Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

calodo2003 said:
Good article, but doesn’t mention the drugs.

I know I’d sure as shit have to be on something potent if I was on the front lines.
Click to expand...


I'm interested to know what?


I've gone through the lot...

Coke... Nah, sketchy as feck, easier to sneak out the back and find a hooker

Mandy... Nope.... Sleep through the lot then cuddle everyone? Not a great weapon...

Acid... Not a chance.... No point laughing at the opposition while having three discussions in your head at the same time and wondering what being normal is like...m

Weed.....hahaha .. Really? First sketchy and paranoid everyone is after you then not giving a feck if they are or not and wanting to just sit and chat with them all..

Speed.... Nobody does speed anymore.... But if they did they would run the feck away... Quickly....

Heroin/opiates....... Yup, not happening.... And if it did, would you give a feck? Or be ablemtomdo anything about it?....


Ket...... You would fight a war, but not a real one, and not one in your vicinity because you have no concept of where you are or what you are doing.



So... Personally, I don't think drugs aid a soldier in the art of killing.... But definitely more in the art of getting out of there.
 
langster said:
I'm interested to know what?


I've gone through the lot...

Coke... Nah, sketchy as feck, easier to sneak out the back and find a hooker

Mandy... Nope.... Sleep through the lot then cuddle everyone? Not a great weapon...

Acid... Not a chance.... No point laughing at the opposition while having three discussions in your head at the same time and wondering what being normal is like...m

Weed.....hahaha .. Really? First sketchy and paranoid everyone is after you then not giving a feck if they are or not and wanting to just sit and chat with them all..

Speed.... Nobody does speed anymore.... But if they did they would run the feck away... Quickly....

Heroin/opiates....... Yup, not happening.... And if it did, would you give a feck? Or be ablemtomdo anything about it?....


Ket...... You would fight a war, but not a real one, and not one in your vicinity because you have no concept of where you are or what you are doing.



So... Personally, I don't think drugs aid a soldier in the art of killing.... But definitely more in the art of getting out of there.
Click to expand...
Meth like the Nazis did. Tramadol to aid in coming down & pain relief like ISIS does.

Coke if no meth.
 
langster said:
The US dropped more bombs on Laos than Germany and Japan combined in WWII. And Laos wasn't even involved in the fecking Vietnam war. The country is still struggling to deal with all the unexploded bombs over 50.years on and the deaths keep stacking up.

It's fecking insane.
Click to expand...
Yes, it's insane. Few people knew about it.

Between 1964 and 1973, the United States dropped about 2.5 million tons of ordnance on Laos during 580,000 bombing sorties—equivalent to a planeload of bombs every eight minutes, 24 hours a day, for nine years—making Laos the most intensively bombarded country per capita in history when not in war with anyone in particular for it. It's no surprise that there are many anti-Americans in those Southeast Asian countries, even though they typically dislike China.
 
Last edited:
Why did USA bomb Laos? Were they missing the target or is there something else to it?
 
ExoduS said:
Why did USA bomb Laos? Were they missing the target or is there something else to it?
Click to expand...

Anti communism. It was in support of the government against the communist opposition and also the help that communist Vietnam had from the communist laosians through the border
 
That's why in most parts of the world, especially Asia, the war is known as the 2nd Indo-China war, not The Vietnam war as the US likes to call it. Part of the reason it's called the Indo-China war is because the US heavily bombed and attacked other countries than just Vietnam. Cambodia and Laos were absolutely battered and it's estimated up to 300,000 Cambodians and as many as 62000 Laosians died during the conflict, which was supposed to just be between the USA and the North Vietnamese.

It's also estimated that over 20,000 Laotsians have been killed by unexploded bombs and land mines since the war ended.
 
langster said:
That's why in most parts of the world, especially Asia, the war is known as the 2nd Indo-China war, not The Vietnam war as the US likes to call it. Part of the reason it's called the Indo-China war is because the US heavily bombed and attacked other countries than just Vietnam. Cambodia and Laos were absolutely battered and it's estimated up to 300,000 Cambodians and as many as 62000 Laosians died during the conflict, which was supposed to just be between the USA and the North Vietnamese.

It's also estimated that over 20,000 Laotsians have been killed by unexploded bombs and land mines since the war ended.
Click to expand...

And that is why there are so much grudges against american belicism and it is brought up to so many whataboutism/hypocrisy conversations because they had been fecking the entire world for the entirety of the XXth century
 
100k wasted (killed or crippled) over the ruins of some town that used to host 50k people:
That’s all you need to know about Russia. Savages.
 
A top Ukrainian general called Bakhmut an impregnable fortress.


I'd love to know what's actually going on.
 
langster said:
Is that a confirmed/accurate number?
Click to expand...
Probably not confirmed, I don't know how they would be able to confirm them when not even the Russians seems to count or even remove their dead from the battlefield. I guess it's estimates by the US intelligence based on information directly from the Ukrainians and indirect information gathered from the Russian side.

Edit: or what @VorZakone said.
 
the hea said:
Here's the clip
Click to expand...

Even if this number is not accurate, it’s fair to assume that the losses sustained are gigantic. And yet, we still don’t see any real resistance inside Russia. That’s the thing that gets me. The people there seem to not give a shit about Ukrainians and the genocide happening in the name of Russia. And they also seem to not give a shit about their own people getting slaughtered.
I‘m starting to understand more and more what people like Kasparov mean when they talk about Russia. They seem to be supportive of all that’s happening. At least the majority.
And looking at the huge Russian diaspora here in Germany, it’s the same picture. We see next to no protests from them against Putin or the war. Instead my city, which has a huge Russian community, is full of pro war graffiti. They are at best indifferent towards the war. At worst very supportive of it. I can’t wrap my head around it.
 
HTG said:
Even if this number is not accurate, it’s fair to assume that the losses sustained are gigantic. And yet, we still don’t see any real resistance inside Russia. That’s the thing that gets me. The people there seem to not give a shit about Ukrainians and the genocide happening in the name of Russia. And they also seem to not give a shit about their own people getting slaughtered.
I‘m starting to understand more and more what people like Kasparov mean when they talk about Russia. They seem to be supportive of all that’s happening. At least the majority.
And looking at the huge Russian diaspora here in Germany, it’s the same picture. We see next to no protests from them against Putin or the war. Instead my city, which has a huge Russian community, is full of pro war graffiti. They are at best indifferent towards the war. At worst very supportive of it. I can’t wrap my head around it.
Click to expand...

I get that completely. The Russians do have a completely different mindset to the rest of the world. Or most of it at least. I keep thinking back to the battle of Stalingrad during WWII when one was given a gun and the guy next to you was given a 5 bullet magazine and told to march on and either hand the ammo over or obtain a gun and use it yourself.

Massively outgunned they were just walking in to their death and they knew it and when it became to much and they turned around to retreat or run they were then shot by their own soldiers. They even kept the better weapons to shoot their own retreating troops than give them to those trying to advance forward in the city.

It's just so difficult to comprehend no matter which way you look at it.

Surely those signing up now cant be happy to be used as Cannon fodder? Don't they even question what or why they are fighting? And isn't there any form of self preservation at all that makes them question the tactics etc?!

It's just unfathomable to me. Especially as in today's age with TV coverage, modern films and computer games, people understand things more and are certainly more exposed to it. Surely that would mean more caution or ideas etc, rather than just gung ho running in blindly hoping to outnumber the enemy which is what still seems to be happening from the Russians.

It's crazy. If someone had said to me before the war started that that was the Russians tactics and told me the losses they have incurred so far I would have said you were batshit crazy.
 
4bars said:
And that is why there are so much grudges against american belicism and it is brought up to so many whataboutism/hypocrisy conversations because they had been fecking the entire world for the entirety of the XXth century
Click to expand...

And it’s as recent as USA in Afghanistan. Some of the exact same tactics the Russians are using were used but now a bunch of Americans are surprised or it’s whataboutism to call it out.
 
shamans said:
And it’s as recent as USA in Afghanistan. Some of the exact same tactics the Russians are using were used but now a bunch of Americans are surprised or it’s whataboutism to call it out.
Click to expand...

How is it as recent? The Vietnam war ended almost 50 years ago. That is closer to the first world war than to today. And I don't think the US committed atrocities as grave as the Russian ones in Afghanistan.

On a sidenote, I don't think democratic countries could wage wars like Russia does in the Social Media age. The protests on the Vietnam war were already huge, no government would survive that these days
 
maniak said:
Bombing civilians.
Click to expand...

Not entirely sure modern NATO tactics resemble anything the Russian’s have done in Ukraine… Not sure I’ve ever seen images of completely destroyed cities having been shelled into oblivion over the course of 9 months as a result of NATO or the US in my lifetime.

Have seen the Russians do it a few times now though. Grozny, Syria and now Ukraine.

Russian tactics are uniquely barbaric and blunt in this modern age.
 
shamans said:
Siding with local warlords, known pedophiles, spreading propaganda and installing a puppet government that no one cared for evident by the lack of support when we pulled out?
Click to expand...
I dont see any relevance to Ukraine. Although one thing seems true about Afghani people, they really didn't care.
 
Spark said:
Not sure I’ve ever seen images of completely destroyed cities having been shelled into oblivion over the course of 9 months as a result of NATO or the US in my lifetime.
Click to expand...

You should check out scenes from Raqqa and Mosul after the anti-ISIS operations at the end of the last decade.
 
Spark said:
Not entirely sure modern NATO tactics resemble anything the Russian’s have done in Ukraine… Not sure I’ve ever seen images of completely destroyed cities having been shelled into oblivion over the course of 9 months as a result of NATO or the US in my lifetime.

Have seen the Russians do it a few times now though. Grozny, Syria and now Ukraine.

Russian tactics are uniquely barbaric and blunt in this modern age.
Click to expand...
Maybe not on the same scale, but from the perspective of those bombed, not sure how much difference it makes. Civilian areas are/were regularly bombed and thousands died. Their hatred towards the US is understandable and legitimate.
 
langster said:
I keep thinking back to the battle of Stalingrad during WWII when one was given a gun and the guy next to you was given a 5 bullet magazine and told to march on and either hand the ammo over or obtain a gun and use it yourself.

Massively outgunned they were just walking in to their death and they knew it and when it became to much and they turned around to retreat or run they were then shot by their own soldiers. They even kept the better weapons to shoot their own retreating troops than give them to those trying to advance forward in the city.
Click to expand...
Order No. 227(Not one step back) was never really used on a big scale. It was a order aimed at commanders and not at normal soldiers which is a common tactic in many armies throughout history.

In the end it was mostly just propaganda from Stalin who later dropped the policy as it didn’t achieve much.
 
Last edited:
Sweet Square said:
Order No. 227(Not one step back) was never really used on a big scale. It was a order aimed at commanders and not at normal soldiers which is a common tactic in many armies throughout history.

In the end it was mostly just propaganda from Stalin who later dropped the policy as it didn’t achieve much.
Click to expand...


Not surprised it didn't achieve much. My lad is doing his history A levels at college and chose WWII as one of his modules. He told me it was used more as a scare tactic, but I still can't unsee Enemy at the Gates and how it makes me feel. And Stalingrad was one of the times the Russians actually shot theirniwn who were retreating or deserting. Apparently that scene was filmed as accurately as possible with actual survivors aiding the filming. That might be why it's so harrowing.
 
langster said:
Not surprised it didn't achieve much. My lad is doing his history A levels at college and chose WWII as one of his modules. He told me it was used more as a scare tactic, but I still can't unsee Enemy at the Gates and how it makes me feel. And Stalingrad was one of the times the Russians actually shot theirniwn who were retreating or deserting. Apparently that scene was filmed as accurately as possible with actual survivors aiding the filming. That might be why it's so harrowing.
Click to expand...

You definitely should unsee Enemy at the Gates, as far as history goes. It's almost Braveheart levels of bad history.
 
shamans said:
Siding with local warlords, known pedophiles, spreading propaganda and installing a puppet government that no one cared for evident by the lack of support when we pulled out?
Click to expand...

The government there was Democratically elected in internationally recognized elections.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.