Doc Holliday said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

It takes an insane amount of chutzpah for this degenerate, senile and corrupt oaf to slander his fellow countrymen as Nazis while he’s cheering and arming real-life Azov Nazis in Ukraine. Disgusting scumbag. pic.twitter.com/xn4mTICqlQ

— David Reaboi, Late Republic Nonsense (@davereaboi) March 24, 2022

---

Looks like ole David is off his rocker and loves him some Vladamir Putin.

---

Because he's critical of Biden?

Biden essentially called US libertarian and conservatives Nazis while he's sending billions of dollars to actual Ukraine Nazis.

Do you guys not understand that Ukraine has a lot of Nazi supporters? It's huge over there.

Literally everyone in US supports Ukrainians defending their homeland. Question is sending money and weapons to a corrupt regime. And whether they are truly blameless given their regular shelling of civilian areas in Donbas, and Azov torturing civilians with impunity.

---

He called them Nazi's because they were Nazis. You shouldn't link conservatism to that nonsense.

Azov probably have dirty hands. Doesn't makes Charlottesville or Putin right.

BearFan33 said:

---

I have read that our Green Berets have been training the Ukrainians since the fall of Crimea. Maybe this is paying dividends now.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/us-armys-green-berets-have-lasting-impact-on-fight-in-ukraine

---

There's little doubt our men and women have been prepping the Ukrainians.

Osodecentx said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Can this be correct?

NATO Estimates Steep Russian Losses in Ukraine as Biden Heads to Europe
Russia may have lost up to one-fifth of its combat force in Ukraine, alliance officials say
NATO estimates Russia may have lost as much as one-fifth of its combat forces in about a month of fighting in Ukraine as President Biden and alliance leaders gather in Brussels for a summit to discuss providing further support to Kyiv to repel the Russian invasion.
Up to 40,000 Russian troops have been killed, wounded, taken prisoner or are missing in Ukraine, said a senior military official from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Russia may also have lost 10% of its equipment, impairing Moscow's ability to maintain its pace of operations, said another NATO official.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/ukraine-humanitarian-crisis-worsens-as-biden-heads-to-europe-11648031069

---

This kinda reminds me of Desert Storm back in 1991. Iraq's vaunted Republican Guard was supposedly one of the largest and well trained fighting forces in the world. American Forces dimantled and destroyed them in a number of days. One thing we NEVER heard during this war were Iraqi casualty numbers. I have read since that the number of dead was around 110,000.

It appears the Russian Army was grossly overrated. I would bet their forces that were sent in the first wave were conscripts that had very little training. And their hearts were probably not in this fight. I feel for the parents!

Putin may be getting very desperate. He has embarrassed himself and his country on the world stage. I hope and pray that chemical and/ or nuclear weapons don't come into play.

---

NO this cannot be.

Canada on here said that the Russian army is sooooo good that our military fears them and would not be able to compete in a conventional war with them.

There is no way that they could have been a paper tiger that looked tough, had the numbers, plenty of tanks, and weapons but not the training, supplies, etc. to fight an effective war because he just KNEW that our military leaders did not know they were not well trained, not well supplied and not an effective army. He just knew that our top military was scared of them.

---

A lot of smart people overestimated the Russian military. I don't remember you posting anything on how inept the Russian military has been; maybe you can refresh my memory.

Expressing respect for an enemy is not an expression of fear

---

Exactly,

And the Russia army is actually much better than it was during the Chechen wars.

We have to remember in the 1st Chechen war the Russian army was soundly beaten.

That would be like the American army being beaten by West Virginia.

The Russian army has become a lot more efficient since then...but its obvious they have a long long long way to go before they are any real threat to the US or EU.

Some experts said the Russia army was as bad as it was during Chechen wars...and many experts said it was now a modern advanced formidable fighting force.

The truth has proven to be somewhere in the middle.

Booray said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Can this be correct?

NATO Estimates Steep Russian Losses in Ukraine as Biden Heads to Europe
Russia may have lost up to one-fifth of its combat force in Ukraine, alliance officials say
NATO estimates Russia may have lost as much as one-fifth of its combat forces in about a month of fighting in Ukraine as President Biden and alliance leaders gather in Brussels for a summit to discuss providing further support to Kyiv to repel the Russian invasion.
Up to 40,000 Russian troops have been killed, wounded, taken prisoner or are missing in Ukraine, said a senior military official from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Russia may also have lost 10% of its equipment, impairing Moscow's ability to maintain its pace of operations, said another NATO official.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/ukraine-humanitarian-crisis-worsens-as-biden-heads-to-europe-11648031069

---

This kinda reminds me of Desert Storm back in 1991. Iraq's vaunted Republican Guard was supposedly one of the largest and well trained fighting forces in the world. American Forces dimantled and destroyed them in a number of days. One thing we NEVER heard during this war were Iraqi casualty numbers. I have read since that the number of dead was around 110,000.

It appears the Russian Army was grossly overrated. I would bet their forces that were sent in the first wave were conscripts that had very little training. And their hearts were probably not in this fight. I feel for the parents!

Putin may be getting very desperate. He has embarrassed himself and his country on the world stage. I hope and pray that chemical and/ or nuclear weapons don't come into play.

---

NO this cannot be.

Canada on here said that the Russian army is sooooo good that our military fears them and would not be able to compete in a conventional war with them.

There is no way that they could have been a paper tiger that looked tough, had the numbers, plenty of tanks, and weapons but not the training, supplies, etc. to fight an effective war because he just KNEW that our military leaders did not know they were not well trained, not well supplied and not an effective army. He just knew that our top military was scared of them.

---

A lot of smart people overestimated the Russian military. I don't remember you posting anything on how inept the Russian military has been; maybe you can refresh my memory.

Expressing respect for an enemy is not an expression of fear

---

I am not going to go looking for it, but he and I exchanged several posts in which he claimed that NATO could not compete with Russia in a conventional land war. His default position is that America is done. I think he enjoys the doom and gloom.

---

Exactly. He said the US could not compete and the US with NATO could not compete. He also doesn't take that back or admit he was wrong even after seeing how Ukraine has done against Russia.

He claimed no one in our military thought we could win, with no proof, facts or anything to back it up other than his claim.

looks like vlad has finally seen the writing on the wall..... gradually walking and talking back.

very gradually - but -

could see the beginning of the end of this huge mistake.

- KKM

william said:

---

looks like vlad has finally seen the writing on the wall..... gradually walking and talking back.

very gradually - but -

could see the beginning of the end of this huge mistake.

- KKM

---

Cheap Russian oil to flood the market in 10, 9, 8, 7....

Amal Shuq-Up said:

---

william said:

---

looks like vlad has finally seen the writing on the wall..... gradually walking and talking back.

very gradually - but -

could see the beginning of the end of this huge mistake.

- KKM

---

Cheap Russian oil to flood the market in 10, 9, 8, 7....

---

let's hope all trade returns to semi-normalcy here pretty soon.

william said:

---

Amal Shuq-Up said:

---

william said:

---

looks like vlad has finally seen the writing on the wall..... gradually walking and talking back.

very gradually - but -

could see the beginning of the end of this huge mistake.

- KKM

---

Cheap Russian oil to flood the market in 10, 9, 8, 7....

---

let's hope all trade returns to semi-normalcy here pretty soon.

---

As long as Biden, Harris and the dems are in power... you can expect trade to be a hot mess.

hopefully more progress over the weekend and risk premia will start to fall off.....

whack the speculators financial pee-pees a bit.

- KKM

{ digesting Italian sausage }

More like 'the truth has shown up in a distant rural town, drunk and stinky',

The US was ill-equipped to win the Vietnam War for a number of reasons, but was still the world's strongest military power at the time.

Wars do not define the power of the military, but only a fool would enter a war on assumptions and bravado.

Putin correctly understood his opportunity was now, but failed to understand that he would lose unless he learned the attendant lessons:

* Putin knew the Russian people considered the Soviet Union the glory days of Russian international influence, but failed to remember that the imposition of military rule in Poland in many ways started the downfall of the USSR;

* Putin knew that Russia depended on its oil and gas industry, and that the US decision to attack O&G under Biden gave him an opportunity to exploit Europe as a market, but failed to consider that invading Ukraine would shut down the European market to Russia and force him to sell at a much lower price to China;

* Putin knew that Biden was much weaker in opposing him than Trump, but failed to consider that the US was not the only possible leader to oppose him. Zelensky showed much more in courage than Putin ever expected, in part because Zelensky knew the Americans would not take the front of the resistance;

* Putin knew that Ukraine had a lot of corruption in its government, and assumed the people of Ukraine would not care about the fall of such corrupt politicians. He failed to consider the impact of Russia invading their homeland, and the history of Ukraine in defending its culture and identity.

The Russian military in large part did as Putin wanted, because Putin had hand-picked the generals in charge. Any officer who would have warned Putin of the risks and danger of his plan was kept from the planning table.

Doc Holliday said:

---

Canon said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Let's talk about what's really going on here.

US official was caught admitting that their goal is to engineer “the end of Putin regime,” thus explaining the “lack of any diplomatic effort by the US to secure a ceasefire.” Also showing that the claimed humanitarian concern for Ukrainians is a total lie https://t.co/xzDiFPdNXP

— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) March 23, 2022

---

The end of the Putin regime IS a humanitarian effort. Russia doesn't need your help. Sit this one out.

---

The end of the Putin regime is the declaration of WW3, a very long war…I don't want that.

You want to push Russia into an alliance with China and parts of the Middle East in a very long and expensive prolonged proxy war?

Thousands will die in the process including children. I can't support that. The planet will be brought to its knees and the solutions will destroy our freedoms.

---

Well, there is a sound argument that WW3 has already started in "cold" mode, in that we have great power alliances in serious contention against one another which includes armed conflict by proxy, which is the time-tested way to wage such a war. That said, here's no indication that Putin being deposed by palace coup would somehow accelerate events into a more intense regional or world conflagration. The Russian Army is essentially "all in" on Ukraine, and not very ably, either. They couldn't expand conventional military actions if they wanted to. At this moment, it's an open question whether or not they could not stop the Finnish Army from advancing on Moscow. (which is why the forward deployment of 50k (or so) NATO troops is such a big deal. Ukraine has the bear by the nose; the bear is quite vulnerable everywhere else.)

Russia is already in an alliance with China, North Korea, and Iran. So our actions here should be predicated on how to incentivize them to withdraw from it, Russia being by far the easiest of the four to persuade to change course. Reasonable people can disagree on whether inflicting a defeat on Russia in UKR will serve that purpose or not.

We did not start the war.
We do have a stake in its outcome.
Innocents are going to die no matter what.
Make sure the carnage delivers a worthwhile result.

whiterock said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Canon said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Let's talk about what's really going on here.

US official was caught admitting that their goal is to engineer “the end of Putin regime,” thus explaining the “lack of any diplomatic effort by the US to secure a ceasefire.” Also showing that the claimed humanitarian concern for Ukrainians is a total lie https://t.co/xzDiFPdNXP

— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) March 23, 2022

---

The end of the Putin regime IS a humanitarian effort. Russia doesn't need your help. Sit this one out.

---

The end of the Putin regime is the declaration of WW3, a very long war…I don't want that.

You want to push Russia into an alliance with China and parts of the Middle East in a very long and expensive prolonged proxy war?

Thousands will die in the process including children. I can't support that. The planet will be brought to its knees and the solutions will destroy our freedoms.

---

Well, there is a sound argument that WW3 has already started in "cold" mode, in that we have great power alliances in serious contention against one another which includes armed conflict by proxy, which is the time-tested way to wage such a war. That said, here's no indication that Putin being deposed by palace coup would somehow accelerate events into a more intense regional or world conflagration. The Russian Army is essentially "all in" on Ukraine, and not very ably, either. They couldn't expand conventional military actions if they wanted to. At this moment, it's an open question whether or not they could not stop the Finnish Army from advancing on Moscow. (which is why the forward deployment of 50k (or so) NATO troops is such a big deal. Ukraine has the bear by the nose; the bear is quite vulnerable everywhere else.)

Russia is already in an alliance with China, North Korea, and Iran. So our actions here should be predicated on how to incentivize them to withdraw from it, Russia being by far the easiest of the four to persuade to change course. Reasonable people can disagree on whether inflicting a defeat on Russia in UKR will serve that purpose or not.

We did not start the war.
We do have a stake in its outcome.
Innocents are going to die no matter what.
Make sure the carnage delivers a worthwhile result.

---

not an apologist for VP - but we over threw their govt in 2013/14 - and were basically getting jobs for every son of for pelosi romney biden kerry et al over there. a slush fund country - and yes there are bio labs over there. run - at least in part - by us.

and again we stated we wouldnt expand NATO past the original borders - 12 countries. NATO is now at 27/30 - not much for growth - gotta rope Ukraine into the fold. Then we can get the 'Stans on board.

so - again - would you want Russia China NK operating a rogue govt state in Mexico???

- KKM

and the wehrmacht wouldnt mind another year of budget increases - or three. the afghanistan acct has run dry. need a new 'crisis'. stock options and such.

william said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Canon said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Let's talk about what's really going on here.

US official was caught admitting that their goal is to engineer “the end of Putin regime,” thus explaining the “lack of any diplomatic effort by the US to secure a ceasefire.” Also showing that the claimed humanitarian concern for Ukrainians is a total lie https://t.co/xzDiFPdNXP

— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) March 23, 2022

---

The end of the Putin regime IS a humanitarian effort. Russia doesn't need your help. Sit this one out.

---

The end of the Putin regime is the declaration of WW3, a very long war…I don't want that.

You want to push Russia into an alliance with China and parts of the Middle East in a very long and expensive prolonged proxy war?

Thousands will die in the process including children. I can't support that. The planet will be brought to its knees and the solutions will destroy our freedoms.

---

Well, there is a sound argument that WW3 has already started in "cold" mode, in that we have great power alliances in serious contention against one another which includes armed conflict by proxy, which is the time-tested way to wage such a war. That said, here's no indication that Putin being deposed by palace coup would somehow accelerate events into a more intense regional or world conflagration. The Russian Army is essentially "all in" on Ukraine, and not very ably, either. They couldn't expand conventional military actions if they wanted to. At this moment, it's an open question whether or not they could not stop the Finnish Army from advancing on Moscow. (which is why the forward deployment of 50k (or so) NATO troops is such a big deal. Ukraine has the bear by the nose; the bear is quite vulnerable everywhere else.)

Russia is already in an alliance with China, North Korea, and Iran. So our actions here should be predicated on how to incentivize them to withdraw from it, Russia being by far the easiest of the four to persuade to change course. Reasonable people can disagree on whether inflicting a defeat on Russia in UKR will serve that purpose or not.

We did not start the war.
We do have a stake in its outcome.
Innocents are going to die no matter what.
Make sure the carnage delivers a worthwhile result.

---

not an apologist for VP - but we over threw their govt in 2013/14 - and were basically getting jobs for every son of for pelosi romney biden kerry et al over there. a slush fund country - and yes there are bio labs over there. run - at least in part - by us.

and again we stated we wouldnt expand NATO past the original borders - 12 countries. NATO is now at 27/30 - not much for growth - gotta rope Ukraine into the fold. Then we can get the 'Stans on board.

so - again - would you want Russia China NK operating a rogue govt state in Mexico???

- KKM

and the wehrmacht wouldnt mind another year of budget increases - or three. the afghanistan acct has run dry. need a new 'crisis'. stock options and such.

---

The usual Russian conspiracy theory talking points used to start the brutal war.

william said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Canon said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Let's talk about what's really going on here.

US official was caught admitting that their goal is to engineer “the end of Putin regime,” thus explaining the “lack of any diplomatic effort by the US to secure a ceasefire.” Also showing that the claimed humanitarian concern for Ukrainians is a total lie https://t.co/xzDiFPdNXP

— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) March 23, 2022

---

The end of the Putin regime IS a humanitarian effort. Russia doesn't need your help. Sit this one out.

---

The end of the Putin regime is the declaration of WW3, a very long war…I don't want that.

You want to push Russia into an alliance with China and parts of the Middle East in a very long and expensive prolonged proxy war?

Thousands will die in the process including children. I can't support that. The planet will be brought to its knees and the solutions will destroy our freedoms.

---

Well, there is a sound argument that WW3 has already started in "cold" mode, in that we have great power alliances in serious contention against one another which includes armed conflict by proxy, which is the time-tested way to wage such a war. That said, here's no indication that Putin being deposed by palace coup would somehow accelerate events into a more intense regional or world conflagration. The Russian Army is essentially "all in" on Ukraine, and not very ably, either. They couldn't expand conventional military actions if they wanted to. At this moment, it's an open question whether or not they could not stop the Finnish Army from advancing on Moscow. (which is why the forward deployment of 50k (or so) NATO troops is such a big deal. Ukraine has the bear by the nose; the bear is quite vulnerable everywhere else.)

Russia is already in an alliance with China, North Korea, and Iran. So our actions here should be predicated on how to incentivize them to withdraw from it, Russia being by far the easiest of the four to persuade to change course. Reasonable people can disagree on whether inflicting a defeat on Russia in UKR will serve that purpose or not.

We did not start the war.
We do have a stake in its outcome.
Innocents are going to die no matter what.
Make sure the carnage delivers a worthwhile result.

---

not an apologist for VP - but we over threw their govt in 2013/14 - and were basically getting jobs for every son of for pelosi romney biden kerry et al over there. a slush fund country - and yes there are bio labs over there. run - at least in part - by us.

and again we stated we wouldnt expand NATO past the original borders - 12 countries. NATO is now at 27/30 - not much for growth - gotta rope Ukraine into the fold. Then we can get the 'Stans on board.

so - again - would you want Russia China NK operating a rogue govt state in Mexico???

- KKM

and the wehrmacht wouldnt mind another year of budget increases - or three. the afghanistan acct has run dry. need a new 'crisis'. stock options and such.

---

Possibly your best post .

Well done .

william said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Canon said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Let's talk about what's really going on here.

US official was caught admitting that their goal is to engineer “the end of Putin regime,” thus explaining the “lack of any diplomatic effort by the US to secure a ceasefire.” Also showing that the claimed humanitarian concern for Ukrainians is a total lie https://t.co/xzDiFPdNXP

— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) March 23, 2022

---

The end of the Putin regime IS a humanitarian effort. Russia doesn't need your help. Sit this one out.

---

The end of the Putin regime is the declaration of WW3, a very long war…I don't want that.

You want to push Russia into an alliance with China and parts of the Middle East in a very long and expensive prolonged proxy war?

Thousands will die in the process including children. I can't support that. The planet will be brought to its knees and the solutions will destroy our freedoms.

---

Well, there is a sound argument that WW3 has already started in "cold" mode, in that we have great power alliances in serious contention against one another which includes armed conflict by proxy, which is the time-tested way to wage such a war. That said, here's no indication that Putin being deposed by palace coup would somehow accelerate events into a more intense regional or world conflagration. The Russian Army is essentially "all in" on Ukraine, and not very ably, either. They couldn't expand conventional military actions if they wanted to. At this moment, it's an open question whether or not they could not stop the Finnish Army from advancing on Moscow. (which is why the forward deployment of 50k (or so) NATO troops is such a big deal. Ukraine has the bear by the nose; the bear is quite vulnerable everywhere else.)

Russia is already in an alliance with China, North Korea, and Iran. So our actions here should be predicated on how to incentivize them to withdraw from it, Russia being by far the easiest of the four to persuade to change course. Reasonable people can disagree on whether inflicting a defeat on Russia in UKR will serve that purpose or not.

We did not start the war.
We do have a stake in its outcome.
Innocents are going to die no matter what.
Make sure the carnage delivers a worthwhile result.

---

not an apologist for VP - but we over threw their govt in 2013/14 - and were basically getting jobs for every son of for pelosi romney biden kerry et al over there. a slush fund country - and yes there are bio labs over there. run - at least in part - by us.

and again we stated we wouldnt expand NATO past the original borders - 12 countries. NATO is now at 27/30 - not much for growth - gotta rope Ukraine into the fold. Then we can get the 'Stans on board.

so - again - would you want Russia China NK operating a rogue govt state in Mexico???

- KKM

and the wehrmacht wouldnt mind another year of budget increases - or three. the afghanistan acct has run dry. need a new 'crisis'. stock options and such.

---

Wait. Russia poisoned the candidate they didn't like in 2004, helped get their guy elected in 2010, defeating the poisoned guy. Invaded Eastern Ukraine taking Crimea after their guy was ousted by the people in 2014, and have been fighting Ukraine via proxy in Donbas from the same time, but somehow the US is the over thrower? If anyone can't see that Russia has been trying to take over Ukraine for nearly 2 decades now, I don't know what else has to transpire. The Russian puppet was having citizens killed in downtown Kyiv in 2013/2014. Now the Russians are just killing them directly in 2022.

I'm fine if someone thinks we shouldn't get involved. There's a rational argument for that. But this "blame the US for this mess" and how we "overthrew their government" crap is straight up Russian propaganda.

ATL Bear said:

---

william said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Canon said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Let's talk about what's really going on here.

US official was caught admitting that their goal is to engineer “the end of Putin regime,” thus explaining the “lack of any diplomatic effort by the US to secure a ceasefire.” Also showing that the claimed humanitarian concern for Ukrainians is a total lie https://t.co/xzDiFPdNXP

— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) March 23, 2022

---

The end of the Putin regime IS a humanitarian effort. Russia doesn't need your help. Sit this one out.

---

The end of the Putin regime is the declaration of WW3, a very long war…I don't want that.

You want to push Russia into an alliance with China and parts of the Middle East in a very long and expensive prolonged proxy war?

Thousands will die in the process including children. I can't support that. The planet will be brought to its knees and the solutions will destroy our freedoms.

---

Well, there is a sound argument that WW3 has already started in "cold" mode, in that we have great power alliances in serious contention against one another which includes armed conflict by proxy, which is the time-tested way to wage such a war. That said, here's no indication that Putin being deposed by palace coup would somehow accelerate events into a more intense regional or world conflagration. The Russian Army is essentially "all in" on Ukraine, and not very ably, either. They couldn't expand conventional military actions if they wanted to. At this moment, it's an open question whether or not they could not stop the Finnish Army from advancing on Moscow. (which is why the forward deployment of 50k (or so) NATO troops is such a big deal. Ukraine has the bear by the nose; the bear is quite vulnerable everywhere else.)

Russia is already in an alliance with China, North Korea, and Iran. So our actions here should be predicated on how to incentivize them to withdraw from it, Russia being by far the easiest of the four to persuade to change course. Reasonable people can disagree on whether inflicting a defeat on Russia in UKR will serve that purpose or not.

We did not start the war.
We do have a stake in its outcome.
Innocents are going to die no matter what.
Make sure the carnage delivers a worthwhile result.

---

not an apologist for VP - but we over threw their govt in 2013/14 - and were basically getting jobs for every son of for pelosi romney biden kerry et al over there. a slush fund country - and yes there are bio labs over there. run - at least in part - by us.

and again we stated we wouldnt expand NATO past the original borders - 12 countries. NATO is now at 27/30 - not much for growth - gotta rope Ukraine into the fold. Then we can get the 'Stans on board.

so - again - would you want Russia China NK operating a rogue govt state in Mexico???

- KKM

and the wehrmacht wouldnt mind another year of budget increases - or three. the afghanistan acct has run dry. need a new 'crisis'. stock options and such.

---

Wait. Russia poisoned the candidate they didn't like in 2004, helped get their guy elected in 2010, defeating the poisoned guy. Invaded Eastern Ukraine taking Crimea after their guy was ousted by the people in 2014, and have been fighting Ukraine via proxy in Donbas from the same time, but somehow the US is the over thrower? If anyone can't see that Russia has been trying to take over Ukraine for nearly 2 decades now, I don't know what else has to transpire. The Russian puppet was having citizens killed in downtown Kyiv in 2013/2014. Now the Russians are just killing them directly in 2022.

I'm fine if someone thinks we shouldn't get involved. There's a rational argument for that. But this "blame the US for this mess" and how we "overthrew their government" crap is straight up Russian propaganda.

---

Bingo.

ATL Bear said:

---

william said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Canon said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Let's talk about what's really going on here.

US official was caught admitting that their goal is to engineer “the end of Putin regime,” thus explaining the “lack of any diplomatic effort by the US to secure a ceasefire.” Also showing that the claimed humanitarian concern for Ukrainians is a total lie https://t.co/xzDiFPdNXP

— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) March 23, 2022

---

The end of the Putin regime IS a humanitarian effort. Russia doesn't need your help. Sit this one out.

---

The end of the Putin regime is the declaration of WW3, a very long war…I don't want that.

You want to push Russia into an alliance with China and parts of the Middle East in a very long and expensive prolonged proxy war?

Thousands will die in the process including children. I can't support that. The planet will be brought to its knees and the solutions will destroy our freedoms.

---

Well, there is a sound argument that WW3 has already started in "cold" mode, in that we have great power alliances in serious contention against one another which includes armed conflict by proxy, which is the time-tested way to wage such a war. That said, here's no indication that Putin being deposed by palace coup would somehow accelerate events into a more intense regional or world conflagration. The Russian Army is essentially "all in" on Ukraine, and not very ably, either. They couldn't expand conventional military actions if they wanted to. At this moment, it's an open question whether or not they could not stop the Finnish Army from advancing on Moscow. (which is why the forward deployment of 50k (or so) NATO troops is such a big deal. Ukraine has the bear by the nose; the bear is quite vulnerable everywhere else.)

Russia is already in an alliance with China, North Korea, and Iran. So our actions here should be predicated on how to incentivize them to withdraw from it, Russia being by far the easiest of the four to persuade to change course. Reasonable people can disagree on whether inflicting a defeat on Russia in UKR will serve that purpose or not.

We did not start the war.
We do have a stake in its outcome.
Innocents are going to die no matter what.
Make sure the carnage delivers a worthwhile result.

---

not an apologist for VP - but we over threw their govt in 2013/14 - and were basically getting jobs for every son of for pelosi romney biden kerry et al over there. a slush fund country - and yes there are bio labs over there. run - at least in part - by us.

and again we stated we wouldnt expand NATO past the original borders - 12 countries. NATO is now at 27/30 - not much for growth - gotta rope Ukraine into the fold. Then we can get the 'Stans on board.

so - again - would you want Russia China NK operating a rogue govt state in Mexico???

- KKM

and the wehrmacht wouldnt mind another year of budget increases - or three. the afghanistan acct has run dry. need a new 'crisis'. stock options and such.

---

Wait. Russia poisoned the candidate they didn't like in 2004, helped get their guy elected in 2010, defeating the poisoned guy. Invaded Eastern Ukraine taking Crimea after their guy was ousted by the people in 2014, and have been fighting Ukraine via proxy in Donbas from the same time, but somehow the US is the over thrower? If anyone can't see that Russia has been trying to take over Ukraine for nearly 2 decades now, I don't know what else has to transpire. The Russian puppet was having citizens killed in downtown Kyiv in 2013/2014. Now the Russians are just killing them directly in 2022.

I'm fine if someone thinks we shouldn't get involved. There's a rational argument for that. But this "blame the US for this mess" and how we "overthrew their government" crap is straight up Russian propaganda.

---

Russia backed a political faction in Ukraine 2004-14 you say?

HuMcK said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

william said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Canon said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Let's talk about what's really going on here.

US official was caught admitting that their goal is to engineer “the end of Putin regime,” thus explaining the “lack of any diplomatic effort by the US to secure a ceasefire.” Also showing that the claimed humanitarian concern for Ukrainians is a total lie https://t.co/xzDiFPdNXP

— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) March 23, 2022

---

The end of the Putin regime IS a humanitarian effort. Russia doesn't need your help. Sit this one out.

---

The end of the Putin regime is the declaration of WW3, a very long war…I don't want that.

You want to push Russia into an alliance with China and parts of the Middle East in a very long and expensive prolonged proxy war?

Thousands will die in the process including children. I can't support that. The planet will be brought to its knees and the solutions will destroy our freedoms.

---

Well, there is a sound argument that WW3 has already started in "cold" mode, in that we have great power alliances in serious contention against one another which includes armed conflict by proxy, which is the time-tested way to wage such a war. That said, here's no indication that Putin being deposed by palace coup would somehow accelerate events into a more intense regional or world conflagration. The Russian Army is essentially "all in" on Ukraine, and not very ably, either. They couldn't expand conventional military actions if they wanted to. At this moment, it's an open question whether or not they could not stop the Finnish Army from advancing on Moscow. (which is why the forward deployment of 50k (or so) NATO troops is such a big deal. Ukraine has the bear by the nose; the bear is quite vulnerable everywhere else.)

Russia is already in an alliance with China, North Korea, and Iran. So our actions here should be predicated on how to incentivize them to withdraw from it, Russia being by far the easiest of the four to persuade to change course. Reasonable people can disagree on whether inflicting a defeat on Russia in UKR will serve that purpose or not.

We did not start the war.
We do have a stake in its outcome.
Innocents are going to die no matter what.
Make sure the carnage delivers a worthwhile result.

---

not an apologist for VP - but we over threw their govt in 2013/14 - and were basically getting jobs for every son of for pelosi romney biden kerry et al over there. a slush fund country - and yes there are bio labs over there. run - at least in part - by us.

and again we stated we wouldnt expand NATO past the original borders - 12 countries. NATO is now at 27/30 - not much for growth - gotta rope Ukraine into the fold. Then we can get the 'Stans on board.

so - again - would you want Russia China NK operating a rogue govt state in Mexico???

- KKM

and the wehrmacht wouldnt mind another year of budget increases - or three. the afghanistan acct has run dry. need a new 'crisis'. stock options and such.

---

Wait. Russia poisoned the candidate they didn't like in 2004, helped get their guy elected in 2010, defeating the poisoned guy. Invaded Eastern Ukraine taking Crimea after their guy was ousted by the people in 2014, and have been fighting Ukraine via proxy in Donbas from the same time, but somehow the US is the over thrower? If anyone can't see that Russia has been trying to take over Ukraine for nearly 2 decades now, I don't know what else has to transpire. The Russian puppet was having citizens killed in downtown Kyiv in 2013/2014. Now the Russians are just killing them directly in 2022.

I'm fine if someone thinks we shouldn't get involved. There's a rational argument for that. But this "blame the US for this mess" and how we "overthrew their government" crap is straight up Russian propaganda.

---

Russia backed a political faction in Ukraine 2004-14 you say?

---

Debunked.

Canada2017 said:

---

william said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Canon said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Let's talk about what's really going on here.

US official was caught admitting that their goal is to engineer “the end of Putin regime,” thus explaining the “lack of any diplomatic effort by the US to secure a ceasefire.” Also showing that the claimed humanitarian concern for Ukrainians is a total lie https://t.co/xzDiFPdNXP

— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) March 23, 2022

---

The end of the Putin regime IS a humanitarian effort. Russia doesn't need your help. Sit this one out.

---

The end of the Putin regime is the declaration of WW3, a very long war…I don't want that.

You want to push Russia into an alliance with China and parts of the Middle East in a very long and expensive prolonged proxy war?

Thousands will die in the process including children. I can't support that. The planet will be brought to its knees and the solutions will destroy our freedoms.

---

Well, there is a sound argument that WW3 has already started in "cold" mode, in that we have great power alliances in serious contention against one another which includes armed conflict by proxy, which is the time-tested way to wage such a war. That said, here's no indication that Putin being deposed by palace coup would somehow accelerate events into a more intense regional or world conflagration. The Russian Army is essentially "all in" on Ukraine, and not very ably, either. They couldn't expand conventional military actions if they wanted to. At this moment, it's an open question whether or not they could not stop the Finnish Army from advancing on Moscow. (which is why the forward deployment of 50k (or so) NATO troops is such a big deal. Ukraine has the bear by the nose; the bear is quite vulnerable everywhere else.)

Russia is already in an alliance with China, North Korea, and Iran. So our actions here should be predicated on how to incentivize them to withdraw from it, Russia being by far the easiest of the four to persuade to change course. Reasonable people can disagree on whether inflicting a defeat on Russia in UKR will serve that purpose or not.

We did not start the war.
We do have a stake in its outcome.
Innocents are going to die no matter what.
Make sure the carnage delivers a worthwhile result.

---

not an apologist for VP - but we over threw their govt in 2013/14 - and were basically getting jobs for every son of for pelosi romney biden kerry et al over there. a slush fund country - and yes there are bio labs over there. run - at least in part - by us.

and again we stated we wouldnt expand NATO past the original borders - 12 countries. NATO is now at 27/30 - not much for growth - gotta rope Ukraine into the fold. Then we can get the 'Stans on board.

so - again - would you want Russia China NK operating a rogue govt state in Mexico???

- KKM

and the wehrmacht wouldnt mind another year of budget increases - or three. the afghanistan acct has run dry. need a new 'crisis'. stock options and such.

---

Possibly your best post .

Well done .

---

but, sadly, off the mark. The claim that the US overthrew the Ukrainian govt in 2013-2014 is straight up nonsense and shows a remarkable lack of familiarity with the basic history of the EuroMaidan movement and the dynamics of the uprising which felled the Yanukovych regime.

One of the most enduring urban myth memes in capitol cities around the world is that, whatever happens, the USG did it. Such is predicated on the assumption that the USG is omnipotent and omniscient, so that whatever happens had to have been either instigated or allowed by the USG.

We are not that good.

whiterock said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

william said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Canon said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Let's talk about what's really going on here.

US official was caught admitting that their goal is to engineer “the end of Putin regime,” thus explaining the “lack of any diplomatic effort by the US to secure a ceasefire.” Also showing that the claimed humanitarian concern for Ukrainians is a total lie https://t.co/xzDiFPdNXP

— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) March 23, 2022

---

The end of the Putin regime IS a humanitarian effort. Russia doesn't need your help. Sit this one out.

---

The end of the Putin regime is the declaration of WW3, a very long war…I don't want that.

You want to push Russia into an alliance with China and parts of the Middle East in a very long and expensive prolonged proxy war?

Thousands will die in the process including children. I can't support that. The planet will be brought to its knees and the solutions will destroy our freedoms.

---

Well, there is a sound argument that WW3 has already started in "cold" mode, in that we have great power alliances in serious contention against one another which includes armed conflict by proxy, which is the time-tested way to wage such a war. That said, here's no indication that Putin being deposed by palace coup would somehow accelerate events into a more intense regional or world conflagration. The Russian Army is essentially "all in" on Ukraine, and not very ably, either. They couldn't expand conventional military actions if they wanted to. At this moment, it's an open question whether or not they could not stop the Finnish Army from advancing on Moscow. (which is why the forward deployment of 50k (or so) NATO troops is such a big deal. Ukraine has the bear by the nose; the bear is quite vulnerable everywhere else.)

Russia is already in an alliance with China, North Korea, and Iran. So our actions here should be predicated on how to incentivize them to withdraw from it, Russia being by far the easiest of the four to persuade to change course. Reasonable people can disagree on whether inflicting a defeat on Russia in UKR will serve that purpose or not.

We did not start the war.
We do have a stake in its outcome.
Innocents are going to die no matter what.
Make sure the carnage delivers a worthwhile result.

---

not an apologist for VP - but we over threw their govt in 2013/14 - and were basically getting jobs for every son of for pelosi romney biden kerry et al over there. a slush fund country - and yes there are bio labs over there. run - at least in part - by us.

and again we stated we wouldnt expand NATO past the original borders - 12 countries. NATO is now at 27/30 - not much for growth - gotta rope Ukraine into the fold. Then we can get the 'Stans on board.

so - again - would you want Russia China NK operating a rogue govt state in Mexico???

- KKM

and the wehrmacht wouldnt mind another year of budget increases - or three. the afghanistan acct has run dry. need a new 'crisis'. stock options and such.

---

Possibly your best post .

Well done .

---

We are not that good.

---

On the mark.

We are that stupid .

It never stops amazing me how unsophisticated Trumpist messaging is, that all they really need to believe something is to just chant the right buzzword enough, no matter what the substance is.

Which part is debunked? Manafort was (Russian-backed) Yanukovich's chief political advisor and campaign manager from 2004-14, before working for free as Trump's chief political advisor and campaign manager in 2016. It's sad how unsubtle the Russians were able to be while going about their schemes, knowing full well that enough gullible fools on the right would cover their eyes and hum to avoid seeing it.

HuMcK said:

---

It never stops amazing me how unsophisticated Trumpist messaging is, that all they really need to believe something is to just chant the right buzzword enough, no matter what the substance is.

Which part is debunked? Manafort was (Russian-backed) Yanukovich's chief political advisor and campaign manager from 2004-14, before working for free as Trump's chief political advisor and campaign manager in 2016. It's sad how unsubtle the Russians were able to be while going about their schemes, knowing full well that enough gullible fools on the right would cover their eyes and hum to avoid seeing it.

---

You're trying to insinuate that Trump and his administration were controlled by Putin.

That's a lie.

Doc Holliday said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

It never stops amazing me how unsophisticated Trumpist messaging is, that all they really need to believe something is to just chant the right buzzword enough, no matter what the substance is.

Which part is debunked? Manafort was (Russian-backed) Yanukovich's chief political advisor and campaign manager from 2004-14, before working for free as Trump's chief political advisor and campaign manager in 2016. It's sad how unsubtle the Russians were able to be while going about their schemes, knowing full well that enough gullible fools on the right would cover their eyes and hum to avoid seeing it.

---

You're trying to insinuate that Trump and his administration were controlled by Putin.

That's a lie.

---

And a weak, stale one.

"Controlled" is a stronger word than I would use. "Supported" and "preferred" are words straight from the man's own IC conclusions though.

I was just using the dates ATL posted to point out what the Russian asset Paul Manafort was up to during that same exact time period, before he went on to manage the Trump campaign for no pay.

You remember Paul Manafort, yes? He was the guy who's silence Trump bought with one of his corrupt pardons. They guy caught dealing with Russian intel to coordinate campaign strategies, like he did for Yanukovyich.

HuMcK said:

---

It never stops amazing me how unsophisticated Trumpist messaging is, that all they really need to believe something is to just chant the right buzzword enough, no matter what the substance is.

Which part is debunked? Manafort was (Russian-backed) Yanukovich's chief political advisor and campaign manager from 2004-14, before working for free as Trump's chief political advisor and campaign manager in 2016. It's sad how unsubtle the Russians were able to be while going about their schemes, knowing full well that enough gullible fools on the right would cover their eyes and hum to avoid seeing it.

---

Manafort worked for the Podesta group so does that mean that pedophile Tony Podesta is also controlled by Russia? Is his pedophile brother John Podesta also controlled by them?

SMH at Hu's feeble attempt to blame Biden's Ukraine war on Trump. His preferred candidate is about to stumble into a nuclear war and he will still be fixated on Manafort and all things Trump.

Too bad Manafort wasn't more successful with Yanukovych. We might not be here today. Would anyone else be happy right now with a no NATO ever Ukraine and no war?

"throwing Russian soldiers like logs into a train's furnace" - vz

not bad.....

- KKM

muddybrazos said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

It never stops amazing me how unsophisticated Trumpist messaging is, that all they really need to believe something is to just chant the right buzzword enough, no matter what the substance is.

Which part is debunked? Manafort was (Russian-backed) Yanukovich's chief political advisor and campaign manager from 2004-14, before working for free as Trump's chief political advisor and campaign manager in 2016. It's sad how unsubtle the Russians were able to be while going about their schemes, knowing full well that enough gullible fools on the right would cover their eyes and hum to avoid seeing it.

---

Manafort worked for the Podesta group so does that mean that pedophile Tony Podesta is also controlled by Russia? Is his pedophile brother John Podesta also controlled by them?

---

Exactly. Many layers of spin in Huck's nonsense. Yanukovich wasn't exactly Russian-backed. The EU paperwork was completed and on his desk awaiting his signature, after matriculating thru the Ukrainian government with both legislative and executive action. At the 11th hour, Putin called and made him the proverbial "offer he couldn't refuse," a carrot & stick proposal where Yanukovich either accepted an economic union with Russia, or an invasion by Russia. Yanukovich can be faulted for failing to stand up to Putin, but look where things ended up when Ukraine finally DID get a president willing to stand up to Putin.

To borrow a phrase from Huck, it never stops amazing me how unsophisticated Anti-Trumpist messaging is, that all they really need to believe something is to just chant the right buzzword enough, no matter what the substance is.

Russia literally poisoned his opponent during an election. "Wasn't exactly Russian-backed" takes on extra ironic humor in that context. Not only did Russia back Yanukovyich, being pro-Russia was basically the entire purpose of the "Party of Regions" he belonged to (and Manafort worked for). The guy fled to Moscow when he got ousted and is still there, it doesn't get any less subtle than that.

HuMcK said:

---

It never stops amazing me how unsophisticated Trumpist messaging is, that all they really need to believe something is to just chant the right buzzword enough, no matter what the substance is.

Which part is debunked? Manafort was (Russian-backed) Yanukovich's chief political advisor and campaign manager from 2004-14, before working for free as Trump's chief political advisor and campaign manager in 2016. It's sad how unsubtle the Russians were able to be while going about their schemes, knowing full well that enough gullible fools on the right would cover their eyes and hum to avoid seeing it.

---

LOL.... Russia Russia Russia!

Dude, you're a broken record and a rube.

HuMcK said:

---

"Controlled" is a stronger word than I would use. "Supported" and "preferred" are words straight from the man's own IC conclusions though.

I was just using the dates ATL posted to point out what the Russian asset Paul Manafort was up to during that same exact time period, before he went on to manage the Trump campaign for no pay.

You remember Paul Manafort, yes? He was the guy who's silence Trump bought with one of his corrupt pardons. They guy caught dealing with Russian intel to coordinate campaign strategies, like he did for Yanukovyich.

---

Our own IC is corrupt as hell. Why on earth would you believe people caught in lies over and over again?

Our IC called Hunter Biden's laptop and all the contents disinformation. That's was a lie you took a part in.

Your biggest issue is failing to understand we, the US, also have schemes and bad people.

BearFan33 said:

---

SMH at Hu's feeble attempt to blame Biden's Ukraine war on Trump. His preferred candidate is about to stumble into a nuclear war and he will still be fixated on Manafort and all things Trump.

---

It's no surprise. Humckleberry was the one on this board trying to defend and defend Biden's fubar mess in Afghanistan just a few short months ago.

He's a hyper-partisan bootlicker of the democrat party and the biden crime family.

HuMcK said:

---

Russia literally poisoned his opponent during an election. "Wasn't exactly Russian-backed" takes on extra ironic humor in that context. Not only did Russia back Yanukovyich, being pro-Russia was basically the entire purpose of the "Party of Regions" he belonged to (and Manafort worked for). The guy fled to Moscow when he got ousted and is still there, it doesn't get any less subtle than that.

---

My friend, you prove too much. Preferring to remain in the Slavic orbit rather than aligning with EU does not ipso facto make one a Russian asset. A majority of Ukrainians did in at least one election give Yanukovic a majority vote, so it's not like he had no constituency. And while in office, Yanukovich did not do as one would expect a "Russian Asset" to do, like execute bilateral agreements tying Ukraine to Russia, refuse to participate in any pro-EU policies, etc..... In fact, he presided over extensive diplomatic negotiations with the EU resulting in final agreements, even issued executive orders in support of Ukraine's turn west. He did not step back from the process until literally the last moment, in response to direct Russian threats.

If he was the Russian puppet your argument needs him to be, Ukrainian history would read a little differently.

Your error here is common to liberals - to live in a worldview with constructed enemies, and mis-define as needed to keep those enemies a real and present danger. In so doing, they themselves become what they fear - intolerant bullies addicted to virtue posture rather than effective policy. The beauty of contrive problems is that one can define them away. Real problems not so much. Those one need only blame on the constructed enemy.

whiterock said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Russia literally poisoned his opponent during an election. "Wasn't exactly Russian-backed" takes on extra ironic humor in that context. Not only did Russia back Yanukovyich, being pro-Russia was basically the entire purpose of the "Party of Regions" he belonged to (and Manafort worked for). The guy fled to Moscow when he got ousted and is still there, it doesn't get any less subtle than that.

---

My friend, you prove too much. Preferring to remain in the Slavic orbit rather than aligning with EU does not ipso facto make one a Russian asset. A majority of Ukrainians did in at least one election give Yanukovic a majority vote, so it's not like he had no constituency. And while in office, Yanukovich did not do as one would expect a "Russian Asset" to do, like execute bilateral agreements tying Ukraine to Russia, refuse to participate in any pro-EU policies, etc..... In fact, he presided over extensive diplomatic negotiations with the EU resulting in final agreements, even issued executive orders in support of Ukraine's turn west. He did not step back from the process until literally the last moment, in response to direct Russian threats.

If he was the Russian puppet your argument needs him to be, Ukrainian history would read a little differently.

Your error here is common to liberals - to live in a worldview with constructed enemies, and mis-define as needed to keep those enemies a real and present danger. In so doing, they themselves become what they fear - intolerant bullies addicted to virtue posture rather than effective policy. The beauty of contrive problems is that one can define them away. Real problems not so much. Those one need only blame on the constructed enemy.

---

I'm usually never in alignment with Humck, but he's right on Yanukovych. Now he's overplaying Manafort's role as a Russian stoolie, as Manafort was hired to move him Westward and to be more broadly appealing. He failed to do so as it played out with Russia being a more "persuasive" partner.

Yanukovych is apparently Putin's desired replacement for Zelensky in Ukraine.