Ukraine War

[atomheartbevo 90641]

 

[Biff Tannen 46163]

2 hours ago, TreatyOak said:

According to Western reports, the conscripts do serve a function. They are sent forward to assault Ukrainian positions. When the Ukrainians fire on the conscripts, they reveal their positions to Russian artillery. It's horrific, but it's a time-honored Russian tactic. 

[Born to Run 6601]

  I honestly don’t see how Putin is NOT going to use a nuke at this point since he has really painted himself in a corner and seems hell bent on the this strategy.  Baring assassination he really has no othet options.  So how do you guys see us responding?
1.  Russia uses a small battlefield  tactical nuke use.  I don’t think we do anything.  Putin will be completely isolated so I think we will stir up global outrage, send more conventional weapons to Ukraine and watch Russia implode.
2.  Russia nukes a city.  All bets are off.  I think we will actually respond forcefully and get directly involved in blasting their military to the stone ages.  Its WW3 at this point.
 
fun times.

Where does he strike? Territories he just liberated via decree full of Russians wanting to be Russian? Territories Ukrain just retook? Crimea? Kyiv? Where does he strike that's generates any positive? (Yes I'm aware that Putin acts against any best interest )

[WhatTheBuck 28928]

On 9/29/2022 at 11:45 PM, Zeus said:

 

 

 

I spy a bigot. This is a worthwhile story. But what Zeus is trying to do here is to promote his ignorance -> fear -> intolerance-> hate of trans people by presenting a headline that says ‘trans person commits a crime!’ when the fact that one of the people involved was trans has absolutely nothing to do with the story. It’s the same thing as when someone tells you a story about someone who is black when the fact that they’re black has nothing to do with the story. It says more about the storyteller than it does about the story because they see that person as a black person, not just as any other person. It’s casual discrimination and is often accompanied by casual (or outright) prejudice.

It was actually anesthesiologist Anna Gabrielian who first reached out to the Russians. But Zeus the bigot wants to smear the trans individual. He thinks he’s got a “Gotcha!” moment. He doesn’t, of course. He’s just a bigot. Also, his football takes are bad.

Here’s the story without any bigoted spin:

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2022/09/29/army-major-and-doctor-wife-charged-in-plot-to-give-us-military-medical-info-to-russians.html

Also, negged, bigot.

Edited October 1, 2022 by WhatTheBuck

[956 Worldwide 35592]

Junior is getting in on the misplaced capitalization game but with him you can tell it’s just an affectation. 

[atomheartbevo 90641]

Somebody is worried about bankers spilling the beans.

[WhatTheBuck 28928]

So far I think Biden is handling the conflict as well as could be expected. I do wish that he’d deliver the response, when Putin boasts that he has weapons more sophisticated than the West has, “As far as you know.” And I don’t think it would hurt if he mentioned that we have nuclear weapons too.

And Jesus, the video of the latest Russian attack on a Ukrainian civilian convoy. Putin is a war criminal and needs to die. I know we have laws against political assassinations but we went after Saddam Hussein and he was way less of a threat to the interests of us and our allies than Putin is. Take the fucker out. There’s a whole history of reasons to criticize the CIA but this is a job that is sort of their whole raison d’être, isn’t it? I’ll bet the guy who steps up and takes his place won’t complain too much.

[Bama Chick 28596]

[B00M 6732]

6 hours ago, Born to Run said:

13 hours ago, Horn Dog said:

  I honestly don’t see how Putin is NOT going to use a nuke at this point since he has really painted himself in a corner and seems hell bent on the this strategy.  Baring assassination he really has no othet options.  So how do you guys see us responding?
1.  Russia uses a small battlefield  tactical nuke use.  I don’t think we do anything.  Putin will be completely isolated so I think we will stir up global outrage, send more conventional weapons to Ukraine and watch Russia implode.
2.  Russia nukes a city.  All bets are off.  I think we will actually respond forcefully and get directly involved in blasting their military to the stone ages.  Its WW3 at this point.
 
fun times.

Where does he strike? Territories he just liberated via decree full of Russians wanting to be Russian? Territories Ukrain just retook? Crimea? Kyiv? Where does he strike that's generates any positive? (Yes I'm aware that Putin acts against any best interest )

Lviv? Kyiv?

[Francisco 2.0 32586]

 

 

[TreatyOak 17363]

4 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

So far I think Biden is handling the conflict as well as could be expected. I do wish that he’d deliver the response, when Putin boasts that he has weapons more sophisticated than the West has, “As far as you know.” And I don’t think it would hurt if he mentioned that we have nuclear weapons too.

And Jesus, the video of the latest Russian attack on a Ukrainian civilian convoy. Putin is a war criminal and needs to die. I know we have laws against political assassinations but we went after Saddam Hussein and he was way less of a threat to the interests of us and our allies than Putin is. Take the fucker out. There’s a whole history of reasons to criticize the CIA but this is a job that is sort of their whole raison d’être, isn’t it? I’ll bet the guy who steps up and takes his place won’t complain too much.

The problem is as bad as Putin is, the hardliner who may follow him could be worse. 

[TreatyOak 17363]

7 hours ago, Born to Run said:

13 hours ago, Horn Dog said:

  I honestly don’t see how Putin is NOT going to use a nuke at this point since he has really painted himself in a corner and seems hell bent on the this strategy.  Baring assassination he really has no othet options.  So how do you guys see us responding?
1.  Russia uses a small battlefield  tactical nuke use.  I don’t think we do anything.  Putin will be completely isolated so I think we will stir up global outrage, send more conventional weapons to Ukraine and watch Russia implode.
2.  Russia nukes a city.  All bets are off.  I think we will actually respond forcefully and get directly involved in blasting their military to the stone ages.  Its WW3 at this point.
 
fun times.

Where does he strike? Territories he just liberated via decree full of Russians wanting to be Russian? Territories Ukrain just retook? Crimea? Kyiv? Where does he strike that's generates any positive? (Yes I'm aware that Putin acts against any best interest )

Some analysts have pointed out that the threat of nuclear weapons is far more effective than the actual use of them. A tactical nuclear weapon would create a crisis greater than anything we’ve ever seen but wouldn’t create a victory for Putin. It could also affect his own soldiers and civilians, but we now know he doesn’t really care about anyone except for himself. Another scenario that has been mentioned is that the Russians attack one of the nuclear plants in Ukraine. Since he is so similar to Hitler, he could share the same “everyone needs to die now” mentality that Hitler tried to pull on his own people at the last stages of the war. I sure hope there is a way out of this that works for the people of Ukraine and the West but I have my doubts. 

[Horn Dog 10158]

8 hours ago, Born to Run said:

14 hours ago, Horn Dog said:

  I honestly don’t see how Putin is NOT going to use a nuke at this point since he has really painted himself in a corner and seems hell bent on the this strategy.  Baring assassination he really has no othet options.  So how do you guys see us responding?
1.  Russia uses a small battlefield  tactical nuke use.  I don’t think we do anything.  Putin will be completely isolated so I think we will stir up global outrage, send more conventional weapons to Ukraine and watch Russia implode.
2.  Russia nukes a city.  All bets are off.  I think we will actually respond forcefully and get directly involved in blasting their military to the stone ages.  Its WW3 at this point.
 
fun times.

Where does he strike? Territories he just liberated via decree full of Russians wanting to be Russian? Territories Ukrain just retook? Crimea? Kyiv? Where does he strike that's generates any positive? (Yes I'm aware that Putin acts against any best interest )

Unfortunately i think we are way pass rationality.  He could strike any of those options and not think twice.  A rational actor would have gotten Ukraine to agree not to join NATO for some set period of time, declared victory in keeping NATO off his border and then withdrawn.   
My guess is he tries to surge with all his new “volunteers” to gain back territory.  When that fails, he will strike with a tactical nuke near a concentration of Urkanian troops and kill a few thousand of his “new Russian citizens” then blame Ukraine for it.  We will not respond militarily but will pressure China and India to condemn and they will murmur something about “both sides”.  We will then threaten to sanction any nation that does not break ties with Russia.  We will then send Ukraine some more sophisticated weapons and try to isolate Russia further.  Hopefully that will work, but it will take years if not decades.

Edited October 1, 2022 by Horn Dog

[Brisketexan 106885]

 
 

If he survives this war, there is a 100% chance that CPAC invites him.

[TeeDubya 3362]

This is some sort of Ukrainian soldier conversation transcript I found today (I can't vouch for its veracity):
https://ukrainevolunteer297689472.wordpress.com/2022/09/30/its-a-slaughter/

"One guy had obviously stepped on a mine by the side of the road. One leg was gone at mid-thigh, the other one was broken lower down and his foot was backward. He was trying to crawl somewhere on one good knee, trailing flowing blood out of a busted artery. Unless he got help quick, he was gone. He was talking calmly in Russian, saying over-and-over, “I will be home soon mother.”"

[WhatTheBuck 28928]

17 hours ago, TreatyOak said:

The problem is as bad as Putin is, the hardliner who may follow him could be worse. 

I don’t know if anyone else shares Putin’s opinion that the collapse of the Soviet Union “was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century” and wants to restore it. Certainly anyone would have understand, okay, invading Ukraine was a bad idea. Maybe they’d see that they and their family and their cronies could get plenty rich in the existing kleptocracy and they wouldn’t have to risk getting themselves ousted at best or killed at worst by military overreach. I say someone should put a bullet through Putin’s noggin and then we take our chances with the next guy. I’m not really sure how he could be worse. 

[WhatTheBuck 28928]

3 hours ago, TeeDubya said:

This is some sort of Ukrainian soldier conversation transcript I found today (I can't vouch for its veracity):
https://ukrainevolunteer297689472.wordpress.com/2022/09/30/its-a-slaughter/

"One guy had obviously stepped on a mine by the side of the road. One leg was gone at mid-thigh, the other one was broken lower down and his foot was backward. He was trying to crawl somewhere on one good knee, trailing flowing blood out of a busted artery. Unless he got help quick, he was gone. He was talking calmly in Russian, saying over-and-over, “I will be home soon mother.”"

Mother, do you think they’ll drop the bomb?

[TreatyOak 17363]

6 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

I don’t know if anyone else shares Putin’s opinion that the collapse of the Soviet Union “was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century” and wants to restore it. Certainly anyone would have understand, okay, invading Ukraine was a bad idea. Maybe they’d see that they and their family and their cronies could get plenty rich in the existing kleptocracy and they wouldn’t have to risk getting themselves ousted at best or killed at worst by military overreach. I say someone should put a bullet through Putin’s noggin and then we take our chances with the next guy. I’m not really sure how he could be worse. 

I don’t know how anyone could be worse but our intelligence experts made the claim. That alone is frightening. 

[Bozo_Casanova 26846]

6 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

I don’t know if anyone else shares Putin’s opinion that the collapse of the Soviet Union “was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century”

Certainly not, but allowing it to disintegrate into kleptocracy and chaos during the shock therapy period was one of the great strategic blunders of the international order.

[WhatTheBuck 28928]

1 minute ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Certainly not, but allowing it to disintegrate into kleptocracy and chaos during the shock therapy period was one of the great strategic blunders of the international order.

Yep. The wall fell and we celebrated and lost interest. Boris Yeltsin was a disaster and, while I’m not well educated on the subject, it seemed like we just sat back and figured, “Welp, they’ve got democracy now and everything will resolve itself.”

Just like when the Soviets pulled out of Afghanistan. We celebrated and the news disappeared from the headlines and the public lost interest. We still had intelligence assets in the country but there was no motivation back home to do anything while the religious extremists took over. And we paid the price.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13729]

On 10/1/2022 at 3:50 AM, WhatTheBuck said:

So far I think Biden is handling the conflict as well as could be expected. I do wish that he’d deliver the response, when Putin boasts that he has weapons more sophisticated than the West has, “As far as you know.” And I don’t think it would hurt if he mentioned that we have nuclear weapons too.

And Jesus, the video of the latest Russian attack on a Ukrainian civilian convoy. Putin is a war criminal and needs to die. I know we have laws against political assassinations but we went after Saddam Hussein and he was way less of a threat to the interests of us and our allies than Putin is. Take the fucker out. There’s a whole history of reasons to criticize the CIA but this is a job that is sort of their whole raison d’être, isn’t it? I’ll bet the guy who steps up and takes his place won’t complain too much.

I would give America an A+ for this conflict. Russia has been fully exposed as a paper Tiger. They’re economically destroyed so there is zero chance of rebuilding their military in the next 20+ years. Most of Europe doesn’t care about Russia’s threats anymore. And Putin is in the most vulnerable spot of his leadership. Just as the world destroyed the USSR in the 80s, we’re finishing the job ( for now) due to Putin’s miscalculations.

there does now seem to be a problem that Putin now cannot give up those territories without admitting defeat. So either he has to go or Russia gets those territories.

if you hear anyone now start to say that the West needs to back down because of the nuclear threat, that person is a pussy. You can’t let a bully get away with their actions just because they could do something worse. 

[Dutchrudder 11243]

1 hour ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Certainly not, but allowing it to disintegrate into kleptocracy and chaos during the shock therapy period was one of the great strategic blunders of the international order.

How exactly were they supposed to stop a nuclear power from devolving into this? Should the international community have invaded Russia to stop it?

[956 Worldwide 35592]

“The West/U.S. is to blame for how Russia is” marks the first step down the road to “Russia is just pursuing its rights by invading its neighbors.” 

[TwiceHorn 32076]

36 minutes ago, Dutchrudder said:

How exactly were they supposed to stop a nuclear power from devolving into this? Should the international community have invaded Russia to stop it?

Well, a very good question.  But, the fact remains that "the West" didn't lift a finger.

I would suppose the rational answer is a lot of humantarian aid and some advisors.

[Mdhorn 6166]

On 10/1/2022 at 4:50 AM, WhatTheBuck said:

So far I think Biden is handling the conflict as well as could be expected. I do wish that he’d deliver the response, when Putin boasts that he has weapons more sophisticated than the West has, “As far as you know.” And I don’t think it would hurt if he mentioned that we have nuclear weapons too.

And Jesus, the video of the latest Russian attack on a Ukrainian civilian convoy. Putin is a war criminal and needs to die. I know we have laws against political assassinations but we went after Saddam Hussein and he was way less of a threat to the interests of us and our allies than Putin is. Take the fucker out. There’s a whole history of reasons to criticize the CIA but this is a job that is sort of their whole raison d’être, isn’t it? I’ll bet the guy who steps up and takes his place won’t complain too much.

Pretty sure that the US could move with support of fleeing Russian oligarchs to assassinate Putin with their assistance.  Currently, their population would probably support it as well--or they'll come around shortly.  The longer he butchers his own, the more enemies he creates around him.   And he continues lying, so Russians have to recognize Putin as a liar, especially since the populace is being drafted to send family to his "special operation". 

[Woland 755]

Russia has a cycle of liberalization/authoritarianism as well it’s military being fit/ total shit. It’s about time for liberalization and surely this has to be rock bottom for the military.

[Anastasis 23717]

2 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Certainly not, but allowing it to disintegrate into kleptocracy and chaos during the shock therapy period was one of the great strategic blunders of the international order.

 

Sir, it's the "rules-based" international order, please. Thank you. 

Edited October 2, 2022 by Anastasis

[956 Worldwide 35592]

If Zyuganov had won in 1996 everything would be awesome there! 
 

Russia’s problems are Russia’s fault. 

[Anastasis 23717]

4 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

If Zyuganov had won in 1996 everything would be awesome there! 

This commitment to democracy thing is interesting.  Especially when it comes face to face with realpolitik. 

[Sawbonz 28217]

It’s like y’all never read Tolstoy or Dostoyevsky 

[Bozo_Casanova 26846]

2 hours ago, Dutchrudder said:

How exactly were they supposed to stop a nuclear power from devolving into this? Should the international community have invaded Russia to stop it?

Of course not. But at the time of the fall very many in both the west and in liberal and anti-corruption circles in Russia argued  for a sort of Marshall Plan for Russia to provide a soft landing economically and politically and prevent Russia from becoming an impoverished nuclear kleptocracy. Instead they got shock therapy. 

1 hour ago, 956 Worldwide said:

“The West/U.S. is to blame for how Russia is” marks the first step down the road to “Russia is just pursuing its rights by invading its neighbors.” 

Oh good grief. The blame lies fully with Putin and the rulers of Russia. That reality can co-exist with the fact that the west didn’t do enough to manage the fall of the Soviet Union and it ultimately damaged our interests. 

[956 Worldwide 35592]

1 hour ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Of course not. But at the time of the fall very many in both the west and in liberal and anti-corruption circles in Russia argued  for a sort of Marshall Plan for Russia to provide a soft landing economically and politically and prevent Russia from becoming an impoverished nuclear kleptocracy. Instead they got shock therapy. 

Oh good grief. The blame lies fully with Putin and the rulers of Russia. That reality can co-exist with the fact that the west didn’t do enough to manage the fall of the Soviet Union and it ultimately damaged our interests. 

The West managed the fall of the Soviet Union most excellently.  Whole countries that were once geopolitical pawns are now safe in the western fold and they are rich and stable.  The West only failed if you consider current day Russia’s interests as “more equal” than others’ interests.

Lots of countries got shock therapy. Most of them did just fine, better than fine even. Russia wanted Western prosperity but not western integration and values, so they fucked it up.  They got the same billions of dollars and the same chance for investment (more even), but this is a pattern with Russia.  Stealing it all was a Russian choice.
 

 Since Peter the Great they’ve wanted Western gear and Western riches with Mongol khanate government.  A Marshall Plan for them was never in the works and I would remind you that Germany hat to get occupied and broken before they got that sweet dough.  Russia was never going to hold to its end of that bargain.
 

No fallen geopolitical foe has been treated more graciously than Russia and that’s a function of its nuclear arsenal and intransigence.  I would argue that the West’s mistake was not being vicious enough in further dismantling and weakening the rump empire left behind; the real problem is that they never accepted they were defeated. 

[956 Worldwide 35592]

2 hours ago, Anastasis said:

This commitment to democracy thing is interesting.  Especially when it comes face to face with realpolitik. 

Whatever American consultants did in 1996, it was more legal and less shady than what Russia did in 2016. And you believe that 2016 is all bullshit so…..

Russians are responsible for Russia. 

[Anastasis 23717]

15 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Whatever American consultants did in 1996, it was more legal and less shady than what Russia did in 2016. And you believe that 2016 is all bullshit so…..

Russians are responsible for Russia. 

You joined this board under the current name in Dec 2020. 

 

But please tell me more Ned. 

 

 

[Anastasis 23717]

1 hour ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

That reality can co-exist with the fact that the west didn’t do enough to manage the fall of the Soviet Union and it ultimately damaged our interests. 

State Department doesn't really do self-reflection well. 

 

[Bozo_Casanova 26846]

47 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

The West managed the fall of the Soviet Union most excellently.  Whole countries that were once geopolitical pawns are now safe in the western fold and they are rich and stable.  The West only failed if you consider current day Russia’s interests as “more equal” than others’ interests.

Lots of countries got shock therapy. Most of them did just fine, better than fine even. Russia wanted Western prosperity but not western integration and values, so they fucked it up.  They got the same billions of dollars and the same chance for investment (more even), but this is a pattern with Russia.  Stealing it all was a Russian choice.
 

 Since Peter the Great they’ve wanted Western gear and Western riches with Mongol khanate government.  A Marshall Plan for them was never in the works and I would remind you that Germany hat to get occupied and broken before they got that sweet dough.  Russia was never going to hold to its end of that bargain.
 

No fallen geopolitical foe has been treated more graciously than Russia and that’s a function of its nuclear arsenal and intransigence.  I would argue that the West’s mistake was not being vicious enough in further dismantling and weakening the rump empire left behind; the real problem is that they never accepted they were defeated. 

Doug Feith posts here?

[956 Worldwide 35592]

4 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, a very good question.  But, the fact remains that "the West" didn't lift a finger.

I would suppose the rational answer is a lot of humantarian aid and some advisors.

The West and U.S. sent billions in money, straight up food aid, and advisors (see @Anastasis’ passive aggressive rejoinders).

The Russians didn’t listen to advice and stole it all. Всё пошло не так. 

[956 Worldwide 35592]

33 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Doug Feith posts here?

Doug Feith was an Iraq War architect and we have a shit track record when we invade places that aren’t a direct threat to us.

We have an amazing track record when it comes to places that want and ask for our help.  It would be awesome and cool if we had expanded NATO and the U.S military presence right up to Russia’s borders in Ukraine and Georgia and encircled them like they accused us of doing. All the places where we did do that (Baltics, Central Europe, Japan, South Korea, even the Balkans) have stability, security, and are either rich or making solid progress.  It’s the places we didn’t do that that suck and are constantly getting invaded or fucked with by Russia or their other neighbors.
 

Everyone who’s in NATO loves being in NATO.  No NATO member has invaded another member (not true of Warsaw Pact). No NATO member has ever been invaded by an outside state. It’s the surest bet in geopolitics and the reason Russia hates it so much is precisely for that reason, Russia can’t stand having territory on its border that is off limits. Russia prefers crisis and instability than having prosperous and stable neighbors it can’t invade. 
 

It would have been good for Russia, too. Vaclav Havel said that the problem with Russia is that it doesn’t know where it begins or ends.  Putting Russia in a box and making that question unambiguous would help them to focus on other shit instead of taking out all their frustration on Ukraine or Moldova. 

[Bozo_Casanova 26846]

Dbl

Edited October 2, 2022 by Bozo_Casanova

[Bozo_Casanova 26846]

58 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Doug Feith was an Iraq War architect and we have a shit track record when we invade places that aren’t a direct threat to us.

We have an amazing track record when it comes to places that want and ask for our help.  It would be awesome and cool if we had expanded NATO and the U.S military presence right up to Russia’s borders in Ukraine and Georgia and encircled them like they accused us of doing. All the places where we did do that (Baltics, Central Europe, Japan, South Korea, even the Balkans) have stability, security, and are either rich or making solid progress.  It’s the places we didn’t do that that suck and are constantly getting invaded or fucked with by Russia or their other neighbors.
 

Everyone who’s in NATO loves being in NATO.  No NATO member has invaded another member (not true of Warsaw Pact). No NATO member has ever been invaded by an outside state. It’s the surest bet in geopolitics and the reason Russia hates it so much is precisely for that reason, Russia can’t stand having territory on its border that is off limits. Russia prefers crisis and instability than having prosperous and stable neighbors it can’t invade. 
 

It would have been good for Russia, too. Vaclav Havel said that the problem with Russia is that it doesn’t know where it begins or ends.  Putting Russia in a box and making that question unambiguous would help them to focus on other shit instead of taking out all their frustration on Ukraine or Moldova. 

Message board poster battles strawman, which one will prevail? I agree with some of that, but none of that is responsive to what I wrote.

Edited October 2, 2022 by Bozo_Casanova

[Anastasis 23717]

1 hour ago, 956 Worldwide said:

(see @Anastasis’ passive aggressive rejoinders).

Funny from the guy evoking his assessment of my take on 2016 from the ether. 

[Anastasis 23717]

2 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Doug Feith posts here?

Everyone are neocons now. 

[maninblack 7975]

On 9/28/2022 at 6:39 PM, Dahobbs said:

I'm willing to expand the list. 

Come to Colorado if you'd like to truthfully explore this. I have no problem meeting up with you.

[Bullneck 19516]

On 10/1/2022 at 3:26 AM, 956 Worldwide said:

Junior is getting in on the misplaced capitalization game but with him you can tell it’s just an affectation. 

[SmokeyTheBear 5569]

Ana is a disingenuous piece of shit. That's all I've got. 

[WhatTheBuck 28928]

2 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Vaclav Havel said that the problem with Russia is that it doesn’t know where it begins or ends.

This is too much of a coincidence to ignore. This is neither here nor there but it could go here or there, there being the Frank Zappa thread. I’ll post it here.

Havel was a big Zappa fan and they had a relationship. I just posted over there earlier about Bongo Fury, an album recorded during a pair of concerts at Armadillo World Headquarters in Austin and reportedly Havel’s favorite.

Here’s Frank with Vaclav in Prague in either ‘89 or ‘90 (I’ve heard both dates and I’m not certain which is correct without doing a little more research):

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/entertainment/music/sdut-frank-zappa-enduring-legacy-2013jan25-story.html

[Longhorn_Fan68 34104]

21 minutes ago, SmokeyTheBear said:

Ana is a disingenuous piece of shit. That's all I've got. 

he was one of my first ignores. when I occasionally uncover a post it does not make me regret my decision

[Dahobbs 18313]

1 hour ago, maninblack said:

Come to Colorado if you'd like to truthfully explore this. I have no problem meeting up with you.

Well look at you. Better yet, why don't you go fight for Russia in Ukraine? It is finally your chance to stab at evil US imperialism or whatever bullshit you believe. 

[Anastasis 23717]

2 hours ago, SmokeyTheBear said:

Ana is a disingenuous piece of shit. That's all I've got. 

This is true. That is all you got.

I understand you clowns and your limits. 

[Chad Fuck 18134]

11 hours ago, Woland said:

Russia has a cycle of liberalization/authoritarianism as well it’s military being fit/ total shit. It’s about time for liberalization and surely this has to be rock bottom for the military.

I dunnow.  That one time in the forests around Tannenberg in 1914 was pretty bad.  The summer of 1941 was pretty bad too.  

Edited October 3, 2022 by Chad Fuck