Artorias said:

---

Tanker123 said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

I'm not so sure its Russia who is losing respect on the world stage. Our leader is a joke

Every parent of a toddler knows this stance 🤣

Grab the wipes ... pic.twitter.com/filWcQEAhG

— Wall Street Silver (@WallStreetSilv) May 4, 2024

---

Why do you consider he is a joke?

---

Because we have eyes, ears, and a functioning brain?

---

Ok. You have a functioning brain. Illuminate Trump's performance with the pandemic. I would like to see your rational mind at work.

#BREAKING Russia says it will perceive the appearance of F-16 fighter jets in Ukraine as “carriers of nuclear weapons regardless of their modification”.

— Clash Report (@clashreport) May 6, 2024

Wow this may be the best strategy of all time.

The Russians claiming another weapon is their nuclear red line. Must be a Monday.

Russia does not want to make a mistake that would cause the US to enter the war because they know we would kick their asses rather quickly and violently. NATO countries conducted a huge logistics exercise to field units from the US and Europe called Steadfast Defender 24. It consisted of over 90,000 service members. Here is some background information:

- US V Corps HQ Forward is located at Poznan, Poland. The US Task Force Commander is a US Army LTG.
- Thousands of US vehicles have been shipped to Poland last year.
- If the US enters the war V Corps will stand up Infantry and Armor Divisions to include requisite units from the other Branches of Military.
- NATO forces will fall under control of V Corps. This is a tangent - no other NATO military has the experience the US Military has at planning, deploying, command and controlling forces that are hundreds of thousands in size.

Steadfast Defender 24 is broken down into two phases.

Phase I - Focus on sending US forces to Europe and falling in place of the prepositioned vehicles.
Phase II - Generating and deploying NATO forces to augment US V Corps.

This exercise will give US V Corps and NATO Militaries numerous lessons learned. They will ask what was planned, what really happened, and how to shrink the delta.

NATO - Steadfast Defender 2024

Tanker123 said:

---

Russia does not want to make a mistake that would cause the US to enter the war because they know we would kick their asses rather quickly and violently.

---

We launch they launch and the winners are those that die. But at least those that survive, will sit back on what's left and think, yeah we beat those evil Russians.

Tanker123 said:

---

AtticusMatlock said:

---

They've been using the TOS-3 since early in the war. Not sure why suddenly it's being reported as new.

---

It makes me think. If an enemy was using those weapons on our cities, would we sue for peace? That is what many are suggesting.

---

Is there not a question of capability and relevance to consider here? We wouldn't need to sue for peace because in theory we could f* up anyone on the planet that tried this.

Ukraine is not the US. Unfortunately for them they do not have this capability, thus suing for peace is a better outcome than perpetual war that effectively bleeds out their country (literally and metaphorically) that is paid for by US taxpayers.

Tanker123 said:

---

Artorias said:

---

Tanker123 said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

I'm not so sure its Russia who is losing respect on the world stage. Our leader is a joke

Every parent of a toddler knows this stance 🤣

Grab the wipes ... pic.twitter.com/filWcQEAhG

— Wall Street Silver (@WallStreetSilv) May 4, 2024

---

Why do you consider he is a joke?

---

Because we have eyes, ears, and a functioning brain?

---

Ok. You have a functioning brain. Illuminate Trump's performance with the pandemic. I would like to see your rational mind at work.

---

You seem to have exposed yourself here. Do you seriously think Biden is not a joke? Even most Democrats do not want Biden as POTUS. They are settling for him because of TDS. Give your side another option and Biden would lose to that option by Reagan-Mondale numbers in a Dem primary. He's had multiple embarrassments on the global stage. Have you already forgotten his record? Or are you just ignoring it?

The proof Ukraine is getting rolled is the fact that "no american blood" has turned into "be ready incase they need us"

Long way away from no ability to mount an offensive.

But it is not our war.

Hakeem Jeffries joins the Macron caucus by suggesting that American troops may need to fight in Ukraine. No matter how many times they repeat this idea, we cannot let it become normalized. It would be World War 3. pic.twitter.com/1XQ8H27pVh

— David Sacks (@DavidSacks) May 6, 2024

YouBet said:

---

Tanker123 said:

---

AtticusMatlock said:

---

They've been using the TOS-3 since early in the war. Not sure why suddenly it's being reported as new.

---

It makes me think. If an enemy was using those weapons on our cities, would we sue for peace? That is what many are suggesting.

---

Is there not a question of capability and relevance to consider here? We wouldn't need to sue for peace because in theory we could f* up anyone on the planet that tried this.

Ukraine is not the US. Unfortunately for them they do not have this capability, thus suing for peace is a better outcome than perpetual war that effectively bleeds out their country (literally and metaphorically) that is paid for by US taxpayers.

---

If Russia could launch thermobaric weapons at US cities, then we are not necessarily kicking its ass.

YouBet said:

---

Tanker123 said:

---

Artorias said:

---

Tanker123 said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

I'm not so sure its Russia who is losing respect on the world stage. Our leader is a joke

Every parent of a toddler knows this stance 🤣

Grab the wipes ... pic.twitter.com/filWcQEAhG

— Wall Street Silver (@WallStreetSilv) May 4, 2024

---

Why do you consider he is a joke?

---

Because we have eyes, ears, and a functioning brain?

---

Ok. You have a functioning brain. Illuminate Trump's performance with the pandemic. I would like to see your rational mind at work.

---

You seem to have exposed yourself here. Do you seriously think Biden is not a joke? Even most Democrats do not want Biden as POTUS. They are settling for him because of TDS. Give your side another option and Biden would lose to that option by Reagan-Mondale numbers in a Dem primary. He's had multiple embarrassments on the global stage. Have you already forgotten his record? Or are you just ignoring it?

---

Did Trump do an admirable job with the pandemic as the leader of this country?

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

The proof Ukraine is getting rolled is the fact that "no american blood" has turned into "be ready incase they need us"

Long way away from no ability to mount an offensive.

But it is not our war.

Hakeem Jeffries joins the Macron caucus by suggesting that American troops may need to fight in Ukraine. No matter how many times they repeat this idea, we cannot let it become normalized. It would be World War 3. pic.twitter.com/1XQ8H27pVh

— David Sacks (@DavidSacks) May 6, 2024

---

Here is an idea, send all the Ukraine flag waving morons in first. Starting with the democrats who waved Ukraine flags. Then start with all the idiots who changed their profile pictures. Let them go fight on the front lines.

Psycho Bunny said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

The proof Ukraine is getting rolled is the fact that "no american blood" has turned into "be ready incase they need us"

Long way away from no ability to mount an offensive.

But it is not our war.

Hakeem Jeffries joins the Macron caucus by suggesting that American troops may need to fight in Ukraine. No matter how many times they repeat this idea, we cannot let it become normalized. It would be World War 3. pic.twitter.com/1XQ8H27pVh

— David Sacks (@DavidSacks) May 6, 2024

---

Here is an idea, send all the Ukraine flag waving morons in first. Starting with the democrats who waved Ukraine flags. Then start with all the idiots who changed their profile pictures. Let them go fight on the front lines.

---

David Sacks is so full of Russian BS his eyes are brown. Jeffries didn't say we would have soldiers in Ukraine. If you watch the actual interview he says that if Ukraine falls Russia will then turn to NATO members and then, and only then, we'd be involved in the defense of a NATO.

At no time, ever, does he say we will put troops in Ukraine. And Sacks knows full well no one would actually look up the interview and just trust his tweet.

Teslag said:

---

Psycho Bunny said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

The proof Ukraine is getting rolled is the fact that "no american blood" has turned into "be ready incase they need us"

Long way away from no ability to mount an offensive.

But it is not our war.

Hakeem Jeffries joins the Macron caucus by suggesting that American troops may need to fight in Ukraine. No matter how many times they repeat this idea, we cannot let it become normalized. It would be World War 3. pic.twitter.com/1XQ8H27pVh

— David Sacks (@DavidSacks) May 6, 2024

---

Here is an idea, send all the Ukraine flag waving morons in first. Starting with the democrats who waved Ukraine flags. Then start with all the idiots who changed their profile pictures. Let them go fight on the front lines.

---

David Sacks is so full of Russian BS his eyes are brown. Jeffries didn't say we would have soldiers in Ukraine. If you watch the actual interview he says that if Ukraine falls Russia will then turn to NATO members and then, and only then, we'd be involved in the defense of a NATO.

At no time, ever, does he say we will put troops in Ukraine. And Sacks knows full well no one would actually look up the interview and just trust his tweet.

---

You mean...he was LYING?

And people here posted his propaganda? Unpossible!!!

So the quoted transcript in the tweet isn't accurate?

The US is fighting Russia with Ukrainian bodies and blood.

Ag with kids said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Psycho Bunny said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

The proof Ukraine is getting rolled is the fact that "no american blood" has turned into "be ready incase they need us"

Long way away from no ability to mount an offensive.

But it is not our war.

Hakeem Jeffries joins the Macron caucus by suggesting that American troops may need to fight in Ukraine. No matter how many times they repeat this idea, we cannot let it become normalized. It would be World War 3. pic.twitter.com/1XQ8H27pVh

— David Sacks (@DavidSacks) May 6, 2024

---

Here is an idea, send all the Ukraine flag waving morons in first. Starting with the democrats who waved Ukraine flags. Then start with all the idiots who changed their profile pictures. Let them go fight on the front lines.

---

David Sacks is so full of Russian BS his eyes are brown. Jeffries didn't say we would have soldiers in Ukraine. If you watch the actual interview he says that if Ukraine falls Russia will then turn to NATO members and then, and only then, we'd be involved in the defense of a NATO.

At no time, ever, does he say we will put troops in Ukraine. And Sacks knows full well no one would actually look up the interview and just trust his tweet.

---

You mean...he was LYING?

And people here posted his propaganda? Unpossible!!!

---

He posted the transcript. The only liar here is Teslag

"No ability to mount an offensive"

Lol

BearJew13 said:

---

So the quoted transcript in the tweet isn't accurate?

---

Nope. Sacks left out the rest of the transcript when he clearly was referring to post Ukraine expansion as he continued. Sack knew full well what he was doing by selectively choosing one part of the transcript and not all of it.

BearJew13 said:

---

So the quoted transcript in the tweet isn't accurate?

---

It's one purposely misleading piece of a larger quote. We aren't sending troops to Europe unless Russia is dumb enough to attack a NATO country. Sacks is full of **** as usual.

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

BearJew13 said:

---

So the quoted transcript in the tweet isn't accurate?

---

It's one purposely misleading piece of a larger quote. We aren't sending troops to Europe unless Russia is dumb enough to attack a NATO country. Sacks is full of **** as usual.

---

Sacks posted source material. You didn't…

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Psycho Bunny said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

The proof Ukraine is getting rolled is the fact that "no american blood" has turned into "be ready incase they need us"

Long way away from no ability to mount an offensive.

But it is not our war.

Hakeem Jeffries joins the Macron caucus by suggesting that American troops may need to fight in Ukraine. No matter how many times they repeat this idea, we cannot let it become normalized. It would be World War 3. pic.twitter.com/1XQ8H27pVh

— David Sacks (@DavidSacks) May 6, 2024

---

Here is an idea, send all the Ukraine flag waving morons in first. Starting with the democrats who waved Ukraine flags. Then start with all the idiots who changed their profile pictures. Let them go fight on the front lines.

---

David Sacks is so full of Russian BS his eyes are brown. Jeffries didn't say we would have soldiers in Ukraine. If you watch the actual interview he says that if Ukraine falls Russia will then turn to NATO members and then, and only then, we'd be involved in the defense of a NATO.

At no time, ever, does he say we will put troops in Ukraine. And Sacks knows full well no one would actually look up the interview and just trust his tweet.

---

You mean...he was LYING?

And people here posted his propaganda? Unpossible!!!

---

He posted the transcript. The only liar here is Teslag

"No ability to mount an offensive"

Lol

---

Sacks didn't post the transcript. He posted an excerpt.

And tossing out that ad hom doesn't make your point any better.

Besides...Teslag's point is correct.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

BearJew13 said:

---

So the quoted transcript in the tweet isn't accurate?

---

It's one purposely misleading piece of a larger quote. We aren't sending troops to Europe unless Russia is dumb enough to attack a NATO country. Sacks is full of **** as usual.

---

Sacks posted source material. You didn't…

---

To quote YOUR source material:

Quote:

---

Sacks didn't…

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

BearJew13 said:

---

So the quoted transcript in the tweet isn't accurate?

---

It's one purposely misleading piece of a larger quote. We aren't sending troops to Europe unless Russia is dumb enough to attack a NATO country. Sacks is full of **** as usual.

---

Sacks posted source material. You didn't…

---

If he's pulling his misleading screenshot from this article, it's literally the next paragraph. So strange that he didn't include the context showing Jeffries wasn't talking about sending troops to Ukraine.

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/democrat-leader-jeffries-pro-putin-faction-in-gop-delayed-ukraine-aid-60-minutes/

Quote:

---

Jeffries explained that he believes Russian President Vladimir Putin seeks to recreate the Soviet Union, and in doing so, will threaten NATO allies. Putin's invasion of neighboring Georgia did not stop there, Jeffries pointed out, nor did his takeover of Crimea in eastern Ukraine.


"Are we to believe that in the face of this kind of consistent aggression that if we allow Vladimir Putin to succeed in Ukraine that he's only going to stop in Ukraine? Of course not," Jeffries said.

---

Ag with kids said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

BearJew13 said:

---

So the quoted transcript in the tweet isn't accurate?

---

It's one purposely misleading piece of a larger quote. We aren't sending troops to Europe unless Russia is dumb enough to attack a NATO country. Sacks is full of **** as usual.

---

Sacks posted source material. You didn't…

---

To quote YOUR source material:

Quote:

---

Sacks didn't…

---

---

You're deflecting now.. "No ability to mount an offensive" has turned into "ready if they need us"

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

BearJew13 said:

---

So the quoted transcript in the tweet isn't accurate?

---

It's one purposely misleading piece of a larger quote. We aren't sending troops to Europe unless Russia is dumb enough to attack a NATO country. Sacks is full of **** as usual.

---

Sacks posted source material. You didn't…

---

If he's pulling his misleading screenshot from this article, it's literally the next paragraph. So strange that he didn't include the context showing Jeffries wasn't talking about sending troops to Ukraine.

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/democrat-leader-jeffries-pro-putin-faction-in-gop-delayed-ukraine-aid-60-minutes/

Quote:

---

Jeffries explained that he believes Russian President Vladimir Putin seeks to recreate the Soviet Union, and in doing so, will threaten NATO allies. Putin's invasion of neighboring Georgia did not stop there, Jeffries pointed out, nor did his takeover of Crimea in eastern Ukraine.


"Are we to believe that in the face of this kind of consistent aggression that if we allow Vladimir Putin to succeed in Ukraine that he's only going to stop in Ukraine? Of course not," Jeffries said.

---

---

Long way away from "no ability to mount an offensive"

You've made my point masterfully. Thank you.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

BearJew13 said:

---

So the quoted transcript in the tweet isn't accurate?

---

It's one purposely misleading piece of a larger quote. We aren't sending troops to Europe unless Russia is dumb enough to attack a NATO country. Sacks is full of **** as usual.

---

Sacks posted source material. You didn't…

---

If he's pulling his misleading screenshot from this article, it's literally the next paragraph. So strange that he didn't include the context showing Jeffries wasn't talking about sending troops to Ukraine.

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/democrat-leader-jeffries-pro-putin-faction-in-gop-delayed-ukraine-aid-60-minutes/

Quote:

---

Jeffries explained that he believes Russian President Vladimir Putin seeks to recreate the Soviet Union, and in doing so, will threaten NATO allies. Putin's invasion of neighboring Georgia did not stop there, Jeffries pointed out, nor did his takeover of Crimea in eastern Ukraine.


"Are we to believe that in the face of this kind of consistent aggression that if we allow Vladimir Putin to succeed in Ukraine that he's only going to stop in Ukraine? Of course not," Jeffries said.

---

---

Long way away from "no ability to mount an offensive"

You've made my point masterfully. Thank you.

---

Weird, you gave up on that "source material" troll pretty quickly.

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

BearJew13 said:

---

So the quoted transcript in the tweet isn't accurate?

---

It's one purposely misleading piece of a larger quote. We aren't sending troops to Europe unless Russia is dumb enough to attack a NATO country. Sacks is full of **** as usual.

---

Sacks posted source material. You didn't…

---

If he's pulling his misleading screenshot from this article, it's literally the next paragraph. So strange that he didn't include the context showing Jeffries wasn't talking about sending troops to Ukraine.

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/democrat-leader-jeffries-pro-putin-faction-in-gop-delayed-ukraine-aid-60-minutes/

Quote:

---

Jeffries explained that he believes Russian President Vladimir Putin seeks to recreate the Soviet Union, and in doing so, will threaten NATO allies. Putin's invasion of neighboring Georgia did not stop there, Jeffries pointed out, nor did his takeover of Crimea in eastern Ukraine.


"Are we to believe that in the face of this kind of consistent aggression that if we allow Vladimir Putin to succeed in Ukraine that he's only going to stop in Ukraine? Of course not," Jeffries said.

---

---

Long way away from "no ability to mount an offensive"

You've made my point masterfully. Thank you.

---

Weird, you gave up on that "source material" troll pretty quickly.

---

Asking for you to source your claims is not trolling. Especially when your sources prove my point. Like I said, genuinely: thank you.

Just flag him and staff will take care of it. I have him blocked so I no longer get caught up in his game. They've told me they won't tolerate the derails and trolling on this thread any longer.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

BearJew13 said:

---

So the quoted transcript in the tweet isn't accurate?

---

It's one purposely misleading piece of a larger quote. We aren't sending troops to Europe unless Russia is dumb enough to attack a NATO country. Sacks is full of **** as usual.

---

Sacks posted source material. You didn't…

---

To quote YOUR source material:

Quote:

---

Sacks didn't…

---

---

You're deflecting now.. "No ability to mount an offensive" has turned into "ready if they need us"

---

You do realize repeating that doesn't make it true, right?

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

BearJew13 said:

---

So the quoted transcript in the tweet isn't accurate?

---

It's one purposely misleading piece of a larger quote. We aren't sending troops to Europe unless Russia is dumb enough to attack a NATO country. Sacks is full of **** as usual.

---

Sacks posted source material. You didn't…

---

If he's pulling his misleading screenshot from this article, it's literally the next paragraph. So strange that he didn't include the context showing Jeffries wasn't talking about sending troops to Ukraine.

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/democrat-leader-jeffries-pro-putin-faction-in-gop-delayed-ukraine-aid-60-minutes/

Quote:

---

Jeffries explained that he believes Russian President Vladimir Putin seeks to recreate the Soviet Union, and in doing so, will threaten NATO allies. Putin's invasion of neighboring Georgia did not stop there, Jeffries pointed out, nor did his takeover of Crimea in eastern Ukraine.


"Are we to believe that in the face of this kind of consistent aggression that if we allow Vladimir Putin to succeed in Ukraine that he's only going to stop in Ukraine? Of course not," Jeffries said.

---

---

Yep. Sacks knew full well his followers wouldn't dig any deeper. And worse, he also knew that Jeffries didn't state we'd have soldiers in Ukraine.

And it worked. And will keep working on a certain group.

Teslag said:

---

Just flag him and staff will take care of it. I have him blocked so I no longer get caught up in his game. They've told me they won't tolerate the derails and trolling on this thread any longer.

---

True, doesn't really matter to me since everyone knows he's just trolling and no one takes him seriously anyways.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

BearJew13 said:

---

So the quoted transcript in the tweet isn't accurate?

---

It's one purposely misleading piece of a larger quote. We aren't sending troops to Europe unless Russia is dumb enough to attack a NATO country. Sacks is full of **** as usual.

---

Sacks posted source material. You didn't…

---

If he's pulling his misleading screenshot from this article, it's literally the next paragraph. So strange that he didn't include the context showing Jeffries wasn't talking about sending troops to Ukraine.

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/democrat-leader-jeffries-pro-putin-faction-in-gop-delayed-ukraine-aid-60-minutes/

Quote:

---

Jeffries explained that he believes Russian President Vladimir Putin seeks to recreate the Soviet Union, and in doing so, will threaten NATO allies. Putin's invasion of neighboring Georgia did not stop there, Jeffries pointed out, nor did his takeover of Crimea in eastern Ukraine.


"Are we to believe that in the face of this kind of consistent aggression that if we allow Vladimir Putin to succeed in Ukraine that he's only going to stop in Ukraine? Of course not," Jeffries said.

---

---

Long way away from "no ability to mount an offensive"

You've made my point masterfully. Thank you.

---

Weird, you gave up on that "source material" troll pretty quickly.

---

Asking for you to source your claims is not trolling. Especially when your sources prove my point. Like I said, genuinely: thank you.

---

My point was that Sacks was full of **** (as usual) and was posting purposely misleading clickbait. Not really sure what else you're talking about.

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

BearJew13 said:

---

So the quoted transcript in the tweet isn't accurate?

---

It's one purposely misleading piece of a larger quote. We aren't sending troops to Europe unless Russia is dumb enough to attack a NATO country. Sacks is full of **** as usual.

---

Sacks posted source material. You didn't…

---

If he's pulling his misleading screenshot from this article, it's literally the next paragraph. So strange that he didn't include the context showing Jeffries wasn't talking about sending troops to Ukraine.

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/democrat-leader-jeffries-pro-putin-faction-in-gop-delayed-ukraine-aid-60-minutes/

Quote:

---

Jeffries explained that he believes Russian President Vladimir Putin seeks to recreate the Soviet Union, and in doing so, will threaten NATO allies. Putin's invasion of neighboring Georgia did not stop there, Jeffries pointed out, nor did his takeover of Crimea in eastern Ukraine.


"Are we to believe that in the face of this kind of consistent aggression that if we allow Vladimir Putin to succeed in Ukraine that he's only going to stop in Ukraine? Of course not," Jeffries said.

---

---

Long way away from "no ability to mount an offensive"

You've made my point masterfully. Thank you.

---

Weird, you gave up on that "source material" troll pretty quickly.

---

Asking for you to source your claims is not trolling. Especially when your sources prove my point. Like I said, genuinely: thank you.

---

My point was that Sacks was full of **** (as usual) and was posting purposely misleading clickbait. Not really sure what else you're talking about.

---

I think you’re reading too much into that. He’s saying that if 🇺🇦 falls, then 🇺🇸 may become involved: not 🇺🇸 involved to prevent 🇺🇦 from falling. 🇷🇺 will likely push into NATO if it wins in 🇺🇦. That’s why 🇺🇦 aid is vital: to prevent 🇷🇺 from conquering 🇺🇦. #SlavaUkraïni

— Joe the Independent (@joe4senate2024) May 6, 2024

Trying to demonstrate how far we have came from the old Ukrainian talking points of no ability to mount an offensive. And Jefferies is absolutely is saying we have to be ready if they need us.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

BearJew13 said:

---

So the quoted transcript in the tweet isn't accurate?

---

It's one purposely misleading piece of a larger quote. We aren't sending troops to Europe unless Russia is dumb enough to attack a NATO country. Sacks is full of **** as usual.

---

Sacks posted source material. You didn't…

---

If he's pulling his misleading screenshot from this article, it's literally the next paragraph. So strange that he didn't include the context showing Jeffries wasn't talking about sending troops to Ukraine.

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/democrat-leader-jeffries-pro-putin-faction-in-gop-delayed-ukraine-aid-60-minutes/

Quote:

---

Jeffries explained that he believes Russian President Vladimir Putin seeks to recreate the Soviet Union, and in doing so, will threaten NATO allies. Putin's invasion of neighboring Georgia did not stop there, Jeffries pointed out, nor did his takeover of Crimea in eastern Ukraine.


"Are we to believe that in the face of this kind of consistent aggression that if we allow Vladimir Putin to succeed in Ukraine that he's only going to stop in Ukraine? Of course not," Jeffries said.

---

---

Long way away from "no ability to mount an offensive"

You've made my point masterfully. Thank you.

---

Weird, you gave up on that "source material" troll pretty quickly.

---

Asking for you to source your claims is not trolling. Especially when your sources prove my point. Like I said, genuinely: thank you.

---

My point was that Sacks was full of **** (as usual) and was posting purposely misleading clickbait. Not really sure what else you're talking about.

---

I think you’re reading too much into that. He’s saying that if 🇺🇦 falls, then 🇺🇸 may become involved: not 🇺🇸 involved to prevent 🇺🇦 from falling. 🇷🇺 will likely push into NATO if it wins in 🇺🇦. That’s why 🇺🇦 aid is vital: to prevent 🇷🇺 from conquering 🇺🇦. #SlavaUkraïni

— Joe the Independent (@joe4senate2024) May 6, 2024

Trying to demonstrate how far we have came from the old Ukrainian talking points of no ability to mount an offensive. And Jefferies is absolutely is saying we have to be ready if they need us.

---

IF

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

BearJew13 said:

---

So the quoted transcript in the tweet isn't accurate?

---

It's one purposely misleading piece of a larger quote. We aren't sending troops to Europe unless Russia is dumb enough to attack a NATO country. Sacks is full of **** as usual.

---

Sacks posted source material. You didn't…

---

If he's pulling his misleading screenshot from this article, it's literally the next paragraph. So strange that he didn't include the context showing Jeffries wasn't talking about sending troops to Ukraine.

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/democrat-leader-jeffries-pro-putin-faction-in-gop-delayed-ukraine-aid-60-minutes/

Quote:

---

Jeffries explained that he believes Russian President Vladimir Putin seeks to recreate the Soviet Union, and in doing so, will threaten NATO allies. Putin's invasion of neighboring Georgia did not stop there, Jeffries pointed out, nor did his takeover of Crimea in eastern Ukraine.


"Are we to believe that in the face of this kind of consistent aggression that if we allow Vladimir Putin to succeed in Ukraine that he's only going to stop in Ukraine? Of course not," Jeffries said.

---

---

Long way away from "no ability to mount an offensive"

You've made my point masterfully. Thank you.

---

Weird, you gave up on that "source material" troll pretty quickly.

---

Asking for you to source your claims is not trolling. Especially when your sources prove my point. Like I said, genuinely: thank you.

---

My point was that Sacks was full of **** (as usual) and was posting purposely misleading clickbait. Not really sure what else you're talking about.

---

I think you’re reading too much into that. He’s saying that if 🇺🇦 falls, then 🇺🇸 may become involved: not 🇺🇸 involved to prevent 🇺🇦 from falling. 🇷🇺 will likely push into NATO if it wins in 🇺🇦. That’s why 🇺🇦 aid is vital: to prevent 🇷🇺 from conquering 🇺🇦. #SlavaUkraïni

— Joe the Independent (@joe4senate2024) May 6, 2024

Trying to demonstrate how far we have came from the old Ukrainian talking points of no ability to mount an offensive. And Jefferies is absolutely is saying we have to be ready if they need us.

---

Biden wins 2024 election, troops will be in Ukraine before Christmas.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

BearJew13 said:

---

So the quoted transcript in the tweet isn't accurate?

---

It's one purposely misleading piece of a larger quote. We aren't sending troops to Europe unless Russia is dumb enough to attack a NATO country. Sacks is full of **** as usual.

---

Sacks posted source material. You didn't…

---

If he's pulling his misleading screenshot from this article, it's literally the next paragraph. So strange that he didn't include the context showing Jeffries wasn't talking about sending troops to Ukraine.

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/democrat-leader-jeffries-pro-putin-faction-in-gop-delayed-ukraine-aid-60-minutes/

Quote:

---

Jeffries explained that he believes Russian President Vladimir Putin seeks to recreate the Soviet Union, and in doing so, will threaten NATO allies. Putin's invasion of neighboring Georgia did not stop there, Jeffries pointed out, nor did his takeover of Crimea in eastern Ukraine.


"Are we to believe that in the face of this kind of consistent aggression that if we allow Vladimir Putin to succeed in Ukraine that he's only going to stop in Ukraine? Of course not," Jeffries said.

---

---

Long way away from "no ability to mount an offensive"

You've made my point masterfully. Thank you.

---

Weird, you gave up on that "source material" troll pretty quickly.

---

Asking for you to source your claims is not trolling. Especially when your sources prove my point. Like I said, genuinely: thank you.

---

My point was that Sacks was full of **** (as usual) and was posting purposely misleading clickbait. Not really sure what else you're talking about.

---

I think you’re reading too much into that. He’s saying that if 🇺🇦 falls, then 🇺🇸 may become involved: not 🇺🇸 involved to prevent 🇺🇦 from falling. 🇷🇺 will likely push into NATO if it wins in 🇺🇦. That’s why 🇺🇦 aid is vital: to prevent 🇷🇺 from conquering 🇺🇦. #SlavaUkraïni

— Joe the Independent (@joe4senate2024) May 6, 2024

Trying to demonstrate how far we have came from the old Ukrainian talking points of no ability to mount an offensive. And Jefferies is absolutely is saying we have to be ready if they need us.

---

Do you think we shouldn't be ready if Putin tries to invade a NATO country?