Replies

Chad C. Mulligan,

BroJoeK doesn't say much besides call people names (Vlad the Invader), use slang, play on cliche (non-applicable Cold War imagery) and use pejoratives (Propaganda).

His posts are vapid.

But, they give me a target against which I can organize my own thoughts.

Actually, this is an extremely well written piece, researched, detailed, and backed with sources: https://qr.ae/ps3bYZ

The old article (pre-Maiden) shows that this has been going on for a long time. I should have spelled that point out for you since all you're looking for is some way to quickly repel any derogatory information for some cause you think you're supposed to be supporting.

—An American puppet regime is still just a puppet, but that's fine by you.

—A Russian puppet is of course bad according to you. Funny thing is, Mr. Y was walking a middle ground and wasn't even really entirely pro-Russian, which one of the articles spells out (why I provided that one) with examples of policies which went against Russian interests.

How about this scenario: The US and Russia both begin to pull their intel and massive influence activities out of Ukraine, and Ukraine actually is a SOVEREIGN state with real elections, where you have actual real candidates to choose from (not folks we prop up and stick before the people).

Guess what that would have been called? Minsk: https://www.unian.info/politics/1043394-minsk-agreement-full-text-in-english.html

Guess who violated the crap out of that agreement and then pridefully proclaimed how we don't give a shit because we didn't sign to it, even though the Germans, Russians, French and Ukraine did?

People like you are easy to understand. We're always right. Anything we do is for the right reason. If others do something horrible, it's bad, but if we the same things, it's all different and somehow OK (our terrorism is good terrorism, our torture is good torture, our kidnappings are good kidnappings, our cluster bombs on civilians are good cluster bombs...). If you disagree you're on the enemy's team. The world according to folks like you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMyJWuvW_9k

Let me ask you this, when will the US leave Iraq? We've been there for 21 years. We invaded them. We used false pretenses for this invasion. We have been asked no less than 20 times to leave, the last time this last January: https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/iraq-seeks-quick-exit-us-forces-no-deadline-set-pm-says-2024-01-10/ So, what do the words “invader” and “occupier” mean to you?

Ukraine was what I refer to as an intel-war, where you had the US and Russia struggling over control. Russian influence is of course bad, but our manipulating and influence is good.

We won this intel war, that is what Maiden was about. After that we began to purge Ukraine of all Russian influence in government, the media, etc. Russia simply cannot stand up against us in that respect because the US MSM, our social media, Google, State Department (we spent >$5 billion pre-Maiden to influence Ukraine's political landscape), our NGO’s (which many are government funded and some are IC fronts), foreign aid, military assistance, Intel activities by the CIA, NSA, even business investors (the DoD and State Department has a say) which get used in this game as well are an overpowering force. Believe it or not, if Ukraine had been a retarded state where the Internet and use of social media is still not as common our influence would be more limited. But in an advanced society like Ukraine, where everyone has a smartphone and is online, but without any outside shielding against us (the censorship is only aimed at Russia, not us), we just take over.

Here is another stupid part about this war. While we can win the intel war (our IC is 3 times Russian's size in personnel with >8 times the budget: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Intelligence_Community), we hand out more foreign aid than Russia, our State Department is bigger than Russia's, we hand out more military assistance than Russia, our MSM is more influential than Russia's, our big tech is more influential that Russia's, we have more and bigger investors than Russia... It will be Russia that wins in an actual hot (conventional) war like we find ourselves in. Do you get what I'm saying here? We already had won! Ukraine was ours! Now, our trophy is getting smashed up and we will (((LOSE))) in a conventional war where Russia has the advantage. For example, Google commands over 84% of the GLOBAL searches: https://www.impressiondigital.com/blog/bing-differ-google/ and that's ours. In this intel-war we had the advantage and we already de facto took over Ukraine.

There is a reason why 2014 and Maiden is the date where this started: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svy-EBvoJLQ That is when we took over.

What do you think: Mr. Z had support by US social media and Google. US big tech is in bed with the US IC. Heck, some of them are basically IC creations! https://qz.com/1145669/googles-true-origin-partly-lies-in-cia-and-nsa-research-grants-for-mass-surveillance Mr. Z had support of the US media, was backed by the US State Department as well as US NGO’s. Even much of his money was being funneled through a Ukrainian oligarch sympathetic to the US but came from us. An independent man? Not a puppet? That's how a comedian, not really wealthy (not able to fund national campaigns), a young man with zero political experience and connections, a Jew in a nation with antisemitic undertones, rises to power like he did. But do you think someone like that might be very easy to control?

https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraine-new-president-volodymyr-zelensky-just-won-the-first-ever-successful-virtual-campaign/ He won because of our social media, Google, State Department and MSM. We literally were the bullhorn used to get him heard across the nation. Do you think he could have done that had he not been our boy?

So tell me, what does “democracy” mean to you? When a foreign intel service influences elections? What does “sovereignty” mean to you? When a foreign government takes over your country?

Is this “sovereignty?” https://oversight.house.gov/timeline/ukraine-11/biden-firing-ukraine-prosecutor-clip/ This was after we had already taken over.

I don’t know the best way to describe this concept.

Sometimes, you’re in a good position. You’ve done well and things are going your way 90+%.

If you continue to push things even further, ask for more, you end up losing.

You actually go backward on the cost-benefit scale, tipping it the other way.

—Ukraine was doing extremely well before the war, economically.

—Ukraine was already ours.

—They had EU membership in reach (that will be delayed by years, if ever).

—They were military strong, i.e. we had been arming, training, and feeding them intel for years.

When you think in terms of feelings and ideologies, when you let yourself be guided by past events that are no longer applicable today, you become divorced from principals like Return On Investment and Risk. Again, not the best example, but someone once said “choose your battles” (Don’t know where that quote came from).

This was stupid: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukrainian-president-zelenskiy-holding-talks-with-biden-adviser-says-2021-12-09/

It caused a war.