comment by ...TUX... (U22398)
posted 9 hours, 43 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 27 minutes ago
No serious Russia expert believes that NATO expansion is a significant cause of Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
'Russia reacts accordingly. Who wouldn't?'
TUX, have you forgotten the sickening revelations from Bucha? Did you miss the bombing of the Mariupol theatre with CHILDREN written in large letters on the roof, so the Russians would know that dozens of kids were sheltering inside after their homes were destroyed?
Who wouldn't do that, hey? Who wouldn't rape a girl in front of her parents then kill her? Who wouldn't systematically destroy a local culture and terrorise the inhabitants of conquered territory? This is on NATO, right?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Atrocities happen all around the globe on a daily basis.
I've not listened too much to the Ukrainian situation as it is just another page in the book of how those who rule the world decide what we should worry about next. There's a current pattern.......get it?
I fully appreciate your inputbut bad news is currently global.................due to the the actions for decades of the West. But let's blame Russia for everything eh?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't propose we blame Russia for everything. Only for the things for which Russia is directly accountable. Whereas you have explicitly endorsed the actions of the Russian state as a natural reaction to NATO expansion. This means you are on record supporting the rape and murder of children in front of their parents and the indiscriminate bombing of civilians. That is your unambiguously stated moral position, TUX.
You have an opportunity to retreat from that horrific stance if you recognise that the world is a complicated place, which isn't divided into good guys and bad guys, and doesn't have one centre of evil controlling all the bad stuff that goes on. The West has a irredeemable crimes on its record, stretching back centuries. The West is rich and powerful, but not *that* powerful its potential influence limited by the conflicts of interest between and within Western nations. Russia and China, to name just two examples, also have a long history of imperial expansion, based on military conquest and suppression of the local cultures and languages within the territories they control. China is currently carrying out genocide of the Uyghur people, something which the West isn't forcing it to do. In the course of the war in Ukraine, I've become aware of many voices from across the former USSR / Russian empire - some now neighbouring countries, some still regions within present-day Russia - talking about their own experiences of Russian imperialism, the imposition of Russian language over local tongues, public spaces and statues honouring Russian cultural figures rather than heroes of the local culture, etc. Despite many years of studying Russia, the extent to which Russian imperialism resembles that of Western imperial history had long been a blind spot on my part.
TUX, there's always lots more to learn about things, and invariably the more you learn about the specifics, the more complicated it looks, and the more idiotic black-and-white generalisations are revealed to be.
Hasn't Ukraine been in conflict before this invasion y Russia? Russian backed forces in the East, where most are Russian speakers were under rebel control? Just some clarity on this would help.
It's difficult to believe what's in the media as the media have been used as tools of propaganda in past wars by all sides in them. Any trust I had for the media was obliterated when we looked at how many backed the government in going to war in Iraq or how it's only an issue in the Palestine-Israel situation when Palestinians react to on going Israeli violence and oppression.
I can easily understand why many distrust the media. Some question why the Russians didn't go for the shock and awe method that the US and its allies used on Iraq. I have my own thoughts on that.
As this is a sporting forum, was it fair to ban Russian athletes from competing in sports? Russian teams from UEFA? Will this be done for other countries that cause wars?
utter bollox by the OP imo
I seriously doubt Putin is trying to begin a new "Russian Empire"
Looks to me like he wants Russian speaking eastern parts of Ukraine (already got Crimea were vast majority of ppl are ethnic Russian and more than welcomed the annexation by Russia in '14)
America and Britain facking around in Russia's back garden.
Neo Nazzzi Ukrainians virtually run their military
Zelensky is on the pay roll of the CIA or something , the priiiick
Bloke has $$$$$ in offshore accounts
The West (basically America and Britain) supplying arms to Ukraine is just prolonging the war and suffering of Ukrainian civilians
But it's good $$ for arms sales ofcourse
America and Britain's war machine needs new markets (capitalism)
Russia won't allow itself to lose this war
Ukraine means too much to them (it means absolutely nothing to people in the West)
It's a dangerous game tbh
Because if Russia thinks they will lose the war imminently, I think quite likely they'll launch a tactical nuke....I don't think it's a idle threat
This is no defence of Putin, but an explanation of what is really going on
I actually think the Russians have held back their best weapons and troops, as Ukraine has alot of meaning to them, as well as family ties
America and Britain are neck deep in all this, make no mistake about it...there is nothing benevolent about these countries
"Some question why the Russians didn't go for the shock and awe method that the US and its allies used on Iraq. I have my own thoughts on that."
Iraqi civilians meant nothing to the Americans and British
Ukrainian civilians have alot more meaning to Russians
That's why
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 2 minutes ago
"Some question why the Russians didn't go for the shock and awe method that the US and its allies used on Iraq. I have my own thoughts on that."
Iraqi civilians meant nothing to the Americans and British
Ukrainian civilians have alot more meaning to Russians
That's why
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, that’s rubbish
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 1 minute ago
"Some question why the Russians didn't go for the shock and awe method that the US and its allies used on Iraq. I have my own thoughts on that."
Iraqi civilians meant nothing to the Americans and British
Ukrainian civilians have alot more meaning to Russians
That's why
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't think that's the only reason (the first sentence) and I don't think Russia cares about all Ukrainians the same.
ask yourself this question:
Do you think Russia is prepared to lose a war with the West over Ukraine ?
A country that has huge geopolitical and cultural significance to Russia?
Answer to that is no chance
That's why this is a v dangerous situation as Russia, as you may like to recall, has more nuclear weapons than even America !
comment by Robb ☀️ ‘It was hot in 1976!’ ☀️ (U22716)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 2 minutes ago
"Some question why the Russians didn't go for the shock and awe method that the US and its allies used on Iraq. I have my own thoughts on that."
Iraqi civilians meant nothing to the Americans and British
Ukrainian civilians have alot more meaning to Russians
That's why
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, that’s rubbish
----------------------------------------------------------------------
it's probably true.
You may not like to admit that
Russia is perfectly capable of using "shock and awe" tactics themselves
Why haven't they used this in Ukraine then ?
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 10 minutes ago
utter bollox by the OP imo
I seriously doubt Putin is trying to begin a new "Russian Empire"
Looks to me like he wants Russian speaking eastern parts of Ukraine (already got Crimea were vast majority of ppl are ethnic Russian and more than welcomed the annexation by Russia in '14)
America and Britain facking around in Russia's back garden.
Neo Nazzzi Ukrainians virtually run their military
Zelensky is on the pay roll of the CIA or something , the priiiick
Bloke has $$$$$ in offshore accounts
The West (basically America and Britain) supplying arms to Ukraine is just prolonging the war and suffering of Ukrainian civilians
But it's good $$ for arms sales ofcourse
America and Britain's war machine needs new markets (capitalism)
Russia won't allow itself to lose this war
Ukraine means too much to them (it means absolutely nothing to people in the West)
It's a dangerous game tbh
Because if Russia thinks they will lose the war imminently, I think quite likely they'll launch a tactical nuke....I don't think it's a idle threat
This is no defence of Putin, but an explanation of what is really going on
I actually think the Russians have held back their best weapons and troops, as Ukraine has alot of meaning to them, as well as family ties
America and Britain are neck deep in all this, make no mistake about it...there is nothing benevolent about these countries
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What an absolute load of bollox
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 1 minute ago
ask yourself this question:
Do you think Russia is prepared to lose a war with the West over Ukraine ?
A country that has huge geopolitical and cultural significance to Russia?
Answer to that is no chance
That's why this is a v dangerous situation as Russia, as you may like to recall, has more nuclear weapons than even America !
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbers of nuclear weapons are irrelevant. After the first 100 are launched from either side it’s over for either country. Hence why neither side will launch them. Russia may not ‘lose’ the war per season but they could very well withdraw much like the US did from Afghanistan
comment by Robb ☀️ ‘It was hot in 1976!’ ☀️ (U22716)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 1 minute ago
ask yourself this question:
Do you think Russia is prepared to lose a war with the West over Ukraine ?
A country that has huge geopolitical and cultural significance to Russia?
Answer to that is no chance
That's why this is a v dangerous situation as Russia, as you may like to recall, has more nuclear weapons than even America !
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbers of nuclear weapons are irrelevant. After the first 100 are launched from either side it’s over for either country. Hence why neither side will launch them. Russia may not ‘lose’ the war per season but they could very well withdraw much like the US did from Afghanistan
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm well aware the number of nukes is irrelevant and everyone loses (except planet earth, as humans are a cancer on the planet and earth would be better off without humans imo)
Can't really compare what Afghanistan meant to America, and what (and where) Ukraine means to Russia
An estimated $3tn in natural resources is probably what Afghanistan meant to the US
comment by ...TUX... (U22398)
posted 11 hours, 43 minutes ago
NATO (the US) encroaches further towards the Russian border for no other reason than 'just because we can'. Russia reacts accordingly. Who wouldn't?
I'm 54 and have always been told that Russia are the enemy but the facts are that the West have caused far far more troubles in my life than Russia ever has.
We're all being played.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
this
TUX and Peks.
Dumb and Dumber..
comment by Whitehotlanespur (U9832)
posted 11 hours, 40 minutes ago
guys-this has been 30 yrs in the making
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4
its over an hr-but bloody informative
US arms manufactures are the only ones benefiting-look at theitr share prices
----------------------------------------------------------------------
this
The greatest trick Putin pulled was getting his bot army to get people to focus on ‘America bad’ and not on what Russia are doing. As if Russia are incapable of doing ‘bad’ things themselves. Luckily there are plenty of people who are able to have the brains to condemn the US for what they’ve done and in the same breath able to condemn Russia for what they’ve done. You don’t have to choose.
i'm not choosing
nor am i saying Putin is right to start a war...because he's not
but he did have reasons.
and i think many other russian leaders would have done the same
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 1 minute ago
i'm not choosing
nor am i saying Putin is right to start a war...because he's not
but he did have reasons.
and i think many other russian leaders would have done the same
----------------------------------------------------------------------
By saying he has reasons you’re excusing him. There is no excuse for what he’s done just as there was no excuse for the West invading Iraq. It was an act of evil and has backfired on him as he’s ended up strengthening NATO more than if he’d never invaded.
He had no legitimate reason to invade and his country is being humiliated on the world stage due to the hubris shown by a country who ran before they could walk.
comment by Robb ☀️ ‘It was hot in 1976!’ ☀️ (U22716)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 1 minute ago
i'm not choosing
nor am i saying Putin is right to start a war...because he's not
but he did have reasons.
and i think many other russian leaders would have done the same
----------------------------------------------------------------------
By saying he has reasons you’re excusing him. There is no excuse for what he’s done just as there was no excuse for the West invading Iraq. It was an act of evil and has backfired on him as he’s ended up strengthening NATO more than if he’d never invaded.
He had no legitimate reason to invade and his country is being humiliated on the world stage due to the hubris shown by a country who ran before they could walk.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
it's not an excuse, it's just a fact
humiliated ? according to who, western media ?
from what i've read from neutral sources, russia is close now to achieving most of the war's objectives
it's not an excuse, it's just a fact
———
What fact? You can’t use the NATO excuse because there were NATO countries on Russia’s border before the war and there will be after the war. Russia pose far more of a threat to their neighbours than NATO does to them.
As for ‘neutral sources’ .. who are these sources?
And yes, humiliated. The Russians themselves have admitted to catastrophic numbers of dead troops. Putin thought it would be a quick victory but it’s been anything but. He wanted Kyiv but he quickly found out how impossible that was.
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 9 seconds ago
comment by Robb ☀️ ‘It was hot in 1976!’ ☀️ (U22716)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 1 minute ago
i'm not choosing
nor am i saying Putin is right to start a war...because he's not
but he did have reasons.
and i think many other russian leaders would have done the same
----------------------------------------------------------------------
By saying he has reasons you’re excusing him. There is no excuse for what he’s done just as there was no excuse for the West invading Iraq. It was an act of evil and has backfired on him as he’s ended up strengthening NATO more than if he’d never invaded.
He had no legitimate reason to invade and his country is being humiliated on the world stage due to the hubris shown by a country who ran before they could walk.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
it's not an excuse, it's just a fact
humiliated ? according to who, western media ?
from what i've read from neutral sources, russia is close now to achieving most of the war's objectives
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you have a link to these “neutral sources”?
comment by Cymru Annibynnol 🏴 (U9094)
posted 27 seconds ago
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 9 seconds ago
comment by Robb ☀️ ‘It was hot in 1976!’ ☀️ (U22716)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 1 minute ago
i'm not choosing
nor am i saying Putin is right to start a war...because he's not
but he did have reasons.
and i think many other russian leaders would have done the same
----------------------------------------------------------------------
By saying he has reasons you’re excusing him. There is no excuse for what he’s done just as there was no excuse for the West invading Iraq. It was an act of evil and has backfired on him as he’s ended up strengthening NATO more than if he’d never invaded.
He had no legitimate reason to invade and his country is being humiliated on the world stage due to the hubris shown by a country who ran before they could walk.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
it's not an excuse, it's just a fact
humiliated ? according to who, western media ?
from what i've read from neutral sources, russia is close now to achieving most of the war's objectives
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you have a link to these “neutral sources”?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Probably takes you to Matt Le Tissier’s website
“By saying he has reasons you’re excusing him”
What a load of bullshiiiit. How the fack does saying he has reasons excuse him of anything.
Sign in if you want to comment
Ukraine
Page 4 of 6
6
posted on 29/7/22
comment by ...TUX... (U22398)
posted 9 hours, 43 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 27 minutes ago
No serious Russia expert believes that NATO expansion is a significant cause of Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
'Russia reacts accordingly. Who wouldn't?'
TUX, have you forgotten the sickening revelations from Bucha? Did you miss the bombing of the Mariupol theatre with CHILDREN written in large letters on the roof, so the Russians would know that dozens of kids were sheltering inside after their homes were destroyed?
Who wouldn't do that, hey? Who wouldn't rape a girl in front of her parents then kill her? Who wouldn't systematically destroy a local culture and terrorise the inhabitants of conquered territory? This is on NATO, right?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Atrocities happen all around the globe on a daily basis.
I've not listened too much to the Ukrainian situation as it is just another page in the book of how those who rule the world decide what we should worry about next. There's a current pattern.......get it?
I fully appreciate your inputbut bad news is currently global.................due to the the actions for decades of the West. But let's blame Russia for everything eh?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't propose we blame Russia for everything. Only for the things for which Russia is directly accountable. Whereas you have explicitly endorsed the actions of the Russian state as a natural reaction to NATO expansion. This means you are on record supporting the rape and murder of children in front of their parents and the indiscriminate bombing of civilians. That is your unambiguously stated moral position, TUX.
You have an opportunity to retreat from that horrific stance if you recognise that the world is a complicated place, which isn't divided into good guys and bad guys, and doesn't have one centre of evil controlling all the bad stuff that goes on. The West has a irredeemable crimes on its record, stretching back centuries. The West is rich and powerful, but not *that* powerful its potential influence limited by the conflicts of interest between and within Western nations. Russia and China, to name just two examples, also have a long history of imperial expansion, based on military conquest and suppression of the local cultures and languages within the territories they control. China is currently carrying out genocide of the Uyghur people, something which the West isn't forcing it to do. In the course of the war in Ukraine, I've become aware of many voices from across the former USSR / Russian empire - some now neighbouring countries, some still regions within present-day Russia - talking about their own experiences of Russian imperialism, the imposition of Russian language over local tongues, public spaces and statues honouring Russian cultural figures rather than heroes of the local culture, etc. Despite many years of studying Russia, the extent to which Russian imperialism resembles that of Western imperial history had long been a blind spot on my part.
TUX, there's always lots more to learn about things, and invariably the more you learn about the specifics, the more complicated it looks, and the more idiotic black-and-white generalisations are revealed to be.
posted on 29/7/22
Hasn't Ukraine been in conflict before this invasion y Russia? Russian backed forces in the East, where most are Russian speakers were under rebel control? Just some clarity on this would help.
It's difficult to believe what's in the media as the media have been used as tools of propaganda in past wars by all sides in them. Any trust I had for the media was obliterated when we looked at how many backed the government in going to war in Iraq or how it's only an issue in the Palestine-Israel situation when Palestinians react to on going Israeli violence and oppression.
I can easily understand why many distrust the media. Some question why the Russians didn't go for the shock and awe method that the US and its allies used on Iraq. I have my own thoughts on that.
As this is a sporting forum, was it fair to ban Russian athletes from competing in sports? Russian teams from UEFA? Will this be done for other countries that cause wars?
posted on 29/7/22
utter bollox by the OP imo
I seriously doubt Putin is trying to begin a new "Russian Empire"
Looks to me like he wants Russian speaking eastern parts of Ukraine (already got Crimea were vast majority of ppl are ethnic Russian and more than welcomed the annexation by Russia in '14)
America and Britain facking around in Russia's back garden.
Neo Nazzzi Ukrainians virtually run their military
Zelensky is on the pay roll of the CIA or something , the priiiick
Bloke has $$$$$ in offshore accounts
The West (basically America and Britain) supplying arms to Ukraine is just prolonging the war and suffering of Ukrainian civilians
But it's good $$ for arms sales ofcourse
America and Britain's war machine needs new markets (capitalism)
Russia won't allow itself to lose this war
Ukraine means too much to them (it means absolutely nothing to people in the West)
It's a dangerous game tbh
Because if Russia thinks they will lose the war imminently, I think quite likely they'll launch a tactical nuke....I don't think it's a idle threat
This is no defence of Putin, but an explanation of what is really going on
I actually think the Russians have held back their best weapons and troops, as Ukraine has alot of meaning to them, as well as family ties
America and Britain are neck deep in all this, make no mistake about it...there is nothing benevolent about these countries
posted on 29/7/22
"Some question why the Russians didn't go for the shock and awe method that the US and its allies used on Iraq. I have my own thoughts on that."
Iraqi civilians meant nothing to the Americans and British
Ukrainian civilians have alot more meaning to Russians
That's why
posted on 29/7/22
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 2 minutes ago
"Some question why the Russians didn't go for the shock and awe method that the US and its allies used on Iraq. I have my own thoughts on that."
Iraqi civilians meant nothing to the Americans and British
Ukrainian civilians have alot more meaning to Russians
That's why
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, that’s rubbish
posted on 29/7/22
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 1 minute ago
"Some question why the Russians didn't go for the shock and awe method that the US and its allies used on Iraq. I have my own thoughts on that."
Iraqi civilians meant nothing to the Americans and British
Ukrainian civilians have alot more meaning to Russians
That's why
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't think that's the only reason (the first sentence) and I don't think Russia cares about all Ukrainians the same.
posted on 29/7/22
ask yourself this question:
Do you think Russia is prepared to lose a war with the West over Ukraine ?
A country that has huge geopolitical and cultural significance to Russia?
Answer to that is no chance
That's why this is a v dangerous situation as Russia, as you may like to recall, has more nuclear weapons than even America !
posted on 29/7/22
comment by Robb ☀️ ‘It was hot in 1976!’ ☀️ (U22716)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 2 minutes ago
"Some question why the Russians didn't go for the shock and awe method that the US and its allies used on Iraq. I have my own thoughts on that."
Iraqi civilians meant nothing to the Americans and British
Ukrainian civilians have alot more meaning to Russians
That's why
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, that’s rubbish
----------------------------------------------------------------------
it's probably true.
You may not like to admit that
Russia is perfectly capable of using "shock and awe" tactics themselves
Why haven't they used this in Ukraine then ?
posted on 29/7/22
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 10 minutes ago
utter bollox by the OP imo
I seriously doubt Putin is trying to begin a new "Russian Empire"
Looks to me like he wants Russian speaking eastern parts of Ukraine (already got Crimea were vast majority of ppl are ethnic Russian and more than welcomed the annexation by Russia in '14)
America and Britain facking around in Russia's back garden.
Neo Nazzzi Ukrainians virtually run their military
Zelensky is on the pay roll of the CIA or something , the priiiick
Bloke has $$$$$ in offshore accounts
The West (basically America and Britain) supplying arms to Ukraine is just prolonging the war and suffering of Ukrainian civilians
But it's good $$ for arms sales ofcourse
America and Britain's war machine needs new markets (capitalism)
Russia won't allow itself to lose this war
Ukraine means too much to them (it means absolutely nothing to people in the West)
It's a dangerous game tbh
Because if Russia thinks they will lose the war imminently, I think quite likely they'll launch a tactical nuke....I don't think it's a idle threat
This is no defence of Putin, but an explanation of what is really going on
I actually think the Russians have held back their best weapons and troops, as Ukraine has alot of meaning to them, as well as family ties
America and Britain are neck deep in all this, make no mistake about it...there is nothing benevolent about these countries
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What an absolute load of bollox
posted on 29/7/22
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 1 minute ago
ask yourself this question:
Do you think Russia is prepared to lose a war with the West over Ukraine ?
A country that has huge geopolitical and cultural significance to Russia?
Answer to that is no chance
That's why this is a v dangerous situation as Russia, as you may like to recall, has more nuclear weapons than even America !
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbers of nuclear weapons are irrelevant. After the first 100 are launched from either side it’s over for either country. Hence why neither side will launch them. Russia may not ‘lose’ the war per season but they could very well withdraw much like the US did from Afghanistan
posted on 29/7/22
* per se
posted on 29/7/22
comment by Robb ☀️ ‘It was hot in 1976!’ ☀️ (U22716)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 1 minute ago
ask yourself this question:
Do you think Russia is prepared to lose a war with the West over Ukraine ?
A country that has huge geopolitical and cultural significance to Russia?
Answer to that is no chance
That's why this is a v dangerous situation as Russia, as you may like to recall, has more nuclear weapons than even America !
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbers of nuclear weapons are irrelevant. After the first 100 are launched from either side it’s over for either country. Hence why neither side will launch them. Russia may not ‘lose’ the war per season but they could very well withdraw much like the US did from Afghanistan
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm well aware the number of nukes is irrelevant and everyone loses (except planet earth, as humans are a cancer on the planet and earth would be better off without humans imo)
Can't really compare what Afghanistan meant to America, and what (and where) Ukraine means to Russia
posted on 29/7/22
An estimated $3tn in natural resources is probably what Afghanistan meant to the US
posted on 29/7/22
comment by ...TUX... (U22398)
posted 11 hours, 43 minutes ago
NATO (the US) encroaches further towards the Russian border for no other reason than 'just because we can'. Russia reacts accordingly. Who wouldn't?
I'm 54 and have always been told that Russia are the enemy but the facts are that the West have caused far far more troubles in my life than Russia ever has.
We're all being played.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
this
posted on 29/7/22
TUX and Peks.
Dumb and Dumber..
posted on 29/7/22
comment by Whitehotlanespur (U9832)
posted 11 hours, 40 minutes ago
guys-this has been 30 yrs in the making
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4
its over an hr-but bloody informative
US arms manufactures are the only ones benefiting-look at theitr share prices
----------------------------------------------------------------------
this
posted on 29/7/22
The greatest trick Putin pulled was getting his bot army to get people to focus on ‘America bad’ and not on what Russia are doing. As if Russia are incapable of doing ‘bad’ things themselves. Luckily there are plenty of people who are able to have the brains to condemn the US for what they’ve done and in the same breath able to condemn Russia for what they’ve done. You don’t have to choose.
posted on 29/7/22
i'm not choosing
nor am i saying Putin is right to start a war...because he's not
but he did have reasons.
and i think many other russian leaders would have done the same
posted on 29/7/22
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 1 minute ago
i'm not choosing
nor am i saying Putin is right to start a war...because he's not
but he did have reasons.
and i think many other russian leaders would have done the same
----------------------------------------------------------------------
By saying he has reasons you’re excusing him. There is no excuse for what he’s done just as there was no excuse for the West invading Iraq. It was an act of evil and has backfired on him as he’s ended up strengthening NATO more than if he’d never invaded.
He had no legitimate reason to invade and his country is being humiliated on the world stage due to the hubris shown by a country who ran before they could walk.
posted on 29/7/22
comment by Robb ☀️ ‘It was hot in 1976!’ ☀️ (U22716)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 1 minute ago
i'm not choosing
nor am i saying Putin is right to start a war...because he's not
but he did have reasons.
and i think many other russian leaders would have done the same
----------------------------------------------------------------------
By saying he has reasons you’re excusing him. There is no excuse for what he’s done just as there was no excuse for the West invading Iraq. It was an act of evil and has backfired on him as he’s ended up strengthening NATO more than if he’d never invaded.
He had no legitimate reason to invade and his country is being humiliated on the world stage due to the hubris shown by a country who ran before they could walk.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
it's not an excuse, it's just a fact
humiliated ? according to who, western media ?
from what i've read from neutral sources, russia is close now to achieving most of the war's objectives
posted on 29/7/22
it's not an excuse, it's just a fact
———
What fact? You can’t use the NATO excuse because there were NATO countries on Russia’s border before the war and there will be after the war. Russia pose far more of a threat to their neighbours than NATO does to them.
As for ‘neutral sources’ .. who are these sources?
And yes, humiliated. The Russians themselves have admitted to catastrophic numbers of dead troops. Putin thought it would be a quick victory but it’s been anything but. He wanted Kyiv but he quickly found out how impossible that was.
posted on 29/7/22
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 9 seconds ago
comment by Robb ☀️ ‘It was hot in 1976!’ ☀️ (U22716)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 1 minute ago
i'm not choosing
nor am i saying Putin is right to start a war...because he's not
but he did have reasons.
and i think many other russian leaders would have done the same
----------------------------------------------------------------------
By saying he has reasons you’re excusing him. There is no excuse for what he’s done just as there was no excuse for the West invading Iraq. It was an act of evil and has backfired on him as he’s ended up strengthening NATO more than if he’d never invaded.
He had no legitimate reason to invade and his country is being humiliated on the world stage due to the hubris shown by a country who ran before they could walk.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
it's not an excuse, it's just a fact
humiliated ? according to who, western media ?
from what i've read from neutral sources, russia is close now to achieving most of the war's objectives
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you have a link to these “neutral sources”?
posted on 29/7/22
comment by Cymru Annibynnol 🏴 (U9094)
posted 27 seconds ago
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 9 seconds ago
comment by Robb ☀️ ‘It was hot in 1976!’ ☀️ (U22716)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 1 minute ago
i'm not choosing
nor am i saying Putin is right to start a war...because he's not
but he did have reasons.
and i think many other russian leaders would have done the same
----------------------------------------------------------------------
By saying he has reasons you’re excusing him. There is no excuse for what he’s done just as there was no excuse for the West invading Iraq. It was an act of evil and has backfired on him as he’s ended up strengthening NATO more than if he’d never invaded.
He had no legitimate reason to invade and his country is being humiliated on the world stage due to the hubris shown by a country who ran before they could walk.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
it's not an excuse, it's just a fact
humiliated ? according to who, western media ?
from what i've read from neutral sources, russia is close now to achieving most of the war's objectives
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you have a link to these “neutral sources”?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Probably takes you to Matt Le Tissier’s website
posted on 29/7/22
Wouldn’t surprise me.
posted on 29/7/22
“By saying he has reasons you’re excusing him”
What a load of bullshiiiit. How the fack does saying he has reasons excuse him of anything.
Page 4 of 6
6