US 'sleepwalking' into WWIII, experts warn nation is underprepared: 'We do not have our Churchill'

[HARK!]

And that's the problem. You don't care, just because it says what you want to hear.

It's not a problem for me.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Why do you suppose that the banks are buying up gold?

Probably because the figure there is always some sucker willing to buy it for real money.

 

[Hans Blaster]

80,000 Ukraine Soldiers 'Refuse' To Fight Russia; 'Mass Desertions' Hit Ukrainian Army - Report​

If this is true I pray that they escape the revenge of Zelenskyy's Dictatorship.

May this war end quickly.

It is strange how their only "source" is Russian state media.

 

[HARK!]

SOUTH AFRICA : USA CAN'T TELL US WHAT TO DO​

Another example of US coercion.

 

[HARK!]

Probably because the figure there is always some sucker willing to buy it for real money.

How much can I buy with one of these?:

 

[HARK!]

It is strange how their only "source" is Russian state media.

Yeah, sort of the same way that US propaganda is reported abroad. Who knows what the truth is in the fog of war?

 

[Hans Blaster]

How much can I buy with one of these:

View attachment 354951

It really depends on if you are in zimbabwe. I doubt that you are, so it will be as useless to you as a 5-pound Chuck 3 note.

 

[HARK!]

It really depends on if you are in zimbabwe. I doubt that you are, so it will be as useless to you as a 5-pound Chuck 3 note.

It won't buy much of anything anywhere. It's just another dead fiat currency. It's not worth much more than a piece of paper. The US dollar is now worth 3 cents. How much will it be worth when it is devalued to zero?

 

[7thKeeper]

It's not a problem for me.

Yes, we can tell you have no problem with dubious sources. So what is the source of your ATACMS claim?

 

[HARK!]

Yes, we can tell you have no problem with dubious sources.

The source is not dubious. I don't claim that FOX is a dubious source when they play a clip of Kamala. That would just be silly.

So what is the source of your ATACMS claim?

I don't remember I watched three interviews of about an hour or more each last night.

One was an interview of a Ex-US weapons inspector. One was a Ex-US General, and the other was a Ex-US CIA agent.

I would have posted each one of those interviews; but each one of these credible sources used profanity at one point or another during their interviews.

 

[7thKeeper]

The source is not dubious. I don't claim that FOX is a dubious source when they play a clip of Kamala. That would just be silly.

The source is a YouTube cooking related channel, inactive for a longer period of time that suddenly started posting about Ukraine. Not dubious, suuuure.

I don't remember I watched three interviews of about an hour or more each last night.

One was an interview of a Ex-US weapons inspector. One was a Ex-US General, and the other was a Ex-US CIA agent.

I would have posted each one of those interviews; but each one of these credible sources used profanity at one point or another during their interviews.

If you watched them anywhere on the net, your history will tell ya. But from those descriptions (and I'm having a hard believing you don't remember even a single name if you watched them last night) I'd wager they included the pedophile Scott Ritter (because that should NOT be forgotten; caught twice, convicted once) and I suspect you might be either misremembering the rank or it was falsely stated, but the second one is probably (ex-)Colonel Douglas Macgregor, because he's been spreading these bogus ammunition stories for a while now.

 

[HARK!]

If you watched them anywhere on the net, your history will tell ya. But from those descriptions (and I'm having a hard believing you don't remember even a single name if you watched them last night) I'd wager they included the pedophile Scott Ritter (because that should NOT be forgotten; caught twice, convicted once) and I suspect you might be either misremembering the rank or it was falsely stated, but the second one is probably (ex-)Colonel Douglas Macgregor, because he's been spreading these bogus ammunition stories for a while now.

I believe that you got two of the names right. I know that you got one right for sure. Now if you can get past those cheap ad hominem fallacies, and actually refute the claim; you might have something credible.

 

[Hans Blaster]

It won't buy much of anything anywhere. It's just another dead fiat currency. It's not worth much more than a piece of paper. The US dollar is now worth 3 cents. How much will it be worth when it is devalued to zero?

Last I checked it takes 100 cents to make 1 dollar as it has for (checks sources...) 230 years.

 

[7thKeeper]

I believe that you got two of the names right. I know that you got one right for sure. Now if you can get past those cheap ad hominem fallacies, and actually refute the claim; you might have something credible.

I'm sorry that pedophilia is cheap to you. But we shouldn't forget that there might be reasons for why Scott Ritter does Scott Ritter things. And I would wager Macgregor is your "source" for the ATACMS claim and he's been straight up lying about different ammunition situations for a while now.

Sorry, but if there's a credibility issue, it's with YOUR sources and claims.

 

[Gene2memE]

False? The 117TH Congress, 2nd Session, convened in 2022. This Resolution was for 2023 appropriations. This is 2024.

Yes. That's HR 7776, which was passed in law in 2022 and set US defense spending for FY2023 (and onwards).

The ATACMS segment is here:

(c) Multiyear Procurement Authority for Certain Munitions.--
(1) Authority for multiyear procurement.--Subject to the
provisions of section 3501 of title 10, United States Code, set
forth in paragraph (3), the head of an agency may enter into one
or more multiyear contracts, beginning in fiscal year 2023, for
the procurement of up to--

[SNIP]
(D) 1,700 MGM-140 Army Tactical Missile Systems
(ATACMS);
[SNIP]
(2) Procurement in conjunction with existing contracts.--The
systems authorized to be procured under paragraph (1) may be
procured as additions to existing contracts covering such
programs.

$12 billion was originally recommended for ATACMS purchases, but it got negotiated down to $7.7 billion.

 

[Nithavela]

It is strange how their only "source" is Russian state media.

I feel that at a certain point, a posters reputation is so shot that it's okay to no longer engage with further videos they post. Especially when any criticism of those videos is only met with a fresh video.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Yeah, sort of the same way that US propaganda is reported abroad. Who knows what the truth is in the fog of war?

What's "US propaganda" got to do with this? The US isn't the country at war with Russia. The US isn't the country that has the competing claims about soldiers killed or captured, territory taken, and equipment destroyed. That is Ukraine.

Both sides make regular claims about the losses of the other and say nothing about their own. Both sides publish combat footage (including drone footage). (And I should note here that about half of the footage in that "video" was training footage of Russian armored vehicles in winter. It isn't winter yet in Kursk. No snow on the ground.)

Both foreign intelligence and military analysts examine the claims, footage, and satellite data and publish assessments of losses and gains. Then there are the collectives of online geolocation trackers that that use published footage to locate and identified destroyed vehicles. Some are openly pro-Russia, some openly pro-Ukraine, and they get similar results because the use the same input data.

The sourcing for this particular video was (as I noted) Russian state media. Media aimed at the Russian people who have little way of getting access to non-Russian news sources. We can view both and look at the analysts favoring each side and get a reasonable estimate of what is actually going on. Russia has a really bad habit of making up or exaggerating numbers wildly. The last I recall, Russia had claimed to have destroyed each of the HIMARS rocket artillary systems provided to Ukraine at least twice (add up the claimed destructions and it was more than twice the transfers to Ukraine) and destroyed some M1 Abrams tanks and M2 Bradley fighting vehicles before they were even transferred.

 

[Hans Blaster]

The source is a YouTube cooking related channel, inactive for a longer period of time that suddenly started posting about Ukraine. Not dubious, suuuure.

If you watched them anywhere on the net, your history will tell ya. But from those descriptions (and I'm having a hard believing you don't remember even a single name if you watched them last night) I'd wager they included the pedophile Scott Ritter (because that should NOT be forgotten; caught twice, convicted once) and I suspect you might be either misremembering the rank or it was falsely stated, but the second one is probably (ex-)Colonel Douglas Macgregor, because he's been spreading these bogus ammunition stories for a while now.

On both the Turkish cooking channel with the Vietnamese woman's profile and the "ukraine/russia" section of the "Times of India" channel you had Ritter, Macgregor, Mearsheimer, and a couple more of the usual "US analysts" pushing pro-Russia lines. It's so odd that...

 

[7thKeeper]

What's "US propaganda" got to do with this? The US isn't the country at war with Russia. The US isn't the country that has the competing claims about soldiers killed or captured, territory taken, and equipment destroyed. That is Ukraine.

Both sides make regular claims about the losses of the other and say nothing about their own. Both sides publish combat footage (including drone footage). (And I should note here that about half of the footage in that "video" was training footage of Russian armored vehicles in winter. It isn't winter yet in Kursk. No snow on the ground.)

Both foreign intelligence and military analysts examine the claims, footage, and satellite data and publish assessments of losses and gains. Then there are the collectives of online geolocation trackers that that use published footage to locate and identified destroyed vehicles. Some are openly pro-Russia, some openly pro-Ukraine, and they get similar results because the use the same input data.

The sourcing for this particular video was (as I noted) Russian state media. Media aimed at the Russian people who have little way of getting access to non-Russian news sources. We can view both and look at the analysts favoring each side and get a reasonable estimate of what is actually going on. Russia has a really bad habit of making up or exaggerating numbers wildly. The last I recall, Russia had claimed to have destroyed each of the HIMARS rocket artillary systems provided to Ukraine at least twice (add up the claimed destructions and it was more than twice the transfers to Ukraine) and destroyed some M1 Abrams tanks and M2 Bradley fighting vehicles before they were even transferred.

My favourite about those Russian destroyed claims is still when the Russian MOD claimed to have destroyed a HIMARS launcher and as evidence of this, they posted a POV clip of a missile striking the second floor of a building. I'm still pondering how that launcher hid inside the building.

 

[HARK!]

I just got a bunch of bad news on the Canadian Prepper channel. Can't post it here, again for that pesky profanity. (Why can't they leave the high emotions out?) There have been some major turns of events; and I expect things to ramp up quickly. I need to focus on getting my own affairs in order.

I'm done here.

Wish you all well.