Russia-Ukraine War

[Gavrushka]

And here everything is very simple. You can do this because it is in line with the policy of your state. Try to go somewhere with contradictory slogans. For example, try to loudly declare something against BLM or LGBT in some. And you will realize that you are no different.

Oh my god...

I just can't even rationalise that comparison on any meaningful level...

We have laws against discrimination, yes, but not against free speech unless it is considered inciteful.

[fiksal]

a bit of commentary on this, from a fellow Russian:

And by the way, no one puts us in jail for protesting against the war. There are penalties for discrediting the armed forces. But I think this is correct. You can’t talk about the boys who are fighting there, risking their lives ... you can’t say bad things about them.

And yes, your media is 100% not telling you a lot. In fact, they only tell you what you need to know. But in fairness ... so everywhere, in any country in the world.

There's a lot to parse above, so I will not. But I'd point these out. These are common things I hear about the free speech.

(Many) Russians do not indeed believe free press exists anywhere or is possible. It's the concept that is nearly impossible to describe (for me) to them. I confirm they also dont believe 100% what Kremlin says, but you have to follow what Kremlin says, always. They believe that.

(Many) Russians also believe that free press and free speech shouldnt exist. The example above has it - you cant speak against what army or Kremlin says about the war.


As for reasons about the war, you can read above, - the key takeaway: it had to happen and killings will have to continue.


Also, did you join the forum just for this thread? Do we know you by another name?

[Gavrushka]

Also, did you join the forum just for this thread? Do we know you by another name?

I did think the same thing...

[mr.WHO]

Also, did you join the forum just for this thread? Do we know you by another name?

I did think the same thing...

If we think all about the same person - I think it's not the case - the style is different, more coherent and readable, rather than "stream of consiousness".
The only common point is that they use same pro-russia bullet points, but this doesn't indicate it's the same person.

[himid]

It is apparently a "need to know" that that is what has happened in Russia during the latest decades.

You are wrong. Yes, propaganda is very strong, sometimes even too much. But the information is available and in principle people think with their own heads.

There is no need to imagine, because the "media" tells us that such country is near us today. It is called "Russia". Why do they make up such a lie?

There is a problem. Someone is lying
As a person living in this country and knowing what people here need, I can say: we don’t need all these conflicts. We need a quiet life, so that we are not poked with sticks, sanctions, etc. So that no one threatens us and does not try to deceive us. That's all we need.

I can give 2 pieces of advice:
1) Always consider that your media is saying what needs to be said. Always keep in mind that they, too, can lie for the sake of the goals pursued by your government. Never try to take everything you are told at face value (everyone can lie).
2) If you can come to Russia and see everything with my own eyes. If I'm not mistaken, Russia is not closed to tourists. Although there may be difficulties with air traffic. There is a high probability that you will see a lot of things that are not told to you or are outright lies.

[Gavrushka]

Also, did you join the forum just for this thread? Do we know you by another name?

I did think the same thing...

If we think all about the same person - I think it's not the case - the style is different, more coherent and readable, rather than "stream of consiousness".
The only common point is that they use same pro-russia bullet points, but this doesn't indicate it's the same person.

Yeah, I have to agree with hindsight.

I lived in Russia for a while, back in 1998, when Putin was just emerging onto the scene. As a generalisation, the populace were excited to be engaging in a world so long denied them, and embracing the idea of democracy, although I have to say corruption was endemic...

It seems now the degree of governmental control Putin has exerted over the course of a generation has simply indoctrinated people into believing what he wants them to believe. From the outside, it's laughable to hear the claim our press are saying what they're told, and only the Russian media are telling the truth, but I guess from the other side of the fence/iron curtain it is going to look very different. - You will want to believe otherwise, perhaps need to.

I do remember during the Falklands war, I was filled with nationalistic pride at how we projected power to the other side of the world and 'won' so I do get how war galvanises opinion. I'm sure another generation from now, when more rational leadership is hopefully in charge in Russia, the likes of himid will see things a little differently.

[himid]

a bit of commentary on this, from a fellow Russian:

And by the way, no one puts us in jail for protesting against the war. There are penalties for discrediting the armed forces. But I think this is correct. You can’t talk about the boys who are fighting there, risking their lives ... you can’t say bad things about them.

And yes, your media is 100% not telling you a lot. In fact, they only tell you what you need to know. But in fairness ... so everywhere, in any country in the world.

There's a lot to parse above, so I will not. But I'd point these out. These are common things I hear about the free speech.

(Many) Russians do not indeed believe free press exists anywhere or is possible. It's the concept that is nearly impossible to describe (for me) to them. I confirm they also dont believe 100% what Kremlin says, but you have to follow what Kremlin says, always. They believe that.

(Many) Russians also believe that free press and free speech shouldnt exist. The example above has it - you cant speak against what army or Kremlin says about the war.


As for reasons about the war, you can read above, - the key takeaway: it had to happen and killings will have to continue.


Also, did you join the forum just for this thread? Do we know you by another name?

Well then I'll add my comment:

(many) do not realize that their press is not so free as they think. Let me give you a banal example: Mr. Trump. Remember how the whole press turned against him. Remember what was bullying. But no one has ever proved his guilt.
Now remember Mr. Hunter Biden. Video about his "adventures" in the public domain. Quite strange, but very interesting facts about his involvement in Ukrainian affairs under the Obama administration. And nothing... silence. Nobody says anything about it.

Well, why go far: Ukraine, February 24. We know the beginning of events. An article in the CNN, right on the title page. A lot of words about "bad Russia", photos of the "atrocities of the first day". Here is just one frame taken from a car accident in Russia (several years ago), and the second frame is a make-up actress. She was found a couple of days later and all possible facts about her were brought. So what? Has anyone issued a rebuttal?

Or a banal example of a Tochka U missile hitting the Kramatorsk railway station. How much has been said about "bad Russia". But the Tochka U is not in service with the Russian Federation (although Belarus has it), and the serial numbers on this missile are suspiciously close to the numbers where the Ukrainian troops acknowledged their attack by the Tochka U missile. Did someone issue a refutation? The most interesting thing is that immediately after the appearance of the serial number of the rocket (accidentally taken by someone), the Western media simply stopped talking about Kramatorsk.

And I can give you a lot of such examples. Your media has a certain information line, and everything that contradicts this line, they simply do not show.
And anyway, why am I? What I mean is that it is not very clear why you consider the media independent. Because they don't tell you otherwise? You are given information: how do you know that it is true or complete?

You understand that any reporter, editor, any media worker receives a salary. Someone pays this salary. And who pays, he orders the music. Well, then you just need to find who pays.

Although in the US I can cite those who sharply criticize the authorities. I love the Fox News editions of Tucker Carlson. By the way, it is difficult for me to give an analogue to him in Russia. He seems to be unique.

[chew-ie]

[..]

Never try to take everything you are told at face value (everyone can lie).

That's common knowledge - no need to reiterate on that [here]. This discussion round here mostly consists of people reflecting different news sources and different point of views.

2) If you can come to Russia and see everything with my own eyes. If I'm not mistaken, Russia is not closed to tourists. Although there may be difficulties with air traffic. There is a high probability that you will see a lot of things that are not told to you or are outright lies.

That's the sad part about it which I already wrote a few [dozen] pages back into this thread - there is so much paranoia on the Russian side of things. Before Russia invaded Ukraine there was a normal connection to the country and it's people. Minus those guys who still lived in the cold war mindset of course. The young people, companies and scientists were connected to the rest of the world. This was shattered by the move some Russians decided to be "necessary" (Putin, military). Now the world is just shocked by the atrocities* Russia committed in Ukraine and at the very least is ~very~ cautious when thinking about any future connections with Russia.
And by atrocities I am _NOT_ talking about some propaganda details posted by either site. I am talking about the constant bombardment of civilians. This move alone is something unworthy of a country who wants to be treated as partner let alone as a friend.

History doesn't matter at this point - as it is not fully written yet. All we have now in that regard is some bits and pieces mixed with a lot of propaganda which has to be combed through by historians for the decades to come.

---

Anyways, welcome to this little discussion

[mr.WHO]

Third part of Lindybeige interview with volunteer - this time the experience of being on a receiving end of russian artillery:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ofJw89oI4cc

[himid]

Now the world is just shocked by the atrocities* Russia committed in Ukraine and at the very least is ~very~ cautious when thinking about any future connections with Russia.

And how do you know that "these atrocities were done by Russia"? Where did you get your information from? From your media? Where do they get their information from? From the Ukrainian authorities or the military? Well, do you understand that they will NEVER blame themselves, even if they did? War is a double-edged event. And the civilian population, unfortunately, will suffer.

Personally, I cannot say where this or that shelling came from and for what reason. Although ... in part I can give examples. Let's start with an old example, Mariupol. The city suffered a lot, and you know why? So I personally saw the video of the fights and I can say with confidence how it happened. And the following happened: the Ukrainian formations (or rather the Azov regiment, which controlled Mariupol) acted according to one simple scheme:
1) People were driven from their apartments to the basement of the house
2) They took away the keys to their apartments from people
3) A man with MANPADS was placed on the roof of the house, and fighters with machine guns and ATGMs were placed in other people's apartments.
Naturally, such houses had to be taken with battle and destruction.

Now, by the way, Russia is investing a lot in the restoration of Mariupol. Well, more precisely, new houses are being built there to replace the destroyed ones. There is a very large building there.

Why did I give this example? Well, probably to show that the destruction can be associated with the presence of the military of the opposing side in this place. There is a lot of video evidence of this (deployment of the military in private homes, hotels or apartment buildings).

Well, let's give another example. Now I will describe to you what they are probably telling you under the motto "Russia is shelling residential buildings." It started not so long ago, along with the beginning of attacks on the energy infrastructure. I hope you understand the reason for the attack on infrastructure (including energy). Everyone needs energy, including the military, repair shops, and enterprises that provide the army. Unfortunately the energy is shared.

But I'm not talking about that, but about the shelling. From time to time, footage appears with a hit really in residential buildings. But here the question is: who got it and why? There is no military sense in getting into a residential building (if there are no military men, of course). Missiles that fly through infrastructure are expensive and it makes no sense to launch them into a residential building. Then what is it? And everything is quite simple: air defense. Ever since the beginning of the war, the Ukrainian army began to place military equipment and air defense inside large cities (by the way, I don’t evacuate residents at the same time). Now imagine: a cruise missile is flying, an anti-aircraft defense missile is launched after it, but loses its target. Where will she fly next? Either it will self-destruct or fly down. Following the example of Poland, we already see that self-destruction is far from always. This version is supported by indirect facts:
1) Such hits happen just during the periods of flight of cruise missiles.
2) The Ukrainian media never shows what flew into the house. Only consequences.
3) The consequences of hitting a house in such cases are much less than those that occur after a cruise missile hits. And this is also logical, because the mass of the warhead of a cruise missile is much greater than that of an anti-aircraft missile.

Well, one more thing (second version, other side of medal). A missile that was shot down by air defense over a city will certainly fall on this city.

And yes, I do not want to justify anyone. War is scary and there are always casualties. It is very difficult to avoid casualties among civilians. But let's not blame just one side. Everything is really very complicated ... and listening to one side, blaming the other ... well, this is a path to nowhere. You will never get objectivity here.

[chew-ie]

Now the world is just shocked by the atrocities* Russia committed in Ukraine and at the very least is ~very~ cautious when thinking about any future connections with Russia.

And how do you know that "these atrocities were done by Russia"? Where did you get your information from? From your media? Where do they get their information from? From the Ukrainian authorities or the military? Well, do you understand that they will NEVER blame themselves, even if they did? War is a double-edged event. And the civilian population, unfortunately, will suffer.

By survivors made it out of there - and there is nothing more to add at that point.

[Mailo]

Now the world is just shocked by the atrocities* Russia committed in Ukraine and at the very least is ~very~ cautious when thinking about any future connections with Russia.

And how do you know that "these atrocities were done by Russia"? Where did you get your information from? From your media? Where do they get their information from? From the Ukrainian authorities or the military? Well, do you understand that they will NEVER blame themselves, even if they did? War is a double-edged event. And the civilian population, unfortunately, will suffer.

Personally, I cannot say where this or that shelling came from and for what reason.

BECAUSE IT WAS SAID BY RUSSIAN MEDIA and BY PUTIN HIMSELF THAT THEY WERE DOING IT!

Or are you accusing Russian TV and Putin to be part of Western and Ukrainian propaganda against Russia? Maybe you should try to get rid of them if that is the case, then ...

Seriously, you cannot condemn attacks by Ukraine on the Crimean bridge and military airports (both valid military targets according to international law) as "terrorism", and then respond by exclusively bombard civilian infrastructure while publicy cheering freezing and dying civilians as a result if you want to be considered to be a nation that can be negotiated with with any sort of good faith instead just a bunch of criminal terrorists that cannot be trusted.

And don't get me started on that Wagner guy. I guess he is also a Ukrainian agent, as he also seems to publish only stuff that fits the view in Western "propaganda".

And again, no, Western media did not contribute in the slightest to this view, just Russian media, and Putin himself.

[Warenwolf]

Now the world is just shocked by the atrocities* Russia committed in Ukraine and at the very least is ~very~ cautious when thinking about any future connections with Russia.

And how do you know that "these atrocities were done by Russia"? Where did you get your information from? From your media? Where do they get their information from? From the Ukrainian authorities or the military? Well, do you understand that they will NEVER blame themselves, even if they did? War is a double-edged event. And the civilian population, unfortunately, will suffer.
.

This is not total list just few examples (Mailo has covered already the Russian sources themself):

Primary sources:
- Webcams which operated early in the war before being taken down could be used to observe the shelling by Russian on residential Ukrainian areas. I linked to one of those in the very start of the thread which was showcasing rocket attack on Kharkiv in the very start of the war in February. I personally verified with google streets that the imagery was from Kharkiv.
- Witnesses among Ukrainian refugees who reside in our countries


Secondary sources (I am not using secondary sources term in a way a historian would)
- through our diplomatic representatives in Ukraine which witnessed with their own eyes the targeting of civilian targets.
- Intercepts of communication between Russian soldiers/units
- Satellite surveillance
- Telegram and tiktok from Russian sources which brag about their "achievements" in Ukraine

Of course, I have danced this dance before so I know how this one goes - You, being a Kremlin loyalist (or worse - seeing how you registered just to immediately post on this thread), will dismiss those as mere propaganda. Only when the war comes to your home you may, perhaps, change your opinion.

[himid]

Now the world is just shocked by the atrocities* Russia committed in Ukraine and at the very least is ~very~ cautious when thinking about any future connections with Russia.

And how do you know that "these atrocities were done by Russia"? Where did you get your information from? From your media? Where do they get their information from? From the Ukrainian authorities or the military? Well, do you understand that they will NEVER blame themselves, even if they did? War is a double-edged event. And the civilian population, unfortunately, will suffer.

Personally, I cannot say where this or that shelling came from and for what reason.

BECAUSE IT WAS SAID BY RUSSIAN MEDIA and BY PUTIN HIMSELF THAT THEY WERE DOING IT!

Or are you accusing Russian TV and Putin to be part of Western and Ukrainian propaganda against Russia? Maybe you should try to get rid of them if that is the case, then ...

Seriously, you cannot condemn attacks by Ukraine on the Crimean bridge and military airports (both valid military targets according to international law) as "terrorism", and then respond by exclusively bombard civilian infrastructure while publicy cheering freezing and dying civilians as a result if you want to be considered to be a nation that can be negotiated with with any sort of good faith instead just a bunch of criminal terrorists that cannot be trusted.

And don't get me started on that Wagner guy. I guess he is also a Ukrainian agent, as he also seems to publish only stuff that fits the view in Western "propaganda".

And again, no, Western media did not contribute in the slightest to this view, just Russian media, and Putin himself.

You are too impulsive.
1) By civilian infrastructure, you probably mean energy? This is a dual purpose infrastructure. Basically, consumption is not by households, but by industry, including military enterprises, railways (transporting equipment and personnel).
2) Before that, nothing like this had happened for more than six months. But Ukrainians can only thank Western aid. It is precisely because of the sharp increase in the military potential of the Ukrainian troops that the industrial potential of Ukraine had to be lowered.
3) I communicate with Ukrainians from different regions. I can say that the shelling of the energy infrastructure brought problems, but these problems are not so critical that they massively threaten people's lives.

And yet ... in my opinion, it is you who do not notice the actions of one side, but notice the actions of the other. Specifically: constant "inexplicable fires" have been taking place on the territory of Russia all this time. There are shelling of residential areas of Donetsk, Belgorod and Kursk regions. They beat indiscriminately, specifically in residential areas.

And let's talk about something else:
In Yugoslavia, for some reason, not half a year later, but from the first days, NATO destroyed all power plants, bridges and other infrastructure. Why do you think? Or for you, NATO's actions are good, and Russia's actions are bad? Or maybe you can explain to me more than a million dead Iraqis? Or is it different?

The shelling of energy, industrial and military infrastructure is necessary in order to reduce the MILITARY potential of Ukrainian troops. And the Ukrainians can thank only those who diligently raised this potential for more than six months.

[himid]

Now the world is just shocked by the atrocities* Russia committed in Ukraine and at the very least is ~very~ cautious when thinking about any future connections with Russia.

And how do you know that "these atrocities were done by Russia"? Where did you get your information from? From your media? Where do they get their information from? From the Ukrainian authorities or the military? Well, do you understand that they will NEVER blame themselves, even if they did? War is a double-edged event. And the civilian population, unfortunately, will suffer.
.

This is not total list just few examples (Mailo has covered already the Russian sources themself):

Primary sources:
- Webcams which operated early in the war before being taken down could be used to observe the shelling by Russian on residential Ukrainian areas. I linked to one of those in the very start of the thread which was showcasing rocket attack on Kharkiv in the very start of the war in February. I personally verified with google streets that the imagery was from Kharkiv.
- Witnesses among Ukrainian refugees who reside in our countries


Secondary sources (I am not using secondary sources term in a way a historian would)
- through our diplomatic representatives in Ukraine which witnessed with their own eyes the targeting of civilian targets.
- Intercepts of communication between Russian soldiers/units
- Satellite surveillance
- Telegram and tiktok from Russian sources which brag about their "achievements" in Ukraine

Of course, I have danced this dance before so I know how this one goes - You, being a Kremlin loyalist (or worse - seeing how you registered just to immediately post on this thread), will dismiss those as mere propaganda. Only when the war comes to your home you may, perhaps, change your opinion.

I also see a lot of videos. But only on them it is impossible to determine where and what came from. For example, Grad shelling is carried out from a distance of 15-20 kilometers. On CCTV cameras, you only see the result, not the source.

By the way, I do not want to say that someone specially beat, for example, in Kharkov. However, there is one video where a man, a Ukrainian, shows a hit in his house. And he directly says that the shells of the Grad flew from the city center. And this is confirmed by his neighbors. What does it say?

1) Multiple rocket launchers (this gun hits the area, fires 40 shells in less than a minute) were located in the Center of Kharkov. By the way, this fact in itself could provoke return fire on them.
2) From these installations, the Ukrainian military tried to fire at the outskirts of Kharkov or some targets outside the city. However, due to some reasons (maybe range limitation, gunner's lack of experience, expiration date of shells), the shelling took place not at targets, but at residential buildings on the outskirts of the city.

And this is not an isolated case.

In addition, I can say that I personally examined one of the attacks on a civilian object in Donetsk. I did it of course from photographs, maps and panoramas. But I was able to determine the place where the shelling came from. This became possible due to the fact that the photographs showed the place and direction of arrival. It turned out that the shelling was from a sector where only Ukrainian troops could be located. How to explain it... I don't know. It was a cafe.

Despite the fact that I give examples where the Ukrainian side is to blame, I do not want to show the exceptional fault of one side. Dense fire is conducted in both directions.

[Warenwolf]

I am noting that you are ignoring most of my post and have focused on one incident and then trying to divert by implying that Ukrainians are the ones shelling themselves*. I am not gonna fall for that.

Again - we have witness accounts and technical accounts of Russians committing war crimes on Ukrainian population and I am not just talking about shelling of power plants during winter time (which you also lie about when implying they cause no or limited civilian suffering).

Your attempts to explain away these are not only the evidence of total moral decay in Russia but also further evidence on why we should double our support for Ukrainian war effort. Time for talk with Kremlin is over - this is the time for bullets.

[jlehtone]

Now imagine: a cruise missile is flying, an anti-aircraft defense missile is launched after it, but loses its target. Where will she fly next? Either it will self-destruct or fly down. Following the example of Poland, we already see that self-destruction is far from always. This version is supported by indirect facts:
1) Such hits happen just during the periods of flight of cruise missiles.
2) The Ukrainian media never shows what flew into the house. Only consequences.
3) The consequences of hitting a house in such cases are much less than those that occur after a cruise missile hits. And this is also logical, because the mass of the warhead of a cruise missile is much greater than that of an anti-aircraft missile.

Well, one more thing (second version, other side of medal). A missile that was shot down by air defense over a city will certainly fall on this city.

And yes, I do not want to justify anyone. War is scary and there are always casualties. It is very difficult to avoid casualties among civilians. But let's not blame just one side.

Thank you for confirming that Russia bombards Ukraine with missiles. Without that hostile action there would be no need to do air defence.
Thank you for admitting that there is no justification for that bombardment.

[fiksal]

Although in the US I can cite those who sharply criticize the authorities. I love the Fox News editions of Tucker Carlson. By the way, it is difficult for me to give an analogue to him in Russia. He seems to be unique.

I have been down this road, I have little in common with you. Even less we can discuss concerning this war (not special operation).

I see all the news from 1TV, I know everything you are saying.

So.

Tucker is a good example of US version of a white supremacists, though not the smartest one. Of course you, Russians like him, and of course you bring up conspiracies around Trump and Biden. US fake news and Russian propaganda do share a lot of stories. US has however free press, but not all press is real news, like the Fox News.

[mr.WHO]

Another Perun video - this time with detailed breakdown about ammo production and logistics:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=deK98IeTjfY

[Falcrack]

Happy New Year! What are your predictions for the war in Ukraine in 2023?

I predict that Ukraine will continue to gain ground, and Russia will start to press the panic button. That means more mobilization, more misery for the Russian people, more of their economy sacrificed for the sake of this stupid war. It will become unsustainable for Russia, alone, or even with the help of Iran, to hope for any kind of victory.

I wonder whether at some point China will start sending significant military aid to Russia. That could really heat things up. China may realize that if Russia loses outright, then there will be chaos on its border with a Russian civil war. They probably do not want their major ally to disintegrate, especially if they feel they will need this ally to support them in their own imperial ambitions of conquest.

If China feels they can use Russia as their personal gas station (since the West will be buying up less and less Russian gas, so Russian gas will be cheap), perhaps they may not care so much about losing the West as a trading partner and choose to invade Taiwan anyways.

I feel that a major world war is yet to come, and it will involve China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea against the democratic nations of the world. The war in Ukraine is just setting the conditions for this to happen. Whether that happens this year, or next, I do not know, but I think it is coming.