Black Dog Posted February 5 Report Posted February 5 18 minutes ago, Moonbox said: That's why there are so many cities in Ukraine with no buildings left standing, and why Putin lost almost the entirety of his professional army. That's why he had to enact conscription and why thousands of his peasant donkey-soldiers die weekly...because Putin's pulling his punches. 🤣👌 Don't forget having to call in North Korean conscripts to fill the ranks of the cannon fodder. Quote
Deluge Posted February 5 Report Posted February 5 27 minutes ago, Moonbox said: That's why there are so many cities in Ukraine with no buildings left standing, and why Putin lost almost the entirety of his professional army. That's why he had to enact conscription and why thousands of his peasant donkey-soldiers die weekly...because Putin's pulling his punches. 🤣👌 Why hasn't Ukraine invaded Russia, professor? 10 minutes ago, Black Dog said: Don't forget having to call in North Korean conscripts to fill the ranks of the cannon fodder. You too, numbuts; why hasn't Ukraine invaded Russia? Clearly Russia's frail and depleted, so why not invade and finish off the poor bastards? Quote
robosmith Posted February 5 Report Posted February 5 6 hours ago, Scott75 said: I've seen no reason to disbelieve Putin's professed concern for the people of Donbass. That being said, I will grant you that had the plight of the Donbass people been his only concern, he may have refrained from starting his military operation in Ukraine. However, he made it clear that this wasn't the case. In the very first sentence of the speech he gave on the day he launched his military operation in Ukraine, he mentioned another reason as well, the security of Russia. Quoting: ** I consider it necessary today to speak again about the tragic events in Donbass and the key aspects of ensuring the security of Russia. ** He elaborates on this point in the following paragraphs: ** I will begin with what I said in my address on February 21, 2022. I spoke about our biggest concerns and worries, and about the fundamental threats which irresponsible Western politicians created for Russia consistently, rudely and unceremoniously from year to year. I am referring to the eastward expansion of NATO, which is moving its military infrastructure ever closer to the Russian border. It is a fact that over the past 30 years we have been patiently trying to come to an agreement with the leading NATO countries regarding the principles of equal and indivisible security in Europe. In response to our proposals, we invariably faced either cynical deception and lies or attempts at pressure and blackmail, while the North Atlantic alliance continued to expand despite our protests and concerns. Its military machine is moving and, as I said, is approaching our very border. Why is this happening? Where did this insolent manner of talking down from the height of their exceptionalism, infallibility and all-permissiveness come from? What is the explanation for this contemptuous and disdainful attitude to our interests and absolutely legitimate demands? The answer is simple. Everything is clear and obvious. In the late 1980s, the Soviet Union grew weaker and subsequently broke apart. That experience should serve as a good lesson for us, because it has shown us that the paralysis of power and will is the first step towards complete degradation and oblivion. We lost confidence for only one moment, but it was enough to disrupt the balance of forces in the world. As a result, the old treaties and agreements are no longer effective. Entreaties and requests do not help. Anything that does not suit the dominant state, the powers that be, is denounced as archaic, obsolete and useless. At the same time, everything it regards as useful is presented as the ultimate truth and forced on others regardless of the cost, abusively and by any means available. Those who refuse to comply are subjected to strong-arm tactics. What I am saying now does not concern only Russia, and Russia is not the only country that is worried about this. This has to do with the entire system of international relations, and sometimes even US allies. The collapse of the Soviet Union led to a redivision of the world, and the norms of international law that developed by that time – and the most important of them, the fundamental norms that were adopted following WWII and largely formalised its outcome – came in the way of those who declared themselves the winners of the Cold War. Of course, practice, international relations and the rules regulating them had to take into account the changes that took place in the world and in the balance of forces. However, this should have been done professionally, smoothly, patiently, and with due regard and respect for the interests of all states and one’s own responsibility. Instead, we saw a state of euphoria created by the feeling of absolute superiority, a kind of modern absolutism, coupled with the low cultural standards and arrogance of those who formulated and pushed through decisions that suited only themselves. The situation took a different turn. ** He then goes on to list several wars that the U.S. and its NATO allies have been involved in recently, starting with NATO's war against Serbia and continuing with the wars in Iraq, Libya and Syria, making a persuasive case that Russia and others have gotten tired of the West's notion that it can do as it pleases wherever it pleases. Putin made it clear in his speech that when it came to Ukraine, western elites had gone too far: ** Even now, with NATO’s eastward expansion the situation for Russia has been becoming worse and more dangerous by the year. Moreover, these past days NATO leadership has been blunt in its statements that they need to accelerate and step up efforts to bring the alliance’s infrastructure closer to Russia’s borders. In other words, they have been toughening their position. We cannot stay idle and passively observe these developments. This would be an absolutely irresponsible thing to do for us. Any further expansion of the North Atlantic alliance’s infrastructure or the ongoing efforts to gain a military foothold of the Ukrainian territory are unacceptable for us. Of course, the question is not about NATO itself. It merely serves as a tool of US foreign policy. The problem is that in territories adjacent to Russia, which I have to note is our historical land, a hostile “anti-Russia” is taking shape. Fully controlled from the outside, it is doing everything to attract NATO armed forces and obtain cutting-edge weapons. For the United States and its allies, it is a policy of containing Russia, with obvious geopolitical dividends. For our country, it is a matter of life and death, a matter of our historical future as a nation. This is not an exaggeration; this is a fact. It is not only a very real threat to our interests but to the very existence of our state and to its sovereignty. It is the red line which we have spoken about on numerous occasions. They have crossed it. ** Sorry, but the world's richest KLEPTOCRAT (thief) has NO CREDIBILITY with me. And he is the m0r0n who waged war on Ukraine to "prevent NATO on his doorstep" and that ONLY increased the number of NATO members on his doorstep. Quote
Hodad Posted February 5 Report Posted February 5 39 minutes ago, Moonbox said: That's why there are so many cities in Ukraine with no buildings left standing, and why Putin lost almost the entirety of his professional army. That's why he had to enact conscription and why thousands of his peasant donkey-soldiers die weekly...because Putin's pulling his punches. 🤣👌 He's pulling them comically hard. Forbes As reserves of armored vehicles run out amid catastrophic losses in Ukraine and western Russia, the Russian military is normalizing assaults in civilian cars. And not just any civilian cars, but Lada Zhigulis: compact models that are just 16 feet from fender to fender and weigh slightly more than one ton. 1 Quote
Black Dog Posted February 5 Report Posted February 5 25 minutes ago, Deluge said: Why hasn't Ukraine invaded Russia, professor? You too, numbuts; why hasn't Ukraine invaded Russia? Clearly Russia's frail and depleted, so why not invade and finish off the poor bastards? Boy are you ever stupid! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kursk_offensive_(2024–present) Quote
Deluge Posted February 5 Report Posted February 5 (edited) 41 minutes ago, Black Dog said: Boy are you ever stupid! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kursk_offensive_(2024–present) No, dipshit, wikipedia is a left-wing rag. We'll use Conservapedia instead - it's truth driven, and anti-woke: two necessary ingredients to accurate reporting: "The NATO war in Ukraine, sometimes known as the Russia–Ukraine civil conflict is a proxy war started by the United States in 2014 with the violent overthrow of the democratically elected government of Ukraine[38] in collaboration with neo-Nazi traitors to the Ukrainian nation.[39] The newly installed Maidan puppet regime immediately began a campaign of unprovoked aggression against the civilians of Donbas. https://www.conservapedia.com/NATO_war_in_Ukraine" Edited February 5 by Deluge Quote
Chrissy1979 Posted February 5 Report Posted February 5 13 minutes ago, Deluge said: No, dipshit, wikipedia is a left-wing rag. We'll use Conservapedia instead - it's truth driven, and anti-woke: two necessary ingredients to accurate reporting: "The NATO war in Ukraine, sometimes known as the Russia–Ukraine civil conflict is a proxy war started by the United States in 2014 with the violent overthrow of the democratically elected government of Ukraine[38] in collaboration with neo-Nazi traitors to the Ukrainian nation.[39] The newly installed Maidan puppet regime immediately began a campaign of unprovoked aggression against the civilians of Donbas. https://www.conservapedia.com/NATO_war_in_Ukraine" 😂 Quote
impartialobserver Posted February 5 Report Posted February 5 16 hours ago, WestCanMan said: I think from the dems' point of view it was a "win" if the war ends today. Russia lost a lot of soldiers, they wasted a lot of ammo, lost a lot of tanks, etc. Mostly though, they lost a lot of face in that war. I think that everyone in the western world thought that mighty Russia would steamroll Ukraine and it instead of a blitzkrieg it turned out to be a nasty war of attrition that they only nominally "won". Sure, they gained a bit of territory, but every inch of it was flattened by artillery. Whoever holds that territory will just spend the next 10 years rebuilding it. And at the end of the day, the cost in human lives does not matter to the Dems. P.S.: and the warhawks in congress probably made out like bandits. A lot of lives would have been lost even if the US/NATO would have stayed out. Russia decided to invade and that entails loss of life no matter how big or small. Quote
Deluge Posted February 5 Report Posted February 5 45 minutes ago, Chrissy1979 said: 😂 Hi Chrissy, how does it feel that woke bullshit is being driven out of the US? I hope you're happy about it because I sure as hell am. Quote
WestCanMan Posted February 5 Report Posted February 5 10 minutes ago, impartialobserver said: A lot of lives would have been lost even if the US/NATO would have stayed out. Russia decided to invade and that entails loss of life no matter how big or small. Biden was talking about Ukraine joining NATO/NATO being in Ukraine all the way back in 2009 and he has never relented. The US would NEVER have allowed Canada to join the Warsaw Pact. Not in a million years. 1 Quote If CNN gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters, leftists would believe everything they typed. If you missed something on the Cultist Narrative Network, don't worry, the dolt horde here will make sure everyone hears it. Ex-Canadian since April 2025
Black Dog Posted February 5 Report Posted February 5 1 hour ago, Deluge said: No, dipshit, wikipedia is a left-wing rag. We'll use Conservapedia instead - it's truth driven, and anti-woke: two necessary ingredients to accurate reporting: What an absolute shitshow of a source. Quote By September 2023 NATO and its Ukrainian proxy forces were soundly defeated on the battlefield by the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. Quote
godzilla Posted February 5 Report Posted February 5 (edited) 1 hour ago, Deluge said: No, dipshit, wikipedia is a left-wing rag. We'll use Conservapedia instead - it's truth driven, and anti-woke: two necessary ingredients to accurate reporting: "The NATO war in Ukraine, sometimes known as the Russia–Ukraine civil conflict is a proxy war started by the United States in 2014 with the violent overthrow of the democratically elected government of Ukraine[38] in collaboration with neo-Nazi traitors to the Ukrainian nation.[39] The newly installed Maidan puppet regime immediately began a campaign of unprovoked aggression against the civilians of Donbas. https://www.conservapedia.com/NATO_war_in_Ukraine" and the US Democrats are actually alien shape shifters! man, you are in DEEP, bro! well guess what? Trump is on the side of Ukraine and the neo-nazis now! Edited February 5 by godzilla Quote
godzilla Posted February 5 Report Posted February 5 7 minutes ago, WestCanMan said: Biden was talking about Ukraine joining NATO/NATO being in Ukraine all the way back in 2009 and he has never relented. The US would NEVER have allowed Canada to join the Warsaw Pact. Not in a million years. who's side are you on, traitor? Quote
Black Dog Posted February 5 Report Posted February 5 2 minutes ago, godzilla said: who's side are you on, traitor? Russia's, always has been. Quote
WestCanMan Posted February 5 Report Posted February 5 12 minutes ago, godzilla said: who's side are you on, traitor? What difference does it make if I'm on Russia's side or Ukraine's? Do you think I live in Ukraine or something? I'm on the side of the people. That's both the people in Russia and the people in Ukraine. 1) That war never needed to happen, and 2) I don't give a shit about Biden's overseas agenda. Joe Biden can go to hell for all I care. And he really should. When Joe Biden dies, if he's not in hell, then it doesn't exist. Quote If CNN gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters, leftists would believe everything they typed. If you missed something on the Cultist Narrative Network, don't worry, the dolt horde here will make sure everyone hears it. Ex-Canadian since April 2025
godzilla Posted February 5 Report Posted February 5 25 minutes ago, WestCanMan said: What difference does it make if I'm on Russia's side or Ukraine's? Do you think I live in Ukraine or something? I'm on the side of the people. That's both the people in Russia and the people in Ukraine. 1) That war never needed to happen, and 2) I don't give a shit about Biden's overseas agenda. Joe Biden can go to hell for all I care. And he really should. When Joe Biden dies, if he's not in hell, then it doesn't exist. well, if you were "for the people" then you would be against tyranny and for democracy. and Putin is a tyrant. the Russian people suffer under Putin. they have for decades. the Ukraine frees themselves from being a Putin puppet state. and now the Ukrainian government is the bad guy? yeah, i don't get the crazy love for Putin... i mean, i know people have to justify Trump's love for the guy. looks like that might be ending anyways as Trump only likes people with power. and Putin is not in a power position at the moment. 1 Quote
Deluge Posted February 5 Report Posted February 5 1 hour ago, godzilla said: and the US Democrats are actually alien shape shifters! man, you are in DEEP, bro! well guess what? Trump is on the side of Ukraine and the neo-nazis now! Democrats aren't aliens, but the illegals sure as hell are. It's a happy day when illegal aliens are kicked out of the country. Trump is on the side of ceasefire. The rest of you scumbags are warmongers. Go f*ck yourselves. Quote
Deluge Posted February 5 Report Posted February 5 1 hour ago, Black Dog said: What an absolute shitshow of a source. Uh, yes you will. "The NATO war in Ukraine, sometimes known as the Russia–Ukraine civil conflict is a proxy war started by the United States in 2014 with the violent overthrow of the democratically elected government of Ukraine[38] in collaboration with neo-Nazi traitors to the Ukrainian nation.[39] The newly installed Maidan puppet regime immediately began a campaign of unprovoked aggression against the civilians of Donbas. https://www.conservapedia.com/NATO_war_in_Ukraine" How does it feel to know that Hussein Obama helped remove Ukraine's democratically elected leader to replace him with that piece of shit Zelenskyy? Quote
Black Dog Posted February 5 Report Posted February 5 8 minutes ago, Deluge said: Uh, yes you will. "The NATO war in Ukraine, sometimes known as the Russia–Ukraine civil conflict is a proxy war started by the United States in 2014 with the violent overthrow of the democratically elected government of Ukraine[38] in collaboration with neo-Nazi traitors to the Ukrainian nation.[39] The newly installed Maidan puppet regime immediately began a campaign of unprovoked aggression against the civilians of Donbas. https://www.conservapedia.com/NATO_war_in_Ukraine" How does it feel to know that Hussein Obama helped remove Ukraine's democratically elected leader to replace him with that piece of shit Zelenskyy? How does it feel to be crazier than a shithouse rat. 1 Quote
Five of swords Posted February 5 Report Posted February 5 On 1/27/2025 at 5:59 AM, Scott75 said: Interesting article from Kit Klarenberg published today on Scheerpost. Quoting the introduction and conclusion of the article: ** On January 19th, TIME magazine published an astonishing article, amply confirming what dissident, anti-war academics, activists, journalists and researchers have argued for a decade. The US always intended to abandon Ukraine after setting up the country for proxy war with Russia, and never had any desire or intention to assist Kiev in defeating Moscow in the conflict, let alone achieving its maximalist aims of regaining Crimea and restoring the country’s 1991 borders. To have a major mainstream outlet finally corroborate this indubitable reality is a seismic development. The TIME article’s brief first paragraph alone is rife with explosive revelations. It notes when the proxy war erupted in February 2022, then-President Joe Biden “set three objectives for the US response” – and “Ukraine’s victory was never among them.” Moreover, the phrase oft-repeated by White House apparatchiks, that Washington would support Kiev “for as long as it takes”, was never meant to be taken literally. Instead, it was just “intentionally vague” newspeak, with no implied timeframe or even desired outcome in mind. Eric Green, a member of Biden’s National Security Council who oversaw Russia policy, states the US “deliberately…made no promise” to President Volodymyr Zelensky to “recover all of the land Russia had occupied” since the conflict’s inception, “and certainly not” Crimea or the breakaway Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics. He said the White House believed “doing so was beyond Ukraine’s ability, even with robust help from the West.” It was well-understood such efforts were “not going to be a success story ultimately” for Kiev, if tried. According to TIME, the Biden administration’s three key objectives in Ukraine were all “achieved”. Nonetheless, “success” on these fronts “provides little satisfaction” to some of the former President’s “closest allies and advisers.” Green was quoted as saying Washington’s purported victory in Ukraine was “unfortunately the kind of success where you don’t feel great about it,” due to Kiev’s “suffering”, and “so much uncertainty about where it’s ultimately going to land.” [snip] Markedly, Zelensky was not present at Trump’s inauguration. In a January 6th interview with Newsweek, the Ukrainian President – typically never one to shy away from international jollies – said he “would like to [attend], of course”, but had received no invitation. In a rambling response, he said he was “not sure it’s proper to come,” particularly “during the war.” Sources close to Trump have claimed that on the contrary, Zelensky repeatedly asked to attend, but was rebuffed. For Berlin, Kiev, London, Paris, and NATO more widely, the writing couldn’t be on the wall any more plainly. Whatever reveries they may have of maintaining the proxy war any longer – Britain recently signed a 100-year-long partnership with Ukraine, under which London will “explore” building military bases on Kiev’s soil – they all ultimately remain imperial vassals, wholly dependent on US financial and military support to exist. Save for a major false flag incident, Trump’s message can only be received among the military alliance. ** Full article: https://scheerpost.com/2025/01/27/its-official-us-abandoning-ukraine/ This is because the usa got what it wanted. Assad out of power. Ukraine is too far away from Israel for the usa to care about for its own sake. Quote
Deluge Posted February 5 Report Posted February 5 11 minutes ago, Black Dog said: How does it feel to be crazier than a shithouse rat. There's no crazy over here, sad sac. You woketards will do anything to keep that war going and THAT is where the crazy is. Quote
WestCanMan Posted February 5 Report Posted February 5 2 hours ago, godzilla said: well, if you were "for the people" then you would be against tyranny and for democracy. and Putin is a tyrant. the Russian people suffer under Putin. they have for decades. the Ukraine frees themselves from being a Putin puppet state. and now the Ukrainian government is the bad guy? What makes you think that Zelenski is any better? Why does he have a Nazi unit that commits war crimes in his army? Why are elected members of the opposition not allowed to participate in their "democracy"? Why did Zelensky seize 100% control of all the media outlets in the country? Quote yeah, i don't get the crazy love for Putin... i mean, i know people have to justify Trump's love for the guy. looks like that might be ending anyways as Trump only likes people with power. and Putin is not in a power position at the moment. I don't "love" Putin any more than I "love" people who joined the Iranian army to protect Iran. I just respect their right to defend their countries. 1 Quote If CNN gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters, leftists would believe everything they typed. If you missed something on the Cultist Narrative Network, don't worry, the dolt horde here will make sure everyone hears it. Ex-Canadian since April 2025
WestCanMan Posted February 5 Report Posted February 5 3 hours ago, godzilla said: and the US Democrats are actually alien shape shifters! I'd have more respect for them if they were, because if they aren't then they're traitors. Quote If CNN gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters, leftists would believe everything they typed. If you missed something on the Cultist Narrative Network, don't worry, the dolt horde here will make sure everyone hears it. Ex-Canadian since April 2025
Black Dog Posted February 5 Report Posted February 5 7 minutes ago, WestCanMan said: I don't "love" Putin any more than I "love" people who joined the Iranian army to protect Iran. I just respect their right to defend their countries. Defending their country by invading another one. Up is down, black is white. 1 Quote
impartialobserver Posted February 5 Report Posted February 5 3 hours ago, WestCanMan said: Biden was talking about Ukraine joining NATO/NATO being in Ukraine all the way back in 2009 and he has never relented. The US would NEVER have allowed Canada to join the Warsaw Pact. Not in a million years. why did he want Ukraine to join NATO? From what I have read over the years.. Russia was not exactly a friendly neighbor. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.