President Biden celebrated the deaths of Russian soldiers in Ukraine during a speech in Normandy, France, commemorating the 80th anniversary of D-Day.
“They’ve suffered tremendous losses, Russia. The numbers are staggering — 350,000 Russian troops dead or wounded. Nearly 1 million people have left Russia because they can no longer see a future in Russia,” Biden said.
The real number of dead or wounded troops in the Ukraine war is unclear since neither side shares information about casualties. But it’s likely Ukraine has suffered more casualties since the conflict is largely an artillery war, and Ukrainian forces have been significantly outgunned.
Russian officials were not invited to the D-Day commemoration despite the Soviet Union being an ally of the US and France during World War II and suffering tens of millions of deaths. Biden used the event to rally support for NATO’s proxy war in Ukraine and slammed Russian President Vladimir Putin as a “tyrant.”
“We know the dark forces that these heroes fought against 80 years ago. They never fade,” Biden said. “Here, in Europe, we see one stark example. Ukraine has been invaded by a tyrant bent on domination.”
Biden also declared that NATO was the “greatest military alliance in the history of the world” and framed the proxy war in Ukraine as a battle for “democracy” despite Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky canceling elections and remaining in power after his term ended.
“Let us be the generation that when history is written about our time — in 10, 20, 30, 50, 80 years from now — it will be said: When the moment came, we met the moment. We stood strong. Our alliances were made stronger. And we saved democracy in our time as well,” Biden said.
Biden’s speech came about a week after he gave Ukraine the green light to use US-provided missiles to strike Russian territory, a significant escalation that risks sparking World War III. Putin has warned of “serious consequences” for NATO countries that support strikes on Russia.
French President Emmanuel Macron is preparing another major escalation of the proxy war. According to a report from Reuters, the French president is holding a meeting with Zelensky on Friday and could announce a deployment of French troops to Ukraine to train Ukrainian soldiers. Russia has warned that any French trainers in Ukraine would be legitimate targets.
He’s a ghoul. He also appeared to be readying himself to sit on an invisible chair.
At least he didn't bring an elderly Nazi out with him, unlike Trudeau last year
Wasn’t Zelensky there? At this point, he certainly qualifies.
What the heck are you all doing, up at such an hour?! Lol, myself included!
;-/
He was looking for a toilet.
What an insult to Russia! They lost 25.5 million people in WW2,
Agreed. The Russian people understand the great patriotic war in way the west cannot even begin to appreciate. Normandy could never have succeeded without the forces on the eastern front grinding up the Germans. Biden is pathetic.
Americans invaded Europe at the end of the war to save Germany, Italy and other fascist states from Russian occupation.
Same reason atom bombs were dropped on civilians in Japan. Eussia was winning there, too.
No. The US Navy won the Pacific war. The US army finished off the Japanese cities but the Navy had won the war.
Major sea battles determined the direction of the war. The cities were finished off by constant bombing, including fire bombing. There was not much for the U.S. Army to do when the infantry reached Japan.
If Japan did not surrender, the US Army would have a lot to do in Operation Downfall the invasion of Japan. But the back to back nuclear bombing convince the Japanese that it was time to quit.
The Japanese were already quitting. There were ragtag remnants in the Islands, but it was over before the nukes.
It is doubtful that the Japanese fully appreciated what the two atomic bombs were that had been used against them. The Soviet attack in Manchuria was more of a shock to the Japanese leadership and convinced them that it was well and truly over for them. The atomic bombs as a cause for ending the war is a myth that Americans delight in telling themselves.
Nukes was a great argument to persuade Stalin to be more flexible.
We have to accept that Stalin was a strong man and he gave up nothing. Even more: he helped Chinese communists to win. Actually he saved them from a certain defeat.
The Chinese lost about 13 million during the war against Japan. Were it not for that war, the Chinese Communist Party would not have gained prominence.
Yes, the war against Japan imperialism helped Chinese communists to become the leading political force in China but they had no chance to succeed against Chiang Kai Shi army supported by Americans. Without Soviet help hardly they could do anything. First Stalin gave to Mao all Japanese weapons captured by Russian army; there was a lot of it. Then he provided them with Soviet military assistance. Chinese civil war was bloody and ended only in 1949.
Chiang was not a nice guy. Hence, he ran off to Formosa.
The Chinese lost over 20 million people in the war against Japan not that any student of the "west" learns that in their study of WWII. A far greater crime than the 14 million killed by the Germans in the holocaust… of course the west only recognizes the 7 million chosen who were killed and not the other 7 million who are deliberately forgotten.
The mother of amnesia; forgetting the "other" holocaust.
Around a third of the Jews were killed, but about 90% of the Roma population outside Spain and Portugal.
Not true. The Alliance at the outset had created a commission to arrange the governance of liberated territories. When the US liberated Italy they ignored the agreement. The US, not Russia, were the first to violate it and with the intent of occupying and arranging the sequelae. DDay was a desperation venture to get into northwestern Europe before they became supererogatory. The Resistance forces, largely Communist, in France and Italy should, like Tito, have succeeded to governance.
I am talking about the reason of the invasion, not about who violated what. Stalin was no less treacherous person than his Anglo-Saxon allies.
As am I. The US needed to have its armies on the ground to keep Western Europe countries from taking control of their own. Capitalism and its bourgeois democracy had proven a disaster and the rising alternative ideology was Communism. Stalin was not the aggressor (as proven in Spain and Greece), the US was.
American militarism is the problem, not "bourgeois democracy". American MIC and American oligarchy are destroying the democracy. Eisenhower talked about the danger of MIC oligarchy for American democracy 60 years ago.
Russia has stuck with the idea of sticking to its own area of influence. Russia does not have 1,000 bases all over the planet.
Yes, Capitalism has to grow (markets & resources) to survive; but, if Capitalism gains ascendancy in Russia, She will go the same way.
Actually we imposed our version of crony capitalism (on steroids) during the years of Clinton's BFF Yeltsin when we sent our bankers to carve up the country. Pensioners were evicted to die in the snow and people in some areas starved to death. Russians remember that vividly, it's not likely to be permitted to happen again in our lifetime.
I think and hope you’re right. Given the impending ecological collapse, Capitalism has to go, or the nightmare gaining on us hourly will reach nihilistic climax.
Ironic that the "Anglo-Saxons" were Germanic tribes that invaded Britain from the mainland.
We can talk about that only hypothetically.
Explain what you mean.
We can only guess what language talked R1b tribes which moved to Britain from continental Europe. Definitely it happened before the start of civilization and phonetic writing wasn't available.
We don’t have to guess that the Angles and the Saxons were Germanic tribes.
The names to those tribes were given later at the time when historians started inventing the histories. Most likely, those R1b tribes who populated Britain first, and who's descendants are dominating the area, talked Celtic language. They were Germanized later together with all the rest of people of north-central and north-western Europe.
What we call "civilization", including writing, started during the early Bronze Age, around 3500 BCE, in various places: Mesopotamia, the Indus River Valley, the Yellow River in China, and Peru. Phonetic writing was invented around 1100 BCE. But that doesn't matter. R1b came from southern Ukraine on the Pontic Steppe, from the Indo-European Yamna culture, which came from the Uralic-speaking Finnic culture from northern Siberia, which probably came from the Yeneisian-speaking culture from the Altai Mountains in southern Siberia west of Mongolia. Indo-European languages developed into almost all the European languages spoken today. One of the languages it developed into was Celtic, which probably arrived in Britain by 2200 BCE. Before that, starting around 4000 BCE, the people there were a mixture of European Western Hunter-Gatherers and Early European Farmers from Anatolia (Turkey), who probably spoke a language related to the Basque language in northern Spain. Before that, around 7000 BCE, there were a Finnic people there. We know this from studying archeology and genetics. The Anglo-Saxons didn't get there until the 5th century CE.
"started during the early Bronze Age, around 3500 BCE" according to fake Scaliger chronology.
You left out that civilization arose separately in Egypt and Mexico, but then most people do.
The French resistance forces were not Communists.
Communists were quite strong in France too. In Italy and Greece only Anglo-Saxon interference prevented communists taking power.
The Germans were fond of describing the "French Resistance" as "French terrorists".
Not all of the French Resistance was communist but a significant portion was. They had the organization, the skills, the numbers and the discipline for this type of work. For their efforts they enjoyed great prestige in France.
That's in part because the French politicians and elite happily handed their communist organizers to the Germans to be shipped off to Dachau and later further east. They did the same to union organizers as well.
Most of the Polish resistance forces were communists, and they did more damage to the German war machine in a single night of epic destruction than the French did during the entire occupation.
Resistance forces in China defeated the Japanese. Communist resistance forces.
They feared communism, that saved Germany and Italy and other capitalistic nations, they needed NATO.
They are still fighting wars for the same reasons, now include China, the BRICs.
We can't blame them for their fear of communists, keeping in mind the horrors of Bolshevism in Russia. NATO played no role in that. In summer 1944 it were American and British armies at whom most Europeans looked with hope. NATO was created later with the purpose of keeping Europe under American control. NATO only created problems for Europe. After WW II, neutral European countries were safe without NATO. Neither Stalin, nor leaders after him had any wish to conquer Finland, Sweden or any other neutral country. Now NATO became a tool of American aggressive imperialism.
Communism was a philosophy for industrialized nations, it made Stalin force the most brutal industrialization on the Russian people, an agrarian nation, a terrible span of history for sure. On the continent’s industrialized nations the political philosophy was the basis for the fight of working people for labor unions, and better working conditions, better quality of life. It was a long and bloody fight. Communism and socialism humanized capitalism and helped capitalism to survive. Neoliberal economies are socially regressive ending social democratic accomplishments. China and Russia appear to have picked out what they see good for the nation and adjusted it to their cultures.
First communist party which served as the pattern for all other communist parties was Bolshevik party created by Lenin. It was a militarized organization with a strict discipline based upon Marxist theory of political development of human society. The goal of the party was the establishment of a global terrorist regime and keeping it by means of terror and cheating.
When Stalin got to the top of the party, he abandoned the idea of "world revolution" and announced that peaceful coexistence between USSR and the rest of the world is possible.
Mao further modified Marxist-Leninist theory and denounced the necessity of communist party to be based upon urban industrial proletariat as it was required by Marx, Lenin and Stalin. Lenin and Stalin used the idea of "dictatorship of proletariat" for justification of terrorist policy against the countryside people who was the majority of the country and who never supported Bolsheviks.
Deng Xiao Ping modified it further denouncing the necessity of eliminating the private capital from the industry.
So in the end we have specific Chinese political system which, as we see, is the most efficient political system created by humans so far.
The U.S. came out of WWII unscathed, powerful. We declared to the world that we were going to make the rules. A Monroe Doctrine on steroids.
The horrors of Bolshevism? What about the horrors of capitalism? Or the horrors of the Czars, which my Russian grandmother told me about?
Which is interesting, because Communism does have its capitalistic bent so as to make money. The difference is that under communism the owner of property and productive enterprise is the state. China uses a hybrid formula. Communist in political orientation, capitalist in business. In the U.S., corporations and a powerful donor class run the state.
One could say in China the communist political orientation humanized capitalism as was the case in social democracies in Europe. Thatcher carried the neoliberal economics to the EU, De Gaulle vetoed the UK MEMBERSHIP two times, he knew why, neoliberal economics are socially regressive. Some time ago we had real statesmen too.
"In the U.S., corporations and a powerful donor class run the state." That's called fascism, the opposite are communism.
They feared an end to warfare, which would negate their power. When the USSR collapsed NATO had no more enemy, so they've spent the last quarter of a century fabricating a Russian boogeyman to justify its continued leeching off our society.
Exactly. D-Day was only possible because the USSR broke the German army's back with the former's failures on the Eastern Front.
For America, WWII was a business expansion plan, for the USSR and other European allies, WWII was a survival plan.
By summer 1944 the outcome of the war was clear to everyone. By that time Italy already changed the sides and Hungary was occupied by Germans for the fear they could do the same. The other allies also were thinking about that.
"By summer 1944 the outcome of the war was clear to everyone" Except for the leaders of Germany and Japan. They kept fighting and allowing their cities to be destroyed.
For German leaders it was the same. They were hanged anyway. Some of them preferred suicide.
Some died in jail cells.
Germany did. At the time of the evil dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan had been negotiating the cessation of the war. We bombed Japanese cities almost daily. We fire bombed cities. Even after the atomic bombs were dropped, B-29s did bombing runs.
Since Allies would only accept unconditional surrender, what Japan negotiating for? Japan attempt at negotiating was weak at best and included demands that the US would never accept such as no war trials and no occupation of the home islands. I suggest reading "The End of the Imperial Japanese Empire" by Richard B. Frank.
And you are correct, the air war continued until August 14/15 when the 86 B-29 bombed Isesake, 81 bombed Kumagaya, 132 B-29 bombed oil facilities at Tsuchizake and 39 B-29 dropped naval mines at various ports.
Aerial dog fights also occurred on that day with the US Navy. The fight end at 2 PM, with F6F piloted by Clarence Moore shooting down a Japanese dive bomber. The last aerial kill by the US Navy.
The Japanese wanted to retain Hirohito as leader. In the end, that is what they got. The purpose of the atom bomb attacks was for what?? A grand test of different varieties of nuclear weapons? One fusion. The other fission. Images of the dead absorbed into cement walkways and roads indicated success. Isn't that nice?/s
2 designs, both fission.
One uranium, one plutonium, both fission bombs. Fusion bombs didn't come until several years later. The images were the shadows of people where they blocked the flash of the reaction from scorching the concrete.
It's most likely that the nuclear bombs were used as a demonstration to the USSR of the dick-wagging lunacy of the US military. It's one thing to demonstrate the destruction of some manikins and some ticky-tacky houses in the desert, something entirely different is to show Soviet observers entire cities full of people destroyed by a single bomb.
The military was champing at the bit to use their new weapon, and when they intercepted communications attempting to use first the Chinese and then the Soviets as go-betweens for peace negotiations they kept the information from Truman. Then they inflated their own estimate of US casualties if an invasion were to be carried out by a factor of 20 by inventing a story that every man, woman and child in the islands would fight to the death. Finally Truman gave in.
Only because the Allies were demanding "Unconditional Surrender" which would have meant public execution for Adolf Hitler.
"By summer 2024 the outcome of the war was clear to everyone" Except for the leaders of the Likud .They kept fighting and allowing their beloved IDF to be destroyed.
========
Fixed for you
The policy of Unconditional Surrender had something to do with the Axis' continued resistance.
At the end of the war, the CEO of General Motors said the U.S. should maintain a wartime economy. Business was great. Not so for workers, There were strikes during the years 1945-1946.
I believe the Russian operation was called Operation Brogation. It began several weeks after D-day. Stalin was in contact with the Allied forces, coordinating with them. The entire West is pathetic. Biden is just a symptom, as is Trump. In fact, in my view, every U.S. President since JFK was murdered in the coup has been pathetic.
I recall
20 some Fascist divisions were stationed in France
~200 Fascist divisions on the Russian Front
Where do you get the (-)???
The – is actually a squiggle meaning approx.
It was called Bagration…
Not only Normandy, Russia won WWII by defeating Germany's invasion. The U.S. never mentions that, and Americans are brainwashed to think that U.S. and western Europe won the war.
1944 – Russia battles Nazis intent on murdering Russians
2024- Russia battles Nazis intent on murdering Russians
Some things just never change. . .
2024- NAZIs aided by the U.S., with the U.S. likewise intent on murdering Russians.
The guy has no manners and much less empathy and common decency.
In 2019, Russian diplomats were not invited to the 75th of V-Day. The Red Army defeated the Werhmacht for Gods sake!
What an ass.
Jeez, it was like watching Churchill in his prime … I, for one, have goose bumps …
All that is missing is the half eaten cigar.
Biden is a disgrace!!!
One of the worst presidents in my lifetime, right up there with Reagan and Darth Vader.
People are used already to hear nonsense from American political elite, so it would be strange if Biden suddenly starts to talk reasonably.
The Israeli lobby has so many locked up (financially) there is no reasonable talk coming out of their lying mouths. In my humble assessment, Israel has us locked up. What AIPAC a foreign agent ) says, are marching orders for the majority of our "representatives".
Totalitarian war mongers loke Biden live in a 180° big-lie mirror world.
A particular phrase, I myself, do enjoy is: ass wipe!
;-]
Thank you for acknowledging his 'totalitarianism'.
Sadly; We can project how much more US people will put up with by looking at how Ukrainians are doing.
In 20 years, if there is no nuclear war, history will tell of how Biden starved millions in Gaza, how he helped slaughter unarmed civilians in Palestine, how he sided with the Zionist/Nazis against HUMANITY.
You can bet Russian media will be playing clips of this, and rightly so, the Russian people will see again the vitriol of America and its obscene revisionist history in the making.
De Gaulle was right, he opposed NATO and UK membership in the EU. Keep the Anglo-Saxons out of Europe if you want peace. Without them the Europeans had regional wars, with them it ended in two WW and a possible third WW.
So what? The Russians should be more concerned about why their young people are getting killed in Ukraine. .
We, the indispensable nation, like to use the phrase "responsibility to protect" when we invade other countries to "save" them. Well, Russia invaded to save the Donbas from the possible big push by Kiev, along with the constant shelling that killed 14,000 Ukraine citizens over a period of 8 years. Victoria and Joe had big parts in the coup in Kiev in 2014. Victoria and Joe. What a pair!
So what? Because it detracts from exactly what you're talking about. There was no reason Biden had to say what he said. And this kind of shit has been constant. Biden is uniting Russians but in the wrong direction.
That is because the Ukrainians are US proxies doing the dying for US capitalistic interests, for the Ukrainians there is nothing but blood and tears and ruins, a failed state. They don't even have a legal government now, Zelensky, the clown is spit shining Biden's boots.
The Russian soldiers are fighting for their motherland and their families, they are motivated, the privatized US and NATO forces are not.
The Russian people know they must protect their nation's resources, that is what the American Energy companies and shareholders want to get. That is why the Americans had Yeltsin and Navalny in waiting.
Zelensky should head for his place in Italy. Or South Florida.
I think he should go to hell and take Biden with him.
To think a demented president and an out of office Zelensky in charge of the empire and nuclear weapons. Can it get crazier than that?
Was the gloating over dead Russians before or after Joe's "bathroom incident'?
No mention of operation Gladio or operation Paperclip.
Keeping the Nazis going after the war.
Russia did win the military war but Russians were communists and the war was capitalists against each other, communists were not welcome but the German competitor had to be destroyed, that was the goal of the first WW also.
Remember, the UK and USA are not European continental nations.
In the same goal and category is the sabotage of the NS2 pipeline. Eliminate Germany and the EU and Russia and then take on China and its economy. Use NATO to get there.
Allen Dulles. The man behind both. The man behind the coup of 1963, the assassination of JFK. When JFK said he wanted to smash the CIA into a thousand pieces, then toss the pieces into the air, he signed his death warrant. Israel, under Ben-Gurion, did not miss him after the assassination. There was an exchange of terse letters concerning Israel developing the bomb. JFK thought correctly that Israel with the bomb would become more belligerent in the ME. JFK firing Dulles did not go over well with Dulles.
I look forward to celebrating Joe Biden's D day. Guess what my "D" stands for?
;-}
Donald!
D is for dude?
or dick head
or dumb-ass
or democrat
or something or other ….
edit) = i have a harmonica key of D it is way more difficult to play than the harmonica key of A or key of G
Dick, I believe!
YOU GUYS ARE SO KIND. I go with wars r us, I can be mean sometimes when I don't like someone and I don't like Biden.
Cynicism is healthy good Lysistrata!
Doo-dah doo-dah
Biden is dreaming if he thinks "history" will praise his hypocritical and deceptive actions and speeches. If history is honest it will tell of how Biden tried to tweek the historical narrative of WW II as a war against the Nazis into a narrative about the war against Russia, when in fact Russia was Europe's and America's savior at Stalingrad. Biden is a decrepid old draft avoider pretending to be a hero. Hopefully in November the voters will get rid of him. But then what?
America's savior??? So Russia saved the USA? From what?
Tim, try to open your eyes and ears and your HEART and MIND.
Tim (also know as jake or Don Julio) is a super troll, cap and all. Like a fly in a glass lf iced tea.
Hi Tim:
Listen bro, get high and lighten up and open up to truth, peace and enlightenment!
If it wasn't for the Russians, the Allies would have lost World War II.
If it wasn't for Lend Lease, Moscow would have the swastika flying over the Kremlin. Stalin was Hitler's ally the first two years of the war.
Stalingrad was the beginning of the end for Hitler Germany. German soldiers feared nothing more than assignment to the Eastern front. The first POWs from Russia came back home in 1957 after long negotiations by the Adenauer government.
Biden's historic legacy will be the failures of an ambitious and incompetent man, he leaves a trail of blood and tears and rubble, ruins, in his wake. In all his years in government he build nothing and said nothing worth remembering.
Very well put.
He is not even worth commenting…!
It was a backhanded compliment from a creepy, demented and ambitious old man. As usual, he wanted it both ways for the upcoming election.
Bye-Done!
Bidette…………………..a toilet piece.
As usual no mention of the fact, by Biden or anyone else, that Stalin with U.S. gold and ammunition and vehicles, transported through Iran which Britain and the USSR invaded together in 1941, invaded half of Europe. And enslaved the people living there. Or that Stalin killed 60 million people, more than any other in world history. Or that he had amassed his army on the border with Germany, to invade Germany and then Western Europe.
Germany had already gone back to a peace economy after beating the British-French forces building up in France for an invasion. Germany offered Britain peace nine times and would withdraw from France. They discovered the Soviet invasion force in the last moment, which is why they had only a few thousands of tanks ready and no winter clothes, as they hadn't prepared for a war of that size.
While Stalin had more than 60,000, possibly close to 100,000 tanks, a number that could only be maintained for a short time. Stalin had also trained half a million paratroopers and placed them on the border, useful only for attack. The Germans could destroy so many planes on the ground because the planes were by the border and out in the open, instead of by their fortified bases. The Germans could move so quickly because the Russians were not preparing a defense. There was no second defense line, or much of a first defense line. The soldiers were not in their usual bases.
Stalin had on his desk at all times a book by his favorite Soviet general, who advocated invasion war for the cause of communism, without a war declaration. Stalin had read all communist literature available at the time. He had even taken the Soviet Union from its "moderate" state control under Lenin to full state control of the economy – he was completely dedicated. He had tried to invade Finland, and then invaded Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, forced Romania to hand over part of its territory. And invaded eastern Poland to which he had no claims – with Roosevelt and his pro-Soviet advisers thinking it just fine.
He had hoped that Germany and France/Britain would be weakened in another trench war, which is why he agreed to a non-aggression pact with Germany to make it happen, and was dismayed when Germany moved so quickly. But the Soviet invasion force was still moved to the border to carry out the plan.
But that must never be mentioned.
Read some real history, not the nonsense put out by Vladimir Rezun, aka Suvorov. Rezun distorts the record to spin a fantasy that satisfies gullible Westerners. For example, he totally ignores Soviet foreign policy under Maxim Litvinov to forge an anti-Hitler coalition in Europe from 1933 to 1939. The agreement with Hitler in the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact came after these efforts failed. Also read David Glantz's "Stumbling Colossus" to get a sense of the actual state of the Red Army just before hostilities began.
Excellent detail John. Excellent!
That is the longest brainfart I have yet seen on this worthy site.
There is much truth you state, though from what I've read, the SU and the Reich were headed to a reckoning and Hitler wanted to clear the deck to the west before what he thought was the inevitable grudge match.
However, your comment is not relevant to Mr. Biden's speech. In other words, it does not matter if the SU was going to start the war of annihilation if Hitler had not, it did not happen that way historically. And the fact of the matter is that the SU was primarily responsible for defeating Hitler. To not acknowledge that on a WW2 celebration/memorial is to deny sacrifice, bravery and history.
Oh , the idiocy ….
The irony of a biden calling putin a tyrant is hard to overlook. Bidens whole foreign policy is applief tyranny, he has zero interest in peace or democracy, it's my way or the highway with America. Then there's bibi the butcher, the biggest tyrant in my lifetime, Bidens best buddy, infact biden is literally crushing Americans freedoms for israels pleasure. Too bad someone didn't interrupt bidens mumbling and tell him to shut da fu@¥ up, go change his depends.
Touché Ole!
Question? Does he use the same brand as Trump?
Biden's speeches are bad, low level speeches even for grade school children. He has nothing to say.
Educated adults know that all the Freedom and Democracy BS is just that. It is all about resources, markets and power, it is now all about Capitalism (neoliberal economics) V. Socialism.
The Nazis imprisoned communists and socialists in concentration camps. The Bismarck Germany was a big competitor with GB and the USA causing WWI.
Reagan level speeches.
Reagan knew how to speak, and he looked like a president. He played the part very well. He also had a better team than Biden and also Alzheimer disease.
You all know I'm not af an of Putin, but this is beligerent, ignorant and incredibly abrasive speech from Biden. I personally apologize to the Russian people, and thank you for helping us defeat the Nazi's in WWII. I wish, we could build a better world together that's peaceful and spends more on improving the quality of life than deadly weaponry and propaganda.
The D-day invasion was one of the most complicated and well executed military plans in history. To bring that much firepower into such small space is indeed a logistics accomplishment. The America and British planners deserved a lot credit for the victory.
Never could have happened without the bulk of the German army being preoccupied on the Russian front.
If my father were alive, you could ask him about it. U.S. Army, 1941 – 1947. ROTC before that. Saw action in Middle East, North Africa, France (Normandy landing), Germany. Without the Red Army chewing up the Wehrmacht in the Eastern front, the Allied invasion would have been snuffed out. He never revealed a lot of his experiences, just that it was clusterf*ck. Word got to his unit as to what happened to the paratroops and the gliders. Paratroopers blown all over the place, landing miles from the landing point, 1/2 of the gliders going down, killing nearly everyone on board. Then the fun part, street to street fighting. I worked with a man, an Air Force pilot, who flew an aircraft that towed a glider. He said it was all he could do to keep from crashing, visibility lousy due to the weather. Some of the tow planes did go down. How come you do not give credit to the Red Army? I can answer that question for you. Because our history erased from memory the sacrifices made. We are not called The United States of Amnesia for nothing.
Biden fantasizes about what future historians will have to say about his regime. Like everything else with completely unrealistic expectation. Provided a new vocabulary is invented to express the insanity, the sadness, the farcicalness, the tragic foolishness and the evil resulting, I wish he would be around to hear the verdict. He deserves it. Sadistic however the thought may be, he deserves to understand what will be said about him. But alas like his mind already is, he will be gone.
His picture will sit next to the fancy bidettes of our time. The most fancy of all; President Bidette.
Bidette or bidet?
What would you say the odds are that Joseph Robinette Biden actually wrote that speech? My guess, slim and none.
None.
Hope Hunter Biden can join his brother the Stolen Valor Beau Biden in his happy place.
"John Wesley, the founder of Methodism, "made a distinction between hell (the receptacle of the damned) and hades (the receptacle of all separate spirits)"
Where is the receptacle for the senile retard liar named Joey Biden.
He will have to make do with hell, no tears from me for the scum.
Mr. Biden is a Catholic. As such, he needs to go to confession. Pronto. He is assisting the killing of innocents on two fronts, he can stop both immediately.
Why he has not been excommunicated beats me. The confession depends on him telling the truth, that would be an issue between him and his God who does know(so they say) when he is telling a lie.
Whether or not you believe or agree with Putin in his interview, he doesn’t come across as a bellicose bumbling mumbling moron. We are “exceptional” alright.
Putin's Annual SPIEF Meeting with Heads of International News Agencies
Very Long Read
https://karlof1.substack.co…
I saw the Tucker Carlson interview with him.
Then I tried to imagine Biden expounding on US History for 30 minutes. That was a bad idea.
I saw the long Oliver Stone interview with him years ago. As far as what he SAID, he's way better than any U.S. president. As far as what he's done, his kill rate is exponentially below them too.
1944: Winston Churchill: "I have left the obvious, essential fact to this point, namely, that it is the Russian Armies who have done the main work in tearing the guts out of the [Nazi] army."
Russia lost over 20 million lives in its war against Hitler and Nazi Germany and this was a central factor in the Allied victory in ending WWII. If Joe Biden had had a minimum of class, he would have highlighted the sacrifices and the major contribution of Russia in the defeat of Hitler and Nazi Germany. That’s an historical fact.
But no. Biden openly “celebrated” Russian deaths, one week after he gave Ukraine the green light to use US-provided missiles to strike Russian territory.
This is what we call stooping very low.
Yesterday's D-Day celebrations in Normandy may have also served to coordinate war strategies, now that the U.S. and other countries have supplied the pro-Nazi regime in Ukraine with planes and missiles to attack the Russian territory.
Such provocations can easily escalate into open war, possibly into a very disastrous nuclear war.
When politicians are low in polls, starting a war may seem like a lifeline to them, and damn the consequences.
The weirdest thing for me is how the entirety of the US establishment is acting like the death of Russians is supposed to be a good thing … something to be celebrated. Not a single reporter asks Biden why the supposed “decimation” of Russia’s army is a good thing.
I guess I didn’t realize when we declared war on Russia?
When Russian cities, not military targets, are hit with American made weapons, it means we are at war with Russia. Putin understands this.
Russia so White. Yuch.
We could have highlighted the sacrifice the Soviet Union made during WWII by inviting representatives from Russia for the remembrance and celebration of V-day. But we didn't.
You are so right, Joe has no class, not even when he is the winner, he still has to kick the loser.
More spouting of revisionist BS. Your hero Stalin was allied with Hitler the first two years of the war. Stalin benefited from his alliance with the Nazis by taking Poland and the Baltic states. Stalin was just a dumbest who didn't realize Hitler would stab him in the back and the Soviet Union was only able to survive with Lend Lease.
The Soviets tried to organize an anti-Hitler coalition between 1933 and early 1939. These efforts were rebuffed. The Molotov-Ribbentrop agreement came about because Stalin knew war was imminent and no good was coming from the Western powers. Cut a deal with the Devil to buy time to prepare for when the Devil turns on you was the rationale.
Poland disappeared (again, and again due to their incompetence and arrogance) under the German onslaught, so taking the eastern half of Poland under Soviet control didn't hurt the Poles (no friends of the Russians by the way) any more than what had already been done to them. From a military point of view this action gave the Soviets a deeper defensive zone for when the Germans would launch their war against the Soviet Union. Realpolitik in a cruel world.
Lend-lease was of great assistance to the Soviet war effort, and they never said otherwise to my knowledge, but it only aided that effort. Without it the Soviets would have had to take more time to gain victory, but they would have won against Germany regardless. The tide of the Soviet war against Germany turned during the Soviet winter counter-offensive of 1941. Lend-lease hadn't really gotten started at that time and so made no difference in the Soviet achievement. And by the way: the Soviets received about one third of the Lend-Lease program. Britain got about two thirds of Lend-Lease. Who was the neediest party here?
Biden's figures are total BS. Russia has lost perhaps 25-50,000 dead max and probably another 75-150,000 wounded, most of whom will return to the battlefield at a 97% rate due to excellent field medical care, which Ukraine forces don't have. Ukraine OTOH has lost at least half a million dead and another half million to 1.5 million, possibly even more, wounded, many of whom are permanent crippled due to poor field medical care.
FJB the most senile angry A$$.
Conisidering Russia did quite a bit to help us win the war, this is a rather backhanded piece of ingratitude, and unprecedented as well.
No US president has ever popped off like this, even during the Cold War.
ESAD.
He looks like he already did.
Comments like this will make the Russians fight. What a slap in the face after loosing 20 million. Worse yet we are unfortunately supporting far right extremism in Ukraine. Thought we learned a lesson supporting Ben Ladin. Foolish of me I suppose.
D-Day would never have been possible without the Russian Army. It was the Russians (with US assistance to be sure) that ultimately stopped the Nazi juggernaut.
Well, the history of D-Day makes no sense without the Russians at all, without the Teheran conference of 1943, without operation Bagration it becomes largely ahistorical mythology, post-war politicized folklore in service of the cold war propaganda effort.
And now Genocide Joe is sitting atop a German Panzer racing toward Moscow
Yeah after helping Hitler take Poland
Andrei Martyanov weighs in on Biden's "numbers":
Horror and Numbers
FJB
“Fifty-seven years ago during the Six-Day War (June 8, 1967), Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) brutally attacked a U.S. naval intelligence ship that was seconded to the National Security Agency (NSA) for intercepting communications in the Middle East. Thirty-four American sailors were killed in the attack, and 171 were wounded by unmarked Mirage fighter aircraft using cannons and rockets. Israeli boats fired machine guns at close range at those helping the wounded, including a Soviet naval vessel that was trying to rescue U.S. sailors; they also machine-gunned life rafts that survivors had dropped in hopes of abandoning the ship. The Israelis immediately called the disaster a “random accident.” It wasn’t “random” and it wasn’t an “accident,” but the NSA investigation of the assault remains classified to this day.
https://www.counterpunch.org/2024/05/31/the-attack-on-the-uss-liberty-symbolizes-israels-duplicity-and-deceit/
Remember the liberty
https://youtu.be/dyotyC_nwsU?si=W8W0CCl-V6CAnpEa
Refreshing to see that someone is finally acknowledging the obvious; that in a war where firepower is the major factor, the side with the most firepower is likely to be inflicting more casualties than they receive, no matter what the shills in the western press, fueled by the faux "military experts" working for partisan "think tanks" or the pentagon "report".
I doubt we'll ever know the full scale of the casualties; yet, in late 2022, the western press was reporting that Ukraine had "1,000,000 men" in its military; yet now, with Russian forces in country numbering some 500 to 750,000, the same western press claims Ukraine is "outnumbered".
EITHER far, far higher casualties than anyone will admit, OR hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians are faux soldiers, busily "guarding the border" with Romania and Poland, or serving in press gangs hunting down the unwilling to send to the front, rather than go themselves.
Or, of course, the western press has simply been lying about everything since day 1.
The issue is that there are at least 2 soldiers (persons in the military) working in procurement, logistics and other non frontline duties.
At least half of these 2/3 of the forces on the Russian side are not engaged on Ukrainian territory thus the 500 to 750 thousands Russian soldiers in Ukraine have a much higher front line duty fraction as they have more support troops back in Russia to sustain them.
So 1,000,000 Ukrainian soldiers leaves us with probably less than 300,000 frontline soldiers (putting aside 100,000 for R&R or training is probably underestimating the number that are actually thus occupied).
Hence 500 to 750,000 Russian solders in Ukraine can easily outnumber the Ukrainian military of 1,000,000 as you are comparing mostly front line soldiers (some will still be on logistics though) with the total military of Ukraine.
That’s not credible. Ukraine easily outnumbered Russia’s troops in Fall/Winter 2022, which is the only reason they were able to retake Kharkov oblast and Kherson west of the Dnieper; the Russians lacked sufficient troops to hold those territories, so they withdrew to more defensible positions. Ukraine began their “counteroffensive” in 2023 with numerical superiority. It was only after that failed, miserably that suddenly they were crying about being “outnumbered”. If, with “1,000,000 men” they can’t match a Russian force of much less than that, something is seriously wrong. For your analysis to make sense, Russia would have to have some 1-2 million men just over the border in Russia supporting the force in Ukraine, which they absolutely do NOT have. So either Russia is doing much more with less, OR Ukraine’s losses have been SO great that the equation has changed since June of last year. I suspect Ukraine’s losses are much higher than the Western media will admit. Which brings us full circle to my original point; it is refreshing to see a journalist admit, reluctantly, that just maybe the casualty exchange has been favoring Russia.
Are you proposing that no military staff are used for logistics and none are rotated or trained?
I'm not in a position to tell you about the troop levels on each side of any of the fronts, but proposing that the Ukrainians alone in the world have managed to break the rule that it takes about two people in the military 'supply' chain to sustain one person at the front is a remarkable proposition.
Food has to be procured weapons and ammunition transported, materiel worn or broken transported away from the front for repair. So the idea that the Ukrainians have 1 million (or even half a million) men at the front just is not how any military ever before have been able to manage a total force of 1 million men.
No but in the supply chain from the training centers and procurement centers all the way to the border.
More accurately the Russians too are likely to employ at least one person in the military not at the front line for each front line soldier (more likely more than one).
The US has 3 to one but then they do go heavy on logistics still very doubtful that the Russians (even less likely the Ukrainians) have been able to get below two in non frontline roles for each person at the front line.
So by your math, at “2 to 1”, the Ukrainians, at “1.000,000 men” should have half a million on the front line, especially since NATO is doing the weapons manufacturing, shipping, and delivery, and much of the training, as well as much of the staff planning.. But they Don’t. So where are the rest? Either dead, or they never existed. Or hiding. Your pick.
Two to one is 2 soldiers in support to every one at the frontline so that would be 333,333 at the frontline to 666.667 in support from one million in total.
And no I do not think the Ukrainians are capable of pulling off an only 2 to one that would imply that they were much, much better at logistics, repair, training and procurement than any nation I know about.
They do have can to rely upon some assistance from the west on repair and to some extend training, and they have been rotating less than most western nations, but the penalty is much longer supply chains (worn down or damaged material has to be transported much further).
The manufacturing, does not count the people in production are not part of the military when we do these calculations, but shipping, and deliver which I group together does – only western sources delivers the stuff not at the front so that only corresponds to a partial relief in the sense that the recruitment potential goes up but for our calculations that does not matter we are still at what does a 1 million man military allow us at the frontline.
The huge array of different western weapons delivered means that the Ukrainians have a maintenance nightmare i.e. far more military men have to be trained on the individual systems so the maintenance staff likely is much larger or much more material has to travel much further for even routine maintenance – there is no free lunch.
Finally the western forces can only assist with staff planning as the Ukrainians are still far form a NATO army – in other words western ‘orders/recommendations’ would not be understood as intended – indeed the Ukrainians did not follow the western recommendations for their attempt at the 2023 offensive – but then these were many now say not sound recommendations.
Even inside NATO we have not been able to get rid of the staff in each nation – just about everything still has to be ‘translated’ – military matters is like any public administration amazingly inefficient – what you are proposing is that the Ukrainians (known for being inefficient and corrupt) have somehow managed this better than all others.
So your one million men more likely are at most 300 thousands at the front line at best – and remember that this includes reserves i.e. forces not actively fighting right now but stand by not far from the front section they are allocated to – prepared to respond to any sudden break through attempt from the enemy.
Now that does not by my logic imply anything about losses – to get to those we would have to know more about how many are recruited each months and how many are ‘lost’ to retirement (old age). So that we have only about 300 thousands at the frontline from a million men military does in my view not allow you to say anything about losses.
Nor does it allow you to say anything about being outnumbered – as that is a local thing – the Ukrainians or the Russians can be outnumbered in any frontline are if they are not able to detect a build up of forces on the other side in time – here the Ukrainians have an advantage as their internal transportation lines are shorter than the Russians who have to move on the outside of what is now a half moon shaped or U shaped front.
Oh please. Then how did they have numerical superiority in fall of 2022? A;; those same limitations held. Bottom line; the Ukrainians have been lying, about everything, since day 1; and the shills in western media have repeated their lies, ad nauseum, for years. It’s disgusting.
All regimes lie about everything all the time.
Yes the limitations held – how or indeed if they achieved numerical superiority is not a thing I could answer from the lack of information available.
They do – any army can only fight a very short time without support troops and a well developed maintenance staff too.
You could eliminate the medics, but no one have done that since the Japanese tried in in WWII – it is not a sustainable strategy.
As for the lying I agree with Thomas, but would want to add that in military affairs it is excusable as the enemy otherwise can exploit the information so I do not complain that the Russians lie too.
Unless the “lying” is an excuse for deep, pervasive corruption, which I believe Ukraine is doing. They heavily inflated the number of soldiers reported on their books, because those inflated salaries could be used to justify US and EU financial aid; they (high level commanders) pocketed the money for the nonexistent soldiers, and now, when they are needed, are wringing their hands claiming they are “outnumbered”. But they won’t admit to casualties, because that makes them look bad; they won’t admit to corruption, because that might stop the money spigot; so they just ignore the question and keep crying.
Note this is a practice pervasive to third world corrupt banana republics relying on US aid; practiced as an art form by the ARVN, by the KMT in China, and by the ROK army during the Korean War. And the US, as the credulous imbeciles we are, fall for it all the time. Again, there are only three reasons for the Ukrainian shortfall in men; 1, the have lost many, many more than they admit, 2, they never had those men to begin with, or 3, too many, Far Too Many, are hiding, playing “border guard”, and pretending to have “internal security” roles.
Here’s a sample to compare the joke that Ukraine is to: in the Winter War, Finland, with a population of 4 million, fielded a 400,000 man army, PLUS 100,000 in the Civic Guard (for paramilitary/internal security duties), and 100,000 women in the “Lotta Svard” a female auxiliary that did nursing, driving, signals, and other non combat roles. Near 15% of the population mobilized, within months of the Soviet attack. Now here’s Ukraine, which even with depopulation, should have 25 million plus in the area Zelensky controls, and they can’t mobilize 2 million (8% of their population) men and women?
You propose that the Ukrainians alone among the nations of the world have managed to field more frontline soldiers compared to soldiers in supply, support, maintenance and medical care – that is implying that they were much more efficient and by implication less corrupt than any other nation – I suggest this is not the case.
You do this as far as I can judge to arrive at the conclusion that there are more losses than some level – this is just plain absurd – all parties are lying. I do not think it is worth my while to try to elucidate this subject further – you seem to wish to arrive at a conclusion and be willing to accept that the Ukrainians must be very efficient (to field more front line troops from a given military size) and are more corrupt than most.
There is absolutely no reason to get to any of these positions to have the Ukrainians (or the Russians) to be right about being outnumbered at any particular frontline section – nor does any of this necessarily imply anything about loss figures. It is really as simple as that soldiers can be at a wrong location at the wrong time – unable to easily disengage and be transported hundreds of miles to where the under manned section is.
Just one recent example – Ukraine was outnumbered in Kharkiv on 10. May 2024 – but by early June it was the Russians who were outnumbered – that does not mean that the Russians were taking x number of casualties – it simply does noy follow – it could but it does not have to.
The Ukrainians have not mobilized to anything like the Finish levels – which is indicative of their inefficiency and their problems arming/training new recruits – this was evident from early in 2022 – but note that few nations maintains anything like the total mobilization levels of WWII – indicative of the increased number of people it takes to field and support increasingly advanced equipment at the front (also likely a choice because of the lower levels of new recruits available from smaller new generations).
So yes the Ukrainians are either too inefficient or too politically unwilling to mobilize the numbers they ought to do – western military experts have complained about this – for a while they had the excuse that there were not the equipment or the trainers to educate the new recruits but now there is.
Was Ukraine “outnumbered in Kharkiv in May? I don’t think so; I think they were holding the border with inexperienced units that simply ran away when the Russians came. By every report, Russia used VERY small forces in making their two gains.
Re Ukrainian losses; excess losses is one of several explanations. I said that IF the Ukrainians were “outnumbered”, after we know they had a numerical superiority in late 2022, then there can only be three explanations; 1. they lied about their 2022 strength (not just for “security” concerns; they lied to their financial backers, because NATO NEVER would have endorsed the 2023 offensive if they knew how weak the Ukrainians actually were – and there is some evidence of that), 2. they lost far more men than the west acknowledges, enough to tip the balance in Russia’s favor, or 3. They have the manpower, but the men (in paramilitary units, border guard, and internal security units) won’t fight or go to the front – and there is some evidence of that, in both the paramilitary 3rd Azov Brigade abruptly leaving Avdiivka, without orders, and then refusing deployment to Chasiv Yar, as did various Right Sector units. Another tidbit; last year, every Oblast was ordered to form a “brigade” (probably just a battalion) out of Police Officers for frontline duty. Yet, I watch Military Summary pretty regularly; I’ve yet to see ANY of those Police units on the front; it’s always the same tired Brigade formations (42mech, 47mech, 79 AA, 82 AA, 100th mech, etc). Where the hell are all those guys?
I’m not saying that they were outnumbered, only that it was/is entirely possible that they were – moving about large number of troops is a thing which is difficult – Russia has the larger recruitment and recruitment potential even at the worst loss estimates they are recruiting 10 thousand more troops per month than they are losing.
Thus they had the ability to build up large forces on the north side of the until may quiet north front. You now say that we know the Ukrainians had the Russians outnumbered in late 2022 – that is possible but not a certainty again you are confusing total military figures with frontline soldiers – the Russian number for total military forces late 2022 were higher than the Ukrainian – and we just do not have the actual numbers for any one place on the frontline confirmed by independent parties – so the rest is just speculation.
As stated earlier there are any number of explanations other than the very limited set you give for why the Ukrainians could find themselves first outnumbering the Russians in Kharkiv only then to be out numbered a little later on.
Your explanations are just 3 out of at least a dozen reasons such things could happen and have happened in other wars.
I am not the only one asking these questions, or coming to these conclusions. WillieOAM, a channel on youtube run by an ex-Australian military member, who spent much of 2022 in Ukraine on humanitarian missions, and now does daily battlefield analysis, is seeing this much the same way. Yesterday, in fact, he had a post very relevant to this discussion. He tries to be impartial, but his inclination is pro-Ukrainian, although NOT pro Zelensky.
When Biden was a Senator, he supported Israel's invasion of Lebanon and authorized Bush's wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. As Obama's VP, he authorized the war in Libya to stop a genocide that was not even occurring and continued Bush's wars and started one in Syria.
Now, he is the president and authorized the proxy war in Ukraine and genocide in Gaza.
He would be outraged if someone said it is good US and Israeli troops died for the unprovoked wars they caused.
Before the November 2020 election, hardly any media made it known that politician Joe Biden had been a life long warmonger. All attention was about Donald Trump and his flaws.
Did he poop in his pants, that is the question.
So the US and NATO are the only countries allowed to run their military right up to a sovereign nations border with impunity.
Not every country believes this illogical move. In fact, a promise was made by America to Russia that if unification of Germany was allowed then NATO would not advance "1 inch" past Germany toward Russia.
Russia forward deployed nuclear submarines, missile cruisers and strategic bombers in Cuba close to the US homeland.
In addition, the US, France, and Germany have approved Ukrainian strikes into Russia with weapons supplied by those countries. In response Russia will supply weapons to any groups in the world fighting the US.
It looks like Joey Biden just put more of our American troops in harms way. Worse yet Joey Biden has put all America citizens in harms way as now every major American city is targeted!
With the exception of the Houthis in Yemen, I cannot see any nation wanting to start a war with the west, could you indicate which nations it is that you see escalating this?
What a disgusting DIShonrable thing to do to all those russians who died fighting for their FREEDOM
He's totally incoherent wherever and whenever he is.
Great News: https://www.msn.com/en-us/n… I love it! Keep it up! F*ck Kimmel for having her on!