so as a Ukrainian I owe you $203 for this, right? If send that to your USDT address, will you shut the fuck up on this fr good, faggot?
nostr:note18c6nxm9q4e3njtwcy9glug675vajxcy3ft7xqclayhkup3mlm6asdatpl9
Your elected representatives are waving the flag of a foreign nation as they cheer for the billions they will send to fund a war you never agreed to pay for.
The money is broken. The incentives are broken. The kleptocrats are in charge. The system will not be fixed from within.
No one is coming to save you.
Save yourself and your family.
Study #Bitcoin and start building a parallel system. https://v.nostr.build/8GneE.mp4
Discussion
Don't most of the money get back to the pockets of USA defense contractors, and some of it back to the senators voted for it anyways?
Victoria Nuland ADMITS U.S. Money To Ukraine LINING Defense Contractor's Pockets
Yes it does to a large degree. It works like this when it comes to military aid part: we get an older equipment, defense contractors get orders to replenish the stock with a newer one.
Why so toxic a response to someone crticising continuation of a war? Are you that immune to the suffering this causes?
Are you really that rerarded?
It’s great to see such in depth analysis and discussion. Really enlightening and rewarding. Always good to learn and exchange views
You seem to be thinking that starving a defending side of funding will magically make agressor to stop. Are you an adequate person variable of basic reasoning?
You should go back to twitter. It’s mostly adults here
You had a chance to learn something from a person actually involved in this war but you choose to remain an ignorant retard.
Do you really think a continuously abusive approach to any response to people is productive? nostr:npub1cj8znuztfqkvq89pl8hceph0svvvqk0qay6nydgk9uyq7fhpfsgsqwrz4u was pointing out the most basic of truths that has been prevalent in a very obvious way throughout the 20th century. War and its associated suffering would not last as long without the constant flow of fiat money that also impoverishes nations. Not only is it destructive on the battlefield but it is destructive off it as well and should be avoided
Answer the question: do you think starving a defending side of funding and military equipment will make an invader stop the war?
Maybe we have different perspectives here. Am not really into flags. I mean the designs can be nice and all that but the Donbas is mainly ethnic Russians. If they wanted independence and it had been given rather than shelling, would this all not have been a big nothing burger? Allowing individuals to carry on their economising. Trading between all and simply not causing massive slaughter for the sake of a symbol of centralisation? It’s insanity
Answer the fucking question already.
I did. I’m afraid am too long in the tooth for these binary perspectives on geopolitics. There’s always much more grey I think the second terrorist bomb close to me did that. Funding and fuelling violence is counterproductive historically. It is better to sit at the table and have the parasites in charge make concessions so that normal individuals can go about their lives peacefully. All of this bullshit is unnecessary suffering. It is upon the individuals of warring nations to force their so called leaders to sit at the table.
So would more funding help? Maybe to prolong and cause more death. Not a huge fan myself mate
The only way to minimise casualties is to surrender. If relief from suffering were their cause, they'd push for surrender.