Taking the Turing test to the next level.
https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1579016732869419008
Apologies this has been posted before, but for anyone that missed it the first time round.
Brace yourself for the Comrade Hitler edition
https://twitter.com/sumlenny/status/1535582101621420032?t=fwqlKxxRQfBFIAXKLgJ0NQ&s=19
Quite how this compares to Commando Comics im not really sure
timba
Free MemberI’m aware that NATO contributions are open to political and accounting debate, however the fact is that 2% of GDP was agreed in 2002, it was agreed again in 2006, again in 2014 and again when Trump threatened to withdraw in 2020 if countries didn’t contribute as agreed.
The 2% is an agreed aim, it's not a requirement. And with good reason, since as you say it's wildly open to accounting and rationale. Frinstance, when the UK agreed to increase its "defence spending", what it mostly did was move a bunch of spending that wasn't in the defence budget into it. Largely veteran welfare, pensions, etc, and lots of fudgery (since a ton of this stuff sat in DWP and NHS spending). The US already did this- basically everything that can possibly be classed as defence spending, is, plus tons that shouldn't because it's one of their best pork barrel spending methods.
And of course even if it is directly relevant defence spending, not all of it's at all NATO relevant, or NATO-useful. The US inland coastguard for instance is of little value in the north atlantic. Whereas those nations with borders with Russia inevitably have a much higher direct contribution. And the 2nd biggest spender by %, Greece, is mostly spending as a direct response to the 6th biggest, Turkey, with most of their strategic and tactical planning focused on defending against that fellow treaty member and presumed ally. A chunk of Turkey and Greece's spending is directly detrimental to NATO but still it goes in the 2%.
So, rather than try and make a real formula that could accurately identify whether spending is actually of value to NATO, AND then try and enforce it across all of the members with all of their different opinions and priorities and budgeting shenanigans, which would be basically impossible, and even if it were, would still be unenforcable, NATO has settled for the "aim for 2%".
Main TV tower in Moscow seems to have been carelessly smoking too..
https://twitter.com/i/status/1579153820349001730
The 2% is an agreed aim, it’s not a requirement
In 2006 2% was a pledge. The global financial crisis in 2008 led to 2% being amended to an aim at the 2014 meeting in Wales. By 2017 the largest economy in Europe was contributing just 1.2% to NATO, at a time when only five of twenty-eight NATO members contributed 2%.
Yes, there are creative accounting practices but these are accepted by NATO, they are open to all and politically it makes sense for everyone to use them
The US is a different case because it's outside of Europe and has interests elsewhere, e.g. Taiwan. US GDP is similar to the total GDP of the rest of NATO, but it spends an amount equivalent to 2/3 of the total NATO budget on defence, i.e more than the expected 1/2. Some of this is dual-purpose spending on capability that can be used either for NATO or in other regions, e.g. satellites and integrated ballistic missile defences e.g. at Ramstein in Germany and another being built in Poland and can be legitimately counted as contributing to NATO.
I understand your position and I'd agree that NATO funding is as clear as mud and "creative". For Germany to request NATO help with cable thieves is IMHO a step too far, although I understand that the timing was bad for the German Chancellor and I don't suppose that he expected to receive help 🙂
Just watched the remastered Blu Ray of Threads in preparation for Vlad's next move.
timba
Free MemberIn 2006 2% was a pledge. The global financial crisis in 2008 led to 2% being amended to an aim at the 2014 meeting in Wales.
TBH that's often stated but you won't find it in the riga summit declaration...
Not convinced it's a single truck bomb, if it was what the hell was it to lift two concurrent road decks but not the ones running parallel?
Missiles? Maybe. But they absolutely did not hit that train with one, if they did it would be in the water, end of. What possible reason would they have for an air burst when they can just hit it? You get the same effect but the added bonus of a great big hole.
Like I said, it seems like an odd thing to hit the road and just hope that debris cascaded onto the train to ignite it. That's Hollywood shit right there. Occams razor says if they knew the train would be there then they knew how to hit it at the same time.
The alleged truck driver's passport shown by the Russians is apparently a photoshop of a sample shown on Wikipedia.
https://twitter.com/AndriiLuchkov/status/1579191454093934592
^^ Looks like that is a prank?
Based on an old Sam Hyde meme or something?
Apologies if I'm wrong!
^^ Looks like that is a prank?
Russian propaganda always looks like it's meant to be a prank. Russia is humiliated by the bridge being attacked, it was a symbol of Russian imperial power and the attack was on Putin's birthday. They don't want to admit that Ukraine knocked it out with one missile strike so they are making a pretense that there is a network of foreign agents undermining Russia from within. The propaganda doesn't have to be convincing, it just has to send a signal to Russians that the official line is that it was a truck bomb, not a missile.
I agree with you but I really do think this is based on an old meme to be honest mate.
A genuine prank rather than Russian misinformation/ incompetence. This time anyway.lol
A genuine prank rather than Russian misinformation/ incompetence. This time anyway.lol
Quite possible, but just the fact that there's doubt about it shows how shoddy Russian propaganda is.
With no special equipment I managed to pause the cctv footage on the first frame when the over exposure from whatever has exploded occurs and both the car and the truck are still clearly visible and untouched. To me this has to suggest that neither is the source of the explosion. However, if I can see that then surely someone official has too.??
TBH that’s often stated but you won’t find it in the riga summit declaration…
I'm not going to read it just now 🙂 🙂 The word "pledge" is used on the NATO website for 2006 and "aim" later for 2014, but if that isn't correct then my apologies
There's a jazzy infographic about halfway down that illustrates both 2% and 20% here... https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/the-two-nato-targets-which-countries-are-hitting-the-mark/
There's no doubt about the fact that Germany committed massively to NATO when the Warsaw Pact was a wall-thickness away, since the wall fell that contribution reduced massively (understandably).
Some German politicians have become unnecessarily reliant on Russian energy while rowing back on defence spending. This has given Russia a financial filip and a pressure point that's been applied during this war, just as Germany's NATO allies and the EU warned.
I'm going to suggest that we stop this thread drift into NATO budgets and I'll try to rein my thoughts in whenever Germany is mentioned 🙂
Allegations were made public yesterday that Arne Schoenbohm, head of the German cyber-security agency, is being investigated for his alleged contacts with Russia.
The intelligence oversight committee said, "These accusations must be decisively investigated"
With no special equipment I managed to pause the cctv footage on the first frame when the over exposure from whatever has exploded occurs and both the car and the truck are still clearly visible and untouched. To me this has to suggest that neither is the source of the explosion. However, if I can see that then surely someone official has too.??
Yes, military analysts pointed that out fairly quickly.
It wasn't a boat because the scorch marks aren't coming from under the bridge. Something punched a hole through the deck. Consistent with a missile with a delayed fuse so that it punches through the deck and explodes underneath, blowing the deck upwards. Ukraine will be promoting the truck bomb theory just to screw with the Russians.
https://twitter.com/ChuckPfarrer/status/1579206314185850880
If something exploded underneath, ie bunker buster time delay missile, or a boat exploded underneath then the explosion radiates from ummmmm underneath in both scenarios.
It wasn’t a boat because the scorch marks aren’t coming from under the bridge. Something punched a hole through the deck. Consistent with a missile with a delayed fuse so that it punches through the deck and explodes underneath, blowing the deck upwards
So there should be scorch marks underneath, but there aren't any. The train seems to have been ignited by flaming debris, which also tends to point to something above the deck
Hasn't N Korea been testing ballistic missiles this week?
Too slow 🙂
That train must have been stationary too, otherwise it would have travelled some distance past the point if explosion before coming to a halt.
looks like the artic lorry had a few tons of ammonium nitrate fertiliser (so a home made truck bomb) on it. Explosion was too big for a 500lb ATACMS round. Interesting as it also explains the sparks/glowing debris raining down just after the explosion...Also
https://twitter.com/OAlexanderDK/status/1579142059075985410?s=20&t=Zhw4m0plWJZdJLKumbjITw
Sums up the difference.
Ukrainian forces somehow carry out a precision attack on a vital supply bridge.
Russia launches missiles at civilians.
Sums up the difference.
Ukrainian forces somehow carry out a precision attack on a vital supply bridge.
Russia launches missiles at civilians.
Yup
Absolutely, and Putin accuses Ukraine of terrorism!
Russian "precision" strike on a highly strategic, er, footbridge????????? in Kiev this morning.. https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/1579367987618148354?s=20&t=CGrrh8Y2BagxKh2f06zi1A
footbridge made of glass...
that's still standing too. .
Even when the last Russian soldier is removed from Ukrainian soil what’s to stop putin firing his missiles on a daily basis?
I see the new general in charge has taken up where he left off when he was helping Assad.
Just bombing playgrounds and universities.
That truck driver looks suspiciously like Dermot Mulligan.
zippykona
Full Member
Even when the last Russian soldier is removed from Ukrainian soil what’s to stop putin firing his missiles on a daily basis?
If as I hope that happens, I suspect he will have some pressing concerns on the home front to deal with. Staying alive mainly. Not the song version.
Maybe there was both.
Imagine, a truck full of "fertiliser" tootling across the bridge at a constant cruise control regulated 30mph.
A precision missile strike on or near the truck.
Right at the point where the trains full of fuel always stop on the bridge.
BOOM
It wasn’t a boat because the scorch marks aren’t coming from under the bridge. Something punched a hole through the deck. Consistent with a missile with a delayed fuse so that it punches through the deck and explodes underneath, blowing the deck upwards.
Which would leave "scorch marks" just as a boat bomb would surely?
Anyway I'm still going boat bomb.
EDIT I've just looked at that tweet from Chuck Pfarrer and may have changed my mind!
footbridge made of glass…
that’s still standing too. .
Very plausible comment in that thread that the actual target may well have been "the building of the European Union advisory assistance located nearby".
Even when the last Russian soldier is removed from Ukrainian soil what’s to stop putin firing his missiles on a daily basis?
Nothing.
BBC reporting:
German consulate hit in Kyiv missile strike
Random or by design?
Where are the missiles that are hitting Kyiv being launched from? Is it Belarus?
I thought the Russian stock of long range precision missiles was severely depleted/gone and that's why they weren't being used to counter the Ukraine offensive.
What's the goal with these missile strikes? Terror? They don't serve a military purpose.
catdras
Free Member
Where are the missiles that are hitting Kyiv being launched from? Is it Belarus?
Moldova reporting that several cruise missiles crossed over its airspace. Again, from the Beeb. They are not happy.
The foreign minister of Moldova, which shares a border with western Ukraine and has its own area of land annexed by Russia (Transnistria), has said several Russian cruise missiles targeting Ukraine had crossed its airspace.
Moldova summoned Moscow's envoy to the country to demand an explanation for the violation, Nicu Popescu confirmed.
What’s the goal with these missile strikes? Terror? They don’t serve a military purpose.
To make Putin look strong and decisive to the right-wing nutters in Russia.
Putin needs to look at the effect the blitz had on the UK during WW11.
It will just harden Ukrainian resolve.
The West also need to supply Ukraine with modern air defence systems too ffs!
It also shows how Putin will really act when he's back is to the wall. Not nukes, just heavy conventional weapon use against civilians and infrastructure.
Random or by design?
I would go for random just on the grounds even at their best the Russians dont seem great at precision weapons and that was before they used up their good ones.
Not only are todays missile strikes disgusting, they are also stupid. It is widely acknowledged he has a shortage of the decent cruise missiles. Every civilian target he strikes with one is a military target he can’t.
It is widely acknowledged he has a shortage of the decent cruise missiles.
Yeah I was thinking that too – I assume he just wanted to hit back quickly with headline-grabbing actions so he can continue to give the illusion that he is the big man and in control of the situation.
Even when the last Russian soldier is removed from Ukrainian soil what’s to stop putin firing his missiles on a daily basis?
I suspect that there will be some further assistance provided from Ukrainian allies in this situation.
Also, lets no forget who built thos bridge.
Saying that you need x kg of rdx to blow up concrete is true
If that concrete has been mixed d and poured correctly, start cutting corners and only using half the cement in the mix c28 structural or whatever will make the hole thing easier to destroy
Yeah I was thinking that too – I assume he just wanted to hit back quickly with headline-grabbing actions so he can continue to give the illusion that he is the big man and in control of the situation.
Can you imagine being the general wanting to advise Putin that this is not the best course of strategy?
"Yes, oh master tactician"
