Ukraine Changes the Face of War Forever
Every fried Russian tank and dead soldier drives home the point that superpowers can no longer dominate simply because they have more troops and weapons.
HD DownloadThere's a powerful David vs. Goliath lesson emerging from Russia's brazen, unprovoked invasion of Ukraine that should give deep pause to global superpowers who still think they can simply muscle the world into any shape they want.
Every Russian tank that gets fried in Ukraine is sending the message that traditional armies can no longer expect to dominate simply because they have more troops, weapons, and money. Russian armored vehicles are falling victim to Next Generation Light Anti-Tank Weapons (NLAWs), which can be carried by individual soldiers, unslung in seconds, and deployed with little training and fatal accuracy. There are credible reports that Russia has already lost $5 billion worth of military equipment in a month of fighting in Ukraine. The human cost for Russia is even more staggering: Nearly 10,000 soldiers have been killed in action, including at least five generals.
That's the reality of contemporary warfare: Smaller, nimbler groups fighting back effectively against lumbering, dumb relics of the past. Despite being the fifth largest fighting force on the planet and starting the war with five times the number of active military as Ukraine, Russia has been stymied in what virtually all observers expected to be a cakewalk.
This isn't to say that Russia isn't also inflicting massive, horrific violence against Ukraine—or that it won't prevail in this conflict, especially the longer things drag on. But this war underscores what James Dale Davidson and William Rees-Mogg called the changing "logic of violence" and "the diminishing returns to violence" in their prophetic 1997 book The Sovereign Individual.
As weapons have become smaller, cheaper, more effective, and more widely dispersed, it's harder and harder for old-style militaries and countries to quickly and effectively achieve their objectives through brute force as they meet resistance at every turn. That resistance includes "information warfare"—which includes hacking and cyber attacks—but also the use of social media, which Ukraine's President Zelenskyy has excelled at to project an aura of invincibility and to cast the conflict in stark terms of good vs. evil.
This lesson shouldn't be new to Americans, as our failures over the past two decades in Afghanistan and Iraq underscored the new reality that old-school invasion and occupation is more expensive and temporary than it is quick and effective. But Russia's incompetence drives home in graphic detail to us—and, one hopes, to the Chinese officials supposedly eyeing an invasion of Taiwan—that even if Goliath does take out David, the price is too high and the victory too transient to bother undertaking.
If the collapse of the Soviet Union—that gargoyle incarnation of belief in top-down authority, power, and decision-making—was the beginning of the end of the 20th century's romance with the nation-state, then Russia's blundering in Ukraine and the United States' disasters in central Asia and the Middle East may be its epitaph.
The future belongs not to the ignorant armies of the night who seek to command and control but to those who embrace and empower the decentralization of weapons, technology, information, currency, and individual ingenuity and courage.
Photo Credits: EyePress/Newscom; LOC; Artvee; Sun news; Jorchr, CC BY-SA 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons; Ministry of Defence, OGL v1.0OGL v1.0, via Wikimedia Commons; MoD, OGL v1.0OGL v1.0, via Wikimedia Commons; Ministry of Defence Ukraine/MEGA / Newscom; Maximilian Clarke/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Ministry of Defence Ukraine/MEGA / Newscom; U.S. Navy Photo by Photographer's Mate Master Chief Terry Cosgrove., Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons; CHINE NOUVELLE/SIPA/Newscom; Havrylo Pustoviyt (1900-1947) [2], Antikvar magazine (Ukraine), issue 4(112), 2019, p.16, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons; Mvs.gov.ua, CC BY 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons; Viewsridge, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons; Kremlin.ru, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons.
Music Credit: "Bold," by Faith Richards via Artlist.
Written and narrated by Nick Gillespie. Edited by Regan Taylor.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
The human cost for Russia is even more staggering: Nearly 10,000 soldiers have been killed in action, including at least five generals.
That's down from the 15,000 figure I heard yesterday.
The Power of Putin is raising them from the dead. He is the King of the Damned. Or something.
Died WITH a shoulder-fired anti-tank missile, or FROM a shoulder-fired anti-tank missile?
This is hilarious.
But for your first comment, Ukraine reports high numbers, counting every probable and hopeful victory for morale purposes. Russia discounts numbers, accurate counts don't benefit them. The 10K number was a nato or UN estimate I read recently (Can't remember which), 15K was Ukraine's estimate. And none of them are completely valid for obvious reasons.
For decades, Western Europe lived in fear of a massive armored Soviet invasion, with tank and troop numbers that couldn't be matched or stopped, short of deploying artillery-launched tactical nuclear shells.
Now a small non-NATO nation, on their own except for advanced weapons support, is wiping out Russian tanks and trucks by the dozens. Inflated casualty counts may lie, but pictures of burned out scrap metal that used to be tanks do not.
Part of the difference is the lethality of the shoulder-fired anti-tank weapons, but part of it is also the reconnaissance value of cheap drones, even against an enemy with far superior air forces.
Keep in mind that Russia is not the Soviet Union.
The real killer of Russians is their own poor logistical support
Keep in mind that Russia is not the Soviet Union.
It's the same projection when he annexed Crimea. Any military action in the region is Hitler invading Poland, even if it's less than 1:10th the size of the invasion.
https://twitter.com/AlertChannel/status/1498414644695814145?t=b2Qsot9l3zr7A3tDEhGnXw&s=19
This is just one of many examples of why we wait days to publish Ukrainian footages.
[Videos, thread]
Home earning solution for everyone to work online and received payments every week in bank acc. earns every day more than $500 and received payments every week kfd directly in bank acc. My last month’s earning was $16390 and all i do is work for maximum 2 hrs a day on my pc. easy work and regular earning are awesome with ths job. go here for more info…… http://jobscash.tk
I grew up during the Viet Nam war. Every night the 3 networks dutifully reported casualties per the DOD. It was always 900 Viet Cong and 75 Americans dead or a similar ratio. Even as a child I found this hard to believe.
Some of those Viet Cong had more than one life?
The statistics were lopsided, but also dishonestly reported. Ironically, the 'Tet Offensive' was an American victory on the ground, but became a media defeat the way it was reported.
Lesson: the media are not trustworthy. Read much and make up your own mind.
I spent years trying to find media I could trust. For a while I thought that might be Reason magazine. Turns out I was wrong again.
Check you premise.
I believe this current war is the most dishonestly reported war of at least the last century.
"Reporters" and "analysts" don't even make a pretense to objectivity. They repeat myths days after they've already proven false. Saw one thing on gas prices today, and as a throw away line the infobabe tosses out something like "of course there's Putin's war slaughtering tens of thousands of civilians, but gas prices were already going up, so..."
Really? Tens of thousands of civilians are being slaughtered? There's 0 basis for this claim, but it's dutifully repeated as simple fact to be mentioned offhand.
Nothing from our media and politicians, no experts, can be regarded as anything approaching credible.
Which would simply be an annoyance if it weren't for the fact they're trying to manufacture/brainwash support for greater recklessness and conflict.
We were lucky last time they ran the "chemical weapons" attack false flag in Syria, because Trump understood it was bullshit and responded by just lobbing some missiles at a mostly empty airstrip instead of declaring war outright.
Keep this in mind: Russia, despite media propaganda to the contrary, is proceeding according to plan. They, like Assad in Syria before, have no incentive whatsoever to use chemical or biological weapons at this point. There is literally nothing to gain. But Ukraine, like the "moderate rebels" in Syria, and globalist spooks want more direct NATO intervention. The incentives are all on one side, and it's not the side our State Department functionaries keep "warning" us will us them.
https://twitter.com/aaronjmate/status/1507091707967459339?t=QLDydTkwCu6FYaMy69vzqw&s=19
"With Washington and its NATO allies forced to watch from the sidelines as Russia’s military advances across Eastern Ukraine and encircles Kiev, US and British officials have resorted to a troubling tactic that could trigger a massive escalation. Following similar claims by his Secretary of State and ambassador the United Nations, US President Joseph Biden has declared that Russia will pay a “severe price” if it uses chemical weapons in Ukraine.
The warnings emanating from the Biden administration contain chilling echoes of those issued by the administration of President Barack Obama throughout the US-led dirty war on Syria.
Almost as soon as Obama implemented his ill-fated “red line” policy vowing an American military response if the Syrian army attacked the Western-backed opposition with chemical weapons, Al Qaeda-aligned opposition factions came forth with claims of mass casualty sarin and chlorine bombings of civilians. The result was a series of US-UK missile strikes on Damascus and a prolonged crisis that nearly triggered the kind of disastrous regime change war that had destabilized Iraq and Libya.
In each major chemical weapons event, signs of staging and deception by the armed Syrian opposition were present. As a former US ambassador in the Middle East told journalist Charles Glass, “The ‘red line’ was an open invitation to a false-flag operation.”"
It’s all about protecting democrats for the US media.
I don't understand why the Ukrainians are fighting so hard against a russian take over.
If you are a slimy welfare rat socialist, then what does it matter if it's putin or zelensky giving you your "free" stuff? "Free" healthcare, "free" food, "free" education, "free" personal protection, "free" phone, "free" education, "free" transportation, etc.
Either way, you get to lay around and listen to the people in charge tell you what and how to think while you keep getting fatter and stupider.
What's the actual difference between russia and ukraine?
Every Welfare/Socialist State in the world is like that, but not everyone partakes.
Also, in order to transition from a Welfare/Socialist Stare to a Free-Market Capitalist society, it helps to be alive first.
"I don't understand why the Ukrainians are fighting so hard against a russian take over."
It's a real head scratcher. I think we're all mostly stumped, like you are.
The 10K number was one published by Pravda (The official Russian Federation mouthpiece) and quickly deleted off the Internet.
I don't see Pravda putting up fake numbers out of nowhere. They must of gotten some official estimate, not for public consumption by accident, and put it in a story.
I don't give Ukraine's estimates much credence, they are for morale/propaganda purposes. As for Russian Federation reported numbers why even bother to read them? You know they are lies.
I 'm sure to dead Putineers and live Ukrainians, it makes no difference...and the Ukrainians have captured Putineer shoulder-fired anti-rank missiles to boot.
Haha, nice. Good to be able to laugh at it.
Wouldn't be the first time Russia did this.
Unfortunately, neither Russia or the United States have learned from the past when it comes to the invading, bloodying and laying waste to other countries. It's quite sad, indeed.
Ukraine is one of those 2+2=5 countries...
Pretty sure Orwell got NewThink and NewSpeak mathrmatics from the history of the Inquisition and Soviet Russia rather than Ukraine.
By the way, 2 Ukrainians in the North and South + 2 Ukrainians in the East and West, with sniper rifles, in an higher location wnd crouched behind rocks or buildings = 5, 10, 15, 20, 25 or any number of dead Putineers, for as many bullets as the Ukrainians have!
*Seseme Street Count goes "MWU-HAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!" * 🙂
This, of course, is most economically done when following the U.S. Marine Corps training of "One Shot, One Kill." However, the training is publically accessible to all.
With the right cartridge, scope, and windage and gravity on their side, the Ukrainian snipers could take out Putineers from miles away.
With Infrared scopes, they could take out Putineers day and night.
And with constant mobility and random shooting around the perimeter, the Ukrainians could paralyze a whole Putineer military base and with decoys all over, they could be almost undefeatable doing it!
Sun Tzu was right: Knowing yourself + knowing your enemy = 100 battles + 100 victories.
The USSR doesn't exist anymore, boomer.
It's hilarious watching your propaganda addled mind try to assign Soviet identity to Russia while denying Soviet Ukraine.
Anyway, enjoy your fantasies. The USSA clergy you have so much faith in certainly appreciates the demonstration of their influence.
The USSR doesn't exist anymore, boomer.
Better tell Peuwtin. He's trying like hell to resurrect it. Might also want to tell the shitheads who were flying the hammer and sickle on their tanks on their way to an appointment with a shoulder-launched missile.
-jcr
LOL
Ok, I'll give you a shot.
Make the case.
What's your evidence?
What steps have they taken to do that?
Pewtin invaded Ukraine, duh!
Jesus, you're even dumber than Tony, the resident SJW twat around here. I guess sucking the formaldehyde out of Lenin's cock really did a number on your vestigial neural system, didn't it?
-jcr
Yikes, lots of insecurity in that post.
I know the USSR no longer exists. My point was that Orwell got "2+2=5" NewThink/Doublethink undrr torture" from the Soviet Union and The Inquisition. Dummy.
And as John C. Randolph fightly observes, it's not like Putin wouldn't bring it back.
Putin said that the dissolution of the USSR was the worst geopolitical catastrophe in recent history. He praised the USSR on numerous occasions. In many polls, many (even a majority) of Russians support Stalin, a mass murderer, because he expanded the borders of the globalist paradise of the Soviet Union (and genocided many ethnic groups to get his way).
And George Bush I called for a new world order under 1000 points of light.
So every military action the US has taken since then, and there have been a lot, is to take over the world?
If not, you can't say that rhetoric which merely comments on history implies any intent to act.
If so, you'll have to admit Russia's invasion of Ukraine as justified defense against forces attempting to conquer the world.
Your response is pure whataboutism. I argued that the Russian mentality glamorizes the Soviet conquests.
I'm not saying it isn't, and my response isn't whataboutism- it has direct bearing on the argument.
You're asserting that the "Russian mentality" indicates Russia intends to conquer all the former Soviet states.
You cannot then ignore the "globalist mindset", as Bush I's statement is just one example of, would then indicate the globalist/NATO intention to conquer the world under one central, global government.
Further, if Russian rhetoric and history causes fear in the Baltic states thus their actions are legitimate, then NATO/coalition rhetoric and history causes fear in Russia that would by your reasoning justify their actions.
Decent people don't attack peaceful, sovereign neighbors.
So….. the Ukrainians are all Rambo, and the russkies are all inept sniper fodder?
Highly ironic that you of all people, encog, would so eagerly subscribe to such…… articles of faith, as it were….. M’lady. Haha.
I’m not saying the ukes ain’t doing some damage. And if so, good for them. But haven’t we seen enough good guy/bad guy narrative spin from media on pretty much everything, to at least be skeptical of what we’re told?
Rah, rah, dude. Do better.
The Ukrainians can indeed be like that and no doubt are using these and other tactics. It's not an article of faith. That is in fact how combat is done. They must be doing something right to have 10,000+ dead Putineers.
I know facts can be 'Terrible And Unfair" to those who don't acknowledge them, but Mother Nature is a bitch and she'll still be there even if you gnaw your arm off coyote-style to attempt to get away.
Newspeak came from Esperanto. So, your 'pretty sure' was dead wrong. Snipers cannot make a kill from miles away; the longest confirmed kill was about 3.5 klicks and that was in an area with minimal humidity, so one less factor to mess with the shot. Thermal scopes don't make much of a difference, night vision are better clarity-wise. The number of folks here who are suddenly tactical specialists is fairly amusing.
Well, they stayed in a Holday Inn last night, and have read two Tom Clancy books.
Pretty sure Esperanto and any real language doesn't require thinking and speaking the opposite of truth.
And I did require for all conditions being equal. And any advantage at night is one-up on any enemy. It doesn't a specialist to know that.
Fog of war. It may go back up if Putin and the Putineers keep up their path to self-destruction wnd aren't overthrown from within by rational, friendlier heads. Must wait and see...
Russia has already lost $5 billion worth of military equipment in a month of fighting in Ukraine
That's a rounding error. Essentially no cost to Russia. But they may not have lots of extra equipment hanging around.
$5B isn't a rounding error to a country with 85% of their people living in poverty.
-jcr
$5 billion is a fraction of what it's cost the US so far...
Triple it. Crush Russia. Fuck you.
Eat lead.
"$5B isn't a rounding error to a country with 85% of their people living in poverty."
Correct. It represents 3/10ths of 1% of their total GDP, which may not sound like a lot, but if the US lost that in materiel, it would equal $100Bn.
Numbers like that get attention by droolin' Joe's handlers since they get the attention of the voters.
Reminder that Canada has a larger GDP than Russia. $5B, if true, is neither rounding error nor crippling.
What’s so surprising? A lot of us died from COVID but got better…
Putin turned me into a newt!
Gingrich?
I got better
must have been an Ingraham segment that featured resurrections that I missed.
But this war underscores what James Dale Davidson and William Rees-Mogg called the changing "logic of violence" and "the diminishing returns to violence" in their prophetic 1997 book The Sovereign Individual.
As weapons have become smaller, cheaper, more effective, and more widely dispersed, it's harder and harder for old-style militaries and countries to quickly and effectively achieve their objectives through brute force as they meet resistance at every turn.
I guess it's a bonus that the sovereign individuals of Ukraine have a friendly superpower to provide them with these smaller, cheaper, more effective shoulder-fired anti-tank missiles.
The most advanced shoulder-fired ATGM we have, against a poorly trained Russian army.
As always happens, tank-mounted anti-ATGM systems will evolve to counter the threat. Israel already has them on some of their armor, and at least 1 occurrence of a missile being taken out (a Kornet, a missile of similar capability)
And drone fighting vehicles. By the millions. That's the future.
But that would be a weapon of mass destruction, not a weapon of conquest.
And smaller bodies or even tinkering "Maker Culture" * individuals can come up with even more advanced weapons.
*( I wish I didn't have to use that term. Once upon a time, being a "Maker" was just something people did, not a subculture, whether it was Grandfather woodworking to make chessboard tables from blocks or Grandfather Clocks with parts from Emperor Clock Company or Grandma crocheting and making quilts on the Singer Sewing Machine powered by foot-pump.)
Good enough reason to support the 2nd amendment.
Perhaps we could invade Ukraine and give them one.
Isn't that what we're...
Of course it isn't. Ukrainians wielding weapons is noble and patriotic. Americans wielding weapons is vile and Insurrectionist. See the difference?
And the last successful invasion of the USA occurred in... oh wait, there hasn't been one. Even in 1812, the better trained British troops weren't prepared for good old fashioned Tennessee and Kentucky sharp shooters with single-shot rifles.
"Wolverines" was kind of a dark comedy, with Cuban and then North Korean troops invading and small bands of high school students taking them on. The reality would be much worse for anyone dumb enough to invade. "A rifle behind every blade of grass" or something.
The charred embers of the White House bring back any memories?
One doesn't need anti-tank weapons to defeat an invader when the entire populace is motivated. But they help. Not that anyone could mount a tank offensive against the USA.
Our enemies will win by corroding the basis of our society: family, rule of law, institutional legitimacy, free speech.
You mean "have won".
Elvis, you're right.
America is just a bunch of lazy welfare rats anymore. Welfare rats who wouldn't know freedom if they tripped over it.
Welfare rats who spend all day with their snouts shoved into the government trough and are completely unaware of the walls erected around them.
If you want to reduce welfare in the American populace, you could start by refusing all tax credits for children and your home.
I understand why the government subsidizes children and home ownership, but if you have the courage of your convictions you should refuse to take welfare from the state.
when did you last have a job?
must be nice.
About 6 years ago. I'm retired.
That doesn't change the fact that the US government provides subsidies for people just because they own a house or have children. While I understand why the government considers that a good investment, it is straight-up welfare for parents and homeowners.
I was addressing prfd's "America is just a bunch of lazy welfare rats anymore". Don't disagree with you, the social engineering via mortgage and child welfare policy is highly questionable.
The US will never again be militarily invaded from the outside, at least not in the foreseeable future. Atlantic and Pacific Oceans are too big a barrier. Even going through Canada or Mexico would require unreasonable logistical capabilities.
But... the US has already fallen. Who needs to invade when you already have all institutional power?
You do know that the Atlantic and Pacific were supposedly a barrier to 9/11, until it happened, right?
You don't understand the conversations you interrupt, do you.
9/11 was hardly an invasion.
I'm gonna be needing a crate of those anti tank missiles for the collection... just in case.
Yep. I'm firmly on Team 2nd Amend and smart defense spending now. Crush authoritarianism. China, Russia whoever wants some.
California, New York, etc. too?
This lesson shouldn't be new to Americans, as our failures over the past two decades in Afghanistan and Iraq underscored the new reality that old-school invasion and occupation is more expensive and temporary than it is quick and effective.
The invasion of Iraq was successful. It was the occupation part that came undone.
We are great at winning wars; we suck at peace negotiations.
Hey, know what just became apparent?
If Ukraine can defeat Russia.......
They can invade Lower England?
you beat Kramer?
Ukraine is weak!
Something something why bother with NATO?
Alaska needs to watch out, if Russia flees to Kamchatka?
depends if you otherwise are able to hold North America – which can be difficult given the sheer numer of troops massed in Venezuela – and if you have a Risk ready.
Lao Tzu observed, as a precursor to Fight Club::
"Those who talk, don't know.
Those who know, don't talk."
They'll be the world's most powerful 3rd world country?
France is overdue for another invasion?
Q.—How many divisions does it take to defend France from invasion?
A.—No one knows. It's never been tried.
The French have a new battle flag: A white cross on a white background.
>>There's a powerful David vs. Goliath lesson emerging from Russia's brazen, unprovoked invasion of Ukraine
misspelled Afghanistan.
Vietnam
oh geez you're gonna start a whole we really won Vietnam thing
Hmm? The US never even tried to win in Vietnam. It was like the last two-thirds of the Korean War, that way.
genuine surprise if you haven't read "we won every battle it was the politicians who lost" on the internets one time before
Yeah, see, that isn't the same as saying "we really won Vietnam". In Vietnam, the enemy was granted a huge sanctuary (North Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia) inviolable from ground attack, granted by American politicians terrified of escalation. Under those conditions, there was no possible way to win the Vietnam War.
What exactly would "we" have won? Some guy in Arkansas whose brother came home in a body bag lost either way.
If there isn't anything worth winning, the correct action is to not fight at all.
Having for whatever reason, good or bad, joined the fight, the choice to simply stake one's troops out for slaughter rather than pursue victory (which is what US politicians did) is its own act of immorality.
"If there isn't anything worth winning, the correct action is to not fight at all"
getting warmer...
"Russia's brazen, unprovoked invasion of Ukraine"
Such obedient propagandists
so brazen.
Borders, how do they work?
Apparently millions of people can just stroll across them every year, then receive taxpayer money from the "sovereign" government of the nation they've invaded.
Did you SEE the way Ukraine was dressed? Totally asking for it. Ukraine may as well lay back and enjoy it.
Lay back and enjoy it is exactly what people have been saying Russia must do.
NATO has made it clear it's a hostile, aggressive alliance whose primary purpose is to destroy Russia.
Ukraine may not officially be in NATO, but NATO has certainly been in Ukraine for years. Ukrainian forces, armed, funded, and trained by NATO, have been waging war on Russia's border since 2014.
What options did Russia have?
A. Invade Ukraine
B. Do nothing, while NATO continues building up forces on their doorstep, and hope everything works out
C. Go ahead and capitulate to globalist NATO, install a Yeltsinesque head of state, and rerun the 90s
Am I missing any other choices here?
In their position, what would you do - what is the "right" action?
NATO has made it clear it's a hostile,
aggressivealliance whose primary purpose is todestroydefend itself against an aggressive and militaristic Russia, that has never conquered or occupied a single square inch of territory.Bullshit.
Bosnia
Iraq
Somalia
Serbia
Afghanistan
Iraq
Libya
Syria
Iraq wasn't a NATO operation.
Tru dat. On the Iraq theme, this 'unprovoked invasion/war of aggression' narrative is beginning to sound a lot like the yellowcake narrative that the media so dutifully parroted before the US invasion.
So tell me a story about Crimea - - - - - - - -
Found the Peuwtin felcher.
-jcr
Suck that globalist cock, soy.
Repeat what the TV tells you like a good little neoconlib.
Shows how brainwashed you are. 1.5 billion Chinese eat soy and haven't stopped coming (or, previously, cumming) yet.
This is also incorrect. The amount of soy that Asian cultures consume is far less than what 'western' vegans and vegetarians consume. Soy is also not a staple of diet in Asian cultures, as is often implied. You may not have explicitly have stated this, but the point needs to be made clear. There are cultural dietary differences, and Asian people do not consume as much soy products as American activists like to promote.
Oh, I wouldn't dream of appropriating your culture like that.
-jcr
No exaggeration there at all. And no one will invade Russia for the simple reason that they have shitloads of nuclear weapons.
A senior senator publicly called for Putin's assassination multiple times and the president just said God wants regime change
Yeah, they’re really not helping. This administration needs to be removed, and someone needs to hook Lindsay Graham up with Ricky Martin so he’s distracted from all of this.
Don't overlook the Winter War. Finns v. Red Army.
Supposedly that David Goliath story is all backwards. Goliath was nearly blind and David was armed with the equivalent of a .40 cal.
When ancient armies formed up for attack, the sling shooters were placed behind the archers because they had longer range.
Nearly 10,000 soldiers have been killed in action, including at least five generals.
Five generals? The Harlem Globetrotters are behind this whole war.
like it's Stratego.
+1 Curly in charge.
"Where's the weenie?"
"Why don't we make him a general?"
https://twitter.com/ClayTravis/status/1507362890386452509?t=m5pS2pkCo-U1NHlB8AxK7g&s=19
North Korea’s propaganda videos look like a bad 1980’s “A Team” episode. Enjoy:
[Video]
https://twitter.com/mtracey/status/1507432998802759682?t=_YeU-AW1cvV9k5Ul3LTWmQ&s=19
Trump said plenty of ridiculous things, but I don't remember any quite as crazy as flying to the Ukraine border and announcing that the US was at war with Russia
If you take what he's saying at face value, this is Joe Biden declaring that US soldiers have already been deployed to Ukraine, and more will be deploying soon to Ukraine. Either he's telling the truth, or so mentally incompetent that he can't be trusted to speak freely
Note which "gaffes" the media regards as warranting significant umbrage. Biden maybe-possibly revealing the physical presence of US troops in Ukraine, contrary to his prior assurances that no such deployments would occur (because it'd mean WWIII) -- apparently not a major "gaffe"
[Video]
I'll take so mentally incompetent that he can't be trusted to speak freely for $2000, Alex.
Fair.
At the same time, both can be true.
Brandon was on next week's talking points.
https://twitter.com/RWApodcast/status/1507450643132428292?t=MXV14ehOygwhAa7RmZJzCw&s=19
Lugansk People's Republic putting up billboards in the newly-acquired territories: "Don't be afraid, speak Russian!"
[Pic]
If Putineers are being misdirected and cussed out in Russian by signs and Citizens on the street, obviously ethnic Russian Ukrainians already aren't afraid to speak and use Russian.
Start again.
I've just muted him until this whole kerfuffle is over with. He actually made some good points early in the situation but has gone full on endorsing Russia while condemning Ukraine. It's the worst case of BDS I've ever seen. He sounds just like the deranged TDS posters.
Again, I've made the exact same points this entire time.
My argument hasn't changed.
Yes, yes it's has. You went from condemning Russians actions while also condemning others actions to excusing everything Russia has done. You may not even realize it's what you've done. In fact I believe you don't realize it. That's how committed you've become to this narrative.
I've thought about it further and can't see any other option. They've conducted a rather restrained invasion, as you yourself have noted, and remained consistent in their demands.
It's not a fucking narrative, it's analysis of the situation.
You still haven't offered any alternative action.
You apparently think NATO is an angelic force that would never do wrong, thus Russian perspective that it's an imminent threat is illegitimate - even though people have been saying for 25 years that Russia cannot survive Ukraine in NATO.
You are stuck in a tautology that invasion=evil in any and all instances... if someone other than NATO does it.
Come right out and say what Russia should've done other than invasion. Then acknowledge the assumptions your suggestion relies upon.
Fuck you can't even make a valid argument. I didn't say NATO was angelic but Russia's invasion was not provoked. NATO wasn't going to let Ukraine join. Germany and France opposed their entry. And they couldn't join anyhow, because they were barred by the NATO treaty, which won't allow countries with disputed territories from joining. Your so stupid you don't even realize what you're talking about. Run along get some more Russian talking points. Ukraine wasn't a viable candidate for NATO, nor was NATO ever going to invade Russia. Adjust your tinfoil hat.
They put seeking NATO membership into their constitution.
It's baffling how you can turn around right after covid, russiagate, hunter's laptop, etc and call other people stupid for not swallowing the neocon load you've gobbled up.
But sure, your over-emotional overreaction and insults might convince people who already agree with you.
What's really happening is you know you're full of shit and you're pissed you dedicated your life to people who want to destroy you and your family, so you lash out at someone for describing reality, hence the hysterical reaction.
They can take all our rights away, but you'll still follow orders?
Slava ukrani, build back better!
Fuck you're a broken record. Yeah I know it's in their constitution has been for decades. So why now? It's a fucking excuse in other words.
Must be just the random misfirings of Putin's deranged mind. Clearly there is and can be no other explanation. It's like in 2014 when the United States CIA instigated and supported a revolution to overthrow the democratically elected government of Ukraine. Probably just random chance.
That's why we executed a color revolution in 2014 to oust the democratically elected government of Ukraine for being too friendly to Russia and rejecting NATO overtures, right you historically illiterate jingoist warmongering Nazi?
Lol. That'll show him.
They could have done what Switzerland, Austria, Finland, and Sweden have done when surrounded or bordered by NATO: nothing.
Putin's Russia is a threat to the Baltic states, Poland, Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria, etc.. That's why they joined the neighborhood defensive alliance NATO. If they hadn't, they would be in the same place as Ukraine is right now.
This is such wilful blindness, who even knows where to start.
Not much of an answer.
You're a historically illiterate moron with no idea what you're talking about. There, that's the only exhaustive and comprehensive answer to something as abjectly fucking retarded as what you've just said.
If Switzerland was a corrupt oligarchy born out of the failure and dissolution of a totalitarian state of which it was formerly a part, sharing a land border with its former benefactor, possessing disputed territories composed nearly entirely of ethnic members of its former benefactor and speaking their language, whose democratically elected government was ousted in a military coup executed and supported by a foreign power that also happens to be a global military hegemon that is openly hostile to Switzerland's former benefactor, you'd be within spitting distance of the point you thought you were making. But instead you're just the aforementioned historically illiterate moron with no idea what you're talking about.
"Benefactor"? Apparently we have very different views on what the Soviet Union was to its puppet states, not to mention its own citizens. I tend to view violently repressive totalitarian states as a bad thing.
If you are making pro-Russian arguments using the phrase "corrupt oligarchy" without any irony, the best possibility is that you are a 'useful idiot'. Worst case you are propagandizing for profit.
The bottom line is that Russia being unhappy with Ukraine's western orientation is not and never will be a valid reason for invasion. Not in Crimea, not in the Donbass, and not in the rest of Ukraine.
And the Donbass and Crimea are part of Ukraine, not Russia. If Russia doesn't like that, cry me a river.
Fortunately for people who aren't in favor of murderous tyrannical kleptocrats like Putin and his government, Ukraine has decided to reject his point-of-a-gun offer to reconstitute Russia's old Soviet-era sphere of influence. And if you think they're showing Russia to be both hapless and evil now, just wait. If Russia does eventually overcome the Ukrainian military (still the most likely outcome), the insurgency that they will face will drain their resources like a bathtub with the drain open.
They're already a weak economic power in the world. Pouring billions into counterinsurgency in Ukraine will leave Russia destitute.
I'll start. The slippery slope argument is short on facts, long on 'interpretation' and emotion. Putin invading Ukraine could be an indicator that he has set his sights of annexing other regions might be a better start.
And yet it's warmongering fascist jingoistic bootlicking faggots like you histrionically screeching that Putin is on the precipice of conquering the entire European continent, peddling hoaxes using video game footage and decade old combat footage from the middle east, whilst simultaneously vicariously wagging your microchode with a heart swollen with patriotic pride every time the US media dutifully reports that Ukraine, the last best hope for democracy and the American way, has killed another 100,000 Russian invaders using nothing but gardening implements and boogers and captured another 10,000 of their tanks while they were at it.
I remember watching footage when Romania joined NATO. People were crying with joy in the streets, waving American flags (the same country that bombed the shit out of their oil industry and civilian centers a couple of generations before) and all the interviewed were saying that they finally felt safe and could start rebuilding their society again. If I'm not mistaken, their economic growth has been phenomenal since that moment. It was similar in Poland - although Poles are essentially papist Russians. So NATO brought stability and some sort of guarantee that the evil aggressor in that part of the world would stay away, or at least think twice before invading again. Let's not lose focus of why NATO was so popular especially in Eastern Europe, it was a purely defensive alliance. Nobody wanted Russia's territory.
That purely defensive alliance has a weird habit of violently invading countries
You know it's okay to criticize NATO and Biden while also condemning an unnecessary war of aggression by Russia.
I don't think it's an unnecessary war of aggression.
One of the primary reasons I come to that conclusion is the history of aggressive invasion from NATO.
What countries have Romania or Poland ever invaded? Or the poor Baltic states or Moldova or Slovakia etc.? These were the countries most enthusiastic about NATO, for good reason. Their people were genocided by the Soviets.
Those countries have been in NATO less than 20 years.
I understand their concerns.
Russians were similarly "genocided" by those same nations as participants in Swedish, French, British, Austrian, and German/Nazi invasions.
The territory of modern Ukraine was the primary route for those invasions.
Russia sees yet another alliance being put together for the purpose of its destruction, and continuing preparations for that eventuality.
I cannot reply to Nardz for some reason - did she block me? In any case, I looked it up and Russia invaded Romania like 12 times since 1800 (the first time it made any foray so far south into Europe). It's fair to say that NATO is a defensive alliance, at least for Eastern European countries.
NATO is a defensive alliance that just so happens to have been at war constantly and invaded more than a half dozen countries in the last 3 decades.
But hey, you brought slave markets back into fashion in Libya, so good work.
Here you go. It's OK that you're a historically illiterate piece of shit, learning is fun!
I only have 4 people muted, but he's been on the list almost as long as Rev. Kirkland and for the same reason. I can't see what he's saying, but the responses seem to indicate that he's being irrational and denying reality. Par for the course with him.
I'm about to do the same.
You’re one of the last people who should ever criticize anyone for being delusional. You’re a standard issue Marxist democrat shill.
I'm not a sstandard-issue anything. My issue profile doesn't fit with Democratic policies on most economic concerns.
I'm not even completely culturally aligned with them, although I do oppose more cultural conservative positions than culturalliberal positions. But that's mostly because cultural conservatives want to use the power of the state to restrict liberty and force a culture on America that most people have moved on from.
But I get that a creature of the fringe wouldn't recognize nuance or heterodoxy.
What I’m able to recognize is far beyond the scope of your limited comprehension. You devote most of your energy to being a democrat apologist. Nuance isn’t your strong point.
Perhaps if you were more intelligent, and less of an ideologue, you would understand that.
sarcasmic is the poster child for the dunning-kruger effect
No enemies to the left is not a nuanced or heterodox position, sarcasmic. It's been standard issue Democratic Party Marxist agitprop since the 1950s. It's hilarious that you think your boomer '60s "counterculture" bullshit is in any way novel, as if libertinism was invented the first time you decided to "experiment" with another guy in the back of VW van smoking peyote.
Meanwhile there exists not one single law in the United States that imposes conservative cultural mores on anyone. But any faggot can sue any service industry professional into oblivion for so much as a hostile facial expression.
The fact that you have to pretend I'm someone else to be able to dispute my post is illuminating.
If you can't differentiate between the issue profiles and writing style of different people, you probably think that Cal Cetin, Rob the Nazi, and NOYB are the same person as well.
"Meanwhile there exists not one single law in the United States that imposes conservative cultural mores on anyone."
There are still some, with Obergafell being the most recent victory over conservative culture warriors.
Abortion used to be in the pro-liberty column, post-Roe, but there have been recent losses for freedom-loving people on that front. It's still going to end up with those who oppose cultural authoritarians winning, it will just take a decade or two longer for right to prevail.
The good news is that cultural conservatism will inevitably lose as pro-liberty values are embraced by younger generations and authoritarian traditionalists die of old age or realize their beliefs are anti-American.
"...He actually made some good points early in the situation but has gone full on endorsing Russia while condemning Ukraine. It's the worst case of BDS I've ever seen. He sounds just like the deranged TDS posters..."
Must have missed them; once he started with "Ignore all media claims", then immediately went to a single opinion piece never repeated with no cites to claim the "US CAUSED THE INVASION!!!!!!!!!!", it was obvious that dealing with an ignorant asshole like that is worthless.
He never did anything of the kind, it just seems that way because you're a half-retarded decrepit senile jingoistic bootlicking fascist old warmonger trying to relive your hardon from Korea or Vietnam.
*Proceeds to reply to half a dozen of Nardz's posts*
You may be a lying, warmongering, bootlicking, jingoistic, gullible, credulous piece of shit, but at least you're consistent about it.
"Every fried Russian tank and dead soldier drives home the point that superpowers can no longer dominate simply because they have more troops and weapons."
I guess whoever wrote this never heard of Vietnam or Afghanistan.
I'll add: Battle of Agincourt, Battle of Rorke's Drift, Battle of Thermopylae (although the Greeks lost that one).
Strategy matters. Quality matters. Tactics matter. Logistics matter. Size has its benefits.
Heck, the American War of Independence was largely won by militia. Lexington and Concord, Bunker Hill were won by militia coming out of the woods. Saratoga was largely won by militia dogging Burgoyne's ass and sniping officers. The southern strategy failed because outside cities, militia ruled, and the Brits had to ship everything but water across the Atlantic. Yorktown was won by traditional armies only because the militia ran Cornwallis out of the southern colonies.
The Battle of Kings Mountain in North Carolina was the pivotal battle that led to Yorktown. In a rational world, it would be known worldwide side by side with all the above-mentioned battles...and no One Worlder UN types would dare approach it or they might get a repeat.
Cowpens was more important. And like many of the battles it was more the regular troops that won that battle. Militia paid it's part but too often ran after one or two volleys. Morgan knew this and used it to his advantage, asking the militia to stand for two volleys and then run. It suckered the British into pursuit where they ran into the line of Regulars who tore them apart.
At Guilfords Courthouse Greene used a similar tactic, and while the battle was technically a British Victory, Cornwallis considered it a pyrrhic victory and forced him to abandon the Carolinas. Greene followed and the Virginia militia did hound Cornwallis, but it was the presence of Regulars under Lafayette that forced him to go into a defensive camp at Yorktown, awaiting relief from Clinton.
The role of militia in the Revolution is greatly exaggerated. It is also misunderstood, as most of the troops at the major battles may have started off raised from local militias but were serving as regular troops.
As for pivotal battles, I believe two battles were the most influential of the war. First was Trenton, a major gamble on Washington's part. It convinced the French to begin providing supplies to the colonists. The second was Germantown, which was a defeat, but ultimately what convinced the French to formally ally with the colonists. It often gets overlooked because it occured around the same time as Saratoga and soon after the loss at Brandywine and Philadelphia, however, the fact that Washington went on the offensive again after a defeat like Brandywine convinced the French that the Americans were in it to win it. And Washington caught Howell completely by surprise at Germantown, only the fog and miscommunication allowed the British to rally and stop them. It was a very close thing. It also forced the British into winter camp in Philadelphia, which places them under virtual siege as Washington attacked any foraging party that left the city. It also allowed Washington time to regroup his army at Valley Forge, where they finally were turned into a decent fighting force under von Steuben, resulting in the Battle of Monmouth, that while it was a tactical draw, was a strategic victory and showed the American Regulars were finally able to stand up to the British Regulars in a classical battle.
Ah, but you couldn't have Cowpens without Kings Mountain First, since the Battle of Kings Mountain drove the Loyalists southwardcto Cowpens.
Another consideration about The Battle of Kings Mountain that made it so awesome was that Loyalist Major Patrick Ferguson was the inventor of what was in that day a superior weapon: a rifled musket, which could shoot longer ranges than standard muskets, eponymously called The Ferguson Rifle.
Alas, the Patriots had the advantage of surprise and that was what enabled them to rout Ferguson and the Loyalists.
There are advantages to both formal organized military and informal militia. The former typically have the advantage of larger scale numbers and weaponry, but the latter have the advantage of flexibility and ability to blend into the population and terrain. The organizdd military depends upon a supply chain and a paymaster, whereas the militia usually brings it's own provisions and lives off the land. Either way of quartermastering could mean feast or famine, depending on the conditions.
They both need each other and there is a place for both in the defense of a free society.
Washington wrote, “I am wearied to death all day with a variety of perplexing circumstances, disturbed at the conduct of the militia, whose behavior and want of discipline has done great injury to the other troops, who never had officers, except in a few instances, worth the bread they eat.”
I'm glad to see this. Pleather is well out of his depth with this piece. I find that people with zero experience other than watching youtube or hollyshit movies believe that technology wins battles and wars, that officers make armies. This has never really been the decisive point for a war. Tactics, use of terrain, and training are more important than neato geewhiz equipment. Quite frankly, the introduction of advances in weapon technology makes a difference, but if terrain or numbers are weighed too heavily against a force, even the cool new rifle that shoots farther won't lead to victory. It may seem like I am arguing against my point, but to clarify, victory requires good leadership. Good leaders understand how to best use the forces, equipment, terrain, time of day, weather, and other factors, that the conflict occurs at. All of this often involves changes on the fly, during the fight, so the ability to maintain a cool head is also key.
Modern wars are economic contests; the side which out-produces the enemy tends to win.
Despite being the fifth largest fighting force on the planet and starting the war with five times the number of active military as Ukraine, Russia has been stymied in what virtually all observers expected to be a cakewalk.
You're reciting the Russian numbers ginned up by internal Russian corruption. This includes 50 year old tanks that haven't ever been upgraded. Might as well compare a F-4 to an F-35.
Even counting the outdated material, they are rapidly falling down the list. They're probably 7th or 8th at this point.
Hey sarcasmic, remember when Iraq shot down hundreds of American fighter jets and destroyed thousands of American tanks and APCs fending off the Yanqui imperialists in 2003? From Walter Duranty to Baghdad Bob to Volodymyr Zelenskyy, you've never encountered a propagandist whose cum you didn't gargle.
But they're still openly shooting people. Big deal.
The future face of war will be invisible, so invisible it won't even be recognized as war. People dying from natural causes, or just disappearing. The only people who'll know it's a war will be those conducting it, and they ain't sayin'.
What do you mean, "future"?
We’ll never forget jews funding Nazis with the help of NATO.
Why do you come here? You’re just a bad joke.
My statements represent the red pill unless any of you blue pill sucking fuckwits can demonstrate refuting them.
“ These people Mr. Biden is cutting checks to in Ukraine aren’t being labeled fascists the way the term is thrown around on Twitter. They are full-on, jackbooted, stiff-armed, “Heil Hitler,” cheering-at-Nuremberg Rallies Nazis — and they’re proud of it.”
http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/mar/8/biden-plays-into-putins-lies-by-arming-neo-nazis-i/
You Nazis always were into pills, especially Crystal Methadrine.
By the bye, you do know The Matrix series from which the Red Pill/Blue Pill Fictional and False Binary derives was created by The Wachowskis, who were formerly Twin Brothers who went Transgender and became Twin Sisters, right?
It's always deliciously ironic and funny to see MGTOW citing this, but a Nazi too?
Get off the pills, Misek...And fuck off, Nazi!
Oh, and how could I forget: The Wachowski Twins are Polish. It's really funny seeing a Neo-Nazi cite as a source people whom he regards as inferior in intelligence.
Pop-Up Video Factoid: Jokes about Polish intelligence are exclusively of Nazi origin and didn't exist before the Nazis. Their loss, since Polish General Casimir Pulaski help Patriots win The American Revolution.
And again, Fuck off, Nazi!
Lol, so we now know that in addition to being a warmongering faggot you're also a half-retarded inbred polack still assblasted about getting buttfucked by everybody and their mother until good old Uncle Sam tethered you to his loving apron strings.
It's too bad Hitler didn't do a better job on your grandparents.
He don’t need no stinking pills! He’s already gaslit.
By the by, did you know that the correct phraseology is "by the by" and not "by the bye"? Did you also know that the Wachowski brothers copped all of the material for the embarrassingly shitty movies they made from existential nihilism and Marxist false consciousness? Did you also know that the Wachowski brothers did not become women when they cut their dicks and balls off and got fake tits because it's not possible to change your sex because it is biologically coded into every single cell in your body?
What's it like trying and failing to intellectually best a no-shit holocaust denier? Jesus fuck man.
You’re a Nazi.
Your statements represent the bullshit spouted by a lying pile of Nazi shit.
Fuck off and die, asshole.
I’ve demonstrated that you’re a lying waste of skin by citing proof in your own words.
You nor anyone else has ever cited proof of your claim that I’m a Nazi. In fact I demonstrated that you, not I, advocate giving weapons to Nazis in Ukraine.
I have presented evidence that proves the blush it holocaust could not have occurred as self proclaimed witnesses have claimed. The whole story falls apart.
Neither you nor anyone else has ever cited any evidence proving your claim to have refuted my evidence.
You’re full of shit.
You should hang your empty head in shame, you lying waste of skin.
Since your evidence is so airtight and filled with FACTS and LOGIC to PWN THE JOOS, you could just keep posting it since it is so conclusive. But in point of fact, you've never posted a single fact or proof of any of your Nazi bullshit for the rather obvious reason that you can't because it's been a crock of bullshit since it was first trotted out at Nuremberg by your spiritual ancestors right before they ate the rope.
Either you’re new here or you’re just another waste of skin liar.
I’ve posted this many times and nobody has refuted any of it. Think you can? Fill your boots or become another example of a fuckwit who denies what they can’t refute.
Bigotry is demonstrated by the refusal to consider counter arguments.
You have neither considered nor refuted my arguments.
If you think that there is physical evidence for a holocaust, you’re wrong.
Video, pictures of what? Piles of bodies during war? People in German uniforms? Dime a dozen and easily staged. No photos, none of the equipment that supposedly killed millions. There exists no physical evidence of that at all.
Prison camps aren’t evidence of a holocaust.
I’ve refuted “eyewitness testimony” as impossible right here. Every so called witness has either been paid or coerced making their bullshit inadmissible.
Germany and every other nation that has criminalized the sharing of logic and science that refutes the holocaust story have criminalized truth.
The following points refute key elements of the holocaust with logic and science. This is because all stories creating the holocaust narrative defy logic and science.
There has been no objective forensic analysis at any supposed site. That means that there is no physical evidence. Any activity that demonstrates and shared evidence to refute the holocaust is a crime in every nation where it allegedly occurred.
The crucial event of the story is the cyanide gassing of millions of Jews. That could never happen the way it has been described by so called witnesses. When their testimony is refuted, the story falls apart.
Jews wrote books illustrated with pictures of themselves shirtless dragging gassed bodies from the chambers to cremation ovens.
But cyanide is absorbed through the skin and NOBODY could have survived a single day of such activity much less collecting reparations into their old age reminiscing about it over a game of checkers.
And so it goes with every bullshit story. The facts prove otherwise.
Let’s not forget another old timey favourite.The story of Babi Yar is a popular lesson in Jewish schools described as the single largest event of the holocaust.
The lesson is that between 30,000 and 100,000 Jews were taken to a ravine in Ukraine where they were killed.
The story is told by one Jewish
survivor, Dina Pronicheva, an actress who testified that she was forced to strip naked and marched to the edge of the ravine. When the firing squad shot, she jumped into the ravine and played dead. After being covered by thousands of bodies and tons of earth she dug herself out, unscathed, when the coast was clear and escaped to tell the story.
She is apparently the only person in history to successfully perform a matrix bullet dodge at a firing squad. The soldier aiming point blank at her never noticed her escape. Never walked a few steps to the edge of the ravine to finish her off.
They were stripped naked to leave no evidence. Naked she had no tools to dig herself out from under 30,000 bodies and tons of dirt.
Only after the deed was done, the nazis realized that so many bullet ridden bodies were evidence. Oops, rookie move. So they brought more Jews and millions of cubic feet of firewood to dig them up, cremate them on gravestones and scatter their ashes in surrounding fields.
There has been no forensic investigation at the site. None of the bullets allegedly burned with the bodies have been recovered. Not one shred of physical evidence of this has ever been found.
There are aerial photographs of the area at the time but they don’t show any evidence of the narrative, no people, no equipment, no firewood, no moved earth, no tracks of any kind.
Simply stating these facts is a crime in Ukraine where the Babi Yar narrative is taught in school
Have you ever heard of the Bletchley park decrypts of the famous German enigma machines? It was credited for turning the tide of the war as allies knew what military actions the Germans were planning.
Only released in the 1980s those translated messages included prison camp information, deaths, transfers and requests for medicines to treat illnesses. The numbers of dead contradict the holocaust narrative of which there was also no mention of.
Are you willingly performing the feeble mental gymnastics required to believe, as the story goes, that Germans were communicating in code about prison camps while talking plainly about their military actions with their top secret enigma machines?
The numbers of dead from German enigma decrypts does align with Red Cross numbers.
The Red Cross regularly visited all prison camps. It was their job to report the cause of all deaths. They recorded a grand total of 271,000 among all camps for the entire war. It is a matter of record.
Are you again performing the feeble mental gymnastics required to believe that the Red Cross were so incompetent that they were completely unaware of 95% or 5,629,000 of all prison camp deaths?
Zyklon B is an off the shelf insecticide used among other places in Prison camps to delouse clothing and bedding to save lives by preventing deadly typhus. The system used for years before the war employed heating to release cyanide gas, fans to circulate the gas and more to exhaust the chambers to make the de loused articles safe to handle.
Pictures of this equipment and the small de lousing buildings with clothing racks still exist in Prison camps. But no evidence of any gas delivery system has ever been found in the places where the bullshit holocaust allegedly occurred. In fact, the story has changed to that they just threw the heat activated pellets through open air vents onto the cold damp covered in filth drainless floors in rooms full of people.
Such an inefficient method would have taken too long to kill the required number of Jews. The pellets couldn’t be spread evenly in rooms full of people. The cold drainless floors would have delayed the release of cyanide from the pellets that people would have swept away from themselves. Any dead would have released all their bodily fluids and their bodies covering the pellets. Vomit would have been added to the floor prior to entering such a room. The revulsion of people told to enter such rooms would have been apparent to any witnesses. It defies common sense that people would have all calmly walked into such places as the fuckwitnesses have stated.
According to Martin Gilbert in his book, Holocaust Journey, the gas chambers at Treblinka utilized carbon monoxide from diesel engines. At the Nuremberg trial of the Nazi war criminals, the American government charged that the Jews were murdered at Treblinka in “steam chambers,” not gas chambers.
Gasoline engine exhaust contains about ten times the carbon monoxide than diesel. Diesel exhaust is relatively safe. Even if the Diesel engines were running at their maximum of 500 ppm, death would take several hours. Far too long to support the narrative.
If Germans had used gas engines, death would have been in a few minutes. But in the holocaust narrative for treblinka diesel was used even though they had plenty of gas for their tanks. Nuremberg still recorded that they were “steam chambers”.
Which stupid lie is more believable? You have to perform some feeble mental gymnastics to buy that.
Jews had been publicly claiming a holocaust of 6 million Jews in various nations no less than 166 times between 1900 and 1945. To raise money and coerce sympathy. Like the wastes of skin who fake cancer on go fund me pages. Do you gamble? Is the 167th time a charm?
The story of gassing Jews began as British propaganda to turn popular opinion against Germany. It was inspired to draw attention away from Jewish Bolshevik war crimes in Russia because that would work against allied propaganda. It also served global Jewish interests to create undeserved sympathy for Jews who had publicly organized boycotts of Germany to drive Germany to war.
There is a documented letter from the head of British propaganda to the head of the war office recommending that they cease the “gassing Jews“ propaganda because there was no evidence for it and if found out would work against their propaganda efforts.
The only thing the bullshit holocaust narrative has in common with WW2 is that they were both the creation of Jews.
These Jewish leaders are admitting it.. Are they lying?
“We Jews are going to bring a war on Germany”.
David A Brown, national chairman, united Jewish campaign, 1934.
“The Israeli people around the world declare economic and financial war against Germany …holy war against Hitlers people”
Chaim Weismann, the Zionist leader, 8 September 1939, Jewish chronicle.
The Toronto evening telegram of 26 February 1940 quoted rabbi Maurice l. Perlzweig of the world Jewish Congress as telling a Canadian audience that” The world Jewish Congress has been at war with Germany for seven years”.
Just another example of a fuckwit who denies what they can’t refute.
Hey man, NOW IT’S SPRINGTIME! Herr Misek is officially in season!
Ah, it's SPRING and a young man's fancy turns to thoughts of...The Łódź Ghetto Uprising!
Say, since 'tis the Season, if the Neo-Nazis or Putineers try to carry out Final Solution II: Chemical Boogaloo, is there a bag-and-tag limit? 🙂
Gee what a shock, the retarded warmongering paint chip eater isn't familiar with The Producers, missed the joke, and made an asshole out of himself.
Any time you want to head over, your fascist hero Zelenskyy will be happy to hand you an AK-47 and a shovel and you can go take down 40,000 of those evil Rooskies single-handed just like every other man, woman and child in Ukraine, you pathetic boomer faggot. But probably you'll just sit on your mangina in your La-Z-Boy with your 3 masks on waiting for your grocery deliveries because you're too much of a pathetic pussy faggot to leave home because of the 'rona.
Has he been on ice until now?
As in “Cool it, Fuehrer Cat!”
Presented without comment…..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ep_glbC_gs
Follow your leader, Sturmfag.
Are you suggesting a bunker mentality?
You’re like a bunch of old ladies.
What are Jews without Nazis? Nothing good. Members of a satanic religion that advocates lying.
ALL ABOARD! WHOOOO WOO hahaha
Then again some people judge others as individuals instead of members of a rival tribe and don't ascribe personal attributes like dishonesty to people based on their race or religion.
What are you without your racist bullshit? Pretty much the same. A pathetic, sniveling little bitch who has to ascribe supernatural supremacy to a bunch of nomadic goat fuckers because you're a fucking loser who can't compete with them.
Educate yourself. There’s nothing racist about scrutinizing the tenets of a religion and holding voluntary members of that religion accountable for advocating them.
Their holiest prayer in Judaism on their holiest day is clearly a plan to lie. The faithful can lie for another year with the comfort and blessing of their religion. If Satan is the father of lies, members of the Jewish religion are his faithful children.
Here is the Kol Nidre text. The holiest Jewish prayer on the holiest Jewish day.
“All vows, obligations, oaths, and anathemas [curses]which we may vow, or swear, or pledge, or whereby we may be bound, from this Day of Atonement until the next we do repent. May they be deemed absolved, forgiven, annulled, and void, and made of no effect: they shall not bind us nor have any power over us. The vows shall not be reckoned vows; the obligations shall not be obligations; nor the oaths be oaths.”
This lesson shouldn't be new to Americans, as our failures over the past two decades in Afghanistan and Iraq
Why leave out the "war" in Libya?
The departed poster here who called himself 'John' repeatedly told me it was worse than Iraq or Afghanistan (because Obama, you know).
You mean besides the fact that it turned Libya back in to a human slave market, and also helped supply a failed glow-op in Syria to oust Assad that contributed to the rise of ISIS and is still on-going?
I realize that, as a slack-jawed, slope-foreheaded hicklib pederast, you're not very good on facts, but please don't pretend you actually know more than John did.
And all over a youtube video with 137 views.
Turn yourself in for crimes against children.
That's basis for promotion these days.
The return of the lying pile of left shit turd!
Turd lies; it's what he does. Further he's abysmally stupid; too stupid to remember lies he told just minutes ago and too stupid to know most everyone here knows he's a pathological liar.
Hey remember when you posted hardcore child pornography link at Reason.com and got your sockpuppet account Sarah Palin's Buttplug banned and an entire comment section and article wiped off the site, shreek?
Hopefully the calculus of war has permanently changed. There's little value in invading and conquering territory now, since most of the value in the modern economy comes from human capital and knowledge. along with reliable and transparent market and legal systems.
Even if an invasion is successful in occupying new territory and controlling raw materials, the trained and knowledgeable people can flee, the advance manufacturing facilities can be destroyed, and a coordinated denial-of-finance response from the non-combatants can inflict far more economic damage on the invaders than any value they gain.
That's what I've been thinking for a while. When farms were 90% of an economy, raiding farms and controlling land was the be-all and end-all of war. Mines didn't change that much. Big old factories fancied it up a little, made it easier to damage the war booty, but didn't really change the importance of territory much.
But now .... if China does actually manage to invade Taiwan, one of their booty goals will be the TSMC fabs, which a few cruise missiles would render useless. Worse yet would be all the engineers and programmers and everyone else who thinks for a living; dictatorships are incompatible with innovation. Hong Kong was a prize beyond compare, and China trashed it. I doubt it will ever be resurrected.
Putin not only trashed his and his military's reputation, he ruined Russia's prospects for a modern economy anytime soon. They sell oil, gas, titanium, lumber, and a bunch of raw resources, and the Tsar had a better economy than that. Heck, the Tsar lost entire fleets to the Japanese in 1905, and had it all rebuilt by 1914. I doubt Putin can do the same with his military.
China doesn't care about fabs; they can build their own. They care about having Taiwan be part of their empire again. It's a matter of national pride, culture, politics, and military power, and they are willing to pay a high price for it.
Yes, and China didn't give a f*ck.
And Putin doesn't give a f*ck either. Ukraine isn't about monetary gain, it is about national pride and military security. Nor does Putin give a f*ck about what you think of his military; he still has enough nuclear weapons to turn Europe into a gigantic smoldering crater, and you forget that at your own peril.
I frankly can't think of many wars that were purely fought based on such simplistic economic considerations. Countries usually conquer other territories in order to project power. China wants Taiwan to be able to control the South China sea; they make money not from Taiwan but from the exertion of that power. Russia wants Ukraine not because they want the farms, but because they don't want Western military bases on their borders.
If only SloJo had said: "Why do we need to be in Ukraine? We have so many nukes in Western Europe we could make Putin an ash before he knew there was a war on."
Good god, do you know anything about the Ukraine war? Russia didn't invade Ukraine because they wanted to enrich themselves. Russia invaded Ukraine because they didn't want Western military bases on their doorstep because the Russian/Ukrainian border is not defensible.
How about Russia "gaining the value" of not being threatened by missiles, spies, and ground forces from Ukraine? What's the monetary value of that?
And the cost of the "coordinated denial-of-finance response" to the West is incalculable: massive loss in confidence in Western financial institutions, the likely creation of alternative systems, and the possible loss of the dollar as reserve currency.
If you boil this down to economics the US citizen will be the biggest loser.
But putinmanbad, so the assholes who locked us down, threaten to seize our bank accounts, force us to participate in medical experiments or be shunned from society, rig our elections, and teach that people are guilty of events that happened before they even existed should now have our full faith and approval.
You will own nothing, and Slava ukraini!
Yes, but US military contractors and non-profits will be big, big winners!
the Russian/Ukrainian border is not defensible.
Which would be very important if not for the fact that the idea of NATO invading Russia is a ridiculous fantasy.
So ridiculous it was stated outright by the president of the United States 48 hours ago, you fucking clown.
Senile people say lots of ridiculous things. Fortunately the competent adults in the room are walking back his blithering.
He said Putin has to go. He said nothing about NATO invading Russia. Only someone whose paranoia rivals Putin's would think otherwise.
And for the safety of Russia's neighbors, he needs to go. Russia's populace seems to be coming to the same conclusion, but we'll see what they do about it. Putin still controls the security services, which have been built around cruelty, repression, and violence, so ousting the oligarchy and their kleptocratic leader will be long and bloody. I'm not sure if Russians are prepared, yet, to endure the necessary suffering to achieve freedom from tyranny.
"...Good god, do you know anything about the Ukraine war? Russia didn't invade Ukraine because they wanted to enrich themselves. Russia invaded Ukraine because they didn't want Western military bases on their doorstep because the Russian/Ukrainian border is not defensible..."
So they're moving the border west to snuggle up to that defended by western military?
You and nardz need a class in logic.
Here's a hint you demented old piece of shit: Russia does not plan on occupying the entirety of Ukraine and never have. They want some strategic territories and to rattle their saber against NATO since the United States couped the last democratically elected Ukrainian government to trade it in for one explicitly hostile to Russia and desirous to follow Ukraine's constitutional mandate to join NATO.
Try to pretend that Biden is Obama or Bush and try to pretend that Ukraine is Libya or Iraq and see if you can regain some semblance of your sanity you warmongering retarded faggot.
Because submission to globalist totalitarian central government worldwide is preferable to any and all violence?
That's the libertarian version of anti-war, yes.
Russians are retarded and stuck in the past. They still think in terms of taking over land and imperial conquest. Not to mention how absolutely fucking ignorant most of their population is, it's partly by design (hardcore censorship) and partly cultural (they have a mentality similar to the American ghetto, and knowing things is seen as effeminate or degenerate).
Come to think of it, Russian culture is really shitty, very similar to ghetto culture in the US (they value bling bling, they respect violence and promote ignorance). If you've lived or hung out enough with them you'd know what I am talking about. But I'm not arguing for any action, let them be them and live how they want. The problem only occurs when they threaten the rest of the world.
Let me guess, you've never traveled outside of East Nickelhead Junction Arkansas but you became an expert on Russian culture the last time you caught an Anderson Cooper marathon?
Remember way back in 2012 when viewing Russia as a military threat was 'retarded and stuck in the past'? I know you absolutely retarded jingoist boomer faggots are gung-ho to relive the glory days of the cold war right down the idiotic caricatures, but unless you want to take your morphine-addicted 400 pound diabetic lardass over there, shut the fuck up. Nobody else's kids need to go get theirs brains splattered all over some oligarchic fuck hole to satisfy your half century old revenge fantasies.
I've been to Russia. And Ukraine. And 40-some other countries. I have basis for comparison, and no, not every culture is equal (at least in its worth to me, from a purely utilitarian point of view).
Lol. It's unbelievable there are people actually this fucking stupid and naive who can actually breathe independently and feed themselves. Holy fuck.
"Every fried Russian tank and dead soldier drives home the point that superpowers can no longer dominate simply because they have more troops and weapons."
Umm, no it doesn't. Russia has gone into this with poor planning, low morale, bad logistics, and outdated equipment. Their campaign's battle plan also appears to be somewhat stupid.
Ukraine will force planners to work harder but it doesn't signal some kind of revolution in warfare.
I'm not even sure it was "poor planning". I think Russia simply didn't expect the West to keep fanning the flames of this conflict. If Ukraine faced Russia without the rhetorical and financial support from the West, Ukraine and Russia would likely have already settled.
I also think that Russia has been holding back deliberately; if they wanted to, they could engage in a massive bombing campaign.
Putin miscalculated. He thought (as most did) that Ukraine would be taken in a week or less. He never wanted to reduce Kyev to rubble. After all, he believes that Ukraine is a part of Russia - destroying it is not helping Russia.
"He thought (as most did) that Ukraine would be taken in a week or less."
What in the world are you basing this conclusion on?
Certainly not anything that Russia has directly said about it being a surround and capture operation with intent to minimize civilian casualties and infrastructure damage...
...conducted with conscripts from Russia in a seeming live fire training war.
He attacked from four different, non-supporting axes with too few forces to handle any two of them, let alone all four. He used conscripts of doubtful capability to bulk up his numbers. He didn't take the time to formulate a plan to actually defeat the Ukrainian Army. He didn't allow the time for the units carrying out the invasion to train to work together and wargame out possible scenarios of what might occur after the initial invasion. He didn't bother to obtain aerial superiority. He didn't set up the necessary logistical "tail" required to support his ground forces beyond the first few days.
All of these are indicative of a campaign predicated on the quick capitulation of the enemy after token resistance. He expected Czechoslovakia '68, not Finland '39.
Again, what are your sources?
40 years of reading on operational warfare. Most of the outside military analysts assumed he'd done all of those things and that's why they expected a short campaign.
To be plain, the guy half-assed it. The people in charge of prosecuting his war should have known there would be problems with the way things were set up. And if they weren't complete toadies they would have told him so. One of the problems with a dictatorship is nobody wants to bring problems or bad news to the person at the top. You could say he was ill-served by his military from Shoigu on down, but he appointed them and he promoted them. GIGO.
Don't take this personally Pete, but '40 years of reading' doesn't equate to any viable experience or knowledge in relation to the topic. I can't think of any reason a person would allow someone with 40 years of reading on medical procedure to conduct open heart surgery, or 40 years reading on automotive technology to repair their car. This isn't saying that these notional folks, or you don't have a basic, intermediate, or advanced grasp of the material in an academic fashion. Or that, perhaps, that understanding can be applied to real-world situations. But it is saying that typically, this is not the case. I agree, the execution of the war in Ukraine has been a mess. I don't know what Putin intended as an end-state, so I cannot make any sort of educated guess as to what his intent may be now.
The conduct of warfare via conventional forces hasn't changed since 1940. What I stated is gospel in every military academy, textbook, and analysis of conventional conflicts since then.
Being a surgeon isn't taught out of a book, but planning, logistics, maneuver, combined arms, maintenance of reserves, etc. is. The days of tribunes learning their craft following Julius Caesar around during the Gallic Wars is over.
What Putin intended then and what he intends now is beside the point. Based just on the forces with the plan and the preparations he commanded on 02/24, the entire effort was doomed if the Ukrainians defended themselves with even a modicum of competency. Which they did. They have no Manstein or MacArthur leading them. They are just following the guidelines laid down by the pioneers of modern warfare 80+ years ago.
They are operating with a skill level that the Russians have repeatedly failed to attain from VE day until now. The Russian Army has never fought an enemy successfully from 05/1945 to now.
The Red Army is only good at shelling hospitals, strafing cars, and rounding up civilians to be killed or imprisoned. Look back at their record and tell me I'm wrong.
The conduct of warfare via conventional forces hasn't changed since 1940. What I stated is gospel in every military academy, textbook, and analysis of conventional conflicts since then.
The article cited in the Atlantic below would disagree. Everything we (the US - a true superpower) did in taking Fallujah in 2004 (afaik the most recent example of urban conflict) would have failed in the Ukraine in 2022. Every military academy spouting conventional wisdom is now - out of date and obsolete. What Ukraine has learned (and technology has reinforced) since 2014 is that the way to destroy the established army is to kill its platforms. For land forces, armor is now as much a burden as a benefit. Once that 1940 platform is gone, the larger force is more disadvantaged because they depended on that more.
The Russians certainly have unique weaknesses re centralized control and a lack of focus on logistics - but their failure really comes down to the oldest lessons about morale - long predating 1940 - from SunTzu to Hannibal v Fabius to Napoleon. Not tech, not size, not the hubris of modern planning/training.
The best post-1940 quote I can find that indicates what Ukraine has learned and Russia hasn't is from, imo, the most underrated general of WW2 -
Nothing is so good for the morale of the troops as occasionally to see a dead general. Bill Slim
And only about 10% of their military.
A 900,000 man army is nothing if you only send 100,000 or so to the battlefront.
It's becoming increasingly obvious that Joe Biden, NATO and the neocons they rode in on wanted this war and they want it to last for as long as possible. Civilian casualties enhance the war propaganda machine. A small price to pay for a new world order. The cease fire offer is on the table but Reason wants us to celebrate Zelensky's refusal to negotiate because David is somehow going to beat Goliath. And every male under 60 is conscripted with a free gun. Women and children get Molotov cocktails. The neocon wet dream is to reduce Russia to a 3rd world country so they can continue to spread western hegemony in Eastern Europe. Everybody seems to have forgotten that Russia still has a whole bunch of nuclear missiles aimed at San Francisco. OK that wouldn't be any great loss. But our proxy war on Russia is a very tricky business. The petrodollar is pretty close to dead and it's reserve currency status not far behind. With 30 trillion in debt, eight percent inflation, 5.00 a gallon gasoline, and an impending worldwide shortage of diesel at any price it might be time to invest in canned food and ammo. But on the other side everybody gets free green energy and streaming TV. The future is truly bright. I you don't die in a nuclear winter or freeze to death in the meantime.
Yeah, sadly, your analysis is spot on.
I hope Western elites and globalists have overplayed their hand, as it is plain to see for anybody outside the Western propaganda bubble that you simply cannot rely on the US and European banking, financial, and trade system.
I'm sorry so many Ukrainians and Russians have to suffer because of this.
I'm also sad about how this is corroding and destroying the last vestiges of liberal democracy in the West.
I'm also sad about how this is corroding and destroying the last vestiges of liberal democracy in the West.
OK, Rip Van Winkle.
"Yeah, sadly, your analysis is spot on..."
You and GG, doing your part for STUPID.
Brilliant rebuttal you decrepit old sack of shit. You and sarcasmic's 5 sockpuppets are doing your part for warmongering jingoistic bootlicking faggot internet tuff gais.
Well put.
Further, few people ever think about what happens after this. The "unintended consequences" if you will.
So you support Ukraine, and Ukraine wins!
Ok, what then?
What happens after Ukrainian victory, and Putin's assassinated or deposed?
Is Russia, who does have 50% of the world's nuclear weapons likely to be more stable? Are Russians going to realize the "error" of their ways and suddenly turn into vapid anglos?
Or is Russia likely to be extremely unstable, possibly ruled by someone with less craft than Putin, and full of people who (rightfully) have a vendetta against Europe and the US?
Last time the progressive intelligentsia got the revolution they wanted in Russia, 105 years ago, things didn't turn out better for humanity.
Then there's the fact that the globalists, the WEF/Davos cabal, would emerge even more powerful, with only China possibly remaining outside their grasp.
Is that going to be good for individual freedoms?
Not if their current trend is any indication.
Fuck Putin, you will own nothing!
https://consortiumnews.com/2022/03/23/pentagon-drops-truth-bombs-to-stave-off-war-with-russia/
But on Tuesday, the Pentagon took the bold step of leaking two stories to reporters that contradict those tales. “Russia’s conduct in the brutal war tells a different story than the widely accepted view that Vladimir Putin is intent on demolishing Ukraine and inflicting maximum civilian damage—and it reveals the Russian leader’s strategic balancing act,” reported Newsweek in an article entitled, “Putin’s Bombers Could Devastate Ukraine But He’s Holding Back. Here’s Why.”
The piece quotes an unnamed analyst at the Pentagon’s Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) saying, “The heart of Kyiv has barely been touched. And almost all of the long-range strikes have been aimed at military targets.”
A retired U.S. Air Force officer now working as an analyst for a Pentagon contractor, added: “We need to understand Russia’s actual conduct. If we merely convince ourselves that Russia is bombing indiscriminately, or [that] it is failing to inflict more harm because its personnel are not up to the task or because it is technically inept, then we are not seeing the real conflict.”
“As of the past weekend, in 24 days of conflict, Russia has flown some 1,400 strike sorties and delivered almost 1,000 missiles (by contrast, the United States flew more sorties and delivered more weapons in the first day of the 2003 Iraq war). …
A proportion of those strikes have damaged and destroyed civilian structures and killed and injured innocent civilians, but the level of death and destruction is low compared to Russia’s capacity.
‘I know it’s hard … to swallow that the carnage and destruction could be much worse than it is,’ says the DIA analyst. ‘But that’s what the facts show. This suggests to me, at least, that Putin is not intentionally attacking civilians, that perhaps he is mindful that he needs to limit damage in order to leave an out for negotiations.'”
A second retired U.S. Air Force officer says:
“I’m frustrated by the current narrative—that Russia is intentionally targeting civilians, that it is demolishing cities, and that Putin doesn’t care. Such a distorted view stands in the way of finding an end before true disaster hits or the war spreads to the rest of Europe. I know that the news keeps repeating that Putin is targeting civilians, but there is no evidence that Russia is intentionally doing so. In fact, I’d say that Russian could be killing thousands more civilians if it wanted to.”
These Pentagon sources confirm what Putin and the Russian Ministry of Defense have been saying all along: that instead of being “stalled,” Russia is executing a methodical war plan to encircle cities, opening humanitarian corridors for civilians, leaving civilian infrastructure like water, electricity, telephony and internet intact, and trying to avoid as many civilian casualties as possible.
Until these Pentagon leaks it was difficult to confirm that Russia was entirely telling the truth and that corporate media were publishing fables cooked up by Ukraine’s publicity machine.
Again, this analysis is spot on.
And, of course, the narrative we are getting is because people like Clinton, Cheney, Obama, Merkel, Biden, and Scholz don't want to admit their mistakes, and because being able to burn up old military hardware and generating millions of refugees is in the political interest of various governments.
I've been saying this since the war began. Russia hasn't been fighting this all out. This is why a NFZ would be useless other than for starting a war with Russia. That being said, Russian forces are experiencing difficulties, largely due to their shaky logistics. They've spent a lot of money on upgrading weapons systems, but have neglected their logistical infrastructure and it is also rampant with corruption. It was true in Napoleon's day and it's true today, logistics is what wins wars.
I don't think Ukraine can win this in the long run, but they are putting up more resistance than I thought they would. I think we should be really hesitant to say the Ukrainians are winning this, it's fairly obvious Russia remains less than fully committed to this war. I'm not really sure what Putin's end game is.
I think Putin's end game was a neutral Ukraine. And his offer is on the table. But he underestimated the neocons seeing this regional conflict as their holy war. But I could be wrong. I want this over and the Ukrainians back home again.
I don't think neutrality on Ukraine's part was his goal. I think he truly felt he could remove the Ukrainian government and replace it with one subservient to Russia. He's using the military to enforce his will on bordering countries. I think he's using the neutrality issue as a cover. His warning against Sweden and Finland and Bosnia-Herzogovnia shows it's a regional play rather than a local play.
There's 0 reason to believe this other than propaganda.
Other than the warning Putin gave every single country I listed, and the fact that since then all these countries have began discussions on joining NATO. Fuck you're the one who is falling for the propaganda. It's so bad you aren't even open to widely available information that runs contrary to your preferred narrative, this is why I muted you. It's not worth it, you are so one tracked that debate is pointless.
Warning countries that are arming Ukraine to kill Russian soldiers means Putin intended to conquer those countries?
Neutrality has been Russia's demand since 2014. It hasn't changed. He, unlike NATO/globalists, hasn't demanded a coup.
Russia has protested yet tolerated NATO's presence in Ukraine for 8 years, but all of a sudden Putin decided to bully all the Baltic states and Finland by invading Ukraine?
No that isn't what he warned those countries. He warned them after he invaded Ukraine that if they join NATO they will suffer the same consequences. You don't even know what your defending obviously. Your so convinced Russia is pure in this you don't even know the facts that you're arguing. You're just like Joe Friday, just from the other side.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-03-12/russian-official-warns-finland-sweden-against-joining-nato
Sweden doesn't border Russia and neither country have historically not been part of Russia's sphere of influence. Both were also officially neutral and not considering joining NATO until Putin gave these unprovoked warnings. Now Finland looks likely to join NATO and Sweden is considering it.
Stop reading Pravda exclusively or Twitter and actually study the broader situation. These threats against Sweden and Finland were completely unprovoked, as both countries were neutral and not interested in joining NATO when he threatened them. They've been officially neutral since before the Cold War. It was just fucking bullying on Russia's part.
LOL
You went full Ken Schultz.
Never go full Ken Schultz.
But hey, at least you'll have support from Tony, Nelson, buttplug, strazele, sqrlsy, etc now.
Hillary, George W, Soros, Hannity, Miss Lindsay, Kinzinger, Schwab, Biden, Cheney etc agree with you too.
You've gone full Joe Friday you fuck head. You can't even make a salient point anymore. Actually you've gone full Hihn just randomly gibberish.
Noticed you couldn't counter the point so you had to resort to insults. Basically, you have no argument so attack the person who posts uncomfortable facts. Yeah, full on Hihn.
"Noticed you couldn't counter the point so you had to resort to insults. Basically, you have no argument so attack the person who posts uncomfortable facts. Yeah, full on Hihn."
You speaking to a mirror?
Why have you been getting so hysterical about someone disagreeing with your tautology?
You still haven't countered the point.
What point???
That Putin threatened the Scandinavian countries for no reason. It was a stupid move on his part. They both were neutral and likely would have stayed that way. Last year only a quarter of Finns supported joining NATO, now the majority do. Same with Sweden. It was stupid to threaten two neutral nations that have remained neutral for over fifty years. It was a hostile act that was completely unprovoked.
Sweden and Finland didn't impose sanctions?
Threatening them may be an error, it may be aggressive, but it hardly indicates a plan for world conquest.
The word "unprovoked" is being thrown around mush the same way "transphobic" is these days.
soldier has retreated from several arguments with me, but is still obviously butt hurt from the experience.
Anytime soldier.
You literally started that digression by calling him names and comparing him to random people who you somehow think are worse than you despite you and sarcasmic's Joe Friday sock having literally identical viewpoints on your warmongering jingoism. It's too bad you spend your vacation in the middle east polishing fenders. The world would have been a better place if you had been killed along with the rest of your special ed class.
What are you gonna do, sarcasmic, try to blow him in the glory hole at a boomer rock concert like you did the last time you pussied out of a fight you tried to start?
Also neither country sent weapons to Ukraine until after Putin threatened them without provocation. They only sent weapons because Russia directly threatened them. So St Putin is completely at fault in this case.
So, to you, Nardz, Putin is not one of the globalists, and he is their adversary? I am not sure you are aware of his role in the KGB, the mother ship of the globalists...
Who are Putin's enemies?
Putin's enemies are anyone who opposes him. Plus, the enemy of my enemy is not necessarily a good guy. Just because Stalin opposed Hitler doesn't mean Stalin had anything good in him (or anything in common with us).
So Putin is or is not the globalists' adversary?
Putin cannot be the globalists' adversary, as someone raised and groomed his whole life in the KGB, the mother of all globalist movements and the friend of the globalists. Unless he went rogue, and really became an Orthodox Christian, which is highly unlikely.
"Global communism" and "globalism" are not interchangeable you ignorant fucking clown. When your enemies are all members of multiple supranational global governance organizations like NATO, the UN, the WEF, the IMF, and the world bank, all working in concert against you, you're not one of the "globalists". Putin is an unreformed communist and Russian nationalist. He's not a globalist when the entire fucking Davos set whose cocks you can't extract from your throat are militarily and economically isolating him and plotting his ouster.
Janeen, if someone takes a shit on Soros' carpet, he's still a carpet shitter, not a freedom fighter. Putin (and Russian society as a whole, with its Stalin worship) is still a carpet shitter for bullying its neighbors for centuries, and in recent history imposing a bullshit, un-European, atheist, bankrupt ideology on everyone in the neighborhood and beyond at gunpoint.
... and yet have replied to every single one of his posts across dozens of threads for days after you supposedly muted him. Here's a tip: if you want to lie, it's better not to lie about something and them demonstrate mere seconds later with your own words that you are a liar.
Or you could just not be a lying piece of shit in addition to a warmongering Nazi, but we know that's a bit beyond your reach.
Go play soldierman over there just like you did when you spent 2 years jerking off in the maintenance bay during Iraq you pathetic faggot high school dropout E2 REMF.
I wonder if he got that idea from the fact that the USA couped the democratically elected government of Ukraine and replaced it with one subservient to the USA in 2014.
If it was about stopping the expansion of NATO or neutrality of Russian border countries, it likely backfired big time. Finland and Sweden both seem more likely to join NATO then they've ever been. Bosnia-Herzogovnia also is wanting to join NATO now and Moldova is moving closer to the west.
Putin sees Ukraine as part of historic Russia. He wants to subdue it without destroying it. If thousands die in the bargain, so what.
The US would be foolish to agree to any further NATO expansion.
Why? Because Putin won't like it? To fucking bad. Putin doesn't get a say.
Such keen geopolitical thinking there.
It's the reality of the situation. You still haven't answered the question. I will for you. The biggest difference today is weak American leadership and high oil prices. So Putin decided he could get away with it. That's the biggest difference. Ukraine was not any more a threat, and NATO less of a threat, than under Trump. So Putin calculated he could get away with war. The thread wasn't increased. If anything it was less of a threat. His invasion has actually made NATO more unified and his actions have convinced NATO to start actually spending on their military while likely expanding it to include at least Finland, and quite probably Sweden. So if his goal was to lessen the threat of a weak NATO it backfired completely.
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2022/03/26/proving-vladimir-putin-correct-joe-biden-demands-regime-change-in-russia/
Russian President Vladimir Putin has long accused NATO and the collective west of trying to interfere in the nations of their adversaries. Using the recent examples of Egypt, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran and Syria, specifically Putin has said the United States wants to overthrow the elected leader of Russia.
Until today the western governments have denied this allegation. However, in his rambling and inarticulate speech in Poland today Joe Biden stated of Vladimir Putin “for God’s sake, this man cannot remain in power,” a direct call for the regime change the same Biden administration has denied.
Yeah. But it doesn't really change anything I said. I have admitted Biden is an imbecile. But it doesn't change the fact that by invading Ukraine, Putin united NATO, convinced it to rearm and to seek his overthrow. It was a strategic blunder on Putin's part. It was completely stupid. Biden is an idiot, you'll get no arguments from me on that. But Putin was stupid to invade because it played into Biden's hands. Biden hopes this will help him and the Democrats, and he may actually be right (first time for anything). As a result we all lose. Biden is a bumbling fool, Putin had nothing to fear from him.
What would you have done if you were Russia's head of state?
Yes, war mongers and globalists like you are going to try to use Russia's invasion of Ukraine to enlarge NATO. Hopefully, cooler heads will prevail.
soldeir, Biden - the "imbecile" as you call him - gathered NATO and European nations before the invasion by staging numerous meetings and finally by sharing US intelligence with them leading up to the invasion. Trump had purposefully scattered NATO and attacked the EU, urging Brexit like actions by members. The united front you see now was not luck and did not begin 1 month ago.
Lol. Watching chickenhawk76 and sarcasmic's Joe Friday sock one-up each other in historical illiteracy is a riot.
Because there is no benefit to US taxpayers.
The US, probably more than any other country, but certainly among world powers, benefits from NATO and any other efforts to international order.
He said taxpayers, sarcasmic. People who have to work for a living instead of spending 16 hours a day drunk as a skunk on Great Value vodka aren't benefiting much from $7 a gallon gasoline, 10% annual inflation, 32 trillion dollars in public debt, and the lowest labor force participation rate since the 1960s before women entered the work force en masse. Drunken self-confessed homeless drug addicted criminals like you who subsist on section 8 housing and SSI who haven't had their diabetic lardass out of their La-Z-Boy in 20 years don't count.
Odd, isn't it, that the evil Russian military has so little experience that they don't know how to handle logistics, while the US military has so much experience that it works like a clockwork.
But, hey, maybe the war in Ukraine will help them catch up to the West.
it's not odd at all. You're reading more into what I said because below I stated the US military has allowed our logistics to degrade over the past two decades. You're so convinced of Russian superiority you can't even admit what is an obvious flaw in the operations. You and Nardz refuse to look at the situation dispassionately and analytically.
https://taskandpurpose.com/news/russia-logistics-china-mres/
Al Jeezera is also reporting the same thing, as is Asia Times. It's not just the Biden loving MSM, it's almost the entire foreign press and military press. Task and Purpose is an independent, free news source that reports on military matters, usually US military, founded in 2014 to assist service members to transition to civilian life. They have been critical of the Pentagon and both Republican and Democratic administrations. They are hardly a jingoistic mouthpiece for Biden or Ukraine. Neither are Al Jeezera or Asia Times.
Your posts are totes analytic and dispassionate.
That's why you've avoided talking about what alternatives Russia had to invasion, what assumptions they rely upon, and what the consequences would be in favor of the ever so insightful "invasion=evil" tautology.
They didn't need to invade nothing had changed. Nothing. Ukraine has wanted to join NATO for years, it's been part of their constitution for decades. Germany and France were opposed to it the same as they've been all along. Ukraine has disputed territories so couldn't join, the same as has been since 2014. Every President since Bush has pushed for them to join, but it hasn't happened and wasn't going to. Nothing changed other than Putin got a war hard on. So, no need to fucking analyze their alternatives since nothing had fucking changed.
Seeking NATO membership hasn't been in their constitution for decades, it was an amendment added in 2019.
NATO is already in Ukraine. What possible reason does Russia have to trust NATO's promises (especially since NATO has already broken promises of the exact same sort)?
What should the US do if a rabidly anti American cartel comes to power via coup in Mexico City, goes to war on Baja, Sonora, and Chihuahua to wipe out any gringos living there, receives arms, funding, and training from Russia and China, and then keeps talking about forming a binding military alliance with them?
And this is just a fraction of the dilemma Russia finds itself in, as the hypothetical alliance hasn't spent the last 30 years at war invading foreign nations.
Ukraine wasn't any close to joining NATO than at any other point since the downfall of the Soviet Union. NATO treaty bars membership to any country that has breakaway territory. Even if the Constitutional amendment is new, nothing else changed. NATO been training with Ukraine since 2014. So, nothing new has happened. Biden said the same shit every President since Bush has said. So nothing fucking has changed.
Keep telling yourself that.
Amazing how you can still show such faith in these people to be honest and in institutions to not act arbitrarily and contrary to their supposed rules.
Very analytical and dispassionate. Not at all jingoistic caricature and dehumanization. You're a really independent thinker and definitely not a half-retarded D- average student who owes his entire existence to a VA "PTSD" disability check.
No, you simply missed my cynicism: the Russian military isn't as good at fighting a real war because they have had a lot less practice than the US military. I'm critiquing the overuse of the US military abroad, to the point that it functions far better than it has any right to function.
To the contrary, I worry a great deal about the apparent lack of Russian military superiority, because if their ground troops keep failing, the consequences for Ukraine, Europe, and the world become more and more dire. You don't worry about that because you fail to look at the situation dispassionately and analytically.
There was a theory as to why the US keeps intervening in all these far away places - to keep its military trained through real war. Even in sports, if you attend every practice, you're still rusty if you haven't played for a while in official matches.
If'n we don't fight 'em over there, we'll a-have to fight 'em over here!
LMFAO. So, an organ of the state that helps their half-retarded high-school dropout volunteer cannon fodder get jobs at McDonald's if they haven't been mercifully blown up overseas? Excellent.
When you find yourself on the same side as Joe Biden AND Al Jazeera, you can be sure you're on the right course and receiving nothing but the unvarnished truth. Yessiree.
Christ on a fucking donkey, you're so goddamn stupid I'm surprised even the parasitic military recruiters that stalk the special ed classes would take you.
It's been pretty obvious, but lost in the mindless acceptance of the narrative provided by the governments and media. If Russia did not use their Air Force, they still could use short/medium range missiles and be done in minutes. The shake and bake tactical guru culture, the sudden appearance of so many global conflict specialists, much like the emergence of millions of internet-trained virologists that cropped up immediately after the spread of covid began, is amazing.
I'm glad I scrolled before posting the same article.
Putin does not want WW3. He wants NATO off his porch and the USSR territories back in the fold, and the Russian army has clearly gone to great lengths to avoid civilian or foreign casualties that would precipitate a global conflict.
A strike on Ukrainian Foreign Legion base blasted the officers and left foreigners untouched. Reddit brigade has since been posting their location almost daily, and have coincidentally avoided any airstrikes.
The face of war has not changed. The face of the Russian bear simply has yellow and blue egg all over it.
Combined arms is hard. And unsupported armor has ALWAYS been vulnerable.
Russia's strength has always been it's size. Bleed the enemy dry by retreating across the Steppes until your ready to counterattack. They've rarely been successful in a purely offensive roles. World War 1, The Winter War, Chechnya. They often win just by pure brutal strength but it's always much more of a struggle than it should be. A lot of that is that the Russian Military just doesn't have the same professionalism, especially in the NCO Corp, that we take for granted in the west.
I caution anyone though who has high hopes of Ukraine winning this. Other than some minor offensive operations, Ukraine remains primarily on the defensive. Winning a defensive war is simply not very feasible. Eventually they'll have to go on the offensive and when they do, I believe the advantage is on the Russians side.
Ukraine does not need to mount any major offensives, they can still go the insurgency route in occupied areas. And Russia cannot afford to keep offensive forces perpetually in the field.
That is a strategy that only works if you are already occupied but if you're trying to avoid occupation it's a losing strategy. The bigger guy has the advantage. It doesn't prevent occupation.
Russia is not and has never been interested in occupying Ukraine you fucking clown. Stick to the things you know, like sitting in a barracks 500 miles from the area where women and children are being slaughtered like farm animals, or fetching french fries and hamburgers for people who have to think for a living.
So they're going to withdraw from Crimea and the Donbass? I think that's news to everyone.
Or anyway, it wouldn't be if not for warmongering fascist pieces of shit like you who have tied up their idiotic jingoism into a proxy war with a foreign country of no strategic value to anyone besides Vladimir Putin.
From my understanding, what Russia's biggest Achilles heel has been is logistics. Unfortunately, the US has also neglected our logistics, as we have focused on COIN warfare the last twenty years. Supplying a fixed patrol base is far different from supplying a mobile front. Additionally, we've had several administrations in a row, starting with Clinton, who haven't understood the importance of Combat Support and Combat Service Support troops and these were often the focus of RIF cuts. So much so that we relied on contractors for much of our Combat Support roles like logistics during Iraq. It doesn't matter how good your shooters are if they don't have beans and bullets. Our Generals and Admirals haven't been much better at advising on the importance of these troops.
Logistics and artillery were always America's two strongest suits, and allowed us to win the second world war. We've neglected both the last twenty years by focusing on COIN and asymmetrical warfare. Logistics may not be as sexy as fighters and shooters, but they're probably the most important troops in combat. The Red Ball express, largely African American troops, were more important to stopping and then reversing the German offensive in the Ardennes than either the 101st or 3rd Army's contribution. The 101st wouldn't even have gotten to Bastogne on time if it wasn't for the Red Ball express and Patton wouldn't have been able to launch his offensive if not for the logistical infrastructure from Marseilles that kept his tanks and troops marching.
It didn't help when they persisted in a plan for armored troops over frozen marshes when the marshes didn't freeze. But yeah, logistics uber alles.
No beans, no bullets, no bandages, no battle.
Lol. Guess which D- average high school dropout pussy-ass REMF who spent his vacation in the sandbox 500 miles from the action needs to justify his pathetic existence.
Hmm, this could end with a destroyed invading army and a destroyed invaded country, and lots of dead people all around. What happens when both sides lose?
Schwab wins
That's the plan that Biden and the EU are pursuing.
An outpouring of government spending on new military hardware, "humanitarian aid", and rebuilding, with contracts going to corporations that are in bed with the Biden administration and the most powerful governments.
I'm thinking this has a lot to do with Ukraine, their willingness to fight for their country against an unprovoked invasion, and the fact that anyone with eyes and an internet connection can see that Russia is 100% in the wrong.
Why would anyone give credence to a wild fantasy about a secret US conspiracy to ... I guess get Ukrainians killed? Drive up the global price of gas? And the goal for the US is what? Some Skull and Bones secret society conspiracy to ... shit, I've got nothing.
There is literally nothing the US gains from Russia invading Ukraine except, possibly, a new NATO country (or two or more?) on or near the Russian border. And that's only happening because Russia invaded. Before that it wasn't going to happen.
Putin is definitely gping to get what he deserves. Even if he ends up occupying Ukraine, it is now a country unified against Russia.
If he doesn't, Ukraine will be fast-tracked into NATO. Finland, Sweden, Bosnia-Herzogovnia, and Moldova all thinking, "Hmm. I didn't think Russia would be stupid or crazy enough to invade a foreign country unprovoked. It looks like that's a bad bet, so I'd better get some friends ASAP.",
Russia has basically assured themselves of NATO on several of their borders once all is said and done. Whether Ukraine is one of them will depend on whether they can get their act together or not. And with the economic hammering they have taken, they won't have the respurces they would need to object.
I don't know of anybody alleging a "conspiracy". This is just the usual doings of the military-industrial complex: war leads to more weapons sales and more political power. It requires no conspiracy, no secrecy, no agreements, just the usual greed, lobbying, and corruption found in the US government.
And what possible benefit does the US have from extending NATO to Ukraine and those other shithole countries?
Contrary to what your government propaganda rags tell you, Putin isn't an idiot who invaded Ukraine to win over their hearts and minds. What he wanted is to destroy Ukrainian military capabilities and an assurance that Ukraine won't join NATO, and he will likely get both.
As for the US, this drives up price inflation, accelerates the loss of US influence in the world, encourages Europe and Asia to become more self-reliant, and accelerates the end of the dollar as the reserve currency.
"It requires no conspiracy"
But it does, because military measures (including arming the Ukrainians) requires a President and a Congress that will go along with the war profiteers. The only way your weird theory works is if everyone is in the pocket of the "military-industrial complex". So yes, you are espousing conspiracies.
"destroy Ukrainian military capabilities and an assurance that Ukraine won't join NATO, and he will likely get both"
In the real world, Putin is haunted by the ghost of the USSR, whose demise he has repeatedly, publicly lamented, and his desire to reconstitute Russia's sphere of influence from before the collapse of the failed Soviet state. And his agression has served to make it much more likely that Ukraine (as well as a growing list of other countries who never were interested before) will be a NATO member soon. He won'tbget what he wants because he has no leverage and his country is being decimated by sanctions.
"As for the US, this drives up price inflation, accelerates the loss of US influence in the world, encourages Europe and Asia to become more self-reliant, and accelerates the end of the dollar as the reserve currency."
This has grown, not shrunk, US influence. Trump's policies drove our allies to look away from American leadership, but Biden just called an emergency meeting of NATO and everyone came. That wouldn't have happened a few years ago. Europe was learning to be self-reliant, but they are back in the fold now. Asia, with the more serious threat of China looming, isn't walking away from us. And the dollar is showing no signs of losing it's place as the de facto world currency. No matter how many times you say it will be replaced as the reserve currency of the world, there is no indication of that and no equally stable currency that would replace it.
Putin is losing on basically every front. World sentiment is against him, his military is grossly underperforming, his economy is in shambles, his populace is openly resisting him (at great personal peril, given the vicious and violent nature of Putin's authoritarian regime), his generals are dying as they are forced to lead a demorilized army from the front lines, and the financial resources he and his cronies have plundered from Russia have been frozen. There isn't a single way that this is going well for Putin.
If we're lucky he will pull a Hitler and put a bullet in his brain.
Alexei Navalny for Russia!
Your comments on the Yuan as a future reserve tender? Nations are accepting trade in it in lieu of the dollar, especially after the western world demonstrated such willingness for national theft of deposited assets.
Russia and China have been preparing for this, and more. US and EU sanctions were a shot in the foot and now we're facing a crisis of production as a result of globalization of supply chains. The EU is considering an emergency agriculture act to expedite production, specifically by waiving laws (ie: environmentalism) impeding it. US is looking to set up lithium strip mines in West VA under the Defense Production Act, also via tossing environmental regs out the window.
You watch too much CNN.
So your position is that the Yuan, which has a long and documented history of manipulation by the Chinese government, would be accepted by international banking and business interests as a stable and trustworthy currency?
You clearly don't understand that stability is one of the most important elements of a global reserve currency. And as long as China is a totalitarian state, it will never be stable. It will always be subject to manipulation. So it won't be trusted.
I don't need to watch the news to understand that the status of the dollar as the world's reserve currency isn't being threatened any time soon. Whatever flaws it may have, it is better than the other options.
Nothing says "stability" like last century's hegemon with 32 trillion dollars in debt (the plurality of which is owned by the issuer of the Yuan) against an actual GDP (GDP minus government spending) of about 20 trillion that is presently agitating for war against a nuclear-armed state.
Quite right. You need to watch state propaganda for that. Lucky for you that's all you do.
You mean like they have been doing for a century, while using propaganda to get fools like you to go along? That's not a "conspiracy", that's business as usual. That's what happened for every war and conflict the US has participated in or supported for more than a century.
It's entirely possible that the US government is corrupt enough, and American voters are stupid enough, to go along with that, even though nobody can explain the benefit to the US of spending trillions to defend countries on the other side of the globe, countries whose people mostly have nothing but contempt for the US and American values.
You live in a fantasy world.
People indoctrinated by US and European corporate media are not "the world".
It's performing the way the Russian military always does, meaning it's far below Western standards, but that doesn't matter.
Putin is and remains very popular in Russia.
What that actually means is that Western governments have seized assets of people on the mere basis of citizenship, without due process.
And there it is: what people like you have really wanted all along is regime change in Russia to some Western puppet who Russians wouldn't elect in a million years. And you are willing to throw Ukrainians into the meat grinder to escalate the situation until Russia breaks.
I don't know if you are willfully ignorant, intentionally saying untrue things because you have some affinity for Russia/Putin, pro-authoritarian in general, or just married to your own fantasy.
Your post above is just insane. There is no factual support for what you are saying, but I'm sure if the Kremlin finds your posts they will pay you handsomely to continue.
I seriously doubt Putin particularly likes what I have written, given that I have called him a psychopath and compared him to a rabid dog.
As for my post being "insane", you're welcome to point out any factual errors.
I consider you and people like you to be insane: not only do you seem to live in a fact free world, your policy preferences are reprehensible.
OK, here are a few:
"That's not a "conspiracy", that's business as usual."
But you aren't talking about the strong connection between the givernment and the defense industry. You are saying that the US givernment policies are *intended* to start, continue, and exacerbate conflicts (in this case, Ukraine). It's you assigning of false motives that is the problem.
The US supporting a fledgeling democracy against an authoritarian invader makes perfect sense. Your evidence-free theory is that it is a US policy. That's a conspiracy theory.
"It's entirely possible that the US government is corrupt enough, and American voters are stupid enough, to go along with that,"
Why would corruption and stupidity be necessary to see the benefit of embracing democratic countries and protecting their self-determination with a mutual defense treaty? It seems like a great way to make illiberal countries with powerful militaries and 'might makes right' philosophies from invading neighbors willy-nilly and setting up puppet governments. Unless you think the people of the Warsaw Pact countries were delighted to live under their Communist overlords?
"You live in a fantasy world."
You'll have to he more specific. This seems like a weak rejoinder to a list of detailed realities of the world today.
"People indoctrinated by US and European corporate media are not "the world"."
The condemnation of Russia is broad and the various countries who are either contributing weapons and resources to Ukraine, slapping sanctions on Russia (or supporting multilateral sanctions), or both is a long list. Countries who have, since the end of WWII, remained neutral (Sweden and Finland are considering joining NATO, Switzerland lifted their banking secrecy laws to freeze assets of Russian leaders and oligarch enablers) are joining the effort. Companies are suspending operations and refusing to sell to Russia. Those are savvy, knowledgeable people, companies, and countries who are making informed, intentional decisions, not rubes "indoctrinated by US and European corporate media".
"Putin is and remains very popular in Russia."
He also wins 90% of the vote each 'election'. But you believe what you want.
"What that actually means is that Western governments have seized assets of people on the mere basis of citizenship"
If it's about citizenship, they are being strangely inefficient in their policies. If it's about targeting those who are executing this unjust war, they are being highly effective.
Hm, I wonder which it is? Citizens or leadership?
"what people like you have really wanted all along is regime change in Russia"
I have always thought Putin was a murderous authoritarian who was heading up a kleptocracy and brutally repressing his people. And as long as he stayed inside his own borders, it was a Russian problem to solve.
My hope that he offs himself is based on my belief that he is an evil man. And I don't throw 'evil' around very often.
But 'regime change' involves outside forces replacing an existing government with another, more friendly, version. I don't think we (or anyone else in the world) should have a say about who Russians wants to lead them as long as the only ones bearing the consequences are Russians.
So no, I don't support a regime change. If Putin doesn't kill himself or get offed by one of his internal allies, we shouldn't do any more than help Ukrainians kick him out (including Donbass and Crimea). And if he does end up overthrowing the lawful government, continuing to support the inevitable insurgency until he goes back home.
Is that specific enough for you?
Coming from the warmongering fascist chickenhawk faggot cocksucker and noted child pornographer who has stated that Vladimir Putin, acting against all possible rationality, invaded a country with less than 1/10 of his military in an attempt to subjugate its people and reconstitute the Soviet Union.
Ukraine is not a fledgling democracy. It is an oligarchy whose democratically-elected government was deposed in a US-backed coup in 2014.
It would require stupidity but not corruption to support wasting American lives and treasure killing people half the world away to "protect" an abstraction. Since Ukraine is not a democratic country, but an American vassal whose democratically-elected government was toppled in a US-backed coup in 2014, that's not germane to this particular discussion.
Right, that's our special job. Our client states are plucky fledgling democracies made of pure truth and justice. Let me know when Russia murders 500,000 civilians in a decade long occupation. They'll be about 1/10 of the way to catching up to the post-WWII USA.
It would be, if you had provided a list of detailed realities of the world today instead of lies and jingoist war propaganda.
Appeal to consensus is still a logical fallacy even when the consensus is among warmongering western governments looking to loot and murder in foreign countries. See also: Iraq; Afghanistan; Syria; Libya; Yugoslavia; Bosnia; Kosovo...
Companies who hire Italian-American security services to prevent their buildings from being burned down are savvy, knowledgeable people making informed, intentional decisions, not rubes succumbing to mafia intimidation in order to continue making a living...
And Joe Biden won with the largest number of votes in the cleanest election in American history; one in which, for possibly the first time in history, no fraud of any kind took place. Octogenarian Joe Biden who refused to campaign due to COVID. More than Obama. More than Clinton. But you believe what you want.
Thousands of laid off Russian McDonald's workers are executing an unjust war? That would probably be news to them. News to the Russian soldiers in Ukraine completely and totally unaffected by any of the economic sanctions, too.
But now that he's laid siege on 3 cities in an adjacent murderous, authoritarian kleptocracy headed by a US puppet as a result of a coup to replace the democratically elected government of Ukraine in 2014, it's an American and NATO problem to solve.
You have called everyone and everything from Donald Trump to evangelical Christians "evil", shreek. Which is particularly ironic coming from a degenerate piece of shit who fucks children and views, possesses, and distributes child pornography.
It's too bad you didn't have that same outlook when the US executed a color revolution in Ukraine 8 years ago, replacing the democratically elected government with a US-friendly NATO lap dog. Also by your "logic" Russia would have been fully justified in intervening in any American election since Truman vs. Dewey since the results of every US election since has borne consequences for multiple other countries. Including, you know, our vassal states in eastern Europe. Is there any special reason why the results of Russia's elections should be the subject of American military intervention due to their possible consequences on foreign nations, but no other country's elections should be? You know, other than you being a Democratic party shill so far up Biden's senile asshole you could check his polyps?
Except, you know, when you do. Like when you want to militarily engage with nuclear-armed Russia because the results of their democratic elections do not comport with your desires for the citizenry of a country that you couldn't have found on an unlabeled map until 2 weeks ago. Some of whom, including in the territories you believe should be the permanent possession of a foreign power, are ethnic Russians.
Returning to a thread a day after the fact in the desperate hope that your interlocutor would never see your reply and using more words to repeat what you had already said did not do anything for the specificity of your "argument", shreek. And wouldn't have even if you had relied upon any actual facts instead of regurgitating warmongering jingoistic yellow journalism propaganda. But I'm happy to show up a day after the fact and shove it up your pedophile asshole for you. Thanks for the opportunity.
Hey look! When confronted with reality, shreek puts his fingers in his ears and screams LALALALALALALALALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU and calls people names because he has no argument. Just like every other time he posts .
It's impressive how you can take American propaganda headlines and turn them into a 700 word essay saying absolutely nothing. You're like the reverse USA Today
Yeah, so unified that they had to close the borders and conscript 60 year old men.
On a related note, I saw a clip of Gropey Joe trying to give a speech to American troops in Poland today, and that guy doesn't have long before he's pushing up the daisies. I've never heard anyone sound so feeble.
-jcr
The Poles have started cracking jokes about Biden screwing in a lightbulb
Share.
How many Biden staffers does it take to change a lightbulb?
Sixteen.
One to see that its burnt out.
One to confirm its out.
One to write an expose blaming the catastrophe on climate change.
One to state replacing the bulb would be racist.
One to state not changing the bulb to be racist.
One to determine the correct racial and gender makeup of the changing crew.
One to organize a union of lightbulb changers.
One to determine the environmental impact of changing the light.
One to lambast the system for not having "free lightbulb changes for all."
One to declare lightbulbs a sign of the patriarchy.
One to declare the "male" and "female" connections are transphobic.
One to demand the lightbulb be made of renewable resources.
And after taking twice the time and quadrupling the cost, one to hire three illegals to do it for a quarter of the pay
Good stuff, but it needs trimming. Ending is gold.
I passed on your suggestion. They came back with: How many Biden does it take to screw in a light bulb? —Only one, but it gets really screwed!
They threw in a bonus: What do you call an honest man in the Biden White House? —Lost.
Biden must hate those damn Iraqis (that’s who lives in Poland, right?)
"What do you call an honest man in the Biden White House? —Lost."
Spit coffee. 10/10
We would still not have cheap LED bulbs if Congress had not passed a phasing out of incandescents. The technology existed, but not the market and they went from $25 a bulb to $2-3 in a few years because government action created the demand and the market.
So? That proves nothing. Plenty of technology gets cheaper and more efficient with time. Leftists like you delude yourselves that your interference in the market helps, when it really hurts.
Notice how the government didn't need to make CRT television sets illegal in order to get people to adopt LCD panels. Notice how the government didn't need to make slide rules illegal in order to get people to adopt digital computers. Notice how the government didn't need to make horses and bicycles illegal to get people to adopt trains and automobiles. It's almost as if new technology matures and displaces old technology only when there's a discernible cost or performance benefit.
U.S. investment in science plainly helped accelerate U.S. dominance in science and technology globally, but it is fair that the cost can be a minefield of pork projects. Depends to some degree on how much you value winning.
Environmental need is definitely a key example. If special free-to-pollute rights had not been carved out for government-picked industry like fossil fuels for so long, and pollution regulated as it must be, we would absolutely be farther along in many areas of tech whether carbon capture, low carbon power, fuel cells etc. Nothing fundamental blocking any of those lines of innovation other than your comment "when there's a discernible cost or performance benefit", which notably includes subsidizing the visible performance of entrenched industry (in this case) via non-visibly offloading huge amounts of the costs to the global population via polluting.
We still don't.
Cool! That makes them only 10x more expensive than incandescents. And all it took was for the government to "create a market" by making a safe, inexpensive technology illegal.
It's remarkable that when you're deliberately trolling, you still somehow manage to sound even more retarded when you're using your sarcasmic handle and applying the chapter summaries you read from Economics In One Lesson. Well done.
"only 10x more expensive than incandescents "
lifetime energy cost of LED bulbs is clearly cheaper than incandescent, are they not? They last 25x as long and far more energy efficient. Quick look at Amazon the per-bulb costs look comparable. Had no idea your argument here was even made these days – what are you looking at?
He was persuasive enough to turn you into a bootlicking warmongering jingoist though, so he has that going for him.
I think the error here is that you're still assuming Russia is a superpower
The performance of their military, especially in the realm of logistics, says otherwise.
A superpower - like the US - would have rolled up the Ukrainian military in two weeks. The disparity is just that large.
The Russian military is not the Soviet military.
We lost 2 wars to illiterate goat fuckers armed with half century old Soviet rifles and RPGs you retarded cunt.
MISSION ACCOMPLISHED right you jingoistic smoothbrain?
I had to stop after these authors showed that they don't know what "unprovoked" means. Probably more wishful-thinking nonsense after that . . .
https://twitter.com/barnes_law/status/1507476774350823427?t=fWBatd0jMh8r_gLXo37RfQ&s=19
The same people who promised you Roberts, Kavanaugh & Barrett would be Scalia style conservatives are the ones demanding more war over Ukraine. FYI: those 3 justices today just said Navy can end Seals' careers over the vaccine mandate.
As others have pointed out, Russia is not a superpower and its military is far more comparable to Ukraine's than the United States's.
Well, golly gee, isn't that great! We go trillions into debt so that we can more effectively bomb nations that have done us no harm into the stone age! Will wonders never cease!
Who are we bombing into the stone age? We're arming a sovereign nation fighting an invader. We aren't bombing anyone.
We're bombing thousands of people every single day and have been for 20 years. Just not in Ukraine. Officially. Yet. The "no fly zone" you're agitating for, and the 101st Airborne who your president told are being deployed to Ukraine, will put a quick end to that.
https://twitter.com/Theo_TJ_Jordan/status/1507524719221874690?t=YdHKOV00lHwkvjhozL99lw&s=19
Psaki openly encouraged Spotify to censor Joe Rogan from the White House podium. A couple weeks later, this comes out.
[Link]
https://twitter.com/benlewismedia/status/1504048686766211073?t=CVL6yRvvFq-Ks9USNK3lOA&s=19
At the Ukraine/Poland border. Tired women and children leaving their country. They’re being pestered by American preachers telling them they all need to accept Jesus as their saviour and their lives will be better. Receiving a lot of eye rolls in response.
[Pic]
Atheistic communism and then atheistic oligarchy left them in such a great state it's understandable why they'd reject religion.
https://twitter.com/emeriticus/status/1507571807611768832?t=r4CDanQ8MuDQKV-fGWhuZg&s=19
The man who created Zelensky: "Kolomoisky . . . reportedly has a controlling interest in Burisma, the Ukrainian oil and gas company which put President Biden’s son, Hunter, on its board of directors in 2014 at a salary of $50,000 per month."
[Link]
https://twitter.com/SallyMayweather/status/1507420420668108804?t=IY_TD1kedryW4VVF-Sx_sg&s=19
[Graphic: where the US has bombed since WWII]
Because some of you will get your panties in a bunch, I'll explain why I posted this one.
It isn't to vilify the US.
Some of these bombings were legitimate (others less so), but that's the point- sometimes violence and military action is justified.
If you don't think Russia is justified, all I ask is that you offer alternative options, admit the assumptions you're relying on, and acknowledge what the likely consequences could be.
Or you can just cru about "Russian propaganda" and go back to rooting for Ukraine to win and Putin to be assassinated, without considering the effects of such events of course.
Your choice.
REMEMBER
THE MAINETHE GHOST OF KYIVSNAKE ISLANDUH... PUTINMANBAD!https://twitter.com/caitoz/status/1507495372851380225?t=8EuCM_SU4IkRL7LkR58vOA&s=19
To be clear, the evidence is mounting that this is a proxy war deliberately instigated and perpetuated by the US empire with the goal of ousting Putin. Which means that, despite all the narrative window dressing and spin, this war is just more US regime change interventionism.
[Links]
A proxy war that Putin instigated?
I'll bite. List how Putin instigated a proxy war, or even a cold war, in a region that is of zero strategic interest to the US?
How? Easy: more than two decades of provocation until Putin's back was against the wall. You can find a Twitter thread giving the history: here.
Putin's paranoia and grandiose delusions about how awesome the Soviet Union was and how terrible it was when it failed doesn't justify invading a sovereign country.
Your paranoia and grandiose delusions about how awesome American oligarchy is and how terrible it would be if it failed didn't justify invading Panama, Cuba, Nicaragua, Haiti, Honduras, Hawaii, Guam, Puerto Rico, Philippines, Syria (no, not your chocolate Messiah's adventure, the color revolution in /49), Korea, Guatemala, Iran, The Dominican Republic, Vietnam, Pakistan, Grenada, Panama again, Iraq, Kuwait, Somalia, Yugoslavia, Bosnia, Croatia, Afghanistan, Iraq again, Libya, and Syria again either. I guess it's a good thing only the good guys get to write history.
Don't just parrot Russian state propaganda, try to make it logical.
Putin's "back is against the wall" if he doesn't control Ukraine - how, specifically. Not metaphorically, not emotionally, not "you don't understand geopolitics", not "he's lost face", how is he surrounded, with nowhere to retreat to, no option for security, and has no reasonable option but to invade another country.
For example, if Russia's back is against the wall in Crimea, what would happen if they... returned to Russia. Not quite a wall at your back if you could go home to the largest nation in the world by surface area. What physically makes this impossible without dying?
For example – true or false, Russia signed the Budapest Memorandum in which Ukraine agreed to give up nuclear weapons – assuring Russia's back *wasn't* up against the wall with nukes next door – in return for Russia's assurance that it would *not* do this one specific thing... what is it?
Rhymes with "evasion".
Yeah, we'll take a page from your book and make measured, logical, careful statements about how everyone we don't like is motivated by pure, illogical, insensate evil.
I'll take "Arguments nobody made" for 500!
Oh sweet, it's a daily double! Perhaps Putin doesn't need to wait until there's an all-out war pushing into his borders and Moscow is under siege before his options are limited.
Or, for example, what would happen if Ukraine ceded Crimea, which is majority ethnic Russians who speak Russian and voted to separate from Ukraine, and the United States allowed it to happen without arming neo-Nazi groups in a foreign country? What physically makes that impossible without dying?
True! Russia did sign the Budapest Memorandum. That Ukraine, with the help of the US-backed coup to replace its democratically elected government that was seeking peace and neutrality with Russia with a western-friendly, pro-NATO, nationalist government, violated the spirit if not the letter of the agreement by allowing a US-backed coup and taking a pro-war, anti-Russia, re-annexation of the disputed territories stance is just an inconvenient historical footnote.
Smells like American dick cheese.
"everyone we don't like is motivated by pure, illogical, insensate evil"
Not gonna hold back on the straw man approach I take it. Can we expect a rapid tour of all of the major fallacies or do you concentrate.
"I'll take "Arguments nobody made" for 500"
You literally said "more than two decades of provocation until Putin's back was against the wall" as a counter-argument to the claim that Putin instigated the invasion. Perhaps you just want to claim that Putin has no interest in influence in Ukraine, merely on a special military operation to secure security, so object to my use of "control" associated with a literal military invasion. Is this supposed to be advanced Orwellian jujitsu or something.
"doesn't need to wait until there's an all-out war pushing into his borders"
Ah, slippery slope fallacy. If Ukraine independence is allowed, the only possible inevitable outcome is "all-out war pushing into his borders".
"Or, for example, what would happen if Ukraine ceded Crimea, which is majority ethnic Russians who speak Russian and voted to separate from Ukraine, and the United States allowed it to happen without arming neo-Nazi groups in a foreign country? What physically makes that impossible without dying?"
At least this is close to not crazy. Did or did not Russia accept the existing borders in 1991? On what grounds do you think ethnic composition is a justification for invasion and internationally agreed borders have no validity? Are there limits or ethnic nationalism is always empowered to pursue violence?
" taking a pro-war, anti-Russia, re-annexation of the disputed territories stance is just an inconvenient historic"
Full circle on the Orwellian doubling down – the Ukrainian majority has consistently favored closer ties with Europe ("inconvenient historical footnote" for sure!) and pursuing this is "pro-war" because Russia doesn't want it and therefore military invasion is justified.
"Smells like"
Pro-war apologia, principally.
"How? Easy: more than two decades of provocation until Putin's back was against the wall..."
This guy never understood that "The devil made me do it!!" was a joke.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1498491107902062592.html
Most fascinating thing about the Ukraine war is the sheer number of top strategic thinkers who warned for years that it was coming if we continued down the same path.
No-one listened to them and here we are.
Small compilation ???? of these warnings, from Kissinger to Mearsheimer.
You say warnings, others say "field guide."
Hunter Biden "worked" for not only Ukrainian energy, but also a biotech company that worked with the Wuhan Institute of Virology and EcoHealth Alliance on GoF and coronaviruses.
(And Moderna still owns the patent for the 19 character gene sequence at the Covid furin cleavage site that makes it so infectious to humans.)
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10652127/Hunter-Biden-helped-secure-millions-funding-military-biotech-research-program-Ukraine.html
Do you ever question any of this stuff before repeating it?
Probably substantially more than you do every time you regurgitate American warmongering propaganda and ActBlue PDF talking points. Salted Nuts has the advantage of saying things that are demonstrably true and providing sources for them. Want to tell us about the heroic Ghost of Kyiv, the blow-out Russian tanks that are from Syria half a decade ago, and the Snake Island martyrs? Go on now, DESTROY the cons with those FACTS and LOGIC!
I was reacting first to the 'Moderna still owns the patent for the 19 character gene sequence at the Covid furin cleavage site'.
I've discussed vaccine and covid stuff in depth with Nuts, can probably find some of the threads you can review. Yeah sorry, it's the usual conservative ideological horseshit vs. reason and measurement. I can't help that it is a centuries-old cliche.
Meanwhile, on the conspiracy front, are you really implying reports of blown out Russian tanks in Ukraine are universally false flag media hoaxes? I have a certain compulsive fascination with pervasive mob madness of this kind.
https://twitter.com/davereaboi/status/1507711885671645185?t=_fMor8OYBlkWQxqjREfCkg&s=19
The absolute balls on this guy—going after Hungary with a manipulative speech while giving Germany a pass.
The Hungarian election is coming up, and Zelensky is playing his part—or, I should say, he’s playing the EU’s part in trying to oust Orban. Won’t work, thankfully.
[Video]
When Hungarians elect nationalist Hungarian leaders it's fascist Nazi fascism with extra Nazis on top. When the United States orchestrates a coup to depose the democratically elected government of Ukraine and replace it with nationalist Ukrainian leaders and then proceeds to send arms to actual, literal, self-avowed, no-shit neo-Nazi militias, that's wonderful laissez faire free market democracy.
You know who else began a promising invasion in the Ukraine, and then ended up having it all backfire?
Prince Oleg of Novgorod?
Haha I am glad there are some commenters who still remember this game.
Regime change will work this time...
https://twitter.com/ElectionWiz/status/1507778361506123779?t=ZEEE8sIdDZOOTz-9XDPQqQ&s=19
WARSAW — "For God's sake, this man cannot remain in power," said Biden, referring to Putin, as he closes out his speech in Poland.
https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1507776158934482955?t=k5VM7xsQD0RzXKsWZ5_bHA&s=19
[Video]
https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1159188880983240710?t=ItoLawXgWM096b8KD6vXMw&s=19
The words of a president matter. They can move markets. They can send our brave men and women to war. They can bring peace.
And they can unleash the deepest, darkest forces in this nation — like Donald Trump has chosen to do.
Hey, asshole nardz! Got anymore twitter or facebook to share and prove you're a fucking ignoramus?
Hey you decrepit old piece of shit! Got anymore fact-free retarded assertions to prove you're an illiterate cunt who does nothing but regurgitate warmongering propaganda like a good little fascist bootlicker you pathetic welfare leeching old piece of shit?
Oh, goody! My own stalker with the attention span of a 5YO like nardz!
Try making sense, or better yet, fuck off and die, asshole.
Oh, it's a "regime"? I thought Adolf Putin was duly elected and everything was above board in the Fatherland? But nows it's a "regime". Tell me more about this "regime"
Big words are hard. Hope that helps. Thank Duranty that we live in the only free country in the world besides Ukraine, where Adolph Biden won more votes than any candidate in history an election for which he didn't campaign.
So, experts:
What do you think will happen if Ukraine wins?
What do you think will happen if Putin is assassinated or deposed?
Do you want to see the globalist/WEF world order more or less powerful than they are now?
Is life better or worse for Americans after these things happen?
If Russia, the multi-ethnic empire, is broken up into a few countries based on ethnic identity and/or language, the world may be slightly safer. (Russia proper will still have nukes, though, but its imperial ambitions may be put on hold until it got back up on its feet).
You know the answers to all of these questions. Libertarians are globalists and have been from the get-go. Anything that benefits supranational global governance and supranational corporations is good. Everything else is bad. Not just bad. Evil. Incomprehensible evil. The kind of evil so terrifying that it would remind you of hellfire and satan and manipulate you into committing unspeakable acts to placate the holy arbiter of justice, except we don't believe in that kind of superstitious nonsense anymore!
You must have misread my post. I have no issues with nation states. Russia is not a nation state. It is a globalist empire comprising of many ethnic groups. Its policy was to create an artificial melting pot and to genocide ethnic groups and move them around, but it didn't work. It turns out Islam is still a stronger ideology than worshipping a mummy in Moscow. And it turns out nation and culture are still stronger than the Soviet ideal of a borderless, classless world. So Russia is a bullshit, artificial country created by the globalists as an experiment. It's time to allow the various nationalities to govern themselves, and let Russia keep the areas with ethnic Russians.
https://twitter.com/EricMMatheny/status/1507716343432425475?t=dC5EoqNFlABsLeK0gB3h_w&s=19
Two years of the media lying to us about COVID followed three years of the media lying to us about Russian Collusion. Why would we ever believe a word about Ukraine?
Oh, Oh! Another twitter cite from the asshole nardz! How
Pathetic.
Oh, Oh! Another idiotic ad hominem attack from the inbred, shit-eating, retarded, credulous boomer welfare case sucking up half a million dollars a year worth of Medicare and Social Security and dutifully regurgitating warmongering fascist propaganda because he's a bootlicking piece of shit! How... unsurprisingly pathetic.
How's about you suit up and go take up the cause, huh you fat, stupid piece of shit? Oh, what's that? You were a draft-dodging pathetic cowardly faggot when you had your chance and now you want to sent 50,000 of somebody else's sons to die for your jingoistic cold war revenge fantasies?
Oh, goody! My own stalker with the attention span of a 5YO like nardz!
Try making sense, or better yet, fuck off and die, asshole.
https://twitter.com/obianuju/status/1507512123550846981?t=57I-6nwyjz1VuZHQLZN1KQ&s=19
OMG. This is a real billboard in Portland Oregon. There is really a “Stop Having Kids” movement.
[Pic]
Oh, Oh! Another twitter cite from the asshole nardz! How
pathetic.
Oh, Oh! Another incoherent copy-paste response from the inbred, shit-eating, retarded, credulous, cowardly, draft-dodging boomer welfare case sucking up half a million dollars a year worth of Medicare and Social Security and dutifully regurgitating warmongering fascist propaganda because he's a bootlicking piece of shit! How... unsurprisingly pathetic.
Why is it that the piece of shit death cultists are always gung-ho to kill pre-and-post-birth children, women, and somebody else's sons, but never try it on themselves?
Oh, goody! My own stalker with the attention span of a 5YO like nardz!
Try making sense, or better yet, fuck off and die, asshole.
Am I the one who thinks "follow the money"?
Every action, or delay in action of Biden is the act of a man who owes Russia. It's almost like his family has received millions from Russians, and know that it is time for payback. Forget the mean tweets, look at what could have been done, and what was done. No action by Biden was the action of a man leading a country that actually wants Russia to suffer a military defeat. It looks like Biden wants to get to a "peace" where Russia gets the rebel provinces, and a "no NATO" promise. If not, where are the anti-air assets? Where are the planes? Why haven't the gazillion anti-tank weapons arrived yet?
Who is John Galt?
You really think not going to war over Ukraine proves bribery via Russia, while going to war for Ukraine would be the non-corrupt way to lead the US?
The fucking crazy is off the damn charts.
As are most every one of your posts, asshole.
Yeah, opposing war against a nuclear armed power is crazy. You regurgitating jingoistic war propaganda despite being a cowardly piece of shit who ran and hid when your generation's war was going on is the height of sanity, right you pathetic Nazi piece of shit?
Oh, goody! My own stalker!!
Try making sense, or better yet, fuck off and die, asshole.
Who is John Galt??? WIH was the point of your post?
Yes, Biden, père et fils, benefited from Ukraine contacts, but try to separate this from the meeting between Hitler and Nixon in Uruguay in '56!
"Try to separate the president's decades-long pay for play scandals from his incoherent warmongering."
Sharp as ever, you cowardly Nazi piece of shit.
Based on his posting history, I believe Longtobefree was deploying a rhetorical device called "sarcasm". People who aren't raging autistic decrepit senile pieces of shit have an easier time with that sort of thing.
Try making sense, or better yet, fuck off and die, asshole.
Good article in the Atlantic re how the fighting is actually happening face-to-face in Ukraine.
Russians still have all the advantages of long-distance murder. But Ukrainians have all the advantages of face-to-face. And those advantages really do change the face of war. Russians can't really win this war. They can just win the body count.
"Good article in the Atlantic..."
No surprise; the article is an opinion piece based on 2nd-hand info by a novelist who (it's claimed) once served in the US military.
No, JShit, that's not a "good article"; it's worthless. Stuff it up your ass with your PANIC flag.
Lol. Ironic as fuck considering you've been mindlessly regurgitating US agitprop and swallowing every hoax and lie as if it was the last drop of cum at the bath house. It's almost like you don't actually ever read anything you reply to and just mindlessly rant and rave like a drug addicted homeless schizophrenic based on nothing more than the URL. Go become worm food before I have to waste another nickel paying for your diabetic medications you worthless old cowardly Nazi piece of warmongering SHIT.
Not ironic that you are:
Full.
Of.
Shit.
Fuck off and die, asshole.
https://twitter.com/nfergus/status/1507808940586799104?t=BJjbn_s-SaukGED-L5TqSA&s=19
As I said last week, the Biden administration has apparently decided to instrumentalize the war in Ukraine to bring about regime change in Russia, rather than trying to end the war in Ukraine as soon as possible. Biden just said it out loud. This is a highly risky strategy.
Bull
Shit.
Biden is nearly as old, senile, and incoherent as you are, but he absolutely did call for regime change in Russia. Are you denying that he said the following words, or are you just impotently raging like the stupid, senile old cowardly Nazi bitch you are?
So let's have it, you Nazi cunt: Did Biden say that or didn't he? If it's Bull. Shit. It should be easy as fuck for you to disprove it. So go ahead chickenhawk. Let's get you on the record.
Oh, OH! Another twitter cite from the asshole nardz!
How...
pathetic.
Grow up, asshole.
Oh, Oh! Another incoherent copy-paste response from the inbred, shit-eating, retarded, credulous, cowardly, draft-dodging boomer welfare case sucking up half a million dollars a year worth of Medicare and Social Security and dutifully regurgitating warmongering fascist propaganda because he's a bootlicking piece of shit! How... unsurprisingly pathetic.
Die of dementia you senile old piece of shit.
Oh! OH! another rage from some pathetic sock.
Fuck off and die, asshole.
https://twitter.com/TheKurtamous/status/1507920056382070786?t=5rJ43ku2hpec0LUjv6RlPw&s=19
They are kneecapping Russian POWs
[Video in thread]
Oh, boy! Another twitter anecdote from nardz!
Russia’s road to victory in Ukraine has been blocked by angry civilians, its broken-down tanks dragged off (and mocked) by farmers in tractors, its soldiers targeted by surprisingly successful Ukrainian resistance.
But one month into the invasion, it seems Russia’s worst enemies have been its own: overconfidence and under-preparedness.
The Russian invasion has devastated major cities and driven more than 10 million people from their homes, according to the United Nations, and thousands of civilians are believed to have died. And yet, Ukraine hasn’t fallen.
https://worldabcnews.com/putins-army-is-stumbling-in-ukraine-did-the-west-get-russias-war-machine-wrong/
Just finished trying to get up to speed on Dugin and his book The Foundations of Geopolitics: The Geopolitical Future of Russia. While the guy is off the rails at times a lot of what he says about some stuff seems to hit the bullseye. Definitely worth a read.
As others have posted Russia seems to be good in wars of attrition. There also seems to be some reason to think Dugin's idea about sowing discord in the US is moving along with better speed than one might expect.
But what worries me most is while the US can survive if Russia wins in the Ukraine the converse is not true. Problem is that while Dugin describes Russia as having the spirit of the Mongol horde which has faded into oblivion the Mongol horde did not have nukes and if Putin finds himself with his back to the wall I would bet dollars to donuts he would have no remorse about using them.
Especially if Biden gets his dick caught in his zipper again and makes some off the wall comment the rest of his administration has to try and explain away.
Sorry, but Nagasaki is the engine of change here; Ukraine simply one of the continuing examples.
It is perhaps possible that the late Soviet dictators might have pushed the button, but the successors know full well that using nukes means getting nuked and no one is gonna do that, which leaves 'superpowers' pretty much subject to the general rules of war.
"Optional" wars like VN and the Mideast are (defensively) 'won' by the side with popular support; the invader's greater economic power still leaves them open to constant flank attack by irregulars.
There will likely be no more "general" wars; Nagasaki. But in the past, those wars were won by economics, not military prowess.
Both Japan and Germany lost their wars the day they attacked, unfortunately, it took a lot of blood to prove it.
Oh, and if anyone wants cites, you are welcome to a ton of them. Fantasies by assholes like nardz are easily ignored; stuff it up your ass, nardz and GG.
You posted a bunch of incoherent bullshit. It would be impossible to provide cites. And you didn't.
Yeah, the people who post 10 paragraph long insightful posts with references are the ones indulging in fantasy. You incoherently rambling about Nagasaki like the senile old piece of shit you are, providing no citations for whatever the fuck it was you were trying and failing to articulate, and then mindlessly name calling while regurgitating jingoistic war propaganda like the good little faggot Nazi coward that you are is the straight up facts, right you pathetic little draft dodging chickenhawk faggot? Heil Biden, you piece of shit. We've got a pool going on which one of you succumbs to your senile dementia first.
You are both stupid and full of shit.
The only 10-paragraph post nardz ever put here was lifted entirely from a magazine and posted without credit.
Stuff it up your ass, shitpilee.
Modern warfare is all about controlling the airspace and the Russians have failed at that.
Ahh yes, the Arma II tacticians are here.
As the Americans did in Afghanistan, right?
And Viet Nam.
The face of war has always been changing. Think of the bow and arrow, Calvary, the motorized vehicle, the cannon, the tank, the airplane, artillery. All change who would win when they had the innovation and the other side did not.
Also remember all the statistics are propaganda at this point. Only when the war is over will we learn the real damage in human life.
We'll never know. The victors write the hagiographies.
I've only been here for about 6 months so I don't know everyone, but is this Janeen Barvick a new poster?
I've never seen them before, but suddenly they're posting a crap-ton and sounding like Sevo crossed with the Internet Research Agency.
I responded to some of their posts before I figured out they weren't a serious person, but I didn't know if they had a history of shitposting like this.
Regardless, my mute list is growing at an alarming rate.
They're a non-serious shit poster like you. Maybe they are you.
"...I've never seen them before, but suddenly they're posting a crap-ton and sounding like Sevo crossed with the Internet Research Agency..."
As opposed to a bullshitting asshole like you?
I don't understand why "... virtually all observers expected [Russia's invasion of Ukraine] to be a cakewalk". How can this even be true?
Everyone, including the Russians, knew that the US was arming the Ukrainians to the hilt with Javelin anti-tank and Stinger anti-air missiles. The capabilities of these specific weapons are well-known (including to the Russian military), and the capabilities of similar weapons have been known for decades.
Also, "asymmetric warfare" has been a thing for decades, and it was easily predictable that it would be a major tactical set for Ukraine in this war.
Thank you Gillespie and Taylor for cluing us all in to this important lesson from the Ukraine war. Too bad you were a few decades late for those of us with a lick of sense. Well, maybe all the other people I have read claiming that this was expected to be an easy operation for the Russians will read this article and get up to speed.
Thanks a lot, Ukraine, for changing the face of war forever.