Top Damas

Thread: Stupid Shit in Kyiv

+ Add Report
Page 5 of 66 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 15 55 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 985
This forum thread is moderated by Admin
  1. #925
    Quote Originally Posted by Paulie97  [View Original Post]
    That's completely irrelevant to the point, as no one in their right mind is thinking of going to the Ukraine or Russia now. But if you are out to give Golfinho a BJ then you need a different angle.
    I'm sorry, but I don't think you followed the context of my post as they relate to the posts referenced.

  2. #924

    Lol

    Quote Originally Posted by Elvis2008  [View Original Post]
    What far right wing Americans have voiced support for Putin? It is better to say that we want to hold back on your wanton spending. That $40 billion in weapons money is going to get us nothing. How much "foreign aid" money to Ukraine ended up in Democratic coffers? You expect us to believe Hunter Biden was the only one? All you lefties were and are making bank demonizing Putin. If you are so anti-Putin, go volunteer to fight the Ruskies yourself.
    Twerp there's no need to demonize Putin as he does it himself, attacking breadlines and maternity wards while executing people with their hands tied behind their backs in basements. As to me, if someone comes to my neighborhood doing the same I'll take up arms. In the meantime I'll support our allies abroad in a similar predicament. Asking AARP members to become overseas mercenaries when they call out your unamerican isolationlist nonsense represents the Tu Quoque fallacy which is another take on the Ad hominem. Only 11 Republican senators were against the latest aid package, no Dem so you are off on the fringes where you belong.

    https://www.thoughtco.com/tu-quoque-...allacy-1692568

    P.S. As to Hunter's laptop, that one is filed away with your 2000 Mules, ballots on Chinese paper, Hillary's emails, Barak's birth certificate, lock her up, stop the steal, John Durham, and the array of Covid conspiracy theories you suckers have been pitching for two years. The one grifting in Ukraine is Trump, caught on tape withholding taxpayer funds for personal favors.

  3. #923

    As one of a multi-part series, that article makes more sense.

    Quote Originally Posted by WyattEarp  [View Original Post]
    Let me clarify. I said all predictions on this war are specious. As far as you making predictions, I can't recall if you specifically did or didn't. I do however think you might be more optimistic for the post-war outcome than I am. My opinion on that can change and most certainly will as time and things progress with the battle, the Russian economy, the global economy and the diplomatic front. (Note: I am not in camp with the pro-Russian or anti-Ukrainian crowd.).

    Since I think Foreign Affairs tries to be somewhat objective, let me give you some further background on the article I posted. It was titled "What If Ukraine Wins?" It was a part of a multi article set. The other titles are "What If Russia Loses?" "What if Russia Wins?" "What If Russia Makes a Deal? And "What If the War in Ukraine Doesn't End?" So Foreign Affairs does try to look at all the possibilities for an outcome. I will have to admit they take a relatively pessimistic tone in all the possibilities.

    I think you have laid out above the poor scenarios for Russia nicely. I don't have any disagreement there.
    I didn't realize that was the case. But I tend to be critical of most media, as a general rule, because there's so much shallow reporting out there. And for me the cardinal sin is the widespread reluctance of authors to be honest and humble about how much they don't know. It's as if they think their reputation will take a hit if they don't sound authoritative. Or maybe it's the fault of the editors or corporate managers? I don't know, but I think the opposite would be the case. I know I'd certainly respect them more.

    Think about it in terms of historical wars. How often did the learned pundits and analysts, writing in the early stages of those wars, get it right? In the Civil War, for example, the early advantages were held by the South as Lee was more advance-minded and McLellan was more on the back foot. So, anyone writing before the 2nd Battle of Bull Run, to pick one milestone, would have been justified in being pessimistic about the Union's prospects.

    In WW-II, Allied butt was being royally kicked by the Axis for most of the early stages of the war. Of course, most US media coverage was of the patriotic cheerleader variety, but I'm sure serious analysts had deep concerns regarding the course of the war. But did any pundit or analyst accurately predict that Hitler would try something like Operation Barbarossa, and thereby squander his advantage?

    Maybe I've missed a war or particular pundit in which accurate predictions took place. I'll happily admit to that, if such an example exists. But it seems to me that the record of wartime analysts is about as good as those who make economic projections, which is to say not very good. Don't get me wrong, they're great at pointing out things to watch out for, and also for explaining things that have already happened. But the sheer number of dynamic variables involved in a wartime scenario makes it a daunting challenge.

    As for my optimism, it's simply based on my assessment of how tidal forces are currently flowing. One prime example is that I think there's been a paradigm shift in how the world views Russia, and what that means for geopolitical relationships going forward. Putin-Dora's Box has been opened, with all the hatefulness and evil revealed, and there's no closing it again. Putin could order a stop to the fighting, and withdraw his forces from Ukraine, but that wouldn't return us to the status quo ante. They've crossed the Rubicon and will be (rightly) perceived as a threat, and NOT as a partner, for decades (or generations) to come. And I think that new reality will create even more alliances in Europe and beyond as a necessary protective counterbalance. Of course there will be bumps in the road, but I think things will come together, not because of altruistic motives, but because of legitimate security concerns. It'll be messy but I think the West (NATO, EU, etc.) will figure it out. OTOH, I don't see any realistic scenario by which Russia avoids pariah status and a significantly more isolated existence than before. And that's a tidal force I see that's flowing inexorably in a negative direction for Russia.

  4. #922

    Absolutely

    Quote Originally Posted by WyattEarp  [View Original Post]
    Very well said.

    The United States and Britain significantly supplying the Russians is an interesting fact that even Stalin and Khrushchev admonished as a major cause for their victory.

    I fast forward to today and it would appear Russian military equipment is not a match for Western equipment. Russia's relative isolation and its failure to modernize in a deep sense has always limited the country.
    US and British re-supply on their back channel was essential or else the thorough ass whooping of the Russos would have been completed.

  5. #921

    Well

    Quote Originally Posted by WyattEarp  [View Original Post]
    Easy Cowboy. Don't bite the forum that feeds everyone. This is the International Sex Guide.

    Similar to me challenging Golfinho awhile back on his post that Americans take their strong currency to buy cheap, third world pussy, we shouldn't criticize the forum and its members inadvertently or not.
    That's completely irrelevant to the point, as no one in their right mind is thinking of going to the Ukraine or Russia now. But if you are out to give Golfinho a BJ then you need a different angle.

  6. #920

    Kazakhstan-Russia tensions? Haven't seen much analysis about this.

    At the recent St. Petersburg Int'l Economic Forum (SPIEF) Kazakhstan President Tokayev raised eyebrows when he said his country would refuse to recognize the separatist republics of Luhansk and Donetsk. Here's the link and quote:

    https://en.trend.az/casia/kazakhstan/3610762.html

    "It has been calculated that if the right of a nation to self-determination is organized throughout the globe, instead of the 193 states that are now members of the UN, more than 500-600 states will appear on earth. It will be chaos. For this reason, we do not recognize either Taiwan, or Kosovo, or South Ossetia, or Abkhazia. Apparently, this principle will also be applied to quasi-state structures, which, in our opinion, are Lugansk and Donetsk. This is a frank answer to your frank question".

    And, in another discordant note, Tokayev refused to accept an award (Order of Alexander Nevsky) from Russia. Putin is reportedly furious at this show of disrespect, especially since the SPIEF was hosted by Russia. And the same reports state that Putin is planning consequences (preparing "gifts") in response.

    https://newsfounded.com/ukraineeng/t...-answer-unian/

    Two additional reports state that Russia has placed restrictions on flows of Kazakh oil through a pipeline and that Kazakhstan may be responding by blocking railcars full of Russian coal. Take these last two reports with a grain of salt, as they're still awaiting verification by more established news sources. But still, everything taken as a whole seems to suggest that all is not rosy in LilliPutin's own backyard.

    https://intellinews.com/face-to-face...ublics-248002/

    "Indeed, one of the first developments in relation to Russia and Kazakhstan that occurred on June 17, shortly after Tokayev's words, was an announcement that the Caspian Pipeline Consortium (CPC) would be periodically halting oil shipments in order to allow the Russian Emergency Situations Ministry to defuse around 50 WWII era mines it had found on the Black Sea seabed. Kazakhstan relies significantly on the CPC infrastructure for oil exports".

    https://thesaxon.org/kazakhstan-bloc...an-coal-media/

    "Authorities of Kazakhstan decided to block 1700 wagons with Russian coal on their territory. The Telegram channel "We Can Explain" writes about this with reference to its sources".

    Again, some of the above reporting needs additional verification, but that won't be easy since I doubt either Russia or Kazakhstan will want to discuss any problems. But it certainly seems like something to keep an eye on and, though it may not result in any major change to the situation, it's an example of one of those "under the radar" variables that no one's really discussed or analyzed. Or, if they have, I haven't seen it yet.

  7. #919

    Not a criticism, just an explanation.

    Quote Originally Posted by WyattEarp  [View Original Post]
    Easy Cowboy. Don't bite the forum that feeds everyone. This is the International Sex Guide.

    Similar to me challenging Golfinho awhile back on his post that Americans take their strong currency to buy cheap, third world pussy, we shouldn't criticize the forum and its members inadvertently or not.
    As I noted, I've made extensive use of the US-centric site. I was just responding to the asinine insinuation that one's number of posts has any relevance to the content of those posts. Poor Pedrito has really taken to scraping the bottom of the barrel in his futile attempts to attack me. His latest bleatings truly reek of desperation.

  8. #918
    Quote Originally Posted by Jmsuttr  [View Original Post]
    While I'm absolutely pro-Ukraine in sentiment, I've done my best to focus on what's actually happening, not on what "should" happen or even what I want to happen. If you can indicate the post, or posts, of mine in which I cross the line into prediction territory, please share.

    It seems to me that I'm the loudest voice in this forum shouting that predictions are a fool's errand, as this war is unique in many aspects and there are too many variables, known and unknown. In fact, that's the very criticism I level against your article, is it not?

    My personal feelings aside, any optimism I've expressed is generally based on optimistic developments, such as arms commitments and other support measures for Ukraine, or the recent granting of EU candidate status. Any such developments that help Ukraine sustain their war effort are positive things, and I'm not shy about pointing them out.

    If, however, support for Ukraine started to fade, or other developments with long-term negative implications occurred, I would discuss those honestly. To this point I would assert that the weight of the evidence leans in a positive direction for Ukraine. And, as I've also posted numerous times, I do my best to focus on the tides, rather than waves or ripples..
    Let me clarify. I said all predictions on this war are specious. As far as you making predictions, I can't recall if you specifically did or didn't. I do however think you might be more optimistic for the post-war outcome than I am. My opinion on that can change and most certainly will as time and things progress with the battle, the Russian economy, the global economy and the diplomatic front. (Note: I am not in camp with the pro-Russian or anti-Ukrainian crowd.).

    Since I think Foreign Affairs tries to be somewhat objective, let me give you some further background on the article I posted. It was titled "What If Ukraine Wins?" It was a part of a multi article set. The other titles are "What If Russia Loses?" "What if Russia Wins?" "What If Russia Makes a Deal? And "What If the War in Ukraine Doesn't End?" So Foreign Affairs does try to look at all the possibilities for an outcome. I will have to admit they take a relatively pessimistic tone in all the possibilities.

    I think you have laid out above the poor scenarios for Russia nicely. I don't have any disagreement there.

  9. #917
    Quote Originally Posted by Xpartan  [View Original Post]
    I agree that it's going to be "a long, grinding war" but you seem to presume that Ukraine somehow has a power to stop it. It doesn't.
    I agree with the sentiment. Barring Putin dying or being deposed, I just don't know how the war comes to some type of end without negotiations.

    I think there is a strong possibility that when the fighting ceases the dividing line between Russia and Ukraine will look like the Korean Demilitarized Zone. I suspect Russia and the Ukraine will be in a state of hostility for many years to come.

  10. #916
    Quote Originally Posted by Jmsuttr  [View Original Post]
    Unlike some, I don't need a fuckboard to find foreign pussy. I've lived abroad for enough years that I can manage just fine.
    Easy Cowboy. Don't bite the forum that feeds everyone. This is the International Sex Guide.

    Similar to me challenging Golfinho awhile back on his post that Americans take their strong currency to buy cheap, third world pussy, we shouldn't criticize the forum and its members inadvertently or not.

  11. #915
    Quote Originally Posted by Paulie97  [View Original Post]
    With the American far right in his corner, and in power in the US, he'd have a real shot at pulling it off.
    What far right wing Americans have voiced support for Putin? It is better to say that we want to hold back on your wanton spending. That $40 billion in weapons money is going to get us nothing. How much "foreign aid" money to Ukraine ended up in Democratic coffers? You expect us to believe Hunter Biden was the only one? All you lefties were and are making bank demonizing Putin. If you are so anti-Putin, go volunteer to fight the Ruskies yourself.

  12. #914
    Quote Originally Posted by Paulie97  [View Original Post]
    Russians take a lot of shit you twerp as they have no other choice. They took a thorough ass whooping in the Russo-Japanese War. They took an additional ass whooping from the Bolcheviks and backed out of WW I. They were at the standing eight count from the Nazis until the West rescued them through re-supplies. They lost the Cold War, their women sucking Western cock to this day to survive, and now have an economy about the size of Texas. To add insult to injury, they've been forced to tuck tail and tun from Kyiv and Kharkiv, and can barely hold their own against a much smaller neighboring country. They are seemingly all white though excepting the Asian provinces, and anti-Jew, and that's why they get a sympathetic though meaningless ear from you here in ISG. Yawns. Bigots absent intellectual pursuits are a dime a dozen.
    Very well said.

    The United States and Britain significantly supplying the Russians is an interesting fact that even Stalin and Khrushchev admonished as a major cause for their victory.

    I fast forward to today and it would appear Russian military equipment is not a match for Western equipment. Russia's relative isolation and its failure to modernize in a deep sense has always limited the country.

  13. #913

    Hitler's Play book

    Quote Originally Posted by ReinerOtto  [View Original Post]
    There is a road on top of this dam, but I doubt, it would be capable of allowing lot of heavy armour to pass. So no good replacement for the bridges in Cherson.

    Because the dam is user for water control, and electricity generation, not a valid target for destruction by the UA forces.
    All these Nazis can do is destroy, just like the last days of the Reich. Speaking of which, little Emperor Macron lost and Colombia has told the Yanks to f off. Civilisation's only hope is open season on acultural interlopers (Americans, other ferals).

  14. #912
    Quote Originally Posted by Jmsuttr  [View Original Post]
    But isn't one river crossing over the Kakhovka Dam? That one, I'd guess, would not be targeted for destruction.
    There is a road on top of this dam, but I doubt, it would be capable of allowing lot of heavy armour to pass. So no good replacement for the bridges in Cherson.

    Because the dam is user for water control, and electricity generation, not a valid target for destruction by the UA forces.

  15. #911

    Well

    Quote Originally Posted by Xpartan  [View Original Post]
    Whatever that power-drunk maniac might or might not have felt didn't have any roots in reality. .
    All these "feelings" were mere excuses on par with the "feelings" Hitler used for his neighboring land grabs. Little Vlad already stated that he has no problem with Finland joining NATO, a country with a 700 mile shared border. The issue with the Ukraine is his false historical narrative and claim that they have no right to exist. Then after that we get to the real reason, that he wants their farmlands and ports, and ultimately a restoration of the old Soviet empire if he can manage to pull it off. With the American far right in his corner, and in power in the US, he'd have a real shot at pulling it off.

+ Add Report
Page 5 of 66 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 15 55 ... LastLast

Posting Limitations

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts


Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape