Comments by "jacq danieles" (@jacqdanieles) on "Preston Stewart " channel.

In an interview, Estonian PM Kaja Kalas was asked by Stephen Sackur the question about why Ukraine should not sue for peace. Her response was: Britain had peace after WW2 & the people stopped being killed. Estonia & the other Baltic states also had peace when the fighting stopped -- but the death & suffering continued. They were subjected to deportations, executions, persecution, torture, rape, & other atrocities. This is why Ukraine refuses to be under ruzzia's boot & will continue to fight.
127
@casuallydeep1368 US isolating all allies & embracing Russia. Yeah, makes sense ...
31
@wallingnaga6563 jfc, he's using a metaphor. Do you really need it spelled out for you?
17
 @PracticalTacticalFedeli the withdrawal from Afghanistan was negotiated by trump -- & he threw the Afghan government to the wolves
11
@mnk9073 maybe. Maybe not. Or maybe ruzzia will collapse like the Soviet Union. You didn't see that coming the last time, or Prigozhin's little adventure, did you?
10
@Constantine0290 bruh, you realize you're cheering imperialism & fascism -- ideas that US servicemen died fighting against in WW2?
9
 @Tylervrooman warmongers? You've forgotten who is the invader, pal. What's your solution? Reward a land grab?
9
@stevecariggillio4139 how do you know ruzzia won't attack them again after they've digested the annexed territories, like they did after swallowing Crimea? What happens to the people under occupation in the East -- & in Crimea -- who are not pro ruzzian? What happens to those displaced refugees who fled from the East & Crimea?
9
I have zero doubt that the US alone can out-produce ruzzia if it sets it's mind to it. Add in the Nato & Asia allies & that becomes even less of a question. The only caveat in that paragraph is "if it sets it's mind to it". I worry about the political will to carry the ball over the line. We cannot afford to abandon Ukraine midway. The repercussions will be the complete loss of credibility of the US as a security partner.
8
@mnk9073 that daft analogy was already dismantled in the video.
6
@stevenalvarado-doc7334 the point was about him LYING about them being 7, not about the ratio of Generals to troops
6
Shush, don't say the quiet part aloud.
5
@187Rajah fake news
4
@sejengkalsehasta3211 stop simping for fascists
3
Who in this administration isn't?
2
If we walk away from Ukraine, the word of the West will be worth less than used toilet paper. If we are unable to follow thru on a commitment to support Ukraine with the means to defend themselves, there's no point even trying to assure Taiwan that we will defend them. The Chinese will read this as weakness. Just like pootin did after the west merely flapped its gums about Crimea.
2
@ghostpiratelechuck2259 while you "debate", he's already dead.
2
Well said!
2
@CyclingAMP those emojis are to compensate for your dumb arguments
1
@danielhall6578 yeah, let's ignore the fact that the Afghan government was left out of the "negotiations", & that trump caved to the demand that the taliban leadership be released from jails & exile, & that he forced Pakistan to release more than 5,000 taliban fighters.
1
🎯
1
You forgot how Drumpf "negotiated" the Afghan withdrawal by shafting the Afghan government?
1
 @f9658 remember "Motorola"? He also fought a long time. But he's now fertilizer.
1
@Fergieh8er12 trump didn't. He simply signed off on what Mattis handed him. Now he realizes those hires aren't the types who will accept illegal orders. So he wants sycophants who will do his bidding regardless of the law or the Constitution, so he's cleaning house & will replace them with toadies. Yeah, it's really that simple.
1
 @fredbyoutubing 🎯🎯🎯
1
 @StefanBlagojevic sounds like a b*tthurt Serbian who got his rear kicked 😂
1
 @philp7884 "your"? Expected from MAGA.
1
Where did you get those Kremlin propaganda talking points from? Care to cite ANY document or treaty that said NATO -- a DEFENSIVE alliance -- will not accept new members? I'll wait ...
1
@casuallydeep1368 who said anything about embracing Russia? I DID. Taking the side of the invader & blaming the victim is "embracing Russia". Maga defending Russia & Putin is "embracing Russia". Those are the facts. And they don't care about your feelings.
1
@themanwithnonamecalledwyat7575 what his fans fail to grasp is that by the US being the dominant force in NATO, US defense contractors are by default the main suppliers to NATO members. Just in airframes alone, firms like Lockheed are able to get a bigger slice of a captive market. Leaving or threatening to leave NATO will force the Europeans to develop & foster their own defense industries to the detriment of US ones. That will have multiple consequences: 1) more competition in global sales from EU contractors that will have become strengthened by their own captive market 2) lower margins & shrinking markets for US defense contractors 3) heavier burden on the US taxpayers to carry the load of R&D on cutting edge technologies & programs. Plus a smaller market means the loss of economies of scale. What would the F35 cost if they were only produced for the US Airforce? 4) potential for the need to downsize production due to loss of NATO member customers. For a billionaire businessman to not see the folly of antagonizing his customers is baffling. Sure he is within rights to pressure NATO members to contribute more to defense. But going about it in this manner is shooting yourself in the foot.
1
@ga98361 the cope is real
1
@ryelor123 that market hasn't peaked. It's just getting warmed up. After the daily dumpster fire drama of the first term, this one has started off in the same vein, but on steroids.
1
Who is "him"? Hegseth?
1
F35 is too expensive & not needed. Like you said, alternatives are adequate for potential conflict with Russia. Heck, the Russians can't even use their best planes against Ukraine for fear of being shot down by manpads.
1
NATO is never going to invade a nuclear-armed armed country. Ruzzia has known this all along. The "NATO expansion" fables are for brainwashing their population.
1