Scott75

Disagree. O'Reilly is a good example of what many Americans think. I agree that he's a good example of what many Americans think. A 2008 Zogby poll found that he was the second most trusted news personality, after Rush Limbaugh, who has an even more conservative base than O'Reily, but I think it's good to remember that they still account for pretty small fractions of the total numbers: ** Survey respondents named Rush Limbaugh (12.5%), Bill O’Reilly (10.1%) and Tom Brokaw (8.5%) the most trusted names in news ** Source: https://www.imao.us/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/media_project_poll_info.pdf I think what's even more important is that people like O'Reily and Limbaugh are only representative of certain -type- of Americans. I think the following quote from O'Reily in 2006 says a lot: ** "It's the traditionalists who really want to keep the country pretty much the way it is," O'Reilly said. "Against the secular progressives who want drastic change. … They control the media." ** Source: https://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=2465303&page=1 I'd disagree with him that progressives control media, but I certainly agree with his view that he is against progressives, at least of the social type. I think a poll done in 2009 provides further evidence that conservatives are his main base. It didn't give an option for progressives, which is a shame, because I have thought of myself as progressive. Moderate can mean many things, but in O'Reily's case, I doubt it includes many progressives. Here's the poll results: ** A Pew Research February 2009 poll found that 66% of his television viewers identify themselves as conservative, 24% moderate, and 3% liberal.[6] ** https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_views_of_Bill_O'Reilly#cite_note-1

infobrics, you must be joking. Obviously dominated by dictators with money. LMAO Find a CREDIBLE source and then we'll talk infobrics.org is apparently a website associated with BRICS. In case you're unaware of BRICS, here's Wikipedia's description of BRICS: ** BRICS is an intergovernmental organization consisting of ten countries—Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates. It is considered to be a counterpart and alternative to the G7 bloc of the world's largest economies, representing nearly half[2] of the world's population.[3][4] ** Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BRICS Scoff all you like, but when an organization representing almost half of the world's population approves a news article, I'd think that most would want to take note of what they have to say. That's not to say that they should be trusted unconditionally, far from it, but certainly what they have to say should be listened to and, if it's important enough, investigated. Since you questioned the infobrics article, I decided to see if I could independently verify if the U.S. had indeed stopped launching HIMARS and ATACMS missiles since January 20th. Turns out, that wasn't accurate, at least for HIMARS missiles: ** Here is the situation on Tuesday, January 21: [snip] The governor of Russia’s Bryansk region, Alexander Bogomaz, said 14 Ukrainian drones were neutralised in the region, which borders Ukraine. He claimed Kyiv also fired four United States-made HIMARS missiles at targets in Bryansk. ** Source: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/1/21/russia-ukraine-war-list-of-key-events-day-one-thousand-sixty-two Another report, this one from February 14th, 2025: ** Ukraine launched a huge wave of drones as well as missiles, Russia said, with 202 unmanned aerial vehicles shot down, along with three French-made Hammer guided bombs and United States-made HIMARS rockets. ** Source: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/2/14/russia-ukraine-war-list-of-key-events-day-17 I haven't been able to find out if ATACMs were still launched after January 20th.

I just finished watching a 23 minute video that was put up by well known youtuber Johnny Harris 2 days ago. It can be seen here: Is he right that China will "never surrender" the South China sea? Perhaps he's right, but only in the sense that it won't surrender it, but rather decide to share it. Yes, I'm being optimistic. While being optimistic, here's another video I saw just before this one that talks about Isaac Asimov's favourite short story, one in which humanity apparently resolves all of its conflicts and simply focuses on surviving rather than fighting amoungst each other, not just for the next 10 years, but forever. Asimov was positively prescient when it came to his belief of the importance of thinking machines in the future. It can be seen here:

The US wasn't SELLING weapons to Ukraine, we were GIVING them weapons. I did some digging on this and found that the western mainstream media is saying that the U.S. MIC is selling weapons to the U.S. government. A BBC article from January 2024 gets into the details: ** US weapons sales overseas rose sharply last year, reaching a record total of $238bn (£187bn), as Russia's invasion of Ukraine stoked demand. The US government directly negotiated $81bn in sales, a 56% increase from 2022, the state department reported. The rest were direct sales by US defence companies to foreign nations. ** Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68136840 As to Simplicius' quote that the U.S. was selling weapons to Ukraine, if it's mistaken, I think it'd make more sense to blame the Ukrainian media where he says he got the quote from to begin with. Here's an article from the Kyiv Post published yesterday on the subject that says the same thing: US Reportedly Halts Weapon Sales to Ukraine, Lawmaker Disputes Claim | Kyiv Post The Ukrainian oligarchs milking the gravy train are, yes. Ukrainians themselves will do much better with a peace deal than the continued slaughter of the adult male population who don't have the money or connections to avoid conscription to the front.

No, it proves he's got some real sanity where it really counts. The escalation with Russia during Biden's term had been getting to the point that MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) could have been triggered. Apparently, it looks like it almost did back in September: https://consortiumnews.com/2024/09/19/scott-ritter-72-hours/ From what I've read, Trump stopped helping Ukraine launch missiles into Ukraine the day he got into office. I believe another poster introduced me to a substack journalist that goes by the moniker Simplicius that has some really good articles on the Ukraine conflict. Like me, he's an admirer of former Swiss Intelligence Officer Jacques Baud, for example: https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/jacques-baud-and-the-russian-way Simplicious came out with an article yesterday that makes the case that far from following the deep state cabal of an insane escalation with Russia, he's tacking hard in the other direction: Reports of Ukraine Funding Freeze Spell Doom amid Trump-Russia Alignment | Simplicius Quoting from the introduction to the article and a bit near the end: ** The doozy of a week continues, as Ukraine proceeds to slide into a hopeless abyss. A raft of new reports point to such a maximalist approach from Trump, that it’s difficult not to sensationalize things with premature enthusiasm. For a long time we wondered at Trump and his team’s true intentions vis-a-vis the war, and whether perhaps the neocon war hawk segment would again reel things back in, steering Trump into the same old escalation spiral against Russia. But thus far, we witness unfolding before us virtually the most optimistic course anyone could have imagined. Not only were all the most critical anti-deep state nominees like Tulsi Gabbard and now Kash Patel successfully confirmed—which itself will squeeze out the ‘bad intel’ component of the globalists’ classic stranglehold on the executive branch—but every sign now points to Trump aiming not for a ‘halfway’ settlement of the war, but a truly decisive one, to obliterate the deep state war party once and for all. And for them, it is nothing less than the worst imaginable nightmare, as the latest issue of Rothschild-owned Economist evokes: Let’s run down the latest transmissions which so emphatically point to an acceleration of events toward the maximalist axis. First there are the reports from within Ukraine itself that Trump’s team has in fact frozen funding. Ukrainian Rada head of the Defense Committee Roman Kostenko was first to break the news: ❗️The US has stopped selling weapons to Ukraine, - head of the Rada Defense Committee Roman Kostenko. The United States has stopped selling weapons to Ukraine, said the head of the Defense Committee of the Verkhovna Rada, Roman Kostenko. "According to my information, the weapons that were going up for sale - deliveries have stopped. Those companies that were supposed to transfer these weapons are now waiting, because there is no decision," the deputy said. “And everyone is waiting to see if there will be a decision to at least supply weapons here for money,” Kostenko added. [snip] As an interesting note, in a new clip referencing the peace deal, Trump states that he thinks Putin “wants to make a deal” but that “he doesn’t have to make a deal because he can have [all of Ukraine] if he wants to.” [audio clip in original] It is fascinating for revealing Trump as more perceptive than perhaps we’ve at times given him credit for. Most assumed the US administration believes the lie, based on faulty intelligence, that Russia is weak and in desperate need of a ceasefire. But in fact Trump appears fully aware that Putin doesn’t need this deal, and can carry on swallowing Ukraine whole. This is critical, as it reveals a lot of implications: for instance, the fact that Trump likely knows the incentive needs to be extremely strong for Russia to choose a deal over taking all of Ukraine as part of the war spoils. As such, we can assume the US must logically be preparing major concessions toward Putin’s demands in order to realistically make a ‘peace deal’ work. And today we had some confirmation of this, as it was reported by Financial Times that the withdrawal of American troops from eastern Europe was an explicit demand from the Russian side in Riyadh, for any normalization to take place. A fresh report in Financial Times has revealed that during US-Russia talks in Saudi Arabia on Tuesday, Moscow demanded that NATO and American forces are withdrawn from eastern Europe as a condition for "normalizing relations." More and more signals point to Trump seeking to reverse a century and a half of fruitless Atlanticist adversarial behavior toward Russia, particularly with today’s other rumor, by way of French Le Point magazine, that Trump intends to attend Moscow’s May 9th Victory Day parade. Trump allegedly debunked this. To conclude, here’s a fitting excerpt from the earlier Spiegel piece: There is no role left for Selenskyj and the Ukraine. A prop that is pushed around the stage has no speaking part. As with the invasion three years ago, his aim is to prove himself as a subject again through his actions, without looking at the consequences. To say, as he did then, for his own people and the whole world to hear, the man in the Kremlin and the man in the White House: I'm still here too. Yes, you are still here—but not for long. **

I don't think that's fair though- I think O'Reilly may represent some on the right, but few if any on the left.

Ukraine is out of soldiers. The Ukrainian people have no more stomach for war. They are having more desertions this winter than at any other time in the war, and now they're like a horse that smells the barn because Trump said he would bring peace and that's all the people care about now. Ukraine can say that they won their independence, Russia can say that they gained territory, Russia can say that they staved off NATO in Ukraine, and all of the people who are still alive get to keep on living. As long as they all feel like they won something, who cares who's right about any of that? The f'ing war is over. Let them all crow. Yay for everyone. That war was so worth it 👎 As I think we can agree, this war was an absolute tragedy for everyone doing the actual fighting from start to finish. As to the powers behind those fighting the war, I think an agreement may finally be in reach soon. Unlike Biden et al, who were deeply entrenched in the Ukraine war gravy train, Trump has no such ties, as far as I know. As an indication of this, I just read that as soon as Trump came into office, he stopped the United States' support of bombing Russia: ** since January 20, the new president’s inauguration, there have been no attacks on Russia with American HIMARS and ATACMS missiles. The assumption is that Kiev received such an order from Trump, who replaced and fired people who dealt with Ukrainian issues in the State Department and the Pentagon. ** Source: Even with Western aid drying up, corruption continues to flourish in Ukraine | infobrics.org As a result of Trump's lack of ties to Ukraine's gravy train, he has no reason to continue funding it. Combined with the fact that Ukraine's soldier count is severely depleted, I think any reasonble person must conclude that this war can't last much longer.

I've never been a fan, but I imagine that some of his criticisms of the left were right.

Amen. As to your questions: 1- Nothing but a lucrative gravy train for certain elites in Ukraine. 2- Biden was in on the gravy train. 3- To keep the gravy train going. A good article on these points was published on infobrics on February 3rd: Even with Western aid drying up, corruption continues to flourish in Ukraine | Infobrics It may not be perfect [I snipped a paragraph that didn't make sense to me], but I think it gets most of the story right. Quoting from it: ** The deep-rooted corruption in Ukraine began to surface after it became clear that the Kiev regime was losing the war. Although the West used a corrupt Ukraine to attack and weaken Russia, the Westerners themselves now look for an alibi for the defeat and to distance themselves from their proxy after ignoring the total corruption of the Kiev regime due to the ambitions of certain leaders to inflict as much damage as possible on Russia. Cracks have begun to appear in the relations between the allies due to corruption, and Ukraine accuses its Western partners of using corruption accusations as an excuse not to admit the country to NATO and the EU. Ukraine is the most corrupt country in Europe today, but the West continued to support Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky uncritically until Donald Trump raised the issue due to then-US President Joe Biden sending American taxpayers’ money to Ukraine. It was then discovered that the Kiev regime was giving part of that money to Hunter Biden, the son of Joe Biden. Hunter Biden, in turn, sent that money to his father, who, at the end of his term, issued a decree on Hunter’s preventive pardon. Trump is now conducting a “special financial operation,” which will include both the Pentagon and Ukraine, to determine where the money went. For this reason, Trump has suspended the US aid program to Ukraine for 90 days, suggesting that there is evidence of financial mismanagement and theft of US taxpayer money. Biden’s last decrees also indicate corruption related to Ukraine. Besides Hunter, Joe Biden issued preventive pardons for his brothers and their wives, as well as for his sister and her husband. It was not clear why and for what reason. However, there was no information about the existence of any criminal offenses and so on. In Kiev, the main culprit behind these corruption schemes is Zelensky, who officially has a monthly salary of 28,000 hryvnias, about $664. Undoubtedly, he has other income because he bought a house for his parents and in-laws, a yacht, and more. According to media reports, Zelensky purchased a villa in Italy and acquired an estate in Britain—the former residence of King Charles and Princess Diana—while Zelensky’s wife has an apartment in London. In addition, the couple owns real estate in Cyprus and Miami. This, according to some sources, is not a complete list. An Egyptian journalist who wrote about the purchase of the Italian villa in the name of Zelensky’s mother-in-law, worth almost $5 million, was found dead under unclear circumstances. As for the castle in the UK, these allegations are made by Ukrainian sources and still need to be verified. However, there is nothing secret that does not become public, and the Trump administration is certainly monitoring the movement of money. Friends, godfathers, and relatives of Ukrainian officials are also getting rich quickly because property is being purchased in their names. Corruption in Ukraine is flourishing at all levels, and Ukrainian officials are issuing directives to journalists not to write about it until the war is over because it is bad for the country, as it may be left without Western aid. Sooner or later, everything will come to light. The Trump administration will likely have all the information and initiate criminal proceedings by now. It is no coincidence that Zelensky is now saying that Ukraine does not have the strength to capture the lost territories. This statement seems to indicate a radical change in Kiev’s position and a renunciation of unrealistic goals to “return to the 1991 borders.” The reason for this is that Western aid is drying up. [snip] Zelensky was a puppet managed by the West and was under the control of British intelligence. This is evidenced by the fact that in the spring of 2022, Zelensky annulled the Istanbul Peace Accords on the directive of then-British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, even though he had a chance to stop the war that would have prevented Ukraine from losing more territory and preserved the lives of hundreds of thousands of people. However, he instead decided to continue to fight on the promise that billions of dollars would flow endlessly, a prospect that Zelensky could not resist as an opportunity to further enrich himself and those closest to him. **

Not a mystery. Putin had been openly talking about it. Can you quote him doing so? Could you link to this alleged meeting? I know that 3 days before Russia's military operation, Putin made a speech saying that he was recognizing the Donbass Republics. I've looked through the speech, he makes no mention of starting a military operation in it.

I once thought the same things. Before Covid, I was firmly on the left, with the lone exception of gun control. In 2020, if I had been American, I would have voted for Biden, though I much preferred Bernie. As far as I'm concerned, a lot of the left went insane when Covid came around. Similarly, I initially thought Russia was the bad guy when Russia started its military operation in Ukraine. It took a lot of reading for me to see this wasn't the case. Now, you're probably right that few who are on the other side of this debate will accept this truth. But I have seen a few at least waver in their beliefs. So considering the stakes could literally be as high as nuclear armageddon, I think it's worth some of my time. I fully admit that I never thought that Trump would have to remind the press that Russia isn't just some country that the U.S. can roll over.

What do you think he lied about? Claiming that Ukraine started the war in which Russia invaded their country. While it's true that Russia was the first country to literally cross the other's border, Ukraine's military clearly antagonized Russia into doing so. I think it's perfectly understandable that you wouldn't know this, however, as the mainstream media has done a terrible job of informing the public of this fact. I myself was unaware of it until I read an article from a former Swiss Intelligence Officer named Jacques Baud. Mr Baud set the record straight in this article he wrote shortly after Russia's military operation in Ukraine began. The translated article in question can be seen here: https://scheerpost.com/2022/04/09/former-nato-military-analyst-blows-the-whistle-on-wests-ukraine-invasion-narrative/ Quoting the most relevant passage in relation to the question of who started this war: ** On February 17 [2022], President Joe Biden announces that Russia will attack Ukraine in the coming days. How does he know? Mystery… But since the 16th, the artillery shelling of the populations of Donbass has increased dramatically, as shown by the daily reports of OSCE observers. Naturally, neither the media, nor the European Union, nor NATO, nor any Western government reacts and intervenes. We will say later that this is Russian disinformation. In fact, it seems that the European Union and some countries purposely glossed over the massacre of the people of Donbass, knowing that it would provoke Russian intervention. [snip] In fact, as early as February 16, Joe Biden knows that the Ukrainians began to shell the civilian populations of Donbass, putting Vladimir Putin in front of a difficult choice: to help Donbass militarily and create an international problem or to sit idle and watch Russian speakers from the Donbass being run over. If he decides to intervene, Vladimir Putin can invoke the international obligation of “ Responsibility To Protect ” (R2P). But he knows that whatever its nature or scale, the intervention will trigger a shower of sanctions. Therefore, whether its intervention is limited to the Donbass or whether it goes further to put pressure on the West for the status of Ukraine, the price to be paid will be the same. This is what he explains in his speech on February 21. That day, he acceded to the request of the Duma and recognized the independence of the two Republics of Donbass and, in the process, he signed treaties of friendship and assistance with them. The Ukrainian artillery bombardments on the populations of Donbass continued and, on February 23, the two Republics requested military aid from Russia. On the 24th, Vladimir Putin invokes Article 51 of the United Nations Charter which provides for mutual military assistance within the framework of a defensive alliance. In order to make the Russian intervention totally illegal in the eyes of the public we deliberately obscure the fact that the war actually started on February 16th. The Ukrainian army was preparing to attack the Donbass as early as 2021, as certain Russian and European intelligence services were well aware… The lawyers will judge. **

Lying isn't lack of eloquence. What do you think he lied about? Well by siding with Russia and conceding most of their demands even before the talks begin. Russia knows that the most important talks need to be with the U.S. They're the only ones capable of bringing Russia to its knees. I think they only way they could do that would bring the entire -world- to its knees, though. I am happy that Trump wants to avoid this path. Recently, well known political realist John Mearsheimer had what I believe was a very informative and concise conversation on CNN wherein he explained the current situation. It can be seen here: https://video.snapstream.net/Play/aTFPXuWkeNiiRG4aihZMKP?accessToken=cnyhersn3kpab

So you posted q quote in which Trump clearly LIED TWICE. What are the 2 things you believe Trump lied about? Oh, I'm pretty sure that Putin won't get everything he wants by the end of this war. I -am- pretty sure that Putin will get everything he believes he -needs- before he'll end this war though. If something happens to him, I doubt Russia would change direction- on the contrary, I think its position could become even more hardline. Here's a quote from the third President of Russia on the recent talk between Trump and Putin: ** Third President of Russia Dmitry Medvedev: The presidents of Russia and the US have talked at last. This is very important in and of itself. The previous US administration cut off all high-level contacts in an attempt to punish and humiliate Russia. As a result, the world was balancing on the brink of the Apocalypse. How did we get there? It just so happened at some point that the US appointed itself the country-in-chief on our planet with the exclusive right to wage a hybrid war against our people, to mete out justice and grant pardons. It was a grave mistake, which nearly wiped humanity off the face of the earth. Nobody attempted something like that before senile Biden’s team. It’s true that we would hold shouting matches with America and sometimes practiced brinkmanship, but nobody slapped personal sanctions on Khrushchev during the Cuban Missile Crisis or on Brezhnev during the conflict in Afghanistan or severed contacts between the heads of state. On the contrary, the leaders kept lines of communication open, which helped resolve crises. ** Source: ‘It is impossible to bring us to our knees’: Russia reacts to Putin-Trump phone call | RT I will say that I think there is, in fact, a way to bring Russia to its knees. It's just that it involves bringing the entire world to its knees as well. As an army Lieutenant once put it: “I am not sure what kind of weapons will be used in World War III, but I am damned sure that World War IV will be fought with spears.” Source: https://quoteinvestigator.com/2010/06/16/future-weapons/

Again, that's not what happened. Former Swiss Intelligence Officer sets the record straight on what actually triggered Russia to starts its military operation in Ukraine in the following article: https://scheerpost.com/2022/04/09/former-nato-military-analyst-blows-the-whistle-on-wests-ukraine-invasion-narrative/ Quoting from his article: ** On February 17, President Joe Biden announces that Russia will attack Ukraine in the coming days. How does he know? Mystery… But since the 16th, the artillery shelling of the populations of Donbass has increased dramatically, as shown by the daily reports of OSCE observers. Naturally, neither the media, nor the European Union, nor NATO, nor any Western government reacts and intervenes. We will say later that this is Russian disinformation. In fact, it seems that the European Union and some countries purposely glossed over the massacre of the people of Donbass, knowing that it would provoke Russian intervention. [snip] In fact, as early as February 16, Joe Biden knows that the Ukrainians began to shell the civilian populations of Donbass, putting Vladimir Putin in front of a difficult choice: to help Donbass militarily and create an international problem or to sit idle and watch Russian speakers from the Donbass being run over. If he decides to intervene, Vladimir Putin can invoke the international obligation of “ Responsibility To Protect ” (R2P). But he knows that whatever its nature or scale, the intervention will trigger a shower of sanctions. Therefore, whether its intervention is limited to the Donbass or whether it goes further to put pressure on the West for the status of Ukraine, the price to be paid will be the same. This is what he explains in his speech on February 21. That day, he acceded to the request of the Duma and recognized the independence of the two Republics of Donbass and, in the process, he signed treaties of friendship and assistance with them. The Ukrainian artillery bombardments on the populations of Donbass continued and, on February 23, the two Republics requested military aid from Russia. On the 24th, Vladimir Putin invokes Article 51 of the United Nations Charter which provides for mutual military assistance within the framework of a defensive alliance. In order to make the Russian intervention totally illegal in the eyes of the public we deliberately obscure the fact that the war actually started on February 16th. The Ukrainian army was preparing to attack the Donbass as early as 2021, as certain Russian and European intelligence services were well aware… The lawyers will judge. **

No, that's not what happened, despite what CNN was saying. I only know of a single western journalist who actually went to Crimea after it rejoined Russia to interview Crimeans on what actually happened, Canadian American Eva Bartlett. She wrote an article on her trip, which can be seen here: https://www.mintpressnews.com/return-russia-crimea-story-referendum-lives-since/262247/ Quoting from her article: ** In the evening, we stay in the home of Vlad’s friend Tata, a Russian woman who moved to Crimea in 2012. Since there was so much hype in Western media about a Russian takeover of the peninsula, I ask the burning questions: Were Crimeans forced to take part in the referendum? What was the mood like around that time? Tata replied: "I never saw so many people in my life go out to vote, of their own free will. There was a period before the referendum, maybe about two months, during which there were two holidays: International Women’s Day, March 8, and Defender of the Fatherland Day, February 23. Normally, people would go away on vacation during these holidays. But that year, Crimeans didn’t go anywhere; they wanted to be sure they were here during the referendum. We felt the sense of a miracle about to happen. People were anxiously awaiting the referendum. There were military tents in the city, but they were not erected by the military, but by local men. They would stand there every day, and people could come and sign a document calling for a referendum. I went one day and asked if I could add my name but I couldn’t, because I have a Russian passport. Only Crimean citizens could sign it. This was the fair way to do it. At that time, my husband was in America. One day, he was watching CNN and got scared and called me because he saw reports of soldiers in the streets, an ‘invasion’ by Russia. The local navy came from Sevastopol to Yalta and anchored their ships off the coast, made a blockade to ensure no larger Ukrainian or other ships could come and attack. But I never saw tanks, I never saw Russian soldiers. I never saw any of that in the city.” **

Trump may not be the most eloquent in his speeches, but he's right on this. I'll quote from the article you referenced and then give my takes as well as evidence for them. ** “I think I have the power to end this war. And I think it’s going very well,” Trump told reporters at Mar-a-Lago on the heels of the meeting between U.S. and Russian officials. “But today I heard, ‘Oh, well we weren’t invited.’ Well, you’ve been there for three years,” Trump continued. “You should’ve ended it in three years. You should have never started it. You could have made a deal. I could have made a deal for Ukraine that would have given them almost all of the land, and no people would have been killed, and no city would have been demolished and not one dome would have been knocked down. But they chose not to do it that way.” Trump went on to rail against former President Biden as “so pathetic” before again criticizing Zelensky. “Look, you have leadership — and I like him personally. He’s fine. But I don’t care about personally. I care about getting the job done. You have leadership now that’s allowed a war to go on that should have never even happened, even without the United States.” ** I certainly think it's possible that Mr. Trump has made more headway in ending this war in the last few weeks than Biden made in the last 3 years. I also fully agree that this war should have ended before now, as well as his statement that, ideally, it should never have started. I think that the best single article with a ton of information detailing what got Russia to start its military operation in Ukraine is one from former Swiss Intelligence Officer Jacques Baud. It can be seen here: https://scheerpost.com/2022/04/09/former-nato-military-analyst-blows-the-whistle-on-wests-ukraine-invasion-narrative/ As to Trump's claim that Zelensky could have made a deal that would have given Ukraine almost all of the land, I suspect he's referring to the peace deal that almost was that happened shortly after Russia's military operation in Ukraine began. An article getting into this can be seen here: The Lost Peace? - Russian-Ukrainian peace talks, February–March 2022 | The Nation What Trump doesn't get into is how the west encouraged Zelensky not to take the deal that Russia was offering. The article above fills in that missing piece of information.

Just finished reading an article published yesterday on Scott Ritter's substack, which can be seen here: https://scottritter.substack.com/p/vasily-goloborodkos-nightmare The article is about Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s rise to fame via a television character he played named Vasily Goloborodko. This character played an every man who became President of Ukraine and, after 3 successful seasons, this was converted into a successful presidential run where he actually became President of Ukraine. Mr. Ritter then goes to compare the last 3 years of Russia's war with Ukraine to be 3 'real life' seasons of Zelensky's time as President of Ukraine and speculating on how the 4th season will end. Quoting the conclusion of Mr. Ritter's article below: ** Goloborodko’s nightmare, which began Season Three of the television version of Servant of the People, has become Zelensky’s reality—hemmed in on all sides by people who seek to depose him, with no way out. Instead of a carefully scripted narrative, Zelensky has turned to drug-fueled impromptu ad libs which have turned tragedy into farce. Where once the world cheered on the Churchillian hero Zelensky portrayed, they now have nothing but pity for the despicable character Zelensky plays today. We are now in Season Four. There is one last act to be had before the series can be closed down, and the producers are considering competing scripts. One has the tragic hero flee to a life in exile, where he can reflect on the causes of his collapse. The other, written by admirers of the HBO series The Sopranos, has a more bloody, fatal ending for the everyman-turned-dictator. But the bottom line is Season Four of the real-life version of Servant of the People will not end well for Zelensky. And the reality is none of those who once sold him as the second coming of Churchill will give a damn. ** I think Mr. Ritter may well be mistaken on his last line. Perhaps some who sold Zelensky "as the second coming of Churchill" care, at least a little, that things didn't exactly turn out the way Churchill's story did, but I sincerely doubt that'll change the fact that Zelensky's end will not be nearly as good as his, with the only thing yet to be determined is just how tragic that end will be.

Just finished reading the following article published yesterday on Consortium News by Scott Ritter, thought it was interesting: Trump’s Munich Strategy | Consortium News Quoting the subtitle of his article, as well as its conclusion: ** At the security conference in Germany we just saw Trump make a classic adaptation of John Boyd’s OODA-loop to destroy his NATO and EU enemies. [snip] Trump’s new secretary of defense, Pete Hegseth, travelled to NATO and put Europe on notice that it was not business as usual, and that perceptions Europe had about key issues such as the war in Ukraine were, in fact, misperceptions. No NATO for Ukraine. No return to the 1991 borders with Russia. No American troops in Ukraine. No NATO cover for any European “peacekeeping” force that might be deployed to Ukraine. And Europe was paying for everything going forward. Enter the OODA-loop. Hegseth was the initiating action. Europe scrambled to react. Enter Vice President J.D. Vance. His speech at the MSC was not designed as a piece of rhetorical genius that would go down in history for its eloquence and intellectual concepts. It was a turd in the European punchbowl, a deliberatively provocative punch in the face of political norms designed to inject chaos into the sense of order that Europe thrives on. Even as Europe strove to respond to the provocation of Hegseth, it now had to adjust to the frontal assault on its sensibilities that J.D. Vance had unleashed. The OODA-loop was in full operational mode. Whatever the Europeans thought the MSC was going to be — perhaps the forum for a forceful rejoinder to the insults of Pete Hegseth — fell apart as they scrambled to respond to the new insults laid out by J.D, Vance, who openly questioned Europe’s role as a partner of the United States. For the European elites gathered in Munich, who had spent their entire adult existence perfecting their roles — individually and collectively — as America’s compliant servants, to suddenly be told they were bad girls and boys whom America no longer identified with was too much. Munich may be remembered by J.D. Vance’s unorthodox — indeed, revolutionary — presentation. But the Munich experience is best encapsulated by the sight and sound of Christopher Heusgen, the chairman of the MSC, breaking down in tears as he closed the MSC, overcome by the reality that Europe was never more than a tool of American power, and now there is a different American master who has decided that Europe is no longer useful as a tool. In the aftermath of Munich, Europe is scrambling to respond to the new reality manifested during the MSC. Action-reaction. The OODA-loop. As French President Emmanuel Macron rallies his European allies to cobble together a coherent response to Trump’s Ukrainian apostacy, Trump dispatched a high-level negotiation team, led by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, to Saudi Arabia, where they will meet with a similarly high-level team from Russia, led by Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, to negotiate an end to the Ukraine conflict and a revival of U.S.-Russian relations that will spell the end of NATO and EU relevancy. Neither the EU nor Ukraine was invited to the table. Game. Set. Match. How do I explain Munich? It is the revolutionary application of Boyd’s OODA-loop, a masterful case-study in disruptive politics conducted in an atmosphere of chaos brought about by the disembowelment of deep-seated political establishments the world relied upon for stability. It’s an acid trip down the rabbit hole chasing a White Rabbit that won’t stop to explain what’s happening. It’s a magic carpet ride to the unknown, piloted by a man who long ago stopped caring about the things we all had grown accustomed to believing served as the core aspects of the lives we led. It is the opening salvo of revolutionary change experienced by people who do not understand revolutions and are not prepared for one to break out all around them. It’s beautiful in a horrible way. It’s Donald Trump personified. “Do you know that the man really likes you?” the unnamed photojournalist tells the unbelieving everyman, Captain Willard, in the final apocalyptic scenes of Apocalypse Now. Welcome to the Revolution. **

Well it's all academic now. Looks like Donny-Boy has an agreement with Vlad and now they're gonna impose it on Comic-Boy. Not yet, but I'm hopeful. So are the Russians apparently. Below are 2 articles that RT published today that get into the current situation between the U.S. and Russia. I think the first one certainly sounds hopeful: Lavrov traveling to Saudi Arabia to prepare Trump-Putin meeting – Kremlin | RT I think the second one does as well, though the title might suggest otherwise: ‘It is impossible to bring us to our knees’: Russia reacts to Putin-Trump phone call | RT Quoting from the second article: ** Third President of Russia Dmitry Medvedev: The presidents of Russia and the US have talked at last. This is very important in and of itself. The previous US administration cut off all high-level contacts in an attempt to punish and humiliate Russia. As a result, the world was balancing on the brink of the Apocalypse. How did we get there? It just so happened at some point that the US appointed itself the country-in-chief on our planet with the exclusive right to wage a hybrid war against our people, to mete out justice and grant pardons. It was a grave mistake, which nearly wiped humanity off the face of the earth. Nobody attempted something like that before senile Biden’s team. It’s true that we would hold shouting matches with America and sometimes practiced brinkmanship, but nobody slapped personal sanctions on Khrushchev during the Cuban Missile Crisis or on Brezhnev during the conflict in Afghanistan or severed contacts between the heads of state. On the contrary, the leaders kept lines of communication open, which helped resolve crises. **

What was the date and time of this shelling occurring they are claiming was happening before Russia got involved? What do you claim is the date and time Russia got involved? What is the shelling that occurred you are talking about? What are the attacks against the local government you are referring to that happened before Russia got involved? From former Swiss Intelligence Officer Jacques Baud's article on the subject: ** On February 17 [2022], President Joe Biden announces that Russia will attack Ukraine in the coming days. How does he know? Mystery… But since the 16th, the artillery shelling of the populations of Donbass has increased dramatically, as shown by the daily reports of OSCE observers. Naturally, neither the media, nor the European Union, nor NATO, nor any Western government reacts and intervenes. We will say later that this is Russian disinformation. In fact, it seems that the European Union and some countries purposely glossed over the massacre of the people of Donbass, knowing that it would provoke Russian intervention. [snip] In fact, as early as February 16, Joe Biden knows that the Ukrainians began to shell the civilian populations of Donbass, putting Vladimir Putin in front of a difficult choice: to help Donbass militarily and create an international problem or to sit idle and watch Russian speakers from the Donbass being run over. If he decides to intervene, Vladimir Putin can invoke the international obligation of “ Responsibility To Protect ” (R2P). But he knows that whatever its nature or scale, the intervention will trigger a shower of sanctions. Therefore, whether its intervention is limited to the Donbass or whether it goes further to put pressure on the West for the status of Ukraine, the price to be paid will be the same. This is what he explains in his speech on February 21. That day, he acceded to the request of the Duma and recognized the independence of the two Republics of Donbass and, in the process, he signed treaties of friendship and assistance with them. The Ukrainian artillery bombardments on the populations of Donbass continued and, on February 23, the two Republics requested military aid from Russia. On the 24th, Vladimir Putin invokes Article 51 of the United Nations Charter which provides for mutual military assistance within the framework of a defensive alliance. In order to make the Russian intervention totally illegal in the eyes of the public we deliberately obscure the fact that the war actually started on February 16th. The Ukrainian army was preparing to attack the Donbass as early as 2021, as certain Russian and European intelligence services were well aware… The lawyers will judge. ** Source: Former NATO Military Analyst Blows the Whistle on West’s Ukraine Invasion Narrative | Scheerpost

I don't think Russia's population decline will not have much of an effect on the war in Ukraine, which I suspect may be over this year. Russia's population decline is something that's more of a long term issue. From Wikipedia: ** The UN is projecting that the decline that started in 2021 will continue, and if current demographic conditions persist, Russia's population will be 120 million in 50 years, a decline of about 17%.[33][32] In January 2024, the Russian statistics agency Rosstat predicted that Russia's population could drop to 130 million by 2046.[34] ** Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Russia

“I listened to the screams,” recalls Revazishvili. “There were many dead and injured downstairs. My first and only thought was to leave in a hurry before they caught up with me. Otherwise, they would tear me apart.” Four years later, Revazishvili and his two companions report they have not yet received the promised 5000 USD bills as a payment and have decided to tell the truth about those who “used and abandoned” them. The full documentary with English subtitles is available below (in two parts): ** Unfortunately, the documentary is no longer available on youtube, but I saw parts of it when it was still up. I also found a non youtube version on the wayback archived version of the original article. This wayback version can be seen here: https://web.archive.org/web/20230130070306/https://orientalreview.org/2017/11/23/cheap-dignity-of-the-ukrainian-revolution/ I can recall a few events that happened in my lifetime where crowds got spooked, and people were trampled while they were fleeing. For sure, but in this case, I think it's pretty clear that most of the killing was done by these mercenary snipers and to this day, few realize that it wasn't Yanukovych's government that was behind it.

Indeed. Ukraine had made plans to attack the Donbass republics since 2021, according to Jacques Baud and the attacks actually began in earnest on February 16, 2022. Had Ukraine not done this or had they at least stopped after Russia recognized the Donbass Republics on February 21, 2022, I think it's quite possible that Russia may never have launched its military operation on February 24, 2022. Unfortunately, Ukraine was filled with delusions of grandeur on how they didn't could take on Russia even -after- Russia started its military operation and so, we have the tragic results of today.