Ukraine: Lindsey Graham Spills The Beans On Why We Are There

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: cherokeetroy

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: charlest2

Small elephant in the room:

Lindsay Graham, McCain, the USA and NATO countries did not attack Ukraine without any provocation, like Russia did.

Large elephant in the room:

I wonder how much of this evolves around trafficking humans. Especially children.

I'd go as far as to say, "not at all".

It would be just as likely that it was a war fought to keep the lizzid peeple in power.

You see, Russia has been trying to reclaim multiple countries that seceded from the USSR bloc, but none is as big a prize is as the Ukraine, which is a veritable bread-basket of agricultural resources and is a source of petroleum, natural gas, iron-ore, coal, manganese, titanium, bauxite, mercury, salt and paraffin wax.

Ukraine also has significant power generating capacity from nuclear, hydro and coal burning sources.

Russia needs those resources and has previously tried controlling the Ukrainian government to get them, but has now resorted to direct military action to wrest them away after the people of Ukraine protested (Euromaidan protests) against being stripped of resources by Russia in 2013-2014.

Subsequent to the Euromaidan protests, Russia began its invasion by annexing the Crimea. There was a lull for several years as the invasion stalled, but the attack was revived in 2022:

Russian invasion of Ukraine - Wikipedia

Yes, human trafficking is synonymous with "lizzid peeple"
because human trafficking is a conspiracy theory. It's not real !

I think you don't understand...humans are also a coveted resource. A very lucrative one.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: cherokeetroy
a reply to: BedevereTheWise

Is the US government involved in child trafficking?

Probably not.

It is actively involved in stopping and prosecuting child trafficking, both in country and, to a lesser extent, abroad, though.

I have to wonder how people who implicitly trust the government wind up on conspiracy websites..

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: chr0naut

Unless you count planning and funding a violent coup on the sitting government...

No, I don't count that. I don't see any evidence that such a thing actually occurred.

Only because you don't want to see.

10 Years ago.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: xuenchen
Graham forgot to say Democrats needed to create a new enemy. 😬

It had nothing to do with the US at all.

I think lots of it does. 😀

originally posted by: cherokeetroy

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: cherokeetroy
a reply to: BedevereTheWise

Is the US government involved in child trafficking?

Probably not.

It is actively involved in stopping and prosecuting child trafficking, both in country and, to a lesser extent, abroad, though.

I have to wonder how people who implicitly trust the government wind up on conspiracy websites..

I don't implicitly trust the government. Nor do I swing to the diametric opposite and implicitly distrust the government.

On some things the government has done wrong. On most things, it has served its own interests. On most things, the interests of the government arose from, and aligned with, the interests of the people.

The current belief, most popular in banana republic clown world countries, that all government only lies, is a loop-de-do paranoid worldview.

a reply to: chr0naut

You'd have to open your eyes and use the thing that sits behind them I guess...

originally posted by: charlest2

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: chr0naut

Unless you count planning and funding a violent coup on the sitting government...

No, I don't count that. I don't see any evidence that such a thing actually occurred.

Only because you don't want to see.

10 Years ago.

You seem to have misunderstood.

In 2014, the Russians invaded Ukraine and annexed a part of it, the Crimea.

The US threatened sanctions against Russia for doing that.

The US did not foment revolt against the sitting government of Ukraine, which was rejecting Russian control, because the Ukrainian people had clearly indicated their dissatisfaction over Russian interference (that keeps coming up again and again, doesn't it?), with the Euromaidan protests.

These were big protests with between 400,000 and 800,000 citizens of Ukraine, not a hundred-odd dissidents that the CIA might be able to get to protest.

a reply to: chr0naut

Good Lord. The question is not who invaded who but why did who invade who. The why is because the US instigated a coup to instill a government favorable to the west, so they could exploit Ukrainian resources and keep them out of the hands of Russia. Also, to put nukes on Moscow's front doorsteps.

Crud! I'm tired of bantering with a denialist.

I'm done here. The frustration has exhausted me.

originally posted by: charlest2
a reply to: chr0naut

Good Lord. The question is not who invaded who but why did who invade who. The why is because the US instigated a coup to instill a government favorable to the west, so they could exploit Ukrainian resources and keep them out of the hands of Russia. Also, to put nukes on Moscow's front doorsteps.

Crud! I'm tired of bantering with a denialist.

The USA is only one country in a big world.

The situation between Ukraine and Russia is other countries fighting each other, for their own reasons, which have nothing to do with US politics.

Yes, the US meddled. The US does that everywhere. They can't help themselves, I'm sure that there is a button somewhere that says "Do NOT Press Me" and they are unable to live and sleep without pressing it - a few times for good measure - and the queue goes down the street!

LOL

And going back to the stupid headline in the OP, the US aren't there. Not at all.

They are sending money and arms, but there are no US troops there.

Six pages in to the topic thread with of all sorts of opinions, and no-one seems to have noticed the misleading untrue statement used in the headline.

a reply to: chr0naut

the US aren't there. Not at all.

Good grief! I can not believe you really believe that. This government will not admit their participation there but who do you think is manning the sophisticated weaponry there. Surely not the Ukrainians. They have had no training on all of the sophistication we have provided them. Not only that, we have been providing advisors there since the beginning.

The CIA has been active on the Ukrainian-Russian border region since long before this war even started.

The Telegraph

CIA builds 12 secret spy bases in Ukraine along Russian border
US agency has trained and equipped Kyiv’s intelligence officers in underground bunkers, some of which are buried in thick forest

You don't know what the F### you're talking about.

I'm done with you.

a reply to: chr0naut

On some things the government has done wrong. On most things, it has served its own interests.

So in your opinion, on most things the government serves its own interests?

In order to serve it's own interests, it has to lie, cheat, steal, suppress information, overstep, among other self-servicing, self- protecting behaviors. The government probably lies 9 times out of 10. I could be generous and say it lies 5 times out of 10. So we could say the government is honest 50% of the time and dishonest 50%.

Now imagine observing this behavior in another human being that you have to deal with in your life. Say it's your life partner because that's what government practically is -- a life partner.

So your life partner is honest with you half of the time but the other half, they're conniving, deceitful, abusive, fraudulent and dangerous.

If you distrust this person 100% of the time, that doesn't make you "paranoid", it makes you a realist.

a reply to: Kurokage

Burisma was controlled by an Oligarch left over from the old USSR, just like most of Russia's resources. It was shut down in 2023

Interesting. Viktor Shokin was the Prosecutor fired for looking into Barisma with the $1 Billion dollars Joe Biden used. Hunter Biden was on the board of Barisma. It does look like the CIA targeted Barisma to get all the details on how the gas worked in Ukraine. Viktor knew this and tried to stop it.

When Trump talked to Ukraine about it, he got dragged through another nothing burger impeachment trial.

So as the war built up, those from the west got what they needed to know from the USSR, killed Barisma and started up another corporate entity to take what was in USSR control.

These kind of things don't happen overnight, but take years to work through.

a reply to: chr0naut

Probably not. It is actively involved in stopping and prosecuting child trafficking, both in country and, to a lesser extent, abroad, though.

So Epstein did not kill himself, Maxwell gets done for trafficking, How many of their clients have been prosecuted? 0.

With the chaos going on with the boarder crossing, lot of missing in that mess. This is a problem everywhere. With how some in the Intelligence Community uses blackmail as a form of control does drive and support some of this market.

originally posted by: kwaka
a reply to: chr0naut

Probably not. It is actively involved in stopping and prosecuting child trafficking, both in country and, to a lesser extent, abroad, though.

So Epstein did not kill himself, Maxwell gets done for trafficking, How many of their clients have been prosecuted? 0.

With the chaos going on with the boarder crossing, lot of missing in that mess. This is a problem everywhere. With how some in the Intelligence Community uses blackmail as a form of control does drive and support some of this market.

The fact that Epstein was arrested is a sign that the government is actually trying to stop paedophilia and to prosecute the offenders it can catch. That Epstein is no longer alive means he can't offend anymore. Epstein's associate who procured underage girls for him to offend against, has also been prosecuted.

There may be others who enabled his offending, but if there wasn't clear evidence of wrongdoing, you can't convict someone without evidence that they committed a crime.

Similarly, you can't arrest people who may have association with Epstein but did not commit any crime. And let me remind you that Donald Trump, who used to be President, was also a close associate of Jeffery Epstein.

An allegation alone that someone is an offender, is insufficient to establish guilt and to prosecute.

Also, before Epstein was caught, there was an alleged victim who came forward and stated that she was raped, while underage, by both Jeffery Epstein and Donald Trump, together. She abandoned the first case without testifying in court. The same person later came forward a second time during Trump's Presidency to resume her case, but again withdrew her case. Should Trump be arrested and chemically castrated on the basis of his association and allegations?

If you personally have clear and definite knowledge, and evidence, of the commission of a crime, but you don't go to the police with that evidence, then you are an accessory to the crime. So if you know something, say something. It is your duty as a citizen.

But if you go to the police and make allegations based only upon hearsay, then you are obstructing the police from prosecuting other actual crimes, and doing that is also called "bearing false witness" and slander.

originally posted by: charlest2
a reply to: chr0naut

Good Lord. The question is not who invaded who but why did who invade who. The why is because the US instigated a coup to instill a government favorable to the west, so they could exploit Ukrainian resources and keep them out of the hands of Russia. Also, to put nukes on Moscow's front doorsteps.

Crud! I'm tired of bantering with a denialist.

I'm done here. The frustration has exhausted me.

In simplist terms, It was because Putin wanted what he didn't have and so decided to try to steal it instead.
Petro Poroshenko, Ukraine's previous president was a Russian pawn and former oligarch moving Ukraine back under Putin's boot and the Ukrainian people didn't want that.

I bet these same people here supporting a dictator invading another country were also the same ones jumping up and down when Bush and friends invaded Iraq.

The ones I see in denial are those lapping up Russian bullsh*t and supporting a dictator raping and killing civillians in Ukraine.

originally posted by: cherokeetroy
a reply to: chr0naut

On some things the government has done wrong. On most things, it has served its own interests.

So in your opinion, on most things the government serves its own interests?

In order to serve it's own interests, it has to lie, cheat, steal, suppress information, overstep, among other self-servicing, self- protecting behaviors. The government probably lies 9 times out of 10. I could be generous and say it lies 5 times out of 10. So we could say the government is honest 50% of the time and dishonest 50%.

Now imagine observing this behavior in another human being that you have to deal with in your life. Say it's your life partner because that's what government practically is -- a life partner.

So your life partner is honest with you half of the time but the other half, they're conniving, deceitful, abusive, fraudulent and dangerous.

If you distrust this person 100% of the time, that doesn't make you "paranoid", it makes you a realist.

"Government of the people, for the people and by the people" - The US Constitutional is designed to keep that statement true - if someone is against the government formed and limited under the Constitution, and elected and with term limits and with balance of powers according to stipulations in the Constitution, how could they possibly be a patriot?

And the US Constitution is not written for a small efficient government with power vested in a single leader or office. It is from the outset and by design giant-sized government, spread from the 3 branches at Federal, Congressional and Senate level, down through 52 states, and then even further through local governments, councils and city governments. And each authority gets a bit of power to do stuff within its purview.

Yuuuuge gov'nmint! Massive infrastructure. Totally not the conservative small government the Republican party pretends to.

a reply to: chr0naut

Should Trump be arrested and chemically castrated on the basis of his association and allegations?

On association and allegations, no. But how else could get 34 felonies? If Trump is a part of the evidence collected on the Epstein raid that is a different story. I would be surprised if that was the case with some of the Executive Orders he put in place.

originally posted by: kwaka
a reply to: chr0naut

Should Trump be arrested and chemically castrated on the basis of his association and allegations?

On association and allegations, no. But how else could get 34 felonies? If Trump is a part of the evidence collected on the Epstein raid that is a different story. I would be surprised if that was the case with some of the Executive Orders he put in place.

What is the picture supposed to be. It looks like security cam footage of public areas of a hotel. Nothing to identify where it is, nor any sign that criminal activity might be happening. Notingburger with Qtard "OMG" comments down the side.

a reply to: chr0naut

nor any sign that criminal activity might be happening

This photo first started from Rachel Chandler, one of Epstein's young pretty girls working for him as a 'model agent'. She took the photo while on the island, is shows some of what is underground there. In one of the rooms is a group of kids sitting on buckets. Why would they do that...? Could it be that its too sore for them to sit on a seat?

It came out around the time there was a battleship parked off Epstein island as the arrest was made.

a reply to: Kurokage

I'm done with you as well.