racketboy.com

I've had my eye on the BBC website all day and it's still not confirmed. The top news stories are still about a defecting Tory MP and the fucking Great British Bake Off.

Admittedly it looks well dodgy but by the same token reports of Russian troops supporting the Pro-Russian Ukrainian forces have dated back to the initial conflict in the Crimea. Any invasion proper would surely target Kiev?

Sload Soap wrote:I've had my eye on the BBC website all day and it's still not confirmed. The top news stories are still about a defecting Tory MP and the fucking Great British Bake Off.

Admittedly it looks well dodgy but by the same token reports of Russian troops supporting the Pro-Russian Ukrainian forces have dated back to the initial conflict in the Crimea. Any invasion proper would surely target Kiev?

Here's what is getting reported in the US: http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/28/world/europe/ukraine-crisis/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Russia's military actions in eastern Ukraine "must cease immediately," British Prime Minister David Cameron said Thursday.

Well, at least Cameron's not watching the Great British Bake Off...

Ack wrote:

Russia's military actions in eastern Ukraine "must cease immediately," British Prime Minister David Cameron said Thursday.

Well, at least Cameron's not watching the Great British Bake Off...

He's been up in Scotland giving them the "Better off together" spiel. I wonder if Adam was there, rotten tomatoes poised and ready.

The beeb has this picture imbedded in their article on Ukraine but it seems to state that the Russian forces moved in last week. Is this how invasions are done now, less Blitzkrieg, more casual saunter?

Well, think of it like this: Russia's military can crush the Ukraine's military. This isn't a question. So why does Russia need a blitzkrieg of some kind, where it will win rapidly but risk a sudden reactionary retaliation from the EU, the US, NATO, the UN, and so on, when it can just ease its way in, escalating bit by bit, letting public fears in rival states ease off before pushing in more troops? It's a slow invasion, but one that doesn't raise as much public interest and therefore doesn't get as much attention.

Ack wrote:It's a slow invasion

Exactly right. It's a melassekrieg.

Yeah, it certainly seems that way.

Welp, back into the fallout shelter for me.

Taken from the BBC:

German Chancellor Angela Merkel has announced the European Council will discuss taking further sanctions against Russia during a summit on Saturday.

ooooh not more sanctions. I'm pretty sure the Russian army will turn around and run back to Moscow if they learn that their general can't use his VISA anymore.

British Prime Minister David Cameron warned that if Russia failed to find a political solution, "she should be in no doubt that there will be further consequences"

Like what Davy? You're going to raise the tone of your voice at Mr Putin?

French President Francois Hollande said it would be "intolerable" if Russian troops were in Ukraine, and demanded Russia stop sending aid to the rebels.

Since they have the brand new ship you sold to them and refused to restrict delivery of, I think they can spare some aid for the rebels.

Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski called the deployment of Russian troops an "aggression" and said international action was needed

Only normal reply you can give to Russian Hitler, but unfortunately Poland it too poor to matter in the debate.

ZeroAX wrote:Russian Hitler

I'm sorry, this made me laugh. There already was a Russian Hitler; his name was Stalin. Referring to Putin as "Stalin Reborn" would have been much better.

MrPopo wrote:I'm sorry, this made me laugh. There already was a Russian Hitler; his name was Stalin. Referring to Putin as "Stalin Reborn" would have been much better.

Stalin and Hitler were very different. With Hitler, at least the Germans were "having a good time". Same for Russians under Putin. Both Hitler and Putin were/are loved by their own people. It's Social Nationalism 101.

On the other hand the only way Stalin could hold on to power was through absolute fear. There's an urban legend about his death. Apparently he might have survived if his guards would go to check on him in the morning, but everyone was so afraid of waking him up in case he chose to stay in bed longer, that by the time they found the guts to do it, he was dead. Of course I have no idea what the source of this urban legend is, but you know....smoke without fire and shit.


Now if you're talking about total number of dead people, yeah they are probably on par.

ZeroAX wrote:Now if you're talking about total number of dead people, yeah they are probably on par.

Actually that's a tough one to quantify since they were both involved in the eastern front of WWII. Whose body count do you put that on?

And his death wasn't near as cool as Rasputin's. Most brutally awesome death in Russia ever.