|
RT is reporting that the personal data of 50 million Turkish citizens was just leaked online. I know that it's RT, but Jesus. Is anyone else reporting or am I just really dumb? QuoProQuid fucked around with this message at 20:46 on Apr 4, 2016 |
#
¿
Apr 4, 2016 20:43
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 19:45 |
|
|
So about that weird web defacement with a bunch of nonsense on it that people were trying to interpret: https://twitter.com/wiczipedia/status/1482736881372741641?s=21 quote:Today, we’re sharing that we’ve observed destructive malware in systems belonging to several Ukrainian government agencies and organizations that work closely with the Ukrainian government. The malware is disguised as ransomware but, if activated by the attacker, would render the infected computer system inoperable. We’re sharing this information to help others in the cybersecurity community look out for and defend against these attacks.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2022 16:52
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:You dumb geriatric gently caress, that's like saying you'll fire missiles into Russian soil. lol, what? no it isn’t. the us and russia have been doing tit for tat with cyber for a while, with Russia being far more aggressive on that front
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2022 01:15
|
|
|
just to be clear, Russia’s specific demands to de-escalate are: https://mid.ru/ru/foreign_policy/rso/nato/1790803/?lang=en * No foreign troops or weaponry East of Germany * No short-range or intermediate range missiles within NATO’s territory; * A permanent end to NATO’s “open door policy” * No military activity or cooperation “in the Eastern Europe, in the South Caucasus and in Central Asia.” * Ukraine formally and explicitly barred from ever being a NATO member in addition to making a mockery of self-determination, i don’t see how any of that suggests good faith on behalf of the russian federation
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2022 22:04
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:As a response to NATO's "our offer is this, nothing" rhetoric, I think it's basically like for like. I hope it's not their final position though, because it's pretty nuts. what why would nato offer anything in a crisis that russia has entirely engineered itself? why would nato even dignify demands that would require it to run roughshod over the sovereignty of its members and third parties
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2022 22:07
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:Because it's better than leaving Ukraine to hang while promising to punish Russia over their corpse I guess? i feel like im having a stroke because there's been literal years of negotiation with russia and multiple agreements to try and defuse the crisis in donbas. russia is effectively saying "no, that isn't good enough" and threatening to instigate a war with ukraine unless it can extract concessions that no sovereign country would ever agree to
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2022 22:12
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:Maybe we could try de-escalation, where Russia withdraws from some of the territory they're currently occupying and some of the sanctions are withdrawn in return. And some of Russia's strategic concerns could be addressed, and Russia in turn could be a better neighbor and stop threatening Ukraine's security. Israel routinely bombs Iranian forces in Syria because they can't possibly allow even a weaker enemy country to have a presence near their border, and the US obviously supports this, but when Russia has concerns about a massive alliance that's far stronger than it continuing to bolster its strength near Russia's borders, they're paranoid and any attempt they make to address the situation is a monstrous act of barbarism from the Western perspective. The real American argument is that we're strong enough that we'll do what we want to do without any real concessions to assuage Russian concerns, and any attempt by Russia to stop us will be met with crippling sanctions that will immiserate the people of Russia. there have been attempts to de-escalate on the issue of donbass through the minsk protocol, which collapsed after separatists attacked dontesk's airport. minsk ii, which was eventually signed, has been defined by repeated violations by russia and russia's partners like, again, im not sure what more can be done here because it is clear that russia wants conflict. its posture for the last few months has been one of repeatedly comparing the government of ukraine to nazis and not taking seriously any attempts to reach a peaceful settlement. it has been nothing but antagonistic since it literally invaded ukraine in 2014 and instigated a civil war in its eastern territories.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2022 23:30
|
|
|
i think if you are american, you can coherently argue that ukraine is not a concern of the united states. i think there's a lot wrong with that perspective, but it's not dissimilar from what a lot of officials in DC themselves are saying behind the scenes. trying to argue that russia is somehow the aggrieved party or that russia is entitled to attack ukraine is absurd. putting aside the entitlement and anti-democratic attitude it takes to declare that you deserve control over X or Y country because it is in your "sphere of influence," ukraine has not made any meaningful moves toward joining NATO or the EU. it does not pose a military or economic threat to russia in any meaningful sense. ukraine has gone out of its way to avoid direct confrontation, as evidenced by the lack of response to russia's annexation of crimea and its continued attempts to work things out through the minsk protocol despite russia repeatedly violating those agreements. this current crisis is one that russia has entirely manufactured itself. moreover, i would point out that one of the reasons that NATO has persisted as an institution into the 21st century is because russia keeps choosing to invade, harass, and threaten its neighbors. if russia were able to exert a modicum of control over itself, people in eastern europe, the caucasus, and balkans would be far less eager to join or remain in the alliance
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2022 14:47
|
|
|
 brave fighters against the forces of imperialism and fascism itt
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2022 17:35
|
|
|
Plastic_Gargoyle posted:What is this from Leszek Kołakowski's' "My Correct Views on Everything"
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2022 17:41
|
|
|
isn't lollontee the genocide denialist who pops up repeatedly in the china thread claiming that the uyghurs are saudi-financed agents or some poo poo?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2022 18:01
|
|
|
lollontee posted:could you maybe moderate the thread before debating me commiegir. like maybe ban that guy under you accusing me of genocide denialism  lollontee posted:i know, i have plenty of migrant friends whove spoken with uighurs fleeing chinese state repression, who tell me it was because of religious conflict lollontee posted:so why do you think the US keeps flip-flopping on treating ETIM as a terrorist organization or an NED recipient? surely it cant have been to use the ETIM to spread radical jihadist and nationalist sentiment in an effort to incite terrorism in places they want, like in Syria or China, depending on the foreign policy priorities of the american empire at any given moment lollontee posted:is your brain accidentally saying things you actually believe? western media fabricating genocides or denying them is something that happens constantly in front of your own eyes, dunno youre so angry at me for it
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2022 18:08
|
|
|
what a normal organization. quote:The Strategic Culture Foundation is a Russian think tank that primarily publishes an online current affairs magazine of the same name. It is regarded as an arm of Russian state interests by the United States government.[1]
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2022 18:34
|
|
|
Al-Saqr posted:So like what’s the significance of giving a written response to Putin by Biden? Wouldn’t anything short of what Russia wants mean that it’s just writing a letter saying ‘ try invading Ukraine bozo we’ll sanction you’? I'm not sure it's transformative but it's productive insofar as it keeps channels open and gives some additional time to all the parties to calm down and de-escalate.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2022 19:17
|
|
|
The official statement from NATO on Russia's demand that NATO not be allowed to have troops within Eastern European NATO member-states: https://twitter.com/NATOpress/status/1484634859045892104 Nenonen posted:This was iirc (can't check WSJ because of pay wall) at least partly about howitzers and their ammunition that was originally from USSR and bought by East Germany, then after unification Finland bought a bunch for cheap because we use the same caliber anyway. Then later Finland donated a bunch of those guns to Estonia, who are now modernizing their equipment to Nato standards but Ukraine still uses a lot of that howitzer model. the article states it is not about finland not approving but germany having a policy against sending weapons to "tense regions." quote:Germany is blocking North Atlantic Treaty Organization ally Estonia from giving military support to Ukraine by refusing to issue permits for German-origin weapons to be exported to Kyiv as it braces for a potential Russian invasion. QuoProQuid fucked around with this message at 22:18 on Jan 21, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2022 22:15
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:^^ Deleted tweet. I think it got deleted because the office appeared to have tagged a parody account by mistake. It was a statement from the NATO spokesperson saying that "NATO will not agree to have first- and second-class members. A threat to one member is a threat to all and we will not restrict our capacity to operate within our own territory in defense of a member." e: yeah, here it is again: https://twitter.com/NATOpress/status/1484637279926820866
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2022 22:21
|
|
|
entry to NATO requires unanimous approval from all NATO member-states. even if the Alliance wanted to throw its requirements to the wind and even if the US wanted to throw open the doors to, idk, japan, countries like France and Germany would not allow them to join
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2022 02:10
|
|
|
Koos Group posted:The events today reminded me of an idea I had, so I'd like to propose that to the thread now. EE posters have previously complained to me that international posters without as much knowledge of the region sometimes come into the thread and start discussions that are not very interesting to those who live there. With all due respect, this would be a bad approach. What people have a problem with is not Americans (and others) contributing to the thread. The issue is low-information, drive-by posters who barge into the thread with a sneering disdain for the people who actually live through the region because ""america bad, russia good."
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2022 04:48
|
|
|
Grape posted:This downplays the equally sinister Clancychat people who treat this real region of the real world like the new episode spoilers section of Dragonball. You’re right. I also hate the Clancy chat and fantasizing about poo poo like dirty bombs. Thanks for the addition.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2022 05:56
|
|
|
BoldFace posted:What in God's name are they smoking in the German Navy. Unsurprisingly, Germany’s defense minister is running away from these comments as fast as she can: https://twitter.com/julianroepcke/status/1484842415714406404?s=21
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2022 13:56
|
|
|
mmkay posted:I've got a sort of weird question - where did the 'Ukraine' vs 'The Ukraine' come from? I know the meaning that's currently assigned for each of them (country vs some breakaway part of Russia or something like that), but how did this article become the defined difference between the two. From quick wikiing (and consulting 20-year old knowledge about Polish grammar lodged into my head) I don't think there's a equivalent in Polish for the 'the' article and the map on articles, suggests that neither Russian, nor Ukrainian have those either. So how was this article translated into English x years ago (and when did that start appearing?)? In English, use of “the” before a place tends to denote a region (see, for instance, the Midwest or the Appalachians). Given that Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union and Russian Empire, it was common in the English-language press to refer to it as “the Ukraine” to denote it was a constituent, non-sovereign part of a larger whole. After Ukraine gained independence in 1991, the Associated Press officially dropped the use of “the” to indicate it was a country. The government has an official policy of requesting that English speakers not use the “the.”
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2022 15:35
|
|
|
The German navy chief who spoke about Russia and Ukraine has been canned (or, rather, being forced to leave) lol: https://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutscher-marinechef-kay-achim-schoenbach-muss-gehen-a-454d5539-5d6a-4880-ba23-21ee7e363dc0 Not surprising but does suggest that Germany wants there to be no misunderstanding of its position.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2022 21:50
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:That's, uh, not helping with the Eastern Ukraine situation it looks like a minor lithuanian MP just shitposting
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2022 15:14
|
|
|
Truga posted:i'm not calling out the condemnations, i'm calling out the idea that this entire conflict was somehow completely unavoidable by the west. when one side completely ignored the positions of the other for like 20 years, you don't get to pretend that. it's insanely lovely for people of ukraine, but this entire poo poo was brewed by both russia and nato, not just one side i don’t think anyone is going to say that the years after the collapse of the Soviet Union were handled well by “the West,” but at a certain point you have to acknowledge that russia has its own agency and its stated motivation for instigating a crisis that could kill tens of thousands is an expansion of NATO that hasn’t happened and isn’t likely to happen. QuoProQuid fucked around with this message at 12:54 on Jan 25, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2022 12:50
|
|
|
Truga posted:i agree, but also in 2008 NATO leadership could have said "see, russians keep saying they'd be real mad if we really took you in" and then kept doing nothing instead of going all "oh yeah, sure, we're definitely letting you in *wink wink nudge nudge*" every few years and then doing absolutely nothing anyway. that's the real headscratcher to me. if ukraine was in nato by 2014 none of this bullshit would fly either, but nope, gotta string them along. wtf? i think NATO and its members are reluctant to have their decision-making hemmed in by outside states (as any state does) and doesn't want russia to see that it can get what it wants by bullying of its neighbors. because, at that point, the view is that it's just encouraging more aggression. like, the context of 2008 was putin telling the Alliance that "Ukraine wasn't a real country" that would not be allowed to make its own decisions and Russia launching DDoS attacks on the Baltics. it then immediately followed up the 2008 summit by invading georgia. there was very little possibility of any NATO member doing much when any overture would have seemingly legitimized those actions and fed into propaganda. like, russia has legitimate security concerns but i don't see how any of its foreign policy is allaying those concerns. every attack just further constrains the political space where any kind of agreement could be made. E: i also forgot that, in 2008, NATO did explicitly decline to offer ukraine or georgia entry to the Membership Action Plan, which was seen as a large victory for Russia at the time and a sign that neither state would be in NATO any time soon. the fact that that decision was followed up by the invasion of georgia was probably not great for further negotiation. QuoProQuid fucked around with this message at 14:44 on Jan 25, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2022 14:40
|
|
|
Tweezer Reprise posted:On Sunday, the British government announced that Moscow was cooking up a plan to topple the government of Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky and install a pro-Kremlin government in his place. Later that night, the New York Times reported that President Joe Biden was weighing sending thousands of troops to NATO countries in Eastern Europe and the Baltics. An hour or so later, the Washington Post broke a story that the U.S. State Department ordered diplomats’ families and non-essential staff to leave Kyiv, citing the “threat of Russian military action.” By Monday afternoon, the Pentagon announced that it was putting 8,500 troops on alert so that they could be moved into NATO territory in Eastern Europe. why the gently caress is the lede of this news story in the second last paragraph. there's like two paragraphs of actual content. what kind of piece is this
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2022 18:52
|
|
|
Curious what happens politically if, after all Germany's attempts to moderate the European response to Russia, it cuts off the gas anyways
QuoProQuid fucked around with this message at 22:06 on Jan 26, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2022 22:03
|
|
|
Rappaport posted:While this is the general sentiment from Germania towards Finland since Gavrilo, what did you mean here?  https://tietokayttoon.fi/documents/...+transition.pdf
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2022 23:44
|
|
|
HonorableTB posted:Here's a fun thought experiment: keep all the variables the same except swap Ukraine for Poland. What does NATO do when it's a member state under threat? That's a good idea of what NATO *could* do vs what they will do. Article IV gets invoked and Russia is told in very clear terms to watch its poo poo lest it trigger a collective response from NATO and, in turn, nuclear war
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2022 04:53
|
|
|
why do you think that germany and russia shouldn't be taken at their word?Nenonen posted:Attacking a whole guarded facility alone has to be a nutjob because any reasonable person wouldn't take that poor chances of staying alive. But a nutjob can also get instructions from the outside, like how Isis grooms potential suicide attackers online. Or maybe someone there was banging his wife or mother. don't know enough about the situation (im not sure anyone does) but i think everyone is immensely skittish that any bit of violence could be cited as a justification to invade the interior ministry is reporting that the guy was fired “for undetermined reasons” shortly before the attack QuoProQuid fucked around with this message at 15:50 on Jan 27, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2022 15:47
|
|
|
FishBulbia posted:https://twitter.com/HamdiAlkhshali/status/1486822661456113672?s=20&t=lziEtipBsjM2ri9DrfusJA to be clear, the different sides were: https://twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/status/1486781657520685058 and https://twitter.com/MarquardtA/status/1486821462338064392 e: ah, you edited your post
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2022 23:39
|
|
|
Terminally Bored posted:Honest question: why are so many people defending/excusing Russia itt American? Did Trump broke so many brains there? there's a tendency among some in the american left to see everything in campist terms, wherein the world is divided between the imperialists (US, NATO, ANZUS, etc) and the anti-imperialists (Russia, China, Syria, Venezuela, Iran). opposing american imperialism means necessarily supporting the latter group and defending/denying its exploitative practices. this isn't a new phenomenon. it dates back to the cold war.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2022 18:35
|
|
|
i mean, i think the russian argument in this specific crisis is absurd and broadly without merit but you do need to understand it to find a way out of the conflict cycle
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2022 18:55
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:You’re not getting out of conflict by understanding the perspective of someone explicitly interested in having a conflict. Even less so if you replace understanding with rote regurgitation of talking points they’ve engineered to move popular sentiment. with all due respect, im not sure i said we should we swallowing Russia’s talking points uncritically. im saying that it’s important to understand their objectives and self-conception if you want to deal with the crisis in a meaningful way. im totally agreed that Russia’s current objective appears to be to instigate a conflict in some form. that understanding is why the EU/US are steadily raising the consequences of a potential attack or invasion in hopes that it forces Russia to a re-evaluate that objective and return to the table QuoProQuid fucked around with this message at 19:13 on Jan 28, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2022 19:09
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:You didn't indeed. What I was pointing at is that the current escalation of conflict between Russia and Ukraine was explicitly set up by Russia with the goal of having a confrontation - understanding that would not prevent Ukraine from facing the ongoing situation, unless you count total surrender as a successful self-defence strategy. As for arguing in favour of the official propaganda of the aggressor, sometimes full verbatim - that's just something that keeps happening in the thread from time to time, usually in the framework of "American bad and victim is supported by America, so what can I come up with for the offender's motivations"? ok. i misread you as accusing me of endorsing russia propaganda and reacted poorly. my bad. we’re both in agreement
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2022 20:23
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:https://twitter.com/SamRamani2/status/1488838198696583171 is this new or is this just repeating the response from NATO to Russia (the same response El Pais leaked)? doesn't seem like anything earth-shattering or unexpected. of course the US and NATO would include this in its formal response. it would be surprising if they were not. QuoProQuid fucked around with this message at 19:34 on Feb 2, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2022 19:27
|
|
|
cat botherer posted:Why does everyone think an invasion is imminent when the Ukrainian gov't itself says it is overblown? "an invasion is imminent and our country will soon know death" is a great way to terrify investors and also spark a panic
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2022 20:06
|
|
|
the response to the reporter is absurd. if you are going in front of the press to make an outstanding claim about what Russia has done or is planning to do, you need to have something that is going to substantiate it. i realize the intelligence community doesn’t want to reveal “their methods” but you cannot open yourself up to questions and not expect to get asked more details. asking government officials to back up their statements is not repeating the propaganda of America’s adversaries or whatever the gently caress
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2022 15:27
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:I mean, do they though? If the US is saying "this is what Russia's going to do," then the proof is if/when Russia does it. And if Russia doesn't do it (either because they changed their minds or if they weren't going to do it in the first place), then nothing about the situation has actually changed. well, then it's unfalsifiable, isn't it? i suppose my core frustration is that it's the job of a free and robust press to push the government to back up its claims and to provide some semblance of public oversight. i understand the statement was primarily for russia and not a domestic audience but the state department should not be surprised when journalists want more information nor should they imply reporters believe russian misinformation when they don't uncritically accept whatever the us government is telling them this is ultimately tangential to the larger crisis (for which i believe russia is the unambiguous aggressor), but these kinds of interactions annoy me
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2022 16:50
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 19:45 |
|
|
72 hours is... fast. still digesting but jesus. It's good to know they're planning for a migrant crisis but I cannot even begin to fathom how bad it would prove to be.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2022 02:59
|
|