Comments by "Thetequilashooter1" (@Thetequilashooter1) on "Artur Rehi"
channel.
-
575
-
465
-
260
-
196
-
194
-
177
-
146
-
110
-
97
-
75
-
73
-
72
-
66
-
63
-
47
-
44
-
39
-
38
-
32
-
31
-
26
-
24
-
22
-
21
-
19
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
10
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
@atychon It is a conspiracy theory. There was no genocide, that’s just Russian propaganda bullshit. Show me pictures like what the Serbs did to the Albanians with massive grave sites, there aren’t any in Ukraine, it’s Russia’s lies to invade Ukraine and take territory that doesn’t belong to it. Just like how Russia lied that it didn’t have any troops in Ukraine, only to admit later that it lied that those “little green men” were Russian troops all along. Crimea was gifted to Ukraine, and the fact that Russia paid Ukraine lease money to use the base for all those years confirmed it. And then Russia lied that it didn’t have troops in Eastern Ukraine, only to have its own troops post selfies of themselves there, or to be captured with Russian visas. Russia is the aggressor. If Russia stopped supporting the separatists and removed its troops from the region there would be peace, but instead Russia wants war.
And no, the US did not have a coup. There’s no evidence to support it, just Russia grabbing at straws trying to make it look that way. Russia didn’t like how Ukraine was turning towards the EU so it took matters into its own hands.
All nations should be able to do whatever they want on their territory. Russia has no right to force Ukraine into doing what is only good for Russia. If Ukraine wants to join NATO, that’s its choice, not Russia’s.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@ I used to be a contracts officer so I am very familiar with how various legal documents work, including memorandums, contracts, agreements, non disclosure agreements, teaming agreements, procurement contracts, etc. The memorandum itself would need to be explicitly clear to state that the US would defend Ukraine. It would not be done by reference to an old document, especially something of that magnitude. There’s nothing of the sort. Regardless, let’s say that the President did sign the memorandum stating that the U.S. must defend Ukraine. It wouldn’t have any legal weight because he doesn’t have the authority to grant that kind of protection on his own. It would take Congress to authorize it, as well. And furthermore, if you really knew what you were talking about you’d also know that the Helsinki Accords were non- binding since each country’s parliaments/Congress would need to approve of them. Facts are the US never would have agreed to protect Ukraine in the 90s when Ukraine wasn’t even an ally. In addition, Russia was going to take the nukes with them whether Ukraine liked it or not. Ukraine didn’t even want them in the first place, and it sure wasn’t about to start a war over them. The nuclear weapons that were in Ukraine also only had 12 year useful lives, 8 of which had already passed, and Ukraine didn’t have the money to properly maintain them.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@stevemcgowen Doesn’t matter on GDP. Russia’s more of a threat to European countries than to the US. Just look at the numbers. The US has given “$46.33 billion worth of bilateral military donations to the Ukrainian government. Germany is the second-biggest military donor to Ukraine. It has given $19.42 billion—almost half the total for all EU members, but still less than half what the U.S. has contributed. France, Italy, and Spain (respectively, the second, third, and fourth largest economies in the EU after Germany) have contributed very little. France’s military aid to Ukraine stands at about $700 million, Italy is at $730 million, and Spain is at $360 million. In comparison, Poland alone has given more than $3 billion in military aid despite being only the sixth-largest economy in the EU. Some European politicians are demanding America spend more on a war in Europe when France, Italy, and Spain have contributed about the same as Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania.”
Like I said, Europe needs to step up. I’m afraid if Trump is elected Ukraine won’t get anything else from the US. He’s leading in the polls so Europe needs to figure it out soon and stop wasting time waiting for the US.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@deven6518 My mistake, that was a typo. I should have better proofread my comment. Facts are that Lockheed already had the original design. It helped Russia develop the Yak 141 after it was near financial ruins. If it weren’t for Lockheed, the Yak-141 never would have gotten to where it was.
From Code One Magazine: “A great deal of misinformation has appeared on the Internet regarding the relationship of the Soviet Yak-41 (later Yak-141), NATO reporting name Freestyle, to the X-35 and the rest of the JSF program. The Pratt & Whitney 3BSD nozzle design predates the Russian work. In fact the 3BSD was tested with a real engine almost twenty years before the first flight of the Yak.”
“Following the announcement by the CIS on September 1991 that it could no longer fund development of the Yak-41M, Yakovlev entered into discussions with several foreign partners who could help fund the program. Lockheed Corporation, which was in the process of developing the X-35 for the US Joint Strike Fighter program, stepped forward, and with their assistance aircraft 48-2 was displayed at the Farnborough Airshow in September 1992. Yakovlev announced that they had reached an agreement with Lockheed for funds of $385 to $400 million for three new prototypes and an additional static test aircraft to test improvements in design and avionics. Planned modifications for the proposed Yak-41M included an increase in STOL weight to 21,500 kg (47,400 lb). One of the prototypes would have been a dual-control trainer. Though no longer flyable, both 48-2 and 48-3 were exhibited at the 1993 Moscow airshow. The partnership began in late 1991, though it was not publicly revealed by Yakovlev until 6 September 1992, and was not revealed by Lockheed until June 1994.”
It’s not the USA that has the long history of copying, but Russia, and it’s done it many times.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
What’s disgusting is that European countries have for years let their militaries dwindle while the U.S. warned them that they needed to spend more, and to stop relying on Russian oil and gas. Now they expect the U.S. to pay for their negligence. Other than the drone strikes, the majority of the weapons used by Ukraine have come from the US. HIMARS, artillery shells, M-777 artillery, thousands of Humvees, GLMRS, guided bombs, Bradleys, etc., not to mention the invaluable intel. The US has no obligation to help Ukraine, and yet it’s provided just as much military aid as all the other countries combined.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Here’s additional clarification from Code One: “A great deal of misinformation has appeared on the Internet regarding the relationship of the Soviet Yak-41 (later Yak-141), NATO reporting name Freestyle, to the X-35 and the rest of the JSF program. The Pratt & Whitney 3BSD nozzle design predates the Russian work. In fact the 3BSD was tested with a real engine almost twenty years before the first flight of the Yak..”
And from the book Yakovlev Aircraft since 1924: Following the announcement by the CIS on September 1991 that it could no longer fund development of the Yak-41M, Yakovlev entered into discussions with several foreign partners who could help fund the program. Lockheed Corporation, which was in the process of developing the X-35 for the US Joint Strike Fighter program, stepped forward, and with their assistance aircraft 48-2 was displayed at the Farnborough Airshow in September 1992. Yakovlev announced that they had reached an agreement with Lockheed for funds of $385 to $400 million for three new prototypes and an additional static test aircraft to test improvements in design and avionics. Planned modifications for the proposed Yak-41M included an increase in STOL weight to 21,500 kg (47,400 lb). One of the prototypes would have been a dual-control trainer. Though no longer flyable, both 48-2 and 48-3 were exhibited at the 1993 Moscow airshow. The partnership began in late 1991, though it was not publicly revealed by Yakovlev until 6 September 1992, and was not revealed by Lockheed until June 1994.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1