Russia-Ukraine War Politics Thread Mk. 2

No, the people in charge of western (((institutions))) is clear so i will continue to do so.
Here, i had several but the sietch wants to eat my posts, if you want more, the usual suspects are all over it.

So you think a globalist puppet won't do globalist policies and choke on girl cock? That's a bold strategy cotton, think you need actual Ukrainians left for that.

I don't give a shit about their reasons for fighting or what they want personally, it's irrelevant to pointing out who is benefitting from the mess. Funny how one group of people will benefit the most in the end, might call it a (((cohencidence))) even🤔
Yes...they are getting money to help a country that has had entire cities turned into rubble.
Huh wierd.

And again, what do the ((())) mean?
 
Yes...they are getting money to help a country that has had entire cities turned into rubble.
Huh wierd.

And again, what do the ((())) mean?
(((-))) stuff is code for 'The Jews'; places like StormFront and such thought it up a while back as a new way to spout anti-semitic BS, while not having to be explicit that the subject of a convo was 'the Jews'.
 
Ahhhh....
I mean, while yes Zelesnky is Jewish, as far as anyone can tell he has no connection to tje west.
And was a comedian before running for president.

People under him have been bad but he is one of the best in the country there.

But
(((-))) stuff is code for 'The Jews'; places like StormFront and such thought it up a while back as a new way to spout anti-semitic BS, while not having to be explicit that the subject of a convo was 'the Jews'.
We have the entire war showing Russia is willing to throw its entire minority population at this.
Ukraine has its entire population fighting. Every race and creed.

But it is all a Jewish plot for the world to be owned by the jews of Blackrock I guess
 
Ahhhh....
I mean, while yes Zelesnky is Jewish, as far as anyone can tell he has no connection to tje west.
And was a comedian before running for president.

People under him have been bad but he is one of the best in the country there.

But

We have the entire war showing Russia is willing to throw its entire minority population at this.
Ukraine has its entire population fighting. Every race and creed.

But it is all a Jewish plot for the world to be owned by the jews of Blackrock I guess
It hurts my head as much as it does yours, I expect.

The fact this level of Jew-hate is back in fashion in public is one of the most worrying signs of the times I've seen, because it's a very fucking powerful canary in our societies coal mine.
 

Nith sides can agree om this one
 

Nith sides can agree om this one
Nope. Let this pass and over the next generation you will see increasingly petty reasons being used as an excuse to seize peoples assets until it's just a normal thing.
 
Nope. Let this pass and over the next generation you will see increasingly petty reasons being used as an excuse to seize peoples assets until it's just a normal thing.
Possible,and even if it not happened,i still do not trust anything what Biden could propose.
So,if i was american senator,i would vote against it just in case.
 
Yeah. The war isn't about how far Ukraine will go. It's about how far the US and Russia will go. And quite simply, Russia cares more than the US ever could.

The US should negotiate a peace, if we cared at all about Ukraine.

But Realpolitik, we don't. All the US wants to do is kill as many Russians as possible using Ukrainian lives. We don't care who wins, as long as Russia can only win Pyrrhically.
Yeah, because intentionally killing as many of a certain country's population via proxy is not something that will make that country's population against you.

Muh realpolitikh, of the Napoleon III and Keiser Willie school. :ROFLMAO:
 
Nope. Let this pass and over the next generation you will see increasingly petty reasons being used as an excuse to seize peoples assets until it's just a normal thing.
>people's
Russia is a foreign state, not a person legally speaking.
 
>people's
Russia is a foreign state, not a person legally speaking.
This situation is more muddled than both sides would like to claim. If you seize assets from groups that you don’t like but aren’t at war with it hurts your credibility. Why would anyone invest in you if their wealth can be taken just like an African dictators whims, or how the CCP will take your stuff if you do things they don’t like. Capitalism isn’t all sunshine and roses.

On the other side we aren’t like Switzerland sadly where we are neutral and we can use our position to influence things to ways we want.
 
This situation is more muddled than both sides would like to claim. If you seize assets from groups that you don’t like but aren’t at war with it hurts your credibility. Why would anyone invest in you if their wealth can be taken just like an African dictators whims, or how the CCP will take your stuff if you do things they don’t like. Capitalism isn’t all sunshine and roses.

On the other side we aren’t like Switzerland sadly where we are neutral and we can use our position to influence things to ways we want.
Conflicts govern themselves by their own rules. Of course Russia, under anything remotely resembling current management, is not someone to count on for investment, and if so, it would probably be used maliciously against you.
Same goes for China. You would rather not have them invest than buy control over your tech companies, universities or banks and then use it in service of the CCP, already happened way too many times. Already happened many times. Credibility is something you want with friends and neutrals, unwillingness to strike against enemies is not credibility, it's weakness.

Would a hypothetical neutral state be more willing to side with your enemies and go against you if they knew that in response you will take all their assets you can get your hands on, or if they were convinced that you won't take any of their assets at all no matter what they do?
Especially if when forced to take sides, the other side subscribes to the former option.
 
No, the people in charge of western (((institutions))) is clear so i will continue to do so.
Here, i had several but the sietch wants to eat my posts, if you want more, the usual suspects are all over it.

So you think a globalist puppet won't do globalist policies and choke on girl cock? That's a bold strategy cotton, think you need actual Ukrainians left for that.

I don't give a shit about their reasons for fighting or what they want personally, it's irrelevant to pointing out who is benefitting from the mess. Funny how one group of people will benefit the most in the end, might call it a (((cohencidence))) even🤔
If you're going to be racist just state it outright instead of playing word games like an alt-right bitch with a tiki torch. You're already using their semi secret symbols. Why not come out and declare yourself an anti-semite?
 
Conflicts govern themselves by their own rules. Of course Russia, under anything remotely resembling current management, is not someone to count on for investment, and if so, it would probably be used maliciously against you.
Same goes for China. You would rather not have them invest than buy control over your tech companies, universities or banks and then use it in service of the CCP, already happened way too many times. Already happened many times. Credibility is something you want with friends and neutrals, unwillingness to strike against enemies is not credibility, it's weakness.

Would a hypothetical neutral state be more willing to side with your enemies and go against you if they knew that in response you will take all their assets you can get your hands on, or if they were convinced that you won't take any of their assets at all no matter what they do?
Especially if when forced to take sides, the other side subscribes to the former option.
When you start seizing assets it definitely hurts you long term as all foreigners start to worry what if their government does something dumb and you take their stuff. It also, as mentioned, sets a precedent that no person should be okay with. Don't let politicians use a crisis to set terrible precedent, that's how we ended up with the patriot act.
 
When you start seizing assets it definitely hurts you long term as all foreigners start to worry what if their government does something dumb and you take their stuff. It also, as mentioned, sets a precedent that no person should be okay with. Don't let politicians use a crisis to set terrible precedent, that's how we ended up with the patriot act.
Well then, nice theory you have there, lets compare it with history, surely no one would trust USA with assets after this:
This was worse than the current situation as it targeted private property.
Where are the consequences of such terrible precedent?
Bah, how many even know of it?
 
Well then, nice theory you have there, lets compare it with history, surely no one would trust USA with assets after this:
This was worse than the current situation as it targeted private property.
Where are the consequences of such terrible precedent?
Bah, how many even know of it?
Apples and fucking oranges.
 
Well then, nice theory you have there, lets compare it with history, surely no one would trust USA with assets after this:
This was worse than the current situation as it targeted private property.
Where are the consequences of such terrible precedent?
Bah, how many even know of it?
Your polish right? You do realize you picked one of the most controversial acts in the last couple of centuries, one that the country has apologized and paid 1.6 billion in reparations for? Or were you just googling quickly for a gotcha and had no idea? Even if this was the same thing (it isn't) it still doesn't help your case at all and changes nothing about what I said. Locking up Japanese people while we're in a shooting war with Japan is way different than seizing assets from a nation we aren't at war with.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top