Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think you mean America... coup 2014 and earlier.
Didn’t your war fiend and moron patient John McCain admit to a color revolution in Ukraine? LOL!
America, bombing sovereign nations one lie at a time. Explains the Saudi’s giving you arrogant war fiends the middle finger, hilarious!
I fully understand why the Ukrainian people protested and wanted Yanukovych out. He broke his election promise to join a trade bloc with the EU and was clearly being used as a puppet by Putin. The US involvement, whatever extent it was, seems like it was a mistake. The US supporting Ukraine with money and weapons right now is fully necessary though. Anything less is basically appeasement. The US has a lot of its own questionable war funding for sure, like what’s going on in Yemen, but the kind of invasion going on in the Ukraine is basically unprecedented in modern times. It’s clear as day that Russia is in the wrong, the only people saying otherwise seem like they are just trying to be contrarian for the sake of it.
Someone here posted about Prigozhyn taking over some party to gain political weight.
Instead of listening to some liberal Russian media outlet, or American whatever, maybe hear it from the horse's mouth?
We publish a request from the editors of the Arguments of the Week publication and the answer:
Dear Evgeny Viktorovich!
One of the largest telegram channels BRIEF, referring to the ISW (American Institute for the Study of War), after your visit to Sergei Mikhailovich Mironov, suggested that by cooperating with the leader of the Just Russia - For Truth party, you are trying to gain control over it. How can you comment on this?
We publish a comment by Evgeny Prigozhin:
“BRIEF, as always, has very clear analytics and iron logic. If I came to Bakhmut, then I take control of Bakhmut. If I met Sergei Mikhailovich Mironov, whom I have known since the 90s, then I take control of A Just Russia. After that, I went to see my friend Lekha, who has been working as a gynecologist for many years, which means he took control of his *****.(female organs)
There’s just one problem: if I sent Slutsky to hell, does that mean I’m taking control of the Liberal Democratic Party or, on the contrary, strengthening his position?”
https://t.me/wagnernew/7055
And believe, me Google translate smoothed lots of his words. Pigozhyn is VERY foul mouthed. What amazes me, he openly cusses out anyone he wants to. In Ozark's there a female foul mouth character... yeah, that how he talks.
The picture that Ukraine was “winning” and Russia was “losing.”
Or that Ukrainians can re-take their lost territory.
Or that every ally was supplying weapons to Ukraine
Or that enemies were not supplying weapons to Russia.
Did you even bother to read the report?
I did read it. The main thing that it talked about was that Ukraine is running low on anti-air missiles. That was mentioned half a dozen times. Running low on that doesnt equate to Ukraine losing or Russia winning. Not does it equate to Ukraine not being able to take back territory
Y'all understand, what sudden proliferation of such leaks mean, right?
The entire "Ukrainian effort" is being prepared for flush. In the quickly developing global crisis, it is suicidal to spend money - and keep pissing off your own population, on something, no one really cares about and in some far far away land. I do understand the noble intention of preserving democracy in the world at expense of the US taxpayers, but it's not like as if the very moment Ukraine surrenders, Russian tanks will roll into Washington DC.
I did read it. The main thing that it talked about was that Ukraine is running low on anti-air missiles. That was mentioned half a dozen times. Running low on that doesnt equate to Ukraine losing or Russia winning. Not does it equate to Ukraine not being able to take back territory
It also just means more missiles can/will be provided, it’s not like no more missiles exist anywhere.
I did read it. The main thing that it talked about was that Ukraine is running low on anti-air missiles. That was mentioned half a dozen times. Running low on that doesnt equate to Ukraine losing or Russia winning. Not does it equate to Ukraine not being able to take back territory
You clearly didn't read the full report.
Quote:
Washington Post: Leaked document reveals US doubts about Ukraine's counteroffensive
When the commander in chief, who gets all the reports and is fully funding you, doubts you, you’re in trouble.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
