WestCanMan

You must have read about it somewhere. We're talking about how messed up the planet is right now because there's a huge idiot in the WH. As a side note, I was mentioning to you that some of us can think for ourselves.

I know that this is gonna blow your mind, but some of us don't say and do what we're told by members of the TV media without question.

OMG listen to you. You backed the BS about widespread, overt Naziism and KKK support at the Freedom Convoy without any evidence, and now you're supporting an openly Nazi military unit, and whitewashing them by referring to them as "non-humanitarians who aren't law-abiding" lol. Just admit that you're supporting Nazis dude, because that's what you're doing. Because they're Nazis, and they're committing war crimes, and that's a huge deal imo. You support them, but that's your problem. Your sources don't talk about hate mongering from our own PM, or peaceful protesters getting trampled by horses, or peaceful protesters getting beaten in front of the HoC by our own cops after they've surrendered on their knees, having their bank accounts frozen when they've committed no crime and no judge has ever even heard their name, and jailed without bail in Ottawa. You can just keep on supporting fascism at home in Canada and actual Nazis in Europe if you want, but stop shifting blame to other people. Victoria Nuland thinks it's a fact, and she knows more about it than you do. Simple advice: 1) Grow up, 2) Don't display any of your Nazi symbols openly in Canada. If you used your brain you'd know that there were already bioweapons facilities there since the cold war and they just kept using them. Russia was in no position to do anything about it for about 20 years so it didn't really matter. Now it does. Can't you tell? Yeah, they should do it on home soil I guess? Or somewhere else in Europe that's further away from the most likely place for them to deploy the bioweapons? It's America's own intel. It's from their own websites. It's from Victoria Nuland's own mouth. Putin doesn't even need spies to find out about it, he just needed a dial-up internet connection and the same security clearance as janitors at the mall. Now you're talking about other people being susceptible to propaganda? LMAO, that's hilarious. You still think that everything you see on CTV, CBC, CNN, and Global is true. I don't actually care which way the facts go, I just follow them. I didn't want to believe 9/11 conspiracy theories either, because I'd rather believe the terrorist theory than the 'US gov't did it themselves' theory but I do have a lot of unanswered questions, starting with how police knew that building 7 was going to come down at the exact moment that it did, seeing as it remains to this day "the only concrete/steel structure in the history of the world to collapse due to fire", and there wasn't much fire there. Other buildings have burned to mere skeletons and remained standing. I'd rather not have our most important ally get caught with bioweapons in Ukraine. I'm well aware that if they're from the '80s, and there was a new facility opened in 2010 which was used to study Anthrax and other bioweapons, and they're still there, that means that they were there from 2016 - 2020, when Trump was the president. I'm not afraid of cognitive dissonance. I can hope that one thing is true while keeping in mind that there are solid reasons to question it. Cheer on your Nazis and wallow in ignorance for all I care dude, whatever blows your hair back.

The US govt is either lying when they say that they don't have bioweapons there or when they say that they have "research materials in the biolabs that they don't want Russia to get." All I'm doing is making you aware of the facts. Go cry to your mommy if you don't like facts, that's what this forum is for. The links have been posted here many times, you just need to tae a break from lying and look at them.

As usual Russia better not get their hands on our research materials, because... our notes are toxic...? v

Reality says that if your own positions are so untenable that your only option to stay in the debate is to lie about what my positions are then it's clear which one of us is the liar and propagandist.

It's official that your posts are a barfbag of CNN and MSNBC propaganda that not even you can stomach. Thanks for posting here, so that I don't have to watch Rachel Maddow to find out what the kids are watching, and FYI the only Nazis in this scenario are the Azovs. They are dyed in the wool, born and bred Nazis right from WWII when their grandfathers supported Hitler & Naziism, and at the end of WWII when their fathers were the only country in Europe refusing to prosecute Nazi war criminals. Just in case you forgot what we're even talking about here: Russian media outlets, TASS and Pravda, said that the US & Ukraine have bioweapons research labs in Ukraine. By the US gov'ts own admission, TASS & Pravda were telling the truth. The American MSM was raging about "RUSSIAN DISINFORMATION ABOUT BIOWEAPONS IN UKRAINE" and they were caught lying. TASS & Pravda - Shown to be passing along truthful, accurate information. US mainstream media - Busted for peddling lies and propaganda. Obviously I can't vouch for Pravda and TASS's avg fare, but I know for a fact that the mainstream media in the US is well-known to be congenital liars. Propagandists is too kind a word for them.

If you believe that anything that you just said was based on reality then you have serious issues.

The only people channeling Hitler in this whole scenario are Ukraine's avowed Nazi military battalion - the Azovs. And for your information, the Ukraine/US actually do have bioweapons research facilities in Ukraine whether you like it or not. Why do you get upset when you're presented that fact?

FYI I watch a lot of Fox programs. Gutfeld, the Five, Jesse Watters, Hannity, Special Report.... lol. I watch one a day most days. Sometimes zero, half, sometimes 1.5. I watch the Five way more than anything else, but sometimes one show gets on a roll for a while. For example, when Russian collusion was a hot topic Sean Hannity was head and shoulders above everyone else. Tucker Carlson is the only person/show on Fox worth watching right now. Every other show is almost as bad as CNN with the anti-Russian propaganda right now.

Anti-tank missiles are pretty big, they don't come in pods, but some BTRs sport anti tank missiles. https://www.19fortyfive.com/2022/03/meet-the-btr-4-watch-ukraines-bucephalus-blast-russian-armored-vehicles/ In the video it was just the 30mm canon firing imo, the missile launch would look quite different. The missile doesn't work at less than 300 feet either, approximately the length of a football field. We had rounds like that in the navy that [theoretically, I never saw anyone try it lol] wouldn't detonate until they travelled a minimum distance, just in case the gun somehow managed to fire on the ship's own superstructure. There are 'cutouts' in the weapon system that makes it impossible for the turrets to fire when they're pointed in the wrong direction anyways, so having the feature that the ammo wouldn't detonate is like an added layer of protection. I guess the BTR's missiles have that feature so that they don't detonate when they're close enough to damage their own vehicle, or kill their own infantry who are in close support? I dunno. The newer Russian tanks aren't so easy to hit with laser-guided missiles: Regarding the pods, when you see them in the navy it's usually a form of anti-missile defence called "chaff" launchers. They shoot flares and clouds of metallic debris straight up into the air to fool Russian missiles like the SS-N-22 Charlies into blowing up. The SN-22s would actually go up in the air and drop down on the ship from above to avoid CIWSs like the Phalanx gun. By the time I got out chaff had evolved into RBOC and then Super RBOC (super-rapid bloom overhead chaff) but that was over 30 years ago. I have no idea what weapons systems modern naval ships have now. Anyhow, Russian tanks also have this stuff to protect the sides from incoming missiles, the video at the top of the page is at 18,000 frames per second to show how it works, it's pretty cool: https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a26768/tanks-defend-themselves-rockets-and-missiles/

It's definitely the time for Russia to do what they have to do. They wouldn't have gotten this far if Trump was POTUS, but then Trump wouldn't have pushed Zelenski for this war with Russia.

I think that with the Khadr case, the fact that the US had GWB laws on the books when Khadr was detained and Obama laws when he was released played a part. Under Bush's law there was no requirement for a trial, and he could be held indefinitely. Obama changed that. The guys who now control Afghanistan could tell us all about it lol. In Canada I think that the case was made that our gov't should have fought the US in court for custody of him, and brought him here, but I don't know why that's a thing because he committed his crimes against Americans. People from Canada who kill people in NYC go to jail in NY.

For sure he had rights after he was captured, but not the same rights as a uniformed soldier. When Bush was POTUS his administration made it law that unlawful combatants could be held indefinitely without trial. https://casebook.icrc.org/glossary/unlawful-combatants Obama's administration changed that: https://www.americanbar.org/advocacy/governmental_legislative_work/priorities_policy/civil_liberties/enemy_combatants/ People have protections under the Geneva Conventions, but there's a clear path for uniformed personnel to surrender, and how they need to be treated if they do. If/when the war ends they get to go home. That protection isn't guaranteed for unlawful combatants. If that's determined to be their status then they'll face a military tribunal. The end of the war has no bearing on their status as a prisoner because they've been sentenced criminally. Sure, but if we're being honest, the Geneva Conventions don't really do much while a war is raging anyways. Everyone will lie about everything that happened and the winner will write the history books. It's mostly armchair quarterbacks and propagandists that they apply to, really. Eg, people still argue about whether or not hundreds of civilians were gassed in Syria, in the age of smartphones with cameras and modern medical diagnostics. If they were gassed, who gassed them? Rools, shmools. You can basically count yourself as lucky if you're in a war zone and you suddenly become protected by/subjected to the GCs. It means that you still have your brain box intact.

1) The Monroe Doctrine, which the US has considered legitimate for over 100 years, says that if any European countries colonize any country in NA or SA that it could be deemed a 'hostile act". A hostile act is definitely grounds for war. 2) After the US had already invaded Cuba and failed, and the Cubans had every reason to believe that the yanks would be back ( there was actually a plan for another invasion), and they started building missile silos in Cuba, with the help of Russia. Kennedy freaked. Every option was on the table, including military strikes against Cuban targets. In the end he settled for a naval blockade (quarantine) and threatened to destroy and Soviet ships that tried to get through. Then they depth-charged a Russian sub in international waters. When was the last time that you called Kennedy's actions during the Cuban Missile Crisis illegitimate? The US and Ukraine HAVE BIOWEAPONS IN UKRAINE. ILLEGALLY. They lied about it, extensively, but now the cat is outta the bag. Ukraine is also threatening to join NATO, which is far more invasive than a European country colonizing Peru, or Cuba getting missile silos to defend themselves from a country that just invaded them a year earlier. But Russia just has to suffer in silence, and just leave the bioweapons there, when it was OK for the US to go berserk about Cuba? There are 20 countries in NATO. Ukraine is huge, with over 3,000km of borders with Russia and Belarus. NATO can park an army in Ukraine that could flatten Russia within days and Russia can't defend that much border. Russia won't stand for Ukraine's transgressions, cute and cuddly as they may seem to you. If this war gets messier, Ukrainians will suffer far worse atrocities than what we've seen so far. Gimme a break. Your hypocrisy is visible from outer space. This is already proven to be silly, as I mentioned above, but it's ok for people to fight back, they just have to do it within the laws of war. Those laws exist "TO PROTECT CIVILIANS". If there's a war by your house, and your neighbours all abide by the laws of war, you should be reasonably safe. If they shoot at a tank from a hospital, the hospital can legally go KABOOM! Those are the laws of war, and they make sense for both sides, 24/7. If the war goes to Russian soil, and Russian civilians fire on a tank from inside a hospital, the Russian hospital will egally be targeted by enemy units. Easy peasy. So yes, it's ok for Ukrainians to fight, but when they break the laws Russia gets to break laws that they were previously constrained by, and at that point you don't get to call the Russians bad names.

Even for people like me who served in the military, but aren't veterans (I finished my 3 years in 1990 and got out), the Geneva Conventions and the wars of law are usually just answers to a trivia question. We may be kind of familiar with them, but it's not the same at all as it is for people like you who lived by those laws and had to abide by them, making split-second decisions which could impact you for the rest of your life. I find it highly disrespectful that people are questioning your knowledge of the topic. It's like someone going in for surgery and telling the Dr what to do. Then they're surprised when ten years later their x-ray tech says "It looks like there's a giant dildo in your chest. How did that get there?" The rules of engagement almost seem unfair to actual military personnel who are fully uniformed and identifiable from head to toe 24/7, because civilians can fight for an hour a day and then wander around in their civvies the rest of the time, munching on baguettes, free as the day they were born. Thanks again for your service Army Guy.

A few things of note about the 2nd video: First off, the description makes it sound like the BTR-82A and T-72B3M are both tanks, but the BTR is just an Armoured Personnel Carrier. It doesn't even seem like that APC was manned when it was hit, nothing was moving. The BTR is designed to be able to kill that vehicle though. Second, the BTR-4 just has a 30mm canon, it's only good for shooting other lightly-armoured vehicles. It's not designed to kill tanks, and the 30mm canon definitely couldn't kill a T-72, it would just bounce off. (Even some tanks aren't heavily armed enough to kill other tanks, like the original 75mm gun on the Sherman in WWII vs the Tiger) 3rd, that footage is from Mariupol, I saw it on youtube. That's where the Azov battalion is deployed - the only Nazi battalion in any military anywhere on earth. I find it odd that our mainstream media tried to portray our freedom convoy as a bunch of Nazis when they were anything but, and that they choose to portray the Azovs as heroes when they're known war criminals from the Donbas war and they're actual Nazis, insignias and all. It's a fact that a lot of Russian tanks are being destroyed or abandoned, but the Russians have a shitload of tanks. More than twice as many as the #2 country in the world. Not all of Russia's tanks are great - they don't get rid of their old junk like the Americans do - but tanks are what they're famous for.

It's a collection of your own straw man arguments and things that you don't understand. I wouldn't say "bitter enemies" but they absolutely are geopolitical adversaries, 100%. By the exact same measure that the people of North America fully support Kennedy's threat of all-out war with Russia if they didn't pull their missiles out of Russia, the people of North America should fully support Putin's threat of war against Ukraine if they didn't stop courting NATO. 100%. The fact that Zelenski opted to accept Putin's challenge makes it mutual combat. Thinking about anything is legal, doing illegal things is illegal. Everyone understands that but you. Your assertion makes sense to a certain point, but bringing the hostile armies of 20 nations to one's doorstep is beyond the pale. It is absolutely, 100% an act of aggression. If you don't think that's an act of aggression then think about what America would do if we tried to sign a defence pact with China, Russia, Iran and NoKo? Would they give us a warning and then invade us if we didn't relent? I guess that you've never heard of the Monroe Doctrine? Why don't you google that, read up on it, and then describe it for me? Define what a "hostile act" is for me if you think you could wrap your head around that one. That's not entirely correct: 1) US forces depth-charged a Russian sub that was armed with a nuclear warhead 2) I never said that there was an actual war, so that's a straw man argument 3) Putin gave Zelenski the exact same ultimatum that Kennedy gave Krushchev: Do what I say or there will be a war, guaranteed. In Cuba, the Russians did the right thing and averted a war with the United States. In Ukraine, Russians were right to call out the US/Ukraine for the illegal bioweapons, and Putin had just as much right to threaten war as Kennedy did. That is absolutely, positively, 100% true and it's just hypocrisy/stupidity to deny that. In this instance, Zelenski accepted the challenge from Russia and now Russia is doing what they have to do, as is their sovereign right. Wrong. 1) I never said that at all. I correctly stated that the weapons are there, and that the US/Ukraine are jointly studying them. The original claim made by the US is that the research was "to develop medicine to counter those biowarfare threats", but ask yourself this: If they're not sharing their cures with the international community, is it a hostile act to create them? You have to do some math on that one, I'm pretty sure that you can't handle it. 2) That's an oversimplification of the actual events 3) it's a lie for you to make that claim because you have absolutely no way of knowing whether or not the US is making bioweapons there. Maybe they are, maybe they aren't, but if they were they'd definitely deny it. The best answer that you could come up with is "The US said that they're not manufacturing bioweapons there and the Beave believes everything that the US gov't says all of a sudden". What we do know is that in a court of law witnesses lose all credibility when they got caught in a lie and: 1) Russia correctly stated that the US/Ukraine had bioweapons in the Ukrainian labs 2) The US gov't initially lied about whether or not they had bioweapons in the labs 3) A high-ranking US official, Victoria Nuland - the Deputy Secretary of State to Ukraine, said that the US gov't and Ukraine gov't actually are jointly working with bioweapons in the Ukraine labs. She said that while under oath in the Senate. So.... 4) The US has lost ALL credibility surrounding the topic of WMDs in this war, just like they did in the Iraq war. Russia is the only country in this war with any credibility at all regarding the topic of bioweapons, period. That's just a fact that we should be ashamed of because theUS is our "most trusted" ally. That's weird, because I knew it before the war happened. How is it that you still don't know that? What's wrong with you Beave? Not up to speed, yet still blabbering at full speed? EVERYTHING I JUST SAID SAID IS 100% VERIFIED FACT. [IS IT SAD THAT RUSSIANS ARE THE ONES TELLING THE TRUTH HERE? YUP.] I'VE OUTDONE MYSELF IN PROVING ONCE AGAIN THAT YOU’RE JUST ANOTHER "WE THE SHEEPLE" TROLL FULL OF IDIOTIC LIES AND PROPAGANDA. ?

You're doing your "WE THE SHEEPLE" thing again. It's getting old now.

You have 28,500 posts here and you still don't even have a rudimentary understanding of how this forum works. Colour me unsurprised. My post was a reply to blackbird, but I'm not gonna tell you how everyone else knows that.

All of the stupid things that you're still saying here have been talked about in other threads. Just other NATO countries? Russia shares a border with a laundry list of countries including China and NoKo. I posted about the size, populations and border lengths of Latvia and Estonia with Russia and Belarus vs Ukraine/Rus/Bel in the war thread. I know far more about the Cuban Missile Crisis than you'll ever begin to know. I know what it's like to live in a state of perpetual war readiness, but not as a civilian in a border city with millions of troops on either side. Your beliefs are just the product of your total inability to think for yourself. You will never have an original thought in your life, all that you're capable of is regurgitating CCCG propaganda. ] FYI Russians do not want NATO in Ukraine and it will take a much bigger war than this to get them to accept NATO there. FYI Prez Z had every chance to avoid this war but he's a puppet of the US and they want this war badly. They're showing pictures of little girls with blood on their faces to turn people like you into drooling pro-war sycophants. You're the Class A useful idiot that will wish and pray for war while having absolutely no idea of the consequences.

https://mronline.org/2022/03/17/victoria-nuland-ukraine-has-biological-research-facilities-worried-russia-may-seize-them/ Tell that to Victoria Nuland. She knows 1,000x more than you do about US/Ukraine/Russia relations and she said that there are bioweapons there. Do you think that she lied to cause controversy and cause problems for her own government? Is she spreading Russian disinformation? Why does she still have a job?

Not even one thing that I wrote there is less than 100% true, but you're free to wallow in your ignorance. Thank god you're not a cop anymore.

How stupid are these protesters? Don't they know that if they want the support of Trudeau and the Liberals they just need to assault way more cops, assault some civilians, burn down some buildings, and loot some stores?

That's a perfect way to describe it.