Redbrickbear said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

After learning about this $400 million mishap, who’s eager to send another $60 billion to Ukraine? pic.twitter.com/OqGcCnfRB3

— Mike Lee (@BasedMikeLee) March 31, 2024

---

Bureaucracy sucks and full of incompetence and corruption so lets defund the military comrade.

---

Ron coming in with that "principled conservative" opinion that government waste and incompetence does not matter….

When are you gonna drop the whole "I'm a conservative" shtick?

---

With conservative values I don't actually have to make these claims. Just move to your paradise where you can lead the world in abortions and rape and pillage your neighbors for fun.

---

Unlike you I'm an actual conservative.

There are no utopias on earth.

Abortion, rape, and stupid proxy wars are evil and wrong.

You just don't have a moral compass and for some strange reason you want to lie on this site about being conservative while you shill for corruption and taxpayer theft….sad

---

I can actually attack your moronic beliefs directly without making up **** like I'm for corruption and tax payer theft. This is how you know you are on the wrong side. Saying proxy wars are evil and wrong is another indicator that you'd rather the US crumble than slow the rise of another Russian empire.

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

After learning about this $400 million mishap, who’s eager to send another $60 billion to Ukraine? pic.twitter.com/OqGcCnfRB3

— Mike Lee (@BasedMikeLee) March 31, 2024

---

Bureaucracy sucks and full of incompetence and corruption so lets defund the military comrade.

---

Ron coming in with that "principled conservative" opinion that government waste and incompetence does not matter….

When are you gonna drop the whole "I'm a conservative" shtick?

---

With conservative values I don't actually have to make these claims. Just move to your paradise where you can lead the world in abortions and rape and pillage your neighbors for fun.

---

Unlike you I'm an actual conservative.

There are no utopias on earth.

Abortion, rape, and stupid proxy wars are evil and wrong.

You just don't have a moral compass and for some strange reason you want to lie on this site about being conservative while you shill for corruption and taxpayer theft….sad

---

I can actually attack your moronic beliefs directly without making up **** like I'm for corruption and tax payer theft. This is how you know you are on the wrong side. Saying proxy wars are evil and wrong is another indicator that you'd rather the US crumble than slow the rise of another Russian empire.

---

You're triggered on this site on Easter morning because you know you're a fraud and fake conservative who has no moral compass.

That pointed criticism really got you mad…lol

And unlike you I'm not afraid of the USA going anywhere. I don't live in fear that the greatest superpower on earth is in any danger.

Redbrickbear said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

After learning about this $400 million mishap, who’s eager to send another $60 billion to Ukraine? pic.twitter.com/OqGcCnfRB3

— Mike Lee (@BasedMikeLee) March 31, 2024

---

Bureaucracy sucks and full of incompetence and corruption so lets defund the military comrade.

---

Ron coming in with that "principled conservative" opinion that government waste and incompetence does not matter….

When are you gonna drop the whole "I'm a conservative" shtick?

---

With conservative values I don't actually have to make these claims. Just move to your paradise where you can lead the world in abortions and rape and pillage your neighbors for fun.

---

Unlike you I'm an actual conservative.

There are no utopias on earth.

Abortion, rape, and stupid proxy wars are evil and wrong.

You just don't have a moral compass and for some strange reason you want to lie on this site about being conservative while you shill for corruption and taxpayer theft….sad

---

I can actually attack your moronic beliefs directly without making up **** like I'm for corruption and tax payer theft. This is how you know you are on the wrong side. Saying proxy wars are evil and wrong is another indicator that you'd rather the US crumble than slow the rise of another Russian empire.

---

You're triggered on this site on Easter morning because you know you're a fraud and fake conservative who has no moral compass.

That pointed criticism really got you mad…lol

And unlike you I'm not afraid of the USA going anywhere. I don't live in fear that the greatest superpower on earth is in any danger.

---

Have you ever considered changing your username to ad hominem? Bring something a bit more materialized to respond to

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

After learning about this $400 million mishap, who’s eager to send another $60 billion to Ukraine? pic.twitter.com/OqGcCnfRB3

— Mike Lee (@BasedMikeLee) March 31, 2024

---

Bureaucracy sucks and full of incompetence and corruption so lets defund the military comrade.

---

Ron coming in with that "principled conservative" opinion that government waste and incompetence does not matter….

When are you gonna drop the whole "I'm a conservative" shtick?

---

With conservative values I don't actually have to make these claims. Just move to your paradise where you can lead the world in abortions and rape and pillage your neighbors for fun.

---

Unlike you I'm an actual conservative.

There are no utopias on earth.

Abortion, rape, and stupid proxy wars are evil and wrong.

You just don't have a moral compass and for some strange reason you want to lie on this site about being conservative while you shill for corruption and taxpayer theft….sad

---

I can actually attack your moronic beliefs directly without making up **** like I'm for corruption and tax payer theft. This is how you know you are on the wrong side. Saying proxy wars are evil and wrong is another indicator that you'd rather the US crumble than slow the rise of another Russian empire.

---

You're triggered on this site on Easter morning because you know you're a fraud and fake conservative who has no moral compass.

That pointed criticism really got you mad…lol

And unlike you I'm not afraid of the USA going anywhere. I don't live in fear that the greatest superpower on earth is in any danger.

---

Have you ever considered changing your username to ad hominem? Bring something a bit more materialized to respond to

---

Have you googled ad hominem?

Kind of like when you call other posters communists or accuse them of liking/supporting abortion and rape…

Some one taught you that word but not how to use it

Redbrickbear said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

After learning about this $400 million mishap, who’s eager to send another $60 billion to Ukraine? pic.twitter.com/OqGcCnfRB3

— Mike Lee (@BasedMikeLee) March 31, 2024

---

Bureaucracy sucks and full of incompetence and corruption so lets defund the military comrade.

---

Ron coming in with that "principled conservative" opinion that government waste and incompetence does not matter….

When are you gonna drop the whole "I'm a conservative" shtick?

---

With conservative values I don't actually have to make these claims. Just move to your paradise where you can lead the world in abortions and rape and pillage your neighbors for fun.

---

Unlike you I'm an actual conservative.

There are no utopias on earth.

Abortion, rape, and stupid proxy wars are evil and wrong.

You just don't have a moral compass and for some strange reason you want to lie on this site about being conservative while you shill for corruption and taxpayer theft….sad

---

I can actually attack your moronic beliefs directly without making up **** like I'm for corruption and tax payer theft. This is how you know you are on the wrong side. Saying proxy wars are evil and wrong is another indicator that you'd rather the US crumble than slow the rise of another Russian empire.

---

You're triggered on this site on Easter morning because you know you're a fraud and fake conservative who has no moral compass.

That pointed criticism really got you mad…lol

And unlike you I'm not afraid of the USA going anywhere. I don't live in fear that the greatest superpower on earth is in any danger.

---

Have you ever considered changing your username to ad hominem? Bring something a bit more materialized to respond to

---

Have you googled ad hominem?

Kind of like when you call other posters communists or accuse them of liking/supporting abortion and rape…

Some one taught you that word but not how to use it

---

I'd hope that the people here that even disagree with me would admit that what you wrote was one of the best examples of an ad hominem as you literally accused me of having no moral compass.

There is a pattern in your posting and I'd assume it comes from a place of wanting to discuss topics that you don't have the discipline to actually learn about.

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

After learning about this $400 million mishap, who’s eager to send another $60 billion to Ukraine? pic.twitter.com/OqGcCnfRB3

— Mike Lee (@BasedMikeLee) March 31, 2024

---

Bureaucracy sucks and full of incompetence and corruption so lets defund the military comrade.

---

Ron coming in with that "principled conservative" opinion that government waste and incompetence does not matter….

When are you gonna drop the whole "I'm a conservative" shtick?

---

With conservative values I don't actually have to make these claims. Just move to your paradise where you can lead the world in abortions and rape and pillage your neighbors for fun.

---

Unlike you I'm an actual conservative.

There are no utopias on earth.

Abortion, rape, and stupid proxy wars are evil and wrong.

You just don't have a moral compass and for some strange reason you want to lie on this site about being conservative while you shill for corruption and taxpayer theft….sad

---

I can actually attack your moronic beliefs directly without making up **** like I'm for corruption and tax payer theft. This is how you know you are on the wrong side. Saying proxy wars are evil and wrong is another indicator that you'd rather the US crumble than slow the rise of another Russian empire.

---

You're triggered on this site on Easter morning because you know you're a fraud and fake conservative who has no moral compass.

That pointed criticism really got you mad…lol

And unlike you I'm not afraid of the USA going anywhere. I don't live in fear that the greatest superpower on earth is in any danger.

---

Have you ever considered changing your username to ad hominem? Bring something a bit more materialized to respond to

---

Have you googled ad hominem?

Kind of like when you call other posters communists or accuse them of liking/supporting abortion and rape…

Some one taught you that word but not how to use it

---

I'd hope that the people here that even disagree with me would admit that what you wrote was one of the best examples of an ad hominem as you literally accused me of having no moral compass.

There is a pattern in your posting

---

I don't personally believe you have a moral compass…or at least it's miss aligned.

That's of course a personal opinion and one I am entitled to have.

You are also welcome to disagree and even explain you're moral worldview (if you have one)

But you don't get to cry about it on a politics forum especially when you are a major offender of personal insults, personal attacks, and outright misrepresentations of other posters views on here.

Redbrickbear said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

After learning about this $400 million mishap, who’s eager to send another $60 billion to Ukraine? pic.twitter.com/OqGcCnfRB3

— Mike Lee (@BasedMikeLee) March 31, 2024

---

Bureaucracy sucks and full of incompetence and corruption so lets defund the military comrade.

---

Ron coming in with that "principled conservative" opinion that government waste and incompetence does not matter….

When are you gonna drop the whole "I'm a conservative" shtick?

---

Bureaucracy does not suck. It came about in response to patronage and unfair labor practices. Civil service and bureaucracy is just the mechanism to manage a Government as big as the US.

There are bad people that do bad things that should be held accountable, but the Government bureaucracy serves a purpose especially in civil service, procurement and continuity of operations. It is like blaming the TurboTax program for your high taxes.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

After learning about this $400 million mishap, who’s eager to send another $60 billion to Ukraine? pic.twitter.com/OqGcCnfRB3

— Mike Lee (@BasedMikeLee) March 31, 2024

---

Bureaucracy sucks and full of incompetence and corruption so lets defund the military comrade.

---

Ron coming in with that "principled conservative" opinion that government waste and incompetence does not matter….

When are you gonna drop the whole "I'm a conservative" shtick?

---

Bureaucracy does not suck. It came about in response to patronage and unfair labor practices.

There are bad people that do bad things that should be held accountable, but the Government bureaucracy serves a purpose .

---

Did you read my post?

I never said bureaucracy did not serve as purpose.

I said government waste and incompetence was bad and NOT a conservative value.

I'm not sure how that is controversial…

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

After learning about this $400 million mishap, who’s eager to send another $60 billion to Ukraine? pic.twitter.com/OqGcCnfRB3

— Mike Lee (@BasedMikeLee) March 31, 2024

---

Bureaucracy sucks and full of incompetence and corruption so lets defund the military comrade.

---

Ron coming in with that "principled conservative" opinion that government waste and incompetence does not matter….

When are you gonna drop the whole "I'm a conservative" shtick?

---

Bureaucracy does not suck. It came about in response to patronage and unfair labor practices.

There are bad people that do bad things that should be held accountable, but the Government bureaucracy serves a purpose .

---

Did you read my post?

I never said bureaucracy did not serve as purpose.

I said government waste and incompetence was bad and NOT a conservative value.

I'm not sure how that is controversial…

---

"Bureaucracy sucks and full of incompetence and corruption so lets defund the military comrade."

Sorry, I misunderstood.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

After learning about this $400 million mishap, who’s eager to send another $60 billion to Ukraine? pic.twitter.com/OqGcCnfRB3

— Mike Lee (@BasedMikeLee) March 31, 2024

---

Bureaucracy sucks and full of incompetence and corruption so lets defund the military comrade.

---

Ron coming in with that "principled conservative" opinion that government waste and incompetence does not matter….

When are you gonna drop the whole "I'm a conservative" shtick?

---

Bureaucracy does not suck. It came about in response to patronage and unfair labor practices.

There are bad people that do bad things that should be held accountable, but the Government bureaucracy serves a purpose .

---

Did you read my post?

I never said bureaucracy did not serve as purpose.

I said government waste and incompetence was bad and NOT a conservative value.

I'm not sure how that is controversial…

---

"Bureaucracy sucks and full of incompetence and corruption so lets defund the military comrade."

Sorry, I misunderstood.

---

But I didn't say that…

Ron did (at least he typed those words out and incorrectly claimed that was my view)

KaiBear said:

---

Ukraine is beginning to collapse. The signs are all there for anyone who has witnessed similar events involving other military conflicts .

Then the political blame game will begin in earnest, until our people are so fed up and embarrassed about still another foreign policy debacle; few will even have the energy to notice the tens of billions of dollars wasted.

Money that remains desperately needed to help our homeless, mentally ill, and drug addicted.

---

Not too late for another massive taxpayer funded money laundering scheme of "aid" to be pushed through Congress.

Politicians, NGOs, and defense complex ghouls have to eat and pay their rent after all…..


And not too late to blame this entire neo-con and liberal fiasco on the populist Right that called the whole thing from the get go….

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

After learning about this $400 million mishap, who’s eager to send another $60 billion to Ukraine? pic.twitter.com/OqGcCnfRB3

— Mike Lee (@BasedMikeLee) March 31, 2024

---

Bureaucracy sucks and full of incompetence and corruption so lets defund the military comrade.

---

Ron coming in with that "principled conservative" opinion that government waste and incompetence does not matter….

When are you gonna drop the whole "I'm a conservative" shtick?

---

Bureaucracy does not suck. It came about in response to patronage and unfair labor practices.

There are bad people that do bad things that should be held accountable, but the Government bureaucracy serves a purpose .

---

Did you read my post?

I never said bureaucracy did not serve as purpose.

I said government waste and incompetence was bad and NOT a conservative value.

I'm not sure how that is controversial…

---

"Bureaucracy sucks and full of incompetence and corruption so lets defund the military comrade."

Sorry, I misunderstood.

---

But I didn't say that…

Ron did (at least he typed those words out and incorrectly claimed that was my view)

---

No issue's here.

Russiagate hoaxers claim Russia has a ray gun, which has been used in American intelligence community members (quad boosted Covidians) but for some reason has not used this 🔫⚡️ on Zelensky.

pic.twitter.com/M8Ipfzy07F

— Cernovich (@Cernovich) April 1, 2024

America has no Ukraine Plan B except more war

https://asiatimes.com/2024/03/america-has-no-ukraine-plan-b-except-more-war/

Good read, shows where Whiterock's flawed numbers come from. Ukraine is collapsing and barring a foolish move by NATO to ignite WW3 by overtly deploying combat forces to Ukraine the choice is to give the Russians the eastern half, or lose the whole thing.

If sanity prevails President Trump will have negotiators at the table in 2025 hammering out the details of that first option and this latest neocon project will be added to the list of foreign policy misadventures that include Afghanistan, Iraq, and Vietnam.

Realitybites said:

---

America has no Ukraine Plan B except more war

https://asiatimes.com/2024/03/america-has-no-ukraine-plan-b-except-more-war/

Good read, shows where Whiterock's flawed numbers come from. Ukraine is collapsing and barring a foolish move by NATO to ignite WW3 by overtly deploying combat forces to Ukraine the choice is to give the Russians the eastern half, or lose the whole thing.

If sanity prevails President Trump will have negotiators at the table in 2025 hammering out the details of that first option and this latest neocon project will be added to the list of foreign policy misadventures that include Afghanistan, Iraq, and Vietnam.

---

It's just Sam Lowery-lite, and actually undermines your assertion that Ukraine is out of manpower.

All you have to do to blow his argument out of the water is point to the combined GDP of Russia vs NATO. It's the difference between a pickup truck and a freight train. If Nato keeps the supply chain open, Russia cannot win. Ukraine is under pressure at this moment due to lack of artillery ammunition and rocket systems. Nato has ample stocks of old ordnance to provide, and has done so. It is the US who is now scaling back, with Congress unwilling (for understandable reasons related to the border, not national security itself) to provide more. We are literally scrapping stuff we could send to Ukraine..... There is an argument for us scaling back our aid and letting the EU countries carry the load (kinda sorta what has happened over the past year) - the US is attending to the China problem vis-a-vis Taiwan. That makes sense. But we are still scrapping significant numbers of weapons & ordnance.

If the situation deteriorates rapidly, France and/or other Nato countries may well send combat units to Kyiv to ensure the survival of a rump Ukrainian state = a "speed bump" to deter Russian intentions.

The fundamental flaw in your analysis is that it assumes if we just let Russia have what it wants, the conflict ends. Appeasement like that rarely works. If Russia subsumes Ukraine, the process starts all over in Romania, Hungary, Slovakia, Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, etc..... We are not on the verge of WWIII. We are in it. It started in 2022. We cannot overcommit to Ukraine, or we leave Taiwan exposed.

The only valid argument for stopping aid to Ukraine is that loss is imminent and we need to conserve for the net phase of the war. Loss is at all imminent, ergo the need for more attrition of Russian forces.

Quote:

---

The fundamental flaw in your analysis is that it assumes if we just let Russia have what it wants, the conflict ends. Appeasement like that rarely works.

---

...and the fundamental flaw in your analysis is that modern Russia is an expansionist power looking for lebensraum. Had we not instigated this conflict, there would be peace in that region right now. For some reason you have a tremendous blind spot for out efforts to destabilize Ukraine through Maidan and its political and military misadventures in the eastern half of its former territory before the Russian invasion. Putin isn't a pudding-eater who woke up one morning and said "let's make this bigger."

As a result even your description of a negotiated peace as "appeasement" is flawed.

Realitybites said:

---

Quote:

---

The fundamental flaw in your analysis is that it assumes if we just let Russia have what it wants, the conflict ends. Appeasement like that rarely works.

---

...and the fundamental flaw in your analysis is that modern Russia is an expansionist power looking for lebensraum. Had we not instigated this conflict, there would be peace in that region right now. For some reason you have a tremendous blind spot for out efforts to destabilize Ukraine through Maidan and its political and military misadventures in the eastern half of its former territory before the Russian invasion. Putin isn't a pudding-eater who woke up one morning and said "let's make this bigger."

As a result even your description of a negotiated peace as "appeasement" is flawed.

---

LOL Russia PUBLICLY hornswoggles Yanukovich to veto EU accession passed by the UKR parliament, a bill he promised to sign and which enjoyed broad public support, thereby prompting a popular uprising in the streets.....and it's OUR fault. WE did not hold a gun to Yanukovich's head. WE did not order or organize anyone to get out in the streets and march into gunfire of the Ukrainian police. We did not order or organize any military officers or politicians to step in and take over.
,
I will allow that you not are not in lock-step with most minded-Russian apologists, who explicitly make the lebensraum argument and follow that if we just let them have it, the conflict goes away. (ignoring, of course, that Russia has already drawn the line well beyond Ukraine.)

Russia is convinced that it must have more lebensraum, and has gone to war to get it. And, somehow, you find a way to blame us for it. Geez-Louise, dude. Conspiratorial recto-cranial inversion is not a good look for anyone.

Realitybites said:

---

Quote:

---

The fundamental flaw in your analysis is that it assumes if we just let Russia have what it wants, the conflict ends. Appeasement like that rarely works.

---

...and the fundamental flaw in your analysis is that modern Russia is an expansionist power looking for lebensraum. Had we not instigated this conflict, there would be peace in that region right now. For some reason you have a tremendous blind spot for out efforts to destabilize Ukraine through Maidan and its political and military misadventures in the eastern half of its former territory before the Russian invasion. Putin isn't a pudding-eater who woke up one morning and said "let's make this bigger."

As a result even your description of a negotiated peace as "appeasement" is flawed.

---

Nothing but RU claptrap.

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Since 1991 . . . %A0And most of it spent early and half of which was military and 1/4 of which was direct economic assistance.

---

You know you can't account for where all those billions went.

The Feds can't even keep with where they spend billions at home%85much less in a corrupt 2nd world country like Ukraine.

Let's just be honest%85.it was slush fund cash to buy off politicians and influence Ukraine.

And possibly to help foment unrest and coups if necessary

---

My answer may surprise you. I have no idea how much we sent Ukraine. It could be well north of $5 billion.

But folks on your side often point to the $5 billion mentioned in the speech. My main point as I've posted several times is that $5 billion since 1991 is pennies compared to what we've given other fledgling democracies. And to connect that $ to an unexpected coup over 20 years later is absurd. And public data has shown that such spending historically has mostly been economic development (loans that don't have to be repaid) and defense.

---

The $5 billion was spent on promoting "democracy," i.e. political manipulation and regime change. There's nothing absurd or even particularly controversial about it. It's just one of those things we don't talk about.

---

I don't see how suddenly, in literally a period of weeks, we could have unleashed this grand plan...

---

Unleash a grand plan%85probably not.

Influence events on the ground by passing around cash and calling on favors and rooting on the protests/coup? %A0Absolutely

---

I don't doubt that for a second. We were open about our support, so have to assume there was direct support.

---

That's basically what I've been saying. We can speculate about how much planning there was, but the point is that it all happened as a result of US influence. The 20 years of US spending are relevant because they created the conditions that culminated in regime change.

---

Ukraine is FIGHTING for Democracy and to join the EU. %A0That is a huge success. %A0Will they keep it? %A0Who knows, but 30 years ago or when Reagan really started going after the Soviet Union did anyone ever think that would happen? %A0If this was a CIA operation it THE most successful of the modern era.

Money well spent, the Baltics, Ukraine, Hungary, Romania all former Communist are now Democracies and fighting to stay free and in the EU. %A0Not to mention the bringing Finland and Sweden into NATO. This has been a banner operation!

---

Ukraine is no more democratic than Russia, and that's probably being generous.

Reagan built an arms control framework and established trust with the Russians such that they were able to voluntarily relinquish Ukraine in exchange for the promise of neutrality. More than anyone else, he would be absolutely horrified by what's happening now.

---

Except all that happened after Reagan was out of office. %A0So there's that pesky misalignment of time and events. %A0It was the Clinton Administration that negotiated the Budapest Memorandum.

And if you think Ukraine is no more democratic than Russia, then take a gander over the last 20 years at the executive branch of both as well as the uniparty of the Duma for the past 15+ years compared to the Rada. %A0

---

The timeline argument is pesky only because you've mentioned it at least four times without ever explaining it. Clinton obviously played a role in poisoning our relationship with Russia. I'm not sure what you think that proves, unless it supports my point.

---

Your point about Reagan was wrong. %A0Ukraine sought independence on their own as did many Soviet satellites. %A0They didn't "voluntarily relinquish" it. Russia was in full collapse with revolutions internally and in many formerly aligned states. If anything we had to help prop them up just to survive and not devolve into a major nuclear armed state in open civil war. %A0

---

I realize they sought independence on their own. And the Russians took a huge risk in agreeing to it. Reagan would be appalled at how we've repaid them and what has resulted.

---

Russia had nothing to do with it. %A0And are you speaking with the dead?

---

Russia had nothing to do with the breakup of the Soviet Union? That is certainly an interesting take.

---

Lose the point, change the goal posts. Typical.

---

What point? You're not even making any sense.

---

You keep saying Russia "allowed" or "agreed" to let Ukraine be independent. Russia was lucky it didn't self destruct. It was powerless to do anything with their satellites and former Union partners, and in fact it was primarily the U.S. that facilitated a soft landing, as well as prevented the mass proliferation of loose nukes.

---

They were not entirely without options. There was talk of taking over Ukraine's security forces by executive decree, for example. Russia was more interested in avoiding civil war and maintaining good relations with the West. Of course we took it as a sign of weakness and have basically treated them as a defeated foe ever since.

---

A sign? They were both at that time, weak and defeated. After facilitating them into that position, we helped them not completely collapse, or fall into a massive civil war, and tried (succeeded with many) to put former states on a path to freedom and economic prosperity. Most satellites progressed to improved positions post Soviet Union. It's the ones that stayed dependent upon Russia, or forced to, that floundered, Ukraine being exhibit A. And now you're spinning that into blame on the U.S. for those efforts. I can admit some errors along the way, but good grief.

It's your boy Putin who has spent the last two decades enriching himself, consolidating his power, and scheming to get the old band back together with tales of ancient history and Western wrongs that you and your ilk are lapping up like 14 year old Komsomolets.

---

Russia and Ukraine had similar problems 30 years ago. Russia has largely recovered under Putin, which is one reason he's so hated in the West. Ukraine was a dumpster fire even before the war. You can't blame the Russians since we pried it out of their grasp.

whiterock said:

---

LOL they were a defeated foe. THEY LOST THE COLD WAR. And not by negotiated surrender. Not by folding their tents and marching home. They collapsed on the field of battle in the middle of the contest.

I was there when it happened.....

---

You and countless other like-minded nitwits, which is why Gorbachev was taking such a big risk. You overlook the importance of the reforms that happened on his initiative. Of course he didn't anticipate that the USSR would break apart - nor did we, for that matter. But if your view were correct, the Cold War would not have ended how and when it did.

whiterock said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

America has no Ukraine Plan B except more war

https://asiatimes.com/2024/03/america-has-no-ukraine-plan-b-except-more-war/

Good read, shows where Whiterock's flawed numbers come from. Ukraine is collapsing and barring a foolish move by NATO to ignite WW3 by overtly deploying combat forces to Ukraine the choice is to give the Russians the eastern half, or lose the whole thing.

If sanity prevails President Trump will have negotiators at the table in 2025 hammering out the details of that first option and this latest neocon project will be added to the list of foreign policy misadventures that include Afghanistan, Iraq, and Vietnam.

---

It's just Sam Lowery-lite, and actually undermines your assertion that Ukraine is out of manpower.

All you have to do to blow his argument out of the water is point to the combined GDP of Russia vs NATO. It's the difference between a pickup truck and a freight train.

---

Freight trains aren't built for war. Neither is the NATO economy. That's all I needed to say a year ago, and it's only proven truer in the weeks and months since.

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

LOL they were a defeated foe. THEY LOST THE COLD WAR. And not by negotiated surrender. Not by folding their tents and marching home. They collapsed on the field of battle in the middle of the contest.

I was there when it happened.....

---

You and countless other like-minded nitwits, which is why Gorbachev was taking such a big risk. You overlook the importance of the reforms that happened on his initiative. Of course he didn't anticipate that the USSR would break apart - nor did we, for that matter. But if your view were correct, the Cold War would not have ended how and when it did.

---

Now you're changing the subject. You do understand I used to chase Soviets around for a living, don't you?

You haven't lived until you stood face to face with a Soviet and had them give earnest explanation for why shooting down KAL 007 was justified. In some ways, it reminds me of your schtick here.

Redbrickbear said:

---

Russiagate hoaxers claim Russia has a ray gun, which has been used in American intelligence community members (quad boosted Covidians) but for some reason has not used this 🔫⚡️ on Zelensky.

pic.twitter.com/M8Ipfzy07F

— Cernovich (@Cernovich) April 1, 2024

---

Google up "Havana Syndrome."

any emitter would have to be located a certain distance of the target. So it's easy to do in place like Cuba or China....police states where the regime can organize and emplace at its own discretion. An emitter may of course be placed anywhere, but operational realities will sharply limit what can be targeted. Would be very very difficult for Russia to get one into position to go after Ukrainian officials. And of course, risk of compromise would be very high. And risk like that tends to make people decide NOT to do things, as consequences of compromise would go far beyond Ukraine......

"emanations" have been a part of the intelligence world forever.. Our computer workstations where shielded back in the 1970s. Still, every time I hit a keystroke on my Wang, my hand-held radio would spit a little static. The shielding could not stop all emissions, but could limit them so that someone in a building across the street would not be able to capture them. (yes, it was possible as early as 1980 to collect emanations that would allow you to read what someone was typing real time from several yards away.....)

All you have to do to weaponize that is to ramp up the emanations and then manipulate their characteristics, to include making them directional (possible), to turn them into a weapon.

So it's not really a question of whether or not this kind of thing could be happening. Just whether or not it is. It's just a little too much "inside baseball" for the general public to put into perspective.

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

America has no Ukraine Plan B except more war

https://asiatimes.com/2024/03/america-has-no-ukraine-plan-b-except-more-war/

Good read, shows where Whiterock's flawed numbers come from. Ukraine is collapsing and barring a foolish move by NATO to ignite WW3 by overtly deploying combat forces to Ukraine the choice is to give the Russians the eastern half, or lose the whole thing.

If sanity prevails President Trump will have negotiators at the table in 2025 hammering out the details of that first option and this latest neocon project will be added to the list of foreign policy misadventures that include Afghanistan, Iraq, and Vietnam.

---

It's just Sam Lowery-lite, and actually undermines your assertion that Ukraine is out of manpower.

All you have to do to blow his argument out of the water is point to the combined GDP of Russia vs NATO. It's the difference between a pickup truck and a freight train.

---

Freight trains aren't built for war. Neither is the NATO economy. That's all I needed to say a year ago, and it's only proven truer in the weeks and months since.

---

LOL you blundered into that one. Freight trains are central to the Russian war machine.....their logistical chain relies upon them to a degree no other military does. Russia has an entire military command devoted to railway operations (+/- 30k troops).

No peacetime economy is built for war. They have to mobilize. And the size of your economy limits how much one can mobilize. The Russian economy is 10% the size of the Nato economy. They have no hope of winning a war against Nato.
https://www.worldeconomics.com/Thoughts/NATOs-Combined-GDP-is-far-larger-than-Russias.aspx

Russia also faces a daunting mismatch in population, 6-to-1:
https://countryeconomy.com/countries/groups/nato

Russia is already at the point where additional mobilizations will affect economic output.....

whiterock said:

---

You do understand I used to chase Soviets around for a living, don't you?

---

There are more Soviets in DC in 2024 than in the Kremlin. For that matter, there are more Soviets in Austin in 2024 than in the Kremlin. The world has changed a lot in the 41 years since Korean 007. Its unfortunate that you didn't change with it.

BREAKING:

Ukraine has used a drone aircraft for the first time to strike a target in Russia.

The Ukrainians hit Alabuga in Tatarstan where Russia produces its suicide drones.

It’s more than 1200 km from Ukraine pic.twitter.com/fzkaAwHSuI

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) April 2, 2024

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

LOL they were a defeated foe. THEY LOST THE COLD WAR. And not by negotiated surrender. Not by folding their tents and marching home. They collapsed on the field of battle in the middle of the contest.

I was there when it happened.....

---

You and countless other like-minded nitwits, which is why Gorbachev was taking such a big risk. You overlook the importance of the reforms that happened on his initiative. Of course he didn't anticipate that the USSR would break apart - nor did we, for that matter. But if your view were correct, the Cold War would not have ended how and when it did.

---

Now you're changing the subject. You do understand I used to chase Soviets around for a living, don't you?

You haven't lived until you stood face to face with a Soviet and had them give earnest explanation for why shooting down KAL 007 was justified. In some ways, it reminds me of your schtick here.

---

I'm talking about the breakup of the Soviet Union and the independence of Ukraine. If anyone's changing the subject, it's you with this KAL 007 stuff.

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

America has no Ukraine Plan B except more war

https://asiatimes.com/2024/03/america-has-no-ukraine-plan-b-except-more-war/

Good read, shows where Whiterock's flawed numbers come from. Ukraine is collapsing and barring a foolish move by NATO to ignite WW3 by overtly deploying combat forces to Ukraine the choice is to give the Russians the eastern half, or lose the whole thing.

If sanity prevails President Trump will have negotiators at the table in 2025 hammering out the details of that first option and this latest neocon project will be added to the list of foreign policy misadventures that include Afghanistan, Iraq, and Vietnam.

---

It's just Sam Lowery-lite, and actually undermines your assertion that Ukraine is out of manpower.

All you have to do to blow his argument out of the water is point to the combined GDP of Russia vs NATO. It's the difference between a pickup truck and a freight train.

---

Freight trains aren't built for war. Neither is the NATO economy. That's all I needed to say a year ago, and it's only proven truer in the weeks and months since.

---

LOL you blundered into that one. Freight trains are central to the Russian war machine.....their logistical chain relies upon them to a degree no other military does. Russia has an entire military command devoted to railway operations (+/- 30k troops).

No peacetime economy is built for war. They have to mobilize. And the size of your economy limits how much one can mobilize. The Russian economy is 10% the size of the Nato economy. They have no hope of winning a war against Nato.
https://www.worldeconomics.com/Thoughts/NATOs-Combined-GDP-is-far-larger-than-Russias.aspx

Russia also faces a daunting mismatch in population, 6-to-1:
https://countryeconomy.com/countries/groups/nato

Russia is already at the point where additional mobilizations will affect economic output.....

---

You missed the point. We never mobilized for Ukraine, and now it's far too late.

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

America has no Ukraine Plan B except more war

https://asiatimes.com/2024/03/america-has-no-ukraine-plan-b-except-more-war/

Good read, shows where Whiterock's flawed numbers come from. Ukraine is collapsing and barring a foolish move by NATO to ignite WW3 by overtly deploying combat forces to Ukraine the choice is to give the Russians the eastern half, or lose the whole thing.

If sanity prevails President Trump will have negotiators at the table in 2025 hammering out the details of that first option and this latest neocon project will be added to the list of foreign policy misadventures that include Afghanistan, Iraq, and Vietnam.

---

It's just Sam Lowery-lite, and actually undermines your assertion that Ukraine is out of manpower.

All you have to do to blow his argument out of the water is point to the combined GDP of Russia vs NATO. It's the difference between a pickup truck and a freight train.

---

Freight trains aren't built for war. Neither is the NATO economy. That's all I needed to say a year ago, and it's only proven truer in the weeks and months since.

---

LOL you blundered into that one. Freight trains are central to the Russian war machine.....their logistical chain relies upon them to a degree no other military does. Russia has an entire military command devoted to railway operations (+/- 30k troops).

No peacetime economy is built for war. They have to mobilize. And the size of your economy limits how much one can mobilize. The Russian economy is 10% the size of the Nato economy. They have no hope of winning a war against Nato.
https://www.worldeconomics.com/Thoughts/NATOs-Combined-GDP-is-far-larger-than-Russias.aspx

Russia also faces a daunting mismatch in population, 6-to-1:
https://countryeconomy.com/countries/groups/nato

Russia is already at the point where additional mobilizations will affect economic output.....

---

It's far too late.

---

Not really, vatnik.

Realitybites said:

---

whiterock said:

---

You do understand I used to chase Soviets around for a living, don't you?

---

There are more Soviets in DC in 2024 than in the Kremlin. For that matter, there are more Soviets in Austin in 2024 than in the Kremlin. The world has changed a lot in the 41 years since Korean 007. Its unfortunate that you didn't change with it.

---

Things have changed, sure. Now they just deny shooting down civilian airliners.

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Since 1991 . . . %A0And most of it spent early and half of which was military and 1/4 of which was direct economic assistance.

---

You know you can't account for where all those billions went.

The Feds can't even keep with where they spend billions at home%85much less in a corrupt 2nd world country like Ukraine.

Let's just be honest%85.it was slush fund cash to buy off politicians and influence Ukraine.

And possibly to help foment unrest and coups if necessary

---

My answer may surprise you. I have no idea how much we sent Ukraine. It could be well north of $5 billion.

But folks on your side often point to the $5 billion mentioned in the speech. My main point as I've posted several times is that $5 billion since 1991 is pennies compared to what we've given other fledgling democracies. And to connect that $ to an unexpected coup over 20 years later is absurd. And public data has shown that such spending historically has mostly been economic development (loans that don't have to be repaid) and defense.

---

The $5 billion was spent on promoting "democracy," i.e. political manipulation and regime change. There's nothing absurd or even particularly controversial about it. It's just one of those things we don't talk about.

---

I don't see how suddenly, in literally a period of weeks, we could have unleashed this grand plan...

---

Unleash a grand plan%85probably not.

Influence events on the ground by passing around cash and calling on favors and rooting on the protests/coup? %A0Absolutely

---

I don't doubt that for a second. We were open about our support, so have to assume there was direct support.

---

That's basically what I've been saying. We can speculate about how much planning there was, but the point is that it all happened as a result of US influence. The 20 years of US spending are relevant because they created the conditions that culminated in regime change.

---

Ukraine is FIGHTING for Democracy and to join the EU. %A0That is a huge success. %A0Will they keep it? %A0Who knows, but 30 years ago or when Reagan really started going after the Soviet Union did anyone ever think that would happen? %A0If this was a CIA operation it THE most successful of the modern era.

Money well spent, the Baltics, Ukraine, Hungary, Romania all former Communist are now Democracies and fighting to stay free and in the EU. %A0Not to mention the bringing Finland and Sweden into NATO. This has been a banner operation!

---

Ukraine is no more democratic than Russia, and that's probably being generous.

Reagan built an arms control framework and established trust with the Russians such that they were able to voluntarily relinquish Ukraine in exchange for the promise of neutrality. More than anyone else, he would be absolutely horrified by what's happening now.

---

Except all that happened after Reagan was out of office. %A0So there's that pesky misalignment of time and events. %A0It was the Clinton Administration that negotiated the Budapest Memorandum.

And if you think Ukraine is no more democratic than Russia, then take a gander over the last 20 years at the executive branch of both as well as the uniparty of the Duma for the past 15+ years compared to the Rada. %A0

---

The timeline argument is pesky only because you've mentioned it at least four times without ever explaining it. Clinton obviously played a role in poisoning our relationship with Russia. I'm not sure what you think that proves, unless it supports my point.

---

Your point about Reagan was wrong. %A0Ukraine sought independence on their own as did many Soviet satellites. %A0They didn't "voluntarily relinquish" it. Russia was in full collapse with revolutions internally and in many formerly aligned states. If anything we had to help prop them up just to survive and not devolve into a major nuclear armed state in open civil war. %A0

---

I realize they sought independence on their own. And the Russians took a huge risk in agreeing to it. Reagan would be appalled at how we've repaid them and what has resulted.

---

Russia had nothing to do with it. %A0And are you speaking with the dead?

---

Russia had nothing to do with the breakup of the Soviet Union? That is certainly an interesting take.

---

Lose the point, change the goal posts. Typical.

---

What point? You're not even making any sense.

---

You keep saying Russia "allowed" or "agreed" to let Ukraine be independent. Russia was lucky it didn't self destruct. It was powerless to do anything with their satellites and former Union partners, and in fact it was primarily the U.S. that facilitated a soft landing, as well as prevented the mass proliferation of loose nukes.

---

They were not entirely without options. There was talk of taking over Ukraine's security forces by executive decree, for example. Russia was more interested in avoiding civil war and maintaining good relations with the West. Of course we took it as a sign of weakness and have basically treated them as a defeated foe ever since.

---

A sign? They were both at that time, weak and defeated. After facilitating them into that position, we helped them not completely collapse, or fall into a massive civil war, and tried (succeeded with many) to put former states on a path to freedom and economic prosperity. Most satellites progressed to improved positions post Soviet Union. It's the ones that stayed dependent upon Russia, or forced to, that floundered, Ukraine being exhibit A. And now you're spinning that into blame on the U.S. for those efforts. I can admit some errors along the way, but good grief.

It's your boy Putin who has spent the last two decades enriching himself, consolidating his power, and scheming to get the old band back together with tales of ancient history and Western wrongs that you and your ilk are lapping up like 14 year old Komsomolets.

---

Russia and Ukraine had similar problems 30 years ago. Russia has largely recovered under Putin, which is one reason he's so hated in the West. Ukraine was a dumpster fire even before the war. You can't blame the Russians since we pried it out of their grasp.

---

Imagine that. Stole their land, corrupted their energy sector, cut off supplies under ill gotten contracts thanks to their hand picked leaders. I wonder why Ukraine had so many issues…

Keep grinding for your man Sam.

---

Hand-picked leaders? You must be mistaking us for the Russians.

MASSIVE SENSELESS LOSSES OF RUSSIAN ADVANCING FORCES, ELON MUSK TURNS A BLIND EYE https://t.co/T1oKtUA2mJ

— WarTranslated (Dmitri) (@wartranslated) April 2, 2024