Redbrickbear said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Some are under the false pretense that Ukraine wouldn't have fought Russia without our support. Their country was invaded. Of course they're going to resist.

---

Resist....sure

Negotiation...maybe

Certain individuals and interests in the West have been telling them not to negotiate for land and to fight

[Russia was "ready to end the war if we took neutrality," Ukraine's former top negotiator confirmed, but Boris Johnson said, "let's just fight."
Tamas Orban
Nov 27, 2023]

---

Too bad Z isn't a dictator and couldn't go against the constitution to abandon NATO

---

Ukraine is not in NATO

So they are not abandoning an alliance they are not even in

As far as Ukraine's Constitution....there is some debate about that

https://verfassungsblog.de/would-ukraine-breach-its-own-constitution-if-it-dropped-its-nato-bid/

---

I'm not sure about Russian but in English you can abandon organizations that you are not a member of.

---

So since unlike you...I am not a member of the Communist party.

I am then abandoning that party by never joining up in the first place?

I guess I have also abandoned being a member of the Japanese Royal family as well.

---

I like when you called him a LGBTQ+ imperialist

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

I am not Orthodox, but I've been surrounded by it most of my life. 90% of my relatives on one side are Serbian Orthodox. My wife's family are Russian immigrants and have a long history with the Russian Orthodox Church. Another part of our family is Greek Orthodox. BTW, the Russian orthodox church in the U.S. is different than the ROC.

I have the utmost respect for the church, so I don't say any of this to be critical, but rather just stating facts that many who do not follow the Orthodox churches probably don't know.

Orthodox churches have long been closely connected with their governments. More recently, for example, the Serbian church supported Milosevic and spoke out in favor of those wars. Unfortunately, Kirill - former KGB - in Russia is a Putin shill and has spoken out aggressively in favor of Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

The Orthodox church also is exceedingly hierarchical. So, for example, the various Russian orthodox churches are governed by Kirill, and he dictates everything from church positions, how the church is run, and Divine Liturgies (weekly services, sermons worship.).

Two reasons for this background. One, when people hear complaints (usually from folks with no understanding) of Ukraine "banning Russian churches," they likely compare it to banning Christian churches here in the U.S. But it's nothing like that. When Ukraine "banned" the ROC, it was not in any way banning the Ortho church or communities, but rather, only those officially governed by and beholden to Kirill. Fortunately, many of those Ukrainian ROC priests disavowed Kirill, stopped referencing him during services, and spoke out against the invasion. Many changed to the Orthodox Church of Ukraine - not Russia-affiliated.

BTW, many also do not know that Putin and Russian agents tried mightily to prevent the formation of the OCU in the first place and used threats, coercion, and worse to keep priests and layfolk in the ROC

Two, there is nothing unusual about Eastern Orthodox Churches working with governments. Many such churches were anti-communists, including the Russian church. But since the fall of communism, various churches have taken different positions relative to democratic values, and even freedom of religion. The Russian church, for example, supported laws restricting other religions and again, has supported Putin. Other eastern churches have supported freedom and democracy.

It should surprise nobody that governments of all kinds - from Russia, to Greece, to Romania, to the U.S. and elsewhere - lend support and work with Ortho churches that share their values. That has been done for thousands of years.

But it is ludicrous to suggest that non-Russian orthodox churches are controlled by or beholden to the U.S. Frankly, that is deeply offensive to the Orthodox church.

---

Several points here that I would address.

1. It's true that Orthodoxy has always been closely tied with politics. I would argue that was the reason for the Eastern Schism in the first place. So, to say the Russian patriarch speaks in favor of his government's wars means very little. Even many Protestant churches in America do the same, and more to the point, so does the newly created Ukrainian church. They are all within their rights to do so. What the Russians don't do is ban other churches, brutally attack their congregants and clergy, and confiscate or destroy their property. Ukraine does all of these things to the Russian Orthodox.

2. Banning Orthodox churches with a connection to Russia is indeed banning Russian churches. It would be as if the US government banned Catholic churches governed by Rome, established a so-called American Catholic Church, and insisted that nothing had changed because all of those Catholic communities could continue existing as long as they renounced the pope and spoke out in favor of American policy.

3. I know you may not agree, but I must keep making the point that opposing Putin is not the equivalent of supporting democracy. Ukraine hasn't been a democracy in any meaningful sense for quite some time, and at this point it's no better than a tin-pot dictatorship ruled by an assortment of thugs, opportunists, and fanatics who are trying to sweep up as much ill-gotten gain as they can while they race for the exit.

4. The OCU would not exist, and would have no reason to exist, if not for the Western policy of sowing ethnic, religious, and political discord in Ukraine. Its origin has nothing to do with theology and everything to do with politics, as evidenced by the rhetoric of Poroshenko, the loyal Ukrainian hierarchy, and American supporters like Biden, McCain, et al.

---

The bold above is false. I know first hand what has happened to several evangelical churches and individuals including imprisonment. This was happening before the war in Ukraine and has only picked up in Russia.

---

My statement was true. Prosecution under Russia's admittedly strict evangelizing laws isn't the same banning, beating, or burning.

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

I have a lot of issues with the Chinese invasion scenario, but we seem to agree that it would constitute banning a church. The fact that people could go to another church doesn't change the nature of the thing. I've posted articles about the violence and other indignities inflicted on UOC churches, including the planting of evidence to incriminate them for "actively helping Putin." The UOC's relationship to Russia and the war is more complex than we're led to believe. Even if the dubious accusations against some clerics are true, total suppression of a thousand-year-old institution is a grossly excessive response.

The fact that there's been no organized effort to end martial law or hold elections means very little considering that Zelensky has also banned every viable or semi-viable opposition party and is now in the process of arresting every political rival in sight, including our friend Poroshenko. Ukraine's WPF ranking is actually lower than it was in 2021, and even that understates the problem. The more unpopular the regime becomes, the more journalists seem to sound the alarm about restrictions on the press. And those are the ones who haven't died in prison.

---

We'll never agree on the UOC or elections, which is fine. But your wrong about the free press rankings. It's improved every year since 2021. And of course, where Ukraine is ranked in the 50s, Russia is in the 180s.

And Ukraine has not banned more opposition parties, just the initial ban, and those politicians are still politically active. I posted multiple articles last week about significant opposition, but they happen to agree with Zelensky major war-related decisions.

I'm not trying to take the easy way out on the mistreatment of UOC priest/members. I just don't have any intel on that and don't trust the media on either side. For example, I've seen UOC priests interviewed who said they disagreed with the ban but have been treated just fine and unaware of mistreatment elsewhere. Yet, I also read your posts. I'll stick to what I said earlier. I have no doubt some of that is happening. I think if it were prevalent, there would be more attention given to it.

---

We may be looking different rankings. The World Press Freedom Index had Ukraine at 67 in 2021, 55 in 2022, 61 in 2023, and 65 in 2024. So it took a big drop at the beginning of the war and has yet to fully recover.

Western media coverage of war crimes by the US and its allies is about the last thing I would expect to see. We didn't learn much from Vietnam, but we did learn not to let that happen. There's practically no first hand reporting of any kind, and Western outlets mostly just repeat official statements from Kiev.

BylrFan said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

Trump lowing the boom on President Borat.

---

Kissing putin's ass is no better. Regan is rolling over his grave right now. Trump will learn the hard way to never trust Russia's word.

---

It was Reagan who adopted the Russian proverb "trust but verify." He considered building trust with Russia to be one of his greatest accomplishments. He would indeed be spinning in his grave over the Ukraine war, but not for the reasons many assume.

sombear said:

---

historian said:

---

sombear said:

---

historian said:

---

---

We didn't send him $100 billion.

---

Closer to $200 billion. He claimed $100 billion was missing. So where did it go?

Just as important, whatever the amount why wasn't it audited? For any government expenditure there should be detailed accounting so that we know exactly where all of it went. That's the problem with the fascists wasting our money: there has been almost no accountability. They have been robbing us for decades creating slush funds for all kinds of evils and using our money to tyrannies us.

Trump & Musk are doing something about this so they are heroes. Many of the loudest critics are probably in the take and belong in prison.

---

[The "missing $100 billion claim is false]

Since the full-scale Russian military invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the U.S. Congress has passed five Ukraine aid bills totaling $175 billion. Of that, $106 billion is designated for direct support to Ukraine, comprising some $69.8 billion in military aid, $33.3 billion for budget support, and $2.8 billion in humanitarian assistance, as tracked by the Washington, D.C.-based Council on Foreign Relations.

The remaining funds support U.S. activities related to the war in Ukraine, as well as U.S. aid to countries affected by Russia's war in Ukraine. A significant portion of the aid is spent in the U.S., funding factories and workers to produce weapons for Ukraine and replenishing Pentagon stockpiles.

A November 2023 article in The Washington Post broke down the U.S. military aid to Ukraine, reporting that most of it is spent in the U.S., used to build new weapons or replenish U.S. stockpiles, rather than going directly to Ukraine. Nearly 90% of the $68 billion in military assistance benefits American workers, with 117 production lines across 31 states and 71 cities producing weapons for Ukraine.

The Post's findings corroborated earlier estimates by Mark Cancian of the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Strategic and International Studies that much of the U.S. aid for Ukraine is spent domestically.

On Feb. 5, 2025, General Keith Kellogg, President Donald Trump's special envoy for Ukraine and Russia, reaffirmed that the $174 billion of U.S. aid to Ukraine is accounted for and being distributed through a transparent process:

"The United States, the American people, the U.S. citizens have given Ukraine over $174 billion. And we have put inspector generals on the ground in Ukraine and here to track that money. So, we have fairly good reporting on where it's going," Kellogg said on the Newsmax TV channel.

---

Zelensky has addressed this. He isn't just talking about cash but about the total value of weapons and aid that they were supposed to have received:

Quote:

---

One-hundred billion (dollars) of these 177, or 200, some people even say, we have never received," Zelenskyy said, according to the translation of the clip. "We are talking about specific things, because we got it not with money but with weapons. We got $70 something billion worth of it. There is training, there is additional transport. There are not only prices for weapons, there were humanitarian programs, social et cetera.

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Tulsi Gabbard says there’s 30 US FUNDED biolabs in Ukraine..

wtf?? pic.twitter.com/fRw362ej2j

— American AF 🇺🇸 (@iAnonPatriot) February 21, 2025

---

Again, from 3 years ago and debunked.

---

It wasn't debunked. She's only saying what US government admitted.

ATL Bear said:

---

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Ukraine Never Should Have Made the Mistake of Getting Invaded

---

Putin should not have invaded. But he did.
Not just true, but the most important truth of all. RUSSIA started all of this.

Biden should not have openly assured the Ukraine that they could join Nato. But he did.
False. Refusing to categorically reject the idea is not synonymous with "assuring" membership.

So what exactly do you want the US to do? Will you send your sons/daughters to go fight for the Ukraine? Or do you just want to send our tax dollars? And to what end and how long?
Support others who are willing to fight, for as long as they are willing to fight, up to and including supporting any future insurgency against a victorious Russia (which we most definitely will do, should such happen).

.

---

It is amazing how hard people work to ignore very elementary geo-strategic realities: Ukraine is a sovereign country which was invaded by Russia without any cause whatsoever, an act which was a significant threat to Nato, an alliance to which we are a member. Russia committed an act of war; Ukraine did not. Nato is significantly more threatened by Russian actions than Russia than vice-versa.

---

You're wrong. Biden did in fact assure them that they could join nato.

As for the rest of your comments, I have no problem with Ukraine continuing to fight.
So how much taxpayer money are you willing to just give away so Ukraine can bleed Russia. 100 billion per year? 200 billion? Just curious.

Personally, I think Europe should foot much of the bill. I also think that if we are going to fund/arm them in huge amounts, getting some favors/pay/guarantees in return for America would be reasonable. So I don't disagree entirely with you. There is value in bleeding Russia, but I wouldn't want to incentivize millions of deaths to do it. So if they want to continue to fight, let's sell them weapons and intelligence, but shelling out unlimited cash clearly makes it very easy for the Ukrainian oligarchs to keep killing off their own people without any personal sacrifice.

---

Show your work here.

---

You have google, it's quite easily found in the public domain. And two months later after Biden assured them it was up to the Ukraine to join or not, Russia invaded.

Yeah, I know ... Russia was always going to invade, blah blah blah. That conversation had nothing to do with it, blah blah blah.

---

Didn't find it on Google. Furthermore, you didn't say "it was up to Ukraine". You said Biden assured them they could join. Everyone knows that "up to Ukraine" goes back to all the required changes necessary to qualify, as well as a vote by the members. You guys are playing fast and loose with the truth. It's getting old.

---

He said Ukraine's future lies in NATO. That's nothing if not an assurance.

ATL Bear said:

---

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Ukraine Never Should Have Made the Mistake of Getting Invaded

---

Putin should not have invaded. But he did.
Not just true, but the most important truth of all. RUSSIA started all of this.

Biden should not have openly assured the Ukraine that they could join Nato. But he did.
False. Refusing to categorically reject the idea is not synonymous with "assuring" membership.

So what exactly do you want the US to do? Will you send your sons/daughters to go fight for the Ukraine? Or do you just want to send our tax dollars? And to what end and how long?
Support others who are willing to fight, for as long as they are willing to fight, up to and including supporting any future insurgency against a victorious Russia (which we most definitely will do, should such happen).

.

---

It is amazing how hard people work to ignore very elementary geo-strategic realities: Ukraine is a sovereign country which was invaded by Russia without any cause whatsoever, an act which was a significant threat to Nato, an alliance to which we are a member. Russia committed an act of war; Ukraine did not. Nato is significantly more threatened by Russian actions than Russia than vice-versa.

---

You're wrong. Biden did in fact assure them that they could join nato.

As for the rest of your comments, I have no problem with Ukraine continuing to fight.
So how much taxpayer money are you willing to just give away so Ukraine can bleed Russia. 100 billion per year? 200 billion? Just curious.

Personally, I think Europe should foot much of the bill. I also think that if we are going to fund/arm them in huge amounts, getting some favors/pay/guarantees in return for America would be reasonable. So I don't disagree entirely with you. There is value in bleeding Russia, but I wouldn't want to incentivize millions of deaths to do it. So if they want to continue to fight, let's sell them weapons and intelligence, but shelling out unlimited cash clearly makes it very easy for the Ukrainian oligarchs to keep killing off their own people without any personal sacrifice.

---

Show your work here.

---

You have google, it's quite easily found in the public domain. And two months later after Biden assured them it was up to the Ukraine to join or not, Russia invaded.

Yeah, I know ... Russia was always going to invade, blah blah blah. That conversation had nothing to do with it, blah blah blah.

---

Didn't find it on Google. Furthermore, you didn't say "it was up to Ukraine". You said Biden assured them they could join. Everyone knows that "up to Ukraine" goes back to all the required changes necessary to qualify, as well as a vote by the members. You guys are playing fast and loose with the truth. It's getting old.

---

Biden said it's up to Ukraine, so that means if Ukraine wants in, they can join. You want to make that some huge obstacle and hoops they'd have to jump through. Whatever you want to pretend, Clearly it's an invitation. So yeah, it's not fast and loose with what he said, you're just being obtuse.

---

Wrong. You apparently don't understand what the NATO admission process is. This is why we get all jacked up over framed conspiracies about this war. If someone believes we have no geopolitical or strategic interest in Ukraine, fine, that's a debate. But when the President of the U.S. has to walk back blaming Ukraine for starting the war, and you guys hounding on facts not in existence, it looks like we are so blinded by politics we aren't willing to deal in reality.

---

Wrong. Up to Ukraine. The most powerful leader in the world laid it in Ukraine's hands to join. So there's an admission process. So what? Biden should have said it's off the table. You know this but you want to remain obtuse to fit your narrative. You think Biden giving them the green light was just going to slide by Putin? Silly and childish.

And I'm not blaming Ukraine for starting the war. Only that joining NATO was a no-go previously. Biden green lit it as do-able, and Russia invaded two months later. Biden screwed this up, like he did everything else. Blood is on his hands because the outcome was predictable. All Putin needed was an excuse.

---

Again, it's always been in Ukraine's hands to comply and the membership to assess whether they had and to determine if they wanted to let them in.

---

It's not unilateral. NATO members have made a joint statement that Ukraine's path is irreversible.

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

"So in fact dictators often don't hold elections"

literally my point lmao.. It is not up to him big brains

---

Yes it is

He can hold elections anytime he wants by suspending the presidential decree of martial law

[imposition of martial law has meant that polls have been indefinitely suspended. Since the war began in February 2022, martial law has been imposed and extended (for 90 days at a time) 14 times thus far]

He does hold elections because he does not want to do so….and the DC (before Trump) and Brussels were not forcing him to do so.

---

Dictator!!!

This is why the Ukrainian parliament's opposition leaders signed a joint statement that both parliamentary and presidential elections should take place after the cessation of the war and the conclusion of martial law. The document indicates a consensus among major political parties regarding the need for an appropriate period of time to prepare for elections and favorable conditions for campaigning and voting.

What Do Voters Think?

For the general population, holding elections under current conditions would be problematic. For example, in a November survey conducted by Kyiv's International Institute of Sociology, over 80 percent of respondents expressed a preference for deferring elections until the war had ended.

---

As if there were any real opposition parties in parliament. They were disbanded and their assets seized long ago. A few members may still occupy seats, but that have no organized leadership. Zelensky's biggest political rival is Poroshenko, a Western ally whom he's now accusing of treason.

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Some are under the false pretense that Ukraine wouldn't have fought Russia without our support. Their country was invaded. Of course they're going to resist.

---

[Russia was "ready to end the war if we took neutrality," Ukraine's former top negotiator confirmed, but Boris Johnson said, "let's just fight."
Tamas Orban
Nov 27, 2023]

---

Yep.

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

historian said:

---

sombear said:

---

historian said:

---

---

We didn't send him $100 billion.

---

Closer to $200 billion. He claimed $100 billion was missing. So where did it go?

Just as important, whatever the amount why wasn't it audited? For any government expenditure there should be detailed accounting so that we know exactly where all of it went. That's the problem with the fascists wasting our money: there has been almost no accountability. They have been robbing us for decades creating slush funds for all kinds of evils and using our money to tyrannies us.

Trump & Musk are doing something about this so they are heroes. Many of the loudest critics are probably in the take and belong in prison.

---

[The "missing $100 billion claim is false]

Since the full-scale Russian military invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the U.S. Congress has passed five Ukraine aid bills totaling $175 billion. Of that, $106 billion is designated for direct support to Ukraine, comprising some $69.8 billion in military aid, $33.3 billion for budget support, and $2.8 billion in humanitarian assistance, as tracked by the Washington, D.C.-based Council on Foreign Relations.

The remaining funds support U.S. activities related to the war in Ukraine, as well as U.S. aid to countries affected by Russia's war in Ukraine. A significant portion of the aid is spent in the U.S., funding factories and workers to produce weapons for Ukraine and replenishing Pentagon stockpiles.

A November 2023 article in The Washington Post broke down the U.S. military aid to Ukraine, reporting that most of it is spent in the U.S., used to build new weapons or replenish U.S. stockpiles, rather than going directly to Ukraine. Nearly 90% of the $68 billion in military assistance benefits American workers, with 117 production lines across 31 states and 71 cities producing weapons for Ukraine.

The Post's findings corroborated earlier estimates by Mark Cancian of the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Strategic and International Studies that much of the U.S. aid for Ukraine is spent domestically.

On Feb. 5, 2025, General Keith Kellogg, President Donald Trump's special envoy for Ukraine and Russia, reaffirmed that the $174 billion of U.S. aid to Ukraine is accounted for and being distributed through a transparent process:

"The United States, the American people, the U.S. citizens have given Ukraine over $174 billion. And we have put inspector generals on the ground in Ukraine and here to track that money. So, we have fairly good reporting on where it's going," Kellogg said on the Newsmax TV channel.

---

Zelensky has addressed this. He isn't just talking about cash but about the total value of weapons and aid that they were supposed to have received:

Quote:

---

One-hundred billion (dollars) of these 177, or 200, some people even say, we have never received," Zelenskyy said, according to the translation of the clip. "We are talking about specific things, because we got it not with money but with weapons. We got $70 something billion worth of it. There is training, there is additional transport. There are not only prices for weapons, there were humanitarian programs, social et cetera.

---

---

Right, I understood that. The point I was making was that X warriors turned that into Zelensky saying $100 billion was missing, which was patently false.

UKRAINE: Leaders arrive in Kyiv urging Zelensky to stay the course and refuse efforts by the Trump administration to end the war. Leaders in attendance from: Canada, Spain, Sweden, Finland, Norway, Denmark, Iceland, Estonia, Latvia, & Lithuaniapic.twitter.com/T1cmC8O2st

— @amuse (@amuse) February 24, 2025

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

"So in fact dictators often don't hold elections"

literally my point lmao.. It is not up to him big brains

---

Yes it is

He can hold elections anytime he wants by suspending the presidential decree of martial law

[imposition of martial law has meant that polls have been indefinitely suspended. Since the war began in February 2022, martial law has been imposed and extended (for 90 days at a time) 14 times thus far]

He does hold elections because he does not want to do so….and the DC (before Trump) and Brussels were not forcing him to do so.

---

Dictator!!!

This is why the Ukrainian parliament's opposition leaders signed a joint statement that both parliamentary and presidential elections should take place after the cessation of the war and the conclusion of martial law. The document indicates a consensus among major political parties regarding the need for an appropriate period of time to prepare for elections and favorable conditions for campaigning and voting.

What Do Voters Think?

For the general population, holding elections under current conditions would be problematic. For example, in a November survey conducted by Kyiv's International Institute of Sociology, over 80 percent of respondents expressed a preference for deferring elections until the war had ended.

---

As if there were any real opposition parties in parliament. They were disbanded and their assets seized long ago. A few members may still occupy seats, but that have no organized leadership. Zelensky's biggest political rival is Poroshenko, a Western ally whom he's now accusing of treason.

---

No, most of the members of the pro-Russian parties that were banned are back in parliament and/or politically active. The members were not banned, just the parties.

No also on opposition. There are 3 candidates widely expected to eventually run, including the general Zelensky fired, and all 3 have come publicly against holding elections. Not a single elected official has called for an election, even though 80% or more in safe seats.

Assassin said:

---

UKRAINE: Leaders arrive in Kyiv urging Zelensky to stay the course and refuse efforts by the Trump administration to end the war. Leaders in attendance from: Canada, Spain, Sweden, Finland, Norway, Denmark, Iceland, Estonia, Latvia, & Lithuaniapic.twitter.com/T1cmC8O2st

— @amuse (@amuse) February 24, 2025

---

amuse is trying to outdo Musk for biggest fraud on X. Those leaders most certainly did not say that.

Redbrickbear said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Some are under the false pretense that Ukraine wouldn't have fought Russia without our support. Their country was invaded. Of course they're going to resist.

---

Resist....sure

Negotiation...maybe

Certain individuals and interests in the West have been telling them not to negotiate for land and to fight

[Russia was "ready to end the war if we took neutrality," Ukraine's former top negotiator confirmed, but Boris Johnson said, "let's just fight."
Tamas Orban
Nov 27, 2023]

---

Too bad Z isn't a dictator and couldn't go against the constitution to abandon NATO

---

Ukraine is not in NATO

So they are not abandoning an alliance they are not even in

As far as Ukraine's Constitution....there is some debate about that

https://verfassungsblog.de/would-ukraine-breach-its-own-constitution-if-it-dropped-its-nato-bid/

---

I'm not sure about Russian but in English you can abandon organizations that you are not a member of.

---

So since unlike you...I am not a member of the Communist party.

I am then abandoning that party by never joining up in the first place?

I guess I have also abandoned being a member of the Japanese Royal family as well.

---

Notice you had to add "being a member" because like most of your points they are some combination of logical fallacies and intellectual dishonestly. This is easily attributed to ignorance as well

sombear said:

---

Assassin said:

---

UKRAINE: Leaders arrive in Kyiv urging Zelensky to stay the course and refuse efforts by the Trump administration to end the war. Leaders in attendance from: Canada, Spain, Sweden, Finland, Norway, Denmark, Iceland, Estonia, Latvia, & Lithuaniapic.twitter.com/T1cmC8O2st

— @amuse (@amuse) February 24, 2025

---

amuse is trying to outdo Musk for biggest fraud on X. Those leaders most certainly did not say that.

---

https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2025/02/24/zelensky-hails-ukraine-s-heroism-on-third-annniversary-of-russia-s-invasion_6738490_4.html#

Assassin said:

---

sombear said:

---

Assassin said:

---

UKRAINE: Leaders arrive in Kyiv urging Zelensky to stay the course and refuse efforts by the Trump administration to end the war. Leaders in attendance from: Canada, Spain, Sweden, Finland, Norway, Denmark, Iceland, Estonia, Latvia, & Lithuaniapic.twitter.com/T1cmC8O2st

— @amuse (@amuse) February 24, 2025

---

amuse is trying to outdo Musk for biggest fraud on X. Those leaders most certainly did not say that.

---

https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2025/02/24/zelensky-hails-ukraine-s-heroism-on-third-annniversary-of-russia-s-invasion_6738490_4.html#

---

Yes, I've read that article and ten like it. None come close to saying the leaders were:

"urging Zelensky to stay the course and refuse efforts by the Trump administration to end the war."

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Some are under the false pretense that Ukraine wouldn't have fought Russia without our support. Their country was invaded. Of course they're going to resist.

---

Resist....sure

Negotiation...maybe

Certain individuals and interests in the West have been telling them not to negotiate for land and to fight

[Russia was "ready to end the war if we took neutrality," Ukraine's former top negotiator confirmed, but Boris Johnson said, "let's just fight."
Tamas Orban
Nov 27, 2023]

---

Too bad Z isn't a dictator and couldn't go against the constitution to abandon NATO

---

Ukraine is not in NATO

So they are not abandoning an alliance they are not even in

As far as Ukraine's Constitution....there is some debate about that

https://verfassungsblog.de/would-ukraine-breach-its-own-constitution-if-it-dropped-its-nato-bid/

---

I'm not sure about Russian but in English you can abandon organizations that you are not a member of.

---

So since unlike you...I am not a member of the Communist party.

I am then abandoning that party by never joining up in the first place?

I guess I have also abandoned being a member of the Japanese Royal family as well.

---

combination of logical fallacies and intellectual dishonestly.

---

Something you have a lot of experience with....

As well as just being an outright goof

Assassin said:

---

sombear said:

---

Assassin said:

---

UKRAINE: Leaders arrive in Kyiv urging Zelensky to stay the course and refuse efforts by the Trump administration to end the war. Leaders in attendance from: Canada, Spain, Sweden, Finland, Norway, Denmark, Iceland, Estonia, Latvia, & Lithuaniapic.twitter.com/T1cmC8O2st

— @amuse (@amuse) February 24, 2025

---

amuse is trying to outdo Musk for biggest fraud on X. Those leaders most certainly did not say that.

---

https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2025/02/24/zelensky-hails-ukraine-s-heroism-on-third-annniversary-of-russia-s-invasion_6738490_4.html#

---

Lets see how long these "leaders" stay elected once they start sending hundreds of billions to corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs

US joins Russia to vote against UN resolution condemning Russia's war against Ukraine

This is bound to upset all of the right people!

Merz: „Absolutely no illusions“ about Trump.
Goal needs to be step by step
independence from a US who „pretty much no longer cares about fate of 🇪🇺“.
„Unclear whether we will still speak of NATO in present shape“ by time of June summit or we need to come up with 🇪🇺alternative. pic.twitter.com/n2KOqHmVKa

— Thorsten Benner (@thorstenbenner) February 23, 2025

The_barBEARian said:

---

US joins Russia to vote against UN resolution condemning Russia's war against Ukraine

This is bound to upset all of the right people!

---

Certainly doesn't upset all the dead civilians that russia raped and killed

Trump already dropped the price for peace to $350B. At this rate we are going to give Ukraine our mineral rights by EOY

BREAKING:

Canada announces it’s sending USD 5 billion of Russia’s frozen funds and a number of new weapons systems to Ukraine, including:

- 25 LAVIII infantry fighting vehicles,
- Artillery shells
- F-16 flight simulators

🇨🇦🇺🇦 pic.twitter.com/tfc9BUrjXw

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) February 24, 2025

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Ukraine Never Should Have Made the Mistake of Getting Invaded

---

Putin should not have invaded. But he did.
Not just true, but the most important truth of all. RUSSIA started all of this.

Biden should not have openly assured the Ukraine that they could join Nato. But he did.
False. Refusing to categorically reject the idea is not synonymous with "assuring" membership.

So what exactly do you want the US to do? Will you send your sons/daughters to go fight for the Ukraine? Or do you just want to send our tax dollars? And to what end and how long?
Support others who are willing to fight, for as long as they are willing to fight, up to and including supporting any future insurgency against a victorious Russia (which we most definitely will do, should such happen).

.

---

It is amazing how hard people work to ignore very elementary geo-strategic realities: Ukraine is a sovereign country which was invaded by Russia without any cause whatsoever, an act which was a significant threat to Nato, an alliance to which we are a member. Russia committed an act of war; Ukraine did not. Nato is significantly more threatened by Russian actions than Russia than vice-versa.

---

You're wrong. Biden did in fact assure them that they could join nato.

As for the rest of your comments, I have no problem with Ukraine continuing to fight.
So how much taxpayer money are you willing to just give away so Ukraine can bleed Russia. 100 billion per year? 200 billion? Just curious.

Personally, I think Europe should foot much of the bill. I also think that if we are going to fund/arm them in huge amounts, getting some favors/pay/guarantees in return for America would be reasonable. So I don't disagree entirely with you. There is value in bleeding Russia, but I wouldn't want to incentivize millions of deaths to do it. So if they want to continue to fight, let's sell them weapons and intelligence, but shelling out unlimited cash clearly makes it very easy for the Ukrainian oligarchs to keep killing off their own people without any personal sacrifice.

---

Show your work here.

---

You have google, it's quite easily found in the public domain. And two months later after Biden assured them it was up to the Ukraine to join or not, Russia invaded.

Yeah, I know ... Russia was always going to invade, blah blah blah. That conversation had nothing to do with it, blah blah blah.

---

Didn't find it on Google. Furthermore, you didn't say "it was up to Ukraine". You said Biden assured them they could join. Everyone knows that "up to Ukraine" goes back to all the required changes necessary to qualify, as well as a vote by the members. You guys are playing fast and loose with the truth. It's getting old.

---

Biden said it's up to Ukraine, so that means if Ukraine wants in, they can join. You want to make that some huge obstacle and hoops they'd have to jump through. Whatever you want to pretend, Clearly it's an invitation. So yeah, it's not fast and loose with what he said, you're just being obtuse.

---

Wrong. You apparently don't understand what the NATO admission process is. This is why we get all jacked up over framed conspiracies about this war. If someone believes we have no geopolitical or strategic interest in Ukraine, fine, that's a debate. But when the President of the U.S. has to walk back blaming Ukraine for starting the war, and you guys hounding on facts not in existence, it looks like we are so blinded by politics we aren't willing to deal in reality.

---

Wrong. Up to Ukraine. The most powerful leader in the world laid it in Ukraine's hands to join. So there's an admission process. So what? Biden should have said it's off the table. You know this but you want to remain obtuse to fit your narrative. You think Biden giving them the green light was just going to slide by Putin? Silly and childish.

And I'm not blaming Ukraine for starting the war. Only that joining NATO was a no-go previously. Biden green lit it as do-able, and Russia invaded two months later. Biden screwed this up, like he did everything else. Blood is on his hands because the outcome was predictable. All Putin needed was an excuse.

---

Again, it's always been in Ukraine's hands to comply and the membership to assess whether they had and to determine if they wanted to let them in.

---

It's not unilateral. NATO members have made a joint statement that Ukraine's path is irreversible.

---

Last year…

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Ukraine Never Should Have Made the Mistake of Getting Invaded

---

Putin should not have invaded. But he did.
Not just true, but the most important truth of all. RUSSIA started all of this.

Biden should not have openly assured the Ukraine that they could join Nato. But he did.
False. Refusing to categorically reject the idea is not synonymous with "assuring" membership.

So what exactly do you want the US to do? Will you send your sons/daughters to go fight for the Ukraine? Or do you just want to send our tax dollars? And to what end and how long?
Support others who are willing to fight, for as long as they are willing to fight, up to and including supporting any future insurgency against a victorious Russia (which we most definitely will do, should such happen).

.

---

It is amazing how hard people work to ignore very elementary geo-strategic realities: Ukraine is a sovereign country which was invaded by Russia without any cause whatsoever, an act which was a significant threat to Nato, an alliance to which we are a member. Russia committed an act of war; Ukraine did not. Nato is significantly more threatened by Russian actions than Russia than vice-versa.

---

You're wrong. Biden did in fact assure them that they could join nato.

As for the rest of your comments, I have no problem with Ukraine continuing to fight.
So how much taxpayer money are you willing to just give away so Ukraine can bleed Russia. 100 billion per year? 200 billion? Just curious.

Personally, I think Europe should foot much of the bill. I also think that if we are going to fund/arm them in huge amounts, getting some favors/pay/guarantees in return for America would be reasonable. So I don't disagree entirely with you. There is value in bleeding Russia, but I wouldn't want to incentivize millions of deaths to do it. So if they want to continue to fight, let's sell them weapons and intelligence, but shelling out unlimited cash clearly makes it very easy for the Ukrainian oligarchs to keep killing off their own people without any personal sacrifice.

---

Show your work here.

---

You have google, it's quite easily found in the public domain. And two months later after Biden assured them it was up to the Ukraine to join or not, Russia invaded.

Yeah, I know ... Russia was always going to invade, blah blah blah. That conversation had nothing to do with it, blah blah blah.

---

Didn't find it on Google. Furthermore, you didn't say "it was up to Ukraine". You said Biden assured them they could join. Everyone knows that "up to Ukraine" goes back to all the required changes necessary to qualify, as well as a vote by the members. You guys are playing fast and loose with the truth. It's getting old.

---

He said Ukraine's future lies in NATO. That's nothing if not an assurance.

---

After the invasion. Good grief.

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Tulsi Gabbard says there’s 30 US FUNDED biolabs in Ukraine..

wtf?? pic.twitter.com/fRw362ej2j

— American AF 🇺🇸 (@iAnonPatriot) February 21, 2025

---

Again, from 3 years ago and debunked.

---

It wasn't debunked. She's only saying what US government admitted.

---

Sambot is in full force.

Pretty sure this is what Trump wanted all along.

BREAKING:

Ursula von der Leyen announces USD 3.5 billion military aid package for Ukraine from the European Commission.

She also revealed that the EU will hold a meeting on March 6th on that will be the start of increased defense spending in Europe pic.twitter.com/fPkeQusW5U

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) February 24, 2025

Assassin said:

---

Pretty sure this is what Trump wanted all along.

BREAKING:

Ursula von der Leyen announces USD 3.5 billion military aid package for Ukraine from the European Commission.

She also revealed that the EU will hold a meeting on March 6th on that will be the start of increased defense spending in Europe pic.twitter.com/fPkeQusW5U

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) February 24, 2025

---

Wow, they're so generous.

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Pretty sure this is what Trump wanted all along.

BREAKING:

Ursula von der Leyen announces USD 3.5 billion military aid package for Ukraine from the European Commission.

She also revealed that the EU will hold a meeting on March 6th on that will be the start of increased defense spending in Europe pic.twitter.com/fPkeQusW5U

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) February 24, 2025

---

Wow, they're so generous.

---

Chump change.

So locals will forget about US donations.

Polish Foreign Minister Sikorski slams Russia’s Ambassador to the UN at the GA:

“Ukraine isn’t as the Russian ambassador said, a ‘project.’ It has a longer history than Russia. It has been a member of the UN longer than Russia. It has a language, identity & its own aspirations” pic.twitter.com/Rfs4iVcy68

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) February 24, 2025

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

"So in fact dictators often don't hold elections"

literally my point lmao.. It is not up to him big brains

---

Yes it is

He can hold elections anytime he wants by suspending the presidential decree of martial law

[imposition of martial law has meant that polls have been indefinitely suspended. Since the war began in February 2022, martial law has been imposed and extended (for 90 days at a time) 14 times thus far]

He does hold elections because he does not want to do so….and the DC (before Trump) and Brussels were not forcing him to do so.

---

Dictator!!!

This is why the Ukrainian parliament's opposition leaders signed a joint statement that both parliamentary and presidential elections should take place after the cessation of the war and the conclusion of martial law. The document indicates a consensus among major political parties regarding the need for an appropriate period of time to prepare for elections and favorable conditions for campaigning and voting.

What Do Voters Think?

For the general population, holding elections under current conditions would be problematic. For example, in a November survey conducted by Kyiv's International Institute of Sociology, over 80 percent of respondents expressed a preference for deferring elections until the war had ended.

---

As if there were any real opposition parties in parliament. They were disbanded and their assets seized long ago. A few members may still occupy seats, but that have no organized leadership. Zelensky's biggest political rival is Poroshenko, a Western ally whom he's now accusing of treason.

---

No, most of the members of the pro-Russian parties that were banned are back in parliament and/or politically active. The members were not banned, just the parties.

No also on opposition. There are 3 candidates widely expected to eventually run, including the general Zelensky fired, and all 3 have come publicly against holding elections. Not a single elected official has called for an election, even though 80% or more in safe seats.

---

Some of them have a parliamentary group, but without a party infrastructure or any of their former resources they've been neutered and intimidated into "keeping a low profile," as the Ukrainian media demurely put it.

I think citing Zaluzhny as a significant opposition figure really highlights my point. If anything he's even more anti-Russian than Zelensky. What's left of Ukrainian politics is basically a contest between the far right and the ultra-far right.

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

historian said:

---

sombear said:

---

historian said:

---

---

We didn't send him $100 billion.

---

Closer to $200 billion. He claimed $100 billion was missing. So where did it go?

Just as important, whatever the amount why wasn't it audited? For any government expenditure there should be detailed accounting so that we know exactly where all of it went. That's the problem with the fascists wasting our money: there has been almost no accountability. They have been robbing us for decades creating slush funds for all kinds of evils and using our money to tyrannies us.

Trump & Musk are doing something about this so they are heroes. Many of the loudest critics are probably in the take and belong in prison.

---

[The "missing $100 billion claim is false]

Since the full-scale Russian military invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the U.S. Congress has passed five Ukraine aid bills totaling $175 billion. Of that, $106 billion is designated for direct support to Ukraine, comprising some $69.8 billion in military aid, $33.3 billion for budget support, and $2.8 billion in humanitarian assistance, as tracked by the Washington, D.C.-based Council on Foreign Relations.

The remaining funds support U.S. activities related to the war in Ukraine, as well as U.S. aid to countries affected by Russia's war in Ukraine. A significant portion of the aid is spent in the U.S., funding factories and workers to produce weapons for Ukraine and replenishing Pentagon stockpiles.

A November 2023 article in The Washington Post broke down the U.S. military aid to Ukraine, reporting that most of it is spent in the U.S., used to build new weapons or replenish U.S. stockpiles, rather than going directly to Ukraine. Nearly 90% of the $68 billion in military assistance benefits American workers, with 117 production lines across 31 states and 71 cities producing weapons for Ukraine.

The Post's findings corroborated earlier estimates by Mark Cancian of the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Strategic and International Studies that much of the U.S. aid for Ukraine is spent domestically.

On Feb. 5, 2025, General Keith Kellogg, President Donald Trump's special envoy for Ukraine and Russia, reaffirmed that the $174 billion of U.S. aid to Ukraine is accounted for and being distributed through a transparent process:

"The United States, the American people, the U.S. citizens have given Ukraine over $174 billion. And we have put inspector generals on the ground in Ukraine and here to track that money. So, we have fairly good reporting on where it's going," Kellogg said on the Newsmax TV channel.

---

Zelensky has addressed this. He isn't just talking about cash but about the total value of weapons and aid that they were supposed to have received:

Quote:

---

One-hundred billion (dollars) of these 177, or 200, some people even say, we have never received," Zelenskyy said, according to the translation of the clip. "We are talking about specific things, because we got it not with money but with weapons. We got $70 something billion worth of it. There is training, there is additional transport. There are not only prices for weapons, there were humanitarian programs, social et cetera.

---

---

Right, I understood that. The point I was making was that X warriors turned that into Zelensky saying $100 billion was missing, which was patently false.

---

Well, if it didn't make it to Ukraine in some form that certainly begs the question.