View Poll Results: Did Poroshenko lie about troops at Debaltseve

Voters
64. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    60 93.75%
  • No

    4 6.25%
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 34 of 34

Thread: Did Poroshenko lie about troops at Debaltseve?

  1. #31
    Invictus


    Rogue Valley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Last Seen
    @
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,134

    Re: Did Poroshenko lie about troops at Debaltseve?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    So you think that the deliberate sacrifice of the lives of his men in this way was worth what you would call a "strategic victory"?
    Unlike you, I don't pretend to know the precise situation around Debaltseve at 00:01 am on 14 February 2015. I don't allow bias to color my battle-space synopsis. The OSCE didn't know because the rebels had denied them access to the Debaltseve area. I know people fighting on both sides of the conflict and even they didn't know the situation with certainly either. Government forces were indeed surrounded, but when this actually occurred is unknown with certitude. I tend to think this happened after the ceasefire went into effect, which is why the rebels felt compelled to violate the ceasefire. They needed extra time to firmly establish "facts on the ground" before allowing access to the OSCE international monitors.

    To answer your question, belligerents sacrificing a particular location for the greater overall good is a common theme in warfare. Leningrad is a prime example.


    Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet. -- Marine Corps General James 'Chaos' Mattis

    Repeal and Replace Trump.

  2. #32
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Did Poroshenko lie about troops at Debaltseve?

    Quote Originally Posted by Simpleχity View Post
    Unlike you, I don't pretend to know the precise situation around Debaltseve at 00:01 am on 14 February 2015. I don't allow bias to color my battle-space synopsis. The OSCE didn't know because the rebels had denied them access to the Debaltseve area. I know people fighting on both sides of the conflict and even they didn't know the situation with certainly either. Government forces were indeed surrounded, but when this actually occurred is unknown with certitude. I tend to think this happened after the ceasefire went into effect, which is why the rebels felt compelled to violate the ceasefire. They needed extra time to firmly establish "facts on the ground" before allowing access to the OSCE international monitors.
    First of all you say you don't know, then you say you tend to think. What are you trying to do, have it both ways? No I'm not there. I was not there when the U.S. dropped a bomb on Hiroshima. How do I know that they actually did it? I have never been there. What is fact is that there were reports that they were surrounded at that time. What is fact is that there was independent reporting that they were surrounded immediately after that time. To believe your version we would have to conclude that on Saturday night at 11:59 p.m. the troops were not surrounded, but then by Sunday, the next day when the ceasefire went into effect, they were surrounded, that is if your version is compatible with independent reporting. I find it rather difficult to believe that all of a sudden, in the course of more or less 24 hours, that those troops became surrounded. What is more likely is that, consistent with prior reports, that they were surrounded, possibly as the ceasefire was being negotiated and even more likely when it went into effect on Sunday. Not only that but we know for a fact the Poroshenko lied about the nature of the withdrawal of Ukrainian troops. So what is more likely is that you have spun a tale to support your biased view.

    Quote Originally Posted by Simpleχity View Post
    To answer your question, belligerents sacrificing a particular location for the greater overall good is a common theme in warfare. Leningrad is a prime example.
    So it is your view that Poroshenko deliberately sacrificing his men in this way, through deceit was worth it. You know what? That is a bunch of BULLS***. First of all it was a humiliating defeat. And I am not the only one that says that. Worldwide, even people who don't like what Putin is doing at all agree with that. Next of all, he needlessly sacrificed the lives of young people for the sake of a humiliating defeat. It is totally disgusting what Poroshenko did here.

  3. #33
    Invictus


    Rogue Valley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Last Seen
    @
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,134

    Re: Did Poroshenko lie about troops at Debaltseve?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    First of all you say you don't know, then you say you tend to think. What are you trying to do, have it both ways?
    Are you being deliberately obtuse? I do not factually know, but I do have an opinion. You on the other hand, claim to know factually.

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    So it is your view that Poroshenko deliberately sacrificing his men in this way, through deceit was worth it.
    Do you always have problems with plain English? I merely said it is a possibility and history is replete with such exemplars.

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    First of all it was a humiliating defeat.
    Indeed it was. Their position was militarily untenable and a pullback should have occurred in January.

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    Next of all, he needlessly sacrificed the lives of young people for the sake of a humiliating defeat. It is totally disgusting what Poroshenko did here.
    Once again, you play the prosecutor, judge, and jury despite not being in total possession of res ipsa loquitur evidence. In short ... I am right because I say I am right.


    Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet. -- Marine Corps General James 'Chaos' Mattis

    Repeal and Replace Trump.

  4. #34
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Did Poroshenko lie about troops at Debaltseve?

    Quote Originally Posted by Simpleχity View Post
    Are you being deliberately obtuse? I do not factually know, but I do have an opinion. You on the other hand, claim to know factually.
    Well let me put it like this, I could be wrong because I am not there. I was not there when they say they went to the moon. For all I know, you could be Yatsenyuk. Who knows? What I know is what I have read. And what I have read appears to suggest that Poroshenko lied. To believe your version, those troops would have had to have been surrounded in a 24 hour time frame. What is more believable is that they were already surrounded when the ceasefire went into effect, CONTRARY TO WHAT YOU HAVE SAID.

    Quote Originally Posted by Simpleχity View Post
    Do you always have problems with plain English? I merely said it is a possibility and history is replete with such exemplars.
    Yep I have a problem with the English that YOU are using. Because your English says that Debaltseve was a strategic victory for Ukraine and that the needless sacrifice of the lives of young people through deceit was worth it. Yep, that's some pretty messed up English.

    Quote Originally Posted by Simpleχity View Post
    Indeed it was. Their position was militarily untenable and a pullback should have occurred in January.
    Now we are cooking with gas. So don't say it was a strategic victory for Ukraine.

    Quote Originally Posted by Simpleχity View Post
    Once again, you play the prosecutor, judge, and jury despite not being in total possession of res ipsa loquitur evidence. In short ... I am right because I say I am right.
    What we have is evidence that the troops were already surrounded when the ceasefire went into effect. You have presented an interpretation of the facts that would require us to believe that all of a sudden the troops became surrounded in a 24 hour timeframe after the ceasefire went into effect, despite the fact that there were reports that they were surrounded before the ceasefire went into effect. Yep, if I had to make a call, it is more likely that they were already surrounded and that your interpretation is bogus.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •