounting-evidence-of-russian-involvement-in-ukraine/509973.html

WakeUp

cnocbui wrote: »

I'll put it another way - why do you say that Ukraine - an independent country - should not be allowed to join the EU or NATO if it wishes to?

because wishes or feeling or whatever other such thing have no place in such matters. it makes zero economic and political sense bringing them into either they are of no use to us only problems. and vis a vis the Russians rightly or wrongly such things are a red line for them. with regard to Nato dont just take my word for that I dont expect you too, Reagans man in Moscow Jack Matlock who helped bring an "end" to the cold war is of the same opinion. that doesnt make it right. is just how it is.

The fact is they are going to intervene until they are certain that there is no prospect of Ukraine becoming a member of NATO. And all of the threats by NATO and so on to sort of increase defenses elsewhere is simply provocative to the Russians. Now, I’m not saying that’s right, but I am saying that’s the way Russia is going to react. And frankly, this is all predictable. And those of us who helped negotiate the end of the Cold War almost unanimously said in the 1990s, “Do not expand NATO eastward. Find a different way to protect eastern Europe, a way that includes Russia. Otherwise, eventually there’s going to be a confrontation, because there is a red line, as far as any Russian government is concerned, when it comes to Ukraine and Georgia and other former republics of the Soviet Union.”

......And the reason many of us—myself, George Kennan, many of us—argued against NATO expansion in the ’90s was precisely to avoid the sort of situation we have today. It was totally predictable. If we start expanding NATO, as we get closer to the Russian border, they are going to consider this a hostile act. And at some point, they will draw a line, and they will do anything within their power to keep it from going any further. That’s what we’re seeing today.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/09/former-u-s-ambassador-ussr-u-s-nato-provoking-ukrainian-crisis.html

Do you think Russia should have some sort of veto?

no

When Ireland chose to join the EU, should the UK have had a say in that decision and had a veto?

no

Would it have been justified for the British Army to invade Ireland to impose the wishes of the UK?

no

I will answer your question if you will answer the one I posed to you earlier.

you asked me how many countries Nato had invaded or something along those lines. see here is the thing that question is irrelevant. the same way Nato is irrelevant to the situation in Ukraine. because Ukraine isnt and never will be a member of Nato. thankfully. nor are they a member of the EU. yet somehow in the eyes of some Nato should be involved and should be relevant when they arent.

Ive answered your questions would appreciate if you could now answer mine. Do you support German efforts at finding a diplomatic solution to the conflict or do you support American calls to arm Ukraine and escalate the conflict?

JacquesDeLad

Egginacup wrote: »

They just want to keep NATO out. And sensibly so.

It must be getting a bit annoying then that everything Putin has done so far has has brought NATO troops closer to his borders. They're actually building on Russia's borders now. That's a catastrophic strategy failure you have to admit.

cnocbui

Egginacup wrote: »

Should Mexico be allowed to join a Chinese or Russian military alliance the against the US?

Sure. No worse than having Russian nuclear subs a few hundred k off the coast.

Egginacup

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

what would be held as conclusive proof though.
we'll agree to ignore US/NATO/Ukraine "spin", and equally Russian official denials, but rely on local and Russian evidence:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/19/russia-official-silence-for-families-troops-killed-in-ukraine

http://www.dw.de/evidence-mounting-of-russian-troops-in-ukraine/a-18294255

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28934213

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/journalists-find-mounting-evidence-of-russian-involvement-in-ukraine/509973.html

This is not proof nor is it evidence of a Russian invasion of Eastern Ukraine. I have seen these newspaper reports before and they reveal nothing.

Is there any possibility that Ukraine intelligence, maybe with the assistance of others, could simply provide proof of a Russian invasion of their land?

I'm not asking for much. Surely Ukrainian agents in cars, aircraft, tanks, motorbikes, whatever could show evidence of this Russian invasion. Could they not?
Could not some reporters go right down to Donbass and, with the help of a camera crew film all these thousands of Russian soldiers and all those bases one would need to feed, arm and house 20,000 men?

There must be some way of exposing the Russian invasion and occupation of East Ukraine.

obplayer

Egginacup wrote: »

This is not proof nor is it evidence of a Russian invasion of Eastern Ukraine. I have seen these newspaper reports before and they reveal nothing.

Is there any possibility that Ukraine intelligence, maybe with the assistance of others, could simply provide proof of a Russian invasion of their land?

I'm not asking for much. Surely Ukrainian agents in cars, aircraft, tanks, motorbikes, whatever could show evidence of this Russian invasion. Could they not?
Could not some reporters go right down to Donbass and, with the help of a camera crew film all these thousands of Russian soldiers and all those bases one would need to feed, arm and house 20,000 men?

There must be some way of exposing the Russian invasion and occupation of East Ukraine.

Perhaps it could be done, but have you ever heard of Potemkin Villages? Watch the videos of people visiting North Korea.

donegaLroad

I liked him as the frontman of Megadeath

http://a2.img.mobypicture.com/f6ff7500ac98a873feaa780222066613_view.jpg

Roger Hassenforder

Egginacup wrote: »

Is there any possibility that Ukraine intelligence, maybe with the assistance of others, could simply provide proof of a Russian invasion of their land?

Would you not file that under propaganda though?

cnocbui

WakeUp wrote: »

because wishes or feeling or whatever other such thing have no place in such matters. it makes zero economic and political sense bringing them into either they are of no use to us only problems. and vis a vis the Russians rightly or wrongly such things are a red line for them. with regard to Nato dont just take my word for that I dont expect you too, Reagans man in Moscow Jack Matlock who helped bring an "end" to the cold war is of the same opinion. that doesnt make it right. is just how it is.
...
you asked me how many countries Nato had invaded or something along those lines. see here is the thing that question is irrelevant. the same way Nato is irrelevant to the situation in Ukraine. because Ukraine isnt and never will be a member of Nato. thankfully. nor are they a member of the EU. yet somehow in the eyes of some Nato should be involved and should be relevant when they arent.

Ive answered your questions would appreciate if you could now answer mine. Do you support German efforts at finding a diplomatic solution to the conflict or do you support American calls to arm Ukraine and escalate the conflict?

I think Putin can not be trusted to ever negotiate in good faith, so the idea of ever reaching a 'diplomatic solution' with him is naive. he has proven to be one of the most outrageous liars one could imagine. You can try to negotiate with a liar but you shouldn't have any expectation he will ever keep his word.

Sure, let the German's have a crack at trying to reach a diplomatic solution with a serial liar, it's worth a try - third time lucky maybe? I don't hold out much hope though.

I welcome the saber rattling the Americans are engaged in, because without it, there isn't the slightest chance Putin would actually stick with any negotiated deal. Have you ever considered that perhaps the saber rattling and the German efforts are an intentional good-cop, bad-cop effort?

I think Putin's intentions are to absorb the entirety of Ukraine and the other Baltic sates. that's why he's so negative about arming Ukraine. He's probably planning some atrocity he can blame on Ukraine as a pretext for a sudden and large scale blitzkrieg invasion to seize the whole country quickly and so doesn't want Ukraine better armed an d so able to put up a costly resistance.

Egginacup

JacquesDeLad wrote: »

It must be getting a bit annoying then that everything Putin has done so far has has brought NATO troops closer to his borders. They're actually building on Russia's borders now. That's a catastrophic strategy failure you have to admit.

Are you seriously going to entertain the parallel-universe notion that NATO expansion is somehow Putin's fault???

By what stretch of the imagination can that even be contemplated?

So if a guy goes to the chipper one afternoon to buy chips and is robbed and shot along the way, are you going to say it's his fault for going to the chipper?

(you probably are)

Gatling

Hopefully putins now either on his deathbed or a dribbling heap .

Should get very interesting if he's out of the picture

Egginacup

obplayer wrote: »

Perhaps it could be done, but have you ever heard of Potemkin Villages? Watch the videos of people visiting North Korea.

That is stretching the bounds of sanity.

What are you saying, that the Russians would knock up some cardboard villages and have their troops dress up as civvies farting about the place pretending to locals in order throw the scent off?

:pac:

Egginacup

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Would you not file that under propaganda though?

You could call it anything you want but I wouldn't want the US to have any say in the information. Remember those weapons inspectors in Iraq? Banging their heads off the walls trying to let it be heard that there are no WMDs anywhere. That everything is compliant. But Bush and his coterie of monkeys just silenced them and told the world that Hussein had half a million litres of germ agents ready to unleash them in 45 minutes?

You could have a fact-finding mission to Ukraine and they could find zero evidence of Russian invasions or occupations yet the suits in Washington would just ignore the facts and state that they have proof. They wouldn't show the proof (because it doesn't exist), just keep lying and lying and lying until they get their war.

Roger Hassenforder

Egginacup wrote: »

You could call it anything you want but I wouldn't want the US to have any say in the information. Remember those weapons inspectors in Iraq? Banging their heads off the walls trying to let it be heard that there are no WMDs anywhere. That everything is compliant. But Bush and his coterie of monkeys just silenced them and told the world that Hussein had half a million litres of germ agents ready to unleash them in 45 minutes?

You could have a fact-finding mission to Ukraine and they could find zero evidence of Russian invasions or occupations yet the suits in Washington would just ignore the facts and state that they have proof. They wouldn't show the proof (because it doesn't exist), just keep lying and lying and lying until they get their war.

I'd say if Putin himself admitted involvement, you'd say he was an American doppelganger