Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You twit. Haven't the last several decades taught you anything? The game isn't to fight Russia militarily, old school style, the game is to get Russia entangled in military expenditure at the expense of everything else and to then bankrupt Russia - and that war is already taking its toll. Didn't Afghanistan and the days of Perestroika teach you anything about how this stuff works?

I think you're the one who's been taking it easy at school. The perestroika farce left the West much more of an idiot than Russia - yes, you told yourself you bankrupted the country, then plowed billions of your taxpayer money into aid packages (which funded lots of lots of expensive real estate around the world with zero difference to ordinary Russians), then rode high on the dumb dream of "as soon as we show these guys the free market and democracy, they'd become exactly like us!", and then...what? I guess you don't question how effective your "bankrupting" strategy is if mere decades later Russia remains easily capable of fucking its impotent, corrupt, utterly dependent neighbors up the ass. Uh-huh.

Russia's foolish Ukraine strategy is already weakening its already-fragile economy. I'm not too worried about where this is going, but obviously you seem to be in quite a twitter over it.

Russia's economy was in the crapper regardless of Ukraine. I don't care about either of these countries but I enjoy calling out the ignorant Americans and their myopic worldviews, as well as grammatical shortcomings. It's "atwitter". Not "in a twitter." Twitter is something else entirely.

Two observations that may hopefully help you in the future:

A.) You're a trolling ass.
B.) You overestimate your grasp of the English language.

You're welcome

They won't. Do you have anything to say on the substance of this conversation?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You twit. Haven't the last several decades taught you anything? The game isn't to fight Russia militarily, old school style, the game is to get Russia entangled in military expenditure at the expense of everything else and to then bankrupt Russia - and that war is already taking its toll. Didn't Afghanistan and the days of Perestroika teach you anything about how this stuff works?

I think you're the one who's been taking it easy at school. The perestroika farce left the West much more of an idiot than Russia - yes, you told yourself you bankrupted the country, then plowed billions of your taxpayer money into aid packages (which funded lots of lots of expensive real estate around the world with zero difference to ordinary Russians), then rode high on the dumb dream of "as soon as we show these guys the free market and democracy, they'd become exactly like us!", and then...what? I guess you don't question how effective your "bankrupting" strategy is if mere decades later Russia remains easily capable of fucking its impotent, corrupt, utterly dependent neighbors up the ass. Uh-huh.

Russia's foolish Ukraine strategy is already weakening its already-fragile economy. I'm not too worried about where this is going, but obviously you seem to be in quite a twitter over it.

Russia's economy was in the crapper regardless of Ukraine. I don't care about either of these countries but I enjoy calling out the ignorant Americans and their myopic worldviews, as well as grammatical shortcomings. It's "atwitter". Not "in a twitter." Twitter is something else entirely.

Two observations that may hopefully help you in the future:

A.) You're a trolling ass.
B.) You overestimate your grasp of the English language.

You're welcome

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You twit. Haven't the last several decades taught you anything? The game isn't to fight Russia militarily, old school style, the game is to get Russia entangled in military expenditure at the expense of everything else and to then bankrupt Russia - and that war is already taking its toll. Didn't Afghanistan and the days of Perestroika teach you anything about how this stuff works?

I think you're the one who's been taking it easy at school. The perestroika farce left the West much more of an idiot than Russia - yes, you told yourself you bankrupted the country, then plowed billions of your taxpayer money into aid packages (which funded lots of lots of expensive real estate around the world with zero difference to ordinary Russians), then rode high on the dumb dream of "as soon as we show these guys the free market and democracy, they'd become exactly like us!", and then...what? I guess you don't question how effective your "bankrupting" strategy is if mere decades later Russia remains easily capable of fucking its impotent, corrupt, utterly dependent neighbors up the ass. Uh-huh.

Russia's foolish Ukraine strategy is already weakening its already-fragile economy. I'm not too worried about where this is going, but obviously you seem to be in quite a twitter over it.

Russia's economy was in the crapper regardless of Ukraine. I don't care about either of these countries but I enjoy calling out the ignorant Americans and their myopic worldviews, as well as grammatical shortcomings. It's "atwitter". Not "in a twitter." Twitter is something else entirely.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You twit. Haven't the last several decades taught you anything? The game isn't to fight Russia militarily, old school style, the game is to get Russia entangled in military expenditure at the expense of everything else and to then bankrupt Russia - and that war is already taking its toll. Didn't Afghanistan and the days of Perestroika teach you anything about how this stuff works?

I think you're the one who's been taking it easy at school. The perestroika farce left the West much more of an idiot than Russia - yes, you told yourself you bankrupted the country, then plowed billions of your taxpayer money into aid packages (which funded lots of lots of expensive real estate around the world with zero difference to ordinary Russians), then rode high on the dumb dream of "as soon as we show these guys the free market and democracy, they'd become exactly like us!", and then...what? I guess you don't question how effective your "bankrupting" strategy is if mere decades later Russia remains easily capable of fucking its impotent, corrupt, utterly dependent neighbors up the ass. Uh-huh.

Russia's foolish Ukraine strategy is already weakening its already-fragile economy. I'm not too worried about where this is going, but obviously you seem to be in quite a twitter over it.

Russia is already violating the latest supposed cease fire. Time to remove Russia from the SWIFT system and wait for Putin to cry "dyadya."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Uh, I guess you don't know much about helicopter and tank warfare, but yes, we can hold them off just like we helped the mujahideen do it in the 70s. You sound drunk, so when you sober up we can discuss it in more detail.

Your use of "we" makes me think you're the one who's high on something. YOU can hold them off? Take that little three-point hat off your head, it makes you look even dumber than you are. Russia isn't exactly short on tanks or helicopters. And more importantly...is Afghanistan better off, now that "you" helped the majahideen? Yes, I know, you left behind such a flourishing country, the envy of the whole neighborhood. Ukraine must be positively clamoring to end up exactly like Afghanistan.

You are long on insults, short on data. And "we" is the United States government. And yes, there aren't really many good countermeasures for good AGTMs these days. And that plus their slow speed is why tanks are becoming obsolete. Which is why they are laying people off at the Bradley and at the M1 Abrams factories. This is really basic stuff.

I'd like you to address the main point - you think Ukraine is eager to be your next Afghanistan? Really? Because clearly, "your" intervention made things so massively better for that country, didn't it?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Uh, I guess you don't know much about helicopter and tank warfare, but yes, we can hold them off just like we helped the mujahideen do it in the 70s. You sound drunk, so when you sober up we can discuss it in more detail.

Your use of "we" makes me think you're the one who's high on something. YOU can hold them off? Take that little three-point hat off your head, it makes you look even dumber than you are. Russia isn't exactly short on tanks or helicopters. And more importantly...is Afghanistan better off, now that "you" helped the majahideen? Yes, I know, you left behind such a flourishing country, the envy of the whole neighborhood. Ukraine must be positively clamoring to end up exactly like Afghanistan.

You are long on insults, short on data. And "we" is the United States government. And yes, there aren't really many good countermeasures for good AGTMs these days. And that plus their slow speed is why tanks are becoming obsolete. Which is why they are laying people off at the Bradley and at the M1 Abrams factories. This is really basic stuff.

Comparing Afghanistan and the Ukraine is ludicrous.

Comparing the heights of the cold war to now is ludicrous.

Anonymous wrote:

Uh, I guess you don't know much about helicopter and tank warfare, but yes, we can hold them off just like we helped the mujahideen do it in the 70s. You sound drunk, so when you sober up we can discuss it in more detail.

Your use of "we" makes me think you're the one who's high on something. YOU can hold them off? Take that little three-point hat off your head, it makes you look even dumber than you are. Russia isn't exactly short on tanks or helicopters. And more importantly...is Afghanistan better off, now that "you" helped the majahideen? Yes, I know, you left behind such a flourishing country, the envy of the whole neighborhood. Ukraine must be positively clamoring to end up exactly like Afghanistan.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tatars are not originally native to Crimea. All of mankind is tribal, from other areas.

The Tatars have a far longer and more legitimate claim to Crimea than the johnny-come-lately Russians do. And they made it clear that they did not approve of Crimean annexation by Russia.

Did the Normans have a legitimate claim to Britian? The conquistadors to Mexico and Peru? So naive.

We are talking about war. Brute force.

That's what's basically happened in Crimea - and now Ukraine. It's the 800 pound gorilla throwing its weight around, trying to take whatever it can. There's zero illusion of legitimacy about it anywhere outside of Russian media.

again, for the 100th time, what are you prepared to do about it?

I'm not the poster you are sparring with, but we will arm Ukraine to stall the Russians militarily, until the combination of the oil shock and sanctions bring the domestic situation to a boil. Putin's only out will be to back off.

We? lol. You and what army? It will take a whole lot of armin' for the Ukrainian armed forces to become competitive with Russia's.

And suppose you do? What do you think you'll get in return? Another corrupt banana republic with more oceanside villas paid for with IMF money. Some prize, eh?

Uh, I guess you don't know much about helicopter and tank warfare, but yes, we can hold them off just like we helped the mujahideen do it in the 70s. You sound drunk, so when you sober up we can discuss it in more detail.

I'm not convinced a weak Russia is in our national interest. I'd like them to take a lead role in going after the Islamic terrorists.

Anonymous wrote:
You twit. Haven't the last several decades taught you anything? The game isn't to fight Russia militarily, old school style, the game is to get Russia entangled in military expenditure at the expense of everything else and to then bankrupt Russia - and that war is already taking its toll. Didn't Afghanistan and the days of Perestroika teach you anything about how this stuff works?

I think you're the one who's been taking it easy at school. The perestroika farce left the West much more of an idiot than Russia - yes, you told yourself you bankrupted the country, then plowed billions of your taxpayer money into aid packages (which funded lots of lots of expensive real estate around the world with zero difference to ordinary Russians), then rode high on the dumb dream of "as soon as we show these guys the free market and democracy, they'd become exactly like us!", and then...what? I guess you don't question how effective your "bankrupting" strategy is if mere decades later Russia remains easily capable of fucking its impotent, corrupt, utterly dependent neighbors up the ass. Uh-huh.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tatars are not originally native to Crimea. All of mankind is tribal, from other areas.

The Tatars have a far longer and more legitimate claim to Crimea than the johnny-come-lately Russians do. And they made it clear that they did not approve of Crimean annexation by Russia.

Did the Normans have a legitimate claim to Britian? The conquistadors to Mexico and Peru? So naive.

We are talking about war. Brute force.

That's what's basically happened in Crimea - and now Ukraine. It's the 800 pound gorilla throwing its weight around, trying to take whatever it can. There's zero illusion of legitimacy about it anywhere outside of Russian media.

again, for the 100th time, what are you prepared to do about it?

I'm not the poster you are sparring with, but we will arm Ukraine to stall the Russians militarily, until the combination of the oil shock and sanctions bring the domestic situation to a boil. Putin's only out will be to back off.

We? lol. You and what army? It will take a whole lot of armin' for the Ukrainian armed forces to become competitive with Russia's.

And suppose you do? What do you think you'll get in return? Another corrupt banana republic with more oceanside villas paid for with IMF money. Some prize, eh?

You twit. Haven't the last several decades taught you anything? The game isn't to fight Russia militarily, old school style, the game is to get Russia entangled in military expenditure at the expense of everything else and to then bankrupt Russia - and that war is already taking its toll. Didn't Afghanistan and the days of Perestroika teach you anything about how this stuff works?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Russia has a long proud and wonderful history.

What happens when your handlers back at the Kremlin find out that nobody here is buying your line of BS?

Indeed. This year when the hapless Russian foreign minister spoke at usually buttoned-up Munich Security Congress, delegates laughed at him derisively. He didn't help himself when he suggested in an aside that German unification (which Gorbachev's Kremlin had blessed) was illegal under international law.

You say this like the Munich Security Congress, and in fact any international body, is an arbiter of truth? All they showed, again, is their own whoredom and hypocrisy. The same international agencies would then turn around and call the Saudi King a reformer and ignore, for instance, the brutal repression of the Bahraini uprising by the Saudi armed forces (with American-made weapons). Or they will all show up to the opening of King Abdullah's Interfaith center in VIENNA and call him a hero working for religious rights - all while back home, his government throws non-Muslims who dare to worship publicly in prisons.

So, let's all stop talking about the opinion of international bodies meaning anything. Bunch of whores. They'll do whatever is politically expedient today. If opposing Russia is what sells, that's what they would do. If it wasn't, it would be all about "well, Putin is a reformer. Really, he's just dealing with a very conservative society. They have their own culture. We need to be sensitive. Let's address it privately. At least he guarantees stability. Anyone else would be even worse. Pass the riesling, please."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tatars are not originally native to Crimea. All of mankind is tribal, from other areas.

The Tatars have a far longer and more legitimate claim to Crimea than the johnny-come-lately Russians do. And they made it clear that they did not approve of Crimean annexation by Russia.

Did the Normans have a legitimate claim to Britian? The conquistadors to Mexico and Peru? So naive.

We are talking about war. Brute force.

That's what's basically happened in Crimea - and now Ukraine. It's the 800 pound gorilla throwing its weight around, trying to take whatever it can. There's zero illusion of legitimacy about it anywhere outside of Russian media.

again, for the 100th time, what are you prepared to do about it?

I'm not the poster you are sparring with, but we will arm Ukraine to stall the Russians militarily, until the combination of the oil shock and sanctions bring the domestic situation to a boil. Putin's only out will be to back off.

We? lol. You and what army? It will take a whole lot of armin' for the Ukrainian armed forces to become competitive with Russia's.

And suppose you do? What do you think you'll get in return? Another corrupt banana republic with more oceanside villas paid for with IMF money. Some prize, eh?