Us contractor denied mercenaries in Ukraine.

strawburry
I'm still waiting.

No problem...

Take your pick -

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Xcathdra

strawburry
I'm still waiting.

No problem...

Take your pick -

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Can you please show me where I (ME) objected to it, your claim was that I (ME) objected so back up your claim please.

Show me my post, and quote me where I (ME) objected to it.


Your claim (www.abovetopsecret.com...)

Xcathdra
A tactic you and others objected to with regards to Russian military units being a part of the invasion in Crimea. So, again, why should we accept this when you wont accept the other?

Emphasis mine.

Defend your claim that accused ME of objecting to this.

As you said "No problem." "Take your pick."

reply to post by strawburry


Yes I linked you to the 300 plus page thread on war un Ukraine where your position has been made clear, especially around the 290 page mark when it comes to Russian actions inside Ukraine.

You dismiss claims about Russian actions inside Ukraine / Crimea while justifying those very actions committed by Russia.

What part of my comment and your posts do you just not understand?

Xcathdra
reply to post by strawburry

 

Yes I linked you to the 300 plus page thread on war un Ukraine where your position has been made clear, especially around the 290 page mark when it comes to Russian actions inside Ukraine.

You dismiss claims about Russian actions inside Ukraine / Crimea while justifying those very actions committed by Russia.

What part of my comment and your posts do you just not understand?

Your claim , dont make me quote it again,

was that I (ME) objected to using SOCIAL MEDIA to IDENTIFY RUSSIAN MILITARY MEMBERS, I made NO SUCH CLAIM.

It should be easy for you to pick 1 out of 300 pages with MY OBJECTIONs so using SOCIAL MEDIA TO IDENTIFY MILITARY IN UKRAINE.

I know for a fact that you are talking bovine methane as I made no such objection. I have been on this site for 2 days, and not ONCE have I objected to that at all.

Simply linking a 300 page threat and spouting generalilities does not defend your claim. Your claim is pure rubbish. Undefendable rubbish, now you are even trying to step outside the bounds of your CLAIM by generalising.

BACK UP YOUR CLAIM like a MAN.

Xcathdra
and stop making excuses for Putin.

I mentioned nothing in regard to Putin in this thread.

However, about an hour ago I had pointed out how another member in another Ukraine related thread had posted that exact same line multiple times in a single post towards me, also just as irrelevant to the actual conversation. That same member has also gone to other threads on Ukraine yesterday, following my posts and accusing me of being a "Russian disinformation agent" several times .

Really makes me think about who may actually be "disinformation agents" around here.

reply to post by strawburry


reply to post by strawburry


Yes I linked you to the 300 plus page thread on war un Ukraine where your position has been made clear, especially around the 290 page mark when it comes to Russian actions inside Ukraine.

You dismiss claims about Russian actions inside Ukraine / Crimea while justifying those very actions committed by Russia.

What part of my comment and your posts do you just not understand?

Xcathdra
reply to post by strawburry

 

reply to post by strawburry

 

Yes I linked you to the 300 plus page thread on war un Ukraine where your position has been made clear, especially around the 290 page mark when it comes to Russian actions inside Ukraine.

You dismiss claims about Russian actions inside Ukraine / Crimea while justifying those very actions committed by Russia.

What part of my comment and your posts do you just not understand?

Then you should have no problem backing up your claim that I objected to using social media for identification of military in Ukraine. It was YOUR claim after all, not MINE.

Should be easy, according to you, to link and quote me a post where I objected to such.

Why can you not defend your claims? Please, prove me I am wrong.

Not up to the challenge? Ok, then retract your claim. I can accept that.

Vovin
I mentioned nothing in regard to Putin in this thread.

When you change your position on a topic because the facts you started using no longer support Putin's version of events / history, you are in fact defending Putin. Since all of the actions on the Russia side are coming thru him, and since you support his actions, you are in fact supporting Putin.

If you don't, then by all means feel free to point out what part of his actions you don't support and why?

Why is a YouTube video sufficient evidence to say American contractors are used in Russia without further investigation?

strawburry
Why can you not defend your claims?

I did and I pointed you to the thread where the position is made in addition to the specific block of posts where its obvious.
Since you are the one who made the posts im a bit confused as to why you are now trying to distance yourself from them?

Ironic that its ok to post a video from youtube with no corresponding context that must be the truth while pointing you to your posts is an absurdity.

Any other comments on the supposed video we are suppose to take at face value?

reply to post by strawburry



I did and I pointed you to the thread where the position is made in addition to the specific block of posts where its obvious.
Since you are the one who made the posts im a bit confused as to why you are now trying to distance yourself from them?

Ironic that its ok to post a video from youtube with no corresponding context that must be the truth while pointing you to your posts is an absurdity.

Any other comments on the supposed video we are suppose to take at face value

But feel free to continue to drag this thread off topic.

reply to post by strawburry


I pointed you to the answer. Your position in that thread supports the statement I made.

if you cannot see that it is not my fault. Maybe you should put more time and thought into your posts so as to convey a specific rather than a generality?

When you make comments that supports another members view / position, it in fact links you to that mindset, whether its intended or not depends entirely on how you phrase your response.

being the topic is what it is, clarity becomes even more of a requirement so something is not taken as it should not be.

Refute the facts and stop resorting to personal attacks.. It really is that simple. And for some one who has been here for only "2" days you sure had no problems attacking me personally. Maybe had you spent some more time discussing / debating and less time attacking, me might find common ground or understand each others position.

Why would a personal attack be appropriate in a discussion of Ukraine Russia and possibly a war?

Xcathdra

Vovin
I mentioned nothing in regard to Putin in this thread.

When you change your position on a topic because the facts you started using no longer support Putin's version of events / history, you are in fact defending Putin. Since all of the actions on the Russia side are coming thru him, and since you support his actions, you are in fact supporting Putin.

If you don't, then by all means feel free to point out what part of his actions you don't support and why?

Why is a YouTube video sufficient evidence to say American contractors are used in Russia without further investigation?

Where the bloody hell did I say that I am advocating on Putin's behalf?

I am not Russian, my cause has nothing to do with furthering Russian nationalism. And I do not really idolize Putin, although he is certainly the top politician in the world right now.

My cause is anti-fascism. This includes the neo-nazis threatening stability on the ground in Ukraine, along with the western deep state governments that bolster such movements to further their own geopolitical agendas.

And when I talk about countries as political entities, I am referring to the state, not the government. There's a huge difference. When I say Russia, I don't mean Putin.

Is that understood?

Vovin
Where the bloody hell did I say that I am advocating on Putin's behalf?

Your entire position / argument thus far has been in support of Russian actions 0 From the annexation of Crimea, to the dreamed up coup in Kiev.

when your position mimics Putin's, and you do nothing to make a distinction, what should be assumed? I find it improbable that you can take a position that is Putin's position and argue you don't support what he has done. It would be like supporting Adolph Hitler while arguing your not a NAZI.

At that point, the distinction is lost.

Vovin
I am not Russian, my cause has nothing to do with furthering Russian nationalism. And I do not really idolize Putin, although he is certainly the top politician in the world right now.

None of my posts have attacked anyone for having a nationality other than American or Russian. As a matter of fact it does not factor into my posts or my position. A person can be British and make an educated argument as to why Ireland should be a united country.

My issue comes in when people chose a position not based on facts, but because the country in question is one they don't like. Its like Frances foreign policy through the cold war. Pretty much any position the US took, the French government chose the other side. The bulk of those actions were not based on anything more than choosing the side they did simply because it was the opposite of the US position.

When we get into those mindsets, its becomes extremely dangerous. It means people are willing to overlook damning information simply because its focused on a country they don't like. They don't think about the broader ramifications or the fact that it could very well be applied inside against them later on down the road.

We see this argument unfolding with the Russian governments action towards Russian media outlets / Professors who voice disagreement with the Russian official position.

exactly at what point does the person supporting those actions become a criminal against the state while having the exact standard used on them? If Russia were to impose a tighter fire wall, preventing Russians from accessing this site, would those Russians on this site who support Russian actions be ok with the sudden restriction?

Vovin
My cause is anti-fascism. This includes the neo-nazis threatening stability on the ground in Ukraine, along with the western deep state governments that bolster such movements to further their own geopolitical agendas.

As is mine but I refuse to accept that every member of the Ukraine government is a fascist. Secondly, history deserves a proper place in these arguments - after all the US government was also considered terrorists by Britain.

Our issues was with the Crowns policies towards the colonies. Should that translate into every single member of the government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland being labeled a terrorist?

President Yanukovych's party in Parliament supported him. Then they stopped supporting him because they did not agree with his handling of the situation. Exactly how does it make those members fascists? Members of Parliament are in fact elected by the Ukrainian people so I also fail to see the argument of a coup.

Or are the labels based on nothing more than they didn't support the side of the argument you / others are on? Because they don't share your view, they are terrorists or fascists?

Vovin
And when I talk about countries as political entities, I am referring to the state, not the government. There's a huge difference. When I say Russia, I don't mean Putin.

Is that understood?

Its irrelevant... The leadership of a government is in fact representing their nation when they officially act. So while Putin ordered the Russian military invasion of Ukraine, Russia as a nation is held to account. A position others in this thread have taken when referring to actions taken by the United States.

Our Constitution actually states our President is the United States when dealing with foreign nations.

Does it mean the government, Obama or Putin, are acting with complete support of the population? NOPE. not even close.

That is the distinction that should be taken into account when crafting responses to whatever.

Vovin

TritonTaranis
Irony and hypocrisy

Sounds like when Russia said they didn't have any Russia troops on the ground in Crimea, and it sound like Russia don't like obstacles in the way of there plans

There only there on request of Ukrainian government to counter Russia spetnaz and agents destabilising Eastern Ukraine hardly there to annex and take over buildings

edit on 9-4-2014 by TritonTaranis because: (no reason given)

See the funny thing here is that you're claiming spetsnaz is acting as agents causing unrest. Right from the start you fail to even know what spestnaz means. Let me explain:

In Russia, there is the Federal Security Bureau. The FSB is in charge of many different branches of spooks, spies and special forces.

Spetsnaz is a term meaning "special operations". Spetsnaz brigades are under FSB command. Spetsnaz operatives are soldiers highly trained to engage ruthlessly in light arm combat against enemy operatives of similar caliber. Spetsnaz GRU and spetsnaz OMON have different jurisdictions (one is deployed in Russian territory, the other is for external ops).

I am?

Lol I don't think so what do you take me for?, you continuously claim I am falsely labelling spetnaz as agents... I am not, I SAID "spetnaz AND agents"

Spetnaz are in the region advising small groups of pro Russians

The Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) confirmed March 16 the arrest of a group of Russians in the Zaporizhzhia (Zaporozhye) region of Ukraine. The men were armed with firearms, explosives and unspecified 'special technical means'. This follows the March 14 arrest near Kherson, Ukraine of several Russians dressed black uniforms with no insignia, armed with AKS-74 assault rifles and in possession of numerous ID cards under various names. One of which was an ID card of Military Intelligence Directorate of the Russian armed forces; commonly known as 'Spetsnaz'.

These men were being guided by an ethnic Russian Ukrainian in what appears to be reconnaissance of the 3 Ukrainian army divisions deployed in Kherson.

Spetsnaz commandos operating in eastern Ukraine would have the missions encompassing general ground reconnaissance of Ukrainian army units. They would also have missions conducting provocateur operations dressed in civilian attire, passing themselves off as local ethnic Russians to stir trouble between Ukrainians and local Russians, organize and provide arms to local militants as happened in Donetsk on March 11.

Confirmed

reply to post by Xcathdra


"You might as well of posted a video from the Blair Witch Project. "

Thank you for that laugh. Haha