You're viewing a single thread.
Thing is storm shadow missiles can't be used without NATO satellites, so yes, NATO is attacking Russian assets inside Russia.
They also can't attack assets inside Russia without using Russian airspace. Russian airspace is equally complicit.
What about Russian sunlight, moonlight or clouds? Are those complicit as well? This is an important question, pls respond!
Sunlight definitely played a key role. Can't see your target without sunlight.
Yes indeed! That makes much sense! Also! Moonlight helps your enemy to see on clear nights and clouds help provide cover for incoming drones! Obviously all of nature is against Russia!
Moonlight is just sunlight with extra steps.
Nah, don't blame it on the sunshine, don't blame it on the moonlight. Blame it on the boogie.
Moonlight, starlight, all night, we're bombing you
If I can't navigate to your house without GPS does that mean when I arrive NATO is fucking your mother?
THIS is the real question
I love this community
Can somebody explain why this was removed? It didn't break any rules, "Russian cope" isn't prohibited by the rules. Just trying to understand the logic. How does deleting controversial opinions (that aren't hate speech or call for violence) help anyone?
Side note, I just realized that Rule 5. says "no politics". How is this even possible? 80% of content here is politics in some shape or form, just like this post.
Rule 2 Russian propaganda is factually incorrect. All factually incorrect information that isn't obviously satire should have matching citations explaining why it's incorrect.
Rule 4 Russian propaganda is hatespeech.
Rule 5 No politics.
I don't pretend to be unbiased or neutral. If what you want is a rule that says don't suck Russian cock by propagating the talking points of war criminals, I'll be glad to add it.
How does deleting controversial opinions (that aren't hate speech or call for violence) help anyone?
If you came to a defense shitposting community looking for help you may have come to the wrong place.
Russia is bad and tells only lies, but this is a pretty egregious twisting of Rule 4
Trying to sell the lie that NATO is at war with Russia is literally Russian MOD talking points.
Yes, agreed. That doesn't make it hate speech. You undermine the concept of hate speech when you abuse it like this.
Doesn't need to be hate speech for it to be removed.
Russian shills just aren't welcome here. They can fuck off to their motherland until their imperial sock puppet of a dictator stops invading sovereign nations.
Then we should add a new rule that better encompasses the intent such as "No misinformation".
Just to be clear I do see the Russians as the bad guys and think their invasion is evil and illegal.
That's not enough, you need to say the line for us
Expecting people not to spread the Russian MoD lies is too much to ask apparently.
edit: toned it down
It's not? I can see it on my phone just fine