Explain it to me like I’m five. How are all of these things not responses to Russian attacks? Provide the timeline for the viewers at home of all these claims.
Consortium News, 2015: The Mess That Nuland MadeAssistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland engineered Ukraine’s regime change without weighing the likely consequences.
Consortium News, 2023: The West’s Sabotage of Peace in UkraineFormer Israeli Prime Minister Bennett’s recent comments about getting his mediation efforts squashed in the early days of the war adds more to the growing pile of evidence that Western powers are intent on regime change in Russia.
George Washington Univ., 2017: NATO Expansion: What Gorbachev HeardDeclassified documents show security assurances against NATO expansion to Soviet leaders from Baker, Bush, Genscher, Kohl, Gates, Mitterrand, Thatcher, Hurd, Major, and Woerner
Lots to read and go through so i dont have a response at this time to the informatio.ln, though I appreciate the different sources for a conflicting view.
Congress has sense approved weapons to Ukraine. Russia has strong ties to groups that use nazi slogans and align with nazi groups such as The Rusich Group. Donbass happened in 2022 and was deemed a false flag. War started in 2014 so even if they were attacked, this is a country at war.
Is your point you’re really bad at this? Whatever you’re getting paid for spreading false information is way too much. Even if it was a nickle.
No, im saying that I am not articulate enough to engage in deep debates about these things, like middle place trophy at best, but you are somehow so far in last place that people in walkers are lapping you on this race track of mental thought.
“Congress denied them funding so this all these points are proven.” -you
‘I have portrayed myself as a person in the walker and you as someone behind it. End of argument’?
Do you not see how pathetic and weak it seems?
Anyway, using your own type of reply: Whatever you are being paid to justify Ukrainian Nazism is too much for your pathetic effort and weak personal attacks.
I only reply to personal attacks with personal attacks which is why your response is so much different than others who have provided information on the subject. Sorry your feelings got hurt. I’ll move on
All they did was imply you are behind the times regarding your pro nato talking points, you are the one that brought actual personal attacks into it in accusing them of being a foreign agent (racism/xenophobia) and implying their correct statement was some how an indictment of their mental faculties (ableism).
Or to put it in a way you can understand: fuck off with this Nazi apologia and read the sources provided to you.
Russia supports nazis, what the heck is your point? Also, admitting they attacked first but wasn’t the right way? Cheers cheif you have no pints to make.
Explain it to me like I’m five. How are all of these things not responses to Russian attacks? Provide the timeline for the viewers at home of all these claims.
Previously:
Previously:
Previously:
Lots to read and go through so i dont have a response at this time to the informatio.ln, though I appreciate the different sources for a conflicting view.
the american congress already did back in 2014 and voted in 2018 to block weapons getting to ukraine’s nazi elements.
if you’re somehow slower than congress on this – almost a decade slower – then you’ve got bigger problems.
Congress has sense approved weapons to Ukraine. Russia has strong ties to groups that use nazi slogans and align with nazi groups such as The Rusich Group. Donbass happened in 2022 and was deemed a false flag. War started in 2014 so even if they were attacked, this is a country at war.
Is your point you’re really bad at this? Whatever you’re getting paid for spreading false information is way too much. Even if it was a nickle.
No idea what you’re referring to here. “Donbass [sic] happened”?
“Anyone who disagrees with me on this miniscule open source social media platform is a paid foreign agent.” Come on, dude.
Does that negate the prior hesitancy?
Are you assuming that because you are being paid to oppose negative views against Ukraine?
Or is it a weak attempt to portray them negatively? Is it not very bad?
No, im saying that I am not articulate enough to engage in deep debates about these things, like middle place trophy at best, but you are somehow so far in last place that people in walkers are lapping you on this race track of mental thought.
“Congress denied them funding so this all these points are proven.” -you
Lol, are you the person in the walker?
‘I have portrayed myself as a person in the walker and you as someone behind it. End of argument’?
Do you not see how pathetic and weak it seems?
Anyway, using your own type of reply: Whatever you are being paid to justify Ukrainian Nazism is too much for your pathetic effort and weak personal attacks.
I only reply to personal attacks with personal attacks which is why your response is so much different than others who have provided information on the subject. Sorry your feelings got hurt. I’ll move on
All they did was imply you are behind the times regarding your pro nato talking points, you are the one that brought actual personal attacks into it in accusing them of being a foreign agent (racism/xenophobia) and implying their correct statement was some how an indictment of their mental faculties (ableism).
Or to put it in a way you can understand: fuck off with this Nazi apologia and read the sources provided to you.
No investigation, no right to speak.
Russia supports nazis, what the heck is your point? Also, admitting they attacked first but wasn’t the right way? Cheers cheif you have no pints to make.
Was the personal attack me questioning your ‘Whatever they are paying you is too much’ attempt at attacking the other person?