Ukrainian victory over Russia is inevitable

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question.

Russia has stated if Ukraine uses U.S. weaponry to strike in Russia, they will consider that the U.S. and NATO are at war with Russia.

Should the U.S. greenlight Ukrainian forces using U.S. missiles to strike inside of Russia?

For certain long-range weapons to be used against Russian targets in Russia, they would be correct. That's because to use them, NATO would have to provide the targeting data, NATO would have to actually program the targeting data into the weapon systems. Its not even clear if Ukrainians could "pull the trigger" for certain weapon systems. At that point, there just is too much direct NATO involvement to pretend its "Ukraine" attacking Russia anymore.

You are providing your view.

Now, in this scenario, U.S. produced missiles are used to attack several buildings inside Russia.

You are trusting Russia will lawyer up and figure out exactly who, what, when, where and how the targeting is done.

Maybe they don't bother and launch three or four submarine launched missiles (conventional) into buildings in Memphis, Boston and Los Angeles.

Now what? What's your next move?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question.

Russia has stated if Ukraine uses U.S. weaponry to strike in Russia, they will consider that the U.S. and NATO are at war with Russia.

Should the U.S. greenlight Ukrainian forces using U.S. missiles to strike inside of Russia?

For certain long-range weapons to be used against Russian targets in Russia, they would be correct. That's because to use them, NATO would have to provide the targeting data, NATO would have to actually program the targeting data into the weapon systems. Its not even clear if Ukrainians could "pull the trigger" for certain weapon systems. At that point, there just is too much direct NATO involvement to pretend its "Ukraine" attacking Russia anymore.

PP, also, do you notice none of this is being talked about in the media?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question.

Russia has stated if Ukraine uses U.S. weaponry to strike in Russia, they will consider that the U.S. and NATO are at war with Russia.

Should the U.S. greenlight Ukrainian forces using U.S. missiles to strike inside of Russia?

For certain long-range weapons to be used against Russian targets in Russia, they would be correct. That's because to use them, NATO would have to provide the targeting data, NATO would have to actually program the targeting data into the weapon systems. Its not even clear if Ukrainians could "pull the trigger" for certain weapon systems. At that point, there just is too much direct NATO involvement to pretend its "Ukraine" attacking Russia anymore.

You are providing your view.

Now, in this scenario, U.S. produced missiles are used to attack several buildings inside Russia.

You are trusting Russia will lawyer up and figure out exactly who, what, when, where and how the targeting is done.

Maybe they don't bother and launch three or four submarine launched missiles (conventional) into buildings in Memphis, Boston and Los Angeles.

Now what? What's your next move?

The likely escalation path is that Russia will provide the same "support" to groups like the Houthi, Syria or any other dozens of parties currently fighting the US somewhere. So the likely retaliation will be a ship in the Red Sea, or a base in Syria or Iraq.

We thankfully have a few escalations before American civilians might be in the line of fire.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question.

Russia has stated if Ukraine uses U.S. weaponry to strike in Russia, they will consider that the U.S. and NATO are at war with Russia.

Should the U.S. greenlight Ukrainian forces using U.S. missiles to strike inside of Russia?

For certain long-range weapons to be used against Russian targets in Russia, they would be correct. That's because to use them, NATO would have to provide the targeting data, NATO would have to actually program the targeting data into the weapon systems. Its not even clear if Ukrainians could "pull the trigger" for certain weapon systems. At that point, there just is too much direct NATO involvement to pretend its "Ukraine" attacking Russia anymore.

PP, also, do you notice none of this is being talked about in the media?

Yes, the media will play dumb on this until the retaliation then start with the "unprovoked" nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question.

Russia has stated if Ukraine uses U.S. weaponry to strike in Russia, they will consider that the U.S. and NATO are at war with Russia.

Should the U.S. greenlight Ukrainian forces using U.S. missiles to strike inside of Russia?

For certain long-range weapons to be used against Russian targets in Russia, they would be correct. That's because to use them, NATO would have to provide the targeting data, NATO would have to actually program the targeting data into the weapon systems. Its not even clear if Ukrainians could "pull the trigger" for certain weapon systems. At that point, there just is too much direct NATO involvement to pretend its "Ukraine" attacking Russia anymore.

You are providing your view.

Now, in this scenario, U.S. produced missiles are used to attack several buildings inside Russia.

You are trusting Russia will lawyer up and figure out exactly who, what, when, where and how the targeting is done.

Maybe they don't bother and launch three or four submarine launched missiles (conventional) into buildings in Memphis, Boston and Los Angeles.

Now what? What's your next move?

The likely escalation path is that Russia will provide the same "support" to groups like the Houthi, Syria or any other dozens of parties currently fighting the US somewhere. So the likely retaliation will be a ship in the Red Sea, or a base in Syria or Iraq.

We thankfully have a few escalations before American civilians might be in the line of fire.

This is a statement from their government.

How are you determining their likely escalation path?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question.

Russia has stated if Ukraine uses U.S. weaponry to strike in Russia, they will consider that the U.S. and NATO are at war with Russia.

Should the U.S. greenlight Ukrainian forces using U.S. missiles to strike inside of Russia?

For certain long-range weapons to be used against Russian targets in Russia, they would be correct. That's because to use them, NATO would have to provide the targeting data, NATO would have to actually program the targeting data into the weapon systems. Its not even clear if Ukrainians could "pull the trigger" for certain weapon systems. At that point, there just is too much direct NATO involvement to pretend its "Ukraine" attacking Russia anymore.

You are providing your view.

Now, in this scenario, U.S. produced missiles are used to attack several buildings inside Russia.

You are trusting Russia will lawyer up and figure out exactly who, what, when, where and how the targeting is done.

Maybe they don't bother and launch three or four submarine launched missiles (conventional) into buildings in Memphis, Boston and Los Angeles.

Now what? What's your next move?

Well?

[Anonymous]

Jeff, you should just lock this thread. It’s mostly a bunch of bots trying spreading RT style fire hose of propaganda bullsht. What the point? The five Fox News viewers reading this are convinced by the stupid bots (I mean studies show their personalities lean authoritarian anyway), but to everyone else this is stupid. Russia invaded Ukraine. They should leave. It’s as simple as that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Jeff, you should just lock this thread. It’s mostly a bunch of bots trying spreading RT style fire hose of propaganda bullsht. What the point? The five Fox News viewers reading this are convinced by the stupid bots (I mean studies show their personalities lean authoritarian anyway), but to everyone else this is stupid. Russia invaded Ukraine. They should leave. It’s as simple as that.

I love keeping this thread alive just for the title alone. So many Ukrainian backers have said so many dumb things, and it needs to be preserved for the record to compare against their current claims.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question.

Russia has stated if Ukraine uses U.S. weaponry to strike in Russia, they will consider that the U.S. and NATO are at war with Russia.

Should the U.S. greenlight Ukrainian forces using U.S. missiles to strike inside of Russia?

For certain long-range weapons to be used against Russian targets in Russia, they would be correct. That's because to use them, NATO would have to provide the targeting data, NATO would have to actually program the targeting data into the weapon systems. Its not even clear if Ukrainians could "pull the trigger" for certain weapon systems. At that point, there just is too much direct NATO involvement to pretend its "Ukraine" attacking Russia anymore.

You are providing your view.

Now, in this scenario, U.S. produced missiles are used to attack several buildings inside Russia.

You are trusting Russia will lawyer up and figure out exactly who, what, when, where and how the targeting is done.

Maybe they don't bother and launch three or four submarine launched missiles (conventional) into buildings in Memphis, Boston and Los Angeles.

Now what? What's your next move?

Well?

I'm not sure who you're asking, but as the local RT/Bebo/Fox posting bot/paid agent, this is exactly why I thought this war was so incredibly stupid.

Frankly its none of our business if some Russians in the Donbass want to pay their taxes to Moscow instead of Kiev. Certainly not worth dead Americans or burning cities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jeff, you should just lock this thread. It’s mostly a bunch of bots trying spreading RT style fire hose of propaganda bullsht. What the point? The five Fox News viewers reading this are convinced by the stupid bots (I mean studies show their personalities lean authoritarian anyway), but to everyone else this is stupid. Russia invaded Ukraine. They should leave. It’s as simple as that.

I love keeping this thread alive just for the title alone. So many Ukrainian backers have said so many dumb things, and it needs to be preserved for the record to compare against their current claims.

Russia conquered Ukraine in 3 days, eh?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Jeff, you should just lock this thread. It’s mostly a bunch of bots trying spreading RT style fire hose of propaganda bullsht. What the point? The five Fox News viewers reading this are convinced by the stupid bots (I mean studies show their personalities lean authoritarian anyway), but to everyone else this is stupid. Russia invaded Ukraine. They should leave. It’s as simple as that.

What's the problem? You can't answer the question?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Jeff, you should just lock this thread. It’s mostly a bunch of bots trying spreading RT style fire hose of propaganda bullsht. What the point? The five Fox News viewers reading this are convinced by the stupid bots (I mean studies show their personalities lean authoritarian anyway), but to everyone else this is stupid. Russia invaded Ukraine. They should leave. It’s as simple as that.

I posted the statement of the question to and answer by Putin. How is that propaganda? It's the president of Russia making a clear statement on where he stands.

It is not some vague statement coming out of some corner of the internet you've never heard of. It's the president of Russia making a clear statement on where he stands in his own words.

I provided no commentary. I let the viewer decide for themselves. What are you afraid of?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jeff, you should just lock this thread. It’s mostly a bunch of bots trying spreading RT style fire hose of propaganda bullsht. What the point? The five Fox News viewers reading this are convinced by the stupid bots (I mean studies show their personalities lean authoritarian anyway), but to everyone else this is stupid. Russia invaded Ukraine. They should leave. It’s as simple as that.

I posted the statement of the question to and answer by Putin. How is that propaganda? It's the president of Russia making a clear statement on where he stands.

It is not some vague statement coming out of some corner of the internet you've never heard of. It's the president of Russia making a clear statement on where he stands in his own words.

I provided no commentary. I let the viewer decide for themselves. What are you afraid of?

Dp- yeah babe. We heard him. We heard him when he said he would have this “special military operation” completed in three days. We also heard him when he said he would use nukes.
His threats aren’t compelling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jeff, you should just lock this thread. It’s mostly a bunch of bots trying spreading RT style fire hose of propaganda bullsht. What the point? The five Fox News viewers reading this are convinced by the stupid bots (I mean studies show their personalities lean authoritarian anyway), but to everyone else this is stupid. Russia invaded Ukraine. They should leave. It’s as simple as that.

I posted the statement of the question to and answer by Putin. How is that propaganda? It's the president of Russia making a clear statement on where he stands.

It is not some vague statement coming out of some corner of the internet you've never heard of. It's the president of Russia making a clear statement on where he stands in his own words.

I provided no commentary. I let the viewer decide for themselves. What are you afraid of?

Dp- yeah babe. We heard him. We heard him when he said he would have this “special military operation” completed in three days. We also heard him when he said he would use nukes.
His threats aren’t compelling.

That's what you're counting on? Chance?

[Anonymous]

Why is the IMF saving the Russian Economy? "Ksenia Yudaeva is the former first deputy governor at Russia's central bank, and a current adviser to its governor Elvira Nabiullina." "From November 1 Ksenia will be the Russian Executive Director at the IMF," https://www.barrons.com/news/sanctioned-russian-central-banker-named-to-imf-s-board-102fd78e "International Monetary Fund's plans to resume missions to Russia" https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/nine-european-countries-protest-against-imf-resuming-missions-russia-2024-09-13/ A "mission" is where they "loan" money to a country.