Who cares? obviously not true, but even if it is, who really cares?Zelensky has milions of dollars he can't account for, in the most corrupt country in the Europe. I strongly believe most of these will end up in foreign bank accounts.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Who cares? obviously not true, but even if it is, who really cares?Zelensky has milions of dollars he can't account for, in the most corrupt country in the Europe. I strongly believe most of these will end up in foreign bank accounts.
do these opportunists propose just giving up Ukraine and Taiwan without a fight? I think this is their plan.A long serious discussion on the global view of what is happening.
We are not 'threatening' China. We have diplomatic relations and arming Taiwan, essentially, we are saying attack US, if you dare.
Did you missed that NATO rejected Ukraine TWICE?Right! It was not a threat to Russia nabbing Ukraine into a military coalition and installing missiles aiming at Moscow from Ukraine.
And the US military was successful in those 'special military operations'. For Iraq, that 'special military operation' was successful enough that your PLA reformatted itself to look like US.I will revisit with you when China unifies Taiwan and see US backing out from its words. We've seen that many times, haven't we? Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, ...
NATO is a military gang organized and headed by US. So you figure it out.Did you missed that NATO rejected Ukraine TWICE?
And the US military was successful in those 'special military operations'. For Iraq, that 'special military operation' was successful enough that your PLA reformatted itself to look like US.
So you say but you see a bunch of countries especially in Eastern Europe that wants to join NATO for this exact reason, to not be taken by Russia. Most of the Eastern European countries militaries are pretty much no match against Russia if they have to defend alone. I mean look at Sweden and Finland.NATO is a US construct and by large a US organization.
Europe after WW2 was completely devastated, while the USA was totally intact and profited from the war. After end of WW2 there were really only two countries who had the power and logistics to wield large scale operations in Europe; The Soviet Union and USA. While the US took control of western Europe, the Soviet took control of eastern half of Europe. That was the setup for almost 40 years during the cold war.
After the cold war, Soviet lost control and influence over its posessions in Eastern Europe. The USA OTOH had no reason to give up its posessions in Western Europe, quite the opposite. As the sole remaining power in Europe it could do whatever it wanted and expanded its posessions way up to Russian border, and thats where we are today. Rest is just wish wash mumbo jumbo.
So this conflict, is not a NATO vs Russia conflict. In fact its a continuation of the long standing power struggle between the big boys in town; USA and Russia. European countries are only spectator and mere chess pieces. The players are USA and Russia.
U.S. needs to send in more. Not in small batches, have to speed it up. Instead of 700 or 800 million military aid package, needs to be 10 billion. 10 billion is chump change compared to what the U.S. spent fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as support the militaries of those countries.
This interesting tweet by Gary highlights a fact that is often overlooked when there is a discussion about Soviet army's achievement in WW2. During that time, the Soviet army had the blessing of being a beneficiary to lend lease policy. Today, Putin's Z force has the opposite of that in terms of sanctions that prevent his local military complex from producing arms
Yes, Putin is trying to put a lot of firepower in the upcoming battle in East. Ukranians need a lot more to hold on to territory. Technical superiority of Western weapons may not be enough to overcome the numbersU.S. needs to send in more. Not in small batches, have to speed it up. Instead of 700 or 800 million military aid package, needs to be 10 billion. 10 billion is chump change compared to what the U.S. spent fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as support the militaries of those countries.
not easy at all,