« First « Previous Comments 842 - 881 of 1,018 Next » Last » Search these comments
please go back further such to Korean War and then Dominican Republic and Bay of Pigs
to find SOME REASON to attack the country, not just total bullshit reasons
richwicks says
to find SOME REASON to attack the country, not just total bullshit reasons
I think they wanted to have US military bases in Iraq because of mostly Iran and what it did in 1979.
.
The bases are for exerting power on regimes. The US intends to make all of the Middle East a vassal state, like Europe is. That's why there are still US bases in Europe.
The US intends to make all of the Middle East a vassal state, like Europe is.
And what's going down in eastern Ukraine has not helped much. Even Finland (was) rushed to get into NATO.
What would stop Russia after controlling Ukraine from going further west?
Nah, the Germans still want them there.
Putin's intelligence and common sense. He doesn't even 'want' Ukraine let alone more territory, he just can't tolerate US proxy NATO at that border. Almost exactly analogous to Cuba.
So my comment was that Putin has no expansionary ambition, you are saying he does?
I just can't understand Putin's ROI considering the hundreds of thousands of people he has gotten killed on both sides with no end in site.
but having 2 brand new NATO members on Russia's border and the entirety of the EU increasing their military budgets is not?
If Russia intended to rape Ukraine for their economic resources or something that could quickly cover the billions Russia has spent of their fuckup of a war - I might be able to understand Putin's motivations.
But right now, I just see Russia banging their heads against a wall with very little to show for it.
Because he hasn't gotten 100's of thousands of Russians killed.
I provided you nearly 20 links reporting Russian casualties yesterday.
https://apnews.com/article/ukraine-troops-killed-zelenskyy-675f53437aaf56a4d990736e85af57c4
That was your first link. Associated Propaganda is your first source.
How about the Al Jazeera report
I will ignore everything if you start posting from our government or known propaganda agencies, meaning western media.
A U.S. intelligence report declassified in mid-December 2023 estimated that 315,000 Russian troops had been killed or wounded in Ukraine. If accurate, the figure would represent 87% of the roughly 360,000 troops Russia had before the war, according to the report.
As of September 2021, there are around 35,000 US troops stationed in Germany.
Your opinion isn't worth considering.
So I can just put you on ignore?
The Al Jazeera link you clearly didn't read
Antony Blinken, our Secretary of State, who announced yesterday that Ukraine will get rushed into NATO ASAP. Do you understand that would mean a direct, automatic, peremptory declaration of war against Russia, requiring all of NATO — that is, their combined militaries — to go kinetic inside Ukraine and theoretically inside Russia, too, (a move that has not worked out well for anyone in all of history), because Article Five of the NATO charter states that an armed attack against one is an attack against all, and must be answered with counter-attack? Thus, you see, Mr. Blinken just announced World War Three.
You might also consider that NATO does not have the capacity to fight that war. The European members don’t have sufficient troops and equipment, or financial reserves for that matter. And there is, of course, America’s under-recruited DEI army of transsexuals and video-gamers, with equipment that has already proven inadequate on-the-ground in Ukraine, and a logistical route for delivery of all that which runs 5,000 miles across an ocean and then another continent. . . whereas our opponent (Russia) is right next door to the battlefield and churning out munitions like there is no tomorrow (which there might well not be for all concerned). Even Adolf Hitler, the last fool to attempt a conquest of Russia, wouldn’t like those odds.
And why would Russia desist from firing hypersonic missiles at Berlin, Paris, London, New York and. . . ? You get the idea. In which case the USA, backstopping NATO, would lob swarms of our nuclear missiles into Russia. . . and the whole shootin’ match ends up twenty minutes later a smoldering, civilization-ending mess. Smooth move, Tony Blinken.
Article Five of the NATO charter states that an armed attack against one is an attack against all, and must be answered with counter-attack?
The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defense recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.
Oh, and Ukraine is not in the North Atlantic area.
Such geography did not stop Turkey, Romania, Poland or the Baltic states from joining.
You might also consider that NATO does not have the capacity to fight that war. The European members don’t have sufficient troops and equipment, or financial reserves for that matter.
Huh? Provided the goal was just to expel Russian troops from Ukrainian land, NATO (i.e. US) airpower alone would mop the floor of Russian invasion troops! Russian front lines and artillery sites would be taken out in less than a week and Ukrainian troops could roll right through.
Russia has numbers, but they have been massively attrited over the last 3 years and are currently getting worked by $1,000 drones.
Holy Shit.
Plz tell us you are only shiposting here. Trolling.
You believe all that complete bullshit you just wrote?
Have you all forgotten how crazy advanced and better Western airpower is than everyone else? Especially against conventional and entrenched targets?
Why did the US lose in Afghanistan?
Again, you're older and probably haven't talked to boots on the ground vets. It was a police force with little conflict. We never went in with the attempt to "win" something.
Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor. Domestic politics and industrial policy will shape the pace and content of transformation as much as the requirement of current missions.
You need to get out of the house and talk to people that are in the know. You clearly don't.
This is NUCLEAR madness and Putin isn’t bluffing | Redacted with Clayton Morris
« First « Previous Comments 842 - 881 of 1,018 Next » Last » Search these comments
"President Vladimir Putin on Tuesday suspended Russian participation in the last remaining nuclear arms control treaty with the United States, warning Washington that Russia had put new ground-based strategic nuclear weapons on combat duty," Reuters reports of the new declaration.
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/putin-suspends-new-start-nuclear-treaty-puts-new-missiles-combat-readiness