- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 2/27/24 at 8:43 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
That's the CT portion. But they use the fact that "biolabs" exist as some proof, when that is a leap in logic (which you expect with CTs b/c that's what they do).
I get the "source" has a vested interest in saying otherwise but Putin literally said they were nefarious based on intel Russia had.
IDC much about the labs but just pointing out it isn't a stretch that we were using Ukraine to do some bad stuff we can't do here.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 8:44 am to stout
quote:
Russia is not going to walk all over Europe like the fear mongers suggested when this first started. That has always been the excuse for America to fund and be involved. It's a lie.
Agreed. I think most rational people see Putin for what he is - the strongman who was able to control the underbosses from looting Russia completely and therefore has maintained a strong hold on power. Pointing out the deficiencies and inaccuracies in the Western policy doesn't make one a "Putin lover."
Russia today is much different than the Soviet Union. I wonder if our political class still views Russia as the Soviet Union from the Stalin days intent on dominating Europe. They don't possess that power nor have they shown the ambitions to militarily do so. NATO has perhaps somewhat had to invent a new boogeyman after the real Soviet threat collapsed.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 8:45 am to meansonny
quote:
Did you watch his interview?
The one where he said he had no interest of invading Europe and that WW3 is just self destruction?
This post was edited on 2/27/24 at 8:47 am
Posted on 2/27/24 at 8:45 am to stout
quote:
but Putin literally said they were nefarious based on intel Russia had.
And it's very likely this entire talking point originated from Putin's misinformation wing
Having Putin promote it isn't shocking to me.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 8:48 am to RFK
St, Petersburg is still a Russian port on the Baltic. The -stans to the southwest are not NATO and Turkey is NATO except when it goes religious extremes.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 8:48 am to RFK
quote:
RFK
There is so much fail in this OP that I wouldn't even know where to begin.
So, I won't even begin.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 8:50 am to SlowFlowPro
Was being sarcastic.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 8:50 am to RFK
quote:
RFK
Tulane Fan, checks out.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 8:54 am to udtiger
quote:
Well, in fairness...he did start another one where he looks like a dumbass.
Ain't no cure for the dumbass
Posted on 2/27/24 at 8:55 am to HeadSlash
quote:
cut off Russia even more from the west and western values
Damn you. I spit up my oatmeal.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 8:56 am to stout
quote:
The one where he said he had no interest of invading Europe and that WW3 is just self destruction?
That's not what he said.
He has no interest in invading NATO countries.
And in consequence, he has a massive interest in keeping countries out of NATO. Do you disagree?
It couldn't be any more simple than that.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 8:58 am to Dog Tree
quote:
Russia will remain a functioning intact country long after the USA has been destroyed from within.
Doubtful. Ethnic Russians aren't reproducing, but their southern Turkic Muslim populations are breeding like rabbits. Russia will be majority Muslim within 100 years, if not sooner.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 9:02 am to meansonny
quote:
And in consequence, he has a massive interest in keeping countries out of NATO. Do you disagree?
Because of all that aggression NATO is known for?
Posted on 2/27/24 at 9:04 am to meansonny
quote:
It couldn't be any more simple than that.
Do you understand why he had an interest in Ukraine? NATO concerns were part of it but there is a lot more at play.
What country do you think he would invade next when he can't even finish off Ukraine?
You guys want it both ways. Russia is so strong they are a threat to invade Europe, but so weak that if we keep funding Ukraine they can hold Russia back. Which is it?
This post was edited on 2/27/24 at 9:06 am
Posted on 2/27/24 at 9:05 am to stout
Posted on 2/27/24 at 9:06 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I'm sure there are labs in Ukraine dealing with biological analysis. We have some in Lake Charles.
Now, are these "biolabs" somehow nefarious actors? There is literally no evidence of this.
Do you know the limitations of the ones inside the US and those in countries not affiliated with any kind of treaties?
Posted on 2/27/24 at 9:07 am to riccoar
quote:
Do you know the limitations of the ones inside the US and those in countries not affiliated with any kind of treaties?
Yes. It's a blank canvas for CTs to create their latest work.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 9:09 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Because of all that aggression NATO is known for?
NATO has never been known for aggression, but individual NATO countries, particularly Germany, have. Russia's problem is that they're geographically huge and sitting on mountains of resources, but have a dwindling population capable of defending them. As their population continues to decline and their neighbors are hungry for those resources, someone (probably a multitude of countries) are going to try to take them by force. While that sounds harsh, just keep in mind that most of what Russia has currently they took from someone else first.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 9:10 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Moldova
Looks more like a coup attempt by rebels than a Russian invasion
Our CIA supports the same crap from time to time without invading
Page 6 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News