War

I don't think I can take a two hour long history lesson, but if you skip to about 1 hour 51 minutes, Tucker asks Putin about freeing Evan Gershkovich.

but if you skip to about 1 hour 51 minutes

I understand it was mainly just a reading of Pute's "history" essay that he "wrote" to justify the invasion.

Ukraine doesn't really exist, stop giving them weapons and they will be much happier yadda, yadda

Joke's on him: Americans barely know their own history.  They definitely don't give a shit about Ukrainian history.

If he was going that far back with history you'd think he'd be way more suspicious of Mongolia.  They're obviously his biggest threat.

I wonder if Tucker will fact  check any of this.

I didn't get very far into the interview last night, but I still may try to watch the whole thing. Tucker did have his skeptical poopy face on for the whole time I did watch. I think he was wondering why Putin was going back to the 1300s.

Watch it on 1.5x

Or wait for your favourtie talking heads to dissect it

Maybe Joe Rogan will dissect it. THE ONLY TALKING HEAD I TRUST.

The left taliing heads like to think rogans required to be intiellectual to have an opinion.

Hes just a dude.

Dint take him so serious.



The problem?
The right thunk hes an intellectual.


Hahah




https://youtube.com/shorts/lzBzAl8a9vc?si=-OLdcSjpo1qvOqJJ

I almost watched Russel Brand talking about it. lol THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING!

Sweet Jesus.  He starts at 862 AD.  I don't know if he appreciates how insane this sounds to an American audience who think history started in 1776.

I think I have an animated version of this interview.

Sweet Jesus.  He starts at 862 AD.  I don't know if he appreciates how insane this sounds to an American audience who think history started in 1776.

Yet their understanding of law is only applicable to 2008.
2ndA for self defense.
Santa, pink, and engagement rings is part of our heritage.

Well it took me about a week to get through it.  What they say is true.  It's largely a waste of time to watch it.  There's a few interesting things though.

Putin and Carlson are operating on a different set of rationales for this war.  They didn't bother to coordinate their message.  It's interesting that Putin would waste this opportunity to appeal to Carlson's viewers.

Credit where it's due, Carlson did spend some time trying to get Putin to free Gershkovich.

Also it was funny when Putin clowned Carlson for being rejected from the CIA.

Macron, who instigated the war against Russia, was left alone. I don't think any country here will fight Russia one on one or together with the entire NATO. All simulations, with or without China's involvement, show that Russia will wipe the closest NATO countries off the map within a few days. After the military power of America and England comes into play, first the balance is established and then the balance changes in favor of NATO. Are the countries that disappeared in the meantime expendable tools for NATO? Which neighboring NATO member would take such a risk? Germany? Türkiye? Poland or Romania? Baltic countries? Nobody.

Russia is currently one of the countries best fighting against global evils. They destroyed many biological laboratories in Ukraine. I personally would never support NATO in a war between NATO and Russia. There are millions like me in Europe.

Meanwhile, Putin's speech last year in which he reminded who took Berlin has spread rapidly in circulation again in recent days.



Macron speaks very easily about war to Russia because there are Italy, Turkey, Greece, Germany and dozens of NATO member countries between him and Russia. If we had placed France in the Baltic Sea, would it be able to talk so freely?

Macron, who instigated the war against Russia, was left alone. I don't think any country here will fight Russia one on one or together with the entire NATO. All simulations, with or without China's involvement, show that Russia will wipe the closest NATO countries off the map within a few days. After the military power of America and England comes into play, first the balance is established and then the balance changes in favor of NATO. Are the countries that disappeared in the meantime expendable tools for NATO? Which neighboring NATO member would take such a risk? Germany? Türkiye? Poland or Romania? Baltic countries? Nobody.

Russia is currently one of the countries best fighting against global evils. They destroyed many biological laboratories in Ukraine. I personally would never support NATO in a war between NATO and Russia. There are millions like me in Europe.

Meanwhile, Putin's speech last year in which he reminded who took Berlin has spread rapidly in circulation again in recent days.



Macron speaks very easily about war to Russia because there are Italy, Turkey, Greece, Germany and dozens of NATO member countries between him and Russia. If we had placed France in the Baltic Sea, would it be able to talk so freely?

You say this and yet, somehow, can can't beat a non-nato nation after .. what?  2 years?

Russia is currently one of the countries best fighting against global evils.

No, he is fighting for evil, to try to recapture the former soviet union.

If Russia really could easily beat a NATO nation, the war in Ukraine would already be over.
The sole thing keeping Russia alive at the moment is the belief it has nuclear weapons capable of causing massive damage.
As soon as it attacks a NATO nation, that deterrent will likely stop being a deterrent and may even result in an attempt at an effective first strike.

There is a reason why Russia hasn't attacked a NATO nation, because it knows that if it does it is dead.

Quote from: wise on March 08, 2024, 04:19:38 AM

Russia is currently one of the countries best fighting against global evils.

No, he is fighting for evil, to try to recapture the former soviet union.

If Russia really could easily beat a NATO nation, the war in Ukraine would already be over.
The sole thing keeping Russia alive at the moment is the belief it has nuclear weapons capable of causing massive damage.
As soon as it attacks a NATO nation, that deterrent will likely stop being a deterrent and may even result in an attempt at an effective first strike.

There is a reason why Russia hasn't attacked a NATO nation, because it knows that if it does it is dead.

Putin doesn’t need to risk direct confrontation with NATO.

He can just wait until a few more NATO countries are stupid enough to install far right leaders and governments with their tongues wedged firmly up his arse.  The big one in particular.  NATO’s doctrine of mutual defense would effectively collapse and he’d be free to have a go at a few more countries his cronies think Russia can have back under the boot.  Baltic states looking particularly vulnerable.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/03/13/israel-strike-unrwa-center-hamas/

I think I've figured out Hamma's winning strategy.  Just send their fighters, armed or not, to the Israeli bases.  They'll carpet bomb their own bases just to get one Hammas fighter.

https://x.com/TurhanBozkurTV/status/1769296798722482197?t=aOC6cruAy0Ki0X0hhUlcqQ&s=09

While calls for war were being made against Russia, which prevents child trafficking in Europe, China, knowing that it would be its turn after Russia, began to give clear messages that it was ready for war.

I'm not sure this will stop Macron. France feels safe because it is far from Russia on the map.

While calls for war were being made against Russia, which prevents child trafficking in Europe

Right....of course it does.

Russian apartment bombing part deux.

https://www.politico.eu/article/russia-moscow-music-venue-ablaze-after-deadly-attack-crocus-hall/

The US says it was ISIS.  I'm sure Russia thinks it was Ukraine.

Russians are one of the most spiteful societies. One of the topics talked on social media is that, in retaliation for the terrorist attack in Russia, Russia has been bombing Ukraine non-stop for 10 days, including the military, police, government and Ukrainian secret service, thousands of people have died, but censorship has been applied in both Russian and Western media in order not to cause outrage.

https://www.axios.com/2024/04/02/world-central-kitchen-strike-gaza-jose-andres

The most moral army in the world at its finest.

Biden has sternly rebuked them by giving them a bunch more bombs.

It's actually a clever move on Israel's part.  A whole lot of aid was just about to move into Gaza.  But by showing they can just murder aid workers without any consequence now all that aid is just being cancelled.

Some days I'm embarrassed to be human.

send some thoughts and prayers

https://discord.com/channels/273499024949248000/946465910703656972/1228819531846389790

Looks like we got a 3way.

Not sure if Israel was just dumb to assassinate Iranian leaders while fighting Hamas, or someone set them up. 

I'm not worried.  This seems performative. 


(famous last words, maybe)

https://x.com/Iran_UN/status/1779269993043022053

Conducted on the strength of Article 51 of the UN Charter pertaining to legitimate defense, Iran’s military action was in response to the Zionist regime’s aggression against our diplomatic premises in Damascus. The matter can be deemed concluded. However, should the Israeli regime make another mistake, Iran’s response will be considerably more severe. It is a conflict between Iran and the rogue Israeli regime, from which the U.S. MUST STAY AWAY!

But WWIII will make the arms manufacturers so much money!

https://www.npr.org/2024/04/13/1244641489/iran-israel-drone-attack-middle-east-gaza

And ineffective.  Apparently most were shot down and only 1,10 year old was injured significantly.