Rants and WTF are you talking about and Coronavirus!

[QUOTE=EscapeArtist;2673875]Considering that Pessimist agrees with you and combining this with his history of deriding you as my brainless lackey with the current nonsensical tirade of his, I'm guessing you can judge where your assertions lie on the spectrum of rationality.[/QUOTE]Tell you what / who agrees with who. 95% of Western democracy populations agree that Putin is a murderous thug. CCP cell leader Mac agrees with the Chinese propaganda machine which has gone into overdrive in support of their latest stooge (and creating stories of their own about US running biological weapons production in UKR) and Comrade Mac is parroting their talking points. Apprentice Murse occasionally makes a show out of mildly disagreeing with his master but always comes around to lick Mac's behind. In the meanwhile, as described in the BBC article which itself linked to an FT scoop, China is preparing to send weapons to Russia to aid in the slaughter of Ukr, perhaps with the proviso that Ru will reciprocate when China likewise begins its own genocide in Taiwan. CCP master Mac is carefully preparing his talking points for these eventualities.

Now back to your lame retorts about robots, uptight, yadda yadda.

[QUOTE=EscapeArtist;2674213]Disagree completely. Strategic position in the black sea does not change much with or without Ukraine. If it was more control of the Black Sea that they desired, they would fight to control Turkey, no Ukraine.[/QUOTE]Putin was instructed in USSR. For real facts, he already took Crimea from Ukraine, now aiming targeting Donbass and thinking so strongly about Odessa which is biggest harbor on black sea. Ukraine belong to USSR for him. Nothing about Turkey which is too far from Russia and much stronger.

[QUOTE=Sirioja;2674368]Putin was instructed in USSR. For real facts, he already took Crimea from Ukraine, now aiming targeting Donbass and thinking so strongly about Odessa which is biggest harbor on black sea. Ukraine belong to USSR for him. Nothing about Turkey which is too far from Russia and much stronger.[/QUOTE]Taking those regions does not mean that there is a strategic benefit from it when one already had it. Reform USSR? Sure. To control Black Sea? No.

Turkey because they control Bosphorus for access to Mediterranean Sea.

I. E. Russian invasion of Ukraine is not for control of the Black Sea. Simple logic.

[QUOTE=Pessimist;2674305]Touching devotion to your CCP master. Fooling no one with your lame retorts. Even Lindsey protests he is not Trump's appendage once in a while but is firmly attached to the fat whale's bum, as you are to the CCPMac's butt and both of you spreading the CCP garbage on this site (hopefully, you are getting paid).[/QUOTE]Someone smack C3 PO, he's malfunctioning again.

[QUOTE=EscapeArtist;2674383]Taking those regions does not mean that there is a strategic benefit from it when one already had it. Reform USSR? Sure. To control Black Sea? No.

Turkey because they control Bosphorus for access to Mediterranean Sea.

I. E. Russian invasion of Ukraine is not for control of the Black Sea. Simple logic.[/QUOTE]Crimea taken from Ukraine, Donbass and now targeted Odessa which is biggest black sea harbor are good for liar Putin business. He target also Georgia, Moldavia, all around black sea. Who could stop him in black sea? Romania? Bulgaria? All belonging to his USSR, even as poor as Ukraine, but searching his past youth, when he should better clean is dirty brain. But he is scared of democracy close to him, because if Russians wanted democracy, then he is dead. Marina Ovsiannikova with Ukrainian father and Russian mother is a hero.

[QUOTE=Sirioja;2674536]But he is scared of democracy close to him, because if Russians wanted democracy, then he is dead. Marina Ovsiannikova with Ukrainian father and Russian mother is a hero.[/QUOTE]There, that's a valid reason, not for control of Black Sea when taking over Ukraine does not change his position significantly from 1 month ago.

[QUOTE=EscapeArtist;2674384]Someone smack C3 PO, he's malfunctioning again.[/QUOTE]3 PO is a beloved staple of our pop culture. You on the other hand are the CCP apprentice of an unreformed version of commie Asian Lando (sans Lando's good looks) that sells down his adopted country and rejoices in the death of many.

My stance aligns with this excerpt from an FT article three days before the invasion: "If war comes, Putin would of course deserve the blame and global opprobrium. Russia's threats are thuggish and dangerous. Yet as misguided as the Russian actions are, American intransigence regarding Nato enlargement is also utterly misguided and risky. "

George Kennan in 1998, architect of USA's containment strategy of USSR, Ambassador to USSR: "I think it is the beginning of a new cold war. I think the Russians will gradually react quite adversely and it will affect their policies. I think it is a tragic mistake. Of course there is going to be a bad reaction from Russia, and then the NATO expanders will say that we always told you that is how the Russians are but this is just wrong. ".

Faith Hill, Senior Director for Europe and Russia of the National Security Council warned Bush in 2008: "Putin would view steps to bring Ukraine and Georgia closer to NATO as a provocative move that would likely provoke pre-emptive Russian military action. "

Jack Matlock, Ambassador to USSR, testified before Senate in 1997: "Far from improving the security of the United States, its Allies, and the nations that wish to enter the Alliance, it could well encourage a chain of events that could produce the most serious security threat to this nation since the Soviet Union collapsed. ".

Robert Gates in 2015, Secretary of Defense under Bush and Obama: "The Russians had long historical ties to Serbia, which we largely ignored. [B]Trying to bring Georgia and Ukraine into NATO was truly overreaching.[/B] The roots of the Russian Empire trace back to Kiev in the ninth century, so that was an especially [B]monumental provocation[/B]. Were the Europeans, much less the Americans, willing to send their sons and daughters to defend Ukraine or Georgia? Hardly. So NATO expansion was a political act, not a carefully considered military commitment, thus undermining the purpose of the alliance and recklessly ignoring what the Russians considered their own vital national interests. [B]Similarly, Putin's hatred of the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (limiting the number and location of Russian and NATO non-nuclear military forces in Europe) was understandable. [/B]"

Bill Burns, Ambassador to USSR, standing Director of the CIA appointed by Biden in March 2021, speaking about his Russian counterparts in 2008: "I have yet to find anyone who views Ukraine in NATO as anything other than a direct challenge to Russian interests."

Pat Buchanan prescient in his 1999 book: "By moving NATO onto Russia's front porch, we have scheduled a twenty-first-century confrontation. "

William Perry, Robert McNamara, Henry Kissinger were all against NATO eastward expansion (or the pace of it). That is two Secretary of Defense and a Secretary of State. For those that do not know, the Secretary Defense is second in the military command structure, only under the President. Secretary of State implements foreign policy and is head of the State Department.

[B]All of the above are patriots. The ones who are still alive condemn this invasion. But all have been vocal critics of their government's foreign policy (NATO expansion).[/B] American politicians have continuously ignored the advice of its top diplomats. P&P would be happy to know that one of the above mentioned, Fiona Hill more or less refers to Putin as a madman.

[QUOTE=EscapeArtist;2674641]There, that's a valid reason, not for control of Black Sea when taking over Ukraine does not change his position significantly from 1 month ago.[/QUOTE]Marioupol and Odessa make a big difference for him and also the gaz pipeline through Ukraine. I really wish Ukrainians will win but if they don t and I know how it will be difficult for them, but they have to destroy the pipeline and both harbors, to kill these business for Putin, just letting him a poor land, when EU have to make Russia broke with no value kopecks, forcing people for revolution because of him. Many Russians will die but they have to kill him.

[QUOTE=EscapeArtist;2673493]Anyway, I'll ask again, was Russia's security actually threatened? Has NATO ever had visions of "conquering" Russia? Who would? Why does Russia need Ukraine?[/QUOTE]Those that are (or strive to be) global powers wish to control their geography so as to make themselves less vulnerable to foreign invasions. This video from 4:00 to 9:00 explains Russia's geography and the strategic military value of having Ukraine (Turgid and Cane might enjoy as well since they seem to have an interest in WWII and military): [URL]https://youtu.be/If61baWF4GE?t=240[/URL].

The security concern is that a rival power could position forces and be arm's reach to Russia's major population centers. During a period of relative peace in the 1840's, USA under the Manifest Destiny improved their geography by extending the borders to both oceans. Having two large oceans on either side of you most definitely increases security (or reduces security concerns). Moscow is less than 500 km from Ukraine border, and 80 percent of the population is west of the Urals.

One, even if it is imagined, Russia does believe the West to be hostile (see my other post about top diplomats being aware that NATO expansion would be interpreted as hostile). Past invasions by Napoleon and Hitler probably fuel that paranoia. The latter wiped out 20 percent of its population and has shaped the modern Russian psyche. Two, security is also about preparing yourself for future hostilities. If you are to believe some on here, Europe will soon be overrun by Muslims who will make Western Europe a third-world shithole plagued with violence.

[QUOTE=Pessimist;2674665]3 PO is a beloved staple of our pop culture. You on the other hand are the CCP apprentice of an unreformed version of commie Asian Lando (sans Lando's good looks) that sells down his adopted country and rejoices in the death of many.[/QUOTE]This dork is over here going on analyzing the merits of Star Wars characters. Geezus, you're that loser high school kid who went on to marry an ugly chick.

[QUOTE=McAdonis;2674695]My stance aligns with this excerpt from an FT article three days before the invasion: "If war comes, Putin would of course deserve the blame and global opprobrium. Russia's threats are thuggish and dangerous. Yet as misguided as the Russian actions are, American intransigence regarding Nato enlargement is also utterly misguided and risky. "

George Kennan in 1998, architect of USA's containment strategy of USSR, Ambassador to USSR: "I think it is the beginning of a new cold war. I think the Russians will gradually react quite adversely and it will affect their policies. I think it is a tragic mistake. Of course there is going to be a bad reaction from Russia, and then the NATO expanders will say that we always told you that is how the Russians are but this is just wrong. ".

Faith Hill, Senior Director for Europe and Russia of the National Security Council warned Bush in 2008: "Putin would view steps to bring Ukraine and Georgia closer to NATO as a provocative move that would likely provoke pre-emptive Russian military action. "

Jack Matlock, Ambassador to USSR, testified before Senate in 1997: "Far from improving the security of the United States, its Allies, and the nations that wish to enter the Alliance, it could well encourage a chain of events that could produce the most serious security threat to this nation since the Soviet Union collapsed. ".

Robert Gates in 2015, Secretary of Defense under Bush and Obama: "The Russians had long historical ties to Serbia, which we largely ignored. [B]Trying to bring Georgia and Ukraine into NATO was truly overreaching.[/B] The roots of the Russian Empire trace back to Kiev in the ninth century, so that was an especially [B]monumental provocation[/B]. Were the Europeans, much less the Americans, willing to send their sons and daughters to defend Ukraine or Georgia? Hardly. So NATO expansion was a political act, not a carefully considered military commitment, thus undermining the purpose of the alliance and recklessly ignoring what the Russians considered their own vital national interests. [B]Similarly, Putin's hatred of the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (limiting the number and location of Russian and NATO non-nuclear military forces in Europe) was understandable. [/B].[/QUOTE]You Commie bastard! How dare you question the narrative, hah!

But on a serious note, those are examples of Western advancements that contributed to the deterioration of Russian influence and positioning. But can you assign the world [B]blame[/B] or [B]fault[/B] to Western advancement? I don't so. Yes you can say that western policy led to this predicament but would you specifically assign "blame"?

Say a boss was a complete asshole at the work place and an employee comes in and shoots up the place. Is the boss to blame for the mass murder? No man, yes the boss's asshole behavior led the shooter to snap but in the end "blame" goes to the shooter for reacting inappropriately, much like Putin is doing.

So my position is that no blame goes to the west but recognize that western decisions did lead Putin down this path. So no fault or blame on the west and all blame on Putin.

Alaska was originally part of Russia so if Alaska decided to join Russia then the USA should just be ok with it according to current USA logic.

[QUOTE=McAdonis;2674695]My stance aligns with this excerpt from an FT article three days before the invasion: "If war comes, Putin would of course deserve the blame and global opprobrium. Russia's threats are thuggish and dangerous. Yet as misguided as the Russian actions are, American intransigence regarding Nato enlargement is also utterly misguided and risky. "

George Kennan in 1998, architect of USA's containment strategy of USSR, Ambassador to USSR: "I think it is the beginning of a new cold war. I think the Russians will gradually react quite adversely and it will affect their policies. I think it is a tragic mistake. Of course there is going to be a bad reaction from Russia, and then the NATO expanders will say that we always told you that is how the Russians are but this is just wrong. ".

Faith Hill, Senior Director for Europe and Russia of the National Security Council warned Bush in 2008: "Putin would view steps to bring Ukraine and Georgia closer to NATO as a provocative move that would likely provoke pre-emptive Russian military action. "

Jack Matlock, Ambassador to USSR, testified before Senate in 1997: "Far from improving the security of the United States, its Allies, and the nations that wish to enter the Alliance, it could well encourage a chain of events that could produce the most serious security threat to this nation since the Soviet Union collapsed. "..[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=MrHo;2674020]My stance on conspiracy theories is this: The biggest trick devil ever pulled was convince you that they do not exist!

People do scheme you know LOL! The whole business world is built on conspiracies and also all our society, it is important to keep order!

Like look, I am more life experienced and international than most of posters here, I know world better because simply I travel more since young age, saw different cultures and experienced many things around the world both in west and east and other places, but many posters here are so opinionated with social and racial bias and it show their upbringing of how they got opinionated by something they have been brainwashed to believe and these guys tend to be very narrow minded! Many white people are like that and I do believe in G7, but they also have to believe that the days of white domination is long over and the world is more international and globalized, but some people who do not know the world tend to still believe in social and racial bias still LOL![/QUOTE]Of course conspiracies are the norm in every business meeting, and at every bar run. It is the function of Machiavellis The Prince. But what I meant was more that within these schemes and plots and strategy meetings, there are opinion leaders who are narcissistic and tend to think they more basics than they actually do. And these people are the stupid ones. The group usually don't want to argue with the opinion leaders for various reasons. So narcissism prevails. And as soon as one opinion leader leaves, most new ones attain narcissistic traits thinking they know more than they do as well. Which basically means they turn more stupid.

Only the minority admits that 99% of what they do are just experiments.

When it comes to white control of the world and the later part of your post, then that is related to the depopulation agenda. Of course the difference between people of different countries are mainly culturally based, and can quickly change, has nothing to do with genes or IQ etc (though maybe isolation, temperature or other external factors like food / medicine makes a difference).

But the west, and Japan (which essentially is an economically and manufacturally western country based in Asia) won't allow themselves to become dirt poor as the rest of the world rises. So depopulation of the world leaves more resources per head for those that are left. And that's what the UN Agendas are for, and perhaps the Great Reset and all the stages therein as well. Machiavellis The Prince in modern action.

[QUOTE=MrHo;2674821]I would say pandemic is over, but now we are fighting with the mind of masses called virus phobia that is no longer exit at least in its strength!

With all these restrictions in FKK, once you are in the room, you suck tongue, dick, pussy, asses etc LOL! How ironic LOL![/QUOTE]New BA2 Omicron version 2.0 is out which has caused 49% UK case surge and will be spreading to the USA and Germany ASAP. The pandemic is far from over. We are in overtime now.