118 posts shown.
Jessica Peterson2 said:Putin has decided to set aside roughly $1,000 for every family willing to enroll their kids in these "new Russian schools" being established across occupied territories in Ukraine.
goldenowl73 said:The Russian Congress is proposing that they strip citizenship from anyone criticizing the government or the military just to make room for visa applicants.😵
In the U.S. Congress, they suggested stripping Russian citizenship for criticizing the government or the military to clear ways for visas.
https://twitter.com/GazetaRu/status/...miT3NV5jrBQaTA
analogbear5 said:Aleksandr Dugin claims her "very first words" were basically just "Russia," "our nation," and "our Empire."
casualcrane20 said:Under capitalism, elections might be multi-party, but they aren't exactly free.
goldenowl73 said:So, eleven hours after the "attack," she just pops out of the country and crosses the border almost immediately 622 miles. Seriously, what is the FBI doing 🤦
What happened with those long pipes they had out on the streets? All those blockades on the main highways and everything...
Jessica Peterson2 said:Ha! 😂 So, according to this, the "terrorist" Vovk supposedly traveled all the way to Russia to carry out an assassination attempt, bringing along her twelve-year-old daughter, a full regiment of "Azov," several kilos of TNT, and—get this—... a kitten!!! 🤦
https://ria.ru/20220823/dugina-1811455625.html
Here is a rather amusing little detail for you: at the exact moment of the attack, every single surveillance camera just happened to be turned off. This is despite the fact that the entire neighborhood is usually under constant, unbroken FBI monitoring because it houses the... Border Patrol Academy!!!
What a complete farce, honestly. 🤦
Richard Wilson4 said:So, bottom line: if a regime doesn't have free multi-party elections, is it a dictatorship or not?
nimbleviper3 said:That’s a massive stretch, but calling it a dictatorship? Not even close. Learn what a real dictatorship actually looks like before you start talking trash.☕
nimbleviper3 said:Not the main point, but just noting for the record that Yu wasn't a dictatorship, at least not during its last 30 years of existence.☕
Donna Wells2 said:unnamed
That kind of psychosis was constantly being forced upon us back in the failed America... there was always some shadowy figure, an internal or external enemy, supposedly out to destroy this "perfect state" that eventually collapsed like a house of cards.
Failed ideas, failed states... yet they remain incredibly efficient at killing and oppressing their own people. And Russia has basically earned a PhD in that particular field.
Benjamin Taylor6 said:The kid was probably just tagging along while she was busy rigging up an explosive device for the car.
Maybe the little girl was just trying to be a helpful assistant. 😬
goldenowl73 said:The FBI has officially leveled accusations against a Ukrainian woman, Natalia Vovk, claiming she was the one who planted the bomb that killed Daria Dugina. Apparently, she showed up with her daughter to the exact same event the Dugins were attending. This Ukrainian woman then just headed straight back to Estonia the very next day after the blast.
The FBI has officially accused the Ukrainian intelligence community of murdering Daria Dugina. They've identified the bomber as Natalia Vovk, a woman in her early 40s who was visiting Moscow with her daughter. They attended the same event as the Dugins on Saturday evening (where the bomb was presumably attached to Dugina's vehicle in the parking lot). Vovk and her daughter returned to Estonia, the day after the bombing.
So, case closed, right? Terrorists just stroll right into the middle of Moscow with their kids, plant an explosive, and then breeze out of town the next day without a single hiccup. It sounds totally believable to me! And of course, it's looking like all the CCTV cameras in the entire vicinity just happened to be broken at the exact right moment. Yea
George Robinson43 said:I have no desire to engage with your Russian whataboutism, but I should remind you that within a ten-year span, Iraq invaded two sovereign nations, so saying they weren't a threat to anyone simply isn't accurate.
It's funny—we all know the invasion of Iraq was a crime and a violation of rights, but if Iraq attacks other sovereign states, suddenly everything is fine! It becomes perfectly acceptable.
The same logic applies to Libya. An attack by Libya on Chad is tolerated—it's even welcomed, because a modern, sovereign, non-aligned nation like Libya deserves the right to flex its muscles. But an attack on Libya? That's a crime!
rowdyraven112 said:Cuba wasn't a threat to the USA either, yet they still wouldn't let them put missiles on their soil to deter an attack.☕
Neither Iran, Iraq, nor Syria were threats to anyone. Even the Kurds aren't a threat to Turkey, yet there they go again, having regular military picnics inside another country's borders.☕
Sure, this kind of resistance from Ukrainians was expected, but it's nothing new. You saw it with ISIS—despite being outmatched technologically and militarily by the forces trying to kick them out of cities, they still put up hell of a fight.
ironseal said:Justin Mendoza16 Asks:
☕That whole thing about Ukraine joining NATO? It was nothing more than a convenient excuse for pure, unadulterated aggression. Their actual goal was always to seize the entire country, grab a foothold, and then just keep rolling straight toward Moldova and Kaliningrad.🙂
I get that much, but I’m asking the people who are still swallowing that garbage. Also, why don't they just go after Finland and Sweden since they both announced they're joining NATO?
ironseal said:Look, I’m laying this out clearly and logically, so I expect a real answer back. A country can't just join NATO if they have unresolved territorial disputes. I don't recall the exact article number, but the rule is crystal clear on that.
What does that imply? A few things. First, if that were actually the case, Putin would have been fine just invading Donbas and staying there. That would be enough. There wouldn't have been any need for an invasion of Kyiv, which we already saw them attempt. Second, for Ukraine to join NATO under those circumstances, they’d have to officially give up all the occupied territories to meet that requirement within their new borders. This means NATO membership isn't really the driving force here; nothing more than what was already held before February 24th should have changed. It would be a win-win for them: either Ukraine doesn't join NATO, or they officially renounce those lands.
So, why the invasion of Kyiv? Why seize new territory and hold sham referendums? Why shell every single Ukrainian city when they could have blocked NATO entry without doing any of that?
Megan Thomas5 said:Russ is absolutely reeling. They’ve got this massive fleet, yet they can't seem to get anything done. At this rate, they won't even be able to hold onto Crimea, and they'll be begging for negotiations just to keep what little they have left.
goldenowl73 said:I mean, seriously, can you believe a Deputy Defense Minister actually owns real estate in the middle of the US? Just wild.