News like this, shows what?
(www.nbcnews.com)
Comments (53)
sorted by:
This is part of the new narrative: "Ukraine is hopeless; we've tried".
You can see many examples of this, and there is discussion about this changed narrative.
Peace talks, but there will be, no, peace. Just talks saying nothing else. I don't think, peace, yet. Although who knows, what to think? However the narrative plays, what's its. Off/On. When needed.
I think there's fatigue. A lack of popularity and some concern. Autumn and Winter approaches. All those tanks and assault vehicles won't do much in wet ground. Unless they've kept big consignments of troops back. They will sooner be operating more defensively. Even holding back to counter from a better flank perhaps if overrunning opposing attacks. But what do I know, I don't. More is probaby based on ifs and nots. Funding, more arms and aid, like new tanks, missiles, jets, enemy, and positions. Tactically Ukraine haven't punched through.
Suddenly ah but peace while gearing and inciting.
No, it's far too soon for that. It's still committed. Significantly there are sighs. Like campaigning will obviously use it when running. Especially when it hasn't bought much. But who knows???
No. There are no peace talks.
That's got nothing to do with anything. "Fatigue" WTF? Stop watching television.
It's not here yet. Russia relies very heavily on artillery. https://liveuamap.com/ <--- It is like this every single day. You are not allowed to know, but the population of Ukraine is being exterminated: Women overseas; men turned into mincemeat under NATO command.
That is COMPLETE bullshit. Ukraine has limitless funding, more money than it knows what to do with. It's paid off its former 5 Billion loan to the IMF, that's after the-most-corrupt-country-in-Europe (Ukraine) took its various cuts. Any arms dealer will sell them anything they want. Of course, it doesn't have an airforce - destroyed in the first 48 hours after 22-02-2022 - nor an army (rather organised militants and gang-pressed civilians) . The tanks are pointless, for show only, and now that is over (all destroyed) that will stop. Tanks need to be part of an organised battalion, and there is nothing like that. Send a tank into a field and it will be destroyed.
The missiles are British and French, and will not be able to be operated by untrained, not-english-speaking Ukrainian school teachers gang-pressed into the front lines.
This is the big story:
You're an idiot.
There were/are peace talks. Jeddah. Saudi Arabia, China, few others. Last week.
They gained nothing except more talks. They aren't going to gain anything either. Not this year. Not unless either side do something significant. Neither side are.
There is fatigue on this topic. The term fatigue means. Dumb munch. Means will the narrative change towards peace as objective. Or will it continue to write a blank check.
Fatigue the funding lessens. Western Media stops going on about it. Makes a peace deal.
It can happen on change of government. The other government campaigning changes policy.
It won't happen this year. Hence any talks do nothing else. Nothing at all. Unless there is something more significant, we will all continue to be bored by it. Fatigue, boring.
Autumn/winter approaches. Wet ground delays all offensive actions. It delayed Russia starting the conflict. It delayed the Ukrainian Counter Offense. Those Vehicles tanks, personnel carrier get used more for defense during those months. Offensive operations stall. They did last year.
Tanks aren't for show if they're properly used. Ukraine hasn't used them effectively. Russia also had problems in its early campaign.
You chat so much crap.
The war is Ukraine versus Russia. Nato could pull funding tomorrow and nothing would've happened. It can keep funding Ukraine, and nothing will happen. It is not fighting Russia. It doesn't matter what it does or doesn't. Russia has not gone to war against Nato. It is fighting Ukraine. It really hasn't defeated it yet, or anything else.
Rhetoric suggest it's Russia versus Nato, it causes morale, if it's the reason for hosility, because when it's your brother, Ukraine, people ask why. It plays them off. It needs reasons. No Russia isn't fighting Nato. Not yet. Not properly. Yes it is fighting Nato if you're a Russian. Or perhaps if you're in Nato. But as a European or American. They're not fighting Russia. Ukraine are, and who were they. Nobody else.
No
No. There were talks in Saudi Arabia that (1) excluded Russia and (2) started from Ukraine's premise that pre-USA disaster, no-longer-existing (former) Ukraine would be magically restored. . . and only then could peace discussions begin. Zelensky is a [edit] Servant of The Synagogue of Satan , a [/edit] traitor, an enemy of the former Ukraine. Only a complete fool would ever call these "peace talks". They were for show. China participated. I think it, China, wants to see who is singing which tune.
Ukraine is not in a position to use tanks effectively, and it never (again) will be. It is not in a position to have an army; it is not in a position to exist. Ukraine is a corpse in a bath of US taxpayers' money, arbitrary billions of US money. The fate of NATO is - probably - at stake.
I mean (you don't know, but) look at what I showed you before https://liveuamap.com/en/2023/13-august-ukrainian-defence-forces-continue-offensive-operations Ukraine is hardly even fighting. The Billions aren't going to Ukraine, they're being drained from the dying USA.
Saudi/China. Many others. It wasn't only those nations.
More are concern with what. Tell me their concerns and why Ukraine thinks it matters more.
The shortages on crop and energy are causing concerns. Set to cause how much more conflict globally.
Automatically it presumes talking points. But it means nothing else. Ukraine's output has fallen regardless. It will take years before it has the same yields, its surplus, distribution, and infrastructure are irreparable for years.
However this conflict was designed to cause what. That is why it drags. They're both in on it, causing. A shift in geopolitics, new methods of trade, and industry.
https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2023/08/13/7415369/
I really laugh at this shit. They got it so wrong, but they continue to flick mud at that wall and hope it sticks.
They're hoping to precipitate a rift between the two. Because of oh my god the coup.
Instead of it being the double bluff it was. Are Wagner's position better or worse. What is that position doing and why. If Wagner were out of the loop why Niger then?
Everyday those reactors fire up hoping mud sticks to a wall. Who reads it. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/aug/13/ukraine-sappers-mine-clearers-russia-war
No war causes it, and we never heard about Ukrainians until today. Their pointless stories. I don't remember minesweepers given so much air time, ever. In fact it doesn't get aired when it's your national army doing their job. Aw poor Sergay. He needs your charity. No sir. Fuck off.
Yeah, we're on the same page. That fucking article, Jesus Christ.
According to Scott Ritter (who may or may not be compromised; some of his videos are - used to be - kinda off, and he sometimes uses "we" when talking about Russia) in Russia (which he toured a few months back) the state and local authorities have more money than they know what to do with (probably an exageration). Because . . . . get this. . . western sanctions have stopped the oligarchs from moving their money out of Russia. Now the oligarchs have to (1) keep thier money in Russia and (2) pay Russian tax - which is a flat 13% that basically everyone pays. So at the end of the last 2 Russian financial years, many cities have unspent budgets and are scrambling to sign off on a few more bridges, hospitals, a university or two . . .
Wagner in Niger is interesting. Russia recently forgave a 13 Billion USD debt, so they are probably in the Niger good books, but who knows? I don't know. Maybe it is partially the Wagner brand image: seasoned NATO thumping street fighter. I am pretty sure that Niger will be played, at least in part, as a distraction from the possibly unfavourable (to the west) "re-interpretation" of the Ukranian conflict. Fucking cynical: let's encourage war to help our PR. Jesus H Christ.
The poor fucking Ukranians. Most were just trying to get along.
Interesting about the tax and sanctions. I doubt billionaire tax fully caused gains to the budget. Sanctions on the other hand have caused? Economically, it seems Russia aren't crumbling by them.
Wagner is not what is being aired by Western media. They keep getting it wrong. It like every other piece of press regarding the conflict has no credible source. It's fickle. It wants Wagner to be something. It wants Russia to lose. But constantly warns it isn't. I am sure it's convincing somebody. Somebody dumb who has no memory and no thought. Because the press one minute later, says something else.
The facts speak for themselves. Look at it. Double bluff. It needed a narrative. It needed to reposition. Why like that. Because it's. Why is it.
Every single time. Who knows. Except look at it. It obviously isn't. It's the head of an opposing army telling the press it needs to degrade morale, so it better keep the line Wagner are such, because if it can, then it gains. Simply look at what's occurred.
Niger, who knows, retaliation for longer range missiles, anything. Pipelines, transit, infrastructure could be affected. Who knows how it plays out. There are plenty of other reasons regionally being exploited, as costs inflate. Nothing new. A hotspot. Like many more occurring as any conflict drags out. Sides.
They're denying Wagner had any involvement because they're still keeping to the line Wagner are exiled, and now they aren't being funded, they're shrinking. Because Russia is imploding. Except somehow that's wrong. Look at it. It's the fickle media trying to convince somebody.
Sorry, but you really have not been paying attention:
This is the current situation. While cycling new recruits through the front line, not using any conscripts, and largely relying on a they-did-well but rag-tag private army, this is how things currently are. Attacks this week in * Western* Ukraine, most of the major electricity systems destroyed (Ukraine has (I mean, 'had') an electric rail system - now, moving tanks 1000km to the front lines is effectively impossible. Hence the tiny new tank deployments - 300 tanks are being lost each month), large concentrations of troops near Odessa. Open land to the east of Kiev, and see here https://liveuamap.com/ for the large Russian buildup behind the borders to the north of Kiev. Russian doesn't even want Ukraine.
Anyway, this is the current situation. Note the troops to the north of Kiev. Just waiting for the Ukrainian collapse:
https://s2.cdnstatic.space/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/12august2023_Ukraine_map.jpg
Russia had been building that force for months now. Apparently 100k troops with tanks and artillery and carriers. It hasn't done much with them yet. Will it?
It's also playing a longer game. If this happens then that.
You're speculating. Russia doesn't want Ukraine. It has integrated parts of the Ukraine already. They are Russian. If it didn't want Ukraine? I mean what about that. It's simply it hasn't taken more, not for better trying.
Odessa could take years to seige. If it's still an objective. That's part of the problem. There isn't an objective. What is it. Defend parts. What parts. Attack parts which parts. Ukraine kill Russians objectively. Russia is now defensive and still making slow offensive ground in Donetsk.
Most recent reports Ukrainian propaganda was it was opening beaches along Odessa for the public/Summer. Not much has been happening along that front since the grain was diverted. It is still under bombardment but not as sustained since Kherson.
Will Russia retake Kharkiv and Sumy, and surround Kiev? Nope not this year.
Who knows what happens and who cares.
No. It has taken the parts of Ukraine that are Russian speaking and that want to be part of Russia. Putin, as a spokesman for Russia, has said many times that he/Russia does not want parts of the former Ukraine that do not want to be part of Russia. Now, it is possible that Russia will drive across Ukraine to the Polish border. But those parts of Ukraine will either return to Poland or become part of a Rump Ukraine, but Russia will has said that it will not incorporate them.
Odessa is Russian speaking and could - and should - be part of Russia. Ukraine is over. Ukraine is the same NATO success as Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria. Whatever is left of Ukraine, a Rump or partitioned, and neutral, will not be part of NATO. Hopefully NATO will be destroyed: NATO is pure evil.
Well, off the top of my head: The bridges to Moldova have been destroyed, eliminating any chance of land support from NATO; the ports' storage facilities have been destroyed; supported, dug in, Russian troops are behind defensive lines about 40 km from Odessa.
Russia is engaging in a process that will be added to the textbooks of war. Behind multiple defensive lines they are actively inviting attacks that result in the deaths of 100s or 1000's of attackers. The preservation of Russian soldiers' lives, on the other hand, is paramount. This is the controlled demolition of the Ukrainian army (== population). Zelensky's (i.e. NATO's) public abandonment this week of gang-pressing probably means USA cannon fodder will be imported. I don't think that any European country's population is stupid enough to sacrifice itself. So Team USA it is.
I kindof agree. In the future we will see, the reality. Speculation is pointless.
No. It has taken. Hahaha. It was all Russian speaking. I didn't think Ukrainian was even a language, rather it was just a dialect of Russian. Until it make belief some other Starwar's language. Kiev as a city goes back thousands of years. Then Zelenskyy came along, and next thing it's called, forget about it. It was all Russian speaking. Until today it reinvented a dialect.
Russia hasn't won shit. It hasn't been decisive. It thought to take territory instead of victory. What territory. No, which. Borders. No. Half. No. This and that. Not that. That has let them arm. Can't take that. Just this. Not that.
By taking territory, it has put itself in a position of conflict. It cannot make peace. It has taken parts of it. So it must beat the rest of the Ukraine, or Ukraine arms, and it continues to get funded. Because Russia hasn't beaten it. It has beaten the Russian speaking parts. Which parts did Russia win?
None is that answer, unless you're Russian. Because it still hasn't beat Ukraine. Maybe then, Russia will get some peace or the territory it desires.
Tell me what was that objective? The other's was simple. Defeating Russia. I cannot say Russia's was beating Ukraine. Not conventionally anyway.
On a higher level of reasoning, one we're not party too, there is an agenda, and it already knows and understands how far this goes. Why it's even played.
Naively you assume it plays. It plays to beat sides not even fighting. Sounds dumb. It could drag them in, anyway. Why not risk it. So it doesn't escalate? If it uses proxies, it's contained. So it isn't direct warfare, and it loses more, from nukes, or whatever. That already signals communication; Demands, concessions. But at the same time emphatically stating it will defeat the other. Although it makes no other attempt to be decisive. Both sides. It simply drags itself out, hoping to win at much larger attrition, if it holds out, the other will ceed ground and lose.
This is happening while what else is happening, globally? Absurdly.
It never used Belarus. It didn't lock the opposing border down. It didn't match offensives with its own. It sat there. It hasn't pressured another flank. Instead it bides its time. Recklessly. The other will never stop. It never fully crushed command structures, coms, and ultilies. Almost no other warfare on this Planet has been fought as archiacally. None. Unless we go back to seige warfare with high walls. Most warfare fights with a purpose to overthrow, crush, disable, destroy. They don't fight for the purpose of causing degradation.
There is another agenda behind this conflict. Where it ironically drags out.
You assume it's some lofty goal of beating Nato. Or defeating Russia. Nope. Not without direct warfare. It hasn't, yet. So why now?
Tell me, it isn't you down voting? Call that faggot out. The nigger troll faggot tranny stalker baits people talking. Purposefully. How do they even know I am online? Mod. A disgusting degenerate. Or are they really that sad they click on my name for new content. How many times a day? I am guessing Mod. A real dumb nigger. What ethnicity? What background? It's why this forum has praise Jesus, bhudda savior crap, Flat Earth every 5 minutes.
OK. All I want to say is that the war, as either a NATO ground -vs- Russia or Ukraine -vs- Russia, is over. It's been over for a long time.
NATO could, maybe, try a non-nuclear air war, but we know that would turn out. Then the NATO air war -vs- Russia would be over too. How many - 50? - advanced NATO fighters and 10? bombers/AWACS shot down in a month, and then it'd be over. They'd make up some bullshit about the wrong pronouns being used, and then they'd stop. And we have seen how Russia responds to attacks: it anhilliates infrastructure.
If NATO tried an air war, Russia would destroy a few military airports (from which the strikes were being launched)
For the last 10 years 'Russia" has been saying that there is not to be any NATO missiles on it's border, or within 1000 km or something. Ukraine is to be neutral. That - along with the 'de-nazification' (which means "de-America-fication") of Ukraine - have always been the clearly stated objectives. Protection of the Russian population in Ukraine was the trigger for the conflict: Attacks "sky rocketed" in the weeks leading up to 22-02-2022.
Not me
Ukraine has too keep itself in the press. It grants it Western aid. If it can convince them. So it makes big dumb splashy headlines to provoke retaliation so it gets funding. These guys. That's why it targets Moscow or the bridge. Instead of actually doing any winning with its missiles. Nope. Give it F16s, it will fly them straight at Russia. Weeeeeeeee. Leopards, yessss.
A news day where Ukraine have made no ground, or had losses, gets turned into; Ukraine struck the bridge, or attacked Moscow. Convincing everybody of how any arms, create legimate targets of continued escalation. Hypocritical, it moves the goalposts, any other bridge, civilian target is a crime of humanity.
They have to keep in the press, convincing people any funding buys headlines, even if it doesn't buy anything else. Other losses magically get turned into babies and children are killed. An attack on an apartment that's been hit 20 times has suddenly killed a baby girl this time. The other 20 times, she was very lucky. Until the tiniest inch of soil amounting to a farmer's field with a barn is a major victory. Ukraine have broken through, they've recaptured a barn, and it still had enough grain to feed all of Africa.
Wait we were talking about a Nato war. Propaganda. It convinces the gullible why they fight. It plays them off. They needed a reason. Seriously. It wasn't Ukrainians. It was Nato.
There is no Nato war. Or there's a much larger global war, and real quick.
Objectively Russia haven't been decisive. What are its objectives. Hold territory. Not that territory. That territory they arm from. But let them arm, so they can kilI them, after they armed. I cannot think of any recent modern warfare conducted, how it's being conducted currently in the Ukraine. Syria perhaps. Damascus. Yemen similar. These never won. They were different, flight.
That's an excuse. What arms do the Baltics have? I agree there was some motivation to protecting the separatists and russians, but there was plenty of other reasons for this conflict, many are geopolitical.
Why are you going over old posts. Why are you replying to posts 2 weeks old.
You're a nigger faggot stalker. Look at that. How did you find the topic, and why?
I am definately a nigger faggot stalker. Also, my tone was off: why was I so negative and aggressive? You were just making conversation.
My bad.
I only browse these sites (voat, poal, *.win) one day a week . . . so 7 days later .
You had a go at me.
I am pissed I keep getting trolled. Some cunt/s a nigger, faggot, tranny, stalker is clicking on my name and post history and down voting it.
They're from Reddit, and think this site works that way. There's a scoring system to posting. It's put me in a mood this person is doing this.
They're a complete freak. But have found other freaks on here. They have a multiple account, and bait. I can say about 3 of their accounts, no point. They believe God made a Flat Earth. They hang about this forum airing non stop garbage. Like nukes aren't real.
However when you clicked on stuff from 8 days ago, it caused alarm. Only that faggot would do that. Every downvote I have is from that nigger. They aren't even black. But none the less, they're a nigger.
You're wrong there has been peace talks. But they went no where with them. Like every other attempt. Laughably Ukraine thinks the rest of the World cares, and if it beats Russia the World will care more. Unfortunately the only people who think Ukraine beating Russia matters, is the West funding it. They don't care much at all. They scream at every opportunity jumping up down on rooftops if Ukraine gains a bombed out village and loses 1000 men and 30 armoured vehicles taking it. It means the counter offensive is succeeding.
So there will be no peace with such absurdity. Not in any current government deciding on how much more funding buys how many more, call it what you like.
But this is a long conflict. It won't be done anytime soon. Not this year. This time next year, campaigning elections, is when real fatigue will have set in, if any results are as nonsensical. It is already being aired in the press now, that it's becoming ridiculous. All that money hasn't bought shit. At what point does it keep buying shit. Well it ups the ante. Longer range missiles, more drones, perhaps fighter jets. It keeps provoking escalation, just to keep it in the press. At what point, does it make any difference?
Russia is also dragging its feet objectively. It is using this conflict like the West for larger Geopolitical goals. When does it counter offensive? It mobilised. Too what extent remains current. But surely it would've built a secondary force. It has, too what extent remains. When does it cause a surgical strike. Another major capture. Or putting that fight in a position of dictating terms. If it doesn't, it's only defending. That Conflict, is entering another decade, since Ukraine fractured. Surely now it's caused a convergence, but it still isn't Nato fighting Russia. It's the same proxy in conflict.
Objectively this conflict is what. Defeating Russia via proxy. But Russia objectively isn't beating the proxy. You assume it's beating Nato. Hahaha. No. Ukraine is the other guy.
Ukraine's biggest problem is they're a common thief. Thief for who causing what remains questionable. Those tactics aren't by buying much except continued begging for further funding. They aren't the gatekeepers of democracy. They're a conflict that's now becoming another handout and an embarrassment. Never before had the hardware gifted been defeated until Ukraine used it, and it simply demands more of it.
They have recklessly charged, often in attempts to gain more funding and support. Throwing away troops and vehicles, instead of actually fighting larger battles with them. At what point haven't they observed minefields. At what point aren't they committing to different wedges and formations. They've kept a percentage behind, reinforcing a huge line, they want to cause a counter offensive from, but instead have sporadically thrown equipment away by attacking and probing multiple fronts. More seems committed towards any defense then engagement. Because when they have pressed, it's using tactics and propaganda that they simply goad more funding and aid from.
They're using missiles and drones often causing further provocation. Attacks on bridges, inside Russia, Svastapol. These haven't gained ground. They make dumb headlines. In attempts to draw more support from provocation, and keep the publicity printing.
Airpower, their lack of, would make no difference, because it hasn't, when they've had it. They're not using it now to any real engagement. Missiles, and drones are being used off the frontal battlefield. Using it would be the same rationality, off the battlefield at targets causing escalation.
The article suggests it is going badly, because it is. It suggests an increasing lack of interest. Sure it has the same backing by Global leaders, but everybody else is becoming real bored of it. So instead it makes splashy headlines by provoking escalation or garnishing funding by drawing out losses.
Try to convince me of any other attrition?
Don't worry, rainy season, the fall, approaches, their headway hasn't done much prior. It just needs more????
Ukraine's biggest problem is that they have no any real national identity necessary to be a nation state somehow respected by the Western elites. For those who rule the West, Ukrainians will always be same millenia hated Russians who don't respect that elite Jewish families, regardless of how deep "Ukrainians" will swallow Western dick. Even if population completely brainwashed to think they are "Ukrainians, Europeans, whose only difference from Russians is that they are not Russians", all that Nulands/Blinkens will see only severely hated Russians, whose ancestors exterminated Khazarian Kaganate and not allowed Jews to do what they want in that Russian territory until Bolshevik Revolution.
Since the 1991 Western elites heavily used that Ukraine construct only as a tool against their eternal enemy. Again, they do not distinguish between Ukrainians and Russians at all. From their view that was a "smart" move to force one Russians to fight against other Russians. But at the same time they denied to really do something for the Ukrainians at all, even a little bit.
Ukraine, since 1991 always, at every single moment of time, was much poorer than Russia or Belarus. Western masters, along with pushing "not a Russia" propaganda, could easily make Ukraine a rich and prosperous region on a post-USSR territory, and make them an example of choosing their side, but eventually it was Ukrainians who seek a job in Russia and even Belarus in millions, not vice-versa. That single fact tell you everything you need to know about real attitude of the Western elites to their new puppets they successfully brainwashed to use against Russia and Belarus. Western masters just could not do anything good to Ukrainins, just because of that millenia hatred against Russians. It is absolute no-go for them, for purely ethnical, tribal reasons.
There was no any surprise that Eastern Ukraine regions turned to the Russia to get rid of that western dick sucking misery they lived in since 1991. It was inevitable, even without 2014 coup and outlawing Russian language.
So now, when Western elites plan totally failed, they do what they always did with their puppets - throw them under the bus. Arrogance and ignorance of Western elites, blinded with that tribal hatred towards Russians make a fate of their Ukrainian LARP even worse.
Just think a second - What could NATO military teach anybody about fighting with Russians? NATO idiots never ever was in a real battle with Russians since NATO foundation, not even talking about any wins. What could they teach Ukrainians about fighting with Russians? Absolutely nothing. However, at the same time, Ukrainians had full access for necessary knowledge about how Russian military fight from USSR times. But all that knowledge was destroyed during Western pushed "desovetisation" of newborn Ukraine. So, you clearly see how West destroyed all useful knowledge and pushed useless western garbage, even in such important area as military. Along with crappy western weapons designed for sales, not for battles, things gets even more sad for Ukraine LARP project.
Western elites truly hate people of Ukraine no less than Russians and Belorussians. That is why you see what you see now, and that is why the Western elites will lost that war, may be along with leading role they hope for in coming NWO shit. Inability to overcome their own tribal hatred along with arrogance and ignorance is a reason for that sad circus we see.
A thief none the less. They're trying to steal from somebody else, and not simply the imaginary border they've imagined as rightful theirs when it's been a part of Russia for centuries. But moving past all of that is the billions, multi billions in funding that has bought almost nothing else except shylocks, beggars, and thieves. It shamefully hasn't enriched the Ukraine. It has destroyed it. Thievery at its finest. We're paying for it to be destroyed. Hurray. No, wait what. We're paying for Ukraine to destroy itself. Money is being robbed somewhere right? It's the only rational explanation. Thieves. For who is the bigger question. At this point they're a trojan. All they've done is degrade themselves and potentially anybody else funding it.
Or please tell me what else any funding has bought? Because it stinks of theft.
I'll wait for them to blame Russia. Further stating they'll win if they get more funding. But somehow they're totally complicit.
Shortly, the narrative of a "Ukrainian" looks like that - "Europe is our best friend and they will give us everything to defeat moskals who do not allow us to thrive on our land". That is since 1991. Just when all MSM and education tell you that West will give everything necessary and the reason of poverty and mess is only Russians, there is nothing strange in current situation at all.
Don't you remember how few years ago majority of people in nearly all countries willingly believed in coronahoax? The same way people of Ukraine believed that they are Ukrainians and if they will hate Russians West will provide everything for them to prosper. They learned to dissociate themselves from and hate Russians, but Western elites just swindled them with prosperity. So now they demand Western part of deal.
Exactly like vaxxed idiots today begin to demand satisfaction.
It is not like they want to steal something, it is like they feel that the West owe them prosperity and defeat over the source of all their problems - Russians. They truly run as refugees to the West and demand luxury hotels and big welfare payments because they think that if they fulfilled their part of deal, then Western promise should be fulfilled without questions.
Of course, Europeans, unaware about that scam deal "Hate Russians in exchange to prosperity", and see just foreigners who wnat to stole everything around and demanding things for free.
On your point on NATO beating Russia it's been the pacman of former satellites. So it won in that regard. But aside from this they did win a previous proxy war against Russia. Finland.
However. Here, Ukraine, it's vastly different. The location, the history, the tactics.
The endgame is what? It cannot win. Not decisively. Nukes. It can fund it. Until more proxy wars erupt, splintering, globally. Funding it, hasn't bought anything except increasing escalation, more funding, a polarised globe, and greater loss of life. How much further does it escalate remains to be seen. Although concurrently and at no foreseeable end will Ukraine cause anything else. If it seeks immediate peace it has been pointless. Ukraine will have lost. As any terms won't seek Ukrainian demands.
Escalation might cause direct NATO involvement. It is currently the only way there is a winner sooner rather than a lengthy war of attrition. Where it will have left the dead for much longer. But risks all out war.
Kind of. This happened many times, but eventually always ended in Russia growth in territory.
It was Russian Empire who liberated Finns from Swedes in the first place. It was Russians who gifted soverenity and statehood to the Finns. Some tensions started only after Bolshevik Revolution, And no, Finland in no way won that war. Finland lost 10% of land to the USSR, including town of Vyborg as a result of that war, if you are not aware, but eventually, after WWII Finland was pretty friendly to the USSR, even regardless of narrative and losses. And again, after USSR fall, some tensions arised between Finland and Russia, but again they was quickly resolved up to the state when there was nearly no border and it was regular weekend entertainment for locals to ride for shopping in each other towns. Got the obvious pattern? Project it to current situation. Finns by themselves, perfectly fine with Russians. It is Western elites trying to use any chance to use Finland against Russia.
Not really. Western elites tribe is extremely conservative in their methods. If you take a look in a history of Finland, especially on how it was influenced to become hostile to Russia, you will find a lot of similarities with everything in Ukraine. Suddenly, you even find representatives of same tribe that infiltrate and began to pull the strings of their victim. Even rethorics of Finland president of the time of Soveit-Finland war was pretty similar to current rethoric of Zelenskiy. Because it is just from the same source, as simple as that.
I thought there was a war with Finland after WW2, not Finland siding with Germany in WW2, involving Russia where Finland gained territory. Funded by Europe? Apology if wrong but I thought it was later. Not the continuation war in WW2?
Yes prior Finland broke away from Sweden aided by Russia in the 1800s.
No, there was a war before WW2. Started in 1939 after clashes on the USSR-Finland border and ended in 1940 with Findland loss of land critical for USSR defence, especially around Leningrad(S.Petersburg).
After WW2 Finland was defeated along with Axis, and left for themself. Soon, Finland become one of the closest trade partner with USSR among capitalist countries.
Ended in 1941, wasnt the winter war in 1944 or the continuation war?
I thought there was something later in 1950 or 55? Finland expanded.
Not simply a stretched Soviet front rushing into Germany, made a truce with Finland already breaking away from Germany, but preventing invasion and communism. Although losing territory.
They did indeed, practically an open border, after the break up of the USSR. Now it's closed again.
No, at that time there already was trade established between USSR and Finland. Peace treaty after WWII was established in 1948. Finland lost some land again and paid a reparations for participating in a war against USSR on the side of Germany, but in exchange got full sovereignty and even was not sovetised in any sense. USSR didn't intervene in internal politics of Finland, however Finland choose to be on side with USSR in international politics.
a) loss (inception towards death) pushes (inception towards life) and draws (life towards death) growth (life). Being pushed implies inspiration; while being drawn implies temptation.
b) growth (life) can only exist "within" loss (inception towards death)...others suggest "without" as the inversion thereof.
ATTRI'TION, noun - "abrasion; wearing by friction"...ones consent to suggested applies attrition to ones resistance (life) within perceivable velocity (inception towards death).
a) to present to the view of others (to show) tempts one to ignore seen (perceivable) for shown (suggested).
b) suggested news represent COMPASS (moderate bounds; moderation; due limits; instrument for directing), while perceivable N(orth) E(east) W(est) S(outh) implies oneself as the "free" will of choice navigating life, while being directed from inception towards death.
Suggestion represents the narrative; ones consent represents the control of others over it. If one resists consenting; then others lose control over suggested narratives.