Rossticus said:

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

Teslag said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Agreed. A lot of the pro Russian posters here always casually hand wave away the pure hatred many Ukrainians have for Russians. **** like that isn't forgotten.

---

How many of them live in Donbas or Crimea?

---

If this war were only about Donbas and Crimea it would have been over in 2022.

---

Many people have suggested that Putin would have gladly taken those territories and stopped. But Blinken et al had 2 more years of grift planned and weren't ready to stop.

---

Russia constitutionally annexed 4 whole oblasts and tried to take out the government in Kyiv in the early months of the war. Their actions at the jump indicate that weren't content with a sliver of east Ukraine and had far broader goals.

---

Yes, its pretty clear that "that time has passed" moment had been reached with Putin. Earlier it might have been worked out, or if Trump had taken office in 2021 the hold-off from invasion would have continued.

But is it really in question the opening looked like going for removing the government or forcing its collapse?

Silent For Too Long said:

---

**** posting aside, do you honestly not understand why Trump is willing to engage with dictators the way he does? Mister think rationally? Do you really think he just worships dictators? Really? Is that really what you think?

---

It's already established why he treats dictators the way he does. If you compliment trump, he'll be your lap dog. He's a low IQ individual who's easily manipulated by simple flattery. Putin is getting the POTUS to spout actual Russian propaganda.

titan said:

---

Rossticus said:

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

Teslag said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Agreed. A lot of the pro Russian posters here always casually hand wave away the pure hatred many Ukrainians have for Russians. **** like that isn't forgotten.

---

How many of them live in Donbas or Crimea?

---

If this war were only about Donbas and Crimea it would have been over in 2022.

---

Many people have suggested that Putin would have gladly taken those territories and stopped. But Blinken et al had 2 more years of grift planned and weren't ready to stop.

---

Russia constitutionally annexed 4 whole oblasts and tried to take out the government in Kyiv in the early months of the war. Their actions at the jump indicate that weren't content with a sliver of east Ukraine and had far broader goals.

---

Yes, its pretty clear that "that time has passed" moment had been reached with Putin. Earlier it might have been worked out, or if Trump had taken office in 2021 the hold-off from invasion would have continued.

But is it really in question the opening looked like going for removing the government or forcing its collapse?

---

Why? What do you think Putin's reasoning would have been to hold-off the invasion?

aTmAg said:

---

titan said:

---

Teslag said:

---

rgag12 said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Agreed. A lot of the pro Russian posters here always casually hand wave away the pure hatred many Ukrainians have for Russians. **** like that isn't forgotten.

---

There are zero pro Russian posters on this board.

Stop with this silly strawman and false dichotomy homie. You are better then that.

---

There are quite a few pro Russian posters on this site.

---

Not pro-Ukrainian does not equal pro-Russian.
The number of pro-Russian posters is very small. The number of not pro-Ukrainian posters and Americans in general grows everyday.

---

If someone only blames one side while completely excusing the other they are most definitely pro one side.

---

Frankly, that's a fair judgement. If you entirely excuse one side and go against the other -- like our MSM does against Russia -- that's a pro -stance. Those that blame Zelensky as just profit driven --that is also a pro stance.

The argument it is TWO corrupt countries fighting an installment of a conflict that like some Mideast ones is centuries old, that is not `pro' one or the other.

---

Just because Ukraine was corrupt does not mean that they are in any way blameworthy for being invaded. The US has proven to be corrupt as hell too, and if Mexico invaded us, then they too would be in the wrong. Even if Russian was as virtuous and clean as the wind driven snow, they would be 100% in the wrong for invading Ukraine.

This war is 100% on Russia.

---

You are giving a pass to our interference. Just because we don't like how someone chose to solve a problem doesn't mean it was 100% their doing. We are increasingly considering overt action in Mexico -- because we are trying to solve a problem created by more than one entity, one of them overseas.

You can't be the moderator of negotiations if you take the stance the blame is 100% on one side when it is not. If you do that, you need to have another nation take over the negotiations.

Sid Farkas said:

---

I've never seen Trump dance to someone else's tune like this. Somehow, some way, Putin has him by the balls...

How? I do not know.

---

You would also be a terrible negotiator.

You have to give Putin a win in public, and then kick him in the balls under the table the best way possible without making him get up and walk out.

Trump's agenda is to get us out of this war. It is an American Frist agenda.

Getting Russia to leave Donbas and Crimea without resorting to US ground troops or thermo-nuclear war is not going to happen. So your best alternative for a negotiated position is either Ukraine invaded by Russia, or US military deaths. I like a negotiated position better, because it is better for the US taxpayer. The problem is, that it is not very good for the people in DC. I don't really care. FDC

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

Stop getting your news from twitter.

---

No.

Anonymous Source said:

---

Sid Farkas said:

---

I've never seen Trump dance to someone else's tune like this. Somehow, some way, Putin has him by the balls...

How? I do not know.

---

Well, we know that at least some of it is financial. Eric Trump's dumb ass said so in 2014.

---

User name checks out.

Please tell us what you're trusted, go-to new source is.

rgvag11 said:

---

titan said:

---

Rossticus said:

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

Teslag said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Agreed. A lot of the pro Russian posters here always casually hand wave away the pure hatred many Ukrainians have for Russians. **** like that isn't forgotten.

---

How many of them live in Donbas or Crimea?

---

If this war were only about Donbas and Crimea it would have been over in 2022.

---

Many people have suggested that Putin would have gladly taken those territories and stopped. But Blinken et al had 2 more years of grift planned and weren't ready to stop.

---

Russia constitutionally annexed 4 whole oblasts and tried to take out the government in Kyiv in the early months of the war. Their actions at the jump indicate that weren't content with a sliver of east Ukraine and had far broader goals.

---

Yes, its pretty clear that "that time has passed" moment had been reached with Putin. Earlier it might have been worked out, or if Trump had taken office in 2021 the hold-off from invasion would have continued.

But is it really in question the opening looked like going for removing the government or forcing its collapse?

---

Why? What do you think Putin's reasoning would have been to hold-off the invasion?

---

Same reason didn't 2016-2020. Trump's reaction is unpredictable and unlikely to be mild. Also, Trump may well have done what the mobilization required -- a flat unambiguous declaration that a "Saddam 1990" act won't be put up with. He certainly would not have implied invading could be okay in certain circumstances as was done, or just kind of draw them offside by talking weasel-words.

If you're trying to truly be an impartial mediator, however, you should keep your trap shut and appear impartial as opposed to dogging on one side and publicly ceding demands right off the bat. Being a neutral third party isn't what we're attempting at the moment, and if it is then we're doing it poorly.

Because they fought back and didn't just lay down and let Putin take what he wanted?

rgag12 said:

---

Not pro-Ukrainian does not equal pro-Russian.
The number of pro-Russian posters is very small. The number of not pro-Ukrainian posters and Americans in general grows everyday.

---

I am very much pro Ukrainian people, especially those that are not fighting with or for Russia.

I think Z is a tick.

I think Putin is evil, and stole some land from Ukraine.

I think we need to exit this conflict as quickly as possible, hopefully with a negotiated peace deal.

These can all be true at the same time.

titan said:

---

rgvag11 said:

---

titan said:

---

Rossticus said:

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

Teslag said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Agreed. A lot of the pro Russian posters here always casually hand wave away the pure hatred many Ukrainians have for Russians. **** like that isn't forgotten.

---

How many of them live in Donbas or Crimea?

---

If this war were only about Donbas and Crimea it would have been over in 2022.

---

Many people have suggested that Putin would have gladly taken those territories and stopped. But Blinken et al had 2 more years of grift planned and weren't ready to stop.

---

Russia constitutionally annexed 4 whole oblasts and tried to take out the government in Kyiv in the early months of the war. Their actions at the jump indicate that weren't content with a sliver of east Ukraine and had far broader goals.

---

Yes, its pretty clear that "that time has passed" moment had been reached with Putin. Earlier it might have been worked out, or if Trump had taken office in 2021 the hold-off from invasion would have continued.

But is it really in question the opening looked like going for removing the government or forcing its collapse?

---

Why? What do you think Putin's reasoning would have been to hold-off the invasion?

---

Same reason didn't 2016-2020. Trump's reaction is unpredictable and unlikely to be mild. Also, Trump may well have done what the mobilization required -- a flat unambiguous declaration that a "Saddam 1990" act won't be put up with. He certainly would not have implied invading could be okay in certain circumstances as was done, or just kind of draw them offside by talking weasel-words.

---

100%

Teslag said:

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Agreed. A lot of the pro Russian posters here always casually hand wave away the pure hatred many Ukrainians have for Russians. **** like that isn't forgotten.

---

There are zero pro Russian posters on this board.

Stop with this silly strawman and false dichotomy homie. You are better then that.

---

There's literally posters here that have said they hope to see Russia win.

There's also this thread literally titled "I'm pulling for Russia" with 118 blue stars

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3375863

You also don't get to call us names (pro war, fanbois, war cheerleaders, etc) and then demand we refrain.

---

I'm shocked at the russophilia on this board.


I'm not shocked about the denialism of its existence.

Teslag said:

---

If someone only blames one side while completely excusing the other they are most definitely pro one side.

---

Or weaking the negotiating position of that side.

He is not pro Russia. He is pro peace, which is pro American tax payer.

I don't want any more of my tax dollars to go towards this war.

Rossticus said:

---

If you're trying to truly be an impartial mediator, however, you should keep your trap shut and appear impartial as opposed to dogging on one side and publicly ceding demands right off the bat. Being a neutral third party isn't what we're attempting at the moment, and if it is then we're doing it poorly.

---

No argument there. Unfortunately there is a big divide with China right now or could have possibly asked their assistance in brokering something. Like US and Russia did the Suez Crisis. (But notice the participants didn't like the resolution)

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

**** posting aside, do you honestly not understand why Trump is willing to engage with dictators the way he does? Mister think rationally? Do you really think he just worships dictators? Really? Is that really what you think?

---

It's already established why he treats dictators the way he does. If you compliment trump, he'll be your lap dog. He's a low IQ individual who's easily manipulated by simple flattery. Putin is getting the POTUS to spout actual Russian propaganda.

---

I'm willing to bet money Trump has a higher IQ then you do. The simple fact that you completely can't comprehend what he's actually doing is proof positive.

It's a negotiation tactic mensa. Stop and think for yourself mister rational thinker.

Teslag said:

---

There was no scheduled election by the constitution of Ukraine.

---

Are you saying that Z followed all of the laws related to when elections were supposed to be held so far?

Or is this one of those "it depends on what your definition of is, is" type of lies.

Educate me if you want. But, my understanding, based on everything I have read, is that there were supposed to be elections in 2024, and Ukraine canceled them.

Where I am incorrect?

Teslag said:

---

The issue is that you only demand Ukraine stop. You never say Russia should stop. Many posters even bend over backwards to justify why Russia should keep going

---

Putin is an evil man and I hope he dies a terrible death.

Both should stop. Now.

The US should also stop. Now.

And then we should retrench, and make it clear that war sucks.

That is what is best for the American tax payer.

rgvag11 said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Agreed. A lot of the pro Russian posters here always casually hand wave away the pure hatred many Ukrainians have for Russians. **** like that isn't forgotten.

---

There are zero pro Russian posters on this board.

Stop with this silly strawman and false dichotomy homie. You are better then that.

---

There's literally posters here that have said they hope to see Russia win.

There's also this thread literally titled "I'm pulling for Russia" with 118 blue stars

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3375863

You also don't get to call us names (pro war, fanbois, war cheerleaders, etc) and then demand we refrain.

---

I'm shocked at the russophilia on this board.


I'm not shocked about the denialism of its existence.

---

Pro-russia? that as a red white and blue blooded american is wild for me to understand. We all need to rewatch rocky 4 and breath in that fresh capitalism.

trolling aside, Do i want my tax dollars going to ukraine? no, do I hate russia more? yes. Ukraine has the right to join NATO and ol Pootin is going to have to accept that, this war is egg on his face, just like the afghan war.

BusterAg said:

---

Teslag said:

---

If someone only blames one side while completely excusing the other they are most definitely pro one side.

---

Or weaking the negotiating position of that side.

He is not pro Russia. He is pro peace, which is pro American tax payer.

I don't want any more of my tax dollars to go towards this war.

---

The mental gymnastics involved in this position is amazing.

So to answer the OPs question, Zelensky did one thing which could be viewed as provocation for the invasion. When Russia took Crimea Zelensky did something that could be viewed as cruel and something Putin pledged to fix.

Crimea has no water supply at all. There is no river feeding the area, no reservoir, no significant rainfall. Water WAS supplied to Crimea through a concrete canal coming from Ukraine. When Russia took Crimea, Zelensky filled this canal with concrete and shut it off. He gave a big finger to the mostly innocent residents of Crimea.

Afterwards, Putin was trucking in water for the residents and blamed Zelensky for the deaths and suffering the Crimeans endured.

A lot of this falls on Obama for failing to respond to the Crimean invasion. Russia took Crimea for the oil and nothing more and Obama should have stopped them, but he ignored it. Since Zelensky couldn't do anything to stop Russia back then (this was pre-drone) he did a kinda cruel thing to the Crimean population. Putin of course blames Zelensky for responding to his oil grab.


The NATO thing is a news blurb that wouldn't have ever happened. This was discussed many times within the COG and with Obama, Trump1, and Biden. All agreed that NATO was not accepting Ukraine because NATO has the defense pact and they were all worried it would start WWIII as everyone knew Putin was coming after Donbras and the new Ukrainian oil fields. You see... Ukraine has enough oil to start a new oil nation state. They have Iran, Iraq, Kuwait levels of reserves. Putin owns Russia's oil and he doesn't want new competition, he wants it for himself.


Putin wants a few other things out of Ukraine. He wants control of the german pipeline. He wants to have his defensive border with Poland moved to the space between the mountains near Lviv. Tanks cannot cross the mountains north of there or south of there so his border with the NATO countries will shrink by 1500 miles and be WAY more defensible. Ukraine is hard to defend, the Poland gap is not. Putin wants ALL of Ukraine and he will eventually get it if we pull out or "broker" a deal.

When it all started pretty much everyone knew the eventual solution would be that Donbras and the Russian sympathizers would be switching to Russia and Ukraine would keep the rest of their country. Now it looks like Trump is making a trade of more of Ukraine in exchange for Putin ignoring our grab at Greenland and the Canal.


This stuff is ALWAYS about the cash. Putin wants the oil cash for himself. Trump doesn't care about Ukraine in any way shape or form, he wants the Greenland resources. Biden wanted to partner with Zelensky and have American oil companies do the work on the Ukrainian fields. Obama didn't realize how much oil we are talking about here and ignored it. Cash, Cash, Cash.


The stick in the spokes in all of these money grabs came from Zelensky's rapid drone development. He wasn't supposed to stop the Russians but he almost overnight rendered their military superiority obsolete with drone attacks. When all is said and done, no matter who eventually gets the cash, the big lesson from all of this is that Zelensky made every other weapon except nukes obsolete overnight. Planes, armies, navies, tanks, everything is worthless now because he used drones so well. 100 years from now the Ukrainian invasion will be looked at as the day the world changed. There are no more strong military nations as a single terror group with mid level AI and 1000 drones can take out any billion dollar aircraft carrier they want. A tank battalion cannot stand against 1000 drones anymore. This invasion changed it all.

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

Yes, it all works out splendidly just like that in pattern and practice, as Mr. Stewart so eloquently laid out.

I can’t believe this is real

Millions of US Taxpayer dollars are being sent by USAID to a British Politician turned Yale Professors wife’s NGO called ‘Turquoise Mountain Foundation’

“The Turquoise Mountain Foundation exists to teach Afghani peasants about degenerate modern art” pic.twitter.com/0jG2WCH9va

— Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) February 18, 2025

---

You're going to make me do your homework for you? Pro tip: if your news source is twitter, you're being deliberately misinformed.

This whole thing is a soup of non sense, so i'll try to untangle the brain worm that twitter dropped in your mind.

Quote:

---

"The Turqoise Mountain Foundation exists to teach Afghani peasants about degenerate modern art"

---

A 10 second google search can take you to the original USAID Fact Sheet for the Turquoise Mountain Foundation (here). The contract, which was granted well before Rory Stewart even met Shoshana Stewart (she was married to someone else), in 2008. She has been the CEO of the charity organization for almost 20 years and the objectives of the project was to provide education and training, economic opportunities, and livelihoods for Afghans. Specifically, 1) build economic and trade opportunities for Afghans through the economic, social and cultural regeneration of Murad Khane, a traditional commercial and craft neighborhood in the center of Kabul's Old City; 2) provide traditional craft education through the Turquoise Mountain Institute for Afghan Arts and Architecture; 3) develop a market for Afghan crafts domestically and internationally through business mentoring, marketing and sales support. The list of accomplishments:

• Established an internationally recognized brand, profiled in over 100 international publications, that sold almost $3 million worth of Afghan crafts to markets in Asia, Europe, North America and the Middle East
• Enhanced Afghanistan's reputation as a source of high-quality products
• Provided direct education, employment and healthcare services to 64,246 Afghans, and indirectly reached approximately over 300,000 beneficiaries
• Provided supplementary educationincluding art and language classes to a total of 122 children (68 boys and 54 girls) between the ages of five and 14
• Graduated 144 students (107 male and 37 female) from the Turquoise Mountain Institute over four years, of whom 24 percent owned their own craft businesses, 52 percent worked in craft-related employment, 13 percent were pursuing further studies, and 11 percent were not in formal employment

Just read the list of accomplishments and tell me why none of these were mentioned? Perhaps it doesn't fit the narrative?

This also had the intended objective of westernizing Afghani citizens (a worthwhile objective, no?). That 30 second clip regarding the 'toilet art' was snipped from a 2015 documentary "Bitter Lake." While absurd on its face, you can google Marcel Duchamp and see the intended purpose of the exhibit (which was in the early 1900s) was intended to be farcical. Out of context, it simply looks bizarre, but when teaching history of western art, the "Fountain" is historically relevant because of the explicit absurdity. It's just a single touchstone however. That twitter clip, implying the entire purpose of the project is to teach 'toilet art' to Afghani peasants (a crude pejorative meant to 'other' these people) is simply a lie.

Stop getting your news from twitter. Possess just the slightest amount of skepticism and do even a miniscule amount of fact checking before sharing stuff like this. Musk and Trump are firing off lie after lie after lie and you can't simply accept them at face value.

---

I don't give a crap what they are working on or what BS accomplishments they fabricate. The fact is our country is bankrupt and shouldn't be spending a dime on waste like this. If you want to send your own money to this fine. However, I and many other are stick and tired of paying for your stupid *****

Buster is 100% correct. Your inability to comprehend it has no impact on reality.

Teslag said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Agreed. A lot of the pro Russian posters here always casually hand wave away the pure hatred many Ukrainians have for Russians. **** like that isn't forgotten.

---

How many of them live in Donbas or Crimea?

---

If this war were only about Donbas and Crimea it would have been over in 2022.

---

I think Putin is an evil man, and I hope he dies a terrible death.

But, this conflict wasn't just about Donbas and Crimea. It was about a country entering into a strategic alliance with NATO that would give NATO the obligation to defend a country that borders Russia.

Calling Donbas and Crimea a DMZ and telling everyone to stop, right now, is the best thing for the American tax payer. It is what we should do.

Sucks for Ukraine. But not our problem.

Supporting Russia would be assassinating Z and helping them take over the rest of Ukraine. That would be evil. We should not do that. But, we should get the hell out of this war.

titan said:

---

rgvag11 said:

---

titan said:

---

Rossticus said:

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

Teslag said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Agreed. A lot of the pro Russian posters here always casually hand wave away the pure hatred many Ukrainians have for Russians. **** like that isn't forgotten.

---

How many of them live in Donbas or Crimea?

---

If this war were only about Donbas and Crimea it would have been over in 2022.

---

Many people have suggested that Putin would have gladly taken those territories and stopped. But Blinken et al had 2 more years of grift planned and weren't ready to stop.

---

Russia constitutionally annexed 4 whole oblasts and tried to take out the government in Kyiv in the early months of the war. Their actions at the jump indicate that weren't content with a sliver of east Ukraine and had far broader goals.

---

Yes, its pretty clear that "that time has passed" moment had been reached with Putin. Earlier it might have been worked out, or if Trump had taken office in 2021 the hold-off from invasion would have continued.

But is it really in question the opening looked like going for removing the government or forcing its collapse?

---

Why? What do you think Putin's reasoning would have been to hold-off the invasion?

---

Same reason didn't 2016-2020. Trump's reaction is unpredictable and unlikely to be mild. Also, Trump may well have done what the mobilization required -- a flat unambiguous declaration that a "Saddam 1990" act won't be put up with. He certainly would not have implied invading could be okay in certain circumstances as was done, or just kind of draw them offside by talking weasel-words.

---

This is a very silly position. Putin is not intimidated by Trump. The recent events make that clear to anyone paying attention.

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

A dictator elected with 74% of the vote? In an actual fair election unlike Russia? Interesting definition of dictator.

---

What about the last schedule election in Ukraine in 2024? How did Z fair in that one?

---

Russia invaded and required them to go under martial law, in which they are not permitted to hold elections. Once Russia stops their unprovoked invasion, Ukraine will hold another election and your question will be answered if he decides to run again.

---

Putin is an evil man and I hope he dies a terrible death.

Thanks for this.

Can you cite to some authority about Ukraine not being permitted to hold elections in 2024?

Quote:

---

Calling Donbas and Crimea a DMZ and telling everyone to stop, right now, is the best thing for the American tax payer. It is what we should do.

---

And if this isn't acceptable to Russia? (Because just this won't be)

rgvag11 said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

Teslag said:

---

If someone only blames one side while completely excusing the other they are most definitely pro one side.

---

Or weaking the negotiating position of that side.

He is not pro Russia. He is pro peace, which is pro American tax payer.

I don't want any more of my tax dollars to go towards this war.

---

The mental gymnastics involved in this position is amazing.

---

Pointing out a false dichotomy is mental gymnastics?

Lol.

rgvag11 said:

---

titan said:

---

rgvag11 said:

---

titan said:

---

Rossticus said:

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

Teslag said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Agreed. A lot of the pro Russian posters here always casually hand wave away the pure hatred many Ukrainians have for Russians. **** like that isn't forgotten.

---

How many of them live in Donbas or Crimea?

---

If this war were only about Donbas and Crimea it would have been over in 2022.

---

Many people have suggested that Putin would have gladly taken those territories and stopped. But Blinken et al had 2 more years of grift planned and weren't ready to stop.

---

Russia constitutionally annexed 4 whole oblasts and tried to take out the government in Kyiv in the early months of the war. Their actions at the jump indicate that weren't content with a sliver of east Ukraine and had far broader goals.

---

Yes, its pretty clear that "that time has passed" moment had been reached with Putin. Earlier it might have been worked out, or if Trump had taken office in 2021 the hold-off from invasion would have continued.

But is it really in question the opening looked like going for removing the government or forcing its collapse?

---

Why? What do you think Putin's reasoning would have been to hold-off the invasion?

---

Same reason didn't 2016-2020. Trump's reaction is unpredictable and unlikely to be mild. Also, Trump may well have done what the mobilization required -- a flat unambiguous declaration that a "Saddam 1990" act won't be put up with. He certainly would not have implied invading could be okay in certain circumstances as was done, or just kind of draw them offside by talking weasel-words.

---

This is a very silly position. Putin is not intimidated by Trump. The recent events make that clear to anyone paying attention.

---

Riiiiiiiight. That's why he has started a war under every US President EXCEPT Trump.

Great take. You clearly understand what's going on.

What does Putin think Trump will do if he doesn't play along?

HowdyTexasAggies said:

---

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

Yes, it all works out splendidly just like that in pattern and practice, as Mr. Stewart so eloquently laid out.

I can’t believe this is real

Millions of US Taxpayer dollars are being sent by USAID to a British Politician turned Yale Professors wife’s NGO called ‘Turquoise Mountain Foundation’

“The Turquoise Mountain Foundation exists to teach Afghani peasants about degenerate modern art” pic.twitter.com/0jG2WCH9va

— Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) February 18, 2025

---

You're going to make me do your homework for you? Pro tip: if your news source is twitter, you're being deliberately misinformed.

This whole thing is a soup of non sense, so i'll try to untangle the brain worm that twitter dropped in your mind.

Quote:

---

"The Turqoise Mountain Foundation exists to teach Afghani peasants about degenerate modern art"

---

A 10 second google search can take you to the original USAID Fact Sheet for the Turquoise Mountain Foundation (here). The contract, which was granted well before Rory Stewart even met Shoshana Stewart (she was married to someone else), in 2008. She has been the CEO of the charity organization for almost 20 years and the objectives of the project was to provide education and training, economic opportunities, and livelihoods for Afghans. Specifically, 1) build economic and trade opportunities for Afghans through the economic, social and cultural regeneration of Murad Khane, a traditional commercial and craft neighborhood in the center of Kabul's Old City; 2) provide traditional craft education through the Turquoise Mountain Institute for Afghan Arts and Architecture; 3) develop a market for Afghan crafts domestically and internationally through business mentoring, marketing and sales support. The list of accomplishments:

• Established an internationally recognized brand, profiled in over 100 international publications, that sold almost $3 million worth of Afghan crafts to markets in Asia, Europe, North America and the Middle East
• Enhanced Afghanistan's reputation as a source of high-quality products
• Provided direct education, employment and healthcare services to 64,246 Afghans, and indirectly reached approximately over 300,000 beneficiaries
• Provided supplementary educationincluding art and language classes to a total of 122 children (68 boys and 54 girls) between the ages of five and 14
• Graduated 144 students (107 male and 37 female) from the Turquoise Mountain Institute over four years, of whom 24 percent owned their own craft businesses, 52 percent worked in craft-related employment, 13 percent were pursuing further studies, and 11 percent were not in formal employment

Just read the list of accomplishments and tell me why none of these were mentioned? Perhaps it doesn't fit the narrative?

This also had the intended objective of westernizing Afghani citizens (a worthwhile objective, no?). That 30 second clip regarding the 'toilet art' was snipped from a 2015 documentary "Bitter Lake." While absurd on its face, you can google Marcel Duchamp and see the intended purpose of the exhibit (which was in the early 1900s) was intended to be farcical. Out of context, it simply looks bizarre, but when teaching history of western art, the "Fountain" is historically relevant because of the explicit absurdity. It's just a single touchstone however. That twitter clip, implying the entire purpose of the project is to teach 'toilet art' to Afghani peasants (a crude pejorative meant to 'other' these people) is simply a lie.

Stop getting your news from twitter. Possess just the slightest amount of skepticism and do even a miniscule amount of fact checking before sharing stuff like this. Musk and Trump are firing off lie after lie after lie and you can't simply accept them at face value.

---

I don't give a crap what they are working on or what BS accomplishments they fabricate. The fact is our country is bankrupt and shouldn't be spending a dime on waste like this. If you want to send your own money to this fine. However, I and many other are stick and tired of paying for your stupid *****

---

Fabricate? These USAID projects are audited by independent PA firms on a yearly basis. And this aid was budgeted and approved by Congress. If you have an issue with the funding of any specific USAID contract, contact your representative and voice your opinion.

Excellent post. The thing to notice here most importantly is what IS the motive and what is not.

Putin's actions are rational from Russia's point of view. This is not an ideological war like with Islamists. Nor the second coming of Hitler's lebensraum. It can be prevented from escalating if you do not allow World War One like stupidity to magnify it.

Russia's motives here are nearly the same as the corrupt DC oligarchs and politicos: CASH, oil, pipes.

"Follow the pipes, follow the oil" is just as true as "follow the cash."

The way to deal with these things is to realize you have to understand that nations that are smart will try to secure their resources and any advantage. You have to both threaten and appeal to that motive. If you overdue it, war becomes the preference as the `gamble' because you have taken too much security away.

The whole point is that they aren't really. DAF grants, overhead costs, housing allowances, you name it. But you'd not know that as you haven't followed data republican or Mike Benz on x.

Teslag said:

---

What does Putin think Trump will do if he doesn't play along?

---

How would any of us know that?

What Trump has a very well established track record of is showing both a carrot and a stick.