This is a 1:1 convo between myself and hobbiks. there is alot here so we dont need a 3rd person quoting any of this!
, below is a comprehensive response to the last month of posts as related to scott ritter posts by me and your posts in this topic and my responses:
History of conversation (
bolded text is new):
Quote (Hobbiks @ Mar 7 2024 08:33am)
Killing enemy combatants in war is not illegal. You are not considered a civilian because you are carrying or on a stretcher. I don't know if you can prove that the drone drivers were nazis, if you can then I would like to know how you got hold of that information. Maybe the Russians on the ground were nazis? After all, anti semitism is more common in Russia than in Ukraine.
Quote (ferdia @ Mar 7 2024 08:44am)
Like the time the Israeli's killed that medic, or the time they shot dead that journalist, or the time they put a 2 year old on a BBQ. Thankfully they didnt gas the tunnels - that would be a tricky one to defend, bad optic's apparently. I feel that if you can gloss over killing medic's its like going down a slide, pretty soon you can gloss over everything. Its really not hard instead to say: killing medic's, journalists, women and children is wrong, no matter who does it. "Medics are protected by the Geneva Conventions. This means that anyone who purposefully attacks or kills a medic clearly wearing medical clothing and has no weapon in their hand commits a war crime." Maybe its because of the American Service-Members' Protection Act which protects US servicemen who commit war crimes from being charged, that the attitude/belief is there is no such thing as a war crime. But most countries do accept that war crimes are an offense.
Quote (Hobbiks @ Mar 7 2024 08:53am)
It depends. A journalist is not an enemy combatant at all, if a journalist is armed they are not considered a journalist in wartime, you should know this. Im sure Israelis have killed a bunch of medics, some probably combat medics (who can be enemy combatants) and some probably civilian medics (who are not enemy combatants). Putting a 2 year old on a BBQ wouldn't be legal even if the baby was an enemy combatant. How do you know the people carrying the strecher were all medics? Have you even seen the clip? You are not arguing against me here, you are arguing about international humanitarian law as set up by Hauge and Geneve. If you don't think a medic with a gun, invading a foreign country is an enemy combatant then that's something you'll have to bring up with the UN, Red Cross, etc, cause I don't make those.
Quote (ferdia @ Mar 7 2024 08:56am)
Your right, I made a mistake. I saw the word carrying and presumed you meant stretcher, but when I read it again I now see you mean a medi, carrying a weapon, while carrying a wounded soldier, which is not a designated medic.
my apologies.
Quote (Hobbiks @ Mar 7 2024 08:58am)
No worries man. I think killing of civilian medics is obviously atrocious, we can both agree on that. I think we can also agree that Hague and Geneve conventions don't do a good enough job at protecting civilians and distinguishing for instance civilian medics from combat medics!
Quote (ferdia @ Mar 7 2024 09:15am)
It would be helpful if the US recognized the concept of war crimes (committed by Americans) but that is not going to happen ever, and is a separate rabbit hole not worth going down.
Quote (ferdia @ Mar 11 2024 09:07am)
Quote (Hobbiks @ Mar 11 2024 09:09am)
Just out of curiosity, would you like it to be another way? Would you like to see a ban on foreign fighters or mercenarys in wars?
Quote (ferdia @ Mar 11 2024 09:54am)
there is a difference between foreign fighters and mercenaries (which are also fighting) vs foreign governments clandestinely involved in wars (what has now been "revealed"). You can't ban these kind of things. there will always be mercenaries. what I am saying is if a country is waging a war, but does not have a mandate to do so, the government of that country should resign for lying to its people. its as simple as that. If Nato has troops in Ukraine they should have said this on day 1. We now know that the USA had agents in Ukraine for the last 8 years and England has troops there. It would not surprise me if Poland and France also have troops there.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/02/27/cia-secret-spy-bases-ukraine-russia-kyiv/ I dont see Nato slapping the US or the UK on the wrists for having soldiers in Ukraine and it makes a mockery of "Nato is not in Ukraine". Its a little green man moment. They are literally putting on a different uniform and saying, nope we are not Nato today, nope we are not Russian soldiers we are freedom fighters, honest to god.
Quote (Hobbiks @ Mar 11 2024 10:42am)
So first of all, nothing has been "revealed". NATO is, like ^Prox1m1ty said, not in Ukraine. It's a little interesting to me that at this point you are essentially building a massive conspiracy theory. To you there are literal clandestine operations (that you have uncovered) involving the UK and the US. What do you base this on? CIA had operatives in Ukraine and one British guy died from PTSD. Countries being invested in other countries foreign politics is NOT an invasion. Both the Soviet Union and the US were heavily invested in european countries during the cold war, and to my knowledge countries like Sweden, Norway or France weren't "invaded" just because there were (for instance) Stay Behind operatives in the respective countries. I don't know what this has to do with my question though. You said banning mercenaries and foreign fighters wont be possible, but that wasn't what i asked. What do YOU think about foreign fighters and mercenaries and should they be banned? If you think they should be banned then will you also admit that you think Russia should pull out every mercenary or untrained person not currently employed by the military from Ukraine? I personally think it should be banned, if that's a question you're interested in.
This is semantics. Nato's members have troops in, and are supporting, Ukraine, with the planning and directing of this war. This is fact, they are not denying this.Quote (ferdia @ Mar 11 2024 10:54am)
How is a fact suddenly a conspiracy theory ? The United States IS in Ukraine. It has forces in Ukraine, and has had them there since 2014. It is actively involved in the war, covertly. Getting caught with your pants down is a big no no.
England IS in Ukraine. It has forces in Ukraine, and has had them there for some time (presumably since after 2022). It is actively involved in the war, covertly. Getting caught with your pants down is a big no no. These are facts. How are facts suddenly conspiracy theories? They are actively involved in the war and they have basically admitted to it. How is this a conspiracy theory ? its a FACT. What are you talking about "that you have uncovered" can you not read the links provided ? Do you want more links? Most critically, the US and the UK are not denying the allegations! You cannot ban mercenary companies. Yes of course mercenary companies should be banned because they do not operate under the same command structure and are more likely to have less accountability (there are a variety of reasons). but saying "should mercenary companies be banned" is like saying "should we take care of the environment" - we dont take care of the environment. People know simple right and wrong but they still do wrong.
Quote (Hobbiks @ Mar 11 2024 11:07am)
A conspiracy theory is a theory, so a yet to be proven thesis, about a conspiracy, which is a group of people working together secretly to achieve a set goal. You have a theory about a conspiracy, which is that the UK and the US together with NATO are invading and fighting alongside Ukraine against Russia. A conspiracy theory. You have not proven that there is a malicious group working towards a set goal and you have not proven that NATO is currently in Ukraine. The United States military is NOT fighting in Ukraine. Private people may be, but the United States is not currently at war in Ukraine. You are literally arguing points that not even Russia is making. Again, you are saying that the US is COVERTLY in a war against Russia, a thesis you CAN NOT PROVE. A conspiracy theory. A shadowy group of western elites are covertly in a war that you can not prove and have uncovered. "These are facts. How are facts suddenly conspiracy theories?" - So first of all, facts can be conspiracy theories, a conspiracy can be proven to indeed exist, what makes something a conspiracy theory is the theory part, it is unproven. "Do you want more links? Most critically, the US and the UK are not denying the allegations!" - Yes. I want the document from the US white house declaring war on Russia. Good luck. "What are you talking about "that you have uncovered" can you not read the links provided ?" - None of the sources you have provided state that the US and UK are covertly and currently in a war with Russia. I don't know what you think your sources say, but none of them say that. Read my last post and try again. " Yes of course mercenary companies should be banned because they do not operate under the same command structure and are more likely to have less accountability" - Good, then we agree. I would love to see Russian criminals, people living on the border of Ukraine who helped in the annexation of Chrimea and the multiple mercenary groups Russia has employed go home, aswell as the Ukrainian Foreign fighters. Wouldn't you agree?
Nato members, ergo Nato, is in Ukraine. Russia did say this afaik. call a spade a spade.You are acting like that journalist asking the UN for the Israeli document "lets commit genocide", there will be no document, but we know that the US is supporting Ukraine financially, logistically, militarily and politically etc etc etc. Your view is that as they have not declared war they are not at war. fine call it a covert war, call it what you will but they are there actively engaged in a proxy war.Quote (Hobbiks @ Mar 11 2024 11:12am)
So here we run into two issues: Nobody is saying that the CIA isn't operating or hasn't been operating in Ukraine, that is however not an act of war. The fact that you would even bring this up as some sort of argument tells me that you don't know much about the legality of war or operations in foreign countries Second of all, you are also creating a conspiracy theory. The Patriot System basic training is 10 weeks long. Maybe it takes a Russian or a chimpanzee multiple years to learn how to effectively use these systems but military specialists seem to learn how to use them pretty effectively in a relatively short period of time (as was always intended). I don't care what some Russian farmer in Vladivostok thinks about NATO involvement, just like i don't care what a North Korean in Hamhung thinks about Juche.
my overarching gripe here is that this is a proxy war instigated by the US over a protracted period of time. There were alot of times when they could have stopped this from happening, or stopped it, and they refused. I am going to hang my hat on that hill.Quote (ferdia @ Mar 11 2024 11:34am)
Just to be very clear here: The United Kingdom and the United States have armed forces in Ukraine, supporting the war effort against Ukraine, even while they have no mandate to do so. Yes or No ?
Quote (Hobbiks @ Mar 11 2024 11:40am)
Having other countries military in your country is not illegal, you don't need a "mandate" for that. How do you think military training between countries work? One country allows another countrys military in. What is your question? Is the Ukrainian military being trained by American military personell? Yes, literally not a single person in the world disagrees with that. Again, you have uncovered absolutely nothing. Training other military forces is not being, and I quote you "involved in the war, covertly.". You have not and can not prove that, you have actually proved the opposite. Edit: Also you never responded to this, from my last post, and I would like you to: Yes. I want the document from the US white house declaring war on Russia. Good luck.
I think we can agree to disagree on this point. Every which way you look at this, this is a proxy war. I responded above as to there will be no document / declaration. Even the US Senate has asked the question as to why they are at war with Russia but its not declared.Quote (ferdia @ Mar 11 2024 12:59pm)
But thats the Point!! We are in some quasi reality where they are sending troops, directing operations, refusing to negotiate, but not declaring war, instead doing it all by Proxy. That surely is an issue for you or no ? This war is the definition of a proxy war. Ergo, the US IS fighting Russia. They are sending the weapons, training the troops, picking the targets and ensuring there is no negotiated settlement. And yes if Nato as an "entity" went "above board" into Ukraine they WOULD obliterate Russia's conventional forces. Oh I wonder what the rat that is Russia would do then? lick its wounds? The logical response from Russia is the nuclear option, as that is exactly what any superpower would do when cornered.
Quote (Hobbiks @ Mar 11 2024 01:12pm)
The US is not directing operations, if they are you would have to provide pretty concrete evidence. It is true that us military personel are training Ukrainians, nobody is denying this. That is not on the other hand the same as being at war. That would be like saying North Korea and China are at war with Ukraine because they are trading with Russia and providing arms. None of this is what would be constituted as a proxy war. Even if it was a proxy war then Russia still invaded a sovereign nation. "Ergo, the US IS fighting Russia. They are sending the weapons, training the troops, picking the targets and ensuring there is no negotiated settlement." - This is not the definition of a proxy war. A proxy war would be Ukraine fighting on the behalf of the US who are themselves not directly involved. According to you, US and UK troops are directly involved (which you cant prove) meaning it wouldn't be a proxy war. Ukraine is also defending itself and their sovereignity and was before they got supplies from the US, proving once more that it cannot be a proxy war.
This is ignoring the arms buildup in Ukraine prior to the war, given to them, by the United States.Quote (Hobbiks @ Mar 11 2024 01:26pm)
So again, you have this MASSIVE earth shaking conspiracy and you cant even provide a few links? It just doesn't seem too plausible to me that you could prove any of this, as you haven't in the last few pages of this thread. If you had this concrete proof i doubt that you wouldn't just send it. Maybe you wouldn't? Maybe you have a secret operation with all the proof, like NATO in Ukraine?
My view remains that the US / Nato / Nato members are actively involved in the logistics and planning etc. associated with this war, and yes has soldiers in UkraineQuote (ferdia @ Mar 11 2024 02:49pm)
No Nato member is directly at war with Russia. However, Nato is officially supporting Ukraine in their conflict with Russia and is, for the most part, following the lead of the United States. It has made no attempt at a negotiated peace and is complicit. The United States is, to use a term, semi covertly, at war with Russia, using Ukrainian soldiers as their Proxy. It is coming to light the extent to which the United states is involved, and has been involved over the last 10 years (in Ukraine). Several Nato countries have made it clear that they will not send troops to Ukraine while several Nato countries have floated the idea of sending troops. It is clear that the US is providing Ukraine with as much information "intel" as possible related to Ukraine and Russia, to help Ukraine kill Russians. The US is arming Ukrainians, supplying intel, training, providing weapons and geo-political protection, a bit like what they are doing in Israel. Without US support Ukraine would be goosed. It is clear that the US is of the view to send long range weapons to Ukraine (in order to strike targets in Russia or Russian controlled places, say Crimea, Moscow). I believe the US still believes that Ukraine can achieve a victory - i.e. retaking crimea, but it is my belief that Russia would not countenance this. Therefore as with last year, no political decision, stuff still has to happen on the battlefield. If Nato was a defensive alliance, it should not have sought to bring Ukraine into Nato, as they knew it would provoke a response from Russia. I am not talking about right or wrong I am talking about cause and effect.
Quote (Hobbiks @ Mar 11 2024 02:54pm)
Again, the war in Ukraine doesn't meet the definition for a proxy war even by your own admission. If the US is actively participating in war efforts then it is not a proxy war. You have to pick one, and even then it would not meet the definitions of a proxy war. Countries in NATO are sending aid to Ukraine, that does not mean NATO is a part of the war. Ukraine is a sovereign nation and can decide for themselves if they want to join NATO. "asthey knew it would provoke a response from Russia." - The world does not revolve around Russia. If Russias response to Ukraine making their own decisions is a full scale invasion then Russia is in the wrong, you do understand this, right?
This is your view. I just disagree.Quote (ferdia @ Mar 11 2024 03:08pm)
I feel it would be more worthwhile to figure out how it is that new users to the thread are able to ignore all the evidence which supports the notion that the US is escalating the war, ensuring it continues, and refuse to accept the notion of spheres of influence. It is quite frankly odd that there is no concern about escalating a war with a nuclear armed opponent yet expecting that opponent to lose. baffling.
Quote (ferdia @ Mar 11 2024 03:15pm)
... The Mearsheimer position (that nato expansion was foolish and a recipe for disaster, and we should all note the position is from 2016, it was not dreamt up after the 2022 invasion) is born out by the maps of the ukraine war and the fact that Russia has not conscripted an extra 5million men (to invade and lay claim to all of ukraine).Russia has created a land bridge to Crimea, Putin has laid claim to everything east of the dniepo river, and russia has not conscripted the men required to invade all of ukraine, much less poland and germany. It is for this reason the argument of the mainstream just does not add up to me. the presumed narrative makes no logical sense.
Quote (ferdia @ Mar 11 2024 03:28pm)
1 Country has been at war for 93% of the time it has existed. If there is no enemy, it creates one. It has Israel in the middle east doing its bidding and it has Pakistan slowing India down while it contrives to wreck China. It is busy all over the world creating conflicts, under the false notion that this will stop any country from directly attacking it. hint: either way no one is going to attack it. The most dangerous enemy if has, is itself. Russia is a convenient enemy so, over the course of a number of years, Russia was provoked into a war with Ukraine. Biden even gave Putin the green light to invade Ukraine. The plan, as we now understand, was to collapse the Russian economy and gobble up Crimea. Is this all propaganda or is there a hint of truth?
Quote (Hobbiks @ Mar 11 2024 03:40pm)
I mean, Djunior talked a little bit about fallacies and this is a perfect example (if he was actually interested and not just conveniently bringing it up when it suits him). Just because something has happened before on the other side of the world doesn't mean it will happen again, or is happening in Ukraine. It's the conclusion just doesn't follow the premises. I have said it before and I'll say it again. If Russia gets provoked by a sovereign state making decisions for themselves and makes a full scale invasion, Russia is at fault. I'm also confused about this idea of Biden "letting Putin invade". What was he supposed to do? Bomb every Russian on the border of Ukraine? Russia is a sovereign nation and even the US (who I just like you, think has an atrocious track record of warcrimes) respected that, as opposed to what Russia is currently up to in Ukraine.
The US is actively involved as we speak, around the world, destabilizing the world. This is my view. Biden was supposed to say Ukraine will not join Nato.Quote (ferdia @ Mar 13 2024 10:26am)
Your tag teaming on him. you should try to attack him one at a time, not together. .
Quote (Hobbiks @ Mar 13 2024 10:34am)
To be fair, whenever anyone who disagrees with you or a few other people in this thread, you all become replyguys and dogpile on to whoever disagrees with you. Don't you think this is a little bit ironic to say? Either way, im not condemning you for it, thats what a debate topic is for right? Djunior said it best a few days ago, if you dont want to discuss with multiple people then go to PMs. Maybe thats something you guys could try if you are unhappy with the state of the thread?
I can only speak for my own actions, I cant speak for others. your argument is sound. A debate should not involve a group ganging up on the dissenting voice. I am opposed to that. The broad issue with the thread is that the, anti-Russian (i was not sure how to frame it, so landed on this), ignores the drivers of this war and ignores the fact that the West, through defending Ukraine via more and more methods (while Ukraine loses troops), has embarked on a path of escalation, while at the same time filling certain peoples pocketsQuote (ferdia @ Mar 22 2024 04:50pm)
Note that my posting this was an example of what I deem to be poor Journalism, and not a criticism of Scott Ritter. It is a terrible article. I am leaving out the argument between Djunior and Proximity, where we both commented. Quote (ferdia @ Mar 28 2024 03:13pm)
...if russia's red line was any nation existing apart from them, then they would have invaded western europe a long time ago and before that the USSR would not have broken up. the fact is, russia recognizes nato's red lines, and borders, noting russia is not busy invading or encroaching on western europe. conversely, as demonstrated, nato does not recognize russia's red lines as related to Ukraine. This is fact. I have to refer you back to what I said: i will answer the question but you might not like the answer. but not liking the answer, disagreeing with the answer, is not a reason not to ask the question.
This post was edited by ferdia on Apr 3 2024 10:31am