Biden's Cascade of Failure!

[SHARK]

Even in the 1930's--US MARINE GENERAL SMEDLEY BUTLER--a decorated war hero--publicly discussed how the US had intervened, instigated rebellions, "regime changes"--and wars--throughout Central America, for SUGAR, PINEAPPLES, and BANANAS. Doe Pineappe and Chiquita Banana baby! They had the White House on SPEED DIAL. Oh, also US Oil companies also gathered at the trough for obscene profits, too. I suppose in your world, Jhkim, the US doesn't do that anymore, right?

I hate to bust that sweet jello bubble, Jhkim, but yes, it still goes on to this day. It has never stopped, nor has it ever been any different. You seem to be blissfully blind to how all nations struggle and compete. Every nation struggles and fights for supremacy, for influence, for power, dominance, and security. Every nation does this--or lines themselves up as the friend behind the big dog on the block.

SHARK, I think we're talking past each other. What that you're saying has been a part of my talking points for decades. Really, it sounds right out of typical progressive critique of globalist imperialism since the 1960s, right up through the 2000s and 2010s to the present.

My ex-father-in-law grew up in Venezuela as part of the American oil companies operating there. So I've learned first hand about the exploitation that American oil companies in Venezuela were responsible for. That doesn't mean that I'm in favor of Chavez and Maduro, though.

The question isn't whether this sort imperialism happens. The question is whether or not it is a good thing.

From my view, it sounds like you're justifying globalist imperialism as "this is just how the world works - learn to accept it". So in the U.S., we should continue to vote in uniparty candidates who do the bidding of oil companies - and not complain about other countries that do the same.

I think that things can get better, and in the long term, they have gotten better. Over the past century, we have seen more and more countries where people live free lives with democratic control of their government.

Greetings!

Last night, I went out to an Irish pub with friends, and celebrated St. Patrick's Day. I had a fantastic basket of Fish & Chips, with Tartar Sauce. I also had a small bowl of traditional Irish Stew, with some yummy bread. All accompanied by some Irish beer, and a White Russian drink. I also enjoyed a slice of the Chocolate Guinness Cake--layers of chocolate cake with Chocolate Mousse, topped by a dark Chocolate Ganesh and Raspberry sauce. Really, an excellent meal. Afterwards, I had some Irish Cream on the rocks, and a fine cigar!

So, now we get back into our political discussion here.

I don't care what Yanakovich was doing, before 2014. The fact is, he was Pro-Russian. He was also anti-EU, and not going along with EU economic plans and proposals--that, not coincidentally--benefitted various EU corporations hugely. Furthermore, Yanakovich was on board with economic plans that benefitted Ukraine and Russia--like various pipeline management projects that Russia was involved with Ukraine in doing, that would extend into Western Europe, and supply western Europe with oil.

We know that the EU and the US didn't like Yanakovich, or his policies, or his good relationship with Russia, so, they decided that Yanakovich had to go--by any means necessary. Thus, what we can see, is the "Colour Revolution" was funded, instigated, and supervised by the US government. Listen or read to the leaked transctips of our fucking ambassador chick, Nuland. So, that's a fact.

The US has supported and trained Ukrainian forces--including the Nazi Azov troops. That also, is a fact.

That makes the US, and by extension, the cock-sucking EU, GUILTY. A priori. Done.

The ongoing US support and involvement with Ukraine is therefore, corrupt, unjust, immoral, and evil.

I think that the US should let Russia and Ukraine sort out there own business, between themselves. I'm also very possessive of our own national pride and prestige. If the US was involved with a civil war, I wouldn't appreciate any foreign power jumping up to help supply them with arms, intelligence, money, and other goodies. At All. Stay the fuck out of OUR BUSINESS. Furthermore, it's OUR LAND. OUR BORDERS. OUR SECURITY. I would fucking jackhammer any nation arrogantly coming up and saying well, you are wrong, and need to do what we fucking say! Fuck that. Ram them with bombers or a fucking nuke, and make them learn their fucking pace. Step out of line, and get fucking annihilated.

But, that ship has sailed. We are in the here and now. So, I think that the facts show that the US is absolutely wrong, and at fault for starting the bullshit to begin with. We instigated the fucking coup--the "Colour Revolution" that brought down the democratically-elected government of Ukraine, and we then installed our nice little puppet, that would let the EU corporations fuck Ukraine in the ass--and, with the added benefit, open the door to the US advancing NATO power further eastwards, geographically, into Ukraine that would make the continued survival of the Russian state precarious at best, and promote further corruption and subversion into the Russian state, to bring the entire Russian country to their knees. Culturally, economically, and politically, corrupt them with even more streams of Liberal Globalism, more Feminism, more Rainbow Hippo propaganda, more abortion propaganda, and more propaganda aimed at attacking the Orthodox Christian Church, and the Christian people in general.

That was the plan. But President Vladimir Putin said "Fuck That!", and invaded.

You need to study real History, and real Geography, and Political Science. There can be no Russia without Ukraine, so Ukraine will be defeated and brought into the fold by Russia. Russia cannot exist with a hostile Ukraine on their border. Just like Georgia. The US tried to train Georgian armies, and we sent "advisors" to Georgia too--in preparation for getting our foot in the door there, but a month later, President Putin sent in the Russian armies and crushed Georgia, and restored a secure border for Russia, and shut the door there in our face, so we couldn't get yet another Chess piece on the board in our favour.

Why is that important? Again, understand Geography and resources. The natural borders of Russia are somewhere along Poland, or further westwards. From the Baltics, on down the map, there is a cordon of defensible terrain--forests, mountains, marshes--that serve as the only series of natural protections and defense lines for a secure Russia. Move that border a thousand miles eastwards, and you are ready to roll tanks and invasion armies deep into Russia where the Russians would be helpless to defend against. Thus, Ukraine must belong to Russia, one way or the other. In a similar manner, Georgia and Chechnya. Georgia was on the plate. Putin stomped on that. Why? Because of strategic resources, and geography. Morals, morals, morals. Too bad. Russia is the big dog on the block, and cannot exist if the Caucuses Oil region is not in their control. The oil is important, of course, but also the GEOGRAPHY. So, those small nations or peoples down there must find a way to live peaceably with the Russians. Either that, or die. There are no other choices, and they know it. As you look over a good map, other similar areas of strategic interest show themselves as key centers for strategic security for Russia. Kazakhstan comes to mind, as well. Thus, there are very real strategic interests for the Russians that are being threatened. You either accept that and respect it, or you get nuked. Or crushed by tanks, whatever. The Russians are no different from any other large nation state doing what it needs to so as to secure the strategic interests of the state and people.

It would be like expecting the US to let Texas secede, and somehow, be an "Independent nation". *Laughing* NO! That wouldn't happen, or couldn't, because, again, look at a map. Geography and resources determine if a large nation state can survive, or otherwise be doomed to be a little small fractured people that are enslaved by their stronger neighbours. Texas, while being a different culture, a different mind set, and some would say a different language--cannot be free. They will be, now and always, part of the larger America. Otherwise, a United States would be critically threatened, and would not continue to survive for very long. As I noted earlier, these same traits and dynamics of strategic interests, of geography and resources, can be seen with Ukraine and Russia, with the same kinds of results. Russia must in whatever way realign Ukraine, or Russia will cease to be a functioning nation state. The dynamics of strategic resources, strategic geography, work the same everywhere, for every large nation state.

So, the motives that were present at the beginning of this situation, for the US and the EU, are clear. The motives for Russia are also clear in their response. This is simply providing an honest, geo political analysis. Look at the fucking map, understand the resources involved. Then read the news section, and understand the global hegemony of the Liberal World Order, and the methods used by the US to corrupt and destabilize nations, and bring them to their knees, so they are controlled slaves.

That should open your eyes to where there is room for applying a moral lens to the situation. Being more educated, it also provides a window into understanding--real understanding--not the fake confusion and phony bewilderment of the Libtards, "Why do 50% of American Republican support Russia?" Because people are actually educated, and can see the in-propagandized elements of history, and politics in action, right before their eyes. The whole beginning stage of this situation are disgusting and corrupt, and most of which, obviously as has been noted, has been instigated by the US.

The fellow member, "I" posted an article earlier, showing how even now we are sending feelers out and trying to set up points of jumping so we can corrupt and overthrow Hungary. Purposely starting rebellions, confusion, instigating resistance and more problems. Creating chaos, so to create destabilization, and weaken the native government. Do you think other nations don't have their own Intelligence Agencies, Jhkim? Do you think they don't have people ready to stand against this kind of evil bullshit?

Why are you suprised when a nation says "no!" to this kind of behavior? Just because we in the US haven't nuked them, doesn't mean that we aren't trying to corrupt them, destroy them, and make them good little controllable slaves. Or client states. Do you think the people of Hungary like being corrupted with Rainbow Hippo propganada? With Feminism propaganda? With all of the corrupt, gagging immoral bullshit and filth that the Western Liberals love so much? Do you not believe that there are people that are willing to kill and fight to resist being corrupted by Western Liberal filth?

I have to light my pipe and make some fresh coffee.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

[SHARK]

But it is Putin who turned Ukraine from seesawing governments and corruption into devastating hot war, and began slaughtering Ukrainians when he didn't get his way.

The U.S. has had devastating wars that it started -- but this isn't one of them.

The war's been going on since 2014, long before Russia invaded.  Zelensky was "slaughtering Ukrainians when he didn't get his way," too.  It was a lot worse than just "seesawing governments and corruption."

Greetings!

That's right, I! Very true!

I also loved that article you posted about Hungary, and America is already trying to corrupt Hungary, and prepare the way for a "Colour Revolution" just like we did in Ukraine!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

[SHARK]

No, I don't agree to that.
...
The U.S. has had devastating wars that it started -- but this isn't one of them.

i'm a little disappointed, because i tried to offer an honest discussion to you and you came back regurgitating all the propaganda they do in Kiev and in western media back at me, complete with "maidan revolution" and "democratic elections". well, let's try to ventilate the room a little more.

"stable state" and "social consensus" are all relative concepts. just about any kind of those is better than civil war - and there wasn't one in Ukraine prior to the coup of 2014. it doesn't matter at all who installed whom - it happens all the time everywhere to those, who allow it, and Ukraine, or rather their post-soviet oligarchy, certainly did - what matters is, which particular seesaw shift resulted in a civil war. which was it again?
and, consequently, Mr. Putin didn't ignite the war - it was going on for eight bloody years before Russia intervened directly, which was a huge escalation for sure, but it wasn't what started this shit at all. the fuckards US installed in Kiev were bombing Donbass for   e i g h t   y e a r s   - why weren't you and the rest of the bleeding hearts around the world as vocal about that as you are now when Putin went berserk? what, you were too busy calling him names and didn't notice?
then, how would you propose this conflict should have been de-escalated in the first place? Putin and co made it abundantly clear that they would not be tolerating any NATO expansion towards their borders anymore, and what was the response? - why, United States and their vassals tried to insert another NATO member right up Putin's keister. and then, just recently Merkel and the rest of US lackeys publicly admitted that Misk agreements were only there to buy time for them to bolster their puppets in Kiev, and there they were not any plans of reconciliation in the first place - so who was escalating again? just Putin? really?

The question isn't whether this sort imperialism happens. The question is whether or not it is a good thing.

From my view, it sounds like you're justifying globalist imperialism as "this is just how the world works - learn to accept it".

and this is just... sad, man. i'm sure SHARK can speak for himself, but allow me chime in as well - no one is telling you to accept anything, that's your choice alone. what's being told to you here is that before you accept or reject something you must fist understand it, and it doesn't look to me like you do. imperialism is a fact of the matter, and it always takes two to fight (at least), but for some reason you insist on only calling the kettle black.

edit: typos

Greetings!

Very sharp and insightful, Klava!

Yes, OPEN THE DOORS TO MORE AIR OF TRUTH!

"The smell of stupid" *Laughing* That made me laugh so much, Klava! I have been smoking my pipe, enjoying some coffee, and just roaring with laughter over your commentary, Klava! Excellent, sir!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

[SHARK]

Greetings!

Here is a program, The Chris Hedges Report. In this program episode, Chris Hedges interviews Medea Benjamin, where they discuss the War in Ukraine. They talk about the United States instigating the "Colour Revolution" in Ukraine, headed up by Victoria Nuland, the then-serving Under Secretary of State (US). WE instigated the coup in Ukraine. The US has also supported, funded, and trained NUMEROUS Right-wing, fascist military units in Ukraine, including the Nazi AZOV Brigades.

They discuss more lies and evil corruption by the US and NATO--how we PROMISED RUSSIA OVER AND OVER that we would not advance NATO beyond Germany.

All LIES, CORRUPTION, DECEIT, AND WARMONGERING. This entire war in Ukraine is engineered to enrich the US Global Empire, the National Security State, and funnel billions of profits into US arms corporations. And, also to strengthen and enrich the EU, and the Liberal World Order. A secondary long-term goal of the mission, is to crush and subordinate Russia.

NOTE: Historically, I have generally *hated* Leftists like Chris Hedges and Medea Benjamin. I also understand that "A broken clock is right twice a day." These people normally or I should say, historically, disgust me. I have admitted that I am very Conservative. I've even mentioned to a past girlfriend when she asked me where I stood on politics--and I told her that I sit at the Right Hand of Genghis Khan!" *Laughing* So, having said that, I believe in integrity. Chris Hedges--a Leftist Scholar and professional journalist, and Medea Benjamin, also a Leftist media scholar, are right on target with their assessments and criticisms of America's entire involvement in Ukraine. They also discuss how the Democrats obsessive hatred of Russia and the whole anti-Russian hysteria promoted throughout much of the US is also manufactured, phony propaganda. Over the years I have periodically kept an eye on listening to Chris Hedges talks and presentations--while many times his positions have infuriated me--I also admit that I have listened, and seen the evidence, the logic, the truth--that he generally strives for. His commitment to truth and integrity also goes along with--wait for it---a concern for morality. Hedges consistently comes down on the US for it's corruption, greed, and absolute lies--and fights to present how many of our government's policies and actions have been entirely fraudulent and immoral, and a shameful abdication of morality. Personally, I come from the "Realist" school of Political Science, of International Relations, as opposed to the "Idealist" school--which is generally more favoured by Liberals, here in America. Nonetheless, integrity and truth are things that I deeply value and cherish. Therefore, I have some considerable respect for Chris Hedges and his analysis on various events concerning US politics, and International Politics. So many good points to think about. I remain encouraged that here at least in the US, there are many true Conservatives and also a few Leftists that can see through all of the lies, corruption, and propaganda, promoted by the US and the EU, and see the real truth.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

[SHARK]

Greetings!

Here we have another Chris Hedges Reports program that discusses the war in Ukraine, and the US and NATO media censorship. The lies, the corruption, the cover-ups, the firing and pressuring against journalists that dare to have the courage and integrity to speak the truth. They are typically silenced. Interestingly, Hedges talks with another journalist here also, Patrick Lawrence as I recall, about the media censorship of a Amnesty International report that Ukraine tactics were a violation of the Laws of War, by purposefully setting up military forces near schools and hospitals. In addition, atrocities and war crimes--by NAZI AZOV brigades--are also lied about, and covered up. A absolutely scrubbed picture is presented to the Western Public.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

[SHARK]

Greetings!

It is refreshing to listen to Colonel Macgreggor here, in this program, where he is interviewed about commentary on the War in Ukraine. Colonel Macgreggor's analysis is very different from the jello propaganda served up on a daily basis by a corrupt, mainstream American Media. Colonel Macgreggor discusses the military situation, as well as growing economic problems--and an economic crisis--throughout Western Europe, as well as here in America. Also, he comments on growing Russian industry and strength, and contrasts that with serious, and irreplaceable losses suffered by Ukraine. He also takes aim at how the US could have genuinely engaged with Russia in the very beginning, and averted this terrible war from the start. It is a relatively brief program, only about 30 minutes, and well-worth listening to for a balanced, sober analysis of the Ukraine War at present, with some analysis about future capabilities and likely political outcomes.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

[Klava]

"stable state" and "social consensus" are all relative concepts. just about any kind of those is better than civil war - and there wasn't one in Ukraine prior to the coup of 2014. it doesn't matter at all who installed whom - it happens all the time everywhere to those, who allow it, and Ukraine, or rather their post-soviet oligarchy, certainly did - what matters is, which particular seesaw shift resulted in a civil war. which was it again?
and, consequently, Mr. Putin didn't ignite the war - it was going on for eight bloody years before Russia intervened directly, which was a huge escalation for sure, but it wasn't what started this shit at all.

Russia intervened directly with the annexation of Crimea immediately

true. how many people died in Crimea as a result? i don't have the number in front of me, but i think you can count those on one hand. you'll have to forgive me, but, personally, i measure the results of imperialistic conflicts mostly in lives lost, not butts hurt.

before the interim government had done anything in Donbas.

it didn't start in Donbass. the fucktards installed in Kiev were crystal clear on their intentions towards ethnic russians right off the bat. just for comparison, you know what one of the the first legislative proposals was that "horrible commies" discussed, when they took power in 1917? - it was called "of peace and of land", and was to deal with ending the war and property rights on land. you know what the democracy-loving US puppets put up? - to strip russian language from its status as official. in a nation of about 42 million people with something like 15 to 20 millions (depending on whom you ask) ethnic russians.

As for the start of hostilities in Donbas... As I understand it, you are saying that the interim government is to blame for its extremism - in other words, for going too far on the seesaw. But was what the interim government objectively that much worse than the Yanukovych government? I'd be open to evidence on this. From what I have learned, it doesn't seem like it.

you "learned" something, huh? how interesting. in current information war, the only way to find out for sure what happened in there would be to go there, man.
i mean, i wouldn't be able to prove anything that follows to you - unless you come visit that is - but let's have a little proximity check:
i'm married to a half-ukrainian. i had been in contact with friends relatives and colleagues in ukraine for 20+ years (most of those connections are severed now, sadly). i have a cousin who's married to an ethnic russian who had to flee their home in Ukraine along with his whole family for fear of their lives very shortly after the coup. the stories of what nationalistic thugs unleashed by junta in Kiev were doing there they carried with them were horrible to say the least. but i wouldn't claim to know the details - everything i posted for you is based solely on what comes out the the mouths of those, who call the shots. you on the other hand are sitting on the other side of the globe, your closest contact with this shit is via "English speaking players, whos views align with Western values" and you "learned stuff"?

From what I understand, ethnic Ukrainians experienced some anti-democratic oppression under Yanukovych, and ethnic Russians experienced some anti-democratic oppression under the the interim government and later Poroshenko. Oppression means, among other things, that anti-government protesters were jailed unfairly - and not allowed legitimate anti-government free speech. So ethnic Russians had legitimate grievances with the Poroshenko government, but then so did ethnic Ukrainians under Yanukovych.

My impression is that ethnic Russians in Donbas were emboldened by the Russian annexation of Crimea, and expected to receive Russian military support, so quickly turned to extreme separatism and violence. They had some legitimate grievances with the government, but no worse than ethnic Ukrainians had with Yanukovych government.

Do you think that the new government in 2014 was objectively more oppressive and less democratic than the Yanukovych government? Is there anything to show that?

Houston to jhkim...
come in, jhkim...

seriously, man. come back to earth. "democray"? in post-soviet Ukraine?

If not, it seems to me that the escalation to greater violence came primarily from the Russian side in 2014, just as Russia further escalated in 2022 with its invasion.

as i said, too much mind reading here, man, too much appealing to emotions and arguments based on things you have no way of knowing.

the fuckards US installed in Kiev were bombing Donbass for   e i g h t   y e a r s   - why weren't you and the rest of the bleeding hearts around the world as vocal about that as you are now when Putin went berserk? what, you were too busy calling him names and didn't notice?
then, how would you propose this conflict should have been de-escalated in the first place? Putin and co made it abundantly clear that they would not be tolerating any NATO expansion towards their borders anymore, and what was the response? - why, United States and their vassals tried to insert another NATO member right up Putin's keister.

The War in Donbas could have been de-escalated by negotiating another ceasefire. Minsk and Minsk 2 failed, but many conflicts have had a dozen or more attempts at ceasefires.

you have conveniently omitted the part were i pointed out that there wasn't any plans for de-escalation on Merkel and co's side in the first place. it was all supposed to just buy time.

as far as NATO, the U.S. and the West are not obliged to submit to Putin's demands any more than Putin is obliged to submit to the demands of the U.S. Putin can't simply demand that, say, Finland can't join NATO or he will invade Finland. That wouldn't be a reasonable demand. Finland has a border with Russia, but it is an independent country.

uh huh. you've been already asked here what you think would happen if we turned situation around and, say, russia or china went to the other side of the glode, installed a vehemently anti-US government in, for example, Canada, and the junta started harassing all the english speaking citizens of that nation - do you think United States would interfere? would that be fair?

What both sides are responsible for is to not escalate violence.

well, that is one thing we can at least agree on. and imo, judging by what info is available atm, United States and vassals got exactly what they intended out of this.

[SHARK]

Greetings!

Klava, here is a full interview with Russian Foreign Minister Maria Zakharova, about Ukraine. Maria Zakharova proceeds to brilliantly educate and ruthlessly crushes the retarded US CNN journalists that attempt to fight her while spewing propaganda. Maria Zakharova just really take them to school, and with such class and style!

What I your perspective on this exchange here? I, of course, got to read the translation. Just listening to her speaking Russian and eloquently explaining all kind of things is such a joy! And, damn she is so smart and razor sharp! Notice how Maria Zakharova proceeds through this entirely without any teleprompters? I don't even think she looks at any notes! She just unpacks all of this straight from her mind! As you know, I don't speak Russian, but just listening to her, watching her eyes and body language, she is immensely intelligent and confident in everything she says. Beautiful episode here!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

[jhkim]

Hey, Klava. We have some talking past each other, so I'm trying to dig down to the core points.

as far as NATO, the U.S. and the West are not obliged to submit to Putin's demands any more than Putin is obliged to submit to the demands of the U.S. Putin can't simply demand that, say, Finland can't join NATO or he will invade Finland. That wouldn't be a reasonable demand. Finland has a border with Russia, but it is an independent country.

uh huh. you've been already asked here what you think would happen if we turned situation around and, say, russia or china went to the other side of the glode, installed a vehemently anti-US government in, for example, Canada, and the junta started harassing all the english speaking citizens of that nation - do you think United States would interfere? would that be fair?

You've used this a couple times. But there's a huge difference between "interfere" and an all-out invasion that costs tens of thousands of lives.

As I've already mentioned, there are already two socialist regimes adjacent to the U.S. - Cuba and Venezuela. Canada seems further off, but it seems conceivable that at some point Mexico could have an anti-American socialist revolution similar to Cuba or Venezuela. And I would not be surprised if China and/or Russia had given covert assistance to the anti-American side. If that was the case, I expect that the U.S. would do a lot of moves -- including harden its border, put troops in place, begin economic sanctions, and take covert action like funding and arming Mexican insurgents.

However, if the U.S. were to respond by invading Mexico wholesale and bombing Mexicans cities to "liberate" them from their government, then I'd be out there with the anti-war protests calling for the American government to stop, and encouraging other countries to help stop the U.S.'s immoral war. It's a question of the level of violence. You seem to use the same metric here:

---

Russia intervened directly with the annexation of Crimea immediately

true. how many people died in Crimea as a result? i don't have the number in front of me, but i think you can count those on one hand. you'll have to forgive me, but, personally, i measure the results of imperialistic conflicts mostly in lives lost, not butts hurt.

I don't think lives lost is the only metric, but yeah, I agree that it is a really important one. I think there's a huge difference between the annexation of Crimea and the invasion, and my reaction to each was very different.

---

What both sides are responsible for is to not escalate violence.

well, that is one thing we can at least agree on. and imo, judging by what info is available atm, United States and vassals got exactly what they intended out of this.

I'm glad we agree on violent escalation being the problem, at least.

To explain my point of view, I think it might help to get some of my own background. My father comes from what is now North Korea, and was born outside of Pyongyang. His father moved south, but his uncles and other family mostly remained in the north. I have a ton of criticisms of how the U.S. handled South Korea. That they installed a pro-American junta, they never intended fair elections, they kept U.S. troops on hand to quell unrest, and they encouraged murderous anti-communist purges. As an 12-year-old child, my father was taken in by the police and beaten for suspicion of helping his family pass money to his communist uncle.

However bad the U.S. and its junta was, though, the North Korean side were far worse. Politics is always a choice of lesser evils. I and everyone in my family are happy that they weren't conquered and had to live under the North Korean regime. South Koreans have had to deal with oppressive police, military juntas, corruption, and more - but that is all far less than what my relatives in North Korea have had to deal with.

I've done my best to learn about both sides of this. I went with my father to the Chinese border of North Korea, and we stopped at North Korean cultural exchange centers to look at materials there. I've read accounts of the many atrocities that have come to light since then. Even so, I still blame primarily the North Korean side for escalating and turning the conflict into a hot war that killed millions.

I think the decades since have demonstrated this. South Korea has made great strides towards establishing democracy and protecting free speech. We see a lot of open media that is critical of American action, and has exposed American atrocities during the occupation. In North Korea, not so much.

This is important because almost all of the arguments here apply to South Korea. That the Americans and the West had no business in Asia, and were just trying to establish a foothold there. That geographically, Korea was naturally in the Chinese and/or Russian sphere. etc.

---

i'm married to a half-ukrainian. i had been in contact with friends relatives and colleagues in ukraine for 20+ years (most of those connections are severed now, sadly). i have a cousin who's married to an ethnic russian who had to flee their home in Ukraine along with his whole family for fear of their lives very shortly after the coup. the stories of what nationalistic thugs unleashed by junta in Kiev were doing there they carried with them were horrible to say the least. but i wouldn't claim to know the details

Thanks for the background. To explain more of my sources, I have no direct family in Ukraine, but I have several close friends here who have direct family in Russia and/or Ukraine in my circles. I am close with a friend from church who immigrated from Russia as an adult as did her husband, and one of the people in my local roleplaying circle immigrated from Ukraine as a child, and has been in contact with her family there.

From 2005 to 2017, I'd gone to role-playing conventions in Finland and Sweden - which had attendees from Russia, Ukraine, and many other former Soviet countries. I also used my trip in 2009 to visit a friend living in Moscow. I've kept in contact with many people from these trips. Last year after the war started, I was contacted by one of these friends in Ukraine hoping I could help get a Starlink device using my Silicon Valley contacts. (I couldn't, but I investigated.)

I also don't claim to know the details, but I am doing my best to talk to sources who are as close as possible to the issues.

---

the fucktards installed in Kiev were crystal clear on their intentions towards ethnic russians right off the bat. just for comparison, you know what one of the the first legislative proposals was that "horrible commies" discussed, when they took power in 1917? - it was called "of peace and of land", and was to deal with ending the war and property rights on land. you know what the democracy-loving US puppets put up? - to strip russian language from its status as official. in a nation of about 42 million people with something like 15 to 20 millions (depending on whom you ask) ethnic russians.

Can you clarify about the official language? From search, the sources I see prior to 2014 still say that Ukrainian was made the sole official language in the 1996 constitution. Here's an example, but the same is described in a number of places.

https://extranet.who.int/mindbank/item/4669

I'm prepared to believe there was violence against ethnic Russians, but the official language doesn't seem like evidence of it. I'd want to hear more about your cousin's having to flee, which sounds much worse.

[Klava]

Klava, here is a full interview with Russian Foreign Minister Maria Zakharova, about Ukraine.
...
What I your perspective on this exchange here?
...

well... you know, there's a saying in russia "ебала жаба гадюку", which could be loosely translated as something like "ones a toad was fucking a viper" - that's kinda how it all looks to me. honestly, it may not have been very obvious from my posts here, but i really hate what Maria Zakharova and her likes represent about as much as i hate those fucktards from CNN who have the audacity to call themselves "journalists".
as to that particular video - well, she is a talking head with a bunch of pre-approved points and comebacks, but nothing special really. the fact that that dude was being pwned as hard by her as he was speaks more of how pathetic he and his whole agenda really is than anything else.
now, the actual minister (Zakharova is just a spokesperson and PR manager) Sergey Lavrov is true gigachad, and speaks proper english as well (when he wants to). watch him for better lulz

[SHARK]

Klava, here is a full interview with Russian Foreign Minister Maria Zakharova, about Ukraine.
...
What I your perspective on this exchange here?
...

well... you know, there's a saying in russia "ебала жаба гадюку", which could be loosely translated as something like "ones a toad was fucking a viper" - that's kinda how it all looks to me. honestly, it may not have been very obvious from my posts here, but i really hate what Maria Zakharova and her likes represent about as much as i hate those fucktards from CNN who have the audacity to call themselves "journalists".
as to that particular video - well, she is a talking head with a bunch of pre-approved points and comebacks, but nothing special really. the fact that that dude was being pwned as hard by her as he was speaks more of how pathetic he and his whole agenda really is than anything else.
now, the actual minister (Zakharova is just a spokesperson and PR manager) Sergey Lavrov is true gigachad, and speaks proper english as well (when he wants to). watch him for better lulz

Greetings!

Yes, Klava! I am always overjoyed when some Jello-filled US Journalist gets wrecked in these kinds of sessions. It is also sad, that we have so many "Journalists" that are--supposedly educated--and yet, they so often show themselves to be absolute morons. It is clear that they have zero real knowledge of the topic at hand.

As for Zakharova, yes. I see. She is the PR person. Well, she certainly has her facts and figures very well memorized! No teleprompters, no real notes, she just unleashes on this clown, right from the hip. I was roaring with laughter with every other sentence she said, while the CNN cown is stuttering and desperately trying to keep up. It is clear that he is really like a "Fish Out of Water". *Laughing*

Have you watched the other videos I posted? Each of them is very interesting, and provides different perspectives on the issues, though also with major points being in common and agreement.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

[jhkim]

Klava, here is a full interview with Russian Foreign Minister Maria Zakharova, about Ukraine.
...
What I your perspective on this exchange here?

well... you know, there's a saying in russia "ебала жаба гадюку", which could be loosely translated as something like "ones a toad was fucking a viper" - that's kinda how it all looks to me. honestly, it may not have been very obvious from my posts here, but i really hate what Maria Zakharova and her likes represent about as much as i hate those fucktards from CNN who have the audacity to call themselves "journalists".
as to that particular video - well, she is a talking head with a bunch of pre-approved points and comebacks, but nothing special really.

Thanks for that, Klava. I'm still catching up on watching SHARK's videos, and I was surprised by the content in some of them. He earlier posted this Max Blumenthal video:

Here is  video news report made by The Real News Network. The interview is with author Max Blumenthal. Also, take notice that this news report and video were presented *5 Years ago*. This is before the Russo-Ukraine war began in February, of 2022.

NOTE: Oh, and if there are any cock-sucking Nazi apologists--or Libtard morons that want to try and tap dance and screech that the fucking AZOV BATTALION doesn't exist, or isn't really full of NAZIS, or any other GASLIGHTING excuse for fucking Ukraine and the Zelensky Junta, pack it in your ass right now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5Uf7aooxvE

This is some transcript from the interview:

One of the things that hasn't been really mentioned in Israeli media is the fact that the Israeli government last year signed a memorandum of understanding with the Polish Law and Justice government and part of that memorandum of understanding was that Israel recognizes Poland's need to ban expressions relating to Polish death camps. Israel just signed onto that. They basically signed on to the legislation that their government is condemning.

And you know why did they do that... Well, Israel has a long history and the Zionist movement has a long history of collaborating with anti-semites including Nazi Germany to advance its own narrow national interests. In this case, we recently saw Poland abstain from a UN vote condemning Israel over the Trump administration's recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital and Poland recently signed a 14.5 million dollar deal to import Patriot missiles from Israel that are mostly made by Israeli arms manufacturers.

Israel's basically looking to Eastern Europe as the future support base for it's right-wing government and Israel really has no place to condemn Poland or the Ukraine or any other country that engages in banning certain recognitions of the Holocaust because Israel's government has authorized its own legislation to forbid its Palestinian citizens from observing their own destruction - specifically the Nakba which represented the organized campaign of ethnic cleansing from 1947 to 1948 in the ongoing campaign of destruction and dispossession of the Palestinian people. So those are really shared values between Israel and the Polish government and those shared values are reflected in the memorandum of understanding.

So this 2017 video critiques the shared nazi-tolerant values among all of the Ukraine government, Polish government, Trump administration, and Israeli government. Most people on the Left are quite aware and indeed vocal about how white supremacist and neo-nazi movements are active within Europe and the U.S. - including within Ukraine.

Since 2017, Ukraine had Zelensky become president who is a Jew and the grandson of a Holocaust survivor. Despite this, I'm sure there is fair critique that he has been pragmatically tolerant of neo-nazi activity within Ukraine.

However, I don't think that in any way justifies invasion in order to denazify Ukraine.

[SHARK]

Thanks for that, Klava. I'm still catching up on watching SHARK's videos, and I was surprised by the content in some of them. He earlier posted this Max Blumenthal video:



However, I don't think that in any way justifies invasion in order to denazify Ukraine.

Greetings!

Yes, I hope you enjoy the videos, Jhkim. I certainly did. I found them to be very interesting, as well as informative.

As for you disagreeing that in any way justifies invasion in order to denazify Ukraine, well, you see? That's where disagreements come from. Russia, clearly, doesn't care whether or not you agree. I would think the fact that Russia fought World War II and crushed the Nazis--while themselves suffering the absolute disastrous losses of 25 to 50 million people entitles them to take care of business. That goes along with to the victor goes the spoils. Defeated and crushed enemy nations must bow down and submit to the victorious, conquering nation. The US has done that for decades in Germany and Japan--and as such, all of these lands around Russia are sensitive areas for their security. So, yeah, if Russia doesn't want Nazis in Ukraine, that's the way it is. Ukraine wouldn't even be here as any kind of entity, if Russia didn't first crush all of the Nazi armies and liberate Ukraine, as part of the Russian Motherland. So, yeah. I imagine Russians believe what they want and what they deem to be a priority is more important than what you, or I, or anyone else thinks. If that isn't good enough, well, that's why tanks and flamethrowers exist.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

[jhkim]

I would think the fact that Russia fought World War II and crushed the Nazis--while themselves suffering the absolute disastrous losses of 25 to 50 million people entitles them to take care of business. That goes along with to the victor goes the spoils. Defeated and crushed enemy nations must bow down and submit to the victorious, conquering nation. The US has done that for decades in Germany and Japan--and as such, all of these lands around Russia are sensitive areas for their security. So, yeah, if Russia doesn't want Nazis in Ukraine, that's the way it is. Ukraine wouldn't even be here as any kind of entity, if Russia didn't first crush all of the Nazi armies and liberate Ukraine, as part of the Russian Motherland. So, yeah. I imagine Russians believe what they want and what they deem to be a priority is more important than what you, or I, or anyone else thinks. If that isn't good enough, well, that's why tanks and flamethrowers exist.

"To the victor go the spoils" is basically "might makes right". If that's your argument, then it seems there is little to criticize the American globalist power-grabbers. They are the victors, so they should get what they want. Whoever wins, it just goes to show.


I don't believe that, though. The U.S. can't always get what it wants even after it invades and is militarily superior - as shown by Vietnam and Afghanistan. Rule by the end of a gun works, but only in the short term. South Korea was once a U.S. imposed military dictatorship, but it has had major democratic reforms. It still has problems, but it's a damn sight better than North Korea.

Overall, this strangely feels like disagreement that I've had with my far-left friends. I know some people who are so opposed to U.S. imperialism that they defend anti-American communist rule like Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea, and China. I am opposed to U.S. imperialism, but sometimes they are the lesser evil in a conflict.

[SHARK]

I would think the fact that Russia fought World War II and crushed the Nazis--while themselves suffering the absolute disastrous losses of 25 to 50 million people entitles them to take care of business. That goes along with to the victor goes the spoils. Defeated and crushed enemy nations must bow down and submit to the victorious, conquering nation. The US has done that for decades in Germany and Japan--and as such, all of these lands around Russia are sensitive areas for their security. So, yeah, if Russia doesn't want Nazis in Ukraine, that's the way it is. Ukraine wouldn't even be here as any kind of entity, if Russia didn't first crush all of the Nazi armies and liberate Ukraine, as part of the Russian Motherland. So, yeah. I imagine Russians believe what they want and what they deem to be a priority is more important than what you, or I, or anyone else thinks. If that isn't good enough, well, that's why tanks and flamethrowers exist.

"To the victor go the spoils" is basically "might makes right". If that's your argument, then it seems there is little to criticize the American globalist power-grabbers. They are the victors, so they should get what they want. Whoever wins, it just goes to show.


I don't believe that, though. The U.S. can't always get what it wants even after it invades and is militarily superior - as shown by Vietnam and Afghanistan. Rule by the end of a gun works, but only in the short term. South Korea was once a U.S. imposed military dictatorship, but it has had major democratic reforms. It still has problems, but it's a damn sight better than North Korea.

Overall, this strangely feels like disagreement that I've had with my far-left friends. I know some people who are so opposed to U.S. imperialism that they defend anti-American communist rule like Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea, and China. I am opposed to U.S. imperialism, but sometimes they are the lesser evil in a conflict.

Greetings!

Well, Jhkim, have you had a chance now to watch all of the videos I posted? I think that the evidence is rock solid in showing that, certainly in regards to the Ukraine War, it is the US and EU that are primarily guilty of corruption, arrogance, and provoking a war in Ukraine, and provoking the Russians. Roll the strategic and diplomatic "Film" back to 2014, and stop the US and EU power-mongering, and there would therefore be no war going on in Ukraine. Ukraine would just be this small nation that is a friendly neighbor-state to Russia. No NATO BS, none of that.

Even if you otherwise subtract such a scenario, if any dispute did develop between Ukraine and Russia--again, it remains small-cale, relatively isolated, and none of our business. Such a conflict could be thus negotiated between themselves, or maybe also add in Poland, Belorussia, and Hungary. Again though, letting THEM handle the situation, whatever the disagreements.

Having said that, though, again, with no US and EU power-mongering going on, there doesn't seem to be a provocation for Russia to invade Ukraine. Yanokovich would still be governing Ukraine, and everyone would be relatively happy or at least more or less content. I would say that scenario would be far superior and preferable to the BS disaster that has befallen Ukraine since then.

Sadly, though, that train has left the station.

The question now is, as we see Russia getting stronger by the week, how do we get out of Ukraine, while simultaneously avoiding some stupid escalation of war with Russia? THAT is what is most important, now. Of course, we have a pack of corrupt hyenas in Washington D.C that are just rubbing their hands together in glee trying to concoct a scheme that manages to escalate a war in Ukraine, somehow bringing the US ever closer to getting directly involved.

That is not an outcome that I want to see. The faster this tragic war is done and over with, the better, for everyone involved. Most especially the Ukrainians, that now have a devastated land and numerous towns and cities that will take YEARS to rebuild. Just imagine how long it will take for Ukraine to get back to the level they were at in January, 2022? Oh, and also, sadly, did you know that 1/4rh of Ukraine's entire population has left Ukraine? Most of those people are not coming back, either. That's gotta be something around 10 to 12 million people. Maybe more, by now. How is Ukraine going to recover from THAT? ONE FOURTH OF THE POPULATION--GONE! That's mind blowing. They have immigrated everywhere from America to Europe, besides the nations immediately bordering Ukraine.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK