search results matching tag: eu

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (126)     Sift Talk (7)     Blogs (4)     Comments (575)   

Trump Supporter CHANGES MIND on Biden in 60sec

newtboy says...

Russia invaded Ukraine to expand. They came up with a dozen lame excuses, like protecting Russian speaking people in Crimea from being insulted and to stop the local government (who they called extremists) from taking abandoned Russian military bases, NATO expansion was never a reason they gave for invading.
In Ukraine proper, his stated excuse was that the new Ukrainian government (formed after the Kremlin installed puppet government was ousted) was comprised of NAZIs who were ethnically cleansing Russian speakers in the East, a total fabrication.
https://www.euractiv.com/section/global-europe/news/in-putins-words-why-russia-invaded-ukraine/
Try keeping your revisionist Russia centric anti democratic fantasy history to yourself. I know some random internet blowhard failure broadcasting from mommy’s basement told you this alternative fact nonsense, you have got to stop trusting them.

There’s been more NATO expansion in “buffer” nations since Russia invaded than in the 50+ years beforehand, with more coming because they invaded their neighbor…again.

Ukraine will be a NATO country now, so is our business.
Ukraine was in a treaty with the US, so was already our business. We guaranteed their borders against invasion in exchange for their nuclear arsenal. No nation will ever do a nuclear disarmament treaty with America, we don’t keep our word or we would be fighting there.
Russian expansionism isn’t stopped by ignoring it, it’s encouraged. Trump encouraged the expansionism into Ukraine proper (Crimea was Ukraine) when he recognized Russia’s claim on the seized territory, giving the green light to expand their military operations in Eastern Ukraine (that they denied existed but absolutely were there fighting during Trump’s administration and even before, recall Russians shot down a passenger plane in Ukraine in 2014 and never left).

The EU is supportive enough of Ukraine that they just unanimously agreed to $54 billion in military aid, and the EU is our closest trading partner so again, our business. The MAGA ploy to block any aid to Ukraine to aid Russia (hoping it would look bad for Biden) has failed, the EU miraculously stood up as a unified front and agreed to fund Ukraine.
NATO has agreed to admit Ukraine as soon as possible, something never considered before the invasion.


Ukraine is a lost war, lost by Russia…Russia just won’t admit it yet, but their country will be feeling the loss for decades…loss of their army, loss of an entire generation of young men, loss of their economy, loss of hundreds of trade agreements/partners, loss of trillions of dollars, loss of international standing and cooperation, loss of stability. At this point, even if Russia took Ukraine tomorrow, it would be a loss for Russia. They destroyed their prize, and themselves in the process, and the rest of the world is happy to destroy them through a proxy while Russia engages directly and is crushed daily.
Winning!

https://youtu.be/WhILMFdifhk?si=k-egPJ1oDrqKrd_S

Ukraine has already won this war by destroying Russia. It’s exceedingly likely they will also drive the Russians out and may even take some of Russia a s a buffer zone…Russia is losing badly.

bobknight33 said:

The question is Why is Russia invading Ukraine.

The answer is NATO creeping into buffer countries that was agreed on after the fall of Russia.



Finally Ukraine is not a NATO country----------- This is none of our business.




Ukraine is a lost war.

Trump Supporter CHANGES MIND on Biden in 60sec

newtboy says...

As usual, you have it all 100% backwards. Not surprising since you are a Russian propagandist.
Russia secretly invaded Ukraine in 2014 as pure expansionism, when they finally admitted the invasion their excuse was Russians in Crimea were being poorly treated and a fear extremists would take over Russian military bases, having absolutely nothing to do with NATO.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_Russian_Federation#:~:text=Russia%20eventually%20admitted%20its%20troops,Russian%20military%
20infrastructure%20by%20extremists%22.

NATO is now “creeping into buffer countries” because Russia started and continues an expansionist policy and threatens its neighbors. Russian expansionism started first. There have been 3 rounds of NATO expansion since Russia started retaking now sovereign lost satellite territories in 2014.
There was never an agreement that NATO wouldn’t accept new members, just as there’s nothing stopping Russia from making allies.
Ukraine was going to be an EU country until Russia’s installed “president” ignored the people and chose Russia over Ukraine and was deposed and expelled so Ukrainians could democratically choose their own leadership which they did. Then Russia invaded.
There was absolutely no chance of them joining NATO until after the invasion, now it’s a near certainty.

Democracy in Europe IS our business. We will be fighting this war at some time, either now while Russia is weak and poor through a proxy or later when we are in a much weaker position fighting them with American soldiers directly…much better to choose now for less money and zero Americans, I know you would prefer to just let Putin re-annex the Balkan states and expand as far as he chooses, returning to socialist communism under his tyrannical leadership, but the free world would prefer to stay free.

And again, it is our business as I clearly explained to you repeatedly because we signed, and actually directed the trilateral disarmament agreement in 92 when we agreed to secure their borders against any incursion and they gave up nuclear weapons the collapsing soviets couldn’t afford to secure themselves. You would make any future agreements, and any current treaties moot and impossible to guarantee because our guarantee is worse than worthless. So shortsighted and not smart. It’s important to keep your word internationally, I know as a MAGgot that doesn’t make sense, just like telling the truth even if it hurts you doesn’t make sense to you…honesty and honor are foreign concepts to your ilk.
It would be nice if you could remember being so wrong so I didn’t have to correct you over and over and over on the exact same topic…but you can’t admit you are wrong so you will forget you were proven wrong, again, and spout the same ignorance, again, forever. So sad and mentally defective….it’s a main feature of MAGA, severe brain damage.

Walk away MAGA policies would hand the world to China, Russia, and N Korea without a word of complaint, then confusion over where our allies are when they come for us.
Ukraine is a war Russia started, one that’s being won by Ukraine with help, and one that has crippled Russia for decades to come WAY cheaper than any American policy could have. Give Joe credit, fine, Joe bankrupted Russia and destroyed their military…I don’t give him that credit, you do.

No, leftists said he would bring us into ruin, and that if he followed trough with his stated intentions he would bring us into war…but he never follows through and caved to China and Russia instead of standing strong for American ideals, interests, and Western democracy. He nearly did start a war by assassinating Iranian government officials and Syrians. I remember when you said ISIS was a nothing burger and not worth paying attention to, right before they took near half of Iraq and Syria, started attacking Americans, and we went to war with them in 2017…who was president then?
We were still at war in Afghanistan when he left office, he had just surrendered unconditionally to the Taliban and Al Qaeda under an agreement they broke repeatedly, but we were still there until Biden (poorly) facilitated the retreat Trump negotiated. Trump/MAGA didn’t avoid or end wars. Nice try at revisionism.

The policy bringing the US near war today is our Israel policy that is the same unthinking blind support for Israel from both parties, same from both presidential candidates. We are in direct military actions endangering American soldiers daily because of THAT conflict, not because of Ukraine. The unbridled ignorance is disappointing even from you. 🤦‍♂️

Ending wars by capitulating like Trump did with Crimea and surrendering unconditionally like Trump did in Afghanistan is not “winning”, it’s losing without even trying and hands the world to dictators.

bobknight33 said:

The kid is asking the wrong question.

The question is Why is Russia invading Ukraine.

The answer is NATO creeping into buffer countries that was agreed on after the fall of Russia.

NATO has not stopped expanding since the fall of the Soviet Union, growing from 17 countries in 1990 to 30 today, several of which were once part of the Soviet-led Warsaw pact.


Finally Ukraine is not a NATO country----------- This is none of our business.


Biden failed Policies have done nothing but keeping pushing for war --

Ukraine is a lost war.

FJB

You leftest said if Trump was POTUS - He would bring us into war--- Never happened.
MEGA 2024 to end wars.

Let's talk about the Trump Georgia indictment contents....

luxintenebris says...

meant to go one and out - although this caught me eye...

"...you truly have no grasp of reality. Yo drink your fake news as fast as you can..."

wow.

if what has been written here is a 'grasp of reality' your gonna need some rosin.

the fake newsstand is on the other side of the street: https://jspp.psychopen.eu/index.php/jspp/article/view/6565/6565.html

bobknight33 said:

Triggered? Not in the least/

Nutboy. You are triggered Tool. Go sit in you little house and continue to believe that you are a big man.

Truth you truly have no grasp of reality. Yo drink your fake news as fast as you can. Hell you even go out of you way to prove your bigness. No on cares. You just a spect of dust.


I ignore you most day and toy you on other days.
I bet you still think Bidenomics is doing just fine. 3.5% of unemployment is great but thats all you see. Sad little man you are.


I see that we are getting close to a tipping point. It might take another 2 quarters, will see.

Ukraine losing 500 troops daily in Bakhmut fight

newtboy says...

I wonder how it’s even possible for Russia to “win” even if they take 100% of Ukraine, which seems impossible itself. It looks far more likely they’re about to lose Crimea.

The stated reasoning was to stop Ukraine from entering the EU (and eventually NATO) to lower tensions along its border and create a buffer zone from the West. Also to stop the terrorist attacks they claimed would come from a free Ukraine.

Now, assuming it survives, Ukraine is guaranteed admission to both, and Sweden, Finland, and more to come. Russia is being hit with attacks daily on the homeland, and their army is decimated and economy destroyed.

I fail to see any way Russia comes out ahead no matter the end results, and the likely outcome will be further degradation of Russia and likely more states becoming independent, shrinking Russia and its influence once again.

surfingyt said:

I love triggering you orc tards…

btw this is a reminder to you that NATO is winning and will continue to advance. umadbro? lololol

Ukraine losing 500 troops daily in Bakhmut fight

newtboy says...

Bwaaaahahahaha.
You are the epitome of a laughing stock…you win…here’s your “biggest boob” trophy. 🏆
Oh you dumbshit….The Washington Free Beacon (a right wing publication) and Paul Singer, (a far right mega donor) paid for the Steele dossier about Trump, then later sold it to Clinton. That’s a fact.
Republicans created the Steele dossier, and most, like 90% of it, is confirmed to be correct, none of it was ever proven false (EG- if the dossier said an anonymous source said Russians have pee tape blackmail material against Trump and it is never found, the dossier wasn’t proven to be wrong at all, it just reported the claim). People (like Manafort) went to prison for charges stemming from it.

But you [are] a foolish ignorant man has no idea of any reality because you watch slanted one sided internet propaganda from anywhere as long as it’s anti American. It’s never correct, it never includes legitimate sources, and it’s 100% anti American, anti constitution twaddle and inconsistent lies.

Since you believe anything you see online, watch this unverified report and enjoy… https://youtube.com/shorts/_f1bYWlfApQ?feature=share
And…
https://youtube.com/shorts/lV-pDw6fUTY?feature=share

You said near 3 weeks ago that Bakhmut HAD fallen and was under 100% Russian control, proven by the faked Russian propaganda film of someone raising a Russian flag somewhere and declaring victory, but Bakhmut is still not taken, Russians are losing 1000 troops a day, and Ukraine just got 40000 more troops and billions more worth of current military equipment, Russia is using 70+ year old equipment they’ve never trained with and is dropping bombs on itself.
I’m taking sides, I’m with democracy and stability by treaty.
You are too-siding with Russia, despotism, expansionism, and lies.
Russia is losing ground, losing soldiers, losing equipment, losing borders, losing its long term stalemate with NATO, losing billions from sanctions, and is losing this war. Facts are facts, and you’ve never met a real fact you could agree with.

Russia entered Ukraine because they tossed out the Russia installed “president” (his first “election” was thrown out as a total farce). Yanukovych delayed signing a hugely popular pending association agreement with the EU, choosing to accept a hugely unpopular and bad for Ukraine Russian trade deal, leading to his removal from office and, surprise, cushy retirement in Russia.

NATO had nothing whatsoever to do with Russia breaking the treaty from the 80’s in which they and the United States guaranteed Ukraine’s sovereignty and border security in perpetuity if they gave up their nukes. That included Crimea, which Russia invaded too over nonsense lies.
They declared Crimea under terrorist attack (it wasn’t) and invaded “to protect the citizens”. They did the same in Ukraine, recognizing the terrorist separatists as the legitimate (unelected) government and declaring the real government were terrorists attacking peaceful Russians in Eastern Ukraine. (The same peaceful Russians that shot down a commercial airline full of innocent people completely uninvolved in their conflict).

Putin said the purpose of the operation was to "protect the people" in the predominantly Russian-speaking region of Donbas who he falsely claimed that "for eight years now, [had] been facing humiliation and genocide perpetrated by the Kyiv regime". Putin said that Russia sought the "demilitarisation and denazification" of Ukraine, and insisted Russia wouldn’t occupy any of Ukraine….all pure lies. He now says he intends to remove Ukraine from the map and Ukrainians from the gene pool.

It had absolutely nothing to do with NATO….NATO wasn’t considering giving Ukraine, Sweden, or Finland membership before the land grab invasions. You lackwit. If anything it was fear that Ukraine might join the EU….but really it was the loss of their installed Russian president that was beholding to the Kremlin, not any of the lame excuses they’ve made since.

You just love to rewrite history and always expect everyone else to be as ignorant of reality as yourself. Sadly for you, some people have memories longer than a methed out gnat and know why things happened, not just what the perpetrators of crimes say today that contradicts everything they said yesterday and before.
There’s no agreement to not expand NATO. Who told you that, Putin?

But has the actual history, or the nuclear treaty, or the ousting of the Russian planted president by the populace and installation of their chosen president (exactly what you hoped for with Trump on Jan 6 except instead of 2000 people it was the entire country performing a coup) been given on your fake propaganda websites? If so, you missed it all.

bobknight33 said:

You win NOT.
The only Russian nonsense is Hill Clinton and the DNC which paid for the Steele Dossier and proven 100% BS .

But you, a foolish man has no idea of this reality because you watch slanted one sided "news"

Bakhmut has almost fallen -- and Russia is gaining ground. I'm not taking sides but facts are facts.




The question is WHY Russia entered Ukraine. Im sure that NATO breaking their agreement with Russia over last 40 years and entering into non NATO countries has a something to do with it.

But has that question been asked on your fake news outlet?

Viral transmission not tested in Pfizer trials

spawnflagger says...

Just because transmissibility-reduction-effectiveness wasn't studied before the (emergency use authorization) release of the vaccine doesn't mean that it wasn't also (somewhat) effective at doing that, but just became known after-the-fact because of a much larger "study" (the general population).
The point of the pre-release studies was to determine how effective it was at preventing severe-disease and hospitalization, and those were the numbers evaluated for the EUA decision (at least in USA)
I don't know who this politician is, but seems to be trying hard to create scandal and controversy. And sure, he did uncover a lie by government officials, sort of (preventing yourself from getting sick to the point of shedding less virus does help others around you too), if they made those statements and marketing materials before such data existed to back it up.
Maybe pfizer did make those claims before the EU rollout? That wasn't shown or discussed in this video, even though it would have helped his argument by presenting that.

Certainly I agree that the phrase "speed of science" is content-less, because the scientific method doesn't define speed. The time-to-marketable-solution might be a better measurement, and that largely depends on how much money you throw at a problem.

Irish Politician Mick Wallace on the United States

noims says...

There are a couple of Irish EU Parliamentarians that act the wise fool - the court jester that is allowed to speak truth to power in the guise of eccentricity.

It's similar to the way the best real American commentaries on politics come from comedians, because the information comes packaged in entertainment, rather than much of the press who are forced to pick one or the other.

Oliver Stones thoughts on why Putin invaded Ukraine

StukaFox says...

I don't believe this was ever about taking Ukraine with the Russian military. I believe this is about destroying Ukraine and squeezing Europe's energy-dependent balls until the EU cracks under the economic pressure caused by the sanctions. This is already happening with Germany whimpering to Daddy Vladdy for all that precious, precious oil and gas. "Oh, we gave Zelensky a billion euros!"; yeah, and you gave Putin 25x that in oil/gas purchases.

The mealy-mouthing and dissembling has already begun, most shamefully from the New York Times, who is calling for Ukraine to make "hard choices". "This isn't capitulation" -- fuck you NYT, yes it is.

I had honest hopes that the western powers would show some spine and resolve, but as soon at their economies started to feel a little pain, the number of fucks given for Ukrainian lives went to zero. Russian is going to rape and murder its way from Odessa to the Belarus border until the western powers figure out some way to make it all Zelensky's fault or force him to cede massive amounts of Ukrainian territory before any real economic pain felt.

The worst part is that Finland and Sweden are going to be granted NATO membership, but Ukraine still is denied. Why are these two the hills NATO is willing to die on and Ukraine not? If NATO isn't willing to risk nuclear war over Ukraine, what happens when the tip of a single Russian boot touches Finnish soil? What happens when Finland then calls for Article 5 and the rest of NATO suddenly realizes shit just got real? What happens when it's time to shit or get off the pot; put up or shut up? Either NATO charges into the teeth of a potential nuclear war, or NATO is shown to be a paper tiger. If someone sees a middle ground, I'm interested in hearing it.

(Incidentally, NATO's Article 5 is pretty porous. A-5 doesn't say every NATO nation commits whatever forces are deemed necessary by the whole to defend against an aggressor. Instead, it says that in the event of A-5 coming into play, each member will take "such action as [the member state] deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area."

Notice the whole 'each member' and 'deems necessary'? Yeah, to quote a popular movie 'I don't think this mutual defense pact means what you think it does'.)

Pete Buttigieg Perfectly Articulates Republican Behavior

BSR says...

Paragraphs please. I can barely find the next line down. I'm old ya know. I can't hold my breath that long.

This is all I see:

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

Karl Popper from The Open Society and Its Enemies [1945]


I will not tolerate this.

Go back to your desk and bring it back when you're done and then I'll read it.

luxintenebris said:

Less well known [than other paradoxes] is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.—In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal.

Karl Popper from The Open Society and Its Enemies [1945]

The dangers of a Russian energy superpower

vil says...

Newt has it researched as usual, some minor points:
- Ukraine is in the UN
- Ukraine in its pre war state could not get into the EU, there are economic criteria for that to have a chance to work. What was proposed was a free trade zone and economic help. The EU was slow as fuck. The Ukrainian political situation was volatile.
- Ukraine could not be admitted into NATO after 2014 as it was already in a proxy war against Russia.

What a US president with a brain could have done in Trumps term was broker a deal with Putin that would make land concessions to Russia (russian speaking regions based on referendums maybe?) in exchange for future EU and NATO affiliation for the rest of Ukraine with vague promises of weapon and troop movement limitations. Nearly impossible but it could be tried if one stayed a step ahead of Putin.

Trump patted him on the back instead and took selfies.

NOAA's GOES-16 Satellite Spies Megaflash Lightning

60 Minutes - Swine Flu Vaccine Warning 1979

PFAS: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)

bremnet says...

I hate it when the uneducated try to explain a complex issue and do a piss poor job of it. Is PFAS a problem? Sure. Are ALL PFAS compounds a problem with regards to their toxicity? No. The small molecule species are problematic because of mobility. The polymeric species are stable as fuck, that's why they were invented and why we use them as seals and barrier layers to isolate corrosive liquids and gases, and why we use them in such things as medical implants. The polymers excel because they are inert and largely unreactive. So - are they all bad? No. Are they all good? No. But it's too late - the fuckwits like Oliver have fueled the Emotional Response bus, and society won't stand for outdated concepts like scientific investigation or rational thought. Eight member countries of the EU are presently on track to restrict or ban all PFAS in any form, sweeping all compounds into the same category with no differentiation between a water soluble perfluorinated molecule like perfluorinated PVME and a one million molecular weight PTFE polymer. If it has a -CF2- moiety in it, it's subject to being banned. Good science doesn't matter any more, the knee-jerk fear mongerers are now making the decisions.

DOPESICK Official Trailer (2021)

luxintenebris jokingly says...

looks like a great movie that might not want to see. having been exposed to this subject matter - hats off to John Oliver btw - it just might bring up the past seething rage again. at least, won't have to fear spoilers.

Pandora's box opened with direct-to-consumer marketing. held it a very bad idea then, and find this - and the Sackler family - a direct result of that bad idea. recall the "Cassandra's" at the time telling that this would - and did - happen. along the same lines when the S&Ls went down. faulty ideology, clear warnings ignored, and what was said to happen, happened. the same folks are still following the same playbook today.

the AMA says it leads to higher drugs prices, EU voted it down for the same reason - using the U.S. as the example, and the operation data of pharmas prove that it is more about sales than safety or R&D. The cost is too high. In currency and lives.

[unless you're in EMT services, sell PDs Narcan, produce black tar, or rehab services - then it's job security]

but hope it's a massive hit.

do for the Sackler name what Stalin, Dahmer, or Manson did for their surname.

Perhaps the weakest link in the US electrical system

spawnflagger says...

this guy covers interesting topics, but is really longwinded. I wish someone would make a "digest" version of his videos... I bet this 25 minutes video could be cut into 5 minutes.

also for near the end (not sure which prior video he was defending) - it's not the voltage that kills, it's the current. And is why GFCI trips on a few mA.

UK and EU also have power strips, but 220+ Volt systems need half the current to get same power, so overloading those wires is less likely.

I've seen a UK power strip that failed and actually shorted hot to ground/earth (fuse didn't help), and a TV was plugged into it, so energized the satellite TV coax cable's ground, which fried the expensive distribution equipment in the wiring closet (which must not have been properly grounded either).



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon