Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
If NATO doesn't respond, then there is no NATO. And I'm not talking just supplying some weapons. I'm talking destroying that 40 mile long Russian military caravan with airpower and installing a no fly zone over Ukraine. Ukraine deserves better from the asshole countries who claim to love freedom.
Speaking of sock puppetsNATO is the most corrupt organization in the world.
NATO put nukes on Russia's border before, in Turkey.
Which led to the Cuban Missile Crisis.
That is totally unacceptable and unethical.
The Ukraine committed war crimes that NATO would be criminal to defend, like stealing oil, murdering ethnic Russians, treaty violations, etc.
So you think being a QAnon freak is better than being a Russian sock Puppet?
Newsflash...we have had sock puppets in various number all the way back to 2015. And everything you post SCREAMS sock puppet
God you are boring...So you think being a QAnon freak is better than being a Russian sock Puppet?
Newsflash...we have had sock puppets in various number all the way back to 2015. And everything you post SCREAMS sock puppet
You are quite correct...Russia is not running around the world invading or creating imperial colonies like US and other capitalists are.
So you think being a QAnon freak is better than being a Russian sock Puppet?
Newsflash...we have had sock puppets in various number all the way back to 2015. And everything you post SCREAMS sock puppet
Every word screams Russian sockThat's stupid.
Just go back in history.
We invaded Vietnam by setting up the Diem dictatorship around 1955, preventing elections.
The Russians instead supported Ho Chi Minh, the hero of all Vietnam.
So then who is the good guy of history?
The evil, capitalist, invading US, or the defender of Vietnam who got and took nothing from it, Russia?
Thanks JO! I understand that most are brainwashed into believing Nato is not an aggressor but they too must be able to at least self-consciously understand the truth.Because we are here in the west most of the people posting here will reflexively villainize the other hemisphere and ignore the fact that NATO has become as much of a threat to global peace and security as anyone they once hoped to blame for that very thing. Any attempt to open their eyes will simply get you tag named Putin lover, commie traitor or some other Alinskite propaganda nomenclature. It's a dead giveaway that you are on the right track.
JO
That's stupid.
Just go back in history.
We invaded Vietnam by setting up the Diem dictatorship around 1955, preventing elections.
The Russians instead supported Ho Chi Minh, the hero of all Vietnam.
So then who is the good guy of history?
The evil, capitalist, invading US, or the defender of Vietnam who got and took nothing from it, Russia?
Yep... I agree 100%... I am most heartbroken for the poor Ukrainian people. They have been duped into thinking that they are fighting for their own freedom which of course is bullshit. There is no good reason on earth why Zelensky couldn't have negotiated a non invasion agreement with Putin... none except for the incessant whispering of NATO in his ear. I wonder if he's rethinking that now? This was totally unnecessary.Thanks JO! I understand that most are brainwashed into believing Nato is not an aggressor but they too must be able to at least self-consciously understand the truth.
Their screeching, namecalling, and commie accusations are all the proof we need to know that they 'get it' on Nato's purpose.
As to the question here? I don't know if Russia will resort to the use of nuclear weapons. But I'm pretty dead certain that Russia will not accept defeat.
The question then becomes, can Russia win what they feel is the minimum for their ongoing security and safety without nuclear weapons?
It's in the interest of the world's countries to ensure that happens, while appeasing US/Nato demands in some way too. The peace talks are now progressing to that end.
I could say a lot more about China's stakes in this move by Nato but I'll save it until there's a willing audience who want to take a rational approach that expresses a need for a peace settlement.
On a positive note, we can see now that no Nato country can possibly be threatened by Russia or China, due to the nuclear deterrent that's the elephant in the room. I think we're seeing that demonstrated for Russia's sake too.
It's hard for any of them to argue against the facts.That's stupid.
Just go back in history.
We invaded Vietnam by setting up the Diem dictatorship around 1955, preventing elections.
The Russians instead supported Ho Chi Minh, the hero of all Vietnam.
So then who is the good guy of history?
The evil, capitalist, invading US, or the defender of Vietnam who got and took nothing from it, Russia?
Yes that is precisely what they are doing in the UkraineRussia is not running around the world invading or creating imperial colonies like US and other capitalists are.
How can we contain it when it has at this point actually contained us?It's hard for any of them to argue against the facts.
But in any case, the old talking point of containing communism, can't work anymore.
Another sock puppet heard fromThanks JO! I understand that most are brainwashed into believing Nato is not an aggressor but they too must be able to at least self-consciously understand the truth.
Their screeching, namecalling, and commie accusations are all the proof we need to know that they 'get it' on Nato's purpose.
As to the question here? I don't know if Russia will resort to the use of nuclear weapons. But I'm pretty dead certain that Russia will not accept defeat.
The question then becomes, can Russia win what they feel is the minimum for their ongoing security and safety without nuclear weapons?
It's in the interest of the world's countries to ensure that happens, while appeasing US/Nato demands in some way too. The peace talks are now progressing to that end.
I could say a lot more about China's stakes in this move by Nato but I'll save it until there's a willing audience who want to take a rational approach that expresses a need for a peace settlement.
On a positive note, we can see now that no Nato country can possibly be threatened by Russia or China, due to the nuclear deterrent that's the elephant in the room. I think we're seeing that demonstrated for Russia's sake too.
No large and powerful nuclear armed nation is seriously threatened anymore. They haven't really been threatened ever since the system of having a proxy fight their wars on their behalf.How can we contain it when it has at this point actually contained us?
JO
Man...it just can't end fast enough....you got that right.No large and powerful nuclear armed nation is seriously threatened anymore. They haven't really been threatened ever since the system of having a proxy fight their wars on their behalf.
But this war is quite different in that Russia has no proxy and so it sees itself directly threatened.
It makes little difference on which side is right, it only matters now that it's ended soon.
If all the rules of this war are discarded, we all should understand that both sides have the power to end it within hours!
More important than US drilling which would take months to come on line , get OPEC producing more which will drive down prices in a day...We do not have to make that decision yet, but we might have to soon after he takes Ukraine. If Pooty believes his threat of nuclear war prevented action against him in Ukraine, he may try to expand again in the very near future.
His premise for this was---------->he would not allow a NATO country to be installed on the Russian border, just as we didn't want CUBA with missiles on our border. Take it for what it is worth, but that is the debate point from experts who semi agree with him or not.
But then, here comes the logic problem------------> If that is his reasoning, if Russia gobbles up Ukraine which then becomes a Russian satellite, Ukraine has NATO members on their borders. So now, he has the same cover for reasoning to do it again?
It is incumbent upon our government, to drill baby drill and bring oil to bear bringing down the cost, so his gas station in Europe is no where near as profitable so as he can not fund expansionist ideas. If our politicians do not do it, I fear we will back here in a year or 18 months, with you posing the same question to us about another country, possibly one of our NATO allies!
More important than US drilling which would take months to come on line , get OPEC producing more which will drive down prices in a day...
Europe need for Gas and Oil drops in April considerably... This gives us until November to break the Russian economy... This is why the WH has been laying it heavy on China, China trades about 20 times more with EU & US than Russia... China even imports Oil from US... China I say wants US membership of TPP to be put on the table... I say the retort is No, but we won't sanction China...
Up EU access to alternative(to Russian Gas) energy over the summer and Russia could be beaten without a NATO firing a shot...
The big thing is what are we going to give Putin to clear off... I say the deal is looking like, Ukraine promise not to join NATO but allowed join EU, sliver of east Ukraine (about 20 -30 miles) and Crimea given to Russia, Russia will be still under some major sanctions, Oligarchs will have assets seized and sold for Ukraine reconstruction.... Putin can sell that home and he would be gone in 10ish years...
And? The reverse is true.Russians HATE "western propaganda"
1. Putin's ambitions can't be "proven". I think his ambitions took a kick in the ass after seeing how poorly his army and air force performed in Ukraine. But it is "well known" that he wants to restore as much of the old USSR that he can. Not my speculation, but the various talking heads' in the NSA and CIA.PROVE IT. Based on what exactly? This sounds like your personal speculation.
Well. . . the west and Ukraine were given ample opportunity not to threaten Russia's security imperatives. Their desires seemed to me, pretty reasonable. I'm not sure why they didn't negotiate when they had the chance. So? If they end up like Cuba, they are, after all, in Russia's sphere of influence. This is something we will just have to accept. It sure as hell is not worth destroying the planet over.
". . . Setting aside the manoeuvres and cynicism of geopolitics, whomever the players, this historical memory is the driving force behind Russia’s respect-seeking, self-protective security proposals, which were published in Moscow in the week the UN voted 130-2 to outlaw Nazism. They are:
These amount to a comprehensive draft of a peace plan for all of post-war Europe and ought to be welcomed in the West. But who understands their significance in Britain? What they are told is that Putin is a pariah and a threat to Christendom.. . ."
