Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

SignUp Now!

Jake Bro Stan & ETNVOL - just ignore and do not engage

BurntJ

B2B Champ/ Feels Great to be King!
Founder
Joined
Jan 9, 2021
Messages
4,743
I’m far from a liberal or spreading liberal ideology.

As I’ve said I’m very nationalist. There is no denying that breaking up and defeating one of The United State’s greatest enemies would be good America.

Once we are done defeating Russia in detail we will be able to shift more focus, energy, and resources to defeating China TO MORE WARS!
FIFY!
 

BurntJ

B2B Champ/ Feels Great to be King!
Founder
Joined
Jan 9, 2021
Messages
4,743
I see Broe stain is still spreading the word of the liberal ideology (which is one of complete crap) His trolling is still terrible though.
I agree EXCEPT......I picture the TARD like this 👇

giphy.gif


FROM HIS MOMS BASEMENT. He really is getting us SOOOOOOOO good!! 😜
 

BurntJ

B2B Champ/ Feels Great to be King!
Founder
Joined
Jan 9, 2021
Messages
4,743
Yeah… that’s the point. China is going to start a war eventually and we need to be ready to kick their asses too when the time comes.
Except YOU SUPPORT SENDING ALL OUR MUNITIONS TO FUCKIN UKRAINE for a War we aren't even participating in......AND that's without even getting into our lost financial resources due to the stupid fuckin war.

So, YORE OWN STATEMENTS SHOW YOU TO BE A FUCKIN IDIOT AND TROLL!!
 
Joined
Jul 1, 2023
Messages
4,814
Except YOU SUPPORT SENDING ALL OUR MUNITIONS TO FUCKIN UKRAINE for a War we aren't even participating in......AND that's without even getting into our lost financial resources due to the stupid fuckin war.

So, YORE OWN STATEMENTS SHOW YOU TO BE A FUCKIN IDIOT AND TROLL!!
We aren’t sending ALL of our munitions to Ukraine. Far from it actually. In fact in many circumstances we are giving them stuff we would have had to pay to destroy anyways due to shelf life restrictions.

I’m guessing you’re trolling about the lost financial resources because the money being spent on Ukraine is some of the best money The US has ever spent. Furthermore, it’s not like The US is hurting financially by any stretch of the imagination.

Most importantly now there is justification to buy more weapons, to stockpile more munitions, and justification to expand the lines to make such weapons.

 
Last edited:

TheRealJohnCooper

💎
Founder
Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2020
Messages
3,907
We aren’t sending ALL of our munitions to Ukraine. Far from it actually. In fact in many circumstances we are giving them stuff we would have had to pay to destroy anyways due to shelf life restrictions.

I’m guessing you’re trolling about the lost financial resources because the money being spent on Ukraine is some of the best money The US has ever spent. Furthermore, it’s not like The US is hurting financially by any stretch of the imagination.

Most importantly now there is justification to buy more weapons, to stockpile more munitions, and justification to expand the lines to make such weapons.
You are a lazy troll too. You sound exactly the same. You suck at trolling actually. You give it up way too soon. When you called yourself a nationalist and then in the next sentence you praise us spending money in a forever war that nobody gives a shit about and we have no interest in it whatsoever.
 
Joined
Jul 1, 2023
Messages
4,814
You are a lazy troll too. You sound exactly the same. You suck at trolling actually. You give it up way too soon. When you called yourself a nationalist and then in the next sentence you praise us spending money in a forever war that nobody gives a shit about and we have no interest in it whatsoever.
By “we have no interest in” I’m assuming you’re just completely disregarding the fact that a majority of the American people support sending aid to Ukraine?

We don’t have to get into the obvious geopolitical and strategic benefits of the war since you likely won’t respond in good faith anyways.
 
Joined
Jul 9, 2022
Messages
2,382
he Russians must be stopped is because if people don’t start pushing back they will just keep invading their neighbors. They’ve been doing it for hundreds of years.
It seems that this statement
What does the Russian occupied territory after WW2 have to do with anything?
You said they invade other countries, when infact, they have been closed in on since WW2.
It’s not like Russia had legal rights to those lands. They should have done exactly like The US did and give all the land back to the individual states, returned their right of self governance, and paid to rebuild them.
With this statement, it is clear that you really need to do more research on this subject.
It’s a real shame that The US saved the Soviets from the Nazis
This is also untrue, and in fact 180 degrees the other way. It was, by in large, the Russian army who defeated the German Army. Yes the US did have a hand in it, but by the time Our forces were in Europe, the Germans were already fucked after Stalingrad. It was at that point, the Germans retreated, all the way back to Berlin.

On 22 June 1941 Hitler launched Operation 'Barbarossa', the invasion of the Soviet Union. It was the beginning of a campaign that would ultimately decide the Second World War. Hitler regarded the Soviet Union as his natural enemy. Notice the date, 6 months before the US even entered WW2 in open ground.

I would suggest that you read up on your history and come with a better working knowledge about what you are talking about.

If I may ask, how old are you?
 
Joined
Jul 1, 2023
Messages
4,814
It seems that this statement

You said they invade other countries, when infact, they have been closed in on since WW2.

With this statement, it is clear that you really need to do more research on this subject.

This is also untrue, and in fact 180 degrees the other way. It was, by in large, the Russian army who defeated the German Army. Yes the US did have a hand in it, but by the time Our forces were in Europe, the Germans were already fucked after Stalingrad. It was at that point, the Germans retreated, all the way back to Berlin.

On 22 June 1941 Hitler launched Operation 'Barbarossa', the invasion of the Soviet Union. It was the beginning of a campaign that would ultimately decide the Second World War. Hitler regarded the Soviet Union as his natural enemy. Notice the date, 6 months before the US even entered WW2 in open ground.

I would suggest that you read up on your history and come with a better working knowledge about what you are talking about.

If I may ask, how old are you?
I’m 30 but clearly you don’t know much history.

Russia needed aid from The US via lend lease to survive long enough for the allies to land in Normandy. They literally only exist today because of that aid.

Most importantly Russia has done nothing but invade its neighbors since WW2. Just in the last 20 years they invaded Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine. Just because NATO has grown since its inception doesn’t mean that Russia is in any way being provoked. You are parroting communist propaganda by even suggesting it. NATO is a defensive alliance.

Russia is the aggressor state and always has been. Even during World War Two they were guilty of invading Poland in collaboration with the Nazis.
 

TheRealJohnCooper

💎
Founder
Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2020
Messages
3,907
By “we have no interest in” I’m assuming you’re just completely disregarding the fact that a majority of the American people support sending aid to Ukraine?

We don’t have to get into the obvious geopolitical and strategic benefits of the war since you likely won’t respond in good faith anyways.
Ok, nazi.
 
Joined
Jul 9, 2022
Messages
2,382
I’m 30 but clearly you don’t know much history.

Russia needed aid from The US via lend lease to survive long enough for the allies to land in Normandy. They literally only exist today because of that aid.

Most importantly Russia has done nothing but invade its neighbors since WW2. Just in the last 20 years they invaded Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine. Just because NATO has grown since its inception doesn’t mean that Russia is in any way being provoked. You are parroting communist propaganda by even suggesting it. NATO is a defensive alliance.

Russia is the aggressor state and always has been. Even during World War Two they were guilty of invading Poland in collaboration with the Nazis.
Ok thanks, that the issue with you snowflakes, you mistake your opinion and misunderstandings as fact.
 
Joined
Jul 1, 2023
Messages
4,814
Unfortunately, you "facts" on WW2 are 100% wrong. They are not facts, nor opinions, they are a regurgitation of bullshit.

Did you research the info I put out opposing your "facts"?
Yes and it’s literally just false information.

That’s why I’m not surprised that you’re attempting to call my facts false, even though they are easily proven with Google, since you’re probably embarrassed at this point.

For example, here is a source that accurately points out that the Russians wouldn’t have been able to resist the Nazis in WW2 if it weren’t for US aid:

“Most famously, Soviet dictator Josef Stalin raised a toast to the Lend-Lease program at the November 1943 Tehran conference with British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt.

"I want to tell you what, from the Russian point of view, the president and the United States have done for victory in this war," Stalin said. "The most important things in this war are the machines.... The United States is a country of machines. Without the machines we received through Lend-Lease, we would have lost the war."

Nikita Khrushchev offered the same opinion.

"If the United States had not helped us, we would not have won the war," he wrote in his memoirs. "One-on-one against Hitler's Germany, we would not have withstood its onslaught and would have lost the war. No one talks about this officially, and Stalin never, I think, left any written traces of his opinion, but I can say that he expressed this view several times in conversations with me."

 
Last edited:

BurntJ

B2B Champ/ Feels Great to be King!
Founder
Joined
Jan 9, 2021
Messages
4,743
We aren’t sending ALL of our munitions to Ukraine. Far from it actually. In fact in many circumstances we are giving them stuff we would have had to pay to destroy anyways due to shelf life restrictions.

I’m guessing you’re trolling about the lost financial resources because the money being spent on Ukraine is some of the best money The US has ever spent. Furthermore, it’s not like The US is hurting financially by any stretch of the imagination.

Most importantly now there is justification to buy more weapons, to stockpile more munitions, and justification to expand the lines to make such weapons.

WEAPONS: Ugh, NO YOU FUCKIN RETARD....maybe you should talk to yore GODS the MSM.....they have even finally started to mention we have been depleting our reserves.

MATH: You literally couldn't be any more retarded.........you clearly don't understand how debt works.


BUT really ALL THIS TO SAY......YOU EXPOSED YORESELF WHEN YOU ADMITTED YORE PRIORTY WAS THE INNOCENT CHILDREN......YOU PLAN TO STEAL AND RAPE!


Fortunately for the world......its becoming easier and easier to spot yore kind (the child raping POS PEDOS!).
 

BurntJ

B2B Champ/ Feels Great to be King!
Founder
Joined
Jan 9, 2021
Messages
4,743
Yes and it’s literally just false information.

That’s why I’m not surprised that you’re attempting to call my facts false, even though they are easily proven with Google, since you’re probably embarrassed at this point.

For example, here is a source that accurately points out that the Russians wouldn’t have been able to resist the Nazis in WW2 if it weren’t for US aid:

“Most famously, Soviet dictator Josef Stalin raised a toast to the Lend-Lease program at the November 1943 Tehran conference with British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt.

"I want to tell you what, from the Russian point of view, the president and the United States have done for victory in this war," Stalin said. "The most important things in this war are the machines.... The United States is a country of machines. Without the machines we received through Lend-Lease, we would have lost the war."

Nikita Khrushchev offered the same opinion.

"If the United States had not helped us, we would not have won the war," he wrote in his memoirs. "One-on-one against Hitler's Germany, we would not have withstood its onslaught and would have lost the war. No one talks about this officially, and Stalin never, I think, left any written traces of his opinion, but I can say that he expressed this view several times in conversations with me."

HO LEE CHIT!!!

This FAGGIT just cited Google......next he will start fact checking us with SNOPES. :ROFLMAO: 😜

What a fuckin loser.
 
Joined
Jul 1, 2023
Messages
4,814
HO LEE CHIT!!!

This FAGGIT just cited Google......next he will start fact checking us with SNOPES. :ROFLMAO: 😜

What a fuckin loser.
Snopes is a singular source.

Google is a source aggregator.

You should really learn how to troll better if you are going to try it.
 
Joined
Jul 9, 2022
Messages
2,382
Yes and it’s literally just false information.

That’s why I’m not surprised that you’re attempting to call my facts false, even though they are easily proven with Google, since you’re probably embarrassed at this point.

For example, here is a source that accurately points out that the Russians wouldn’t have been able to resist the Nazis in WW2 if it weren’t for US aid:

“Most famously, Soviet dictator Josef Stalin raised a toast to the Lend-Lease program at the November 1943 Tehran conference with British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt.

"I want to tell you what, from the Russian point of view, the president and the United States have done for victory in this war," Stalin said. "The most important things in this war are the machines.... The United States is a country of machines. Without the machines we received through Lend-Lease, we would have lost the war."

Nikita Khrushchev offered the same opinion.

"If the United States had not helped us, we would not have won the war," he wrote in his memoirs. "One-on-one against Hitler's Germany, we would not have withstood its onslaught and would have lost the war. No one talks about this officially, and Stalin never, I think, left any written traces of his opinion, but I can say that he expressed this view several times in conversations with me."

Let me explain something........

It is a common misconception that the Germany Army in WW2 was this mechanized, over equipped war machine that could just steamroll anywhere and everywhere at will, and decimate the opposition at the snap of a finger. This is far from true......over the years, mystique has been veiled over the eyes of history, because of course, the victors write the history books, and the stories we hear ( assuming you are in the US ), are stars and stripes American Glory.

Trust me, I spent 8 years in the Army's 82nd Airborne Division.

A term you might have heard is "Blitzkrieg". This tactic was employed by the German army with great success, and until that time, the strategy was not possible. What is important to understand about this, is the German Army HAD to use this strategy.......WHY?........supplies.

The German Army had little to no fuel reserves, had no oil production, and thusly, the only way they could win a battle was to do it QUICKLY......real quick.....or they would run out of fuel and supplies. This issue is still evident today, as Germany has some of the highest fuel prices in the world, and still produces no oil.

Long and short of it. The German Army could not feed itself that far into Russia, especially in the winter. The German Army lost WW2 at the Battle of Stalingrad, and the USA had nothing to do with it.

Understand, I am not taking glory from our boys, but credit must be given where proper.

Again, history is written by the victors. After the war at the beginning of the cold war, Nikita Khrushchev said a bunch of stuff......What would you expect him to say?>>>>>>"Yeah the Germans suck and we beat them? No he like all other politicians inflate everything politically.

If they would have wanted to, the Red Army could have took over all of Europe, and likely would have, but we had this thing called the atomic bomb and had just used it.
 
Joined
Jul 1, 2023
Messages
4,814
Let me explain something........

It is a common misconception that the Germany Army in WW2 was this mechanized, over equipped war machine that could just steamroll anywhere and everywhere at will, and decimate the opposition at the snap of a finger. This is far from true......over the years, mystique has been veiled over the eyes of history, because of course, the victors write the history books, and the stories we hear ( assuming you are in the US ), are stars and stripes American Glory.

Trust me, I spent 8 years in the Army's 82nd Airborne Division.

A term you might have heard is "Blitzkrieg". This tactic was employed by the German army with great success, and until that time, the strategy was not possible. What is important to understand about this, is the German Army HAD to use this strategy.......WHY?........supplies.

The German Army had little to no fuel reserves, had no oil production, and thusly, the only way they could win a battle was to do it QUICKLY......real quick.....or they would run out of fuel and supplies. This issue is still evident today, as Germany has some of the highest fuel prices in the world, and still produces no oil.

Long and short of it. The German Army could not feed itself that far into Russia, especially in the winter. The German Army lost WW2 at the Battle of Stalingrad, and the USA had nothing to do with it.

Understand, I am not taking glory from our boys, but credit must be given where proper.

Again, history is written by the victors. After the war at the beginning of the cold war, Nikita Khrushchev said a bunch of stuff......What would you expect him to say?>>>>>>"Yeah the Germans suck and we beat them? No he like all other politicians inflate everything politically.

If they would have wanted to, the Red Army could have took over all of Europe, and likely would have, but we had this thing called the atomic bomb and had just used it.
The Russian army would have never made it to Stalingrad without that US aid.

Stalin himself said so. This isn’t some sort of debatable point.

Oh and yes everyone knows the Germans relied on horses more machines for transport and supply because they were still suffer from their disarmament. That just goes to show you how bad off the Russian army was without US aid.
 

hmt5000

Legendary
Founder
Joined
Dec 10, 2020
Messages
6,595
That’s pretty rich coming from the poster who was stanning for a convicted communist pedophile.
Pretty sure you're the commie and I wouldn't put being a pedo past a "man" like you. Thousands of kids are being trafficked out of Ukraine due to this war. People like you keep those breeding grounds going. You're a pretty sick puppy.
 
Joined
Jul 1, 2023
Messages
4,814
Pretty sure you're the commie and I wouldn't put being a pedo past a "man" like you. Thousands of kids are being trafficked out of Ukraine due to this war. People like you keep those breeding grounds going. You're a pretty sick puppy.
Russia is the one trafficking the kids.

Folks stanning for the communists, like you, are the ones enabling that sort of stuff.

Telling other people that they are communists while stanning the Russians is like saying men can have babies. At some point facts matter even to folks in fantasy land like yourself.
 
Joined
Jul 9, 2022
Messages
2,382
The Russian army would have never made it to Stalingrad without that US aid.
That statement is inherently wrong, as the Russian Army did not have to mobilize to Stalingrad. Since you are such a history buff do you know the tactic employed by the Red Army at the start of operation Barbarossa until the start of Stalingrad?

Stalin himself said so. This isn’t some sort of debatable point.
Maybe maybe not
Oh and yes everyone knows the Germans relied on horses more machines for transport and supply because they were still suffer from their disarmament. That just goes to show you how bad off the Russian army was without US aid.
Thanks for googling the info I brought up and verified it to be true. But do not show that you knew it. Because you did not. Most of the Russian military was mechanized, of note, with the best tank of ww2 by far, the T34. The T-34 for example, light years ahead of the USA tank...........made in the middle of the country......and the US helped in what way?
 
Joined
Jul 1, 2023
Messages
4,814
That statement is inherently wrong, as the Russian Army did not have to mobilize to Stalingrad. Since you are such a history buff do you know the tactic employed by the Red Army at the start of operation Barbarossa until the start of Stalingrad?


Maybe maybe not

Thanks for googling the info I brought up and verified it to be true. But do not show that you knew it. Because you did not. Most of the Russian military was mechanized, of note, with the best tank of ww2 by far, the T34. The T-34 for example, light years ahead of the USA tank...........made in the middle of the country......and the US helped in what way?
Now you’re just trying to be cute.

Got there as in would have already been completely destroyed lol 🙄

“Most visibly, the United States provided the Soviet Union with more than 400,000 jeeps and trucks, 14,000 aircraft, 8,000 tractors and construction vehicles, and 13,000 battle tanks.

However, the real significance of Lend-Lease for the Soviet war effort was that it covered the "sensitive points" of Soviet production -- gasoline, explosives, aluminum, nonferrous metals, radio communications, and so on, says historian Boris Sokolov.

"In a hypothetical battle one-on-one between the U.S.S.R and Germany, without the help of Lend-Lease and without the diversion of significant forces of the Luftwaffe and the German Navy and the diversion of more than one-quarter of its land forces in the fight against Britain and the United States, Stalin could hardly have beaten Hitler," Sokolov wrote in an essay for RFE/RL's Russian Service.”

"In order to really assess the significance of Lend-Lease for the Soviet victory, you only have to imagine how the Soviet Union would have had to fight if there had been no Lend-Lease aid," Sokolov wrote. "Without Lend-Lease, the Red Army would not have had about one-third of its ammunition, half of its aircraft, or half of its tanks. In addition, there would have been constant shortages of transportation and fuel. The railroads would have periodically come to a halt. And Soviet forces would have been much more poorly coordinated with a constant lack of radio equipment. And they would have been perpetually hungry without American canned meat and fats."

In 1963, KGB monitoring recordedSoviet Marshal Georgy Zhukov saying: "People say that the allies didn't help us. But it cannot be denied that the Americans sent us materiel without which we could not have formed our reserves or continued the war. The Americans provided vital explosives and gunpowder. And how much steel! Could we really have set up the production of our tanks without American steel? And now they are saying that we had plenty of everything on our own."

 
Last edited:

BurntJ

B2B Champ/ Feels Great to be King!
Founder
Joined
Jan 9, 2021
Messages
4,743
Pretty sure you're the commie and I wouldn't put being a pedo past a "man" like you. Thousands of kids are being trafficked out of Ukraine due to this war. People like you keep those breeding grounds going. You're a pretty sick puppy.
Oh he admitted he loves war and its all about the innocent children for him in another thread.

He outed himself as a PEDO.
 
Top Bottom