You think the US doesn't have any soldiers who criticize their President? I hate to break it to you but this is very common among soldiers at war, especially conscripted ones. They piss and moan about all kinds of things.
There are videos out there of masked Russian soldiers criticizing Putin and intercepted phone calls too:
In phone calls to friends and relatives at home, Russian soldiers gave damning insider accounts of battlefield failures and civilian executions, excoriating their leaders just weeks into the campaign to take Kyiv.
I used to respect you. I used to like you.
I can't believe you bought the bullshit this bastard is selling.
It such a disappointment that you really support this shit and come against me, when you know what type of motherfukker I am and still side against me on this.
That hurts me more than anything else really. So fuck you too
I don't know why you don't just relax and take a step back. From what I've seen you have been nonstop with trying to argue with people about politics for years.
Doesn't it ever get old? Why not focus on something positive and even better, something you actually have control over?
I don't know why you don't just relax and take a step back. From what I've seen you have been nonstop with trying to argue with people about politics for years.
Doesn't it ever get old? Why not focus on something positive and even better, something you actually have control over?
My entire life, I've wanted to see presidents and politicians held accountable for their actions and arrested for being the criminals they are.
Now that's happening, but it's to the one guy that least deserves it.
Reagan: Iran Contra
Bush Sr.: Iraq lies of wmd
Clinton: Kosovo, Sarajevo Yugoslavia
Bush Jr: Patriot Act/War on Terror
Obama: drone murders, innocent people
*Abdulrahman al-Awlaki
Biden: plenty and counting, to numerous to list.
A few weeks back I thought admin had come to his senses and closed this thread. Everyone has said everything they could possibly say. Now it is just profane and abusive language.
Now the significance of this would be something like Laos or Cambodia joining a Chinese alliance...who really gives a shit?
But what about the ukranian people who've been sold a line of bullshit that they could be in NATO and live in a liberal globalist utopian society of unlimited porn and free money?
European countries going behind Washington's back to try to get the war and suffering for profit to end.
Well, it is in their backyards, and not in the neighborhood of smug Washington socialites playing empire and getting rich off the death and bloodshed.
Because the European people sure aren't benefiting from it. Neither are the American or Ukrainian people.
So why not?
Why should hundreds of thousands of people die to play a game in a corrupt Eastern European ogliarchy that bribed Joe Biden for decades?
But hey @Big_paul at least that bad orange man is going to pay for paying off a porn star huh?
Shit, who cares about hundreds of thousands of people getting killed and corrupt wars for profit by the "big guy" in the Whitehouse at long as he gets his cut and he isn't orange?
As you know full well (because I've told you at least twice), we've had 5 peace summits since the invasion fully supported by Washington. Wikipedia briefly lays them out. What would be different this time? You know what you're saying is wrong, but sneakily and deceptively you keep repeating it hoping it'll stick.
The first round of talks began on 28 February, near the Belarusian border. The Ukrainian president's office said that the main goals were to call for an immediate ceasefire, and for Russian troops to be withdrawn from Ukraine.[14] It concluded with no immediate agreements.[15]
Second round (3 March)
On 3 March, the second round of peace talks began. Both sides agreed to open humanitarian corridors for evacuating civilians.[16] Russia's demands were Ukraine's recognition of Russian-occupied Crimea, independence for separatist-controlled Luhansk and Donetsk, and "de-militarisation" and "de-Nazification". Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba stated that while his country was ready for talks to resume, Russia's demands had not changed.[17][18]
It was reported on 28 March that three members of the Ukrainian negotiating team, including Russian billionaire Roman Abramovich and Ukrainian politician Rustem Umerov, were suffering from suspected poisoning.[19] According to the independent newspaper Meduza, prior to the alleged poisoning, Umerov was accused by the Kremlin and Russian state-controlled media of being an American spy, and that he was deliberately prolonging the negotiations to Ukraine's advantage.[20] Umerov later wrote on Facebook that he was "fine", calling for people to not trust "unverified information".[21][22][23]
On 5 March, Naftali Bennett flew to Moscow and held three hours of meetings with Putin, then flew to Germany and held meetings with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz. Bennett spoke in advance with Zelensky, who had previously asked for his help mediating. He also coordinated with the US, France and Germany.[24] According to Al Monitor, the meetings were instigated by Scholz who made a lightning visit to Israel on 3 March and held a long one-on-one meeting, which resulted in the mediation idea.[25] Bennett said in 2023 that both sides had wanted a ceasefire, the odds of the deal holding had been 50-50 and that and that the Western powers backing Ukraine had blocked the deal.[26] Later he expressed doubts regarding the desirability of such a deal.[27]
Third round (7 March)
A third round of negotiations began on 7 March, amidst ongoing fighting and bombing.[28] Although a deal had not been reached yet, Ukrainian negotiator and advisor to the president Mykhailo Podoliak tweeted that "there were some small positive shifts regarding logistics of humanitarian corridors."[3][29] However, the day before, a Ukrainian negotiator was shot amid claims of spying for Russia.[30]
Antalya Diplomacy Forum (10 March)
On 10 March, Russian foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and his Ukrainian counterpart Dmytro Kuleba met for talks in Antalya, Turkey with Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu as mediator, in the first high-level contact between the two sides since the beginning of the invasion.[5] Ukraine had attempted to negotiate a 24-hour ceasefire to provide aid and evacuation to civilians, especially in Mariupol.[31] After two hours of talks, no agreement was reached.[32] Airstrikes on the port city continued.[33]
Fourth round (14–17 March)
In the first government delegation to Ukraine since the beginning of the invasion, the prime ministers of Poland, the Czech Republic, and Slovenia met with Zelenskyy in Kyiv on 15 March 2022.[34]
The fourth round of negotiations began on 14 March via video conference. The talks lasted a few hours and ended without a breakthrough. The two sides resumed talks on 15 March,[6] after which Volodymyr Zelenskyy described the talks as beginning to "sound more realistic".[35]
The two sides again resumed talks on 16 March.[35] Later that day, the Financial Times reported that a 15-point plan, first discussed on 14 March, negotiated with the Russians was being identified by Zelenskyy as more realistic for ending the war.[36][37] After the fourth day of talks on 17 March, Russia said an agreement has not been reached.[38] Following the talks, French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian warned that Russia was only "pretending to negotiate", in line with a strategy it has used elsewhere.[39]
On 20 March, Turkey's Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu, the mediator of the talks, described them as "making progress". Referring to his role as "an honest mediator and facilitator", he gave little further detail.[40]
Following his address to the Israeli parliament, Zelenskyy thanked Israeli prime minister Naftali Bennett for his efforts in encouraging peace talks, and suggested that they might take place in Jerusalem.[41]
Fifth round (21 March)
The fifth round of talks, on 21 March, failed to achieve a breakthrough. Zelenskyy called for direct talks with Putin to end the war.[42] Sergey Lavrov said direct talks between the two presidents would only go ahead once both sides are closer to reaching a settlement.[43]
Can you imagine what life would be like if you got this angry and belligerent every day for two years over something as trivial as Joe Biden?
There's research on the psychology of internet trolling.
"Spreading misinformation is one of the primary purposes of trolling. This type of trolling is usually agenda-driven and conducted through fake accounts and pseudonyms. The basic purpose of this sort of trolling is to create counterfeit perceptions regarding a situation. "
"At times people are so rigid in their beliefs that they engage in trolling behavior when they feel that their belief is being threatened. This is often the case when a discussion is about religion and politics. They feel justified in trolling when they believe the victim has somehow committed an offense against them by stating a contradictory point of view."
"It has been observed that men are more likely to troll as compared to women because society tends to encourage traits of arrogance, dominance, and competitiveness in men.
Psychologists suggest that anonymity plays a vital role in trolling. People feel a lack of restraint when they are communicating online. They tend to easily say things over the internet that they would not say in face-to-face communication."
"Trollers tend to tease and exploit human errors and weaknesses. They wish to gain a reaction and then troll them some more to further upset their victims to have some fun. The best way to deal with such people is to ignore them. Being ignored kills their fun and they move onto their next target."
The International Psychology Clinic London Private Psychologists and Psychiatrists Take the first step towards unlocking your full potential by scheduling
theinternationalpsychologyclinic.com
"First, based on the results of psychopathy and sadism, we understand the internet troll as someone who is callous, lacks a sense of personal responsibility and enjoys causing others harm.
The significance of psychopathy in the results also indicates trolls have an empathy deficit, particularly when it comes to their ability to experience and internalise other people’s emotions.
On top of this, the interaction between high sadism and high self-esteem suggests trolls are not trolling because they have low self-worth. In fact, this is quite the opposite. The more someone enjoys hurting others and the better they feel about themselves, the more likely they are to troll."
A new Australian study shows if a person has high levels of sadism and high self-esteem, they are more likely to troll.
theconversation.com
"While trolls—to use a dehumanizing term—may be more likely to be manipulative, sadistic, and psychopathic, they may also be suffering, feeling lonely and isolated with no clear socially acceptable outlets. Approaching such people with the intention to offer support and connection is, at best, likely to go nowhere… and more troubling, may lead to harm to the would-be helper and ultimately greater isolation for the person trolling."
The notification that ignored content is popping up meaning that cunt @hometeam is copy and pasting propoganda here.
I refuse to see it at this point because it's a circular argument.
He will not engage on his own merits and words, but copy and paste propoganda in masse.
Useless endeavor.
Propoganda doesn't change facts.
The fact is, the Ukrainian people are dying needlessly for a scheme that benifits a small group of people in Washington. Nobody else.
And the only argument against the observation that this could have easily been prevented by simple low cost diplomacy by US NATO Ukraine alliance is "Putin is a megalomaniac cartoon supervillain bent on world domination"
Which is just as stupid as it sounds.
And only stupid people keep saying it. @hometeam is a stupid person. No denying the obvious there.
@Big_paul is not stupid, but has a big blue pill shoved up his ass so deep, he's coughing it up.
One will parrot mindless bullshit incessantly, without even thinking about it.
The other can't make sense out or what he's been told and is struggling to compare it to what he sees. Because the the two contradict themselves.
One mind is free inside and searching for a truth that makes sense to him. A very tumultuous and stressful endeavor that is certainly not going to lead to utopian dreams. But, the truth never does.
The other has no interest in truth and has submitted his manhood (unlikely he ever had any to begin with) to those he thinks will keep him like a sheep. To live in a fantasy world of bizarre contradictions and paradoxes that only keep meaning by parroting the theme of the day. Which has no relationship at all to yesterday or reality as it exists
One is a man searching for a useable truth in a sea of lies.
The other is a cunt that has relinquished his manhood to be kept like an animal by those he sees as his betters
@falseprophet09
If you really want to know how the war is going you'd be doing yourself a disservice not to follow the ISW. Here's their map of what's going on in Bakhmut. They point out where the city council building is that was taken and you can kinda see where the supply road is:
You can see there's plenty of city left to capture, and it's now in the densest part of the city. It's street by street, building by building fighting and a lot of it is kicking down a door, clearing a room (where they're waiting for you), and moving on to the next door. It's full of snipers and people with grenade launchers. It's not a battle that favors the attacker.
This is their assessment from April 1st: Russian, Ukrainian, and Western sources observed on April 1 that the Russian winter offensive has failed to achieve the Kremlin’s goals of seizing the Donetsk and Luhansk oblast administrative borders by March 31. Chief of the Russian General Staff Valery Gerasimov had announced on December 22 that Russian forces were focusing most of their efforts on seizing Donetsk Oblast, and Russian forces launched their winter offensive operation in early February along the Kupyansk-Svatove-Kreminna-Lyman line and on select frontlines in western Donetsk Oblast.[1] The UK Ministry of Defense (MoD) observed that Gerasimov has failed to extend Russian control over Donbas during his appointment as the theater commander in Ukraine and has achieved only marginal gains by expending mobilized personnel.[2] Ukrainian intelligence representative Andriy Yusov stated that Gerasimov missed the Kremlin’s deadline to capture Donbas by March 31.[3]
Russian milbloggers fretted that Russian forces must finish their offensive operations in Bakhmut and Avdiivka to prepare for the Ukrainian counteroffensives they expect between Orthodox Easter on April 16 and Soviet Victory Day on May 9.[4] Milbloggers highlighted their disappointment that there have not been any decisive battles throughout the winter and observed that Russia will not be capable of continuing a large-scale offensive operation if it is unable to secure Bakhmut and Avdiivka in the coming weeks. Deputy Head of the Main Directorate of the Russian National Guard (Rosgvardia) in occupied Donetsk Oblast Alexander Khodakovsky stated that he agrees with former theater commander Army General Sergey Surovikin that Russia needs to shift to defensive positions.[5] (ISW is not aware of any publicly reported statement Surovikin has made along these lines) Khodakovsky noted that failures during the offensive cause manpower losses and spark negative sentiments among the personnel, and argued that unnamed actors may be attempting to continue the offensive for personal reasons rather than taking a rational approach to the issue. Khodakovsky’s comment likely implies that Gerasimov is pursuing personal interest in sustaining the offensive in order to retain favor with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Khodakovsky’s recent appointment on March 30 as regional Rosgvardia deputy head and the return of Surovikin (at least by proxy) to the information space may indicate that Gerasimov’s unsuccessful theater-wide offensive may already be costing him favor with Putin.
Khodakovsky’s and milbloggers’ requests for Russian forces to prioritize defensive operations are not unreasonable and indicate that nationalist groups are sensible to the changing dynamics on the frontlines. ISW had long assessed that the Russian winter offensive is unlikely to be successful due to persistent failures of the Russian command to comprehend the time and space relationships involved in such a campaign.[6] ISW also assessed that Russia would lack the combat power necessary to sustain more than one major offensive operation in Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts, and ongoing recruitment campaigns in Russia and occupied Ukrainian territories may indicate that Russia is preparing for reserve shortages.[7]
Growing Russian speculation about Russian military command changes likely indicates that Russia may soon reshuffle its senior military command due to the failed winter offensive. Russian milbloggers claimed on April 1 that the Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) recalled Russian Airborne (VDV) Forces commander Colonel General Mikhail Teplinsky from leave on March 30 after the Russian MoD reportedly replaced him with Lieutenant General Oleg Makarevich on January 13.[8] The Russian MoD never confirmed Teplinsky’s dismissal, and it is likely that the MoD placed him on leave so it could recall him to command the VDV whenever it deemed necessary. Russian milbloggers claimed that Teplinsky immediately flew to the Russian Joint Grouping Headquarters in Rostov-on-Don, Krasnodar Krai to assume command of the VDV and that he is already planning future operations.[9] One milblogger claimed that Chief of the General Staff of the Ground Forces and former Central Military District (CMD) Commander Colonel General Alexander Lapin flew with Teplinsky to the Joint Grouping Headquarters.[10] The Russian MoD replaced Lapin with Lieutenant General Andrey Mordvichev as CMD commander officially on February 17 following intense public criticism of Lapin for his management of the Svatove-Kreminna line in the fall of 2022.[11] It remains to be seen if Lapin will regain a role commanding forces in Ukraine, however. Russian sources speculated starting on March 27 that the Russian MoD has also recently dismissed Eastern Military District (EMD) Commander Colonel General Rustam Muradov in response to intense criticism of his command over significant losses in offensive operations near Vuhledar in early 2023.[12] ISW has previously observed that intensified Russian speculation about changes in military command has corresponded with real changes in Russian commanders, although not necessarily following the exact claims of Russian sources.
Here's what West Point says about the first battle of Fallujah:
" Specifically, doctrine states offensive urban operations “typically require a minimum of three to five times the force ratios needed for rural combat.” Also, the most effective force package for high-intensity urban warfare involves a combination of infantry, armor, engineers, artillery, and other enablers, with a symbiotic relationship "
"The First Battle of Fallujah was a loss for the US forces not because of fighting capability, but due to insufficient planning, force ratios, information operations, and ultimately political support for the operation."
John Spencer and Jayson Geroux | 10.28.22 The First Battle of Fallujah occurred between April 3 and May 1, 2004 during Operation Iraqi Freedom. The city of Fallujah is situated […]
It's a circular argument because you say it could've been avoided with diplomacy, I show you that they did diplomacy - and now at that point you should say "oh you're right" or "no that wasn't really diplomacy" - but instead you go back to saying it could've been avoided with diplomacy (as if I never showed you they did it.) The tactic is clear - if you just keep repeating it maybe it'll stick, but you know better - they've done diplomacy, a lot of it.
The end point is clear - either you concede you're wrong, or show me how that wasn't diplomacy or wasn't enough.
I've also showed you all the diplomacy they did before the invasion, they did every type of diplomacy there is, and in fact they had a summit that prevented a 2021 invasion:
Lol fuck you. I was a republican for most of my adult life but when I saw Republicans swallowing trump nationalist cock I'm out.
I'm a red pill in every way other than I don't want to see old people eating dog food, and I think every American life should receive needed health care.
It's a circular argument because you say it could've been avoided with diplomacy, I show you that they did diplomacy - and now at that point you should say "oh you're right" or "no that wasn't really diplomacy" - but instead you go back to saying it could've been avoided with diplomacy (as if I never showed you they did it.) The tactic is clear - if you just keep repeating it maybe it'll stick, but you know better - they've done diplomacy, a lot of it.
The end point is clear - either you concede you're wrong, or show me how that wasn't diplomacy or wasn't enough.
I've also showed you all the diplomacy they did before the invasion, they did every type of diplomacy there is, and in fact they had a summit that prevented a 2021 invasion:
Lol fuck you. I was a republican for most of my adult life but when I saw Republicans swallowing trump nationalist cock I'm out.
I'm a red pill in every way other than I don't want to see old people eating dog food, and I think every American life should receive needed health care.
I mean you were a republican back when they had good old Bush and the boys in there!
Then, how dare those red, elephant bastards let that orange Boogeyman win their primary and run for president?
How dare those fuckers Paul?
I mean, didn't they get the memo when the DNC rigged it's own primary to axe Bernie Sanders and place queen Hillary on the throne to fuck it's own voters out of their choices?
But those goddamn Republicans Paul? They didn't learn. They let that democracy bullshit get in the way and let the voters decide.
The cocksuckers. They should've known better.
Because Americans need more free shit huh Paul?
Except the government doesn't own anything. And can't give anybody something they didn't earn, without first taking it from someone else who did earn it.
But fuck it right Paul?
Give everyone free shit, go all over the world taking the shit you want from little people who can't stop you from robbing them and tell them it's for their own good because..... democracy you know.
And those bastards that dare to stand up against free shit and endless foreign looting? Nuke those bastards abroad and lock up the domestic dissenters.
I just wonder Paul, since you're the guy that says everyone should get free shit.
Tell me why Joe Biden is paying lucrative pensions and salaries for the Ukrainian government, while the pensions of Americans are in serious jeopardy and dwindling in value every day?
Are you cool with Ukrainian government officials getting free shit at the expense of American taxpayers?
Or does it make a difference where the work comes from? Because nothing is free.
So do you just cheer for people getting free shit? Or just certain people?
Because everyone can't have free shit Paul. Somebody has to pay for the shit you give to people who don't pay for it themselves.
So explain that bizarre paradox to everyone here. How do you figure everyone deserves free shit?
Why is Joe Biden paying Ukrainian lucrative pensions when American pensions, that Americans actually worked for, are dwindling every day and likely will never be collected by the American people who worked for it?
God I bet the wisdom you're going to impart on us all is going to be so astounding that I'll never believe free shit doesn't exist in reality ever again.
Fuck man...I'm all ears hanging on the edge of my seat..
We start with 800 billion subtract 200 billion a year from defense and place it into protecting the defenseless millions of Americans. We would still be spending more than every perceived enemy combined.
I don't understand you. You are a blue collar guy. I'm sure you break your ass day in and day out, and you support the company man who has his thumb up your ass. Wtf!
We start with 800 billion subtract 200 billion a year from defense and place it into protecting the defenseless millions of Americans. We would still be spending more than every perceived enemy combined.
Those billions of dollars Joe Biden is laundering through Ukraine seem like they could be used right here.
I mean dude, if "defending Americans" doesn't mean securing a border and protecting American property and pensions that they've paid into their whole lives, then what the fuck does it mean?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
www.nytimes.com
www.newsweek.com
.jpg)
