Day 3. Who's going to be the next overlord of Russia? Which is as important as day one and two.Day one, someone puts a bullet in Putins brain pan.
Day two, war over.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Day 3. Who's going to be the next overlord of Russia? Which is as important as day one and two.Day one, someone puts a bullet in Putins brain pan.
Day two, war over.
Day 3. Who's going to be the next overlord of Russia? Which is as important as day one and two.
Czarist Russia expanded into Siberia and Central Asia. That was 2 governments back from who they have now.
They did it about the same time that we were expanding west and killing off the Indians who lived there.
Bad? meh. I dont know. But I'm not going to criticize Russia for doing the same thing we did.
not right or wrong, just an interesting different perspective:russia has been our enemy or at least hostile for a couple of centuries. say,since the sea otter deal in the 18th/19th cent. they had a chance to get into a hot war wiith us in '62,maybe in '60 and thought about it in the mid 80s. they passed on all of them. they have tried and succeded to undermine us here with a lot of success. we need to keep cool and not jerk around in europe. we have this hemisphere to deal with. probably gonna need some ongoing involvement in the mid east. asia is going to split between india and china,i think. africa? who knows? the current shit with russia is not being run for love america,patriotic reasons. it's a profit center for the nwo,mic and our pols. and,we COULD try and fix shit here.
goats and sheep to."And steal their women, and rape their horses."
Genghis Khan was just doing his part to reduce the carbon footprint.I mean if we are digging up history, might as well mention that the Mongols conquered and ruled Russia for a pretty long while.
You just proved my point why Ukraine is a buffer.oh lord.
During the opening stages of Operation Barbarossa, the Wehrmacht spent June-September of 1941 conducting massive battles of encirclement and annihilation. That was the correct strategy against a larger but less mobile enemy.
"Ukraine" was not a buffer, it was the location of the strongest Soviet armies in summer 1941.
In October- December they pushed towards Moscow (Operation Typhoon) but were unable to take it. They got within 5 miles before the soviet counterattack drove them back.
In 1942, Case Blue was not directed against Moscow at all. That was the operation against Stalingrad and the oil fields. In 1942, the Soviets in front of Moscow maintained the offensive at Rzhev (the meatgrinder)
I suggest you read up on your history a little bit.
Technically there bases right up their asses. Nukes I can not say for sure. Russia waited too long to get aggressive about Nato. Hell they even, as I have stated many times before in these UA/RU threads, that they helped push more fuckers to join Nato. A little too late to argue about boarders and Nato on boarders for RU side. All there is left is UA. UA as a majority had RU to the core. Lets say they manage to have taken over UA. The amount of guerilla warfare would be nuts. Hell we see it happening on actual RU lands. Guerilla tactics that is.when the soviets tried to move nukes off the coast of Florida, we stopped them. they were reasonable enough to see what the probable outcome would be.
Now we are doing the same thing. pushing bases and nukes right up to Russia's border. It's an aggressive, militant policy of dominance. We are telling Russia that they must either surrender or be toppled. Russia called our bluff, and is fighting for their own survival. this time, we are not reasonable enough to see what the probable outcome will be.
most likely our apparent blindness is because we are now ruled not by American patriots, but rather by people who want to depopulate the world, and who have other loyalties - they couldn't give a rats ass about Americans or our national interests.
Ukraine is a buffer, but your historical examples were all wrong, making you look stupid.You just proved my point why Ukraine is a buffer.
Thanks
Technically the fuckin Austrian Corporal could have done RU in big time. What some here seem to forget is that there was a war on multiple fronts still. And the American War machine spewing armament out like a Yellowstone geyser. Unless you're one the side that the US did nothing for RU in WWII.There have been a few other rulers that thought like that too. Napoleon comes to mind first. The second is the Austrian Corporal.
Both found out that it ain't that easy
M
This has to be the most uneducated and unaware thing I have read in a month or more. Even the warmongers haven’t been talking about statehood for Russia. Might as well make Israel 52, China 53 and the entire UAE 54.The west should expand into Russia.
Yes it’s good for business..anything good for the US I’m in favor for
We should take it over and make it the 51st state.
Future wars are about natural resources, water, farm land, population density.
Entire planet is explored, no more “new land”
As populations grow the footprint needs to follow. That’s why China is buying land everywhere.
What the latest war games doctrine if China invaded Taiwan, blockade and starve them out because they rely on imports for everything.
We know we can’t land troops and we know they can’t beat us in blue water operations. So the idea is to blockade.
China is building dams to rivers that run into India because they understand resources scarcity.
Everyone has the same problems.
Russian still owns land signed to them in China's time of duress. Remember during the Jap invasion? That is crazy some say China is still salty over that part of history. It would have been one thing to have bought the lands there as RU sold Alaska.ChiComs.
The Japs gave the Russians a run for their money, but you forget that most of the land taken by the Soviets was not in Asia, but in Europe.
Gotta hook a brotha up naw mean? haha!yeah, like we were doomed and terrorists would blow up america if the taliban controlled afghanistan.
2 trillion dollars, countless casualties and 20 years later, the taliban has more resources that ever before, and we are still giving them financial aid.
WARS HAVE always been about this bruv. Basic history that can be researched in these modern times with our finger tips.Future wars are about natural resources, water, farm land, population density.
IF the fuckers would vote red I'm for.... 51,52,53,54! hahahaha!This has to be the most uneducated and unaware thing I have read in a month or more. Even the warmongers haven’t been talking about statehood for Russia. Might as well make Israel 52, China 53 and the entire UAE 54.
This has to be satire.
Had the Soviets not invaded Manchuria, the war in Japan would have ground on. It would have completely changed the post war dynamic between the US and Japan. And likely cost countless souls.Technically the fuckin Austrian Corporal could have done RU in big time. What some here seem to forget is that there was a war on multiple fronts still. And the American War machine spewing armament out like a Yellowstone geyser. Unless you're one the side that the US did nothing for RU in WWII.
not right or wrong, just an interesting different perspective:
![]()
Love and hate: History of Russia-U.S. relations that you never heard of
Most Russians today consider America their main enemy, and many Americans look suspiciously on Russia's political leadership. The Arzamas...www.rbth.com
![]()
What role did Russia play in the U.S. Civil War?
Russian-American relations were not always so bitter and tense as now. During the American Civil War, Russia supported the Union primarily because...www.rbth.com
the current russian government says that they backed the wrong side in our civ
That would make sense if you believe that the parties changed like the dems love to make statements about in media.not right or wrong, just an interesting different perspective:
![]()
Love and hate: History of Russia-U.S. relations that you never heard of
Most Russians today consider America their main enemy, and many Americans look suspiciously on Russia's political leadership. The Arzamas...www.rbth.com
![]()
What role did Russia play in the U.S. Civil War?
Russian-American relations were not always so bitter and tense as now. During the American Civil War, Russia supported the Union primarily because...www.rbth.com
the current russian government says that they backed the wrong side in our civil war.
That's what Napoleon thought too.Technically the fuckin Austrian Corporal could have done RU in big time. What some here seem to forget is that there was a war on multiple fronts still. And the American War machine spewing armament out like a Yellowstone geyser. Unless you're one the side that the US did nothing for RU in WWII.
Thank bitch ass Bush II along side Clinton yes, for the shit show we see today somewhat.Russia could have been our bestest friend not long ago and our best ally.
But the NWO and Global Elites couldn't have that, so instead they had the Clintons and a bunch of other fuckers do their best to destroy the new Russia and ensure the people that survived the really bad times knew never to trust the west. It was the actions of the Clintons and the USA stooges of the Global Elites that pretty much forced the rise of Putin.
this is no different.WARS HAVE always been about this bruv. Basic history that can be researched in these modern times with our finger tips.
Though subject with the a-bomb being around by the end of the war. Japan would have possibly made US drop a couple more before giving up.Had the Soviets not invaded Manchuria, the war in Japan would have ground on. It would have completely changed the post war dynamic between the US and Japan. And likely cost countless souls.
This is a commonly over looked fact while the Nukes were a big part, everyone talks about the nukes nobody talks about the million man army that Russia pushed into Manchuria . The Japs getting their asses handed to them in China by Russia was a big part too.
Except - BRICS with 40% of the worlds oil production, a material amount of oil demand and the desire to trade in local currency has entered the chat…this is no different.
western oil companies want to exploit and profit from the gas and oil in eastern ukraine while the policy makers also want to use this to collapse the russian energy business (and perhaps russia's entire economy).
France v Russia at that time had a single front. Sorry just two different types of war. Also no bombers or dive bombers, or artillary that cant strike deep into enemy lands like they did in WWII. The older folk I know that are from RU have in a majority recognized that without the help of the US, RU would be speaking Sauerkraut. The Afrika front fucked Germany in two. Dealing with desert bullshit in the south and millions of unarmed RU soldiers willing to run at German lines with potatoes in their hands after a few drinks. That kind of determination is no joke when you're dealing with mutlitple fronts. And arms pouring in to enemy hands from their allies.That's what Napoleon thought too.
The Russians can trade land for time for a LONG time before running into problems. That's why they moved most of their industrial production east of the Urals when the Germans invaded
M
Did not post that to argue about who is doing what. Just to point out that since the inception of humans walkin this earth War has always been about resources. Just a fact of life thats all. Who tells you other wise sure has hell does not know when the US was founded as a nation, or read a book hahaha!this is no different.
western oil companies want to exploit and profit from the gas and oil in eastern ukraine while the policy makers also want to use this to collapse the russian energy business (and perhaps russia's entire economy).
those same people destroyed syria for similar reasons.
A small recon motorcycle force getting ambushed on the outskirts of Moscow is not a mechanized division….tiger tanks didn’t see the kremlin on the horizon.Ukraine is a buffer, but your historical examples were all wrong, making you look stupid.
Just say that Russia needs Ukraine as a buffer against NATO expansion and I'll agree with you.
these are good points. The multifront war prevented Germany from focusing it's full attention on the USSR, even though the majority of German units were tied up in the East. Without that diversion of forces, other outcomes might have opened up for the Germans. For example, if the units sent to North Africa in '42 were sent East instead, maybe Stalingrad never happens. If all the JG squadrons were available in Russia, rather than defending against Allied bomber attacks, maybe the Red airforce never gains the edge. And when the repercussions of that multifront war is combined with the reality of the massive amount of material that we sent to the soviets, no honest person can say that the war would have turned out the same if it was only Nazi vs Soviet 1 on 1. We motorized them. People don't understand how critically important just that one aspect is. Soviet Deep Battle doctrine would have been impossible without American motor transport. The rapid concentration of overwhelming forces at a single point in the line and speed to exploit a breakthrough were the ultimate Soviet trump cards in the wide expanses in the East.Technically the fuckin Austrian Corporal could have done RU in big time. What some here seem to forget is that there was a war on multiple fronts still. And the American War machine spewing armament out like a Yellowstone geyser. Unless you're one the side that the US did nothing for RU in WWII.
again, you look stupid because you are trying to look smart, but your facts are always wrong.A small recon motorcycle force getting ambushed on the outskirts of Moscow is not a mechanized division….tiger tanks didn’t see the kremlin on the horizon.
I’d re read you history.
How about stop trying to be right and have a macro conversation from a Birds Eye view while leaving insults out of it.
Everyone to busy to step on every crack and showing how smart they are, rather than trying to communicate.
It would have taken one hell of a effort to get them out of China and Korea. Nukes wouldn’t solve that problem, 1,000,000 Ru soldiers did. Blowing up cities and killing civilians and manufacturing nukes did well, Killing troops spread and dug in across a country side no.Though subject with the a-bomb being around by the end of the war. Japan would have possibly made US drop a couple more before giving up.
Russia was in no position to argue up until the Bush/neocon war in Ossetia. There again, we were doing what we do best and trying to shove our will down Russia's throat and make them buckle. We have a pathological need to do it, for some reason.Technically there bases right up their asses. Nukes I can not say for sure. Russia waited too long to get aggressive about Nato. Hell they even, as I have stated many times before in these UA/RU threads, that they helped push more fuckers to join Nato. A little too late to argue about boarders and Nato on boarders for RU side. All there is left is UA. UA as a majority had RU to the core. Lets say they manage to have taken over UA. The amount of guerilla warfare would be nuts. Hell we see it happening on actual RU lands. Guerilla tactics that is.
Again trying to prove your right and not getting it.again, you look stupid because you are trying to look smart, but your facts are always wrong.
Tiger tanks were not used until late 1942. The Threat to Moscow was in 1941. Stop going Belushi on us with your comments. Just quit while you are ahead.
if you can't take the time to develop your thoughts and type them out in a factual and coherent manner, why bother. Most of your comments are neocon trolling, and nobody needs that bullshit. We could just turn on 60 minutes if we wanted that. The rest of your comments are full of factoids that you try to use to look like an authority on this subject, but everything is wrong, wrong, and even more wrong.Again trying to prove your right and not getting it.
How about tiger is easier to type while on a cell phone and is also a name that anyone who isn’t a WW2 buff will understand.
That’s why it’s a conversation.if you can't take the time to develop your thoughts and type them out in a factual and coherent manner, why bother. Most of your comments are neocon trolling, and nobody needs that bullshit. We could just turn on 60 minutes if we wanted that. The rest of your comments are full of factoids that you try to use to look like an authority on this subject, but everything is wrong, wrong, and even more wrong.
if you stop trolling and factoid dropping, maybe you'd learn something
Some people in this thread are far more intelligent and educated on this topic than you realize.
it's going to get so ugly.Except - BRICS with 40% of the worlds oil production, a material amount of oil demand and the desire to trade in local currency has entered the chat…
What is the same was done to the leader in the US? What would Biden do after that happened?Day one, someone puts a bullet in Putins brain pan.
Day two, war over.
That subject leads to a depressing conclusion.It won't work. Globally extraction in the US is more expensive when compared with other countries. Doing what you suggest would drive prices below profits and bankrupt US companies and foreign companies operating in the US before Russia Saudi or a number of other faltered.
View attachment 8212703
We are basiclly par for our most out put every, minus a Minute ammout int 2019 and 2020. If we maintain current average output 2023 will be the most oil the US has ever produced in a single year.
All that would do is Kill US production and Jobs when cost over runs profits.
NWO baby! Here we come!it's going to get so ugly.
but remember, these aren't just events which are "happening" while our so-called leaders react to them. We were told that very soon we will own nothing and like it. This whole economic disaster is contrived to produce the outcome they desire.
Almost like a Joseph's Famine analogy. If you don't sell yourself into slavery, you'll starve to death on the street.
We’d have to go blow up some pipelines or start a war in an area a lot of European energy flows through to prop up the price?That subject leads to a depressing conclusion.
for the record, there was no switch. that's pure Ivory Tower propaganda.That would make sense if you believe that the parties changed like the dems love to make statements about in media.
for the record, there was no switch. that's pure Ivory Tower propaganda.
IDK. Deersniper got banned like 6 times from various accounts. That only counts as 1.Do I get some sort of referral bonus or something for all of the accounts that have gotten banned in this thread?
...and Napoleon's army lost. The Russian necessity of giving ground for time has paid off more than once.France v Russia at that time had a single front. Sorry just two different types of war. Also no bombers or dive bombers, or artillary that cant strike deep into enemy lands like they did in WWII. The older folk I know that are from RU have in a majority recognized that without the help of the US, RU would be speaking Sauerkraut. The Afrika front fucked Germany in two. Dealing with desert bullshit in the south and millions of unarmed RU soldiers willing to run at German lines with potatoes in their hands after a few drinks. That kind of determination is no joke when you're dealing with mutlitple fronts. And arms pouring in to enemy hands from their allies.