FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Bear8084 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

"All resources in Russian economy are exhausted. Inflation is rising, interest rates cannot be significantly increased. Extreme lack of the workforce. Adding money from reserves to market will just increase inflation without bringing new growth. Russia is likely facing stagnation… pic.twitter.com/rXRQULbrKt

— Jaanika Merilo (@jaanikamerilo) July 29, 2024

---

2.6% unemployment rate is full employment, which means, from this point forward, every single soldier mobilized and sent to the front has a negative effect on GDP. Sure, Russia can keep transferring resources to keep war production at current levels, but they can't do it forever. Eventually people are going to need new clothes, new cars, replacement household items, etc......

Russia will be able to sustain current war production into at least the summer of 2025, but they stay at that level indefinitely. They'll have to increasingly rob Peter (private sector) to pay Paul (war production).

---

More importantly than that is the loss of any solider is a devastating thing for Russia.

They don't have the birth rate to replace any losses.


[Russia's death rate has been higher than its birth rate for years, resulting in a natural population decline. In 2022, Russia's crude birth rate was 8.9 per 100,000 people, the lowest it's been since 2000, while its death rate was about 1.7 times higher than its birth rate. Russia's fertility rate is also one of the lowest in the world, with women having an average of 1.42 children in 2022, compared to the 2.1 children needed to maintain the population]

---

indeed. But Russia doesn't care about that if they subsume Ukraine into the Russia. They pick up 40m people, disproportionately young & female (given that Ukraine is fighting this war with +30 year old men).

---

I think you mean disproportionately old. The idea that Ukraine has a largely young population and is saving it for a rainy day while their aging army collapses is completely illogical.

As for the women, they'll be better off under Russian rule than fleeing west to fill the brothels of Europe. Those poor souls will be putting the "slav" in slavery for years to come, naturally without a word of complaint from the West. It's the only thing Europe really likes about them.

---

Good grief what a disgusting post. Not super surprising it's from the Russian.

---

The false sympathy and exploitation of Ukraine by the West is indeed disgusting.

---

Yet, Ukraine asks for help. Hmm, who do I believe?

The guy with a Baylor Law Degree living a great Capitalist life in America pleading to let the Russian's have Ukraine as the humanitarian thing to do or the Ukranian President whose Nation was invaded asking for military hardware so they can repel the invader???

Sorry, rings hollow. I will go with the guy that was invaded asking for help...

---

In March of 1914, 9 months before we entered WWII, the US passed the Lend-Lease Act, under which we supplied the following to the USSR (then at war with Germany):

• 400,000 jeeps & trucks
• 14,000 airplanes
• 8,000 tractors
• 13,000 tanks
• 1.5 million blankets
• 15 million pairs of army boots
• 107,000 tons of cotton
• 2.7 million tons of petrol products
• 4.5 million tons of food

Was that exploitation?
Was that false sympathy?

Nope. It was Realpolitik. It was national interest.

---

1. I assume you mean 1941

World War I was a very foolish internal European civil war that we should have stayed out of.

2. Its probably time we even re-evaluated the WWII mythology and nostalgia as well.

Its getting dangerous considering how you pro-War Chick-Hawks use it as an endless bloody shirt to try and get American boys killed in more foreign wars....and apparently will use it as a excuse for more wars forever and ever and ever.

The USA got into that war because it was actually physically attacked by the Empire of Japan...it was probably the last legitimate large scale war we have fought.

But lets also be honest... Peter Hitchens hits the nail on the head in terms of how that war ended.

"World War II began as a war to save Poland from a ruthless totalitarian doctorship. It ended with Poland under the control of a ruthless totalitarian dictatorship...along with half of the entire European continent. And along the way 50 million people died"

---

If WW1 and WW2 were not worthy of the US entering,

---

WWI was not

I did not say the same for WW2....Japan attacked the USA....I specially said it was the last large scale legitimate war the USA has fought.

---

Fair enough, I was looking at your last paragraph.

I do believe WW1 was worth the US entering. The Freedom of Navigation alone.

---

I can assure you the powers that be in the USA did not enter that war to "defend the right of navigation"

[When WWI began in Europe in 1914, many Americans wanted the United States to stay out of the conflict, forcing President Woodrow Wilson to adopt a policy of strict neutrality...
.
Despite the U.S. position, many Americans personally sympathized with Britain, France and their allies. American institutions lent large sums to the Allied governments, giving the U.S. a financial stake in the outcome of the war. Nearly 10% of Americans identified as ethnic Germans, most of whom hoped the United States would remain neutral in the war....

While the country was at peace, American banks made huge loans to the Entente powers, which were used mainly to buy munitions, raw materials, and food from across the Atlantic. Although US President Woodrow Wilson made preparations for a land war before 1917, he also authorize a shipbuilding program for the United States Navy. Wilson was narrowly re-elected in 1916 on an anti-war platform.]

---

You left out the German U-Boats sinking US shipping. You guys are so conspiracy driven,

---

1. That is well know...so is the Zimmerman telegram to Mexico.

https://www.theworldwar.org/learn/about-wwi/zimmermann-telegram

2. Its not conspiracy to say that the US leadership and financial elite had a preferred out come of that war in mind. And that they were not as interested in saying neutral as the majority of the population.

America's political and financial elite were looking for reasons to get into the war...the average America was looking for reasons to stay out of it.

---

How do you guys make it through the day with all the conspiracies impacting every aspect of life? Everything is some Cabal conspiracy by the rich.

---

Buddy there are entire books written about World War I and the politics involved in our decision to enter that war.

As some point you have to stop labeling facts and opinions you don't like as "conspiracy" theories.

Unless of course you think the U.S. fights all wars without input from the American business and financial community.

PS

The text I quoted was right from the National World War I museum and memorial

A bunch of "conspiracy" theorists right?

https://www.theworldwar.org/learn/about-wwi/us-enters-war

"Despite the U.S. position, many Americans personally sympathized with Britain, France and their allies. American institutions lent large sums to the Allied governments, giving the U.S. a financial stake in the outcome of the war."

---

You pick and choose what you want to show. That is one piece of the puzzle and the financial is secondary to public sympathies. You also don't mention the U-Boat attacks or that the USS Aztec was torpedoed resulting in 28 US deaths just before the US entering the war.

---

And you of course pick and choose what points you want to emphasize….thats part of debate

German naval attacks not with standing the American pubic was not on board with getting into WWI even long after it was declared.

It took a large PR and propaganda campaign to get them in line.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Bear8084 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

"All resources in Russian economy are exhausted. Inflation is rising, interest rates cannot be significantly increased. Extreme lack of the workforce. Adding money from reserves to market will just increase inflation without bringing new growth. Russia is likely facing stagnation… pic.twitter.com/rXRQULbrKt

— Jaanika Merilo (@jaanikamerilo) July 29, 2024

---

2.6% unemployment rate is full employment, which means, from this point forward, every single soldier mobilized and sent to the front has a negative effect on GDP. Sure, Russia can keep transferring resources to keep war production at current levels, but they can't do it forever. Eventually people are going to need new clothes, new cars, replacement household items, etc......

Russia will be able to sustain current war production into at least the summer of 2025, but they stay at that level indefinitely. They'll have to increasingly rob Peter (private sector) to pay Paul (war production).

---

More importantly than that is the loss of any solider is a devastating thing for Russia.

They don't have the birth rate to replace any losses.


[Russia's death rate has been higher than its birth rate for years, resulting in a natural population decline. In 2022, Russia's crude birth rate was 8.9 per 100,000 people, the lowest it's been since 2000, while its death rate was about 1.7 times higher than its birth rate. Russia's fertility rate is also one of the lowest in the world, with women having an average of 1.42 children in 2022, compared to the 2.1 children needed to maintain the population]

---

indeed. But Russia doesn't care about that if they subsume Ukraine into the Russia. They pick up 40m people, disproportionately young & female (given that Ukraine is fighting this war with +30 year old men).

---

I think you mean disproportionately old. The idea that Ukraine has a largely young population and is saving it for a rainy day while their aging army collapses is completely illogical.

As for the women, they'll be better off under Russian rule than fleeing west to fill the brothels of Europe. Those poor souls will be putting the "slav" in slavery for years to come, naturally without a word of complaint from the West. It's the only thing Europe really likes about them.

---

Good grief what a disgusting post. Not super surprising it's from the Russian.

---

The false sympathy and exploitation of Ukraine by the West is indeed disgusting.

---

Yet, Ukraine asks for help. Hmm, who do I believe?

The guy with a Baylor Law Degree living a great Capitalist life in America pleading to let the Russian's have Ukraine as the humanitarian thing to do or the Ukranian President whose Nation was invaded asking for military hardware so they can repel the invader???

Sorry, rings hollow. I will go with the guy that was invaded asking for help...

---

In March of 1914, 9 months before we entered WWII, the US passed the Lend-Lease Act, under which we supplied the following to the USSR (then at war with Germany):

• 400,000 jeeps & trucks
• 14,000 airplanes
• 8,000 tractors
• 13,000 tanks
• 1.5 million blankets
• 15 million pairs of army boots
• 107,000 tons of cotton
• 2.7 million tons of petrol products
• 4.5 million tons of food

Was that exploitation?
Was that false sympathy?

Nope. It was Realpolitik. It was national interest.

---

1. I assume you mean 1941

World War I was a very foolish internal European civil war that we should have stayed out of.

2. Its probably time we even re-evaluated the WWII mythology and nostalgia as well.

Its getting dangerous considering how you pro-War Chick-Hawks use it as an endless bloody shirt to try and get American boys killed in more foreign wars....and apparently will use it as a excuse for more wars forever and ever and ever.

The USA got into that war because it was actually physically attacked by the Empire of Japan...it was probably the last legitimate large scale war we have fought.

But lets also be honest... Peter Hitchens hits the nail on the head in terms of how that war ended.

"World War II began as a war to save Poland from a ruthless totalitarian doctorship. It ended with Poland under the control of a ruthless totalitarian dictatorship...along with half of the entire European continent. And along the way 50 million people died"

---

If WW1 and WW2 were not worthy of the US entering,

---

WWI was not

I did not say the same for WW2....Japan attacked the USA....I specially said it was the last large scale legitimate war the USA has fought.

---

I do believe WW1 was worth the US entering. The Freedom of Navigation alone.

---

Senator La Follette of Wisconsin had some interesting words on that issue… he made a good point that the UK violated the freedom of navigation at will

[ The Senator delivered a long and passionate speech in opposition to a declaration of war, during which he said:

"I am talking now about principles. You cannot distinguish between the principles which allowed England to mine a large area of the Atlantic Ocean and the North Sea in order to shut in Germany, and the principle on which Germany by her submarines seeks to destroy all shipping which enters the war zone which she has laid out around the British Isles.

The English mines are intended to destroy without warning every ship that enters the war zone she has proscribed, killing or drowning every passenger that cannot find some means of escape. It is neither more nor less than that which Germany tries to do with her submarines in her war zone.

We acquiesced in England's action without protest. It is proposed that we now go to war with Germany for identically the same action upon her part…

I say again that when two nations are at war any neutral nation, in order to preserve its character as a neutral nation, must exact the same conduct from both warring nations; both must equally obey the principles of international law. If a neutral nation fails in that, then its rights upon the high seasto adopt the President's phraseare relative and not absolute. There can be no greater violation of our neutrality than the requirement that one of two belligerents shall adhere to the settled principles of law and that the other shall have the advantage of not doing so.

The respect that German naval authorities were required to pay to the rights of our people upon the high seas would depend upon the question whether we had exacted the same rights from German's enemies. If we had not done so, we lost our character as a neutral nation and our people unfortunately had lost the protection that belongs to neutrals.

Our responsibility was joint in the sense that we must exact the same conduct from both belligerents.
The failure to treat the belligerent nations of Europe alike, the failure to reject the unlawful "war zones" of both Germany and Great Britain is wholly accountable for our present dilemma. We should not seek to hide our blunder behind the smoke of battle to inflame the mind of our people by half truths into the frenzy of war in order that they may never appreciate the real cause of it until it is too late. I do not believe that our national honor is served by such a course. The right way is the honorable way."

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Bear8084 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

"All resources in Russian economy are exhausted. Inflation is rising, interest rates cannot be significantly increased. Extreme lack of the workforce. Adding money from reserves to market will just increase inflation without bringing new growth. Russia is likely facing stagnation… pic.twitter.com/rXRQULbrKt

— Jaanika Merilo (@jaanikamerilo) July 29, 2024

---

2.6% unemployment rate is full employment, which means, from this point forward, every single soldier mobilized and sent to the front has a negative effect on GDP. Sure, Russia can keep transferring resources to keep war production at current levels, but they can't do it forever. Eventually people are going to need new clothes, new cars, replacement household items, etc......

Russia will be able to sustain current war production into at least the summer of 2025, but they stay at that level indefinitely. They'll have to increasingly rob Peter (private sector) to pay Paul (war production).

---

More importantly than that is the loss of any solider is a devastating thing for Russia.

They don't have the birth rate to replace any losses.


[Russia's death rate has been higher than its birth rate for years, resulting in a natural population decline. In 2022, Russia's crude birth rate was 8.9 per 100,000 people, the lowest it's been since 2000, while its death rate was about 1.7 times higher than its birth rate. Russia's fertility rate is also one of the lowest in the world, with women having an average of 1.42 children in 2022, compared to the 2.1 children needed to maintain the population]

---

indeed. But Russia doesn't care about that if they subsume Ukraine into the Russia. They pick up 40m people, disproportionately young & female (given that Ukraine is fighting this war with +30 year old men).

---

I think you mean disproportionately old. The idea that Ukraine has a largely young population and is saving it for a rainy day while their aging army collapses is completely illogical.

As for the women, they'll be better off under Russian rule than fleeing west to fill the brothels of Europe. Those poor souls will be putting the "slav" in slavery for years to come, naturally without a word of complaint from the West. It's the only thing Europe really likes about them.

---

Good grief what a disgusting post. Not super surprising it's from the Russian.

---

The false sympathy and exploitation of Ukraine by the West is indeed disgusting.

---

Yet, Ukraine asks for help. Hmm, who do I believe?

The guy with a Baylor Law Degree living a great Capitalist life in America pleading to let the Russian's have Ukraine as the humanitarian thing to do or the Ukranian President whose Nation was invaded asking for military hardware so they can repel the invader???

Sorry, rings hollow. I will go with the guy that was invaded asking for help...

---

In March of 1914, 9 months before we entered WWII, the US passed the Lend-Lease Act, under which we supplied the following to the USSR (then at war with Germany):

• 400,000 jeeps & trucks
• 14,000 airplanes
• 8,000 tractors
• 13,000 tanks
• 1.5 million blankets
• 15 million pairs of army boots
• 107,000 tons of cotton
• 2.7 million tons of petrol products
• 4.5 million tons of food

Was that exploitation?
Was that false sympathy?

Nope. It was Realpolitik. It was national interest.

---

1. I assume you mean 1941

World War I was a very foolish internal European civil war that we should have stayed out of.

2. Its probably time we even re-evaluated the WWII mythology and nostalgia as well.

Its getting dangerous considering how you pro-War Chick-Hawks use it as an endless bloody shirt to try and get American boys killed in more foreign wars....and apparently will use it as a excuse for more wars forever and ever and ever.

The USA got into that war because it was actually physically attacked by the Empire of Japan...it was probably the last legitimate large scale war we have fought.

But lets also be honest... Peter Hitchens hits the nail on the head in terms of how that war ended.

"World War II began as a war to save Poland from a ruthless totalitarian doctorship. It ended with Poland under the control of a ruthless totalitarian dictatorship...along with half of the entire European continent. And along the way 50 million people died"

---

If WW1 and WW2 were not worthy of the US entering,

---

WWI was not

I did not say the same for WW2....Japan attacked the USA....I specially said it was the last large scale legitimate war the USA has fought.

---

I do believe WW1 was worth the US entering. The Freedom of Navigation alone.

---

Senator La Follette of Wisconsin had some interesting words on that issue… he made a good point that the UK violated the laws of navigation at will

[ The Senator delivered a long and passionate speech in opposition to a declaration of war, during which he said:

"I am talking now about principles. You cannot distinguish between the principles which allowed England to mine a large area of the Atlantic Ocean and the North Sea in order to shut in Germany, and the principle on which Germany by her submarines seeks to destroy all shipping which enters the war zone which she has laid out around the British Isles.

The English mines are intended to destroy without warning every ship that enters the war zone she has proscribed, killing or drowning every passenger that cannot find some means of escape. It is neither more nor less than that which Germany tries to do with her submarines in her war zone.

We acquiesced in England's action without protest. It is proposed that we now go to war with Germany for identically the same action upon her part…

I say again that when two nations are at war any neutral nation, in order to preserve its character as a neutral nation, must exact the same conduct from both warring nations; both must equally obey the principles of international law. If a neutral nation fails in that, then its rights upon the high seasto adopt the President's phraseare relative and not absolute. There can be no greater violation of our neutrality than the requirement that one of two belligerents shall adhere to the settled principles of law and that the other shall have the advantage of not doing so.

The respect that German naval authorities were required to pay to the rights of our people upon the high seas would depend upon the question whether we had exacted the same rights from German's enemies. If we had not done so, we lost our character as a neutral nation and our people unfortunately had lost the protection that belongs to neutrals.

Our responsibility was joint in the sense that we must exact the same conduct from both belligerents.
The failure to treat the belligerent nations of Europe alike, the failure to reject the unlawful "war zones" of both Germany and Great Britain is wholly accountable for our present dilemma. We should not seek to hide our blunder behind the smoke of battle to inflame the mind of our people by half truths into the frenzy of war in order that they may never appreciate the real cause of it until it is too late. I do not believe that our national honor is served by such a course. The right way is the honorable way."

---

Brilliant.

Submarine attacks not withstanding?

That's like saying minus the flying the planes into the buildings the video Bin Laden made caused the invasion of Afghanistan!

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

"All resources in Russian economy are exhausted. Inflation is rising, interest rates cannot be significantly increased. Extreme lack of the workforce. Adding money from reserves to market will just increase inflation without bringing new growth. Russia is likely facing stagnation… pic.twitter.com/rXRQULbrKt

— Jaanika Merilo (@jaanikamerilo) July 29, 2024

---

2.6% unemployment rate is full employment, which means, from this point forward, every single soldier mobilized and sent to the front has a negative effect on GDP. Sure, Russia can keep transferring resources to keep war production at current levels, but they can't do it forever. Eventually people are going to need new clothes, new cars, replacement household items, etc......

Russia will be able to sustain current war production into at least the summer of 2025, but they stay at that level indefinitely. They'll have to increasingly rob Peter (private sector) to pay Paul (war production).

---

More importantly than that is the loss of any solider is a devastating thing for Russia.

They don't have the birth rate to replace any losses.


[Russia's death rate has been higher than its birth rate for years, resulting in a natural population decline. In 2022, Russia's crude birth rate was 8.9 per 100,000 people, the lowest it's been since 2000, while its death rate was about 1.7 times higher than its birth rate. Russia's fertility rate is also one of the lowest in the world, with women having an average of 1.42 children in 2022, compared to the 2.1 children needed to maintain the population]

---

indeed. But Russia doesn't care about that if they subsume Ukraine into the Russia. They pick up 40m people, disproportionately young & female (given that Ukraine is fighting this war with +30 year old men).

---

I think you mean disproportionately old. The idea that Ukraine has a largely young population and is saving it for a rainy day while their aging army collapses is completely illogical.

As for the women, they'll be better off under Russian rule than fleeing west to fill the brothels of Europe. Those poor souls will be putting the "slav" in slavery for years to come, naturally without a word of complaint from the West. It's the only thing Europe really likes about them.

---

Given the fact that your Russian comrades are raping their way across Ukraine, I suspect if you ask a Ukrainian woman, she might feel she's better off working at a brothel in Europe.

---

Few Westerners bother to talk to Ukrainians under Russian rule...

---

What's the scoop?

Let me guess: they recommend to just sit back and enjoy it.

---

They're not just sitting back by any means. They've been fighting the Kiev regime for ten years and counting. Anti-Russian resistance is virtually non-existent in the Donbas. It's minimal in Zaporizhzhia and Kherson, where most of your horror stories come from. Many of the separatists are former Ukrainian military. The civilian population has suffered wanton attacks from Western proxies for years. The Russians are widely considered liberators, and with good reason.

---

Thanks for the scoop. So, it's the Ukrainians raping and killing the Ukrainians.

Of course.

Thank God for the Russian "liberators." Afterall, it's far better to live under Russian rule than any Western democracy.

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

"All resources in Russian economy are exhausted. Inflation is rising, interest rates cannot be significantly increased. Extreme lack of the workforce. Adding money from reserves to market will just increase inflation without bringing new growth. Russia is likely facing stagnation… pic.twitter.com/rXRQULbrKt

— Jaanika Merilo (@jaanikamerilo) July 29, 2024

---

2.6% unemployment rate is full employment, which means, from this point forward, every single soldier mobilized and sent to the front has a negative effect on GDP. Sure, Russia can keep transferring resources to keep war production at current levels, but they can't do it forever. Eventually people are going to need new clothes, new cars, replacement household items, etc......

Russia will be able to sustain current war production into at least the summer of 2025, but they stay at that level indefinitely. They'll have to increasingly rob Peter (private sector) to pay Paul (war production).

---

More importantly than that is the loss of any solider is a devastating thing for Russia.

They don't have the birth rate to replace any losses.


[Russia's death rate has been higher than its birth rate for years, resulting in a natural population decline. In 2022, Russia's crude birth rate was 8.9 per 100,000 people, the lowest it's been since 2000, while its death rate was about 1.7 times higher than its birth rate. Russia's fertility rate is also one of the lowest in the world, with women having an average of 1.42 children in 2022, compared to the 2.1 children needed to maintain the population]

---

indeed. But Russia doesn't care about that if they subsume Ukraine into the Russia. They pick up 40m people, disproportionately young & female (given that Ukraine is fighting this war with +30 year old men).

---

I think you mean disproportionately old. The idea that Ukraine has a largely young population and is saving it for a rainy day while their aging army collapses is completely illogical.

As for the women, they'll be better off under Russian rule than fleeing west to fill the brothels of Europe. Those poor souls will be putting the "slav" in slavery for years to come, naturally without a word of complaint from the West. It's the only thing Europe really likes about them.

---

Given the fact that your Russian comrades are raping their way across Ukraine, I suspect if you ask a Ukrainian woman, she might feel she's better off working at a brothel in Europe.

---

Few Westerners bother to talk to Ukrainians under Russian rule...

---

What's the scoop?

Let me guess: they recommend to just sit back and enjoy it.

---

They're not just sitting back by any means. They've been fighting the Kiev regime for ten years and counting. Anti-Russian resistance is virtually non-existent in the Donbas. It's minimal in Zaporizhzhia and Kherson, where most of your horror stories come from. Many of the separatists are former Ukrainian military. The civilian population has suffered wanton attacks from Western proxies for years. The Russians are widely considered liberators, and with good reason.

---

Thanks for the scoop. So, it's the Ukrainians raping and killing the Ukrainians.

Of course.

Thank God for the Russian "liberators." Afterall, it's far better to live under Russian rule than any Western democracy.

---

Ukrainians have been engaged in a civil war, yes.

Most of them live a long way from any Western democracy...and even the Poles are halfway glad to see them suffering.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Submarine attacks not withstanding?

---

It's a wildly know reason given for the declaration for war…you act like you just found out about it.

The financial/political calculus for war seems to be the thing you have never heard of…and are uncomfortable discussing.

The Senator from Wisconsin gave a speech dealing with the hypocrisy of Congress complaining about Germany's naval war…while not complaining about the British naval war….both violate the freedom of navigation you seem so concerned about

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Submarine attacks not withstanding?

---

It's a wildly know reason given for the declaration for war…you act like you just found out about it.

The financial/political calculus for war seems to be the thing you have never heard of…and are uncomfortable discussing.

The Senator from Wisconsin gave a speech dealing with the hypocrisy of Congress complaining about Germany's naval war…while not complaining about the British naval war….both violate the freedom of navigation you seem so concerned about

---

You make side points the major cause. You have a tendency to take a side fact or a secondary issue and turn it into the "real reason". Everything is a lie to cover up your "real reasons", but only if it is a way for the US to look bad and be in the wrong. Hell, Russia invaded Ukraine and your point is that it is the US fault because some diplomat made a phone call 8 years earlier or Harris voiced an opinion that any Nation should be able to apply to NATO. Putin ordering the tanks across is now the minor issue in Ukraine. WW1 was about profiteering, the sinking of US ships not a big deal. Supported by one Senator saying we should be pissed at GB too.

You don't find this strange? It is ALWAYS the US fault no matter what anyone does for you and Sam. If it isn't obvious, you will find some side point to blame.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

"All resources in Russian economy are exhausted. Inflation is rising, interest rates cannot be significantly increased. Extreme lack of the workforce. Adding money from reserves to market will just increase inflation without bringing new growth. Russia is likely facing stagnation… pic.twitter.com/rXRQULbrKt

— Jaanika Merilo (@jaanikamerilo) July 29, 2024

---

2.6% unemployment rate is full employment, which means, from this point forward, every single soldier mobilized and sent to the front has a negative effect on GDP. Sure, Russia can keep transferring resources to keep war production at current levels, but they can't do it forever. Eventually people are going to need new clothes, new cars, replacement household items, etc......

Russia will be able to sustain current war production into at least the summer of 2025, but they stay at that level indefinitely. They'll have to increasingly rob Peter (private sector) to pay Paul (war production).

---

More importantly than that is the loss of any solider is a devastating thing for Russia.

They don't have the birth rate to replace any losses.


[Russia's death rate has been higher than its birth rate for years, resulting in a natural population decline. In 2022, Russia's crude birth rate was 8.9 per 100,000 people, the lowest it's been since 2000, while its death rate was about 1.7 times higher than its birth rate. Russia's fertility rate is also one of the lowest in the world, with women having an average of 1.42 children in 2022, compared to the 2.1 children needed to maintain the population]

---

indeed. But Russia doesn't care about that if they subsume Ukraine into the Russia. They pick up 40m people, disproportionately young & female (given that Ukraine is fighting this war with +30 year old men).

---

I think you mean disproportionately old. The idea that Ukraine has a largely young population and is saving it for a rainy day while their aging army collapses is completely illogical.

As for the women, they'll be better off under Russian rule than fleeing west to fill the brothels of Europe. Those poor souls will be putting the "slav" in slavery for years to come, naturally without a word of complaint from the West. It's the only thing Europe really likes about them.

---

Given the fact that your Russian comrades are raping their way across Ukraine, I suspect if you ask a Ukrainian woman, she might feel she's better off working at a brothel in Europe.

---

Few Westerners bother to talk to Ukrainians under Russian rule...

---

What's the scoop?

Let me guess: they recommend to just sit back and enjoy it.

---

They're not just sitting back by any means. They've been fighting the Kiev regime for ten years and counting. Anti-Russian resistance is virtually non-existent in the Donbas. It's minimal in Zaporizhzhia and Kherson, where most of your horror stories come from. Many of the separatists are former Ukrainian military. The civilian population has suffered wanton attacks from Western proxies for years. The Russians are widely considered liberators, and with good reason.

---

Thanks for the scoop. So, it's the Ukrainians raping and killing the Ukrainians.

Of course.

Thank God for the Russian "liberators." Afterall, it's far better to live under Russian rule than any Western democracy.

---

Ukrainians have been engaged in a civil war, yes.

Most of them live a long way from any Western democracy...and even the Poles are halfway glad to see them suffering.

---

Vatnik gonna vatnik. Good grief.

Sam Lowry said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

And good grief, how miserable and nihilistic does our political class have to be, risking Western civilization in an obviously failed war over a backwater country because they can't afford to lose face? They value nothing except money and power. Everything else is expendable. If you ever wanted wanted an example of cultural despair, you're looking right at it.

---

If you think Western Civilization is at risk over modest military aid to a "backwater country" trying to defend itself against a despotic invader, you are the very over dramatic weakling bent on the precise decline you claim to abhor.

---

If you want to confront a nuclear power without factoring in that risk, you're being naive. Neocons are often referred to as liberals who got mugged by "reality." In other words, you're witnessing what happens when the flower power generation gets actual power and figures out that their utopian ideas can't be realized without violence. Of course utopian ideas are never realized, but no one in post-modern America wants to hear that.

---

Nary an ideal throughout history has been realized without violence whether it is actual or the threat therof. That's the Utopian navet you and many others can't fathom. This isn't about neocon, neo liberal, isolationism or populism. The nuclear equation is already cast when rogue despotism armed as such is in existence. When it actively asserts itself it played the card of requiring an address.

---

Except that the only rogue actor here is NATO. We're the ones who flagrantly violate national sovereignty at our every whim, while Russia takes decades to try to negotiate a solution.

We had a rules-based international order. Too bad we weren't satisfied with it.

---

Come on Sam.

Even though I fundamentally agree that NATO bares its share of responsibility for the Ukrainian war …..in no way is Russia blameless.

---

To be clear, Russia violated international law by invading Ukraine. I'm not going to deny that. My argument is that we provoked them.

---

Totally agree Russia was provoked.
Have stated so previously.

However both elites miscalculated.

Biden never thought Putin would follow through with an invasion to stop Ukraine from joining NATO.

Putin thought his army would overwhelm Ukraine in a matter of weeks.

The_barBEARian said:

---

Dear Putin and Xi,

Y’all feel free to fire them nukes whenever you’re ready.

I’m starting to think humanity might be better off without us. pic.twitter.com/HpLgUYl52d

— Clandestine (@WarClandestine) July 30, 2024

---

and just whom is Clandestine ? I'm not familiar with his fine work. stay off the internet. think for yourself

Sam Lowry said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

And good grief, how miserable and nihilistic does our political class have to be, risking Western civilization in an obviously failed war over a backwater country because they can't afford to lose face? They value nothing except money and power. Everything else is expendable. If you ever wanted wanted an example of cultural despair, you're looking right at it.

---

If you think Western Civilization is at risk over modest military aid to a "backwater country" trying to defend itself against a despotic invader, you are the very over dramatic weakling bent on the precise decline you claim to abhor.

---

If you want to confront a nuclear power without factoring in that risk, you're being naive. Neocons are often referred to as liberals who got mugged by "reality." In other words, you're witnessing what happens when the flower power generation gets actual power and figures out that their utopian ideas can't be realized without violence. Of course utopian ideas are never realized, but no one in post-modern America wants to hear that.

---

Nary an ideal throughout history has been realized without violence whether it is actual or the threat therof. That's the Utopian navet you and many others can't fathom. This isn't about neocon, neo liberal, isolationism or populism. The nuclear equation is already cast when rogue despotism armed as such is in existence. When it actively asserts itself it played the card of requiring an address.

---

Except that the only rogue actor here is NATO. We're the ones who flagrantly violate national sovereignty at our every whim, while Russia takes decades to try to negotiate a solution.

We had a rules-based international order. Too bad we weren't satisfied with it.

---

Come on Sam.

Even though I fundamentally agree that NATO bares its share of responsibility for the Ukrainian war …..in no way is Russia blameless.

---

To be clear, Russia violated international law by invading Ukraine. I'm not going to deny that. My argument is that we provoked them.

---

I robbed the bank because they had the money and I didn't. Putin's not Robin Hood. He's a mafioso with some heavy weaponry.

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

And good grief, how miserable and nihilistic does our political class have to be, risking Western civilization in an obviously failed war over a backwater country because they can't afford to lose face? They value nothing except money and power. Everything else is expendable. If you ever wanted wanted an example of cultural despair, you're looking right at it.

---

If you think Western Civilization is at risk over modest military aid to a "backwater country" trying to defend itself against a despotic invader, you are the very over dramatic weakling bent on the precise decline you claim to abhor.

---

If you want to confront a nuclear power without factoring in that risk, you're being naive. Neocons are often referred to as liberals who got mugged by "reality." In other words, you're witnessing what happens when the flower power generation gets actual power and figures out that their utopian ideas can't be realized without violence. Of course utopian ideas are never realized, but no one in post-modern America wants to hear that.

---

Nary an ideal throughout history has been realized without violence whether it is actual or the threat therof. That's the Utopian navet you and many others can't fathom. This isn't about neocon, neo liberal, isolationism or populism. The nuclear equation is already cast when rogue despotism armed as such is in existence. When it actively asserts itself it played the card of requiring an address.

---

Except that the only rogue actor here is NATO. We're the ones who flagrantly violate national sovereignty at our every whim, while Russia takes decades to try to negotiate a solution.

We had a rules-based international order. Too bad we weren't satisfied with it.

---

Come on Sam.

Even though I fundamentally agree that NATO bares its share of responsibility for the Ukrainian war …..in no way is Russia blameless.

---

To be clear, Russia violated international law by invading Ukraine. I'm not going to deny that. My argument is that we provoked them.

---

I robbed the bank because they had the money and I didn't. Putin's not Robin Hood. He's a mafioso with some heavy weaponry.

---

Yep. That's why he didn't let you get away without taking his cut.

J.R. said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

Dear Putin and Xi,

Y’all feel free to fire them nukes whenever you’re ready.

I’m starting to think humanity might be better off without us. pic.twitter.com/HpLgUYl52d

— Clandestine (@WarClandestine) July 30, 2024

---

and just whom is Clandestine ? I'm not familiar with his fine work. stay off the internet. think for yourself

---

Democrats are cringe and inviting some hoe to twerk at your rally to pander to Blacks is demeaning to those very people you are trying to pander to.

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

And good grief, how miserable and nihilistic does our political class have to be, risking Western civilization in an obviously failed war over a backwater country because they can't afford to lose face? They value nothing except money and power. Everything else is expendable. If you ever wanted wanted an example of cultural despair, you're looking right at it.

---

If you think Western Civilization is at risk over modest military aid to a "backwater country" trying to defend itself against a despotic invader, you are the very over dramatic weakling bent on the precise decline you claim to abhor.

---

If you want to confront a nuclear power without factoring in that risk, you're being naive. Neocons are often referred to as liberals who got mugged by "reality." In other words, you're witnessing what happens when the flower power generation gets actual power and figures out that their utopian ideas can't be realized without violence. Of course utopian ideas are never realized, but no one in post-modern America wants to hear that.

---

Nary an ideal throughout history has been realized without violence whether it is actual or the threat therof. That's the Utopian navet you and many others can't fathom. This isn't about neocon, neo liberal, isolationism or populism. The nuclear equation is already cast when rogue despotism armed as such is in existence. When it actively asserts itself it played the card of requiring an address.

---

Except that the only rogue actor here is NATO. We're the ones who flagrantly violate national sovereignty at our every whim, while Russia takes decades to try to negotiate a solution.

We had a rules-based international order. Too bad we weren't satisfied with it.

---

Come on Sam.

Even though I fundamentally agree that NATO bares its share of responsibility for the Ukrainian war …..in no way is Russia blameless.

---

To be clear, Russia violated international law by invading Ukraine. I'm not going to deny that. My argument is that we provoked them.

---

I robbed the bank because they had the money and I didn't. Putin's not Robin Hood. He's a mafioso with some heavy weaponry.

---

Yep. That's why he didn't let you get away without taking his cut.

---

Hey, if you're a fan of extortion, murder, and grift, Putin's your guy for sure.

---

He's a mafioso, and we're working in his territory. It's the closest you've come to reality, and I'm not being snarky. By all means think of it that way if it helps.

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

And good grief, how miserable and nihilistic does our political class have to be, risking Western civilization in an obviously failed war over a backwater country because they can't afford to lose face? They value nothing except money and power. Everything else is expendable. If you ever wanted wanted an example of cultural despair, you're looking right at it.

---

If you think Western Civilization is at risk over modest military aid to a "backwater country" trying to defend itself against a despotic invader, you are the very over dramatic weakling bent on the precise decline you claim to abhor.

---

If you want to confront a nuclear power without factoring in that risk, you're being naive. Neocons are often referred to as liberals who got mugged by "reality." In other words, you're witnessing what happens when the flower power generation gets actual power and figures out that their utopian ideas can't be realized without violence. Of course utopian ideas are never realized, but no one in post-modern America wants to hear that.

---

Nary an ideal throughout history has been realized without violence whether it is actual or the threat therof. That's the Utopian navet you and many others can't fathom. This isn't about neocon, neo liberal, isolationism or populism. The nuclear equation is already cast when rogue despotism armed as such is in existence. When it actively asserts itself it played the card of requiring an address.

---

Except that the only rogue actor here is NATO. We're the ones who flagrantly violate national sovereignty at our every whim, while Russia takes decades to try to negotiate a solution.

We had a rules-based international order. Too bad we weren't satisfied with it.

---

Come on Sam.

Even though I fundamentally agree that NATO bares its share of responsibility for the Ukrainian war …..in no way is Russia blameless.

---

To be clear, Russia violated international law by invading Ukraine. I'm not going to deny that. My argument is that we provoked them.

---

I robbed the bank because they had the money and I didn't. Putin's not Robin Hood. He's a mafioso with some heavy weaponry.

---

Yep. That's why he didn't let you get away without taking his cut.

---

Hey, if you're a fan of extortion, murder, and grift, Putin's your guy for sure.

---

He's a mafioso, and we're working in his territory. It's the closest you've come to reality, and I'm not being snarky. By all means think of it that way if it helps.

---

Only arrogance would say it's "his territory". He tried to expand his grift and it's not going as planned.

---

What do you think DC is trying to do in Eastern Europe?

At least the Russkies can claim that has been their neck of the woods (sphere of influence) for hundreds of years.

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

And good grief, how miserable and nihilistic does our political class have to be, risking Western civilization in an obviously failed war over a backwater country because they can't afford to lose face? They value nothing except money and power. Everything else is expendable. If you ever wanted wanted an example of cultural despair, you're looking right at it.

---

If you think Western Civilization is at risk over modest military aid to a "backwater country" trying to defend itself against a despotic invader, you are the very over dramatic weakling bent on the precise decline you claim to abhor.

---

If you want to confront a nuclear power without factoring in that risk, you're being naive. Neocons are often referred to as liberals who got mugged by "reality." In other words, you're witnessing what happens when the flower power generation gets actual power and figures out that their utopian ideas can't be realized without violence. Of course utopian ideas are never realized, but no one in post-modern America wants to hear that.

---

Nary an ideal throughout history has been realized without violence whether it is actual or the threat therof. That's the Utopian navet you and many others can't fathom. This isn't about neocon, neo liberal, isolationism or populism. The nuclear equation is already cast when rogue despotism armed as such is in existence. When it actively asserts itself it played the card of requiring an address.

---

Except that the only rogue actor here is NATO. We're the ones who flagrantly violate national sovereignty at our every whim, while Russia takes decades to try to negotiate a solution.

We had a rules-based international order. Too bad we weren't satisfied with it.

---

Come on Sam.

Even though I fundamentally agree that NATO bares its share of responsibility for the Ukrainian war …..in no way is Russia blameless.

---

To be clear, Russia violated international law by invading Ukraine. I'm not going to deny that. My argument is that we provoked them.

---

I robbed the bank because they had the money and I didn't. Putin's not Robin Hood. He's a mafioso with some heavy weaponry.

---

Yep. That's why he didn't let you get away without taking his cut.

---

Hey, if you're a fan of extortion, murder, and grift, Putin's your guy for sure.

---

He's a mafioso, and we're working in his territory. It's the closest you've come to reality, and I'm not being snarky. By all means think of it that way if it helps.

---

Only arrogance would say it's "his territory". He tried to expand his grift and it's not going as planned.

---

What do you think DC is trying to do in Eastern Europe?

At least the Russkies can claim that has been their neck of the woods (sphere of influence) for hundreds of years.

---

Arrogant to talk about spheres of influence, but not at all arrogant to presume we're the neighborhood police...from the other side of the world. Our divine mandate truly knows no limits.

Only shills would conflate invasion with influence. Russia lost the influence conflict, so they've been taking by force for a decade. And the police in my analogy are the Ukrainian Army, or what you've been told to think of as Nazis.

KaiBear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

And good grief, how miserable and nihilistic does our political class have to be, risking Western civilization in an obviously failed war over a backwater country because they can't afford to lose face? They value nothing except money and power. Everything else is expendable. If you ever wanted wanted an example of cultural despair, you're looking right at it.

---

If you think Western Civilization is at risk over modest military aid to a "backwater country" trying to defend itself against a despotic invader, you are the very over dramatic weakling bent on the precise decline you claim to abhor.

---

If you want to confront a nuclear power without factoring in that risk, you're being naive. Neocons are often referred to as liberals who got mugged by "reality." In other words, you're witnessing what happens when the flower power generation gets actual power and figures out that their utopian ideas can't be realized without violence. Of course utopian ideas are never realized, but no one in post-modern America wants to hear that.

---

Nary an ideal throughout history has been realized without violence whether it is actual or the threat therof. That's the Utopian navet you and many others can't fathom. This isn't about neocon, neo liberal, isolationism or populism. The nuclear equation is already cast when rogue despotism armed as such is in existence. When it actively asserts itself it played the card of requiring an address.

---

Except that the only rogue actor here is NATO. We're the ones who flagrantly violate national sovereignty at our every whim, while Russia takes decades to try to negotiate a solution.

We had a rules-based international order. Too bad we weren't satisfied with it.

---

Come on Sam.

Even though I fundamentally agree that NATO bares its share of responsibility for the Ukrainian war …..in no way is Russia blameless.

---

To be clear, Russia violated international law by invading Ukraine. I'm not going to deny that. My argument is that we provoked them.

---

Totally agree Russia was provoked.
Have stated so previously.

However both elites miscalculated.

Biden never thought Putin would follow through with an invasion to stop Ukraine from joining NATO.

Putin thought his army would overwhelm Ukraine in a matter of weeks.

---

I think Putin's miscalculation was that military conflict would force Ukraine to the negotiating table. The initial expeditionary force the Russian Federation fielded was in no way large enough to capture and hold territory. When it was clear that Zelensky was going to choose national suicide, they fell back, regrouped and now have a 650,000 man army that will take and hold as much of Ukraine as is needed to ensure their national security. Zelensky can surrender, give the Russians four Oblasts and agree to neutrality or he can continue and lose half the country.

At any rate, the Ukraine game is halfway through the fourth quarter and the Russians have a big lead. The Israel/Hezbollah game kicks off in an hour.

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

And good grief, how miserable and nihilistic does our political class have to be, risking Western civilization in an obviously failed war over a backwater country because they can't afford to lose face? They value nothing except money and power. Everything else is expendable. If you ever wanted wanted an example of cultural despair, you're looking right at it.

---

If you think Western Civilization is at risk over modest military aid to a "backwater country" trying to defend itself against a despotic invader, you are the very over dramatic weakling bent on the precise decline you claim to abhor.

---

If you want to confront a nuclear power without factoring in that risk, you're being naive. Neocons are often referred to as liberals who got mugged by "reality." In other words, you're witnessing what happens when the flower power generation gets actual power and figures out that their utopian ideas can't be realized without violence. Of course utopian ideas are never realized, but no one in post-modern America wants to hear that.

---

Nary an ideal throughout history has been realized without violence whether it is actual or the threat therof. That's the Utopian navet you and many others can't fathom. This isn't about neocon, neo liberal, isolationism or populism. The nuclear equation is already cast when rogue despotism armed as such is in existence. When it actively asserts itself it played the card of requiring an address.

---

Except that the only rogue actor here is NATO. We're the ones who flagrantly violate national sovereignty at our every whim, while Russia takes decades to try to negotiate a solution.

We had a rules-based international order. Too bad we weren't satisfied with it.

---

Come on Sam.

Even though I fundamentally agree that NATO bares its share of responsibility for the Ukrainian war …..in no way is Russia blameless.

---

To be clear, Russia violated international law by invading Ukraine. I'm not going to deny that. My argument is that we provoked them.

---

I robbed the bank because they had the money and I didn't. Putin's not Robin Hood. He's a mafioso with some heavy weaponry.

---

Yep. That's why he didn't let you get away without taking his cut.

---

Hey, if you're a fan of extortion, murder, and grift, Putin's your guy for sure.

---

He's a mafioso, and we're working in his territory. It's the closest you've come to reality, and I'm not being snarky. By all means think of it that way if it helps.

---

Only arrogance would say it's "his territory". He tried to expand his grift and it's not going as planned.

---

What do you think DC is trying to do in Eastern Europe?

At least the Russkies can claim that has been their neck of the woods (sphere of influence) for hundreds of years.

---

DC trying to do? Right now, give the Ukrainians what they need to defend their Nation. Everything the US is doing is lockstep with NATO. The only people that believe there is some nefarious act going on are the pro-Russia crowd.

Sphere of Influenc? I guess we should help the British Empire re-establish their sphere of influence? That sphere of influence ended in 1992 and the Russians agreed. They could have kept Crimea and the Donbas and Ukraine would have been fine with it to have their own Nation. You seem to forget that Russia agreed to all this. But, it doesn't fit your pro-Russia/Putin schtick. Come on let's here about the US Diplomat call 10 years before Putin invaded as the true cause and justification for an invasion. You guys really believe this garbage?

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

"All resources in Russian economy are exhausted. Inflation is rising, interest rates cannot be significantly increased. Extreme lack of the workforce. Adding money from reserves to market will just increase inflation without bringing new growth. Russia is likely facing stagnation… pic.twitter.com/rXRQULbrKt

— Jaanika Merilo (@jaanikamerilo) July 29, 2024

---

2.6% unemployment rate is full employment, which means, from this point forward, every single soldier mobilized and sent to the front has a negative effect on GDP. Sure, Russia can keep transferring resources to keep war production at current levels, but they can't do it forever. Eventually people are going to need new clothes, new cars, replacement household items, etc......

Russia will be able to sustain current war production into at least the summer of 2025, but they stay at that level indefinitely. They'll have to increasingly rob Peter (private sector) to pay Paul (war production).

---

More importantly than that is the loss of any solider is a devastating thing for Russia.

They don't have the birth rate to replace any losses.


[Russia's death rate has been higher than its birth rate for years, resulting in a natural population decline. In 2022, Russia's crude birth rate was 8.9 per 100,000 people, the lowest it's been since 2000, while its death rate was about 1.7 times higher than its birth rate. Russia's fertility rate is also one of the lowest in the world, with women having an average of 1.42 children in 2022, compared to the 2.1 children needed to maintain the population]

---

indeed. But Russia doesn't care about that if they subsume Ukraine into the Russia. They pick up 40m people, disproportionately young & female (given that Ukraine is fighting this war with +30 year old men).

---

I doubt they even want to try to "subsume" the whole of Ukraine into the Russian Federation.

It was pretty obvious the plan for the war in Ukraine was to drive to Kyiv and install a more friendly (puppet) government in Ukraine.

Not much different than the US strategy in Iraq in 2003

Only difference is that Russia (who is not a major military power) could not even accomplish that simple task against a much smaller adversary....while the USA (who is a major military power) could and did accomplish a similar task in a matter of weeks.

---

they have stated it multiple times, increasingly so. Publicly.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

"All resources in Russian economy are exhausted. Inflation is rising, interest rates cannot be significantly increased. Extreme lack of the workforce. Adding money from reserves to market will just increase inflation without bringing new growth. Russia is likely facing stagnation… pic.twitter.com/rXRQULbrKt

— Jaanika Merilo (@jaanikamerilo) July 29, 2024

---

2.6% unemployment rate is full employment, which means, from this point forward, every single soldier mobilized and sent to the front has a negative effect on GDP. Sure, Russia can keep transferring resources to keep war production at current levels, but they can't do it forever. Eventually people are going to need new clothes, new cars, replacement household items, etc......

Russia will be able to sustain current war production into at least the summer of 2025, but they stay at that level indefinitely. They'll have to increasingly rob Peter (private sector) to pay Paul (war production).

---

More importantly than that is the loss of any solider is a devastating thing for Russia.

They don't have the birth rate to replace any losses.


[Russia's death rate has been higher than its birth rate for years, resulting in a natural population decline. In 2022, Russia's crude birth rate was 8.9 per 100,000 people, the lowest it's been since 2000, while its death rate was about 1.7 times higher than its birth rate. Russia's fertility rate is also one of the lowest in the world, with women having an average of 1.42 children in 2022, compared to the 2.1 children needed to maintain the population]

---

indeed. But Russia doesn't care about that if they subsume Ukraine into the Russia. They pick up 40m people, disproportionately young & female (given that Ukraine is fighting this war with +30 year old men).

---

I think you mean disproportionately old. The idea that Ukraine has a largely young population and is saving it for a rainy day while their aging army collapses is completely illogical.

As for the women, they'll be better off under Russian rule than fleeing west to fill the brothels of Europe. Those poor souls will be putting the "slav" in slavery for years to come, naturally without a word of complaint from the West. It's the only thing Europe really likes about them.

---

Given the fact that your Russian comrades are raping their way across Ukraine, I suspect if you ask a Ukrainian woman, she might feel she's better off working at a brothel in Europe.

---

Few Westerners bother to talk to Ukrainians under Russian rule...

---

What's the scoop?

Let me guess: they recommend to just sit back and enjoy it.

---

They're not just sitting back by any means. They've been fighting the Kiev regime for ten years and counting. Anti-Russian resistance is virtually non-existent in the Donbas. It's minimal in Zaporizhzhia and Kherson, where most of your horror stories come from. Many of the separatists are former Ukrainian military. The civilian population has suffered wanton attacks from Western proxies for years. The Russians are widely considered liberators, and with good reason.

---

Thanks for the scoop. So, it's the Ukrainians raping and killing the Ukrainians.

Of course.

Thank God for the Russian "liberators." Afterall, it's far better to live under Russian rule than any Western democracy.

---

Ukrainians have been engaged in a civil war, yes.

Most of them live a long way from any Western democracy...and even the Poles are halfway glad to see them suffering.

---

Dang, who knew the Russians were getting such a bad rap - well, outside of you of course. I'm glad to hear that. The Russians are the good guys and all the many reports we hear about them committing atrocities is just anti-Russian propaganda.

It's probably because the Russians are just trying to save Christianity.

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

"All resources in Russian economy are exhausted. Inflation is rising, interest rates cannot be significantly increased. Extreme lack of the workforce. Adding money from reserves to market will just increase inflation without bringing new growth. Russia is likely facing stagnation… pic.twitter.com/rXRQULbrKt

— Jaanika Merilo (@jaanikamerilo) July 29, 2024

---

Sure, Russia can keep transferring resources to keep war production at current levels, but they can't do it forever.

---

They don't need to.

---

They do if Nato keeps supplying Ukraine, which it can and will do, certainly for long enough for the Russian machine to crater.

---

Well we will see won't we....because that seems to be the plan.

And if NATO/America mass funding Ukraine still does not lead them to win and the Russian military to crumble...

Will you and the rest of the War Hawks on the forum admit it was a mistake and that we have been lied to by DC aligned Media propaganda?

Or just like the failure wars in Iraq and Afganistan....will it just go down the memeory hole?

---

Nope. Because it's not a mistake. It's a win/win situation. If our support for Ukraine causes Russia to collapse....that's a win. If our support for Ukraine ultimately fails to stop Russia, we have made Russia pay dearly for the victory, so dearly that it will take them decades to recover....a half-million casualties and counting.....a century of arty rounds spent......an artillery army nearly out of artillery pieces.....thousands of tanks destroyed......a bomber force nearly wiped out......the BSF reduced by 20 ships and forced to flee to safe harbor.....new members to the Nato alliance......actual Nato mobilization steps..... That's a win. A big one. A cheap one.

Russia is headed for Kaliningrad, buddy, whether you want to admit it or not. No, not one big armored thrust. But inch by inch, gambit by gambit, that's what they want. The want Poland back. Stopping them, slowing them down, sapping their strength, etc......you do that every time you get the chance. Because it is stupendously effin' obtuse (fortified with breathtaking ignorance) to standback and say "oh, we have no interests east of the Bug....Russia has never been an expansionist power anyway.....we don't need to worry about their intentions......they're too weak to do anything like that...." Our interests do indeed go east of the Bug, but Russia believes it's interests go well west of the Bug......

Russia is too weak to roll over Ukraine, yet look at what it's costing everybody to fix the problem they started when they invaded what they thought would be an easy 3-day special operation. And yet, you insist that we let Russia get in position to make the same kind of miscalculations over Poland.

Quote:

---

Russia is headed for Kaliningrad, buddy, whether you want to admit it or not. No, not one big armored thrust. But inch by inch, gambit by gambit, that's what they want. The want Poland back

---

What a stupid assertion. They wanted Poland back so much they signed the Minsk treaties? Heck, Putin was even willing to ensdorse a status quo that didn't absorb the Russian oblasts into the Russian Federation.

I hope that the final gift of the boomers to humanity isn't to resurrect the cold war and turn it into a hot one. Your generation is cursed.

Bear8084 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Bear8084 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

"All resources in Russian economy are exhausted. Inflation is rising, interest rates cannot be significantly increased. Extreme lack of the workforce. Adding money from reserves to market will just increase inflation without bringing new growth. Russia is likely facing stagnation… pic.twitter.com/rXRQULbrKt

— Jaanika Merilo (@jaanikamerilo) July 29, 2024

---

2.6% unemployment rate is full employment, which means, from this point forward, every single soldier mobilized and sent to the front has a negative effect on GDP. Sure, Russia can keep transferring resources to keep war production at current levels, but they can't do it forever. Eventually people are going to need new clothes, new cars, replacement household items, etc......

Russia will be able to sustain current war production into at least the summer of 2025, but they stay at that level indefinitely. They'll have to increasingly rob Peter (private sector) to pay Paul (war production).

---

More importantly than that is the loss of any solider is a devastating thing for Russia.

They don't have the birth rate to replace any losses.


[Russia's death rate has been higher than its birth rate for years, resulting in a natural population decline. In 2022, Russia's crude birth rate was 8.9 per 100,000 people, the lowest it's been since 2000, while its death rate was about 1.7 times higher than its birth rate. Russia's fertility rate is also one of the lowest in the world, with women having an average of 1.42 children in 2022, compared to the 2.1 children needed to maintain the population]

---

indeed. But Russia doesn't care about that if they subsume Ukraine into the Russia. They pick up 40m people, disproportionately young & female (given that Ukraine is fighting this war with +30 year old men).

---

I think you mean disproportionately old. The idea that Ukraine has a largely young population and is saving it for a rainy day while their aging army collapses is completely illogical.

As for the women, they'll be better off under Russian rule than fleeing west to fill the brothels of Europe. Those poor souls will be putting the "slav" in slavery for years to come, naturally without a word of complaint from the West. It's the only thing Europe really likes about them.

---

Good grief what a disgusting post. Not super surprising it's from the Russian.

---

The false sympathy and exploitation of Ukraine by the West is indeed disgusting.

---

Yet, Ukraine asks for help. Hmm, who do I believe?

The guy with a Baylor Law Degree living a great Capitalist life in America pleading to let the Russian's have Ukraine as the humanitarian thing to do or the Ukranian President whose Nation was invaded asking for military hardware so they can repel the invader???

Sorry, rings hollow. I will go with the guy that was invaded asking for help...

---

Zelensky's disregard for Ukrainian lives is a war crime in its own right. Of course he's under enormous pressure. The top Nazi militia leader during Maidan -- the same one Nuland worked closely with -- threatened to hang from the highest tree in Kyiv he made a deal with Russia. Not one but two of Ukraine's negotiators were murdered in 2022 after being smeared as Russian collaborators. A few weeks later the US and UK scuttled another peace deal. So when we talk about noble, generous America helping its defenseless ally, it reeks of hypocrisy. That's what I call ringing hollow.

---

More propaganda from the pro-rape and pro-genocide Russian.

The only thing that rings hollow are your posts, cuck.

---

'effin amazin' isn't it. In an effort to be Lord Halifax, he's become Lord Haw Haw.

Realitybites said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

And good grief, how miserable and nihilistic does our political class have to be, risking Western civilization in an obviously failed war over a backwater country because they can't afford to lose face? They value nothing except money and power. Everything else is expendable. If you ever wanted wanted an example of cultural despair, you're looking right at it.

---

If you think Western Civilization is at risk over modest military aid to a "backwater country" trying to defend itself against a despotic invader, you are the very over dramatic weakling bent on the precise decline you claim to abhor.

---

If you want to confront a nuclear power without factoring in that risk, you're being naive. Neocons are often referred to as liberals who got mugged by "reality." In other words, you're witnessing what happens when the flower power generation gets actual power and figures out that their utopian ideas can't be realized without violence. Of course utopian ideas are never realized, but no one in post-modern America wants to hear that.

---

Nary an ideal throughout history has been realized without violence whether it is actual or the threat therof. That's the Utopian navet you and many others can't fathom. This isn't about neocon, neo liberal, isolationism or populism. The nuclear equation is already cast when rogue despotism armed as such is in existence. When it actively asserts itself it played the card of requiring an address.

---

Except that the only rogue actor here is NATO. We're the ones who flagrantly violate national sovereignty at our every whim, while Russia takes decades to try to negotiate a solution.

We had a rules-based international order. Too bad we weren't satisfied with it.

---

Come on Sam.

Even though I fundamentally agree that NATO bares its share of responsibility for the Ukrainian war …..in no way is Russia blameless.

---

To be clear, Russia violated international law by invading Ukraine. I'm not going to deny that. My argument is that we provoked them.

---

Totally agree Russia was provoked.
Have stated so previously.

However both elites miscalculated.

Biden never thought Putin would follow through with an invasion to stop Ukraine from joining NATO.

Putin thought his army would overwhelm Ukraine in a matter of weeks.

---

I think Putin's miscalculation was that military conflict would force Ukraine to the negotiating table. The initial expeditionary force the Russian Federation fielded was in no way large enough to capture and hold territory. When it was clear that Zelensky was going to choose national suicide, they fell back, regrouped and now have a 650,000 man army that will take and hold as much of Ukraine as is needed to ensure their national security. Zelensky can surrender, give the Russians four Oblasts and agree to neutrality or he can continue and lose half the country.

At any rate, the Ukraine game is halfway through the fourth quarter and the Russians have a big lead. The Israel/Hezbollah game kicks off in an hour.

---

The "It was just an feint" myth again with Russian BS mixed in.

Realitybites said:

---

Quote:

---

Russia is headed for Kaliningrad, buddy, whether you want to admit it or not. No, not one big armored thrust. But inch by inch, gambit by gambit, that's what they want. The want Poland back

---

What a stupid assertion. They wanted Poland back so much they signed the Minsk treaties? Heck, Putin was even willing to ensdorse a status quo that didn't absorb the Russian oblasts into the Russian Federation.

I hope that the final gift of the boomers to humanity isn't to resurrect the cold war and turn it into a hot one. Your generation is cursed.

---

I don't agree with his assertion - at least not to the extent Russia is willing to do anything about it, but I find it humorous you pointed to their signature on the Minsk treaties as some sort of evidence Russia doesn't want Poland, when Russia so blatantly violated Minsk by invading Ukraine.

Let's not pretend that an agreement will ever stop Russia from doing as it pleases.

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

"All resources in Russian economy are exhausted. Inflation is rising, interest rates cannot be significantly increased. Extreme lack of the workforce. Adding money from reserves to market will just increase inflation without bringing new growth. Russia is likely facing stagnation… pic.twitter.com/rXRQULbrKt

— Jaanika Merilo (@jaanikamerilo) July 29, 2024

---

2.6% unemployment rate is full employment, which means, from this point forward, every single soldier mobilized and sent to the front has a negative effect on GDP. Sure, Russia can keep transferring resources to keep war production at current levels, but they can't do it forever. Eventually people are going to need new clothes, new cars, replacement household items, etc......

Russia will be able to sustain current war production into at least the summer of 2025, but they stay at that level indefinitely. They'll have to increasingly rob Peter (private sector) to pay Paul (war production).

---

More importantly than that is the loss of any solider is a devastating thing for Russia.

They don't have the birth rate to replace any losses.


[Russia's death rate has been higher than its birth rate for years, resulting in a natural population decline. In 2022, Russia's crude birth rate was 8.9 per 100,000 people, the lowest it's been since 2000, while its death rate was about 1.7 times higher than its birth rate. Russia's fertility rate is also one of the lowest in the world, with women having an average of 1.42 children in 2022, compared to the 2.1 children needed to maintain the population]

---

indeed. But Russia doesn't care about that if they subsume Ukraine into the Russia. They pick up 40m people, disproportionately young & female (given that Ukraine is fighting this war with +30 year old men).

---

I doubt they even want to try to "subsume" the whole of Ukraine into the Russian Federation.

It was pretty obvious the plan for the war in Ukraine was to drive to Kyiv and install a more friendly (puppet) government in Ukraine.

Not much different than the US strategy in Iraq in 2003

Only difference is that Russia (who is not a major military power) could not even accomplish that simple task against a much smaller adversary....while the USA (who is a major military power) could and did accomplish a similar task in a matter of weeks.

---

they have stated it multiple times, increasingly so. Publicly.

---

I have seen them cast doubt on the historic nature of the Ukrainian state…but that is propaganda for internal Russian consumption. Along with excuse making for how they are allowed to invade another nation (the excuse being that Ukraine is not a nation….obviously when Ukraine had a pro-Russian government they never made such foolish claims)

I have never seen them say they want to physically absorb all of ukriane into Russia…

Not to mention they can't actually do it…they have yet to even take all of the Donbas…much less central or western Ukraine where they have little to no support.

I don't think Russia wants to do it…and they can't even if they foolishly decided that was the course they would follow.

We could not occupy Iraq forever and they can not occupy Ukraine forever

Realitybites said:

---

Quote:

---

Russia is headed for Kaliningrad, buddy, whether you want to admit it or not. No, not one big armored thrust. But inch by inch, gambit by gambit, that's what they want. The want Poland back

---

What a stupid assertion. They wanted Poland back so much they signed the Minsk treaties? Heck, Putin was even willing to ensdorse a status quo that didn't absorb the Russian oblasts into the Russian Federation.

I hope that the final gift of the boomers to humanity isn't to resurrect the cold war and turn it into a hot one. Your generation is cursed.

---

I stand agape at your inability to understand the subject material and the course of events.

The Minsk Treaties did not curtail Russia in the least. They undermined Ukrainian sovereignty by forcing Ukraine to negotiate in ways that limited its actions in its own sovereign territory. And, of course, Russia invaded outright when the agreements had served their purpose (of destabilizing Ukraine).

When will it dawn on you that Russia is not a zombie dancing on strings pulled by boomers?
When will it dawn on you that Russia actually does have territorial ambitions?
Do you even know where Kalningrad is?
Do you even know where the Suwalkin Gap is?
Do you really think that American Boomers persuaded Germany to agree to station combat troops in Lithuania? (to defend the Suwalkin Gap).

I swear, reading your posts is like returning to the third world, where literally everybody "knew" that America was omniscient and omnipotent, so whatever happened was America's fault = America had to know about it and didn't stop it so......or America actually caused it to happen. It's like nobody in the world, other than America, has any agency in anything.

whiterock said:

---

Bear8084 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Bear8084 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

"All resources in Russian economy are exhausted. Inflation is rising, interest rates cannot be significantly increased. Extreme lack of the workforce. Adding money from reserves to market will just increase inflation without bringing new growth. Russia is likely facing stagnation… pic.twitter.com/rXRQULbrKt

— Jaanika Merilo (@jaanikamerilo) July 29, 2024

---

2.6% unemployment rate is full employment, which means, from this point forward, every single soldier mobilized and sent to the front has a negative effect on GDP. Sure, Russia can keep transferring resources to keep war production at current levels, but they can't do it forever. Eventually people are going to need new clothes, new cars, replacement household items, etc......

Russia will be able to sustain current war production into at least the summer of 2025, but they stay at that level indefinitely. They'll have to increasingly rob Peter (private sector) to pay Paul (war production).

---

More importantly than that is the loss of any solider is a devastating thing for Russia.

They don't have the birth rate to replace any losses.


[Russia's death rate has been higher than its birth rate for years, resulting in a natural population decline. In 2022, Russia's crude birth rate was 8.9 per 100,000 people, the lowest it's been since 2000, while its death rate was about 1.7 times higher than its birth rate. Russia's fertility rate is also one of the lowest in the world, with women having an average of 1.42 children in 2022, compared to the 2.1 children needed to maintain the population]

---

indeed. But Russia doesn't care about that if they subsume Ukraine into the Russia. They pick up 40m people, disproportionately young & female (given that Ukraine is fighting this war with +30 year old men).

---

I think you mean disproportionately old. The idea that Ukraine has a largely young population and is saving it for a rainy day while their aging army collapses is completely illogical.

As for the women, they'll be better off under Russian rule than fleeing west to fill the brothels of Europe. Those poor souls will be putting the "slav" in slavery for years to come, naturally without a word of complaint from the West. It's the only thing Europe really likes about them.

---

Good grief what a disgusting post. Not super surprising it's from the Russian.

---

The false sympathy and exploitation of Ukraine by the West is indeed disgusting.

---

Yet, Ukraine asks for help. Hmm, who do I believe?

The guy with a Baylor Law Degree living a great Capitalist life in America pleading to let the Russian's have Ukraine as the humanitarian thing to do or the Ukranian President whose Nation was invaded asking for military hardware so they can repel the invader???

Sorry, rings hollow. I will go with the guy that was invaded asking for help...

---

Zelensky's disregard for Ukrainian lives is a war crime in its own right. Of course he's under enormous pressure. The top Nazi militia leader during Maidan -- the same one Nuland worked closely with -- threatened to hang from the highest tree in Kyiv he made a deal with Russia. Not one but two of Ukraine's negotiators were murdered in 2022 after being smeared as Russian collaborators. A few weeks later the US and UK scuttled another peace deal. So when we talk about noble, generous America helping its defenseless ally, it reeks of hypocrisy. That's what I call ringing hollow.

---

More propaganda from the pro-rape and pro-genocide Russian.

The only thing that rings hollow are your posts, cuck.

---

'effin amazin' isn't it. In an effort to be Lord Halifax, he's become Lord Haw Haw.

---

Amusing reference.

Don't agree with your accusation; but still a clever post.