()
posted ago by pkvi ago by pkvi +9 / -2
Comments (19)
sorted by:
3
xolotltlaloc 3 points ago +3 / -0

Coincidentally, the CIA is a 75-year-old Zionist/Israeli Proxy :)

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
Ep0ch 1 point ago +1 / -0

Bullshit. https://www.rbth.com/history/329096-russian-tsars-british-royals

Knight of the garter? In fact he spent a lot of time in England.

WW1 ended Empires. Replaced by technology and corporation. Banks having their hidden hands. Russia wasn't supposed to lose its crown it controlled it far more. Somebody else probably thought they could control the mob. Remember Britain got stung by the banks. Egypt.

The problem was Monarchies didn't adapt quick enough to the changes being forced. Mass production, the automobile, flight. Banks becoming far more powerful. Instead sent millions into a pointless war to force automation. It killed off some of the brightest. They killed them off with influenza as well. The structure and paradigms changed. Tradition becoming uprooted. They also all carried bibles into WW1.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
Ep0ch 1 point ago +1 / -0

You misunderstand how much he was liked. How much time he spent in the UK. How much commerce flowed between. He failed against the Germans. He was weak, lost control of population to Communism. Where did he die? Ukraine. I wonder about the feud now. What about the Baltics?

Knight of the garter isn't given away. Look at all the marriage in-between Monarchies.

Yes it all changed but was the to point to destroy him and replace him with the mob? I don't think so. The mob isn't controlled. It wasn't in France. It took wiping out Napoleon to achieve that.

Obviously they had their own designs. But I don't think the Russian Monarchy was completely it. He had Victorian favour.

Who knows and who cares. When opportunity arose they likely fueled it. Why not. It's an option. But I doubt it was the actual design. As a Monarch it could be your head next. If you let the mob win. Easier sending them off to war before they gain such idealism. The problem was how he ruled.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
Ep0ch 1 point ago +1 / -0

It's probably a bunch of factors ike counterplay, history, and agenda.

I can only speculate like everybody else.

But it is kinda obvious. Agenda, Eeveee climate technology, counterplay contain Russia by buffer etc, history always goes back to former relationships, and territory. Of course history has changed. But there's always feuds to ignite from opposing claims and interests.

Who knows fully? Except that which is otherwise obvious.

Today there's new technology being inserted from an agenda to cause change, it causes counterplays often to contain the competition by changing methods, and history always repeats itself.

But unless you know everything there is only speculation.

Speculation today is it is getting really grim quicker. Collapse is happening, and it often forces change, and conflict is occurring. It often being the catalyst for collapse to cause change. But is it controlled as easily? Is it really that simple?

You're asking the wrong person.

1
TumbleweedMafia 1 point ago +1 / -0

Jesuit involvement as well. Also, look into Operation Aerodynamic.

1
csehszlovakze 1 point ago +1 / -0

*cohencidentally

;-)

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
0
Ep0ch 0 points ago +1 / -1

Yawn.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
0
Ep0ch 0 points ago +1 / -1

CIA hasn't been in Ukraine for 75 years. They probably have to extents and big word limits. But you give the CIA far too much credit for recent events that are much more recent.

What is this topic anyway? In aid of what? The CIA. You spook. Hahaha. Dumbass.

Seriously it makes no difference. You see where it's at now?

Russia doesn't fully recognise Ukraine. It recognises Russia. The last time Russia mobilised was in WW2. It has just acquired how much of the Ukraine into Russian sovereignity? Those Oblasts. Territorial integrity. The more Ukraine fights it, the more territory Russia recognises as Russian. It has trapped far worse armies, and lost far more in the process, millions and millions and millions, but it kept fighting sometimes to the last battalion, until it won. It technically won WW2.

The only deal is to recognise Russia. Or they will fight until they won't lose. Russia won't lose when it has nukes. Ukraine has already lost. Territory.

Or convince me how, this topic makes any difference. Ukraine will have to recognise Russia. Or Russia will have to lose. Historically those odds are Russian at home.

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
0
Ep0ch 0 points ago +1 / -1

I don't really care. Except any feud goes back further than the CIA. But any history is recent.

Today it's a big problem. Read all the shit print on Reddit there's your CIA. Mindless propaganda. It doesn't understand history, but tries to incite.

The main thing it isn't providing is an analyst. It instead serves a bunch of propaganda.

Any analyst will tell you it's grim. It's a big deal. Bigger deal to Russia. It simply doesn't see it as anything else. It therefore becomes unthinkable to lose. Of course we have today's generation. But they probably aren't enough to change that programming.

No I am 100% not a Russian. I'd fight them all the same. But that picture isn't looking good the longer this drags out. It is what it is.

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
1
Ep0ch 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yawn. I'd beat the crap out of you at Holdem.

Not Russian. Never claimed I was.

Try to tempt history. They haven't been beaten historically at home, not since the Mongols. They're Russians anyway.

Subjectively we are talking about something else, not your fetish for losing. But you might get lucky. Dumbass.

I understand you're all gung ho about the Cold War. It technically wasn't fought at home. It technically wasn't a war. Besides for it to occur, Russia still won.

I find it laughable everybody else is a Russian. Everybody who doesn't share your propaganda. I mean look at it. Dumbass.

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1