Jump to content


Photo

Kiev Is Burning


  • Please log in to reply
18667 replies to this topic

#10741 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,128 posts

Posted 30 March 2015 - 0943 AM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houthis

 

'The group's flag reads as following: "God is Great, Death to America, Death to Israel, Curse on the Jews, Victory to Islam". However, commenting on the meaning of the slogan, Ali al Bukhayti, the former spokesperson and official media face of the Houthis said: "We do not really want death to anyone. The slogan is simply against the interference of those governments.'

 

Ah, thats alright then. :D

 

Entirely harmless and deserves to be protected under freedom of speech, they should be allowed to immigrate to the US so they can exercise their rights to freedom of speech and expression ;) Any incidents of psychological disorders will be sure to not be aired on mass media in order to protect their rights so as the minority group can continue their pursuit of happiness.


  • 0

#10742 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,578 posts

Posted 30 March 2015 - 1058 AM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houthis
 
'The group's flag reads as following: "God is Great, Death to America, Death to Israel, Curse on the Jews, Victory to Islam". However, commenting on the meaning of the slogan, Ali al Bukhayti, the former spokesperson and official media face of the Houthis said: "We do not really want death to anyone. The slogan is simply against the interference of those governments.'
 
Ah, thats alright then. :D


That is called " colourful figure of speech™". They are into hyperbole ;)
  • 0

#10743 glenn239

glenn239

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,402 posts

Posted 30 March 2015 - 1148 AM

 

Urbaniod Right now, we have a country that is not even part of the MTCR and will happily sell similar stuff to (almost) anyone that can pay. Yes, it's the same country that now offers the sale of 4th gen multirole fighters to Argentina.

 

 

 

4th Gen multi-role fighters are legal to sell under international law.  What is not legal for Russia to sell is long range (I believe 190+ NM) precision missiles like the TLAM’s you mention.   For example, with the BrahMos hypersonic missile program with India, apparently the range of the missile is set by international treaty, not the limits of the missile. 

 

 

 

 

 Actually you seem very busy inventing even the most ridiculous excuses to let Putin win.

 

 

 

I don’t GAF who wins in Ukraine.  I want the effects to be contained so that they don’t spill out to influence the important stuff that is happening elsewhere and make sure that nothing puts our troops lives in danger in places like the ME if we can help it.


  • 0

#10744 Adam Peter

Adam Peter

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,353 posts

Posted 30 March 2015 - 1219 PM

 MANPADS or ATGW’s

 

Engineering or mining equipment to restore free trade :)


  • 0

#10745 urbanoid

urbanoid

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,412 posts

Posted 30 March 2015 - 1236 PM

 

 

Urbaniod Right now, we have a country that is not even part of the MTCR and will happily sell similar stuff to (almost) anyone that can pay. Yes, it's the same country that now offers the sale of 4th gen multirole fighters to Argentina.

 

 

 

4th Gen multi-role fighters are legal to sell under international law.  What is not legal for Russia to sell is long range (I believe 190+ NM) precision missiles like the TLAM’s you mention.   For example, with the BrahMos hypersonic missile program with India, apparently the range of the missile is set by international treaty, not the limits of the missile. 

 

 

 

 

 Actually you seem very busy inventing even the most ridiculous excuses to let Putin win.

 

 

 

I don’t GAF who wins in Ukraine.  I want the effects to be contained so that they don’t spill out to influence the important stuff that is happening elsewhere and make sure that nothing puts our troops lives in danger in places like the ME if we can help it.

 

 

If not Russia, PRC can sell it anyway, they're not part of the treaty. In a few years probably Pakistan will have similiar stuff.

 

Whatever, Russia can hurt the West much less than the other way around, we can play such silly games too.

 

If you think that challenging the western world and winning despite less favourable position sets a good precedent for the future and won't be noticed by other rogue states, then I have no questions left.


Edited by urbanoid, 30 March 2015 - 1237 PM.

  • 0

#10746 BansheeOne

BansheeOne

    Bullshit filter overload, venting into civility charger

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,408 posts

Posted 30 March 2015 - 1252 PM

Video call of Dutch-led MH 17 investigation team for witnesses of transport of Buk system purportedly used in the shootdown.

 


  • 0

#10747 glenn239

glenn239

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,402 posts

Posted 30 March 2015 - 1514 PM

Adam Peter - Engineering or mining equipment to restore free trade

 

 

 

Every now and again they bust one of the tunnels or routes into the southern USA, but I wonder if about 4 make it for every 1 that doesn’t.


  • 0

#10748 glenn239

glenn239

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,402 posts

Posted 30 March 2015 - 1535 PM

Urbanoid If not Russia, PRC can sell it anyway, they're not part of the treaty.

 

 

 

The PRC is irrelevant.  Russia is a member of the treaty and we have to keep it that way.

 

 In a few years probably Pakistan will have similiar stuff.

 

 

No, it will not.  

 

 

If you think that challenging the western world and winning despite less favourable position sets a good precedent for the future and won't be noticed by other rogue states, then I have no questions left.

 

 

 

The priority is our troops’ safety in the ME.   For example, the Canadian Defense minister on W5 indicated that a critical calculation for our CF-118 missions in Syria is the location of Assad’s high level anti-aircraft weapons. 


  • 0

#10749 urbanoid

urbanoid

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,412 posts

Posted 30 March 2015 - 1648 PM

The PRC is irrelevant.  Russia is a member of the treaty and we have to keep it that way.

 

No, it will not.  

 

Because Glenn says so? LOL.


  • 0

#10750 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,751 posts

Posted 31 March 2015 - 0547 AM

 

 

I had similar thoughts. We humans love sarcasm, it's a hard temptation to avoid :lol:...

It was a real question, I am horrified at a thought that someone can justify a foreign intervention in a sovereign state by "president invited us there". Guess that goes in difference of what I think government should be allowed to do vs what Andreas thinks. I don't think that government has right to invite other country military to intervene vs unless invaded by third party. So in case of both Yemen or Ukraine I don't think it was their "right" to invite Russia or SA.

 

Re: Yemen - Make no mistake both sides in Yemen border on "scum" lebel. I was just intrigued why is a SA (and other local paragons of democracy - now that is a real sarcasm) are allowed to intervene in sovereign state and Russia is not. I don't think either should be, but obviously there is more then slight differences of what is considered right of sovereign state and it's government here.

I wrote that on Syria thread, only difference between rebels and government in Yemen is that rebels officially state that what government thinks - Death to America/Jews/Courage the Covardly Dog/whatever. The sooner you learn that "moderate" in that region means Gadaffi/Sadam/Asad/Saudi King level of dictator the better. Cause "democracy" and "free elections" means that Muslim Brotherhood or similar scum are getting into power. Did you not learn something from Egypt and Libya?


Edited by bojan, 31 March 2015 - 0556 AM.

  • 0

#10751 Andreas

Andreas

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 709 posts

Posted 31 March 2015 - 0557 AM


 Guess that goes in difference of what I think government should be allowed to do vs what Andreas thinks.

 

 

It doesn't matter what I think, no matter how hard you try to make it personal (as in 'if my argument doesn't stack up, I just go for the opponent'). What matters is the situation in international law, where there is at least a strong presumption that an invited intervention carries legitimacy that an uninvited does not.

 

http://opil.ouplaw.c...-e1702?prd=EPIL

 

So no Sunshine, Yemen and Saudi Arabia is not the same as Ukraine and Russia.

 

As for your 'real question', you got a real answer. Sorry if you don't like it.

 

All the best

 

Andreas


Edited by Andreas, 31 March 2015 - 0559 AM.

  • 0

#10752 Roman Alymov

Roman Alymov

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,543 posts

Posted 31 March 2015 - 0618 AM

Professor Stephen Cohen - This is the worst international crises since the Cuban missiles crisis

 

https://m.youtube.co...h?v=vWzHhW_qNiM

 

Article based on this video

http://www.washingto...peak-truth.html


Edited by Roman Alymov, 31 March 2015 - 0624 AM.

  • 0

#10753 Yama

Yama

    The only honest Scorpion

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 6,997 posts

Posted 31 March 2015 - 0634 AM

Guess that goes in difference of what I think government should be allowed to do vs what Andreas thinks.

 
It doesn't matter what I think, no matter how hard you try to make it personal (as in 'if my argument doesn't stack up, I just go for the opponent'). What matters is the situation in international law, where there is at least a strong presumption that an invited intervention carries legitimacy that an uninvited does not.


Man, I didn't realize Gaddafi and Milosevic invited NATO.
  • 0

#10754 Andreas

Andreas

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 709 posts

Posted 31 March 2015 - 0703 AM

 

 

Guess that goes in difference of what I think government should be allowed to do vs what Andreas thinks.

 
It doesn't matter what I think, no matter how hard you try to make it personal (as in 'if my argument doesn't stack up, I just go for the opponent'). What matters is the situation in international law, where there is at least a strong presumption that an invited intervention carries legitimacy that an uninvited does not.

 


Man, I didn't realize Gaddafi and Milosevic invited NATO.

 

 

That wasn't the question that was asked, so the answer given doesn't relate to it.

 

All the best

 

Andreas


  • 0

#10755 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,751 posts

Posted 31 March 2015 - 0707 AM

 

It doesn't matter what I think, no matter how hard you try to make it personal (as in 'if my argument doesn't stack up, I just go for the opponent'). 

 

 

Lol, for all my years of posting on TN I am one of few that actually avoided that. And even if I am, since "you are no cyber stalking and don't know what I am thinking" how do you find yourself competent to judge that?

 

 

...

So no Sunshine, Yemen and Saudi Arabia is not the same as Ukraine and Russia.

 

Talking about personal attacks and sarcasm... ...shine. See - no I am personally going after you.

 

BTW, nice echo chamber all around. Milosevic would have been proud of you, since he never mastered that art.


Edited by bojan, 31 March 2015 - 0720 AM.

  • 0

#10756 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,751 posts

Posted 31 March 2015 - 0709 AM

 

That wasn't the question that was asked, so the answer given doesn't relate to it.

 

Sure it does not relate if it is inconvenient to answer to.


  • 0

#10757 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,751 posts

Posted 31 March 2015 - 0712 AM

 

Man, I didn't realize Gaddafi and Milosevic invited NATO.

 

We were never at war with Eurasia.

Hey, Andreas, I can into sarcasm also.


Edited by bojan, 31 March 2015 - 0721 AM.

  • 0

#10758 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,751 posts

Posted 31 March 2015 - 0718 AM

I think the invitation from A.Hitler for an all expenses paid tour around Europe to SHAEF also got lost in the post. Maybe we should have waited to be invited? :)

 

 

Goodwin low being invoked again Stuart?

 

Neither Qaddafi (whatever you spell his name) or Milosevic (or rather their countries) were bombed for actually invading other country. Even Hague tribunal agreed on that.

And Brits were perfectly happy sitting on their asses, as was rest of world while Germany was doing naughty things to undesirables, as long as that stayed inside Germany. Only blatant landgrab and realization that they are next, IOW existential threat made them act. Something that was quite lacking with clowns from Libya and Serbia.


  • 0

#10759 Yama

Yama

    The only honest Scorpion

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 6,997 posts

Posted 31 March 2015 - 0821 AM

Guess that goes in difference of what I think government should be allowed to do vs what Andreas thinks.

 
It doesn't matter what I think, no matter how hard you try to make it personal (as in 'if my argument doesn't stack up, I just go for the opponent'). What matters is the situation in international law, where there is at least a strong presumption that an invited intervention carries legitimacy that an uninvited does not.


Man, I didn't realize Gaddafi and Milosevic invited NATO.

 
That wasn't the question that was asked, so the answer given doesn't relate to it.


So they were outside the scope of international law, and were not interventions?

That will be news to many.
  • 0

#10760 T-44

T-44

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 581 posts

Posted 31 March 2015 - 0821 AM

 


 Guess that goes in difference of what I think government should be allowed to do vs what Andreas thinks.

 

 

It doesn't matter what I think, no matter how hard you try to make it personal (as in 'if my argument doesn't stack up, I just go for the opponent'). What matters is the situation in international law, where there is at least a strong presumption that an invited intervention carries legitimacy that an uninvited does not.

 

http://opil.ouplaw.c...-e1702?prd=EPIL

 

So no Sunshine, Yemen and Saudi Arabia is not the same as Ukraine and Russia.

 

As for your 'real question', you got a real answer. Sorry if you don't like it.

 

All the best

 

Andreas

 

Strange that you make that link, because:

 

"Other cases of State practice have taken place, inter alia, in (...) Kosovo 2008."

 

SO DNR and LNR could, by international law, legally invite South-Ossetian (who recognised them) troops to their territories?


  • 0