Support of hopeless country that could lead to nuclear war

[Toro]

Have you ever thought of why we support Ukraine? Why do the US spend billions of dollars every year on this country? Maybe you would want to raise an objection saying that Ukraine is an important partner for both us and all Western states. However, it doesn’t seem true to me. The American Conservative has just published an analytic paper (Why Does American Folly March on in Ukraine?) where it discusses in detail why such actions don’t pay off for the US at all.

The paper says that all Western politicians keep insisting that the US could lose a lot if they stop providing military support for Ukraine. The problem is that these are lies and illusions which have no evidence whatsoever. In fact, Ukraine has no strategic value for the United States.

We did the same thing with Vietnam in 1965, although we had no need for war. The only difference is that in Vietnam we faced a much weaker state but now are at risk of the direct confrontation against a nuclear armed state. I think such actions can be necessary in only one case and that is if it directly concerns the US national interests. Since when has a small, hopeless Ukraine whom we don’t benefit from at all become so near and dear? Clearly, Ukrainian support is not worth a global catastrophe for the American nation.

But what do you think: is Ukraine which now has nothing of substance to offer worth the risk of waging a war against Russia? This will be a full-scale disaster for the whole world, not just a bunch of people. And we could definitely avoid this scenario. All it takes is just for us to stop sending weapons to Zelensky.
View attachment 963204

STFU bot

 

[Deadstick]

Yes, yes, if you can't prove it 100%, then it didn't happen.

What we can prove is that he lies a lot. We know this because of what happened with Malaysian Airlines flight that got shot down.

Putin's media came out with a picture, a google maps picture, showing the point at which a Ukrainian military jet shot a missile towards the airliner.

Only the Dutch then found out that it came from a SAM, not from an air based missile.

MH17 photo of fighter jet released in Russia slammed

A photo published on Russian television that appeared to show MH17 being shot out of the sky by a Ukrainian fighter jet has been vigorously refuted by citizen sleuths across the world.

www.smh.com.au

This shows us how Putin operates. He's not going to do things so obvious. He does things, then he puts doubt out there. Like with the Novichok case. He said Porton Down also has Novichok. Like the UK govt wanted to get rid of a Russian FSB agent living away his life is Salisbury.

But the British called him out on it, and basically proved it was done by Russia, especially with the evidence of the two agents.

If you look at how Putin operates, based on the information we have, it's pretty obvious that all these poisonings with plutonium etc were done by Putin.

But it takes a lot of research in order to put it all together.

So no real evidence, has it not crossed your mind that Skripal was worth more dead than alive to Western intelligence for the propaganda value, and that goes for more of these Russians who collaborated with the West, Berezovsky for one, before he was found dead in his home he had ben in contact with the Russians about returning home to Russia, fact is he knew too much how the Mi6 and other intelligence services work so he had to be silenced, Navalny could be another one, Skripal had already served time in Russia for treason so why would they try and kill him? also bringing a deadly nerve agent through a UK airport is total nonsense, where are the Skripals? i believe they could have been killed, and the Porton down connection is very real, whatever poisoned the Skripals it was not a military grade nerve agent,as for MH17 there were eye witnesses at the time who reported a jet fighter in the air near the aircraft at the time, that report went out of the news the same day.

 

[frigidweirdo]

So no real evidence, has it not crossed your mind that Skripal was worth more dead than alive to Western intelligence for the propaganda value, and that goes for more of these Russians who collaborated with the West, Berezovsky for one, before he was found dead in his home he had ben in contact with the Russians about returning home to Russia, fact is he knew too much how the Mi6 and other intelligence services work so he had to be silenced, Navalny could be another one, Skripal had already served time in Russia for treason so why would they try and kill him? also bringing a deadly nerve agent through a UK airport is total nonsense, where are the Skripals? i believe they could have been killed, and the Porton down connection is very real, whatever poisoned the Skripals it was not a military grade nerve agent,as for MH17 there were eye witnesses at the time who reported a jet fighter in the air near the aircraft at the time, that report went out of the news the same day.

There's loads of evidence.

Western intelligence wouldn't use Novichok to kill someone in their own country. The risk is too high to everyone around them. You could just put a bullet in their head, it'd be much easier.

The Porton Down "connection" was mentioned just to spread the seed of doubt. The same as Russia posting the picture of the Ukrainian fighter jet "shooting down" the MA airliner. It's cheap, it's easy, you spread doubt and the conspiracy theorists in the west run with it.

He's done it multiple times.

 

[Deadstick]

There's loads of evidence.

Western intelligence wouldn't use Novichok to kill someone in their own country. The risk is too high to everyone around them. You could just put a bullet in their head, it'd be much easier.

The Porton Down "connection" was mentioned just to spread the seed of doubt. The same as Russia posting the picture of the Ukrainian fighter jet "shooting down" the MA airliner. It's cheap, it's easy, you spread doubt and the conspiracy theorists in the west run with it.

He's done it multiple times.

There is no evidence, the fighter jet was first reported by eye witnesses on the ground, then when it became inconvenient it went out of the news that same day, also the Novichok story i don't buy, whatever poisoned the Skripals it was not a deadly military grade nerve agent or they would be dead, and you say if Western intelligence wanted someone dead they would put a bullet in their head, well the same goes for Russia, why would they transport a nerve agent through an international airport or over several borderers overland? the whole thing was a false flag, one more on top of all the others, the Novichok nonsense was for the shock value with the terrified public that a bullet in the head would not have, you seem to be very naive about what these people are capable of, ever hear of GLADIO?

 

[frigidweirdo]

There is no evidence, the fighter jet was first reported by eye witnesses on the ground, then when it became inconvenient it went out of the news that same day, also the Novichok story i don't buy, whatever poisoned the Skripals it was not a deadly military grade nerve agent or they would be dead, and you say if Western intelligence wanted someone dead they would put a bullet in their head, well the same goes for Russia, why would they transport a nerve agent through an international airport or over several borderers overland? the whole thing was a false flag, one more on top of all the others, the Novichok nonsense was for the shock value with the terrified public that a bullet in the head would not have, you seem to be very naive about what these people are capable of, ever hear of GLADIO?

"when it became inconvenient". What are you even trying to say?

Russia's media said it was a surface to air missile and provided "proof" of this that was total bullshit. Then it admitted it was shot down by a BUK SAM missile.

You don't buy the Skripal case? Well, someone did die. Dawn Sturgess. And some hamsters and a cat.

The Skripals didn't necessarily touch the nerve agent, it was put on the door handle. If they didn't use the front door that day, then the amount they got was not enough to kill them.

According to the chronology, they were seen at 9:15 driving around near to their home. At 13:30 they went to the town center, had lunch and by 16:15 had collapsed in the center of town in a park, suggesting they hadn't been home. Novichok would have killed them within 5-10 minutes had they inhaled enough of the stuff. But they only inhaled enough to keep Sergei in hospital for a month.

But clearly you're doing what the Russian govt was doing, putting enough doubt. You're not showing anything. You're just saying "it could have been this". No evidence. Why do you need evidence when it's all about sowing the seeds of doubt?

 

[Zavulon]

There's loads of evidence.

Western intelligence wouldn't use Novichok to kill someone in their own country. The risk is too high to everyone around them. You could just put a bullet in their head, it'd be much easier.

And, highly likely, they did exactly this. All those nonsense about Novichok have no independent confirmation. Just the empty words of the British officials.

The Porton Down "connection" was mentioned just to spread the seed of doubt.

The Porton Down "connection" is a simple geographic fact. As well as the "Chemical Dagger" connection is a simple chronological fact. I dunno if both of those connections were a simple coincidence, but I doubt it. And the British violations of the international laws and so obviously lying stories about Novichok do not help to stop doubting and become a true believer.

 

[frigidweirdo]

And, highly likely, they did exactly this. All those nonsense about Novichok have no independent confirmation. Just the empty words of the British officials.



The Porton Down "connection" is a simple geographic fact. As well as the "Chemical Dagger" connection is a simple chronological fact. I dunno if both of those connections were a simple coincidence, but I doubt it. And the British violations of the international laws and so obviously lying stories about Novichok do not help to stop doubting and become a true believer.

Go on then, give us your argument as to why it's "highly likely" that western intelligence used novichok in their own country.

Use evidence. Post the source. Quote the part of the source you think backs your argument up. Explain why it backs your argument up.

Guess what I think you'll do. Nothing anywhere close to that. Again.

The "Porton Down "connection"" is not a connection. If Porton Down had had a leak, a LOT OF PEOPLE would have died or been ill. Instead you have two Russians, one of whom was a former FSB and his daughter, one English woman who got close, perhaps touched the door handle, and a police officer who wore a chemical suit and had to retire because of the impact.

Clearly the limited nature of this suggests that the novichok was put somewhere where most people wouldn't get close. And the British say it was the door handle, which sounds about right.

And what "violations of international law"? Again, you just write random stuff and I'm expected to know what you're talking about.

 

[Zavulon]

Go on then, give us your argument as to why it's "highly likely" that western intelligence used novichok in their own country.

I didn't say that. I said, that, highly likely, that British intelligence just put bullets in the Skripals' heads. And all their talks about never existed Novichok is a plain lie.

Use evidence. Post the source. Quote the part of the source you think backs your argument up. Explain why it backs your argument up.

Guess what I think you'll do. Nothing anywhere close to that. Again.

The point is, that there is no evidences at all. There is the fact, that two citizens of Russian Federation were missed in the Great Britain. And there is the fact, that British Government tell mad stories instead of do what they supposed to do.
Everything else can't be anything but the act of faith or pure speculations.

The "Porton Down "connection"" is not a connection. If Porton Down had had a leak, a LOT OF PEOPLE would have died or been ill.

It depends on the type of the leak. If the vial was stolen from Porton Down and sold to Skripal - why not?

Instead you have two Russians, one of whom was a former FSB and his daughter, one English woman who got close, perhaps touched the door handle, and a police officer who wore a chemical suit and had to retire because of the impact.

Clearly the limited nature of this suggests that the novichok was put somewhere where most people wouldn't get close. And the British say it was the door handle, which sounds about right.

And what "violations of international law"? Again, you just write random stuff and I'm expected to know what you're talking about.

According the international law, if a citizen of one country is getting in trouble in another country, the representative of his country (or of a neutral country) should be allowed to visit him. This is one of the reasons why we need diplomatic relationships at all. It was not done.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I didn't say that. I said, that, highly likely, that British intelligence just put bullets in the Skripals' heads. And all their talks about never existed Novichok is a plain lie.


The point is, that there is no evidences at all. There is the fact, that two citizens of Russian Federation were missed in the Great Britain. And there is the fact, that British Government tell mad stories instead of do what they supposed to do.
Everything else can't be anything but the act of faith or pure speculations.


It depends on the type of the leak. If the vial was stolen from Porton Down and sold to Skripal - why not?


According the international law, if a citizen of one country is getting in trouble in another country, the representative of his country (or of a neutral country) should be allowed to visit him. This is one of the reasons why we need diplomatic relationships at all. It was not done.

So you're just making stuff up now then?

 

[Zavulon]

So you're just making stuff up now then?

No. The facts are simple - two Russian citizens were missed in the Great UK, British government violate international laws and tell the obvious lie and nonsense.
Everything else can be only speculations or an act of the blind faith (to the words of the British officials).

As for me, the simplest explanation (don't forget about Occam's razor) of the said facts is quite simple. The Brits simply killed two Russian citizens and totally invented the whole story about never-existed Novichok, as a part of their fake-reality TV show "The Russian poisoiners. Season II".
May be, you have another explanations (they are possible, too) , but I beg you - don't suggest me (or other members) to blindly believe in the words of the British officials.

 

[frigidweirdo]

No. The facts are simple - two Russian citizens were missed in the Great UK, British government violate international laws and tell the obvious lie and nonsense.
Everything else can be only speculations or an act of the blind faith (to the words of the British officials).

As for me, the simplest explanation (don't forget about Occam's razor) of the said facts is quite simple. The Brits simply killed two Russian citizens and totally invented the whole story about never-existed Novichok, as a part of their fake-reality TV show "The Russian poisoiners. Season II".
May be, you have another explanations (they are possible, too) , but I beg you - don't suggest me (or other members) to blindly believe in the words of the British officials.

Nope, one Russian citizen, his daughter and the other was a British citizen, and may have been a Russian citizen, depending on whether the Russians decided to get rid of his Russian citizenship or not.

On the 18th March, two weeks after the attack, the Russian govt said the UK govt had rejected access to the Skripals, who were both ill with the Novichok poisoning.

Possibly Putin did this to be able to tell people that the UK was hiding these people. Sergei was British, so the British govt had no need to comply. His daughter was Russian, but if you'd been attacked by your own government, you probably wouldn't want to talk to your own govt.

But again, Putin doing what Putin does, put doubt into people's minds and hope it sticks.
Yes, with any news story there's what people have seen, then what the governments of different places say.

Russia lies, and lies badly, it's been doing it for a long time. It also sees a lot of Putin's opponents dying in mysterious circumstances.
The UK govt had no reason to get rid of Skripal, and what would Skripal know that would be a threat to the UK? Not much. The UK govt got info from Skripal, not the other way around.
There are little to no cases of countries going around killing former enemy secret service agents who have defected to their country.

Putin had many killed in different countries.

Russian pilot Maxim Kuzminov who defected to Ukraine 'shot dead' in Spain

Maxim Kuzminov - who fled Russia on a military helicopter - was found dead in Spain, according to reports.

www.bbc.com

"Russian pilot Maxim Kuzminov who defected to Ukraine 'shot dead' in Spain"

A coincidence? Not at all.

 

[Zavulon]

Nope, one Russian citizen, his daughter and the other was a British citizen, and may have been a Russian citizen, depending on whether the Russians decided to get rid of his Russian citizenship or not.

Sergei Skripal didn't get rid of his Russian citizenship and he was a Russian citizens (as well as British one). He had all rights of a Russian citizen, including right to be defended by the Russian government. British government violated his rights.

On the 18th March, two weeks after the attack, the Russian govt said the UK govt had rejected access to the Skripals, who were both ill with the Novichok poisoning.

The UK government rejected access to the Skripals and said [obvious lie] that they were both ill with poisoning with [non-existent] Novichok.

Possibly Putin did this to be able to tell people that the UK was hiding these people. Sergei was British, so the British govt had no need to comply. His daughter was Russian, but if you'd been attacked by your own government, you probably wouldn't want to talk to your own govt.

What? Do you really belive that Russian ambassador would jump on them and rug their necks with his bare teeth? Anyway, there is no problem to invite an ambassador from a neutral state. And this was not done, either.

But again, Putin doing what Putin does, put doubt into people's minds and hope it sticks.
Yes, with any news story there's what people have seen, then what the governments of different places say.

Actually, it is British government who putting doubts in people's minds by hiding truth.

Russia lies, and lies badly, it's been doing it for a long time. It also sees a lot of Putin's opponents dying in mysterious circumstances.
The UK govt had no reason to get rid of Skripal, and what would Skripal know that would be a threat to the UK?

First of all, we don't know what exactly was revealed by Skripal. Second - theiy might kill him and his daughter not for something they know, but just for show.

Not much. The UK govt got info from Skripal, not the other way around.

Who knows?

There are little to no cases of countries going around killing former enemy secret service agents who have defected to their country.

Putin had many killed in different countries.

Russian pilot Maxim Kuzminov who defected to Ukraine 'shot dead' in Spain

Maxim Kuzminov - who fled Russia on a military helicopter - was found dead in Spain, according to reports.

www.bbc.com

"Russian pilot Maxim Kuzminov who defected to Ukraine 'shot dead' in Spain"

A coincidence? Not at all.

I do not say that we don't kill traitors at all. We do. And not only traitors, but other enemies too. I'm not going to argue about Kuzminov. It's quite possible that he was killed by Russia, and he deserved it. I do say, that the whole Skripals' case is a nonsense.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Sergei Skripal didn't get rid of his Russian citizenship and he was a Russian citizens (as well as British one). He had all rights of a Russian citizen, including right to be defended by the Russian government. British government violated his rights.

The UK government rejected access to the Skripals and said [obvious lie] that they were both ill with poisoning with [non-existent] Novichok.


What? Do you really belive that Russian ambassador would jump on them and rug their necks with his bare teeth? Anyway, there is no problem to invite an ambassador from a neutral state. And this was not done, either.



Actually, it is British government who putting doubts in people's minds by hiding truth.


First of all, we don't know what exactly was revealed by Skripal. Second - theiy might kill him and his daughter not for something they know, but just for show.




Who knows?

I do not say that we don't kill traitors at all. We do. And not only traitors, but other enemies too. I'm not going to argue about Kuzminov. It's quite possible that he was killed by Russia, and he deserved it. I do say, that the whole Skripals' case is a nonsense.

Well, when you defect from your home country, you give that all up automatically.

There's no way in hell Russia wanted to speak to them because it was concerned for their welfare, probably just wanted to make sure they were dead or not.

Really you're providing no argument, just the same old "it could be this", spreading doubt. You haven't posted a single source, you have provided a single piece of evidence.

But you admit Russia kills traitors, and Skripal was an active traitor at the time of his poisoning. You seem to think two and two equals one hundred and eight five.

 

[Zavulon]

Well, when you defect from your home country, you give that all up automatically.

No. Being a criminal doesn't make you non-citizen. You still has all your rights.

There's no way in hell Russia wanted to speak to them because it was concerned for their welfare, probably just wanted to make sure they were dead or not.

It's just your assumptions, nothing more. They had the rights and British government rejected their basic human rights. Anyway, even if they were poisoned (what I don't believe) what is the practical reason for UK to reject their meeting with an ambassador (Russian, Chinese or Swiss)?

Really you're providing no argument, just the same old "it could be this", spreading doubt. You haven't posted a single source, you have provided a single piece of evidence.

I pointed the simple and obvious facts. Two Russian citizens were missed in the UK, and British government hide actual information about them and spread obvious lie and nonsense. The simplest explanation for those facts I see (Occam's razor) is that they were killed by British government.

But you admit Russia kills traitors, and Skripal was an active traitor at the time of his poisoning. You seem to think two and two equals one hundred and eight five.

Sripal was not active traitor. His legal status was "pardoned criminal". And his daughter, as far as I know, was innocent. And we usually don't kill criminals by those unreliable and publicaly dangerous ways.

 

[frigidweirdo]

No. Being a criminal doesn't make you non-citizen. You still has all your rights.

It's just your assumptions, nothing more. They had the rights and British government rejected their basic human rights. Anyway, even if they were poisoned (what I don't believe) what is the practical reason for UK to reject their meeting with an ambassador (Russian, Chinese or Swiss)?


I pointed the simple and obvious facts. Two Russian citizens were missed in the UK, and British government hide actual information about them and spread obvious lie and nonsense. The simplest explanation for those facts I see (Occam's razor) is that they were killed by British government.


Sripal was not active traitor. His legal status was "pardoned criminal". And his daughter, as far as I know, was innocent. And we usually don't kill criminals by those unreliable and publicaly dangerous ways.

Are we talking about Skripal's rights here? Doesn't seem so. The Russian govt asked the British govt and the British govt said no. Why? Because the Skripals didn't want it. Why would you?

Whichever scenario we go for that makes sense, the Skripals would not have wanted to talk to the Russian govt.

Because even if the west had done it, and blamed it on the Russian govt, the Skripals would have thought it had been done by the Russian govt.

And a smart guy like Skripal would have known that the Russian govt goes around assassinating Russian traitors in foreign countries. If the west do it, they do it more discretely than the Russians do.

It's not just my assumptions. I'm having a conversation with a Russian who is quite clearly a person who has either accepted what the Russian govt has said, or actively works for the Russian govt on internet forums to spread doubt. Probably the latter.

You haven't posted any evidence. So... what evidence is there for your argument? None.

For my argument there's evidence. The Malaysian Airliner shooting down is perfect evidence of how the Russian govt and Putin operate.

They work cheaply, they work not very well, but they know they don't have to, because all they need to do is spread doubt. Exactly what you're doing. You're not even trying to make an argument, you're just trying to spread doubt.

A coincidence? No, I don't believe in coincidences and I don't believe all these Russians falling out of windows, being poisoned with deadly substances or being shot in Spain are a coincidence.

Putin is a fucker, who will kill anyone who gets in his way. He's shown it so many times, and a former KGB fucker will go after the FSB traitors.