• HideTV Updates Coming Monday

    HideTV will be down on Monday for updates. We'll let you all know as soon as it's back up and message @alexj-12 with any questions!

  • Win an RIX Storm S3 Thermal Imaging Scope!

    To enter, all you need to do is add an image of yourself at the range below! Subscribers get more entries, check out the plans below for a better chance of winning!

    Join the contest Subscribe

Ukraine war Bullshit.

he was a journalist doing a big scoop. yes,likely a big ratings boost attempt. bringing up the holodor would be like grilling Trump about Stormy Daniels or Obama about Larry Sinclair during an interview. not likely productive. if he is ignorant,as you say,guess he has no access to people who are informed. but,it is good to have someone on here who is knowledgeable about and has access to all the deepest information extant. still haven't said why you think we should be doing what we are doing in Ukraine. and,how spending ?? billions doing whatever it is is a good investment in America's present and future interest and security. my bet is you are unable to cobble together any justification beyond what the Lindsey Graham types spew. you have never said why you think spending 60+ billion on Ukraine is better than spending it here to fix some of the broken stuff we have. in my ignorant view,all that has done is help secure Black Rock's investment there,arm the cartels and hamas,profit our MIC and let Z and his wife and buds buy a lot of expensive toys and homes. hasn't done much for the Ukrainian people who are victims no matter who gets the blame for this mess.
You have gone the binary route, once again. You assume I’m in-favor of how things have been done. This is a continual gross error, so maybe I’m not being clear enough or you’re overlooking/not reading exactly what I’ve said.

I’m firmly with Trump on deterrence or ending it quickly. He kept Putin deterred by showing strength like no other US President has ever shown Russia. Reagan was the closest distant 2nd place, but Russia was falling apart internally way before Reagan even ran in ’76.

Tucker has openly stated his ignorance very recently, where he genuinely thought the people surrounding him were basically good, decent people that might have different views. He has been, or at least claims to have been way behind the power curve on understanding the workings of American govt. He still does not have a good grasp on that, but has made a lot of progress.

If you are still in the place of thinking I’m in the same camp with Lindsay Graham, you really don’t understand me well at all and are reverting back to that either/or mentality. I’m not sure you’ve ever seen as big of a critic of RINOs as me. It’s one of the reasons I’ve been a State and County delegate actually trying to get rid of as many of them as possible over the last 15 years in my State.

Once again, the US MIC does not need the small-time weapons sent to Ukraine to profit. The existing backlog of FMS to other countries already has manufacturing capacity strained, because Europe has dropped the ball for the past 30-40 years + in that sector. We’ve been sending munitions that were scheduled for destruction/de-miling, that were obsolete by US military standards.

Exceptions to that are the Javelins Trump sent, and some other missiles, but most of the post-2022 missiles were old FMS to NATO countries in Europe who sent their old stock, with new stock already negotiated via FMS to fill their place for the NATO customers.

Most of what we have sent was already paid for 20-30 years ago, so we have only assigned value to those materials. I thought we covered this already?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 232593
Well, seemingly he is in the same "no clue" category in spite of his post.
I will not spoon-feed in that place, but instead will ask:

What methods would you use to determine the other nations who have the combat power to skull-drag Russia?

Instead of assuming Russia is unbeatable by anyone but the US, look at the details of their main combat power, and how that combat power would be overmatched.

Then look at who has those systems in sufficient quantities to destroy Russian combat power qualitatively.

None of those systems have been used in this war, other than in limited ISR roles by non-belligerents.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: ken226
A lot of you guys need to get educated on the basic fundamentals of all of this, otherwise your opinions aren’t valid.

If it’s something as simple as placing America first, I’m with you, and leave it at that.

But understanding the geopolitics side requires work and a lot of experience.

The problem for the younger guys is they want to be spoon-fed on social media, and Russia does a great job of catering to the childish mentality of easy button explanations. A lot of you have fallen for that and refuse to see it.

Same with Marxism: "Capitalists bad, workers good." Class division is the result so a dictator can take over.

If you don’t even know the basic geography of the world or this region, then your political theory ideas have no almost no merit.

It’s like trying to jump into advanced ballistics with trajectory, BCs, wind compensation, LRFs, without even knowing how to set up a rifle or apply the fundamentals. Young guys want to run when they still are in diapers.

Social media offers you what looks like a cheat code, but you’re only cheating yourselves.
 
A lot of you guys need to get educated on the basic fundamentals of all of this, otherwise your opinions aren’t valid.

If it’s something as simple as placing America first, I’m with you, and leave it at that.

But understanding the geopolitics side requires work and a lot of experience.

The problem for the younger guys is they want to be spoon-fed on social media, and Russia does a great job of catering to the childish mentality of easy button explanations. A lot of you have fallen for that and refuse to see it.

Same with Marxism: "Capitalists bad, workers good." Class division is the result so a dictator can take over.

If you don’t even know the basic geography of the world or this region, then your political theory ideas have no almost no merit.

It’s like trying to jump into advanced ballistics with trajectory, BCs, wind compensation, LRFs, without even knowing how to set up a rifle or apply the fundamentals. Young guys want to run when they still are in diapers.

Social media offers you what looks like a cheat code, but you’re only cheating yourselves.
good point. i only needed one photo to choose a side. :p

05rHYnEle50P.jpeg
 
another point that seems important to me. IF you think that Macgregor's talk with Tucker contains the truth,IMHO this matters.
he claims that there are a large # of Muslim soviet citizens fighting with Russia,mostly Turk ethnicity and Chechnyian. he says about 20K KIA.
this is remarkable if true. nasty wars in 90s between Russia and Chechnya. Russia essentially won them but took some big hits. i sem to remember that that big terrot attack in Moscow was done by the Chechnyans i bet they incorporated many lessons into their doctrine. if Putin has repaired
relations with them,that gives the big lie to any talk of lack of popular support for Putin by the people. that they are willing to fight and die under Russian command as Russians,looks even worse for anyone trying to destabilize it. BTW those wars were by Yeltsin not Putin.
repeating stuff but i think restarting mil aid was areal bad idea. cut off all aid and it ends fast,which would meet the goal of saving Uke lives. obviously not my or anyone else's call.
I listened to that. 1.2 million Ukrainian casualties??? Come on. Where is he getting those numbers from??? And if you look at the normal casualty projection rates for offense vs defense that would put the Russian #s at a level that would have inflicted serious social unrest inside Russia.
 
A lot of you guys need to get educated on the basic fundamentals of all of this, otherwise your opinions aren’t valid.
. . . . but of course, yours are valid?

If it’s something as simple as placing America first, I’m with you, and leave it at that.
But understanding the geopolitics side requires work and a lot of experience.
. . . . . and you are blindly assuming quite a lot. For instance the background and experience of some in this audience.

The problem for the younger guys is they want to be spoon-fed on social media, and Russia does a great job of catering to the childish mentality of easy button explanations. A lot of you have fallen for that and refuse to see it.
again, you are assuming the age of others engaging you and you are wrongly assuming that the opinions of those debating you are formed from the fountain of social media.

If someone differs in opinion with you, by default they have obviously fallen for manipulated propaganda and refuse to see it?

Same with Marxism: "Capitalists bad, workers good." Class division is the result so a dictator can take over.

If you don’t even know the basic geography of the world or this region, then your political theory ideas have no almost no merit.

It’s like trying to jump into advanced ballistics with trajectory, BCs, wind compensation, LRFs, without even knowing how to set up a rifle or apply the fundamentals. Young guys want to run when they still are in diapers.

Social media offers you what looks like a cheat code, but you’re only cheating yourselves.
Your mental masturbation is getting the forum a bit sticky.
 
I listened to that. 1.2 million Ukrainian casualties??? Come on. Where is he getting those numbers from??? And if you look at the normal casualty projection rates for offense vs defense that would put the Russian #s at a level that would have inflicted serious social unrest inside Russia.
Not trying to jump in front of Mosin or answer for him but a good bit if the numbers were being driven by several indirect metrics. Even a year ago, there were taking satellite imagery of large cemeteries in country that were expanding at a crazy rate. The same way analysts would view two photos of the same area but imaged at different times to document troop movements, logistics build ups and shipyard cycles, they were looking at the expansion of new graves.

They were pointing out such disparities in what was being reported versus the "evidence" over a year ago. The numbers they listed then can now be seen to fit the trajectory leading to those 1.2 million numbers. Normally, I would just throw the bullshit flag but there are so many other obvious differences between what was reported there and reality, I believe that the Russian casualties were vastly over reported while the UKR casualties were vastly altered lower for public consumption.

Even though the Russian ground forces have no doubt suffered a lot of losses, their public support and backing is reported to be quite high. Putin and the governing body there have done a great job of marketing their military to its own people.
 
The mistake many people make is seeing this an “either, or” choice. It isn’t.

The second mistake a lot of people make is underestimating Russia as our foe. If you know even the slightest bit about what is happening on the intelligence front you would reject that as demonstrably false.

Russia has an economy slightly larger than Florida and is heavily dependent on two industries. If you really wanted to squeeze some juice there are better ways to do that, as the current CiNC is showing.

Forget about any pretext or sequence of provocative events. Ask yourself why would Russia’s posture be (in Ukraine and other places) reverting to invasions and mass migrating their citizens into certain geographical regions. It’s a question that largely answer itself IMVHO.
 
You have gone the binary route, once again. You assume I’m in-favor of how things have been done. This is a continual gross error, so maybe I’m not being clear enough or you’re overlooking/not reading exactly what I’ve said.

I’m firmly with Trump on deterrence or ending it quickly. He kept Putin deterred by showing strength like no other US President has ever shown Russia. Reagan was the closest distant 2nd place, but Russia was falling apart internally way before Reagan even ran in ’76.

Tucker has openly stated his ignorance very recently, where he genuinely thought the people surrounding him were basically good, decent people that might have different views. He has been, or at least claims to have been way behind the power curve on understanding the workings of American govt. He still does not have a good grasp on that, but has made a lot of progress.

If you are still in the place of thinking I’m in the same camp with Lindsay Graham, you really don’t understand me well at all and are reverting back to that either/or mentality. I’m not sure you’ve ever seen as big of a critic of RINOs as me. It’s one of the reasons I’ve been a State and County delegate actually trying to get rid of as many of them as possible over the last 15 years in my State.

Once again, the US MIC does not need the small-time weapons sent to Ukraine to profit. The existing backlog of FMS to other countries already has manufacturing capacity strained, because Europe has dropped the ball for the past 30-40 years + in that sector. We’ve been sending munitions that were scheduled for destruction/de-miling, that were obsolete by US military standards.

Exceptions to that are the Javelins Trump sent, and some other missiles, but most of the post-2022 missiles were old FMS to NATO countries in Europe who sent their old stock, with new stock already negotiated via FMS to fill their place for the NATO customers.

Most of what we have sent was already paid for 20-30 years ago, so we have only assigned value to those materials. I thought we covered this already?
your claim to omniscience is annoying. read the my 1st sentence. i said IF you believe Macgregor's take and his #s then a lot of what he says follows. if you doubt them,then put yours out there. you still won't commit to an opinion on why we are doing what we are. if you think the reasons are in error,OK. what do you believe the real reasons for our deep state's motivations are? it sounds like you believe that what we have sent re mil gear and ammo were outdated. OK,sounds likely. sending it was not a small $ amount. the intel support,space based targeting are freebies? the cash? the mansions and Bugattis? so,you say that the 60 bil guess is wrong by how much? $1 is too much.
the assertion that Putin didn't go during Trump #1 and waited for Biden to get in is pure conjecture. proof or some evidence for that? if so,then he really blew it starting something when the MIC was in full control of the admin. fact is,what could Trump have done? send bullets? sanctions? a nuc strike? my point is we have no biz sending anything to anywhere in Europe,never have.
agree Uke 1.2 mil KIA seems a stretch. think i saw on MSM somewhere that Rus KIA is 900K. that sounds a bit over blown too. we will never know with any certainty. for the US,it doesn't matter.
if Putin is empire building so what? Stalin did too. didn't last long and keeping it under harsh control didn't work long. take a look at the history of empires. many,esp multi culturals,don't have a great track record. i'll never see any risk to US if that stays out of west.hem. and if we have a strong milit defense in place. as fast as today's world is,i don't see an empire being a good idea or a success. our try for 1 has been a real rat fuck.
 
I listened to that. 1.2 million Ukrainian casualties??? Come on. Where is he getting those numbers from??? And if you look at the normal casualty projection rates for offense vs defense that would put the Russian #s at a level that would have inflicted serious social unrest inside Russia.
No idea on numbers but offensive vs defensive casualty rates will always be skewed by asymmetry in firepower.

Look at the entire later half of the US efforts in the pacific during WW2, despite mounting continuous attacks on very well fortified positions held by fanatical troops, they never equal let alone exceeded Japanese casualties.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 232593 and ken226
No idea on numbers but offensive vs defensive casualty rates will always be skewed by asymmetry in firepower.

Look at the entire later half of the US efforts in the pacific during WW2, despite mounting continuous attacks on very well fortified positions held by fanatical troops, they never equal let alone exceeded Japanese casualties.
good point. actually reflected in some of Mongol battles,some of Alexanders. but those were often open field fights. seems to apply to German early blitz victories. that could be about maneuver superiority but the Pacific example is right. sieges have a dif setup but often the attacker has had < people.
 
Russia is also throwing bombs at a 20-1 ratio or something crazy. Didn't some numbers get accidently released early last year and they were at 800K+? Also, Ukraine is going crazy kidnapping off the streets and feeding them directly to the front lines with minimal training. That's not low causality actions.

Maybe this is all just fake Russia propaganda and Ukraine is actually winning.
 
since ukrainian tour length is open-ended or indefinite now until the war ends, the videos of men being snatched up on the streets and thrown into vans by military "recruiters" (if true) doesn't look good for the losses on that side either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Yasherka
Lots of low level individuals/servicemen being sacrificed for the MIC and a couple of elites on both side to make a lot of money. The EU and American government are all complicit in this ridiculous war.
IMO the only true war/military intervention that was justifiable by the US since WW2 was Iraq/Kuwait. A coalition was formed, objective was clear and an end result/exit was planned and executed.
I do hope DJT can help end this ridiculous mess, too many lives lost for what? Amazing what age, time and observations does to ones (my) thinking.
Uke can't win this war and the EU and US money/ weapons being sent there is just resulting in unnecessary deaths and a prolonged war.
 
Not trying to jump in front of Mosin or answer for him but a good bit if the numbers were being driven by several indirect metrics. Even a year ago, there were taking satellite imagery of large cemeteries in country that were expanding at a crazy rate. The same way analysts would view two photos of the same area but imaged at different times to document troop movements, logistics build ups and shipyard cycles, they were looking at the expansion of new graves.

They were pointing out such disparities in what was being reported versus the "evidence" over a year ago. The numbers they listed then can now be seen to fit the trajectory leading to those 1.2 million numbers. Normally, I would just throw the bullshit flag but there are so many other obvious differences between what was reported there and reality, I believe that the Russian casualties were vastly over reported while the UKR casualties were vastly altered lower for public consumption.

Even though the Russian ground forces have no doubt suffered a lot of losses, their public support and backing is reported to be quite high. Putin and the governing body there have done a great job of marketing their military to its own people.


I know several things for a fact:

The casualty numbers on both sides are approaching or have passed 1 million. It is hard to track exactly, but on a macro scale it can be determined. The casualty breakdown in this war is 50/50 killed/wounded, as opposed to the historical modern warfare norm of 2/3 wounded, 1/3 killed. This is attributable to the widespread use of drones which enable the more effective implementation of ordnance. Additionally, there is no way to capture wounded troops so they are just killed in situ by more drones to prevent them from getting taken back to care and recovering.

The Ukies are absolutely press ganging people, to include foreigners who are in the country on foreign passports and who should not be subject to conscription. They don't care because if the press gang officers don't meet their quotas then they get sent to the front to die instead.

The munitions expenditure has been absolutely astronomical on both sides and Russia is out expending and out producing the West by a factor of 300 %.
 
I know several things for a fact:

The casualty numbers on both sides are approaching or have passed 1 million. It is hard to track exactly, but on a macro scale it can be determined. The casualty breakdown in this war is 50/50 killed/wounded, as opposed to the historical modern warfare norm of 2/3 wounded, 1/3 killed. This is attributable to the widespread use of drones which enable the more effective implementation of ordnance. Additionally, there is no way to capture wounded troops so they are just killed in situ by more drones to prevent them from getting taken back to care and recovering.

The Ukies are absolutely press ganging people, to include foreigners who are in the country on foreign passports and who should not be subject to conscription. They don't care because if the press gang officers don't meet their quotas then they get sent to the front to die instead.

The munitions expenditure has been absolutely astronomical on both sides and Russia is out expending and out producing the West by a factor of 300 %.

Fact: There's nothing, absolutely nothing, statistically informational coming from that area that are facts. Anyone claiming to know any facts is full of it. Even the people that know what the facts are will never tell the truth. They will spew the propaganda.
 
Fact: There's nothing, absolutely nothing, statistically informational coming from that area that are facts. Anyone claiming to know any facts is full of it. Even the people that know what the facts are will never tell the truth. They will spew the propaganda.

Well, fuck you too you arrogant prick.

Don't call me a liar next time.
 
No idea on numbers but offensive vs defensive casualty rates will always be skewed by asymmetry in firepower.

Look at the entire later half of the US efforts in the pacific during WW2, despite mounting continuous attacks on very well fortified positions held by fanatical troops, they never equal let alone exceeded Japanese casualties.
Fair point. But there is a targeting component in that asymmetry in firepower. And I am beginning to suspect that when it comes to deep targeting in the JSA, the Russians are kind of lacking. Very much the same as NATO during Noble Anvil’s air campaign against the VJ back in 99.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eostech
Lots of low level individuals/servicemen being sacrificed for the MIC and a couple of elites on both side to make a lot of money. The EU and American government are all complicit in this ridiculous war.
IMO the only true war/military intervention that was justifiable by the US since WW2 was Iraq/Kuwait. A coalition was formed, objective was clear and an end result/exit was planned and executed.
I do hope DJT can help end this ridiculous mess, too many lives lost for what? Amazing what age, time and observations does to ones (my) thinking.
Uke can't win this war and the EU and US money/ weapons being sent there is just resulting in unnecessary deaths and a prolonged war.
agree,a point of discussion. gulf 1 was easily justified as you said. should Bush 1 have gone for regime change then? debatable yes/no. Korea? i think Truman had no choice but to intervene. how far north to go after Inchon? debatable again but not that close to china. china did have troops heading south prior to our getting close to the Yalu. Grenada? have no opinion because of lack of real knowledge.
seems to me that Somali piracy and Houthi's attacks on commercial shipping should stomped on hard,not the 1/2 measures used til now. it seems to me that both those jobs are clearly ones that an alliance should be worked up for. don't mean invading Yemen or Somalia. this in my silly ideas could bring in India,Russia and maybe China. a pipe dream for sure.
the rest of our wars and interventions of choice are abominable starting with VN. the southern border is THE biggest threat now IMHO.
 
your claim to omniscience is annoying. read the my 1st sentence. i said IF you believe Macgregor's take and his #s then a lot of what he says follows. if you doubt them,then put yours out there. you still won't commit to an opinion on why we are doing what we are. if you think the reasons are in error,OK. what do you believe the real reasons for our deep state's motivations are? it sounds like you believe that what we have sent re mil gear and ammo were outdated. OK,sounds likely. sending it was not a small $ amount. the intel support,space based targeting are freebies? the cash? the mansions and Bugattis? so,you say that the 60 bil guess is wrong by how much? $1 is too much.
the assertion that Putin didn't go during Trump #1 and waited for Biden to get in is pure conjecture. proof or some evidence for that? if so,then he really blew it starting something when the MIC was in full control of the admin. fact is,what could Trump have done? send bullets? sanctions? a nuc strike? my point is we have no biz sending anything to anywhere in Europe,never have.
agree Uke 1.2 mil KIA seems a stretch. think i saw on MSM somewhere that Rus KIA is 900K. that sounds a bit over blown too. we will never know with any certainty. for the US,it doesn't matter.
if Putin is empire building so what? Stalin did too. didn't last long and keeping it under harsh control didn't work long. take a look at the history of empires. many,esp multi culturals,don't have a great track record. i'll never see any risk to US if that stays out of west.hem. and if we have a strong milit defense in place. as fast as today's world is,i don't see an empire being a good idea or a success. our try for 1 has been a real rat fuck.
I’ve stated my perspective many time here as to why the US policy on Ukraine is what it is and has changed depending on WH. I have never claimed omniscience, just that I’ve been paying very close attention to Ukraine for 3 decades now, on top of the prior 2 decades when they were part of the USSR.

There are more actors than “the deep state”, and multiple deep states. Russia has its interests, Ukraine and Eastern Europeans have theirs, and Western Europe has something different. All are separately-focused. Then there’s the US.

US
Since 1992, the US has been in a constant state of withdrawal from Europe. My family lived there during the Cold War in the early 1980s where you couldn’t trip without running into a USAF base like Spangdahlem, Ramstein, Bitburg, Hahn, Frankfurt Rhein-Main, Sembach, Wiesbaden, and Zweibrücken.

In 1992, the US said, “It’s the peace dividend! We don’t need to spend on European defense anymore like we’ve done, because the Soviet threat is gone.” I and the circles I was in did not agree with this assessment, because we actually knew the history of Russia and how it treated all of its neighbors. To us, it was only a matter of time, even though we hoped it wouldn’t come to that. Sadly, we were right, and the weak-minded peaceniks made the world more dangerous by cutting defense.

If you noticed, no US President has made foreign policy a major campaign platform since 1992. It has always been about the economy, jobs, and domestic issues since that time.

The US also has had Russian moles and double agents woven into its young Intelligence and political sectors at least since the 1930s, with tons of compromising levers used against politicians and bureaucrats as a way for Russia to balance out the lack of engagement between the US and Russia in trade, as well as mitigate the US’s unmatched military and political might.

EU
The EU is a gaggle of weak politicians from socialist parties who have been working to remove the sovereignty of the member states, and surrender them to the central EU parliament, which gets its marching orders from globalist actors who are clearly not humanitarian, but devilish in nature. Legacy EU proponents were focused on the trade union and economic motives. Notice how the shift to climate change, mass immigration of savages, and energy policies has made the EU more reliant on Russian Oil and NG though, while degrading European defenses?

Most of the political parties in Europe were seeded with Soviet assets generations ago. Even NATO HQ was seeded with Soviet assets, and the German BND was headed by one of the biggest double agents of all, Reinhardt Gehlen.

The Europeans, except for Finland and Poland, followed suit by cutting defense spending as well, fundamentally undermining their industrial capacity to make modern, relevant combat systems, especially in the aerospace sector.

NATO
NATO is broken down into 4 main camps now:

1. US/Canada/UK/Norwegian/Danish alliance
2. German, French, Belgian, Dutch, Italian Alliance
3. Eastern European post-Soviet collapse alliance, with Poland as the largest member of that group
4. Post-2022 members Finland and Sweden

Group 3 came begging and screaming willing to do whatever it took to join NATO, because they knew Russia resurges and they catch the brunt of Russian aggression historically. Eastern Europeans can’t afford to forget history, and all the families have directly-connected losses of family members to Russian aggression, many of whom are still missing to this day (mine included).

Putin planned to re-take any former Russian-occupied nations as part of his internal strategic vision for Russia, to re-assert Russian strength and its “rightful place in the world”. This was internal to the Russian foreign ministry, while talking about peace and non-aggression openly as Putin needed to re-build Russian military capacity using energy revenue from inflated oil/NG prices, after decades of managing the warped energy policies within Europe to cut off their own sources under the guise of the fake climate change crisis.

Every US President worked with or stayed out of Putin’s way in those efforts, except Trump. Every US President refused to send weapons to Ukraine, except Trump. Some US Presidents worked with Putin secretly to disarm Ukraine, in preparation for Putin’s long-term vision of occupying and controlling Ukraine.

The Clintons were on Russian payroll, Obama was on payroll, and Biden was on payroll dating back to 1972. Bushes were more influenced by China, but none of them would help Ukraine with modern weapons sales until Trump in March of 2018.

This conflicts diametrically with what has been reported about the US meddling in Ukrainian elections. The US and EU openly supported fair and free elections in Ukraine, while Putin subverted the elections with puppets. Remember that Yanukovych’s first election in 2004 was found to have been rigged with ballot-stuffing, electioneering, and other typical Democrat/Communist tactics. It wasn’t until 2010 when Putin finally got him into the Presidency.

By 2014, as Putin realized he was losing Ukraine with his puppet Yanukovych being protested for 4 months with Euromaiden after he signed Putin’s Russia-Eurasia Economic Pact in Dec 2013, he started to build the insurance policy through the Obama WH, using VP Biden’s son, Hunter as a board member of Russian-owned Burisma. Putin could not afford for Burisma’s money-laundering schemes to be exposed by a genuine Ukrainian President. He also annexed Crimea once Yanukovych fled and invaded the Donbas with Russian Army forces, as documented by their own soldiers who didn’t turn off location services on their phones. He lied about this repeatedly, that there were no Russian Army in Donbas

US policy under Obama was to let this happen, and still coerce NATO partners to deny the transfer of weapons to Ukraine. The US WH was working along with Putin until something unexpected happened in US politics. A person who wasn’t blessed-off by both political parties made it into the WH, Donald Trump.

Trump’s policy on Ukraine was a 180˚ reversal from Obama, Bush, and Clinton-where the focus was on disarming or ignoring Ukraine. Especially after Putin tested Trump’s resolve at Khasham in Syria in Feb 2018, Trump sent huge shipments of modern advanced missiles and weapons to Ukraine, breaking US policy trends since the 1990s. Trump also threatened Putin with something still unmentionable, that Putin better not FO in Ukraine. Trump also collapsed Russia’s GDP growth with US unleashed energy policy.

With the election steal of 2020, with massive Democrat/CPUSA/DSA interference and election-rigging to get Putin’s compromised Biden into the WH, Putin once again enjoyed massive energy net revenues when the WTI and Brent crude prices went back up to levels that supported Russian GDP growth, and a year of Putin’s military build-up. During Biden’s handlers’ first year in the WH, they also denied sale of weapons to Ukraine, reversing the Trump policy.

I just double-checked the US DSCA website, where all Foreign Military Sales orders are published. Nothing for Ukraine in 2021 under Biden, and nothing but non-standard ammunition to Ukraine until April 2022. Nothing in May, June, July, August, Sep, Oct, Nov, Dec 2022. You see a major increase in FMS to existing customers around the world, especially in Eastern Europe, UK, Germany, Taiwan, Finland, etc.

So US foreign policy towards Ukraine under most White Houses has been secretly pro-Russian, help Putin screw over Ukraine. The only major departure from that trend has been under Trump.
 
On the Desert Storm discussion. I have a questions.

1.Had we not interviened and let the chips fall as they may. Would 9/11 happened and the resulting wars been necessary as the motivation that led to the 1990-2001 "terrorist" attacks would not have been there.

2.While I understand Saddam's grievances against Kuwait were not the strongest, especially after Kuwait loaned them Billions to fight Iran. Was the UN stepping in really necessary?

3.Was the fall out, and repercussions worth saving Kuwait from Saddam?

I ask these questions, looking at the current situation in eastern Europe. What will the long term repercussions be?
 
  • Like
Reactions: mosin46
Must be USAID budget cuts

Used to fire prosecutors investigating Burisma for billion in USAID bucks now its down to making propaganda cartoons for children


One of the biggest omissions from all media is the fact that Burisma was Russian-owned and run by Putin’s/Yanukovych's placement of Mykola Zlochevsky as the CEO. He used to be the ecology minister, and is ethnic Russian from Donbas.

So now you have to ask why it was so important for the US Vice President’s son to sit on the board of Burisma, after Putin lost his puppet President, Yanukovych.

iu


And who benefitted by having the investigation shut down? What was there to hide?

Also notice that all of the corporate democrat media in the US and socialists in Europe claimed the new Ukrainian President, Poroshenko, appointed a corrupt prosecutor. Why would they make that claim, and all clamor in union for his removal?

Why would they hide the fact that there were 2 assassination attempts against him (Viktor Shokin), even as/after Biden demanded he be fired? Shokin was in position to expose the Putin-Yanukovych-Zlochevsky-Biden bribery scheme.

Short story: Biden had been on Putin’s payroll all along. Hunter literally exposed the open bribery scheme with his fingerprints all over it for the world to see when he dropped that laptop off and never picked it up.

This is why Putin had Elena Baturian (Russian billionaire oligarch sex-trafficker) wired $3.5 million to Hunter’s Rosemont Seneca shell corp in Feb 2014, as Euromaiden protests were at a peak. US SECSTATE John Kerry’s stepson was also co-owner of Rosemont Seneca with Hunter. Chris Heinz. Once he saw what was going on, he punched out quickly.

It gets even worse though. Zlochevsky fled to go live like a billionaire in Monaco, as the UK/London investigators seized millions of his dollars held in accounts outside of Ukraine. In Sept 2014 during the NATO summit, Obama coerced UK PM David Cameron to release Zlochevsky’s money.

Now why would Obama go and do something like that? Who benefitted?
 
  • Like
Reactions: kthomas
Well it says Ukrainian in any case whichever way you spin it Bidens pilaged Ukraine while USAID paid so that pilaging can continue.

Following the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine Zlochevsky donated hundreds of millions Ukrainian Hryvnia's (UAH) to the Armed Forces of Ukraine, the Ukrainian Special Operations Forces and the "Army of Drones" project of the Ukrainian government.[14]



Meanwhile, one has to ask why Hunter Biden is entitled to Secret Service protection. Imagine being a SS agent working security for Hunter

USAID and Ukraine money grift gone , pay for play puff up in smoke , but tax payer still on the hook

GmBTedpbcAIG9rb
 
If you read the details, Zlochevsky was fined during trial and part of his plea agreement. That’s when they got money from him and “donated” it to the Ukrainian Army, even though he had been a Putin puppet for years. He’s been laundering millions in USD for many years, and avoided other penalties by transferring his assets into his daughters’ names, especially the apartments in Dubai.

It all reads like a Bond villain movie. You don’t need a script, as it’s already written in great detail, far more outrageous than Ian Flemming’s imagination could bear to put to pen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kthomas
. . . . but of course, yours are valid?


. . . . . and you are blindly assuming quite a lot. For instance the background and experience of some in this audience.


again, you are assuming the age of others engaging you and you are wrongly assuming that the opinions of those debating you are formed from the fountain of social media.

If someone differs in opinion with you, by default they have obviously fallen for manipulated propaganda and refuse to see it?


Your mental masturbation is getting the forum a bit sticky.
If the shoe doesn’t fit, don’t wear it.

Yes, my perspective on this is valid, having studied it in great detail over the past several decades, to include travel to the region and private contacts within the Russian Foreign Ministry, Russian intelligentsia, and Russian Cossacks.

There are a lot of guys on here who are pro-Russian that have no regional orientation, no basic geographic literacy, no US history literacy, but get spoon-fed on TikTok and X, thinking they have a clue what’s going on.

For those types, it’s really best not to post. You have to learn how to pound nails before you can built a house. Some of these guys don’t even know which end of the hammer is the claw or the face.
 
Meanwhile, one has to ask why Hunter Biden is entitled to Secret Service protection. Imagine being a SS agent working security for Hunter

USAID and Ukraine money grift gone , pay for play puff up in smoke , but tax payer still on the hook

GmBTedpbcAIG9rb
probably one of the safer details with almost zero chance you'd have to take a bullet to save him.
unless he has dirt on hillary.
 
I’ve stated my perspective many time here as to why the US policy on Ukraine is what it is and has changed depending on WH. I have never claimed omniscience, just that I’ve been paying very close attention to Ukraine for 3 decades now, on top of the prior 2 decades when they were part of the USSR.

There are more actors than “the deep state”, and multiple deep states. Russia has its interests, Ukraine and Eastern Europeans have theirs, and Western Europe has something different. All are separately-focused. Then there’s the US.

US
Since 1992, the US has been in a constant state of withdrawal from Europe. My family lived there during the Cold War in the early 1980s where you couldn’t trip without running into a USAF base like Spangdahlem, Ramstein, Bitburg, Hahn, Frankfurt Rhein-Main, Sembach, Wiesbaden, and Zweibrücken.

In 1992, the US said, “It’s the peace dividend! We don’t need to spend on European defense anymore like we’ve done, because the Soviet threat is gone.” I and the circles I was in did not agree with this assessment, because we actually knew the history of Russia and how it treated all of its neighbors. To us, it was only a matter of time, even though we hoped it wouldn’t come to that. Sadly, we were right, and the weak-minded peaceniks made the world more dangerous by cutting defense.

If you noticed, no US President has made foreign policy a major campaign platform since 1992. It has always been about the economy, jobs, and domestic issues since that time.

The US also has had Russian moles and double agents woven into its young Intelligence and political sectors at least since the 1930s, with tons of compromising levers used against politicians and bureaucrats as a way for Russia to balance out the lack of engagement between the US and Russia in trade, as well as mitigate the US’s unmatched military and political might.

EU
The EU is a gaggle of weak politicians from socialist parties who have been working to remove the sovereignty of the member states, and surrender them to the central EU parliament, which gets its marching orders from globalist actors who are clearly not humanitarian, but devilish in nature. Legacy EU proponents were focused on the trade union and economic motives. Notice how the shift to climate change, mass immigration of savages, and energy policies has made the EU more reliant on Russian Oil and NG though, while degrading European defenses?

Most of the political parties in Europe were seeded with Soviet assets generations ago. Even NATO HQ was seeded with Soviet assets, and the German BND was headed by one of the biggest double agents of all, Reinhardt Gehlen.

The Europeans, except for Finland and Poland, followed suit by cutting defense spending as well, fundamentally undermining their industrial capacity to make modern, relevant combat systems, especially in the aerospace sector.

NATO
NATO is broken down into 4 main camps now:

1. US/Canada/UK/Norwegian/Danish alliance
2. German, French, Belgian, Dutch, Italian Alliance
3. Eastern European post-Soviet collapse alliance, with Poland as the largest member of that group
4. Post-2022 members Finland and Sweden

Group 3 came begging and screaming willing to do whatever it took to join NATO, because they knew Russia resurges and they catch the brunt of Russian aggression historically. Eastern Europeans can’t afford to forget history, and all the families have directly-connected losses of family members to Russian aggression, many of whom are still missing to this day (mine included).

Putin planned to re-take any former Russian-occupied nations as part of his internal strategic vision for Russia, to re-assert Russian strength and its “rightful place in the world”. This was internal to the Russian foreign ministry, while talking about peace and non-aggression openly as Putin needed to re-build Russian military capacity using energy revenue from inflated oil/NG prices, after decades of managing the warped energy policies within Europe to cut off their own sources under the guise of the fake climate change crisis.

Every US President worked with or stayed out of Putin’s way in those efforts, except Trump. Every US President refused to send weapons to Ukraine, except Trump. Some US Presidents worked with Putin secretly to disarm Ukraine, in preparation for Putin’s long-term vision of occupying and controlling Ukraine.

The Clintons were on Russian payroll, Obama was on payroll, and Biden was on payroll dating back to 1972. Bushes were more influenced by China, but none of them would help Ukraine with modern weapons sales until Trump in March of 2018.

This conflicts diametrically with what has been reported about the US meddling in Ukrainian elections. The US and EU openly supported fair and free elections in Ukraine, while Putin subverted the elections with puppets. Remember that Yanukovych’s first election in 2004 was found to have been rigged with ballot-stuffing, electioneering, and other typical Democrat/Communist tactics. It wasn’t until 2010 when Putin finally got him into the Presidency.

By 2014, as Putin realized he was losing Ukraine with his puppet Yanukovych being protested for 4 months with Euromaiden after he signed Putin’s Russia-Eurasia Economic Pact in Dec 2013, he started to build the insurance policy through the Obama WH, using VP Biden’s son, Hunter as a board member of Russian-owned Burisma. Putin could not afford for Burisma’s money-laundering schemes to be exposed by a genuine Ukrainian President. He also annexed Crimea once Yanukovych fled and invaded the Donbas with Russian Army forces, as documented by their own soldiers who didn’t turn off location services on their phones. He lied about this repeatedly, that there were no Russian Army in Donbas

US policy under Obama was to let this happen, and still coerce NATO partners to deny the transfer of weapons to Ukraine. The US WH was working along with Putin until something unexpected happened in US politics. A person who wasn’t blessed-off by both political parties made it into the WH, Donald Trump.

Trump’s policy on Ukraine was a 180˚ reversal from Obama, Bush, and Clinton-where the focus was on disarming or ignoring Ukraine. Especially after Putin tested Trump’s resolve at Khasham in Syria in Feb 2018, Trump sent huge shipments of modern advanced missiles and weapons to Ukraine, breaking US policy trends since the 1990s. Trump also threatened Putin with something still unmentionable, that Putin better not FO in Ukraine. Trump also collapsed Russia’s GDP growth with US unleashed energy policy.

With the election steal of 2020, with massive Democrat/CPUSA/DSA interference and election-rigging to get Putin’s compromised Biden into the WH, Putin once again enjoyed massive energy net revenues when the WTI and Brent crude prices went back up to levels that supported Russian GDP growth, and a year of Putin’s military build-up. During Biden’s handlers’ first year in the WH, they also denied sale of weapons to Ukraine, reversing the Trump policy.

I just double-checked the US DSCA website, where all Foreign Military Sales orders are published. Nothing for Ukraine in 2021 under Biden, and nothing but non-standard ammunition to Ukraine until April 2022. Nothing in May, June, July, August, Sep, Oct, Nov, Dec 2022. You see a major increase in FMS to existing customers around the world, especially in Eastern Europe, UK, Germany, Taiwan, Finland, etc.

So US foreign policy towards Ukraine under most White Houses has been secretly pro-Russian, help Putin screw over Ukraine. The only major departure from that trend has been under Trump.
for starters Russia penetrated our gov before ww2. that Clinton,Obama and Biden were bought and paid for is about right. actually they were on several non US payrolls. that is academic and is or should be well known. your Yanukovych take is about opposite of several other's take. that gets down to who one believes. that Putin is a corrupt,brutal dictator is also obvious. also,that he has strong domestic support. must be a Russian thing,so did Stalin and Lenin.
that Trump 1 had control of Putin may be true,but i don't think so. like i asked,what could he do beyond economic plays and bluffing? for that matter,what can he do now?
your claim that Russia is weak militarily is pretty lame. maybe you think Lithuania and Moldova can take it out? we may be overestimating them but that gets down to a casualty tolerance. could Putin go to the channel if he wanted to? prob but expensive. does he seek to regain loses that were in the USSR's control? maybe/maybe not and maybe you are a mind reader. there is good evidence that Russia's economy and industrial capacity is well advanced > '22. are they incompetent vis a vis US military? maybe. maybe we can turn them into ash. they only have to hit us with about 1% of their 1600 nucs to make that a bad trade. JFK figured that out and passed on the chance. our current war mongers don't seem concerned. maybe you aren't either.
this boils down to your being unwilling to lay out what you think we should have done since you say you disagree there. you also fail to commit to what should be done now. you also refuse to try and justify either of those. a lot of reasons stated elsewhere are: deflect Russia,save Europe,let Black Rock buy Ukraine,produce yet more corrupt billionaires,restock with new stuff,profit our MIC? the fact is the American people are not willing to go to war over any place in Europe. ie except the "i stand with Ukraine" crowd and our very own MIC. there wasn't anything in Europe in 1917 worth 1 American life or 1 American dollar and there hasn't been anything sense then. that we have places for our effort and $s here is obvious.
all bean breeze anyway as i don't think you are in charge and i know i'm not.
 
On the Desert Storm discussion. I have a questions.

1.Had we not interviened and let the chips fall as they may. Would 9/11 happened and the resulting wars been necessary as the motivation that led to the 1990-2001 "terrorist" attacks would not have been there.

2.While I understand Saddam's grievances against Kuwait were not the strongest, especially after Kuwait loaned them Billions to fight Iran. Was the UN stepping in really necessary?

3.Was the fall out, and repercussions worth saving Kuwait from Saddam?

I ask these questions, looking at the current situation in eastern Europe. What will the long term repercussions be?
i had a silly and prob sick idea at the time.
say to Saddam-"you are our main man in the ME" we will buy oil from you at 60% (of whatever the price was then) as much and as long as you can pump it. if you fuck with our stuff,our people or pricing we will take you out directly. and,BTW,lay off the WMDs and don't fuck with our inspectors. let the Jews,Persians and other Arabs deal with him if they could or would. we had heavily supported him in his war with Iran. wouldn't be the 1st murderous dictator we installed or supported. or the last. i can't help but think he went because he thought he was our man there.
 
i had a silly and prob sick idea at the time.
say to Saddam-"you are our main man in the ME" we will buy oil from you at 60% (of whatever the price was then) as much and as long as you can pump it. if you fuck with our stuff,our people or pricing we will take you out directly. and,BTW,lay off the WMDs and don't fuck with our inspectors. let the Jews,Persians and other Arabs deal with him if they could or would. we had heavily supported him in his war with Iran. wouldn't be the 1st murderous dictator we installed or supported. or the last. i can't help but think he went because he thought he was our man there.
well they kinda were, until he moved on Kuwait.
 
kinda my response to your ? re maybe we should not have done Gulf 1. fair question.
Kinda what I am getting at, the pandora's box it opened. Was it worth it?

If we had let him take it, what were the negative ramifications on the USA, global order, oil production?

I have never met anyone from Kuwait, yet have had multpile friends shed blood take life and loose life in Iraq and Afghan. Because of the these decisions.
 
A lot of letters and posts about weak and incompetent country let alone fear “Russkies are coming”. How if they are so <insert you favorite denigration here>?
There are ton of “heil hitlers” left especially in the Eastern Europe where there were plenty of nazi collaborators using Germany as an excuse to wipe out local opposition. Poles also had a lot of sins regarding helping Germans solving their “Jew problem”. Croats got rid of their inhibitions and went medieval in Jasenovac that would made even the most hardened Inquisition sickos blush, Banderas in Ukropland, balts hardly able to wait German boot etc. A lot of that scum survived as Soviets did not clean house enough and their children and grandchildren are reviving old ideas and are trying to better their grandparents. This time around i think end result just might be final for them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: khel and mosin46