Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
(Today at 4:37 am)Belacqua Wrote: Tulsi Gabbard tweeted this just now:
Quote:Deep State warmongers and their Propaganda Media are again trying to undermine President Trump’s efforts to bring peace to Ukraine—and indeed Europe—by falsely claiming that the ‘U.S. intelligence community’ agrees to and supports EU/NATO viewpoint that Russia’s aim is to invade/conquer Europe (in order to gin up support for their pro-war policies). The truth is that ‘US intelligence’ assesses that Russia does not even have the capability to conquer and occupy Ukraine, what to speak of ‘invading and occupying’ Europe.
But again, any statement from "the intelligence community" should be taken with extreme skepticism.
Russias capabilities and Russias goals do not need to align. Thats exactly what the entire Ukraine war is about. That seems to have escaped Gabbard....and you.
You arent worth half the Rubles you have been paid. I hope your handlers will recognize this and act accordingly.
(Today at 4:37 am)Belacqua Wrote: Tulsi Gabbard tweeted this just now:
She's the Director of National Intelligence.
This points to a contradiction that we hear a lot:
1) Russia is incompetent, all of its good soldiers have been killed and they're sending unmotivated office staff to the front, their weapons are all gone and were inferior anyway, it can't do military strategy, and
2) Russia is an imminent threat to Europe.
But again, any statement from "the intelligence community" should be taken with extreme skepticism.
No matter how incompetent (and as war shows answer is really, really incompetent) putler jackboots are they still can kill civilians and damage infrastructure. There is also propaganda to consider so russia while inept in general still might be threat.
Can you link me to a recent book or article explaining why Russia will collapse soon? I'm genuinely curious about what you're reading.
(11 hours ago)Ivan Denisovich Wrote: No matter how incompetent (and as war shows answer is really, really incompetent) putler jackboots are they still can kill civilians and damage infrastructure. There is also propaganda to consider so russia while inept in general still might be threat.
Can you link me to a recent book or article explaining why Russia will collapse soon? I'm genuinely curious about what you're reading.
I said nothing about it collapsing soon (though I wouldn't be against such thing) merely that every day of Ukraine bleeding it makes it closer to collapse which should be obvious as one can't keep country on war footing indefinitely. As to my sources - https://krytykapolityczna.pl/swiat/rosja...-protesty/
You will have to run it through translator.
The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.
(10 hours ago)Belacqua Wrote: Can you link me to a recent book or article explaining why Russia will collapse soon? I'm genuinely curious about what you're reading.
I said nothing about it collapsing soon (though I wouldn't be against such thing) merely that every day of Ukraine bleeding it makes it closer to collapse which should be obvious as one can't keep country on war footing indefinitely. As to my sources - https://krytykapolityczna.pl/swiat/rosja...-protesty/
(10 hours ago)Belacqua Wrote: Can you link me to a recent book or article explaining why Russia will collapse soon? I'm genuinely curious about what you're reading.
I said nothing about it collapsing soon (though I wouldn't be against such thing) merely that every day of Ukraine bleeding it makes it closer to collapse which should be obvious as one can't keep country on war footing indefinitely. As to my sources - https://krytykapolityczna.pl/swiat/rosja...-protesty/
You will have to run it through translator.
Well this article certainly paints a grimmer picture than anything else I've seen in a serious publication.
Naturally we hear about shortages of things that have to be imported, and different problems that you'd expect in a wartime economy.
Of course since I don't know Polish I haven't heard of the periodical before, but Googling around it does seem to have a good reputation, and of course I like that fact that it has a progressive orientation.
I suppose it comes down to a war of attrition, and which country can keep itself afloat longer while sustaining the war. Famously, Russia tends to win wars of attrition. Ukraine's economy of course is not in good condition, so how well it keeps going depends entirely on how much money other countries give it. With America now wanting to disengage from the whole fiasco, I don't think it's a very optimistic picture.
So if we go back to my earlier question, about what we can hope for from the EU's recent promise of a loan. If the plan is just to keep Ukraine from total failure until Russia's economy completely collapses, or until the people of Russia organize some kind of glorious democratic revolution to oust Putin, I don't have much confidence in its success.
Russia, and before that of course the Soviet Union, has been America's designated enemy since the Cold War. A great deal has been written about it that was intended to shape public opinion. I tend to be skeptical of publications with obvious political agendas. I have never been to Russia, but I know for a fact that much of what is written about China in the Anglophone media is pure fiction. The desire to make China into an enemy is very unfortunate.
For example, the Economist magazine, which is supposed to be a serious periodical, is sort of a joke among people who know China well, because it confidently predicts the collapse of China's economy every six months or so. But China's economy never cooperates with that prediction, and recently even the Economist admitted that economically China has "won" 2025.
A while back I mentioned on this forum how China has built many miles of high speed rail for other countries in Asia, and someone replied immediately, in a sort of knee-jerk way, that everything China builds is of poor quality. That's simply not true, but someone who has never been to China or ridden on its trains feels confident in passing judgment, based on no experience at all.
Anyway, I bring up this tangent because even supposedly serious publications in the Anglophone world can be wildly distorted by ideology, and I think we have to be especially cautious when reading about America's economic competitors. This does not mean that what Putin says is true of course. Only that anti-Russian reporting may also be misleading.
So I appreciate you linking me to an article from a perspective that I haven't seen before. Thank you again.
Belacqua Wrote:With America now wanting to disengage from the whole fiasco
Fiasco? Maybe you want Ukraine to apologize to you for not having a war more to your liking?
Belacqua Wrote:So if we go back to my earlier question, about what we can hope for from the EU's recent promise of a loan.
You know how you ridiculed Zelensky for ordering warplanes he "doesn't have money for" and you proclaimed him insane? Well, now he has money for airplanes that will bomb Russians and you are the insane one.
Belacqua Wrote:Russia, and before that of course the Soviet Union, has been America's designated enemy since the Cold War.
Ah, Belacqua's relentless attempt to portray Russia as a victim. But the truth is that the US didn't designate Russia as an enemy. Just the opposite. The whole world tried to work with Russia and trade with them in hope of getting them to normalcy that every country needs years to achieve after it leaves communism, but it didn't pan out because Putin is insane. And the world should have acted before and not ignore Russia's pseudo democracy.
teachings of the Bible are so muddled and self-contradictory that it was possible for Christians to happily burn heretics alive for five long centuries. It was even possible for the most venerated patriarchs of the Church, like St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, to conclude that heretics should be tortured (Augustine) or killed outright (Aquinas). Martin Luther and John Calvin advocated the wholesale murder of heretics, apostates, Jews, and witches. - Sam Harris, "Letter To A Christian Nation"
(10 hours ago)Ivan Denisovich Wrote: I said nothing about it collapsing soon (though I wouldn't be against such thing) merely that every day of Ukraine bleeding it makes it closer to collapse which should be obvious as one can't keep country on war footing indefinitely. As to my sources - https://krytykapolityczna.pl/swiat/rosja...-protesty/
You will have to run it through translator.
Well this article certainly paints a grimmer picture than anything else I've seen in a serious publication.
Naturally we hear about shortages of things that have to be imported, and different problems that you'd expect in a wartime economy.
Of course since I don't know Polish I haven't heard of the periodical before, but Googling around it does seem to have a good reputation, and of course I like that fact that it has a progressive orientation.
I suppose it comes down to a war of attrition, and which country can keep itself afloat longer while sustaining the war. Famously, Russia tends to win wars of attrition. Ukraine's economy of course is not in good condition, so how well it keeps going depends entirely on how much money other countries give it. With America now wanting to disengage from the whole fiasco, I don't think it's a very optimistic picture.
So if we go back to my earlier question, about what we can hope for from the EU's recent promise of a loan. If the plan is just to keep Ukraine from total failure until Russia's economy completely collapses, or until the people of Russia organize some kind of glorious democratic revolution to oust Putin, I don't have much confidence in its success.
Russia, and before that of course the Soviet Union, has been America's designated enemy since the Cold War. A great deal has been written about it that was intended to shape public opinion. I tend to be skeptical of publications with obvious political agendas. I have never been to Russia, but I know for a fact that much of what is written about China in the Anglophone media is pure fiction. The desire to make China into an enemy is very unfortunate.
For example, the Economist magazine, which is supposed to be a serious periodical, is sort of a joke among people who know China well, because it confidently predicts the collapse of China's economy every six months or so. But China's economy never cooperates with that prediction, and recently even the Economist admitted that economically China has "won" 2025.
A while back I mentioned on this forum how China has built many miles of high speed rail for other countries in Asia, and someone replied immediately, in a sort of knee-jerk way, that everything China builds is of poor quality. That's simply not true, but someone who has never been to China or ridden on its trains feels confident in passing judgment, based on no experience at all.
Anyway, I bring up this tangent because even supposedly serious publications in the Anglophone world can be wildly distorted by ideology, and I think we have to be especially cautious when reading about America's economic competitors. This does not mean that what Putin says is true of course. Only that anti-Russian reporting may also be misleading.
So I appreciate you linking me to an article from a perspective that I haven't seen before. Thank you again.
Things are really simple here - russia is a rogue state (and one hilariously incompetent considering how long ago war was supposed to end) guilty of starting war (and it's not its first one) and threat to Europe in general and Eastern Europe in particular. Thus money spent to keep it bleeding itself are money well spent. I also would argue that Europe need send more weapons and ammunition as every russian killed is a russian that will not be in any other potential battlefield, nor will he help with rebuilding if it ever comes to that.
The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.
(Today at 4:04 am)Belacqua Wrote: Just for fun I asked Grok if what you say is true. Here is what it said:
No, the Russian government is not close to collapse as of December 2025. While the regime faces significant challenges—particularly economic strain from the ongoing war in Ukraine, sanctions, and internal pressures—these have not reached a breaking point that threatens the Kremlin's stability.
Economic Pressures
Russia's economy has slowed markedly in 2025 due to high military spending, depleted reserves, and falling oil revenues. Growth is projected at around 1-2% (down from 4%+ in prior years), with inflation high and a budget deficit that has required tapping into sovereign funds. Analysts describe this as "military Keynesianism" leading to stagnation, with risks of recession or overheating. However, the economy has shown resilience through war-driven production, trade with China and India, and domestic financing—no full collapse has occurred, and the Kremlin has managed deficits without major crises.
Political and Internal Stability
Vladimir Putin's regime maintains firm control through repression, high approval ratings (often 80%+ in polls), and loyalty from elites and regions. There are no widespread protests or significant opposition movements inside Russia; dissent is suppressed, and key figures like Navalny's successors operate mostly in exile with limited domestic impact. Putin has consolidated power, with no credible internal challengers. The war in Ukraine continues without major setbacks that could destabilize the leadership—Russian forces have made gradual gains, though at high cost.
Health and Succession Rumors
Persistent rumors about Putin's health (e.g., cancer, Parkinson's) have circulated for years but lack evidence. He appears publicly active, and the Kremlin denies any issues. Succession remains unclear, but the regime's structure is designed to endure without immediate upheaval.
Broader Context
The war in Ukraine drags on, with Russia pursuing maximalist goals (e.g., control over annexed regions) despite diplomatic overtures. External pressures like sanctions and aid to Ukraine have not forced concessions or regime change. Some analysts predict long-term erosion (e.g., demographic decline, over-reliance on military spending), but these are gradual, not imminent threats.In summary, while the regime is under strain and the war is unsustainable long-term, it is far from collapsing. Predictions of imminent downfall have repeatedly proven overstated, as Russia adapts to pressures.
110 web pages
Well, I don't know. Maybe Elon has made a deal with old Putin. But this echoes what I've read elsewhere.
We can always hope, I guess. But it doesn't do any good to ignore the facts.
Wait, you're not only appealing to artificial "intelligence", but one known to have fascist bias?
Christ on a stick. You are such a puppet. I'd feel sorry for you, but you've chosen to be this stupid. It's on you.
(10 hours ago)Belacqua Wrote: Can you link me to a recent book or article explaining why Russia will collapse soon? I'm genuinely curious about what you're reading.
Why, when you refuse to present the sources you've been asked?
(7 hours ago)Ivan Denisovich Wrote: Things are really simple here - russia is a rogue state (and one hilariously incompetent considering how long ago war was supposed to end) guilty of starting war (and it's not its first one) and threat to Europe in general and Eastern Europe in particular. Thus money spent to keep it bleeding itself are money well spent. I also would argue that Europe need send more weapons and ammunition as every russian killed is a russian that will not be in any other potential battlefield, nor will he help with rebuilding if it ever comes to that.
This is all in keeping with what I've read elsewhere: that this is largely a proxy war for the purpose of weakening Russia.
