Donald Trump is a weak beta male in comparison to Vlad "Big Bad" Putin. Agree?

Donald Trump is a weak beta male in comparison to Vlad "Big Bad" Putin. Agree?

Other urls found in this thread:

moonofalabama.org/2016/03/russia-is-weaponizing-everything.html
moonofalabama.org/2016/07/clinton-asserts-putin-influence-on-us-elections-after-taking-russian-bribes.html
youtube.com/watch?v=ecC2_gz_MoQ
youtube.com/watch?v=yDIlQ3_lsKE
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Russo-Turkish_wars
en.rocketnews24.com/2013/09/03/limb-lengthening-surgery-becoming-increasingly-popular-in-korea-despite-inherent-dangers/
nakedcapitalism.com/2016/07/michael-hudson-us-nato-border-confrontation-with-russia-risks-nuclear-war-and-loss-of-european-partners.html
youtube.com/watch?v=zk_VszbZa_s
youtube.com/watch?v=cyPsqsH8I4M
youtube.com/watch?v=uEmPaTc589M
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Yes.

Not only has Putin weaponized everything:
moonofalabama.org/2016/03/russia-is-weaponizing-everything.html

He also rules most of the world from the shadows:
moonofalabama.org/2016/07/clinton-asserts-putin-influence-on-us-elections-after-taking-russian-bribes.html

>Vlad
>Big
Bald manlet
>bad
Mostly for his own country and population
He's not that big bad as the media tries to make him, he's pretty much made out to be the devil incarnate because liberals need a boogey man and the liberal jews need to scare their goys so they do what they want

Reminder: Putin fucks sexy russian broads all day long. Trump needs to pay for them.

Reminder: Putin could definitely beat Trump's ass in a fight, or in any armed combat. Or, probably, in any chess game, or board game in general.

He is doing pretty well.

Reminder:
youtube.com/watch?v=ecC2_gz_MoQ

No...NO! Vladimir could never cuck Trump! His...his name is on the building!! Who are you to call Trump a beta????? He's the richest guy in the whole world!

hes alpha...

Tfw you'll never go hard like Vladimir Putin

youtube.com/watch?v=yDIlQ3_lsKE

>Donald Trump is a weak beta male
>Agree?

factually, it's impossible not to

Vlad = a guy with genuine confidence
Trump = a guy with a complex

Not suprised you idiot basement dwellers can't tell the difference.

1. With our gov and with current finance minister there is nothing he or someone else could do better. A price on oil is there where it should be. We had money for investments when the price was about ~$100. Nothing was done.
2. Our previous minister invested money in US bonds. Why? Because he is a graduate of US university. He was taught so.
My American comrades, we are not strong as you think.

That was objectively terrible, but I could see a whole crowd of russian kids getting pumped up to this so I can't hate on it

Economically no you are nowhere as strong, but militarily, you are second only to us.

I GO HARD LIKE VLADIMIR PUTIN

Well I mean, it's novelty rap. That's the appeal I guess. Black dudes living in Russia dropping trap beats about Putin. You just don't see it every day.

>If I fuck Putin's cock, maybe I'll get a prize

Kek... every Russian I've spoken with irl cannot stand that Manlet and they all talk about how shitty it is in Russia.

Believe me. I would love nothing more than for the US and Russia to get along. But that would require Russia to submit and quit acting like they want to rebuild the Soviet Union. Which lots of Russians don't want that. Its hard for a Russian to admit defeat but that's what must take place before we can progress as allies.

For Christ sake, we nuked Japan and now we are great allies. Putin is just butthurt because the S.U. fell.

That's actually not correct. Russia is considered strong because of their massive nuclear arsenal.

But when it comes to technology and "military strength" , believe it or not, the U.K. Is actually second.

lol he sizes up dem tittays and gives 2 thumbs up

You've never visited Russia. Have you?

YES

>technology and "military strength"
Does U.K have it's own tank or jet?

russians are pretty patriotic till theyre drunk

Russians, like most people, only tolerate criticism of their country between each other.

Two Russians can shit on their country all day, but if an outsider comes in and tries to say something bad about Russia, they'll knock his faggot ass out.

I was in Sochii for the Olympics.

Yes. It's shit.

They have better equipment and better allies than you do.

For the last time you retards, Vlad is short for Vladislav, short for Vladimir is "Vova".

>5'7
>6'2

There's a reason one is so obsessed with photo ops that show how manly they are. He has the same complex Stalin did.

Nope. We can only defend, we're outnumbered.
We lost all Russia-Turkey wars because allies in face of Britain and France helped these kebabs. NATO is much bigger enemy that we have ever faced.

>better equipment
Yeah, no. Aside from some subs and destroyers, all they have is pretty much mediocre at best.

Russia doesn't have the same emphasis on height as the West.

Russians, and slavs in general, don't really care if you're small or short if you're strong and scrappy. They're far less insecure about height as a result.

->

Honestly I never thought about someone's height until I was old enough to understand American TV shows and movies. I still don't quite understand how this simple measure can be that important to some people.

I heard the bong people got the new rooty tooty point n shooties on their warships what do them Russian allies got

>We lost all Russia-Turkey wars
wut?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Russo-Turkish_wars

Typical East slav/asian country. What did you expect?
Are going to visit Olympics in Rio too?

It doesn't matter that Russia is best at fighting wars from a defensive standpoint. There is no way that we could win a fight in Eastern Europe even with our allies there.

Trump and Putin will spit roast Merkel figuratively, if not literally.

You are completely delusional if you really believe that. I understand that you are indoctrinated to believe that US military is the only force in the world capable of projecting its power, but do not be fooled by thinking that Russian military isn't strong enough, capable enough or equipped to a point where they can't fight a offensive war on their borders. Considering the state of NATO and it's minor members who are the actual first line of defense against Russia, Russia can steamroll until it hits Berlin within a month tops.

Wherever American culture spreads, so does for some reason an influx of height insecurity.

>en.rocketnews24.com/2013/09/03/limb-lengthening-surgery-becoming-increasingly-popular-in-korea-despite-inherent-dangers/

I mean, Koreans were always short, and all of a sudden they care about being tall, to the point they're willing to torture their kids and perform dangerous treatments on them to make them an inch or two taller.

Maybe some sociologist can explain why this is so. I'm guessing its just a result of inherent vanity and extreme self-centerdness present in US media and culture. (ie: Kardashians)

Ya huh, very secure about his height.

I know he wears heels, I know Stalin did. So did Medvedev.

What makes you think so? US have military bases in every country of the alliance.

Pic unrelated?

I don't think Russia could would make it to Berlin tbqh.
They would be stopped in Poland before any further incursions were done.
The Baltics however are done for in case of war.
There is no way Russia could sustain such a wide front with the current organization, Maybe the Soviets could but i highlt doubt Russia is able to do so today.

I'm not being delusional. I was stationed in Eastern Europe not so long ago and we knew if it came down to it, we and our friends would be cannon fodder with a day or week at very best without bringing nukes to the table.

I suppose it's also an orthopedic shoes. But yeah, Medvedev and Putin are really short.

Isn't their military doctrine strictly defensive, though? Do they really have the manpower and industrial capacity to steamroll through Europe?

The US troops in the Baltics are just cannon fodder yes, The idea is that US troops are stationed there so in case of war American lives would be lost and the public would support a full blown article 5 style support to the Nato allies, Simple.

The light motorized infantry the US have stationed in the Baltics serve just that purpose.

Putin is a manlet who's barley taller than merkel

Let's stop talking about possible war.
Putin is balding.
Trump has a silky-smooth hair.
Trump > Putin
/thread

I don't get this non sense, why does it matter if we are all Russia or USA?
Without race factoring in there is only arbitrary nonsense holding these states together.

Russia have offensive capabilites aswell, But overall the Russian military is best suited for defensive operations yes.
The problem for current day Russia is the economy.
Russia would not last economically in case of war.
It is a lose-lose for them.

Although Polish military is expanding at a fast pace, it's still not strong enough to sustain a prolonged warfare with someone like Russia. The doctrine of all minor NATO members is to provide resistance until the main NATO force arrives. Poland is too close to Russia to do anything about them. They are in my opinion the only military in this part of the world that could give the Russians serious trouble, but that is far from stopping them at the borders.

Russia doesn't need to sustain a wide front. Warfare has evolved beyond that. All they need to do is capture strategic points and establish a corridor that will support the main avenue of attack.

>We lost all Russia-Turkey
Are you retarded?

They could. It obviously isn't their interest (or anyone's really) for them to do so. The NATO forces in the Baltics (where I was at) and in the rest of Eastern Europe are the biggest threat to them and they have more than enough firepower from troops to TBMs to completely saturate us. After that, if they move quick enough, the rest of Europe would fall very quickly before any real reinforcements arrive to turn the tide. Of course this is assuming that nukes somehow don't get involved.
Exactly.

It's becoming increasingly popular in India, too. I mean, if you're a 5 foot tall Indian man.. that could be the end of your blood line.
I'm a 5'7 manlet, but I have no problem with women. If I were 5 foot-4, hell, I'd get the surgery.

>NATO is much bigger enemy that we have ever faced.
nakedcapitalism.com/2016/07/michael-hudson-us-nato-border-confrontation-with-russia-risks-nuclear-war-and-loss-of-european-partners.html

Hudson here argues that democracies can not engage in large scale wars. It is too costly. Nuclear exchange is a possibility if things get out of had, though.

You are correct about Poland not being able to hold back a full scale Russian attack due to proximity yes indeed, But the thing is Germany and France are not that far away and these two countries could easily move troops to Poland before Russia reached anything west of the Vistula river.
But it all depends on how awake the politicians in these countries are and how quick they react.
If they hold back, Then i think your scenario is very very likely.
>They are in my opinion the only military in this part of the world that could give the Russians serious trouble.

Finland could do heavy damage on Russia and could easily strike strategic targets in ST Petersburg with Artillery/MLRS.
Swedens and Polands navy could also do signficiant damage on the Russian baltic fleet.

>Russia doesn't need to sustain a wide front. Warfare has evolved beyond that. All they need to do is capture strategic points and establish a corridor that will support the main avenue of attack.

Correct if it wasn't for article 5 you would be 100% correct actually.
But the thing is that it would become a two-front war with US/Canadian forces attacking Russia in the east and this alone would be too much for Russia to handle unfortunatly for them.

Every military doctrine will have a contingency plan that also involves offensive maneuvers, so does Russian. Their Western and Southern military districts have more than enough manpower for any kind of push to the west. The Southern district has around 30 brigades alone. Keep in mind that any of the advancing forces will have support elements in Russia proper and Black Sea.

youtube.com/watch?v=zk_VszbZa_s

>Finland could do heavy damage on Russia and could easily strike strategic targets

What makes you think Finland would even get involved? They are not a NATO member. Neither is Sweden which you mentioned too. As a matter of fact, Sweden is neutral by nature. There's simply no incentive for these two countries to join a conflict unless Russia attacks first, which is highly unlikely.

As for the Canadian/US attack in the east, I don't really see a strategic incentive to attack so far away from the capital. Any expeditionary force that is coming from the east has to go through a shit show of terrain before they reach any strategically important infrastructure. I'm pretty sure Russians would go for defense in depth if their eastern territory was attacked.

kek

>better equipment
Better equipment that they can't produce by them own. That doesn't work this way, you know.

Wtf i hate trump now guess i am mentally shill now

Sounds like you're eager for war, senpai. Ja caм Aлбaнaц . Дa ли мe жeлиш мpтвoг?

Not eager for war. Bole me kurac sta si i ko si desu familia.

kek I have no idea what that says. I'm just using google translate.

Our technology is fucking lit m8
Didn't we just invent the warp drive?

>What makes you think Finland would even get involved? They are not a NATO member. Neither is Sweden which you mentioned too. As a matter of fact, Sweden is neutral by nature. There's simply no incentive for these two countries to join a conflict unless Russia attacks first, which is highly unlikely.

The thing is that Finland and Sweden are not nato-members yes, But in case of a Baltic/Russian conflict we would be dragged in very quickly as we are percived as Nato-countries by Russia.
Also our countries have too tight ties with the US/Nato for it to be ignored by the Russian strategic doctrine.
>As for the Canadian/US attack in the east, I don't really see a strategic incentive to attack so far away from the capital. Any expeditionary force that is coming from the east has to go through a shit show of terrain before they reach any strategically important infrastructure. I'm pretty sure Russians would go for defense in depth if their eastern territory was attacked.

The thing about this attack is that this would create a second front that would divert troops to the east aswell, As soon as the US/Canadian forces establish a bridgehead over the Bering sea, It would be near impossible for the Russian forces to hold back the assault there.
and after some time the forces would push the eastern military district in towards Siberia.

I personally a war like this never happens, Too much good people would be killed for nothing imo.
And this goes for both sides.

Jesus story was a copy of Caeser life
Putin is a new caesar and saviour of planet.
We need new religion

2 Inches taller than the weak woman who's influence was so powerful she almost collapsed one of the largest unions in the world?

If only that power was used for good...

>MFW when iam taller than all of them

all tall guys was irrelecant in politics
manlets a top-tier

Those who are developing Russian military doctrine probably took into account the position of Finland and Sweden in case of a NATO-Russia conflict. Chances are they have a non-aggression treaty typed and ready for both of these countries that would get them out of the way in case of war.

I completely understand that an attack in the east would open up two fronts, but take a good look at the geography of eastern Russia. That place is a logistical nightmare for anyone, even the mighty US Army Logistics Corps. The terrain is fucked to a point where the only time you can actually navigate it is in the winter. Otherwise you are stuck in mud and no tracked vehicle can help you. I highly doubt Russia would pull any of its western forces to defend the east, as they can simply let those spearheading forces get bogged down in the harsh terrain while they take care of the west. I'm pretty sure US and Canadian generals would use this avenue of attack as the last resort, not only because they would have to cross a vast expanse to reach Moscow, but also because they have too many natural obstacles that guarded Russia for centuries from these exact type of attack. One of them are the Ural mountains.

>we would be dragged in very quickly as we are percived as Nato-countries by Russia.
Actually no. You might be, but that is because you are allied with the US and would supprt them.

...

nah, putin is a bald, pudgy midget who trump could use as his personal butt slut if he wanted.

0/10 retard.

Divide and conquer:the post.
Left exploits it's selfinvented narrative of "the alfa male" leader, they are trying to reduce both Trump and Putin to a baboons. Dont fall to their jewery.

Let me put it this way; if a political opponent told Putin he had small hands he wouldn't bat an eye and would move on to more important matters.

>They would be stopped in Poland before any further incursions were done.
Consider that Kaliningrad alone has enough hardware- tanks, ifvs, artys, whatnot, to match those in all of Poland's active and reserve formations and they are pretty much massed already in that tiny enclave whilst Poland's forces are diluted across the country. They'd clear out huge swathes of Poland by themselves before the rest of the Western MD comes a knockin barely 48 hours later.

kek. at this moment Drump make nothing in politic when Vladimir fuck western intererests for 3 years long.
And rebuild russia for 15 years

You are correct about the remoteness and that the infrastructure is really bad in eastern Russia.
It would indeed be much easier to attack in the west due to the majority of land between Moskva/Poland is either Grassland/forest with some swamps here and there.
But i still think that incursions in eastern Russia would not be ignored by Russian generals and this could be very dangerous for the western front as if the US/Canada used enough equipment/troops there it would simply be impossible to ignore and large portions of the Central military district that are supposed to help the Southern and Western military district in the west, Would be forced to send troops to both the west and east which could weaken it alot.

Also the US navy would have to combat the Russian pacific navy so basically there would be an eastern front regardless of strategic value due to that fact.

Russias achilles heel is the Karelian/Smolensk front.

Yes Sweden are more likely to be dragged in than Finland, Finland is not as strategically important as Swedish territory is (Gotland, Scanian coast) But i still think Finland in the eyes of the Russian strategic command is too big of a threat for it to be leaved out of a large scale war like that unfortunatly.

Finland could easily take ST Peterburg temporarely if Russia had their hands full in Poland/Baltics which could result in a massive propaganda victory for Nato/US.

I have not checked the numbers of vehicles that are stationed in Kalningrad, But Poland has enough to hold Russian troops from crossing the vistula, That iam sure they can do.
Atleast until US/German/French help arrives within the 36-72 hour timespan it would take.

And that man would soon die of radiation poisoning.

China would beat both your asses and you know it.

lol BBC niga, mi6 kill litvinenko

>t. country with permanent US military bases in it

That's true but it's worth pointing out that Russia's defense doctrine is pretty decent, even in the east. The US/Canadian forces would have a pretty big fight on their hands out there, no matter how sparse Russian troops are in that region. Russian East Military Oblast counts more than 40 brigades alone, without airforce and naval units. Also, keep in mind that Russia has immense army reserves. Every able bodied male over the age of 18 has received a one year minimum military training. What the regular army cannot handle, a huge guerrilla force will. All the military has to do is draw the enemy in deep, let them get stuck in the terrain, and have the guerrillas wear them down.

Yes it would be a hell of a fight, But these 40 Brigades would be needed in the west and the fact that they would have to remain in eastern Russia would severly weaken the western front.
>Every able bodied male over the age of 18 has received a one year minimum military training. What the regular army cannot handle, a huge guerrilla force will. All the military has to do is draw the enemy in deep, let them get stuck in the terrain, and have the guerrillas wear them down.

It's the same here in Sweden/Finland except that not every able-bodied have done service here in Sweden due to conscription being out of use since 2010.
But there is enough civilian firearms for that to be a massive problem for an invador, But then again if a country has to use its civilians as the defence then it is already lost and the civilian will act as damage control unfortunatly.

It really is interesting to think about what theoretically could happen if the things we said happend hehe.

Are you retarded? Putin was basically given Russia by having the right friends.

Trump will get the presidency only by performing the most amazing campaign the world has ever seen whilst ALL the media and probably ALL the rich is against him. Not only that you have had decades of leftist brainwashing affecting about half the population plus cuckservative brainwashing affecting I would say about 30% of the rest.

This is the most alpha thing we have seen since I have no idea when. Maybe Napolean, something like that.

>But then again if a country has to use its civilians as the defence then it is already lost and the civilian will act as damage control unfortunatly.

See, this is where you're wrong. Unlike the western militaries, Eastern European countries like Russia and Yugoslavia based their defensive doctrine purely on partisan elements that would resist the enemy. Yugoslav army was nothing more than an incubator for partisan guerrillas. I assume Soviet Army was similar. That kind of mentality stuck around even to this day. There are no civilian men in Russia. They are all soldiers in reserve, that's the whole point. This might be hard to comprehend for someone from Sweden or United States, but the idea of defense in depth has become the mainstay of most Eastern European countries after WWII.

Too bad you can't vote for Putin.
You'll have to settle for Trump.

Trump got cucked by multiple wifes
They fucking cheated on him
If he cant handle his own wives, how can he handle a country?

Nono i very well understand this, Sweden and Finland is literally exactly the same.
When my dad did his service in the 80s he were instructed that even after defeat they would still take up arms.
My friends whom have done service recently stated that the attitude is exactly that.
(Iam starting my service next year)
But the thing is that there is very little a guerrila type army can do against a much superior professional/conscripted army with air-support/Artillery support.
That is the point i were trying to get to.
On the other hand Russias conventional army is strong enough to serious damage so i don't think they will have to resort to that anyways.

You've seen what a bunch of primitives in sandal managed to do in Afghanistan and Iraq. Now imagine a larger formation of much more experienced and trained fighters with unlimited access to weapons and ammo. Americans are proud of their 'behind every blade of grass' ability to defend the country. Russia is that much worse in the sense that they would activate a 'behind every blade of grass' doctrine only it wouldn't be a bunch of civies who took a rifle class somewhere. It would be trained fighters, most of whom still have combat experience from Chechnya and Dagestan.

He's maybe a bald manlet but that's why he's a badass. Being a manlet gives you a really mean atittude towards life since you gotta be alpha or else you die alone. Manlets are natural leaders and true fuckin warriors and conquerors.

Indeed it would be a too big problem to ignore, But there would be no way they could outgun or in anyway defeat or destroy a proffesional military despite having large amounts of equipment.
It is simply not realistic to fend of a military such as the US military in that fashion without support like North Vietnam got in the 60s.

Also Afghanistan/Iraq are bad examples of this as the casualty ratio is almost laughable.
More than 1 million iraqis died, With less than 15k American dead.

The US primary aim would be to remove the leadership in Russia and exchange it with someone else.
And when that would be done the US would gradually pull out of Russia.
If something like this happend.
It is not like the US would annex Russia, So i personally think the guerilla factor will be degraded as a threat due to this fact.
There is no country on the planet that could conquer Russia and annex it without using genocidal methods, So yes Partisans and other volunteers groups would be threat, But only after the Russian military have been formally defeated, And by then it would be too late.

>Sweden
obligatory
youtube.com/watch?v=cyPsqsH8I4M

Pozhalusta brat' ((((((
Wai you do dis.

Also please return to this rather than what you got today.
>youtube.com/watch?v=uEmPaTc589M
Imperial Russia>CCCP>Current Russia.
imo.