I thought Trump was the existential threat?

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: fringeofthefringe

Ukraine gained independence in 1991 after the USSR ended, at that time, Barack Obama was a 30 year old US Senator for Iowa.

a reply to: chr0naut

You're clueless. You disagree for the sake of being disagreeable. Barry-30 year old senator for Iowa?

Oops, I was wrong, he was a 30yo senator for Illinois, not Iowa in 1991.

Apologies.

And even after a few tries, you still got it wrong. WHAT is your point with all the BS ???? 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Please comment on the topic.

There are hundreds of other sites where you can publish silly memes without interrupting serious discussion.

originally posted by: DontTreadOnMe
a reply to: andy06shake

Add Ukraine to your list of children who MUST not get nukes.

AGREED !!!

1. The "regime change" that installed your favorite puppet was during Obama's presidency

2. Ukraine wasn't a threat to Russia until "spookville inc." took over making it an intelli-state. Are you saying it's okay for Israel to defend its surroundings but not for Russia??

3. I'm saying in its current state, "Ukraine" in name doesn't matter in the slightest unless your unusually nostalgic over eastern block history, like yourself perhaps. I can think of better hobbies but to each their own.

I'm not going to explain myself further to someone who purposely ignores the context of what someone has said.

Ever heard of "active listening"? Try "active reading" and you might gleen the fact I didn't need a historical background on Ukraine because of you didn't get it yet, IDGAF.

Savvy?

November 25, 2024 One of many revelations coming...

WHY Schumer, Pelosi, Biden (Jill), and other top Democrats were so eager to visit Ukraine and show visual support for Zelenskyy on his home turf...

Huge $$$ kickbacks: gettr.com...

The more you know, the better!

originally posted by: VariedcodeSole
1. The "regime change" that installed your favorite puppet was during Obama's presidency

I live in New Zealand, and during Obama's presidency, we had a centre right "National Party" led government the whole time. Firstly under John Key (who was a fairly good PM), then under Bill English (who wasn't). The coalition parties were National/ACT/United Future/Māori Party and there was no change of government for the entire period.

2. Ukraine wasn't a threat to Russia until "spookville inc." took over making it an intelli-state. Are you saying it's okay for Israel to defend its surroundings but not for Russia??

Israel was directly attacked. It wasn't defending its surroundings. Hamas directly attacked Israel. Hamas was attacking its surroundings.

Ukraine was directly attacked. It wasn't defending its surroundings. Russia directly attacked Ukraine. Russia was attacking its surroundings.

Now that Israel and Ukraine are engaged in separate wars, they are responding into areas outside their borders, where their enemies have marshalled forces.

Prior to the recent conflict there, Ukraine was denuclearized and WMD's were removed from the former Soviet state. Ukraine made no militarily aggressive actions towards Russia. Ukraine was trading freely with The Russian Federation. Ukraine did seem to want to distance itself from Russian meddling and influence in its politics. Ukraine was attacked without provocation on February 2014 until March 2014, and then again from February 2022, ongoing.

3. I'm saying in its current state, "Ukraine" in name doesn't matter in the slightest unless your unusually nostalgic over eastern block history, like yourself perhaps. I can think of better hobbies but to each their own.

I'm not going to explain myself further to someone who purposely ignores the context of what someone has said.

Ever heard of "active listening"? Try "active reading" and you might gleen the fact I didn't need a historical background on Ukraine because of you didn't get it yet, IDGAF.

Savvy?

Ah, a rant, for no reason at all (because you don't care)!

a reply to: fringeofthefringe

I support European nations providing nuclear weapons to Ukraine since we're going to drop Ukraine once Trump takes over.

originally posted by: tamusan
a reply to: fringeofthefringe

I support European nations providing nuclear weapons to Ukraine since we're going to drop them once Trump takes over.

President Trump is not dropping nuclear weapons on anyone.

I forgot you were on my no contact list for being abysmally sycophantic. There's several of you on here that I refuse to share the air with. It's like trying to talk to someone who only responds like an automated customer service bot.

I won't be making that mistake again going forward. You can wipe that off your chin now unless of course you're going in for seconds.

I forgot you were on my no contact list for being abysmally sycophantic. It's like trying to talk to someone who only responds like automated customer service.

a reply to: VariedcodeSole

That was so funny, I know me too. Sometimes I just say,"what the hell", and respond. Then I regret it. Doesn't matter what kind of facts you present or reasoning, canned customer servicesque responses, classic.

a reply to: WeMustCare

What I was saying is that he is going to drop Ukraine, not nukes. I edited the last comment to better clarify my meaning.

a reply to: fringeofthefringe

Didn't you know?

They care about the environment so much, they're going to use nuclear weapons to fight global warming...or cause it.

Yet still it's Trump's fault, why?
Because he didn't run as a democrat.

Make sense?

Of course not, nothing the left does makes sense.

Nothing.

Speaking of, this is tonight's program on Ground Zero Radio;

11/25/24: IF YOU CAN’T BEAT ‘EM ATACM W/ DAVID KNIGHT | Ground Zero with Clyde Lewis

Has World War III already begun? According to a Ukrainian ambassador, Valery Zaluzhny, it has. He referenced the greater internationalization of the war with the presence of North Korean troops, Iranian technology on the battlefield, and Chinese support for Moscow. Why do totalitarian regimes take over and the people fall for them? Well, people assume that leaders are there for the public good and we are now seeing that the Deep State is pushing for a New World Order, which is overlapping with the Great Reset with a quest for annihilation. It is dissolving sovereignty for post-nuclear authoritarianism. Moreover, will the American Warhawks come out in full force under the Trump administration? Stay tuned. Tonight on Ground Zero (7-10 pm, pacific time) Clyde Lewis talks with David Knight about IF YOU CAN’T BEAT ‘EM ATACM.

www.groundzeromedia.org...

Mentioned on the show, a throwback to 1983;

The Day After (1983)
In the mid-1980s, the U.S. is poised on the brink of nuclear war. This shadow looms over the residents of a small town in Kansas as they continue their daily lives. Dr. Russell Oakes (Jason Robards) maintains his busy schedule

youtube.com...

Predictive programing, maybe.

November 25, 2024

Since Joe Biden gave his blessings to escalating U.S. involvement last week, Ukraine has launched rockets into Russia 3 times.

The third barrage came today: www.thegatewaypundit.com...

From what I've read, Ukraine military personnel don't have the training to launch these sophisticated missiles at specific targets. The launching, targeting, guidance is being handled by AMERICANS, or NATO personnel.

If Vladimir Putin loses his cool and launches weapons that start WWIII, it will be too late (and pointless) for us to complain about Joe Biden's stupidity and callousness.

Something needs to be done NOW. Since removing Biden from office probably won't change anything at this point, the preference is to keep Vladimir Putin from striking the nations who are supplying these weapons and people for bombing targets inside of Russia.

a reply to: RickyD

Its because they were so corrupt they were selling off anything not nailed down on the black market and everyone with any sense saw the issue there.

You will be able to provide tangible proof since you managed to make the claim.

Where is that now?

Also, if indeed that was the case, dont you imagine Russia shared the same to similar problems after the fall of communism, and the soviet union, where the illegal sale of nuclear warheads on the black market is of concern?

I postulate that Iran and NK will be far less trustworthy than Ukraine in the 90s put it that way.

And far more likely to use one, or give it to a terrorist force, to use on their behalf.

Do you know who i imagine will be of a similar mind, that would be Donald Trump, at least where the Iranians are concerned.

a reply to: Dalamax

Nobody is giving Zelenskyy nukes.

Or if they are, please provide proof of such?

a reply to: Tolkien

Much worse: giving nukes to unstable Ukrainian regime in the middle of an armed conflict is a recipe for nuclear war.

Indeed it would be chaos and Russia would respond in kind before they were ever in place.

But again where is the proof Biden is giving Ukraine nukes?

Tell you one thing if Putin gives the Iranians modern nuclear technology to build bombs, Israel's days are numbered.

And i think that's a pretty safe bet.

a reply to: DontTreadOnMe

Why would it be my list DTOM?

Im not the one handing down nuclear technologies for foreign troops and ordinance, Russian may well be through.

And the thing is said "children" as you put it, already had nukes and managed to make less of a mess with them than your own nation, so there is that.

The fact is they have yet to fire two off in anger right or wrong of the matter be darned.

But again nobody is providing Ukraine with nukes so it's rather a moot point by my guess.

As it would be a terrible idea to do so and only add nuclear fuel to the fire already raging.

Iran and North Korea on the other hand...................

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Dalamax

Nobody is giving Zelenskyy nukes.

Or if they are, please provide proof of such?

nobody said they were. If you read the article AND UNDERSTAND IT, you will see why that post was foolish.

According to the New York Times, US and European officials have discussed a range of options they believe will deter Russia from taking more Ukrainian territory, including providing Kiev with nuclear weapons. The outlet reports that Western officials believe the Kremlin will not significantly escalate the war before Donald Trump is sworn in as President in January.

continue with your DERP.

a reply to: network dude

I did understand it, and did think it was foolish.

And are you sure about nobody saying that?

Why not? It’s the same as giving nukes to Zelinsky.

Again, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

Ukraine had nukes way before Zelinsky was in charge.

Giving them nukes now is like sending them money, the only difference being instead of mrs Z buying luxury items in foreign countries mr Z will be throwing sh!t at a fan.

If a countermeasure to that escalation is proliferation than so be it.

A well armed world is a safe world.

Because that's not the impression i get.

And please continue with screaming words in block capitals.

Also if the New York Times had any real proof of such, regarding providing Ukraine with nuclear weapons, or anybody else for that matter, I'm sure they would cite their source.

Have a nice day.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: network dude

I did understand it, and did think it was foolish.

And are you sure?

Why not? It’s the same as giving nukes to Zelinsky.

Again, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

Ukraine had nukes way before Zelinsky was in charge.

Giving them nukes now is like sending them money, the only difference being instead of mrs Z buying luxury items in foreign countries mr Z will be throwing sh!t at a fan.

If a countermeasure to that escalation is proliferation than so be it.

A well armed world is a safe world.

Because that's not the impression i get.

And please continue with screaming words in block capitals.

And if the New York Times had any real proof of such, regarding providing Ukraine with nuclear weapons, or anybody else for that matter, I'm sure they would cite their source.

Have a nice day.

and that statement sounded like they were saying if the US is going to be handing out nukes, then it would be hard to condemn Russia if they were to do the same. Which would imply that we all need to put the pipe down and just let things settle a bit.

But go hyperbolic, it's your thing. DERP

a reply to: network dude

I think what i suggested is rather plain.

The same as what others suggested is rather plain.

Nobody, including the USA is handing out nukes to Ukraine, nor likely to any time soon.

As to going hyperbolic, again you are the one screaming words in block capitals.

I suggest you take your own advice.