Brits lie about Russian advances, I guess like they lied about the mythological 'spring counter-offensive to the black sea.'

⚡UK Defense Ministry: Russian forces control most of destroyed Marinka.

Russia has made "creeping advances" through the ruins of Marinka in Donetsk Oblast and now "likely controls" most of the area, the U.K. Defense Ministry reported on Dec. 5.https://t.co/vxwizqpIX4

— The Kyiv Independent (@KyivIndependent) December 5, 2023

For the readers at home, Marinka is a small Ukrainian town of 9,000 people that has largely been destroyed and depopulated since 2022. So once again, another winter of Russian meat grinding may win them another small town. This is the massive offensive that months and months of 200 tanks has yielded.

Teslag said:

---

For the readers at home, Marinka is a small Ukrainian town of 9,000 people that has largely been destroyed and depopulated since 2022.

---

This what Ukraine "winning" looks like.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

For the readers at home, Marinka is a small Ukrainian town of 9,000 people that has largely been destroyed and depopulated since 2022.

---

This what Ukraine "winning" looks like.

---

Winning for Ukraine is waking up and not being Russian.

Zelensky on his knees today begging for billions via video conference to the US Senate. Meanwhile, the Kiev mayor says the Great Z is not so great and his days are numbered.

I am sure we can fully trust the next leader to be as transparent and honest as Zelensky about where all this money is going.

The fear mongering about Putin taking over all of Eastern Europe if we do not support Ukraine with all our weapons and dollars falls flat with the pro-Ukers tell us how ineffective Putin's military is and how he is the laughing stock of the world by how crappy his troops and equipment are.

Dems and their blue and yellow bellied R conspirators are caught in their lie and their grift. This is not and has never been about the people of Ukraine and their supposed sovereignty.

This was nothing but a mechanism to start a regional conflict, send billions to another country, then stamp feet and say we will need billions more to rebuild Ukraine and billions more to restock the equipment and munitions we gave away.

Quote:

---

Zelensky on his knees today begging for billions via video conference to the US Senate

---

His alternative is to get on his knees and beg Putin for mercy. Which would you do?

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

Zelensky on his knees today begging for billions via video conference to the US Senate

---

His alternative is to get on his knees and beg Putin for mercy. Which would you do?

---

I would have either told Biden to support me unequivocally and if the answer was no or uncertain then I would have worked out a deal with Putin before the conflict started. Its actually pretty simple.

Instead, this conflict likely results in the dissolution of NATO, which I welcome but I know it will absolutely crush you.

Quote:

---

then I would have worked out a deal with Putin before the conflict started.

---

What if Putin wasn't interested in a deal?

Quote:

---

this conflict likely results in the dissolution of NATO

---

This conflict has literally increased the footprint of NATO.

It will decrease dramatically and precipitously when Trump pulls us out in just over a year from now. And not a moment too soon.

fka ftc said:

---

It will decrease dramatically and precipitously when Trump pulls us out in just over a year from now. And not a moment too soon.

---

Ya, that's not happening.

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

then I would have worked out a deal with Putin before the conflict started.

---

What if Putin wasn't interested in a deal?

---

Seems like there were several off ramps but the decision by Ukraine, NATO and the US was to continue to provoke the bear.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/events-leading-up-russias-invasion-ukraine-2022-02-28/

Quote:

---

Jan. 2021: Zelenskiy appeals to U.S. president Joe Biden to let Ukraine join NATO. In February, his government freezes the assets of opposition leader Viktor Medvedchuk, the Kremlin's most prominent ally in Ukraine.

Spring 2021: Russia begins massing troops near Ukraine's borders in what it says are training exercises.

Nov. 2021: Satellite images taken by Maxar Technologies show ongoing buildup of Russian forces near Ukraine with estimates soon surpassing 100,000 troops deployed.

Dec. 17 2021: Russia presents security demands including that NATO pull back troops and weapons from eastern Europe and bar Ukraine from ever joining.

Jan. 24 2022: NATO puts forces on standby and reinforces eastern Europe with more ships and fighter jets.

Jan. 26: Washington responds to Russia's security demands, repeating a commitment to NATO's "open-door" policy while offering a "pragmatic evaluation" of Moscow's concerns. Two days later Russia says its demands not addressed.

Feb. 2022: Amid growing Western fears Russia could attack Ukraine, the United States says it will send 3,000 extra troops to NATO members Poland and Romania. Washington and allies say they will not send troops to Ukraine, but warn of severe economic sanctions if Russian President Vladimir Putin takes military action.

Feb. 21: In a TV address, Putin says Ukraine is an integral part of Russian history and has a puppet regime managed by foreign powers. Putin orders what he called peacekeeping forces into two breakaway regions in eastern Ukraine, after recognising them as independent.

Feb. 22: The U.S., Britain and their allies sanction Russian parliament members, banks and other assets in response to Putin's troop order. Germany halts the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline project.

Feb. 23: Russian-backed separatist leaders ask Russia for help repelling aggression from the Ukrainian army.

Feb. 24: Putin authorizes "special military operations" in Ukraine. Russian forces begin missile and artillery attacks, striking major Ukrainian cities including Kiev.

Feb. 26: Western allies announce new sanctions, including restrictions on Russia's central bank and expelling key banks off the main global payments system.

---

Russians plans for Ukraine far predate anything on your timeline. This invasion is and has always been a land grab.

I didn't think I needed to include the prior 30 years but they were at the link I provided.

Quote:

---

1991: Shortly after the fall of the Soviet Union, Ukraine declares independence from Moscow.

2004: Pro-Russian candidate Viktor Yanukovich is declared president but allegations of vote-rigging trigger protests, known as the Orange Revolution, forcing a re-run of the vote. Pro-Western former prime minister, Viktor Yushchenko, is elected president.

2005: Yushchenko takes power with promises to lead Ukraine out of the Kremlin's orbit, towards NATO and the EU.

2008: NATO promises Ukraine it will one day join the alliance.

2010: Yanukovich wins a presidential election.

2013: Yanukovich's government suspends trade and association talks with the EU and opts to revive economic ties with Moscow, triggering months of mass rallies in Kyiv.

February 2014: Parliament votes to remove Yanukovich after bloodshed in the protests. Within days, armed men seize parliament in the Ukrainian region of Crimea and raise the Russian flag. Moscow later annexes the territory.

April 2014: Pro-Russian separatists in the eastern region of Donbass declare independence. Some 15,000 people have been killed since 2014 in fighting between the separatists and the Ukrainian army, according to the Kyiv government.

2017: An association agreement between Ukraine and the EU opens markets for free trade of goods and services, and visa-free travel to the EU for Ukrainians.

2019: Former comic actor Volodymyr Zelenskiy is elected president.

---

Seems to me that both the DC and Moscow have been playing puppet masters since fall of the Soviet Union, so I think maybe its a bit ill-informed or simply naive to classify it as a Putin land grab.

Except a land grab is exactly what it is. Putin wants the country, and even Nortex admitted as much a couple pages back with the "spoils of war" comment. It is what it is. The only thing that "provoked" Putin is that we would make it difficult for him to use Ukraine to his benefit. That's it.

I have said the same as well that Putin wants a buffer zone. As NATO continued to encroach in the area, as they built up troops and weaponry, as they bullied Russia and as they tried to install western friendly puppets in Ukraine, he had enough and decided he would take the country by force if he could not control it by proxy.

That does not mean I support Putin and his actions, but I at least understand them.

I just continue to not give a crap who runs the Donbas or Kiev. Whatever, it shouldn't be our problem.

Zelensky is at best a slight shade of gray better than Putin. And I find the democrats love of xi and the mullahs etc dispositive about any foreign policy they advocate being about some shared notion of "freedom"

Agree.

Quote:

---

I have said the same as well that Putin wants a buffer zone

---

A buffer against what? NATO is a voluntary defensive pact.

NATO has always been the excuse, but not the reason for Putin taking over Ukraine.

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

I have said the same as well that Putin wants a buffer zone

---

A buffer against what? NATO is a voluntary defensive pact.

---

Countries shouldn't be so aggressive and want to defend themselves!!!

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

I have said the same as well that Putin wants a buffer zone

---

A buffer against what? NATO is a voluntary defensive pact.

---

Just ask the Serbs and Libyans. It's practically a co-prosperity sphere. The Ukrainians are just the latest 'beneficiaries.'

Ag with kids said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

I have said the same as well that Putin wants a buffer zone

---

A buffer against what? NATO is a voluntary defensive pact.

---

Countries shouldn't be so aggressive and want to defend themselves!!!

---

You jest, but this is quite literally what many pulling for Russia believe.

Teslag said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

I have said the same as well that Putin wants a buffer zone

---

A buffer against what? NATO is a voluntary defensive pact.

---

Countries shouldn't be so aggressive and want to defend themselves!!!

---

You jest, but this is quite literally what many pulling for Russia believe.

---

Have you ever found someone, in real life or on f16, actually pulling for Russia?

That is what gets super old with your shtick and others who spew such nonsense.

And defensive pacts, troop movements and placement of defensive weapons that could be used offensively is aggression. There is no getting around that.

Putin had his reasons whether you like them, agree with him or think they are valid in your view of the world.

But it contributes NOTHING to the convo with snark after snark and you and others have been asked repeatedly to knock it off.

Quote:

---

Have you ever found someone, in real life or on f16, actually pulling for Russia?

---

Yes, here in a thread literally titled "I'm Pulling for Russia" with 117 blue stars.

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3375863/1

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

Have you ever found someone, in real life or on f16, actually pulling for Russia?

---

Yes, here in a thread literally titled "I'm Pulling for Russia" with 117 blue stars.

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3375863/1

---

Stop it. Total and absolute derailing at this point as that has been brought up and discussed NUMEROUS times in this very thread. Poster was being facetious along with the 117 blue stars (I guess maybe you are jealous of that?).

Find actual evidence that someone has openly and consistently rooted for Russia to stack Uke corpses in the same manner that you have used derogatory terms to cheerlead the stacking of Russian bodies, including civilians.

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

Have you ever found someone, in real life or on f16, actually pulling for Russia?

---

Yes, here in a thread literally titled "I'm Pulling for Russia" with 117 blue stars.

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3375863/1

---

Are they pulling for Russia, or are they sick of leftists who support that laughable excuse for a money laundering scheme?

When someone literally says "I'm puling for Russia" I tend to think they are puling for Russia.

Moscow ready for negotiations to end the war, still. Kiev; nope, we want to keep fighting for Robotyne.

Quote:

---

Moscow is ready to resolve the ongoing conflict with Kiev through diplomatic means at any moment, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told the news media outlet RTVI on Tuesday. Russia has never rejected such an option, and it was Kiev that withdrew from the talks in spring 2022, he noted.

Russia launched its military operation in Ukraine in February 2022 to protect the Russian-speaking population of the two Donbass republics. The former Ukrainian territories declared independence from Kiev in the wake of the 2014 Maidan coup, leading to years of conflict.

Moscow has repeatedly stated that it is ready to talk with Kiev as long as the situation on the ground is considered. In autumn 2022, the two republics, alongside two other Ukrainian territories, officially joined Russia following a series of referendums.

Kiev has ruled out any negotiations with Moscow on multiple occasions. Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky signed a decree last autumn banning any talks with the current Kremlin leadership. He also put forward his own peace plan, demanding that all Russian troops withdraw from all the territories within Ukraine's 1991 borders before any talks could commence. Moscow rejected the idea, calling it detached from reality.

---

Again you have to stretch really hard to see Zelensky as a victim at this point. It's not too different than blaming the IDF for the hostages' fate in Gaza. And I do feel empathy for both the UFA kids in uniform and hostages.

Russia could literally end this war at any moment by puling their troops out of Ukraine. It's laughably absurd that Russian state media tells the world that they wanted to negotiate and end to a war they started.

Biden obviously shouldn't have used Zelensky to provoke them into starting the war, and they share some responsibility, even though the proximate cause is really the former two.

nortex97 said:

---

Biden obviously shouldn't have used Zelensky to provoke them into starting the war, and they share some responsibility, even though the proximate cause is really the former two.

---

Yes, Vladimir Putin, the dictator of Russia, who has previously invaded former Soviet Republics bears no blame in this. He was simply forced to invade their neighbor once Biden assumed office in January of 2021. Prior to that Russia had no interest in Ukraine.

NEW - Zelensky is turning Ukraine into an authoritarian state just like Russia, says Kyiv mayor Vitali Klitschko — NY Post

— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) December 5, 2023

He has to either flea or do that, imho, as the people are sick of the pointless slaughter.

Quote:

---

The above represents the loudest such claim in recent days. It declares outright that in three years' time Russia may hit the countries on NATO's eastern flank, as per a Polish national security agency head.
It also cites a German think tank which claims that NATO must be ready to "fend off a Russian offensive in 6 to 10 years."

Jacek Siewiera, chief of Poland's National Security Bureau, says

Quote:

---

"Unfortunately this analysis is consistent with studies drawn up in the US," he told Nasz Dziennik, a Polish Catholic newspaper. "But in my opinion the time frame presented by the German analysts is too optimistic. If we want to avoid war, the Nato countries on the eastern flank should adopt a shorter, three-year time horizon to prepare for confrontation."

---

He goes on to point out the real specter that has the West so frightened, Russia's ramping industrial capabilities:

Quote:

---

Siewiera added: "This is the time window when we have to create a capability on the eastern flank that would provide a clear signal deterring aggression. The arms industry in Russia is working in three shifts each day and can rebuild its resources within the next three years."

---

In what seems a coordinated effort, every Western shill is now scrounging corner to corner for anything that can even remotely resemble some clue of Russia's putative 'designs' against Europe. For instance, Anton Gerashchenko posted this Soloviev episode which he claims spells out Russian designs to completely upturn Europe, recreating a special Austro-Hungarian zone.

Such fantasies now dominate the headlines, with every little offhand remark Putin makes used to rubberstamp some new wild dream about rebirthing the Russian Empire. For instance, a new such remark Putin made about Latvia's persecution of ethnic Russians was contorted into a claim by MSM that Putin had now threatened Latvia, designating them as "next" after Ukraine.
This fraudulent specter of Russian imperialism is being ginned-up to spin fear through the dim European populace and galvanize Ukraine's sagging support.
But more insidiously, it represents the projection and telegraphing of NATO's own plans to continue drawing Russia through an ever-denser gauntlet of war to continuously undermine its development as a sovereign superpower. I wrote about this in the latest reader's mailbag, but the recently intensifying drumbeats of war make me almost certain that a far larger European conflict is looming at the horizon.
The National Review article even ends on this foreboding note:

Quote:

---

The bottom line is that the Kremlin plans to change the world order, especially in terms of security, and the conquest of Ukraine is a first step in that plan. If the West abandoned Ukraine now, it would be further exposing NATO to Russian aggression in the years to come. Instead, in order to avert the danger from Russia, NATO and the EU must hold strong in their support for Ukraine and continuing developing their military capabilities. The Russian threat must be neutralized, and this is the only way to do it.

---

But their clumsy narrative-hopping exposes a major flaw in this new Western propaganda train.

They, like others, argue that Russia is massively expanding its military, earmarking extraordinary new budgets for 2024 and beyond, which is used to adumbrate some looming future conquests. Yet in the same breath, they comically argue that the push for ceasefire is a major Russian propaganda thrust serving Russia's interests to end the war and cement new territorial gains. Therefore, they argue, the West should at all costs continue funding Ukraine militarily to thwart this insidious Russian plan to use the ceasefire triumph as a major validation of its conquest.

Think that through for a second. Russia is vastly expanding its budgets and planning to conquer all of Europe, yet at the same time, it is Russia that is clamoring to end the war, and that a ceasefire is a "Russian propaganda" directive? How does that make sense?

That's on the same order of stupidity as the earlier posted Tweet, which highlights Ukraine's claim that only joining NATO would protect it by deterring Russia from ever attacking again, yet at the same time absurdly propounds that Russia is set to attack other NATO members after it conquers Ukraine. So what possible protection can NATO offer?

It's just risible bile, and shows the utter moral and intellectual destitution of the declining West's late stage propaganda effortsthey're not even trying anymore. Just observe doltish Stoltenberg who pantomimes concern with his bovine blinks while expectorating some nonsense like: "We must bring peace by continuing to arm Ukraine!"

It's a veritable gallery of clowns!

---

They're just nuts in Kiev:

Quote:

---

Now Ukrainian Pravda reports Zaluzhny requested from Lloyd Austin a mind-bending 17,000,000 artillery shells and $400,000,000,000 (yes, $400B) dollars.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

he Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine asked the US for 17 million shells. Valery Zaluzhny also called on Washington to transfer up to $400 billion to Kiev for the "de-occupation of Ukraine." TASS writes about this with reference to material from the Ukrayinska Pravda publication, which cites a source familiar with the content of negotiations with Pentagon head Lloyd Austin with Zaluzhny. "Austin was told there was a need for 17 million shells. To put it mildly, he was surprised, because so much could not be collected all over the world," said the interlocutor of the Ukrainian media. - FRWL reports

---

That's what it would cost to liberate the rest of the required territories, according to the embattled and addled Generalissimo. Recall this is the same man who requested ground-burrowing plasma robots.
It's so absurd as to warrant a possible gag of some sort. In fact, some Russian analysts have propounded that this is actually a Bankova leak meant to discredit Zaluzhny, painting him in exactly the detached-from-reality light that the report portrays.

Keep in mind, at the U.S.'s current production of 300k shells a year, 17M shells represents half a century of 24/7 American shell output. So either Zaluzhny is eyeing a glorious circa 2075 return to Crimea, or perhaps he's pulling everyone's leg on purpose, maybe as some form of rebellious gesture or to send a signal of hopelessness to wake people up.

---

Anyway, more at the link, blah blah blah. Let's just hope those evil all-powerful Russians don't try to take Hungary and Poland in a couple years, though they are weak and 'can't mount an offensive' after the Ukrainians crushed them the past two years. Or something.

Former Zelensky adviser Arestovich says that “in the conflict of Globalists and Realists, we bet on the wrong side.”

Globalists wanted NATO expansion. Realists advocated Ukrainian neutrality to avoid war.

Ukraine bet on Globalists and got destroyed.pic.twitter.com/Qa2ywxzf2O

— David Sacks (@DavidSacks) December 6, 2023

This got no maintream attention at the time but was *hugely* significant (https://t.co/YGoFpleU0b). RAND is massively influential and its recommendations are routinely adopted as policy, almost immediately after publication. Recommend you read in full, it's only 30 pages. pic.twitter.com/yo1hPUIO7R

— Kit Klarenberg (@KitKlarenberg) December 5, 2023

RAND recommended slowly and subtly creating the conditions for Kiev's betrayal, and "a negotiated end in a timeframe that would serve US interests," as "a dramatic, overnight shift in US policy is politically impossible." The past year has been building to now. And here we are. pic.twitter.com/sf3B0HBZDO

— Kit Klarenberg (@KitKlarenberg) December 5, 2023

Worth watching this.

Doesn’t mean I agree with everything said, just that it’s worth watching.

Sullivan is technically accurate, but what’s missing is a realistic explanation of how this conflict ends. https://t.co/JlnykVKdcc

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) December 6, 2023

You mean sending billions to known corrupt politicians with stipulations that no one could audit how the money was being spent could end up like this? Russia, Zelensky, and the military industrial complex made a ton of money from this war