Posts by Bryan Booth82

Jeremy Peterson4 said:Honestly? We should just cut them off from Europe entirely for the long haul.

We shouldn't even have to break a sweat trying to achieve that; they’ve basically done the dirty work themselves.
Our only job now is to make sure that seal stays shut for the next 50 years.

I'm sitting here listening to the news right now, and the German Chancellor just branded Putin a war criminal—and this is coming from someone who is supposedly considered one of the "moderate" voices!

lp

boldmarlin32 said:Even if they win a war.
What's the point if the EU finds another way to buy energy?

They can't "win" a war they've already lost.
What’s actually far more devastating for Russia is that they have permanently forfeited their foothold in the EU—especially considering how much work went into building those relationships over decades.

Now, all they have left is this naive, desperate mantra about reshaping the global order, where they imagine themselves being... what was it again?
Best,

dustyfalcon122 said:But how exactly are you supposed to de-escalate?
The fascists started this conquest and now they're losing ground and throwing nuclear threats around.
The Ukrainians have zero reason to stop, and besides, why would we give other fascists any ideas by backing down?
If you think we should just hand over territory to Russ, maybe start by giving up your own house first.

By defeating the fascists, obviously. It’s the only way forward.
Best,

rowdytiger13 said:If I briefly lose my mind and accept the idea that Ukraine is part of Russia and Ukrainians are just Russians in denial, then the whole situation becomes even more twisted.
Just imagine slaughtering your own people; it’s no wonder everyone is fleeing their sphere of influence as fast as they can.

History shows us that the Russians simply lack the capacity to establish or maintain a sphere of influence, and it’s for a very basic reason: they don't even possess a shred of respect for themselves, let alone anyone else.
Best,

Amanda Allen4 said:Honestly, nobody needs to humiliate the Russ—they’re doing a perfectly fine job of that themselves with their current foreign policy.

Just how much has Russia's global standing as a superpower actually increased following this whole "crusade" into Ukraine to root out neo-Nazism?

Let’s be honest: very few people even considered them a true superpower before this aggression began, which only served to prove that even their status as a mere regional power is highly debatable.

If we are looking for where neo-Nazism actually exists in its chosen form, you'll find it right there in Russia. It’s hardly any wonder that they’ve become the primary target for both national patriots and the far-right populist movements back home.
Lp

Timothy Williams5 said:My dear casualtiger2, if we could just wave a magic wand and erase Ukrainian and American nationalism, Ukrainians would be living under a Russian protectorate this morning, and I’d be crossing some border line through places like Kavlovac or Vivovitica just to get to a major US city. Dubrovnik would probably be under Kusturica's thumb, and we'd likely be seeing mass executions scattered across the American landscape.

The truth is, that surge of national identity was exactly what allowed them to repel the invaders.
I can empathize with people who argue that all forms of nationalism are identical—thinking that someone singing about wiping out a local gang here is the same thing as someone singing about liquidating a different gang halfway across the world. It isn't.

It seems like the media, the church, and the politicians have completely brainwashed you, though I suppose some of our own "intellectuals" worked quite hard to convince us of that too (like those ridiculous edits showing Franjo Harmon and Slobodan Maddox sharing a bed). They wanted us to believe they had some secret pact to start a war just so they could loot an innocent population. Sure, why not.

If you can find any empathy for Ukraine's resistance against the creation of Great Russia, then you should be able to understand exactly what was happening back in 1991 during the collapse of America.

A simple test for you: just look up the nationalist rhetoric coming out of the former America between 1985 and 1990. You won't find anything comparable in the old American territories—no weird pilgrimages to Lazarev's remains, no obsessive glorification of the Battle of Mexico, and no nonsense about "all Mexicans in one state."

We should respect and celebrate the people who stood their ground against aggression.
If you don't believe me, go ahead and ask the Ukrainians what they think, and tell them you want to strip away their sense of national identity. See how that goes.

Checkmate👍
Lp

G-7 SUMMIT
Biden: ‘We have to stay united against Putin!’; Proposed ban on Russian gold imports

Right at the kickoff of the summit in the Bavarian Alps, four of the seven wealthy nations making up the G-7 announced they are moving toward a ban on importing gold from Russia.

lp

Nancy Gomez26 said:The flaw in your strategy is that all NATO members share specific intelligence. That creates a risk of leaks. Within a smaller coalition, decisions are reached much faster and operations proceed without friction. The Canadians would love to participate, only to trip everyone up later. Look at how they are already obstructing airspace for planes transporting munitions to Ukraine. It seems minor, yet they are actively creating roadblocks.

Will the Canadians be left wondering just as much as they'll be questioning Milanovic?🤔
It might sound absolutely radical to some people, but let’s be honest here: NATO members are almost certainly going to be pulled into a direct conflict against Russia sooner rather than later. It feels inevitable, doesn't it? We can try to play politics all we want, but at what point does "avoiding escalation" just become a polite way of saying we're waiting for the inevitable?
Does Putler actually have the guts to strike a NATO member? I honestly don't know, but if he decides to cross that line, then Canada better be ready to step up and do its part in the defense.

lp

Nancy Gomez26 said:NATO, strictly as an organization, isn't going to jump in. If anything happens, we'll see a coalition of willing nations step up instead. NATO is far too bloated and cumbersome for those kinds of maneuvers. Besides, Ukraine isn't a member, so from a purely legal standpoint, NATO has zero obligation to them. Trying to get every single member state to agree on an action like that? It's a logistical nightmare.

Where on earth does it say they need to ask permission from Putler's puppet, Orban?🤔

NATO members will absolutely enter a conflict against Russia sooner or later—the real question is whether it happens today, next week, or next month... and honestly, whether it’s officially under the NATO banner or just a separate group doesn't even matter.

I think they've finally, slowly but surely, seen through Putler's little theater production... because behind all those threats, it's nothing but cheap acting.
The idea that he’d actually use nuclear weapons is nothing more than fairy tales for children.
That garbage only understands raw strength, which is why they need to be decisively crushed so they never even dream of doing this again.

Best regards,

Arthur Miller7 said:So according to you, there's just zero help available? Just let Russia stomp all over them then? If we let them get away with it, things in Donbas aren't gonna stop anytime soon—you can take that to the bank. If you believe that propaganda, fine, but the truth is they’ll just keep pushing as far as they possibly can.

That is exactly why we have to crush them. This kind of filth only understands one thing: raw, overwhelming force.

lp

bluerider63 said:

We already saw how that went down when they tried to appease Russia by handing over Crimea, and we all saw the mess that left behind. Why on earth would you think Europe should just walk right back into that same trap?

NATO’s already made it clear they aren't stepping in, which honestly is the only kind of help that actually matters, but if they did, we'd be staring down the barrel of WW3. All these sanctions, shipping off weapons, and those big, empty speeches at fancy summits don't really change much on the ground. What else are we supposed to do to make sure we don't screw this up the same way?

The single biggest blunder would be for NATO to sit on its hands and refuse to get actively involved in this conflict, yet based on how the current situation is unfolding, I fully expect them to intervene sooner rather than later.

lp

brightheron64 said:"Backwardness" is such a subjective term, isn't it? Let's step away from the war talk for a second and look at the US Supreme Court and the Roe v. Wade decision. It might feel like a local circus to some, but its impact is truly global...

And while we're on the subject of brotherly love and peace... honestly, from the days of Gilgamesh right up to this very moment, there has always been something inherently "unpeaceful" about humanity...

... and we slide right into Whatabautism 🤦
The core issue here is that there is actually a massive amount of common ground between us. The real disaster happens when the negative elements start to outweigh the good—whether we're talking about everything from minor annoyances to full-blown xenophobia or homophobia...
When the lack of peace is forgotten, and the negativity is what we choose to fix...
LP

Bryan Taylor6 said:Do Germans really want an atomic bomb?....this keeps getting more and more intense

They don't want it; our colleague is just feeling a bit discouraged, as usual.
If you aren't absolutely certain about a fact, why not just make it up? Or rather, let's call it "adjusting the narrative" to fit the story, shall we?
LP

brightheron64 said:As long as we’re all chipping into the same pot and the distribution feels fair... everything stays smooth. But the moment someone (like Johnson) starts feeling like they aren't getting their fair share of the loot...

Let's play a little game of "what if"...

Picture this: Russia puts massive pressure on NATO, and under that collective umbrella, Germany begins an intense, actually quite frantic, buildup of its military forces—reaching a point where they might even eye their own Atomic bomb (since they already possess the raw materials, the expertise, and the tech)... and then they go ahead and get politically reckless about it too... what exactly would our current friends and allies think? Would they say, "Welcome to the Club"? Wouldn't certain old memories suddenly start resurfacing...

Or would everyone collectively panic and ask... "Wait, surely we aren't going through this for a fourth time?"

Yeah, looking through that outdated lens of the North America, Johnson is basically prepping an invasion of France just so he can liberate Germany from there.🤦

Drop that nonsense already; you know as well as I do that we left that era of history behind us.

Germany isn't rearming for its own sake; it’s doing it because of everyone else, because they were obsessed with the idea that they could somehow "leapfrog" straight into the future.
But that kind of future is only possible once others reach the necessary level too—take Russia, for example, which has chosen a much more difficult path.

Well, the Mexicans paid quite a high price for their new level of awareness, didn't they?
The Russians will pay even more, because they simply refuse to learn from history.
Best regards

brightheron64 said:Oh, really? So, what, tomorrow my Mexican friends and I are suddenly "brothers" again, version 3.0, just because we're all hanging out in the European Union?

Sure, the sentiment is outdated, but let's be honest, it's also a daily reality.
On our side, it’s almost like a harmless childhood game—despite the banners at the stadiums or the graffiti on the walls—compared to their constant public media narrative where "the big, evil extremist is lurking everywhere".

Just as a side note, back in the early 80s during those days of forced "brotherhood and unity," I was traveling through southern Mexico and felt my stomach drop when I realized how they spoke about Muslims in almost every single conversation, using nothing but slurs. So, is it that Mexicans are truly, fundamentally broken, making this "until the end of time" rhetoric just a hollow cliché, or does nearly every nation—especially within this millennial European circus of "brotherly love" where everyone is supposedly best friends—carry these ugly memories that fall under the category of "public virtues and secret vices"?

Hmm... maybe even today.🤔🤔
I hear about kids from Washington, D.C. heading over to Mexico City for trips all the time...
🤔
But honestly, looking at history, this supposed "eternal enmity" just isn't sustainable.
It wasn't just that these relatively "newly formed" nations hated and fought each other just like any other group; they practically wiped each other out from within.

When you look at the internal purges, say within Germany... and then follow that up with the wars against France.... in both cases, there is absolutely no basis left for "eternal hostility."

Conflict exists, sure, but it isn't some timeless, inevitable thing like the propaganda tries to make it out to be.

Best,

brightheron64 said:I don't think we'll see any of that "who misled us?" talk... Russians and Poles have been mortal enemies since time immemorial, which is exactly why I brought up Taras Bulba (from Gogol), who was a Cossack—and believe it or not, hailing right out of Zaporizhzhia in modern-day Ukraine.

If you take a look at a map of Europe before World War I, you won't even be able to find Poland. It’s no wonder that Poland fights with everything it has—hands, feet, teeth, and nails—against absolutely anything carrying a "Russian" prefix... As for the Germans, they swallowed them up, though they certainly made their comeback after WWII, especially since the EU actually holds onto certain values and standards...

This whole mantra about "eternal enemies"—as if this will last until the end of time—is a pretty regressive... okay, let's call it what it is: a fossilized way of looking at human civilization.
It is no coincidence that this exact perspective is championed by dictatorships, like the current one in Russia... preaching to their subjects about an eternal enemy, about "our people" who need protecting, and about the "traitors" who need to be punished or coerced back into a "brotherly embrace."

This mantra isn't foreign to national patriots of any stripe... mainly because it's easy to swallow. It's simple fodder for those who don't want to deal with anything demanding or intellectually rigorous.

I'll be truly surprised when the more discerning individuals start making concessions and accepting that kind of nonsense.

lp

darkdriver said:Look, I’m honestly too exhausted to dive deep into this myself—and you clearly know your stuff when it comes to all those numbers and volumes—so I figured I'd just ask you.
The Russians, though—they're basically built to live large. Like, their whole history is just one long stretch of decadence and over-the-top extravagance, so I mean, losing that lifestyle is probably gonna hit them pretty hard.
I guess those 153 UN member states will surely step up and send them some humanitarian aid, maybe just some loaves of bread and salted fish, just so they don't, you know, actually starve.
But honestly? I'm more worried about what's happening in Europe. Since I'm such a total Putinophile—I mean, I really enjoy all the perks that come with it—I still find myself questioning things. And from what I can see, things aren't exactly looking great for our own domestic industries right now.
Glory to Sanctions
Lp

Yeah, I have to point that out too... that tired old argument that sanctions won't do a damn thing to Russia is such a naive fairy tale. People love to claim Russians can survive on nothing but bread and water, but it's nonsense.
Is there anything new to say? It's getting incredibly stale.

Best,

darkdriver said:So, how many liters actually go into a barrel? I guess it depends on what kind of barrel you're talking about—like, are we talking about industrial oil stuff or just a standard container? But if you're asking about the standard oil barrel used here in the States, it's about 42 gallons... which works out to roughly 159 liters. Just a little heads-up though—it can vary depending on who's doing the measuring, I suppose!
Glory to Sanctions LP!

Go ahead, Google it... though honestly, it feels like you've either finally woken up to reality or you're just running out of ways to defend Russia's supposed economic bright future.

lp

darkdriver said:Is Google gonna just ignore China's GDP?
I know, I know—we're all basically becoming Chinese puppets at this point

Fine, go ahead, "Google it" if you want...
But let me give you a reality check using a simple analogy. If you have a one-liter bottle, sure, you can pour exactly one liter of water into it.🤔
Now, if you have 40 bottles, you can certainly guarantee those first 40 liters. But what about the other 153? Who knows? You might run out of water before they're full. Maybe some bottles are cracked, maybe some are empty, or maybe you barely manage to squeeze out another 20 or 30 liters. How on earth do you expect to fill them all perfectly every single time?
The truth is, it sounds easy on paper, but it's a nightmare in practice. You actually have to organize the logistics, secure the shipping, establish the supply chains, chase down payments, and hit strict deadlines... everything that happened effortlessly with those first 40 units requires massive coordination. It doesn't just happen by magic!

Glory to Sanctions LP

hollowdriver13 said:I'm guessing you meant $4.7 trillion, but the actual number is actually a bit higher, sitting at $5,081 billion.

Oh, sure, just a little slip of the tongue, right? As if such a massive discrepancy matters at all.😉

lp