The Ukraine Question

[WVBRY]

How does a country that won't join some some global conglomerate that doesn't concern with that country's interests, compromise its own borders?

I'm saying it should be up to the Ukraine to decide whether they want to join NATO or not. If it wasn't obvious to you, I was referring to Putin's demands that the Ukraine not join NATO. This demand on Putin's part already shows an attitude of de-legitimization towards Ukraine's sovereignty. I'm not sure why I have to repeat myself, as my position that you quoted (out of context, but I digress) was pretty clear, but I sense I am going to have to do that alot today, ie repeat myself.

Please stop framing this issue as one it is not. You're twisting the situation by being deliberately vague. Stop being Putin's little propaganda bot.

Also, nice ad hominem but it's not gonna work with me.

[silke]

I'm not sure why I have to repeat myself, as my position that you quoted (out of context, but I digress) was pretty clear, but I sense I am going to have to do that alot today, ie repeat myself.

It's because you're too arrogant and you don't explain your positions well.

Why should NATO and Ukraine adopt authoritarianism and be the sole actors in making this decision?

Explain yourself.

[WVBRY]

Explain yourself.

No, I don't feel like it.

[silke]

No, I don't feel like it.

aww, well whenever you're feeling like it come back and let's have a discussion

[Baqer]

https://warontherocks.com/2021/11/fe...rmy-logistics/

Article from November 2021 about Russian logistics.

"The Russian army will be hard-pressed to conduct a ground offensive of more than 90 miles beyond the borders of the former Soviet Union without a logistics pause."

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

lol Putin's theme song:

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

"Why should NATO and Ukraine adopt authoritarianism and be the sole actors in making this decision?"

Any country that doesn't have it's own authority or real power will get easily blown up by others who do. Big fish eat little fish etc- it's not really hard to understand. Ukraine in 1994 sadly traded in their real tangible power for a naive ideal it seems. Authority is never pretty- but it's almost always a necessary evil. Unless you trust the average Karen and Ken to be the sole enactor of justice- and I as sure hell don't. I don't like authority, but I would still want an authority to stop Bundy and Dahmer. etc. But if somebody uses their power inappropriately- like killing civilians and others unprovoked - than a greater authority must stop them.

In gay koombayah land we wouldn't need this shit and everybody would just hold hands and be friends and we would allow other people to have their own identities and culture without being insecure about it, but as a human race we are not there yet. Obviously. Putin in the past was better at keeping his true evil hidden but this thing pushed him over the edge now everybody is seeing what he's really like. I always saw it, but 4D Ni people often don't have the confidence to convey to this the plebs. And that whole thing about how it's easy to fool other people than convince them they are being fooled.

At political conferences he was able to use his 4D Demo Si to manipulate homophobes into thinking he's this righteous and good guy. Some evil dictator douche making a 'protect the children' line and the masses of unwashed breeders get in line and say 'Heil ******.'

ROFLMAO @ STR8 FEMALES THINKING THEY CAN CHANGE PUTIN BY BEING NICE TO HIM. I'm sorry- that poem was sweet, but come on now. I'm not trying to knock heterosexuality too much, sometimes this really does work- but I think it's too little too late....

[aixelsyd]

The Q anon people on my fb feed actually think Putin is the good guy (like Trump) and is fighting the Satanic NWO Deep State...by sending troops to bomb civilians and run over civilians with tanks.

Yeah, okay. That's a brand of crazy I haven't even touched yet and hope never to.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Let this be a lesson for all us:

Say you and another person has a knife. The other person with a knife tries to make you a deal and say if you give up your knife, they promise they will never use their knife against you. You naively and stupidly AND SANSA SEASON 1 STARK ISHLY agree. Look, there's even a contract!

A few years later ((or whenever)), the other person campily smiles and stabs you in the throat and watches in glee as he stabs you with in the neck with both knives. Blood squirts out in a gory fashion and u drop over dead.

Maybe that's not exactly what happened - but looks that way to me.

[Adam Strange]

The Q anon people on my fb feed actually think Putin is the good guy (like Trump) and is fighting the Satanic NWO Deep State...by sending troops to bomb civilians and run over civilians with tanks.

Yeah, okay. That's a brand of crazy I haven't even touched yet and hope never to.

The problem with free and unfiltered information exchange is that you get to hear everyone, and all the voices are equally loud.

When I first encountered people like this, I assumed that they were merely stupid and might, just possibly, be educated with more information and some sympathetic understanding.
But no.
Most of them are extremely damaged and they want to share their experience with you, by damaging you, too.

My advice: Don’t give these guys oxygen.

[RBRS]

The problem with free and unfiltered information exchange is that you get to hear everyone, and all the voices are equally loud.

When I first encountered people like this, I assumed that they were merely stupid and might, just possibly, be educated with more information and some sympathetic understanding.
But no.
Most of them are extremely damaged and they want to share their experience with you, by damaging you, too.

My advice: Don’t give these guys oxygen.

My theory is that fanatic religious conspirationist are actually very bored with life and like to imagine they live in a TV show or movie. Not talking about sane Putin or Trump supporters but people who actually believe satanic reptilians run the world from the 7th dimension.

[Northstar]

Never trust Russians, never. They are experts at lying and disinformation. Both my grandfathers killed them when they invaded us in 1939, with very similar sounding bullshit to justify their actions. Hell, they had the nerve to claim they were dropping food on "poor starving finnish people" when they in actuality were bombing us. This is the origin for Molotov's cocktail btw. I'm fully on Ukraine's side on this, when Russians say they are your "friends", just wait for the knife to your back.

[xerx]

Well if somebody didn't know that NATO is governed by a bunch of sociopaths ...

You don't happen to have Germanic ancestry @xerx? Germany still has weapons with which their leadership intended to kill every human being on this planet, like 6 times over for that lethal overkill.

I'm not Germanic. But if it's any consolation, I do believe that hawkish elements within Western governments helped create this crisis; that history will describe NATO as an offensive rather than defensive alliance; and that the West is also responsible for Russia's economic problems during the Yeltsin era, following Russia's adoption of extreme privatization as delineated to them by Western economists, setting the stage for Russia's diplomatic isolation.

[Poptart]

Man, someone tries to share something with good intentions, and people pile-on because…whatever reason.
Moreover, why judge the intentions/intellectual capacity of the actor in question, if you don’t seem to know anything about them?

Maybe I’m cynical and not giving her the benefit of the doubt, but I assume that celebrities do shit like this for attention .

I mean, writing a poem for a dictator—“if your mom loved you the way I would have loved you, then you wouldn’t have to hurt”—not only is it self-absorbed and tone-deaf, it feels like she’s blaming this war on his hypothetical mommy issues. Putin is a 70 year old man.

[RBRS]

Not sure what false information you are referring to. Not saying that there isn't any going around, I'm just not aware of what you are referring to exactly.

I agree with you that NATO hasn't always been used defensively, but I wouldn't paint Putin as a victim here either. His demands that the Ukraine not join NATO, while somewhat understandable from a pragmatic standpoint, are in reality an attempt to undermine the sovereignty of Ukraine as a country, and he knows it.

Putin will have to capitulate at some point because he is already in a corner and knows it. His threat to use nukes is mostly a way to free up some wiggle room in the international politics scene by trying to instill fear in other countries. Which is why we shouldn't take it at face value, IMO.

I agree that the petrodollar will largely benefit from this though. However, this doesn't take away from the fact that Russia has invaded the Ukraine militarily, using force, and is doing so because his motives is to de-legitimize another sovereign nation. I think neutrality is not the right attitude to have here, because clearly Putin crossed a line - in contrast, I have a hard time imagining that if the US gains from this economically (which they will), that this was all an accident. But these questions are two different issues, even if they are somewhat related. I wouldn't paint Putin as a victim regardless of any US attempt to regain control of EU markets because Putin knows that his motives are different from self-defense and also because I doubt the US wanted him to invade the Ukraine, or somehow orchestrated this war. I suppose you could argue that is an economic defense on Putin's part but it's mostly an ideological and military attack on the Ukraine.




I think we are ultimately speaking from different values here.

I agree that nuclear war would be catasptrophic (which is kind of a non-statement anyways since I think everyone would agree on that) but I doubt Putin would use the atomic bomb. I also think that it's worth taking the risk of standing up to him, especially since he is at a moment weakness, it feels like now or never.

I agree with @ouronis that what you are saying here sounds like "let's give the aggressor what they want and maybe he'll leave us alone". I can't agree with that.

It is perfectly reasonable for a country to join any coalition it wants. It is perfectly reasonable for a country which sees it's security compromised by another country's coalition to intervene, even more so if the threat for security is nuclear.

>Putin will have to capitulate at some point because he is already in a corner and knows it. His threat to use nukes is mostly a way to free up some wiggle room in the international politics scene by trying to instill fear in other countries. Which is why we shouldn't take it at face value, IMO.

Putin cannot capitulate because that would mean Russia being practically done, with sanctions and nukes at their doorstep. Russia is not likely to capitulate under any situation without a coup and negotiations with the said coup to at least lift sanctions. The whole russian central bank's currency reserve is almost useless and the other half has been freezed in western banks, capitulation is impossible at this point.

And the nuclear threat is very present, in fact I fear we might be meeting Mr' Oppenheimer soon enough (Let's all hope its not the case). Russia has literally nothing to lose and it's subsistence as a state is at stake by sanctions...

https://politicalwire.com/2022/02/26...war-coalition/

https://youtu.be/TgwavrWZFp4

IMG_20220228_160549_886.jpg

>I agree that the petrodollar will largely benefit from this though. However, this doesn't take away from the fact that Russia has invaded the Ukraine militarily, using force, and is doing so because his motives is to de-legitimize another sovereign nation. I think neutrality is not the right attitude to have here, because clearly Putin crossed a line - in contrast, I have a hard time imagining that if the US gains from this economically (which they will), that this was all an accident. But these questions are two different issues, even if they are somewhat related. I wouldn't paint Putin as a victim regardless of any US attempt to regain control of EU markets because Putin knows that his motives are different from self-defense and also because I doubt the US wanted him to invade the Ukraine, or somehow orchestrated this war. I suppose you could argue that is an economic defense on Putin's part but it's mostly an ideological and military attack on the Ukraine

My personal take is that the US wanted some small scale skirmish, or the recognition of Novorossiya, as a way to impose sanctions on specially Russian gas, metal and rare earth exports. Putin recognized this and saw a more calm rethoric from the west during the second half of diplomatic tensions but NATO would still not agree to reject Ukraine's application for joining, so that was his moment to invade.

The entrance of Ukraine in NATO assured a war with Russia, it has been evident for decades and only at 2014 serious attempts at it started, were halted by the civil war and the rest is history.

Through the twoo weeks of negotiations the only compromise to keep the Status Quo that we needed to adopt was to not allow Ukraine to enter NATO, and other nation's sovereignty doesn't seem to be a top priority for NATO judging from how it's most prominent member has behaved towards Libya and Syria (both cases because of Petrodollar's integrity).

So it's my personal guess that this conflict is a result of the USA's strategy of securing it's own financial system, but it has gone awry.

>but I doubt Putin would use the atomic bomb. I also think that it's worth taking the risk of standing up to him, especially since he is at a moment weakness, it feels like now or never.

I'm pretty sure he's willing to throw his nuclear arsenal, because a "world war" between NATO and Russia cannot end without the use of nuclear weaponry. Neither Europe, nor Russia, nor the US can be properly occupied, if Ukraine itself seems to be very hard to occupy, imagine trying to take over NATO on a conventional battlefield.

I think nukes would be used atleast against major cities and military objectives.

Russia might be militarily or economically weak right now, but it still has the second largest nuclear arsenal in the world.

I agree with @ouronis that what you are saying here sounds like "let's give the aggressor what they want and maybe he'll leave us alone". I can't agree with that.[/QUOTE]

The agressor is asking for Ukraine to not join NATO, a cause for which I think it's absurd to unleash a great war.

It even sounds hypocritical for me to start such a conflict while sharing coalition with the US, which is pretty much known for it's coups and funding for rebels in opposing countries to drive them towards the path they see fit (thus "proxily" vulnerating other countries sovereignty).

From a purely pragmatic standpoint you could say that NATO itself was built to contain Russia and that it should be our goal to dismantle the country, as a way of securing our power and eliminating a potential threat. But I think even on those terms it isn't worth such a large scale conflict.

[Toro]

AnnaLynne McCord (random c-list actress) has blessed us with this beautiful poem she wrote for Putin.

She is lucky she is hot. But she needs to stay out of the sun her fair skin is starting dry out like leather.

[Adam Strange]

It seems that the Russian troops were not told that they were invading the Ukraine.

https://twitter.com/cspan/status/1498323215621533698

[Adam Strange]

The dangers of Authoritarian leaders of any philosophy:



Illia Ponomarenko
@IAPonomarenko

Yes, Kyiv and Kharkiv have been shelled for the first time since 1941. Two men gave such an order — Adolf ****** and Vladimir Putin.

[Minde]

hm.. I do not notice my previouse message posted here. political censorship to hide the truth?

Which message? This one?

USA-hithlerists occupation soldiers use terroristic tactics against people of own "nation". Practically they use them as hostages.
They place artillery close to living houses (hundreds may live in single such house). They do same even in Kiev. So RF has lesser wish to attack it (by rockets, shells) and may do not attack, to avoid death of many civil people and civil structures destruction. While to use infantry in towns leads to redundant death, so it's not good option and needs longer preparation.

That is response #195. You're not being censored, you silly goose. In fact, having an actual Russian talking here is enlightening in some ways.


---------------------------------


Mildly related to the above, I keep reminding myself that this is Information Age warfare. Perhaps we are moving into another age, but it remains that information =/= truth.

If I know anything, it's that no one can know everything, even what's just relevant to this situation.


---------------------------------


If people are saying that we should give Ukraine to Putin because otherwise we'll be guilty of destroying the world... why not say the same to Russia? Roll over and give up or you're just perpetuating world war. I feel like that line of thought doesn't give aggressors responsibility and I see similar lines of thinking when it comes to domestic abuse. "If you just gave him what he he wants he wouldn't hit you. So it's your fault you're hurt."

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

I don't know how a person could be on Russia's side on this unless they were:

1. Incredibly naive/gullible/easily manipulated
2. A troll
3. A douchebag

There is this mentality some people have that anything the news reports on is 'manipulation' or something to get you on a certain side of something ((and they in turn need to always rebel and always choose the opposite side etc.)) ... and well, while the Elites don't care about us, doesn't mean he's gonna be your savior against SJWs/globohomos/The Deep State and all the people you don't like either but it seems both Putin and Trump have been on that manipulative traitorous game for quite a while. Saying what people want to hear and then stabbing 'em in the back etc.

[Poptart]

Stumbled upon this report - “Russia’s Possible Invasion of Ukraine” (published Jan. 13, 2022)

The report is long but worth reading if you’re interested in this sort of thing. I’m including a section of the report below:

Russian Prospects of Success

Mechanized attacks are not always as rapid as attackers hope. Two of the quickest movements of armored forces in history—German general Heinz Guderian’s punch through the Ardennes and seizure of Dunkirk in May 1940, and the U.S. and coalition advance from the Kuwait border to Baghdad in 2003—each averagedapproximately 20 miles per day. Movement against a determined foe in winter conditions with limited daylight could reduce that rate of advance significantly.

With enough troops, firepower, logistics, time, and national will, as well as no outside interference, Russia could grind forward until its military achieves the Kremlin’s political objectives. Russia’s military outnumbers Ukraine’s military in the air and on the ground, Russia gained extensive experience in conducting combined-arms operations in Syria, and the terrain favors offensive mechanized warfare. However, the true calculation of military success can only be taken after a clash of arms begins. In addition, there are several intangibles—such as weather, urban combat, command and control, logistics, and morale—that may play a significant role in the initial stages of a war.

Weather: An invasion that begins in January or February would have the advantage of frozen ground to support the cross-country movement of a large mechanized force. It would also mean operating in conditions of freezing cold and limited visibility. January is usually the coldest and snowiest month of the year in Ukraine, averaging 8.5 hours of daylight during the month and increasing to 10 hours by February.8 This would put a premium on night fighting capabilities to keep an advance moving forward. Should fighting continue into March, mechanized forces would have to deal with the infamous Rasputitsa, or thaw. In October, Rasputitsa turns firm ground into mud. In March, the frozen steppes thaw, and the land again becomes at best a bog, and at worst a sea of mud. Winter weather is also less than optimal for reliable close air support operations.

Urban Combat: While much of the terrain east of the Dnepr River includes rural fields and forests, there are several major urban areas that a Russian mechanized force would have to either take or bypass and besiege. Kiev has almost 3 million inhabitants, Kharkiv has roughly 1.5 million, Odessa has 1 million, Dnipro has almost 1 million, Zaporizhia has 750,000, and even Mariupol has almost 500,000.9 If defended, these large urban areas could take considerable time and casualties to clear and occupy. In the First Chechen War, it took Russian forces from December 31, 1994, to February 9, 1995, to wrestle control of Grozny, then a city of less than 400,000, from a few thousand Chechen fighters.10 In the Second Chechen War, the siege of Grozny also took six weeks.

Therefore, the best course of action for Russian troops would be to bypass urban areas and mop them up later. However, Kharkiv is just over the border from Russia and is a major road and railroad junction. If Russian forces did not control Kharkiv, it would seriously diminish their logistical capability to support a central thrust toward the Dnepr River and beyond. Furthermore, Kiev poses a similar challenge and, as the nation’s capital, possesses great symbolic value for whichever side holds it. Russia may be unable to avoid sustained urban combat in several major metropolitan areas (and the resulting high casualties) if it attempts more than a punitive incursion into Ukraine.

Command and Control: There is a Russian expression: “the first blini is always a mess.” In the case of an invasion of Ukraine, Russia will be conducting its largest combined arms operation since the Battle of Berlin in 1945. The 2008 Russo-Georgian War saw just five days of combat and engaged 70,000 Russian soldiers.11 In Syria, the primary maneuver forces included Syrian ground units, with help from Lebanese Hezbollah, militia forces from neighboring countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan, private military companies such as the Wagner Group, and Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Quds Forces. But Russia did not deploy significant numbers of conventional forces. Approximately 120,000 Russian soldiers are mobilized near Ukraine, with tens of thousands more ready to deploy into combat.12 It will be a challenge for Russian command and control to first move all of these forces into their attack positions with proper march discipline. It will also be difficult for Russia to maintain that discipline during the attack so that the massive amounts of vehicles and soldiers moving on a limited number of slippery and poor roads and often at night do not become one gargantuan traffic jam.

The coordination of airborne and amphibious assaults will prove another challenge. While airborne forces could be dropped along the Dnepr River to seize crucial bridges, how long would they be able to hold out while armored forces try to reach them over winter roads? The same applies for amphibious forces attempting to outflank Ukrainian defenses near Mariupol or to seize Odessa. Black Sea hydrography and coastal topography provide few good landing sites for amphibious forces, and once landed, they would be hard to sustain.13 Without proper coordination and rapid advance of armored forces, any airborne or amphibious assault as part of the invasion could become a “bridge or beach too far” for Russian forces. Figures 3a, 3b, and 3c highlight ships from the Russian navy’s Black Sea Fleet, including landing ships and corvettes that could be used in an amphibious assault into Ukraine.

The Russian military also has limited experience in coordinating a large number of aircraft that will support the ground attack. Russian air operations in Syria and Chechnya do not compare with the number of sorties that could be required in Ukraine across a front possibly several hundred miles wide. This will be the first time since World War II that Russia’s ground forces will face a modern mechanized opponent, and its air forces will face an opponent with a modern air force and air defense system. Consequently, Russian forces will likely face notable challenges in command, control, communications, and coordination.

Logistics: The initial attack will likely be well supported with artillery and air support, leading to several breakthroughs in Ukrainian defenses. However, once combat units expend their initial stores of ammunition, fuel, and food, the real test of Russian military strength will begin—including Russia’s ability to sustain the advance of a massive mechanized force over hundreds of miles of territory. Kiev and the Dnepr River crossings are at least 150 to 200 road miles from the Russian border, and its army will require at least several days of fighting to reach them. Before that, they will undoubtedly have to resupply, refuel, and replace combat losses of men and material at least once, which will require an operational pause.

In his article “Feeding the Bear,”Alex Vershinin argues that there are serious logistical challenges to a Russian invasion that is supposed to roll over the Baltic states in 96 hours and present the West with a fait accompli. Russia has built an excellent war machine for fighting near its frontier and striking deep with long-range fires. However, Russia may have trouble with a sustained ground offensive far beyond Russian railroads without a major logistical halt or a massive mobilization of reserves.14 As the operational depth in Ukraine is far greater than in the Baltics, a Russian invasion of Ukraine could be a longer affair than some anticipate due to the time and distance to bring up supplies. If the invasion is not concluded quickly due to a combination of weather, logistics, and Ukrainian resistance, how might this impact Russian morale?

Morale: There are two levels of morale on each side to consider: the morale of individual soldiers and the morale of each country and its people. At the individual level, will a Ukrainian soldier who believes he or she is fighting for their homeland have an advantage over a Russian soldier whose motivation for fighting may vary? For the Ukrainian nation as a whole, how strong is their sense of a unique national identity to resist what could be a long, destructive, and bloody struggle? The answers cannot be known until the war begins. However, should war come, one factor influencing morale will be time. The longer the Ukrainian army resists the Russians, the greater its confidence may grow as well as its institutional knowledge of how to fight this enemy. In addition, the longer the war continues, the greater may be the level of international support and the greater the chance of increased arms transfers to help turn the tide on the battlefield.

For Russia, the longer the war continues and the greater the casualties, the greater the chance of undermining Russian morale from the level of the basic soldier to Russian society writ large. Approximately one-third of Russian ground forces consist of one-year conscripts.15 These conscripts serve alongside professional soldiers, or kontraktniki, under a system of hazing known as the dedovshchina. This system is infamous for its abuses up to and including murder, which can erode unit cohesion. Additionally, heavy casualties will need quick replacements, and reservists brought to reinforce frontline units have received little recent training. As the number of professional soldiers decreases due to casualties, and reservists and conscripts increase on the front line, the chance of poor unit cohesion at the soldier level will rise. If casualties and even defeats mount, problems of cohesion at the front could be reflected in public unrest at home.

Every Kremlin ruler knows that one of the quickest ways to end a Russian dynasty or regime is to lose a war. While early Soviet assessments of the war in Afghanistan were hopeful, they eventually turned gloomy. At a Politburo meeting on October 17, 1985, for example, Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev read letters from Soviet citizens expressing growing dissatisfaction with the war in Afghanistan—including “mothers’ grief over the dead and the crippled” and “heart-wrenching descriptions of funerals.”16 As the Soviet war in Afghanistan dragged on, the costs—including in blood and money—were too high and outweighed any geostrategic benefits. Over the course of the war, nearly 15,000 Soviet soldiers were killed, and another 35,000 were wounded.

Russian families are sure to resent their soldiers being used as cannon fodder, and the ubiquitous presence of cell phone cameras and videos in today’s world will expand soldiers’ complaints beyond their units. Therefore, the question for the Kremlin will be: the longer the war grinds on and society reacts to casualties and economic duress, how much are their initial objectives worth to them?

[Beautiful sky]

Actors generally are the dumbest people on the planet.

There are exceptions to this!

[Beautiful sky]

Nothing to discuss. I’m sure Putin was quite off put by the Ukrainians shuttling off water supply to Crimea.

[Minde]

I don't know how a person could be on Russia's side on this unless they were:

1. Incredibly naive/gullible/easily manipulated
2. A troll
3. A douchebag

Or intimidated / bullied / coerced. I expect for many (especially those within Russian borders) it could be... inconvenient... to speak too much counter the official narrative and talking points.

It's interesting, for example, to watch Sol waver off into independent thinking earlier only to more recently adhere much more tightly to what Putin and Russian officials are saying.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

It's interesting, for example, to watch Sol waver off into independent thinking earlier only to more recently adhere much more tightly to what Putin and Russian officials are saying.

Putin has successfully manipulated anti-gay people into agreeing with him and Sol has made about 567969 posts here about the virtues of opposite sex relations and how same sex relations are a thing that Just Shouldn't Be® All sins can be forgiven if somebody is advocating for the origin of creation-givers (ie straights)) I know ppl get tired of me ranting about gays so much- but when a manipulative douchebag is using us in order to fulfill his world domination agendas I have a right to rant about it.

The media just posted something how a lot of right-wingers are abandoning Putin cuz of what he's doing but I think that's also a kinda leftie manipulation where they are *hoping* that will be the case but a lot of others haven't yet - like in the past when they said how Hillary was creaming Trump but Trump ended winning anyway. ((and I think Hillary was equally a poor choice of course but I'm just saying so much media attention backfires cuz of people's sickening anti-gay hatred.)) Once again like George R R R R ® Martin would say while farting loudly: People are still being so naive to how cruel and violent and hateful/bigoted others can really be. Kinda off topic but this is why I hated Stranger Things as a TV show it was so cheesy and idealistic and ppl in my school never acted so friendly like that - maybe only if u were a certain kind of person.

[Not A Communist Shill]

>Russia and the USA have nuclear missiles that can travel across whole continents, and you're worried about nukes on the border of Russia - a state which has persistently invaded its neighbours over the last 20 years?

Nukes that can hit under the time limit of 4 minutes can go undetected, meaning most vital Russian infrastructure could be destroyed without response, that's a serious threat.

>Russia is less likely to invade a country if it is a member of Nato or the EU.

When Romania, Slovakia, Bulgaria, or the baltic states joined NATO, Russia didn't intervene. But they did intervene in Ukraine after Euromaidan, and have intervened again, it seems like it is for the very same reason. Might that be because Russia is reacting agains't a serious threat to their security? Because NATO has kept expanding into Eastern and Southeastern Europe since the fall of the Warsaw pact.

Ukraine's NATO application isn't worth all this conflict, specially in economic terms Europe is going to be hit very, very hard.

Putin has written and talked of restoring the Russian empire for many years. It's his life ambition. Conquering Kazakhstan etc. has nothing to do with the policies of the EU or NATO.

He sees the West as corrupted by homosexuals and Jews and sees Russia as the last bastion of Christianity.

The countries that join NATO begged to, and of their own choice, because they felt threatened by Russia. And they were quite correct. Russia invading its neighbours is not respecting the sovereignty or security of anybody.

[Not A Communist Shill]

And in all seriousness you meant the UK, a state that has colonized and, well, callously screwed around with everyone else due to being a desperado isolated island nation.

Hoping this is ringing a bell, else you might not find enough bellboys to do your bidding.

You obviously haven't been very observant. The UK has been giving up its empire since WW2, and has not had any imperial ambitions in the last 20 years.

You mention the UK because I'm British, as though I support what the British government does. That's not a very effective strategy. I'm opposed to imperialism regardless of who is doing it, the UK, Russia, or anybody. It's just that it's the Russian president who speaks of restoring the Russian empire.

[Not A Communist Shill]

I don't know how fast these missiles can be at a target so sorry if this is a bit ignorant, but I imagine that if you were planning to use them on someone you'd want to decrease the distance they need to travel in order to shorten the travel time enough that their being shot down is unlikely. The fear may be if you launch a nuke at a nuclear power you had better be sure you destroy your target completely lest they nuke you back. If they can shoot your nuke down and launch their own then you're in real trouble

The West has submarines that can fire nukes too, at much shorter distance.

[Not A Communist Shill]

Putin cannot capitulate because that would mean Russia being practically done, with sanctions and nukes at their doorstep.

If Putin goes, and the Russian people actually get what they want, sanctions will end and Russia will most likely have a bright future.

[Rusal]

It seems that the Russian troops were not told that they were invading the Ukraine.

https://twitter.com/cspan/status/1498323215621533698

BS propaganda. They were told to say they didn't know otherwise they could get lynched by Ukrainians. Now some Ukrainians have adopted their line to try to humanize this mess, but not true at all.

Putin is sending Chechens, Dagestanis to invade and kill people who have never done anything to them. He is demented. He's going to wreck Europe.

@Sol you twisted little old turd. This is what is Ukrainian TV is brodcasting, a small child that later died and of course there's more we're not seeing. How is this going to help 'UkSSR' or make them accept the Russian's peferred solution?



And as these images keep coming up the following weeks, months and repercussions blow up in your face, what are you going to say? That the world has become 'hithlerist'?

[Manatroid92]

If Putin goes, and the Russian people actually get what they want, sanctions will end and Russia will most likely have a bright future.

I’m really hoping this is the case, but doesn’t Russia still have oligarchs other than Putin to contend with? From what I understood (and I could be very wrong) he has a weird tug-of-war situation with them, but if he goes, couldn’t just insert another corrupt leader to replace him?

[ouronis]

I’m really hoping this is the case, but doesn’t Russia still have oligarchs other than Putin to contend with? From what I understood (and I could be very wrong) he has a weird tug-of-war situation with them, but if he goes, couldn’t just insert another corrupt leader to replace him?

My guess is in that situation, they would just replace him with one of their own and then that dude's predilections would come to define Russia's status with the rest of Europe and the world.

[Eliza Thomason]

God says through His prophets that this war on Ukraine is not what we think. He says the real reason will soon be exposeed. meanwhile, we can expect lies and mroe lies from our media on this!

The media news is not the news, they are a paid arm of propaganda. They are fake news. They are liars. They know they are coming down, and that exposures of their lies and evil deeds are coming, so they want to distract us from the real news that is about to come out in our country. Don’t believe what they say about Ukraine.

Prophets said in September that we would see two major news networks crash forever this year. CNN and MSNBC were named. At the time of that prophecy, there was no sign this would happen! But God said it. And now we can see it will happen. As of January, CNN viewership is down 90%, and that happened in 2021! Yes. Google it. God says now that soon, CNN will be lights out, forever.

God says next is MSNBC and their parent company NBC. They will go bankrupt.

Because they lie. They don’t tell the news.

God says what the media is now telling us about the Ukraine is not true. I have already heard this elsewhere, as had Johnny Enlow, as he explains in the link below. Probably, instead, Putin is SAVING Ukraine from the nefarious and very evil use of their country by the worldwide evil deep state. The media is trying to make it look like something else is going to happen, because they want war, as they need money and want death, so they are telling FAKE STORIES with FAKE PICTURES, explained below. Whatever the real truth is on that, God says that the truth about what is happenign there will soon be fully exposed.

For reasonable intelligent discussion that you won’t hear on the news about what is going on, see Johhny Enlow on Elijah Streams:

https://rumble.com/vvw10k-johnny-enl...-going-on.html

To narrow that video down to the topic at hand, see explanations of the media starting at 22 min.

When it veers off to another topic, skip ahead to 1 hr., 5 min. where he talks of Kasarian [sp.?] Mafia/ Jews (= NOT real Jews) and their Ukraine connec tion. I think that is the very explanation you will hear when the truth that God promised will be exposed comes out.

[Rusal]

Sol uses 'hithlerist' to blame Ukr for the invasion and destruction and Eliza says 'Jews' are lying because there is no destruction. They could run Russia Today together.

[Eliza Thomason]

... Eliza says 'Jews' are lying because there is no destruction. They could run Russia Today together.

That is NOT what I said. I said NOT Jews. Fakes pretending they are Jews. NOT Jews, the chosen people of God. It is reckoning time for these fakes. They lose.

[Rusal]

That is NOT what I said. I said NOT Jews. Fakes pretending they are Jews. NOT Jews, the chosen people of God. It is reckoning time for these fakes. They lose.

[Eliza Thomason]

@Rusal,
It looks funny but if I click on it I might blue screen....

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Dumb self-righteous fucks blaming the victim.

"When we do shitty things in life we don't think we're not righteous - we think we have the right." Sol and Eliza's own self-imposed righteousness is blinding them to the fact they are very wrong about this. Your imaginary friend telling you that it's "God" talking isn't really God, but the Idea of Stupidity.

Part of how you are so dumbly manipulated by people is that their is a lot of confusion between the Illuminati and the Deep State. In a campy way, people talk about the Illuminati being evil but the Illuminated Ones are actually very ethically superior. I am an Illuminated One actually - cuz my natural aura is so bright and shiny. I became a moderator on this forum because I'm an Illuminated One. The Deep State - yes , are the dark forces trying to stop the Illuminati and take light out of the world and descend us into true darkness. Satan is the misunderstood scapegoat and figure you're meant to LOVE instead of HATE - he Is the Light and Lord and actually good and part of the Illuminati. By hating Satan, you really only hate yourself. That is why you are so LOST my child- but it's not too late.

God loves Satan because Satan is one with him and God is the Non-Dualistic Part of the All - and Satan actually loves God, too. The Deep State are the true enemy, but a big part of why you are so confused about this is because you are confusing the two VERY different entities way too much.

[Eliza Thomason]

@Shazaam, this is real, not pretend.

[Manatroid92]

I thought we were talking about Ukraine...