(Thread IKs:
fatherboxx)
|
ugh I've seen multiple vids now where UA is blowing up russian owned starlink recievers with fpv drones. elon needs to be sent to gitmo.
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2024 19:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 04:55 |
|
|
quote:An investigation has been launched into the facts of the shootings of unarmed Ukrainian prisoners of war in Avdiivka and Vesely The link shows images of dead soldiers, if you don't want to see them, you can just not click it. https://t.me/Donetsk_obl_prokuratura/2254
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2024 19:25
|
|
|
There are photos of dead prisoners with their hands tied behind their backs, and there is video of a separate incident of execution of prisoners.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2024 19:40
|
|
|
Yes, but can we rule out Sudden Death Syndrome? Just asking questions here. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2024 19:49
|
|
|
Electric Wrigglies posted:If you don't stop dissenting, you will be made to descent (from the fifth story window). War in Ukraine CE: The Decent Dissent Descent
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2024 20:00
|
|
|
OddObserver posted:There are photos of dead prisoners with their hands tied behind their backs, and there is video of a separate incident of execution of prisoners. Did not know any photos showed dead soldiers having their hands bound, do you have a source saying this? beer_war posted:Yes, but can we rule out Sudden Death Syndrome? Just asking questions here. I think it is important to accurately state the facts and afaik there is no video of prisoners in Avdiika being executed. It is also interesting because it is being widely reported that such a video exists. It is an exercise in media literacy. Weka fucked around with this message at 20:12 on Feb 21, 2024 |
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2024 20:09
|
|
|
AI generated Bernie AV poster JAQ'ing? In this thread? My this is certainly a development. Surely have never seen that before. Let's see how this develops.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2024 20:39
|
|
|
Staluigi posted:War in Ukraine CE: Decimation of the Decent Dissent Descent Desantnik Detachment
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2024 20:57
|
|
|
Weka posted:Did not know any photos showed dead soldiers having their hands bound, do you have a source saying this? These photos were all over twitter a couple of days ago, they're very real. As for videos, they were reported to be on Russian social media, I trust the sources I saw reporting it, but didn't check it out after having seen the photos of soldiers with their hands bound and executed. Got no reason to doubt the Russian filmed some of these executions.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2024 21:26
|
|
|
Weka posted:not that there is video of executions. Weka posted:afaik there is no video of prisoners in Avdiika being executed.  (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2024 21:29
|
|
|
Atreiden posted:These photos were all over twitter a couple of days ago, they're very real. As for videos, they were reported to be on Russian social media, I trust the sources I saw reporting it, but didn't check it out after having seen the photos of soldiers with their hands bound and executed. Got no reason to doubt the Russian filmed some of these executions. Do you recall the sources which you say you trust?
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2024 21:30
|
|
|
Can you please stop blatantly trying to bait people into posting content that will get them probed/banned. Thanks (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2024 22:06
|
|
|
Edit: .
DJ Burette fucked around with this message at 22:36 on Feb 21, 2024 |
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2024 22:10
|
|
|
Anyway, the Senate might pass a resolution condemning Hungary. Yeah, words are cheap, but still. Again from Punchbowl's newsletter.quote:Shaheen, Tillis to unveil resolution condemning Hungary Bolding at the end there is mine.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2024 22:15
|
|
|
Moon Slayer posted:Anyway, the Senate might pass a resolution condemning Hungary. Yeah, words are cheap, but still. Again from Punchbowl's newsletter. does this kinda stuff go to the house because i could see it not passing there or getting shelved?
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2024 22:18
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:does this kinda stuff go to the house because i could see it not passing there or getting shelved? It's just a senate resolution, so not a law or bill or anything that binds anyone to do anything. Think of it as an official warning from one of the legislative bodies of a superpower.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2024 22:22
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:It's just a senate resolution, so not a law or bill or anything that binds anyone to do anything. ok. because i feel like even something like that would die in the house.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2024 22:23
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:ok. because i feel like even something like that would die in the house. Senate can give a resolution that the house majority can go gently caress themselves 
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2024 22:25
|
|
|
Staluigi posted:War in Ukraine CE: The Decent Dissent Descent I second this 
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2024 23:30
|
|
|
Tigey posted:Can you please stop blatantly trying to bait people into posting content that will get them probed/banned. Thanks I am asking for the names of sources reporting on said video, not the sources posting it, sorry if there was a lack of clarity.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 00:33
|
|
|
Sorry about the old post, but it had to be said:jaete posted:I wonder if Starlink could just give Ukraine all the coordinates of all the terminals inside the internationally-recognised borders of Ukraine The AFU knows where it isn't, because it knows where it is.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 02:08
|
|
|
When the Democrats held the House, could they have appropriated money that could have been tapped in every year? For example, instead of $100b in two packages or whatever we did that had to pass the House every time, what about $200b that could be tapped in at any time from the executive as needed? Is this legal? Was there simply no will to do it because the amount is too high and we didn't know how Ukraine would fare?
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 04:37
|
|
|
small butter posted:When the Democrats held the House, could they have appropriated money that could have been tapped in every year? For example, instead of $100b in two packages or whatever we did that had to pass the House every time, what about $200b that could be tapped in at any time from the executive as needed? Is this legal? Was there simply no will to do it because the amount is too high and we didn't know how Ukraine would fare? From what I understand, the maximum range of a house term is the next fiscal year. So every two years the budget is essentially born anew. The only thing that keeps the House from defunding the federal government is decorum and the fact that this would be batshit insane to do. Ukraine was invaded in an election year that although was more skewed to republicans with the House flipping, still had an extremely strong dem showing--the expected losses were almost an order of magnitude greater than actually occurred, which is unusual for a midterm election. But the end result was that the dems could basically provide for 2023, but not beyond that. So 2024 starts with no aid authorized, because of a GOP house that can barely elect a Speaker. As for an executive slush fund, that isn't really how govt operates. Beyond that, it would just get revoked/defunded the moment the GOP gets into office--they don't want Biden to have that much freedom and independence. Which, frankly, would be the sanest thing they'd do about an executive slush fund, albeit doing it for more vindictive reasons. Congress reins in the executive with the power of the purse. To give that away by throwing no-strings fuckyou money at the executive would be destabilizing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 04:52
|
|
|
Thanks for that explanation.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 17:32
|
|
|
Also, the president still has $4 billion in authority to draw down for aid to Ukraine. The executive is choosing not to exercise that authority until congress passes a supplemental or budget of some kind.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 18:02
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Also, the president still has $4 billion in authority to draw down for aid to Ukraine. The executive is choosing not to exercise that authority until congress passes a supplemental or budget of some kind. Yeah isn't this existing setup basically a slush fund? They gave a chunk of money that the executive can drawdown on as he sees fit. I know it's actually mostly used to buy stuff for our military to replace what we sent over but financially it seems kind of like a slush fund to me? Or maybe I don't understand the term.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 18:50
|
|
|
D-Pad posted:Yeah isn't this existing setup basically a slush fund? They gave a chunk of money that the executive can drawdown on as he sees fit. I know it's actually mostly used to buy stuff for our military to replace what we sent over but financially it seems kind of like a slush fund to me? Or maybe I don't understand the term. I think people see dollar amounts but drawdown authority isn't the same as having a slush fund you can do whatever with. The letter of the law is: quote:he may direct, for the purposes of this part, the drawdown of defense articles from the stocks of the Department of Defense, defense services of the Department of Defense, and military education and training, of an aggregate value of not to exceed $100,000,000 in any fiscal year. The limits have been updated but the key point is that the President gets to hand off existing things or make the DoD do things. This is not the same as having the cash to create new procurement contracts to actually get new things built. One of the main complaints right now is that the 155mm production in the US is hitting supply bottlenecks and they need additional congressional funding to get factories built to produce components. PDA doesn't do anything there. The President can't give away things that don't exist.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 19:03
|
|
|
McConnell wreaked havoc on federal agencies for a decade with the sequester deal. Can congress really not get multiple years of funding through?
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 19:04
|
|
|
D-Pad posted:Yeah isn't this existing setup basically a slush fund? They gave a chunk of money that the executive can drawdown on as he sees fit. I know it's actually mostly used to buy stuff for our military to replace what we sent over but financially it seems kind of like a slush fund to me? Or maybe I don't understand the term. The PDA authority cannot be used to buy goods for the US government; it is an authority, not a source of funding. PDA is authority to draw down from US stocks for foreign military aid. There is a standard amount the president always has for emergencies, which is low, like $100 million or something. In US Code, some countries are given additional amounts or specifically limited as not being eligible for this military assistance without special congressional authority. As for what is being used to buy replacement goods for the US: These are from appropriations passed by congress in supplementals (or it could go into a future budget bill). So PDA: Authority for executive to give materiel etc, without any appropriations attached. USAI, supplemental appropriations: Congressional approval to spend new appropriations on equipment/services/etc, which might be spent on US acquisitions or might be spent in support of a foreign country. Previously, congress did two things: Expanded the PDA dollar-value limit by billions, to allow the executive to draw down euqipment from existing stocks and send it to Ukraine. There is about $4 billion of that authority remaining. Passed appropriations for things like US defense industrial base, replacement of items donated via PDA, or appropriations to buy things directly for Ukraine. Presently, the executive has refused to do more of the former until they see new passages of the latter. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/COMPS-1071/pdf/COMPS-1071.pdf
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 19:06
|
|
|
While technically the term "slush fund" can include any account used for miscellaneous expenditures, it usually implies corrupt use of the money. I certainly don't agree with more of my tax dollars being sent abroad, there doesn't seem to be any illegitimate use of the funds by the Biden administration. Afaik the only place the money set aside for Ukraine goes is either to Ukraine itself or arms dealers like boeing and raytheon. Where the weapons go after they get sent to Ukraine could be a whole different story tho. Edit: VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV To draw a distinction between the purpose of the money and where it may end up. If some of the weaponry goes missing that does not imply corruption upon the Biden's part, so it's still not a "slush fund". (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) Cpt_Obvious fucked around with this message at 20:33 on Feb 22, 2024 |
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 19:22
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:Where the weapons go after they get sent to Ukraine could be a whole different story tho. Is there a particular point for bringing this up?
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 19:50
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:While technically the term "slush fund" can include any account used for miscellaneous expenditures, it usually implies corrupt use of the money. I certainly don't agree with more of my tax dollars being sent abroad, there doesn't seem to be any illegitimate use of the funds by the Biden administration. Afaik the only place the money set aside for Ukraine goes is either to Ukraine itself or arms dealers like boeing and Raytheon. Emphasis mine. A preponderance of the evidence suggests--and no extant evidence suggest otherwise--that most of it is going to the Russian military. It takes a variety of means and routes--some direct, and some indirect. Edit: Raenir Salazar posted:Is there a particular point for bringing this up? It's a poo poo-in-the-room-and-then-ask-why-it-smells post. "Just asking questions," and all that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 19:55
|
|
|
One time, a SAM system was given by Russia to some Ukrainian separatists without proper training, and that led to the shoot-down of an airliner and deaths of hundreds of civilians. Therefore, countries shouldn’t give the Ukrainian government weapons or something.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 20:07
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Is there a particular point for bringing this up? Been hearing and seeing this talking point from a few right leaning commentators. They think Ukraine may go the way Afghanistan after the Soviets left, causing instability in the region and blow back effects for decades after. It is interesting how certain talking points to tend hit the media landscape all at once.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 20:09
|
|
|
I remember it was a talking point like a year ago. Pretty insane it's still out there, after so much time of nonstop heavy fighting. What has Ukraine been using to fight if they treacherously sell donated weapons to woke terrorists, do they pelt Russians with potatoes?
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 20:25
|
|
|
Its very weird to act shocked about the idea that some of equipment and money bound for Ukraine falls off the van when it is definitely already happening.quote:But the inspector general report noted that after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine last year, the Defense Department’s ability to track and monitor all of the US equipment pouring into Ukraine, as required by law under the Arms Export Control Act, faced “challenges” because of the limited US presence in the country. quote:CNN reported in April 2022 that the Biden administration was willing to take the risk of losing track of weapons supplied to Ukraine despite a lack of visibility, as they saw it as critical to Ukraine’s defeat of Russian forces. quote:Still, criminal organizations managed to steal some weaponry and equipment provided by the US and its allies, the report says. Ukraine was already a hot spot for illegally trafficked weapons before the war. quote:According to the 2021 Global Organized Crime Index, Ukraine has one of the largest illegally trafficked arms markets in Europe, especially when it comes to small arms and ammunition. And its consistent with the US losing track of weapons being sent to other war-torn countries as well. quote:As an illustration of how haphazard the supervision of this arms distribution often was, last week, five months after being asked by The New York Times for its own tally of small arms issued to partner forces in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Pentagon said it has records for fewer than half the number of firearms in the researchers’ count — about 700,000 in all. This is an amount, Overton noted, that “only accounts for 48 percent of the total small arms supplied by the U.S. government that can be found in open-source government reports.” quote:Dramatic TTP videos show apparent attacks on Pakistani police and army outposts by militants armed with American weapons and using night vision and thermal sights, which Afghan Peace Watch said in a new report are “highly sought-after accessories supplied to Afghan Special Forces.” The report quotes a Taliban fighter in Nangarhar province, bordering Pakistan, as saying night vision items sell for $500 to $1,000. Its not necessarily a commentary on the morality of providing lethal aid to Ukraine. Its just a fact of life for warfare.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 20:30
|
|
|
"Already happening": Prevented attempts to steal less stuff than owned by an average NRA member.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 20:37
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:I remember it was a talking point like a year ago. Pretty insane it's still out there, after so much time of nonstop heavy fighting. What has Ukraine been using to fight if they treacherously sell donated weapons to woke terrorists, do they pelt Russians with potatoes? You may remember that actually there is no war happening at all since there is no footage of it on twitter.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 21:08
|
|
|
1stGear posted:Its very weird to act shocked about the idea that some of equipment and money bound for Ukraine falls off the van when it is definitely already happening. "Not able to track it" does not mean it's being sold on the black market. As you also point out, a fraction of the arms sent to any country always gets diverted by locals, so there is nothing remarkable about Ukraine. Why are you trying to pretend that this is an issue? (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 21:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 04:55 |
|
|
Deteriorata posted:Why are you trying to pretend that this is an issue? 1stGear posted:Its not necessarily a commentary on the morality of providing lethal aid to Ukraine. Its just a fact of life for warfare. I felt compelled to touch the hot stove because it is genuinely wild to me that people in this thread believe the thing that happens in every war ever isn't happening in this one.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 21:17
|
|