Putin can knock down some building kill a few thousand Ukrainians but he will never ever rule Ukraine and that is more obvious with each passing day. Somebody told this fool a lie and be bought it.
Russia will lose this war.
And I do expect to see somebody finally get fed up and take this thug out, what a great day that will be.
They are not seeking to control the entire country.
Week after week, I keep pointing out they never mentioned such an objective, even specifically stated they didn't intend an occupation. What they SAID is they are there to demilitarize, denazify and neutralize. That's what they're doing. The best portion of the Ukraine armed forces, and the Nazis, are all in the east, surrounded. The Russians do control the battlefield, and generally the airspace.
Ukraine has already SAID for days on end now that they'll be willing to accept neutrality, the only sticking point is getting security guarantees.
It's ridiculous to see dozens of people so delusional about what the belligerents are actually saying. Don't they know how to internet? Go to the source.
another reminder that wigins is so naive that he believes russian propaganda.
You are a flaming racist and bigot, agip. Get over yourself.
Your thread is a nice case study in mass delusion. You deliberately deprive yourself of accurate information as "propaganda" while desperately seeking out what you find emotionally acceptable - which is what real propaganda targets. And others desperate for this same relief join you. What you all fail to understand is how this desperation results from a pathological commitment to news from somewhere far away as if it were a life or death personal issue. The same thing happened with covid-19. It happens with school shootings. The cycle of fear and stress, followed by emotional relief, is an addiction. It's real brain chemistry holding you prisoner.
As I mentioned before, you've yet to mention even one primary source. We can take your failure to deny that as an admission you haven't accessed any. If you don't have primary sources, you don't know anything.
All the information from primary sources - not disputed by either side - shows the Ukrainian military is already strategically defeated, as I've already explained. What's the use of hating or insulting me for the sake of denying this? Am I the type to get triggered, or the type to calmly psychoanalyze you? You could benefit from a bit of reflection on your mental state. Ukraine's defeat isn't going to harm you any more than your favorite sports team losing.
another reminder that wigins is so naive that he believes russian propaganda.
You are a flaming racist and bigot, agip. Get over yourself.
Your thread is a nice case study in mass delusion. You deliberately deprive yourself of accurate information as "propaganda" while desperately seeking out what you find emotionally acceptable - which is what real propaganda targets. And others desperate for this same relief join you. What you all fail to understand is how this desperation results from a pathological commitment to news from somewhere far away as if it were a life or death personal issue. The same thing happened with covid-19. It happens with school shootings. The cycle of fear and stress, followed by emotional relief, is an addiction. It's real brain chemistry holding you prisoner.
As I mentioned before, you've yet to mention even one primary source. We can take your failure to deny that as an admission you haven't accessed any. If you don't have primary sources, you don't know anything.
All the information from primary sources - not disputed by either side - shows the Ukrainian military is already strategically defeated, as I've already explained. What's the use of hating or insulting me for the sake of denying this? Am I the type to get triggered, or the type to calmly psychoanalyze you? You could benefit from a bit of reflection on your mental state. Ukraine's defeat isn't going to harm you any more than your favorite sports team losing.
you know, Wigins, a good exercise for you would be this:
Ask yourself why you so strongly argued that Russia would not invade Ukraine. Just go into the bathroom, sit on your throne, and ask yourself why you thought that. And then come back and report in. It would be a good exercise and we're here to help each other in this difficult time.
Then we can talk about why you think Russia is not out to control all of Ukraine. It's a process.
Russian forces did not make any major advances and Ukrainian forces carried out several local counterattacks on March 17. Russian forces made little territorial progress and continued to deploy reserve elements—including from the 1st Guards Tank Army and 810th Naval Infantry Brigade—in small force packets that are unlikely to prove decisive. Russian forces continue to suffer heavy casualties around Kharkiv, and Russian attempts to bypass the city of Izyum are unlikely to succeed. Russian forces continued assaults on Mariupol on March 17 but did not conduct any other successful advances from Crimea.
Key Takeaways * Russian forces continue to make steady territorial gains around Mariupol and are increasingly targeting residential areas of the city. * Ukrainian forces northwest of Kyiv launched several local counterattacks and inflicted heavy damage on Russian forces. * Ukrainian forces repelled Russian operations around Kharkiv and reported killing a regimental commander. * Ukrainian intelligence reports that Russia may have expended nearly its entire store of precision cruise missiles in the first twenty days of its invasion. * Russian forces deployed unspecified reserve elements of the 1st Guards Tank Army and Baltic Fleet Naval Infantry to northeastern Ukraine on March 17. * Russia may be parceling out elements of the reserve force that could conduct an amphibious operation along the Black Sea coast to support ongoing assaults on Mariupol, further reducing the likelihood of a Russian amphibious assault on Odesa. * Ukrainian forces shot down 10 Russian aircraft—including five jets, three helicopters, and two UAVs—on March 16, and Ukrainian forces continue to successfully contest Russian air operations.
Shortage of precision cruise missiles is consistent with Russia's failure to follow up initial strikes on Ukrainian air defenses. The failure to gain clear air superiority in turn leads to limited air support to ground forces and is consistent with the Russian forces relatively heavy losses in that arena.
You are a flaming racist and bigot, agip. Get over yourself.
Your thread is a nice case study in mass delusion. You deliberately deprive yourself of accurate information as "propaganda" while desperately seeking out what you find emotionally acceptable - which is what real propaganda targets. And others desperate for this same relief join you. What you all fail to understand is how this desperation results from a pathological commitment to news from somewhere far away as if it were a life or death personal issue. The same thing happened with covid-19. It happens with school shootings. The cycle of fear and stress, followed by emotional relief, is an addiction. It's real brain chemistry holding you prisoner.
As I mentioned before, you've yet to mention even one primary source. We can take your failure to deny that as an admission you haven't accessed any. If you don't have primary sources, you don't know anything.
All the information from primary sources - not disputed by either side - shows the Ukrainian military is already strategically defeated, as I've already explained. What's the use of hating or insulting me for the sake of denying this? Am I the type to get triggered, or the type to calmly psychoanalyze you? You could benefit from a bit of reflection on your mental state. Ukraine's defeat isn't going to harm you any more than your favorite sports team losing.
you know, Wigins, a good exercise for you would be this:
Ask yourself why you so strongly argued that Russia would not invade Ukraine. Just go into the bathroom, sit on your throne, and ask yourself why you thought that. And then come back and report in. It would be a good exercise and we're here to help each other in this difficult time.
Then we can talk about why you think Russia is not out to control all of Ukraine. It's a process.
Most people thought Russia wouldn't invade because it was a terrible idea even if it was over in 3 days.
Zelensky himself thought the idea that Russia would invade was ridiculous a few days before the invasion and even made of the west for telling him it was going to happen.
Putin wants control of Ukraine's government. He has control of Belarus. Belarus is still Belarus. That's what he wants in Ukraine in order to keep NATO out. This isn't complicated he's been saying he would never accept NATO in Ukraine for 18+years.
you know, Wigins, a good exercise for you would be this:
Ask yourself why you so strongly argued that Russia would not invade Ukraine. Just go into the bathroom, sit on your throne, and ask yourself why you thought that. And then come back and report in. It would be a good exercise and we're here to help each other in this difficult time.
Then we can talk about why you think Russia is not out to control all of Ukraine. It's a process.
The answer to that is obvious and completely uninteresting: he's no more than a garden variety pseudo-intellectual dbag who hangs his hat on cheap, poorly thought out contrarianism.
Hell, he's not even a pseudo-intellectual, he's just a straight up dipsh!t that couldn't reason his way out of a wet paper bag.
"COVID is a nothingburger" - wrong; "Russia won't invade and the media is warmongering"- wrong; "Ukraine will fall in 3-4 days" - wrong. This is what happens when you become obsessed with consuming media and so called "anti-media" (i.e. the kind of mass media that purports to be an alternative to "the propaganda," despite being nothing but it).
The only reason I don't block him is so that I can see what profoundly retarded bs he'll claim next. This is entertainment you can't get anywhere else and I truly take joy in watching this creature writhe and flail about.
Most people thought Russia wouldn't invade because it was a terrible idea even if it was over in 3 days.
Zelensky himself thought the idea that Russia would invade was ridiculous a few days before the invasion and even made of the west for telling him it was going to happen.
Everyone important said it was imminent but people claimed the media or the Biden administration was war mongering. Oh but guess what, turns out that was all declassified intelligence coming straight from the Pentagon where we could see the Russians were started to fuel missiles and make moves that indicated ultra-high probability of invasion.
you know, Wigins, a good exercise for you would be this:
Ask yourself why you so strongly argued that Russia would not invade Ukraine. Just go into the bathroom, sit on your throne, and ask yourself why you thought that. And then come back and report in. It would be a good exercise and we're here to help each other in this difficult time.
Then we can talk about why you think Russia is not out to control all of Ukraine. It's a process.
The answer to that is obvious and completely uninteresting: he's no more than a garden variety pseudo-intellectual dbag who hangs his hat on cheap, poorly thought out contrarianism.
Hell, he's not even a pseudo-intellectual, he's just a straight up dipsh!t that couldn't reason his way out of a wet paper bag.
"COVID is a nothingburger" - wrong; "Russia won't invade and the media is warmongering"- wrong; "Ukraine will fall in 3-4 days" - wrong. This is what happens when you become obsessed with consuming media and so called "anti-media" (i.e. the kind of mass media that purports to be an alternative to "the propaganda," despite being nothing but it).
The only reason I don't block him is so that I can see what profoundly retarded bs he'll claim next. This is entertainment you can't get anywhere else and I truly take joy in watching this creature writhe and flail about.
Everyone important said it was imminent but people claimed the media or the Biden administration was war mongering. Oh but guess what, turns out that was all declassified intelligence coming straight from the Pentagon where we could see the Russians were started to fuel missiles and make moves that indicated ultra-high probability of invasion.
Ummmm, racket, millennial dude... do you recall what you were saying about a potential invasion before the actual invasion (if we're agreeing to call it that.... ) happened? Don't make me dig up old arguments. :-)
Most people thought Russia wouldn't invade because it was a terrible idea even if it was over in 3 days.
Zelensky himself thought the idea that Russia would invade was ridiculous a few days before the invasion and even made of the west for telling him it was going to happen.
Everyone important said it was imminent but people claimed the media or the Biden administration was war mongering. Oh but guess what, turns out that was all declassified intelligence coming straight from the Pentagon where we could see the Russians were started to fuel missiles and make moves that indicated ultra-high probability of invasion.
The writing was on the wall in the middle of 2021 and no one did anything to prevent it.
Ukraine does not qualify to be in NATO. It is so corrupt it will never qualify to be in NATO.
What is the point of telling them they can be in NATO if they want other than to provoke Putin?
If Europe gave a damn about Ukraine they wouldn't have approved NordStream 1 and 2. The entire purpose of Nordstream was for Russia to be able to shut off the gas in Ukraine and Belarus without having to shut the gas off in Europe.
Putin's a bad guy. That doesn't mean he's the only one at fault for this war.
you know, Wigins, a good exercise for you would be this:
Ask yourself why you so strongly argued that Russia would not invade Ukraine. Just go into the bathroom, sit on your throne, and ask yourself why you thought that. And then come back and report in. It would be a good exercise and we're here to help each other in this difficult time.
Then we can talk about why you think Russia is not out to control all of Ukraine. It's a process.
Most people thought Russia wouldn't invade because it was a terrible idea even if it was over in 3 days.
Zelensky himself thought the idea that Russia would invade was ridiculous a few days before the invasion and even made of the west for telling him it was going to happen.
Putin wants control of Ukraine's government. He has control of Belarus. Belarus is still Belarus. That's what he wants in Ukraine in order to keep NATO out. This isn't complicated he's been saying he would never accept NATO in Ukraine for 18+years.
Belarus is not a good comparison for Ukraine. Belarus is ruled by a dictator (Lukashenko) who is totally under the thumb of Russia. Also, Russia didn't invade Belarus and instead Putin supported Lukashenko after the disputed election while he started his vicious crackdown and mass arrests/torture of political opponents. Belarus is still Belarus in that it is still a puppet government ruled by a dictator. I don't think that is what Ukrainians would like to be become, but that is what Putin wants. Besides, the whole NATO thing is just an excuse. If NATO was the issue, then why now? Ukraine hadn't applied for membership and wouldn't be accepted anyway.
JUST IN: Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov just praised Fox News for being the “only” American media outlet that is aiding their Kremlin propaganda. “Only Fox News is trying to represent some alternative [pro-Russian] points of view.”
— No Lie with Brian Tyler Cohen (@NoLieWithBTC) March 18, 2022
Most people thought Russia wouldn't invade because it was a terrible idea even if it was over in 3 days.
Zelensky himself thought the idea that Russia would invade was ridiculous a few days before the invasion and even made of the west for telling him it was going to happen.
Putin wants control of Ukraine's government. He has control of Belarus. Belarus is still Belarus. That's what he wants in Ukraine in order to keep NATO out. This isn't complicated he's been saying he would never accept NATO in Ukraine for 18+years.
Belarus is not a good comparison for Ukraine. Belarus is ruled by a dictator (Lukashenko) who is totally under the thumb of Russia. Also, Russia didn't invade Belarus and instead Putin supported Lukashenko after the disputed election while he started his vicious crackdown and mass arrests/torture of political opponents. Belarus is still Belarus in that it is still a puppet government ruled by a dictator. I don't think that is what Ukrainians would like to be become, but that is what Putin wants. Besides, the whole NATO thing is just an excuse. If NATO was the issue, then why now? Ukraine hadn't applied for membership and wouldn't be accepted anyway.
Ukraine was under Russia's thumb until the west toppled its government in 2014.
They didn't start talking about joining NATO seriously until Zelensky was elected in 2019.
Putin has said it was about NATO from the start. Why is it so inconceivable that Putin's primary strategic grievance is the reason he invaded?
Just pretend Trump was still in office. You wouldn't be nearly as excited about starting world war 3 if your interest wasn't purely political.
Carlson's position is it's Europe's problem. Europe enabled it and Europe pretended Russia wasn't a threat for the last 40 years while the US paid all the bills.
Europe's economy is almost as large as the US economy. Let them clean their own house.
Why are we sending billions to defend Ukraine's border when we won't even defend the US border?
You don't have to agree with this position but it sure as hell isn't pro-Russia.
Everyone important said it was imminent but people claimed the media or the Biden administration was war mongering. Oh but guess what, turns out that was all declassified intelligence coming straight from the Pentagon where we could see the Russians were started to fuel missiles and make moves that indicated ultra-high probability of invasion.
The writing was on the wall in the middle of 2021 and no one did anything to prevent it.
Ukraine does not qualify to be in NATO. It is so corrupt it will never qualify to be in NATO.
What is the point of telling them they can be in NATO if they want other than to provoke Putin?
If Europe gave a damn about Ukraine they wouldn't have approved NordStream 1 and 2. The entire purpose of Nordstream was for Russia to be able to shut off the gas in Ukraine and Belarus without having to shut the gas off in Europe.
Putin's a bad guy. That doesn't mean he's the only one at fault for this war.
The U.S. (at least) has been supplying arms and releasing intelligence about Russia preparations for an invasion since at least November of last year. That's a great deal more than not "doing anything to prevent" the invasion. The sharing of intelligence played a big role in solidifying the NATO response.
When Biden said the decision to join NATO was "up to Ukraine" it's simply a statement that NATO has an open door policy in which any country can request membership, but it includes meeting the membership requirements. These are upholding democracy, making progress toward a market economy, military forces under civilian control, respecting borders and other countries sovereignty, and progress toward making their military compatible with NATO forces. No one denies that Ukraine has a history of corruption and has significant ultra-nationalist factions and these would have to be resolved to join NATO, but that these issues exist does not preclude them ever being resolved. Likewise Russia could join NATO if they changed their behavior to meet the conditions of acceptance.
It's probably fair to say that Europe (the EU) wasn't terribly invested in Ukraine vs Russia as long as it wasn't a liability, hence NordStream 2 detrimental impact on Ukraine wasn't a primary concern. If Russia had played nice, it still wouldn't be an issue, but Russia going rogue certainly is an issue.
Just pretend Trump was still in office. You wouldn't be nearly as excited about starting world war 3 if your interest wasn't purely political.
Carlson's position is it's Europe's problem. Europe enabled it and Europe pretended Russia wasn't a threat for the last 40 years while the US paid all the bills.
Europe's economy is almost as large as the US economy. Let them clean their own house.
Why are we sending billions to defend Ukraine's border when we won't even defend the US border?
You don't have to agree with this position but it sure as hell isn't pro-Russia.
your official recommendation to the US is to go soft on Russia.
The writing was on the wall in the middle of 2021 and no one did anything to prevent it.
Ukraine does not qualify to be in NATO. It is so corrupt it will never qualify to be in NATO.
What is the point of telling them they can be in NATO if they want other than to provoke Putin?
If Europe gave a damn about Ukraine they wouldn't have approved NordStream 1 and 2. The entire purpose of Nordstream was for Russia to be able to shut off the gas in Ukraine and Belarus without having to shut the gas off in Europe.
Putin's a bad guy. That doesn't mean he's the only one at fault for this war.
The U.S. (at least) has been supplying arms and releasing intelligence about Russia preparations for an invasion since at least November of last year. That's a great deal more than not "doing anything to prevent" the invasion. The sharing of intelligence played a big role in solidifying the NATO response.
When Biden said the decision to join NATO was "up to Ukraine" it's simply a statement that NATO has an open door policy in which any country can request membership, but it includes meeting the membership requirements. These are upholding democracy, making progress toward a market economy, military forces under civilian control, respecting borders and other countries sovereignty, and progress toward making their military compatible with NATO forces. No one denies that Ukraine has a history of corruption and has significant ultra-nationalist factions and these would have to be resolved to join NATO, but that these issues exist does not preclude them ever being resolved. Likewise Russia could join NATO if they changed their behavior to meet the conditions of acceptance.
It's probably fair to say that Europe (the EU) wasn't terribly invested in Ukraine vs Russia as long as it wasn't a liability, hence NordStream 2 detrimental impact on Ukraine wasn't a primary concern. If Russia had played nice, it still wouldn't be an issue, but Russia going rogue certainly is an issue.
You don't have to agree with Russia's motives. You just have to acknowledge that they are rational and that they exist.
Russia doesn't think Putin is evil. The people like him. They have literally had nothing but dictators since 1917. Russia doesn't compare Putin to JKF or Reagan they compare him to Russian leaders and by Russian standards he's not that bad.
The survey of Russian adults, conducted by independent research organizations in Russia last week, found relatively weak support for Moscow's invasion of Ukraine compared to past incursions.
Belarus is not a good comparison for Ukraine. Belarus is ruled by a dictator (Lukashenko) who is totally under the thumb of Russia. Also, Russia didn't invade Belarus and instead Putin supported Lukashenko after the disputed election while he started his vicious crackdown and mass arrests/torture of political opponents. Belarus is still Belarus in that it is still a puppet government ruled by a dictator. I don't think that is what Ukrainians would like to be become, but that is what Putin wants. Besides, the whole NATO thing is just an excuse. If NATO was the issue, then why now? Ukraine hadn't applied for membership and wouldn't be accepted anyway.
Ukraine was under Russia's thumb until the west toppled its government in 2014.
They didn't start talking about joining NATO seriously until Zelensky was elected in 2019.
Putin has said it was about NATO from the start. Why is it so inconceivable that Putin's primary strategic grievance is the reason he invaded?
They were only under the thumb of Russia during Yanukovych's rule. And as I recall, the Ukrainians didn't seem to like his hard turn towards Russia. Yushchenko had advocated for NATO membership and closer ties to Europe, but he was poisoned by Putin's FSB. The Ukrainian's didn't seem to like when Yanukovych tried to steal the election from him either.
Also anyone who trusts what Putin says is a useful fool. Putin repeatedly lied in the build up to the war and spoke half-truths.
Just pretend Trump was still in office. You wouldn't be nearly as excited about starting world war 3 if your interest wasn't purely political.
Carlson's position is it's Europe's problem. Europe enabled it and Europe pretended Russia wasn't a threat for the last 40 years while the US paid all the bills.
Europe's economy is almost as large as the US economy. Let them clean their own house.
Why are we sending billions to defend Ukraine's border when we won't even defend the US border?
You don't have to agree with this position but it sure as hell isn't pro-Russia.
your official recommendation to the US is to go soft on Russia.
Got it. Thanks.
Going soft on Russia is the only reason there's a war happening.
Bush and Europe did nothing when Russia invaded Georgia.
Obama and Europe did nothing when Russia annexed the Crimea.
Why would Putin think they would care if he invaded Ukraine?
Belarus is not a good comparison for Ukraine. Belarus is ruled by a dictator (Lukashenko) who is totally under the thumb of Russia. Also, Russia didn't invade Belarus and instead Putin supported Lukashenko after the disputed election while he started his vicious crackdown and mass arrests/torture of political opponents. Belarus is still Belarus in that it is still a puppet government ruled by a dictator. I don't think that is what Ukrainians would like to be become, but that is what Putin wants. Besides, the whole NATO thing is just an excuse. If NATO was the issue, then why now? Ukraine hadn't applied for membership and wouldn't be accepted anyway.
Ukraine was under Russia's thumb until the west toppled its government in 2014.
They didn't start talking about joining NATO seriously until Zelensky was elected in 2019.
Putin has said it was about NATO from the start. Why is it so inconceivable that Putin's primary strategic grievance is the reason he invaded?
You repeat this stuff forcefully (some would say hysterically) as if anyone disputes it. We f'ing know what Putin said. What we don't know is why an American would feel the need to sympathize and agree with him, and act as an apologist for the Russia murder of thousands of Ukrainian children.
All the push-back you think you are getting isn't because we don't think you can quote or summarize Putin and his Russian networks correctly. It's because you're a scumbag on par with them.
