DiabloWags said:cbbass1 said:
Putin, Zelenskyy, Russians, and Ukrainians are ready for this war to end. The U.S. is still pushing for regime change, escalation, and "giving the sanctions more time to work."
Everyone is ready to make a peace deal, except for the U.S.
There is absolutely no evidence to support your claim.
In fact, quite the opposite.
Putin says peace talks are at a "dead end"
Putin says peace talks at 'dead end,' US 'deeply' concerned about chemical weapons: Live Ukraine updates (yahoo.com)
Russia may not be very good at fighting wars with its military, but have to give them credit for how successfully they meddle in our elections and caused irreparable damage to our nation and people.Quote:
The time is coming "to again help our partner Trump to become president," state TV host Evgeny Popov recently declared. On Thursday's edition of the state television show The Evening With Vladimir Soloviev, Putin's pet pundits offered an update on plans for 2024.
"We're trying to feel our way, figuring out the first steps. What can we do in 2023, 2024?," Russian "Americanist" Malek Dudakov, a political scientist specializing in the U.S., said. He suggested that Russia's interference in the upcoming elections is still in its early stages, and that more will be accomplished after the war is over and frosty relations between the U.S. and Russia start to warm up. "When things thaw out and the presidential race for 2024 is firmly on the agenda, there'll be moments we can use," he added. "The most banal approach I can think of is to invite Trumpbefore he announces he's running for Presidentto some future summit in liberated Mariupol."
Dmitry Drobnitsky, an omnipresent "Americanist" on Soloviev's show, suggested that Tulsi Gabbard should be invited along with Trump. Dudakov agreed: "Tulsi Gabbard would also be great. Maybe Trump will take her as his vice-president?" Gabbard has recently become a fixture of state television for her pro-Russian talking points, and has even been described as a "Russian agent" by the Kremlin's propaganda machine.
If state television is any indication, the real agenda of the Kremlin's operatives was never limited to boosting any particular candidates, but rather aimed to harm America as a whole. Dudakov stressed: "With Europe, economic wars should take priority. With America, we should be working to amplify the divisions andin light of our limited abilitiesto deepen the polarization of American society."
He went on: "There is a horrific polarization of society in the United States, very serious conflicts between the Democrats and Republicans that keep expanding. You've already mentioned that America is a dying empireand most empires weren't conquered, they were destroyed from within. The same fate likely awaits America in the near decade. That's why, when all the processes are thawed, Russia might get the chance to play on that."
🇸🇪#Sweden and 🇫🇮#Finland's prime ministers have just held a joint press conference outlining plans to join #NATO.
— Dave Keating (@DaveKeating) April 13, 2022
🇫🇮 expected to move first. PM Marin says she won't give a timetable but "it will happen quite fast—within weeks, not within months, we will have the discussion" pic.twitter.com/huEKnkDVUD
Unit2Sucks said:
Putin's strategic master stroke of attacking Ukraine to combat NATO creeping to his border has been a Trumpian success. He's pushing Sweden and Finland into NATO's arms and is likely to have another thousand plus KM of NATO border.🇸🇪#Sweden and 🇫🇮#Finland's prime ministers have just held a joint press conference outlining plans to join #NATO.
— Dave Keating (@DaveKeating) April 13, 2022
🇫🇮 expected to move first. PM Marin says she won't give a timetable but "it will happen quite fast—within weeks, not within months, we will have the discussion" pic.twitter.com/huEKnkDVUD
Perhaps NATO ("NayTO") should rename itselfUnit2Sucks said:
Putin's strategic master stroke of attacking Ukraine to combat NATO creeping to his border has been a Trumpian success. He's pushing Sweden and Finland into NATO's arms and is likely to have another thousand plus KM of NATO border.🇸🇪#Sweden and 🇫🇮#Finland's prime ministers have just held a joint press conference outlining plans to join #NATO.
— Dave Keating (@DaveKeating) April 13, 2022
🇫🇮 expected to move first. PM Marin says she won't give a timetable but "it will happen quite fast—within weeks, not within months, we will have the discussion" pic.twitter.com/huEKnkDVUD
Russia has figured out that it's hard to fight with fists, but easy to trick the mind.Unit2Sucks said:Quote:
Russia may not be very good at fighting wars with its military, but have to give them credit for how successfully they meddle in our elections and caused irreparable damage to our nation and people.
concordtom said:Russia has figured out that it's hard to fight with fists, but easy to trick the mind.Unit2Sucks said:Quote:
Russia may not be very good at fighting wars with its military, but have to give them credit for how successfully they meddle in our elections and caused irreparable damage to our nation and people.
It's all what George Orwell wrote about:
Sorry.AunBear89 said:
Ummmmm. . .
Your posts might get taken a bit more seriously if
1) there were far fewer of them
2) you did even a bit of research (the "A" in NATO does NOT stand for American)
Russia's state news agency TASS says Moskva sank during a storm while being towed to a port, blamed sinking on damage caused by a fire. #Ukraine says it hit the ship with a missile pic.twitter.com/t8c0Sv2ZBC
— Kristina Jovanovski (@kjovano) April 14, 2022
Sebastabear said:
I love how Russia is saying their flagship sank "because of a storm". I mean I realize that Russia is growing increasingly allergic to things like "facts" but as a clue, it doesn't seem overly credible to say their flagship in an active warzone sank because of an "accidental fire" and a "storm". Yeah right.Russia's state news agency TASS says Moskva sank during a storm while being towed to a port, blamed sinking on damage caused by a fire. #Ukraine says it hit the ship with a missile pic.twitter.com/t8c0Sv2ZBC
— Kristina Jovanovski (@kjovano) April 14, 2022
Claims are being made that it's been sunk. It's probably not a good sign when a country with no navy is able to sink a ship named after your capital city.golden sloth said:Sebastabear said:
I love how Russia is saying their flagship sank "because of a storm". I mean I realize that Russia is growing increasingly allergic to things like "facts" but as a clue, it doesn't seem overly credible to say their flagship in an active warzone sank because of an "accidental fire" and a "storm". Yeah right.Russia's state news agency TASS says Moskva sank during a storm while being towed to a port, blamed sinking on damage caused by a fire. #Ukraine says it hit the ship with a missile pic.twitter.com/t8c0Sv2ZBC
— Kristina Jovanovski (@kjovano) April 14, 2022
I think its debatable which is more embarrassing.
Yeah, the Wall Street Journal and others are reporting that it sank. Not that it is sinking. That it's gone. Crazy.Unit2Sucks said:Claims are being made that it's been sunk. It's probably not a good sign when a country with no navy is able to sink a ship named after your capital city.golden sloth said:Sebastabear said:
I love how Russia is saying their flagship sank "because of a storm". I mean I realize that Russia is growing increasingly allergic to things like "facts" but as a clue, it doesn't seem overly credible to say their flagship in an active warzone sank because of an "accidental fire" and a "storm". Yeah right.Russia's state news agency TASS says Moskva sank during a storm while being towed to a port, blamed sinking on damage caused by a fire. #Ukraine says it hit the ship with a missile pic.twitter.com/t8c0Sv2ZBC
— Kristina Jovanovski (@kjovano) April 14, 2022
I think its debatable which is more embarrassing.
Sebastabear said:Yeah, the Wall Street Journal and others are reporting that it sank. Not that it is sinking. That it's gone. Crazy.Unit2Sucks said:Claims are being made that it's been sunk. It's probably not a good sign when a country with no navy is able to sink a ship named after your capital city.golden sloth said:Sebastabear said:
I love how Russia is saying their flagship sank "because of a storm". I mean I realize that Russia is growing increasingly allergic to things like "facts" but as a clue, it doesn't seem overly credible to say their flagship in an active warzone sank because of an "accidental fire" and a "storm". Yeah right.Russia's state news agency TASS says Moskva sank during a storm while being towed to a port, blamed sinking on damage caused by a fire. #Ukraine says it hit the ship with a missile pic.twitter.com/t8c0Sv2ZBC
— Kristina Jovanovski (@kjovano) April 14, 2022
I think its debatable which is more embarrassing.
Vladimir Putin, strategic genius: A flagship sunk, tens of thousands of Russian KIA and WIA, pariah status and global humiliation, and NATO about to be 32 countries including Sweden and Finland.
— Tom Nichols (@RadioFreeTom) April 14, 2022
An amazing amount of self-inflicted damage in a record amount of time. https://t.co/I1G4K8kYvA
U.S. confirmation now that the ship was sunk by Ukrainian missiles. Have to add this "onboard fire" to the long litany of things Russia has lied about during this war. And yet some on here keep focusing on "American disinformation" even though everything we've said about this conflict has been proven true and literally every word out of Russia is a lie.Unit2Sucks said:Claims are being made that it's been sunk. It's probably not a good sign when a country with no navy is able to sink a ship named after your capital city.golden sloth said:Sebastabear said:
I love how Russia is saying their flagship sank "because of a storm". I mean I realize that Russia is growing increasingly allergic to things like "facts" but as a clue, it doesn't seem overly credible to say their flagship in an active warzone sank because of an "accidental fire" and a "storm". Yeah right.Russia's state news agency TASS says Moskva sank during a storm while being towed to a port, blamed sinking on damage caused by a fire. #Ukraine says it hit the ship with a missile pic.twitter.com/t8c0Sv2ZBC
— Kristina Jovanovski (@kjovano) April 14, 2022
I think its debatable which is more embarrassing.
Yeah.bearister said:
…been thinking same. Plenty of terror groups willing to take his funding and go on a mission.
concordtom said:Yeah.bearister said:
…been thinking same. Plenty of terror groups willing to take his funding and go on a mission.
It seems pretty likely.
He can explode a small nuke somewhere in Ukraine, and what's the response going to be?
I mean, play it out....
The West could then send massive non-nukes and soldiers and planes into Ukraine and begin to wipe Putin out. But then he can send nukes to blow up our positions en masse.
He can then decide to blow up Warsaw if he doesn't like Poland. Or London if he doesn't like London. Where does it end? Will we launch a strike on Moscow? No. We cannot. Because then the WarGames scenario is on.
This only will end when Putin is taken out. Who is going to be the Valkyrie hero??? (I don't suppose we can get any type of agent in there....)
Any "Von Stauffenberg" type isn't going to show up until Putin endangers the entire planet. Even then....
US and NATO needs to be employing Psychological Ops with Russians.
We can't win this with helicopters and missiles. Dude has gone mad mad mad.
I hope we have James Bond and Q working on this.
golden sloth said:concordtom said:Yeah.bearister said:
…been thinking same. Plenty of terror groups willing to take his funding and go on a mission.
It seems pretty likely.
He can explode a small nuke somewhere in Ukraine, and what's the response going to be?
I mean, play it out....
The West could then send massive non-nukes and soldiers and planes into Ukraine and begin to wipe Putin out. But then he can send nukes to blow up our positions en masse.
He can then decide to blow up Warsaw if he doesn't like Poland. Or London if he doesn't like London. Where does it end? Will we launch a strike on Moscow? No. We cannot. Because then the WarGames scenario is on.
This only will end when Putin is taken out. Who is going to be the Valkyrie hero??? (I don't suppose we can get any type of agent in there....)
Any "Von Stauffenberg" type isn't going to show up until Putin endangers the entire planet. Even then....
US and NATO needs to be employing Psychological Ops with Russians.
We can't win this with helicopters and missiles. Dude has gone mad mad mad.
I hope we have James Bond and Q working on this.
I disagree with your premise. In spite of me not approving the actions of Russia, and believing they have miscalculated their assumptions, I do think Putin is acting rationally, and I do think he wants to avoid nuclear war.
I dont see the constant escalation you are talking about. NATO continues to supply Ukraine, but not commit to troops in Ukraine. This has not changed from the war's outset.
Well, I certainly hope you are right - that would obviously be a great relief from my imagined possible outcome.golden sloth said:concordtom said:Yeah.bearister said:
…been thinking same. Plenty of terror groups willing to take his funding and go on a mission.
It seems pretty likely.
He can explode a small nuke somewhere in Ukraine, and what's the response going to be?
I mean, play it out....
The West could then send massive non-nukes and soldiers and planes into Ukraine and begin to wipe Putin out. But then he can send nukes to blow up our positions en masse.
He can then decide to blow up Warsaw if he doesn't like Poland. Or London if he doesn't like London. Where does it end? Will we launch a strike on Moscow? No. We cannot. Because then the WarGames scenario is on.
This only will end when Putin is taken out. Who is going to be the Valkyrie hero??? (I don't suppose we can get any type of agent in there....)
Any "Von Stauffenberg" type isn't going to show up until Putin endangers the entire planet. Even then....
US and NATO needs to be employing Psychological Ops with Russians.
We can't win this with helicopters and missiles. Dude has gone mad mad mad.
I hope we have James Bond and Q working on this.
I disagree with your premise. In spite of me not approving the actions of Russia, and believing they have miscalculated their assumptions, I do think Putin is acting rationally, and I do think he wants to avoid nuclear war.
I dont see the constant escalation you are talking about. NATO continues to supply Ukraine, but not commit to troops in Ukraine. This has not changed from the war's outset.
I dunno. Seems like they are doing a pretty good job of blowing up Ukraine.sycasey said:golden sloth said:concordtom said:Yeah.bearister said:
…been thinking same. Plenty of terror groups willing to take his funding and go on a mission.
It seems pretty likely.
He can explode a small nuke somewhere in Ukraine, and what's the response going to be?
I mean, play it out....
The West could then send massive non-nukes and soldiers and planes into Ukraine and begin to wipe Putin out. But then he can send nukes to blow up our positions en masse.
He can then decide to blow up Warsaw if he doesn't like Poland. Or London if he doesn't like London. Where does it end? Will we launch a strike on Moscow? No. We cannot. Because then the WarGames scenario is on.
This only will end when Putin is taken out. Who is going to be the Valkyrie hero??? (I don't suppose we can get any type of agent in there....)
Any "Von Stauffenberg" type isn't going to show up until Putin endangers the entire planet. Even then....
US and NATO needs to be employing Psychological Ops with Russians.
We can't win this with helicopters and missiles. Dude has gone mad mad mad.
I hope we have James Bond and Q working on this.
I disagree with your premise. In spite of me not approving the actions of Russia, and believing they have miscalculated their assumptions, I do think Putin is acting rationally, and I do think he wants to avoid nuclear war.
I dont see the constant escalation you are talking about. NATO continues to supply Ukraine, but not commit to troops in Ukraine. This has not changed from the war's outset.
The state of their current invasion should also not inspire confidence in Russia's ability to competently execute a nuclear attack. Are we sure they wouldn't just hit themselves with their own missiles?
Call me a pessimist, but I figure the Russians will aim their missiles at Kyiv and hit Chernobyl.concordtom said:I dunno. Seems like they are doing a pretty good job of blowing up Ukraine.sycasey said:golden sloth said:concordtom said:Yeah.bearister said:
…been thinking same. Plenty of terror groups willing to take his funding and go on a mission.
It seems pretty likely.
He can explode a small nuke somewhere in Ukraine, and what's the response going to be?
I mean, play it out....
The West could then send massive non-nukes and soldiers and planes into Ukraine and begin to wipe Putin out. But then he can send nukes to blow up our positions en masse.
He can then decide to blow up Warsaw if he doesn't like Poland. Or London if he doesn't like London. Where does it end? Will we launch a strike on Moscow? No. We cannot. Because then the WarGames scenario is on.
This only will end when Putin is taken out. Who is going to be the Valkyrie hero??? (I don't suppose we can get any type of agent in there....)
Any "Von Stauffenberg" type isn't going to show up until Putin endangers the entire planet. Even then....
US and NATO needs to be employing Psychological Ops with Russians.
We can't win this with helicopters and missiles. Dude has gone mad mad mad.
I hope we have James Bond and Q working on this.
I disagree with your premise. In spite of me not approving the actions of Russia, and believing they have miscalculated their assumptions, I do think Putin is acting rationally, and I do think he wants to avoid nuclear war.
I dont see the constant escalation you are talking about. NATO continues to supply Ukraine, but not commit to troops in Ukraine. This has not changed from the war's outset.
The state of their current invasion should also not inspire confidence in Russia's ability to competently execute a nuclear attack. Are we sure they wouldn't just hit themselves with their own missiles?
golden sloth said:concordtom said:Yeah.bearister said:
…been thinking same. Plenty of terror groups willing to take his funding and go on a mission.
It seems pretty likely.
He can explode a small nuke somewhere in Ukraine, and what's the response going to be?
I mean, play it out....
The West could then send massive non-nukes and soldiers and planes into Ukraine and begin to wipe Putin out. But then he can send nukes to blow up our positions en masse.
He can then decide to blow up Warsaw if he doesn't like Poland. Or London if he doesn't like London. Where does it end? Will we launch a strike on Moscow? No. We cannot. Because then the WarGames scenario is on.
This only will end when Putin is taken out. Who is going to be the Valkyrie hero??? (I don't suppose we can get any type of agent in there....)
Any "Von Stauffenberg" type isn't going to show up until Putin endangers the entire planet. Even then....
US and NATO needs to be employing Psychological Ops with Russians.
We can't win this with helicopters and missiles. Dude has gone mad mad mad.
I hope we have James Bond and Q working on this.
I disagree with your premise. In spite of me not approving the actions of Russia, and believing they have miscalculated their assumptions, I do think Putin is acting rationally, and I do think he wants to avoid nuclear war.
I dont see the constant escalation you are talking about. NATO continues to supply Ukraine, but not commit to troops in Ukraine. This has not changed from the war's outset.
concordtom said:Well, I certainly hope you are right - that would obviously be a great relief from my imagined possible outcome.golden sloth said:concordtom said:Yeah.bearister said:
…been thinking same. Plenty of terror groups willing to take his funding and go on a mission.
It seems pretty likely.
He can explode a small nuke somewhere in Ukraine, and what's the response going to be?
I mean, play it out....
The West could then send massive non-nukes and soldiers and planes into Ukraine and begin to wipe Putin out. But then he can send nukes to blow up our positions en masse.
He can then decide to blow up Warsaw if he doesn't like Poland. Or London if he doesn't like London. Where does it end? Will we launch a strike on Moscow? No. We cannot. Because then the WarGames scenario is on.
This only will end when Putin is taken out. Who is going to be the Valkyrie hero??? (I don't suppose we can get any type of agent in there....)
Any "Von Stauffenberg" type isn't going to show up until Putin endangers the entire planet. Even then....
US and NATO needs to be employing Psychological Ops with Russians.
We can't win this with helicopters and missiles. Dude has gone mad mad mad.
I hope we have James Bond and Q working on this.
I disagree with your premise. In spite of me not approving the actions of Russia, and believing they have miscalculated their assumptions, I do think Putin is acting rationally, and I do think he wants to avoid nuclear war.
I dont see the constant escalation you are talking about. NATO continues to supply Ukraine, but not commit to troops in Ukraine. This has not changed from the war's outset.
Thank you for the optimism.
Perhaps you can tell me what you think is rational about what Putin is doing, rational in HIS mind (admittedly), that is.
But only when they know that the wind is blowing southeast. Ooops!Eastern Oregon Bear said:Call me a pessimist, but I figure the Russians will aim their missiles at Kyiv and hit Chernobyl.concordtom said:I dunno. Seems like they are doing a pretty good job of blowing up Ukraine.sycasey said:golden sloth said:concordtom said:Yeah.bearister said:
…been thinking same. Plenty of terror groups willing to take his funding and go on a mission.
It seems pretty likely.
He can explode a small nuke somewhere in Ukraine, and what's the response going to be?
I mean, play it out....
The West could then send massive non-nukes and soldiers and planes into Ukraine and begin to wipe Putin out. But then he can send nukes to blow up our positions en masse.
He can then decide to blow up Warsaw if he doesn't like Poland. Or London if he doesn't like London. Where does it end? Will we launch a strike on Moscow? No. We cannot. Because then the WarGames scenario is on.
This only will end when Putin is taken out. Who is going to be the Valkyrie hero??? (I don't suppose we can get any type of agent in there....)
Any "Von Stauffenberg" type isn't going to show up until Putin endangers the entire planet. Even then....
US and NATO needs to be employing Psychological Ops with Russians.
We can't win this with helicopters and missiles. Dude has gone mad mad mad.
I hope we have James Bond and Q working on this.
I disagree with your premise. In spite of me not approving the actions of Russia, and believing they have miscalculated their assumptions, I do think Putin is acting rationally, and I do think he wants to avoid nuclear war.
I dont see the constant escalation you are talking about. NATO continues to supply Ukraine, but not commit to troops in Ukraine. This has not changed from the war's outset.
The state of their current invasion should also not inspire confidence in Russia's ability to competently execute a nuclear attack. Are we sure they wouldn't just hit themselves with their own missiles?
Perhaps.Cal88 said:golden sloth said:concordtom said:Yeah.bearister said:
…been thinking same. Plenty of terror groups willing to take his funding and go on a mission.
It seems pretty likely.
He can explode a small nuke somewhere in Ukraine, and what's the response going to be?
I mean, play it out....
The West could then send massive non-nukes and soldiers and planes into Ukraine and begin to wipe Putin out. But then he can send nukes to blow up our positions en masse.
He can then decide to blow up Warsaw if he doesn't like Poland. Or London if he doesn't like London. Where does it end? Will we launch a strike on Moscow? No. We cannot. Because then the WarGames scenario is on.
This only will end when Putin is taken out. Who is going to be the Valkyrie hero??? (I don't suppose we can get any type of agent in there....)
Any "Von Stauffenberg" type isn't going to show up until Putin endangers the entire planet. Even then....
US and NATO needs to be employing Psychological Ops with Russians.
We can't win this with helicopters and missiles. Dude has gone mad mad mad.
I hope we have James Bond and Q working on this.
I disagree with your premise. In spite of me not approving the actions of Russia, and believing they have miscalculated their assumptions, I do think Putin is acting rationally, and I do think he wants to avoid nuclear war.
I dont see the constant escalation you are talking about. NATO continues to supply Ukraine, but not commit to troops in Ukraine. This has not changed from the war's outset.
Agreed. Russia's main objective is to encircle the ~60k strong Ukrainian forces on the Donbass front, which I think they will achieve within the next 2-4 weeks. These forces are the main Ukrainian army body outside of the cities, without which Russia will have a free rein over the entire eastern bank of the Dniepr river.
Their next objective will be Nikolayev then Odessa, Russia is ultimately planning on breaking up Ukraine in 2 or 3 parts, with the Russian/russophone-majority area either forming a new state or being outright annexed, and possibly the southwestern Rusyn region seceding and/or going to Hungary. Basically Russia wants to break up Ukraine along ethnic lines, the same way NATO broke up Yugoslavia in the 1990s or the US broke up Iraq in the 00s.
