Irenaeus, Siteadmin, Check users, oversight, Administrators
351,679
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 529:
Line 529: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Talk:Main Page/Archive index/228 (view source)
Revision as of 10:43, January 1, 2023
, 10:43, January 1, 2023no edit summary
:It ought to be patently obvious by now to User:Conservative that there is a concerted effort to discredit Prof. Mearsheimer as a "Putin stooge", and his continued misuse and misquoting the respected scholar, Prof. Mearsheimer, as a fig leaf for his own confused take on the [[NATO war in Ukraine]] only serves to aid the effort to smear Prof. Mearsheimer. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 18:27, December 2, 2022 (EST)
:It ought to be patently obvious by now to User:Conservative that there is a concerted effort to discredit Prof. Mearsheimer as a "Putin stooge", and his continued misuse and misquoting the respected scholar, Prof. Mearsheimer, as a fig leaf for his own confused take on the [[NATO war in Ukraine]] only serves to aid the effort to smear Prof. Mearsheimer. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 18:27, December 2, 2022 (EST)
===2023 prognostications for NATO war===
::Let's try some testable hypotheses / theories of victory, eh?
::'''Partial:''' Russian forces are pushed back to, or beyond, the 2014 LOCs by May 2023.
::'''Complete:''' Russian forces are forced to withdraw from Ukraine's internationally recognised borders, including Crimea and the abandonment of the Sevastopol naval base, by Sept. 2023.
::I'll even throw in withdrawal from northern Luhansk region by Feb. 2023 as an interim data point.
::What you got, Captain Cauldron? Let's lay down some markers. [[User:ConwayIII|ConwayIII]] ([[User talk:ConwayIII|talk]]) 19:41, December 1, 2022 (EST)
:::The Bakhmut cauldron turns into another [[Verdun]] meatgrinder all winter; Germany faces a "1917 moment" and the people rise up and kick NATO out; everybody gets sick of Zelensky and he either gets the Mussolini/Ghedaffi treatment of flees to the West ''ala'' Shah of Iran & Marcos; Iranian color revolution gets squashed; China unites the country by invading Taiwan; North Korea attacks South Korea and Japan with missiles; Turkiye and Iran whack a bunch of Americans in Syria; [[Wagner Group]] and American forces face off in Africa; [[hybrid war]] comes to the West with sabotage, terror attacks and assassinations on Western "leaders". The Surovikin sledgehammer swings about January on [[Avdiivka]]. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 20:24, December 1, 2022 (EST)
::::Nice try, but that's not how this works. I've laid out three specific, time-bound predictions about the progress of the war in Ukraine, the longest term of which can be evaluated in < 12 month's time.
::::Since you're apparently so convinced of Russia's inevitable victory, you've presumably got some insight into how that's going to be achieved. So let's see it, Captain: three of your own, specific and time-bound to within 12 months hence, and confined to territorial gains / losses relative to the current front lines.
::::You've almost got a first. Surovikin swinging stuff at Avdiivka is meaningless, of course, but would you care to take a punt on its capture by Russian forces by Jan. 2023? [[User:ConwayIII|ConwayIII]] ([[User talk:ConwayIII|talk]]) 15:58, December 2, 2022 (EST)
:::::I'm in the middle of reviewing updates, so gimme a couple of hours. But your premise and question is flawed from the gitgo: "territorial gains / losses". Russian objectives have never been "territorial gains/losses", but rather "demilitarization", i.e. destruction of enemy forces, which of course now includes NATO. And they've been effective at that. So to project anything, one needs to know about force configuration and the types of weapons NATO is sending in, as you say, over the next 12 months. Apparently, the Russians are preparing missile attacks on Western spy satellite systems now.
:::::So if the Russians gain "territory" in space, how does that count? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 17:18, December 2, 2022 (EST)
:::::BTW, any comments on [[von der Leyen]]'s confirmation of 100,000 Ukrainian soldiers dead? or is she just as demented as Joe Biden in reading a teleprompter, or has the same staff that loads Kamals's teleprompter, or is just as ignorant as all the other civilian "authorities" in NATO and the West about military matters? or does she and her staff just think 100,000 dead Ukies is just a joke? and the rest of us peons are just ignorant idiots who will believe any line of crap? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 17:23, December 2, 2022 (EST)
:'''Prognostication 1:''' Being that the Russian objective ''is not'' to "conquer territory", but rather destruction of enemy forces and warmaking ability, and the Russians hold the edge in space flight, short of [[nuclear war]], we could anticipate destruction of Western satellites, which could affect internet communications, GPS positioning, and ground or [[bankrupt]] Western commercial air travel as well as affect shipping on the high seas (the only thing preventing such action is Russian consideration of NATO reprisal actions on their own military-space infrastructure. However, given these satellite systems are responsible for killing Russian soldiers - that, and Russian public opinion, can pressure Russian military and political leaders to take action if they anticipate they can come ahead in the end. The Russians have launched some 27 satellites in the past two months. Some possibly are military communication satellites; others may be suicide satellites to take out NATO & Western communication systems. Iran and China likewise have such capabilities.) [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 18:53, December 2, 2022 (EST)
:'''Prognostication 2:''' Being that Russia and China both hold the edge in hypersonic missile technology, and US says it won't catch up to 2025 (plus the added burden of putting an effective hypersonic into mass production), we can anticipate Russian use of hypersonics ''before'' that 2-year timeframe, and possibility scenarios like Prognostication 1 being played out ''before'' the US can make retaliatory response with hypersonics. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 19:03, December 2, 2022 (EST)
::Put up or shut up, my man. Territorial change is the one metric that constrains your otherwise pathological mendacity, because the Russians are always forced to report it accurately in the end.
::It's also an obvious measure of the relative success / failure of the SMO now that - according to the terms of the annexation - Ukraine is currently occupying sovereign Russian soil and threatening to take lots more of it. [[User:ConwayIII|ConwayIII]] ([[User talk:ConwayIII|talk]]) 19:22, December 2, 2022 (EST)
:::Bingo, which justifies nuking DC, Brussels and NY. That, and NATO killing Russian soldiers with satellites. As Putin and Karen Carpenter said, ''We've only Just Begun''. Meanwhile, NATO is out of weapons.
:::Okay, let's discuss two fronts - northern Lugansk (sometimes called the Kharkov or Kremmenaya front). The Polish "War in Ukraine"" channel spelled out the strategy for encircling the Wagner group attacking Bakhmut, and eventually moving on Donetsk from the north back in September when [[Zelensky Offensive]] began. But reports say its too late. The Russian have been reinforced, the "Wagner line" has been constructed protecting their rear and Donetsk, and Ukie/NATO has weakeened itself with all its suicide attacks, In fact, reports say Liman is in danger of being recaptured right now, but I suspect the Russians will wait a little longer and make it part of a larger movement.
:::Bakhmut: Two theories: (1) [[Prigozhin]] alludes to turning it into a meatgrinder if Zelensky wants to keep feeding cannonfodder into it; (2) it's on the verge of total encirclement (the first textbook cauldron of the war), which then gives opportunities to advance in any direction. Soledar, Kramatorsk, or Avdiivka. My guess is the constant shelling from Avdiivka on Donetsk must be dealt with first. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 19:57, December 2, 2022 (EST)
::::Now, Dima at the "Military Summary" anticipates a big battle at Bakhmut, a city formerly of 10,000, on a scale similar to the [[Battle of Mariupol]]. There evidently aren't any building structures standing, civilians likely are long gone, and it's going to be a battle for a piece of land that sits on high ground. Which is why it's a strategic point.
::::Once Bakhmut is pierced, there are no trenches between Bakhmut and the city of Dnepr where a retreating force can dig in. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 20:05, December 2, 2022 (EST)
:::::[https://youtu.be/FPdsUvX_SA4 Rybar's daily] minute and half reports are considered the most accurate. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 20:24, December 2, 2022 (EST)
::::::Vague handwaving about the strategic value of Bakhmut is not a testable hypothesis. As you well know, it works like this:
::::::*Russian forces will capture Bakhmut by <month> 2023.
::::::*Ukrainian forces will withdraw from Bakhmut by <month> 2023.
::::::*Russian forces will capture Kramatorsk by <month> 2023.
::::::*Russian forces will recapture Kherson city by <month> 2023.
::::::*Russian forces will capture the entire Donetsk region by <month> 2023.
::::::Feel free to go as big & bold or as paltry & piffling as you please, but commit or go home. [[User:ConwayIII|ConwayIII]] ([[User talk:ConwayIII|talk]]) 15:22, December 3, 2022 (EST)
:::::::I don't think you understand very much about war. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 18:26, December 3, 2022 (EST)
::::::::*'''Bakhmut update:''' It looks like the Russians are going with the Pirgozhin scenario, the meatgrinder/attrition scenario. Ukraine/NATO is loosing 500-800 men in Bakhmut daily simply because they cannot afford to lose it (the whole Donbas front will collapse). Russians have an 8:1 edge in artillery shells.
:::::::::An aside: the situation in Bakhmut highlights the difference between NATO/Ukraine strategic thinking vs. Russian. NATO/Ukraine is focused on territory; Russia is focused on destruction of enemy forces. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 13:24, December 6, 2022 (EST)
:::::::::IOWs, the Russians aren't going to close the cauldron (total encirclement); they will leave a road in and out to keep feeding into the meatgrinder. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 13:31, December 6, 2022 (EST)
::::::::::[https://www.bitchute.com/video/A7do1dvP7yVF/ Here's what the ''Soltenspek'' will do.] There is no way NATO can compete with the heavy, non-nuclear flamethrower. NATO cannot produce and deliver to the battlefield in sufficient quantities the weapon or ammunition. And massing forces in Bakhmut or northern Lugansk makes them sitting ducks. And luckily, the Russians usually ask for a surrender before using it.
::::::::::What Zelensky and NATO are doing to these troops is immoral.
::::::::::None of this is a mystery, what is happening. The only way the US can deliver ordinance with the same effect as the ''Soltenspek'' is by air. And the minute a US plane enters Ukrainian airspace to attack Russian forces is WWIII. Even if the US could train Ukrainian pilots and give them aircraft, they still can't compete in sufficient quantities to make a difference, not even counting how many months or years it would take. This is the path of insanity NATO & the [[Biden junta]] have led the planet down. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 03:56, December 7, 2022 (EST)
:::::::But specifically, to your question: (a) the war has already moved outside the territory of Ukraine; (b) "for as long as it takes." [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 18:42, December 3, 2022 (EST)
:::::::Specifically to time frames, the two year window for the US to match Russian and Chinese offensive missile capabilities doesn't bode well for the West. The question is over priority targets. Satellites I believe will be the first targets, to shut down the Western propaganda media apparatus, which basically the West believes it can win the war with. Once the information flow is cut off, then what targets back on earth are priority.
:::::::Most American's still don't know that about 90% of the population will be dead within 90 days once the power grid is shut off. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 19:00, December 3, 2022 (EST)
::::::::Great stuff, Captain. So just so everyone's clear for the record, this site's foremost military analyst & war correspondent can happily assure the world that Russia's victory is inevitable, and yet is unable to advance any theory of victory or even offer a single testable proposition that might point towards one.
::::::::How about you go write in that moonbase now seeing as we've established fan fiction is all you're good for? [[User:ConwayIII|ConwayIII]] ([[User talk:ConwayIII|talk]]) 19:48, December 3, 2022 (EST)
:::::::::Biden says negotiations can began after Russia withdraws its army; Putin says Russia will withdraw its army when the objective of demilitarizing Ukraine is complete. So the answer to your question is there - once Ukraine is demilitarized of NATO's war making ability, the Russians will withdraw (the idea Russia is trying to "capture" or "conquer" territory is totally a Western propaganda fabrication. NATO colonialism and adventurism is the aggressive party here, trying to "capture" territory). The war has evolved into a [[hybrid war]] now, with terror attacks and assassinations outside Ukraine. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 00:30, December 4, 2022 (EST)
::::::::::Nope. There's enough vague blather in the annexation decree to allow Putin to be pretty creative re. what is / isn't Russian territory he's retreating from, but there's no grand Mission Accomplished skedaddle on offer anymore.
::::::::::The ultra-nationalists know he's f_____ it. The mafia-business-as-usual types know he's f_____ it. The old school Soviet / KGB types know he's f_____ it. None of them, however, are remotely clear on how to unf___ it, and so, in the meantime, they're content to watch his authority bleed out and wait for good, clean shots at him and each other. [[User:ConwayIII|ConwayIII]] ([[User talk:ConwayIII|talk]]) 17:37, December 4, 2022 (EST)
:::::::::::Let me just say, a [[Kremlin]]ologist you're not. You should get a job with the CIA [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 18:24, December 4, 2022 (EST)
:::::::::::Laying aside internal Russian politics, the objective never was to conquer Ukraine. The objective was demilitarization - first of Ukraine, then, if necessary, the de-NATOization of [[Western Europe]]. NATO itself activated that Russian contingency. So this is where we are today.
:::::::::::And the latest news is, [[India]] has rejected the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's overture to join the "North Atlantic" treaty organization. Evidently, Putin is winning the global political war, as NATO commits economic suicide.
:::::::::::Military blocs are created to defend trading blocs. But this military alliance has long outlived its usefulness. And nobody buys that "democracy and freedom" rhetoric anymore, not after seeing the genocidal war crimes NATO has committed against the global South. We're in that phase Toynbee described as "the suicidalness of militarism." [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 18:37, December 4, 2022 (EST)
:This is a guy you should add to your watchlist: [[Brian Berletic]]. [https://youtu.be/Zq9li-2W-Yc New US B-21 Raider Illustrates Waste in Western Defense Spending Giving Russia-China the Edge]. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 19:04, December 4, 2022 (EST)
::Once the initial tilt at regime change failed, Russia unequivocally switched to an objective of taking & holding Ukrainian territory. They even did this thing -anorexing? - some of that territory, which I'm reliably informed says they love it longtime therefore finders keepers or summat like that. [[User:ConwayIII|ConwayIII]] ([[User talk:ConwayIII|talk]]) 16:05, December 5, 2022 (EST)
:::Let's discuss this for a moment: Under no military doctrine can a force of 40,000 storm a city of 3,000,000 like Kyiv and force regime change. So the original premise is faulty. The initial movement toward Kyiv was aimed at forcing a negotiation, which did occur in [[Ankara]]. The [[Zelensky regime]] accepted all Moscow demands - autonomy for the [[Donbas]] republics which would remain part of Ukraine, giving up [[Crimea]] to the Russian Federation, and Russian troops would withdraw. [[BoJo]] (at the behest of NATO & Washington) sabotaged the efforts in early April in Kyiv and told Zelensky to fight on. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 16:20, December 5, 2022 (EST)
::::So what we have now is no less than three times refusals on the part of the West to negotiate peaceful settlements:
::::#the [[Minsk Accords]] likewise sabotaged by Washington;
::::#the two draft peace treaties in writing, one with NATO and one with the United States, presented to Blinken on Dec. 17, 2021 and rejected out of hand;
::::#sabotage of the Ankara negotiation.
::::We don't even need to get into the INF or SALT treaty negotiations. But the boys in the [[Kremlin]] have pretty much got the message NATO wants war with Russia. They're not Germans. They're not going to bend over and ask to put it in. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 16:32, December 5, 2022 (EST)
:::::'''Returning briefly to March 2022 Ankara negotiations''' and agreement: Moonofalabama reports [[Blinken]] has accepted those terms. Quoting Blinken in the ''WSJ'': ''"Our focus is on continuing to do what we’ve been doing, which is to make sure that Ukraine has in its hands what it needs to defend itself, what it needs to push back against the Russian aggression,'' '''to take back territory that’s been seized from it since February 24th,''' [https://www.moonofalabama.org/2022/12/us-gives-up-on-crimea.html] which of course means the Russians can keep [[Crimea]]. Now, one can argue Blinken was playing the idiot (as if he needs to) or "misspoke", but as a longtime observer of idiot Democrat administrations' idiotic conduct of [[diplomacy]], I can adjudicate that Blinken is in good company with a storied tradition of idiotic Democrats idiotic conduct of diplomacy by idiotic diplomats. Nothing's changed. Thank God the Russians can see the same thing, as well. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 07:11, December 7, 2022 (EST)
===Here's what I don't understand===
In the past few weeks, you can't turn around without hearing how (a) Russia has an 8-1 edge in artillery, (b) 50% of Ukrainian donated artillery is down all the time because of barrel overheating from over use and has to be trucked 1000 miles to Poland for repairs, (c) the Russians fire off as much artillery shells in a single day that the U.S. did in the entire [[Gulf War]], (d) we have no reports on Russian artillery being down because of barrel overheating, (e) the Russians supposedly were running out of artillery shells last April but now that intelligence report has been pushed back to next April, (f) why didn't the idiots in the Pentagon and CIA consider any of these factors before provoking the war, (g) did those same idiots really expect to win the war by propaganda and sanctions alone last spring, or has nuclear war always been the final option to prevent a Russian victory? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 03:00, December 13, 2022 (EST)
:Russia's artillery is less accurate (For example, HIMARS). It has to lay down more artillery to compensate. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 20:11, December 18, 2022 (EST)
::We're back to logistics. (a) the US and NATO don't have enough HIMARS (never mind the problems with production, transport, and loading ammunition); (b) the Russians have the same precision weapons, and in greater numbers on the battlefield, in Ukraine. (c) the Russians use earlier, less accurate artillery to save costs and save high tech weaponry for strategic strikes. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 20:25, December 18, 2022 (EST)
::More logistics: if it costs a $250,000 missile to shoot down a $200 drone, and you don't have enough missiles or missile launchers, and you get attacked by a swarm of 200 drones at once, what do you do next? Answer: Spend more money. Unfortunately, this has been the thinking in the Pentagon for a long time. And it's showing glaringly in this war. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 20:36, December 18, 2022 (EST)
:::Just before the war started, Biden announced that it would take only three or four days for the Russians to take over Ukraine. That must be what the intelligence people told him. So the issue of barrels overheating and ammunition running out didn't come up at that time. Biden's focus was on getting Iran a nuclear weapon. The problem is how to blow up Israel in a way that doesn't alienate American Jewish voters. The solution: Putin has to be the baddie. Biden needed Russian anti-aircraft defenses in Syria to prevent an Israeli strike on Iran. Biden scratched Putin's back giving the go ahead to Nordstream 2, so Putin would scratch his. The recent performance of Russian weapons might have thrown a monkey wrench into that plan. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 21:00, December 27, 2022 (EST)
::::This war and the NATO provocations behind it have been in the planning phase for at least two decades. You'd think in that time it might have occurred to somebody that Russia was not the paper tiger they imagined. Now all we hear about is [[regime change]] in Russia; do these idiots really believe Russia does not have "continuity of government" contingencies like the US has in the case of a 9/11 attack or capital insurrection? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 21:45, December 27, 2022 (EST)
::::And back to the OP: the Russians really have a 16:1 artillery advantage, assuming 50% are down at any given time for barrel change like the [[AFU]]; only they can do the change out much quicker in the field. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 21:51, December 27, 2022 (EST)
:::::As to continuity of government: Let's get real for a minute. Does anybody really believe that the world's largest nuclear power, who's seen the Czar's family executed, that's had [[Politburo]] members kill each other in the midst of quorums, doesn't have contingencies for mobs in the street or internal subversion? Are the boobs in the CIA really that stupid, or do they really believe media, journalists, and the rest of us are all that stupid? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 22:06, December 27, 2022 (EST)
::::::The Afghan withdrawal convinced Putin that Biden was a weakling and triggered Russian preparations for war. At least that is the conclusion of a detailed "road to war" story published by ''The Washington Post'' back in August. [https://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2022/08/putin-invaded-ukraine-because-biden-screwed-up-afghanistan-withdrawal-washington-post-reports/ Here] is a summary. It is based on anonymous "analysts" and "officials," but perhaps these can be trusted when there is no obvious partisan agenda. Putin would have been in a stronger position had he waited for Nordstream 2 to come on line, so the timing suggests that he acted impulsively. It reminds me of the story of Khrushchev being provoked by the weakness Kennedy allegedly showed at the 1961 summit in Vienna. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 22:41, December 27, 2022 (EST)
:::::::There's an exact opposite conclusion to be reached: the hasty withdrawal from Afghanistan meant resources and funding were being transferred elsewhere (to Ukraine and Taiwan). The plan by the Kyiv regime to invade the Donbas Republics with 120,000 troops (one-half Ukraine's force) and end the [[Donbas war]] has been in open source since April 2021, months before the Afghan withdrawal. (Perhap's Biden's lifting Nordstream sanctions in January 2021 was a diversionary headfake). The Kyiv regime and [[AFU]] take orders from DC, and the planned invasion of Donbas and Crimea was for March 7, 2022, but Putin beat it by two weeks. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 23:03, December 27, 2022 (EST)
:::::::[https://www.antiwar.com/blog/2021/04/15/tulsi-gabbard-issues-warning-about-potential-war-with-russia/ Here's Tulsi Gabbard warning] of war planners war with Russia on April; 16, 2021, months ahead of the Afghan withdrawal. If Tulsi knew about it, Putin did, too. Apparently, as a former member of Congress, Tulsi had access to information and contacted Tucker Carlson, not the other way around (Tucker's staff didn't get the info first and contact her for comment). [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 23:30, December 27, 2022 (EST)
:::::::Here's Kyiv regime chief propagandist [[Alexei Arestovich]] in 2019 [https://bombardsbodylanguage.com/2022/03/18/body-language-zelenskys-advisor-oleksiy-arestovych-in-2019-interview/ laying out in detail] on Ukrainian television exactly what's going to happen in 2021 & 2022 in the deal made with NATO. They'd have to fight the war and win first before being allowed into NATO. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 23:53, December 27, 2022 (EST)
===Nigerian President: Ukraine source of arms for Boko Haram, other terrorists in Lake Chad region===
If true, Ukraine has become a state sponsor of ISIS (of which Boko Haram is a branch).[https://www.breitbart.com/africa/2022/12/01/nigerian-president-complains-ukraine-war-bringing-arms-and-manpower-to-terrorists/]--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 23:43, December 1, 2022 (EST)
:Ukraine's just a proxy here; it's still US/NATO/Sullivan/Avril Haines, etc. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 23:48, December 1, 2022 (EST)
::Well, evidently the Ukrainian puppet regime is still collaborating with terrorists. If it's going to be argued that all the evil activities perpetrated by Ukrainian nationalists are the result of strings being pulled by Western "internationalists," then I suppose contemporary Ukraine is possibly comparable to [[Vichy France]]. —[[User:Liberaltears|<code><span style="background:#FF8181">'''LT'''</span></code>]] '''''[[User talk:Liberaltears|<sup>(The Old Right was right!)</sup>]]''''' Friday, 00:08, December 2, 2022 (EST)
:::There are numerous parallels that can be drawn, most recently the Afghan national regime.
:::To truly understand the Ukraine, or Russia for that matter, is a concept that most Americans and media simply don't quite grasp. The typical person living in Ukraine, or Rusia, they really are not political people. They don't involve themselves in politics, avoid it, think it's dirty business, don't like talking about politics, or thinking about politics. They are just ordinary people consumed with family, life, career, church, local community, etc. Political questions and decisions is something far away, removed from them, that they can have little impact on, don't wish to waste time with, and don't want to create enemies by aligning with one side or another.
:::The Germans were very much like this as well - until 1945, when they were forced to accept the responsibility for the decision to entrust to others their own fate.
:::Yes, every culture has its partisan political animals who dominate media, debate, government, etc. But your typical Russian or Ukrainian citizen, they are afraid to engage at any level, and even resent being "pressured" to take a side or a stance on a political issue or question. It's something to keep in mind when you hear "experts", East or West, talk about the "Ukrainian people" or the "Russian people". Those same people who are being "generalized", let's say, want no part of the discussion that they are being talked about. They are not political people. Call it a "Slavic thing." [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 01:32, December 2, 2022 (EST)
===Ukrainian fascism===
This is [https://videopress.com/v/1hMa8B4H what happened to an old women on a Kiev subway] who said the Ukrainian armed forces are killers and she couldn't wait to be liberated by the Russian. Yes. the Galicians of Western Ukraine are becoming "Westernized"; this looks like what happens on New York & Philadelphia subways. Any wonder why Russians and Russian speaking people of Ukraine are resisting "Ukrainianization"? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 05:39, December 4, 2022 (EST) [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 05:39, December 4, 2022 (EST)
:So, this woman, who was born in [[Soviet]] times, took advantage of Gorbachev's [[glasnost]] to express an opinion, and was beaten and silenced by Western-backed fascists. So much for Western "liberal democracy". The Russians ain't buying it no mo. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 06:46, December 4, 2022 (EST)
:Yesterday a Russian quadcopter [https://www.bitchute.com/video/D4aORk1xAgi1/] in Artemovsk (Bakhmut) direction detected the movement of a Ukrainian group. At first glance, it looked like a sabotage and reconnaissance group of seven people, it turned out that four Ukrainian soldiers were leading three men in standard Ukrainian field uniforms to a firing squad. Today a new video from the Ukrainian side have surfaced in the Internet. It really looks like it is the exact same scene, armed Ukrainian soldiers scort captive Ukrainians and line them up in a ditch in a forest area. This video is the confirmation of what we suspected yesterday. Dissenting Ukrainian troops who don't want to either be used as cannon fodder or to bomb and murder Donbass civilians are simply executed as an example for other possible "traitors" and deserters.[https://www.bitchute.com/video/0gGQAxaTlWqn/] [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 00:42, December 7, 2022 (EST)
=== User Conservative's Prognostications for the Russia-Ukraine War ===
As far as Russia vs. Ukraine/NATO War, both sides do not want to lose face. If Russia ratches up the war, NATO will ratchet up their support for Ukraine. The war will continue until Ukraine is wrecked and Ukraine is a dysfunctional rump state. Russia will not lose Crimea and will retain part of Eastern Ukraine. I base these predictions various things Professor [[John Joseph Mearsheimer]] and Colonel Douglas Macgregor have said. But as Mearsheimer has said, wars are unpredictable things.
Today's America often elects leaders who don't understand world affairs/politics and/or economics. [[Joe Biden]] and [[Kamala Harris]] are clueless examples of this. [[Donald Trump]] handled Russia much better through diplomacy and through helping to keep America's energy industry strong which inhibited Russia's ability to fund war.
In the end, Ukraine, Russia, Europeans, the USA and the world at large will all be losers from the economic damage, lives lost and lower food production (Ukraine produces a lot of food).
For additional resources, please see:
*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_aNMOEQ0248 The 2022 Holberg Debate w/ John Mearsheimer and Carl Bildt: Ukraine, Russia, China and the West],
*[https://www.youtube.com/@realjohnmearsheimer/videos John Jay Mearsheimer YouTube channel]
*[https://www.youtube.com/@douglasmacgregorofficial/videos Douglas Macgregor YouTube channel]
Time will tell how close my predictions come to the grim truth about this war. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 20:50, December 18, 2022 (EST)
:Actually, I'm not certain that MacGregor has his own YouTube channel. There are two in his name, the first has been around for a while and featured 2 minute clips; the second appeared in the last two months and carries extended interviews. MacGregor appear regularly on Judge Napolitano's channel, and a few others (Useful Idiots, The Greyzone, Jackson Hinkle, Redacted (?) etc). But I'm not sure he runs either channel. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 20:57, December 18, 2022 (EST)
== Dems move up South Carolina primary ==
In 2020, Buttigieg won the February 28 Iowa caucus with 26.2 percent of vote, edging out Sanders, who got 26.1 percent. Biden got 15.8 percent. It took so long to count the vote that no one remembers Buttigieg's great victory. At the time, we didn't know whether Buttigieg or Sanders had won, but it was clear that Biden had lost the heartland. Did Biden supporters sabotage the count? The Clintons hated Sanders because he ran against Hillary in 2016 and they were in a position to arrange such things.
On second thought, maybe Biden did win. He got 16 delegates compared to 7 for Buttigieg and 12 for Sanders. The travesty in Iowa is a gift that keeps on giving. Buttigieg and the minor candidates suddenly dropped out, perhaps after being promised positions, and the Biden campaign was miraculously resurrected. Biden went on to defeat Sanders in the March 9 South Carolina primary.
Given this history, it is hardly surprising that [https://apnews.com/article/2022-midterm-elections-biden-iowa-e46b21ac9ed4ac96be6791bf7afc163d Biden wants South Carolina to go first in 2024]. The Democratic National Committee's rule making committee has voted to move the South Carolina primary to February 3. It's all about diversity, according to Team Biden. In other words, South Carolina has more black Democrats than Iowa does.
While it's hard to justify Iowa going first every four years, this proposal strikes me as narrowly self-promotional. Blacks will vote for the Dems no matter what and the party needs a nominee who has broad appeal. The campaign season is too long as it is. More early primaries is a step in the wrong direction. There is a good chance that Iowa or New Hampshire will respond to the DNC vote by scheduling a caucus or primary before February 3. No state should get a privileged "early primary" position. The first round of primaries should feature more than one state. Every primary should be held in a national primary season. The trend of moving up primaries can be blamed on the 1968 New Hampshire primary, which was held March 12 and had a major impact on national politics that year. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1968_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries Almost all the other primaries that year were held in May or June.] [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 07:49, December 3, 2022 (EST
:The Iowa caucuses were rigged. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 18:48, December 3, 2022 (EST)
::The schedule for 2024 approved by the DNC is South Carolina on Feb. 3, Nevada and New Hampshire on Feb. 13, Georgia on Feb. 20, and Michigan on Feb. 27. Other states will hold their primaries beginning in March. That assumes that the states don't have their own ideas on this issue, which I suspect they do. Before long, we will select party leaders for the next election right after the previous election, as in a parliamentary system. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 22:11, December 3, 2022 (EST)
:::I think I agree, this move will backfire. It ''extends'' the primary season, if South Carolina is that crucial. Campaigning will begin in November 2023. The idea presumably is to galvanize African American voters around a single front runner early. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 00:50, December 4, 2022 (EST)
== Trump wants "termination of all rules" ==
I never cared for rules myself. Rules, shmules, I always say. But I'm not running for president. Did someone hack Trump's account? His latest post on Truth Social calls for "termination of all rules...even those found in the constitution." Here is Hinderaker: "[https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2022/12/trump-is-finished.php Trump is finished]." Perhaps this is related to the vote in Georgia, where control of the U.S. Senate hangs in the balance. It's a burn-it-down outburst like when Bill Clinton pardoned tax swindler Marc Rich on his way out of office -- and then blamed the Jews.<br/>
'''Update''': [https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/12/03/poll-donald-trump-holds-double-digit-lead-hypothetical-2024-primary/ Trump leads DeSantis 47 to 28 percent in a Zogby poll of potential Republican primary voters]. Mike Pence came in third with five percent. The survey was taken November 9-11. I think its clear that we need to move on. It's not just the Truth Social post, which surely no one who was planning a serious campaign for president would write. Based on the results of the last two cycles, Trump can no longer win a general election. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 00:11, December 4, 2022 (EST)
:What makes me think we're only hearing half the story? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 01:39, December 4, 2022 (EST)
:Regardless of one may think of Trump's post, what is indisputable is that the Constitution does not provide a solution to a situation like what he describes. As in, there is no procedure laid out in the event of a stolen election, much like how there was no procedure laid out in the event that a state wishes to secede. Like Abraham Lincoln before him, Trump understands that when a constitutional crisis of this scale arises, it is virtually impossible to resolve it without resorting to acts that are themselves unconstitutional. Basically, you're damned if you do, damned if you don't.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 02:04, December 5, 2022 (EST)
::Call me a fool, but I have no idea in what context this statement was uttered. I vaguely have the impression it is somewhat related primaries, or the Dems changing the primary schedule or something or other. Who knows? Who cares without context? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 02:57, December 5, 2022 (EST)
:::It's obvious that he wrote it in the context of (1) his belief that the 2020 election was stolen from him; and (2) his understanding that there is no clear remedy to a stolen election at this stage, two years afterward.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 14:31, December 5, 2022 (EST)
::::It still doesn't make any sense. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 14:53, December 5, 2022 (EST)
:::::There are only two sets of people who hang on Trump's every word - his groupies and his enemies. With an Interational situation the most tense in about 6 decades, it seems to me only the most obsessed, imbalanced partisans would be paying attention to this. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 15:00, December 5, 2022 (EST)
::::::Indeed. Pay no attention to the fascist soiling himself behind the curtain. Indictments incoming. [[User:ConwayIII|ConwayIII]] ([[User talk:ConwayIII|talk]]) 15:31, December 5, 2022 (EST)
:::::::Yahbut Obama wingman already offered a prisoner swap, Hunter for Trump. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 15:34, December 5, 2022 (EST)
::::::::Yeah, man. A new fan fiction project beckons. Negotiations at the highest levels. [[User:ConwayIII|ConwayIII]] ([[User talk:ConwayIII|talk]]) 16:20, December 5, 2022 (EST)
:::::::::Last time we had a prisoner swap like this, both [[Clarence Thomas]] and [[Bill Clinton]] served out their terms. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 16:51, December 5, 2022 (EST)
::::::::::Trump's post was in reaction to Elon Musk's release of documents concerning Twitter's decision to censor the ''New York Post''`s story on Hunter Biden's laptop just before the 2020 election. IMO, the point he's missing is that he was president at the time. That is to say, he was in a position to do something about the problem, especially if Twitter was acting in response to FBI warnings. Director Chris Wray was a longtime ally of James Comey, so what did he expect? See "[https://nypost.com/2022/12/04/fbi-warned-twitter-of-hunter-biden-hack-before-censoring-the-post/ FBI warned Twitter during ‘weekly’ meetings of Hunter Biden ‘hack-and-leak operation’ before censoring The Post]." [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 01:02, December 6, 2022 (EST)
:::::::::::Yah I saw something about this this morning. It left more questions than answered. It looks like the groundwork for Congressional investigations. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 18:09, December 5, 2022 (EST)
== Trump helped flatline liberalism. He further tanked trust in media. And he probably caused Elon Musk to buy Twitter and say that he is voting Republican ==
Obama helped make liberalism "cool" because he was well-spoken and charming.
Here is a graph of the political affiliations of Americans: [https://news.gallup.com/poll/388988/political-ideology-steady-conservatives-moderates-tie.aspx U.S. Political Ideology Steady; Conservatives, Moderates Tie]
You will notice that from 1992 to to 2004 liberalism may have grown 2 points (there is poll/sampling error though) which is liberalism growing 2 points in 12 years. However, from 2004 to 2018 liberalism grew 4 points.
There was bound to be some political backlash to Trump so from 2016 to 2018 liberalism still did grow a bit.
But if there is one thing that Trump definitely did and that was to attack CNN and fake news. America's trust in media has dropped 9 points from 2018 to 2021.[https://news.gallup.com/poll/355526/americans-trust-media-dips-second-lowest-record.aspx]
Trump was also funny which took some of the coolness away from liberalism.
Liberalism dropped and then flatlined from 2018 to 2021.
Now it is becoming clear that liberals are the establishment and elitist. The corporate elite takeover of the Democratic Party started with Obama's romance with bankers who backed his campaign.
Twitter censoring the Hunter Biden scandals during the 2016 election may have prompted Elon Musk to buy Twitter.
Biden may damage the Democrat/liberal brand further too. {{Unsigned|User:Conservative}}
:Duh, the Democrats just crushed your [[Red wave]] and took solid control of the Senate (meaning they don't Kamala as a tiebreaker anymore)
:What planet are you on? I hope this isn't the start of another round of your destructive and demoralizing red wave cheerleading. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 12:30, December 4, 2022 (EST)
::Graphs don't lie. Deal with it! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 12:48, December 4, 2022 (EST)
The Birkbeck College, University of London professor [[Eric Kaufmann]] wrote in his 2010 book ''Shall the Religious Inherit the Earth?'' concerning America:
:High evangelical fertility rates more than compensated for losses to liberal Protestant sects during the twentieth century. In recent decades, white secularism has surged, but Latino and Asian religious immigration has taken up the slack, keeping secularism at bay. Across denominations, the fertility advantage of religious fundamentalists of all colours is significant and growing. After 2020, their demographic weight will begin to tip the balance in the culture wars towards the conservative side, ramping up pressure on hot-button issues such as [[abortion]]. By the end of the century, three quarters of America may be pro-life. Their activism will leap over the borders of the 'Redeemer Nation' to evangelize the world. Already, the rise of the World Congress of Families has launched a global religious right, its arms stretching across the bloody lines of the War on Terror to embrace the entire Abrahamic family.[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/05/why-is-year-2020-key-year-for-christian.html]
On July 24, 2019, due to religious immigration to the United States and the [[Atheism and fertility rates|higher fertility rate of religious people]], [[Eric Kaufmann]] wrote in an article entitled ''Why Is [[Secularization]] Likely to Stall in America by 2050? A Response to Laurie DeRose'': "Overall, the picture suggests that the U.S. will continue to secularize in the coming decades. However, a combination of religious immigration, immigrant religious retention, slowing religious decline due to a rising prevalence of believers among the affiliated, and higher native religious birth rates will result in a plateauing of secularizing trends by mid-century." [https://ifstudies.org/blog/why-is-secularization-likely-to-stall-in-america-by-2050-a-response-to-laurie-derose Why Is Secularization Likely to Stall in America by 2050?]
Victory is on the horizon! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 12:50, December 4, 2022 (EST)
:Why don't we add all your "Victory is on the horizon!" to [[Conservapedia proven right]]. Then I'll believe it. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 12:52, December 4, 2022 (EST)
::Hispanics and black men are moving towards the Republicans. And the liberal, women libertines are not having babies! The writing is on the wall, amigo! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 12:58, December 4, 2022 (EST)
::::Not two days ago you accused me of having an infatuation with race, and now you use it as the basis for your argument (And I'm the guy who built that [[coalition]] - not you). [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 13:05, December 4, 2022 (EST)
:::The GOP controls the House by 3 votes after your Red wave. You know, at any given time, there are as many as 5 House vacancies caused death, resignations, etc. How much you wanna lay odds we'll see spate of deaths and resignations in the first 6 months of next year? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 13:04, December 4, 2022 (EST)
::::I think the Democrats are going to get crushed in the 2024 presidential election and the political betting markets (which tend to be more predictive than polls agree with me).[https://electionbettingodds.com/GOPPrimary2024.html] And by the 2030s, entitlement spending on the old [https://www.conservapedia.com/User:Conservative/Economics#Economic_depression_.2F_Economic_collapse and a very potential economic depression] will crowd out discretionary spending. Liberalism will be starved for federal cash and will wither. Liberals will find it harder to spend other people's money. On top of this, the [[desecularization|world is becoming more religious by the day]] with Christianity/Islam leading the pack (And conservative Christianity and religious fundamentalism which tends to be socially conservative is growing. See: [[Growth of religious fundamentalism]]). I still remain an optimist, but I will be preparing for a very economic storm in the 2030s.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:15, December 4, 2022 (EST)
:::Each seat in Congress is worth $4.79 trillion (the size of the federal budget) divide by 535 (the number of legislators) = $8,900,000,000. Trust me, the Dems are working overtime right now to find the goods (or "flaws" as you say) on 3 GOP members. If you are the "realist" you claim to be, you need to stop making all your argument solely based on "ideology". [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 13:18, December 4, 2022 (EST)
::::Busyness does not equal results. Hamsters run fast on their wheels, but don't go anywhere! A Republican will be sitting in the Oval Office in 2025. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:23, December 4, 2022 (EST)
:::::Well, you're 0-2 right now for the last two elections. If you were a sports handicapper, I'd bet opposite on the opposing team on your recommendations. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 13:29, December 4, 2022 (EST)
::::"[https://youtu.be/_242ddefZV8 Don't you think we could have got some other space cadet to hit Rabinga? Cheaper, too. $50 bucks.]" [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 13:22, December 4, 2022 (EST)
:::::I have found a website that compiles the data from all political websites to form a weighted average of the results. And since the political betting markets are better than the pollsters, I will be more informed on who is likely to win major elections. See: [[Essay: Political polls vs. political betting markets. Which are better? Also, there was no red wave in 2022 U.S. midterm elections, but it was a fun red cape to wave in front of Democrats for awhile. Olé! Olé! Olé!]].[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:44, December 4, 2022 (EST)
::::::You have to have a [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUWn_TJTrnU growth mindset] if you want to progress in life as much as what is possible. So I don't beat myself up over failing to predict 3 past elections since I have been at Conservapedia. Instead, I took a more productive path and I found better tools to predict elections. This is a helpful investing skill since a Democrat with low growth policies who is against oil drilling can suppress the economy and the stock markets. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:52, December 4, 2022 (EST)
:We are done talking. You have vandalized this page and deleted my responses. You are not acting in good faith. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 13:57, December 4, 2022 (EST)
::If I did delete one of your posts, it was by accident. My apologies if this was the case. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:59, December 4, 2022 (EST)
:::You deleted a whole lot more than one post. [https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk%3AMain_Page&action=history&year=2022&month=12&tagfilter=&deleted=1] [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']]</sup> 15:29, December 8, 2022 (EST)