No, but giving up on life and spending all day with increasingly disjointed and angry rants online thinking you’re the smartest person around while you’ve never actually had any real-world experience in the crap you rave about is not healthy.

Nobody thinks it is.

If you won't listen to the literal experts who were fuking there and can tell you what went wrong, then there is no point having a discussion.

Is drinking healthy? Is doing drugs healthy? Is going through life not understanding how even the most basic phenomena you observe work, even to a first approximation, healthy? Is being consumed by greed and seeking material comforts to get minor dopamine hits healthy?

Again, simply because nobody thinks something is healthy, it must not be so. Democracy is built into the very fabric of how you see reality. You can't imagine it any other way or why others might not see it that way. Others, like me, might not care that nobody sees my way of living as healthy or "good". That's how China and Russia are too. They have their own views on what "good" is, especially in terms of government and law.

Do you have any hobbies (other than spending all day posting online about how much smarter and morally ethical you are than all the rest of us)?

Do yourself a favor take like 24 hours without posting online - anywhere. I bet it’s like a hardcore alcoholic trying not to drink for a day, but it will do you a lot of good.

Srs.

Edit: funny you brought up drinking right out the gate yourself while I was typing this.

Take a 24 hour detox.

I'm not any more ethical than you guys. I have a different set of ethics, as I explained. I also explained why our current policies are illogical because they undermine our stated goals. I post to share my ideas and to vent.

Guys, I know he’s fun to fck with, but let’s try to help Wincel and not engage him (at least for a day) itt.

And Wincel, if you read this and think “haha I’ll just make another alt” than I rest my case.

I have seen literally zero rebuttals to my arguments here. If anyone can convince me of why our foreign policy helps America or the world, I'm happy to hear it. I've watched Michael McFaul, John Ikenberry, Paul Wolfowitz, and Francis Fukuyama talk for hours, and my only conclusion is that they are completely wrong.

Braindead take on China. Despite what the west wants the world to think, China is not forcing African politicians to accept Chinese money to invest in infrastructure, resource extraction etc. It's business.

Now what the Europeans did in Africa is a different story.

1/10, read a book.

Yea, colonialism was wrong. Hot take. China is engaging warlords and dictators in Africa, to the lessening of the quality of life of almost everyone else.

They are also engaging in the systematic annihilation of an entire race of people. Right now, like right this second.

They are holding and entire developed nation hostage on the world scene because it’s been part of the communist propaganda machine since the 1950s.

But I suppose that’s all OK because some Western country did something bad once too.

If you enjoy anything listed in the First Amendment to the American Constitution the CCP is absolutely a threat to that.

Cherrypicked literal nobodies whom you agree with and who conveniently tend to ignore the minor thing between Russia and the US: Europe. Russian agression predates NATO by a huge margin. One could bring at least half a dozen experts with a completely different opinion, backed up by facts.

You're just an American who hates America so much, he convinced himself that Russia and China got the right picture and America should be punished. Born and living in possibly the most prosperous country on the planet and this is the best you can do. Pretty sad, winnie. Seek help and some friends.

Yeah, that's fair.

The thing you need to realize about Africa is that is the leadership structure of Africa. What else do you have to engage with? The warlords and dictators run the show. You do what you can and work within the confines of the system to develop civilization. This pays dividends later because you prevent radical movements like Boko Haram, for example, from sweeping through the area and destabilizing neighbors.

The CCP is not a threat to the 1st Amendment because the CCP has no viable way to conquer America. They would be a threat to a Chinese 1st amendment, yes. Their quibbling over American criticisms isn't a serious threat to American liberty. I am free to say fuk Xi Jinpooh as much as I want with zero threat to my safety.

The more severe threat to our constitution is right here at home, where political division and media brainwashing is fomenting radicalism. That Americans have to self-censor their support for Trump or their views on homosexuality, for example is worrying.

Damn, barney gumble, miscinbro and the fake US veterans getting slapped around in this thread by wincel

****ing lol

Literal nobodies? These are some of the most cited IR scholars, a former US ambassador to the USSR, and the most eminent neoliberal economist who worked with the post communist states. I've watched the other experts too. They pretty much all parrot what Michael McFaul says. But the arguments are weak.

No, and that's yet another veiled McCarthyist insult again. With you or against you. The grand irony is you, someone who is not American, are lecturing me, a born and raised American, about how I am unAmerican.

There is no way to return energy prices to the level they were before the start of the SMO - EU Commissioner Simson

--------------------------------------------------------

European Insider
@Europa_Insider
🇬🇧 Workers at the Port of Felixstowe, the UK's busiest container port which deals with nearly half (48%) of all Britain's containerised trade, will go on strike for eight days later this month, as their dispute over pay continues. Massive supply chain disruptions are expected.

koostapoulus reminds of the little yellow dog who was always sucking up to Spike:

Special Military Operation, Season 2

At the risk of sounding very pedantic, Ukraine’s counteroffensive in eastern Kharkov Oblast is an excellent demonstration of the difficulties in evaluating military operations. Everyone agrees on the basic geography of what has happened: Ukraine cleared everything west of the Oskil river of Russian forces. Nobody agrees on what this means, however. I have seen all of the following interpretations posited - note, people reached all of these conclusions from the same set of data:

Russia has drawn Ukraine into a trap and will soon counterattack

Russia voluntarily withdrew from Kharkov to prioritize other fronts

Russia drew the Ukrainians out to hit them with artillery

Russia suffered a massive intelligence failure and did not see or respond to Ukraine’s offensive

Russia suffered a defeat in battle and was forced to retreat

Let’s do a methodical autopsy and see what we come away with.

The first thing we want to note is that the disparity of forces on this front was absolutely laughable. Ukraine assembled a strike group of at least five full brigades, and aimed at a line of contact which had no Russian regular troops at all. The Russian frontline defenses in the region were manned by allied donbas militia and national guardsmen. It seems there was a lone Battalion Tactical Group (BTG) in Izyum, but little else.

It is undeniable, even for Ukrainians celebrating the advance, that Kharkov oblast had been almost completely hollowed out of Russian troops, leaving little more than a screening force. Two important things flow from this. First, that the Ukrainian shock group was in most places advancing against virtually nonexistent resistance. Secondly, more ominously for Ukraine, the low quality units left behind for screening purposes were able to put up good resistance against the Ukrainians - the Rosgvardiya men in Balakliya held out tenaciously for several days before evacuating through a corridor.

In my previous analysis, conducted while the Ukrainian counteroffensive was just beginning to develop, I noted two important things about the shape of the battlefield.

I argued that Ukraine would be unable to push across the Oskil and properly exploit their offensive.

I noted that Ukraine was making rapid advances against thinly manned, hollowed out portions of the front, and that Russia had committed very little to the battle.

Both of these statements were correct. I freely admit, however, that I drew the incorrect conclusion from them. I believe the Ukrainian advance would culminate at the Oskil river, leaving them vulnerable to a Russian counterattack by the arriving reserves. It seems fairly clear now that this is incorrect, and the Russian reserves that were en-route were tasked with stabilizing the defense at the Oskil, not launching a counterattack.

This was not an operational trap by Russia, but neither was it a victory in battle for Ukraine - for the simple reason that there was not much of a battle at all. Russia had already hollowed out these positions, and withdrew the remaining screening forces very quickly. Ukraine covered a lot of ground, but were unable to destroy any Russian units, because there really weren’t any there.

It would be silly to try to talk the Ukrainian side out of their excitement right now. Credit where credit is due, they did manage to put together a good sized shock group, aim it at a weak portion of the front, and regain a good bit of ground. Considering the abject lack of successes for Ukraine in this war, they are rightfully trying to eke every last bit of morale and propaganda out of this.

I do not, however, believe that the territorial losses in Kharkov in any way change the ultimate calculus of the war. Russia hollowed out this front and surrendered ground, but they were able to maul the Ukrainian forces as they advanced with relentless artillery and airstrikes. Ukrainian channels widely report overflowing hospitals. The Russian Ministry of Defense claimed 4,000 killed and 8,000 wounded for Ukraine during their advance - I believe this is high, but even if we reduce the numbers by 50% (leaving us with 6,000 total casualties, reasonable given how much ordnance Russia discharged) it is very clear that the loss ratios in this operation were stacked badly against Ukraine, as they always are.

Big Serge Expectations:
Russian escalation of attacks on Ukrainian infrastructure and command centers.

Russian force deployment raised without full mobilization.

Intensification of Russian efforts to recover DNR territory.

Possible escalation in Syria, likely in the form of Syrian army attacks on US bases.

https://bigserge.substack.com/p/spec...eration-season

Bluntly, you guys fear China or Russia conquering the world when the United States is currently engaged in a program to do exactly that. You fear attacks on freedom when the US uses its economic power to force others to do its bidding, something you all seem afraid China will do. The hypocrisy is mindboggling. At the end of it all, the best argument people come up with is isomorphic to "But we are the good guys!" But what does that even mean? By many metrics, China's government is more effective than ours. By others, ours more effective than theirs. They look at how our system works and what it has created and think "No thanks." How can anyone be certain of what is "good"? It's all made up. What you have are tangible results. For decades, the US could show its prosperity and argue it had the objectively best laws. And other countries observed and agreed that market economies were more effective. But beyond that, it is still unclear. We can't just assume we are right and best and try to force this on the world. We can defend our own liberty and prevent others from messing with us and our allies, but the expansionary aims are dangerous and imo, stupid.

https://www.nachrichten.at/politik/a...art391,3710959

Ukraine will bis zu 20 Milliarden Dollar vom IWF

Zelensky preparing to get on his knees and beg Europe for 20 billion while they brace for a very bad recession

I bet he gets it

This is what all those Ukrainians died for. Zelensky is using their blood to beg for money.

I'd ask you guys to all consider one elementary case study: Stalin. Have you ever wondered why nobody killed him? He reigned for so long, was so cruel, and killed so many people. Why didn't people kill him?

The answer is obvious. People deemed him good for the USSR. He brought them stability and expanded their territory and power. Their standard of living improved. The education and economy improved, in spite of multiple failures and setbacks. Stalin brought the USSR from its knees to an eminent superpower. Today, it is clear market economies are more effective. Back then, it was not so. People didn't kill Stalin because they didn't think they could do better. They weren't sure they'd actually be better off. He made himself hard to kill and had a culture of repression and fear to keep power, but he was still only one man. Any number of those below him could have murdered him. That is the entire point. This is key to how dictators gain and hold power.

It's not enough to be a comic book villain. You actually have to have some results and something worth pointing to, and believe it or not, these people do have that. Stalin had the defeat of Hitler, a monumental achievement in itself, a massive expansion of territory and global influence, the development of wmd, and huge increases in education, technology, and standard of living. People didn't want to kill Stalin, and many viewed him as a hero.

This is the lesson of dictatorship. To us, Stalin was a villain of history -- one of the worst men to ever live because of the insane scale of murder he committed. To some Russians, he was their strongest and greatest leader. And depending on how you measure it, both are true.

Wincel brah youre one disturbed fellow… even by miscer standards

....which would do absolutely nothing. IP bans don't do dik.

It's an old picture from when I used to shave my head in the Navy (which I was actually in, probably unlike terrocuck).

doubt.

Err wait - the Russian "Navy"?

believe.

Surprise, surprise, lying from the Kremlin crew. The only person that called for a ban defends Russia. It would be healthy for him to step away from bb.com though. But as was pointed out a ban won’t do sht to stop him.

****ing LOL

He probably saved and set the picture as his newest wallpaper on his cell phone to show strangers @ Walmart

wincel is getting in the way of their circle jerk and they want him cancelled. Surprised the retard crew is mostly made up of liberals and other low test individuals?