Lol, the West just shut itself out of the 11th biggest economy in the world. But sure, our main motivation in adding tiny Baltic counties to our alliance was so we could sell iPhones there.
4 Likes
https://twitter.com/RichardEngel/status/1498699942268973057?t=n1PIzI8KnGLiA6Ga96xiLQ&s=19
https://twitter.com/phildstewart/status/1498691078437969924?t=NZHX71f2O4lP-TgQcFF03A&s=19
If these two things are true, and I fully assume they are wishful thinking, then this is going inconceivably bad for Russia. Like recheck the loyalty of Putin’s personal security bad.
Well the good news is this deal isn’t offered in places like Ukraine and Chechnya, so they won’t have to suffer under the heel of NATO’s cruel protection racket.
6 Likes
Yea I don’t put too much stock that Russia has given Belarus their partition plans to draw maps on. I thought it was funny that apparently there are some troop movements shown that haven’t happened yet (but everyone knows that’s what they’re going to do) and that he’s out there using a pointing stick and a flip chart.
Is there some kind of Producers angle here? Does Russia have insurance on all of its tanks?
1 Like
YCBWF
this is in english. unfortunately putin doesn’t watch youtube, but o m g someone should force him to watch this.
My completely uninformed explanation is that it seems like Russia really wants this over with fast and they’re willing to Zerg rush Ukraine with tanks even before securing supply lines and airspaces. Maybe it’s worth losing a bunch of tanks and men if they can take Kiev quickly?
crazy video. two of 17 russian helicopters crash into the sea.
watch the second video.
Major eDem “we tried” energy on the yacht seizure failures
3 Likes
I think they may be slowing down by design, choosing to encircle Kyiv rather than attempt to invade it. I also think Russian morale is likely low and there are likely a lot of deserters by raw number. What that constitutes by percentage is anyone’s guess.
I really don’t see your perspective.
NATO really has little to do with US interventionism elsewhere. It’s not like USA wouldn’t have invaded Iraq if NATO didn’t exist.
The assertions of protection under Article 5 and what most NATO members get is not vague at all. And it’s not about protection from the US, so I don’t see why it is accurate to call it a racket. It is really about, “our troops are going to be there so any attack on your soil will also be an attack on us.”
These countries also get to underinvest in their own defense and have access to the world’s best military technology for their own forces.
It would be great if no country needed a military at all, but that doesn’t make any defense pact an exploitative arrangement.
3 Likes
machin’s boat ONETIME!!!
I’m sure we have a LA class sub parked by the Maldeves and could have these dumb boats on the bottom of the ocean within 5 minutes
holy shit