The Russians Are Coming, The Russians Are Coming!

[wilberforce15]

You should try reading them. Otherwise they're paper weights.

You just learned about the Lusitania, but smart people have known the truth for 100 years.

 

[wilberforce15]

Is your position that everyone uses human shields to get the rhetorical high ground, including us, but that the Ukraine doesn't?

 

[vantexan]

Do you think it was random luck that the enemy was right about the Lusitania?

And we just happened to be using women and children as shields on that exact ship?

Yes I do. The Lusitania wasn't the only ship sunk. And I don't think the women and children were used as shields. If everyone knew the war materials were on there then the women and children wouldn't have got on that boat. Yah, the Germans know we're supplying their enemies with this ship and they've been sinking other ships but surely they won't destroy us with all the women and children onboard. It strains credulity. Obviously what you read are conspiracy theories.

 

[wilberforce15]

Yes I do. The Lusitania wasn't the only ship sunk. And I don't think the women and children were used as shields. If everyone knew the war materials were on there then the women and children wouldn't have got on that boat. Yah, the Germans know we're supplying their enemies with this ship and they've been sinking other ships but surely they won't destroy us with all the women and children onboard. It strains credulity. Obviously what you read are conspiracy theories.

The women and children did not know. Correct.

They were still used as human shields and rhetorical devices by our government.

The Germans didn't hit a single errant target that we know about. And for the last 100 years, people call folks like me conspiracy theorists and wackjobs, and then still are incredulous even after we are proven thoroughly right. That's the power of the propaganda that has taken over you.

Our government has not just used human shields, but has had plans made at the highest level to intentionally kill our own soldiers to justify invading a preferred target. These aren't conspiracy theories. It's plain-Jane, documented fact.

Ukraine knows how this war is fought. And it is fought with headlines more than bombs. They are winning the headline war because their propaganda machine is very good (and run by us...)

 

[wilberforce15]

The human shields weren't so much to deter Germans sinking it. That was possible. But not probable. You're right.

The women and children were put on there for the purposes of being war propaganda for us when they were killed.

That's how evil we were 100 years ago.

What's happening now?

 

[vantexan]

Is your position that everyone uses human shields to get the rhetorical high ground, including us, but that the Ukraine doesn't?

It's my theory that Ukraine didn't have a large military to begin with and the bulk of their fighting force are civilians. Civilians who live in apartments. You may not be aware but most people over there live in apartments. Russia randomly and sporadically attacked civilian neighborhoods which were all apartment buildings. Why not just attack military installations? Fuel depots? Factories? Airport runways? Harbors? Do you think when the Russians destroyed that theater that had all those civilians inside it was because they were being fired upon? They dropped a bomb on it. Russia is trying to subdue the Ukrainians by destroying their cities. Not because some dude with a rifle opened up on them from an apartment window.

 

[wilberforce15]

It's my theory that Ukraine didn't have a large military to begin with and the bulk of their fighting force are civilians. Civilians who live in apartments. You may not be aware but most people over there live in apartments. Russia randomly and sporadically attacked civilian neighborhoods which were all apartment buildings. Why not just attack military installations? Fuel depots? Factories? Airport runways? Harbors? Do you think when the Russians destroyed that theater that had all those civilians inside it was because they were being fired upon? They dropped a bomb on it. Russia is trying to subdue the Ukrainians by destroying their cities. Not because some dude with a rifle opened up on them from an apartment window.

So, you are admitting that there are weapons and fighters and material in apartment buildings.

Why shoudln't the Russians bomb them, then?

Why would Ukrainians choose to place fighting men and material in civilian buildings with civilians in them?

Hmmmm? Why might they do that?

Oh, to get a headline when Russians bomb it.

 

[vantexan]

The women and children did not know. Correct.

They were still used as human shields and rhetorical devices by our government.

The Germans didn't hit a single errant target that we know about. And for the last 100 years, people call folks like me conspiracy theorists and wackjobs, and then still are incredulous even after we are proven thoroughly right. That's the power of the propaganda that has taken over you.

Our government has not just used human shields, but has had plans made at the highest level to intentionally kill our own soldiers to justify invading a preferred target. These aren't conspiracy theories. It's plain-Jane, documented fact.

Ukraine knows how this war is fought. And it is fought with headlines more than bombs. They are winning the headline war because their propaganda machine is very good (and run by us...)

It's conspiracy theories period. And the Russians didn't retreat because of headlines.

 

[wilberforce15]

It's conspiracy theories period. And the Russians didn't retreat because of headlines.

I just gave you everything you wanted. And you're still blind.

The Russians did retreat because of headlines.

Headlines generate sympathy. Sympathy generates better supplies and reinforcement.

Headlines are a force multiplier.

They aren't backing out from the headlines. They're backing out from what the headlines bring, which is material support. Gosh you're dense.

 

[vantexan]

So, you are admitting that there are weapons and fighters and material in apartment buildings.

Why shoudln't the Russians bomb them, then?

Why would Ukrainians choose to place fighting men and material in civilian buildings with civilians in them?

Hmmmm? Why might they do that?

Oh, to get a headline when Russians bomb it.

A man with a rifle in an apartment building wouldn't have anything to shoot at if the Russians didn't enter those neighborhoods. It's called a war crime attacking civilians.

 

[wilberforce15]

A man with a rifle in an apartment building wouldn't have anything to shoot at if the Russians didn't enter those neighborhoods. It's called a war crime attacking civilians.

I didn't say the Russians should invade.

I didn't say they were right. I didn't say Ukrainians were wrong to fight back.

A man with a rifle isn't a civilian. He is a combatant. Russia shouldn't have invaded. But bombing a building full of war material and fighting men isn't a war crime.

 

[wilberforce15]

Ukrainians put the fighting men in those buildings for the purposes of getting them killed by Russian bombs, so that they could have a headline.

This is not hard. It's actually quite simple, smart, and effective, and it's why every military has done it in every war for 100 years.

 

[vantexan]

I just gave you everything you wanted. And you're still blind.

The Russians did retreat because of headlines.

Headlines generate sympathy. Sympathy generates better supplies and reinforcement.

Headlines are a force multiplier.

They aren't backing out from the headlines. They're backing out from what the headlines bring, which is material support. Gosh you're dense.

Are you under the impression the Ukrainians are better armed than the Russians? They still haven't received everything we promised them. They still don't control their skies. The Ukrainians are kicking ass. You know why? They have a lot more men and even if the Ukrainians are mostly armed with rifles those bullets still kill people. Just like the Sioux and Cheyenne at the Little Big Horn. We had hundreds, they had 10,000.

 

[wilberforce15]

Are you under the impression the Ukrainians are better armed than the Russians? They still haven't received everything we promised them. They still don't control their skies. The Ukrainians are kicking ass. You know why? They have a lot more men and even if the Ukrainians are mostly armed with rifles those bullets still kill people. Just like the Sioux and Cheyenne at the Little Big Horn. We had hundreds, they had 10,000.

Of course they're not better armed. But they are getting more support than ever, because of the headlines. The headlines bring the cavalry.

You are changing the subject.

Why did Ukraine put fighting men and material in civilian buildings?

There is only one good answer.

 

[rickyb]

It wasn't NATO genius.

Im just reading about greece and they eben mentioned nato in afghanistan i believe

 

[rickyb]

You're defending Russia and have been since the start.

No and ur just lying again

 

[vantexan]

I didn't say the Russians should invade.

I didn't say they were right. I didn't say Ukrainians were wrong to fight back.

A man with a rifle isn't a civilian. He is a combatant. Russia shouldn't have invaded. But bombing a building full of war material and fighting men isn't a war crime.

There are still 35,000,000 million Ukrainians who didn't flee. Most of them live in apartments. Going into civilian neighborhoods is about trying to cowl them into surrendering. And they're slaughtering civilians to do it.

 

[wilberforce15]

There are still 35,000,000 million Ukrainians who didn't flee. Most of them live in apartments. Going into civilian neighborhoods is about trying to cowl them into surrendering. And they're slaughtering civilians to do it.

So why would Ukraine put fighting men and material in those apartments?

 

[wilberforce15]

The old question of who benefits is a helpful guide, here.

Ukraine has more to gain from headlines of slaughtered civilians than Russia has to gain from actually slaughtering them.

Therefore, suspicion and skepticism is the only correct take.

 

[vantexan]

Im just reading about greece and they eben mentioned nato in afghanistan i believe

We had a "coalition of the willing" who went into Afghanistan. Not NATO. By the way under Article 5 of the NATO charter an attack on one member is an attack on all. 9/11 would certainly qualify.