Russian Invasion of Ukraine[In Progress]

[DaRude]

...

I see that you're also seeing "Kremlin copypasta" everywhere. Care to point where this "Kremlin copypasta" is? Is "Kremlin copypasta" with you in your room right now? Are the western news articles themselves now "Kremlin copypasta"? And if it's not, then somehow me citing them is what's making it propaganda in your head? Or we're down to the simpletron level with the following logic: IF negative coverage of Ukraine THEN yell Kremlin propaganda!

And this is a clear example of how someone who does not have an argument throws a smoke screen in the shape of a wall of text, an image that is unrelated to the topic and ends with this marvellous question "what is Kremlin copypasta".

Well, it is exactly what you do: give veracity to unverifiable information, use "information" coming from the regime loud-speaking trolls and attacking anyone who calls your bluff.

IF  my lack of credibility is exposed THEN
  Walltextit
  Use bold letters
  Throw unrelated pictures in
  Go into rant
ELSE
  Go to Kremlin and "copypasta" again
EN IF

Claims "veracity to unverifiable information...use "information" coming from the regime loud-speaking trolls" yet with plethora of my posts can't cite a single example. Credibility is "exposed" only when you get called out and cannot cite your claims, and if you read up i'm not the one who hasn't provided a valid sources for my claims, not my problem if you're not liking them. All Russian media is propaganda and cannot be cited, all Chinese media is propaganda and cannot be cited, all FOX news is propaganda and cannot be cited, all ultra right sources are propaganda and cannot be cited, all ultra left sources are propaganda and cannot be cited, all other western media is propaganda but only when it speaks negative of Ukraine. Seems legit.

Are you so confused that you believe registration date on this forum somehow indicates your true age?

You are the one who's confused and can't even calculate my age.
We are on the internet, deal with it.

Ok, now we're getting somewhere. So we've established that you feel western media is now pushing Kremlin lies without addressing them, and you don't believe that people with critical thinking need to hear both sides to make up their minds.

Nope, obviously you are not capable to understand my post.  
I've described it above that the issue is "false balancing", where two opinions are cited while the one is true or close to the truth (Ukraine) and the other one is a straight out lie (Russia) but who am I to explain this to a Kremlin troll like you, whose arguments are based on repeating Kremlin propaganda every day and false balancing.  

Do you suggest that we all should only listen to Zelenskyy as the source of ultimate truth? Are there any articles that cover Ukraine negatively that you feel is just, or all negative coverage is Kremlins propaganda by definition to you? And on this specific topic, care to show at least one exact example from my many sources where they cite Kremlin lies? Or will you just post the same meme for the 20th time, feeling that it somehow helps your argument in some form?

You are obviously too dumb to research it yourself. Here is one case:
https://www.berliner-zeitung.de/news/putin-droht-bei-einem-angriff-setzt-russland-atomwaffen-ein-li.295226

The head of the Kremlin declared on television: "If we are attacked, we will fight back." According to Kremlin leader Vladimir Putin, Russia will use nuclear weapons only in response to an attack. "We consider weapons of mass destruction, nuclear weapons, as a means of defense," he said at a televised meeting of the Kremlin's Human Rights Council on Wednesday. Russia's strategy is based on a policy of "so-called retaliation". "If we are attacked, we fight back," he added. In the past, the Kremlin chief had announced that Russian territory would be defended by all military means. Now, with a view to the confrontation with the West as a result of the Ukraine conflict, he emphasized that "the danger of nuclear war is growing".

And that's it, article's end.
Poor Pootin, is playing his strawman and victim card again, "evil West want's to attack friendly Russia".  

Russia isn't "threatened" in any way.
The west won't start a nuclear war.
Russia is the one who's repeatedly threatening to use a nuclear bomb in Ukraine and is already bombing Ukraine deliberately.
I'm not saying Berliner Zeitung launched this low quality BS intentionally to spread Putin's lies but it's just very fortunate for Putin to get his message out there.  
But useful tools, like you, will still find an excuse for Putler's propaganda and continue to spread it willfully.

Let's go back to school again and i'll try to build a basic logic chain for you to understand. Let's try to objectify things so you're not as confused.

When reading your comments, one can get the impression that you are the one who's in dire need of some education.
Don't you have any education in your cell?

I believe it's unlikely that A happens. is a good answer to the question of What do you think are the chances of A happening. But is not an answer to the question of Will you do X if A happens. It's like me asking If it rains, will you agree that the weather forecast was correct and you saying I believe it'll be sunny. And you know who else enjoyed rain? Hitler! and pretending if that somehow answers the asked question. Shall we actually try answering the third time without you going on a tirade against evil AfD? But if you're unwilling/unable to answer that and enjoy rambling about AfD, at least opine on this. Considering AfD support jumped from 16% to 21% in less than a year, how high do you expect them to get, and do you expect them to beat CDU/CSU? Pretty simple question no? Can be answered with just one line like this: I think AfD won't get above X% and they will/will not beat CDU/CSU.

How many % our radical far-right AfD will get can't be answered because I'm not able to look into the future.  
The previous radical far-right organization achieved 43.91% and we all know how it ended...  


In addition, I'm not surprised from someone who's behind bars and is unable to avoid pyramid quotes...  
Keep pushing your Kremlin propaganda.

I asked how old you are and you wasted two posts pointing to your forum registration date only to ultimately claim that your age is how long you've been registered on this forum. 

"false balancing", where two opinions are cited while the one is true or close to the truth (Ukraine) and the other one is a straight out lie (Russia)
I've cited many sources which claim Ukrainian involvement in NS explosion, now can you stop wasting time and PLEASE cite at least one recent source which claims the true or close to the truth (Ukrainian) version that Russia is responsible for Nord Stream sabotage?
 

I asked for an example from my citations where they cite Kremlin lies, you proceed to call me "too dumb" and post a new resource with a totally different story which I never cited or even talked about. 

I asked if you'd concede UA involvement in the sabotage of NS if Germany puts a warrant out on Ukrainians involved, you wasted two posts speculating on probability of AfD getting into power, when i finally asked you to speculate on what % AfD will get up to, you finally say that you're not able to look into the future

You yourself run an ad campaign, but you keep posting a meme about getting money for posts   

[DaRude]

Now to something different. Looks like we're talking about spring offensive again, they should just stop specifying the year

Ukraine’s Slog Prompts Focus on Next Year’s Fight
...
But military strategists and policy makers across the West are already starting to think about next year’s spring offensive. The shift reflects a deepening appreciation that, barring a major breakthrough, Ukraine’s fight to eject Russia’s invasion forces is likely to take a long time.
...
But an initial attempt to use newly supplied Western tanks and armored vehicles to punch through fortified Russian lines stalled.
...
But military leaders and policy makers already are grappling with the question of what can be achieved in the next few months and how to prepare for a protracted conflict.

A nagging concern in Kyiv and Western capitals is that politicians and voters may come to see the war as a quagmire and sour on supporting Ukraine. Even if Kyiv’s Western backers stay resolute, clocks are ticking as Ukrainian forces burn through munitions, manpower and stamina for a grueling fight.

All military campaigns end at some point—even in wars that grind on for years—at what tacticians call a culmination, or the point when advancing forces can go no further due to success, impediments or lack of supplies.
...
“I do think there’s a realization in the administration that Ukraine’s not going to be regaining all its territory any time soon,” Daalder said. [former President Barack Obama’s ambassador to NATO]
...
U.S. and other Western officials have hoped that a significant Ukrainian breakthrough could bruise Russian forces enough to bring President Vladimir Putin to a negotiating table as soon as this winter for serious talks about some kind of settlement. Chances of that happening now appear slim, diplomats say.
Instead, Russia is reinforcing its physical defenses in Ukraine, adding more soldiers and ramping up production of ammunition and weaponry. The West is also cranking up military industries, raising the prospect of a protracted war of attrition.
...
History shows otherwise, with wars averaging from three to seven years with multiple campaign seasons, they say.
“This war could look like the Korean War, with rapid movement on the front line in the early months and then relative stasis—but it takes years for both sides to realize that,” said Dmitry Gorenburg, a Russia expert at the Center for Naval Analyses, a think tank linked to the Pentagon.
...
Rain and snow might slow operations of heavy equipment such as tanks, but Ukrainian forces have proven most effective so far when operating in small units, often with lighter equipment.
...
Ukraine’s initial attempts to use European tanks and U.S. troop carriers in the offensive didn’t fare well, but by next spring Kyiv will have both more Western equipment and more skilled operators of the gear.
...
By the middle of next year, Ukraine might also be flying U.S.-made F-16 jet fighters
...
Russia has antiaircraft systems that might hit the planes, raising concerns in Washington that Ukrainian fighters would just get shot down. Equipping them with munitions such as the Joint Standoff Weapon and Paveway precision-guided bombs could allow F-16s to keep a safer distance from the front.
...
The West might also eventually provide more advanced equipment, like sophisticated drones capable of air attacks. Early this year U.S. weapons maker General Atomics offered Ukraine two of its Reaper MQ-9 drones for one dollar
...
Working against Ukraine, in addition to weather, are potentially dwindling supplies of Western munitions and wear on equipment already donated.
...
Russia also continues to reinforce its defenses in Ukraine, including by putting new land mines in some places Ukrainian troops have cleared them.
Strategists looking to next year and beyond hope that over time—even as Russia reinforces impediments to Ukrainian assaults—Ukrainian troops can acquire skills and experience that allow them to outmaneuver and outsmart Russian forces.

How politicians will view the war next year remains a widespread concern, especially because of the U.S. presidential election next November. Former President Donald Trump, the Republican front-runner, has suggested he would curtail support to Ukraine.
...
Concern that such support might fade if Trump were to regain the White House increases pressure on Ukraine and its supporters to deliver significant gains in the next campaign season if they aren’t possible this year.

So now Ukrainians are more effective without tanks   so much for freeing the leopard and abrams . Experiment have failed (which suddenly was always obvious to everyone), but despite Russians having even more time to prepare, double up their defense lines and mine fields, we're willing to try again but this time we'll give you F16s (maybe) and perhaps some drones (like Bayraktars you had) (also maybe), which we know will get shot down so perhaps they'll just lob missiles from far away, that will surely be a game changer next year, and potential new president will stop this all, so yeah good luck but in any case you just get more manpower ready and hope. Who wouldn't want to sign up for this  

[suchmoon]

Let me attempt to summarize this. I asked you a question, you reply that you feel that "your sentences doesn't make then something to be answered" and proceed to compare it with '"Firehose" of loaded questions used to be prominent in Soviet propaganda'. How many questions exactly have i asked you that you feel that there's a "firehose" of them? Then i say it's an excuse to not engage in a conversation and just shitpost. And you reply with "another staple of Soviet/Putin propaganda - projection." I rebut with show me where i don't answer your question/not engaging in a conversation. You follow that with Straw man ... I don't care enough about your delusions to have any questions for you.

Just for shits and giggles I opened the last page of your post history and searched for a question mark ("?"). 180 results. Granted this includes quotes and you tend to ladder-quote a lot, but still, it's an excessive number. For example 1miau and paxmao have 50 each, many of which come from quoting you. I hope that settles your question about questions. People who have something to say (like actual opinions or facts) don't have to wrap it into this "I'm just a bystander asking a question" nonsense. Thus your statement about not engaging in a conversation and just shitposting is a projection. You do this excessively and you accuse others of it.

[1miau]

In addition, I'm not surprised from someone who's behind bars and is unable to avoid pyramid quotes...  
Keep pushing your Kremlin propaganda.

I asked how old you are and you wasted two posts pointing to your forum registration date only to ultimately claim that your age is how long you've been registered on this forum.  

Well, it really seems to be wasted time to explain that to you because you are not able to understandt it.  
Not my issue, deal with it.
You might be older but you have earned far less Merit and contributed far less valuable content. Heck, you are an embarassment by pushing Kremlin talking points every day. Shame, shame.
Enjoy the time in your cell...

"false balancing", where two opinions are cited while the one is true or close to the truth (Ukraine) and the other one is a straight out lie (Russia)
I've cited many sources which claim Ukrainian involvement in NS explosion, now can you stop wasting time and PLEASE cite at least one recent source which claims the true or close to the truth (Ukrainian) version that Russia is responsible for Nord Stream sabotage?

LOOOOL, now you are really embarrassed, since I've delievered a source and you didn't like it because my source is exactly pointing out the issue.
Here it is again:

https://www.berliner-zeitung.de/news/putin-droht-bei-einem-angriff-setzt-russland-atomwaffen-ein-li.295226

The head of the Kremlin declared on television: "If we are attacked, we will fight back." According to Kremlin leader Vladimir Putin, Russia will use nuclear weapons only in response to an attack. "We consider weapons of mass destruction, nuclear weapons, as a means of defense," he said at a televised meeting of the Kremlin's Human Rights Council on Wednesday. Russia's strategy is based on a policy of "so-called retaliation". "If we are attacked, we fight back," he added. In the past, the Kremlin chief had announced that Russian territory would be defended by all military means. Now, with a view to the confrontation with the West as a result of the Ukraine conflict, he emphasized that "the danger of nuclear war is growing".

And that's it, article's end.
Poor Pootin, is playing his strawman and victim card again, "evil West wants to attack friendly Russia".  

Russia isn't "threatened" in any way.
The west won't start a nuclear war.
Russia is the one who's repeatedly threatening to use a nuclear bomb in Ukraine and is already bombing Ukraine deliberately.
I'm not saying Berliner Zeitung launched this low quality BS intentionally to spread Putin's lies but it's just very fortunate for Putin to get his message out there.  
But useful tools, like you, will still find an excuse for Putler's propaganda and continue to spread it willfully.

Of course, you have no arguments now and look like a washed clown...

I've cited many sources which claim Ukrainian involvement in NS explosion, now can you stop wasting time and PLEASE cite at least one recent source which claims the true or close to the truth (Ukrainian) version that Russia is responsible for Nord Stream sabotage?

Which is wrong once again and you are just looking like a fool because you can't prove that Ukraine is behind it.
It's all "if's", "looks like's", "could be's", "traces", "hints" from you for this useless pipeline, where the west couldn't care less about it because no matter if blown up or not blown up, this project is dead and there won't be any purchases of Russian gas into Germany. Only our German AfD idiots party would resume it and I expect that Germany won't vote them again after our previous adventure with a similar party.
Our "if's", "looks like's", "could be's", "traces", "hints" of the day:
*suspected* Ukrainian involvement
*traces are leading into Ukraine* (which can be everything in case Rusia has faked these traces into Ukraine with agents, cooperating undercover with Ukrainian "patriots".  
Are just too obsessed with defend war criminal Putler or are you really to dumb to understand it? Genuine question!
Maybe travel to Moscow and protest to "stop the war" there. Let's see what will happen.  

I asked for an example from my citations where they cite Kremlin lies, you proceed to call me "too dumb" and post a new resource with a totally different story which I never cited or even talked about.  

You asked and I delievered:

https://www.berliner-zeitung.de/news/putin-droht-bei-einem-angriff-setzt-russland-atomwaffen-ein-li.295226

The head of the Kremlin declared on television: "If we are attacked, we will fight back." According to Kremlin leader Vladimir Putin, Russia will use nuclear weapons only in response to an attack. "We consider weapons of mass destruction, nuclear weapons, as a means of defense," he said at a televised meeting of the Kremlin's Human Rights Council on Wednesday. Russia's strategy is based on a policy of "so-called retaliation". "If we are attacked, we fight back," he added. In the past, the Kremlin chief had announced that Russian territory would be defended by all military means. Now, with a view to the confrontation with the West as a result of the Ukraine conflict, he emphasized that "the danger of nuclear war is growing".

And that's it, article's end.
Poor Pootin, is playing his strawman and victim card again, "evil West wants to attack friendly Russia".  

Russia isn't "threatened" in any way.
The west won't start a nuclear war.
Russia is the one who's repeatedly threatening to use a nuclear bomb in Ukraine and is already bombing Ukraine deliberately.
I'm not saying Berliner Zeitung launched this low quality BS intentionally to spread Putin's lies but it's just very fortunate for Putin to get his message out there.  
But useful tools, like you, will still find an excuse for Putler's propaganda and continue to spread it willfully.

And now you are looking like a washed clown.  

I asked if you'd concede UA involvement in the sabotage of NS if Germany puts a warrant out on Ukrainians involved, you wasted two posts speculating on probability of AfD getting into power, when i finally asked you to speculate on what % AfD will get up to, you finally say that you're not able to look into the future

LOL, everyone who says otherwise that he can predict election results in 2, 4 or even 8 years is a straight out liar.
I can't predict it, no one can predict it reliably.  

You yourself run an ad campaign, but you keep posting a meme about getting money for posts    

You are really incapable to research properly. Posts in Politics and Society are not counted:

Excluded boards, (Altcoins, WO & Serious, Sig Threads, Press, Politics, Games, Micro, Off-topic, Mega Threads.)

So, I don't expect to get a reward for this and even if, it would be a neutral reward, or are you saying, that Zelensky is operating MixTum mixer?  
Maybe you can spin an anti-Ukrainian story around it: Zelensky operating Bitcoin launderer "MixTum" to obfuscate funds from NATO into drug purchases for his Nazi friends.  
Here you go:

[BADecker]

Whose side is the American President and Congress really on? It doesn't seem like it's the side of America. I'm surprised that Biden doesn't wear a black "Down With America" hat.


As Maui Burns, Biden Demands Another $24 Billion…For Ukraine!


http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2023/august/14/as-maui-burns-biden-demands-another-24-billion-for-ukraine/
I am not a big fan of Federal Government disaster relief. Too much of the time the money never gets to those who need it most, and too often Washington's armies of disaster "experts" are more interested in pushing people around than helping them.

Nevertheless, it's hard to look at recent footage of the devastation in Maui and then hear President Biden tell Congress that he needs another $24 billion for Ukraine. How can this Administration continue to justify tens of billions of dollars for this losing war that is not in our interest while the rest of the United States disintegrates?

Biden's new $24 billion request comes on top of well over $120 billion already spent to fight the US proxy war on Russia in Ukraine. Heritage Foundation budget expert Richard Stern has done the math and determined that Biden's spending on the Ukraine war thus far will cost each and every American household $900. How many Americans would rather have those $900 dollars back in their pocket rather than in the pockets of Lockheed-Martin, Raytheon, and Ukraine's oligarchs?

Recent surveys have shown that a majority of Americans could not afford to cover a sudden $1,000 emergency. Will Americans connect the dots and realize that the reason they can't find that $1,000 for an emergency is because the neocons have already sent it to Ukraine?
...

[paxmao]

Whose side is the American President and Congress really on? It doesn't seem like it's the side of America. I'm surprised that Biden doesn't wear a black "Down With America" hat.


As Maui Burns, Biden Demands Another $24 Billion…For Ukraine!


...

As Maui burns, Trump continues negating the climate change https://www.npr.org/2020/09/14/912799501/i-don-t-think-science-knows-visiting-fires-trump-denies-climate-change

'I Don't Think Science Knows': Visiting Fires, Trump Denies Climate Change

See, this two things are actually related to each other, while the fact that Biden supports ending the war in Ukraine in a way that guarantees that aggression is not rewarded, that we do not go back to cold war and where Ruzzia has an incentive to avoid further wars and demilitarises itself in the process has nothing to do with helping rebuild Maui.

[BADecker]

Whose side is the American President and Congress really on? It doesn't seem like it's the side of America. I'm surprised that Biden doesn't wear a black "Down With America" hat.


As Maui Burns, Biden Demands Another $24 Billion…For Ukraine!


...

As Maui burns, Trump continues negating the climate change https://www.npr.org/2020/09/14/912799501/i-don-t-think-science-knows-visiting-fires-trump-denies-climate-change

'I Don't Think Science Knows': Visiting Fires, Trump Denies Climate Change

See, this two things are actually related to each other, while the fact that Biden supports ending the war in Ukraine in a way that guarantees that aggression is not rewarded, that we do not go back to cold war and where Ruzzia has an incentive to avoid further wars and demilitarises itself in the process has nothing to do with helping rebuild Maui.

Climate change is something that has been going on for at least the last five thousand years. In the northern half of the United States, they get four seasons every year. Climate change. If you want time periods other than annually, same thing. You pick it. Climate change all the time... warm to cold, cold back to warm, warm to cold again... over and over and over.

When you study the science, global warming has been rate-decreasing over the last 20 years or so.

When you study the history of the earth, there have been times when the earth was much warmer, and times when it was much colder. Maui fires don't have anything to do with it, and climate change doesn't have anything to do with Maui fires.

Trump was right as usual.

Climate change is an excuse that Biden might use to say that it's nature, so might as well give more money to Ukraine for the war.

[paxmao]

Whose side is the American President and Congress really on? It doesn't seem like it's the side of America. I'm surprised that Biden doesn't wear a black "Down With America" hat.


As Maui Burns, Biden Demands Another $24 Billion…For Ukraine!


...

As Maui burns, Trump continues negating the climate change https://www.npr.org/2020/09/14/912799501/i-don-t-think-science-knows-visiting-fires-trump-denies-climate-change

'I Don't Think Science Knows': Visiting Fires, Trump Denies Climate Change

See, this two things are actually related to each other, while the fact that Biden supports ending the war in Ukraine in a way that guarantees that aggression is not rewarded, that we do not go back to cold war and where Ruzzia has an incentive to avoid further wars and demilitarises itself in the process has nothing to do with helping rebuild Maui.

Climate change is something that has been going on for at least the last five thousand years. In the northern half of the United States, they get four seasons every year. Climate change. If you want time periods other than annually, same thing. You pick it. Climate change all the time... warm to cold, cold back to warm, warm to cold again... over and over and over.

When you study the science, global warming has been rate-decreasing over the last 20 years or so.

When you study the history of the earth, there have been times when the earth was much warmer, and times when it was much colder. Maui fires don't have anything to do with it, and climate change doesn't have anything to do with Maui fires.

Trump was right as usual.

Climate change is an excuse that Biden might use to say that it's nature, so might as well give more money to Ukraine for the war.

Please, kindly enlighten us with your obvious scientific superiority on this (and also in biology during COVId, psichology in the war, physics and any other sciences in general), which of the following are not true in your world:

- The CO2 produces greenhouse effects.
- Greenhouse effect raises the median temperature in the biosphere.
- The average amount of CO2 in the atmosphere has constantly increased during the last century.
- A large part of the CO2 emissions are due to human activities, precisely to the burning of fossil fuels.
- An increase in temperatures creates a more variable climate, provoking more droughts, more destructive raining, more wildfires.

I suggest you travel to Greece before answering.

And back to the war, it seems that Ruzzians are getting grinded at a reasonable pace in the supply chain and as a result in the Zapo front.  Ruzzia is self-demilitarising itself, while Ukraine has first stopped the aggression and turned the tide quite effectively.

As of now, it is mentioned in various sources that Ruzzia has less armoured vehicles and artillery power than Ukraine in the front.

[BADecker]

~

Please, kindly enlighten us with your obvious scientific superiority on this (and also in biology during COVId, psichology in the war, physics and any other sciences in general), which of the following are not true in your world:

- The CO2 produces greenhouse effects.
- Greenhouse effect raises the median temperature in the biosphere.
- The average amount of CO2 in the atmosphere has constantly increased during the last century.
- A large part of the CO2 emissions are due to human activities, precisely to the burning of fossil fuels.
- An increase in temperatures creates a more variable climate, provoking more droughts, more destructive raining, more wildfires.

I suggest you travel to Greece before answering.

And back to the war, it seems that Ruzzians are getting grinded at a reasonable pace in the supply chain and as a result in the Zapo front.  Ruzzia is self-demilitarising itself, while Ukraine has first stopped the aggression and turned the tide quite effectively.

As of now, it is mentioned in various sources that Ruzzia has less armoured vehicles and artillery power than Ukraine in the front.

CO2 produces greenhouse effect where?... in greenhouses. If governments and big business don't mess with the way things work in nature - like with chemtrails and HAARP - CO2 is what plants need to grow.

A little more global warming would be a good thing. Think of melting some of the polar Arctic and Antarctic to open up lands in Antarctica, Siberia, and Northern Canada for human occupation. Plus, extra humidity would bring wetness to places like the Sahara Desert so that those lands could be opened up for farming.

Nobody knows that greenhouse effect is bad. It's all a story that can't be proven until it happens.


As far as the war goes, there are ups and downs on both sides. But overall, Ukraine is being slaughtered. Dream your dreams. Ukraine is ultimately done for. If the US pushes against Russia too hard, Putin will be removed from office, Medvedev will take over, the nukes will fly, and we will have WW3.

[1miau]

A little more global warming would be a good thing. Think of melting some of the polar Arctic and Antarctic to open up lands in Antarctica, Siberia, and Northern Canada for human occupation. Plus, extra humidity would bring wetness to places like the Sahara Desert so that those lands could be opened up for farming.

Nobody knows that greenhouse effect is bad. It's all a story that can't be proven until it happens.

Of course! People in Miami, New York, Amsterdam, Barcelona, Venice and many more cities will be able to get a pool in their whole ground floor basically FOR FREE. 
People in these cities won't have to water their garden anymore.
They even can get fish right in the streets.
Many water, such wow.

Plus, extra humidity would bring wetness to places like the Sahara Desert so that those lands could be opened up for farming.

Wrong: globally, hotter temperatures will result in more deserts overally, especially longer periods of drought. Already happening in Africa and Spain.
But it's a good thing:
Deserts will grow bigger and we all know that in a desert, desserts are made.
It will be finger licking good.

 

[BADecker]

A little more global warming would be a good thing. Think of melting some of the polar Arctic and Antarctic to open up lands in Antarctica, Siberia, and Northern Canada for human occupation. Plus, extra humidity would bring wetness to places like the Sahara Desert so that those lands could be opened up for farming.

Nobody knows that greenhouse effect is bad. It's all a story that can't be proven until it happens.

Of course! People in Miami, New York, Amsterdam, Barcelona, Venice and many more cities will be able to get a pool in their whole ground floor basically FOR FREE.  
People in these cities won't have to water their garden anymore.
They even can get fish right in the streets.
Many water, such wow.

Plus, extra humidity would bring wetness to places like the Sahara Desert so that those lands could be opened up for farming.

Wrong: globally, hotter temperatures will result in more deserts overally, especially longer periods of drought. Already happening in Africa and Spain.
But it's a good thing:
Deserts will grow bigger and we all know that in a desert, desserts are made.
It will be finger licking good.

 

I know you are not brain dead. So, consider Venice. As their land sinks deeper, they simply build on top of what went before. If there is global warming, it isn't happening fast enough so that the people will not be aware of it before it becomes dangerous. They have plenty of time to move... like generations.

Consider Greece, other lands in the Mediterranean, Coasts off Japan, China, India, and many other places. There are cities under water off these coasts. People adapt. Besides with all the land opening up in Siberia, Northern Canada, and Antarctica, lots of room to grow the populations of the world. In addition to that, there is Seasteading that people can do.

On top of that, the rate of increase of global warming has been decreasing for the last 20 years. The climate change emergency is going away.



Globally warmer temperatures increase drought? Are you making a joke? We just talked about more moisture from the ice melts. A lot of that moisture will go into the air. When it returns as rain, it will water the deserts. At some stage the deserts will be gone... farmland in their place.

One of the best benefits of more water in the air is H2O2. As more moisture gets higher in the atmosphere, cosmic rays turn a bunch of it into H2O2. Some people might call it acid rain, but it isn't enough to harm anything... except to get into the marshes and swamp lands and kill off loads of mosquitoes and other bugs that DuPont has to do in the present with tank loads of chlorine dioxide.

And the better benefit to people is that some of that H2O2 will get into people and chemically neutralize bacteria and viruses. People won't be as sick. Doctors will have to find other jobs. But why not? As badly as they did with Covid, who needs them?



There isn't any CO2 or global warming threat.

[1miau]

I know you are not brain dead. So, consider Venice. As their land sinks deeper, they simply build on top of what went before. If there is global warming, it isn't happening fast enough so that the people will not be aware of it before it becomes dangerous. They have plenty of time to move... like generations.

Consider Greece, other lands in the Mediterranean, Coasts off Japan, China, India, and many other places. There are cities under water off these coasts. People adapt. Besides with all the land opening up in Siberia, Northern Canada, and Antarctica, lots of room to grow the populations of the world. In addition to that, there is Seasteading that people can do.

You are aware, that these changes have happened over several 1000s of years? Last warming period of 4.5 degrees lasted over 14,000 years.
It's now down to several 100s of years, currently looking like 250 years for 4.5 degrees hotter, so more than 50x faster.
So sorry, your appeasement doesn't work...

Globally warmer temperatures increase drought?

Yes

Are you making a joke?

No

We just talked about more moisture from the ice melts. A lot of that moisture will go into the air. When it returns as rain, it will water the deserts. At some stage the deserts will be gone... farmland in their place.

Your world seems to be very simple, like here.  



Water goes from sea into air, clouds are raining in the mountains and water is flowing back into the ocean...  

But no, it's much more complicated: climate change is causing longer periods of drought, where agriculture becomes much more difficult.
Even if there's more rain overally, this doesn't mean it'll be good for agriculture if there's one intense shower. Water will disappear quickly again.
And more Hurricanes aren't desirable either.  

So far, deserts have grown bigger in Africa (Sahel zone) making agriculture much more difficult.
In Europe: Desertifiction is a big problem in Spain, drought a big problem in Italy, France, Greece and Turkey etc...

There isn't any CO2 or global warming threat.

Nooooo, of course not...
Don't look up...  

[BADecker]

I know you are not brain dead. So, consider Venice. As their land sinks deeper, they simply build on top of what went before. If there is global warming, it isn't happening fast enough so that the people will not be aware of it before it becomes dangerous. They have plenty of time to move... like generations.

Consider Greece, other lands in the Mediterranean, Coasts off Japan, China, India, and many other places. There are cities under water off these coasts. People adapt. Besides with all the land opening up in Siberia, Northern Canada, and Antarctica, lots of room to grow the populations of the world. In addition to that, there is Seasteading that people can do.

You are aware, that these changes have happened over several 1000s of years? Last warming period of 4.5 degrees lasted over 14,000 years.
It's now down to several 100s of years, currently looking like 250 years for 4.5 degrees hotter, so more than 50x faster.
So sorry, your appeasement doesn't work...

https://www.talkimg.com/images/2023/08/16/MavgH.png

I am aware that the whole universe in its present form is about 7500 years old. I am also aware that science attributes the earth to several billion years old, and the universe to like 13 to 14 billion years. But if you look at the way they write about it, they tell you right out that these are only guesses, and that they don't really know.

Globally warmer temperatures increase drought?

Yes

Are you making a joke?

No

We just talked about more moisture from the ice melts. A lot of that moisture will go into the air. When it returns as rain, it will water the deserts. At some stage the deserts will be gone... farmland in their place.

Your world seems to be very simple, like here.  

https://www.talkimg.com/images/2023/08/16/MaJod.png

Water goes from sea into air, clouds are raining in the mountains and water is flowing back into the ocean...  

But no, it's much more complicated: climate change is causing longer periods of drought, where agriculture becomes much more difficult.
Even if there's more rain overally, this doesn't mean it'll be good for agriculture if there's one intense shower. Water will disappear quickly again.
And more Hurricanes aren't desirable either.  

So far, deserts have grown bigger in Africa (Sahel zone) making agriculture much more difficult.
In Europe: Desertifiction is a big problem in Spain, drought a big problem in Italy, France, Greece and Turkey etc...

You don't have any basis for your thinking on climate change when you are soooo extremely far from correct about the age of the present universe and earth.

There isn't any CO2 or global warming threat.

Nooooo, of course not...
Don't look up...  

You can say that there is global warming all day long. You can find many books on the subjct. Perhaps I can say and find just like you, but in a different direction. Without clearly and completely analyzing what you believe, you simply have a religion going for yourself.

And, of course, I have a religion going for myself by believing the Bible. But my belief in what the Bible says doesn't come from analyzing like science does. It comes from the analysis of the strength behind the writers, and the validation of the likeness of old copies with new copies, and the kind of meticulous people the People of Ancient Israel were. There is power and strength in the age of the universe as shown in the Bible.

What might all that have to do with the war? Cain, the first born of all people who were born, killed his brother Abel. That happened probably easily within the first 100 years after creation. It's still going on today.

[tvbcof]

...

...

Turning the embarrassing 'hockey stick' fraud on it's side doesn't suddenly make it worth any more than it was.  Even full-on high priests in the climate scientism cult would rather forget Michael Mann's hoax since it was so profoundly debunked.  The climategate e-mail leaks didn't do it any favors either.

For those who don't know, Mann came up with a model which produced a 'hockey stick' line even when random data was fed in.  As far as I know he has still not released his algorithms and the data he used.  He's not a practicing scientist after all.  His hoax got the image on the front page of the mainstream fake-news, and he was issued a PhD, so all is good...at least in climate-cult-land where the globalist money lives.

[Branko]

Sanctions and their effect

https://www.businessinsider.com/war-in-ukraine-russia-richer-millionaires-billionaires-uhnw-wealth-ubs-2023-8

[DaRude]

In addition, I'm not surprised from someone who's behind bars and is unable to avoid pyramid quotes...  
Keep pushing your Kremlin propaganda.

I asked how old you are and you wasted two posts pointing to your forum registration date only to ultimately claim that your age is how long you've been registered on this forum.  

Well, it really seems to be wasted time to explain that to you because you are not able to understandt it.  
Not my issue, deal with it.
You might be older but you have earned far less Merit and contributed far less valuable content. Heck, you are an embarassment by pushing Kremlin talking points every day. Shame, shame.
Enjoy the time in your cell...

"false balancing", where two opinions are cited while the one is true or close to the truth (Ukraine) and the other one is a straight out lie (Russia)
I've cited many sources which claim Ukrainian involvement in NS explosion, now can you stop wasting time and PLEASE cite at least one recent source which claims the true or close to the truth (Ukrainian) version that Russia is responsible for Nord Stream sabotage?

LOOOOL, now you are really embarrassed, since I've delievered a source and you didn't like it because my source is exactly pointing out the issue.
Here it is again:

https://www.berliner-zeitung.de/news/putin-droht-bei-einem-angriff-setzt-russland-atomwaffen-ein-li.295226

The head of the Kremlin declared on television: "If we are attacked, we will fight back." According to Kremlin leader Vladimir Putin, Russia will use nuclear weapons only in response to an attack. "We consider weapons of mass destruction, nuclear weapons, as a means of defense," he said at a televised meeting of the Kremlin's Human Rights Council on Wednesday. Russia's strategy is based on a policy of "so-called retaliation". "If we are attacked, we fight back," he added. In the past, the Kremlin chief had announced that Russian territory would be defended by all military means. Now, with a view to the confrontation with the West as a result of the Ukraine conflict, he emphasized that "the danger of nuclear war is growing".

And that's it, article's end.
Poor Pootin, is playing his strawman and victim card again, "evil West wants to attack friendly Russia".  

Russia isn't "threatened" in any way.
The west won't start a nuclear war.
Russia is the one who's repeatedly threatening to use a nuclear bomb in Ukraine and is already bombing Ukraine deliberately.
I'm not saying Berliner Zeitung launched this low quality BS intentionally to spread Putin's lies but it's just very fortunate for Putin to get his message out there.  
But useful tools, like you, will still find an excuse for Putler's propaganda and continue to spread it willfully.

Of course, you have no arguments now and look like a washed clown...

I've cited many sources which claim Ukrainian involvement in NS explosion, now can you stop wasting time and PLEASE cite at least one recent source which claims the true or close to the truth (Ukrainian) version that Russia is responsible for Nord Stream sabotage?

Which is wrong once again and you are just looking like a fool because you can't prove that Ukraine is behind it.
It's all "if's", "looks like's", "could be's", "traces", "hints" from you for this useless pipeline, where the west couldn't care less about it because no matter if blown up or not blown up, this project is dead and there won't be any purchases of Russian gas into Germany. Only our German AfD idiots party would resume it and I expect that Germany won't vote them again after our previous adventure with a similar party.
Our "if's", "looks like's", "could be's", "traces", "hints" of the day:
*suspected* Ukrainian involvement
*traces are leading into Ukraine* (which can be everything in case Rusia has faked these traces into Ukraine with agents, cooperating undercover with Ukrainian "patriots".  
Are just too obsessed with defend war criminal Putler or are you really to dumb to understand it? Genuine question!
Maybe travel to Moscow and protest to "stop the war" there. Let's see what will happen.  

I asked for an example from my citations where they cite Kremlin lies, you proceed to call me "too dumb" and post a new resource with a totally different story which I never cited or even talked about.  

You asked and I delievered:

https://www.berliner-zeitung.de/news/putin-droht-bei-einem-angriff-setzt-russland-atomwaffen-ein-li.295226

The head of the Kremlin declared on television: "If we are attacked, we will fight back." According to Kremlin leader Vladimir Putin, Russia will use nuclear weapons only in response to an attack. "We consider weapons of mass destruction, nuclear weapons, as a means of defense," he said at a televised meeting of the Kremlin's Human Rights Council on Wednesday. Russia's strategy is based on a policy of "so-called retaliation". "If we are attacked, we fight back," he added. In the past, the Kremlin chief had announced that Russian territory would be defended by all military means. Now, with a view to the confrontation with the West as a result of the Ukraine conflict, he emphasized that "the danger of nuclear war is growing".

And that's it, article's end.
Poor Pootin, is playing his strawman and victim card again, "evil West wants to attack friendly Russia".  

Russia isn't "threatened" in any way.
The west won't start a nuclear war.
Russia is the one who's repeatedly threatening to use a nuclear bomb in Ukraine and is already bombing Ukraine deliberately.
I'm not saying Berliner Zeitung launched this low quality BS intentionally to spread Putin's lies but it's just very fortunate for Putin to get his message out there.  
But useful tools, like you, will still find an excuse for Putler's propaganda and continue to spread it willfully.

And now you are looking like a washed clown.  

I asked if you'd concede UA involvement in the sabotage of NS if Germany puts a warrant out on Ukrainians involved, you wasted two posts speculating on probability of AfD getting into power, when i finally asked you to speculate on what % AfD will get up to, you finally say that you're not able to look into the future

LOL, everyone who says otherwise that he can predict election results in 2, 4 or even 8 years is a straight out liar.
I can't predict it, no one can predict it reliably.  

You yourself run an ad campaign, but you keep posting a meme about getting money for posts    

You are really incapable to research properly. Posts in Politics and Society are not counted:

Excluded boards, (Altcoins, WO & Serious, Sig Threads, Press, Politics, Games, Micro, Off-topic, Mega Threads.)

So, I don't expect to get a reward for this and even if, it would be a neutral reward, or are you saying, that Zelensky is operating MixTum mixer?  
Maybe you can spin an anti-Ukrainian story around it: Zelensky operating Bitcoin launderer "MixTum" to obfuscate funds from NATO into drug purchases for his Nazi friends.  
Here you go:

Yes, yes internet stickers and badges really matter and everyone should strive for them.

Can you ask someone to explain to you what "provide source that Russia is responsible for Nord Stream sabotage" and "my citations where they cite Kremlin lies" means or translate it to your native tongue? Here's internet attempt to translate it into German. "eine Quelle zu nennen, die besagt, dass Russland für die Sabotage von Nord Stream verantwortlich ist" or ask an adult and then think how citing totally unrelated news article is relevant to this.

I understand that after you used up your credibility you can just play dumb forever, but nevertheless, let me ask you this for the last time, what would it take for you to change your mind on this? Who's authority would you believe, outside of Zelenskyy publicly admitting that he order to blow up Nord Stream himself? Once again Germany putting our arrest warrants wouldn't be enough for you?

Let me attempt to summarize this. I asked you a question, you reply that you feel that "your sentences doesn't make then something to be answered" and proceed to compare it with '"Firehose" of loaded questions used to be prominent in Soviet propaganda'. How many questions exactly have i asked you that you feel that there's a "firehose" of them? Then i say it's an excuse to not engage in a conversation and just shitpost. And you reply with "another staple of Soviet/Putin propaganda - projection." I rebut with show me where i don't answer your question/not engaging in a conversation. You follow that with Straw man ... I don't care enough about your delusions to have any questions for you.

Just for shits and giggles I opened the last page of your post history and searched for a question mark ("?"). 180 results. Granted this includes quotes and you tend to ladder-quote a lot, but still, it's an excessive number. For example 1miau and paxmao have 50 each, many of which come from quoting you. I hope that settles your question about questions. People who have something to say (like actual opinions or facts) don't have to wrap it into this "I'm just a bystander asking a question" nonsense. Thus your statement about not engaging in a conversation and just shitposting is a projection. You do this excessively and you accuse others of it.

I asked for citations that many times?   Glad you recognize that this is for "shits and giggles" a ctritical thinking person would be more curious to see a ratio of question marks vs actual sentences written, but that's too complicated, just throw out a headline and watch sheep get in line, follow the leader and yell orcs raping babies with everyone.

[DaRude]

Sanctions and their effect

https://www.businessinsider.com/war-in-ukraine-russia-richer-millionaires-billionaires-uhnw-wealth-ubs-2023-8

I'm sure there are issues of concentration of wealth and distribution to owners of military industrial complex etc, but west is also ramping up it's military spending, so in comparison this is quite damming, especially so coming from UBS.

The number of Russian millionaires also rose by about 56,000 to 408,000 in 2022, while the number of ultra-high-net-worth individuals — people worth over $50 million — jumped by nearly 4,500.

But the US lost more wealth than any other country last year, shedding $5.9 trillion, while North America and Europe combined got $10.9 trillion poorer, UBS reported.

There were also 1 million fewer American millionaires by the end of 2022,  although the US still accounted for over 50% of the world's ultra-high-net-worth individuals, the bank said.

[tvbcof]

...

...
There were also 1 million fewer American millionaires by the end of 2022,  although the US still accounted for over 50% of the world's ultra-high-net-worth individuals, the bank said.

It's been pointed out, I think accurately, that the economic warfare in the U.S. is mainly between the rich and the ultra-rich.  Anyone who is below millionaire status (aka, a homeowner) is basically inconsequential chattel-slave class.  Neither a threat, nor a real target.

My money is on the ultra-rich.  Many/most of the 'rich' have fallen victim to the same snares set for the chattel-slave plebs (the plandemic de-pop shot, the climate cult baloney, etc.)  Now that I think about it, maybe the 'rich' were in fact the primary targets.  They in particular tend to take the bait hook, line, and sinker.

The dynamics in the 'developing world' country where I live currently are almost identical except one has to divide by a factor.  Say ten.  The 'middle-upper class' tend to be the ones who are _still_ too scared to take off their masks.  The plebs generally didn't even put them on except under duress.  Now one can tell the slaves because they are forced to wear masks in order to keep their jobs and feed their families, or they are a terrified car-owning mid-level bureaucrats who really do believe the bullshit.

[BADecker]

The title of the article says it all. But the Youtube video says more.


Cracks Forming! NATO Official Suggests Ukraine Give Up Land


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmV7WyxxCao
Despite endless promises that NATO's dedication to Ukraine is unwavering, we were treated to a peek behind the mask yesterday, when the NATO Secretary General's chief of staff suggested in a newspaper interview that Ukraine might cede land to Russia in exchange for NATO membership of what's left of the country. Is Ukraine about to get thrown under the bus? Also today: Trump's numbers keep improving with each indictment...do they realize this?
...

[paxmao]

The title of the article says it all. But the Youtube video says more.


Cracks Forming! NATO Official Suggests Ukraine Give Up Land


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmV7WyxxCao
Despite endless promises that NATO's dedication to Ukraine is unwavering, we were treated to a peek behind the mask yesterday, when the NATO Secretary General's chief of staff suggested in a newspaper interview that Ukraine might cede land to Russia in exchange for NATO membership of what's left of the country. Is Ukraine about to get thrown under the bus? Also today: Trump's numbers keep improving with each indictment...do they realize this?
...

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/aug/16/nato-official-suggests-ukraine-could-give-up-territory-in-exchange-for-membership#:~:text=A%20senior%20Nato%20official%20has,an%20end%20to%20the%20war.

Nato official apologises over suggestion Ukraine could give up land for membership

A senior Nato official has apologised and clarified his comments a day after he said publicly that Ukraine could give up territory to Russia in exchange for Nato membership and an end to the war.

Stian Jenssen, the chief of staff to the Nato secretary general, Jens Stoltenberg, told a Norwegian newspaper that he should not have spoken as simplistically as he did, after his initial comments prompted an angry reaction from Kyiv.

At a panel event in Norway on Tuesday, Jenssen had said that while any peace deal reached would have to be acceptable to Ukraine, alliance members were discussing how the 18-month war might be brought to an end.

So, not a crack, just a dude having that type of happy moment in public - not only not an official posture or comment, but something that he had to take back minutes after he said it.

Let's speak of cracks, real cracks: But BA, which of 39 felonies indicted to Trump would you say is going to be the easies to prove? I am saying this because they are using the RICO legislation - this is used for drug gangs, pimps & slavery networks and many other crimes committed by an organised group.

This means that penalties are around 20 years per each individual involved and as of now the count is around 19. Tell me BA, how many "cracks" do you think are going to happen here? How many will start speaking for immunity?