« First « Previous Comments 80 - 119 of 171 Next » Last » Search these comments
That's not true. Russia has been trying to negotiate with Ukraine for 8 solid years.There's one thing on patnet that doesn't change: puturds running their little propaganda campaign.
richwicks saysThat's not true. Russia has been trying to negotiate with Ukraine for 8 solid years.There's one thing on patnet that doesn't change: puturds running their little propaganda campaign.
How exactly did they negotiate? By installing their puppet Yanukovitch?
By taking over Crimea?
By sending their goons to Donetsk/Lugansk? Or by leading hybrid war for 8 years?
Will you actually be stupid enough to claim that non of this happened?
If I didn't know your MO I'd feel sorry for someone so misinformed. But since I know your MO, the feeling is that of disgust.
How exactly did they negotiate? By installing their puppet Yanukovitch? By taking over Crimea? By sending their goons to Donetsk/Lugansk? Or by leading hybrid war for 8 years?
They should come to the table, negotiate a deal and make it clear that this is about the separatist regions only and any future aggression deviating from the deal and expanding will be met with force.
This isn't about saving lives,
Just demonstrate I'm incorrect. You're again wasting your time insulting me.I've done it, and repeatedly. Your typical pattern is 1) to pretend that it didn't happen, 2) when referred back demand quotes 3) when receive quote ignore or divert to another topic.
There was no conflict when their puppet Yanukovitch was in power.I think you are saying that Russian puppets are good because Russia is happy and there's no conflict with Russia. In other words, Russia should be able to install it's puppets, let you live in return, and it's a fair compromise. If anyone ever needs proof that you are Putler's propaganda troll, this is a good reference point.
Well you got REAL war now.And it's a continuation of the hybrid war they started in 2014. BOTH were started by Russia. "It was so avoidable, we really should've been nicer to that crocodile." Pathetic.
I'm pointing out none of this would have happened if the US didn't overthrow Ukraine in 2014.I already pointed out that your perpetual repetition of a false doesn't make it true. I explained why. You couldn't argue against the explanation, so you just dismissed it and engaged "whack-a-mole" mode.
I don't believe my government because they are proven and habitual liars. Why do you believe anything the US government says?
richwicks saysJust demonstrate I'm incorrect. You're again wasting your time insulting me.I've done it, and repeatedly.
Quote me - provide a link.I dedicated a post to your use of grey propaganda, with a specific example. Are you saying that you don't remember? Yes or no?
Your "proof" is you said I was wrong and insinuated I was having anal sex with Putin.I did no such thing, let's be clear about who said what. My statement was that your tongue is stuck in a part of Putin's body. There was nothing about anal sex. Furthermore, I didn't use it as a proof. It was an inference from your observed endearment of Putler.
richwicks saysThis isn't about saving lives,
Clearly it isn't. Let Europe deal with it
engage in diplomacy only and only engage in military actions and aid if a Nato member is attacked.
The US has been broke for a while (like plenty of other countries), hence the fiery printing and massive inflation and shortages.
richwicks saysQuote me - provide a link.I dedicated a post to your use of grey propaganda,
No quote, no link.Are you saying that you don't remember? Yes or no?
...not because I learn anything from you at this point.
richwicks saysNo quote, no link.Are you saying that you don't remember? Yes or no?
Patrick - reveal this comment: https://patrick.net/post/1344825?start=27#comment-1837824
@richwicks ^^
Quote me, provide a link, refresh my memory.Here you go, dear senile: https://patrick.net/post/1344073?start=9#comment-1826473
no proof of any existential threat to Russia from Ukraine have been provided
I do not like Putin, as he is a murdering thug.He is indeed.
The idea that the invasion was "unprovoked" is a matter of opinion.
HeadSet saysI do not like Putin, as he is a murdering thug.He is indeed.
HeadSet saysThe idea that the invasion was "unprovoked" is a matter of opinion.
It is a matter of opinion indeed. All this "Support Ukraine" business - it's the world deciding whether the opinion of a murdering thug should count for anything going forward.
I do not like Putin, as he is a murdering thug. But from the Russian point of view, with Ukraine
richwicks saysQuote me, provide a link, refresh my memory.Here you go, dear senile: https://patrick.net/post/1344073?start=9#comment-1826473
mostly reader saysrichwicks saysJust demonstrate I'm incorrect. You're again wasting your time insulting me.I've done it, and repeatedly.
Quote me. We're going back to this.
Show your dedicated post, quote it, provide links. I expect you to point to any random post, and dishonestly claim it proves something it doesn't. This is why I'm saying "quote it", if you do - I expect you to lie about the quotes.
Show your dedicated post, quote it, provide links.I did just that - provided a link to my dedicated post. That's EXACTLY what you asked me to do. This is YOUR quote from YOUR post asking me to do that. Now you act butthurt because supposedly it's not what you demanded.
richwicks saysShow your dedicated post, quote it, provide links.I did just that - provided a link to my dedicated post. That's EXACTLY what you asked me to do. This is YOUR quote from YOUR post asking me to do that. Now you act butthurt because supposedly it's not what you demanded.
Sheesh, you can't even put together a coherent thought.
Are you denying that you tried to pin Bucha on Ukrainians and requesting quote for that?
Be specific, dear senile.
British Petroleum poisoned the entire Gulf of Mexico.
What I HEAR, and I may be misinformed, is that the Ukrainians did it.
richwicks saysShow your dedicated post, quote it, provide links.I did just that - provided a link to my dedicated post
mostly reader saysrichwicks saysNo, exact quote, and link to it.I feel that I'm talking to a retard
That's interesting. Quick scan had no links again.
Provide quotes of mine with links.
Well, show the quote.I gave you the link, go and read. I'm not chewing your dog food. It's quite clear that your demands for quotes are a stalling technique.
you talk about nothingThis is not true. I point out holes in your disinformation campaign and I accurately classify your status in this world.
I have had to beg you for over a month for what forms your opinions.Did anything change once you had it? Nope. That's why. I understand fully well who you are.
richwicks saysWell, show the quote.I gave you the link,
Provide a quote and links. Show your dedicated post, quote it, provide links.
Here you go, dear senile: https://patrick.net/post/1344073?start=9#comment-1826473
My response:
mostly reader saysHere you go, dear senile: https://patrick.net/post/1344073?start=9#comment-1826473
This would be a 101 on how to detect one of the propaganda techniques.
Intro: most real-life situations have a large number of variables and moving parts. It's not always clear how they fit multi-dimentional world into a coherent picture based on incomplete and ambiguous data. Slight mis-interpretation of data points - a little bit to the right here, a little bit upwards there, skip this data point because it doesn't fit, stretch another one because it supports - and you get one pictures. Change the direction in which you move the points - and you get a different picture, which may also be consistent, yet be in conflict with the first one. That's what this technique does, it paints the picture by slight manipulation of data points. Lying by omission is quite popular with this approach.
In other words, just your bullshit - nothing I've said.No-no-no-no-no-no-no-no-no. This selective quoting that you are demonstrating right now is exactly an example of grey propaganda. I further dissect that lie you push about US overthrowing Ukraine. You conveniently omit that bit.
richwicks saysIn other words, just your bullshit - nothing I've said.No-no-no-no-no-no-no-no-no. This selective quoting that you are demonstrating right now is exactly an example of grey propaganda.
FortWayneAsNancyPelosiHaircut saysnot sure what this means, will this do anything for our gas prices? They haven't come down yet.
No connection whatsoever.
RWSGFY says
FortWayneAsNancyPelosiHaircut saysnot sure what this means, will this do anything for our gas prices? They haven't come down yet.
No connection whatsoever.
well fuck me then, $7 a gallon. Can't wait till I'm out of CA with their faggot tranny worshipping bullshit and high gas prices and fucking commie fucks everywhere and militant leftist blacks. fuck all of that.
Hey, meant to ask you and forgot. How did you know which posts of mine marked as "personal"
Because I replied to them before they were marked.
richwicks saysBecause I replied to them before they were marked.
No, you didn't. https://patrick.net/post/1344825?start=27#comment-1837824 -
I don't think this is going anywhere guys. Right or wrong, maybe just move on from the back and forth? This is going down the classic forum rabbit hole. Agree to disagree so to speak.
« First « Previous Comments 80 - 119 of 171 Next » Last » Search these comments
"
How Russian energy giant Gazprom lost $300bn.
It was not too long ago that Gazprom, Russia’s state-controlled energy conglomerate, was one of the Kremlin’s most powerful weapons. But those days now seem like a distant memory. Today, Gazprom is a financial shadow of its former self.
The speed of Gazprom’s decline is breathtaking. At its peak in May 2008, the company’s market capitalisation reached $367bn (£237bn), making it one of world’s most valuable companies, according to a survey compiled by the Financial Times. Only fellow Exxonmobile and PetroChina were worth more. Gazprom’s deputy chair Alexander Medvedev repeatedly predicted that within a decade the Russian energy giant could be worth $1 trillion.
That prediction now seems foolhardy. Since 2008, Gazprom’s value has plummeted. In early August it had a market capitalisation of $51bn – losing more than $300bn. No company among the world’s top 5,000 has suffered a bigger collapse, Bloomberg Business News reported in April 2014, and by the end of the year net income had fallen by an astonishing 86%.
Though share prices have rallied slightly since, indicators suggest Gazprom has further to fall. Lingering uncertainty raises questions about whether it can survive, with production continuing to tumble downward.
So what happened? Why is a company with the world’s largest gas reserves, operating in a country bordering China and the European Union – two of the world’s top energy consumers, performing so badly?"
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/aug/07/gazprom-oil-company-share-price-collapse