I don't think it's a flying leap of logic at all. After all the failures and outright lies of the intelligence community our politicians and the MSMS over the last couple of decades, nothing any of them say should be accepted without absolute proof. That mentality is not our fault, it's theirs for losing the trust of the people.
Dan, here's your Ukraine thread.
- Thread starter Syskatine
- Start date
I hear you and care. You have been here a long time and though grumpy occasionally you have been a good poster. Thank you for being here and we value you as a vessel of the spirit you carry.
Libs just don't know how to it right. Their MO. As proven with our forced clown show.
The article I posted said they're having trouble getting artillery, and I think Toon's article was the one that said they're importing shells from N Korea and Iran.
So of course that means they're gonna be out in 2 - 3 months or I've been suckered. Classic Dan.
Hey, when the rest of the world laughs at your cult and doesn't believe anything they say, what other choice do you have but to say everyone else is wrong? LOL it never gets old.
We all need to tune into Hannity or Alex Jones!
So what's your time frame? Is Russia supposed to be forbidden from importing weapons but Ukraine can import all it wants? Russia is running out of ammo, right? So eventually they're not going to have anything to fight with, right? Isn't that what you're arguing? isn't that the take-away we're supposed to get from your links? Hell, you said Russia has already lost. So when was the fait accompli? When will Russia get the memo? When will the Ukrainian counter-offensive start to have results? When will all the killing stop? Are your reporters telling the truth about Russia running out and losing the artillery battle 4 to 1, but Biden is lying that Ukraine is running out? I'm looking for some consistency of thought from you.
Don't look now but Hannity is 100% on your team when it comes to the proxy war. I didn't know Alex Jones was still a thing.
Dan, are you debating someone over something?
I have no idea -- I passed along reporting. I know you don't believe it unless it comes from Russia. The point of the thread was to share our sources. Here they are. Ignore them if you like. I'm not listening to Russel Brand about ANYTHING, lol. I bring open source reporting and you post... Russel Brand, a comedian with mental health problems. Okay, then.
The first obvious clue was your confidence that Putin wouldn't invade. I marveled at how you disbelieved all the western media, but you said it was propaganda and you knew better. That didn't change your mind and you kept reading the same people that were obviously wrong.
So maybe an accumulation of that stuff will change your perception. Doubtful, but you never know. Even if it does, you won't admit it, but you don't like being proven demonstrably wrong, so I'm just quietly sharing reports from peop.e with a full set of teeth, that aren't Putin disciples, and you can adjudge who's listening to capable, competent people. Give it a few months and let's see where it is. It'll be fun to see who was listening to smart people. I'm also waiting for some reports from you about what's happening over there. Hopefully someone a little more credible than Russel Brand...
It does not surprise me that you’re terrified of Russell Brand’s ridicule. And thank you for your honesty, I won the bet with my wife that you couldn’t handle 30 seconds! I notice you didn’t mention the links from John Mearsheimer or Scott Ritter, so I suppose you didn’t read what they had to say about the war either. Between the two of us which one would you say has ensconced himself in an echo chamber, me who asks you to keep sending your links for me to see or you who refuses to consider mine, can’t even open them?
I was dead wrong in thinking Russia would not invade and I owned up to my error and continue to do so. Beyond that you really don’t have much to say except accusations that I only believe what the Russians say even though I repeatedly report when it is pro-Russian in its opinion and you should view it with suspicion. Neither Mearsheimer nor Russell Brand, by the way, are remotely pro-Russian in what they say. Ritter comes too close to the line to be sure. At least I know who the people are when I share a link. I don’t think you do know who your reporters are or where they get their information.
At any rate I’ll ask again that you keep posting links from people who supply you with your information, I would like to read or listen to them. I guess there’s no point in my doing so since you won’t read or listen to them under any circumstances.
Last edited:
You really think you're onto something because I won't listen to... Russel Brand, lol.
Be a serious person and quit listening to loons.
I don't think I'm onto anything, Sys. I think you're weak willed and too timid to hear anything that deviates from your preferred narrative. Forget Brand. Mearsheimer is a serious person with serious knowledge. His video is less than 20 minutes long. He speaks with utmost objectivity, just lays out the situation as it exists. He says nothing about a Russian artillery problem. Scott Ritter is also a very serious person with very serious opinions which are usually backed with first hand knowledge. His article doesn't say one funny thing and doesn't make fun of people like you. He, too, says nothing about Russia running out of artillery rounds. You don't have to believe them regardless of their credibility. But for God's sake you don't have to be afraid of what they have to say.
I'll look at them. I don't know why you can't traffic in the written word instead of videos like a gen z moron that can't read, but I'll try and watch that stuff. You're son's a writer and you watch people whose demographic base likes videos, probably because they're unemployed or don't read real well, but I'll make an exception and watch a video.
Scott Ritter's is the written word. And let me add: I don't think you realize how foolish you sound when you say things like that.
Last edited:
Here’s the written word from independent (and very left wing) journalists.
The real casualties of Russia’s ‘civil war’: the Beltway expert class - The Grayzone
Numerous serious casualties were incurred during Wagner chief Yevgeny Prigozhin's supposed "coup." The Grayzone offers an in-depth look at the massacre carried out by some of America’s top Russia experts against their own credibility. When Wagner Group leader Yevgeny Prigozhin launched a...
thegrayzone.com
Here’s the written word from independent (and very left wing) journalists.
The real casualties of Russia’s ‘civil war’: the Beltway expert class - The Grayzone
Numerous serious casualties were incurred during Wagner chief Yevgeny Prigozhin's supposed "coup." The Grayzone offers an in-depth look at the massacre carried out by some of America’s top Russia experts against their own credibility. When Wagner Group leader Yevgeny Prigozhin launched a...
He is a regular contributor to Russian state-owned Sputnik and RT, and has frequently used his various platforms to spread Russian propaganda.[6][7][8] He acted as a briefer on behalf of the Permanent Mission of the Russian Federation to the United Nations who invited him to speak at a UN Security Council meeting organised by Russia.[9]
Blumenthal is the editor of The Grayzone website, which is known for its apologetic coverage of authoritarian regimes such as the Chinese, Russian, Syrian, and Venezuelan governments, including its denial of chemical attacks by the Syrian government and of human rights abuses against Uyghurs.[10][11][12][13][14]
carry on
Have you found that Pee Pee tape yet? How about Russian Collusion, Extorting Ukraine and a whole list of other shit we heard about Trump that all turned out to be lies. Oh yea you got Manafort for exactly what Hunter has been proven to have done.
Like I said it's from a far left wing website. I'm surprised you find that objectionable (well, not really surprised). Why don't you try rebutting what is said rather than dismiss it without reading it. You may learn something. You may learn that it is a good thing to read what contributors to Sputnik and RT have to say. Don't be like @Syskatine. Don't be afraid to read something you're afraid will say something that questions your beliefs, that's a coward's way out. You may find out an independent journalist says something you ought to know about. Burst your bubble!
I can't believe you accuse others of reading propaganda and then post what (I guess) is supposed to establish facts. The guy.writes:
Ukrainian counteroffensive’s second week ends in failure | MR Online
First and foremost, the counteroffensive gambit has failed.mronline.org
This tragic reality means that, regardless of the battlefield reality that exists in Ukraine, NATO will continue to push Ukraine to sacrifice its manpower in a fruitless struggle against Russia for the simple fact that NATO is unwilling to willingly lose political face at home and abroad.
Fruitless struggle. They saved.like 80% of the country from Russian occupation and it was fruitless.
That's just clumsy propaganda, Dan. Why woukd you believe him over Forbes? The rest of the world was marveling at russia's waste of manpower for Bahkmut and how Ukraine was sapping russia's.manpower and resources and he says the exact opposite?
He didn't have any cites to his #'s, either. His bahkmut #'s sure seem high.
What about this peepee tape? Are you saying I fell for it, because I made fun of Donald's piss play?
They didn’t *save* any portion of the country. In the beginning all Russia was after is the Russian speaking/culturally Russian portion of eastern Ukraine which the Zelensky government was trying to annihilate, along with ensuring there is space between Russia's border and NATO missiles. I don’t disagree, let me tell you for the MILLIONTH TIME, that Ritter paints a very rosy picture of Russia’s success. He overhyped as much as your CIA-inspired reporters do. Let me say again I believe the truth is somewhere in the middle. But if all you read and believe is what your CIA-infiltrated reporters say you will not know where the middle is.
I’ll ask you again what is your timeline for when Ukraine regains the upper hand and drives Russia out? One of the primary reasons for the success Russia has had in capturing 15-20% of Ukrainian territory (the Russian speaking/culturally Russian section of the country) has been their artillery prowess. Your reporters are claiming Ukraine is losing only one of theirs for every four of Russia’s. They’re also reporting that Russia is reduced to importing some of their munitions (conveniently ignoring that Ukraine is importing ALL of their weapons), inferring that Russia is in danger of running out (while Joe Biden has told us Ukraine *is* virtually out). Which would mean Russia will lose, according to your reporters. You’re on record saying Rusdia has *already lost* the war. Which is it? Are they going to lose (if so, when?) or have they already lost and just don’t know it yet?
I’m inclined to believe what Mearsheimer says, that this will become a frozen conflict. But like Mearsheimer says it is doubtful Russia will give back any of the territory it has captured and equally doubtful Ukraine will agree to become a neutral state. I think we may have another “Korea” on our hands.
A video for you, Sys. Go to the 15:30 minute to hear Ukraine war analysis. (You won’t like it.)
usefulidiots.substack.com
Former CIA Analyst: The West Cannot Defeat Russia in Ukraine
Listen now (66 min) | Plus AOC completes her corporate transformation, George Santos becomes Rosa Parks, and the burning question: Is Barbie a communist?
usefulidiots.substack.com
Do you think I'm going to excuse that? He deserved to spend time in jail (I suppose; I know nothing about the incident). OTOH as a former UN weapons inspector, a type-A male that led a squad into Iran expecting to fight his way in and fight his way out, but by God he was going to fulfill his mission even if it killed him, I give him an element of credibility that he knows what he's talking about when it comes to what's happening in Ukraine.
Similar threads
