I wonder what's Kolomoisky is up to... arresting yourself by the hands of your own "project" is a proper 3-d chess move.
Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion
- Thread starter Wednesday at Stoke
- Start date
Not it’s not a brilliant post you loons and wake up and smell the roses. Idiots.
Do you get joy out of this? Does it make you happy to see Russia terrorizing its neighbour? Never mind that the post you quoted is hardly brilliant.
Lsdffsdfsdmao whoever just brought this post on - thank you! That's comedy gold, guess his money from Moscow just came over.
Some people have gone so far down the "russia is really strong, they'll eventually win" path, that their need to be right about it tramples all the rest.
This is such a bizarre post, I don't know if it merits a serious response.
@DT12 does add much needed perspective on this thread, and I'm just pointing that out.
Trump already menaced to quit NATO when he was president.
Wouldn't Trump need Congress to to exit NATO?
Though, with how spineless congressional republicans are, they might go along with it if dear leader says so.
Though, with how spineless congressional republicans are, they might go along with it if dear leader says so.
It's not a perspective, it's literally the points that Russian propaganda translates (internally and to the outside world) almost word by word. Points that have been debunked myriad times.
Yes...so it would depend on an eventual win of trumo and a +50% congress. Not unlikely. He had that already
Doesn't help that Romney, one of the few who stood up to MAGA, is retiring.
Probably gonna get replaced by another Yes-man.
Would it need 50 or 60 votes?
That's the fate of everyone who stood up to MAGA. They were either primaried, or they retired because they knew they were going to get primaried. Some might have slipped through the cracks, but the GOP is well and truly the party of Trump now. And last time showed that a loss is just going to make them even more Trumpy.
I'm not sure I see a way out of Trumpism for them either, after they rejected the best chance they're ever going get in the immediate wake of Trump losing as an incumbent and then Jan 6th. I genuinely thought that was the end of Trump, but the pathetic weasels who initially made moves against him (like Lindsey Graham, the old feck) then pathetically weaseled their way back in immediately after.
No one worth taking seriously pretends that Ukraine is a bastion of corruption-free utopia. But it's also not really relevant. Because Ukraine has corruption issues, it's fine for Putin to invade? Is that the argument here? Ukraine sucks, so let's throw it to Putin? Putin, one of the biggest international crooks out there, turning Russia more and more totalitarian? Besides, Kolomoisky has been arrested. The "much needed" perspective by @DT12 left that part out.
I'll sympathize with the argument that it's not about autocracy vs democracy. I don't particularly concern myself with arguments like that. For gods sake, Saudi Arabia is a regional ally of the US. But what are we arguing here? That supporting Ukraine is wrong? Or that politicians come out with empty rhetoric? His "much needed" perspective also conveniently leaves out all of Russia's meddling as described in this piece, which has English subs:
@DT12 also argues that the West is crippling itself economically. How is that the case? US economy is booming. European countries are doing reasonably fine. They're hardly "crippling" themselves. The results of sanctions have been underwhelming thus far but that in itself is not an argument that the West is crippling itself.
He then makes the argument that Ukraine's fully mobilized army is being decimated by Russia's peacetime army. How's that the case? How does he define being decimated? Both countries are suffering immense casualties. Russia has suffered so many casualties that they themselves have had to mobilize as well.
That doesn't mean all of his post is bad. He makes certain points that I myself agree with:
- I don't think Ukraine will be able to push the Russians out of Donbas and Crimea militarily. I agree with him on this. I'm more inclined to think that Ukraine's best hope is making the war so costly for Putin that he has to retreat. But this can take years. Just like the Soviet-Afghan war took 9 years before the Soviets eventually left.
- I also agree with him that Putin won't invade a NATO country.
Considering whenever Trump, or Trump-candidates loses, the base just rejects reality and substitute their own, claiming fraud and whatever else, I don't think there is any way out of it either.
They genuinely think Trump is super awesome, and that he is popular with the general public too.
Trumpism only ends when Trump dies, even if he loses in November, they will not abandon him.
Yeah but what would you know about russian propaganda?
I googled it and as far as i read, 50% of congress OR 2/3rds of senate
Love the part about believing Putin wont invade any other country after Ukraine because he said so.
I'd say the Ukrainians have learned this the hard way, from the 1994 Budapest Agreement to the present.
Nearly every argument except the inconvenient reality of nukes being involved in Russia/Ukraine, which wasn't a consideration for NATO and Kosovo.
Gary, the king of chess. It was easy to bomb Yugoslavia for situation in Kosovo that was nowhere near as deadly as what is happening in Israel for example. Just look at official civilian deaths in Kosovo war vs civilian deaths in Gaza since October 7th. People are still dying of cancer because of depleted uranium used in NATO ammunition. Why not bomb Israel, give Palestine independence and install a large NATO base in Palestine ? I know… whataboutism. 
As far Russia goes… Those feckers can fight back so it is difficult to discipline them into democracy.
As far Russia goes… Those feckers can fight back so it is difficult to discipline them into democracy.
He knew that brilliant Redcafe posters were onto him and needed to create a diversion.
Intervention in Kosovo made sense and needed to be done, situation is a bit different in Ukraine though.
Moldova 'next victim' in West’s hybrid war against Russia — Lavrov - Russian Politics & Diplomacy - TASS
Just seen this although its from November. Lavrov making ground for the next invasion.
Although, didnt Putin say he wont invade any other country after Ukraine..
https://edition.cnn.com/2024/01/03/politics/senate-immigration-negotiations-congress/index.html
The big take-away :
In interviews with CNN, a wide-range of House Republicans said that they would only accept a border deal that resembles the hardline immigration bill that passed their chamber last year – known as HR 2 – even though Senate Democrats and the White House strongly oppose that plan and call it a non-starter.
And some Republicans were even more direct, suggesting that any deal should be rejected if it could bolster President Joe Biden’s standing ahead of November.
“Let me tell you, I’m not willing to do too damn much right now to help a Democrat and to help Joe Biden’s approval rating,” Rep. Troy Nehls, a Texas Republican, told CNN. “I will not help the Democrats try to improve this man’s dismal approval ratings. I’m not going to do it. Why would I? Chuck Schumer has had HR 2 on his desk since July. And he did nothing with it.”
There you have it, they are just blatantly admitting that they will pass exactly nothing, no matter what the circumstances, all to make Biden look bad.
The big take-away :
In interviews with CNN, a wide-range of House Republicans said that they would only accept a border deal that resembles the hardline immigration bill that passed their chamber last year – known as HR 2 – even though Senate Democrats and the White House strongly oppose that plan and call it a non-starter.
And some Republicans were even more direct, suggesting that any deal should be rejected if it could bolster President Joe Biden’s standing ahead of November.
“Let me tell you, I’m not willing to do too damn much right now to help a Democrat and to help Joe Biden’s approval rating,” Rep. Troy Nehls, a Texas Republican, told CNN. “I will not help the Democrats try to improve this man’s dismal approval ratings. I’m not going to do it. Why would I? Chuck Schumer has had HR 2 on his desk since July. And he did nothing with it.”
There you have it, they are just blatantly admitting that they will pass exactly nothing, no matter what the circumstances, all to make Biden look bad.
"Gentlemen, an immovable Parliament is more obnoxious than an immovable king! You are drunkards, tricksters, villains, whoremasters, godless, self-seeking, ambitious tricksters. You are no more capable of conducting the affairs of this nation than you are of running a brothel!"
That's how I feel about Congress right now, especially when Republicans control the House.
Rest of NATO has to step up, but i doubt that they will, a dark year ahead for Ukraine.
I think there is also a need to include a couple of big players from the Far East as well. South Korea already supplies Poland with brand new tanks while Japan already ended the arms exports ban around a decade ago (Japan CAN sell weapons and they already do by selling homemade Patriot missiles to the US). Those Asian players should see this as a solid testing ground for their own hardware as well.
Where is the promised strong response from the White House? I remember them warning NK against supplying Russia with ammo/ missiles. What a weak and pathetic administration with non-functional congress, the remaining credibility of US is being embarrassed and shattered on the worldwide stage.
Obviously we may never know the truth of what happened in these early discussions but anyway, WSJ wrote an article. It seems the discovery of Bucha was a major turning point.
I don't think there's really been anything to even remotely suggest Ukraine has ever been open to a peace deal. His wording there even... "Ukraine blew its best chance for peace"... As if Ukraine would ever want "peace" under occupation.
Usual wsj pro-russian clickbait bull.
Yaroslav Trofimov is hardly pro-Russian. But you do you.
Nepal halts work permits for Russia, Ukraine after soldiers killed
https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-...sia-ukraine-after-soldiers-killed-2024-01-05/
Don't know or care who he is and wouldn't waste my time reading the article, just observing that's a pro-russian statement he's making. All too common from the wsj.
In fairness, he's saying republicans (and putin) are making that statement, i dunno if he's trying to insinuate there's some truth in it.
Last edited:
You are aware that he quotes the opinion of pro-Russian politicians, not his own, in that tweet?
Its a fairly common occurrence to dismiss the contents of an article without reading it if its published by a author they dislike or a newspaper that falls on wrong side of their political spectrum. I do it myself sometimes, but not doing it its great way not to be stuck in an echo chamber.