Ukraine and the Russian invasion, 2022-24
- Thread starter kebabking
- Start date
Ĝasper
Well-Known Member
Why's Trudeau putting on a Slavic accent to say "Hello Volodomir"?
keybored
Well done. You remember cat good.
He's got form.
Yossarian
⏭️
The39thStep
Urban critical thinker
Lengthy but fascinating article on the Nuzhin issue on the BBC Russian site which covers a host of issues about the subject, Wagner, and how Ukraine negotiates exchanges of prisoners ( needs translation which you can do via Chrome)
"An interlocutor of the BBC in Kyiv, who previously took part in organizing prisoner exchanges and is familiar with how this is happening now, said that the Ukrainian GUR (Intelligence Department of the Ministry of Defense) is entering into negotiations on three lines - with the Russian General Staff, the leadership of the self-proclaimed DPR , as well as with the "Prigozhinsky" when it comes to prisoners or the bodies of those killed in the Bakhmut direction."
"In the case of Nuzhin, a BBC source says, negotiations allegedly went on with representatives of PMCs, and "very good conditions" were offered for the former convict from the Russian side.
How many Ukrainian soldiers were returned from captivity in exchange for Nuzhin, the BBC interlocutor does not know exactly, but explains that for Ukraine the priority is the return of their prisoners, and "what the Russians will do with the Russians is your Russian problems" .
www.bbc.com
"An interlocutor of the BBC in Kyiv, who previously took part in organizing prisoner exchanges and is familiar with how this is happening now, said that the Ukrainian GUR (Intelligence Department of the Ministry of Defense) is entering into negotiations on three lines - with the Russian General Staff, the leadership of the self-proclaimed DPR , as well as with the "Prigozhinsky" when it comes to prisoners or the bodies of those killed in the Bakhmut direction."
"In the case of Nuzhin, a BBC source says, negotiations allegedly went on with representatives of PMCs, and "very good conditions" were offered for the former convict from the Russian side.
How many Ukrainian soldiers were returned from captivity in exchange for Nuzhin, the BBC interlocutor does not know exactly, but explains that for Ukraine the priority is the return of their prisoners, and "what the Russians will do with the Russians is your Russian problems" .
"Тот, кто нам тело отдаст, по-любому будет виновный". История жизни и смерти Евгения Нужина, забитого кувалдой - BBC News Русская служба
В ночь на 13 ноября в соцсетях появилось видео, на котором мужчину, вернувшегося из украинского плена, забивают кувалдой. Этим мужчиной был Евгений Нужин - бывший заключенный, завербованный "ЧВК Вагнера" для войны в Украине. Попав в плен, он говорил, что сдался добровольно, но в итоге был...
www.bbc.com
Indeliblelink
\......👁&👁......./
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
It'd be a courtesy to say what's in that video so people know before clicking the link
I stopped myself with that one.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
The word of Sin is RestrictionI stopped myself with that one.
friedaweed
Me and me girl named Jane
I don't see the problem with revisiting old ground in a thread.
This thread is neigh 640 pages long now and folk will dip in and out and it is a discussion that some may come to later in the development of the war.
I've followed the thread from day one but having only recently read some of the the historical stuff on NATO, and the fall of the former soviet union I have actually found it really interesting. I also value the knowledge and insight that a number of posters on this thread have so much so that I would like to engage with their thoughts about what their views are about some of what I've read, but to be honest the willy waving that goes on here just puts you off.
I don't have a massively informed opinion on some of these things but I know that in order to bolster my opinion it would help me from engaging in discussion with people who's views I'd benefit from hearing IYSWIM.
If people can't ask questions that revisit previously discussed areas on a 600 page thread without being shouted down then it's not a discussion its just a "We did this 6 months ago" closed shop.
Where's the scope for advance dialogue and creating a shared consensus in that? Where's the actual 'Ongoing' discussion?
It seems it's OK to have a few pages of calling each other dickwads and wankstains but it's verboten to revisit themes and concepts that have previously been discussed by the main contributors of the discussion.
Wasn't this why a lot of board members historically said they stopped contributing to P&P and something we've said we'd sort out numerous times over the years?
Just asking like
Anyway, I found this an interesting read.
nsarchive.gwu.edu
If anyone can recommend anything else without sending me that old Google meme I'd appreciate it.
This thread is neigh 640 pages long now and folk will dip in and out and it is a discussion that some may come to later in the development of the war.
I've followed the thread from day one but having only recently read some of the the historical stuff on NATO, and the fall of the former soviet union I have actually found it really interesting. I also value the knowledge and insight that a number of posters on this thread have so much so that I would like to engage with their thoughts about what their views are about some of what I've read, but to be honest the willy waving that goes on here just puts you off.
I don't have a massively informed opinion on some of these things but I know that in order to bolster my opinion it would help me from engaging in discussion with people who's views I'd benefit from hearing IYSWIM.
If people can't ask questions that revisit previously discussed areas on a 600 page thread without being shouted down then it's not a discussion its just a "We did this 6 months ago" closed shop.
Where's the scope for advance dialogue and creating a shared consensus in that? Where's the actual 'Ongoing' discussion?
It seems it's OK to have a few pages of calling each other dickwads and wankstains but it's verboten to revisit themes and concepts that have previously been discussed by the main contributors of the discussion.
Wasn't this why a lot of board members historically said they stopped contributing to P&P and something we've said we'd sort out numerous times over the years?
Just asking like
Anyway, I found this an interesting read.
NATO Expansion: What Gorbachev Heard | National Security Archive
Western leaders gave multiple assurances against NATO expansion to Gorbachev in 1990-1991 according to declassified American, Russian, British, Germans documents
nsarchive.gwu.edu
If anyone can recommend anything else without sending me that old Google meme I'd appreciate it.
Last edited:
nogojones
spelling is overrated
There was that "agreement", but there was also an agreement that if Ukraine gave up their pretty big stockpile of nuclear weapons to Russia, their security would be guaranteed, by the USA, Russia and the UK.I don't see the problem with revisiting old ground in a thread.
This thread is neigh 640 pages long now and folk will dip in and out and it is a discussion that some may come to later in the development of the war.
I've followed the thread from day one but having only recently read some of the the historical stuff on NATO, and the fall of the former soviet union I have actually found it really interesting. I also value the knowledge and insight that a number of posters on this thread have so much so that would like to engage with their thoughts about what their views are about some of what I've read, but to be honest the willy waving that goes on here just puts you off.
I don't have a massively informed opinion on some of these things but I know that in order to bolster my opinion it would help me from engaging in discussion with people who's views I'd benefit from engaging with IYSWIM.
If people can't ask questions that revisit previously discussed areas on a 600 page thread without being shouted down then it's not a discussion its just a "We did this 6 months ago" closed shop.
Where's the scope for advance dialogue and creating a shared consensus in that? Where's the actual 'Ongoing' discussion?
It seems it's OK to have a few pages of calling each other dickwads and wankstains but it's verboten to revisit themes and concepts that have previously been discussed by the main contributors of the discussion.
Wasn't this why a lot of board members historically said they stopped contributing to P&P and something we've said we'd sort out numerous times over the years?
Just asking like
Anyway, I found this an interesting read.
NATO Expansion: What Gorbachev Heard | National Security Archive
Western leaders gave multiple assurances against NATO expansion to Gorbachev in 1990-1991 according to declassified American, Russian, British, Germans documents
If anyone can recommend anything else without sending me that old Google meme I'd appreciate it.
Budapest Memorandum - Wikipedia
But that agreement was as solid as agreements in P&P not to call each other names.
friedaweed
Me and me girl named Jane
Thanks mate. I have been reading about that as well in some Chomsky stuff on Clinton but not that wiki page specifically.There was that "agreement", but there was also an agreement that if Ukraine gave up their pretty big stockpile of nuclear weapons to Russia, their security would be guaranteed, by the USA, Russia and the UK.
Budapest Memorandum - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
But that agreement was as solid as agreements in P&P not to call each other names.
Appreciated, yer cunt!
nogojones
spelling is overrated
wanker
friedaweed
Me and me girl named Jane
What's wrong with just saying why you don't think it is NATO's fault and explaining why? Shirley that's more of a discussion. I know there's personality issues and beef drippin attached but it would be so much more interesting to read to a layperson if people just engaged with the posters position.when was the agreement to not call each other names in P&P and it Sub Forums ya Cockwomble
plus not a lot of name calling last night just people get frustrated at someone "going its all nato fault prove me otherwise"
and saying maybe search this massive thread a little
cesare
shady's dreams ♥
If it was a new poster or someone that didn't usually post in P&P I'd be right behind that. But he's not been away that long and is a long-term regular. When I returned after ages I didn't jump in expecting loads of explanations and disrupting shit.
Ax^
Silly Rabbit
what personal insults did i give that the reason i'm confused
lot of good post happened last night and it was more than just a pile on with the other side
going "no its natos fault
, and no i will not catch up on anything "with the poster in question never answering why he thought the Ukrainians did not deserve the same conditions as every other nation aside from Russia
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
I think that, when someone comes onto the thread making wild claims, people point out that they're wild claims, and that someone then DEMANDS that they explain, it's not surprising that such people might think "You know what? Fuck you."
It might not be big, or clever. But it's understandable.
The39thStep
Urban critical thinker
Setting a very high bar there pal
Ax^
Silly Rabbit
having a lay person asking questions is fine enough
but as always you get more flies with honey than vinegar
as with almost all p&p threads if you don't come across as blatantly abrasive then you get more out of the discussion
and screw you i don't want to read anything is not a good idea
but as always you get more flies with honey than vinegar
as with almost all p&p threads if you don't come across as blatantly abrasive then you get more out of the discussion
and screw you i don't want to read anything is not a good idea
Kevbad the Bad
Amiable Bowel Syndrome
The trouble with the 'it's all NATO's fault' viewpoint, which certainly might be worth talking about, is that some holding that view are pro Putin. Others may be pro Putin but pretend otherwise. I'm not saying that applies to many people on here, but places like Stop the War have some like that. If people take that view it would also be a good idea to take note of the counter arguments. A section of the American Marxist left is particularly bad at this, people like Pilger too. They betray their bias, and ignorance of Russian and Ukrainian history, in their eagerness to put all the blame onto the great satan, the USA.
friedaweed
Me and me girl named Jane
Fair do's and I respect your view on that and I'm not specifically sticking up for anyone here, I honestly never have any idea who the current antagonist is, it's never on my radar. It's just in my head that it's easier to engage with the subject rather than the poster I suppose for the benefit of other people reading the thread. A bit 'play the ball not the man' to coin a terrible footy related blokey analogy.
what personal insults did i give that the reason i'm confused
lot of good post happened last night and it was more than just a pile on with the other side
going "no its natos fault
with the poster in question never answering why he thought the Ukrainians did not deserve the same conditions as every other nation aside from Russia
I wasn't specifically implying you were insulting anyone chief. It just seems to develop into a load of blurrrr when it would be easier to react to the point being raised.
I'd of actually read with interest the debate on the position being taken rather than the inevitable escalation to thread ban hammering personally.
Maybe I'm expecting too much
No offence meant x
Last edited:
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
That's where you went wrong
cesare
shady's dreams ♥
It was wrong for any annoying strategy, accepted.That's where you went wrong
friedaweed
Me and me girl named Jane
Thanks for that. That's kind of my point but I'm not always succinct at putting it across but it certainly is worth talking about.
Yeah but not everyone who reads the thread wants the taste of vinegar when they leave it. Give them some honey.having a lay person asking questions is fine enough
but as always you get more flies with honey than vinegar
as with almost all p&p threads if you don't come across as blatantly abrasive then you get more out of the discussion
and screw you i don't want to read anything is not a good idea
FTR I don't agree with that it's "all nato's fault" which is why it would be nice to hear why you also don't think that's the case.
cesare
shady's dreams ♥
Don't come the fucking innocent.Disrupting shit.
Obvs quite unlike this navel gazing you’re participating in.
friedaweed
Me and me girl named Jane
Yeah maybe my serotonin levels are quite high today and I'm expecting more from life. I have been burning the odd joss stick as well lately
Similar threads
