Strikes from Ukraine on Yandex Data centers.

[Elliott]

14 hours ago, Karmadhi said:

 

If overthrowing Putin was that easy, it would have been done already by the West. Not to mention you may get someone worse. 

 

The west wants the war to drag on forever, the longer it lasts the weaker Russia gets. The west wants Russia divided up. You think Europe cares about Ukrainians, they just bought a record amount of arctic gas from Russia, U.S. buying Iranian diesel through them. Who is Ukraine trying to impress with morality, some African country going to support them? Nations aren't supporting Ukraine out of morality.

If Europeans cared about Ukraine, a lot more would be enlisting in the Ukrainian army. They don't give a fuck about Ukraine. If Russia invaded Canada, I'd enlist in Canadian army.

Edited yesterday at 08:40 AM by Elliott

[Rafael Thundercat]

5 hours ago, Elliott said:

After this video, you still support centralization via socialism? Did you watch the entire video?

I am still watching. I will finish today. Why do you assume I support whatever? And what is your insight about this?

[Elliott]

1 hour ago, Rafael Thundercat said:

I am still watching. I will finish today. Why do you assume I support whatever? And what is your insight about this?

What he calls a "symbolic" society,  where psychopathy offers greater reward and less risk than it did in tribal society. Our impersonal society is not conducive for a centralized socialist structure with our society's current level of development.

Edited Tuesday at 08:38 PM by Elliott

[Elliott]

 

 

[Ajay0]

The longer the war wages, the more widows and orphans are created, and the greater possibility of a nuclear war and holocaust.

The only one's profitting from this war is the western military industrial complex with high weapons sales and profits and skyrocketing share prices. They have also successfully captured weapons markets in Sweden and Finland after these two joined nato recently. 

A long war would also boost profits greatly. 

As Julian Assange stated, " A long unsuccessful war is more profitable than a short successful war."

So I don't see any chances of this war ending until all the profits are milked out.

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, Ajay0 said:

The longer the war wages, the more widows and orphans are created, and the greater possibility of a nuclear war and holocaust.

The only one's profitting from this war is the western military industrial complex with high weapons sales and profits and skyrocketing share prices. They have also successfully captured weapons markets in Sweden and Finland after these two joined nato recently. 

A long war would also boost profits greatly. 

As Julian Assange stated, " A long unsuccessful war is more profitable than a short successful war."

So I don't see any chances of this war ending until all the profits are milked out.

This war is not about American profit, for once. It is about Putin's imperialism. Sometimes it is profitable to oppose a devil.

You don't think Russian oligarchs profit off war?

Edited yesterday at 05:14 AM by Leo Gura

[Apparition of Jack]

1 hour ago, Ajay0 said:

The longer the war wages, the more widows and orphans are created, and the greater possibility of a nuclear war and holocaust.

The only one's profitting from this war is the western military industrial complex with high weapons sales and profits and skyrocketing share prices. They have also successfully captured weapons markets in Sweden and Finland after these two joined nato recently. 

A long war would also boost profits greatly. 

As Julian Assange stated, " A long unsuccessful war is more profitable than a short successful war."

So I don't see any chances of this war ending until all the profits are milked out.

If a long war is so bad Russia is free to leave Ukraine at any point 👍 

[Ajay0]

23 minutes ago, Apparition of Jack said:

If a long war is so bad Russia is free to leave Ukraine at any point 👍 

A long war is profitable to the western military complex, not Russia which is losing its own weapons markets to western competitors due to sanctions and so on. 

Ironically the US, France  and Russia are the top three weapons providers in the world at the moment. 

As the war progresses, it is possible that Russia will slide more down the ladder though it can later make a comeback with its brics partners which encompasses over 50 % of the world popuation and 35 % of the world's GDP. 

Even though the US-Nato was defeated by the Taliban in afghanistan after twenty years of fighting, heavy casualties and trillions of dollars down the drain, many weapons contractors made plenty of money during the duration of the war. 

So it is possible that the ukraine war will be similarly milked till optimal profits are obtained with western taxpayer money as in afghanistan. 

[Heaven]

The main reason why the world isn’t attacking Russia is because of their nuclear arsenal. 
Iran is trying to achieve the same and then it could do whatever it wants.

Trump might be idiot but he ain’t stupid.

[Lyubov]

7 hours ago, Ajay0 said:

The longer the war wages, the more widows and orphans are created, and the greater possibility of a nuclear war and holocaust.

The only one's profitting from this war is the western military industrial complex with high weapons sales and profits and skyrocketing share prices. They have also successfully captured weapons markets in Sweden and Finland after these two joined nato recently. 

A long war would also boost profits greatly. 

As Julian Assange stated, " A long unsuccessful war is more profitable than a short successful war."

So I don't see any chances of this war ending until all the profits are milked out.

Nothing is driving this war more than Putin's ambitions and the entire Russian nation which are like sheep, pure conformity for whatever the Tsar says. Arm's industry is just getting rich off it, they are not creating the demand. 

[Karmadhi]

9 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

This war is not about American profit, for once. It is about Putin's imperialism. Sometimes it is profitable to oppose a devil.

Two things can be true at the same time.

Putin wants land and USA uses that desire of Putin to profit themselves

By USA i mean American companies and powerful lobbying groups

I doubt the average American benefits from the war much

The American deep state has no real incentive to stop the war as it is benefting from it

As long as Russia is advancing in the front Putin has no real incentive the stop the war either

Only losers here are Ukranian and Russian common citizens who are dying in mass

Although to be fair I think some people overestimate the role of USA in this war a little too much

In the end, it is about Ukraine and their desire to protect their land

USA is milking the desire but it is not creating it, it would have existing with or without USA

That is key to understand

Edited yesterday at 02:43 PM by Karmadhi

[Ajay0]

16 hours ago, Lyubov said:

Nothing is driving this war more than Putin's ambitions and the entire Russian nation which are like sheep, pure conformity for whatever the Tsar says. Arm's industry is just getting rich off it, they are not creating the demand. 

See, the true culprit in this regard is Yeltsin, not Putin. Everyone is condemning Putin but not Yeltsin who was the man who installed Putin.

After the western leaders decided to expand Nato eastward dishonestly inspite of their verbal promises to Gorbachev and Yeltsin on "not one inch eastward", Yeltsin made many diplomatic and friendly trips to the west to remind them of their promises and found that he was ignored because he was considered poor and weak by the wealthy and powerful west and not worthy of much consideration.

So consequently, Yeltsin himself installed putin as his successor due to Putin' s military background, and also supported by the russian military and bureaucracy who saw Nato expansion a threat.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-50807747

If the west had honestly observed its promises to Gorbachev and Yeltsin, checked its Shylockian greed for new weapons markets in eastern europe, and not expanded eastward to eastern europe and finally to the very borders of nuclear-armed Russia, I don't think this mess would have happened.

Seeing that the west was honoring its promises on  "not one inch eastward", Yeltsin would have relaxed and would have promoted an economist or diplomat or sociologist or lawyer or even a baby-sitter as the next president of Russia. He and Russia would have trusted the west more and would have become more aligned to it. 

However the dishonesty of the west created a trust deficit with Russia and also destroyed their credibility in front of the rest of the world as well.

Until the west develops honest and competent leaders who can manage the situation properly, I don't think they will see an end to the incessant warmongering in europe and the west over ludicrous issues.

This is consideration of the fact that the two world wars which originated in europe killing a hundred million people , were said to have been largely preventable as per historians, provided there were competent, capable and far-sighted western statesmen, leaders and diplomats involved. 

Edited 10 hours ago by Ajay0

[Lyubov]

3 hours ago, Ajay0 said:

See, the true culprit in this regard is Yeltsin, not Putin.

Bro Yeltsin is dead. And was dead seven years before the annexation of Crimea. I fundamentally do not agree with how you divide responsibility. 

Edited 7 hours ago by Lyubov

[Basman]

I blame the US for my failed marriage and not passing my exam. Fuck aerica.

[Ajay0]

1 hour ago, Lyubov said:

Bro Yeltsin is dead. And was dead seven years before the annexation of Crimea. I fundamentally do not agree with how you divide responsibility. 

Yes, but Yeltsin also vehemently opposed nato expansion as such.

https://www.nytimes.com/1993/10/02/world/yeltsin-opposes-expansion-of-nato-in-eastern-europe.html

https://jamestown.org/yeltsin-repeats-opposition-to-nato-expansion/https://cdclv.unlv.edu/pragmatism/ds_nato.pdf

https://cdclv.unlv.edu/pragmatism/ds_nato.pdf

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jan/12/russias-belief-in-nato-betrayal-and-why-it-matters-today
 

So you can see here poor and incompetent leadership in the west is responsible for needlessly making an adversary of a staunch western ally like Yeltsin, and which is reminiscent of the incompetent and poor western leadership responsible for the devastating two world wars which originated in the west and which could have been easily prevented if competent leaders with good judgement and character had been at the helm, as per historians.

 

Edited 6 hours ago by Ajay0

[Atb210201]

Yeah Zelenskyy has to go.

Putin is right.

End of story.

[Lyubov]

43 minutes ago, Ajay0 said:

Yes, but Yeltsin also vehemently opposed nato expansion as such.

https://www.nytimes.com/1993/10/02/world/yeltsin-opposes-expansion-of-nato-in-eastern-europe.html

https://jamestown.org/yeltsin-repeats-opposition-to-nato-expansion/https://cdclv.unlv.edu/pragmatism/ds_nato.pdf

https://cdclv.unlv.edu/pragmatism/ds_nato.pdf

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jan/12/russias-belief-in-nato-betrayal-and-why-it-matters-today
 

So you can see here poor and incompetent leadership in the west is responsible for needlessly making an adversary of a staunch western ally like Yeltsin, and which is reminiscent of the incompetent and poor western leadership responsible for the devastating two world wars which originated in the west and which could have been easily prevented if competent leaders with good judgement and character had been at the helm, as per historians.

 

Those countries that joined NATO did so for the very reason why what has happened to Ukraine out of their own free will and sovereignty. It does not take a genius to know basic history and know you will be annexed if you border Russia. Not a single country bordering Russia trusts them not to invade. I don’t doubt that American foreign policy has its flaws and there is a lack of integrity in it but hinging everything that has happened on “if only the USA didn’t…” washes away the one responsible for the war and invading which is Russia. Russia is the only part of this equation who has launched a war. 

Edited 5 hours ago by Lyubov

[Ajay0]

6 minutes ago, Lyubov said:

Those countries that joined NATO did so for the very reason why what has happened to Ukraine out of their own free will and sovereignty. It does not take a genius to know basic history and know you will be annexed if you border Russia. Not a single country bordering Russia trusts them not to invade. I don’t doubt that American foreign policy has its flaws and there is a lack of integrity in it but hinging everything that has happened on “if only the USA didn’t…” washes away the one responsible for the war and invading which is Russia. Russia is the only part of this equation who has launched a war. 

Obviously prevention of conflict  is considered to be an attribute of superior leadership skills than mere cures through military responses!

If you were a leader of the west, what steps would you have taken to prevent the devastating two world wars which originated in europe and the  present ukraine war as well !

[Joseph Maynor]

Love is often not as dramatic as war.  

[Lyubov]

1 hour ago, Ajay0 said:

Obviously prevention of conflict  is considered to be an attribute of superior leadership skills than mere cures through military responses!

If you were a leader of the west, what steps would you have taken to prevent the devastating two world wars which originated in europe and the  present ukraine war as well !

That’s a good question and I do agree that conflict prevention is a very important part of diplomacy and leadership. I will answer for the Ukraine war and the collapse of the Soviet Union since it is more relevant today. It’s difficult to say because it’s pure hindsight and we have no other alternative outcome to compare it to since Russia has invaded Ukraine and that’s the truth.

Let Ukraine keep its nuclear arsenal. In hindsight there should have been support from the west to support Ukraine with having the nuclear weapons that were left there when the Soviet Union collapsed. This was totally inconceivable at the time and it’s pure hindsight since at the time this decision was made it was from a very different context. I really only see deterrence as the only true driving factor to have prevented this war. I don’t believe any sort of diplomacy would have stopped Russia from trying to re-annex former Soviet Republics. Germany tried with economic ties and we have seen how that has turned out. If anything the Baltics in NATO have prevented Russia from going in there to this day, and a nuclear armed Ukraine would have prevented them from invading there as well. Diplomacy is not going to stop a former empire with a history of imperialist aggression from trying to rebuild their crumbled empire. 

Edited 3 hours ago by Lyubov