sycasey said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Zippergate said:

---

You totally missed the point as expected. We don't control Russian policy. We DO control our own policy. We pursued policies that provoked the Russian evasion. Therefore, it is perfectly reasonable to blame the war on our policies.

---

The last sentence does not follow from the previous. The first blame is on the country that decided to attack.

Can prior US policy be criticized? Of course. But the BLAME goes on Russia and Putin. They started the war.

---

Most serious analysts like Mearsheimer or Sachs beg to differ, stating that the war started in 2014, due to the action of the post-Maidan Coup government.

---

If you mean when Russia annexed Crimea and started leading separatist militia groups in the Donbas, then I agree.

---

Crimeans overwhelmingly wanted to join Russia, as confirmed by their referendum and several independent/western polls.

Similarly, the seperatist movement in the Donbass was an organic movement, that is why they have managed to withstand the vastly larger Kiev army for nearly a decade.

---

The separatist groups were controlled by the Russian military.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_separatist_forces_in_Ukraine

---

This opinion is brought to you by the same Wikipedia editors who will boldly claim that the Ukrainian biolabs, whose existence was confirmed by Nuland at a congressional hearing, don't really exist...

---

It wasn't confirmed.

---

This is your version of dajo's insisting that Putin is dead. Just pretend that Nuland never did say that Ukraine had biolabs, and keep pushing that square peg into the round hole...

---

She definitely said they had biolabs. What has not been confirmed is if those labs were ever used to create bio-weapons, or if the US participated in funding of that. There's no evidence of that, except from Russian state media.

---

You really are incorrigible, aren't you?



Rubio asked Nuland straight up if Ukraine had bioweapon labs, to which Nuland answered that Ukraine did have biolabs, and that they were very concerned about Russia getting ahold of these labs. If Ukraine didn't have bioweapon labs, she would have just answered "no", and she certainly would not have expressed fear of "Russia getting ahold of these labs".

The reason she answered the way she did is because anything less than her reply, let alone a straight negative answer, would have been a lie under oath.

Cal88 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Zippergate said:

---

You totally missed the point as expected. We don't control Russian policy. We DO control our own policy. We pursued policies that provoked the Russian evasion. Therefore, it is perfectly reasonable to blame the war on our policies.

---

The last sentence does not follow from the previous. The first blame is on the country that decided to attack.

Can prior US policy be criticized? Of course. But the BLAME goes on Russia and Putin. They started the war.

---

Most serious analysts like Mearsheimer or Sachs beg to differ, stating that the war started in 2014, due to the action of the post-Maidan Coup government.

---

If you mean when Russia annexed Crimea and started leading separatist militia groups in the Donbas, then I agree.

---

Crimeans overwhelmingly wanted to join Russia, as confirmed by their referendum and several independent/western polls.

Similarly, the seperatist movement in the Donbass was an organic movement, that is why they have managed to withstand the vastly larger Kiev army for nearly a decade.

---

The separatist groups were controlled by the Russian military.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_separatist_forces_in_Ukraine

---

This opinion is brought to you by the same Wikipedia editors who will boldly claim that the Ukrainian biolabs, whose existence was confirmed by Nuland at a congressional hearing, don't really exist...

---

It wasn't confirmed.

---

This is your version of dajo's insisting that Putin is dead. Just pretend that Nuland never did say that Ukraine had biolabs, and keep pushing that square peg into the round hole...

---

My version of insisting that Putin is dead is me making fun of you for repeating lies for propaganda because propagandists like you only care about repeating the lie

dajo9 said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Zippergate said:

---

You totally missed the point as expected. We don't control Russian policy. We DO control our own policy. We pursued policies that provoked the Russian evasion. Therefore, it is perfectly reasonable to blame the war on our policies.

---

The last sentence does not follow from the previous. The first blame is on the country that decided to attack.

Can prior US policy be criticized? Of course. But the BLAME goes on Russia and Putin. They started the war.

---

Most serious analysts like Mearsheimer or Sachs beg to differ, stating that the war started in 2014, due to the action of the post-Maidan Coup government.

---

If you mean when Russia annexed Crimea and started leading separatist militia groups in the Donbas, then I agree.

---

Crimeans overwhelmingly wanted to join Russia, as confirmed by their referendum and several independent/western polls.

Similarly, the seperatist movement in the Donbass was an organic movement, that is why they have managed to withstand the vastly larger Kiev army for nearly a decade.

---

The separatist groups were controlled by the Russian military.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_separatist_forces_in_Ukraine

---

This opinion is brought to you by the same Wikipedia editors who will boldly claim that the Ukrainian biolabs, whose existence was confirmed by Nuland at a congressional hearing, don't really exist...

---

It wasn't confirmed.

---

This is your version of dajo's insisting that Putin is dead. Just pretend that Nuland never did say that Ukraine had biolabs, and keep pushing that square peg into the round hole...

---

My version of insisting that Putin is dead is me making fun of you for repeating lies for propaganda because propagandists like you only care about repeating the lie

---

That's pretty much what you're doing here, repeating the lie about me being a "propagandist" when in fact my views and analyses on Ukraine are in complete alignment with those of Mearsheimer or Sachs...

While their government wants to fight a losing battle to the last Ukrainian, people in Ukraine are getting sick of this war:

More and more Ukrainians are fighting back against the mobilization, often with the help of civilian bystanders.

The people had enough of Zelensky. pic.twitter.com/VxjE24v5E5

— Mats Nilsson (@mazzenilsson) June 5, 2024

Cal88 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Zippergate said:

---

You totally missed the point as expected. We don't control Russian policy. We DO control our own policy. We pursued policies that provoked the Russian evasion. Therefore, it is perfectly reasonable to blame the war on our policies.

---

The last sentence does not follow from the previous. The first blame is on the country that decided to attack.

Can prior US policy be criticized? Of course. But the BLAME goes on Russia and Putin. They started the war.

---

Most serious analysts like Mearsheimer or Sachs beg to differ, stating that the war started in 2014, due to the action of the post-Maidan Coup government.

---

If you mean when Russia annexed Crimea and started leading separatist militia groups in the Donbas, then I agree.

---

Crimeans overwhelmingly wanted to join Russia, as confirmed by their referendum and several independent/western polls.

Similarly, the seperatist movement in the Donbass was an organic movement, that is why they have managed to withstand the vastly larger Kiev army for nearly a decade.

---

The separatist groups were controlled by the Russian military.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_separatist_forces_in_Ukraine

---

This opinion is brought to you by the same Wikipedia editors who will boldly claim that the Ukrainian biolabs, whose existence was confirmed by Nuland at a congressional hearing, don't really exist...

---

It wasn't confirmed.

---

This is your version of dajo's insisting that Putin is dead. Just pretend that Nuland never did say that Ukraine had biolabs, and keep pushing that square peg into the round hole...

---

She definitely said they had biolabs. What has not been confirmed is if those labs were ever used to create bio-weapons, or if the US participated in funding of that. There's no evidence of that, except from Russian state media.

---

You really are incorrigible, aren't you?



Rubio asked Nuland straight up if Ukraine had bioweapon labs, to which Nuland answered that Ukraine did have biolabs, and that they were very concerned about Russia getting ahold of these labs. If Ukraine didn't have bioweapon labs, she would have just answered "no", and she certainly would not have expressed fear of "Russia getting ahold of these labs".

The reason she answered the way she did is because anything less than her reply, let alone a straight negative answer, would have been a lie under oath.

---

There's what the video actually says, then there's what you are assuming about it, then there's you acting like your assumption is incontrovertible proof. All of it right there in one post.

"Ukraine has biological research facilities." That's a direct quote under oath from Nuland.
So we're supposed to believe that a US government official is concerned about biological research facilities but it is unreasonable to conclude that these facilities research (produce?) bioweapons? Seriously?

Zippergate said:

---

"Ukraine has biological research facilities." That's a direct quote under oath from Nuland.
So we're supposed to believe that a US government official is concerned about biological research facilities but it is unreasonable to conclude that these facilities research (produce?) bioweapons? Seriously?

---

How about you actually read the explanation in the Wikipedia article? This isn't hard.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine_bioweapons_conspiracy_theory

Quote:

---

New laboratories were established to secure and dismantle the remnants of the Soviet biological weapons program, and since then have been used to monitor and prevent new epidemics.

---

So yeah, they are there (in part) to handle bioweapons . . . they are there to handle and protect people from old Soviet-era bioweapons that had been left behind in Ukraine. Is it reasonable that a country at war with Russia might be worried that the Russian military could take over some of those facilities and get access to some of that old dangerous material? Yes, it is. Nuland's statement doesn't prove any more than that.

Now, is it POSSIBLE that the US government is lying and that the Russian government's story is true. Sure, anything is possible. But to prove it, you need to bring more evidence than this weak tea.

sycasey said:

---

Zippergate said:

---

"Ukraine has biological research facilities." That's a direct quote under oath from Nuland.
So we're supposed to believe that a US government official is concerned about biological research facilities but it is unreasonable to conclude that these facilities research (produce?) bioweapons? Seriously?

---

How about you actually read the explanation in the Wikipedia article? This isn't hard.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine_bioweapons_conspiracy_theory

Quote:

---

New laboratories were established to secure and dismantle the remnants of the Soviet biological weapons program, and since then have been used to monitor and prevent new epidemics.

---

So yeah, they are there (in part) to handle bioweapons . . . they are there to handle and protect people from old Soviet-era bioweapons that had been left behind in Ukraine. Is it reasonable that a country at war with Russia might be worried that the Russian military could take over some of those facilities and get access to some of that old dangerous material? Yes, it is. Nuland's statement doesn't prove any more than that.

Now, is it POSSIBLE that the US government is lying and that the Russian government's story is true. Sure, anything is possible. But to prove it, you need to bring more evidence than this weak tea.

---

Yeah, right, "old Soviet-era bioweapons that were left behind in Ukraine"... for the past 34 years??

Even by your own standards, you're trying too hard.

Cal88 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Zippergate said:

---

"Ukraine has biological research facilities." That's a direct quote under oath from Nuland.
So we're supposed to believe that a US government official is concerned about biological research facilities but it is unreasonable to conclude that these facilities research (produce?) bioweapons? Seriously?

---

How about you actually read the explanation in the Wikipedia article? This isn't hard.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine_bioweapons_conspiracy_theory

Quote:

---

New laboratories were established to secure and dismantle the remnants of the Soviet biological weapons program, and since then have been used to monitor and prevent new epidemics.

---

So yeah, they are there (in part) to handle bioweapons . . . they are there to handle and protect people from old Soviet-era bioweapons that had been left behind in Ukraine. Is it reasonable that a country at war with Russia might be worried that the Russian military could take over some of those facilities and get access to some of that old dangerous material? Yes, it is. Nuland's statement doesn't prove any more than that.

Now, is it POSSIBLE that the US government is lying and that the Russian government's story is true. Sure, anything is possible. But to prove it, you need to bring more evidence than this weak tea.

---

Yeah, right, "old Soviet-era bioweapons that were left behind in Ukraine"... for the past 34 years??

Even by your own standards, you're trying too hard.

---

Either way, if the labs are researching potentially dangerous diseases, it stands to reason you wouldn't want them falling into enemy hands. That would be true whether or not anyone was actually creating new bioweapons there.

^ keep digging.

Ukraine is one of the biggest hubs in the traffic of organs.

In Ukraine, a group of 11 women demand that the authorities hand over information on who "harvested" organs from their dead soldier husbands and sons.

Their bodies were returned with signs of "surgical removal of Organs"

Everything is for sale in Dictator Zelenskys Ukraine. pic.twitter.com/nW0bGAEBPM

— Chay Bowes (@BowesChay) June 5, 2024

Prior to the war with Russia in 2020, the Franco-German TV network Arte did an expose' on child trafficking in Ukraine, where they estimated that 10% of global child trafficking took place, done or allowed by high officials:

L'UKRAINE :En 2020 Arte décrivait l’Ukraine comme le pays le plus corrompu du monde, la plaque tournante de la pédophilie mondiale, protégé par des dirigeants corrompus...⁦⁦@Alexis_Cossette⁩ ⁦@BlackBondPtv⁩ ⁦@mmtchi⁩ ⁦@UPR_Asselineau⁩ pic.twitter.com/ziIyJxdM4U

— DK (@DKagape17) February 14, 2024

There is no doubt that with the war and the explosion of number of orphans in Ukraine, that sordid traffic is booming today, as well as the arms and organs traffic, which could not happen without high officials being involved.

Cal88 said:

---

^ keep digging.

Ukraine is one of the biggest hubs in the traffic of organs.

---

Non-rebuttal and then moving on to another topic. Classic.

sycasey said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

^ keep digging.

Ukraine is one of the biggest hubs in the traffic of organs.

---

Non-rebuttal and then moving on to another topic. Classic.

---

Your main point was already addressed and properly dismantled. Disingenuous hair-splitting, time-wasting responses extending what was already addressed need not be gratified.

Conscription practices getting more desperate all the time in Ukraine:

Ukrainian mothers storm a cоnscription office after a young man was kidnapped and torturеd to dеаth in the basement pic.twitter.com/FHIVuk9Tri

— What the media hides. (@narrative_hole) June 5, 2024

Has Bubba visited lately, or Epstein pre "suicide" (under Bill Barr's watch)?

Previously I've seen lots of young people partying in Kyiv, and their draft age was like 28 - 45? Are these all children of elites? It doesn't add up, young men partying, and amputees and mentally deficient sent to the front lines.

Cal88 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

^ keep digging.

Ukraine is one of the biggest hubs in the traffic of organs.

---

Non-rebuttal and then moving on to another topic. Classic.

---

Your main point was already addressed and properly dismantled. Disingenuous hair-splitting, time-wasting responses extending what was already addressed need not be gratified.

---

LOL.

sycasey said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

^ keep digging.

Ukraine is one of the biggest hubs in the traffic of organs.

---

Non-rebuttal and then moving on to another topic. Classic.

---

Your main point was already addressed and properly dismantled. Disingenuous hair-splitting, time-wasting responses extending what was already addressed need not be gratified.

---

LOL.

---

Cal88 is correct here. Nuland had a layup opportunity to say there weren't bioweapon labs in Ukraine when directly asked about it. She didn't.

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

^ keep digging.

Ukraine is one of the biggest hubs in the traffic of organs.

---

Non-rebuttal and then moving on to another topic. Classic.

---

Your main point was already addressed and properly dismantled. Disingenuous hair-splitting, time-wasting responses extending what was already addressed need not be gratified.

---

LOL.

---

Cal88 is correct here. Nuland had a layup opportunity to say there weren't bioweapon labs in Ukraine when directly asked about it. She didn't.

---

She did the dumb thing of trying to explain what the labs were rather than just answer the question. A poor answer doesn't prove there are bioweapon labs.

Cal88 said:

---

Conscription practices getting more desperate all the time in Ukraine:

Ukrainian mothers storm a cоnscription office after a young man was kidnapped and torturеd to dеаth in the basement pic.twitter.com/FHIVuk9Tri

— What the media hides. (@narrative_hole) June 5, 2024

---

More details on this case:

🇺🇦🚨‼️ Beaten to death by military recruiters!

The family of 32-year-old Sergei Kovalchuk says that he was severely beaten in the military recruitment center, and then was hospitalized with multiple injuries already in a coma. Despite the efforts of doctors, Sergei Kovalchuk… pic.twitter.com/3WkaCtuGML

— Lord Bebo (@MyLordBebo) June 5, 2024

"Beaten to death by military recruiters!

The family of 32-year-old Sergei Kovalchuk says that he was severely beaten in the military recruitment center, and then was hospitalized with multiple injuries already in a coma. Despite the efforts of doctors, Sergei Kovalchuk died without regaining consciousness.

The hospital confirmed that the deceased was delivered in extremely serious condition in a coma with a diagnosis of "closed craniocerebral injury, linear fracture of the parietal bone, right-sided intracranial hematoma, focal brain contusion, diffuse brain contusion, fracture of the lower jaw."

According to locals, this is the fourth or fifth such incident in the city.

The military recruiters immediately published an explanation that there was no physical impact on him, and the cause of his death was too much alcohol:
"The man was 'snatched' by an epileptic attack caused by prolonged alcohol consumption."

-> The people will hunt these recruiters down when it's over. I guarantee you this."

Cal88 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Zippergate said:

---

"Ukraine has biological research facilities." That's a direct quote under oath from Nuland.
So we're supposed to believe that a US government official is concerned about biological research facilities but it is unreasonable to conclude that these facilities research (produce?) bioweapons? Seriously?

---

How about you actually read the explanation in the Wikipedia article? This isn't hard.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine_bioweapons_conspiracy_theory

Quote:

---

New laboratories were established to secure and dismantle the remnants of the Soviet biological weapons program, and since then have been used to monitor and prevent new epidemics.

---

So yeah, they are there (in part) to handle bioweapons . . . they are there to handle and protect people from old Soviet-era bioweapons that had been left behind in Ukraine. Is it reasonable that a country at war with Russia might be worried that the Russian military could take over some of those facilities and get access to some of that old dangerous material? Yes, it is. Nuland's statement doesn't prove any more than that.

Now, is it POSSIBLE that the US government is lying and that the Russian government's story is true. Sure, anything is possible. But to prove it, you need to bring more evidence than this weak tea.

---

Yeah, right, "old Soviet-era bioweapons that were left behind in Ukraine"... for the past 34 years??

Even by your own standards, you're trying too hard.

---

When I moved to my current location in eastern Oregon, the US Government was busily destroying (by incineration) vast stockpiles of nerve gas that had been sitting in underground bunkers for 50+ years. Right now, across the Columbia River, they are deciding what to do with large quantities of radioactive materials stashed in similar bunkers at Hanford. Governments hang on to stuff until the need to do something becomes critical (i. e. metal drums corroding and developing leaks). If there was no easy way to deal with bioweapons, it wouldn't surprise me a bit if they sat for 34 years or more.

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Zippergate said:

---

"Ukraine has biological research facilities." That's a direct quote under oath from Nuland.
So we're supposed to believe that a US government official is concerned about biological research facilities but it is unreasonable to conclude that these facilities research (produce?) bioweapons? Seriously?

---

How about you actually read the explanation in the Wikipedia article? This isn't hard.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine_bioweapons_conspiracy_theory

Quote:

---

New laboratories were established to secure and dismantle the remnants of the Soviet biological weapons program, and since then have been used to monitor and prevent new epidemics.

---

So yeah, they are there (in part) to handle bioweapons . . . they are there to handle and protect people from old Soviet-era bioweapons that had been left behind in Ukraine. Is it reasonable that a country at war with Russia might be worried that the Russian military could take over some of those facilities and get access to some of that old dangerous material? Yes, it is. Nuland's statement doesn't prove any more than that.

Now, is it POSSIBLE that the US government is lying and that the Russian government's story is true. Sure, anything is possible. But to prove it, you need to bring more evidence than this weak tea.

---

Yeah, right, "old Soviet-era bioweapons that were left behind in Ukraine"... for the past 34 years??

Even by your own standards, you're trying too hard.

---

When I moved to my current location in eastern Oregon, the US Government was busily destroying (by incineration) vast stockpiles of nerve gas that had sitting in underground bunkers for 50+ years. Right now, across the Columbia River, they are deciding what to do with large quantities of radioactive materials stashed in similar bunkers at Hanford. Governments hang on to stuff until the need to do something becomes critical (i. e. metal drums corroding and developing leaks). If there was no easy way to deal with bioweapons, it wouldn't surprise me a bit if they sat for 34 years or more.

---

It's amazing how much mental hoops some will jump in order to accommodate for their "safe" scenario...

Chemical weapons or radioactive material are much harder to dispose of, bioweapons are much smaller in volume and can easily be incinerated on the premises of a biolab.

Cal88 said:

---

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Zippergate said:

---

"Ukraine has biological research facilities." That's a direct quote under oath from Nuland.
So we're supposed to believe that a US government official is concerned about biological research facilities but it is unreasonable to conclude that these facilities research (produce?) bioweapons? Seriously?

---

How about you actually read the explanation in the Wikipedia article? This isn't hard.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine_bioweapons_conspiracy_theory

Quote:

---

New laboratories were established to secure and dismantle the remnants of the Soviet biological weapons program, and since then have been used to monitor and prevent new epidemics.

---

So yeah, they are there (in part) to handle bioweapons . . . they are there to handle and protect people from old Soviet-era bioweapons that had been left behind in Ukraine. Is it reasonable that a country at war with Russia might be worried that the Russian military could take over some of those facilities and get access to some of that old dangerous material? Yes, it is. Nuland's statement doesn't prove any more than that.

Now, is it POSSIBLE that the US government is lying and that the Russian government's story is true. Sure, anything is possible. But to prove it, you need to bring more evidence than this weak tea.

---

Yeah, right, "old Soviet-era bioweapons that were left behind in Ukraine"... for the past 34 years??

Even by your own standards, you're trying too hard.

---

When I moved to my current location in eastern Oregon, the US Government was busily destroying (by incineration) vast stockpiles of nerve gas that had sitting in underground bunkers for 50+ years. Right now, across the Columbia River, they are deciding what to do with large quantities of radioactive materials stashed in similar bunkers at Hanford. Governments hang on to stuff until the need to do something becomes critical (i. e. metal drums corroding and developing leaks). If there was no easy way to deal with bioweapons, it wouldn't surprise me a bit if they sat for 34 years or more.

---

It's amazing how much mental hoops some will jump in order to accommodate for their "safe" scenario...

---

No one has been jumping through more mental hoops in this thread than you.

All according to plan I'm sure

Quote:

---

3:12 PM Jun 5, 2024

---

Quote:

---

ayden @squatsons
Putin: Moscow will consider an asymmetric response to the supply of weapons for attacks on the Russian Federation
The President of Russia noted that Russia can supply its long-range weapons to regions of the world, from where there will be sensitive blows to countries supplying weapons to Ukraine.

---

🇺🇦🇫🇷🇺🇸🇬🇧 Hiw can you celebrate DDay with Ukranian leadership, whose heroes are Bandera and co? pic.twitter.com/YNANog3SYA

— Lord Bebo (@MyLordBebo) June 5, 2024

WAR: Why is Zelensky using our weapons to attack Russia's nuclear ballistic missile early warning radar network? These attacks are designed to provoke Russia to attack the US - Ukraine wants American troops on the ground in Ukraine. pic.twitter.com/fzLbGqPpYk

— @amuse (@amuse) June 6, 2024

This seems escalatory to me.

bearister said:

---

My Mom had a Merc Cougar that looked like this:





…..and speaking of mercs, I liked this merc movie as a kid. In the US Dark of Sun (1968),in UK The Mercenaries.

---

That makes your Moms a cougar