I don't have to justify anything. The aid is already approved and will continue.

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

And please answer my question, Are you for giving Ukraine permission to make advanced weapons strike into Russia?

---

I literally quoted your question and said yes in the previous post.

And define "win".

---

This is what everyone that has been opposed to Ukraine funding has said from the get go.

The Ukraine fanboys need to define the terms of victory.

Period

Yall are the ones begging for unlimited aid and escalation.

So YOU tell US what the goals are here.

It's not our job to tell you what we want accomplished because we are against funding this **** show.

The onus is on YOU to tell us WHY the investment of untraceable money amd material is necessary, what the goals are, and how a "win" would be defined.

Per usual, u have this assbackwards my dude.

---

Who is saying this?

---

Nobody that I know. It's a strawman.

---

Actually the fact that Ukrainian aid is attached to almost every bill that touches the floor of congress and when we call out such things the Teslag crew calls us Putin Fanboys is pretty much proof that the Warhawks and neocons on here want unlimited Ukrainian Aid.

If you have spent anytime at all reading this thread you will have seen that there are two major camps.

1) calls for moderation, oversight of aid, deescalation, and peace agreement.

2) the other calls for aid without oversight, and whatever it takes to stack Russian bodies.

I have consistently taken side 1
Teslag et al. Have consistently taken side 2 and defended every aid package put before the congressional floor.

---

None of what you said equals the below.

Quote:

---

Yall are the ones begging for unlimited aid and escalation.

---

Would you like to try again? Or maybe just admit that you made it up?

cslifer said:

---

Saying that someone is "always" full of hot air tends to eventually come back to bite you.

---

Putin likes power.

Crossing the Rubicon of attacking a NATO country would permanently remove any power he has.

Putin isn't psycho like the idiots in the middle east.

OPAG said:

---

Quote:

---

Yep. You can't have that opinion that "Russia will eventually control the whole country" and reconcile it with these maps.

---

I have never stated that Russian wins by taking over all of Ukraine. That's you doing what you do, moving the goal post.

Speaking with hubris and confidence does not make you right in your assessments and evaluations.

When I ask you "How do you know" your response is that YOU can read a map and calendar. You are basically telling me that you either have no real sources of what's going on there outside the bloggers and propaganda guys.

---

And when you're asked "how do you know", you claim you can't show your sources...

Which means that you have none, either...

Teslag said:

---

Shelling a foreign invader is always fair game. Don't like it? Don't invade a sovereign nation.

---

These were Russian speaking Ukrainians. Before this thing kicked off.

This kicked off before Zelenskyy became president

OPAG said:

---

Quote:

---

Yep. You can't have that opinion that "Russia will eventually control the whole country" and reconcile it with these maps.

---

Russia doesn't have a big desire to take over all of Ukraine. Never did.

They are doing what they want. They want a buffer between them and the NWO pedo cabal wicked west>

That's it.

---

Putin has even said that Ukraine is Russian...

And the invasion didn't try to take Kyiv just by accident. It was intended to take Kyiv to control the entire country and bring it back into the Motherland.

Quote:

---

But you don't see how wicked the West has become, you have what I have said all along a very myopic and stubborn point of view and it totally wrong.

---

You have a big issue with the west...we see that. Apparently, you now think Russia is much more pure.

Quote:

---

And so is Weatherman and so is Ags with Kids. It is extremely clear what this fore (sic) into Kursk is all about.

---

What IS this foray into Kursk about?

Quote:

---

For Ukraine to win, there are only two possibilities.

1. Get West/Nato/US boots on the ground actually engaging - (like we did in Vietnam) - Russian's, That my friend is going to lead to a massive escalation and yea, the Ruskies will respond to it, they must respond to it. YOU KNOW NOTHING OF THE RUSSIAN MINDSET IF YOU THINK THEY WONT.

2. Try to provoke Russia into making a strike against NATO that is supplying all this stuff to Ukraine.

---

Ukraine needs no US boots on the ground. They're holding their own with old Soviet materiel and older western materiel that was designed specifically for this purpose.

And WHAT is this response you're claiming Russia will have?

Quote:

---

Here is the reality without support from the west, this is over tomorrow! Or would you deny that?

---

I will agree that the materiel that the west is giving has helped and without it, they would definitely have a much harder time.

But, the materiel will continue to be there.

Quote:

---

Again if the roles were reversed, and China or Russia, was supply Mexico with weapons and making strikes with those weapons inside the US, what would our response be?

---

We'd **** up MEXICO.

OPAG said:

---

Quote:

---

Irrelevant because we wouldn't invade Mexico in an unprovoked land grab in the first place.

---

LOL From the Mexican point of view we already did that. You do know what the war with Mexico was about yes.


What if Mexica, decides they want back what they feel was their that we took from them? Hmmm

---

This was right after Mexico stole New Spain from Spain, right?

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

And please answer my question, Are you for giving Ukraine permission to make advanced weapons strike into Russia?

---

I literally quoted your question and said yes in the previous post.

And define "win".

---

This is what everyone that has been opposed to Ukraine funding has said from the get go.

The Ukraine fanboys need to define the terms of victory.

Period

Yall are the ones begging for unlimited aid and escalation.

So YOU tell US what the goals are here.

It's not our job to tell you what we want accomplished because we are against funding this **** show.

The onus is on YOU to tell us WHY the investment of untraceable money amd material is necessary, what the goals are, and how a "win" would be defined.

Per usual, u have this assbackwards my dude.

---

Who is saying this?

---

Nobody that I know. It's a strawman.

---

Actually the fact that Ukrainian aid is attached to almost every bill that touches the floor of congress and when we call out such things the Teslag crew calls us Putin Fanboys is pretty much proof that the Warhawks and neocons on here want unlimited Ukrainian Aid.

If you have spent anytime at all reading this thread you will have seen that there are two major camps.

1) calls for moderation, oversight of aid, deescalation, and peace agreement.

2) the other calls for aid without oversight, and whatever it takes to stack Russian bodies.

I have consistently taken side 1
Teslag et al. Have consistently taken side 2 and defended every aid package put before the congressional floor.

---

None of what you said equals the below.

Quote:

---

Yall are the ones begging for unlimited aid and escalation.

---

Would you like to try again? Or maybe just admit that you made it up?

---

So if you're not "begging for unlimited aid" as he wrote, when/where did you define your desired cap in aid? If you haven't made that clear, could you quantify how much aid you think should be sent and what your dollar limit is?

I could find "as long as it takes" style posts in the ole bookmarks if you're going to pretend that hasn't been a consistent theme in this thread.

OPAG said:

---

Quote:

---

So are the actual Ukrainians. They don't want to be Russians.

---

And how pray tell, do you know that. Besides the PR sources?

men are being wiped out, or fleeing or try to hide from getting grabbed and sent to the front.

They are now sending the women in.

If there was a real referendum allowed to vote to continue war or sue for peace, the result would be overwhelming to sue for peace. There is a reason Zelensky suspended (was forced to) the elections. HE WOULD OF BEEN TROUNCED if it was free and fair. The cabal knows this.

---

Well, maybe they don't want to be Russians AND don't want to be KILLED by Russians.

Has that crossed your mind?

Ukraine can't hold elections in Ukraine. Russia has occupied a chunk of Ukraine. How could elections be held there?

Maybe if Russia would GTFO then they could actually hold elections there...

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

If there was a real referendum allowed to vote to continue war or sue for peace, the result would be overwhelming to sue for peace.

---

And you accuse us of making unfounded assumptions…


And the Ukrainians fight awfully hard for a people being forced to.

---

I don't think its fair to say his assumption is unfounded. Recall that Zelensky campaigned on peace, and then started shelling Russians….

---

Shelling Russians that WERE INVADING UKRAINE.

I think you forgot the bolded part...

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

And please answer my question, Are you for giving Ukraine permission to make advanced weapons strike into Russia?

---

I literally quoted your question and said yes in the previous post.

And define "win".

---

This is what everyone that has been opposed to Ukraine funding has said from the get go.

The Ukraine fanboys need to define the terms of victory.

Period

Yall are the ones begging for unlimited aid and escalation.

So YOU tell US what the goals are here.

It's not our job to tell you what we want accomplished because we are against funding this **** show.

The onus is on YOU to tell us WHY the investment of untraceable money amd material is necessary, what the goals are, and how a "win" would be defined.

Per usual, u have this assbackwards my dude.

---

Who is saying this?

---

Nobody that I know. It's a strawman.

---

Actually the fact that Ukrainian aid is attached to almost every bill that touches the floor of congress and when we call out such things the Teslag crew calls us Putin Fanboys is pretty much proof that the Warhawks and neocons on here want unlimited Ukrainian Aid.

If you have spent anytime at all reading this thread you will have seen that there are two major camps.

1) calls for moderation, oversight of aid, deescalation, and peace agreement.

2) the other calls for aid without oversight, and whatever it takes to stack Russian bodies.

I have consistently taken side 1
Teslag et al. Have consistently taken side 2 and defended every aid package put before the congressional floor.

---

See, this is the strawman...

Nobody, even Tesla, has called for aid WITHOUT OVERSIGHT.

And...nobody, even Tesla, has called for WHATEVER IT TAKES to stack Russian bodies.

Deescalation will only come when Putin decides to deescalate. He could do it today. But, he still wants the rest of Ukraine AND, IMO, his ego is severely butthurt from his military being embarrased so he's continuing to waste Russian bodies to save face.

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Putin can de-escalate this at any time of his choosing.

---

Also that isn't what I said. I didn't mention deescalation at all.

I said your side is asking for continual monetary and military aid for Ukraine.

Because your side is asking for aid the burden is on you to defend why the aid should be given.

That includes outlining the goals the aid will be put towards as well as defining what "winning" means for the Ukrainians.

It's not on the other side to define what winning means.

---

If you have spent anytime at all reading this thread you will have seen that there are two major camps.

1) calls for moderation, oversight of aid, deescalation, and peace agreement.

2) the other calls for aid without oversight, and whatever it takes to stack Russian bodies.

I have consistently taken side 1

You linked a post from hours AFTER the one you quoted.

Interesting map if true

Selydove in 2 days… pic.twitter.com/nzZ7uTAsEE

— ayden (@squatsons) August 29, 2024

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

And please answer my question, Are you for giving Ukraine permission to make advanced weapons strike into Russia?

---

I literally quoted your question and said yes in the previous post.

And define "win".

---

This is what everyone that has been opposed to Ukraine funding has said from the get go.

The Ukraine fanboys need to define the terms of victory.

Period

Yall are the ones begging for unlimited aid and escalation.

So YOU tell US what the goals are here.

It's not our job to tell you what we want accomplished because we are against funding this **** show.

The onus is on YOU to tell us WHY the investment of untraceable money amd material is necessary, what the goals are, and how a "win" would be defined.

Per usual, u have this assbackwards my dude.

---

Who is saying this?

---

Nobody that I know. It's a strawman.

---

Actually the fact that Ukrainian aid is attached to almost every bill that touches the floor of congress and when we call out such things the Teslag crew calls us Putin Fanboys is pretty much proof that the Warhawks and neocons on here want unlimited Ukrainian Aid.

If you have spent anytime at all reading this thread you will have seen that there are two major camps.

1) calls for moderation, oversight of aid, deescalation, and peace agreement.

2) the other calls for aid without oversight, and whatever it takes to stack Russian bodies.

I have consistently taken side 1
Teslag et al. Have consistently taken side 2 and defended every aid package put before the congressional floor.

---

None of what you said equals the below.

Quote:

---

Yall are the ones begging for unlimited aid and escalation.

---

Would you like to try again? Or maybe just admit that you made it up?

---

So if you're not "begging for unlimited aid" as he wrote, when/where did you define your desired cap in aid? If you haven't made that clear, could you quantify how much aid you think should be sent and what your dollar limit is?

I could find "as long as it takes" style posts in the ole bookmarks if you're going to pretend that hasn't been a consistent theme in this thread.

---

So, if there is not an explicit dollar limit, then it's "unlimited"? As in infinite?

That's inane. Here's an example:

How much will you spend in your life on tacos? If you can't tell me an exact dollar amount, then you're willing to spend an unlimited amount on tacos.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

You linked a post from hours AFTER the one you quoted.

---

He'd been implying deescalation for awhile.

GoAgs11 said:

---

When does UKE realize they cannot stop Russia? Russia will eventually control the whole country

---

Poland will likely take the western half of Ukraine if there is a serious risk of Kyiv falling.

Another pro-Kiev regime mouthpiece online recognizing the truth about the Kursk fiasco:

What the Kursk operation achieved was a shift in perceptions on the war and frankly not much else.

If the current trajectory continues, that shift will become temporary and Kursk will likely backfire on the Ukrainian political and military leadership. https://t.co/o57P1ZYccI

— Thord Are Iversen (@The_Lookout_N) August 30, 2024

Some truth here:

🚨🇺🇦Dmitry Medvedev drops $14.8 trillion Truth Bomb on Ukraine:

"Why are Kiev neo-Nazis so eager to take back Donbass, which is completely alien to them?

Why are they desperately supported in this by all the rabid animals who guard the Western world today: from the half-dead… pic.twitter.com/JbSbQ2TYBE

— Aussie Cossack (@aussiecossack) August 30, 2024

Russians seem to credibly claim 2 of the vaunted F-16's have been lost, one to a Patriot. Remember, these pilots weren't even previously tactical aviation pilots at all, before being trained in the type over the past year.

Front update;

Quote:

---

But my contention is that, if and when we start seeing multiple Ukrainian fronts collapsing at the same time, that will be the final siren song notifying us that the 'snowball effect' has truly begun and that Russian manpower is now overwhelmingly superior as a generality. That's because as a last desperation move, Ukraine would be forced to pull forces from other fronts just to plug holes to keep from being entirely overrun and surrounded. The fact they're not necessarily doing this yet likely means there are still some reserves available. When those reserves run out, it can create a cascading effect where reserves are pulled from other fronts, and then those fronts subsequently begin collapsing just as fast as the Pokrovsk one. Only then can we say that the AFU's final stanza has begun.

---

In the near future, the Selidovo direction will have a new supply line, since the Donetsk-Selidovo highway has been cleared.#from_the_battlefield
🇷🇺 Sofa General Staff https://t.co/rVuoRQIfCD pic.twitter.com/eP3eRQ3GUa

— -- GEROMAN -- time will tell - 👀 -- (@GeromanAT) August 30, 2024

Forever war, to the last Ukrainian.

Quote:

---

And when you're asked "how do you know", you claim you can't show your sources...

---

I have already addressed this and you just do not want to hear it.

I said, I could take you personally by the hand, introduce you to my "sources" and you would not believe them anyway.

In any case I have also said I am not Hillary Clinton, I am assuming that you may know what I mean by that, but maybe you don't.
Hillary almost single handidly led to the death and exposure of many of our best CIA operatives. I think she did it on purpose.
I will not do that, not only will I not do that, I won't even mess around with which agencies or military branches I am getting stuff from, NOPE ain't going there. Especially not for you or Teslag or guys on this board.

I will say that I myself have worked directly with very high level officials in both the CIA and the FBI.

I will leave it at that.

Quote:

---

You have a big issue with the west...we see that. Apparently, you now think Russia is much more pure.

---

And you don't have any issue with the west? Really, what sort of myopic world are you leaving in.

And yes, ideologically Russia is more pure.

They resist the LGBT agenda.

They and other Eastern European country resist the forced immigration of millions of Islamic "refugees">

They resist the sex and drug trafficking cabal.

Are they pure, NOPE. NO ONE is.

But you are living in a fantacy land if you think that you Ukraine is some noble and clean country just wanting independence.

Quote:

---

They resist the sex and drug trafficking cabal.

---

Most prostitutes in the Middle East and even in Western Europe are funneled from Russia and Eastern Europe.

Ag with kids said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

And please answer my question, Are you for giving Ukraine permission to make advanced weapons strike into Russia?

---

I literally quoted your question and said yes in the previous post.

And define "win".

---

This is what everyone that has been opposed to Ukraine funding has said from the get go.

The Ukraine fanboys need to define the terms of victory.

Period

Yall are the ones begging for unlimited aid and escalation.

So YOU tell US what the goals are here.

It's not our job to tell you what we want accomplished because we are against funding this **** show.

The onus is on YOU to tell us WHY the investment of untraceable money amd material is necessary, what the goals are, and how a "win" would be defined.

Per usual, u have this assbackwards my dude.

---

Who is saying this?

---

Nobody that I know. It's a strawman.

---

Actually the fact that Ukrainian aid is attached to almost every bill that touches the floor of congress and when we call out such things the Teslag crew calls us Putin Fanboys is pretty much proof that the Warhawks and neocons on here want unlimited Ukrainian Aid.

If you have spent anytime at all reading this thread you will have seen that there are two major camps.

1) calls for moderation, oversight of aid, deescalation, and peace agreement.

2) the other calls for aid without oversight, and whatever it takes to stack Russian bodies.

I have consistently taken side 1
Teslag et al. Have consistently taken side 2 and defended every aid package put before the congressional floor.

---

None of what you said equals the below.

Quote:

---

Yall are the ones begging for unlimited aid and escalation.

---

Would you like to try again? Or maybe just admit that you made it up?

---

So if you're not "begging for unlimited aid" as he wrote, when/where did you define your desired cap in aid? If you haven't made that clear, could you quantify how much aid you think should be sent and what your dollar limit is?

I could find "as long as it takes" style posts in the ole bookmarks if you're going to pretend that hasn't been a consistent theme in this thread.

---

So, if there is not an explicit dollar limit, then it's "unlimited"? As in infinite?

That's inane. Here's an example:

How much will you spend in your life on tacos? If you can't tell me an exact dollar amount, then you're willing to spend an unlimited amount on tacos.

---

Less then $10 per week. That wasn't hard.

Whats your limit on aid? If you can't provide one, it's completely reasonable to assume you're asking for unlimited money, because you are.

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

They resist the sex and drug trafficking cabal.

---

Most prostitutes in the Middle East and even in Western Europe are funneled from Russia and Eastern Europe.

---

You just knocking the legs out from under logic with your big poon funnel facts.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

And please answer my question, Are you for giving Ukraine permission to make advanced weapons strike into Russia?

---

I literally quoted your question and said yes in the previous post.

And define "win".

---

This is what everyone that has been opposed to Ukraine funding has said from the get go.

The Ukraine fanboys need to define the terms of victory.

Period

Yall are the ones begging for unlimited aid and escalation.

So YOU tell US what the goals are here.

It's not our job to tell you what we want accomplished because we are against funding this **** show.

The onus is on YOU to tell us WHY the investment of untraceable money amd material is necessary, what the goals are, and how a "win" would be defined.

Per usual, u have this assbackwards my dude.

---

Who is saying this?

---

Nobody that I know. It's a strawman.

---

Actually the fact that Ukrainian aid is attached to almost every bill that touches the floor of congress and when we call out such things the Teslag crew calls us Putin Fanboys is pretty much proof that the Warhawks and neocons on here want unlimited Ukrainian Aid.

If you have spent anytime at all reading this thread you will have seen that there are two major camps.

1) calls for moderation, oversight of aid, deescalation, and peace agreement.

2) the other calls for aid without oversight, and whatever it takes to stack Russian bodies.

I have consistently taken side 1
Teslag et al. Have consistently taken side 2 and defended every aid package put before the congressional floor.

---

None of what you said equals the below.

Quote:

---

Yall are the ones begging for unlimited aid and escalation.

---

Would you like to try again? Or maybe just admit that you made it up?

---

So if you're not "begging for unlimited aid" as he wrote, when/where did you define your desired cap in aid? If you haven't made that clear, could you quantify how much aid you think should be sent and what your dollar limit is?

I could find "as long as it takes" style posts in the ole bookmarks if you're going to pretend that hasn't been a consistent theme in this thread.

---

So, if there is not an explicit dollar limit, then it's "unlimited"? As in infinite?

That's inane. Here's an example:

How much will you spend in your life on tacos? If you can't tell me an exact dollar amount, then you're willing to spend an unlimited amount on tacos.

---

Less then $10 per week. That wasn't hard.

Whats your limit on aid? If you can't provide one, it's completely reasonable to assume you're asking for unlimited money, because you are.

---

He said posters are "begging for unlimited aid and escalation." Seems easy to find evidence of that, and yet there is none. Just another strawman.

OPAG said:

---

Quote:

---

You have a big issue with the west...we see that. Apparently, you now think Russia is much more pure.

---

And you don't have any issue with the west? Really, what sort of myopic world are you leaving in.

And yes, ideologically Russia is more pure.

They resist the LGBT agenda.

They and other Eastern European country resist the forced immigration of millions of Islamic "refugees">

They resist the sex and drug trafficking cabal.

Are they pure, NOPE. NO ONE is.

But you are living in a fantacy land if you think that you Ukraine is some noble and clean country just wanting independence.

---

They also throw people out windows or send them to Siberia for saying anything negative about the government. So pure.

Territorial Defense units are sort of like our national guard, in some respects. Some good folks, but not who the pentagon would put largely at the tip of the spear in an invasion, imho.

🇷🇺🇺🇦 Kursk front: After costly battles without any advance and the Russian breakthrough in Donbass, the Ukranian army circles out the battle capable units out of Kursk.

They’re rotated out and replaced with territorial defense troops, which are less trained, experienced and… pic.twitter.com/K13oQpmRPk

— Lord Bebo (@MyLordBebo) August 30, 2024

The city of Donetsk, which has been the subject of indiscriminate shelling by the AFU for the past 10 years, is now out of direct artillery range.

You know what isn't though? The town of Pokrovsk, one of the biggest military supply hubs for the AFU's Donbass front. pic.twitter.com/o26fve4pS6

— Olga Bazova (@OlgaBazova) August 30, 2024

Good point:

There's this narrative at the moment that Russia - or indeed Putin - has no red lines. Indeed, I read that one of Zelensky's reasons for the Kursk invasion is to prove that there are no such red lines and that Ukraine should be relieved of all Western constraints in carrying out…

— Chamberlain's Ghost (@RSA_Observer) August 30, 2024

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

And please answer my question, Are you for giving Ukraine permission to make advanced weapons strike into Russia?

---

I literally quoted your question and said yes in the previous post.

And define "win".

---

This is what everyone that has been opposed to Ukraine funding has said from the get go.

The Ukraine fanboys need to define the terms of victory.

Period

Yall are the ones begging for unlimited aid and escalation.

So YOU tell US what the goals are here.

It's not our job to tell you what we want accomplished because we are against funding this **** show.

The onus is on YOU to tell us WHY the investment of untraceable money amd material is necessary, what the goals are, and how a "win" would be defined.

Per usual, u have this assbackwards my dude.

---

Who is saying this?

---

Nobody that I know. It's a strawman.

---

Actually the fact that Ukrainian aid is attached to almost every bill that touches the floor of congress and when we call out such things the Teslag crew calls us Putin Fanboys is pretty much proof that the Warhawks and neocons on here want unlimited Ukrainian Aid.

If you have spent anytime at all reading this thread you will have seen that there are two major camps.

1) calls for moderation, oversight of aid, deescalation, and peace agreement.

2) the other calls for aid without oversight, and whatever it takes to stack Russian bodies.

I have consistently taken side 1
Teslag et al. Have consistently taken side 2 and defended every aid package put before the congressional floor.

---

None of what you said equals the below.

Quote:

---

Yall are the ones begging for unlimited aid and escalation.

---

Would you like to try again? Or maybe just admit that you made it up?

---

So if you're not "begging for unlimited aid" as he wrote, when/where did you define your desired cap in aid? If you haven't made that clear, could you quantify how much aid you think should be sent and what your dollar limit is?

I could find "as long as it takes" style posts in the ole bookmarks if you're going to pretend that hasn't been a consistent theme in this thread.

---

So, if there is not an explicit dollar limit, then it's "unlimited"? As in infinite?

That's inane. Here's an example:

How much will you spend in your life on tacos? If you can't tell me an exact dollar amount, then you're willing to spend an unlimited amount on tacos.

---

Less then $10 per week. That wasn't hard.

Whats your limit on aid? If you can't provide one, it's completely reasonable to assume you're asking for unlimited money, because you are.

---

He said posters are "begging for unlimited aid and escalation." Seems easy to find evidence of that, and yet there is none. Just another strawman.

---

The evidence is 200 pages of calling for more aid without defining a limit to that aid.

If someone defined the limit and I missed it, you could show me where they did so and I'd agree with you.

The only 'limit' I have seen championed from the pro-war folks who adore Zelensky's regime is 'whatever it takes' which is a euphemism for 'without limit.' This is also why many now champion sending the latest Tomahawk cruise missiles, JDAM-ER, and munitions from our remaining 'stockpile' of weapons we haven't, and telling Syrsky to 'go ahead, strike as far and wide as the munitions will let you, at whatever you want, within Russia.'

Mike Benz made the point with Tucker (toward the end of their podcast this week) that there are a few components/aspects to the blob's wars; strategic, tactical, logistical, and political. Strategic involves monetary interests of folks like oil/gas co, and tactical involves rent a mob's as necessary or weapons and logistics which are obvious. Political requires the approval of enough folks back home to keep funding the war no matter the actual situation/damage (see: Vietnam vs. Libya/Afghanistan).

I think politically, American popular opinion is firmly against this 'unlimited' and endless war against Putin with no American interests other than the mineral/oil and gas rights in the Donbas to speak of. That's obviously what motivates the Kiev regime to try to retake the Donbas, not the people there. This is also why Telegram (and X) is so important to the blob: it's the threat of a 'populist' or anti-institutional message being widely received politically, anywhere:

I need you to absorb everything I told @NewsMax here about NATO's military, intelligence & political reasons for seizing control over Telegram and using this new political prosecution of Pavel to finally get it. pic.twitter.com/eBznYnSqBq

— Mike Benz (@MikeBenzCyber) August 27, 2024

The 'seize Eurasia' plan is not going to go away with a truce/settlement of Ukraine after our election:

If you think it's even close to being over, you don't get it yet. No matter what happens this year, the Seize Eurasia master plan & the Ukraine pivot point war will rage on for 70 yrs. If a deal is struck, we'll simply shift from formal DOD military to deniable CIA paramilitary. https://t.co/2UrHHooIGl pic.twitter.com/55RpImxSo1

— Mike Benz (@MikeBenzCyber) April 22, 2024

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

And please answer my question, Are you for giving Ukraine permission to make advanced weapons strike into Russia?

---

I literally quoted your question and said yes in the previous post.

And define "win".

---

This is what everyone that has been opposed to Ukraine funding has said from the get go.

The Ukraine fanboys need to define the terms of victory.

Period

Yall are the ones begging for unlimited aid and escalation.

So YOU tell US what the goals are here.

It's not our job to tell you what we want accomplished because we are against funding this **** show.

The onus is on YOU to tell us WHY the investment of untraceable money amd material is necessary, what the goals are, and how a "win" would be defined.

Per usual, u have this assbackwards my dude.

---

Who is saying this?

---

Nobody that I know. It's a strawman.

---

Actually the fact that Ukrainian aid is attached to almost every bill that touches the floor of congress and when we call out such things the Teslag crew calls us Putin Fanboys is pretty much proof that the Warhawks and neocons on here want unlimited Ukrainian Aid.

If you have spent anytime at all reading this thread you will have seen that there are two major camps.

1) calls for moderation, oversight of aid, deescalation, and peace agreement.

2) the other calls for aid without oversight, and whatever it takes to stack Russian bodies.

I have consistently taken side 1
Teslag et al. Have consistently taken side 2 and defended every aid package put before the congressional floor.

---

None of what you said equals the below.

Quote:

---

Yall are the ones begging for unlimited aid and escalation.

---

Would you like to try again? Or maybe just admit that you made it up?

---

So if you're not "begging for unlimited aid" as he wrote, when/where did you define your desired cap in aid? If you haven't made that clear, could you quantify how much aid you think should be sent and what your dollar limit is?

I could find "as long as it takes" style posts in the ole bookmarks if you're going to pretend that hasn't been a consistent theme in this thread.

---

So, if there is not an explicit dollar limit, then it's "unlimited"? As in infinite?

That's inane. Here's an example:

How much will you spend in your life on tacos? If you can't tell me an exact dollar amount, then you're willing to spend an unlimited amount on tacos.

---

Less then $10 per week. That wasn't hard.

Whats your limit on aid? If you can't provide one, it's completely reasonable to assume you're asking for unlimited money, because you are.

---

He said posters are "begging for unlimited aid and escalation." Seems easy to find evidence of that, and yet there is none. Just another strawman.

---

The evidence is 200 pages of calling for more aid without defining a limit to that aid.

If someone defined the limit and I missed it, you could show me where they did so and I'd agree with you.

---

You can make whatever logic leap to support your usual vague trolling arguments that you'd like. Meanwhile, back in the real world where actual words matter, I'll continue to wait for that poster to quote someone "begging for unlimited aid and escalation." Guessing I'll be waiting awhile.

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

And please answer my question, Are you for giving Ukraine permission to make advanced weapons strike into Russia?

---

I literally quoted your question and said yes in the previous post.

And define "win".

---

This is what everyone that has been opposed to Ukraine funding has said from the get go.

The Ukraine fanboys need to define the terms of victory.

Period

Yall are the ones begging for unlimited aid and escalation.

So YOU tell US what the goals are here.

It's not our job to tell you what we want accomplished because we are against funding this **** show.

The onus is on YOU to tell us WHY the investment of untraceable money amd material is necessary, what the goals are, and how a "win" would be defined.

Per usual, u have this assbackwards my dude.

---

Who is saying this?

---

Nobody that I know. It's a strawman.

---

Actually the fact that Ukrainian aid is attached to almost every bill that touches the floor of congress and when we call out such things the Teslag crew calls us Putin Fanboys is pretty much proof that the Warhawks and neocons on here want unlimited Ukrainian Aid.

If you have spent anytime at all reading this thread you will have seen that there are two major camps.

1) calls for moderation, oversight of aid, deescalation, and peace agreement.

2) the other calls for aid without oversight, and whatever it takes to stack Russian bodies.

I have consistently taken side 1
Teslag et al. Have consistently taken side 2 and defended every aid package put before the congressional floor.

---

None of what you said equals the below.

Quote:

---

Yall are the ones begging for unlimited aid and escalation.

---

Would you like to try again? Or maybe just admit that you made it up?

---

So if you're not "begging for unlimited aid" as he wrote, when/where did you define your desired cap in aid? If you haven't made that clear, could you quantify how much aid you think should be sent and what your dollar limit is?

I could find "as long as it takes" style posts in the ole bookmarks if you're going to pretend that hasn't been a consistent theme in this thread.

---

So, if there is not an explicit dollar limit, then it's "unlimited"? As in infinite?

That's inane. Here's an example:

How much will you spend in your life on tacos? If you can't tell me an exact dollar amount, then you're willing to spend an unlimited amount on tacos.

---

Less then $10 per week. That wasn't hard.

Whats your limit on aid? If you can't provide one, it's completely reasonable to assume you're asking for unlimited money, because you are.

---

He said posters are "begging for unlimited aid and escalation." Seems easy to find evidence of that, and yet there is none. Just another strawman.

---

The evidence is 200 pages of calling for more aid without defining a limit to that aid.

If someone defined the limit and I missed it, you could show me where they did so and I'd agree with you.

---

You can make whatever logic leap to support your usual vague trolling arguments that you'd like. Meanwhile, back in the real world where actual words matter, I'll continue to wait for that poster to quote someone "begging for unlimited aid and escalation." Guessing I'll be waiting awhile.

---

Then show/tell us the limit. Unlimited means "without limit"

Nothing vague about this: if you can't define the limit then "unlimited" is an accurate description.

You're exactly correct. The other poster is pitifully falling back on "well no one said the word unlimited"

Forgive double negative here: but if it's not unlimited, they could show/tell us the limit.

"They are doing what they want. They want a buffer between them and the NWO pedo cabal wicked west>

That's it.

But you don't see how wicked the West has become, you have what I have said all along a very myopic and stubborn point of view and it totally wrong."
-------
You should visit Russia. My Ukrainian son can't go back to Ukraine, and my Soviet historian wife can't get in to Russia to do her research. You know, because it's not a free country. But maybe because you're a true believer, they'll let you have access to the archives.

You are unhinged. Talking about your CIA and FBI contacts. You really should move to Russia. I think you'd be happier there. Just don't come groveling back like Oswald when the weather gets too cold in the gulag they'll send you to.

Edit to add: It's not your view of the war that's the issue. We can agree to discuss it and work toward peace, which should always be the desired outcome. It's your view of Russian moral superiority that is truly unhinged.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

And please answer my question, Are you for giving Ukraine permission to make advanced weapons strike into Russia?

---

I literally quoted your question and said yes in the previous post.

And define "win".

---

This is what everyone that has been opposed to Ukraine funding has said from the get go.

The Ukraine fanboys need to define the terms of victory.

Period

Yall are the ones begging for unlimited aid and escalation.

So YOU tell US what the goals are here.

It's not our job to tell you what we want accomplished because we are against funding this **** show.

The onus is on YOU to tell us WHY the investment of untraceable money amd material is necessary, what the goals are, and how a "win" would be defined.

Per usual, u have this assbackwards my dude.

---

Who is saying this?

---

Nobody that I know. It's a strawman.

---

Actually the fact that Ukrainian aid is attached to almost every bill that touches the floor of congress and when we call out such things the Teslag crew calls us Putin Fanboys is pretty much proof that the Warhawks and neocons on here want unlimited Ukrainian Aid.

If you have spent anytime at all reading this thread you will have seen that there are two major camps.

1) calls for moderation, oversight of aid, deescalation, and peace agreement.

2) the other calls for aid without oversight, and whatever it takes to stack Russian bodies.

I have consistently taken side 1
Teslag et al. Have consistently taken side 2 and defended every aid package put before the congressional floor.

---

None of what you said equals the below.

Quote:

---

Yall are the ones begging for unlimited aid and escalation.

---

Would you like to try again? Or maybe just admit that you made it up?

---

So if you're not "begging for unlimited aid" as he wrote, when/where did you define your desired cap in aid? If you haven't made that clear, could you quantify how much aid you think should be sent and what your dollar limit is?

I could find "as long as it takes" style posts in the ole bookmarks if you're going to pretend that hasn't been a consistent theme in this thread.

---

So, if there is not an explicit dollar limit, then it's "unlimited"? As in infinite?

That's inane. Here's an example:

How much will you spend in your life on tacos? If you can't tell me an exact dollar amount, then you're willing to spend an unlimited amount on tacos.

---

Less then $10 per week. That wasn't hard.

Whats your limit on aid? If you can't provide one, it's completely reasonable to assume you're asking for unlimited money, because you are.

---

He said posters are "begging for unlimited aid and escalation." Seems easy to find evidence of that, and yet there is none. Just another strawman.

---

The evidence is 200 pages of calling for more aid without defining a limit to that aid.

If someone defined the limit and I missed it, you could show me where they did so and I'd agree with you.

---

You can make whatever logic leap to support your usual vague trolling arguments that you'd like. Meanwhile, back in the real world where actual words matter, I'll continue to wait for that poster to quote someone "begging for unlimited aid and escalation." Guessing I'll be waiting awhile.

---

Then show/tell us the limit. Unlimited means "without limit"

Nothing vague about this: if you can't define the limit then "unlimited" is an accurate description.

---

That poster didn't say "they won't give a limit on how much/how long the aid will go." He literally said posters are "begging for unlimited aid and escalation." I'm just looking for any evidence of that. I'm guessing he hasn't defended the comment because he knows he made it up.