Glue sniffing.
Trump Re Ukraine
- Thread starter securespark
- Start date
- Status
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 25 Jul 2022
- Messages
- 15,063
- Reaction score
- 1,170
- Country
Just unbelievable
- Joined
- 17 Jul 2019
- Messages
- 2,598
- Reaction score
- 648
- Country
- Joined
- 22 Aug 2006
- Messages
- 6,101
- Reaction score
- 805
- Country
No - shortly after the Minsk accord, long before the war.
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 22 Aug 2006
- Messages
- 6,101
- Reaction score
- 805
- Country
It is true, I don't make stuff up, you're the compulsive liar with an axe to grind. I don't have one. I remember the maps showing high numbers of east-leaning voters.
I put at the top "the shape of things to come?"
Poots will want the purple bits.
Last edited:
The minerals are becoming a massive issue. Trump is demanding that Zelensky sign the deal. As with so many things to do with Trump, I find it fascinating. It is being done very publicly mainly, I have read, because Trump wants to be able to say he has got a victory for the US taxpayer. I have been trying to find out as much as I can, but the details are still pretty vague. It seems that the idea to trade minerals for security was first suggested by Zelensky last year. But it is not clear whether the deal which Zelensky has now rejected is the same one Biden was working on. I don't think it can be, because it looks like Zelensky was only given sight of it last week, and was asked to sign it without having any lawyers check it. According to the Telegraph, the terms were extremely onerous, asking for 50% of all Ukraine's future resource wealth, not just mineral wealth:
Also, it was drawn up by commercial lawyers in New York, rather than the US government, which sounds a bit odd.
And the other issue is the one I have mentioned a few times before. Apparently, it isn't clear what the agreement is supposed to cover. On the face of it, Ukraine were being asked to pay $500bn just to cover the $110bn that the USA has already sent them. That made no sense to me. But nobody seems to know what the extra $390bn is for because the agreement didn't actually say.
This may of course just have been bit of classic Trump deal making. It looks like another agreement is now being worked on.
Minsk agreement was 2014
Putin sent in Wagner group in 2014 to start annexation of Donbas
We term “Russian backed separatists” commonly used in regards to the 2 main groups in Donetsk and Luhansk, but they were formed and largely run by citizens of the Russian federation.
So your claim that both sides broke the Minsk agreement is not correct.
Putin led Wagner army and Russian citizens started the Donbas annexation and thus broke the Minsk agreement…..Ukraine was engaged in defending itself
Facts and detail matter
- Joined
- 30 May 2022
- Messages
- 348
- Reaction score
- 120
- Country
How would a Russian observer influence the outcome?
You are being dishonest…..your maps don’t show what you claim
You used the phrase “East leaning voters” implying people in Donbas wanted to vote to be part of Russia
What you’ve shown is the Donbas region voting for a candidate in the Ukrainian government…..not the same thing at all.
It’s hard to find much objective evidence, but polls done in Eastern Ukraine do indicate majority of citizens want to be part of Ukraine or independent, there’s never been much support for Donbas to become part of Russia
Despite Concerns about Governance, Ukrainians Want to Remain One Country
A clear majority of Ukrainians agree that their country should remain a single, unified state, according to a pair of new surveys conducted by the Pew
www.pewresearch.org
What you mean is: “how would Kremlin stooges, influence Ukrainian politics”
A = by spreading lies, misinformation, propaganda…….just like your heroes Trump and Putin
You drank a gallon of Kool aid before making up that fantasy
Good effort in twisting the sh1t out of facts in your desperation to support your Orange Messiah.
- Joined
- 25 Jul 2022
- Messages
- 15,063
- Reaction score
- 1,170
- Country
A bit like some on here too
Why is Trump so disliked in the UK?
A few things spring to mind. Trump lacks certain qualities which the British traditionally esteem.
For instance, he has no class, no charm, no coolness, no credibility, no compassion, no wit, no warmth, no wisdom, no subtlety, no sensitivity, no self-awareness, no humility, no honour and no grace - all qualities, funnily enough, with which his predecessor Mr. Obama was generously blessed.
So for us, the stark contrast does rather throw Trump’s limitations into embarrassingly sharp relief.
Plus, we like a laugh. And while Trump may be laughable, he has never once said anything wry, witty or even faintly amusing - not once, ever.
I don’t say that rhetorically, I mean it quite literally: not once, not ever. And that fact is particularly disturbing to the British sensibility - for us, to lack humour is almost inhuman.
But with Trump, it’s a fact. He doesn’t even seem to understand what a joke is - his idea of a joke is a crass comment, an illiterate insult, a casual act of cruelty.
Trump is a troll. And like all trolls, he is never funny and he never laughs; he only crows or jeers.
And scarily, he doesn’t just talk in crude, witless insults - he actually thinks in them. His mind is a simple bot-like algorithm of petty prejudices and knee-jerk nastiness.
There is never any under-layer of irony, complexity, nuance or depth. It?s all surface.
Some Americans might see this as refreshingly upfront.
Well, we don’t. We see it as having no inner world, no soul.
And in Britain we traditionally side with David, not Goliath. All our heroes are plucky underdogs: Robin Hood, Dick Whittington, Oliver Twist.
Trump is neither plucky, nor an underdog. He is the exact opposite of that.
He’s not even a spoiled rich-boy, or a greedy fat-cat.
He’s more a fat white slug. A Jabba the Hutt of privilege.
And worse, he is that most unforgivable of all things to the British: a bully.
That is, except when he is among bullies; then he suddenly transforms into a snivelling sidekick instead.
There are unspoken rules to this stuff - the Queensberry rules of basic decency - and he breaks them all. He punches downwards - which a gentleman should, would, could never do - and every blow he aims is below the belt. He particularly likes to kick the vulnerable or voiceless - and he kicks them when they are down.
So the fact that a significant minority - perhaps a third - of Americans look at what he does, listen to what he says, and then think 'Yeah, he seems like my kind of guy? is a matter of some confusion and no little distress to British people, given that:
* Americans are supposed to be nicer than us, and mostly are.
* You don't need a particularly keen eye for detail to spot a few flaws in the man.
This last point is what especially confuses and dismays British people, and many other people too; his faults seem pretty bloody hard to miss.
After all, it’s impossible to read a single tweet, or hear him speak a sentence or two, without staring deep into the abyss. He turns being artless into an art form; he is a Picasso of pettiness; a Shakespeare of ****. His faults are fractal: even his flaws have flaws, and so on ad infinitum.
God knows there have always been stupid people in the world, and plenty of nasty people too. But rarely has stupidity been so nasty, or nastiness so stupid.
He makes Nixon look trustworthy and George W look smart.
In fact, if Frankenstein decided to make a monster assembled entirely from human flaws - he would make a Trump.
And a remorseful Doctor Frankenstein would clutch out big clumpfuls of hair and scream in anguish:
'My God? what? have? I? created?
If being a **** was a TV show, Trump would be the boxed set."
A few things spring to mind. Trump lacks certain qualities which the British traditionally esteem.
For instance, he has no class, no charm, no coolness, no credibility, no compassion, no wit, no warmth, no wisdom, no subtlety, no sensitivity, no self-awareness, no humility, no honour and no grace - all qualities, funnily enough, with which his predecessor Mr. Obama was generously blessed.
So for us, the stark contrast does rather throw Trump’s limitations into embarrassingly sharp relief.
Plus, we like a laugh. And while Trump may be laughable, he has never once said anything wry, witty or even faintly amusing - not once, ever.
I don’t say that rhetorically, I mean it quite literally: not once, not ever. And that fact is particularly disturbing to the British sensibility - for us, to lack humour is almost inhuman.
But with Trump, it’s a fact. He doesn’t even seem to understand what a joke is - his idea of a joke is a crass comment, an illiterate insult, a casual act of cruelty.
Trump is a troll. And like all trolls, he is never funny and he never laughs; he only crows or jeers.
And scarily, he doesn’t just talk in crude, witless insults - he actually thinks in them. His mind is a simple bot-like algorithm of petty prejudices and knee-jerk nastiness.
There is never any under-layer of irony, complexity, nuance or depth. It?s all surface.
Some Americans might see this as refreshingly upfront.
Well, we don’t. We see it as having no inner world, no soul.
And in Britain we traditionally side with David, not Goliath. All our heroes are plucky underdogs: Robin Hood, Dick Whittington, Oliver Twist.
Trump is neither plucky, nor an underdog. He is the exact opposite of that.
He’s not even a spoiled rich-boy, or a greedy fat-cat.
He’s more a fat white slug. A Jabba the Hutt of privilege.
And worse, he is that most unforgivable of all things to the British: a bully.
That is, except when he is among bullies; then he suddenly transforms into a snivelling sidekick instead.
There are unspoken rules to this stuff - the Queensberry rules of basic decency - and he breaks them all. He punches downwards - which a gentleman should, would, could never do - and every blow he aims is below the belt. He particularly likes to kick the vulnerable or voiceless - and he kicks them when they are down.
So the fact that a significant minority - perhaps a third - of Americans look at what he does, listen to what he says, and then think 'Yeah, he seems like my kind of guy? is a matter of some confusion and no little distress to British people, given that:
* Americans are supposed to be nicer than us, and mostly are.
* You don't need a particularly keen eye for detail to spot a few flaws in the man.
This last point is what especially confuses and dismays British people, and many other people too; his faults seem pretty bloody hard to miss.
After all, it’s impossible to read a single tweet, or hear him speak a sentence or two, without staring deep into the abyss. He turns being artless into an art form; he is a Picasso of pettiness; a Shakespeare of ****. His faults are fractal: even his flaws have flaws, and so on ad infinitum.
God knows there have always been stupid people in the world, and plenty of nasty people too. But rarely has stupidity been so nasty, or nastiness so stupid.
He makes Nixon look trustworthy and George W look smart.
In fact, if Frankenstein decided to make a monster assembled entirely from human flaws - he would make a Trump.
And a remorseful Doctor Frankenstein would clutch out big clumpfuls of hair and scream in anguish:
'My God? what? have? I? created?
If being a **** was a TV show, Trump would be the boxed set."
- Joined
- 22 Aug 2006
- Messages
- 6,101
- Reaction score
- 805
- Country
You are being dishonest
"You used the phrase “East leaning voters” implying people in Donbas wanted to vote to be part of Russia"
Supporting east leaning candidates - is east leaning voters. Again you post crap. You say I was saying something else so you rail against it.
Liar. As usual.
"You used the phrase “East leaning voters” implying people in Donbas wanted to vote to be part of Russia"
Supporting east leaning candidates - is east leaning voters. Again you post crap. You say I was saying something else so you rail against it.
Liar. As usual.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 30 May 2022
- Messages
- 348
- Reaction score
- 120
- Country
No, a Russian observer to the election.
How would they influence the outcome?
- Status
Sponsored Links
