Kyiv calls for ‘liquidation’ of Iranian plants building weapons for Russia

[applesauce]

Well, expensive military help can end.

Just like NATO no-fly-zone over Libya ended.

But unstabilization likely will keep forever.

Iraq and Libya are the new paradigm of American empire domination. Cheapest domination, in the middle of chaos.

Black Rock will gain nothing, and if someday all the invesments of Black Rock in europe just blow up in a Russia nuclear war, it will be a wonderful news to USA.

USA elite doesnt need money, they can print it, they need assure supply of energy and raw materials for the next 100 years, and to do that, it's needed to turn first world into third world (except USA).

USA (and China) is enough to satisfy American ruling elite needs, they dont need European investments.

And money is just a way of exchange richness, it's not richness.

Maybe expensive military help will end when the firsts Russian nukes fall in Frankfurt, then USA wont need to keep acting this nonsense hollywood comedy in real world.

sure, aid can end, but Ukraine is right next to EU/NATO, a large failed state will constantly require NATO attention, refugees, weapons black market, drugs, all manner of illegal activities that nato will need to watch out for. people are thinking that refugees from the middle east and africa to europe is bad now, but they at least have a massive body of water and very limited routes into europe, this is not the case for Ukraine.

and nuclear war is not good news to anyone. you seriously think any EU/russia nuclear exchange will not involve nato and hence the us (hello? article 5?)? all the money, power and resources in the world means nothing if everyone dies in a nuclear war and even the most powerful at best can only lead a brief radiation filled, sick existence in a bunker.

also,the us isnt short on energy or most raw materials. its a continent size country like china and russia with tons of resources within the country. except it has enough population to be very powerful(unlike russia) but not too much to require a lot of external resources for its own people(unlike china. this is also why its bad news for the west when russia is forced into being a chinese resource appendage, it solves chinese resource problems and bypasses most potential choke points like the malacca strait.

The us doesn't need the energy and resource, what it wants is world hegemony. the kind it enjoyed 1991 to about 2008. this is why it cannot help but want to start a new cold war and attempt to contain china

since the real competition is with china, europe is a sideshow that is bad news for the us, it isnt enough to take out russia but enough to force washington to waste attention and wealth there, while weakening its european allies which could have otherwise thrown its energy in with the us into competition with china. and china is making moves while the west is held up, see the situation in the middle east and china's slow but clear inroads into the pacific via the minor island nations. china is by no means more influential than the us right now, but the pattern is clear, china influence grows and the us' wanes in comparison.

 

[BHAN85]

sure, aid can end, but Ukraine is right next to EU/NATO, a large failed state will constantly require NATO attention, refugees, weapons black market, drugs, all manner of illegal activities that nato will need to watch out for. people are thinking that refugees from the middle east and africa to europe is bad now, but they at least have a massive body of water and very limited routes into europe, this is not the case for Ukraine.

and nuclear war is not good news to anyone. you seriously think any EU/russia nuclear exchange will not involve nato and hence the us (hello? article 5?)? all the money, power and resources in the world means nothing if everyone dies in a nuclear war and even the most powerful at best can only lead a brief radiation filled, sick existence in a bunker.

also,the us isnt short on energy or most raw materials. its a continent size country like china and russia with tons of resources within the country. except it has enough population to be very powerful(unlike russia) but not too much to require a lot of external resources for its own people(unlike china. this is also why its bad news for the west when russia is forced into being a chinese resource appendage, it solves chinese resource problems and bypasses most potential choke points like the malacca strait.

The us doesn't need the energy and resource, what it wants is world hegemony. the kind it enjoyed 1991 to about 2008. this is why it cannot help but want to start a new cold war and attempt to contain china

since the real competition is with china, europe is a sideshow that is bad news for the us, it isnt enough to take out russia but enough to force washington to waste attention and wealth there, while weakening its european allies which could have otherwise thrown its energy in with the us into competition with china. and china is making moves while the west is held up, see the situation in the middle east and china's slow but clear inroads into the pacific via the minor island nations. china is by no means more influential than the us right now, but the pattern is clear, china influence grows and the us' wanes in comparison.

Do you think in 20 years world wont have problems of energy with the current consumption projections?

EU ban on the sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2035 explained | Topics | European Parliament

All new cars and vans sold in the EU as of 2035 should not produce any CO2 emissions. What does this mean in practice? Check out our FAQ to find out.

www.europarl.europa.eu

Europe richness was useful for USA in the past, to stop USSR communism spread, and to turn European former colonies into states to make commerce them.

That's done, Europe richness is not useful for USA anymore, it's a problem to solve.

Ukraine is the start of the "solution". Americans tried a color revolution in Spain Catalonia 2017 (remember Barcelona, Ramblas, terrorist attacks August 17th 2017), they failed, but their intentions are crystal clear: burn west europe, it doesnt matter if the fire starts by the east or the west, if it's ukraine war or secesionism spring mayhem.

A West Europe turned into a Libya and Iraq is good news for American interests.

 

[applesauce]

Do you think in 20 years world wont have problems of energy with the current consumption projections?

EU ban on the sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2035 explained | Topics | European Parliament

All new cars and vans sold in the EU as of 2035 should not produce any CO2 emissions. What does this mean in practice? Check out our FAQ to find out.

www.europarl.europa.eu

Europe richness was useful for USA in the past, to stop USSR communism spread, and to turn European former colonies into states to make commerce them.

That's done, Europe richness is not useful for USA anymore, it's a problem to solve.

Ukraine is the start of the "solution". Americans tried a color revolution in Spain Catalonia 2017 (remember Barcelona, Ramblas, terrorist attacks August 17th 2017), they failed, but their intentions are crystal clear: burn west europe, it doesnt matter if the fire starts by the east or the west, if it's ukraine war or secesionism spring mayhem.

A West Europe turned into a Libya and Iraq is good news for American interests.

world might, the usa wont in theory.

it has huge reserves of its own that it hasnt tapped and a ton of unexplored areas, huge fracking potential and has canada and its tar sands by the balls.
so energy prices might go up but running out isnt an issue.

Europe has this benefit before too when russia is providing all the cheap energy and didn't even have compete with china since the russian gas fields for each economy are from different parts of russia but now they're screwed and russia is looking are building pipelines to move what would have been european gas towards the east.

and what is your theory on why a burning europe is good for the us? i already mentioned why it would be bad for the us.

 

[BHAN85]

world might, the usa wont in theory.

it has huge reserves of its own that it hasnt tapped and a ton of unexplored areas, huge fracking potential and has canada and its tar sands by the balls.
so energy prices might go up but running out isnt an issue.

Europe has this benefit before too when russia is providing all the cheap energy and didn't even have compete with china since the russian gas fields for each economy are from different parts of russia but now they're screwed and russia is looking are building pipelines to move what would have been european gas towards the east.

and what is your theory on why a burning europe is good for the us? i already mentioned why it would be bad for the us.

I said, raw materials and energy resources are limited, are not endless. I dont know if 20 years or 50 years, or 100 years, but it's not endless.

Why Europe is developed rich and Latin America is poor developing? Because it existed USSR and European colonies, but that is over. Now it has more sense for USA interests a rich Mexico than a rich West Europe.

USA ruling elite doesnt need Europe sucking limited resources, they can satisfy their needs without European parasites rich elite.

And if they achieve a European war against Russia and/or China, it would be wonderful for USA interests.

I think USA are not afraid of WWIII, they are protected by two oceans and by a large amount of ABM shields.

 

[ZeEa5KPul]

Okay, go liquidate them then.

 

[Stryker1982]

Okay, go liquidate them then.

They want the Americanski to do it for them lol.

Besides I thought they are intercepting all of them anyways.

 

[Foinikas]

They want the Americanski to do it for them lol.

Besides I thought they are intercepting all of them anyways.

"Destroy Iran for us,it's for your own good".

 

[applesauce]

I said, raw materials and energy resources are limited, are not endless. I dont know if 20 years or 50 years, or 100 years, but it's not endless.

Why Europe is developed rich and Latin America is poor developing? Because it existed USSR and European colonies, but that is over. Now it has more sense for USA interests a rich Mexico than a rich West Europe.

USA ruling elite doesnt need Europe sucking limited resources, they can satisfy their needs without European parasites rich elite.

And if they achieve a European war against Russia and/or China, it would be wonderful for USA interests.

I think USA are not afraid of WWIII, they are protected by two oceans and by a large amount of ABM shields.

well, i mean, in a long enough time frame of usage, nothing is "endless" not even hydrogen fusion, if and when people manage to crack that tech. but that doesn't mean much for discussion of the near/foreseeable future.

and at least in the medium term, there is no risk of running out for the us, again prices going up sure, but running out no(discounting artificial shortages, for example the government's refusal to explore and drill in national preserves).

and dropping eu again makes no sense, because- 1. the us isn't dropping them, it instead has to support them, billions are earmarked for Ukraine as we speak, us assets in europe continue to account for huge chunks of the us overall military. and 2 the us cannot drop them. its world power is built on a world wide network of treaties and alliances. if it drops europe, that world wide alliance fractures.

and you need to seriously read up more on ABM systems. to put it simply, the us- or anyones -ABM capabilities right now, isn't stopping more than a couple ICBM missiles at best, might (with a big maybe) work against a north korean attack but dont even think about stopping the potential hundreds to thousands that russia would throw their way.

 

[Oldman1]

At some point Ukranians themselves will say enough is enough and stop sending their men to fight this unwinnable war....If you ask me Ukis will one day kill him. ..West is trying to make a hero of of him but in reality he took his country to dumpster..

Unwinnable to who? How is Russia going to retake those territories they occupied and lost? Lose another 100k Russian troops for Putin's aims? It went from Denazify and demilitarize Ukraine to something else. Zelensky has been portrayed as Nazi LGBT anti Christ satanist president by the Russians. The Russians don't even know what they are fighting anymore.

 

[Muhammed45]

Unwinnable to who? How is Russia going to retake those territories they occupied and lost? Lose another 100k Russian troops for Putin's aims? It went from Denazify and demilitarize Ukraine to something else. Zelensky has been portrayed as Nazi LGBT anti Christ satanist president by the Russians. The Russians don't even know what they are fighting anymore.

On the contrary, Russians know why they are fighting from the day first. Their main goal is to save Russian ethnics of Europe first and foremost, they want Europeans to respect every Russian citizen no matter in which country. Russia is not to be underesrimated and hence attack on pathetic Ukraine led by a homosexual rat.

So far the whole NATO homosexual countries have supported the neo NAZIs of Kiev and Russia has so far destroyed their plans.

Iran is offering Russia with cost effective Solutions, on the other hand, supporters of Ukraine are getting close to bankruptcy. Despite their tall claims, they are still begging Russians for gas and pay Russia billions of Euros.

Russia with its cost effective solutions and the dark hours friends such as India and China is going to teach west a good lesson.

 

[aryobarzan]

Unwinnable to who? How is Russia going to retake those territories they occupied and lost? Lose another 100k Russian troops for Putin's aims? It went from Denazify and demilitarize Ukraine to something else. Zelensky has been portrayed as Nazi LGBT anti Christ satanist president by the Russians. The Russians don't even know what they are fighting anymore.

Let me ask you this hypothetical question:

Would US attack Mexico if they were about to join WARSAW pact.....

As for Ukraine...Laws of Physics tells me that if a nation of 40 million is to be invaded by a nation of 140 million the outcome is almost predictable...The Job of this ZELINSKI idiot if he loved his country would have been to avoid that outcome and not gamble with the future of his country....

Similar laws of physics went to work when Iraq (20 million in 1980) attacked Iran (60 million)..and Iran was no Russia 40 years ago!..Small mass can not push larger mass.....when are they going to learn

 

[Oldman1]

Let me ask you this hypothetical question:

Would US attack Mexico if they were about to join WARSAW pact.....

As for Ukraine...Laws of Physics tells me that if a nation of 40 million is to be invaded by a nation of 140 million the outcome is almost predictable...The Job of this ZELINSKI idiot if he loved his country would have been to avoid that outcome and not gamble with the future of his country....

Similar laws of physics went to work when Iraq (20 million in 1980) attacked Iran (60 million)..and Iran was no Russia 40 years ago!..Small mass can not push larger mass.....when are they going to learn

Doubt it. We didn't attack any country that was Warsaw during the Cold War.

Really? Why did the Russians lose Afghanistan during the 1980s?

Why U.S. lose to Vietnam when we have a bigger population? Same for Afghanistan during the 2000s?

Not sure how your Laws of Physics explain that. I mean does that that apply to Iran losing the war automatically against the U.S. because we have a bigger population?

 

[Hack-Hook]

Really? Why did the Russians lose Afghanistan during the 1980s?

hmmm, I guess a girl who was free with her sexual favor's and hate USSR put the taught of shipping manpads and to Afghanistan inside the head of a senator , and as it was cheap , they said why not ,and sadly they didn't care or forget to decide what to do with Afghanistan after Russia and as a result we have what we see today

Why U.S. lose to Vietnam when we have a bigger population? Same for Afghanistan during the 2000s?

you guys are not resilient and don't tolerate death count and partial mobilization in your special operations.
it also must have something with Vietcong's brainwashed their members and villagers perfectly (as if they needed any brainwashing considering how corrupt the generals government in south were )
about Afghanistan I don't believe you lost during 2000s

Not sure how your Laws of Physics explain that. I mean does that that apply to Iran losing the war automatically against the U.S. because we have a bigger population?

if you convince your population it is necessary for USA survival why not .
after all its partly law of physics , partly motivation , and partly technology .each part can cancel the other part if there disparity in them

 

[Oldman1]

hmmm, I guess a girl who was free with her sexual favor's and hate USSR put the taught of shipping manpads and to Afghanistan inside the head of a senator , and as it was cheap , they said why not ,and sadly they didn't care or forget to decide what to do with Afghanistan after Russia and as a result we have what we see today

Well the Afghans have to really decide what to do after kicking the Russians out. I mean did Russia and China have to do something after the Vietnam War was over? Stay in Vietnam?

you guys are not resilient and don't tolerate death count and partial mobilization in your special operations.
it also must have something with Vietcong's brainwashed their members and villagers perfectly (as if they needed any brainwashing considering how corrupt the generals government in south were )
about Afghanistan I don't believe you lost during 2000s

Don't know about not being resilient. I mean you look at U.S. history in warfare and see how long the wars or conflicts been going on.

if you convince your population it is necessary for USA survival why not .
after all its partly law of physics , partly motivation , and partly technology .each part can cancel the other part if there disparity in them

Then the Russians don't have that motivation since many hundreds of thousands fled when the first so called partial mobilization was called for. The Ukrainians are defending their home with such intensity. Technology is another thing when Ukrainians are getting access to high tech equipment and training.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Don't know about not being resilient. I mean you look at U.S. history in warfare and see how long the wars or conflicts been going on.

different generation , different upbringing . at ww2 they were ashamed of not going to war at Vietnam , they were proud of dodging the draft

Well the Afghans have to really decide what to do after kicking the Russians out. I mean did Russia and China have to do something after the Vietnam War was over? Stay in Vietnam?

considering the amount of weapon you guys injected into Afghanistan and the warlords you propped in every villages , and in Vietnam , didn't you faced a single party and it was not clear who get the power after USA? was it the situation in Afghanistan. also in Vietnam the Russia and china at the war time started an indoctrination campaign and built various school around the country that teached mainly communism to people and children , you forget about that part of war

after the war there you guys were interested only taking back the remaining stingers.russia and china after leaving didn't left a vacuum of power , in Afghanistan you left one

Then the Russians don't have that motivation since many hundreds of thousands fled when the first so called partial mobilization was called for. The Ukrainians are defending their home with such intensity. Technology is another thing when Ukrainians are getting access to high tech equipment and training.

Russia not only don't have motivation , don't knew about the technique of war and what to do with the technology so their technology here is also useless the motivation is on kiev , the technology is the same , the law of physics is on Russia side