I think it's a wise talk by Trump who tend to say reasonable things in controversial manners that may end up being true.
It's his way of telling the NATO allies to take responsibility and help fund their own security (if it's really important to them) to keep the organization sustainable, help them have more say, become somewhat independent of US for their own good, and more importantly to help lessen the financial burden on US. I believe the other party who prefer others to be dependent on US think that will help US have greater say in NATO. Or even have strong control over other members.
Trump also thinks far ahead:
"If others have equal say for example, It will become hard for the "entity in control" (the bad guy) of USA to make unilateral decisions that will endanger regional security like wrongly/easily attacking nations like Russia in the future."
Sure... balanced statements that create consensus and show his perfect understanding of international diplomacy such as: "I said: 'You didn't pay? You're delinquent?' He said: 'Yes, let's say that happened.' No, I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them (Russia) to do whatever the hell they want. You gotta pay," Trump said. In my book this is paying for protection, so the best solution for Europe is to get rid of the intermediary. Make no mistake, Europe can perfectly develop a range of weapons that can successfully replace all the US produced with a similar level of technology and characteristics and this means that they will also become a competitor of the US in the international weapons market - even more than now. do you think this is a good deal? |
|
|
|
Tucker Carlson was fired out Fox because his lies and the lies of those he interviewed about the 2020 election in the United States cost Fox almost 1 Billion dollars to Dominion voting Systems, in the biggest defamation lawsuit of the history of the United States. After making his boss to lose such amount of money, it is to nobody surprise someone had to be fired. right?
Tucker Carlson is not an idiot, he is pretty much aware of what he does and he is very good at it, he is someone who sell fear, he is a fear-monger a pawn for propaganda, who is at the service of the Russian government and in favor of the Republican party. The most interesting thing and also one of the most obvious things is that it is just matter of time for him to get directly into politics and not only being a piece of the propaganda machinery for his alleged allies. He will eventually go for the Presidency of the United States, thrus he needs to stay relevant and keep his influence on the Republican voters in the long term, after Trump is gone, he will try; perhaps he may try first to test the ground by running for a seat in the senate, time will tell.
Pretty ironic Tucker show so much criticism against the government of the USA, which allows him to say whatever he wants, if he was born in Russia and tried to critic Putin in the same way he does to Biden, he would be dead in less than one year. Guaranteed.
All of the Fox News cast members lie and lie. His replacement probably lies just as much as he does. I suppose it's possible his firing was part of the Dominion settlement, but it doesn't seem like you would have much trouble finding somebody else to do Tucker's job for a lot less salary. Have their ratings for his time slot moved down at all? I agree he could be eyeing the presidency after Trump goes... Curiously enough, the Fox ratings moved severely down when they tried a more balanced approach - you know, like saying that Trump was not right in something, like minuscule stuff. They simply cannot do anything else, because they have the audience that they have built: People who only want to hear one side of the story or even just "a story", meaning a fictional story. So yes, Tucker is a fiction theatre actor - thus an entertainer. |
|
|
|
-
Yeah, I'm more than sure that in almost 2 years of war there was more than enough requests from Western journalists, but obviously it was all rejected. While Carlson, knowing his views and stance towards Russia, he was good choice. As you say, his was getting lot of popularity, I think it says a lot. Difficult to expect that he will ask inconvenient questions. That 28 minutes history lesson from Putin. It was interesting interpretation of things from Putin, but Tucker don't had much to respond because he obviously don't know history of this region in detail. Same can be said about target audience of interview. It's not secret that average American redneck don't know much what's happening outside US, not even talking about history. They don't believe in mainstream media, but have lot of trust in Tucker. In US sending military support to Ukraine is getting more opposition than it was in first year of war. And interview like this can increase this public opinion even more, it's important before upcoming elections. To be honest, I dont understand where the Russian interests align with the interest of the Republican party and the interests of the American people who identify themselves as Republican voters. Perhaps someone here should explain it to me, because I dont get it. The Republican party I recall from the 2010's and before, it was a party about freedom, conservatism, lower taxes and protection to the second amendment. Where does the freedom values of the Republican party align with Russia and the ideas of Putin? Putin is a proto dictator, who wants to stay in the presidency for the rest of his life and oppress his own people, those who do not go along with his own ideology. Some republicans will say it is not about supporting a dictatorship, but rather about saving money and not sending the tax payer's money abroad when there are so many things to care about there in the United States, though that also does not make sense, because the Republican party is not against sending money and military equipment to Israel in their war against Hamas. So it is not about money, there is some ideological factor behind all of it. The Republican party in general seem to be more rough on China than they are against Russia, so I am not sure how they would react on the situation possibly going on in Taiwan and the political and military pressure there. The oversimplified version goes like this. Republicans don’t want to support the proxy war against Russia in Ukraine. Republicans think America is giving NATO & other world organizations (WEF) too much money and influence. Democrats think the opposite in both cases. This aside from the differences in social issues. In all cases, Russia would align more with a Republican run USA. This doesn’t mean they are in cahoots though. It mostly means they don’t want to spend money they don’t have or live under a one world government. I would need the not-oversimplified version of this, because saying that keeping the US influence and alliances is too expensive if not really a argument and it is not necessarily true. The US needs that influence to keep their home economy running and to be honest, the home security standing a chance against all short of threats. Not in cahoots... I do not have proof, but it is white, comes in a bottle and smells of milk. |
|
|
|
IMO even without the US Europe would be able to protect itself from Russia with ease and it's not like the US would sit this one out if Russia attacked. They are helping Ukraine and they would help if it was Finland or some other country. They'd use this opportunity to weaken Russia.
Lets face the numbers though. The EU without any help from the US has nuclear strike capabilities that Ukraine does nowt, so Ukraine was an easy target for Russia, but EU countries are not. Furthermore, combined forces of the EU have both more modern ground and air forces than Russia, even if Russia had full support of Belarus, which it won't have because the citizens of Belarus do not support this war and would be against any aggression towards the EU, unlike Russians who largely support the war.
In case of a RF-EU conflict Putin would be on his own, with maybe North Korea at his side. China would not jeopardize its good relations with so many countries, so it would not help and the only way Russia could have a chance against the EU or NATO is with full support from China, or if it used its nukes because that's the only thing Russia has more than the EU.
I agree. The point is that Trump is saying "you have to pay into NATO" but then the US has the strongest political hold on NATO so US would naturally be leading on NATO decisions. It seems to me that by spending 2%, Europe would be able to deploy a sufficiently dissuasive force and power projection ability. Trump is trying to extort money from Europe for his own US weapons production, and frankly he is not a trustable ally, so perhaps that money is better spent putting "Europe First". |
|
|
|
The US by means of Trump is considering not supporting Europe - even, in Trumps words, encouraging Ruzzia to do "all they can" to Europe. Given this situation, Europe should consider becoming militarily independent from the US. There is no reason to keep the US bases in Europe nor to allow their forces to be stationed in Europe. I think that Europe will have to effectively spend that money in weapons and military production given the situation we are observing in Ukraine, but there is no reason why that should be spent buying US weapons. Republicans will put "America First" meaning US first, so EU should think about Europe first policies in defence. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/feb/11/donald-trump-says-he-would-encourage-russia-to-attack-nato-countries-who-dont-pay-billsDonald Trump has said he would “encourage” Russia to attack any of the US’s Nato allies whom he considers to have not met their financial obligations.
The Joe Biden White House immediately rebuked the former president’s comments, saying in a statement: “Encouraging invasions of our closest allies by murderous regimes is appalling and unhinged – and it endangers American national security, global stability, and our economy at home.”
Jens Stoltenberg in Washington DC, Nato chief says Trump remarks may put US and EU lives at risk. Jens Stoltenberg, Nato’s secretary-general, also lambasted Trump’s comments. “Nato remains ready and able to defend all allies,” Stoltenberg said in a statement.
“Any suggestion that allies will not defend each other undermines all of our security, including that of the US, and puts American and European soldiers at increased risk. I expect that regardless of who wins the presidential election the US will remain a strong and committed Nato ally.” This is like "paying from protection" from Trumps narrow view of the world. |
|
|
|
~
Imagine how this interview is going to look in the history books...
This whole situation with Carlson seems kinda sketchy if you ask me. I mean, here weve got this presidential race going on, plus the Republicans are trying to block aid to Ukraine and then Carlson goes and interviews Putin out of the blue? Come on. Putin seemed pretty smug about the whole thing. He basically told Carlson flat out that if the US stops sending weapons to Ukraine, the war would be over "in a few weeks". Not exactly subtle. Clearly Putin sees a guy like Carlson as useful idiot to spread his message. And Carlson will get a good financial benefit from the network from all this... So, win-win! It is common to find useful idiots everywhere, there is always someone willing to take the coin and to the job. However is far less common to see how the useful idiot is called "useful idiot" right in the useful idiots face. As usual, among all the lies, Putin sometimes has a element of truth in what he says: Tucker is effective not a real journalist. He was ejected from Fox because he is simply not a journalist, but rather a cheap wannabe propagandist. |
|
|
|
[...]
America has a thousand ways that the government protects the rights of the people. Trump doesn't want to lose this, for his own personal gain. But this means that he has to uphold it for all Americans.
[...]
But what about Trump saying he'll let China take Taiwan if they want to? Maybe this is "America first" in some narrow way, but that seems like it would be pretty bad for us in the long run. That is pretty much what part of the ideology of America first is about, first taking care of the issues of the people of the United States and then (perhaps) take care of the issues and life of those who are abroad. In the mind of many Republicans it does not make sense for them to spend billions of dollars in the defense of Ukraine or Taiwan while there is a homelessness crisis and veterans in the streets on their own country. Though, you must be aware that, even if the Republican party was handed all that money back for them to build houses for the homeless, they would never do that, if it sounds like socialism they won't do it. They would instead give that money to some contractor for it to build the houses and them sell them at the full market price. Those are the views of the whole capitalist system in the United States, and MAGA will only defend Israel because to them it makes sense to do so, but Ukraine and Taiwan do not. I think we are so forgetting the basics here and not getting well some elemental facts - the economy of the US is built on their ability to get things their way at a global scale. America (US) never stopped putting America first. The difference is how Trump understands (or rather does not understand) what it means to put US first.1) I t is a fallacy to say that people "live in the streets" in the US because the money is spent elsewhere. People are living in the streets because the US has a system that does not provide social safety nets, it is do or die. 2) Loosing face and trustworthiness at international level will cause the US economy to worsen. The US is a global power - to a point THE global power. The level of progress, autonomy, democracy (for now) and lifestyle in the US is not because of their internal markets and resources (not only), it is because of the ability to defend their interests at a global scale and have multinational companies that are accepted elsewhere by charm or threat equally. 3) The weapons sent to Ukraine are produced mostly in the US. The weapon goes to Ukraine, the jobs stay at home. 4) The US does have enemies, competitors, and allies. You want less enemies, the right allies and keep competitors weak.Thus, there are states that are hostile to US and there are states who can eat a chunk of the living standards of the US citizens and there are some others, usually democracies, that are willing to collaborate towards common goals. If you get that wrong, the hostiles will keep on attacking your ships in the Red Sea, China will eat up your share of the global market for high-value services and Europe will decide that they no longer need to have US bases, nor give any preferential treatment to US companies.. - For example, Taiwan as of now is critical for the semiconductor industry. Let it be in Chinese hands and you have lost a critical supply in hand of a competitor (who is building a huge army reaaally fast BTW). It is 101. - For example, you break NATO and Europe will no longer be collaborative (e.g. getting rid of all the FAANG +Tesla and create their own - "Europe First" style) - so you change an ally to a competitor - what a brilliant idea! - Putin needs democracies to fail. He would look like shit if Ukraine joined the EU and start becoming a well developed country. Make no mistake - Putin hates the US and the EU systems as much as the USSR did. He will undermine it, and has done it, at every occasion. e.g. US decides not to support Ukraine (while dismantling NATO) and Ruzzia will be thinking Letonia, Findland, Poland... OOhhh unless you really believe that Putin would not try to go for the next one (LOL x 10). Is that a problem to US? Yes, Ruzzia is a competitor to the US in several markets and in world influence. Let Ruzzia grown and again, they will eat a chunk of your living standards. So now, what are the benefits of letting Ruzzia take Ukraine, China take Taiwan and break the NATO alliance? Plus breaking the Asia-Paicific trade zone and many other "brilliant moves"? A short term protectionist boost perhaps? Who thinks that the US will be better of long term changing allies into competitors? If I were Xi Jingpin or Putin trying to put an agent into the presidency of the US I would choose, in essence, Trump. My guess is that they actually have. BTW, Republicans defend Israel because it makes sense? May I get you view on why it makes sense? In fact, I am interested to understand what is the Republican global picture of where the US should be in 5 to 10 years, because what I see for now is not "US first". |
|
|
|
You seem to agree with Putin that Ukraine is properly party of Russia (thus justifying Russia's attack on Ukraine).
So would you agree with China as well with respect to Taiwan?
The situation is different between China and Taiwan. China isn't trying to protect Taiwanese from a warmongering Taiwan government as Putin was protecting Ukrainians from a warmongering Ukraine government. But Trump recently implied that he agreed with the CPC that Taiwan was part of China, and that the US should not intervene should China attack Taiwan, essentially green-lighting the invasion should he win in November. Do you agree with that? Trump accepts money where ever he can find it. Ruzzia money is good, Chinese money is equally good. All he needs is to use the US, make sure that all the other countries do well while the US goes into a full-blown protectionism that finally end with the dollar down the drain for lack of competitivity and collect all the bribes in the Caymans & Barbados accounts. It is the perfect plan and it is working well with some of the most obfuscated (e.g. dumBAss). Totally backwards. But of course, it's you. Never heard of the American dream? Didn't hear of MAGA either? You simply can't take it when somebody cuts you off, right? Why don't you get to work and change your country to have an American-like dream, rather than trying to leach off America? Oh, yes. Leaching off others is built right into your mindset. We almost forgot that... because we are free, and you aren't. So, we have an excuse for forgetting.
~
I have been in both Abilene, TX an New York. I can assure you that they will not understand each other - not because of the language, but because Texans simply do not bother to understand others.
When you are honest and right - like Texans are - you don't need to play around with listening to others. That's why Biden is trying to break down Texas with border issues. Texas is right, and Biden knows it. And being right means that they won't give in to him. Once again you are parroting stuff you know nothing about. Firstly, in any case Ruzzian would be a dialect of Ukrainian. The original Ruzzians come from Kyiv dumBAss, but your University of Tik-Tok did not have that class did it?
Thank you. One of the best pieces of knowledge you have enlightened us with, yet. Since Kiev is Russian, what is Ukraine messing with Russia for? Time to get the US and the EU out of the affairs of Russia, so that Ukraine can be reunited with all of Russia.
~
Standard Pollacks. Lost it to Hitler, and now showing us why.  Learn to read you silly dumBAss or simply bother to check the links: the original Ruzzians are "The Russ of Kyiv", 13th century. Just try not to put words in my text I have not written (you honest follower of the cheerleader's legs of the Wylie Bulldogs).  If you have gone to this school or any other in Abilene, I perfectly understand you lack of skills. Being honest and straightforward yes, I recon they are quite straightforward - honesty not so much - the problem is that bit in which you say "they are right". They think they are right and anything you say is then based on that basic assumption of themselves being always right by "the grace of god" (AKA your imaginary friend in cases like that). |
|
|
|
You seem to agree with Putin that Ukraine is properly party of Russia (thus justifying Russia's attack on Ukraine).
So would you agree with China as well with respect to Taiwan?
The situation is different between China and Taiwan. China isn't trying to protect Taiwanese from a warmongering Taiwan government as Putin was protecting Ukrainians from a warmongering Ukraine government. But Trump recently implied that he agreed with the CPC that Taiwan was part of China, and that the US should not intervene should China attack Taiwan, essentially green-lighting the invasion should he win in November. Do you agree with that? Trump accepts money where ever he can find it. Ruzzia money is good, Chinese money is equally good. All he needs is to use the US, make sure that all the other countries do well while the US goes into a full-blown protectionism that finally end with the dollar down the drain for lack of competitivity and collect all the bribes in the Caymans & Barbados accounts. It is the perfect plan and it is working well with some of the most obfuscated (e.g. dumBAss). Putin didn't say much of this directly. But he would have liked to wake the American people up. So, he is doing it through the formation of BRICS, a system that will bring down our enemy, the banking system. Even Trump might not understand it... the criminality of the US and EU banking systems.
Just out of curiosity, when China says that Taiwan is part of China--presumably justifying a forthcoming invasion of that country by them--do you agree with them too? You are among those who I don't seem to agree with. You used the word 'too' in your question, but you didn't explain what you are referring to when using it. You seem to agree with Putin that Ukraine is properly party of Russia (thus justifying Russia's attack on Ukraine). So would you agree with China as well with respect to Taiwan? Okay, think about this. We knew it all along, but we just didn't have any incentive to focus on it before. If a guy from New York City talks to a guy from Abilene, Texas, they both understand each other [...] Ukrainian is essentially a dialect of Russian. Even though there are several different languages spoken in Ukraine, the real Slavic language of Ukraine is simply a dialect of Russian. But you could say that Russian is a dialect of Ukrainian. [...] He was always going to cite the (very real) broken promises Western diplomats made about NATO's Eastward expansion. I have been in both Abilene, TX an New York. I can assure you that they will not understand each other - not because of the language, but because Texans simply do not bother to understand others. Once again you are parroting stuff you know nothing about. Firstly, in any case Ruzzian would be a dialect of Ukrainian. The original Ruzzians come from Kyiv dumBAss, but your University of Tik-Tok did not have that class did it?
But the fact is that none of these are actually mutually intelligible nor dialects because they diverged several hundred years ago. https://www.mondly.com/blog/ukrainian-russian-similar/ Its origins can be traced back to the Old East Slavic language used in Kievan Rus between the 10th and the 13th century. After the fall of the Kievan Rus, the language developed into what was called the Ruthenian language. Before making a fool of yourself, do some research on what is a dialect, what is a language and try to not pretending to know shit dumBAss. A request to join NATO (adhesion) is a decision of the country applying. NATO as suchcannot promise that it won't "expand". Can you provide evidence of anyone promising that to Putin? |
|
|
|
[...]
One of the most important points quietly coming out of this interview is (read between the lines), Trump is right on. We are being played by the wealthy banker and bank owner cabal. The West banking system is thieving from us all.
[...]
Oh, it wasn't very quiet. In fact it was the central theme of the interview. Putin's objective for this interview is to signal to the 40% of Americans who already want to vote for Trump that he's on their side, and against the other side. Trump is surely the first major presidential candidate in the history of the USA who will have benefitted from the endorsement of one of our country's primary enemies. Strange times indeed... Went right over your head, didn't it. Of course, you weren't around when Russia was our ally in WW2 [...] Ruzzia has never been anyone's ally dumBAss. They play their own game and were very happy to receive weapons and supplies under the lend and lease during WWII, but Stalin an his successors have always had very clear in their minds that the capitalist US was the biggest threat to their future power because it shows how a different world is possible and better. Putin is well know to lie - e.g. "I am not going to invade Ukraine" and even to the point of not recognising Ruzzia is at war. |
|
|
|
Do the site is honest about their promise of self exclusion or this is just a marketing strategy because like a store owner ,
why do you let your customer be banned in your store when you can just let them Buy and buy whatever they wanted?
same principle in gambling addiction , those addict will do anything just to gamble and even if they locked their account for
sure they will look for another way and site to gamble so why not let them continue their gambling?
they cant allow them to continue because there's always a penalty for any violation in gambling, we cannot continue doing the wrong thing and expect them to overlook, the way most of these gamblers begin to have issues with them is when they are not ready to learn and know more about the gambling platform even right before they started to use them as their desired choice, so many cant afford to read their terms and conditions and yet they complain of having ban. Getting banned would really be just because of these possible reasons. 1. Multi-account 2. Abuse bonuses 3. VPN 4. Intentional self exclude feature So if you are someone whose really that have the plans on stopping gambling with those kind of self exclusion thing then its not something that could be seen or available for most platforms but somewhat you could really be able to request it out if possible.The main issue on here is the addiction deep inside you on which there's no way that you could really be able to get rid with it because we know that no matter how you do avoid but still that addiction is still there then these kind of acts are useless. I am not sure many sites use the self-exclude and those who do it, it may not be to full effect since you can lie your way in if you are really determined to do so. I guess self-exclusion in an absolute sense is just not really possible nowadays for most regions of the world. VPNs are difficult to detect, papers can be forged and banks may not be cooperative. |
|
|
|
Actually i can't deny that the main attention of gambling nowadays often revolves around the hope of a big win rather than the enjoyment of the game. probably 95% of players are entering by the hope of making $$ rather than just having fun. I really agree with you, after all, there can not be any enjoyment by losing your dollars unless you have an abundance of it. For most, whether you come to a casino for fun or catching a huge jackpot actually winning is the ultimate peace of soul in gambling life.
Then those people are doing it wrong, a person should only gamble if they have money to spare, meaning that even if they were to lose all the money they deposited at their favorite casino, that loss will not represent any kind of obstacle for them on the future, if a person cannot really afford to do this and instead they are looking to make gambling a source of income, it is almost a foregone conclusion that they will fail and lose whatever money they planned to multiply. It is a problem that would self-solve as people seeking profit would naturally drift away from mere chance games that are certainly make them loose in the long term by design, while they would gather around games that require skill such as poker or black jack or even dice to a point. Even in this case, they are likely to end up loosing as they are very competitive. |
|
|
|
I’m very interested to see this interview and plan on watching it tomorrow night. I think it’s important to hear the other side of the story and I applaud Tucker for bringing that to us. I understand half the people watching will say it’s all propaganda, but just maybe it will make some sort of a difference that can help lead to peace.
If you have not heard the "other side of the story" AKA as Putin's bag of shit, is because you did not want to hear it. This is 2 hours of political propaganda and my only takeaway from it is that it is becoming more clear where the financing to MAGA friendly media comes from. Is just braindead rhetoric for the weaklings of MAGA. "We are not your enemy", "we do not seek conflict"... it just collides head on with the last 20 years of Ruzzia's doing. Putin may be a very authoritarian person but he did not climb up to power by being stupid or lacking in calculations about politics and economics. #
...
Nor by being honest. |
|
|
|
Edited to add: 12/feb it seems that a refinery near Moscow caught fire today. Or has it been two!? Zelensky has replaced Valerii Zaluzhnyi with Syrskyi. Let's see which changes in strategy this brings, within the limited options given the indecision of US and the issues with Hungary in the EU, although 50 billion in funding for 4 years has been finally unblocked. Zaluz was keen on enhancing the technology role and at this point there were probably issues around what is happening in Avdiivka.
Talks about it were coming for few recent weeks and it only looked only matter of time. Personally, I think it's not right decision, but who I'm to judge them? Still, it leaves some bad taste in mouth. It looks that main reason why Zaluzhnyi was fired was not successful counteroffensive. Zelensky wants to see progress and seems that no matter what price of it will be, that's my observation. Syrskyi, not really sure about him, I read mixed opinions on him, some even calling him the butcher. On the other hand he was responsible for defense of Kyiv and successful Kharkiv counteroffensive. BTW, interesting detail that he was born in Russia and graduated from Moscow Higher Military Command School. That's probably one of rare cases when person can be called as good Russian. Fresh Russian joke: Gerasimov: give up, you won’t win!
Syrsky: Russians don’t give up!  I actually find the joke funny, because it has plenty of elements of truth. Syrsky did study in USSR times in the best Soviet military institution at Moscow with many of today's Ruzzian generals which is a great asset (know your enemy - Tsun Tzu's Art of War). At the same time, he needs to find the way to change the game. However, it must be said that the financial game has changed since Ukraine has started to target oil & gas refineries and plants. By the time you post again bragging about how "Avdiivka has been gloriously taken", someone out there will value each of those square meters of ruins that Ruzzia is buying at Manhattan prices. Shall we agree on 20,000 per square meter or would you like to discuss  Zelensky has replaced Valerii Zaluzhnyi with Syrskyi. Let's see which changes in strategy this brings, within the limited options given the indecision of US and the issues with Hungary in the EU, although 50 billion in funding for 4 years has been finally unblocked. Zaluz was keen on enhancing the technology role and at this point there were probably issues around what is happening in Avdiivka.
Talks about it were coming for few recent weeks and it only looked only matter of time. Personally, I think it's not right decision, but who I'm to judge them? Still, it leaves some bad taste in mouth. It looks that main reason why Zaluzhnyi was fired was not successful counteroffensive. Zelensky wants to see progress and seems that no matter what price of it will be, that's my observation. Syrskyi, not really sure about him, I read mixed opinions on him, some even calling him the butcher. On the other hand he was responsible for defense of Kyiv and successful Kharkiv counteroffensive. BTW, interesting detail that he was born in Russia and graduated from Moscow Higher Military Command School. That's probably one of rare cases when person can be called as good Russian. Many of the USSR generals, even the ones who fought the III Reich, were Ukrainian born or had Ukrainian ancestry. I hope Syrsky brings some new ideas, but above it I hope he is given the means to succeed by Europe and US - succeed to a degree at least. |
|
|
|
Only responsible gamblers will realize the best time to stop gambling and not everyone can be a responsible gambler and have enough self-patience to stop when the time is right which is why most gamblers lose everything even after being ahead of the house at one point during their gambling session.
Yes, it is because responsible gamblers have very wise thoughts in determining things so that when they gamble they can always control themselves because the commitment they have is very big so it is not surprising that gamblers who have self-control are responsible gamblers, but some most gamblers have difficulty making efforts to become responsible gamblers because they hope to win and don't know when is the right time to stop gambling. Slots are the most played games in the world of online gambling, they might be also in the offline gambling sphere but I'm not sure about that. The biggest reason for this is that slot machines often have the possibility to provide high multipliers when compared to other games in a casino, which is what attracts the gamblers most of the times because they hope they might hit a big multiplier.
One of the right reasons for me why slot games are more popular is not because they often give big multipliers but all casino games can give big multipliers, it's just that the difference is in the graphics and the different types of slots make us very curious and very comfortable when betting on the game slots. In the past, before slot games became more popular, there was a crash game which was often played by many people and there was also a plinko game which often gave big multipliers. This is just about the graphic appearance being different in each slot game, not because it provides big multipliers. Machines and slots click better on some people for whatever reason, so I think it is not about the multiplier but more about getting that feeling. It would be impossible to get people playing for hours on a slot machine just because they are expecting a multiplier on that precise day or something like that. So games have to be about what you enjoy, there is no rational decision other than stop when no longer having fun. |
|
|
|
Lol. Ask a mathematician who specializes in statistics applied to games and you will see how he tells you that luck does not exist. What we call luck is a shorthand for variance, or statistical deviation of average outcomes. - How lucky do you think you are from 1 to 10?
It does not make sense. If you mean on a given day, it may be 1 or it may be 10, but in the long run, the larger the sample, the more towards the average the results tend. - Does your sense of luck in regular life correlate with your luck in gambling?
Any supposed correlation in this sense is the result of pure imagination. - Do you believe that some special things or actions can increase your luck?
Of course not. Luck is by default something you cannot control. If there is something you can do about it then you are in the land of the partially or fully controllable and then you can either do all required to get things to where you want them to be or you can at least do something to achieve the result but still there is a chance it won't happen. So I do not think I have lucky days nor the like. |
|
|
|
|
Zelensky has replaced Valerii Zaluzhnyi with Syrskyi. Let's see which changes in strategy this brings, within the limited options given the indecision of US and the issues with Hungary in the EU, although 50 billion in funding for 4 years has been finally unblocked. Zaluz was keen on enhancing the technology role and at this point there were probably issues around what is happening in Avdiivka.
|
|
|
|
C'mon, this dude literally said that Ukraine is aggressor who invading territory of Russia, it seems that lives in some kind of alternative reality.
Russians were oppressed in parts of Ukraine, similar to Albanians on Kosovo been oppressed by Serbia. So, similar to Albanians, Russians in parts of Ukraine declared independence. USA, instead bombing Ukraine like they bombed Serbia, decided to arm Ukraine so they could oppress Russians more...is that double standard or what? Official line propaganda again. Ruzzians and Ukranians were living peacefully, with many people speaking both languages. Putin used the usual strategy of creating a problem by financing protests and creating a situation of violence. Then sent in two army corps to invade parts of Ukraine under the excuse that there were people "oppressed". It goes like this: - You have a big problem because you do not know what time is it. - Oh, really, I had not noticed anything - Just a second, let me break your watch.... now... you have a big problem, because you do not know what time is it. If burning people alive because they protested peacefully is your idea of " living peacefully" then OK This look like peaceful guy? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHWHqj8g7BkPoroshenko was an advocate of joining the EU and, while someone did a fantastic job of removing all context of this speech, he is clearly speaking about economy. By joining the EU and getting investment, jobs, social rights, pensions,... that is how you win over Ruzzia - and that is what Putin cannot afford of course. And that is how you really win the war, by creating a future for Ukrainians. It looks to me that this proves that Ruzzia was financing of groups to de-stabilise the region resulting in clashes and what is in fact a proxy war from Ruzzia. BTW, this was after Ruzzia invaded Crimea. Yes, when people use violence they may get violence in return - I am sure you know about it. I would not expect you to tell all sides of this story anyway, whoever brain-washed you did a great job. |
|
|
|
I don`t sure that it is so. At least it can be correct just for the part of gamblers. I can say about myself but i think that lots of gamblers thinks the same. I prefer to use one casino with one UI, or severa; casino that look the same. It was a situation when i had to try new casino with the unusual(for me) UI and it was awful experience - i missed 2 matches trying to bet.
Of course someone wants new games, new experience, but the others wants to get the same UI in all casinos - to be able to choose it without some discomfort.
Casinos play it safe because they know that the wants of their customers can be contradictory, because on one hand we want a casino to be and offer a completely different experience than what you can get in other casinos. But at the same time we want to have a familiarity with the layout, games and the different bets offered there as if we had gambled at that casino for years, and it is obvious that such wants cannot be satisfied by a single casino, so they prefer to go with the latter option as it is the one that makes the most financial sense to them. Anyway we have an opportunity to choose the casino we need. We can choose the casino with the UI we like, or test something new. Also, even the casino we gamble in can change their UI time by time and we have to research it. Sometimes it makes the UI better, but sometimes we get problems with it. I`m old enough to learn new UI often and if casino i like will change if rather often - i`ll leave it casino. But i repeat - it is good that we can choose different casinos with different UIs Well, as far as I'm concerned, you're absolutely right, the casino interface is something that can be very decisive, I personally will always look for the best for entertainment, we are consumers, because we like what we see, we can't do anything nothing to do less, we are accustomed to doing any type of thing to be able to generate whatever it is, what I say and I go out we can see that there are many casinos, some of them are very new, but you have to be very careful when to choose the casino to play, to make a deposit, I have said it several times but before entering a casino, we should moreover comply with the KYC requirements, of course before all this do the relevant research to see what Such are the casinos, and as with confidence, I think that this is the first thing we should do, or is there something else, if we do not do this there is no way that things can be very secure, it is done so that things are cuho better. Sometimes we get overwhelmed by a lot of casinos and those casinos make us not know which ones to go for, but in my personal experience I have always said something, it is better to go for the oldest casinos because the oldest casinos are the ones who make the difference. difference, they are casinos that are not going to pose any type of problems when it comes to withdrawing, they are casinos that have gone through many situations, they have more experience in many things, and this makes things better when it comes to solving any problem , they are not going to start fighting with the lcinetes just because the clients do it that way, they have been knowing for years when they are people who want to do troll things, the coifnaizay and reputation that they have does not happen from one day to the next, these things are what We must see and not entertain ourselves in the new cases because sometimes they do not offer us security. Overwhelmed by the number of them, underwhelmed by the quality of most, and sadly not much inspired by the variety an innovation. This business needs to make a push to create something new if they aim to attract new players instead of fighting to death for the existing ones - who have such a wide offer that can be jumping from one another and barely notice the difference. |
|
|
|
|
There are no free meals anywhere. A faucet usually changes your time and effort for a minimal amount of crypto in return. They made sense in the past when the price was very low and made sense to accumulate this way, but nowadays that is gone really - it does not matter if it is a casino or anything else - your time is more valuable that a few sats.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
