Russia-Ukraine War 2022 - Page 236 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#15227740
Most unfortunate this all came out. For Russia.

The children's camp that became an execution ground

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-61442387

"The story of the summer camp killings is chilling but so is this detail: more than 1,000 civilians were killed in the Bucha region during a month under Russian occupation, but most did not die from shrapnel or shelling. More than 650 were tortured and shot dead by Russian soldiers, according to a senior police official.

Now Ukraine is searching for their killers."


Ukraine has moved on the counteroffensive during week 11 of Russia’s war, taking back towns to the north and east of the second-largest city Kharkiv.
According to some news reports, Russian forces retreated to regroup around defensive positions less than 10km (6 miles) from the Russian border, with Ukrainian units in hot pursuit.

I wonder what else will be found in the "liberated" ruins Russia left back.
By Rich
#15227748
Independent_Srpska wrote:Russia already accepted 1,200,000 refugees from east Ukraine since 2014 to Feb 2022.

Kiev regime started to relocate them by the state terror in the colors of AZOV battalion and music by Stepan Bandera.

Russia paid their money and made their choice or at least their government did on Russian's behalf. Russia could have used its influence to establish an autonomous Russian area of the country containing the whole of the south and the east. Given time they could very possibly have split Ukraine apart and reunited with south eastern part of the country. But oh no that wasn't good enough for Russia they demanded dominance over the whole of Ukraine and Moldova to boot.

When you demand everything you can end up with nothing, or at least a very reduced share of the pie. Germany could be much bigger, much greater than it is currently. From 1871 to 1914 they underplayed their hand and then compounded this by massively over playing their hand in World War I and World War II. Serbia made the same mistake of demanding everything than complaining when they ended up the losers. If Serbia had just peacefully allowed the whole of Slovenia and Croatia and Kosovo minus their majority Serb areas to peacefully become independent, they would have been in a strong position to create a a greater Serbia. But no they demanded everything and ended up losers.

Far right parties only got a small percentage in the last elections in Ukraine, but even if they had got a majority so what? As i referenced in anther thread, Jews had to know their place in pre war Nazi Germany. This was not ideal, but it was not exceptional. In the nineteen thirties, the majority of people in the world had to know their place, untouchables in India to just give one example. In the nineteen thirties the majority of the world's population lacked what we now consider basic human rights.

The correct justification for going to war with Nazi Germany was not to stop Hitler ruling Germany or Austria, it was to stop him ruling, Czech, Slovakia, Poland, France, Belgium, Yugoslavia, Ukraine etc. We don't live in an ideal world. We can't go invading and taking over every country to protect minority rights. And we certainly can't allow this as an excuse for imperialist domination. A Nazi style ethnic Ukrainian nationalist government in Kiev, is not something the world should need to make a major concern. The chances of Ukraine going on some major continental conquest like Nazi Germany or Napoleonic France did are zero.

If some people who identify as Russians lose some rights in Ukraine, so what? That doesn't justify Russian imperialistic domination of Ukraine which is what Russia demanded.
#15227750
Wels wrote:Yes, and no one had a problem with that up to 2015. But the reason for the end of this peace was Russia, not Kyiv.

No, Kyiv did not "take this away from them", the Donbas was flooded with insurgents from Russia and help the real two percent of pro-russian rabble rousers to become a threat to all.



But, it is not like that.
On 23 February 2014 , Ukrainian majority abolished "the language law".

Ukraine abolishes law on languages of minorities, including Russian
EDUCATIONFEB 24 2014INTERFAXINTERFAX


So, Kiev did have problems with regional autonomy of Russian speaking population. It was 2014. Immediately wave of unrests started among the population. Immediately Kiev sent armed units to deal with unsatisfied citiezens.
Among armed units of Ukrainians there were those bright-eyed with Nazi insignia

Regarding your second accusation, "burning russians alive" :excited: ? And the evil Kyivers ate russian babies alive, of course. This is complete bullsh!t and you know it.


That's a logical fallacy. You know about Odesa and burning 40+ people in the building.

the clashes in Odesa on 2 May 2014 — one of a number of mass assemblies marked with violence in 2014 — which claimed 48 lives (40 men, seven women and a boy). Unlike the Maidan protests, where clashes mainly took place between protesters and the police or police-backed counter-protesters or so-called ‘tytushki’, the clashes in Odesa occurred between people with different political views about Ukraine’s future and constitutional set-up, following the change in the national Government as a result of the Maidan protests.


Of course those were not humanitarian convoys, Russia just called them so, those were false flag operations by Russia to inflitrate and transfer weapons and soldiers into the Donbas, just like the little green men did in Krimea. Too bad this time no one fell for this maskirovka.


That's not correct. There were no proofs for your claims. The OSCE observers did not report any transfer of weapons from Russia. The NATO experts did not report ever. The only who reported were "objective" Polish spies, whose claims were never substantiated, so they are equal to your (or mine) claims in the forum.

For your information, Donbass did not need supplies from Russia, Donbass initially was armed by the Russian deserters from the Ukrainian army (when army turned on Russian people).


Supported by Russia, but true. Unfortunately he had lied about his intentions, and in a such blatant way that when this became obvious his former voters became so furious they wanted him to step back. The Ukrainians did not want to live under a russian puppet faking democracy, with russian pressure and corruption, converting Ukraine to the kind of sh!thole Russia was.
Yanukovich then "stepped back" alright to his beloved Moscow which then was not longer able to pull strings in the Ukraine. Then there was another president, and finally there was Zelensky, voted for by 73 percent of the population.
The EU was probably more happy about that than the US, but the latter were happy too that Moscow's marionette was gone, understandably. Most happy were the Ukrainians, having some perspective again.


This is pure Russophobia. It perfectly fits into NATO-West narrative based on xenophobia and Russian hatred.
You are trying to present this like something pretty normal to oust legally elected president because he was inclined to Russia (which was legitimate) and you and NATO hordes did not like that, so they staged the Coup and started civil unrest.
Now, the consequences of such aggressive actions blew back in the face of initial perpetrators and you all now whine over consequences and you all cowardly do not mention initial events that divided country and started the killings.

Thugs and soldiers imported by Russia destabilizing the Donbas region and then "calling Moscow for help", which instantly acknowledges DPR and LPR as "independent states". Laughable. No one with a quarter pound of minced meat between the ears will believe that the majority of people living in the Donbas rgeion ever did that. You know that Russia tries to deport hundred thousands of civilians to Russia, while the rest is being brainwashed and harrassed to obey their new "leader"?
"This is what the 'Russification' of Ukraine's education system looks like in occupied areas" <2 hours ago>
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/th ... 9020cc7be7

Indepencence "declared" by Russia, no one else in the world.
When the russians have been driven out, the real population will not even be able to do anything because a lot of it has been deported to Russia, which again resettles the region with russians from elsewhere. Just like in Poland after WW2.

^ fixed that for you.


For DPR and LPR is more than enough to be recognized by Russia, Russia by recognizing them made basically an obligation to protect them as an independent states, and RUssia sent out the message to NATO aggressor to stop. (Basically like South Ossetia case).
It will take a lot military force to change this reality in the field. NATO pact knows very well it's different meddling 2000km away from Russia and NATO know what it means plotting on the Russian borders.
The latter brings finger closer to the red button.
That's in no-one's interest.
I hope idiots from the NATO will calm down and pull back to their lairs they crawled out from.
#15227752
Rich wrote:Russia paid their money and made their choice or at least their government did on Russian's behalf. Russia could have used its influence to establish an autonomous Russian area of the country containing the whole of the south and the east. Given time they could very possibly have split Ukraine apart and reunited with south eastern part of the country. But oh no that wasn't good enough for Russia they demanded dominance over the whole of Ukraine and Moldova to boot


This is not correct. Russia basically was going in the direction you write. Minsk agreements were allowing some autonomy of these regions (subject to negotiations), but the firm point was Donbass stays in Ukraine.
Referendums by DPR and LPR in 2014 did not have Russia's approval, and they were caused by violence inflicted by Kiev on the citizens in the East.

When you demand everything you can end up with nothing, or at least a very reduced share of the pie. Germany could be much bigger, much greater than it is currently. From 1871 to 1914 they underplayed their hand and then compounded this by massively over playing their hand in World War I and World War II. Serbia made the same mistake of demanding everything than complaining when they ended up the losers. If Serbia had just peacefully allowed the whole of Slovenia and Croatia and Kosovo minus their majority Serb areas to peacefully become independent, they would have been in a strong position to create a a greater Serbia. But no they demanded everything and ended up losers.


This for Serbia is not correct neither. Exactly that was on the table - peaceful dissolution of Yugoslavia with the right of Serbs in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina to stay in what would be Yugoslavia. Croats and Muslims did not want that, they wanted right to secede for themselves, barring that right to Serbs.
That's exactly why the war broke out in Yugoslavia.
Croats in Croatia did not want to peacefully allow Serbs from Srpska Krajina (which is basically the whole eastern borders (some 15%-20% of population and territory) of today's Croatia stay in Yugoslavia. The same happened in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Muslims+Croats started killing Serbs because Serbs (and Serb municipalities and population) conducted plebiscite to stay in Yugoslavia.
So, all in all, you are completely wrong and unaware of what happened.

The West has completely hypocritical approach to these various situations.
In Yugoslavia they supported separatists Croats and Muslims, but bombed Serbs who wanted to stay in the integral state. Then they supported integralists in Croatia and BiH and bombed Serbs who wanted to secede from these imposed administrations.
In Kosovo they firstly supported separatist Albanians and they bombed integralists in Belgrade, then they prevented Serb parts of Kosovo to join Serbia, because suddenly the West supports integralists :lol:

Unlike in case of Yugoslavia, the West is again against separatists in Donbass and pro-Ukrainian integralists. With the short field trip in supporting Chechen separatists in Russia, against Russian integralists.

So, please, do not go in that field.

Far right parties only got a small percentage in the last elections in Ukraine, but even if they had got a majority so what? As i referenced in anther thread, Jews had to know their place in pre war Nazi Germany. This was not ideal, but it was not exceptional. In the nineteen thirties, the majority of people in the world had to know their place, untouchables in India to just give one example. In the nineteen thirties the majority of the world's population lacked what we now consider basic human rights.

The correct justification for going to war with Nazi Germany was not to stop Hitler ruling Germany or Austria, it was to stop him ruling, Czech, Slovakia, Poland, France, Belgium, Yugoslavia, Ukraine etc. We don't live in an ideal world. We can't go invading and taking over every country to protect minority rights. And we certainly can't allow this as an excuse for imperialist domination. A Nazi style ethnic Ukrainian nationalist government in Kiev, is not something the world should need to make a major concern. The chances of Ukraine going on some major continental conquest like Nazi Germany or Napoleonic France did are zero.

If some people who identify as Russians lose some rights in Ukraine, so what? That doesn't justify Russian imperialistic domination of Ukraine which is what Russia demanded.


I do not agree. Russia did not demand such things. The crucial point is rights of Russians in the east. What was going on in the east was not an isolated event, it was 8 years long harassment, accompanied with Nazi narrative (which is a red flag in front of bull's eyes when it comes to Russia) and flirting with the aggressive NATO pact.
You can not abolish rights of people who identified as Russians in Ukraine. Why would you do that anywhere in the world, no one likes that, no one peacefully agrees to it, especially not Russians in Ukraine. It was so dumb.
BTW, it is completely against basically the founding act of Ukraine when USSR was dissolving. (Belovezh Accords). These republics (Belarus, Ukraine, Russia) obliged themselves to preserve rights of "minorities" that would stay in other Republics, exactly because of the geniuses like the ones in Ukraine that would some day might say:"Ah, phuck those minorities, let's kick their asses a bit...we have NATO on our door...they will help us..."

Consequences of the greed and hegemony are here now.
#15227753
Oh, boy - forceful ethnogenesis is painful.
I've seen that in the Balkans.



Ukrainian Nazism beyond schizophrenia: Nebenzya came to the UN Security Council with a Ukrainian textbook:

The Ministry of Education of Ukraine is engaged in total rewriting of history.
I took the 8th grade geography textbook. According to him, the ancestors of the French, Spaniards, Turks and even Jews came from Ukraine.

I want to turn to my French colleague: Nicolas, did you know that you are actually Ukrainian? If you don't believe me, read the textbook. It has an iron logic: since the ancestors of the French are Gauls, they came from Galicia in Ukraine.

Do you know that, according to the author of the textbook, Ukrainians and Poles are of Slavic origin, and Russians are Finno-Ugric?

The Belarusians were also denied Slavdom, they were attributed to the Baltic peoples.

The textbook of the history of Ukraine for the 7th grade says that "the formation of the Ukrainian people has 140 thousand years." The 9th grade history textbook states that “by the end of the 19th century, Ukrainians were one of the largest peoples in Europe.”

The author of the book "Ukrainian Nation" is generally convinced that "the population of Eastern Europe entered the 1st millennium of a new era under the name of Ukrainians."

https://t.me/kornilov1968/10425
By Rich
#15227755
Independent_Srpska wrote:You can not abolish rights of people who identified as Russians in Ukraine.

Have the rights of the of those who identified as Ukrainians in Crimea or the Eastern Republics been respected since 2014? Not in the slightest. Ukraine and Russians have been at war since 2014, the Ukrainians would have had to been bat shit insane not to suppress the overt displays of Russian nationalist identity after 2014.

On the whole, on average are the rights of people in Kherson better or worse since the Russian invasion? They're clearly worse.

On the whole on average, has the quality of life for the residents of Mariupol been improved by the special military operation? Clearly they haven't.
#15227757
Rich wrote:Have the rights of the of those who identified as Ukrainians in Crimea or the Eastern Republics been respected since 2014? Not in the slightest. Ukraine and Russians have been at war since 2014, the Ukrainians would have had to been bat shit insane not to suppress the overt displays of Russian nationalist identity after 2014.

On the whole, on average are the rights of people in Kherson better or worse since the Russian invasion? They're clearly worse.

On the whole on average, has the quality of life for the residents of Mariupol been improved by the special military operation? Clearly they haven't.


Dude, why do you refuse to acknowledge the reality which means the timeline and causality of events?

First the Kiev regime started to abolish the rights of Russian speaking population in Ukraine, after they ousted the president inclined to Russia (it was orchestrated by the USA).
So, the status quo and power balance was disrupted by AMERICANS and their Kiev puppets.
Further, Kiev attempt to reduce rights of Russian speaking population caused turbulences and "reduction" of rights of Ukrainians in regions where they are minority.

So, please stop with that ridiculous western whining :"We hit you first, and you bastards hit us back, that was rude from your side!"

Regarding Mariupol - it's a war, it gets ugly and then it gets better for those who survive. If it stays in DPR for Russian speaking people will be better they will say quality of life improved, for Ukrainian people who fought for Kiev will suck. And vice versa.
#15227777
Ignoring the idiot trolls like @Independent_Srpska @Igor Antunov and Putin for a moment.

The later has threatened Finland and Sweden again this morning. I would be interested to know exactly what it is with which he is threatening them. He has no viable navy. His army is bogged down in Ukraine. If he mobilizes he has a lot of broken rusty stuff but nothing like the ground forces to threaten Finland. To get to Sweden on the ground he has to cross through Finland which, frankly, would probably stop him at the first forest he comes to. If he enters Norway to get to Sweden he triggers NATO and then he loses the whole show. He would be forced to use nukes and then it is all academic anyway. Now if he Nukes Finland it costs him St. Petersburg due to the prevailing winds in the region.

He could simply declare victory in Ukraine, bring his troops home, have a parade and get back to dying of old age someday. Sadly, given the bovine temperament of the Russian people, I fear we are in for a catastrophe.

The Russian people, who, because of their cowardice, are directly to blame for this mess will go down in big numbers as will people everywhere. Their fear of power has doomed their democratic experiment and given them a destructive despot.

By the way. NATO troops are trained to fight on a nuclear battlefield. Yes there is such a thing.
User avatar
By Rancid
#15227779
Drlee wrote:Ignoring the idiot trolls like @Independent_Srpska @Igor Antunov and Putin for a moment.

The later has threatened Finland and Sweden again this morning. I would be interested to know exactly what it is with which he is threatening them. He has no viable navy. His army is bogged down in Ukraine. If he mobilizes he has a lot of broken rusty stuff but nothing like the ground forces to threaten Finland. To get to Sweden on the ground he has to cross through Finland which, frankly, would probably stop him at the first forest he comes to. If he enters Norway to get to Sweden he triggers NATO and then he loses the whole show. He would be forced to use nukes and then it is all academic anyway. Now if he Nukes Finland it costs him St. Petersburg due to the prevailing winds in the region.

He could simply declare victory in Ukraine, bring his troops home, have a parade and get back to dying of old age someday. Sadly, given the bovine temperament of the Russian people, I fear we are in for a catastrophe.

The Russian people, who, because of their cowardice, are directly to blame for this mess will go down in big numbers as will people everywhere. Their fear of power has doomed their democratic experiment and given them a destructive despot.

By the way. NATO troops are trained to fight on a nuclear battlefield. Yes there is such a thing.


Putin isn't stupid enough to attack Finland or Sweden. @Igor Antunov tries to explain this away as "it's cheaper/more fun to put weapons in Cuba" or some other stupid shit he say's to cope.

The only wildcard that could change things is if Putin is in fact, dying of an illness, in which case, he could make a stupid move. Still, hopefully there are some Russians that would go against his dying wishes.


Anyway Putin probably would have been more successful if he focused on Donbas from the start. All of the fucking around with Kyiv and Kharkiv as really put Russia off balance. It's time to send NATO troops to Ukraine.
#15227780
@Independent_Srpska

The Russian Army is getting a severe ass kicking in Ukraine! Of course, we are laughing because of the immense arrogance Putin displayed prior to invading Ukraine. I admit, I am surprised at the massive incompetence of the Russian Army. I expected them initially to take Ukraine. But it seems the Ukrainian Army has performed very well. But, just from reliable news reports, I could see things the Russians were doing that we would never do because it would put us in a vulnerable position to be attacked on the battlefield. Our army would have had a field day. It would have been no contest.

And I have to say, @Drlee hits the nail on the head with this quote:

Drlee wrote:There is something that happens to all soldiers. We are trained to be lethal and provided wonderfully powerful equipment. Very early on, we come to think of ourselves as invulnerable and that our units are invulnerable. These notions are quickly dispelled and the first sound of gunfire. Nevertheless, Putin's (and many of his general's) personal experience of combat is nonexistent. All he has seen are fancy parades with very macho and pretty troops presenting shiny, cool looking equipment. And his generals love to tell him how wonderful and transcendent his weapons are. But.


Nobody is super man. Nobody is invincible. Putin thought his army was invincible. And when you think you are invincible, that's exactly when military disaster strikes. It reminds of me of how Confederate general Robert E. Lee began to think after winning a string of battlefield victories in the American Civil War. He began to think he was invincible. And when he began to think he was invincible, he stopped listening to good advice from his subordinates, and his disastrous defeat at Gettysburg happened. Kinda like what is happening to Russia right now in Ukraine. Putin began to think he was invincible, and that was when disaster struck.
Last edited by Politics_Observer on 16 May 2022 18:35, edited 1 time in total.
#15227781
Drlee wrote:Ignoring the idiot trolls like @Independent_Srpska @Igor Antunov and Putin for a moment.

The later has threatened Finland and Sweden again this morning. I would be interested to know exactly what it is with which he is threatening them. He has no viable navy. His army is bogged down in Ukraine. If he mobilizes he has a lot of broken rusty stuff but nothing like the ground forces to threaten Finland. To get to Sweden on the ground he has to cross through Finland which, frankly, would probably stop him at the first forest he comes to. If he enters Norway to get to Sweden he triggers NATO and then he loses the whole show. He would be forced to use nukes and then it is all academic anyway. Now if he Nukes Finland it costs him St. Petersburg due to the prevailing winds in the region.

He could simply declare victory in Ukraine, bring his troops home, have a parade and get back to dying of old age someday. Sadly, given the bovine temperament of the Russian people, I fear we are in for a catastrophe.

The Russian people, who, because of their cowardice, are directly to blame for this mess will go down in big numbers as will people everywhere. Their fear of power has doomed their democratic experiment and given them a destructive despot.

By the way. NATO troops are trained to fight on a nuclear battlefield. Yes there is such a thing.


Yeah. The average IQ of the NATO goblin is equal to the number of states in the NATO. So, the mission is clear, increase the number of countries to increase the IQ.

Therefore, NATO goblins root for a "protection" of Sweden and Finland from a rusty, incapable, incompetent, disorganized, obsolete Russian army without navy. :lol:
A kind of incoherent thinking, but who am I to judge Goblins' support to Ukraine.
Image
#15227782
@ingliz

ingliz wrote:@Politics_Observer, I think.


That wasn't me. I thought there was a good chance that Putin would use tactical nukes on Ukraine because he was getting his ass kicked so bad in Ukraine, and Ukraine isn't part of NATO. Finland and Sweden are not on Putin's radar. And I seriously doubt he would attack Finland and Sweden, especially after they join NATO. It would be especially stupid for Putin to use tactical nuclear weapons on Finland and Sweden after they have joined NATO, given that NATO is a nuclear alliance and can respond in kind.
#15227784
Drlee wrote:The later [Putin] has threatened Finland and Sweden again this morning.

I wonder if they really don't see how counterproductive their policy and rhetoric are, however, they must be like a projectile shot out of a gun and unable to change its trajectory.

Rancid wrote:The only wildcard that could change things is if Putin is in fact, dying of an illness

In my opinion everyone, including Putin himself, is preparing for a post-Putin era which could be closer than we'd think, and Putin started this war because he couldn't postpone it for any longer. He was actually aware of the weaknesses of the military, that's why he started the whole thing with an overconfident and blatant nuclear threat (which was a bluff, of course), with which he meant to deter the West from any intervention. He also may have been actually aware that Ukraine wouldn't collapse immediately as his legions appear there, but he really believed in the necessity of a preventive strike and a radical social change, or rather a radical change in social consciousness in Russia anyway, which has to be done before his retirement.
#15227785
Beren wrote:which was a bluff, of course

Famous last words. :lol:

When,

The position we have reached is one where stability depends on something that is more the antithesis of strategy than its apotheosis, on threats that things will get out of hand, that we might act irrationally, that possibly, through an inadvertence, we could set in motion a process which in its development and conclusion would be beyond human control and comprehension.

— Lawrence Freedman, The Evolution of Nuclear Strategy: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003, p.458.
#15227786
Rancid wrote:Putin will be remembered by history as the great buffoon. :lol:

In other words, the 21st century Mussolini. Hitler, after all, was kicking everyone's ass until Stalin came along and kicked his ass. When Putin invaded Ukraine, it wasn't Hitler invading Poland, it was Mussolini invading Abyssinia. He flushed his own legacy down the toilet. His wallet fell out into the bowl just as he pulled the chain.... :lol:
#15227787
ingliz wrote:Famous last words. :lol:

A barking dog never bites. He was too much blatant as well, so he did his threatening the wrong way if he wasn't bluffing. But he was, so it was okay, direct Western military intervention wasn't on the deck anyway. That kind of threats have been inflating a lot since then because people get even used to nuclear threatening sooner or later, you know, even though Putin can have a really scary face and tone while scaring.
#15227788
re Srpska
you are repeating your view like a mantra that must be true instead of at least taking other information into consideration.

Just an example
"Russian citizens led the separatist movement in Donetsk from April until August 2014, and were supported by volunteers and material from Russia.[38][39][40] As the conflict escalated in May 2014, Russia employed a "hybrid approach", deploying a combination of disinformation, irregular fighters, regular Russian troops, and conventional military support to destabilize the Donbas.[41][42][43]"

38 Kofman, Michael; Migacheva, Katya; Nichiporuk, Brian; Radin, Andrew; Tkacheva, Olesya; Oberholtzer, Jenny (2017). Lessons from Russia's Operations in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine (PDF) (Report). Santa Monica: RAND Corporation. pp. 43–44.

39 Strelkov/Girkin Demoted, Transnistrian Siloviki Strengthened in 'Donetsk People's Republic', Vladimir Socor, Jamestown Foundation, 15 August 2014

40 Pushing locals aside, Russians take top rebel posts in east Ukraine". Reuters. 27 July 2014. Archived from the original on 28 July 2014. Retrieved 27 July 2014.

41 same source like 39

42 Fedorov, Yury E. (15 January 2019). "Russia's 'Hybrid' Aggression Against Ukraine". Routledge Handbook of Russian Security. Routledge. ISBN 978-1-351-18122-8.

All there to read, example: https://books.google.de/books?id=7vODDw ... 22&f=false


I have evidence for each of my claims, you are repeating the same russian propaganda since months. Sounds like a broken record, and we both sound like it. Nothing to gain, have a nice day.
Last edited by Wels on 16 May 2022 20:07, edited 1 time in total.
  • 1
  • 234
  • 235
  • 236
  • 237
  • 238
  • 323

@litwin We just need to send more HIMMARs to U[…]

@snapdragon more than a hard gestational age cut[…]

You said Boomers were lazy, that is simply wron[…]