Posted on 03/31/2024 9:23:09 AM PDT by USA-FRANCE
Ha! Liquid assets? The US has no ‘liquid assets’ that its government owns. Only debt.
Idiotic argument. 90% of the BORROWED, high interest money the US pizzes away on supplying UKR stays in the US.....and then there’s the borrowed money to pay teachers, workers, retirement systems in the UKR...
Yes, absolutely. I am amazed at the old conservative (boomers?) that can’t see beyond the forever war propaganda. And god help anyone who dare criticizes Israel or our involvement in funding their adventures. Oh golly, unleash the Zionist war dogs.
“90% of the BORROWED, high interest money the US pizzes away on supplying UKR”
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well all the weaponry US produced for the MASSIVE WWII was also based on borrowed money, nevertheless the result is that it got America immensely rich. That’s how the USA became a superpower.
Investing on military/civilian industry with borrowed money is smart. Because the whole world is in need of weapons and technology now, like never before since WW2. Those investments produce goods America gains a lot of when they are sold.
It would be easy for Ukraine to pay back. Ukraine being one of the richest country in Europe when it comes to natural resources. It has everything America needs, even large reserves of Uranium! Why do you think Russia wants Ukraine so badly huh? It’s the Economy!
It’s time we wake up from our communist attitudes.
Let’s make our Industry Great Again!
Well he’s a frenchie, so...
Ukraine will never pay back a single cent of the money they grifted.
Half of Russias Wealth fund... up in smoke...
Just for comparison's sake, how is the U.S. Wealth Fund doing?
“Happy Trans-Conservative Day of Visibility to all our Zeepers!”
And a Happy Dead Ruzzian Looter Day to you too! Tomorrow will be Dead Ruzzian Rapist Day!
Actually, every day is a good day to kill Ruzzian looters and rapists!
Slave Ukraini!
From around A.D. 800 to the 11th century, a vast number of Scandinavians left their homelands to seek their fortunes elsewhere. These seafaring warriors–known collectively as Vikings or Norsemen (“Northmen”)–began by raiding coastal sites, especially undefended monasteries, in the British Isles. Over the next three centuries, they would leave their mark as pirates, raiders, traders and settlers on much of Britain and the European continent, as well as parts of modern-day Russia, Iceland, Greenland and Newfoundland.
To do that they had to settle there so they were and became tribes of people living in Russia that were preying on others around them.
By the tenth century, the northern part of the East European Plain and its Baltic and White Sea coasts were settled by tribes of East Slavic, Baltic, and Finnic peoples. The first historical exploration of the region was conducted by Norse Varangians, who established the principalities of Rus. After the dissolution of that polity, the Grand Duchy of Moscow would eventually collect most of the lands of European Russia starting from the 13th century.
wy69
I don’t oppose killing any rapers or looters in any country.
WWII was war bonds. And if you think comparing UKR with WWII makes your point you’re certifiably insane
“WWII was war bonds. And if you think comparing UKR with WWII makes your point you’re certifiably insane”
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You don’t seem to understand what is going on here - at all.
I said that Russia is right now benefiting economically from its wartime economy budget. If it works for Russia, why wouldn’t similar Western investments on our own military structures be great for OUR economies as well? That was in essence what I explained.
This is not about a “little Ukraine war” compared to WW2, as you seem to imply.
Do I have to remind you that Russia has mobilized 40% of its ENTIRE national budget to wage war! Historically speaking, this is gigantic and totally out-of-scale in this day and age.
It means one thing : Russian is preparing itself for a much, much wider war.
Russia is preparing itself to expand it’s war even further against many other Western countries, and against the West’s interests all over the world.
We are already in a low intensity WW3. If you don’t understand this fact then you must start to inform yourself, urgently.
Thus, when we invest in the so called Ukraine war, it’s actually an investment to cope with something already much wider, we’re already in a low-pace ww3 involving dozens of countries - its all in full swing! We don’t have the luxury to sleep-walk though this. We must react now. Even the Israel war going right now is a direct result of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Putin asked his Iranian allies to foment a Hamas-Israel war in order to disperse and put extra pressure on the West’s weapons deliveries to Ukraine. It worked. It has indeed lighten up the pressure on the Russia / Ukraine front in Russia’s favor. At the same time Russia gets massive help form Communist North Korea which provided Russia with 3 millions shells... All communist nations are already helping each other with military expenditures to finance and/or militarized even further the anti-Western front. While our Congressmen are on.. vacation... sleepy congressmen....
Russia has a history of escalating wars, against others and especially against its own citizens. That’s what the Kremlin deep-state does.
The Russian State Budget at War
SCEEUS Commentary No. 4, 2024
Total security related spending will reach about 40–45 % of all state expenditures in 2024. In addition, Russia faces an increasing cost for debt servicing, from 4 % of all expenditures in 2019 to 8 % in 2024. This debt factor is a key vulnerability and potential target for sanctions.
https://sceeus.se/en/publications/the-russian-state-budget-at-war/
The Russians went out of their way to prevent this war -- with the Minsk Accords, by coming to us with their secure concerns in 12/21 and by negotiating a peace deal in Turkey two years ago (that was killed by Boris Johnson).
Meanwhile, your glorious leader is doing everything he can to keep the war going, including pondering sending French troops into Ukraine.
I’m just starting Kier Giles’ book “Russia’s War On Everybody” which will no doubt add more detail.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Interesting, I never heard about that book yet.
I would like to read it as well...
“Any half decent history of Russia will tell you that Moscow didn’t exist even as a local power until the Mongol hegemony in the 13th and 14th centuries.”
So you think nobody lived in the region until the 13th century and were not going around taking over villages that had food and other worth? And if they were, they were just great people that didn’t harm anyone for their personal needs?
You’re right about the city of Moscow. But Moscow had nothing to do with the villages and the warring going on between them at that time. And the article this thread is based on didn’t say that Moscow was attacking, they displayed Russia was. And there’s a whole lot more to that region than just Moscow and was in the 9th century.
I don’t claim anything. But even common sense should point out that there were villages and early people that at some point went into the region and some settled there. And countries are not created from a whole lot of people suddenly appearing in the region without there being much smaller numbers prior to that. That’s how countires are formed.And they had to survive so attacking their neighbors was no different than in the US. And the explorers and pioneers were the way our towns, states, and ultimately our country’s borders were established. And if the country retained the principles of taking other cities and countries was the answer to their advancement, then they will act this way. Two other countries that did the sme thing were Japan and Germany in the mid 1900’s.
wy69
“Any half decent history of Russia will tell you that Moscow didn’t exist even as a local power until the Mongol hegemony in the 13th and 14th centuries.”
So you think nobody lived in the region until the 13th century and were not going around taking over villages that had food and other worth? And if they were, they were just great people that didn’t harm anyone for their personal needs?
You’re right about the city of Moscow. But Moscow had nothing to do with the villages and the warring going on between them at that time. And the article this thread is based on didn’t say that Moscow was attacking, they displayed Russia was. And there’s a whole lot more to that region than just Moscow and was in the 9th century.
I don’t claim anything. But even common sense should point out that there were villages and early people that at some point went into the region and some settled there. And countries are not created from a whole lot of people suddenly appearing in the region without there being much smaller numbers prior to that. That’s how countires are formed.And they had to survive so attacking their neighbors was no different than in the US. And the explorers and pioneers were the way our towns, states, and ultimately our country’s borders were established. And if the country retained the principles of taking other cities and countries was the answer to their advancement, then they will act this way. Two other countries that did the sme thing were Japan and Germany in the mid 1900’s.
wy69
For one thing, none of the tribes occupying the forest zone in the 9th century called themselves Russian. (Vernadsky thought the word Rus' derived from an Alan word, but most scholars think it was Scandinavian for "rowers" or "boatmen". Even Moscow didn't use the word until Catherine the Great expropriated it from Kiev to try to bring some respectability to her empire.)
Intertribal and intercity squabbling prior to the arrival of the Mongols, (which I'm guessing you're trying to elevate to the level of invasions), doesn't stand being compared to the large army employed by Ivan to conquer and plunder Kazan in 1552. Even Kievan Rus' military in 1200 was little more than a mob of maybe 5000 men. Compare to Ivan's 60,000 men with cannon and siege engines.
“For one thing, none of the tribes occupying the forest zone in the 9th century called themselves Russian.”
None of the colonies in the US called themselves American either. American didn’t exist at the time. But they did exist as villagers in places all up and down the east coast and the colonists conducted search and destroy raids on Native American settlements. They burned villages and corn crops (ironic, in that the English were often starving). Both sides committed atrocities against the other.
The size of the army doesn’t always restrict the type of warfare being fought. Factually it was the run and gun and shooting from behind rocks and trees that was major in the colonist defeating the Brittish army during our revolution. That was something the colonists learned from the American indians and put it into practice.
“(which I’m guessing you’re trying to elevate to the level of invasions)”
We aren’t talking about invasions. We’re talking about the beginnings where what turned into Russia learned to fight their wars. If you’ll remember David sleu Goliath with a pebble. But he learned how to use the sling from his ancestors.
If I remember right, you posted a question to me in one of your first posts in my direction asking me about conqueering and plundering. And that is exactly what the early settlers in the region did. And it was long before Russia existed. But you can be sure they learned all the successful tactics from that time also. And that included their famous retreating actions that took out Napoleon.
wy69
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.