War in Ukraine

[LouderVol]

Explain to me when you think the Ukrainians are going to win because of this? This is the same thing that was posted almost 3 years ago. Now don't get me wrong, the financial stress or stability can impact the ability to wage war but its been in a range for quite some time.

It's not a good thing or a bad thing at this point.

The Turkish Lira has fallen off the map and they still wage war in Syria.

US Dollar to Turkish Lira Exchange Rate Chart | Xe

If the U.S. doesn't manufacturer more dollars Trump is going to have a hell of a problem at some point, and that graph will look like that for almost all world currencies.

What are you saying, Ukraine is winning? The Ukraine is going to win soon? Posting graphs without context as to what you are trying to say, isn't very helpful for discussion, imo.

your argument doesn't make sense. according to your link the Lira is trading 34x, vs the ruble being 112x. that shows more stability in Turkey than in Russia. which would mean they are in a better spot to make war in Syria than Russia is in Ukraine. at least from a monetary value standpoint.

you seriously post the most random crap and act like it proves something beyond your ability to use hyperlinks.

 

[LSU-SIU]

I've seen a few emotional breakdowns where folks get lathered up and shown to the door.

Good times.

Ras, if you're out there - come back and take your lumps, nerd.

What lumps would he have to take? Generally, if I remember correctly, he thought Russia would be victorious. Time table? (Now I didn't necessarily agree with him on everything)

 

[LSU-SIU]

your argument doesn't make sense. according to your link the Lira is trading 34x, vs the ruble being 112x. that shows more stability in Turkey than in Russia. which would mean they are in a better spot to make war in Syria than Russia is in Ukraine. at least from a monetary value standpoint.

you seriously post the most random crap and act like it proves something beyond your ability to use hyperlinks.

There is no argument.

That's rich for someone implying Russia is going to lose because of their birth rate.

Please send me my money.

 

[PEPPERJAX]

What lumps would he have to take? Generally, if I remember correctly, he thought Russia would be victorious. Time table? (Now I didn't necessarily agree with him on everything)

RAS was critical of cypress hill's debut album in the rap thread with me years ago. That is my only beef.

 

[PEPPERJAX]

Was he a reincarnated Volprof?

Tastylicks or Mick

 

[Septic]

What lumps would he have to take? Generally, if I remember correctly, he thought Russia would be victorious. Time table? (Now I didn't necessarily agree with him on everything)

Three years and Russia has made the equivalent headway of The United States invading Mexico and only making it a couple of hundred miles in.

In no possible definition of the word has this been a success for world "superpower".

For some reason that is obvious to us but somehow not to you, you look completely ridiculous trying to prop up Russia - as did Ras.

 

[Septic]

RAS was critical of cypress hill's debut album in the rap thread with me years ago. That is my only beef.

Anyone who isn't willing to pick it, pack it, fire it up or come along isn't worth having around.

 

[LSU-SIU]

Three years and Russia has made the equivalent headway of The United States invading Mexico and only making it a couple of hundred miles in.

In no possible definition of the word has this been a success for world "superpower".

For some reason that is obvious to us but somehow not to you, you look completely ridiculous trying to prop up Russia - as did Ras.

Of course, if you are right... than you should be able to send me money. They shouldn't need my money, so just send it to me. The irony is you said the same thing three years ago implying the Ukraine was going to win, now the Russians are not gaining as you would wish. The Ukraine is winning?

So, you think Russia will collapse in three years, and the Ukraine will regain all of the land back? And you came up with this based on a currency chart that looks like the same thing or similar to what you posted 3 years ago. You are saying the chart is telling you Russia is about to collapse, is that your data you are using for this prediction?

It would seem logical that if Russia isn't a superpower... I should be getting a check, and the $2T sent to Afghanistan should be sent back to because the Taiban wasn't a superpower, it was less than 100,000 goat herders living in caves.

 

[LouderVol]

What lumps would he have to take? Generally, if I remember correctly, he thought Russia would be victorious. Time table? (Now I didn't necessarily agree with him on everything)

1. Russia was never going to invade
2. Russia was going to be seen as liberators and not invaders
3. Poland was going to invade western Ukraine
4. Russia was going to take Odessa
5. Russia was going to break thru at Bakhmut/whichever point was the current hot fight
6. Ukraine was incapable of launching counteroffensives, he said this famously before the first/biggest one, but used it several other times.
7. the Moskva was lost due to a cigarette
8. The Russians were fighting the cleanest war ever, no major civilian losses, Putin deserved a Noble Peace Prize, and the world militaries were going to rewrite their strategies with how well Russia was fighting.
9. Russia wasn't using T-64s or older
10. Russia wasn't getting equipment from other countries
11. Russia didn't need troops from other countries
12. The west was going to use those missiles that landed in Poland and killed 2 citizens was going to be the false flag to get the west involved.
13. the various pipelines were further false flags that were going to get the west fighting.
14. NATO troops were already on the front lines, there were no more Ukrainians left.
15. Wagner wasn't rebelling
16. then once Wagner was rebelling it was just a false flag and there was no bad blood, right up until Putin missiled Prigozhin out of the skies.
17. Russians were lining up to volunteer
18. Ukraine was incapable of striking back into Russia
19. when Ukraine did start striking Russian targets in Russia it was NATO doing it
20. every single western system was going to be destroyed as soon as it crossed the border.
21. whatever did survive wasn't even going to work.
22. Russia has blown up 6+ of the 4 Patriot systems we sent over
23. The war was going according to Putin's original plan
24. Changing out generals/chief of staffs was a sign of winning, but for Russia only.
25. Zelensky was going to flee the Russian invasion


and that's just keeping it pretty generic, not being pedantic, and limiting it to this thread. far more examples in the first two Ukraine threads.

*and this doesn't include any of the obvious bs justifications for the war*

 

[LouderVol]

There is no argument.

That's rich for someone implying Russia is going to lose because of their birth rate.

Please send me my money.

don't worry Trump is going to get your money. he promised.

 

[LSU-SIU]

1. Russia was never going to invade
2. Russia was going to be seen as liberators and not invaders
3. Poland was going to invade western Ukraine
4. Russia was going to take Odessa
5. Russia was going to break thru at Bakhmut/whichever point was the current hot fight
6. Ukraine was incapable of launching counteroffensives, he said this famously before the first/biggest one, but used it several other times.
7. the Moskva was lost due to a cigarette
8. The Russians were fighting the cleanest war ever, no major civilian losses, Putin deserved a Noble Peace Prize, and the world militaries were going to rewrite their strategies with how well Russia was fighting.
9. Russia wasn't using T-64s or older
10. Russia wasn't getting equipment from other countries
11. Russia didn't need troops from other countries
12. The west was going to use those missiles that landed in Poland and killed 2 citizens was going to be the false flag to get the west involved.
13. the various pipelines were further false flags that were going to get the west fighting.
14. NATO troops were already on the front lines, there were no more Ukrainians left.
15. Wagner wasn't rebelling
16. then once Wagner was rebelling it was just a false flag and there was no bad blood, right up until Putin missiled Prigozhin out of the skies.
17. Russians were lining up to volunteer
18. Ukraine was incapable of striking back into Russia
19. when Ukraine did start striking Russian targets in Russia it was NATO doing it
20. every single western system was going to be destroyed as soon as it crossed the border.
21. whatever did survive wasn't even going to work.
22. Russia has blown up 6+ of the 4 Patriot systems we sent over
23. The war was going according to Putin's original plan
24. Changing out generals/chief of staffs was a sign of winning, but for Russia only.
25. Zelensky was going to flee the Russian invasion


and that's just keeping it pretty generic, not being pedantic, and limiting it to this thread. far more examples in the first two Ukraine threads.

Well, let's take the first two.

1, Even the Ukrainians said Russia wasn't going to invade.
2, The Russians are considered liberators to the initial invasion i.e. Eastern Ukraine. They are not liberators to the more Western side, it's all about destroying it at some point.

So, basically you are saying the Ukraine is winning? What's the time table for all this Ukrainian winning to be finalized? 2025? 2026? 2030? 2040? What is the actual plan the Ukraine has really presented to achieve all this?

For the record, while everyone was predicting all the Russians defeats here in 2022, I posted my thoughts as a generalization i.e. meat grinder which could take 1-2 decades. I than increased the rate once the FABs started to drop to most likely less than a decade about a year ago or less. I gave some ways that the Ukrainians and Neocons could impact those time tables or financial conditions, etc. Most of that would probably lead to nuclear war. NOthing has really change in 2 years, although if Trump makes it to office that could further increase my rate of ending the conflict.

If the Ukraine is winning than give me my money back as this was said 2-3 years ago. If they are losing what is the realistic path to victory and what is the victory being achieved?

Is the Ukraine still winning the war? If yes, how much additional funding do they need? If no, why didn't you tell me before they weren't winning?

 

[LSU-SIU]

don't worry Trump is going to get your money. he promised.

Doubt he will get money back for me, hoping he stops some of the spending at least on this silly stupid ****.

The Ukrainians were stupid enough to listen to the U.S. government, its not my problem they are that stupid.

 

[Septic]

Of course, if you are right... than you should be able to send me money. They shouldn't need my money, so just send it to me. The irony is you said the same thing three years ago implying the Ukraine was going to win, now the Russians are not gaining as you would wish. The Ukraine is winning?

So, you think Russia will collapse in three years, and the Ukraine will regain all of the land back? And you came up with this based on a currency chart that looks like the same thing or similar to what you posted 3 years ago. You are saying the chart is telling you Russia is about to collapse, is that your data you are using for this prediction?

It would seem logical that if Russia isn't a superpower... I should be getting a check, and the $2T sent to Afghanistan should be sent back to because the Taiban wasn't a superpower, it was less than 100,000 goat herders living in caves.

On the one hand I want to ask you what TF you're talking from purely an entertainment aspect. But on the other, your takes are so mind numbingly dumb that I don't really care what you think.

 

[BeardedVol]

Well, let's take the first two.


2, The Russians are considered liberators to the initial invasion i.e. Eastern Ukraine. They are not liberators to the more Western side, it's all about destroying it at some point.

Lol, no.

 

[LSU-SIU]

On the one hand I want to ask you what TF you're talking from purely an entertainment aspect. But on the other, your takes are so mind numbingly dumb that I don't really care what you think.

Of course, you used the same exact data point to make a prediction that you used three years ago to predict the thing that didn't happen. You literally picked one data point to make a future prediction on a collapse of a whole country, I'm sure my comments and questions do seem dumb to you. We're all wrong, but you seem to be double down on the wrong without self-reflecting as to your initial prediction. A broke clock is still right twice a day, btw.

The "i know" part of your prior post is quite something. Sound more akin to "faith" at this point.

Keep raging, it's funny and cute.

 

[NorthDallas40]

Of course, you used the same exact data point to make a prediction that you used three years ago to predict the thing that didn't happen. You literally picked one data point to make a future prediction on a collapse of a whole country, I'm sure my comments and questions do seem dumb to you. We're all wrong, but you seem to be double down on the wrong without self-reflecting as to your initial prediction. A broke clock is still right twice a day, btw.

The "i know" part of your prior post is quite something. Sound more akin to "faith" at this point.

Keep raging, it's funny and cute.

 

[LouderVol]

Well, let's take the first two.

1, Even the Ukrainians said Russia wasn't going to invade.
2, The Russians are considered liberators to the initial invasion i.e. Eastern Ukraine. They are not liberators to the more Western side, it's all about destroying it at some point.

So, basically you are saying the Ukraine is winning? What's the time table for all this Ukrainian winning to be finalized? 2025? 2026? 2030? 2040? What is the actual plan the Ukraine has really presented to achieve all this?

For the record, while everyone was predicting all the Russians defeats here in 2022, I posted my thoughts as a generalization i.e. meat grinder which could take 1-2 decades. I than increased the rate once the FABs started to drop to most likely less than a decade about a year ago or less. I gave some ways that the Ukrainians and Neocons could impact those time tables or financial conditions, etc. Most of that would probably lead to nuclear war. NOthing has really change in 2 years, although if Trump makes it to office that could further increase my rate of ending the conflict.

If the Ukraine is winning than give me my money back as this was said 2-3 years ago. If they are losing what is the realistic path to victory and what is the victory being achieved?

Is the Ukraine still winning the war? If yes, how much additional funding do they need? If no, why didn't you tell me before they weren't winning?

they were not considered the liberators even in the east. they had to evict about half of the population because they couldn't control them. they spent the first several months of occupation going around and arresting people and deporting them to Siberia.

never said Ukraine was winning or going to win. I was on the meat grinder rant long before you were. I said from the start this would be another Winter War, I still believe that. you are just so far up Putin you see everything that doesn't 100% align with you as the enemy.

I have said for years victory won't be foreign troops in either Moscow or Kiev. its going to look very weird, some type of "white peace" where both sides hold their current lines and the fighting stops. I doubt there are any type of diplomatic promises unless there is an exchange of land as well. No promise to stay out of NATO, no making Russia pay damages.

 

[LouderVol]

Doubt he will get money back for me, hoping he stops some of the spending at least on this silly stupid ****.

The Ukrainians were stupid enough to listen to the U.S. government, its not my problem they are that stupid.

unfortunately Putin was even more dumb and listened to his generals when they said they could defeat Ukraine.

 

[Septic]

Of course, you used the same exact data point to make a prediction that you used three years ago to predict the thing that didn't happen. You literally picked one data point to make a future prediction on a collapse of a whole country, I'm sure my comments and questions do seem dumb to you. We're all wrong, but you seem to be double down on the wrong without self-reflecting as to your initial prediction. A broke clock is still right twice a day, btw.

The "i know" part of your prior post is quite something. Sound more akin to "faith" at this point.

Keep raging, it's funny and cute.

Watching you flail about and pointing out that the Ruble is at a 32-month low is "raging?"

No wonder your geopolitical takes are so dumb, you have no handle on reality.

LOL

 

[LSU-SIU]

Watching you flail about and pointing out that the Ruble is at a 32-month low is "raging?"

No wonder your geopolitical takes are so dumb, you have no handle on reality.

LOL

View attachment 701172

You're still raging, its cute. You're posting the same thing you were three years ago, which is okay I guess. You are predicting a nation is going to collapse off the virtual same data point you did three years ago. It could collapse, but the data was the same three years ago? I am sure you do think my comments and questions are dumb, no doubt about that.

So.... Russia is going to collapse in three years and the Ukraine is going to win all this land back? And you "know that" by looking at that chart?

Watching you flail about and pointing out that the Ruble is at a 32-month low is "raging?"

No, I am asking you simple questions as to what you mean, and you don't really provide much. You say stuff like, "I know that".... followed by basically a collapse of Russia. My questions is how do you, "know that". Now you are back to posting the same data point from three years ago. Now, that can be your guess, the problem here... is your guess is the same guess you made three years ago on basically the same data point. That doesn't mean you can't be right. A broken clock is right twice a day as they say.

I haven't even said you were wrong about this new prediction which seems the same as the old prediction.

Is the Ukraine winning now? If not, why hasn't someone told me that on this forum before? If yes, than why do they need more funding from me or how much do they need to finish?

(Next, someone will say that I claimed Russia couldn't financially collapse, hell if they can't... the U.S. basically did in 2008-2010... the Fed certainly did a good job of delaying the global system from meltdown.... it's all fraud . A sane person doesn't throw people into vans in the thousands to be sent to their death based on a currency chart i.e. hope. )

We're talking complete mentality illness... the same people saying Russia is in collapse and can't fight a war, are the same lunatics claiming money needs to be sent in mass to protect from the Evil Pootin that which they claim he can't do.

 

[BeardedVol]

Russia’s Central Bank to suspend foreign currency purchases through end of year — Meduza

Russia’s Central Bank will refrain from purchasing foreign currency on the domestic market from November 28 through the end of 2024. According to the bank’s press release, this decision was made “to reduce financial market volatility” and is being implemented “in alignment with the Russian...

meduza.io

@LSU-SIU is like:

 

[Rocky_Top_Vol13]

 

[Septic]

You're still raging, its cute. You're posting the same thing you were three years ago, which is okay I guess. You are predicting a nation is going to collapse off the virtual same data point you did three years ago. It could collapse, but the data was the same three years ago? I am sure you do think my comments and questions are dumb, no doubt about that.

So.... Russia is going to collapse in three years and the Ukraine is going to win all this land back? And you "know that" by looking at that chart?



No, I am asking you simple questions as to what you mean, and you don't really provide much. You say stuff like, "I know that".... followed by basically a collapse of Russia. My questions is how do you, "know that". Now you are back to posting the same data point from three years ago. Now, that can be your guess, the problem here... is your guess is the same guess you made three years ago on basically the same data point. That doesn't mean you can't be right. A broken clock is right twice a day as they say.

I haven't even said you were wrong about this new prediction which seems the same as the old prediction.

Is the Ukraine winning now? If not, why hasn't someone told me that on this forum before? If yes, than why do they need more funding from me or how much do they need to finish?

(Next, someone will say that I claimed Russia couldn't financially collapse, hell if they can't... the U.S. basically did in 2008-2010... the Fed certainly did a good job of delaying the global system from meltdown.... it's all fraud . A sane person throw people into vans in the thousands to be sent to their death on a chart i.e. hope. )

All I did was drop a link to an article that talks about the ruble not doing well, with the only commentary being that one "hates to see it."

You've extrapolated that out and inferred things I haven't stated and now you're making up points to an argument you seem to be having in your head, but nowhere else. But yes, keep telling me and others that we're the ones "raging."

Take a lap, bozo.

 

[LSU-SIU]

All I did was drop a link to an article that talks about the ruble not doing well, with the only commentary being that one "hates to see it."

You've extrapolated that out and inferred things I haven't stated and now you're making up points to an argument you seem to be having in your head, but nowhere else. But yes, keep telling me and others that we're the ones "raging."

bozo.

No, I asked you and you said "collapse", which is what you are implying anyway and what you implying years ago. Now you are lying about the things you said.

I have no argument, just pointing out obvious observations.

Nobody is forcing you do these things, right?

 

[Septic]

No, I asked you and you said "collapse", which is what you are implying anyway and what you implying years ago. Now you are lying about the things you said.

I have no argument, just pointing out obvious observations.

Nobody is forcing you do these things, right?

Your emotions are getting the better of you ma'am.