Jump to content
Male HQ

Ukraine invasion by Russia Discussion and it's impact on Singapore and Asia? (compiled)


singalion

Recommended Posts

What is your point of view regarding the massive build up of military forces at the Border to Ukraine and holding joint military trainings in Belarus near the border to Ukraine?

 

Do you fear a new World War?

 

What is your interpretation of the Russian actions?

 

What impact do you see for Singapore and South East Asia on this development?

 

 

 

Here some background info:

 

For the images please refer to the original article:

 

https://www.economist.com/interactive/2022/02/11/russias-military-build-up-enters-a-more-dangerous-phase

Ukraine and Russia
Russia’s military build-up enters a more dangerous phase

 

The Economist   Feb 11th 2022

New satellite images show troops and equipment massing ever-closer to Ukraine

Russian military vehicles mass in Rechitsa, Belarus
Feb 11th 2022
Russia is engaged in the largest military build-up in Europe since the cold war. It has demanded that NATO pull back from eastern Europe and rule out Ukraine joining the alliance. Weeks of diplomacy have produced little. On February 11th Jake Sullivan, President Joe Biden’s national security adviser, warned that “the threat is now immediate”. Mr Biden reportedly phoned European allies to tell them that an attack was likely.
Around 100 Russian battalion tactical groups—fighting formations of 1,000 or so troops, accompanied by air defence, artillery and logistics—have gathered on Ukraine’s borders with Russia and Belarus. The build-up has entered a new phase. Russian units are heading from large bases into staging areas near the border. Troops are moving to link up with their equipment. Vital enablers for war, like field hospitals and engineering units, are being put into place. All of this is visible. America and its NATO allies scrutinise Russia’s mobilisation using spy satellites, surveillance flights and other means of gathering intelligence.
 
But in the 21st century, others are watching, too. Open-source intelligence, known as OSINT, is a flourishing field. Journalists, researchers and amateur enthusiasts use commercial-satellite imagery, videos posted on social media, ship and aircraft-tracking websites and other publicly available sources to see military forces moving and massing, nearly in real time. These techniques are being applied to the Russia-Ukraine crisis.
 

Ukraine Yelnya

To understand why the build-up now looks more threatening, start with Yelnya, a base 125km from Russia’s border with Belarus, normally home to the 144th Guards Motorised Rifle Division. In November last year Yelnya began to fill with equipment from the 41st Combined Arms Army, a high-level formation that typically includes several divisions and is based more than 3,000km away in Siberia. According to Janes, a defence-intelligence firm, satellite images taken in late January showed troops had begun to occupy the tents. Internal heating melted the snow on top; the surrounding ground turned into a muddy slush, indicating heavy footfall (move the slider below to see the change).
 
October 13th 2021
January 19th 2022
[Note for pictures refer to the link]
 
 
The left of this image probably shows two battalions of infantry fighting vehicles, says Tom Bullock, an analyst at Janes. To their right, with their long barrels visibly protruding, are two battalions of the 2S19 Msta, a self-propelled howitzer.
 
At the top left, we can see a battalion of the BM-27 Uragan, a self-propelled multiple-rocket-launcher system, says Mr Bullock. At the bottom right are likely main battle tanks, with external fuel drums attached to the rear.
 
Now Yelnya is emptying out. It is doing so under the cover of cloud, out of sight of normal optical satellite imagery. But as The Economist explained in a recent Technology Quarterly, synthetic-aperture radar (SAR) satellites help to get around this problem. The European Space Agency’s Sentinel-1 SAR satellites make images of every spot in Europe every six days. The results are grainy, meaning individual vehicles or buildings cannot be picked out. But man-made structures reflect radar waves from SAR satellites particularly well. Here, they have been coloured purple. That allows us to see the dramatic change at Yelnya between January 23rd and February 11th.
 
The 41st Combined Arms Army is moving south, towards the Ukrainian border. An anonymous open-source analyst, who tweets under the name @danspiun, told The Economist how he and others discovered this. Russian drivers are enthusiastic users of cameras fitted to their dashboards, to capture traffic accidents. In recent weeks, handheld cameras and these have recorded military equipment being moved by road and rail—images that are then shared online.
 
One video clip (left) posted on TikTok shows equipment at a station. The background allows it to be “geo-located” to Novozybkov station in Bryansk, around 35km from Ukraine’s border. In a second clip (right) another train laden with armoured vehicles is visible at the same station, some of its carriages decoupled. An eight-figure number emblazoned on the train can be cross-referenced with a website that tracks railway movements. The train began its journey in Yelnya—the camp being emptied—and travelled to Novozybkov.
 
Ukraine Kursk
As Yelnya empties and new units arrive from all over Russia, Ukraine’s eastern border is growing thick with Russian forces. Consider the western city of Kursk, famous for a second-world-war German-Soviet tank battle. One of the units involved in that fight was the 1st Guards Tank Army, the Russian army’s premier offensive formation, based near Moscow. Elements of that army were spotted on social media, west of Kursk, last week. Other units are also turning up at a training area to the east of the city, thought to house the 6th Combined Arms Army. Henry Boyd of the International Institute for Strategic Studies, a think-tank in London, suggests that the new arrivals seen below might be elements of the Northern Fleet's 200th Motor Rifle Brigade, normally based in Murmansk, a port near the Finnish border.
 
In this satellite photo from February 10th, new tents and housing for troops are visible. The lack of snow on the roof suggests that the building is heated and ready for troops or already housing them.
Russia’s build-up continues. This image shows heavy-equipment transporters—lined up at the bottom left—that have recently taken additional vehicles to Kursk
 
 
Ukraine Novoozernoye
Russia invaded and annexed Crimea, Ukraine in 2014. The satellite images below show how a camp at Novoozernoye, on the north-west coast—and probably home to the 58th Combined Arms Army—jumped in size between September and early February. More recent photos, from February 9th, show a surge in forces over the preceding 24 hours. In another image of the same site, artillery pieces can be seen churning up the ground in training. To the south, out of shot, are the glimmering waters of the Black Sea, where Russia is assembling a large naval force, including landing craft.
 
September 15th 2021
February 1st 2022
 
 
A new garrison has appeared to the south. This shows not just housing, but also a suspected field hospital—the cross-shaped tent. Armies sometimes set up hospitals during exercises. But Rob Lee of King's College says that field hospitals popping up in different regions around Ukraine is "certainly abnormal".
 
Russian artillery pieces can be seen leaving tracks in the ground during training. Russia’s army has more than 4,600 artillery weapons of different kinds; Ukraine is thought to have fewer than 2,000.
 
In Oktyabrskoye, in the middle of the Crimean peninsula, a huge camp has sprouted at a disused airfield. It now appears to hold the better part of a brigade. Personnel tents have been deployed in former aircraft shelters and along the tarmac.
April 8th 2020
February 10th 2022
 
Ukraine Zyabrovka
Ukraine is essentially ringed on three sides, because of a large Russian build-up in Belarus. “Allied Resolve”, a hastily-announced Russia-Belarus exercise—more likely cover for troop movements—began on February 10th and is due to end on February 20th. As many as 30,000 Russian troops may be involved, according to NATO. Some are alarmingly close to Ukrainian soil. Zyabrovka, around 25km from the border, is another disused airfield which has become a swarm of activity.
March 13th 2020
February 10th 2022
 
Helicopters at Zyabrovka. The airfield appears to be host to a battalion tactical group of the VDV, Russia’s airborne forces, suggests Mr Boyd. The VDV’s paratroopers would probably be at the vanguard of any offensive.
 
The double-cross shape here, larger than the one at Novoozernoye, is probably another field hospital. The shape is almost identical to those set up by the Russian armed forces elsewhere. Alongside it is more housing for troops.Little more than 50km to the east, even closer to Ukraine, is Rechitsa. Videos and photos on social media have shown sprawling fields of Russian tanks, formidable air defences and even a karaoke party for soldiers under falling snow. Satellite images from February 9th show how Russian vehicles have been training in the snow, leaving spidery trails.
 
Taken together, these satellite images show that Ukraine is now ringed by Russian forces to its north, east and south.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
20220122_UKRAINE_OSINT-_.png
 
 
That gives the Kremlin options: a thrust into the Donbas region of eastern Ukraine to support Russian proxies there; a deeper attack along Ukraine’s southern coast all the way to the Dnieper river; punitive raids against Ukraine’s armed forces—or even a drive all the way to Kyiv. On February 11th America urged its citizens to leave the city within 48 hours. As Antony Blinken, America’s secretary of state, noted on the same day: “We're in a window when an invasion could begin at any time.”

 

Sources: Maxar Technologies; Planet; International Institute for Strategic Studies; Janes; Rochan Consulting; The Economist

 

 

 

 

https://www.economist.com/interactive/2022/02/11/russias-military-build-up-enters-a-more-dangerous-phase

 
Edited by singalion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The actions of Putin are unpredictable.

 

But if the conflict gets resolved diplomatically,  all the credit should go to President Biden who showed his toughness confronting the Russian strongman.  Strongman vs. strongman,  but America + NATO has the better military and economic weapons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/17/2022 at 3:23 PM, singalion said:

What is your point of view regarding the massive build up of military forces at the Border to Ukraine and holding joint military trainings in Belarus near the border to Ukraine?

 

Do you fear a new World War?

 

What is your interpretation of the Russian actions?

 

What impact do you see for Singapore and South East Asia on this development?

 

 

 

Here some background info:

 

For the images please refer to the original article:

 

https://www.economist.com/interactive/2022/02/11/russias-military-build-up-enters-a-more-dangerous-phase

Ukraine and Russia
Russia’s military build-up enters a more dangerous phase

 

The Economist   Feb 11th 2022

New satellite images show troops and equipment massing ever-closer to Ukraine

Russian military vehicles mass in Rechitsa, Belarus
Feb 11th 2022
Russia is engaged in the largest military build-up in Europe since the cold war. It has demanded that NATO pull back from eastern Europe and rule out Ukraine joining the alliance. Weeks of diplomacy have produced little. On February 11th Jake Sullivan, President Joe Biden’s national security adviser, warned that “the threat is now immediate”. Mr Biden reportedly phoned European allies to tell them that an attack was likely.
Around 100 Russian battalion tactical groups—fighting formations of 1,000 or so troops, accompanied by air defence, artillery and logistics—have gathered on Ukraine’s borders with Russia and Belarus. The build-up has entered a new phase. Russian units are heading from large bases into staging areas near the border. Troops are moving to link up with their equipment. Vital enablers for war, like field hospitals and engineering units, are being put into place. All of this is visible. America and its NATO allies scrutinise Russia’s mobilisation using spy satellites, surveillance flights and other means of gathering intelligence.
 
But in the 21st century, others are watching, too. Open-source intelligence, known as OSINT, is a flourishing field. Journalists, researchers and amateur enthusiasts use commercial-satellite imagery, videos posted on social media, ship and aircraft-tracking websites and other publicly available sources to see military forces moving and massing, nearly in real time. These techniques are being applied to the Russia-Ukraine crisis.
 

Ukraine Yelnya

To understand why the build-up now looks more threatening, start with Yelnya, a base 125km from Russia’s border with Belarus, normally home to the 144th Guards Motorised Rifle Division. In November last year Yelnya began to fill with equipment from the 41st Combined Arms Army, a high-level formation that typically includes several divisions and is based more than 3,000km away in Siberia. According to Janes, a defence-intelligence firm, satellite images taken in late January showed troops had begun to occupy the tents. Internal heating melted the snow on top; the surrounding ground turned into a muddy slush, indicating heavy footfall (move the slider below to see the change).
 
October 13th 2021
January 19th 2022
[Note for pictures refer to the link]
 
 
The left of this image probably shows two battalions of infantry fighting vehicles, says Tom Bullock, an analyst at Janes. To their right, with their long barrels visibly protruding, are two battalions of the 2S19 Msta, a self-propelled howitzer.
 
At the top left, we can see a battalion of the BM-27 Uragan, a self-propelled multiple-rocket-launcher system, says Mr Bullock. At the bottom right are likely main battle tanks, with external fuel drums attached to the rear.
 
Now Yelnya is emptying out. It is doing so under the cover of cloud, out of sight of normal optical satellite imagery. But as The Economist explained in a recent Technology Quarterly, synthetic-aperture radar (SAR) satellites help to get around this problem. The European Space Agency’s Sentinel-1 SAR satellites make images of every spot in Europe every six days. The results are grainy, meaning individual vehicles or buildings cannot be picked out. But man-made structures reflect radar waves from SAR satellites particularly well. Here, they have been coloured purple. That allows us to see the dramatic change at Yelnya between January 23rd and February 11th.
 
The 41st Combined Arms Army is moving south, towards the Ukrainian border. An anonymous open-source analyst, who tweets under the name @danspiun, told The Economist how he and others discovered this. Russian drivers are enthusiastic users of cameras fitted to their dashboards, to capture traffic accidents. In recent weeks, handheld cameras and these have recorded military equipment being moved by road and rail—images that are then shared online.
 
One video clip (left) posted on TikTok shows equipment at a station. The background allows it to be “geo-located” to Novozybkov station in Bryansk, around 35km from Ukraine’s border. In a second clip (right) another train laden with armoured vehicles is visible at the same station, some of its carriages decoupled. An eight-figure number emblazoned on the train can be cross-referenced with a website that tracks railway movements. The train began its journey in Yelnya—the camp being emptied—and travelled to Novozybkov.
 
Ukraine Kursk
As Yelnya empties and new units arrive from all over Russia, Ukraine’s eastern border is growing thick with Russian forces. Consider the western city of Kursk, famous for a second-world-war German-Soviet tank battle. One of the units involved in that fight was the 1st Guards Tank Army, the Russian army’s premier offensive formation, based near Moscow. Elements of that army were spotted on social media, west of Kursk, last week. Other units are also turning up at a training area to the east of the city, thought to house the 6th Combined Arms Army. Henry Boyd of the International Institute for Strategic Studies, a think-tank in London, suggests that the new arrivals seen below might be elements of the Northern Fleet's 200th Motor Rifle Brigade, normally based in Murmansk, a port near the Finnish border.
 
In this satellite photo from February 10th, new tents and housing for troops are visible. The lack of snow on the roof suggests that the building is heated and ready for troops or already housing them.
Russia’s build-up continues. This image shows heavy-equipment transporters—lined up at the bottom left—that have recently taken additional vehicles to Kursk
 
 
Ukraine Novoozernoye
Russia invaded and annexed Crimea, Ukraine in 2014. The satellite images below show how a camp at Novoozernoye, on the north-west coast—and probably home to the 58th Combined Arms Army—jumped in size between September and early February. More recent photos, from February 9th, show a surge in forces over the preceding 24 hours. In another image of the same site, artillery pieces can be seen churning up the ground in training. To the south, out of shot, are the glimmering waters of the Black Sea, where Russia is assembling a large naval force, including landing craft.
 
September 15th 2021
February 1st 2022
 
 
A new garrison has appeared to the south. This shows not just housing, but also a suspected field hospital—the cross-shaped tent. Armies sometimes set up hospitals during exercises. But Rob Lee of King's College says that field hospitals popping up in different regions around Ukraine is "certainly abnormal".
 
Russian artillery pieces can be seen leaving tracks in the ground during training. Russia’s army has more than 4,600 artillery weapons of different kinds; Ukraine is thought to have fewer than 2,000.
 
In Oktyabrskoye, in the middle of the Crimean peninsula, a huge camp has sprouted at a disused airfield. It now appears to hold the better part of a brigade. Personnel tents have been deployed in former aircraft shelters and along the tarmac.
April 8th 2020
February 10th 2022
 
Ukraine Zyabrovka
Ukraine is essentially ringed on three sides, because of a large Russian build-up in Belarus. “Allied Resolve”, a hastily-announced Russia-Belarus exercise—more likely cover for troop movements—began on February 10th and is due to end on February 20th. As many as 30,000 Russian troops may be involved, according to NATO. Some are alarmingly close to Ukrainian soil. Zyabrovka, around 25km from the border, is another disused airfield which has become a swarm of activity.
March 13th 2020
February 10th 2022
 
Helicopters at Zyabrovka. The airfield appears to be host to a battalion tactical group of the VDV, Russia’s airborne forces, suggests Mr Boyd. The VDV’s paratroopers would probably be at the vanguard of any offensive.
 
The double-cross shape here, larger than the one at Novoozernoye, is probably another field hospital. The shape is almost identical to those set up by the Russian armed forces elsewhere. Alongside it is more housing for troops.Little more than 50km to the east, even closer to Ukraine, is Rechitsa. Videos and photos on social media have shown sprawling fields of Russian tanks, formidable air defences and even a karaoke party for soldiers under falling snow. Satellite images from February 9th show how Russian vehicles have been training in the snow, leaving spidery trails.
 
Taken together, these satellite images show that Ukraine is now ringed by Russian forces to its north, east and south.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
20220122_UKRAINE_OSINT-_.png
 
 
That gives the Kremlin options: a thrust into the Donbas region of eastern Ukraine to support Russian proxies there; a deeper attack along Ukraine’s southern coast all the way to the Dnieper river; punitive raids against Ukraine’s armed forces—or even a drive all the way to Kyiv. On February 11th America urged its citizens to leave the city within 48 hours. As Antony Blinken, America’s secretary of state, noted on the same day: “We're in a window when an invasion could begin at any time.”

 

Sources: Maxar Technologies; Planet; International Institute for Strategic Studies; Janes; Rochan Consulting; The Economist

 

 

 

 

https://www.economist.com/interactive/2022/02/11/russias-military-build-up-enters-a-more-dangerous-phase

 

 

thanks... good info, compact and quick read to summarize the conflicts that was brewing for quite a long while...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/18/2022 at 4:45 AM, Steve5380 said:

The actions of Putin are unpredictable.

 

But if the conflict gets resolved diplomatically,  all the credit should go to President Biden who showed his toughness confronting the Russian strongman.  Strongman vs. strongman,  but America + NATO has the better military and economic weapons.

 

This guy below? Senile Biden? Resolving anything diplomatically....? Yeah right...  Give it up already! 

 

Tongue | Joe Biden | Know Your Meme

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't fear a new World War - at least not one escalating out of this crisis. It seems posters so far consider this to be an issue between Russia and the USA/NATO. I suggest there is another power sitting waiting to see what will happen and how it can benefit. China could have a major effect on what is about to happen. It now has massive investments in many parts of Russia. At the same time the USA has made it clear it does not want the large Chinese companies involved in its own economy. So China has more interest in helping Russia in my view. Plus China has massive US$ reserves totalling around $3,408 billion which, were it to use them to hurt the USA, could assist Russia respond to the massive sanctions the USA has threatened against it. It could also put the world into a major recession.

 

I am sure those involved in the Ukraine crisis will have one eye on Beijing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Does anyone spot a difference?

 

 

Mr Macron and Mr Putin were pictured sat far apart in Moscow

Putin meets Macron on February 11, 2022

 

Gan9ncwGg5TJwl67y6upRFXCdIJAWMeC.jpg

 

Putin and Scholz took their seats at opposite ends of the same enormous white table from the Putin-Macron talks on 15 Feb 2022.

 

 

 

 

 

Presidente Jair Bolsonaro was seen sitting close to Vladimir Putin in Moscow

Russian President Vladimir Putin with his Brazilian counterpart Jair Bolsonaro during a meeting in Moscow, Russia February 16, 2022

 

Russian President Vladimir Putin shakes hands with his Brazilian counterpart Jair Bolsonaro during a meeting in Moscow, Russia February 16, 2022. Sputnik/Mikhail Klimentyev/Kremlin via REUTERS

Russian President Vladimir Putin shakes hands with his Brazilian counterpart Jair Bolsonaro during a meeting in Moscow, Russia February 16, 2022

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/18/2022 at 4:45 AM, Steve5380 said:

The actions of Putin are unpredictable.

 

But if the conflict gets resolved diplomatically,  all the credit should go to President Biden who showed his toughness confronting the Russian strongman.  Strongman vs. strongman,  but America + NATO has the better military and economic weapons.

 

Biden and his 2 boys would do the world a favour if they stay out from the Ukraine/Russia/Europe conflict, and let these countries resolve the issue themselves.  The problem is, USA is always trying to stir shit (and then sells his weapons to these countries and benefit at the expense of these countries).  This has been US' modus operandi all these years since the WW2.

 

I am sure even bigger european countries like France and Germany is pissed with the US. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/18/2022 at 6:33 AM, Guest Tree said:

 

Biden and his 2 boys would do the world a favour if they stay out from the Ukraine/Russia/Europe conflict, and let these countries resolve the issue themselves.  The problem is, USA is always trying to stir shit (and then sells his weapons to these countries and benefit at the expense of these countries).  This has been US' modus operandi all these years since the WW2.

 

I am sure even bigger european countries like France and Germany is pissed with the US. 

 

Don't forget that the USA didn't just let Germany plus Japan plus Italy resolve their issues with other countries by themselves in WWII.  It defeated the countries of the Axis, and so helped get Japan out of Singapore.   Otherwise,  your parents and you would have been fucked!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You overlook the fact it took the US 2 yrs to enter both WW and a direct attack before they were prepared to get involved..... Quite content to sell arms to 3rd parties to keep their economy ticking over.... Same as they are doing now!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/18/2022 at 3:14 AM, InBangkok said:

I don't fear a new World War 

 

This coming from you is very understandable.  You feel secure in Thailand,  your of old folk with little money retirement place,  and you don't give a damn about the millions of innocent victims that a World War may cause.  All you care for is that among the ruins there might be still many places in the world to travel to,  sightseeing and listening to live music.  But don't feel so secure!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it not the Americans going around stirring up conflicts???

Examples. Yemen, Iran, Iraq,Venezuela, Nth Korea, China, Libya and more

There is no bigger threatening country than the USA and its mate Israel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/18/2022 at 8:03 AM, Sub femboy said:

You overlook the fact it took the US 2 yrs to enter both WW and a direct attack before they were prepared to get involved..... Quite content to sell arms to 3rd parties to keep their economy ticking over.... Same as they are doing now!

 

You don't know enough about WW2.  And I am surprised @Nightingale 'thanked' your post.  Although I understand why...

 

Shortly after the start of WW2 in 1939,  America started to provide military supplies and other goods to the Europa that was fighting Hitler.  Many convoys of ships sailed from the US to Europe and were attacked by the Nazis.  Then a year later, after Japan attacked the US in Pearl Harbor in December of 1941,  America declared war against Japan and Germany declared war against America,  and from there on the two parties,  the Allies and the Axis,  fully engaged. 

 

One reason America didn't enter the war from the beginning is that it didn't have much of a military.  Merely 100,000 troops.  It had to build up its military force through conscription and training,  and this took time.  But from early on, America offered the same support it is now giving to Ukraine.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/18/2022 at 8:13 AM, Sub femboy said:

Is it not the Americans going around stirring up conflicts???

Examples. Yemen, Iran, Iraq,Venezuela, Nth Korea, China, Libya and more

There is no bigger threatening country than the USA and its mate Israel

 

I understand the reason you are a "Sub femboy" and not a "Super femboy".   You let your emotions prevail over reason.

 

America does not go around stirring up conflicts.  Instead, it responds of conflicts where no other nations want to get involved.  Fighting  Nazism and communism was not an evil undertaking.  Who knows what this world would be today if these regimes could have propagated freely!   Don't think that people in North Korea, Cuba, China and even Russia enjoy their freedom like I do in America and you partially do in Singapore!

 

There are so many anti-American emotions going around!  But yet you enjoy all the modern products that have originated in America,  even some of its nice junk food! :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/18/2022 at 10:59 PM, Steve5380 said:

One reason America didn't enter the war from the beginning is that it didn't have much of a military.  Merely 100,000 troops.  It had to build up its military force through conscription and training,  and this took time.  But from early on, America offered the same support it is now giving to Ukraine.  

And the reason the US didn't have much of a military? It was ruled by pacifists who wanted no part of a war in Europe or anywhere else. And the aid it provided mostly to the United Kingdom - because the Nazis and Italian Fascists had conquered virtually every other country - had to be repaid, one reason why the UK was virtually bankrupt after it had won the war with American backing. Had the UK not fought Hitler and his Nazis virtually single-handedly for two years, there would have been nothing for the US to contribute in Europe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/18/2022 at 11:11 PM, Steve5380 said:

America does not go around stirring up conflicts.  Instead, it responds of conflicts where no other nations want to get involved.

Time you read up on your history of the USA for you could not be more wrong.

 

The USA and its CIA started meddling disastrously with other countries in the early 1950s. It unilaterally deposed the duly elected Prime Minister of democratic Iran, Mohammad Mosaddegh and restored to power the corrupt Shah with his hated secret police, the Savak. The increasingly megalomanic Shah so enraged his peoples that in 1978 he was deposed and fled the country. This led to the return of the Ayatollah Khomeini and the Iranian Revolution - and we all know what happened thereafter. All the fault of the USA. The problems the USA has with Iran today are a direct result of that action.

 

Then during the 8-year Iran-Iraq war, pissed off with Iran the USA sided with Saddam Hussein, sending him vast amounts of cash and weaponry, even though he was using banned chemical weapons. Then when Hussein turned 180 degrees to bite the hand which had fed him so lavishly, the USA gets pissed off again and invades, deposes him and takes over the country. To run it, George Bush puts in his pal, the cowboy boot wearing, cigar chomping Paul Bremer who had never administered anything worthwhile in his career. Not only did he screw everything up, during his watch US$9 billion went missing and unaccounted for. Far worse, by disbanding the Iraqi army, he created the conditions for the rise of ISIS - and we know what a disaster that became for the entire world.

 

We know the USA also propped up with cash and weaponry the dictators Marcos in The Philippines and Allende in Chile. We know that it informed the Indonesian government 24 hours in advance that it would not put up objections when it annexed East Timor, a conflict that led to 100,000 deaths. We know that it did precisely the same with West Pakistan when it wanted to go to war with East Pakistan to stop it becoming a separate state. East Pakistan became Bangladesh, but up to 3 million were killed in the resultant genocide. Yet another major failure for the USA and its CIA.

 

By far the worst error was in Indo-China. During WWII, Ho Chi Minh and his independence forces were an ally of the USA. Presidents Roosevelt and Truman were both anti-colonial. Part of the deal of their entering that war was that the European colonial powers give up their colonies after the war. Ho had written to both Presidents to remind them of their promises and to give him assurances that the hated French would not return to India-China. Truman reneged on that promise. Thus Ho's war with France continued until 1954 when France suffered a humiliating defeat at Dien Bien Phu and finally pulled out. A bunch of Americans had already been helping the French when it was realised the Vietnamese, whose only desire was to govern their own nation, were getting arms from Russia. This escalated and thus started the great Indochina War which resulted in a massive disaster for the USA and an equally disastrous one for three poor countries - Laos, Vietnam and Cambodia.

 

Over a 9 year span, the USA dropped a planeload of bombs on Laos every 8 minutes, 24 hours a day for 9 whole years. Tiny, landlocked Laos became the most bombed country on the planet - all thanks to the CIA. And for what reason? Because bombers on missions over Vietnam could not return to their bases with bombs on board. So the pilots just flew a few extra miles and dropped the rest. Fuck Laos! Who cares? In any case, no one has heard of it! Bye bye bombs! 

 

The USA had by then invaded Vietnam in a vain attempt to prop up a succession of corrupt governments the south, killing around 3 million Vietnamese in the process. Nixon and Kissinger then decided - without getting approval from Congress as enshrined in US law - to invade Cambodia. The resultant incursion and massive bombing so destabilised the country it led directly to the rise of the Khmer Rouge. And we know that the resultant genocide killed at least 1.5 million Cambodians. All this a result of the USA's futile actions in Indo-China, a part of the world the people in Washington, the civil servants, knew almost nothing about!

 

Most recently we have had the invasion of Afghanistan on the pretext of killing Bin Laden. Yet another disaster. Vast amount of cash and arms pumped into the country which was left much worse off than when the USA invaded and is now facing according to all official sources a humanitarian catastrophe.

 

So @Steve5380, quit lying about how great the USA is and what a force for good it is in the world. The USA only does anything in this world if it protects its own interests - and to hell with the peoples it murders and those who are killed by the genocidal regimes it helps into power because it has no real clue what it is doing.

Edited by InBangkok
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/18/2022 at 10:35 AM, InBangkok said:

And the reason the US didn't have much of a military? It was ruled by pacifists who wanted no part of a war in Europe or anywhere else. And the aid it provided mostly to the United Kingdom - because the Nazis and Italian Fascists had conquered virtually every other country - had to be repaid, one reason why the UK was virtually bankrupt after it had won the war with American backing. Had the UK not fought Hitler and his Nazis virtually single-handedly for two years, there would have been nothing for the US to contribute in Europe.

 

Had America not helped the UK during WWII,  there would not have been much left of it. The Queen would have been forced to wear a Swastika. :lol:

And the United Kingdom recognizes with gratitude the help from America even today,  soon a century later!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/18/2022 at 11:47 AM, InBangkok said:

Time you read up on your history of the USA for you could not be more wrong.

 

The USA and its CIA started meddling disastrously with other countries in the early 1950s. It unilaterally deposed the duly elected Prime Minister of democratic Iran, Mohammad Mosaddegh and restored to power the corrupt Shah with his hated secret police, the Savak. The increasingly megalomanic Shah so enraged his peoples that in 1978 he was deposed and fled the country. This led to the return of the Ayatollah Khomeini and the Iranian Revolution - and we all know what happened thereafter. All the fault of the USA. The problems the USA has with Iran today are a direct result of that action.

 

Then during the 8-year Iran-Iraq war, pissed off with Iran the USA sided with Saddam Hussein, sending him vast amounts of cash and weaponry, even though he was using banned chemical weapons. Then when Hussein turned 180 degrees to bite the hand which had fed him so lavishly, the USA gets pissed off again and invades, deposes him and takes over the country. To run it, George Bush puts in his pal, the cowboy boot wearing, cigar chomping Paul Bremer who had never administered anything worthwhile in his career. Not only did he screw everything up, during his watch US$9 billion went missing and unaccounted for. Far worse, by disbanding the Iraqi army, he created the conditions for the rise of ISIS - and we know what a disaster that became for the entire world.

 

We know the USA also propped up with cash and weaponry the dictators Marcos in The Philippines and Allende in Chile. We know that it informed the Indonesian government 24 hours in advance that it would not put up objections when it annexed East Timor, a conflict that led to 100,000 deaths. We know that it did precisely the same with West Pakistan when it wanted to go to war with East Pakistan to stop it becoming a separate state. East Pakistan became Bangladesh, but up to 3 million were killed in the resultant genocide. Yet another major failure for the USA and its CIA.

 

By far the worst error was in Indo-China. During WWII, Ho Chi Minh and his independence forces were an ally of the USA. Presidents Roosevelt and Truman were both anti-colonial. Part of the deal of their entering that war was that the European colonial powers give up their colonies after the war. Ho had written to both Presidents to remind them of their promises and to give him assurances that the hated French would not return to India-China. Truman reneged on that promise. Thus Ho's war with France continued until 1954 when France suffered a humiliating defeat at Dien Bien Phu and finally pulled out. A bunch of Americans had already been helping the French when it was realised the Vietnamese, whose only desire was to govern their own nation, were getting arms from Russia. This escalated and thus started the great Indochina War which resulted in a massive disaster for the USA and an equally disastrous one for three poor countries - Laos, Vietnam and Cambodia.

 

Over a 9 year span, the USA dropped a planeload of bombs on Laos every 8 minutes, 24 hours a day for 9 whole years. Tiny, landlocked Laos became the most bombed country on the planet - all thanks to the CIA. And for what reason? Because bombers on missions over Vietnam could not return to their bases with bombs on board. So the pilots just flew a few extra miles and dropped the rest. Fuck Laos! Who cares? In any case, no one has heard of it! Bye bye bombs! 

 

The USA had by then invaded Vietnam in a vain attempt to prop up a succession of corrupt governments the south, killing around 3 million Vietnamese in the process. Nixon and Kissinger then decided - without getting approval from Congress as enshrined in US law - to invade Cambodia. The resultant incursion and massive bombing so destabilised the country it led directly to the rise of the Khmer Rouge. And we know that the resultant genocide killed at least 1.5 million Cambodians. All this a result of the USA's futile actions in Indo-China, a part of the world the people in Washington, the civil servants, knew almost nothing about!

 

Most recently we have had the invasion of Afghanistan on the pretext of killing Bin Laden. Yet another disaster. Vast amount of cash and arms pumped into the country which was left much worse off than when the USA invaded and is now facing according to all official sources a humanitarian catastrophe.

 

So @Steve5380, quit lying about how great the USA is and what a force for good it is in the world. The USA only does anything in this world if it protects its own interests - and to hell with the peoples it murders and those who are killed by the genocidal regimes it helps into power because it has no real clue what it is doing.

 

We don't know what is your native country, because you are afraid of revealing anything about you.  Maybe you are British?  Maybe this is why your envy for America obscures your mind?   

 

Many countries have had their bad days due to the leaders that destiny,  or the devil,  put up to govern them.  In the case of America,  in recent times these leaders have consistently been the republican ones.  And they are getting more war-happy.  One of the recent big blunders was the worthless Iraq war started by GW Bush, and the badly handled invasion of Afghanistan.  I recognize that America has a problem of white supremacists embracing the GOP for monetary gain and war profiteering.  Their support of Trump has also shown this clearly.  They despise democracy and want to transform America into a totalitarian plutocracy.  So far the US is still holding together by its Constitution and its support from the progressive democrats,  but the future is uncertain.  America is still defined by its great Constitution and its noble principles. 

 

As for the main sources of conflicts, this is surely not America.  It was the expansionism of Germany under Hitler that precipitated WWII.  It was the expansionism of Russia's communism that lead to the Korean war.  It was communism after it spread to China that tried to expand beyond North Vietnam that prompted the Vietnam war.  It was the way the communist regimes treated their people that the West in horror made all its efforts in contain it. This lead to the actions of the US to keep communism out of the continent. This was also why Allende was deposed in Chile and why Castro's Cuba was marginalized.  All this grow into the Cold War.  It was the evil of the Nazis that lead to the creation of the state of Israel.  It was the total incompatibility of the Israeli Jews and the Arabs that lead to the Middle East wars, and these and the tyrannical and criminal acts of Hussein in Iraq were the motivation to throw him out and lead to the Iraq war. 

 

You will find all variations of history to accommodate for whatever your ideology is.  Unlike physics,  history is what it is depending on who writes it.  And you have happened to hit on a bunch of anti-American interpretations of history,  or you do it here to malevolently oppose me.   In any case,  you are responsible for what you think and write,  and I don't need to worry about it  :)      

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/19/2022 at 3:09 AM, Steve5380 said:

 

Had America not helped the UK during WWII,  there would not have been much left of it. The Queen would have been forced to wear a Swastika. :lol:

And the United Kingdom recognizes with gratitude the help from America even today,  soon a century later!

 

Please don't go around telling anyone if America is helping anyone during WWII. If not for Pearl Harbour, the Americans wouldn't even have been involved in the fight. 

 

And right now, Biden is stirring war in different regions as an age-old tactic to distract everyone from his own problems at home. Look at how he withdrew from Afghanistan so quickly, leaving the entire region in turmoil and al-Qaeda still there; And while he let al-Qaeda remain in Afghanistan, he pretended to conduct a counter-terrorism raid in northwest Syria; and now, he is playing up the tension in Ukraine and UK to stir more shit there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/18/2022 at 4:59 PM, Guest Guest said:

 

Please don't go around telling anyone if America is helping anyone during WWII. If not for Pearl Harbour, the Americans wouldn't even have been involved in the fight. 

 

And right now, Biden is stirring war in different regions as an age-old tactic to distract everyone from his own problems at home. Look at how he withdrew from Afghanistan so quickly, leaving the entire region in turmoil and al-Qaeda still there; And while he let al-Qaeda remain in Afghanistan, he pretended to conduct a counter-terrorism raid in northwest Syria; and now, he is playing up the tension in Ukraine and UK to stir more shit there. 

 

It is not true that Biden stirs more shit there.  What is very clear is that you are stirring shit HERE, at BW and in this very thread.

 

You cannot be so ignorant to not know that America was involved in WW2 from the start, helping Britain by sending convoys with its war ships protecting the merchant vessels that brought supplies to Britain.  BEFORE Pearl Harbor.

 

Please go back and learn about WW2 before posting falsities here.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/19/2022 at 10:05 AM, Steve5380 said:

 

It is not true that Biden stirs more shit there.  What is very clear is that you are stirring shit HERE, at BW and in this very thread.

 

You cannot be so ignorant to not know that America was involved in WW2 from the start, helping Britain by sending convoys with its war ships protecting the merchant vessels that brought supplies to Britain.  BEFORE Pearl Harbor.

 

Please go back and learn about WW2 before posting falsities here.  

 

Yeah right! And why was America involved in WW2 by "helping Britain by sending convoys with its war ships protecting the merchant vessels that brought supplies to Britain.  BEFORE Pearl Harbor"? It was all for the MONEY that they wanted to earn from the chaos!

 

The Neutrality Act of 1939 allowed belligerents such as Great Britain to purchase war materiel from the United States, but only on a “cash and carry” basis. On September 2, 1940, President Roosevelt signed a “Destroyers for Bases” agreement. Under the terms of the agreement, the United States gave the British more than 50 obsolete destroyers, in exchange for 99-year leases to territory in Newfoundland and the Caribbean, which would be used as U.S. air and naval bases. In December 1940, Churchill warned Roosevelt that the British were no longer able to pay for supplies. On December 17, President Roosevelt proposed a new initiative that would be known as Lend-Lease. The United States would provide Great Britain with the supplies it needed to fight Germany, but would not insist upon being paid immediately. Instead, the United States would “lend” the supplies to the British, deferring payment. When payment eventually did take place, the emphasis would not be on payment in dollars but there will still be payment in one form or another. And that was how lend-lease commercial terms began. 

 

So now, Biden is merely trying to stir all the shit he can, so as to distract everyone from the issues he is facing in his own home country! 

 

And of course, China is merely waiting for all the chaos to start, before they start making their moves on Taiwan and the South China Sea against every single Southeast Asian countries which has a stake there, directly or indirectly such as Singapore! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/19/2022 at 9:05 AM, Steve5380 said:

You cannot be so ignorant to not know that America was involved in WW2 from the start, helping Britain by sending convoys with its war ships protecting the merchant vessels that brought supplies to Britain.  BEFORE Pearl Harbor.

 

Please go back and learn about WW2 before posting falsities here.  

Ah, but it is you who should learn about American history before writing about it. America was an isolationist country prior to Pearl Harbour. No political party wanted anything to do with a war in Europe. Roosevelt's speeches make clear he agreed America would not become involved in the war. Behind the scenes, though, he understood that unless he helped the UK in some way, the Nazis were almost certain to attack Britain again, even after Britain had beaten the Luftwaffe during the Blitz. If that happened, the USA was likely to be next on Hitler's list. So he came to agreement with Churchill that the US would SELL arms and supplies to the UK. SELL - not give. In other words a commercial transaction repaid for at great cost after the war. He still did not then start to build up the US military forces. That did not happen until AFTER Pearl Harbour.

 

Selling arms and supplies is nothing like being involved in fighting a war. If you believe that, then you believe the USA fought with Iraq in the Iraq-Iran war. There again, the USA only profited by selling vast quantities of arms to Saddam Hussein. Not one US soldier fight in that 8-year war.

war.

 

And while on the subject of World War ii, it was not the British, the Americans and their allies who really won the war. It was the Soviet Union. Had the Soviet Union not beaten back the Nazis and then quickly marched towards Berlin, the war ould almost certainly have been lost. This came at a horrendous cost in the lives of the Soviet peoples - approximately 25 million deaths against 420,000 American deaths and 450,000 British deaths.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/19/2022 at 3:00 AM, Steve5380 said:

As for the main sources of conflicts, this is surely not America.  It was the expansionism of Germany under Hitler that precipitated WWII.  It was the expansionism of Russia's communism that lead to the Korean war.  It was communism after it spread to China that tried to expand beyond North Vietnam that prompted the Vietnam war.

How naive you are! Let's look at the Korean War. The USA had agreed that following the defeat of Japan, all Japan's colonial possessions would be returned to those countries from which Japan had appropriated them. When it came to Korea, the USA did not like this agreement and so, after a short period of the Koreans ruling themselves, the US along with the Soviets unilaterally decided to split the country in two and took it back from a united Korea. As with all partitioned countries - like Vietnam, India/Pakistan etc. - the partition at the 38th parallel split the country into two in a manner which corresponded to no political, cultural or terrain boundaries. It was just a total mess. As is now generally agreed by historians, the war which resulted was not a proxy war between superpowers - it was a civil war between the peoples of one country. But the US did not agree with that either and so they decided to prop up the South. Then the Soviets did the same in the north.

 

The trouble was that both the superpowers wanted a unified country under their control. Then again, most in Washington had no desire to get involved with Korea. It was not their problem and it was in a part of the world they knew little about and simply did not understand. What changed it was the Soviets exploding a nuclear bomb in 1949. When the Chinese communists beat America's ally Chiang Kai Shek to take over China later that year, Washington was in a state of utter panic and paranoia. Someone with little knowledge of Asia concocted the stupid domino theory. Thereafter what were frequently nationalist ideals - as in Vietnam - became countries that would fall to communism if the US did not intervene. 

 

And with that the body count just increased and multiplied horrendously. 2.5  million dead in Korea after which the US restored the brutal, corrupt hated strongman Syngman Rhee as its puppet President in the south. Even before the war started, the US colluded with Rhee in the massacre of up to 100,000 leftists and peasants. These mass killings were kept secret for 50 years. Documents and photographs taken by a US Army major declassified early this century show CIA and US military personnel present at the killings. Even before the war Rhee had imprisoned 30,000 alleged leftists. After the war, massively rigged elections ensured his regime continued with dreadful political repression until Rhee was eventually forced to leave the country in a CIA aircraft following a mass student revolt against his regime.

 

Why is there no peace agreement between north and south Korea? For the very simple reason that America's puppet Rhee adamantly refused to sign one. He always believed that with American backing he could take over the north. So it is largely thanks to US intervention that the Korean peninsula remains in a state of war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/19/2022 at 12:00 AM, Sub femboy said:

Hey Steve.... You know what?

There is not much difference between you and a Thanksgiving Turkey..... You are both stuffed full of sh-t.

 

I feel so sorry for you, having to eat Thanksgiving Turkey... stuffed full of sh-t.

 

But,  maybe you have some affinity? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/19/2022 at 12:45 AM, InBangkok said:

How naive you are! Let's look at the Korean War. The USA had agreed that following the defeat of Japan, all Japan's colonial possessions would be returned to those countries from which Japan had appropriated them. When it came to Korea, the USA did not like this agreement and so, after a short period of the Koreans ruling themselves, the US along with the Soviets unilaterally decided to split the country in two and took it back from a united Korea. As with all partitioned countries - like Vietnam, India/Pakistan etc. - the partition at the 38th parallel split the country into two in a manner which corresponded to no political, cultural or terrain boundaries. It was just a total mess. As is now generally agreed by historians, the war which resulted was not a proxy war between superpowers - it was a civil war between the peoples of one country. But the US did not agree with that either and so they decided to prop up the South. Then the Soviets did the same in the north.

 

The trouble was that both the superpowers wanted a unified country under their control. Then again, most in Washington had no desire to get involved with Korea. It was not their problem and it was in a part of the world they knew little about and simply did not understand. What changed it was the Soviets exploding a nuclear bomb in 1949. When the Chinese communists beat America's ally Chiang Kai Shek to take over China later that year, Washington was in a state of utter panic and paranoia. Someone with little knowledge of Asia concocted the stupid domino theory. Thereafter what were frequently nationalist ideals - as in Vietnam - became countries that would fall to communism if the US did not intervene. 

 

And with that the body count just increased and multiplied horrendously. 2.5  million dead in Korea after which the US restored the brutal, corrupt hated strongman Syngman Rhee as its puppet President in the south. Even before the war started, the US colluded with Rhee in the massacre of up to 100,000 leftists and peasants. These mass killings were kept secret for 50 years. Documents and photographs taken by a US Army major declassified early this century show CIA and US military personnel present at the killings. Even before the war Rhee had imprisoned 30,000 alleged leftists. After the war, massively rigged elections ensured his regime continued with dreadful political repression until Rhee was eventually forced to leave the country in a CIA aircraft following a mass student revolt against his regime.

 

Why is there no peace agreement between north and south Korea? For the very simple reason that America's puppet Rhee adamantly refused to sign one. He always believed that with American backing he could take over the north. So it is largely thanks to US intervention that the Korean peninsula remains in a state of war.

 

It seems that you are the naive.  Or you read about Korea from a very questionable source.

 

After America defeated Japan  ( yes, it was the US in the campaign of the Pacific, not Russia or someone else ) it was the anti-colonialist sentiment of America which proposed to place Korea under a trusteeship until it could govern itself.  Four nations, the US, Russia, China and Britain, should be the trustees.  But Stalin had other desires, to take full control of Korea with his army.  This was when the US decided to partition the country and take control of half of it from the communists.   It established the pro-West Syngman Rhee as president,  who was reelected multiple times.  He ruled for 12 years until 1960.  He was a strong anti-communist, which of course pleased the West, and displeased the anti-West. 

 

We can argue until my bedtime of who was right and who was wrong,  something neither of us has completely trustworthy information about,  but one decisive fact is the REALITY OF TODAY.  Are you a supporter of N. Korea, arguing that people there are much better off than those in S. Korea?  You regret that not ALL of Korea is like the half in the north?

 

In the comparison between Russia and America,  read the news of today.  Which country is threatening to invade another peaceful country for no authentic reason but for an expansionist desire?   Didn't Hitler do the same when he invaded Poland?   America and the NATO countries have no expansionist, colonialist desires.  But Russia has, and China has.  Ask yourself WHY the Ukrainian want to join NATO and east Europe instead of merging with their long time buddies, the Russians?   Why is there no love for Russia?  Why does Taiwan not want to merge with communist China,  the same as the habitants of Hong Kong?

 

Ask yourself these questions,  if you can be impartial,  and stop your blabbering condemning America.  It is so silly! :lol:

.

Edited by Steve5380
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/20/2022 at 5:31 AM, Steve5380 said:

It seems that you are the naive.  Or you read about Korea from a very questionable source.

 

After America defeated Japan  ( yes, it was the US in the campaign of the Pacific, not Russia or someone else ) it was the anti-colonialist sentiment of America which proposed to place Korea under a trusteeship until it could govern itself.

Which kindergarten history have you been reading? Korea was never placed under a trusteeship. The issue of Korea was entrusted to the United Nations. China was never involved at the outset. It was because America backed the corrupt, murdering regime of Syngman Rhee in the South (definite shades of Vietnam here) that the Soviets, only thereafter, decided to back the North. Kim Il sung was not a communist. He had indeed been one, but he was thrown out of the Comintern in the early 1930s because he was regarded as too much of a nationalist. Later he realised that his only hope of attaining independence meant becoming a Russian communist party member. But it was a means to an end.

 

And this is where America and clearly Americans who post on this forum diverge from history. They regard American actions in Asia as being anti communist, when what most Asian nations wanted after World War 2 was independence from Japanese, French and other colonialism. Throughout all its ugly adventures into Asia, America was haunted by one issue: "Who Lost China?" For years Washington was a madhouse with everyone blaming everyone else for the fact that Mao had actually taken on Chiang Kai-shek and beaten him. It was already paranoid about Soviet communism. Now there was a second communist power. That fact alone dictated American actions in the far smaller and therefore pliable countries in Asia.

 

@Steve5380 has never been to Korea, has never discussed the Korean issue with any who live in Korea, speaks no Korean. In fact all he knows is what he learns from wikipedia! And when embarrassing issues he knows nothing about come up, he fails even to answer, as in this point I raised yesterday. And that's odd since he once had a Lao boyfriend whom he doted on.

 

So - will he tell us what is his view about the US making tiny Laos the most bombed country in the history of our world? A country with which it was not at war, with which Congress had not sanctioned war? In other words a secret war. How can any reasonable and sensible human being not believe that what I wrote earlier is one of the most abominable wartime acts in history, and that the USA should be hauled before the International Criminal Court and tried for these actions - 

 

On 2/19/2022 at 12:47 AM, InBangkok said:

Over a 9 year span, the USA dropped a planeload of bombs on Laos every 8 minutes, 24 hours a day for 9 whole years. Tiny, landlocked Laos became the most bombed country on the planet - all thanks to the CIA.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/18/2022 at 11:59 PM, Steve5380 said:

 

You don't know enough about WW2.  And I am surprised @Nightingale 'thanked' your post.  Although I understand why...

 

Shortly after the start of WW2 in 1939,  America started to provide military supplies and other goods to the Europa that was fighting Hitler.  Many convoys of ships sailed from the US to Europe and were attacked by the Nazis.  Then a year later, after Japan attacked the US in Pearl Harbor in December of 1941,  America declared war against Japan and Germany declared war against America,  and from there on the two parties,  the Allies and the Axis,  fully engaged. 

 

One reason America didn't enter the war from the beginning is that it didn't have much of a military.  Merely 100,000 troops.  It had to build up its military force through conscription and training,  and this took time.  But from early on, America offered the same support it is now giving to Ukraine.  

 

You did not present any backing to your claim that the US entered the war late due to low number of troops.

Are you talking of WWI or WWII ?

 

Historically, I don't think your point is correct.

 

The US considered itself as a neutral state before WWI  and ran a policy not to interfere into world issues if it did not impact the US.

Only after Germany started drowning various US merchant ships in 1917 there was a policy shift and some sort of reason to enter into the war against Germany.

 

For WWII the situation was much different. There was a big divide on interventionist supporters and isolationist A huge bi-partisan fraction of Congress was simply against intervention.

The US intended to stay neutral. The issues in China by Japan did not bother the US.

During those times there wasn't any body such as the UN and countries ran a policy of strict non-interference.

Further there was a big divide in Congress since 1937, the Democrats (holding the Congress with majority were extremely against interventionism. The German actions on Europe did not interfere with the US. For years the Democrats were following a isolationist tradition in their foreign policy. Anything that did not impact the US was not of the US's concern. And their policy was for  the US should somehow stay neutral.

 

The policy for WWII changed somewhere in 1940 as the Democrats thought that the allied powers against Germany would withhold Germany, but England was at the brink of getting conquered by Germany. This is when the US secretly started selling more weapons to the UK (and Churchill was asking the US to take a bigger role.

But the real blow was Pearl Harbour.

The war declaration by the US on Japan meant a direct threat against Germany. Due to the German Japanese treaties, Germany was not obligated to declare war against the US as Japan was the attacker. But by that time Germany had to declare war against the US due to the German Japanese Italian Axis to defend the powers.

 

 

The US always had sufficient soldiers to defend the US from neighbours. (Note again the anti interventionalist policy run by the US for years). The US for many years ranked only 7th in military force since 1930s and this even declined when the US had not acted sufficiently on the huge arms and force increases by Germany and Russia after 1935 and keep up with increasing their military force but the US was always able to mobilise soldiers when required.

In fact the biggest issue for the US was a lack of pilots for military air crafts. The US did not train sufficient soldiers in the air force.

(That was probably one of the aims of the Japanese on their attack on Pearl Harbour to even further decline the air force of the US).

It would be better to look up on history before posting some bizarre claims on the US entering the war.

 

It is really a pity that non US citizen need to give you some lectures on the US history...

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/20/2022 at 8:51 AM, Nightingale said:

 

As usual, your loyalty to your host country has blinded yourself to the faults of your host country, as if your host country can do no wrong.  Of course USA has intervened in various countries of Latin America and Middle East, causing miseries to societies and laying ruins and still threatening the backyards of Russia and China by launching a new cold war under the slogan of "freedom and democracy", with its interventionist wing NED meddling in domestic politics.  The West has no colonialist desires?  Then how do you explain French neo-colonialism as criticised by the former Permanent Representative of the African Union Mission to the USA?

 

Arikana Chihombori-Quao  on  French  Neo-colonialism

Do you still believe that the govt of France still has a lot of control over a African nations?

They have significant control over all the 14 former colonies.  They forced them to sign a document The Pact for the Continuation of Colonisation.  On the other hand, we are giving you independence (political independence), but you also have to sign this document.  You are "independent" but are going to continue to be colonised.  2 countries Mali and Guinea refused to sign it.  The French went to them and poured concrete into sewage pipes and completely devastated the 2 economies.  This was done as a way of letting the other countries know that if you do not sign this document, this is the fate that awaits you.

 

If you sign this document, you shall deposit 85% of your bank reserves with the French central bank under the control of the French Minister of Finance.    Should you request some of those money, you will have to submit a financial statement for your country and can be approved up to 20% of whatever you have deposited before, as a loan at commercial interest rates.  The only difference is that the 85% deposit is lowered to between 50 and 60%.  The countries are still forced to deposit their reserves with the French central bank.  You have a credit with France but you owe France.  This has been going on till this day.  So the 14 countries' combined hard cash is over $500 billion every year.  France takes this money to invest in its own stock market under the French name and the countries may or may not know the returns.  Currently, for every 14 billion that France takes out of Africa, it earns 300 billion.  This is how much France takes out of Africa every year.  France has the audacity to look at them and call them poor countries.  Why should poor African countries give $500 billion to France year in and year out.

 

What gets to me is how does the world sit back and watch this carnage take place in Africa.  Where is the UN?  This is the body that is supposed to be looking out for any violation of human rights.  What France is doing is the biggest violation of human rights.  People and dying of starvation among unemployment and these poor countries are giving $500b to France.  It simply does not make any sense.  The world sits back to watch all this unfold and nobody says anything.

 

Please don't just point on France. Don't forget such colonialist powers as the British also.

Even small Belgium held 3 countries as colonies together 15 times bigger than the territory of Belgium.

The whole episode of colonialism was bad for the African continent.

 

You should lay more importance on the hold of the US onto Central American and South American countries which the US considered as their hemisphere also.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/19/2022 at 12:11 AM, Steve5380 said:

I understand the reason you are a "Sub femboy" and not a "Super femboy".   You let your emotions prevail over reason.

 

 

Can you Steve reason on valid arguments instead of denigrating Members on their nick names or fetishes?

 

You response here is terribly immature and insulting and totally does not serve to win any argument.

 

Are you also a transgender basher or basher of other minorities???

 

I thought you know what gay guys suffer in their life due to discrimination, why need to go down to such nasty things as above?

 

Your post is not much different to some of the Guest trolling posts if not worse...

 

This is extremely disrespectful of you.

 

 

Edited by singalion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Historically, the German unification is the starting point of the Ukraine issue and the Nato expansion to the Eastern Europe.

 

Russia is repeating a claim that has no real basis in evidence.

 

The center point is Gorbatschow's initial claim in 2009 that the unification of Germany resulted in a promise for NATO not to expand its troops East of Germany.

 

However, Gorbatschow himself retracted this in various interviews.

 

But Russia under Putin is repeating this claim without presenting any real evidence that such promise ever existed.

 

the history behind Russia’s claim that Nato promised not to expand to the east

February 14, 2022

 

The main issue highlighted by the crisis on the Ukraine borders over the past few months has predominantly focused on the role of Nato and the friction over the eastward expansion of the alliance. This has been a constant message emerging from the Kremlin: that the Nato membership of many parts of the old Soviet Bloc, and the prospective membership of Ukraine to the alliance, poses a threat to Russian sovereignty.

But the decision to accept former members of the Warsaw Pact, the defensive alliance which included the USSR and several eastern European countries, is being subject to a revisionist history. This is perpetuating a myth that Nato promised not to expand eastwards after the Soviet Union dissolved.

In 2014, the former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev marked the 25th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin wall by noting in an interview that that Nato’s enlargement “was not discussed at all” at the time:

Not a single Eastern European country raised the issue, not even after the Warsaw Pact ceased to exist in 1991. Western leaders didn’t bring it up, either.

There was, he said, no promise not to enlarge the alliance, though in the same interview Gorbachev also stated that he thinks that enlargement was a “big mistake” and “a violation of the spirit of the statements and assurances made” in 1990.

Indeed, the only formal agreement signed between NATO countries and the USSR, before its breakup in December 1991, was the Treaty of Final Settlement with Respect to Germany. The promises made specifically relate to Germany, and the territory of the former GDR, which were on the deployment of non-German Nato forces into eastern Germany and the deployment of nuclear weapons – and these promises have been kept.

 

 

https://theconversation.com/ukraine-the-history-behind-russias-claim-that-nato-promised-not-to-expand-to-the-east-177085

 

 

 

It is most relevant that the parties taking part for the German unification talks were the Soviet Union, the UK, France , the US but not other NATO members.

Therefore, it is easy to debunk Putin's wrong claim, as NATO would have always signed something in writing if it ever had given any such "promise'. And how could NATO had known in 1990 that Eastern European countries would gain "" independence"' from the Soviet hemisphere?

When Poland, Czech Republic and Hungary joined the NATO in 1999 there was no (major) objection from Russia at all. If thee had been such agreement, it had been easy for Russia to object to the entry of these countries to NATO.

Further, there is no written piece of evidence so far that supports the claim of Putin. Nothing.

Putin is keeping on a myth that was debunked by hiw own the then Soviet President, Gorbatschow.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by singalion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/20/2022 at 2:20 AM, Guest Guest said:

 

That coming from @singalion?

I really don't know whether I should be laughing at the English or the hypocrisy... 

 

Face Palm Laugh GIF - Face Palm Laugh Tom Hiddleston - Discover & Share GIFs

 

Let's share the whiskey in your bottle of "snake oil" and keep laughing as long as our breath allows! :lol:

 

face-palm-laugh.gif.b02cc6c0b0fa913602f7f5ac3aeb04b2.gifface-palm-laugh.gif.b02cc6c0b0fa913602f7f5ac3aeb04b2.gifface-palm-laugh.gif.b02cc6c0b0fa913602f7f5ac3aeb04b2.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/20/2022 at 12:21 AM, InBangkok said:

Which kindergarten history have you been reading? Korea was never placed under a trusteeship. The issue of Korea was entrusted to the United Nations. China was never involved at the outset. It was because America backed the corrupt, murdering regime of Syngman Rhee in the South (definite shades of Vietnam here) that the Soviets, only thereafter, decided to back the North. Kim Il sung was not a communist. He had indeed been one, but he was thrown out of the Comintern in the early 1930s because he was regarded as too much of a nationalist. Later he realised that his only hope of attaining independence meant becoming a Russian communist party member. But it was a means to an end.

 

And this is where America and clearly Americans who post on this forum diverge from history. They regard American actions in Asia as being anti communist, when what most Asian nations wanted after World War 2 was independence from Japanese, French and other colonialism. Throughout all its ugly adventures into Asia, America was haunted by one issue: "Who Lost China?" For years Washington was a madhouse with everyone blaming everyone else for the fact that Mao had actually taken on Chiang Kai-shek and beaten him. It was already paranoid about Soviet communism. Now there was a second communist power. That fact alone dictated American actions in the far smaller and therefore pliable countries in Asia.

 

@Steve5380 has never been to Korea, has never discussed the Korean issue with any who live in Korea, speaks no Korean. In fact all he knows is what he learns from wikipedia! And when embarrassing issues he knows nothing about come up, he fails even to answer, as in this point I raised yesterday. And that's odd since he once had a Lao boyfriend whom he doted on.

 

So - will he tell us what is his view about the US making tiny Laos the most bombed country in the history of our world? A country with which it was not at war, with which Congress had not sanctioned war? In other words a secret war. How can any reasonable and sensible human being not believe that what I wrote earlier is one of the most abominable wartime acts in history, and that the USA should be hauled before the International Criminal Court and tried for these actions - 

 

 

 

Another bunch of utmost nonsense!  

 

Where did you get that I have never been in Korea?  I had so much fun in Seoul getting up on the 101 skyscraper and visiting the Equus and Hyundai saunas, with many cute Koreans... :)   I'll bet you have never enjoyed South Koreans as much as I have! :lol:

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was alive and well during crucial parts of World War 2.  

 

In contrast, here a bunch of guys who had zero existence and were not even a remote thought then,  vent here their anti-American feelings having hastily looked up some information about those times,  having scratched with eager nails from questionable information all what could be blamed on America.

 

You can dwell in the past all you want, guys.

 

I live in the PRESENT, and TODAY the same as in many recent decades, America and NATO are the GOOD guys,  while Russia, China and other totalitarian regimes are the BAD guys. 

 

I have no idea how long the waiting lines are for immigration into Russia, China, North Korea are,  but it is indisputable that they are far shorter,  if there are any of such lines,  than the overflowing quantity of people who want to come to live in America.    If America is so evil...   why would this be ??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/20/2022 at 9:40 PM, Steve5380 said:

 

Let's share the whiskey in your bottle of "snake oil" and keep laughing as long as our breath allows! :lol:

 

 

 

On 2/19/2022 at 12:11 AM, Steve5380 said:

I understand the reason you are a "Sub femboy" and not a "Super femboy".   You let your emotions prevail over reason.

 

 

It doesn't change anything on the fact that your starting sentence in your response to the Member Subfemboy was repugnant! 

 

Also joining into the "league" of trolls and reposting the Guest troll's attacks won't make you look better. 

 

To me there is nothing more disgusting at BW than quoting attacks from the most infamous trolls on BW. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/21/2022 at 12:14 AM, Steve5380 said:

I was alive and well during crucial parts of World War 2.  

 

In contrast, here a bunch of guys who had zero existence and were not even a remote thought then

 

If you're 79 years old, then you were born 1943 or 1944. 

 

You want to tell us you experienced the war as a baby up to your 2nd birthday and that makes you an expert on WWII???

 

Unless, you're much older...

 

Further, you wrote on BW you had been born in Argentina and only much later immigrated to the US. 

 

Good laugh...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/21/2022 at 12:03 AM, Steve5380 said:

 

Another bunch of utmost nonsense!  

 

Where did you get that I have never been in Korea?  I had so much fun in Seoul getting up on the 101 skyscraper and visiting the Equus and Hyundai saunas, with many cute Koreans... :)   I'll bet you have never enjoyed South Koreans as much as I have! :lol:

 

 

 

I trust these sexual escapades in Korea seriously made you an expert of Korean history... same as your visit to I Park Tower 101...

 

Only because someone erred on your visits to Korea, doesen't make his post to "utmost nonsense". 

 

Unfortunately, your point on this Korean "trusteeship" by the US is wrong. 

 

Same as other parts of your post on Korea. 

 

Don't call other parts of posts "bunch of utmost nonsense" if someone corrects your false historical parts of your posts. 

 

 

Edited by singalion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/20/2022 at 10:39 AM, singalion said:

 

 

It doesn't change anything on the fact that your starting sentence in your response to the Member Subfemboy was repugnant! 

 

Also joining into the "league" of trolls and reposting the Guest troll's attacks won't make you look better. 

 

To me there is nothing more disgusting at BW than quoting attacks from the most infamous trolls on BW. 

 

 

Please read again your post that prompted the response of Guest Guest, because it was so disrespectful to me!

 

His observation about you was exactly what I also observe in you:  "you see the speckle in the other's eye but not the log in your eye"  ( paraphrasing Jesus Christ ).  This for me is quite DISGUSTING,  like it also is for Guest Guest.   I on the other hand,  see the speckle in my eye and the speckle in the eyes of others,  but this does not make me poke a stick into their eyes.   

 

About infamous trolls,  who are these tenors who troll after me in this thread I created "for gays who will be seniors one day" ? :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/20/2022 at 11:11 AM, singalion said:

 

If you're 79 years old, then you were born 1943 or 1944. 

 

You want to tell us you experienced the war as a baby up to your 2nd birthday and that makes you an expert on WWII???

 

Unless, you're much older...

 

Further, you wrote on BW you had been born in Argentina and only much later immigrated to the US. 

 

Good laugh...

 

 

 

I was born in 1943 and I am now 78 years old.  I was born into a family of German refugees that had fled Hitler.  Surely during my gestation, I must have received the vibes of horror from my mother following the terrible events of this world war.  And my childhood proceeded amidst the people who had been direct victims of this war.

 

Can you say the same?   You don't even tell where you come from, what your age is,  because you have so much to hide.  The same is true for your co-tenor.   I have little to hide, therefore I have no problems telling about my life.  I often have speculated with the idea that I might be the reincarnation of a heroic German soldier who perished protecting his peers from their enemy.  

 

So the laugh is on me.  Your secrecy is sign that you have some inferiority issues.  Well...  I should not laugh about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/20/2022 at 11:20 AM, singalion said:

 

I trust these sexual escapades in Korea seriously made you an expert of Korean history... same as your visit to I Park Tower 101...

 

Only because someone erred on your visits to Korea, doesen't make his post to "utmost nonsense". 

 

Unfortunately, your point on this Korean "trusteeship" by the US is wrong. 

 

Same as other parts of your post on Korea. 

 

Don't call other parts of posts "bunch of utmost nonsense" if someone corrects your false historical parts of your posts. 

 

 

 

Have you visited the gay saunas in Seoul?  No?  Then I know more about Korea than you do.  At least the important things. :lol:

 

And please,  read a little about Korea after the defeat of Japan:

 

 

Division of Korea

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
 
Jump to navigationJump to search
310px-Korea_DMZ.svg.png
 
Closeup of the Korean Demilitarized Zone that surrounds the Military Demarcation Line
310px-Korea_demilitarized_zone_map_-_196
 
The Korean Peninsula was divided along the 38th parallel north from 1945 until 1950 and along the Military Demarcation Line from 1953 to present.

The division of Korea began with the defeat of Japan in World War II. During the war, the Allied leaders considered the question of Korea's future after Japan's surrender in the war. The leaders reached an understanding that Korea would be liberated from Japan but would be placed under an international trusteeship until the Koreans would be deemed ready for self-rule.[1]

In the last days of the war, the U.S. proposed dividing the Korean peninsula into two occupation zones (a U.S. and Soviet one) with the 38th parallel as the dividing line. The Soviets accepted their proposal and agreed to divide Korea.[2]

It was understood that this division was only a temporary arrangement until the trusteeship could be implemented. The Moscow Conference of Foreign Ministers in December 1945 resulted in an agreement on a four-power Korean trusteeship lasting up to five years.[3] However, with the onset of the Cold War and other factors both international and domestic, including Korean opposition to the trusteeship, negotiations between the United States and the Soviet Union over the next two years regarding the implementation of the trusteeship failed, thus effectively nullifying the only agreed-upon framework for the re-establishment of an independent and unified Korean state.[1]: 45–154 

With this, the Korean question was referred to the United Nations. In 1948, after the UN failed to produce an outcome acceptable to the Soviet Union, UN-supervised elections were held in the US-occupied south only. The American-backed Syngman Rhee won the election, while Kim Il-sung consolidated his position as the leader of Soviet-occupied northern Korea. This led to the establishment of the Republic of Korea in South Korea on 15 August 1948, promptly followed by the establishment of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea in North Korea on 9 September 1948. The United States supported the South, the Soviet Union supported the North, and each government claimed sovereignty over the whole Korean peninsula.

 

Please notice the word "trusteeship" in this article.  And if in doubt, google "trusteeship of Korea",  and you will have plenty to read. 

 

I like to use "utmost nonsense" when replying to the person who first used this expression.  That's fair,  isn't it?  😃

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/21/2022 at 12:39 AM, singalion said:

 

 

It doesn't change anything on the fact that your starting sentence in your response to the Member Subfemboy was repugnant! 

 

Also joining into the "league" of trolls and reposting the Guest troll's attacks won't make you look better. 

 

To me there is nothing more disgusting at BW than quoting attacks from the most infamous trolls on BW. 

 

 

If you really want to know what is "disgusting" and how the infamous troll on BW looks like, just have a good look into the mirror. And at the same time, you will also see an incalcitrant and incessant liar who will twist and turn everything that has ever been recorded just to fit his own narrative. If this is what you call "nothing more disgusting at BW", how on earth do you live with yourself everyday? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/20/2022 at 11:03 PM, Steve5380 said:

I have little to hide . . . Where did you get that I have never been in Korea?  I had so much fun in Seoul getting up on the 101 skyscraper and visiting the Equus and Hyundai saunas, with many cute Koreans... :)   I'll bet you have never enjoyed South Koreans as much as I have! :lol:

You have never been to South Korea!

 

On 2/21/2022 at 4:36 AM, Steve5380 said:

I was born in 1943 and I am now 78 years old.  I was born into a family of German refugees that had fled Hitler.  Surely during my gestation, I must have received the vibes of horror from my mother following the terrible events of this world war . . .

 

So the laugh is on me.

How true. The laugh is absolutely on you for expecting anyone to believe such ridiculous nonsense.

 

On 2/19/2022 at 3:00 AM, Steve5380 said:

As for the main sources of conflicts, this is surely not America . . .  It was communism after it spread to China that tried to expand beyond North Vietnam that prompted the Vietnam war.  It was the way the communist regimes treated their people that the West in horror made all its efforts in contain it. This lead to the actions of the US to keep communism out of the continent. This was also why Allende was deposed in Chile and why Castro's Cuba was marginalized.  All this grow into the Cold War.  It was the evil of the Nazis that lead to the creation of the state of Israel.  It was the total incompatibility of the Israeli Jews and the Arabs that lead to the Middle East wars, and these and the tyrannical and criminal acts of Hussein in Iraq were the motivation to throw him out and lead to the Iraq war. 

It's a long time since I have read not only such utter nonsense but such an utter distortion of history. And you make up your silly allegations without ever answering the factual points made by other more rational posters. Since you are so sure of what you consider your "facts", will you now answer the following -

 

1. Who destabilised Iran? The USA by toppling the duly elected Prime Minister. Why? Because the USA wanted cheap oil and Mossadegh had said he would nationalise Iran's oil for the benefit of the Iranian people. End result? The USA returns the corrupt murdering Shah to power. Result. The advent of the Khomeini revolution. The result? Once America's ally, Iran becomes its bitter foe. Responsibility? The USA's.

 

2. Who started the Iran-Iraq War? Saddam Hussein. Odd how the Nazis had been wiped out about 35 years earlier, yet you claim they were responsible! Who supported Saddam Husseim, despite his using children as soldiers and banned chemical weapons? The USA. Who then suddenly got worried about Iraq using chemical weapons and invaded on false pretences? The USA.

 

3. Who claimed publicly that he would force European nations to abandon colonialism after World War 2? US Presidents Roosevelt and Truman. Who supported the USA during World War 2? Ho Chi Minh. Who reneged on their promise by permitting France to return to its murderous rule in Vietnam? Truman and the US administration. Who tried to prop up the French when they were losing? the USA? Who then invaded Indo-China starting three wars - two of which were not given congressional approval and were therefore illegal wars? The USA under Presidents Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon.

 

4. I will say again and note you have still not responded - who over nine whole years dropped more bombs on tiny Laos than on any other country in the history of the world? The USA! Why? With up to 30% of the cluster bombs not having exploded, 20,000 men, women and children have been killed by these dreadful weapons since the end of that war. 30% of the country still remains contaminated by unexploded ordinance. How much has the US paid to Laos for clearing its land? In the first 20 years, only $100 million - total. The fact that children are still being killed by US bombs means nothing to Washington. 

 

5. The USA suffered utter humiliation in Vietnam. It suffered a hugely expensive humiliation in the war in Afghanistan. 

 

6. Who by providing huge amounts of cash and arms to the Islamic militants fighting the Russians in Afghanistan thereby created the conditions for the rise of Al Qaeda?? The USA.

 

7. Who by disbanding the Iraqi army created the conditions for the rise of ISIS? The USA.

 

And @Steve5380 is so stupid he expects us to believe all these hugely serious, murdering events were the fault of the Nazis.

Edited by InBangkok
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/21/2022 at 5:27 AM, Steve5380 said:

 

Please read again your post that prompted the response of Guest Guest, because it was so disrespectful to me!

 

His observation about you was exactly what I also observe in you:  "you see the speckle in the other's eye but not the log in your eye"  ( paraphrasing Jesus Christ ).  This for me is quite DISGUSTING,  like it also is for Guest Guest.   I on the other hand,  see the speckle in my eye and the speckle in the eyes of others,  but this does not make me poke a stick into their eyes.   

 

About infamous trolls,  who are these tenors who troll after me in this thread I created "for gays who will be seniors one day" ? :lol:

 

With our civility in discussion you aim to call me a troll?

 

I am not in any way disrespectful to you but just setting things straight or sharing our point of views or also correcting all your errors you post at BW.

 

That is surely not trolling.

 

Have you ever seen any post where I called you any expletive or started saying that you act emotional because you are a submissive femboy?

 

Have you ever seen any post from me at BW with a starting line such as "this is nonsense" , "this is the worst bullshit" or something of that sort?

 

Have you ever seen that I went down to take any Guest troll's post at BW to hit out at anyone else?

 

 

When your posts are challenged then this is disgusting to you and you need to resort joining and reposting of troll posts or resort to trolling yourself?

 

You should be ashamed of yourself Steve5380 for needing to go down to such means.

 

 

 

 

Edited by singalion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/21/2022 at 2:39 PM, singalion said:

You should be ashamed of yourself Steve5380 for needing to go down to such means.

He should be ashamed of so much of the trash he writes. But shame is a word missing from @Steve5380's dictionary of the English language. Sadly as we have seen so many times, when he does not get his own way, when he can not truthfully find his way out of an issue he has proposed as fact which is nothing like factual, his only resort is to trashing fellow posters. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • G_M changed the title to Ukraine invasion by Russia Discussion and it's impact on Singapore and Asia? (compiled)
  • HendryTan locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...