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!
(Yesterday at 7:59 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: How has anyone ever benefitted by stopping a murderous dictator from invading europe, amiright?
Why does this clown even try? There isn't anyone here who believes more than .01% of what he says. That's because sometimes a thing is correct. A lot of chaff, and then a kernel of ergot.
If you get to thinking you’re a person of some influence, try ordering somebody else’s dog around.
Sometimes people have principled objections. Sometimes people are misinformed. Sometimes people just want to know what their take is going to be.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Yesterday at 9:05 pm (This post was last modified: Yesterday at 9:10 pm by Thumpalumpacus.)
He's the same sort who argues that war is big business in other forums, no doubt. But now the party line is a 90b euro program will not do anything good for anyone. I think he really means it won't do the Russians any good. But Rheinmetall, BAe, Dassault, Vickers, and god knows how many others will be doing fine, pumping out weapons for Ukraine. Killing Russian invaders. Europe will be more secure, too, at least from conventional attack. (the Russians will certainly ramp up their terrorist attacks against Poland, the Baltic states, Germany, and others.) I am fine with Russian invaders dying. If they wish to stop dying, they can go back to Russia. I want Europe to be secure. If that takes more dead Russian invaders, I'm fine with that, too.
Of course, I don't have Putin's hand up my ass so far he can pick my nose on the sly -- unlike Bel.
Also, I want to see sources for the claim that the weapons are useless due to the lack of ammunition. Link to those sources so I can read them myself directly. Yes, that means that I don't trust you as far as I could throw a T-72. Those sources had better not be Russian, or I'll be leading you to the woodshed.
(Yesterday at 6:40 am)Belacqua Wrote: So you agree that we shouldn't believe what US intelligence agencies say. That's good.
Don't listen to the intelligence agencies, listen to my ill-informed and obviously biased opinion. Because if we know anything from history, it's that appeasement works!
It's worse option than original plan of using frozen russian assets I think but that still is a positive outcome.
I'm curious as to how you predict this playing out. In the long run, it seems as though a positive outcome is far from guaranteed.
History indicates that a large portion of the 90 billion will be skimmed off by corruption. But let's assume that this time a significant portion of the money will go to the war effort. How much time does this buy?
War is expensive, so what is the predicted timeline? Does this money keep Ukraine fighting until the end of 2026? During that time, will there be a possibility of reversing the losses that have happened so far? Surely they're not fantasizing about pushing the Russians back to the pre-war borders.
Then there's also a question of whether this is enough. Trump is now expecting the European countries to pay for Ukraine's military equipment. Does this money come on top of the 90 billion? Zelensky said in a speech recently that some of the weapons systems he was given are now useless due to a lack of ammunition, and he wants more. So that's expensive too.
And of course there's the issue of whether Europe can really afford this. (Hungary, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic declined to participate in the plan, so their economies are less vulnerable.) Remember that the US has told European countries that they're no longer allowed to buy cheap energy from Russia, and this is having a significant effect on their economies. Industry is hurting, and the cost of living for citizens is going up. As living standards decline, and voters see their tax money being sent to a war that can't be won, the current leaders become less popular and there's an increased threat of right-wing parties gaining popularity.
Remember that US sanctions on Russia are designed in part to benefit US oil suppliers. Europe has to buy more expensive oil from America. But America has exempted itself from this -- it does not sanction Russian exports of uranium to the US. Every year America buys millions and millions of dollars worth of uranium from Russia -- about 20 to 25% of what it needs to keep its reactors running. This money of course benefits the Russian government. So it looks pretty hypocritical that America gets its energy supplies from Russia while saying that Europe can't do the same.
So seriously, realistically -- what benefit do we get from funding another year of war, paid for by European taxpayers in a "loan" which will certainly never be repaid?
What benefit? With each day of Ukraine continuing to bleed Upper Volta with rockets we're closer to russia collapse. It already ain't doing too well and if putler propaganda apparatus won't convince Europe leaders of abandoning Ukraine then maybe this anus mundi will implode like in 1917 or at least it will be too weak to continue both war and being nuisance to its neighbours. There however is no hope of russia ever becoming normal country. Unless Mongols will take over again I guess.
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.
(Yesterday at 7:39 pm)Belacqua Wrote: I'm curious as to how you predict this playing out. In the long run, it seems as though a positive outcome is far from guaranteed.
History indicates that a large portion of the 90 billion will be skimmed off by corruption. But let's assume that this time a significant portion of the money will go to the war effort. How much time does this buy?
War is expensive, so what is the predicted timeline? Does this money keep Ukraine fighting until the end of 2026? During that time, will there be a possibility of reversing the losses that have happened so far? Surely they're not fantasizing about pushing the Russians back to the pre-war borders.
Then there's also a question of whether this is enough. Trump is now expecting the European countries to pay for Ukraine's military equipment. Does this money come on top of the 90 billion? Zelensky said in a speech recently that some of the weapons systems he was given are now useless due to a lack of ammunition, and he wants more. So that's expensive too.
And of course there's the issue of whether Europe can really afford this. (Hungary, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic declined to participate in the plan, so their economies are less vulnerable.) Remember that the US has told European countries that they're no longer allowed to buy cheap energy from Russia, and this is having a significant effect on their economies. Industry is hurting, and the cost of living for citizens is going up. As living standards decline, and voters see their tax money being sent to a war that can't be won, the current leaders become less popular and there's an increased threat of right-wing parties gaining popularity.
Remember that US sanctions on Russia are designed in part to benefit US oil suppliers. Europe has to buy more expensive oil from America. But America has exempted itself from this -- it does not sanction Russian exports of uranium to the US. Every year America buys millions and millions of dollars worth of uranium from Russia -- about 20 to 25% of what it needs to keep its reactors running. This money of course benefits the Russian government. So it looks pretty hypocritical that America gets its energy supplies from Russia while saying that Europe can't do the same.
So seriously, realistically -- what benefit do we get from funding another year of war, paid for by European taxpayers in a "loan" which will certainly never be repaid?
What benefit? With each day of Ukraine continuing to bleed Upper Volta with rockets we're closer to russia collapse. It already ain't doing too well and if putler propaganda apparatus won't convince Europe leaders of abandoning Ukraine then maybe this anus mundi will implode like in 1917 or at least it will be too weak to continue both war and being nuisance to its neighbours. There however is no hope of russia ever becoming normal country. Unless Mongols will take over again I guess.
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.
(Today at 2:44 am)Ivan Denisovich Wrote: What benefit? With each day of Ukraine continuing to bleed Upper Volta with rockets we're closer to russia collapse. It already ain't doing too well and if putler propaganda apparatus won't convince Europe leaders of abandoning Ukraine then maybe this anus mundi will implode like in 1917 or at least it will be too weak to continue both war and being nuisance to its neighbours. There however is no hope of russia ever becoming normal country. Unless Mongols will take over again I guess.
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.
Grok?
The app Musk had to reprogramme several times because it kept giving answers that went against his agenda?
Today at 4:37 am (This post was last modified: Today at 4:44 am by Belacqua.)
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.
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.
(Today at 2:44 am)Ivan Denisovich Wrote: What benefit? With each day of Ukraine continuing to bleed Upper Volta with rockets we're closer to russia collapse. It already ain't doing too well and if putler propaganda apparatus won't convince Europe leaders of abandoning Ukraine then maybe this anus mundi will implode like in 1917 or at least it will be too weak to continue both war and being nuisance to its neighbours. There however is no hope of russia ever becoming normal country. Unless Mongols will take over again I guess.
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.
Next time ask putler directly, I'm sure that answer you will get will be just as "good".
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 4:37 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.
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.
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.
