Ukraine Invasion discussion thread.

blackbery

Well-known member
Oh DEAR, the Trump-haters back onto 'Russian Collusion Delusion'.

I'm outta here, they will never stop, their TDS too severe.
 

Dirius

Well-known member
You'll be pleased to learn that Germany announced that it will send weapons to Ukraine. France is sending defensive equipment. Ditto the UK.

This may be too little too late, but as of this evening Kyiv still stands in Ukrainian hands.

Don't overlook what is happening now with Russia's economy. This is from Reuters News Service, Dirius. It wouldn't kill you to read a link once in a while.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europ...er-time-under-sanctions-onslaught-2022-02-25/

For one thing, Russia's GDP has dropped substantially in the past decade.

Germany's energy supply's are now 40% domestic renewables, mostly off-shore windfarms. They have their environmental issues, but they're not subject to Vladimir Putin.


I'm not overlooking the economic impact of sanctions, but these don't work on a short-term basis. Ergo this sanctions won't stop the russian invasion, unless its a drawn out invasion that lasts for months on end. All that the sanctions do, is put some pressure on Russia, but they don't prevent the death of civilians.
 

Dirius

Well-known member
Dirius, you live in a fantasy world.

Biden has been in office just over 13 months.

What he inherited from your man Trump was a rampant Covid epidemic creating massive supply chain problems, and an energy sector whose pricing is subject to fluctuations in global energy supply and demand.

Did you actually major in economics, or were you bluffing?

Yes and it only took him 2 months to destroy the economy- which is a surprising achievement. Imagine what he ll do in 3 more years?
 

leomoon

Well-known member
Yes and it only took him 2 months to destroy the economy- which is a surprising achievement. Imagine what he ll do in 3 more years?


What bills did Pres. Biden push through congress that caused the economy to fail in the manner your alleging?



What exactly did he do that caused a sinking of the US economy or Worldwide inflation?


I'd love to hear your valued opinion. When you say "someone ruined the economy, how then did that happen? The GDP is up 7%, the Stock Market has been up up up, Unemployment has been down, the only thing I can think of is worldwide Inflation.



Supply issues we are having, are worldwide. Nothing I am aware of that President Biden did to cause any of it. So you can inform us. :annoyed:
 
Last edited:

Dirius

Well-known member
What bills did Pres. Biden push through congress that caused the economy to fail in the manner your alleging?

What exactly did he do that caused a sinking of the US economy or Worldwide inflation?

I'd love to hear your valued opinion. When you say "someone ruined the economy, how then did that happen? The GDP is up 7%, the Stock Market has been up up up, Unemployment has been down, the only thing I can think of is worldwide Inflation.

Supply issues we are having, are worldwide. Nothing I am aware of that President Biden did to cause any of it. So you can inform us. :annoyed:

Biden's policy in regards to the energy sector, caused a massive rise in costs of production, transportation, and general standards of living. For example, if the price of energy goes up, so does the price of producing and transporting food and goods. The inflation is what has caused the market to crash in the last few months, which is setting up the economy to a massive recession in late 2022 and 2023.

Unemployment is back to its pre-covid levels, which is just the dead-cat bounce effect. The other problem with inflation is devaluation of long-term government bonds, which will soon trigger a mass selloff, and might crash the market even further. Monetary policy itself will stall recession for a few months but bring issues with the rising interest rates hike expected for March period.

The economy is not looking well, but he is setting up the U.S. for a massive crash in late 2022 or 2023.
 

leomoon

Well-known member
Dirius:


You can't just say "his policies", What legislation did he push through Congress? You never answered this.



When did the Stock Market crash? There is no crash that I'm aware of, as it has always goes up and it goes down. It went down700 pts the other and gained 1,000 or so the following day.

There is no Stock Market Crash.



Now, you are making predictions? Nostradamus?



Inflation is here, that is a given. But you've not pointed to one single piece of legislation with his name on it, that caused inflation.



BTW: Corporations have reported RECORD PROFITS yet they are all increasing prices aka "inflation" so what did Mr. Biden do to FORCE the capitalists to increase their prices?



Please be specific.



IF "unemployment is back to where it was pre-pandemic??"and if President Biden caused this, is that a TERRIBLE thing he has done?

Isn't it a "good thing" it's back to where it was BEFORE the pandemic?


Unemployment was low before the pandemic - "thats a good thing?"
then it went up, i.e. "under trump"

Under President Biden "it came back down" Is that a bad thing?


As for "bond sell-offs crashing the market that hasn't crashed?/
WHAT did President Biden do that will de-value bonds?



You say, "monetary policy will stall recession" So says you or Fox TV, it sounds like just an opinion to me.



Yet all these opinions don't say what President Biden did too bring about or not bring about your fears -



Its all speculation, and even if a normal recession occurs (which it should every 20 years or so), then what in the world does that have to do with President Biden?


Nonsensical. Sounds like Fox goobly-gook to me. Vague, non-specific, finger pointing with zero facts.

The Federal Reserve sets the Monetary policy for this country and the interest rates and, not Joe Biden.!!!

I can post their chart for you if you'd like to see it.
 
Last edited:

waybread

Well-known member
T...
I said that, in my opinion, the goal is for Russia not to take Ukraine as a whole.

Instead, the russian strategy is rather to occupy the eastern front and partition it.

Both these things are different. Taking the whole country would imply that the borders of Ukraine would remain the same but under russian control and with a puppet russian government. On the other hand, a partition of Ukraine would create a small number of pro-russian states, but there would still be a rather large chunk of Ukranian land which would be allied with western interests.

If Russia takes the whole country, Putin would be in control of all its resources, which would have an economic impact on Ukraine's clients. If Ukraine still exists, it changes drastically how this resources would later allocate to the European Union.
'
Dirius, the partition idea was bandied about in 2014, with Russia's invasion of Crimea and the eastern districts. I wouldn't say its out of the question, as a "divide and conquer" strategy might work very well. On the other hand, if Putin loses his iron grip, a "multi-state solution" that leaves a core of democratically-minded Ukrainians in the western districts might not be so easy to intimidate. If they were to align more strongly with the West, Putin would still claim that they pose a security risk to his vassal states.

Please stop lying about my political affiliations. You know from my multiple posts-- to which you responded, so you apparently read them-- on other threads, that I am an independent voter with strong centrist leanings. A main reason is that I like to pick and chose my issues without necessarily supporting an entire party platform.

Unfortunately, rightwingers tend to see anyone without extreme pro-Trump loyalties as a bunch of hardcore leftists. This would include traditional moderate Republicans.

If you call me a Democrat, what should I call you? A reactionary?
 

waybread

Well-known member
I'm not overlooking the economic impact of sanctions, but these don't work on a short-term basis. Ergo this sanctions won't stop the russian invasion, unless its a drawn out invasion that lasts for months on end. All that the sanctions do, is put some pressure on Russia, but they don't prevent the death of civilians.

Say what? The Russian invasion is already underway. Sanctions weren't imposed prior to the invasion, rightly or wrongly, to give the West some leverage, and Putin some reason to back off.

The new set of sanctions, as well as the pre-war supply chain problems, Covid, and war fall-out, will have an effect on the Russian people. It's hard to say how far Putin is willing to go with Ukraine if he generates much more hardship back home.
 

Dirius

Well-known member
'
Dirius, the partition idea was bandied about in 2014, with Russia's invasion of Crimea and the eastern districts. I wouldn't say its out of the question, as a "divide and conquer" strategy might work very well. On the other hand, if Putin loses his iron grip, a "multi-state solution" that leaves a core of democratically-minded Ukrainians in the western districts might not be so easy to intimidate. If they were to align more strongly with the West, Putin would still claim that they pose a security risk to his vassal states.

From the perspective of the ukranian population, the long-term consequences don't matter right now, because they are getting killed.

In the short term, for Putin, this might be the best way to secure some territory while mitigating the costs, while for Ukraine a ceasefire to save their population. The eastern territories would end up managing themselves, and while there will be instability, it might still be better than an outright war.

The alternative of a long attrition war will be devastating for the ukrainian population. It is really up to the ukranian leadership which way they want to go, but its very likely the russian strategy is to push the leadership into choosing the solution which saves the population. Lets remember Ukraine is a democratic republic, so the interest of its president should be the security of the people, over the territoy. Every single hour this war continues, more people die.
 

waybread

Well-known member
Yes and it only took him 2 months to destroy the economy- which is a surprising achievement. Imagine what he ll do in 3 more years?

I don't know which economy you are talking about.

I think you were bluffing when you said you have a university degree in economics. In your classes, you would have learned about globalization and international trade. No economy, including Argentina's, stands alone.

Biden inherited a serious Covid pandemic which had already disrupted supply chains, both domestically and internationally.

Biden took office in January, 2021, when the US unemployment rate was 6.4% Today the unemployment rate is 4%. Economists generally regard that as full employment.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/273909/seasonally-adjusted-monthly-unemployment-rate-in-the-us/

The Dow Jones always has its ups and downs, but it generally climbed during the Biden administration. Recent sell-offs have primarily to do with concerns about Putin's invasion of Russia and the West's economic sanctions. Friday it was up over 800 points.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1104278/weekly-performance-of-djia-index/

The US GDP increased in 2021 to $22.99 trillion, a gain of over $2 trillion since 2020.

How many more economic measures to you want?
 

Dirius

Well-known member
Say what? The Russian invasion is already underway. Sanctions weren't imposed prior to the invasion, rightly or wrongly, to give the West some leverage, and Putin some reason to back off.

The new set of sanctions, as well as the pre-war supply chain problems, Covid, and war fall-out, will have an effect on the Russian people. It's hard to say how far Putin is willing to go with Ukraine if he generates much more hardship back home.

Sanctions are a double edge sword, they won't stop the russian invasion going underway, and can also harm the countries applying them (you think increasing oil and gas costs won't affect americans and europeans?) - so it also causes instability back home for the sanctioning nations.

The diference is that despite the sanctions, Russia will be gaining territory is he continues with the war. On the other hand, Europe and the U.S. sanctions will only cause harm to their own population - so sanctions do have the downside of creation a destabilization in their respective nations.

So how long can, for example, France uphold those sanctions before the people protest about them? These are things that also need to be taken into account.Remember your complaints about Trump's economic war with China? Same scenario here, sanctions to Russia also cause problems for the U.S.

From the perspective of Russia, they can loose money with sanctions, and gain money with territory. For Europe, they can only loose money with sanctions.
 

waybread

Well-known member
Dirius, what news are you following? There already is an "outright war" in Ukraine.

The western allies are shipping arms to Ukraine as we speak.

Right now Russia's military strategy has been to blow up a dam providing water to Kyiv, control the airport, and set fire to a pipeline. This looks like a siege to me.

Russia is not reporting its own casualty figures.

From the perspective of the ukranian population, the long-term consequences don't matter right now, because they are getting killed.

In the short term, for Putin, this might be the best way to secure some territory while mitigating the costs, while for Ukraine a ceasefire to save their population. The eastern territories would end up managing themselves, and while there will be instability, it might still be better than an outright war.

The alternative of a long attrition war will be devastating for the ukrainian population. It is really up to the ukranian leadership which way they want to go, but its very likely the russian strategy is to push the leadership into choosing the solution which saves the population. Lets remember Ukraine is a democratic republic, so the interest of its president should be the security of the people, over the territoy. Every single hour this war continues, more people die.
 

Dirius

Well-known member
Dirius, what news are you following? There already is an "outright war" in Ukraine.

The western allies are shipping arms to Ukraine as we speak.

Right now Russia's military strategy has been to blow up a dam providing water to Kyiv, control the airport, and set fire to a pipeline. This looks like a siege to me.

Russia is not reporting its own casualty figures.

What does this comment supposed to be about? Yes the russians are setting up as if the war was going to be long. Why would that surprise you or be in opposition to what I said? At this points your statements are kind of redundant.

Russia's actions are there to set up such a meeting by pressuring the Ukraine into unfavorable terms. Long term war is worse for Ukraine than it is for Russia. Because the longer the war, the more civilians die. Russia isn't loosing civilians. Is that so hard to deduce on your own waybread?
 
Last edited:

waybread

Well-known member
Dirius, western leaders are very much aware that sanctions can hurt their own people. The strategy is simple. Sanctions will hurt Russia much more.

Hard to say what will be Russia's financial gain in controlling territory that it has decimated. The West will pour aid money into Ukraine if it survives the Russian attacks. If Putin takes over, he's on his own to rebuild the infrastructure that his Ukraine-- or those puppet states-- are going to need for him to reap any economic benefits. Recall that he bombed a dam holding Kyiv's water supply, an oil pipeline and territory around an airport.

Meanwhile, Ukrainian fighters are putting up a fierce resistance in and around Kyiv.

Sanctions are a double edge sword, they won't stop the russian invasion going underway, and can also harm the countries applying them (you think increasing oil and gas costs won't affect americans and europeans?) - so it also causes instability back home for the sanctioning nations.

The diference is that despite the sanctions, Russia will be gaining territory is he continues with the war. On the other hand, Europe and the U.S. sanctions will only cause harm to their own population - so sanctions do have the downside of creation a destabilization in their respective nations.

So how long can, for example, France uphold those sanctions before the people protest about them? These are things that also need to be taken into account.Remember your complaints about Trump's economic war with China? Same scenario here, sanctions to Russia also cause problems for the U.S.

From the perspective of Russia, they can loose money with sanctions, and gain money with territory. For Europe, they can only loose money with sanctions.
 

Dirius

Well-known member
Dirius, western leaders are very much aware that sanctions can hurt their own people. The strategy is simple. Sanctions will hurt Russia much more.

Hard to say what will be Russia's financial gain in controlling territory that it has decimated. The West will pour aid money into Ukraine if it survives the Russian attacks. If Putin takes over, he's on his own to rebuild the infrastructure that his Ukraine-- or those puppet states-- are going to need for him to reap any economic benefits. Recall that he bombed a dam holding Kyiv's water supply, an oil pipeline and territory around an airport.

Meanwhile, Ukrainian fighters are putting up a fierce resistance in and around Kyiv.

The infrastructure of the eastern territories isn't too damaged, except for military targets such as airports. It does seem like the russians didn't want to destroy much of their new territory. The real devastation is on the outskirts of Kyev, which might indicate they are not planning on taking that region (they assume they won't be able too and may push for negotiations). Russia may suffer economic losses due to sanctions, but they will gain territory as a result, which is an economic gain. For them it sort of evens out. For those doing the sanctioning, there is no real gain, just loss, even if this loss is marginal.
 

blackbery

Well-known member
She ALWAYS responds by attacking the member who dares to hold an opposing view.

This is how liberals respond when they don't like the truth, they can't refute the facts so they make it personal with their childish insults.

Maybe they will burn the cities down again like the BLM 'mostly peaceful' riots. :sick::sick::sick:


Sorry waybread, I don't really read your posts anymore, so reply all you want, but this is all you'll get from me.
 

blackbery

Well-known member
Back on the fake news trail as usual.:whistling::whistling::whistling:

And, yep, President Trump did meet with the Russians PRIVATELY due to a little thing called Obamagate where the demonrats spied on Trump, before & after the election. They lied to get fake FISAs & colluded with top leaders in the cia/fbi to try to bring down a duly elected president. It's called TREASON 7 they will all hang for it. The death penalty is the correct punishment for those who break US code on treason & sedition.

Durham report dripping out the intel slowly with their source for the fake Russia dossier up for trial in Oct/22.


Nord Stream 2: Trump approves sanctions on Russia gas pipeline
Published21 December 2019



President Donald Trump has signed a law that will impose sanctions on any firm that helps Russia's state-owned gas company, Gazprom, finish a pipeline into the European Union.

The sanctions target firms building Nord Stream 2, an undersea pipeline that will allow Russia to increase gas exports to Germany.

The US considers the project a security risk to Europe.

Both Russia and the EU have strongly condemned the US sanctions.




https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-50875935


AS SOON as the illegal resident o'biden got into office in 2021, he REVERSED the Sanctions & then stopped the Keystone pipeline which made the US MORE energy independent.

Xiden always puts Chinese, Russian interests first, Trump always put AMERICA FIRST.

Trump a Patriot, O'Biden a Traitor.






TRUMP:
However, in January 2017, with the new POTUS, trump worked on removing those sanctions from his good buddy and mentor in all strong arm techniques, Vladimir Putin.

He also invited the Russians, (Putin's right hand man, Lakrov and others working in close proximity) to the Oval Office, the first time EVER Russians were invited in.

There are lots of photos published of them. It happened the first month he was in office, January 2017. Putin used these photos for P.R. in Russia, and certainly helped him gain popularity in Russia which today, (or last week) he still enjoyed.

It was also realized later that trump gave the Russians a top secret info, he received via Israel on the Middle East.

Yep, him!


Photos:



https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=trump%20Russians%20in%20Oval%20Office&qs=n&form=QBIR&sp=-1&pq=trump%20russians%20in%20oval%20office&sc=0-29&cvid=29B38D8C3C044221BC9DFC24438119C3&first=1&tsc=ImageBasicHover
 

blackbery

Well-known member
There are 15 biological laboratories in Ukraine, owned by US private companies, which have extraterritorial status, ie they do not report to the Ukrainian authorities. They may pose a risk of biological contamination. This is what Igor Nikulin, a former member of the UN Biological Weapons Commission said.

It is said that biological warfare agents could also be developed there:

“Private US military biolabs are developing the latest types of biological warfare agents: bacteria and viruses. American biologists then test them on a specific gene pool – plants, animals and humans,” Igor Nikulin told the Army Standard electronic publication.

According to him, in 2014 then-President Barack Obama banned such dangerous experiments from being conducted on US soil. Since then, countries dependent on the US have been chosen as the site for biolaboratories. The “partners” must sign a confidentiality agreement. “Even if something goes wrong, they have no right to share confidential information about the labs’ activities,” the expert said. – In addition, the principle of extraterritoriality applies to these laboratories. All employees have diplomatic passports and these facilities are effectively US territory.

In any case, it cannot be ruled out that dangerous biological substances are being handled there – suspicious outbreaks of disease have already occurred in the past. Examples include hemorrhagic fever, African swine fever, SARS, brucellosis and rabies.

What is dangerous about these laboratories is that they are all private:

“They are essentially contractors for the Pentagon. They enjoy extraterritorial rights and operate under the American flag, but even US President Joe Biden is not fully accountable to private labs. Sometimes they act in the public interest and sometimes in their own interest.”


That the USA has laboratories in Ukraine can also be seen by looking at the Website from the American embassy in Ukraine – even if it says there that the “Biological Threat Reduction Program” is primarily intended to consolidate and “secure” “security-related pathogens and toxins”.
 

blackbery

Well-known member
Russia has repeatedly expressed suspicion in recent years that the US is developing biological weapons, even jointly with China in October asked the UNto conduct investigations in this regard. It was explicitly pointed out that the USA had more than 200 biolaboratories outside of its national territory, the work of which was not transparently informed. The fact that the US co-funded the massively controversial and dangerous Gain of Function research in the Wuhan laboratory, which may have given rise to the corona virus, certainly did not help in this regard.

Against this background, it does not seem impossible that Russian forces should render the laboratories in Ukraine harmless.

Putin taking care of the very dangerous medical labs right next to his border.

Why don't the Pentagon build them in Canada or Mexico right next to THEIR border & see how the American people like that.
 

jac

Well-known member
Reading a couple of hateful, misinformed pages prompts me to shoot ahead and mention a few things it seems no one is aware of.

It is a long understood principle, not theory, that TPTB/globalists have been planning this (like 911, the plandemic, etc.) These same people own the media outlets including radio stations, publishers, you name it. They also own the universities and professors, as well as the senate and congress.

The last world wars should have raised enough suspicions that any intelligent observer could see something stank.

The very definitions of fascism and democracy are so skewed as to evoke a knee jerk response instead of investigation.

This forum features some very educated and talented astrologers. How wonderful if the same research and skill evident in their meticulous processes in astrology were pressed into service when it comes to discriminating truth from fiction in atrocious world events.

I have found it depressing and frustrating to give information based on empiric evidence to folks who want to believe fairytales. So tear away, and I'll be lurking amidst the exchanges re: the million or so things I have yet to fathom about reading the lights.
 
Top