Russia-Ukraine War 2022 - Page 869 - 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

#15318828
Potemkin wrote:...The West just couldn’t give up its Cold War mentality until it was too late.


Demonstrating this mentality in realtime, Rich wrote:...We should be seeking compromise with Russia in order to contain China North Korea and Iran and also longer term to contain potential enemies of Turkey, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.


Yes Rich, the West only exists to stop the development of other nations on the Earth's crust, and if this makes the West unpopular, it can always resort to terrorism to scare other nations into compliance.

It's a world of Cherokees out there, isn't it. And the West is the creator of Trails of Tears, isn't it.
User avatar
By litwin
#15318831
QatzelOk wrote:Yes Rich, the West only exists to stop the development of other nations on the Earth's crust, and if this makes the West unpopular, it can always resort to terrorism to scare other nations into compliance.

It's a world of Cherokees out there, isn't it. And the West is the creator of Trails of Tears, isn't it.


watch this :

watch from 1944

#15318869
Well - there you have it.

Putin just visited North Korea, then Vietnam.

Russia sends military to support Cuba.

Russia renews ties with Afghanistan, too.

And probably many more such things are happening in the background.

So clearly Russia has finally given up on trying to work with the west, has accepted there is again a cold war, no longer cares about the sensitivities of the west, and instead reconnects with old allies.

And the funniest part is, apparently our brilliant leaders are ACTUALLY SURPRISED by this development ?!?!?!? :eek: :eh: :D :lol:
#15318876
Negotiator wrote:Well - there you have it.

Putin just visited North Korea, then Vietnam.

Russia sends military to support Cuba.

Russia renews ties with Afghanistan, too.

And probably many more such things are happening in the background.

So clearly Russia has finally given up on trying to work with the west, has accepted there is again a cold war, no longer cares about the sensitivities of the west, and instead reconnects with old allies.

And the funniest part is, apparently our brilliant leaders are ACTUALLY SURPRISED by this development ?!?!?!? :eek: :eh: :D :lol:


So many crazy and failing states Putin visits nowadays besides Vietnam from that list. Such strong allies, wow. If previously Russia was in the G8 and now it has to visit Afghanistan, Cuba and North Korea. Oh how the mighty have fallen. :lol:

The only crazy regimes that are failed states that Putin hasn't visited yet are Venezuela, Syria and Iran. Its laughable but Iran is the most stable out of the crazy failing states mentioned before.
User avatar
By litwin
#15318896
QatzelOk wrote:Yes Rich, the West only exists to stop the development of other nations on the Earth's crust, and if this makes the West unpopular, it can always resort to terrorism to scare other nations into compliance.

It's a world of Cherokees out there, isn't it. And the West is the creator of Trails of Tears, isn't it.


Moscow imperialists are crying . any comment on this ? on which side are you ?
https://x.com/i/status/1802105552396296193
#15318965
As far as choice of terms goes, "failing state" is a poor one. North Korea is a "failed state" since many decades. What a strange kind of "failure". When does the actual failure ever happen ? NK is still there and I'm not aware of any sign of actual failure.

The advantage most non-western countries have over especially the USA and Germany is very simple: they educate their children well. In fact, if there is any problem with China that they're educating their children a bit too well and should give them more time simply to play and process and be creative, too.

Noth Korea was hold back by a simple issue: lack of access to international trade. That problem is now not fully gone, but gotten much easier, with their alliance with Russia.

Other than that, everybody knows that North Korea has nuclear bombs, which are a completely non-trivial to develop, and a simple space program. Amazing archievements for such a small country that was very much on its own. So yeah, theres definitely potential there, in regards to what this country can archieve if ever unleashed from the bondage of US sanctions.

And, if the rumor mill is to be believed, US sanctions seem to near their end. BRICS is rumored to introduce a new international currency in the coming months. On June 9, 2024, the petrodollar officially ended; Saudi Arabia didnt renew the treaty. That means they'll very likely adopt the BRICS currency and western countries will have no choice to do the same.

So yeah, you may see a failure upwards soon, with NK.

I dont know much about Vietnam, so I cant say much about it either. All I know is that even so long after the war, they still suffer from the aftereffects of Agent Orange.
#15318969
Describing the rest of the world outside NATOstan, JohnRawls wrote:So many crazy and failing states ...


Yes, you're so much better off staying in your Euro-garden and getting other countries - through extortion - to bomb one another to poverty and despair.

Perhaps Western leaders are the crazy ones, and the West is poised to fail and has terrible leaders?
User avatar
By noemon
#15318982
Rugoz wrote::knife:

The "attempt to destroy Russia" only exists in that confused mind of yours. If anything, the West is far too obsessed with not giving that impression. Russia can get the fuck out of Ukraine and that's it. The only thing at risk is the career of Putin and his cronies.



The only risk of NATO taking over the 300 year old Russian Naval Headquarters where Ukranians have been applying for visas to visit since Russia gifted the area to them is to "Putin and his cronies".

I guess the only risk to the US handing over the Pentagon to Russia is to Biden and his cronies. Why not give the Pentagon to Russia?

:knife:
#15318993
noemon wrote:The only risk of NATO taking over the 300 year old Russian Naval Headquarters where Ukranians have been applying for visas to visit since Russia gifted the area to them is to "Putin and his cronies".

I guess the only risk to the US handing over the Pentagon to Russia is to Biden and his cronies. Why not give the Pentagon to Russia?

:knife:


People who write this kind of stuff make me usually wonder. Why does NATO need Crimea? Turkey is NATO, Romania is NATO, Bulgaria is NATO we have infinite supply of bases to control the Black Sea from and we actually control it both the channels and in the number of vessels by a very large margin. Even more so with the Russian Black Sea fleet being destroyed basically and being a shell of its former self that can just hide in its naval bases or in the Sea of Azov while not being able to maintain its Grain shipment bloackade anymore by the threat of Ukranian drones. What even happened to the Grain and Naval blockade that Russia attempted, huh?

So explain to me what is the point of Crimea for NATO? We literally don't need it. Plus the logistics alone to station NATO fleets there would be stupid, much easier to base them out of Romania, Turkey or Bulgaria if needed.
User avatar
By noemon
#15318995
JohnRawls wrote:People who write this kind of stuff make me usually wonder. Why does NATO need Crimea? Turkey is NATO, Romania is NATO, Bulgaria is NATO we have infinite supply of bases to control the Black Sea from and we actually control it both the channels and in the number of vessels by a very large margin. Even more so with the Russian Black Sea fleet being destroyed basically and being a shell of its former self that can just hide in its naval bases or in the Sea of Azov while not being able to maintain its Grain shipment bloackade anymore by the threat of Ukranian drones. What even happened to the Grain and Naval blockade that Russia attempted, huh?

So explain to me what is the point of Crimea for NATO? We literally don't need it. Plus the logistics alone to station NATO fleets there would be stupid, much easier to base them out of Romania, Turkey or Bulgaria if needed.


This is called flame-baiting and is not a valid argument.

You are the one who needs to explain: if you don't need it, then why do you claim it and why are you fighting a war for it?

Did Nato need to destroy Yugoslavia? Did it need to bomb Serbia, did it need to bomb the convoy of Albanian refugees thus killing more Albanians than Serbia? Did it need to destroy Iraq, how about Libya?

:eh: :knife:
#15319002
noemon wrote:This is called flame-baiting and is not a valid argument.

You are the one who needs to explain: if you don't need it, then why do you claim it and why are you fighting a war for it?

Did Nato need to destroy Yugoslavia? Did it need to bomb Serbia, did it need to bomb the convoy of Albanian refugees thus killing more Albanians than Serbia? Did it need to destroy Iraq, how about Libya?

:eh: :knife:


So you are not going to answer. Listen, your argument was that NATO are in to some kind of expansion war for Crimea. Reality is that we are helping Ukraine in a defensive war which Russia clearly initiated. Russia also stole Crimea from Ukraine back in 2014 with a phony referendum with the vote being held while military personel occupied the territory.

Basically you are refusing to explain your own argument, hence why it is "weird" to bring that whole argument in the first place. It is kinda impossible to explain why NATO needs Crimea when it already has bases that are 10 times better for itself and with way better logistics that are already in place that NATO doesn't need to fight a war for.
#15319004
JohnRawls wrote:So you are not going to answer. Listen, your argument was that NATO are in to some kind of expansion war for Crimea. Reality is that we are helping Ukraine in a defensive war which Russia clearly initiated. Russia also stole Crimea from Ukraine back in 2014 with a phony referendum with the vote being held while military personel occupied the territory.

Basically you are refusing to explain your own argument, hence why it is "weird" to bring that whole argument in the first place. It is kinda impossible to explain why NATO needs Crimea when it already has bases that are 10 times better for itself and with way better logistics that are already in place that NATO doesn't need to fight a war for.


You are ranting incoherently again.

I did answer your flame-bait question which was not even a question but a claim you made:

You claimed that "the west does not need Crimea", prove your silly claim before you make any more nonsense.

Also, explain how the west needed Yugoslavia, Iraq, Kossovo, Afghanistan, Libya.

As for the rest of your explicit propaganda, it remains as laughable as it was days, weeks, and months ago.

Ukraine signed 3 times peace with Russia(twice in Minsk and once in Istanbul), 3 times warmongers like yourself forced your Ukrainian colony to do as you please.

Stop talking on the Ukrainian people's name. You have no right whatsoever.

You are not protecting anybody, and your stupid policies have already resulted to the destruction of Ukraine and thousands dead, for nothing.

In less that a year's time, you lot will be completely sectioned politically.

In less than 2 years time you will not even remember your anti-Russian days.
#15319006
noemon wrote:You are ranting incoherently again.

I did answer your flame-bait question which was not even a question but a claim you made:

You claimed that "the west does not need Crimea", prove your silly claim before you make any more nonsense.

Also, explain how the west needed Yugoslavia, Iraq, Kossovo, Afghanistan, Libya.

As for the rest of your explicit propaganda, it remains as laughable as it was days, weeks, and months ago.

Ukraine signed 3 times peace with Russia(twice in Minsk and once in Istanbul), 3 times warmongers like yourself forced your Ukrainian colony to do as you please.

Stop talking on the Ukrainian people's name. You have no right whatsoever.

You are not protecting anybody, and your stupid policies have already resulted to the destruction of Ukraine and thousands dead, for nothing.



You are ranting incoherently again.


No, you are blinded by propaganda or your own prejudices.


I did answer your flame-bait question which was not even a question but a claim you made:

You claimed that "the west does not need Crimea", prove your silly claim before you make any more nonsense.


How do I proove a negative besides the argument that I brought up already. We have tons of our own bases, 1 base less or more doesn't make a difference when you have many already. We control the Black Sea and we control the channels. You don't accept this argument for whatever reason. Beyond this argument you can't really proove a negative.

Also, explain how the west needed Yugoslavia, Iraq, Kossovo, Afghanistan, Libya.

As for the rest of your explicit propaganda, it remains as laughable as it was days, weeks, and months ago.


This is whataboutism and you are trying to pin every conflict that anyone might dislike saying that every conflict that NATO is involved in is bad. This is a non-sequitar basically. NATO wasn't even the main force in half of them. But lets ignore your whataboutism and non-sequitar to NATO so

Yugoslavia/Kosovo: NATO intervened after years of civil war and genocide. Europe usually doesn't like this kind of stuff happening in Europe itself. The intervention didn't solve all the issues in the regions but at least it stopped the conflicts and stopped the genocide/ethnic cleansing.

Iraq/Afghanistan: That was mostly the US and yes, this was done under wrong pretense obviously and as an angry response to 9/11. It did damage the international rules based order in the long term which we are still trying to recover from. But once again, this was mostly the US and there were demonstrations in Europe not to do it at the time.

Lybia: This was mostly French/German doing. Well mostly French but once again, they intervened to stop the murder and the civil war that was ongoing. Problem that there was no plan for afterwards and France/Germany thought that everything is going to sort out by itself which it didn't.

Now having discussed the whataboutism, here is the kicker. How is this relevant to Ukraine when NATO is not intervening and helping Ukraine fight a defensive war?


Ukraine signed 3 times peace with Russia(twice in Minsk and once in Istanbul), 3 times warmongers like yourself forced your Ukrainian colony to do as you please.

Stop talking on the Ukrainian people's name. You have no right whatsoever.

You are not protecting anybody, and your stupid policies have already resulted to the destruction of Ukraine and thousands dead, for nothing.


Yeah, Ukraine signed 3 times deals with Russia and Russia broke all of them. This is blatantly clear by now from Gas extortion to starting a full insurgency on the territory of Ukraine with RUSSIANs from RUSSIA and not local ones to stealing territory to starting a full scale massive invasion.

Ukranian people agree with me on mass while people like you would probably be imprisoned and deported from Ukraine for being a Russian colaborator if not worse....
Last edited by JohnRawls on 22 Jun 2024 16:27, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By noemon
#15319007
:lol:


You can't make this up, the whataboutist whose only argument is "what about 1 less base?" Is bothered by "why did you attack Iraq, Libya, Afghanista, Serbia, Kossovo" if you didn't need a base there?

The fake whataboutist is bothered by a valid whatabout argument in response to his own whataboutism.

Can't make this up indeed.

:lol:

Get a grip on yourself John.

When you do, you will eventually realise that your pathetic propaganda is not convincing anybody, not even those positive on your anti-Russian hatred.

John wrote:This is whataboutism and you are trying to pin every conflict that anyone might dislike saying that every conflict that NATO is involved in is bad.


No, when you openly claim that the west attacks only when "it needs to"(whatever that means in your brain), then you can rightly expect people to point out to you, that this is not the case as all these examples prove beyond any doubt, rendering your argument as a bit more than laughable.
User avatar
By litwin
#15319031
Negotiator wrote:Current study: people in the west want peace.

https://instituteforglobalaffairs.org/w ... ticism.pdf

Thats already what the EU parliament elections showed, but this study also polled US citizen, with the same result.

First aid, Maskal style! :lol:

He didn’t even seem that badly injured. Maskali just don’t seem to value life in the same way the rest of us do....


a Putin´s solder finishes his comrade off with a shot in the head after he was wounded by an FPV drone. I VIDEO

https://x.com/i/status/1804578557219537028

https://x.com/justin__sane/status/1804262751428387252
Last edited by litwin on 22 Jun 2024 20:08, edited 1 time in total.
By Rugoz
#15319033
JohnRawls wrote:People who write this kind of stuff make me usually wonder. Why does NATO need Crimea?


It doesn't.

When Russia took it in 2014, nobody gave a damn. Ukraine did not even attempt to take it back.

If Putin wanted Crimea in exchange for peace, he would get it. Problem is, he already had it before the war. It would be a crushing defeat.
User avatar
By litwin
#15319037
QatzelOk wrote:Yes Rich, the West only exists to stop the development of other nations on the Earth's crust, and if this makes the West unpopular, it can always resort to terrorism to scare other nations into compliance.

It's a world of Cherokees out there, isn't it. And the West is the creator of Trails of Tears, isn't it.

any comment on this ? Dugin : "This is a lie! In fact, Muscovy is a colonial empire, which right now is engaged in genocide and destruction of its former colony - Ukraine."


https://x.com/i/status/1804191423442362513
  • 1
  • 867
  • 868
  • 869
  • 870
  • 871
  • 872
World War II Day by Day

July 13, Saturday Germans decide on plan for inv[…]

The Supreme Court decision is absurd. President o[…]

Over the last two years, the U.S. Federal Reserve […]

I certainly don't buy they're protesting genocide […]