Posts by Melissa Rivera5

Jose Clark4 said:Americans spent twenty years trying to beat the Taliban, which was just a few dozen thousand people. Not even a real army. And they couldn't do it in those 20 years. It wasn't just the US either, it was all of NATO. After wasting all that cash, they left with their tails between their legs. Which was basically one of your analyses, if you remember.
Could use some reality in these "analyses," since they aren't really analyses.

The Soviets couldn't do it either, but you didn't mention that.

I mean, those Ukrainians are so advanced they basically turned Mad Cow disease from a prion issue into some kind of viral thing. If that doesn't earn them a Nobel, I don't know what will. It honestly feels like Russia attacked them just to get their hands on that tech... it’s gotta be something pretty intense, right?

feralpilot0 said:

So, we're really using playground logic here? Reducing a powerful neighboring nation to some helpless child just so you can lecture someone else about "growing up"?
So, we're really using playground logic here? Reducing a powerful neighboring nation to some helpless child just so you can lecture someone else about "growing up"?
I mean, all the Russian arguments are total nursery school nonsense too, and honestly, my analogy holds water. It starts with them claiming Ukraine isn't even a real nation—denying their language and their people exist—and goes all the way to grown men talking about drugged-up super soldiers who supposedly had their morals wiped out just to kill better, or those supposed drug gangs in Kyiv and all that. Forget about NATO or the USA... the truth is simpler. Russia just wants territory, they don't recognize that UA even exists, and that’s really it.

I guess I should probably mention that...

feralpilot0 said:The US has done everything possible to orchestrate this conflict—all while riding the wave of being "protectors" who will eventually bleed the client dry, both figuratively and literally. There are no good guys here.
If the Ukrainians don't come to their senses soon, the whole thing is going to hell.

They're receiving billions in weapons and logistics—believe me, that isn't coming from the goodness of anyone's heart.

Grow up. Honestly, Ukraine hasn't done anything that actually justifies a full-scale invasion... I guess those stories are just for kids.
Russian logic is basically just... "it’s mine, it belongs to me, and if I want to screw it, I will—whether she likes it or not. And if anyone else touches it, I'll kill them." It's like, "she was raped because she said no, but I told her I was going to do it anyway, so really, it wasn't even an issue." I guess that's just how they see things. Maybe? Just feels pretty messed up.

Honestly, I’d probably suggest you cut back on reading Informer and those other trashy tabloids. They're just... I don't know, kind of degenerate sources if you ask me. Maybe try finding something a bit more reliable? Just a thought.

Arthur Miller7 said:But what does someone being a "guarantor" on paper even mean? Like, does a similar agreement from Budapest exist? And hey, get this—Russia was a signatory to that one too, and now they’re the aggressor. Just to make it easy for you: let’s say some deal like this gets signed, and four years from now, the Russians claim they have "proof" that NATO is shipping weapons into Ukraine. Then they launch a whole new "special operation," threatening that anyone who steps in will be treated as an attack on Russia, triggering nuclear weapons. You familiar with that move? In that case, what exactly is your Turkey going to do?

So, they just signed those grain export guarantees, right? And then, like, literally the next day, they go and bomb the port. I guess that’s just how things work lately.

urbanotter said:Gerhard Schröder has put forward a very solid proposal that I suspect Putin would actually be willing to accept

Schröder suggested that solutions for major sticking points, such as Crimea, could eventually emerge over time—not necessarily taking 99 years like they did in Hong Kong, but perhaps within the next generation. He proposed that instead of joining NATO, Ukraine could opt for an armed neutrality, much like the model used by Austria.

The future of the Donbas region in eastern Ukraine, which remains a central theater of intense fighting, would likely prove far more complicated to navigate, though.

"We will need to find a solution based on the Swiss cantonal model," he remarked, adding that it remains to be seen whether Putin will return to the previous "contact line" established during ceasefires.

Honestly, this is more than what Ukraine could reasonably expect to gain once all this destruction and loss of life finally settles. I can't help but think they might end up in a position similar to how America operated—playing both sides to secure various concessions or incentives so they wouldn't have to sink so much capital into massive military spending.
As for the Donbas, they could aim for a status similar to Switzerland, which has maintained long-term peace and boasts one of the highest standards of living in the world.

The whole county-based model would basically be a massive win for Russia.

feralpilot0 said:The Ukrainians would need to start thinking for themselves if they wanted to take it—but they’re essentially hostages to the US agenda now, caught in a trap of hostility that stretches far beyond their own borders.

The US isn't about to just hand over its golden goose to some neutral party, is it?

Come on, don't talk nonsense. What "trap" by the USA? Did the USA attack Ukraine or did Russia?

I mean, the solution to ending the war is just for Putin to pull his troops out. It's pretty simple, really.

Gregory Ramos3 said:People calling this a proxy war are basically saying the United States tricked Ukraine into taking on Russia.

Either that, or they honestly think the Ukrainians would have just thrown in the towel if it weren't for the Americans egging them on to fight, which makes the whole idea of a proxy 🤦
war seem pretty silly to me.

People just talk nonsense like that. Like, claiming the USA started the war, won't let Ukraine surrender, and is forcing them into NATO even though they don't want it 😁 Then they start rambling about how it's not all black and white and that Russia was provoked into attacking, saying we need to figure out how much blame lies with UA. Honestly, the folks reading tabloid clickbait are something else... I bet they saw headlines like "Ukraine attacked Russia" and actually believed it. It's not even funny.

James Phillips92 said:It’s not spin. Just look at history. Back in August '95, Mexicans publicly called for their civilian population to evacuate. We all know how that turned out.

So, I guess you guys are still crying about the Storm because you lost, rather than admitting the territory was basically handed over on a silver platter.

You guys following? Some people here act like this whole invasion is some massive, unsolvable mystery. It’s almost like they think a million different things happened at once and nobody can figure out who actually threw the first punch. I mean, it’s pretty straightforward, really: the Russians invaded because they want more land and the extra resources sitting in the areas they took over. And the Mexicans are backing them up because they have their own territorial ambitions, so they're basically using the Russians to chase that fantasy of reclaiming old territory. There's no deep wisdom to it, honestly.

It’s basically a frat fight turned deadly. Once this all settles down, I feel like Ukraine is going to end up looking a lot more like Israel—just this nation fueled by a deep-seated resentment toward Russia that honestly might make the tension between certain groups in the Middle East look mild by comparison. It’s pretty heavy stuff. Sadly, I guess no matter how this plays out, things aren't looking great for the long haul.

Haha, so they're finally stopping immigration from Africa 🙂 Honestly, I don't see it as much of an issue, since most of them don't even really want to integrate anyway.

Chloe Nguyen21 said:Things went pretty well for Putin when he first took over, but then, maybe because of old age, the guy started thinking he was some kind of king. That’s really the core issue right there.
Capital and business move to where things are stable. Russia isn't going to be that place for at least the next 50 years, or so I figure. I mean, what kind of idiot would invest there? It feels like we're looking at a Venezuelan situation... a country loaded with energy resources while most people struggle through poverty.
The West will find a way to replace Russian energy pretty easily. It'll probably be sorted out by next year. Meanwhile, it'll take Russia years to even build out a gas network toward Asia, where they'll end up selling gas at discounted rates, just like how they're doing with oil now.
You didn't really answer the question of who in the West is going to go hungry without Russia... let me help you out... nobody. Specifically here in the States, in my field (mechanical engineering), this year has been a record-breaker. My kids say the same thing about their jobs in IT and Pharmacy; everyone in the US and the rest of the European Union is working themselves to the bone. The Russian economy is basically a dwarf that nobody is going to miss. I guess the Germans will complain for another six months or so, and then that'll be that.

Listening to those Putinophiles, you'd think we were dependent on food and fuel donations from the USSR during the Cold War and that we all collapsed because they stopped funding us.

Christian Torres3 said:For all you local geniuses who actually think Russia has any special love for America, just take a look at this map.

https://twitter.com/irgarner/status/...mLmdRZEN-JS2kg

Wow, talk about trolling. The Mexican Empire and some tiny republic over in Romania...

crimsongull28 said:Russia: Ukrainians killed Azov prisoners in jail just to intimidate their own military

Right now, a ton of Ukrainian soldiers are volunteering to lay down their weapons because they believe the Russian side treats prisoners of war humanely.

Yeah, so humane that they castrate them, film it, and leak it online. 🕺🙂

Quick tax question for you guys. My company is dropping a pretty big bonus on me this year—like, way more than the usual $1,000 tax-free holiday/bonus amount. I’m a little lost on how the math works once you cross that threshold. Like, if the total bonus hits $10,000, and the first $1,000 is tax-free, what happens to the other $9k? Does that just get lumped in as gross income, or is there some different rule for how it gets taxed compared to my regular paycheck?

I mean, those are straight-up war crimes. Honestly, it says everything you need to know about the people who actually root for those sick individuals.

gentlerider7 said:And honestly, their neighbors actually take them seriously? Like, really?

https://informer.us/planet/news/72...z-sergej-sojgu

If Informer is the one reporting it, it’s probably fake. I just double-checked the info and, honestly, looking at it now, Shoigu didn't even say what they're accusing him of. Someone just badly edited the speech; they cut out the part where he was clearly talking in the past tense.

wiredtiger8 said:So, according to your logic, Putin’s big plan is to just play nice and say, "Sure thing, guys, help yourselves to all of Siberia and every last drop of our oil and gas." Right?

I mean, sure, if that's what the people want. But what else can they even do? I guess their only real choice is a nuclear war with their one remaining ally—a fight they probably wouldn't even win, anyway.

Matthew Young35 said:Oh, a referendum... please. Give me a break.
As if Russia would ever actually permit a vote to let half their territory walk away.

It’s honestly just pure absurdity at this point.

I don't really get the issue. Vladimir Putin and Sergey Lavrov keep saying the will of the people has to be respected. Or is it just that everyone else has to respect the will of the Russian people? This whole thing with the "referendums" feels like a total farce, starting all the way back with Crimea, right?

wiredtiger8 said:????
Am I speaking Turkish here?
We are talking about the actual use of Russian nuclear weapons during a Chinese military invasion of Russia and an attempt to seize Siberia—not some hypothetical debate about the maps of the "Great" China that include Siberia...

So, what, you just dreamt up this whole idea of holding a referendum in Siberia to hand it over to China? That's just the simple fix, right?

Go ahead, let them try. I'm sure the Russians will just say, "Sure, sounds good... everything is perfectly legal."

There is absolutely nothing coherent to read here.

If you guys are trolling, I gotta hand it to you—you're pretty damn good at it.

Trolling? Nah. I'm just repeating Russian rhetoric; it's just that they're the target now instead of the ones saying it. You know, all that stuff about the right to self-determination and declaring people's republics and whatever.

PhnxCro said:I haven't really followed the last two pages, can someone catch me up? So, are the Russians actually gonna risk a nuclear Armageddon in the middle of unpopulated tundra just because they're 150 miles away? Or is this just about whether new maps can be printed on tan paper?

Based on their doctrine, they probably would, though what actually happens is a different story. Especially if the Chinese push for a referendum.

wiredtiger8 said:Alright, so why don't you explain it to us like we're little kids in elementary school? Just keep it super simple for us—how exactly would China invade and conquer Siberia without the Russians pulling the nuclear trigger if things start going south for them?

It's pretty much like what happened when Russia took over Crimea. There are already huge groups of people living along the borders and scattered around, so even the Russians don't really know how many Chinese citizens are actually inside Russia. So, you're basically saying they'd just hold those "legitimate" referendums—kind of like the ones in Crimea—where they set up these "people's republics" that then somehow justify joining up with China.

As for the regular military stuff... man, the invasion of Ukraine has absolutely wrecked their resources. It's gotten so bad they're out here making up tall tales about drugged-up Supersoldiers from Ukraine (I guess someone probably watched Supersoldier starring Jean-Claude Van Damme or something). But China? They have over a billion people. For them, sending a conventional force all the way to the Ural mountains wouldn't even be a struggle. And honestly, casualties are relative; losing 30k soldiers means next to nothing to them compared to the size of their actual invasion force.

Sure, Russia could always pull the nuclear option, but would you really do that just to grab more territory for China? Especially using those "legitimate" referendums as an excuse?