₦airaland Forum

Botragelad:
Israel jets flew into Iran and dominated for several hours. Why is it hard for Iran to do the same? 😂😂😂

Which day did Israel jets fly into Iran?
What did those Jets damage inside Iran?

Chucks13:
So you mean Ukraine should not defend their country? And when millitary mounted roadblocks everywhere in our region you started calling UN, AU, ICC, ITU, BBG, BBQ ec but you are the here celebrating a bulier idiot called Putin invading a sovereign country ba? Honestly I'm ashamed of you.

There are still many countries today where colonial rule and even broad-daylight slavery is the order of the day from the hands of these European countries, pretending to love freedom, human right, etc.
Continue to fool yourself believing all western propaganda on Ukraine.

obajoey:
So you think it is only Russia that is fighting Ukraine?

who else is fighting Ukraine?

God1000:
it appears you just woke up from your sleep man, I support Ukraine's right to defend itself from the invaders just like I've been supporting Palestinians and their struggle for independence.

We both know Ukraine doesn't have what it takes to annihilate Russia but they have done excellently well holding Russia back for 3years now

Zelensky has merely sacrificed his citizens to further the geopolitical agenda of America and Europe.
Never equate Ukraine to Palestinians. Ukraine and Russia used to be in the same country b4. Disagreements on border should never have been the concern of the West

God1000:
Ukraine will become very vulnerable to Russia in coming weeks if EU doesn't step in and provide the needed support

So, it is America and EU dat have been fighting Russia since and not Ukraine?

Botragelad:
Oh, wow, I'm just so shocked that Iran didn't launch their 'super-powerful' rockets to take down the B-52s. 😄😄

Why not fly the B-52 over Iran first?

Botragelad:
Source:
https://m.jpost.com/israel-news/article-844971

The fear of Iran
Joint drill or no joint drill, Operation True Promise 3 from Iran is real
Israel to chop more Iran missiles soon
Useless Israel, genocidal land thief

Amayabor1:
1. What were you expecting when a member of the Politburo who was very vocal against the US writes about the lend and lease program?

2. "Until the lions have their own historians, the history of the hunt will always glorify the hunter". Refer to 1 above for it's meaning

3. Never in the history of the USSR did the opinion of a politburo member taken as the official stance of the USSR. The official position of USSR was in line with the position taken by the politburo as a body or a group, and not by the opinion of an individual.

4. Lol. Why should the memoir of Khrushchev be used as a propaganda material by the USSR when he stated the truth that ran contrary to the false view most people after him in the USSR held? And please, can you show me evidence where Stalin gave Nikolai a medal for the book he authored? I would like to see.

5. What are you saying? Lol. Yes, I said the USSR and subsequent Russia officials deliberately downplayed the role the lend and lease program played in helping the USSR to defeat Nazi Germany. Where did I tell you that those downplays weren't the official government position?

I do not know the official position of USSR on this matter, but one thing is for sure; The officials of USSR and Russia over the years have deliberately tried to downplay the role the lend and lease program had in helping them achieve victory


6. And how does Russia perceive the program officially? What is your evidence of USSR/Russia official position on this subject matter? Books written by Nikolai? Lol 😅🤣😅

Am done talking
Thanks and bye

Amayabor1:
1. Well, even the article you shared stated it was at a conference. Except you were blind to that part. "TOAST" is what is making you feel it was at a dinner even thought the article you shared stated it was at a conference? Lol.


2. Lol. What is the process please? Funny guy. Yes, a leader can wake up and take his nation into Nato as long as all the necessary requirements laid down by Nato have been fulfilled by country. The first step of joining nato is notify nato that your country wants to join and that step is taken by the leader of the country. Taaah. Go and sit down. Overthrow Putin because he takes Russia into Nato. If you don't know your history, let me remind you; Putin tried for Russia to join Nato. He tried. He wanted it. It was the US that didn't want it.

3. Lies. All these aren't USSR/Russia official account of events.

1. Don't they eat in conferences?
Maybe after dis u will stop arguing blindly.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tehran_Conference

Dinner meeting
Before the Tripartite Dinner Meeting of 29 November 1943 at the Conference, Churchill presented Stalin with a specially commissioned ceremonial sword (the "Sword of Stalingrad," made in Sheffield), as a gift from King George VI to the citizens of Stalingrad and the Soviet people, commemorating the Soviet victory at Stalingrad. When Stalin received the sheathed sword, he took it with both hands and kissed the scabbard. Stalin held the sword by the sheathe and angled the pommel downwards, causing the sword to slide out of its scabbard and fall to the ground. He then handed it to Marshal Kliment Voroshilov[14]

"Without American machines the United Nations never could have won the war."

— Joseph Stalin, during the dinner at the Tehran Conference.[15][16]
Stalin proposed executing 50,000 to 100,000 German officers so that Germany could not plan another war. Roosevelt, believing that Stalin was not serious, joked that "maybe 49,000 would be enough." Churchill, however, was outraged and denounced "the cold blooded execution of soldiers who fought for their country." He said that only war criminals should be put on trial in accordance with the Moscow Document, which he had written. He stormed out of the room but was brought back in by Stalin, who said he was joking. Churchill was glad Stalin had relented but thought that Stalin had been testing the waters.[17]


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tehran_Conference

Nothing a leader say in dinner is important.
That how James Baker told Mikhail Gorbachev that NATO will not spread one inch eastward, should the Berlin wall fall.
The same James Baker today, has denied he ever said anything of such.

2. NATO membership is not Ukraine war, where one president can support, while the immediate next president will oppose.
Equally, members can veto your application. Turkey vetoed against Finland and Sweden over Kurd disagreements.
Finland and Sweden had to settle by the side with Turkey first, b4 their application pulled thru.
So, its a national matter in such case. U can't throw away all your Kurds cos u want to join NATO. No single leader can decide that matter. Putin will be killed b4 he can give up anything Russia has acquired over the years cos of NATO

3. Soviet State Planning Committee's documents are the official documents of the Soviet union

lexy2014:
thats beautiful....what is your answer in your reply that I recognised?



which comment does your comment above answer?

its because you are very intelligent I am asking you these:

1. can you share what it is that Trump knows?

2. DId Putin envisage that he will still be fighting Ukraine 3years after invading the country?

yes or no

for these two simple questions, you wrote epistle:



how does all your grammar answer these two questions?

verbosity does not equate to substance

Whatever is left u don't understand, feel free to peruse my answers again

lexy2014:
thats beautiful....what is your answer in your reply that I recognised?



which comment does your comment above answer?

its because you are very intelligent I am asking you these:

1. can you share what it is that Trump knows?

2. DId Putin envisage that he will still be fighting Ukraine 3years after invading the country?

yes or no

for these two simple questions, you wrote epistle:



how does all your grammar answer these two questions?

verbosity does not equate to substance

I understand.
U have assimilated my answers already

lexy2014:
thats beautiful....what is your answer in your reply that I recognised?



which comment does your comment above answer?

its because you are very intelligent I am asking you these:

1. can you share what it is that Trump knows?

2. DId Putin envisage that he will still be fighting Ukraine 3years after invading the country?

yes or no

for these two simple questions, you wrote epistle:



how does all your grammar answer these two questions?

verbosity does not equate to substance

Yes, my answers are all u need.

lexy2014:
what is your answer in your reply that I recognised?



which comment does your comment above answer?

its because you are very intelligent I am asking you these:

1. can you share what it is that Trump knows?

2. DId Putin envisage that he will still be fighting Ukraine 3years after invading the country?

yes or no

for these two simple questions, you wrote epistle:



how does all your grammar answer these two questions?

verbosity does not equate to substance

Am amused u enjoyed the answers i supplied

lexy2014:
which comment does your comment above answer?

its because you are very intelligent I am asking you these:

1. can you share what it is that Trump knows?

2. DId Putin envisage that he will still be fighting Ukraine 3years after invading the country?

yes or no

for these two simple questions, you wrote epistle:



how does all your grammar answer these two questions?

verbosity does not equate to substance

Am glad you've already recognized your answer in my reply.
So adjust ur views accordingly

lexy2014:
which comment does your comment above answer?

its because you are very intelligent I am asking you these:

1. can you share what it is that Trump knows?

2. DId Putin envisage that he will still be fighting Ukraine 3years after invading the country?

yes or no

for these two simple questions, you wrote epistle:



how does all your grammar answer these two questions?

verbosity does not equate to substance

Sure. U already got all the answers u deserve

lexy2014:
its because you are very intelligent I am asking you these:

1. can you share what it is that Trump knows?

2. DId Putin envisage that he will still be fighting Ukraine 3years after invading the country?

yes or no

for these two simple questions, you wrote epistle:



how does all your grammar answer these two questions?

verbosity does not equate to substance

Dats becos u're mumu, otherwise, u've already been adequately answered

lexy2014:
how does all your grammar answer these two questions?

can you share what it is that Trump knows?

DId Putin envisage that he will still be fighting Ukraine 3years after invading the country? yes or no

i have already answered year questions. U are only too dull to see it

lexy2014:
can you share with us what Trump knows?

DId Putin envisage that he will still be fighting Ukraine 3years after invading the country?

Putin is up against 50 NATO and affiliate nations. So no suprise d war has lasted this long.
If Ukraine is the brave one fighting all along, then why is Zelensky jittery about America pulling out?
Why is Zelensky running from one European capital to another?
Then Trump knows Ukraine was used to prevent Russian gas from reaching Europe
Ukraine was den used to destroy the Nord stream effort of Russia to supply Europe aside thru Ukraine
Trump knows America turned Ukraine into a bio lab for biological toxins development
And precipitated a cold war with Russia by openly funding neo-Nazi groups
which was followed by unprecedented sanctions against Russia with clear intent to collapse Russia

D00msDay:
Trump should take it easy on Zelensky. His making it look like Zelensky was the aggressor. Zelenskys crime was his attempt to joining Nato. Putin did the invasion, the war was and is being fought in Ukrainian territory yet making the young man look like his the one at fault. I'm not supporting Trump on this.

A peace deal should also favour Ukraine. U can't draft a one sided peace deal and expect Zelensky to rush and grab it wit joy.

See dem, those who think they know more dan Trump.
Ukraine as a former Soviet country acted very foolishly in helping the west to destroy Russia.
After 3yrs of war and all the sanctions of this world, the west thought Russia would have broken up into 11republics like former USSR. So, Ukraine will have to lose territory as a lesson.

Amayabor1:
1. Lol. The short history of the Great Patriotic War written by who?

2. "Until the lions have their own historians, the history of the hunt will always glorify the hunter".

3. What do you expect a politburo member to say? And sorry, the views of Nikolai Ryzhkov were never official position of the USSR on this subject matter.

4. So, both Nikolai wrote a book and it must have been the official position of USSR but the memoir of Nikita Khrushchev can't be the official position of the USSR on this subject matter right? Lol.

5. For your information, there was a deliberate effort made by the then USSR officials to downplay and never discuss US effort in helping them defeat nazi Germany.


6. And we are only discussing USSR account of things. I may have to bring the US side of the story so you can see how they were instrumental in helping the USSR defeat Germany.

Maybe you think only the Nikolais have written a book on this subject.

1, Soviet State Planning Committee
2. How relevant is dis?
3. A senior Politburo member will only reflect official positions. U are very mistaken to think otherwise.
4. Memoir of Khrushchev were never used as propaganda materials like Nikolai, who got a medal for the book from Stalin.
5. U are a hypocrite. U speak with one side of tongue that Russian officials deliberately downplay d lease, then argue with the flip side of same tongue, dat those downplays were not the official government position. So, how are those people officials, if they are not maintaining official positions?
6. All that matter in Russia, is how Russia perceived the lease officially. Which makes Sokolov u keep quoting, an irrelevant reference

Amayabor1:
1. Yes, you can make a toast at a conference. It was a conference held in Tehran and Stalin said what he said at that conference.

2. Lol. Was Sanna Marin, the former prime minister of Finland the owner of Finland when Finland joined Nato? Or is Ulf Kristersson, the owner of Sweden when he carried Sweden into Nato? So, if Putin, who is an autocratic wanted Russia to join Nato and Nato members agreed, who would have stopped him? You? Lol

3. I didn't see any link. Was it not fear of nazi Germany that made USSR sign a Non-aggression pact with Germany? Lol.

4. None of all what you quoted is an official government of USSR/Russia account of events.

The truth is that,USSR/Russia will never agree that the US was instrumental in helping them defeat nazi Germany and it is understandable. They lost more than 25 million citizens and they will naturally want to take all the glory, instead of giving that glory to their enemy (the US).

1. U are wrong. It happened at a dinner. But i will let you argue blindly some more, b4 i show u the proof. Cos even if Stalin made such speech in a conference hall, its still trash talk
2. U don't know the process it takes to put a country in NATO, thats why u think one leader can just wakeup and dump his nation on NATO. Putin will be overthrown should he be insane enough to attempt to force NATO on Russia.
4. soviet planning committee
The Military Economy of the USSR during the Patriotic War"
A Brief History of the Great Patriotic War"
Are all official government of USSR/Russia account of events.

Amayabor1:
Omo. I have been away.

Hehehe in Rema's voice. 😅. So, you went to Google? So, we all go to Google then. Lol. That's by the way

Did you read the full article ? Let me summarize what the article says; Without US help, Russia would have lost that war. But before I delve into that, let me correct something you said; you are wrong to say that what a head of state says during dinner is irrelevant. It depends on the event the head of state is talking about. First, Stalin stated in an international conference in Tehran (not dinner) that the USSR would have lost the war without the help of the US. Nikita Khrushchev, in his memoir (not over dinnner) also said the same thing.

Also, the examples you gave really shows you may not even understand the issues at hand. Trump saying he wants to get Greenland or make Canada the 51st state and Putin saying he wants Russia to join Nato are things they intend/intended to do in the FUTURE. It is different from when a Soviet leader that has fought a war and after the war, gave an assessment that his country would have lost the war if not for the help of the US. How you equate both scenarios baffles me. Trump criticizing Bush for invading Iraq after 9/11 is a perfect example not the one you gave. Trump as president criticized Bush for going to war in Iraq. You see the similarities? These were world leaders talking about events that has happened, not the example you gave where leaders were talking about things they intend to do (and for your information, Putin was actually serious about Russia joing Nato).

It will be foolish to brush aside the talk of leaders of a country when they describe past events involving their country.

My second write up will be about the article itself.

Stalin RAISED A TOAST. Do u drink in conference hall? They were eating when Stalin spoke. And what he said was never the official position of Russia over the issue.
Now, it does not matter whether a president talks about what will happen or what has happened.
Its all trash talk if it is not the official position of the country. Trump wishing to annex Canada or Greenland, is on his own. There is nothing in any official quarter about such. Similarly, Trump's opinion about Bush and Gulf war, cannot alter the official narrative of America on the matter.
Also, Putin is not the owner of Russia. He cannot decide suddenly to put Russia in NATO. And ofcourse Clinton rightly ignored him dat day.

Here is another link on the issue


The beginning was laid already in the first post-war publications in serious scientific journals and in the big press. In the Soviet State Planning Committee, with the help of fairly simple manipulations with numbers, they promptly deduced an estimate of the scale of Western aid at 4% compared to domestic production.

This figure was also found in the official work "The Military Economy of the USSR during the Patriotic War" by the head of the State Planning Commission and member of the Politburo Nikolai Voznesensky, who was soon repressed in the "Leningrad case". The book was published with a delay of more than 30 years, only in 1984, just between detente and perestroika, when the positive attitude towards the comrades-in-arms in the fight against Hitlerism was not very welcomed.

In the same 1984, "A Brief History of the Great Patriotic War" was published, which was an extract from the 6-volume officialdom, in which a much more objective assessment of the allied aid was given. In a short version, the case was limited to this, we admit, by no means a neutral passage:

[Quote] During the war, the USSR really received some types of weapons under Lend-Lease, as well as machinery, equipment, materials important for the national economy, in particular, steam locomotives, fuel, communications, various types of non-ferrous metals and chemicals. For example, the delivery of 401 vehicles to the USA and Great Britain was a significant help. However, in general, this assistance was not in any way significant and could not have a decisive influence on the course of the Great Patriotic War. [/ Quote]


So, the OFFICIAL RECORD had the lease effectiveness at only 4%
Regardless of what Stalin or Khruschev said otherwise.

Amayabor1:
A Soviet report by Politburo member Nikolai Voznesensky in 1948 asserted that the United States, described as "the head of the antidemocratic camp and the warrior of imperialist expansion around the world," contributed materiel during the war that amounted to just 4.8 percent of the Soviet Union's own wartime production.

This was by a politburo member. It was not an official USSR government report. 1948 was a heightened period of the cold war and thinking a report from a politburo member will praise US effort in helping USSR in ww2 is a sign of naivety.

Same thing with the comment made by Nikolai Ryzhkov in 2015. A former soviet leaders saying in 2015 that the US helped USSR to defeat nazi Germany would have turned the entire country against him.

But let's analyze the opinions of PARTICIPANTS in the war and intelligence report.

I will be posting pictures from the article you sent

U left out this

The Short History Of The Great Patriotic War, also from 1948, acknowledged
the Lend-Lease shipments, but concluded: "Overall this assistance was not
significant enough to in any way exert a decisive influence over the course of
the Great Patriotic War.

Then Nikolai Voznesensky was a very senior member of the Politburo. Not just a member, so his views must be official.
Plus the view was expressed IN A BOOK he wrote, which received the highest soviet award from Jo Stalin.
Same too for Nikolai Ryzhkov. He wrote a book and expressed his view.
It will have to be the official view, cos you can't write a book
without citing references. So, book is far reliable than any toast Stalin may have made over dinner or letter Khruschev wrote about recollections of Stalin. None of that matter.
Equally, gossips from foot soldiers and hatchet men, cannever be considered as official position on the matter.

smokinloud:
🤡🤡🤡
1. Israel doesn't need the Gaza marine field provided it's within the territory of Gaza. Israel approves Palestine to develop whatever they want freely on the field.
2. That's the problem. As long as you believe Israel proper does not belong to Israel you'll always have problem with Israel.
3,4,5 are too weighty for you to disprove.

continue with your mumuing
No need to answer u again.
bye

Arrowhead71:
stop watching nonsense stuff on YouTube, some guys are just cashing out on you
And I know Iran will attack Israel again
And I sincerely support Hamas not to release the hostages
And I support you, that your Hamas is powerful
And Hezbolla is also a super power
And you should please help us beg Hamas to have mercy on Israel
Are you happy now

Mtchewwww
What could you do, wen Iran struck Israel and 10million Jews hid like rats in bunkers?

Botragelad:
Repeating the same trash again.

The criminality of Israel is well documented by UN and ICJ.
Israel cannot build on lands not its own.
Israel has no right to blockade Gaza
What nonsense are u defending Israel about?
Israel is a rouge state and an illegitimate nation.
Thats d summary

AImiron:
Source: CNN

During the oval office media briefing, Zelensky called J.D Vance a BITCH
He asked Vance, 'have you ever been to Ukraine before' Then added bitch, with Ukrainian language.

smokinloud:
Is that an agreement between Israel and Egypt?!.
You mentioned 1994 though. I don't know what point you are driving out with that.

Israel started building fence around gaza 1994. And as long as Israel maintain gaza is a threat to its security, Egypt will have to comply with the blockade.
Egypt is not d one blockading, Its Israel.

Botragelad:
Are you reading all I said at all?
So, according to you Egypt has “right” to build a wall to “demarcate its boundaries,” but Israel’s control of Gaza’s borders is a “blockade.” Funny! Well, Egypt’s wall exists because Hamas tunnels into Egypt to kill, and smuggle weapons, a fact even Hamas’s own propaganda can’t deny. Meanwhile you are framing Israel’s restrictions as a “blockade” because Hamas fires rockets at Israeli civilians and builds cross-border tunnels to invade Israel. But keep pretending.
If you think Egypt’s wall is acceptable, why is Israel’s control of its own borders, a response to Hamas’s direct attacks suddenly “oppression”? Is Hamas’s terrorism the only valid reason for a nation to secure its borders?

Again, Israel withdrew all its troops and people from Gaza in 2005. But since Hamas took over, Israel has been forced to maintain a security perimeter to prevent Hamas from launching rockets, kidnapping Israelis, and smuggling weapons. This is not occupation it’s self-defense.

Your 90% figure is a wild guess by the way, not a fact. Israel’s “control” of Gaza’s borders, airspace, and coastline is a response to Hamas’s declared war. Hamas’s charter still calls for Israel’s destruction, so Israel’s security measures are proportional in such case.

It's called sovereignty protection, that's what Israel's doing, and until Hamas recognizes Israel’s right to exist, Israel has every right to secure its borders. It's that simple.

All your propaganda for Israel will not absolve it of its criminality.
Israel has no right to alter its occupied territories based on security.
Israel has no right to defend itself against its occupied territories. An armed robber has no right to defend itself against the victims of the robbery.
Israel never left Gaza, 90% of gaza is under israel occupation.
Argue with the 1947 Gaza map

smokinloud:
I've asked you to show me an article of the Camp David accord that says what you're claiming.

nonsense

smokinloud:
😂🤣🤣😂😂🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡
1. Israel that supply Gaza electricity, water, Jobs and other good things of life is the one blockading Gaza?!. What benefits are Gazans getting from Egypt?!.
2. It's blockade when Israel build borders against Gaza but it's not blockade when Egypt builds borders against Gaza?.🤡🤡🤡
3. What are the things that Gaza can't get from Israel?!. Mention one.
4. If those things exist why can't they get double of such things from Egypt?!.
5. If Israel blockades them from getting water and electricity then they should strengthen their diplomatic ties with Egypt. No be rocket science.

I hope Botragelad will see now, why i say u are a dunce?
1. Gaza has 1.6trillion Cubit tonnes of natural gas, which Israel is hindering from development. Gaza does not need alms from Israel or
anybody. Israel should leave gaza alone. simple
2. Israel has no right to build borders in land dat does not belong to it.
Blockade is deliberately preventing goods and services. Its not fence per se.
3,4,5 too stupid to address!

smokinloud:
😂🤣 in 1994, it was Oslo accord. You've shifted goal post and I'm not surprised. There's was no issues of Palestinians owning Gaza in 1994. Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005 and left the RAFAH crossing for Egypt and Palestine. If Israel and the main media cry that Egypt smuggles weapons into Gaza. It is still not a direct command, imposition or influence for Egypt to shut everything against Gaza. You nor dey use your brai.n?.

Who cares about Oslo? Am telling u blockade is different from fence and Israel blockaded Gaza in 2007. Egypt will have to tear the camp David accord to allow trade between itself and Gaza after then