captain_shane

No, I'm sorry but you need to turn off Maddow and NPR. Both sides have lost 1M+ soldiers. Ukraine has lost 20% of it's land. You need to educate yourself before injecting your wrong opinions.

They're winning but losing tons of men. They can drag this out but it's still a massive loss of Russian lives. You bloodthirsty Zelensky supporters don't understand this. For you on your comfy couch, it's 'Till The Last Ukrainian!

Here's what you Euro's don't get. The US doesn't need you at all. Russia could take over all of Europe and it wouldn't matter at all to the US.

Out of power? Ukraine is losing 7% of their land and 350k people per year. I'm glad you're willing to sacrifice 28% more of their land and 1.4M more soldiers to stick it to Putin. How tough do you feel on your couch right now General?

There's not going to be a deal. Zelensky won't sign anything without strict defense guarantees. He essentially wants NATO style guarantees or he won't sign. There's no way Trump agrees to that unless Zelensky signs over ALL of Ukraines wealth, not just some mysterious minerals that might not even be worth extracting.

Aren't you supposed to still be searching for the lost Trump Pee Tapes? Why aren't you leftists putting on your thinking caps and using your sleuth skills to track down that infamous set of blackmail tapes? Why waste time on here when there's so many more important things to be done?

Lol, imagine the brain of leftists. First you criticize trump for going for the mineral deal, now that it looks like it's going to fall through you criticize him for that. You'd criticize him if it went through and say he's a colonizer or something. Go say your prayers to Maddow, it's time for your afternoon nap grandpa.

Nice try.

Why do you think Putin wouldn't launch nukes at Europe if he thinks he's going to collapse? Why do you want to escalate towards WW3? Why is Ukraine worth risking a nuclear holocaust? I find it funny how rabid leftists were against the middle east wars, but against boogeyman Putin they're worse than John Bolton. You have Dick Cheney and George Bush on your side lol. The entire neo-con complex is on your side hahahaha

It's the same mindset as the election. Insult White males and then wonder why they don't vote for you. They live in a different reality weaved for them by the mainstream media. People like Maddow have become the new Priests within the Cathedral.

Are you living in a separate reality? In what way is JD a clown and Zelensky isn't when Zelensky literally insulted them to their faces and called them bitches? I would love your weed connect because it's clearly mind blowing stuff you've got.

Lol, this is why you lost the election. Pure emotions from the left. I really don't care if you think trump or jd are the devil himself, calling them a bitch to their face when you're there to beg for money is hilariously stupid, especially stupid to do it to Trump of all people who has a very big ego. I'm honestly surprised Trump didn't cut all support right then and there and deport Zelensky to Moscow.

They wanted to bait this clown and show the country who they're dealing with. A petulant child who isn't going to negotiate in good faith. He literally called JD a bitch to his face.

I'm not baiting. I'm waiting for the Arm Chair Generals to come up with a plan to retake the lost 20% of land and secure it. One guy apparently thinks drones will recapture the land. No, land needs soldiers to seize it and occupy it. I'm truly waiting for the brilliant Sun Tzu plan from my fellow Aseannow members. The plan currently from them seems to be Bidens plan of continuous arms and money disbursement, which hasn't worked considering they've lost 20% of land in three years. So about 7% of their land gone each year if we keep doing what we're doing. About 1M+ ukrainians have died and 1M+ russians have died in three years. So roughly 675k dead soldiers per year. WHAT IS YOUR PLAN GENERALS? ASEAN PATTON WHERE ARE YOU?

Better make sure my tribe buddies at Blackrock rebuild!

Another tough guy. Go sign up for Big Z's slaughter fest instead of hiding behind your computer screen. Dust off the cheeto dust, cut your neckbeard, buy a gun and go kill some ruskies coward.

Explain Ukraine's winning plan then. You're clearly willing for many more hundreds of thousands of them to die, you better have a winning strategy.

Because there's no upward mobility for the vast majority of thai people, especially isaan people. Gambling is highly enticing when it doesn't matter if you lose it all because you're broke anyway.

Yeah, they want out because the petulant child wants the war to continue until the last ukrainian. There's no winning strategy for Ukraine, none whatsoever. Continuing to fund this is continuing to fund slavic genocide. I imagine Big Z's a big fan of the holodomor.

I think you should prove your Ukrainian support and join their forces. They could use you on the front lines. I think everyone on here who wants the conflict to continue should immediately buy a plane ticket and fight for Zelensky. Your lifespan is estimated to be 4 hours long once you hit the front lines, but it's ok, you'll be remembered as a war hero. As Big Z said: TO THE LAST UKRAINIAN!

It'll never happen. Thailand is a two-tier caste system with thai-chinese owning everything and full thai's owning nothing. It's the same in all of SE Asia, mixed chinese own everything while full bred locals own nothing. Some are more extreme than others like in Laos is 99% / 1% ownership and Vietnam 70% / 30%, but Thailand is close to the top of the imbalances with 90% / 10%.

Spot on.

The loan sharks here really are sharks, the American mafia only lent people money at 2% per week.

I'll accept your defeat. Good day sir, I hope you get your boosters and lots of them.

1. The Core Issue: A Young, Healthy Boy Died Days After Vaccination Deflection from the core concern: The article headline reports that a healthy 13-year-old boy died just three days after receiving the Pfizer vaccine, yet the response immediately shifts away from investigating this tragedy and into a generic defense of vaccine safety. Lack of transparency: Instead of acknowledging the potential link and conducting a thorough public autopsy report, the establishment response is simply "no cause of death determined yet." This delay and obfuscation are common patterns seen when evidence might contradict official narratives. 2. The Misleading "Risk vs. Benefit" Argument The claim that "COVID-19 presents a higher risk than vaccine side effects" is based on population-level statistics that do not account for: Age group differences: Young, healthy individuals have an extremely low risk of severe COVID-19. Pre-existing health conditions: Most severe COVID cases in young people involve comorbidities like obesity, diabetes, or immunodeficiency. Natural immunity: Many young people already had COVID-19 and were at lower risk of reinfection or severe illness than the vaccinated population. CDC’s own data (as of 2021) shows: The survival rate for children and teens from COVID-19 is over 99.99%. Healthy teens rarely experience severe COVID-19, but vaccine-related myocarditis cases have been significantly more common than expected. Conclusion: The risk-benefit calculation varies by age, and blindly applying this logic across all demographics ignores scientific nuance. 3. "Most Cases Are Mild" – A Convenient Downplay of Myocarditis "Most cases are mild" is an irresponsible statement when discussing heart inflammation in teenagers. Myocarditis is NOT a minor side effect: It permanently scars the heart muscle. Even mild myocarditis increases long-term risks of heart failure, arrhythmias, and sudden cardiac arrest. Studies show a non-trivial percentage of vaccine-induced myocarditis patients experience lingering heart damage. Contradictory messaging: Before COVID-19, any form of myocarditis was taken extremely seriously. Suddenly, post-vaccine myocarditis is treated as a “temporary inconvenience” rather than the potentially lifelong medical condition that it is. Conclusion: If a healthy young individual dies three days after vaccination, and myocarditis is known to be linked to the vaccine, it is scientifically dishonest to dismiss concerns outright. 4. False Equivalency: COVID-19 Myocarditis vs. Vaccine-Induced Myocarditis The response claims that “myocarditis is more common after COVID-19 infection than after vaccination”, but this comparison is misleading. Key differences: COVID-induced myocarditis is mostly seen in severely ill individuals with underlying conditions. Vaccine-induced myocarditis is occurring in healthy young individuals who were at near-zero risk from COVID in the first place. The mechanism of injury differs – vaccine myocarditis appears to be an immune overreaction, while COVID myocarditis is a secondary effect in critically ill patients. Real-world studies challenge the claim: A large Israeli study found that vaccine-induced myocarditis rates in young males (16-24) were significantly higher than COVID-induced myocarditis rates. Sweden, Denmark, and Norway suspended Moderna for young people due to myocarditis concerns, contradicting the blanket safety claims. Conclusion: The argument that COVID-19 causes more myocarditis than vaccines is misleading and ignores key differences in affected populations. 5. The "Expert Consensus" Fallacy The bootlicker response relies heavily on an appeal to authority by citing organizations like: The American Academy of Pediatrics The American Heart Association The American Medical Association The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Problems with this approach: These organizations have financial and political incentives to promote widespread vaccination. Many of these groups receive funding from pharmaceutical companies or have direct partnerships with the vaccine manufacturers. Dissenting doctors and scientists who raise legitimate concerns are censored, blacklisted, or labeled as misinformation spreaders. Lack of transparency in the CDC and FDA: The CDC’s own advisory panel initially voted against booster shots for young people, but the decision was overridden for political reasons. The FDA approved Pfizer’s vaccine for kids based on flimsy data with limited follow-up. Conclusion: Consensus is not science. Citing government-backed organizations without acknowledging their conflicts of interest is intellectually lazy and anti-scientific. Final Verdict: The Defense Is Weak and Politically Motivated This person’s response completely dodges the core issue: A healthy 13-year-old boy died suddenly after receiving the Pfizer vaccine. Instead of demanding a full and transparent investigation, the response shifts to generic pro-vaccine rhetoric. The argument is based on misleading comparisons, downplaying of side effects, and appeals to authority rather than an honest discussion of the risks. The proper scientific approach would be to: Investigate the case thoroughly instead of brushing it off. Acknowledge uncertainties rather than making blanket safety claims. Recognize that risk-benefit analysis varies by age and should be debated openly. Instead, we get propaganda disguised as medical advice—a tactic that erodes public trust in health authorities.