Poland`s aid to Ukraine if Russia invades - part 7

This war keeps getting stranger and stranger.

Quote from a guy interviewed for the article:

"It's shocking that countries in the EU have worked so hard to wean themselves off piped Russian fossil gas only to replace it with the shipped equivalent," said Jonathan Noronha-Gant, senior fossil fuel campaigner at Global Witness. "It doesn't matter if it comes from a pipeline or a boat - it still means European companies are sending billions to [Vladimir] Putin's war chest."

Source: ft.com/content/1e70ff72-52d8-46b6-a8f4-fcc86fb88a6d

• 
  IMG_6740.jpeg
  

Oh, wait, it looks like Hungarians noticed this news already :D:

magyarnemzet.hu/english/2023/08/new-russian-textbook-falsifies-history-regarding-hungarian-revolution-of-1956

"Speaking to InfoRadio, Aron Mathe, deputy chairman of the Committee of National Remembrance, spoke up against the claims in the Russian history book.

What is written in the Russian history book is undoubtedly a falsification of history from the Hungarian point of view. We simply cannot accept it. It makes us sick to our stomachs*, because this is what we heard for 33 years after the revolution."

*Yeah, I know the feeling.


I'd say that RuSSian version of history and view of reality gets even stranger and stranger than that.

I hope none are paying for gas in roubles.

Quite a bit of good news today from the front. Good for Ukraine, that is.

That's EU for you, Bobi. It also forbids the use of certain pesticides in European farming but continues to manufacture and export them to many countries including, for example, Brazil where their use is not banned. Then the EU proceeds to... import food from Brazil. Bez wódki nie razbieryosh ;)

I wonder what a decent person would need to be able to read RuSSian history textbooks and to deal in real life with RuSSians raised on them... Probably something stronger than vodka:

Sometimes it's useful to look at things from a different perspective. For example, today I learnt that general Suvorov was a rather saintly man, and if it wasn't for some unfortunate incidents with unruly cossacks, nobody would even dream of questioning his canonisation. :)


Dealing with Russians, provided they are in moderate numbers and not armed, is quite fun (and I'm speaking from personal experience).

I honestly don't find it funny, Kania. There is a lot of death and human suffering connected to such topics.


It is clearly fun for you, no doubt.

Not every death and suffering is bad. In some cases, both are well-deserved.

I`m sorry but I am not shocked you aren`t able to provide factual sources for your claims. :):):)

Let me call you a liar then and let me also say: the US didn`t officially threaten the USSR with nukes while Soviets didn`t have them. I mean American politicians on 1940s who openly used nuke threats against the USSR. You were lying.


I remember our Russian lying interlocutor was very resolute about his claims, so now it is time to say: Sprawdzam. :):):)

Huh? I mean are you serious?

The United States State Department, on their own website, disagrees.

Source: 2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ho/time/cwr/104434.htm

Will you argue with the foreign ministry of the United States about what they did or did not do?

Here's some quotes, from a source that is most incentivized to deny that the US ever used "atomic diplomacy" to force the Soviets to back down:

During the Berlin Blockade of 1948-49, President Truman transferred several B-29 bombers capable of delivering nuclear bombs to the region to signal to the Soviet Union that the United States was both capable of implementing a nuclear attack and willing to execute it if it became necessary.

Same State Department page, says that some policymakers had made the argument that the United States bombed Nagasaki and Hiroshima, not because they wanted to force Japan to surrender (they were on their last legs anyway, and the Soviet invasion into Hokkaido was imminent), but because they wanted to demonstrate to Stalin what a terrible weapon they had acquired. This also prevented the Soviet Union from making any claims on Japan, and as a result Japan was under sole American occupation for the next decade.

You can read about Iran and Turkey in other places.

After we got the bomb ourselves, they continued to try to threaten us during the Korean War and then after the Cuban Revolution.

Only when we began to have more atomic weapons than them, did they cease to threaten us outright on a regular basis.

So? What does it have to do with the topic of RuSSia falsifying history?

Were there any bombs in the planes? Did US politicians directly warn Stalin they would drop those bombs? No.

I am still waiting for clear nuke threats like your ex President or propagandists or military utter in Russian media against Ukraine and NATO countries.

Are you an idiot?

You are telling me, that you draw an = sign, between propagandists and ex-presidents making rhetorical threats, and an actual government stationing bombers and atomic bombs in a way that communicates a real threat of attack?

If your criteria is random propagandists and ex presidents, then there are probably not dozens, or even hundreds, but hundreds of thousands of examples from the American side.

Do you want me to watch 50 years of American television, and find for you every instance where a tv anchor or some guy like Reagan, says something along the lines of "we should nuke the Russkis"? Are you really - so incredibly thick?

You have a seriously childish understanding of America.

You claimed a false fact, I called you a liar. It is your fekking duty to prove you weren`t lying.

*sighs*

@Bobko

Don't feed him. That's Pawian's favourite game: he will twist your every word, ignore your point of view, and refuse to honestly consider any of your arguments. Also, everything you say will be interpreted with maximum of bad will and then you will be called a "liar" and "kanalia" with an accompanying battery of "tfus!" and "fekks!".*rolls eyes*

@pawian

Ok, now I see you do not debate in good faith. Enjoy living in your world of fantasy.

I didn't even mention to you, a moment when an American general seemed to be in charge of decision making over nukes during the Korean War, and nearly dragged us all into Hell. This scared even Truman, and he fired Douglas MacArthur.

But keep talking about Soloviev and Medvedev, and dismissing nuclear bombers and sitting American presidents.

A snippet of a press-conference Truman gave on 30th of November 1950:

Q. Mr. President, I wonder if we could retrace that reference to the atom bomb? Did we understand you clearly that the use of the atomic bomb is under active consideration?

Truman: Always has been. It is one of our weapons.

Q. Does that mean, Mr. President, use against military objectives, or civilian-

Truman: It's a matter that the military people will have to decide. I'm not a military authority that passes on those things.

Q. Mr. President, perhaps it would be better if we are allowed to quote your remarks on that directly?

Truman: I don't think-I don't think that is necessary.

Q. Mr. President, you said this depends on United Nations action. Does that mean that we wouldn't use the atomic bomb except on a United Nations authorization?

Truman: No, it doesn't mean that at all. The action against Communist China depends on the action of the United Nations. The military commander in the field will have charge of the use of the weapons, as he always has.

Since I know you have issues with reading comprehension - the implication was that the authority to use atomic weapons now rested in the hands of MacArthur.

This maniac then proceeded to make so many wild threats, it would make Medvedev blush (even though unlike him, Medvedev has no ability to direct nuclear attacks).

That was the time when Soviets already had their nukes. Stop twisting, you lying putinist madafaka!
Here is the quote from your post which I am debunking:

Between 1945 and until 1949 America threatened the Soviet Union with nuclear annihilation in several dozen instances.


You stinking Russophile. You should sigh over yourself first, not others. hahaha


Exactly! Tfu, ty ruska kanalio! Three times tfu!!!

You really are amazing. I already gave you the Berlin Blockade. That incident alone likely generated more than a dozen threats.

I also directed you to Iran and Turkey.

I am not your personal encyclopedia, and I won't chew everything out for you so that you can comprehend it.

I see you are big lover of America, and a hater of Russia. Good for you!

@Bobko

See what I mean? A clinical case. :)

You forgot to add - imperialist Russia - yes, I am.


Yes, we still mean tfu on you and your beloved putinists!!!

FU
and your grandpas, too!
Ha!

I never actually experienced it on my own skin, like this, until now.

Papa Pawian getting old and cranky.

Bobko, your patience is not working to your advantage ...

How many times do I have to tell you that Poles are incurable imbeciles? Just look at how they debate and "think" that misspelling Russia is a winning argument. I have been to many forums and never met so many morons like Paulina and othe such geniuses...


Bingo!!! Finally getting there, Bobko...What's left are just insults and mockery...the final phase...

My best advice to you (no, I am not trying to be patronizing) is this: Post but don't respond to a-holes. Especially the spelling warriors...

Hey, Novi. I don't particularly enjoy engaging in elder abuse, but I will if I'm provoked. ;)

Iran and Turkey must've been happy about it.


Wow, this sounds like RuSSia nowadays lol


You mean like RuSSia deploying tactical nukes to Belarus? Lukashenko said in May that they were on the move already.

The thing is that nowadays RuSSia is threatening other countries with using nukes and actually moving nukes to our borders, despite the fact that NATO is doing no such thing and there are no nukes in NATO countries bordering RuSSia.

Absolute power, corrupts absolutely)

It was good for the planet, and probably even the United States, that their monopoly on nuclear weapons lasted a mere 4 years.

Thank you, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg.

There must be balance in the universe.

Some commies downplay it but it was the greatest tragedy of humanity.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki nukes killed about 200k people. Holodomor killed about 12 mi. And that was only one tragedy from that retarded ideology. How incompetent a ideology needs to be to pick a extremely fertile country and kill everyone from starvation...

Are you another Pawian?

Please apply logic in making your arguments.

This is how I track our conversation:

K: Whether Russia remains as a single entity, or splits up into smaller statelets - it cannot be trusted with nuclear weapons. For example, what if the communists come back into power?

B: When have Communists ever used nukes?

K: Neither have the Nazis ever used them.

B: When did the Nazis have nuclear weapons?

K: So Hitler did nothing wrong then?

Do you see how you make yourself look like an idiot, quite needlessly so also?

Did you just admit that RuSSia got absolutely corrupted with power it has? :)))


Not good for RuSSia's neighbours though. So, I'm sure you understand why RuSSia's neighbours had to go into an alliance that is able to counterbalance RuSSia's power.


So, the conclusion is that Ukraine, Poland, the Baltics, Finland, etc. should all get nukes :))))

Would you want me to give you the evidence that Poles are incurable imbeciles? Like right now, going out of their way to aggravate Russia and prolong the war - even when the ususally warmongering US and Western Europe are looking for ways to end it! That's how stupid Poles are...Or maybe they enjoy their role of being new focal point...No war, no fame? Is that it?

By the way, I would expect the smarter ones like you to jump on the spelling a-holes like Paulina with both feet and tell them to knock that sh*it off.

Your inaction makes you a party to this insanity.


Not exactly. Just another Polak.

Ironside`s dream. :):):)