For those of you that want to fight to the last Ukranian
- Thread starter nottyboi
- Start date
This is the modern version of drive up in a jeep, grab the guy and say he is in the army now. I am sure it is happening in Russia too.
Putin boi feigns concern for Ukrainian soldiers but hasn't shed his crocodile tears for the hundreds of thousands
of Russian conscripts.
We've noticed. Is there any way we might persuade you to stop? Get a clue! Warmonger and Putin Fanboy are the exact same thing!!!
Nonsense. This is a war that could have been avoided, but Ukraine and it Western handlers inisisted on it. The goal is to weaken Russia and inflcit a strategic defeat on Russia. Ukrainian blood is just an input into the whole evil enterpise. A civil war among Slavs, the untermensch of Europe.
Last edited:
Not happening. Russia is relying on tradititional recruiting, offering poor people in rural Russia very good pay and adventure to fight for the fatherland. Since january 47K Russians have volunteered to join the fight. that is 380K a year. $3500/month is a LOT of money in some parts of Russia.
To stop what? To stop giving Putin handout? I would find Putin obnoxious
if he is visiting us to panhandle for money like Zelensky.
Of course it could have been avoided, had Russia stayed within it's borders. Are you mental or something
???Terror is what israel is doing to Pali babies and children. Now your baby killler champion Natanyahu says FUCK The ICJ which represents the entire world. And somehow you think I am "out there" lol.
The Senate’s $95.3 Billion Handout
Feb 14, 2024
Brian Maher
$60 billion for Ukraine… $14 billion for Israel…
$8 billion for Taiwan and Indo-Pacific allies… $9.1 billion in humanitarian aid to Gaza.
Shovel in some sundry billions for sundry purposes… and the American taxpayer goes upon the hook for a $95.3 billion bill.
Here you have, in summary, the “emergency spending” bill passed Tuesday by the United States Senate.
And here you have, in summary, the imperatives of Imperial Washington.
“Supporting this bill is standing up to Putin,” thundered the president, Biden.
“We can’t walk away now,” added the addled one.
Just so. Yet if “we” cannot walk away now… can we ever walk away?
It was easier to walk away yesterday than it is today. And it will be harder to walk away tomorrow than it is today.
Shall we walk our way into war with Russia because we cannot walk away today, tomorrow — or the tomorrow after that?
We would rather walk away.
Yet we believe the great clash of powers will be delayed indefinitely.
We have observed that the United States only extends Ukraine the wherewithal to extend the bloodletting.
It has not extended Ukraine the wherewithal to win the war. Nor do we believe it will.
It does not wish to press Mr. Putin’s backward into a corner. That is because a cornered man is a dangerous man.
And the tighter the corner… the more dangerous the man.
We are told Vladimir is a very dangerous fellow as is. And a tightly cornered Vladimir?
Imagine it if you can.
Thus the United States endeavors to keep the show going along present lines — a plodding, Russia-sapping affair resulting in neither Russian defeat nor Russian victory.
And the longer the show runs, so much the better for the United States.
The United States government adopts a more neutral approach to the Gaza dispute.
It is, in one aspect at least, admirable.
It hands Israel the cudgel to batten the heads of Gazans.
It then hands Gazans the monies to meet their subsequent hospital expenses and — if required — their funeral expenses.
“History settles every account,” exulted Addison Mitchell McConnell III, Senate minority leader.
“And today,” continued the senior senator from Kentucky, “on the value of American leadership and strength, history will record that the Senate did not blink.”
It is fortunate — for the United States — that history has yet to settle its financial account.
The nation creaks and groans beneath $34.2 trillion of debt. It will never satisfy its creditors.
Meantime, annual budgetary deficits of $2 trillion or more are in prospect.
When will history settle the American budgetary account? No time soon, it is our sincere hope.
Secondly: Who will settle the American budgetary account?
The answer — to the extent the account can be settled at all — is the American taxpayer.
His signature must ultimately go upon the cheque.
It is he who undersigns “American leadership and strength.”
What is the collateral in back of the offering?
His labor.
Would he decline the present transaction if given a say?
We do not know. He was not handed a say.
Perhaps he believes in the Ukrainian cause, in the Israeli cause, in the humanitarian cause, in the Taiwanese cause, in the sundry cause.
Thus he may be hot to sign his name upon the $95.3 billion cheque issued yesterday by the United States Senate.
Yet then again… he may not be hot to sign his name upon the $95.3 billion cheque issued yesterday by the United States Senate.
Thus he is a man dragooned.
Yet Sen. McConnell would inform this no-sayer that he lacks the overall vision. That the foreign aid bill is in fact an American jobs bill.
The Associated Press:
Dollars provided by the legislation would purchase U.S.-made defense equipment, including munitions and air defense systems that authorities say are desperately needed as Russia batters the country…
About a third of the money allocated to supporting Ukraine actually will be spent replenishing the U.S. military with the weapons and equipment that are going to Kyiv. Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell has repeatedly emphasized that point, saying in a statement Tuesday that the money is about “reaffirming a commitment to rebuild and modernize our military, restore our credibility and give the current commander in chief, as well as the next, more tools to secure our interests.”
Thus we might label the bill “The Military-Industrial Complex Jobs Act.”
And let the thing be dedicated to the 16-year-old Ukrainian conscript… or the 66-year-old Ukrainian conscript… who sacrifices his limbs or his life in distant killing fields… in order that American arms manufacturers may prosper.
Please sign it, Mr. President!
We are heart and soul for the national defense. May the sword of the Republic be sharp!
(May it also be sheathed, we say — whenever possible.)
Yet as we are against left-wing Keynesianism, we are against right-wing Keynesianism.
We believe that neither butter, nor guns, are agents of economic salvation. Columnist Michael Lind:
The old Republican Party of Robert Taft and Dwight Eisenhower was a fiscally conservative party of Northeasterners and Midwesterners who favored balanced budgets and viewed foreign wars and military spending with suspicion; recall Eisenhower’s warning about the “military-industrial complex”…
In 1944, mostly military federal spending was 37.8% of GDP. If military spending works such wonders, why not devote 40% of the economy to it, and not just 6%? If military Keynesianism is considered such a success by conservatives, they can hardly balk at what the Prussian military, during World War I, called “war socialism.”
The United States House of Representatives must approve the emergency spending bill under present consideration.
Speaker Michael Johnson is against it. He has stated he will not permit it onto the floor.
Yet do not misunderestimate the will of Imperial Washington.
There exists a parliamentary gimmick called a “discharge petition.”
Its employment would outflank Mr. Johnson… and bring the bill to a full House vote over his defiant objection.
Our spies inform us that certain senators are in active conspiracy with House members. They intend to effect the discharge petition.
We hazard it stands every prospect of success. We further hazard the House of Representatives — “The People’s House” — will pass it.
Thus the glories of American democracy are on rich display.
“Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want,” said Mencken…“and deserve to get it good and hard.”
Prepare to get it — good and hard.
Feb 14, 2024
Brian Maher
$60 billion for Ukraine… $14 billion for Israel…
$8 billion for Taiwan and Indo-Pacific allies… $9.1 billion in humanitarian aid to Gaza.
Shovel in some sundry billions for sundry purposes… and the American taxpayer goes upon the hook for a $95.3 billion bill.
Here you have, in summary, the “emergency spending” bill passed Tuesday by the United States Senate.
And here you have, in summary, the imperatives of Imperial Washington.
“Supporting this bill is standing up to Putin,” thundered the president, Biden.
“We can’t walk away now,” added the addled one.
Just so. Yet if “we” cannot walk away now… can we ever walk away?
It was easier to walk away yesterday than it is today. And it will be harder to walk away tomorrow than it is today.
Shall we walk our way into war with Russia because we cannot walk away today, tomorrow — or the tomorrow after that?
We would rather walk away.
Yet we believe the great clash of powers will be delayed indefinitely.
We have observed that the United States only extends Ukraine the wherewithal to extend the bloodletting.
It has not extended Ukraine the wherewithal to win the war. Nor do we believe it will.
It does not wish to press Mr. Putin’s backward into a corner. That is because a cornered man is a dangerous man.
And the tighter the corner… the more dangerous the man.
We are told Vladimir is a very dangerous fellow as is. And a tightly cornered Vladimir?
Imagine it if you can.
Thus the United States endeavors to keep the show going along present lines — a plodding, Russia-sapping affair resulting in neither Russian defeat nor Russian victory.
And the longer the show runs, so much the better for the United States.
The United States government adopts a more neutral approach to the Gaza dispute.
It is, in one aspect at least, admirable.
It hands Israel the cudgel to batten the heads of Gazans.
It then hands Gazans the monies to meet their subsequent hospital expenses and — if required — their funeral expenses.
“History settles every account,” exulted Addison Mitchell McConnell III, Senate minority leader.
“And today,” continued the senior senator from Kentucky, “on the value of American leadership and strength, history will record that the Senate did not blink.”
It is fortunate — for the United States — that history has yet to settle its financial account.
The nation creaks and groans beneath $34.2 trillion of debt. It will never satisfy its creditors.
Meantime, annual budgetary deficits of $2 trillion or more are in prospect.
When will history settle the American budgetary account? No time soon, it is our sincere hope.
Secondly: Who will settle the American budgetary account?
The answer — to the extent the account can be settled at all — is the American taxpayer.
His signature must ultimately go upon the cheque.
It is he who undersigns “American leadership and strength.”
What is the collateral in back of the offering?
His labor.
Would he decline the present transaction if given a say?
We do not know. He was not handed a say.
Perhaps he believes in the Ukrainian cause, in the Israeli cause, in the humanitarian cause, in the Taiwanese cause, in the sundry cause.
Thus he may be hot to sign his name upon the $95.3 billion cheque issued yesterday by the United States Senate.
Yet then again… he may not be hot to sign his name upon the $95.3 billion cheque issued yesterday by the United States Senate.
Thus he is a man dragooned.
Yet Sen. McConnell would inform this no-sayer that he lacks the overall vision. That the foreign aid bill is in fact an American jobs bill.
The Associated Press:
Dollars provided by the legislation would purchase U.S.-made defense equipment, including munitions and air defense systems that authorities say are desperately needed as Russia batters the country…
About a third of the money allocated to supporting Ukraine actually will be spent replenishing the U.S. military with the weapons and equipment that are going to Kyiv. Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell has repeatedly emphasized that point, saying in a statement Tuesday that the money is about “reaffirming a commitment to rebuild and modernize our military, restore our credibility and give the current commander in chief, as well as the next, more tools to secure our interests.”
Thus we might label the bill “The Military-Industrial Complex Jobs Act.”
And let the thing be dedicated to the 16-year-old Ukrainian conscript… or the 66-year-old Ukrainian conscript… who sacrifices his limbs or his life in distant killing fields… in order that American arms manufacturers may prosper.
Please sign it, Mr. President!
We are heart and soul for the national defense. May the sword of the Republic be sharp!
(May it also be sheathed, we say — whenever possible.)
Yet as we are against left-wing Keynesianism, we are against right-wing Keynesianism.
We believe that neither butter, nor guns, are agents of economic salvation. Columnist Michael Lind:
The old Republican Party of Robert Taft and Dwight Eisenhower was a fiscally conservative party of Northeasterners and Midwesterners who favored balanced budgets and viewed foreign wars and military spending with suspicion; recall Eisenhower’s warning about the “military-industrial complex”…
In 1944, mostly military federal spending was 37.8% of GDP. If military spending works such wonders, why not devote 40% of the economy to it, and not just 6%? If military Keynesianism is considered such a success by conservatives, they can hardly balk at what the Prussian military, during World War I, called “war socialism.”
The United States House of Representatives must approve the emergency spending bill under present consideration.
Speaker Michael Johnson is against it. He has stated he will not permit it onto the floor.
Yet do not misunderestimate the will of Imperial Washington.
There exists a parliamentary gimmick called a “discharge petition.”
Its employment would outflank Mr. Johnson… and bring the bill to a full House vote over his defiant objection.
Our spies inform us that certain senators are in active conspiracy with House members. They intend to effect the discharge petition.
We hazard it stands every prospect of success. We further hazard the House of Representatives — “The People’s House” — will pass it.
Thus the glories of American democracy are on rich display.
“Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want,” said Mencken…“and deserve to get it good and hard.”
Prepare to get it — good and hard.
The US has been sending all the bombs to Gaza, none for Ukraine anymore.
About 60lbs of bombs per person in Gaza so far.
Yes that would have happened if Ukraine implemented the peace agreement they had signed and stopped killing people in the Donbas.Of course it could have been avoided, had Russia stayed within it's borders. Are you mental or something
Ukrainian refugees with family in UK no longer automatically accepted
18 Feb, 2024
Ministers were under fire on Monday night after closing a scheme for Ukrainian families to come to the UK and tightening rules for refugees seeking to flee the wartorn country.
The Home Office shut the Ukraine family scheme at 3pm on Monday. The programme has allowed some 72,000 applicants to join family members in the UK or to extend their stay in the UK.
Ukrainians seeking to flee the country following Vladimir Putin’s invasion will still be able to apply to come to the UK through the Homes for Ukraine scheme. This allows people in the UK to sponsor refugees and take them into their properties.
However, the rules are being tightened so that only people who are permanently resident or settled in the UK will be able to act as sponsors. It means Ukrainians who have come to the UK on visas will no longer be able to sponsor family or friends under the Homes for Ukraine scheme.
The changes, revealed in a policy document published on Monday, follow the widely-welcomed move announced at the weekend by the Home Office to allow all Ukrainians who have already been granted sanctuary in the UK to extend their visas for an extra 18 months.
Enver Solomon, chief executive of the Refugee Council, said: “It’s concerning that one of the few safe routes created for families to reunite will be closing at such short notice. This is a reminder of the disadvantages of bespoke, one-off visa schemes that support refugees in the short-term but leave people in limbo, anxious and uncertain about their future.”
Stephen Kinnock, shadow immigration minister, said: “Restricting family rights at a time when Ukrainian troops are under heavy fire in Donetsk sends the wrong message to the people of Ukraine about our willingness to stand with them.
“Ministers must urgently explain the justification for these measures and how they will ensure vulnerable Ukrainians are not put at risk by these changes.”
Tom Cottam, head of policy for the British Red Cross, said: “We’re concerned that closing the Ukraine Family Scheme shuts down a route to safety for people fleeing the conflict. We urge the Government to reconsider these changes.”
The schemes have so far offered sanctuary to more than 280,000 Ukrainians. The Home Office said they were being adapted to ensure they remained “as efficient and sustainable as possible”.
A source close to James Cleverly, the Home Secretary, hit back at Mr
Kinnock’s criticism: “Nobody from Ukraine who is here already is being asked to leave but in fact can stay longer, and nobody who wanted to and still wants to is being prevented from applying to come here from Ukraine because the Homes for Ukraine route still exists.
“Given these facts it’s hard not see these statements as anything beyond cynical scaremongering on the backs of people we and the British public have been happy and proud to help and support, and will continue to.”
www.telegraph.co.uk
18 Feb, 2024
Ministers were under fire on Monday night after closing a scheme for Ukrainian families to come to the UK and tightening rules for refugees seeking to flee the wartorn country.
The Home Office shut the Ukraine family scheme at 3pm on Monday. The programme has allowed some 72,000 applicants to join family members in the UK or to extend their stay in the UK.
Ukrainians seeking to flee the country following Vladimir Putin’s invasion will still be able to apply to come to the UK through the Homes for Ukraine scheme. This allows people in the UK to sponsor refugees and take them into their properties.
However, the rules are being tightened so that only people who are permanently resident or settled in the UK will be able to act as sponsors. It means Ukrainians who have come to the UK on visas will no longer be able to sponsor family or friends under the Homes for Ukraine scheme.
The changes, revealed in a policy document published on Monday, follow the widely-welcomed move announced at the weekend by the Home Office to allow all Ukrainians who have already been granted sanctuary in the UK to extend their visas for an extra 18 months.
Enver Solomon, chief executive of the Refugee Council, said: “It’s concerning that one of the few safe routes created for families to reunite will be closing at such short notice. This is a reminder of the disadvantages of bespoke, one-off visa schemes that support refugees in the short-term but leave people in limbo, anxious and uncertain about their future.”
Stephen Kinnock, shadow immigration minister, said: “Restricting family rights at a time when Ukrainian troops are under heavy fire in Donetsk sends the wrong message to the people of Ukraine about our willingness to stand with them.
“Ministers must urgently explain the justification for these measures and how they will ensure vulnerable Ukrainians are not put at risk by these changes.”
Tom Cottam, head of policy for the British Red Cross, said: “We’re concerned that closing the Ukraine Family Scheme shuts down a route to safety for people fleeing the conflict. We urge the Government to reconsider these changes.”
The schemes have so far offered sanctuary to more than 280,000 Ukrainians. The Home Office said they were being adapted to ensure they remained “as efficient and sustainable as possible”.
A source close to James Cleverly, the Home Secretary, hit back at Mr
Kinnock’s criticism: “Nobody from Ukraine who is here already is being asked to leave but in fact can stay longer, and nobody who wanted to and still wants to is being prevented from applying to come here from Ukraine because the Homes for Ukraine route still exists.
“Given these facts it’s hard not see these statements as anything beyond cynical scaremongering on the backs of people we and the British public have been happy and proud to help and support, and will continue to.”
Ukrainian refugees with family in UK no longer automatically accepted
Home Office rule changed but they can still apply to come through the Homes for Ukraine scheme
