NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.
On November 18 2025 19:49 Jankisa wrote: Our guys here are in a bit of a media bubble and are a tad slow generally so they are behind the curve on what they are supposed to push at the moment.
It's these... let's call them state-approved talking points that keep popping up. From NATO expansion to root causes to the thrust towards Kyiv was just a distraction to now Zelensky's legitimacy. We'll see new versions being trotted out every once in a while, and some of them even try to stick around.
And whenever the nonsense they're peddling is debunked they always avoid addressing the rebuttals. Then after a few weeks or months they come back are are pushing the same crap, pretending it hadn't been already debunked.
That's the most frustrating part. They come in here and shit all over the thread, disappears for without addressing anything substantial, then returns a month later to vomit some more of their dear leader's talking points. It's just consistent bad faith arguments and trolling
On November 18 2025 19:49 Jankisa wrote: Our guys here are in a bit of a media bubble and are a tad slow generally so they are behind the curve on what they are supposed to push at the moment.
It's these... let's call them state-approved talking points that keep popping up. From NATO expansion to root causes to the thrust towards Kyiv was just a distraction to now Zelensky's legitimacy. We'll see new versions being trotted out every once in a while, and some of them even try to stick around.
And whenever the nonsense they're peddling is debunked they always avoid addressing the rebuttals. Then after a few weeks or months they come back are are pushing the same crap, pretending it hadn't been already debunked.
That's the most frustrating part. They come in here and shit all over the thread, disappears for without addressing anything substantial, then returns a month later to vomit some more of their dear leader's talking points. It's just consistent bad faith arguments and trolling
Imo this is because there like 10 people in this thread stoking each other non stop. And won't listen to any arguments. No matter what is said you guys live in a parallel universe where the facts are the same but you interpret them completely opposite. Some of us a smart enough not to engage cos there's no point. Let bigons be bigots
Reality is Russia hasn't gotten a quick victory like they hoped. At the same time the sanctions and arms support from that many powerful nations are not proving to be as effective as any of us hoped.
The latter is concerning because the effectiveness of sanctions etc are meant to be the ultimate "peaceful" deterrence / diplomatic option for globalization
On November 18 2025 19:49 Jankisa wrote: Our guys here are in a bit of a media bubble and are a tad slow generally so they are behind the curve on what they are supposed to push at the moment.
It's these... let's call them state-approved talking points that keep popping up. From NATO expansion to root causes to the thrust towards Kyiv was just a distraction to now Zelensky's legitimacy. We'll see new versions being trotted out every once in a while, and some of them even try to stick around.
And whenever the nonsense they're peddling is debunked they always avoid addressing the rebuttals. Then after a few weeks or months they come back are are pushing the same crap, pretending it hadn't been already debunked.
That's the most frustrating part. They come in here and shit all over the thread, disappears for without addressing anything substantial, then returns a month later to vomit some more of their dear leader's talking points. It's just consistent bad faith arguments and trolling
Imo this is because there like 10 people in this thread stoking each other non stop. And won't listen to any arguments. No matter what is said you guys live in a parallel universe where the facts are the same but you interpret them completely opposite. Some of us a smart enough not to engage cos there's no point. Let bigons be bigots
In my experience the people who come back from time to time to tell everyone that they don't engage because they're not mad, well they're really not mad at all. This is a really not mad attitude to have.
On November 18 2025 19:49 Jankisa wrote: Our guys here are in a bit of a media bubble and are a tad slow generally so they are behind the curve on what they are supposed to push at the moment.
It's these... let's call them state-approved talking points that keep popping up. From NATO expansion to root causes to the thrust towards Kyiv was just a distraction to now Zelensky's legitimacy. We'll see new versions being trotted out every once in a while, and some of them even try to stick around.
And whenever the nonsense they're peddling is debunked they always avoid addressing the rebuttals. Then after a few weeks or months they come back are are pushing the same crap, pretending it hadn't been already debunked.
That's the most frustrating part. They come in here and shit all over the thread, disappears for without addressing anything substantial, then returns a month later to vomit some more of their dear leader's talking points. It's just consistent bad faith arguments and trolling
Imo this is because there like 10 people in this thread stoking each other non stop. And won't listen to any arguments. No matter what is said you guys live in a parallel universe where the facts are the same but you interpret them completely opposite. Some of us a smart enough not to engage cos there's no point. Let bigons be bigots
In my experience the people who come back from time to time to tell everyone that they don't engage because they're not mad, well they're really not mad at all. This is a really not mad attitude to have.
And the arguments are like this
Why is no one talking about corruption of ze and his team?
When it's one of the most widely publicized and discussed topics of the last 6 months. Comes off as tad disingenuous.
On November 19 2025 13:36 ETisME wrote: Reality is Russia hasn't gotten a quick victory like they hoped. At the same time the sanctions and arms support from that many powerful nations are not proving to be as effective as any of us hoped.
The latter is concerning because the effectiveness of sanctions etc are meant to be the ultimate "peaceful" deterrence / diplomatic option for globalization
Nobody expected sanctions to be fast. Also the effectiveness of sanctions depends a lot as well on whether the regime in question is even interested in participating in international trade. South Africa is the example that is generally always used as the ultimate success. Sanctions started in 1963. Major western countries joined in 1984. It then still took 6 years for the government to cave and release Mandela. And a further year for sufficient reforms to pass that sanctions were lifted, having done their job. Sanctions haven't worked in North Korea or Iran for various reasons, but mostly because the regime places the well-being of the population as a secondary concern behind staying in power, and squashes any opposition through violence. The South African regime, in contrast, gave a shit about the quality of life of white people in the country, and that was going to shit. I suspect Russia's power dynamics are closer to those of North Korea than those of South Africa in Apartheid. So sanctions, if they work at all, will take even longer to have their impact.
Sanctions in Russia are also aimed at disrupting Putin's supply of military equipment. This seems to be working and the equipment they're using is increasingly inferior, but they are also adapting. It isn't exactly a secret that Russia is happy to just throw soldiers at a problem. As long as they have the human resources to do that, they don't need smart missiles, armoured vehicles, etc. Between that and the reality of war there seemingly transitioning away from actually needing much high end equipment (like a navy, air force or armoured vehicles) and instead focusing on extreme amounts of cheap drones and missiles used in a WW1 style entrenched ground war, sanctions are not going to stop Putin's ability to wage war. They've certainly destroyed his ability to wage a war in the way NATO wages modern war. But that isn't very relevant as long as Putin doesn't care about minimising losses on his own side. And that can be sustained as long as humans can be conscripted. Something Russia has a big surplus of.
Don't get me wrong; between the sanctions and the war, the Russian economy is irrevocably fucked. It'll take decades to recover. That doesn't help Ukraine one bit.
On November 18 2025 19:49 Jankisa wrote: Our guys here are in a bit of a media bubble and are a tad slow generally so they are behind the curve on what they are supposed to push at the moment.
It's these... let's call them state-approved talking points that keep popping up. From NATO expansion to root causes to the thrust towards Kyiv was just a distraction to now Zelensky's legitimacy. We'll see new versions being trotted out every once in a while, and some of them even try to stick around.
And whenever the nonsense they're peddling is debunked they always avoid addressing the rebuttals. Then after a few weeks or months they come back are are pushing the same crap, pretending it hadn't been already debunked.
Rebuttals lol, throwing increasingly more unhinged shit at the wall along with ad-hominems is not a rebuttal. Take a look at the Norwegian poster interacting with my posts on the last page, one whacky theory after the other often contradicting the previous post he (or she) made and apparently every single post needs to be answered or 'you lost'.
I mean, thats just a sad way to go through life, no? This isn't an endurance contest, I said what I came to say, you say whatever you have the time to say. If the conversation is going around in circles its ok to exit the circle, at least in my opinion. Think about your mental health.
On November 18 2025 19:49 Jankisa wrote: Our guys here are in a bit of a media bubble and are a tad slow generally so they are behind the curve on what they are supposed to push at the moment.
It's these... let's call them state-approved talking points that keep popping up. From NATO expansion to root causes to the thrust towards Kyiv was just a distraction to now Zelensky's legitimacy. We'll see new versions being trotted out every once in a while, and some of them even try to stick around.
And whenever the nonsense they're peddling is debunked they always avoid addressing the rebuttals. Then after a few weeks or months they come back are are pushing the same crap, pretending it hadn't been already debunked.
That's the most frustrating part. They come in here and shit all over the thread, disappears for without addressing anything substantial, then returns a month later to vomit some more of their dear leader's talking points. It's just consistent bad faith arguments and trolling
Imo this is because there like 10 people in this thread stoking each other non stop. And won't listen to any arguments. No matter what is said you guys live in a parallel universe where the facts are the same but you interpret them completely opposite. Some of us a smart enough not to engage cos there's no point. Let bigons be bigots
You are the one living in some parallel universe.
We do listen to arguments. You just ignore the counterarguments. Feel free to address my rebuttal to the NATO threat nonsense.
On November 18 2025 19:49 Jankisa wrote: Our guys here are in a bit of a media bubble and are a tad slow generally so they are behind the curve on what they are supposed to push at the moment.
It's these... let's call them state-approved talking points that keep popping up. From NATO expansion to root causes to the thrust towards Kyiv was just a distraction to now Zelensky's legitimacy. We'll see new versions being trotted out every once in a while, and some of them even try to stick around.
And whenever the nonsense they're peddling is debunked they always avoid addressing the rebuttals. Then after a few weeks or months they come back are are pushing the same crap, pretending it hadn't been already debunked.
Rebuttals lol, throwing increasingly more unhinged shit at the wall along with ad-hominems is not a rebuttal. Take a look at the Norwegian poster interacting with my posts on the last page, one whacky theory after the other often contradicting the previous post he (or she) made and apparently every single post needs to be answered or 'you lost'.
I mean, thats just a sad way to go through life, no? This isn't an endurance contest, I said what I came to say, you say whatever you have the time to say. If the conversation is going around in circles its ok to exit the circle, at least in my opinion. Think about your mental health.
On November 18 2025 19:49 Jankisa wrote: Our guys here are in a bit of a media bubble and are a tad slow generally so they are behind the curve on what they are supposed to push at the moment.
It's these... let's call them state-approved talking points that keep popping up. From NATO expansion to root causes to the thrust towards Kyiv was just a distraction to now Zelensky's legitimacy. We'll see new versions being trotted out every once in a while, and some of them even try to stick around.
And whenever the nonsense they're peddling is debunked they always avoid addressing the rebuttals. Then after a few weeks or months they come back are are pushing the same crap, pretending it hadn't been already debunked.
That's the most frustrating part. They come in here and shit all over the thread, disappears for without addressing anything substantial, then returns a month later to vomit some more of their dear leader's talking points. It's just consistent bad faith arguments and trolling
Imo this is because there like 10 people in this thread stoking each other non stop. And won't listen to any arguments. No matter what is said you guys live in a parallel universe where the facts are the same but you interpret them completely opposite. Some of us a smart enough not to engage cos there's no point. Let bigons be bigots
You are the one living in some parallel universe.
We do listen to argument. You just ignore the counterarguments. Feel free to address my rebuttal to the NATO threat nonsense.
As an avid ukraine supporter, I 100% have checked out of engaging much in discussions in this thread because I often felt like the people on my side are as worth engaging with as zeo is. Its a "us vs them" by now, so no shot at any fruitful discussion and I realised that I started to show a little of the same tendencies so I dipped out.
Now I just check up every now and then when there is a new development to see if maybe someone posted some interesting source, but any kind of discussion quickly has me cringe at everyone involved and I move on.
On November 19 2025 18:08 maybenexttime wrote: Are you telling me that this is not a rebuttal?
You called the guy a fascist in your first sentence. Why would you expect anyone to take what you write after that seriously, though you did put effort into articulating why you think like you do with something you think backs up your claims. Which is at a far higher standard than the 'no u, reeeeee' crowd.
Why would you expect someone to interact with you and address your claims if your first words are an insult? These are unhealthy interactions
On November 19 2025 18:08 maybenexttime wrote: Are you telling me that this is not a rebuttal?
You called the guy a fascist in your first sentence. Why would you expect anyone to take what you write after that seriously, though you did put effort into articulating why you think like you do with something you think backs up your claims. Which is at a far higher standard than the 'no u, reeeeee' crowd.
Why would you expect someone to interact with you and address your claims if your first words are an insult? These are unhealthy interactions
I called a fascist a fascist. It's a statement of fact, not an insult. He openly supports a fascist dictatorship waging an explicitly genocidal war. What else should I call him?
On November 18 2025 19:49 Jankisa wrote: Our guys here are in a bit of a media bubble and are a tad slow generally so they are behind the curve on what they are supposed to push at the moment.
It's these... let's call them state-approved talking points that keep popping up. From NATO expansion to root causes to the thrust towards Kyiv was just a distraction to now Zelensky's legitimacy. We'll see new versions being trotted out every once in a while, and some of them even try to stick around.
And whenever the nonsense they're peddling is debunked they always avoid addressing the rebuttals. Then after a few weeks or months they come back are are pushing the same crap, pretending it hadn't been already debunked.
That's the most frustrating part. They come in here and shit all over the thread, disappears for without addressing anything substantial, then returns a month later to vomit some more of their dear leader's talking points. It's just consistent bad faith arguments and trolling
Imo this is because there like 10 people in this thread stoking each other non stop. And won't listen to any arguments. No matter what is said you guys live in a parallel universe where the facts are the same but you interpret them completely opposite. Some of us a smart enough not to engage cos there's no point. Let bigons be bigots
You are the one living in some parallel universe.
We do listen to argument. You just ignore the counterarguments. Feel free to address my rebuttal to the NATO threat nonsense.
As an avid ukraine supporter, I 100% have checked out of engaging much in discussions in this thread because I often felt like the people on my side are as worth engaging with as zeo is. Its a "us vs them" by now, so no shot at any fruitful discussion and I realised that I started to show a little of the same tendencies so I dipped out.
Now I just check up every now and then when there is a new development to see if maybe someone posted some interesting source, but any kind of discussion quickly has me cringe at everyone involved and I move on.
Not having circlejerks is genuinely the goal we're trying to have, and perhaps I share fault for the cringe you refer to, but any discussions with relevancy tend to get buried by the back and forth with the Russian sympathizers, turning the thread into a downright shitfest. This is why I've suggested throwing the trolls out of here, but so far to no avail.
Not that there are exactly leaps and bounds of progress happening in Ukraine to begin with, but anything worth discussing, such as the current problem surrounding the dramatic equipment shortage, as well as leadership casualties, allowing Russia to make much greater advances than before in the south, just gets drowned out in all the "Herp derp Z is corrupt! Nazis in Ukraine!" vomit
If it's any consolation, this is somehow the least fucked up Ukraine discussion forum I know of. It's so much worse over on Reddit. And the less we talk about discussions on Twitter or Facebook the better
If you want to challenge yourself watch people like Mersheimer explain what is really going on. He is an American patriot, he wants America and Europe to win but he is a realist and actually looks at the situation with open mind. He has been right and predicted everything that has been happening now since 2014 so he has an excellent fact record of getting things right
On November 19 2025 20:42 spets1 wrote: If you want to challenge yourself watch people like Mersheimer explain what is really going on. He is an American patriot, he wants America and Europe to win but he is a realist and actually looks at the situation with open mind. He has been right and predicted everything that has been happening now since 2014 so he has an excellent fact record of getting things right
What is really going on is that Russia is still sending men to die almost four years after an expected one week timeframe.
On November 19 2025 20:42 spets1 wrote: If you want to challenge yourself watch people like Mersheimer explain what is really going on. He is an American patriot, he wants America and Europe to win but he is a realist and actually looks at the situation with open mind. He has been right and predicted everything that has been happening now since 2014 so he has an excellent fact record of getting things right
Meshimer has been consistently wrong about Russia aims and goals, he completely ignores what Putin says (de-nazification, regime change) and is still pushing his tired, old "NATO made us do it" despite Putin moving troops from Kaliningrad and NATO borders to go all in on Ukraine.
The guy is an absolute joke who said this:
In June 2022, Mearsheimer delivered a speech on "The Causes and Consequences of the Ukraine War". He said there is no evidence that Putin wants to conquer Ukraine, and no evidence that Russia wants to install a puppet government. Mearsheimer argued that if Putin did want to conquer Ukraine, he would have used a larger army. Mearsheimer believes Putin has been telling the truth about his motives, saying Putin "does not have a history of lying to other leaders" or to foreign audiences
You being obsessed with thinking this guy is some sort of a genius who predicted everything when he's been consistently wrong on how the war will go (saying that any offense from Ukraine is impossible before they took back Kharkiv and Kherson and pushed the Russians back from Kyiv) is pretty misguided there, I'd say.
On November 19 2025 20:42 spets1 wrote: If you want to challenge yourself watch people like Mersheimer explain what is really going on. He is an American patriot, he wants America and Europe to win but he is a realist and actually looks at the situation with open mind. He has been right and predicted everything that has been happening now since 2014 so he has an excellent fact record of getting things right
This must be sarcasm, right?
Famously, Mearsheimer "predicted" that Putin won't attack Ukraine two weeks before the full scale invasion began. The timing was something out of a comedy sketch.
To make it even funnier, he went further and said: "If he (Putin) invaded Ukraine, he'd own it."
On November 19 2025 18:08 maybenexttime wrote: Are you telling me that this is not a rebuttal?
You called the guy a fascist in your first sentence. Why would you expect anyone to take what you write after that seriously, though you did put effort into articulating why you think like you do with something you think backs up your claims. Which is at a far higher standard than the 'no u, reeeeee' crowd.
Why would you expect someone to interact with you and address your claims if your first words are an insult? These are unhealthy interactions
Why would calling Putin a fascist be an insult? It is the term that most accurately describes his form of government. Would calling a Lenin supporter a communist supporter being an insult?
Or what about about fascism do you think doesn’t fit and what would be a better term?
On November 19 2025 18:08 maybenexttime wrote: Are you telling me that this is not a rebuttal?
You called the guy a fascist in your first sentence. Why would you expect anyone to take what you write after that seriously, though you did put effort into articulating why you think like you do with something you think backs up your claims. Which is at a far higher standard than the 'no u, reeeeee' crowd.
Why would you expect someone to interact with you and address your claims if your first words are an insult? These are unhealthy interactions
Why would calling Putin a fascist be an insult? It is the term that most accurately describes his form of government. Would calling a Lenin supporter a communist supporter being an insult?
Or what about about fascism do you think doesn’t fit and what would be a better term?
Fascism is a negatively charged term, which is why dear leader can't be fascist even thought he says what fascists say, does what fascists does, and runs his country like a fascist state.
You also see this with Nazis, where the most clear cut Nazis are the ones who are the most vehemently against being called as such, because that would make them look bad, hmmkay? These are all weak people who simply aren't capable of owning their own beliefs
On November 19 2025 18:08 maybenexttime wrote: Are you telling me that this is not a rebuttal?
You called the guy a fascist in your first sentence. Why would you expect anyone to take what you write after that seriously, though you did put effort into articulating why you think like you do with something you think backs up your claims. Which is at a far higher standard than the 'no u, reeeeee' crowd.
Why would you expect someone to interact with you and address your claims if your first words are an insult? These are unhealthy interactions
Why would calling Putin a fascist be an insult? It is the term that most accurately describes his form of government. Would calling a Lenin supporter a communist supporter being an insult?
Or what about about fascism do you think doesn’t fit and what would be a better term?
Fascism is a negatively charged term, which is why dear leader can't be fascist even thought he says what fascists say, does what fascists does, and runs his country like a fascist state.
You also see this with Nazis, where the most clear cut Nazis are the ones who are the most vehemently against being called as such, because that would make them look bad, hmmkay? These are all weak people who simply aren't capable of owning their own beliefs
But I understand why he wouldn’t want Putin called a Nazi, to a lot of people it has just come to mean worst of the worst. Fascism however is just a form of government. I have many reasons why I don’t like it, and I’m sure your the same. But I can’t understand why a Putin supporter wouldn’t. They should be explaining why it’s the best form of government and the only thing stopping it from being perfect is the liberals or communists.
On November 19 2025 18:08 maybenexttime wrote: Are you telling me that this is not a rebuttal?
You called the guy a fascist in your first sentence. Why would you expect anyone to take what you write after that seriously, though you did put effort into articulating why you think like you do with something you think backs up your claims. Which is at a far higher standard than the 'no u, reeeeee' crowd.
Why would you expect someone to interact with you and address your claims if your first words are an insult? These are unhealthy interactions
Why would calling Putin a fascist be an insult? It is the term that most accurately describes his form of government. Would calling a Lenin supporter a communist supporter being an insult?
Or what about about fascism do you think doesn’t fit and what would be a better term?
Myself, I hope every single person with a Nazi or WWII Nazi collaborator tattoo holding a weapon in Ukraine dies. Whatever nation or people they come from.
EPT
