401–410 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is why Trump is pushing Ukraine to accept capitulation on Russian terms. Like to give Russia two big cities Zaporizhzhia and Kherson they have no control of.
A Trump surrender like the world has never before seen
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Amazing to see Russia win the Cold War—one we didn’t even know we were in. Their propaganda network is so strong that it took 3 weeks to go from “Russia is the enemy” to “eh, we have other problems” amongst the folks who…subscribe accordingly. Absolute masterclass in projecting power in the digital age.
[flagged]
I know very well it's a drop in the ocean, you can donate to ukraine here https://u24.gov.ua/ You can decide how to allocate your donation, defense, demining, humanitarian aid (...)
Also you can donate directly for the kamikaze drones here: https://www.sternenkofund.org/donate They are extremely effective in countering russian troops. One drone costs as little as 500$
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They could ally with China. The Chinese are only frenemies with Russia anyways, and they make way much more money trading with the rest of Europe.
Perhaps surprisingly, Europe has more nuclear weapons than China (France: 290 warheads, UK: 225 warheads, China: 500 warheads). China never really bought into the mutually assured destruction doctrine in the same way that the US and Soviet Union did.
https://www.economist.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1424,quality=8...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Withdrawing" to 1990 borders? You mean expelling the states that joined after 1990? I'm not sure that would go over well with the Baltics, Romania, Sweden and Finland. Withdrawal from NATO is voluntary and cannot be compelled.
USA leaving NATO was floated. I don't know how realistic any of it is, just that these are the terms being negotiated.
NATO in its former shape has pretty much been dismantled over the course of last month.
[1] NATO minus the US is still alive, of course.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As all conspiracy theories, this provides a simple explanation to circumstances that otherwise require complex answers, but it holds no water. The KGB was ineffective and inept. It didn't reach the masses, it didn't influence public opinion. Of course a former KGB agent selling his story must tell you otherwise, but most of these guys spent their whole career feigning successes to their superiors.
While they may feign success to their supervisors you need to look at the tangible results. They got germany to shut down their nuclear power plants and got the civil rights act passed. That's not ineffective.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There’s no “propaganda network.” America has a president that overthrew the GOP leadership by destroying Jeb Bush over the Iraq War: https://youtu.be/H4ThZcq1oJQ?si=ZawKMFFY3LmAhYMr . After the mistakes of the last two decades, there is little appetite in America to do anything in foreign countries americans can’t find on a map beyond empty virtue signaling.
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thank you. This is what people with privilege don't get. There are concentric circles of giving a fuck: first in the center is yourself, then your family, then your friends, then your community, then your city, then your country, then other countries on the planet. It's impossible to get people to care about the outermost circle when their inner circles are not satisfied, so they won't be happy to see their elected o…
Yet somehow the US is continuing to send tons of expensive military aid to Israel. Which shows this isn't actually about the cost. If this had anything to do with money and caring about domestic spending first, then you'd see aid to Israel cut off as well. Funny how that's not happening.
Yeah, why is that?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From my reading, that says we agreed not to invade Ukraine, not that we agreed to put american boots on the ground to defend Ukraine.
Does "nuclear weapons" attach to the first half of the or in section 4? Seems they wrote it poorly... "victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used" You are also engaged in some sophistry, where you are acting as if the hypothetical obligation you are discussing is the only possible obligation. Selling aging weapons stock is pretty clearly assistance, and it…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Amazing to see Russia win the Cold War—one we didn’t even know we were in. Their propaganda network is so strong that it took 3 weeks to go from “Russia is the enemy” to “eh, we have other problems” amongst the folks who…subscribe accordingly. Absolute masterclass in projecting power in the digital age.
[flagged]
That’s not to say that the KGB didn’t have some degree of influence on certain movements. But the overall picture that Bezmenov paints is laughably false with hindsight. The interview is from 1984, and I’m sure many in the KGB at that time really believed that their cunning plan to brainwash the West was working.
