barbos
Contributor
This is fucking ironic.You know barbos, this is meant to be a discussion forum
This is fucking ironic.You know barbos, this is meant to be a discussion forum
No they didn't! They only asked for Russian withdraw from their land! That's all.Russia has released their "compromise position peace plan" for Ukraine:
The plan requires the following: 1) complete and unconditional surrender; 2) demilitarization; 3) dismiss all constitutional authorities; 4) "forced denazification programs encompassing all authorities; 5) Ukraine must pay compensation to Russia, including reimbursing relatives of Russian soldiers 6) officially recognize that the entire territory of Ukraine belongs to the Russian Federation".
I'd like to know if anyone honestly thinks that this is reasonable or that a sane person would give in to this?
But regime in Kiev was the first who suggested unconditional surrender (of Russia)
And I did not see you complaining about that.
Russia is winning this war and and will be the one imposing conditions.
Like what?What makes you an expert of Navalny?What makes her an expert of Navalny?
You're the one with the outlandish nonsensicle statements about Navalny. This is a "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" situation.
No, It is you who parroting western propaganda.The problem with the conversations in this thread that you are involved is that you're just parroting the official Putin propaganda line. But those are obvious lies. Bizarre planted assertions to justify a Russian invasion. Its statements right out of Goebels playbook.
US Congress report is fake news?Just the fact that you keep repeating the fake news plant regarding Ukrainian Nazis makes any of your statements hard to believe. I find it hard to believe that you believe what you are saying
The street in the Nikopol was named after the guy in the center
Not irony at all. Maybe hypocritical, but definitely not irony.This is fucking ironic.You know barbos, this is meant to be a discussion forum
Man, two years in and still winning. Russia is winning a war like has never been won before. I can't wait for their five year anniversary of 'still winning the war in Ukraine".Russia has released their "compromise position peace plan" for Ukraine:
The plan requires the following: 1) complete and unconditional surrender; 2) demilitarization; 3) dismiss all constitutional authorities; 4) "forced denazification programs encompassing all authorities; 5) Ukraine must pay compensation to Russia, including reimbursing relatives of Russian soldiers 6) officially recognize that the entire territory of Ukraine belongs to the Russian Federation".
I'd like to know if anyone honestly thinks that this is reasonable or that a sane person would give in to this?
But regime in Kiev was the first who suggested unconditional surrender (of Russia)
And I did not see you complaining about that.
Russia is winning this war and and will be the one imposing conditions.
Wow. That's the best they've got to stopping a naval drone is small arms fire?
China could basically walk in and take whatever it wants now except for the issue of nukes. Russia has bled an awful lot of it's combat power against Ukraine, they couldn't hope to fight a two-front war.If Russia gets just a little bit weaker, China will be easily able to walk in and take what they want. And oh how ironic… Russia won’t even have oil money to fight back with.Living in Russia has to be tough for a principled, intelligent, informed person. Navalny and his supporters within China's gas station are proof of that.
“I think it is a stand-alone, and I suspect it will need to be on suspension,” Johnson said of foreign assistance.
...
The suspension calendar requires a two-thirds majority to approve legislation on the House floor — meaning Johnson would need a substantial number of Democratic votes. He has taken that approach with many contentious measures so far in his speakership.
China could basically walk in and take whatever it wants now except for the issue of nukes. Russia has bled an awful lot of it's combat power against Ukraine, they couldn't hope to fight a two-front war.If Russia gets just a little bit weaker, China will be easily able to walk in and take what they want. And oh how ironic… Russia won’t even have oil money to fight back with.Living in Russia has to be tough for a principled, intelligent, informed person. Navalny and his supporters within China's gas station are proof of that.
The street in the Nikopol was named after the guy in the center
All the videos you are posting prove nothing. They're no doubt compiled and spread by Russian propagandists. It's easy to plant stuff, or take stuff out of context to make a point. You can "prove" anything that way.
Yes, and reparations. That's called unconditional surrender.No they didn't! They only asked for Russian withdraw from their land! That's all.Russia has released their "compromise position peace plan" for Ukraine:
The plan requires the following: 1) complete and unconditional surrender; 2) demilitarization; 3) dismiss all constitutional authorities; 4) "forced denazification programs encompassing all authorities; 5) Ukraine must pay compensation to Russia, including reimbursing relatives of Russian soldiers 6) officially recognize that the entire territory of Ukraine belongs to the Russian Federation".
I'd like to know if anyone honestly thinks that this is reasonable or that a sane person would give in to this?
But regime in Kiev was the first who suggested unconditional surrender (of Russia)
And I did not see you complaining about that.
Russia is winning this war and and will be the one imposing conditions.
Wow. That's the best they've got to stopping a naval drone is small arms fire?
Yes, I can repeat again. Russia should have "invaded" Ukraine in 1990s, took everythging which was illegally attached to it by soviets and then cut the rest loose.Sometimes it is best just to let a poster speak for themselves.Don't know. But you did post this, I guess you cared enough for that.Why should I care about some unknown textbook written in a language unknown to me with unknown distribution and used in possibly zero school classrooms? Because you THINK it says something wrong, and you THINK it looks legitimate but also you admit that the publishers say they had a misprint?
Why should you care? Because I am not unique. There are a lot of people in Russia who care and support "invasion" based on shit like this book. Yes, I literally think that this book alone justifies invading this piece of land.
What's the difference? But OK hypocritical, even though I do discuss things you post here, whereas you keep ignoring everything I post.Not irony at all. Maybe hypocritical, but definitely not irony.