Explosion hits capital of breakaway Ukrainian region (VIDEOS)

[Monica33]

The Russian strategy of showing strength while negotiating is so far successful.

It has put the Ukraine issue back on the front pages, it showed that the U.S. and NATO are unwilling to fight for the Ukraine and it has demonstrated disunity within NATO. The U.S. made some concession by offering negotiations over minor issues which Russia had previously requested.

Meanwhile more satellite pictures of the alleged 'Russian invasion forces' were published by the BBC. Professor Paul Robinson, who is a former military intelligence officer, debunked them.

The whole U.S. campaign of a 'Russian invasion' is disinformation designed to give cover for the upcoming attack of Ukraine on its rebellious Donbas region.



Excerpt from Bs latest on' Moon of Alabama '-- surely one of the very best investigators anywhere

 

[watsup]

The whole U.S. campaign of a 'Russian invasion' is disinformation designed to give cover for the upcoming attack of Ukraine on its rebellious Donbas region

Thank you for that. Now o don’t have to read TASS to get Putin Paradise propaganda.

 

[Schism]

Nobody has global commitments like we do.

Why are we mired in global commitments? More importantly, why do seem to be defending those global commitments?

And more to the point, many of those global "commitments" are at the point of a sword or a result of arm-twisting and economic threats.

Neither of these two points have any real relation to your previous claim.

You're arguing that we can't possibly know what Ted Bundy's intentions are with his date today, because he can't be pigeonholed by his behavior on previous dates. I would disagree. We've seen how our country operates over decades in terms of wrecking entire nations and secret wars.

Behind the secret U.S. war in Africa
The Secret War in Africa
U.S. SECRET WARS IN AFRICA RAGE ON, DESPITE TALK OF DOWNSIZING

And I assume you can google Edward Snowden, CIA black sites, CIA torture, and NSA spying on Americans.

Or do you deny this too?

 

[jpn]

Meanwhile more satellite pictures of the alleged 'Russian invasion forces' were published by the BBC. Professor Paul Robinson, who is a former military intelligence officer, debunked them.

Debunked them?

Once again conservatives are here on DP regurgitating half-baked "analyses" that fit their pre-existing world views, without taking the time to actually analyze what is being said.

The first picture shows a facility which Robinson breathlessly exclaims is irrelevant because:

"In fact, it’s north west of the Belarusian capital Minsk, and about half way between Minsk and the Lithuanian border. In other words, IT’S NOWHERE NEAR UKRAINE."​

Love the all-caps. You wouldn't know it if you don't read the BBC article, but the BBC actually takes pains to point out that the picture in not on the Ukrainian border.

BBC: "Of particular concern is the presence of a new field hospital, at some distance to the rear at the Osipovichi training area in north-western Belarus."​

According to Google Maps, Osipovichi is about 118 miles from the Ukrainian border. Not exactly "NOWHERE NEAR UKRAINE" in today's world of paved roads.​

He also objects to the BBC's characterization of a staging area:

"The BBC notes that “Analysts at London-based McKenzie Intelligence Services have highlighted the large staging area on the right bank of the river as an indicator of possible intent to move large numbers of vehicles.” What “large staging area”?? There’s just a big empty space."​

Yeah, genius, big empty spaces make really good areas for staging equipment. Duh.

He objects to pointing to Russian artillery at Bretsky:

"More important is Bretsky’s location. It’s in the far, far south-western corner of Belarus, connecting to the far, far north-western corner of Ukraine. Now think about this for a moment. Is that a likely location for a Russian attack on Ukraine? "There is no strategic, operational, or tactical logic I can see for charging into the far west of Ukraine in such a way. It makes no sense."​

Pardon me for suggesting that this guy has no f***ing clue what the Russian invasion plans are. Also, he seems to want to have it both ways, since earlier he whined about the "prejudicial use of the word ‘surrounded’" when the BBC pointed out how the Russian deployments were surrounding Ukraine. When shown Russian forces on the perimeter, then he whines that they have no purpose obvious to him, so they should be ignored. M'kay.

And then he basically concedes the final photo, but says it's meaningless because...well, just because:

"And finally, we have a picture of some helicopters in Zyabrovka in south-eastern Belarus, which do at least the advantage of being more or less decently located for an invasion, but which by themselves mean nothing."​

So Monica believes some guy she found on the Internet who agrees with her, proving once again the old maxim: "the Internet makes smart people smarter, and dumb people dumber."

 

[watsup]

Debunked them?

Once again conservatives are here on DP regurgitating half-baked "analyses" that fit their pre-existing world views, without taking the time to actually analyze what is being said.

The first picture shows a facility which Robinson breathlessly exclaims is irrelevant because:

"In fact, it’s north west of the Belarusian capital Minsk, and about half way between Minsk and the Lithuanian border. In other words, IT’S NOWHERE NEAR UKRAINE."​

Love the all-caps. You wouldn't know it if you don't read the BBC article, but the BBC actually takes pains to point out that the picture in not on the Ukrainian border.

BBC: "Of particular concern is the presence of a new field hospital, at some distance to the rear at the Osipovichi training area in north-western Belarus."​

According to Google Maps, Osipovichi is about 118 miles from the Ukrainian border. Not exactly "NOWHERE NEAR UKRAINE" in today's world of paved roads.​

He also objects to the BBC's characterization of a staging area:

"The BBC notes that “Analysts at London-based McKenzie Intelligence Services have highlighted the large staging area on the right bank of the river as an indicator of possible intent to move large numbers of vehicles.” What “large staging area”?? There’s just a big empty space."​

Yeah, genius, big empty spaces make really good areas for staging equipment. Duh.

He objects to pointing to Russian artillery at Bretsky:

"More important is Bretsky’s location. It’s in the far, far south-western corner of Belarus, connecting to the far, far north-western corner of Ukraine. Now think about this for a moment. Is that a likely location for a Russian attack on Ukraine? "There is no strategic, operational, or tactical logic I can see for charging into the far west of Ukraine in such a way. It makes no sense."​

Pardon me for suggesting that this guy has no f***ing clue what the Russian invasion plans are. Also, he seems to want to have it both ways, since earlier he whined about the "prejudicial use of the word ‘surrounded’" when the BBC pointed out how the Russian deployments were surrounding Ukraine. When shown Russian forces on the perimeter, then he whines that they have no purpose obvious to him, so they should be ignored. M'kay.

And then he basically concedes the final photo, but says it's meaningless because...well, just because:

"And finally, we have a picture of some helicopters in Zyabrovka in south-eastern Belarus, which do at least the advantage of being more or less decently located for an invasion, but which by themselves mean nothing."​

So Monica believes some guy she found on the Internet who agrees with her, proving once again the old maxim: "the Internet makes smart people smarter, and dumb people dumber."

Excellent analysis.