Russia Invades Ukraine

[ab2cmiller]

Russia recently declared their terms for peace.

How do you determine if Ukraine has been denazafied?

 

[calvegas04]

Russia recently declared their terms for peace.

See Russia doesn't want peace

 

[NDVirginia19]

Those are completely untenable positions for peace. But I think there is maneuver room for both sides to compromise

 

[ab2cmiller]

The Russian asset strikes again.

 

[GATTACA!]

Russia recently declared their terms for peace.

It’s like trying to negotiate with a crack head.

 

[Giddyup]

The Russian asset strikes again.

What? Trump cut off Russia’s oil and now they are gonna agree to the ceasefire. You might need to adjust your Trump is Putin puppet delusion a little now.

 

[Giddyup]

What? Trump cut off Russia’s oil and now they are gonna agree to the ceasefire. You might need to adjust your Trump is Putin puppet delusion a little now.

That was quick. Cut off the oil and Putin crawls back to the peace table.

 

[ab2cmiller]

What? Trump cut off Russia’s oil and now they are gonna agree to the ceasefire. You might need to adjust your Trump is Putin puppet delusion a little now.

Don’t know if the “you” was directed at me or not. My post was sarcastic lol.

 

[BuaConstrictor]

The Russian asset strikes again.

This was literally done under Joe Biden on January 10th, 2025. A week before Trump took office.

Link #1: Biden Administration imposes sweeping sanctions against the Russian Energy Sector days ahead of the Trump Transition
Click on "Issued" in above link leads you to:
Link #2: https://ofac.treasury.gov/recent-actions/20250110
Click on " Russia-related General License 8L" takes you to this PDF:
(https://ofac.treasury.gov/media/933791/download?inline)

This pdf was (partially) screengrabbed for the Tweet...because..if they posted the entire PDF or you know..actually linked you to anything the tweet was referencing..people would see that this was dated on January 10th, 2025...and this was part of an EO Biden signed on his way out of office.

 

[Sea Turtle]

Russia is being perfectly reasonable 😆 🤣

 

[ab2cmiller]

This was literally done under Joe Biden on January 13th, 2025. A week before Trump took office.

Link #1: Biden Administration imposes sweeping sanctions against the Russian Energy Sector days ahead of the Trump Transition
Click on "Issued" in above link leads you to:
Link #2: https://ofac.treasury.gov/recent-actions/20250110
Click on " Russia-related General License 8L" takes you to this PDF:
(https://ofac.treasury.gov/media/933791/download?inline)

This pdf was (partially) screengrabbed for the Tweet...because..if they posted the entire PDF or you know..actually linked you to anything the tweet was referencing..people would see that this was dated on January 10th, 2025...and this was part of an EO Biden signed on his way out of office.

Even if all that you say is true, it would seem that a “Russian asset” would issue his own EO rescinding the previous EO

 

[BuaConstrictor]

Even if all that you say is true,

It is. Prove it's not.

would seem that a “Russian asset” would issue his own EO rescinding the previous EO

You're assuming Trump is competent.

 

[ab2cmiller]

Also, if true, why did Biden wait to do the EO until he was on his way out the door??

Edit:
When I use the term Biden, I mean Biden’s people.

 

[BuaConstrictor]

Also, if true, why did Biden wait to do the EO until he was on his way out the door??

I don't know. Ask him? I've openly stated I think Biden mismanaged the Ukraine-Russia War.

Stop interpreting me proving your dumbshit about Trump wrong with me endorsing Biden's action or inaction on a topic.

Why do you keep saying "if true"? What more proof do you want aside from me having to walk you through the EO's and show you the actual PDF's?

 

[ab2cmiller]

I don't know. Ask him? I've openly stated I think Biden mismanaged the Ukraine-Russia War.

Stop interpreting me proving your dumbshit about Trump wrong with me endorsing Biden's action or inaction on a topic.

Why do you keep saying "if true"? What more proof do you want aside from me having to walk you through the EO's and show you the actual PDF's?

Because I didn’t take time yet to look into it you arrogant prick.

 

[BuaConstrictor]

Because I didn’t take time yet to look into it

Obviously. Thankfully I did. How much time does it take you to click on three links? You've made three responses to the post. You could have done it about 20 times by now.

you arrogant prick.

1. Guilty. Thank you.
2. You forgot to add the term "correct"
3. I understand you're mad that the tweet you posted to make some point re: Trump was blown the fuck up because you weren't capable of detecting some bullshit in it or simply Googling the order referenced in the screengrab...but this is really a "you" problem and not a "me" one.
4. You need to do better.

 

[Giddyup]

Yeah I’m not gonna look it up but let’s make the stretch that Bua is correct. There is always a difference between an EO and actual enforcement of said EO. Regardless good to get both sides to a ceasefire.

 

[BuaConstrictor]

Yeah I’m not gonna look it up

You don't have to. I've provided the information.

There is always a difference between an EO and actual enforcement of said EO

The EO has been in action for over 24 hours by this point (12:01 AM EST, March 12th).

 

[NDVirginia19]

But I was reliably told that Trump was KKKompromised by Russia????

 

[BuaConstrictor]

But I was reliably told that Trump was KKKompromised by Russia????

Just to be clear, your basis for Trump NOT being compromised by Russia is Russia being hurt by an EO that Biden signed?

 

[calvegas04]

 

[ab2cmiller]

I don't know. Ask him? I've openly stated I think Biden mismanaged the Ukraine-Russia War.

Stop interpreting me proving your dumbshit about Trump wrong with me endorsing Biden's action or inaction on a topic.

Why do you keep saying "if true"? What more proof do you want aside from me having to walk you through the EO's and show you the actual PDF's?

I actually did some searching and found the reason why Biden's team didn't do it earlier was out of concern that they (Biden's team) didn't want to destabilize global oil and gas markets.

Once the Dem's lost, suddenly Biden's team found new "courage". What an amazing coincidence. Increasing sanctions against Russia was a win. They were probably hoping for a 2-fer that it actually would destabilize oil and gas markets.

A Minefield in Russia's Energy Sector: Biden's Final Sanctions Act May be Game-Changing

On January 10, 2025, the U.S. Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) announced its most comprehensive sanctions to-date against Russia's energy sector.

www.troutman.com

Treasury Secretary Bessent's testimony regarding Russian sanctions during his confirmation hearing.

 

[BuaConstrictor]

I actually did some searching and found the reason why Biden's team didn't do it earlier was out of concern that they (Biden's team) didn't want to destabilize global oil and gas markets.

Once the Dem's lost, suddenly Biden's team found new "courage". What an amazing coincidence. Increasing sanctions against Russia was a win. They were probably hoping for a 2-fer that it actually would destabilize oil and gas markets.

A Minefield in Russia's Energy Sector: Biden's Final Sanctions Act May be Game-Changing

On January 10, 2025, the U.S. Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) announced its most comprehensive sanctions to-date against Russia's energy sector.

www.troutman.com

Treasury Secretary Bessent's testimony regarding Russian sanctions during his confirmation hearing.

So..Just to be clear....your tweet and it's claim were....false?

Still waiting for you to admit that.

We can start there.




Trying to get you to take an actual position here rather than political hackery:

Should Biden have done what he did? Was it a good thing? You say it was a "win", but follow it up with tin foil hat nonsense saying that Biden was "hoping" the sanctions would destabilize the market...which I would assume you think is a bad thing? An act of sabotage for Trump? Destabilization is a bad thing, is it?

If so, and perhaps regardless, do you support Trump's Treasury Sec. advocating for more harsh sanctions?..as those would de-stabilize the market more?

If the original sanctions were going to de-stabilize the markets(and that is a bad thing) and Trump was aware of them, as you alluded to a few posts ago, why didn't Trump stop them?

Again, stop being a hack for a second and take a position and analyze something.

Overall, pretty sad that it took me absolutely clownsuiting you to make you actually look into the shit you post and swallowing it hook line and sinker like the bootlicker you are.

Pretty scary to think about how much other bullshit you believe that you haven't spent any time looking into.

 

[ab2cmiller]

So..Just to be clear....your tweet and it's claim were....false?

Still waiting for you to admit that.

We can start there.




Trying to get you to take an actual position here rather than political hackery:

Should Biden have done what he did? Was it a good thing? You say it was a "win", but follow it up with tin foil hat nonsense saying that Biden was "hoping" the sanctions would destabilize the market...which I would assume you think is a bad thing? An act of sabotage for Trump? Destabilization is a bad thing, is it?

If so, and perhaps regardless, do you support Trump's Treasury Sec. advocating for more harsh sanctions?..as those would de-stabilize the market more?

If the original sanctions were going to de-stabilize the markets(and that is a bad thing) and Trump was aware of them, as you alluded to a few posts ago, why didn't Trump stop them?

Again, stop being a hack for a second and take a position and analyze something.

I would call the original tweet I posted as false. Thank you for pointing that out.
I am for harsher sanctions on Russia, even if it destabilizes the market.
I am stating that the Biden/Harris would NOT have never issued the EO had they won.

What is your stance?

 

[BuaConstrictor]

I would call the original tweet I posted as false. Thank you for pointing that out.

Good boy.

I am for harsher sanctions on Russia, even if it destabilizes the market.

You have not answered all my questions in regards to this:
-Should Biden have done what he did? Was it a good thing?
-You say it was a "win", but follow it up with tin foil hat nonsense saying that Biden was "hoping" the sanctions would destabilize the market...which I would assume you think is a bad thing? An act of sabotage for Trump? Destabilization is a bad thing, is it?
-If the original sanctions were going to de-stabilize the markets(and that is a bad thing) and Trump was aware of them, as you alluded to a few posts ago, why didn't Trump stop them?

What is your stance?

I'll answer yours when you answer mine.

You don't hold the cards here. I do.

 

[ab2cmiller]

Good boy.

You have not answered all my questions in regards to this:
Should Biden have done what he did? Was it a good thing?
You say it was a "win", but follow it up with tin foil hat nonsense saying that Biden was "hoping" the sanctions would destabilize the market...which I would assume you think is a bad thing? An act of sabotage for Trump? Destabilization is a bad thing, is it?
If the original sanctions were going to de-stabilize the markets(and that is a bad thing) and Trump was aware of them, as you alluded to a few posts ago, why didn't Trump stop them?


I'll answer yours when you answer mine.

You don't hold the cards here. I do.

That's because you are a chicken shit. Come on man. Take a stance. I heard that once someplace.

 

[BuaConstrictor]

That's because you are a chicken shit. Come on man. Take a stance. I heard that once someplace.

I'll more than happily do so once you answer the questions you are avoiding.

I've already take "a stance" in an earlier post in response to you. More than happy to expound on it once you stop avoiding answering questions.

-Should Biden have done what he did? Was it a good thing?
-You say it was a "win", but follow it up with tin foil hat nonsense saying that Biden was "hoping" the sanctions would destabilize the market...which I would assume you think is a bad thing? An act of sabotage for Trump? Destabilization is a bad thing, is it?
-If the original sanctions were going to de-stabilize the markets(and that is a bad thing) and Trump was aware of them, as you alluded to a few posts ago, why didn't Trump stop them?

 

[ab2cmiller]

I'll more than happily do so once you answer the questions you are avoiding.

I've already take "a stance" in an earlier post in response to you. More than happy to expound on it once you avoid answering questions.

-Should Biden have done what he did? Was it a good thing?
-You say it was a "win", but follow it up with tin foil hat nonsense saying that Biden was "hoping" the sanctions would destabilize the market...which I would assume you think is a bad thing? An act of sabotage for Trump? Destabilization is a bad thing, is it?
-If the original sanctions were going to de-stabilize the markets(and that is a bad thing) and Trump was aware of them, as you alluded to a few posts ago, why didn't Trump stop them?

I'm not playing this game. You've done this with a number of people. You routinely just decide whatever answers are provided are not good enough. I won't answer anymore of your questions. If that means I never get to hear your totally "reasonable" (LOL) takes. I'll be fine. You are the definition of a troll. As others have posted on here, Irish#1 is about as reasonable as you come. Gets along with virtually everyone. He finally chose to ignore you. As will I.

The political boards have always been a bit of a dumpster fire. Since you've joined, it's basically become an inferno where you and Giddyup dominate the boards. Virtually unreadable.

 

[BuaConstrictor]

I'm not playing this game.

Yes you are.

You've done this with a number of people

No I haven't. Provide proof.

You routinely just decide whatever answers are provided are not good enough

You literally haven't provided answers to questions I have asked. So it's not "deciding"/judging answers that have been provided...you haven't provided those answers to be judged or decided on yet!

Hell, I'm already pre-typing my response to "my stance" assuming you were actually going to answer the question. I'll still type it and save it, just in case you ever get the stones to respond.

I won't answer anymore of your questions.

"Chicken shit."

Also, I know why you won't. It's ok. You can't bring yourself to even answer the first unanswered question because you are such a hack.

As will I.

"Chicken shit"/MAGA tears.

The political boards have always been a bit of a dumpster fire

With people like you, I can see why. Seems more like a "you" problem if they were an issue before I was ever here.

 

[ab2cmiller]

The Russian asset strikes again.

Well as it turns out, this tweet is TRUE after all. Trump chose not to extend this waiver out, unlike Biden.

Here's the history.

Waiver first allowed allowed transactions through 6/24/22 when it would expire.
Guess what, Biden's team chickened out and said well ending it is really a bad idea soooo, I guess we will extend it out to 12/5/22.
As 12/5/22 approached, Biden's team decided it wasn't a good idea to let the waiver expire, so they extended it to 5/15/23.
As 5/15/23 approached, Biden's team decided it wasn't a good idea to let the waiver expire, they extended it to 11/1/23.
Extended again to 5/1/24
Extended again to 11/1/24
Extended again (just before the election) to 4/30/25.
Oooops, we lost the election, we're done doing extensions, we're moving it up to 3/12/25

Trump takes office and lets the waiver expire.
Hmmmmmmmmmm. Total bullshit. Total chicken shit. I can only assume that Trump saw the wisdom of Biden's teams choices.