Posted on 09/13/2023 7:53:54 PM PDT by UMCRevMom@aol.com
Update from Ukraine | Ruzzia lost Big Ship and Submarine | Sevastopol Black Sea Fleet is doomed
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7ESH2MVCYU
The summary of the situation of Russian re-invasion to Ukraine covering the recent developments on the battlefield, as of 13th September 2023 – 22:00 (Kyiv time). [NOTE: two summaries per week, released on Wednesday and Sunday]
https://militaryland.net/news/invasion-day-567-summary/
*** Great interactive maps with viewer controlled Map magnification tool to use for each Front!
https://militaryland.net/maps/
“Hey kids, see what happens when you do drugs. Don’t do drugs.”
I agree. You and the Mom should get into a therapy program right away.
The problem I have with this is not only the escalation by the crime syndicate, but that Russia will now fast track all its missile tech to the Norks..which will result in them having obtained the hyper sonic missiles..aimed directly at guess who.
“cra[?”
How silly.
“If you were grateful to be a US citizen and you really are a reverend, which I doubt you are, you would NOT, nor NEVER support ANY WAR. Especially one that is forced upon a citizenry by criminals and scum.
You are not a US citizen. You are a deceiver and a citizen of the global cabal.”
You really shouldn’t buy into “once-upon-a-time’ foolish fantasy world.
Bwahahahaha!!! Nice!
“My non-support of Ukraine and the dancing homosexual puppet doesn’t equal support for Russia.
I don’t know how many times I have to repeat this for you”
Question: Just curious. Did someone state ‘why?’ you don’t support Ukraine? Or, did someone state your non-support of Ukraine may give you de- facto support for Russia?
Either way, try to illuminate crz, ‘once-upon-a-time’ & Rocko their proclamations do not equate to truth.
https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/4182263/posts?page=109#109
Dont try to avoid the question. Since those of us who are against this war will be deemed Russian propagandists. What is your response to this threat?
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4182372/posts
Like I said. Go tell your friend Denys Davystuff to send em.
👍🏻
Instead, here you are spending an inordinate amount of time on a small internet political forum, endlessly bloviating, obfuscating, spewing insults, putting together long-winded, tiresome screeds that bore nearly everyone here to death and looking down your pompous nose at those who question your rabid love affair with Youcrayne; the most corrupt nation in Europe.
Surely a sign of sheer 'effin brilliance!
Bunny boiler alert!
“the most corrupt nation in Europe.”
Europe? Just Europe?
We got one of theirs issuing threats against anyone and everyone who are against this cabal caused war and they wont issue their disgust at it.
Says a lot about them.
LOL - you nailed it. This pretentious clown is hilarious. 😂
You’ve hooked into an arrogant Spaniard there. He thinks lowly of Americans but highly of war, especially when we pay and send our young men. He’s not an American citizen regardless of his claim of paying taxes. Even foreigners pay taxes when they buy a bag of chips at the airport.
Russia is ranked as more corrupt than Ukraine.
https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/corruption-index?continent=europe
One would hope that she is at least giving some of the money she earns for pushing this one-sided propaganda to FR for using up bandwidth. Maybe she is, and maybe that's why she's allowed to continue unabated. We know she was writing mods to get people's posts removed that she didn't like, and they sadly accommodated her. Perhaps that's why.
Two interesting confirm your ratioale:
1st- pg #9
“One of the major aims of multilateral treaty negotiation is to ensure that all state party to the negotiations reach a common understanding of the purpose and goals of the treaty. IN THIS WAY, MULTILATERAL TREATY NEGOTIATION IS AS MUCH ABOUT INTERNATIONAL NORM CONSTRUCTION AS IT IS ABOUT THE MUTUAL ASSUMPTION OF LEGAL OBLIGATIONS. Under this view, one of the very purposes of the treaty is to establish consensus about the ideals contained in the treaty. Indeed, the reason that some countries sign multilateral treaties is to gain assurance that other countries are committed to the same goals.”
2nd- pg # 11
“The “advice and consent” language of the Constitution suggests that the Senate should have some role in negotiating treaties. However, the notion that the Senate could ASSIST in treaty negotiation was briefly tested and quickly rejected by President Washington. After the initial failed involvement of the Senate in treaty negotiation, the practice of sole negotiation of treaties by the executive developed. Treaty negotiation became associated with the President’s power to conduct foreign relations. While the President is now the exclusive negotiator of treaties, in practice the executive branch often consults with Congress about ongoing multilateral treaty negotiations and the potential ramifications of contemplated treaties. At times, disputes have arisen between Congress and the President regarding the effect of conflicting presidential and senatorial interpretations of a treaty during its negotiation stages. However, the President’s monopoly on treaty negotiation has never been seriously questioned.”
https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1227&context=law_lawreview
Thanks for reminding me.
Heh.
I am a retired fellow that’s done with an entirely different career. This debate is a little hobby on my phone.
Except for the bloviating. That’s just my character, ask my wife. I’ll just go happily bloviating down the street, waving my umbrella for emphasis. I’m a dangerous man, I tell you.
If you lot end up in tears though, that’s all to the good.
Both interesting quotes confirm your comment:
1st- pg #9
“One of the major aims of multilateral treaty negotiation is to ensure that all state party to the negotiations reach a common understanding of the purpose and goals of the treaty. IN THIS WAY, MULTILATERAL TREATY NEGOTIATION IS AS MUCH ABOUT INTERNATIONAL NORM CONSTRUCTION AS IT IS ABOUT THE MUTUAL ASSUMPTION OF LEGAL OBLIGATIONS. Under this view, one of the very purposes of the treaty is to establish consensus about the ideals contained in the treaty. Indeed, the reason that some countries sign multilateral treaties is to gain assurance that other countries are committed to the same goals.”
2nd- pg # 11
“The “advice and consent” language of the Constitution suggests that the Senate should have some role in negotiating treaties. However, the notion that the Senate could ASSIST in treaty negotiation was briefly tested and quickly rejected by President Washington. After the initial failed involvement of the Senate in treaty negotiation, the practice of sole negotiation of treaties by the executive developed. Treaty negotiation became associated with the President’s power to conduct foreign relations. While the President is now the exclusive negotiator of treaties, in practice the executive branch often consults with Congress about ongoing multilateral treaty negotiations and the potential ramifications of contemplated treaties. At times, disputes have arisen between Congress and the President regarding the effect of conflicting presidential and senatorial interpretations of a treaty during its negotiation stages. However, the President’s monopoly on treaty negotiation has never been seriously questioned.”
https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1227&context=law_lawreview
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.