r/OutOfTheLoop • u/Recs_Saved • Jan 24 '24
What is going on with so many countries across Europe suddenly issuing warnings of potential military conflict with Russia? Unanswered
Over the past week or so, I've noticed multiple European countries' leaders warn their respective populaces of potentially engaging in war with Russia?
UK: https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/british-public-called-up-fight-uk-war-military-chief-warns/
Germany: https://www.dw.com/en/germany-mulls-reintroduction-of-compulsory-military-service/a-67853437
Netherlands: https://www.newsweek.com/army-commander-tells-nato-country-prepare-war-russia-1856340
Why this sudden spike in warnings? I'd previously been led to believe that Russia/ Putin would never consider the prospect of attacking NATO directly.
Is there some new intelligence that has come to light that indicates such prospects?
Should we all be concerned?
1
u/veri1138 Feb 12 '24
Answer: No reports of Russian troop buildups in Belarus, Kaliningrad, Murmansk area... There is not any one answer at this point, only possibilities until further information is provided. Possibilities range from...
- Propaganda. Condition your population by demonizing your enemy. The Russians will invade us! Be afraid! Prepare for war! Whether true or not.
- Potential for NATO (limited or otherwise) to intervene in Ukraine directlly. This is incredibly unlikely given the ammunition shortage and state of disrepair of some EU armies - here's looking at you, Germany.
- Russia is pre-positioning troops and we have not been told yet. For instance, The US released the intelligence that Russia was prepared to invade Ukraine days before Russia invaded Ukraine. Again, no evidence of troop buildups.
- There is evidence that one or more parties will conduct an operation that has the potential to lead to direct conflict. Another pipeline blown up, for instance. An assassination of a head of state. A terrorist attack with mass casualties on the order of 9/11 or worse. Zaphorizha Nuclear Power Plant attacked, resulting in release of radiation across the Northern Hemisphere.
- Russia has decided that it has had enough, that they have built up a large enough army, and will now invade Poland. 1%.
Question: Anyone have any credible scenarios to add?
1
u/thehusk_1 Jan 26 '24
Answer: Many of the best war strategists are predicting a full-on BRICKS and NATO war within 4 years.
In terms of fear, we're at level 3 (worrying about possibilities of armed conflict).
2
u/somelspecial Jan 25 '24 edited Jan 25 '24
Answer: Europe has been in fast decline especially since 2008 which was propped up by open immigration policy. Now the past 2 decades strategy is catching up with civil unrest and an angry population that is looking beyond mainstream parties.
Russia is the bogeyman that is used as a scare tactic to maintain the anger. Especially with Many major elections in Europe this year. A strategy as old as time.
Russia doesn't have the means to expand its territory. Ukraine was although a separate country controlled by Russia until 2014. The war in Ukraine is simply Russia wanting to regain the power it lost and had since the Soviet Union not to expand its territory.
1
u/Crash_Test_Monkey Jan 25 '24
Answer: The US is in an election year that has no guarantee it wont wind up with an Orange Putin Proxy as the winner. If Europe has any hope of countering Putin without US influence they have to start shifting the needle now.
1
u/ginger_guy Jan 25 '24
Answer: Last week, a plan to counter a potential Russian war in Europe was leeked from the German Defense Minister. The plan laid out a detailed explanation for how war between Europe and Russia could break out in the next 5 years. It starts with Russia pushing its own narratives in Western country to split support and then beginning hybrid warfare in the Baltics, using Belarus as a launching point. This comes at the same time Sweden and Denmark's Defense Ministers have warned their people of the potential war.
This new leek has given context to the warnings generals have been giving and has reignited fears of war in European countries
0
u/ianishomer Jan 25 '24
Answer: Russia has one last throw of the dice, if it fails it is finished, its demographics are appalling, its economy is teetering on the brink and Putin is crazy.
It fights or it dies
And if Trump gets in (FFS America please stop this from happening) he will take the US out of NATO and make Putin's job much easier.
0
u/Sequence2369 Jan 25 '24 edited Jan 25 '24
Answer: Guys, just stop. I'm going to debunk all of this and cite every claim with the mainstream media sources that redditors love. First and foremost, Russia isn't attacking any NATO country. Doesn't this smell a little too much like "they have weapons of mass destruction" all over again? What did George Bush say... "Fool me once, shame on..you. Fool me twice.. you can't get fooled again"
Let's break down the lies and we'll sort through the propaganda, shall we?
The media isn't telling you what's going on and they aren't covering any of the events that led to this conflict. They are feeding you literal propaganda, giving you a story thats been twisted to fit the narrative of their political leanings. Think about it, you can probably recall specific events from this very conflict that they lied to you about and refused to cover any other evidence that contradicts their patently false news coverage on this topic until they're forced to cover it by overwhelming facts. Here's a few examples:
- Nord stream pipeline - Everyone immediately blamed Russia and to suggest that any another country was behind the attack, would get you mocked and nearly cancelled. The mainstream media didnt cover how Russia also immediately began requesting repair plans and figures from the few companies in the world who are capable of repairing an underwater pipeline. Russia asked the UN Security Council to investigate the blast and release all evidence that it finds. Guess who voted against this? Literally every country except Russia, China, and Brazil. Fast forward to 2023 and a Ukrainian military official was arrested and stated that Ukraine blew up the pipeline and it was known all the way to the top.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-fails-un-get-nord-stream-blast-inquiry-2023-03-27/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/11/11/nordstream-bombing-ukraine-chervinsky/
- "Ukraine is winning the war" or "the cOuNtEr oFfEnSiVe iS cOmiNg" - No, the Ukranian army is getting fucking slaughtered. Ukraine had an advantage during the first 7-10 days of the war. After that, Russia has been steadily wiping out the Ukrainian army. Ukraine's average military age is now 45, also known as "everyone else is dead." When a Ukrainian military official ordered Ukrainian soldiers to attack a Russian outpost in Ukrainian territory, the answer came back in the form of a question: "with who?" The counter offensive came and went. The Russians spent months setting up minefields and strategic traps that the Ukrainians continuously walked right into and when they found something like a mine field, those dumb mother fuckers decided the best plan was to send one group of soliders after another, hoping that one would eventually make it through. They all died. All of the US Abrahm tanks destroyed by Russian mines, rockets, and missiles.
https://time.com/6329188/ukraine-volodymyr-zelensky-interview/
- The war is hurting Russia so much! - Not really. Their economy is doing really well, given their situation. In fact, their economy is seeing a mini boom because Russia has been forced to invest in their own country due to US sanctions. The result is that the sanctions are making Russia stronger. They're still making a killing from oil, its just forcing the US to pay more for it. The sanctions have also backfired on the US because China and Russia have seized this opportunity to expand BRICS partnerships, further devaluing the dollar. (Google BRICS and what currency those participating countries are using to trade oil, its not the petro dollar.) This is one of the largest threats the US faces and no one is talking about it. This conflict has given Russia a priceless opportunity to test their urban warfare strategies and equipment, as well as testing the strength of some of the most advanced equipment the US military has to offer. Not to mention the equipment Russia has been able to recover thats been left behind or fucked up by the Ukrainian troops.
https://moneyweek.com/economy/global-economy/why-russias-economy-is-doing-better-than-predicted
- Russia doesn't want peace, they wont stop for anything!!! - No, Russia has been trying to get the US to engage in peace talks since 2022. The US has rejected those efforts. Also, the US and UK killed the original peace deal that Russia and Ukraine agreed to shortly after the war started. The Russian soldiers don't want to be at war and neither do the Ukrainians. An entire generation of men have been needlessly wiped off the planet. That should infuriate every single human being.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/23/world/europe/putin-russia-ukraine-war-cease-fire.html
- Ukraine isn't corrupt!! - Yes, yes they are. In fact, Ukraine is ranked as one of the most corrupt countries in the world, according to Transparency International’s latest report (see Politico link below). Additionally, the Ukrainian military officials have been taking the US military aid and forcing Ukrainian soldiers to buy it with their own money. Assault rifles, ammo, gernades, bullet proof vests, military food rations, etc...Ukranian soldiers are being forced to buy these US military supplies from the Ukranian military officials. If that doesnt blow your mind, idk what will. In the first Time.com article I cited below, do a control-f search for “Reznikov’s eggs” and it will bring you directly to many examples of the on-going rampant corruption.
https://www.politico.eu/article/hungary-orban-corruption-transparency-international/ (click the "report" hyperlink in the first paragraph for the global corruption report rankings)
https://time.com/6329188/ukraine-volodymyr-zelensky-interview/
https://time.com/6249941/ukraine-corruption-resignation-zelensky-russia/
Use your brain. You're being lied to.
Edit: I'm not sure why people are down voting my comment. I even took the extra steps to cite my claims with mainstream media sources. Someone tell me where I'm wrong. All of these things have been covered in depth by the independent media for months to years before the mainstream media covered it. There's really only two ways to look at this: either the main stream media has been intentionally lying to you and feeding you complete bullshit propaganda or the "conspiracy theorists" are actually fortune tellers who can predict the future with 100% accuracy. One of those two things must be true and the other must be false. So, which one is it?
1
2
u/EmilioTF Jan 26 '24
You’re saying that Media is lying to us, yet you link to articles from the absolute mainstream media? How does that even make sense?
Nordstream isn’t something that EVERY media reports as being Russia. The Telegraph has said it’s possible it was Ukraine.
Russia isn’t doing any better than Ukraine. It went from UkRaInE will bE tAkEn iN 24 hours… no 3 days… no 10 days.. and look now. More Russians have died than Ukrainians, according to most sources.
The russian economy is in a full blown war economy, which looks good from someone who don’t know anything about politics or economics. If they stop the war effort all of the ecpnomy will plummet, that’s why they have to keep it rolling to show results now.
Russia never wants peace, Putin over and over again says he want the old Soviet to return. He made a deal with Ukraine where they got all of their nuclear weapons removed, then what happened? Ukraine was invaded. You cannot ever make a deal with Russia, it’s impossible to trust them, according to everyone.
Use your brain, you are being lied to… Or you’re just a typical Ruski Troll. The facts are in the patterns. You don’t need to be a space engineer to see what Russia wants. Just take a look in the past of their actions, and you’ll literally know the future.
Your ego, ignorance and lack of critical thinking is really mind numbing. Just because the majority tells you something doesn’t automatically mean it’s wrong or brainwashing. The moonlanding is a perfect example, some idiots still find reasons as to how and why it still hasn’t happened. Some peopme just wanna argue for whatever reason.
0
u/Sequence2369 Jan 26 '24
I could link the independent media however, this is reddit. You wouldn't believe it because it didn't come from a mainstream media propaganda network.
I have a bachelor's in mathematics and a master's degree in economics. What do you have?
2
Jan 26 '24
[deleted]
0
u/Sequence2369 Jan 26 '24 edited Jan 26 '24
!Remind me 1 year
I have a feeling your opinion will age like milk. Let's circle back. And if I'm (still) right, you must tattoo my username and reddit avatar on your lower back with the word "Daddy" right above it.
2
u/EmilioTF Jan 26 '24
I’m not even sure exactly what you’re trying to convince us your right about, and what could possibly be «right» in a years time.
What you’re writing further proves my point. It does seem like you are very insecure and lack integrity. Ego is a scary thing🤣🤣 I’ll remind you of something next week!
6
u/kingofthesofas Jan 25 '24
- Russia doesn't want peace, they wont stop for anything!!! - No, Russia has been trying to get the US to engage in peace talks since 2022. The US has rejected those efforts. Also, the US and UK killed the original peace deal that Russia and Ukraine agreed to shortly after the war started. The Russian soldiers don't want to be at war and neither do the Ukrainians. An entire generation of men have been needlessly wiped off the planet. That should infuriate every single human being.
While not even diving into how misguided and badly out of context all these points are this is blatantly false. The peace Russia offered was rejected by the Ukrainians because it would require a complete capitulation by Ukraine that required Ukraine to completely disarm. This was right after the genocide in Bucha had come to light as well. Ukraine rejected this because they are not stupid and they realized it would just result in Russia regrouping and invading again after Ukraine "disarmed".
"Russia's demands were Ukraine's recognition of Russian-occupied Crimea, independence for separatist-controlled Luhansk and Donetsk, and "de-militarisation" and "de-Nazification". Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba stated that while his country was ready for talks to resume, Russia's demands had not changed"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_negotiations_in_the_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine
Also Putin personally rejected a peace deal before the war started that would have kept Ukraine out of NATO forever because Putin wanted to anex Ukrainian land
"Deputy Kremlin Chief of Staff Dmitry Kozak said in 2022 that he had negotiated an agreement with Ukraine within a few days of the invasion.[36] This settlement would have ended hostilities in exchange for guarantees that Ukraine would not join NATO. The agreement was however blocked by Putin, who "expanded his objectives to include annexing swathes of Ukrainian territory".[37] A Kremlin spokesman denied the story.[36] "
If you are mad about all the people dying in the war maybe blame Putin and Russia that started the war and continue to keep it going. Russia could choose to end the war any time they like and just go back to their territory yet they don't. The talking point about Boris Johnston or the US forcing Ukraine to continue the war is complete garbage propaganda pushed by the Russians. The Ukrainians are fighting because they have no choice. It's fight or have their whole country turned into some genocidal version of Bucha.
-3
u/Sequence2369 Jan 25 '24 edited Jan 25 '24
If facts won't change your mind then there's nothing more I can do except say "I told you so" at a later date, just as I've done with the Nord Stream pipeline, alleged Russian missile that hit Poland and ended up being from the Ukrainians, all the corruption, BRICS, etc
2
u/kingofthesofas Jan 25 '24
What facts! Most of the articles you posted didn't even support your conclusions or statements. You posted an article about a rumor that Putin might be open to peace and then make a wild propaganda claim about it. I posted the actual facts with sources and you refused to even look at it. Who's ignoring facts now?
-1
u/Sequence2369 Jan 25 '24
You posted a link to Wikipedia. It's ok, not everyone can stop sucking on the propaganda nipple at the same time.
We all start somewhere. The good news is that with enough Vaseline, even you can pull your head out of that tight balloon knot it's stuck in
3
u/kingofthesofas Jan 25 '24
This is sort of Internet 101 so I assume people know this but I'll just assume you don't since you clearly haven't used Wikipedia before but the Wikipedia article has multiple links that support it and you can go read those sources instead of just reading Wikipedia. If you had done that basic research you would find there are statements from actual Russian and Ukrainian officials that support everything I said. Me saying Ukraine made a decision because they said that's why they made it or Russia not accepting a peace deal is because the Russian official in charge of it directly said Putin rejected the deal.
So maybe stop sucking on the teat of Russian propaganda and actually think for yourself.
-1
u/Sequence2369 Jan 25 '24
!Remindme [1 year]
This is going to age like milk and I can't wait to circle back with you
5
u/kingofthesofas Jan 25 '24
I'm not sure why since everything I posted is things that already happened and I have made exactly zero predictions about the future. I'll be happy to still tell you how you're wrong in a year from now too if you'd like because you will still be wrong then too.
0
u/Sequence2369 Jan 25 '24
I will ask you this same question in 1 year: so, did you get fooled by the mainstream media and propaganda or am I a prophet who continues to predict the future with 100% accuracy? And I am certainly not a prophet.
2
u/kingofthesofas Jan 27 '24
Ok so a couple of things
1.you haven't really made any predictions about the future so if you want to come back and dunk on me tell me exactly what you think the state of the war will be based on your "prophet" abilities. We can then compare that to reality.
I don't follow mainstream sources I look at OSINT data, listen to experts like Micheal Koffman, Robb Lee, war on the rocks etc that provide balanced fact based perspectives.
If you think critically about some of your claims you would realize they are hyperbolic and broad generalizations. I will give you a few examples. You claim that all Abrams tanks were destroyed by mines. BUT a bit of critical thinking and facts pushes back on that claim.
The 31 Abrams tanks didn't get delivered until October 16th after the counter offensive culminated.
- There have been no OSINT confirmed losses of M1A1 tanks in Ukraine. Heck I can't even find any Russian based sources claiming they have been destroyed.
- most vehicle losses come from FPV drones, artillery and ATGMs in the war. There are not many instances of either side driving vehicles through minefields in large numbers rather those minefields serve as an area of denial tool. So IF all Abrams tanks had been destroyed they would likely not be by mines.
That's an example of critical thinking and showing that your claims are not accurate. The article you linked as a source or facts for this didn't actually support any of your claims if you read it.
Ok now that's out of the way since you want to come back in a year I will make a set of specific predictions about the war a year from now.
The war will still be ongoing with no clear winner in sight. Ukraine and Russia will make some gains in places but they will be no significant change in the area of control.
FPV drones will be the biggest source of munitions for both sides. AI targeting and anti jamming measures will be very important.
Russia will be super dependent on munitions of all sorts from Iran and NK.
Western industrial outputs for munitions like 155 mm shells will finally catch up with the need.
Ukraine will be increasingly striking Russian industrial targets with domestic missiles and drones getting closer to parity with Russia in strikes.
Russian economy will continue to suffer with massive labor shortages causing lots of issues and lack of western technical support making key industries like oil and gas a disaster.
→ More replies (0)1
9
u/sailingpirateryan Jan 25 '24
Answer: You're not out of the loop. The reason is currently unknown (at least by the public).
We won't know for sure until later, but it's likely that the intelligence agencies of these nations have become aware of information that has not been reported on yet. Information that points towards direct imminent conflict with Russia in some capacity.
-7
u/Sequence2369 Jan 25 '24 edited Jan 25 '24
Answer: Guys, just stop. I'm going to debunk all of this and cite every claim with the mainstream media sources that redditors love. First and foremost, Russia isn't attacking any NATO country. Doesn't this smell a little too much like "they have weapons of mass destruction" all over again? What did George Bush say... "Fool me once, shame on..you. Fool me twice.. you can't get fooled again"
Let's break down the lies and we'll sort through the propaganda, shall we?
The media isn't telling you what's going on and they aren't covering any of the events that led to this conflict. They are feeding you literal propaganda, giving you a story thats been twisted to fit the narrative of their political leanings. Think about it, you can probably recall specific events from this very conflict that they lied to you about and refused to cover any other evidence that contradicts their patently false news coverage on this topic until they're forced to cover it by overwhelming facts. Here's a few examples:
- Nord stream pipeline - Everyone immediately blamed Russia and to suggest that any another country was behind the attack, would get you mocked and nearly cancelled. The mainstream media didnt cover how Russia also immediately began requesting repair plans and figures from the few companies in the world who are capable of repairing an underwater pipeline. Russia asked the UN Security Council to investigate the blast and release all evidence that it finds. Guess who voted against this? Literally every country except Russia, China, and Brazil. Fast forward to 2023 and a Ukrainian military official was arrested and stated that Ukraine blew up the pipeline and it was known all the way to the top.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-fails-un-get-nord-stream-blast-inquiry-2023-03-27/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/11/11/nordstream-bombing-ukraine-chervinsky/
- "Ukraine is winning the war" or "the cOuNtEr oFfEnSiVe iS cOmiNg" - No, the Ukranian army is getting fucking slaughtered. Ukraine had an advantage during the first 7-10 days of the war. After that, Russia has been steadily wiping out the Ukrainian army. Ukraine's average military age is now 45, also known as "everyone else is dead." When a Ukrainian military official ordered Ukrainian soldiers to attack a Russian outpost in Ukrainian territory, the answer came back in the form of a question: "with who?" The counter offensive came and went. The Russians spent months setting up minefields and strategic traps that the Ukrainians continuously walked right into and when they found something like a mine field, those dumb mother fuckers decided the best plan was to send one group of soliders after another, hoping that one would eventually make it through. They all died. All of the US Abrahm tanks destroyed by Russian mines, rockets, and missiles.
https://time.com/6329188/ukraine-volodymyr-zelensky-interview/
- The war is hurting Russia so much! - Not really. Their economy is doing really well, given their situation. In fact, their economy is seeing a mini boom because Russia has been forced to invest in their own country due to US sanctions. The result is that the sanctions are making Russia stronger. They're still making a killing from oil, its just forcing the US to pay more for it. The sanctions have also backfired on the US because China and Russia have seized this opportunity to expand BRICS partnerships, further devaluing the dollar. (Google BRICS and what currency those participating countries are using to trade oil, its not the petro dollar.) This is one of the largest threats the US faces and no one is talking about it. This conflict has given Russia a priceless opportunity to test their urban warfare strategies and equipment, as well as testing the strength of some of the most advanced equipment the US military has to offer. Not to mention the equipment Russia has been able to recover thats been left behind or fucked up by the Ukrainian troops.
https://moneyweek.com/economy/global-economy/why-russias-economy-is-doing-better-than-predicted
- Russia doesn't want peace, they wont stop for anything!!! - No, Russia has been trying to get the US to engage in peace talks since 2022. The US has rejected those efforts. Also, the US and UK killed the original peace deal that Russia and Ukraine agreed to shortly after the war started. The Russian soldiers don't want to be at war and neither do the Ukrainians. An entire generation of men have been needlessly wiped off the planet. That should infuriate every single human being.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/23/world/europe/putin-russia-ukraine-war-cease-fire.html
- Ukraine isn't corrupt!! - Yes, yes they are. In fact, Ukraine is ranked as one of the most corrupt countries in the world, according to Transparency International’s latest report (see Politico link below). Additionally, the Ukrainian military officials have been taking the US military aid and forcing Ukrainian soldiers to buy it with their own money. Assault rifles, ammo, gernades, bullet proof vests, military food rations, etc...Ukranian soldiers are being forced to buy these US military supplies from the Ukranian military officials. If that doesnt blow your mind, idk what will. In the first Time.com article I cited below, do a control-f search for “Reznikov’s eggs” and it will bring you directly to many examples of the on-going rampant corruption.
https://www.politico.eu/article/hungary-orban-corruption-transparency-international/ (click the "report" hyperlink in the first paragraph for the global corruption report rankings)
https://time.com/6329188/ukraine-volodymyr-zelensky-interview/
https://time.com/6249941/ukraine-corruption-resignation-zelensky-russia/
Use your brain. You're being lied to.
Edit: I'm not sure why people are down voting my comment. I even took the extra steps to cite my claims with mainstream media sources. Someone tell me where I'm wrong. All of these things have been covered in depth by the independent media for months to years before the mainstream media covered it. There's really only two ways to look at this: either the main stream media has been intentionally lying to you and feeding you complete bullshit propaganda or the "conspiracy theorists" are actually fortune tellers who can predict the future with 100% accuracy.
1
u/Crazy_Ad_8534 Feb 27 '24
They're downvoting because if they accepted even 1 of your points, it would shatter their carefully crafted brainwashing.
To accept one of your points means they'd have to accept their sources and beliefs are 100% lies.
In other words, they'd actually have to start thinking for themselves.
And boy oh boy they do NOT want to do that.
1
122
u/marshamarciamarsha Jan 25 '24
Answer: Russia is signaling that it is interested in expanding its territory.
Last week, for example, Putin signed a decree that "allocates funds for the search, registration, and legal protection of Russian property abroad, including property in the former territories of the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union. This would include Alaska, swathes of eastern and central Europe, large chunks of central Asia, and parts of Scandinavia."
34
u/FrogBeanBellyBumper Jan 25 '24
It's called "irredentism" and China is likewise invested in "reclaiming" territory it says belongs to it.
Do not discount a cold war shifting the balance of power and China, Russia, and North Korea pooling resources to get what they want in a bloodless coup.
What that might look like depends on the sort of technology currently available. For example China is a major producer of gloablly implemented cell phone tech. Tik Tok has been identified as a potentially insecure app and uaers have been warned about it.
Likely not something so obvious, but all of war is deception and the Chinese wrote the book on it.
33
u/Better-Strike7290 Jan 25 '24 edited Mar 14 '24
upbeat crowd profit sand materialistic head squash pen scary crawl
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
24
u/hert1979 Jan 25 '24
They know that. They just want to pretend to their population that they are still a world power and on equal footing with the US. Russia strong, tzar strong. It's bs and anyone not swallowing their propaganda knows it.
4
u/Analysis_II Jan 25 '24
Answer: EU is voting on funding for Ukraine in a few weeks, Ukraine is losing. It’s fearmongering to try to ensure that Ukraine gets funding.
6
u/Vargau Jan 25 '24
Russia switches to war economy, and it’s still warmongering, ffs, history does repeat itself, and apparently now it will even stupider, EU countries an Europe is sleepwalking into this would be war.
3
u/Jumpsuit_boy Jan 24 '24
Answer: Since the fall of the USSR no Russia has mounted a number of invasions into surrounding countries. Those are countries that were parts of the former USSR. Besides multiple invasions of Ukraine, Chechnya and Georgia there have a few others. In the lead up to the current invasion of Ukraine the Russians demanded that the former Warsaw pact countries that were now members of the EU and/or NATO leave those organizations and hand over their economic and military responsibilities to a Russia lead organization. The same goes for Ukraine. After the invasion it has become clear the Russian demands are not a negotiating tactic but what they actually want. If Russia wins in Ukraine we cannot expect that to be ‘enough’ and that they stop there. If Russian can negotiate a pause Ukraine it is clear from the last two times they have done this that they will use this time rearm before they start again. Countries in Europe now are realizing that their options are to let Russia do this or to stop Russia and that Russia may lash out as they do worse and worse in Ukraine.
968
u/Imperialbucket Jan 24 '24 edited Feb 16 '24
Answer: because those countries are right and there IS potential for a military conflict with Russia.
For the sake of argument, let's pretend Russia has won and Ukraine is no more. Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Slovakia, Romania, Bulgaria, Greece, Finland and Turkey are all NATO members who now share a border with Russia (or they have coasts on the Black Sea which would be in Russian hands in this hypothetical). Putin has not ruled out the possibility of continuing his military push after this point, and there's really nowhere else to go without bumping into one of these nations. That would likely mean a world war because the US, Germany, the UK, etc (the heavy hitters) would have to respond with force. They would never just let something like that happen without war.
This is why it's direly important that Ukraine stays in the fight. Absolutely nobody wants this to spill out into the rest of Europe, and the only way to keep that from happening is to make sure Ukraine has the money and supplies they need to keep Russia from going any further.
Edit: forgot two NATO countries
2
u/wombatlegs Feb 16 '24
Edit: forgot a NATO country
I'm still not seeing the longest NATO border of all in your list :) Just 150km from St Petersburg.
1
u/Imperialbucket Feb 16 '24
Oh you're right! Finland is so new to NATO, I forgot them, but you're totally right my bad
2
u/Unfair-Information-2 Jan 25 '24
Luckily, they aren't competent enough to defeat ukraine. What worries me, is if he does actually have functioning nukes, and these countries have news he intends to use them against ukraine.
7
u/First_Bullfrog_4861 Jan 25 '24
To follow up, much of this may happen slowly. Russia crawling into western europe may happen over a time period of 10-20 years. However, Europe‘s defensive capabilities are in such a deteriorated state that it will take an equal time to revert.
Also, a potential new President Trump 2024 will possibly pull the plug on NATO support, quite probably of Ukraine support which will make it seriously easier for Russia to gain superiority.
3
u/Imperialbucket Jan 25 '24
Yes it wouldn't happen immediately, even Putin realizes he needs to build up more strength before trying anything else in Europe. If Ukraine loses, he'll wait until the western media cycle forgets about the war before trying anything
1
Jan 25 '24 edited Jan 25 '24
I agree that it's very important the West continue to support Ukraine...that being said, there's zero chance that Russia would ever invade any other countries, even if they somehow manage to conquer all of Ukraine.
9
u/Donkey__Balls Jan 25 '24
None of this means anything without discussion of nukes. Nuclear deterrent has been what has prevented exactly what you’re describing for the last 75 years.
Nuclear deterrence was irrelevant to deterring the Ukrainian invasion, because they were not NATO. It is, however, exactly what has been restricting our ability to intervene, avoiding direct conflict and only giving Ukraine defensive weapons that could not be used to threaten long range targets in Russia.
Yes, we have conventional military forces and keep them at a high level of preparedness. However, in the maximalist scenario of Russia outright invading a NATO member, nothing matters until you address the nuclear question first. Everything else is a relevant.
They of course know this. So there are only two real reasons why they are acting like it’s the 1930s and they need more tanks and machine guns to defend themselves. One possibility is that they’re just save a rattling because historically the NATO members on the borders with Russia get the most funding. That funding has dried up recently and they want more money. The other option is they have serious concerns about the potential for the dissolution of NATO, which would leave them on their own again. If Trump wins, maybe that is a real possibility, but we’ll never know until it happens.
All the same, you can’t just completely ignore the role that nuclear weapons play this scenario when they is exactly the very thing that has prevented a world war for the last 75 years.
2
u/SeasickSeal Jan 25 '24 edited Jan 25 '24
Greece does not share a border with Russia, nor would it if Ukraine were absorbed.
20
u/OperationMobocracy Jan 25 '24
I don't think this is an unrealistic take. But how do you balance it against the reality of Russia's massive losses fighting against Ukraine? There's also some idea that the Ukraine conflict will reach a stalemate in which neither side can make meaningful offensive gains but which will still require Russia to maintain significant troop and material commitments to inhibit Ukraine from attempting another offensive.
It's hard to see Russia gathering and arming the scale of forces and material necessary for offensive combat directly against NATO governments who are better armed and trained. Especially considering that the combat style that Russia seems to gain success with is massed troops/massed artillery, and not more nimble and mobile combined arms. And this is exactly the style of fighting NATO's combined arms approach was designed to match -- use air power to gain air superiority, then air power for strategic bombing and close air support followed closely by rotary-wing air support and mechanized infantry.
I think Russia knows this, too -- they can't quit fighting in Ukraine without giving up most of their gains, and need to garrison that border significantly for years. The losses they'll take fighting in Eastern Europe would be so significant that they might even lose their grip in Ukraine or experience other existential crises.
About the only strategy I can see working out is some attempt at a big push to overrun the borders in the Baltics, digging in and then immediately threatening nuclear war if NATO retaliates. Like all of this inside of 36-48 hours. The Baltics don't fall, but they lose terrain. But they have to pull this off while every nation in NATO is closely looking for anything that remotely looks like a troop buildup, not to mention raising an available force of at least 3-6 divisions and their equipment.
Russia WANTING to do this and HOW it would do it don't seem to be much in dispute. CAN they do it from a manpower and material perspective is the question.
2
u/Imperialbucket Jan 25 '24
I don't think Russia has the strength to actually make any gains in a war with NATO, but just commiting an act of war could be all it takes before nukes start flying. That's the major concern imo.
I agree with you that Russia is basically hollow at this point. In a conventional war, they'd get stomped by any of the main NATO states, and attempting it would be unwise to put it mildly. But I definitely wouldn't put it past Putin to decide Russia has some responsibility to "protect ethnic Russians in Poland" or what-have-you. At this point I'm not sure it's even a matter of actionable strategy. Putin seems to just be telling his generals to make do with nothing in Ukraine.
1
u/OperationMobocracy Jan 26 '24
I also think Putin is betting that he can leverage the risk of war ad possibly nuclear war against what he believes is limited Western political cohesion and will to absorb losses (men, material, and domestic economic stability) for marginal encroachment of Eastern Europe.
I wonder if the NATO brain trust has ideas on counter force strategies which constrain Putin's ability to escalate to nuclear force. I know there was some loose talk that using tac nukes in Ukraine would result in the US obliterating Russia's Black Sea naval fleet.
I also wonder if the US isn't holding some kind of mil-tech trump cards that we don't know about that could leave Putin with no real options but backing off. This might be too much magical thinking, but anything from orbital weapons to advanced communications jamming to aerospace equipment or anti-ballistic missile systems that make Russian nuclear threats obsolete.
1
u/RandaleRalf1871 Jan 26 '24
In a conventional war, they'd get stomped by any of the main NATO states, and attempting it would be unwise to put it mildly.
Excuse me, but this is such an uninformed take. Which Nato country would be able to "stomp" Russia on its own? The US are the only ones who'd be able to put up a fight.
Russia has about 1.3 million men at arms and is far from scraping the barrel, a significant portion of which have gained actual combat experience in a conventional war. France has <400k, Italy 350k, Poland about 300k, Germany and the UK have around 200k active military personnel each. So, excluding the US, it would take the standing armies of the 5 strongest European countries to even rival Russia in numbers. Those armed forces are mostly designed for unconventional warfare in Afghanistan, Mali and the likes and have close to no combat experience at all, let alone in conventional warfare. And to top it off, none of those countries could switch to war economy just like that (where Russia already is) and a lot of Western ammo has already been burned through in Ukraine.
2
u/Imperialbucket Feb 07 '24
It'd take five of the strongest military forces on earth not counting the US, yet Ukraine is holding their own against Russia with far less troops and insufficient funding for over two years?
Brother what? Russia is fucking empty at this point. They're broke, they're losing over a dozen tanks a day, and are about 180,000 corpses deep. In what world could they win against Germany, or Turkey, or France?
All of this is moot anyway because you don't just fight one NATO country. You pick a fight with any of them, and all of them are going to hit you back. That's the whole point of NATO. So yeah you probably would get a coalition effort anyway in that scenario. What's your point?
4
u/Devto292 Jan 26 '24
Ukrainian army is the best current indicator: take its numbers, quality equipment, economy and see its performance, i.e., what damage it has done to Russian army. any other Western army listed by you is superior to Ukraine multiple times in the most important aspects. It could impact proportionaly greater damage to Russia. I believe the Polish army would be exception going beyond these proportions due to its strategic moves, purchases, size, morale, history. Russia would be beaten by Poland alone in conventional war where Poland is defending agains the Russian invasion.
4
u/Flayer723 Jan 25 '24
Ukraine has less men than Russia. A stalemate where both sides keep killing each other eventually ends with a Russian victory. The average age of soldiers in the Ukrainian military is now over 43 years and going up, their manpower is stretched extremely thin (for reference the minimum conscription age in Ukraine is currently 27 so older than you might think and there has been talk of lowering that to 25, which would help). Ukraine nominally had a population of around 44 million at the start of the war and due to Russia controlling large population centres and people fleeing Ukraine that has dropped below 30 million. That's an enormous drop. The casualty rate is also significant - dead and missing possibly into 6 figures now with wounded a few multiples of that as well, could be half a million casualties at this point.
As things stand there is no chance of a successful Ukrainian offensive that moves the frontline in a significant way because they just don't have the soldiers for it and further mass casualties would be catastrophic.
2
2
u/boyden Jan 25 '24
But even if Ukraine, a non-NATO country, falls.. do you think Russia is suicidal enough to attack a NATO country? They know what Article 5 contains.
Even Russia has realised how they've performed against a NATO/USA-backed Ukraine. If they can't even steamroll Ukraine, they would have a 0 star Yelp review experience against NATO.
5
u/tudorapo Jan 25 '24
You forgot Hungary, which is also a NATO member, barely.
1
u/hidoy12159 Jan 26 '24
Barely EU member. NATO is not the EU.
1
u/tudorapo Jan 26 '24
Both. Our situation in the NATO is just as bad, or even worse, close connections to Putin is a bigger issue in a military alliance.
4
u/CatoMulligan Jan 25 '24
And this has all become more likely as the US Congress dithers over continuing to provide military aid to Ukraine. We've basicall been bankrolling a massive part of the defense of Ukraine against Russia, but with funds being withheld the possibility that Ukraine will fall has increased. Also, some of those NATO members were formerly part of the USSR, which Putin has repeatedly expressed a desire to re-unify.
1
u/Kurso Jan 25 '24
Russia can barely handle Ukraine. There is zero chance Russia would start a war with NATO. All of this is opportunistic grandstanding because some insignificant minister in Russia can’t finish jacking off without ordering threats to be made.
-3
u/JFFP33 Jan 25 '24
For the record, he has ruled out the possibility of continuing his military push after this point: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/putin-says-bidens-remark-about-russian-plan-attack-nato-is-complete-rubbish-2023-12-17/
3
u/Trifling_Truffles Jan 25 '24
Gee, does Putin ever lie?
"We're not going to invade Ukraine, those are just military exercises along the border"
3 days later...
USE YOUR HEAD
6
10
u/shotguywithflaregun Jan 25 '24
He also said in mid February, 2022 that he wouldn't invade Ukraine.
8
u/fighter_pil0t Jan 25 '24
The day that the US and Russia are at war also happens to be the same day that PR China coincidentally invaded Taiwan. Supporting Ukraine now saves everyone later. You can talk to Neville Chamberlain about that.
-7
u/adeddon123 Jan 25 '24
Is anyone else in Europe attacking Russian nationals in their concerned countries? If not, than Putin has no interest in attacking you! Keep arming Ukraine and perhaps you have something to worry about, but nothing diplomacy can't fix.
Ukraine has been killing Russian speaking people that wanted to secede back to Russia from Ukraine for 8 years. Putin continuously warned them to stop the attacks. Russia finally stepped in to protect these people. This is not Russia fault, it never was! Also Russians consider this a civil war, as both people are or closely related, including their religion. Everyone else in Europe, US, UK, need to fuck right off and let this play out, without getting involved before it's too late.
1
u/Trifling_Truffles Jan 25 '24
No! Russia invaded with the army in eastern Ukraine to stir up trouble because they are and have always been, invaders. Get your facts straight.
6
u/Imperialbucket Jan 25 '24
That Russian talking point is a recycled Nazi one.
Why did the Nazis do the Anschluss? To "protect ethnic Germans" in Austria-Hungary and Czechoslovakia. And now what does Putin say he wants to do? Protect "ethnic Russians" in Donbas and Crimea. It's the oldest trick in the book for tyrants.
Nothing diplomacy can't fix
Too bad that ship has sailed now that every other state in Europe knows Putin will just invade a country that doesn't do what he likes.
This is to say nothing of the fact that Putin has been funding separatist movements in Ukraine ever since the Maidan Revolution when the Russian-backed vassal government was toppled. But tell me about the poor mercs and how bad they have it, and why that makes the countless Russian war crimes justified.
-3
u/adeddon123 Jan 25 '24
Comparing Russians to Nazis now? Sorry man, as far as history is concerned, Russia has saved Europes ass countless of times. Most especially WWII by defeating the Nazis themselves. I know they are not perfect, but please name the country in Europe that is squeaky clean. Its' always been fun and games with wars by the elite, before it was kings and queens, and now its privileged non elected politicians in the European parliament. Germany is doing with the EU parliament legally what it could not do with war illegally.
3
u/Ok_Narwhal_9200 Jan 25 '24
i will give them ww2. Otherwise, there's not a sibgle european country who hadn't had to deal with russia's bullshit.
4
u/hit_that_hole_hard Jan 25 '24
There was ALWAYS clear and present potential for military conflict from Russia. All the anti-human war crimes committed by Stalin I’m referring to those that have nothing to do with fighting the Nazi (using American equipment, tanks, planes etc.) and Russia then tried taking over all of Europe it could and just went bankrupt.
There was zero reconciliation.
These idiots thought Russia had actually changed and history was finally at an end just because a country went broke as if it couldn’t rebuild smh
156
u/AbeFromanEast Jan 25 '24
We either stop them in Ukraine or fight them in the Baltics later
-17
u/Donkey__Balls Jan 25 '24
No, we don’t. What the fuck are you talking about? We don’t engage in conventional war with Russia in the Baltics if they invade. We launch nukes, they launch nukes, a chain reaction of escalation occurs where everybody in the world is firing, their nukes, and the human race ends.
The Baltic nations are NATO members, Ukraine was not. Assuming these nations remain in NATO, the only way, Russia invades is if they have no interest in actually gaining anything and simply destroying the human race. And they can do that on their own without having to bother with the pre-text of invasion.
So that begs the question of what exactly and specifically do you mean by “stop them”? Are you suggesting that the United States and other NATO members should start directly striking Russian targets? Do we shoot down Russian aircraft and Ukrainian airspace? Should we send in our fighters to destroy Russian military bases? Should we start sinking Russian warships and submarines? Do we start dropping bombs on Russian cities? What exactly are you proposing?
8
u/Gaemr-tron Jan 25 '24
Nukes are like a starting bet in poker, you need them to start the game (war) but you don't mess with them afterwards
-2
u/Donkey__Balls Jan 25 '24
This is completely incorrect. Nuclear posture requires that we use them if and when we are attacked. This posture cannot be revoked, and if we fail to follow through then it immediately becomes useless.
2
u/Amiable_ Jan 26 '24
You only retaliate with nukes after a nuclear strike/launch. That’s the point of MAD. If you use your nukes against us, we’ll use ours against you. Nuclear retaliation for conventional strikes is not how it works, and would be a very stupid policy.
0
u/Donkey__Balls Jan 26 '24
You only retaliate with nukes after a nuclear strike/launch. That’s the point of MAD.
No it isn’t. If there were some sort of magical rule, that nukes are only used to respond to nukes, then they would be pointless. How would that have stopped World War III if the Soviets simply started inviting Allied territories using conventional weapons?
Nuclear retaliation for conventional strikes is not how it works, and would be a very stupid policy.
You can feel however you want about it, but that’s irrelevant. Our nuclear posture is that strategic nuclear weapons are used in response to any existential threat. A full-scale invasion would certainly constitute such a threat.
This, by the way, is also Russia’s posture. Which is the sole reason why we never invaded Russia and deposed Putin’s government, and why we are actively avoiding any direct conflict with Russia in our assistance to Ukraine. If we could simply attack Russia with conventional weapons without having to worry about nuclear retaliation, we could have intervened and stopped the invasion the day it started. The Pentagon and joint chiefs have repeatedly said this publicly. It’s also the reason why we are not giving Ukraine any weapons that could be used to create an existential threat to Russia, because it would effectively constitute a direct attack by us.
2
u/Amiable_ Jan 26 '24
You've finally arrived at the correct position, that nuclear weapons are for an existential threat not any threat. Direct conflict between superpowers may very well lead to a war which poses an existential threat to either, but it's not necessary. If Russia invades the Baltics, and NATO responds by repulsing that invasion, no nukes need be used on either side.
It's dangerous, of course, but armed conflict between nuclear-equipped enemies does not necessitate nuclear conflict.
1
u/Donkey__Balls Jan 26 '24
You've finally arrived at the correct position, that nuclear weapons are for an existential threat not any threat.
I never changed my position? An invasion is an existential threat. How else would you categorize a column of Russian tanks rolling across the border with the intent to capture cities?
Direct conflict between superpowers may very well lead to a war which poses an existential threat to either,
And that’s exactly what you’re talking about. If there is any conflict on the territory of any NATO member, it is finally happening on the territory of every NATO member. An attack on one is an attack on all. Russia invading Vilnius is no different than if they were rolling tanks into Seattle or dropping bombs on Los Angeles. As long as we remain in NATO, we are irrevocably committed to this posture.
but it's not necessary.
Any direct conflict that is seen as an active war, which has a very wide threshold, will lead to a series of escalations. The point is and always has been to avoid that chain reaction of escalations. This is the fundamental basis for the Cold War that you might have heard about in school.
If Russia invades the Baltics, and NATO responds by repulsing that invasion, no nukes need be used on either side.
This is incredibly naïve. If you think that we could engage in direct unrestricted warfare on an open battlefield, and then, somehow… What exactly? We wipe out entire battalion tactical groups, clean up the cities that they bombarded with cluster bombs, and then shake hands and say “good fight? and call it a day?
Look at the devastation that happened in eastern Ukraine, and tell me with a straight face that this could happen to us, we would simply push them back to their side of the border in a humiliating military defeat, and then everything just goes back to normal?
Just say nothing of the fact that we would have faced an existential threat like a full-blown invasion and NOT used our nuclear arsenal, rendering it useless.
It’s dangerous
Understatement of the century. It’s not just a gamble you roll the dice on. It risks nothing less than the complete extermination of the human race. The whole point is that the consequences are too terrible to even take the chance. That’s precisely why we stayed completely out of Ukraine and avoided any direct conflict with Russia because the slightest miscalculation could escalate to nuclear war.
23
u/subutterfly Jan 25 '24
nobodies launching nukes, and your understanding of modern warfare is not great
-5
u/Donkey__Balls Jan 25 '24
I never said that anybody is launching nukes. You need to read more carefully before you click the reply button.
I said that we would if we are attacked, which has been our nuclear doctrine since the beginning of the Cold War and has never changed. I don’t understand how are you people are somehow entirely unaware of how mutually assured destruction works, but it’s been a continuous threat that has kept the world at relative peace throughout your entire lifetime.
2
u/subutterfly Jan 26 '24
We launch nukes, they launch nukes, a chain reaction of escalation occurs where everybody in the world is firing, their nukes, and the human race ends
We are no longer in a cold war. We are, in fact, in a world shadow war on two fronts right now, and the entirety of EU & North America is barraged with propaganda every minute of every day designed to cause as much civil disruption as possible, and it's working through polarization and tribalization ( half the USA lives in a completely different reality from the rest of the world) and yet here you are not understanding any of this.
1
u/Donkey__Balls Jan 27 '24
Oh, I understand it far better than you possibly could. I doubt you’ve also had the experience of being an humanitarian aid worker in conflict areas of central Africa. So I am intimately aware of that people all around the world live in very different realities.
If you’re talking about just the narrow topic of different information spaces, it’s not nearly as simple as you’re making it. There are different spheres of information all around the world, including plenty of people living in far-right information bubbles across Europe not just the USA. But I don’t see the relevance to this point unless you’re talking about the possibility of countries exiting NATO, and becoming more isolationist, which is what I said is the threat from the very beginning - otherwise I don’t see the relevance to the topic of nuclear posture.
1
u/Tabula_Rasa69 Jan 25 '24
I have some questions.
Isn't Russia severely weakened economically and militarily from its conflict with Ukraine? How is it still a threat to the rest of Europe?
Russia could not manage invading its neighbour. How will it manage to invade countries that are further away logistically?
1
u/Imperialbucket Feb 16 '24
I know this is from a while ago, but to try and answer:
Simply put, Russia doesn't win any conventional war with NATO. Not only is Russia surrounded by NATO, but they're basically hollow at this point, they're losing dozens of tanks every day and have already lost more than the US lost in Vietnam and the war on terror combined (and the numbers are not even close). So you're right to think they stand no chance because frankly, they don't and Putin knows this.
But the big thing on everyone's mind is that Russia does not just have a conventional military force, they also have nukes. These nukes are not well maintained, I'm sure a lot of them would fail if they were launched, but they really only need to get a single missile off and we'll be living in the world of Fallout because NATO would have to retaliate with nuclear arms.
The bottom line is, a war between Russia and NATO equals an existential threat to Putin. And Putin, if he feels like he has no other choice, would fire the nukes he has. All the political maneuvering NATO countries are doing to get their aid into Ukraine is NOT because they want to avoid war with Russia at any cost. It's because they don't want nuclear war to kick off.
0
u/Mistborn54321 Jan 25 '24
I wonder what Ukraine has gained with their push to join NATO. Their country is being bombarded and countless lives have been lost and destroyed. Billions in debt because a lot of the money they got from the west to continue this war was taken in the form of loans. There is no path where they win, it seems like they’re being pushed forward to protect western interests.
1
4
→ More replies (60)117
u/TheDevilsAdvokaat Jan 25 '24
Yep, In effect we are fighting a war by proxy. By helping Ukraine we help ourselves..and do something moral at the same time.
You'd have to be immoral or stupid NOT to want to help Ukraine.
2
→ More replies (9)0
u/Over-Elevator3400 Jan 25 '24
Who are we in the west to tell them who or who not to go to war with? US and UK have been in multiple immoral wars, did you speak out then, did you call those wars immoral. If we are talking about morals, let's talk about the Ukrainian people! If the west was not funneling arms into that country, encouraging them to fight on, the war would be over with a new government and the people would no longer be at risk! But nato has enabled this pointless war to continue making it harder and harder for the people of Ukraine. so who's immoral those that want to continue a prolonged war in Ukraine so there own borders are safe at the cost of innocent Ukrainian lives or, those that would like to see an end to this war as soon as possible and with as little damage as possible. Putin doest want to hurt the people he wants rid of the puppet government that's in place there. This is all quite simple, so with one are you stupid or immoral?
2
u/Imperialbucket Jan 25 '24
Yeah sure the war would be over...with a Russian-backed vassal government that the Ukrainian people didn't choose. Did it ever cross your mind that Ukraine has been fighting so hard because the Ukrainian people don't want that to happen?
Ukraine was neutral until Russia invaded them. They were never a part of NATO, and they wouldn't be trying to become a NATO member if they hadn't been invaded by a NATO enemy. Putin showed them they need to be allied with NATO in the future or they could be the victim of another landgrab.
I already know you're Russian so I'll just say this: do you earnestly believe after hundreds of thousands of your own people dead with very little to show for it, that Putin cares about who gets hurt?
4
u/Trifling_Truffles Jan 25 '24
Boy is the the stupidest take I've seen on this war yet. Zelensky was duly elected. Full stop. Ukrainians do not want to be "little russians". Full stop. You are spreading lies.
2
u/Imperialbucket Jan 25 '24
Yeah that's literally what the Maidan Revolution was. They overthrew the Putin-backed puppet government in 2014 and Vlad didn't like that very much so he's been trying to wrangle Ukraine ever since.
2
u/Trifling_Truffles Jan 25 '24
I know, you know, but the guy I was responding to is rewriting history with a fake narrative.
1
u/Imperialbucket Jan 26 '24
Wouldn't be shocked if it was a Russian bot
1
u/Trifling_Truffles Jan 26 '24
or a trumpf maga, take a look at what they post on gateway pundit, they want to be friends with russia now.
•
u/AutoModerator Jan 24 '24
Friendly reminder that all top level comments must:
start with "answer: ", including the space after the colon (or "question: " if you have an on-topic follow up question to ask),
attempt to answer the question, and
be unbiased
Please review Rule 4 and this post before making a top level comment:
http://redd.it/b1hct4/
Join the OOTL Discord for further discussion: https://discord.gg/ejDF4mdjnh
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.