Tim

[Tim @TimWhite777]

@RT_com Why doesn’t RT cover the events unfolding in Russia? https://t.co/XhvD7nxbsS

[Clash Report @clashreport]

Zelensky:

This war needs to end. But Russia’s leader wants to keep fighting.

That is why Ukrainian sanctions against this aggression are at work.

Last night, our drones traveled roughly 1,000 kilometers to the St. Petersburg region, targeting enemy naval arsenals and the base in Kronstadt.

Our long-range sanctions also covered about 500 kilometers to the Krasnodar region and struck an oil depot.

Russia must end its war and stop its attacks on human lives. Any act of injustice against Ukraine will receive a just response.

[Tim @TimWhite777]

No, dumbfuck, the point is that people are acting like a building lit up with colored lights is some kind of national crisis. You don’t have to support it, but the nonstop crying and outrage over something this trivial is ridiculous.

Gay people aren’t going anywhere, and neither is support for them. We all get one life on this planet to spend with our families, friends, and loved ones, yet some of you waste every day looking for something new to complain about. If a few colored lights on a building have you this worked up, maybe it’s time to reevaluate your priorities.

Let people live their lives the way they want as long as they’re not breaking any laws or hurting anyone. The world doesn’t revolve around your personal dislikes. Grow a spine, get a grip, and quit bitching about every little thing you see.

[Tim @TimWhite777]

@OwenShroyerHQ Donald Trump knows there is no evidence the election was rigged, and he knows that if he brings false charges against anyone, they will be thrown out of court.

[Tim @TimWhite777]

That’s a weak argument. People of every race, religion, and nationality get offended by certain words, slurs, and insults directed at them. Jews get offended by antisemitic slurs. Asians get offended by racial slurs. Hispanics get offended by slurs targeting them. Arabs, Native Americans, Christians, Muslims, and countless other groups all have words they find offensive.

Being offended by an insult aimed at your group isn’t unique to Black people. That’s normal human behavior. The real question is why you’re pretending only one group reacts to insults when literally everyone does.

For example, if I walked up to your mother or grandmother while you were standing there and called her a whore or a slut, you wouldn’t get angry? I’m pretty sure you would, because certain words are meant to insult and provoke people.

The same way a group of girls can call each other bitches, but if you walk up and call them bitches, there’s a good chance they’ll take offense. Context matters. Certain words trigger reactions from people of every race and background, not just Black people.

[Tim @TimWhite777]

@redleft9 @Fighter_Puncch And this is monkey behavior.

[Tay / messyfightz4u 😘 @Tay1166733]

White t-shirt was putting her back into those punches

[Tim @TimWhite777]

@redleft9 @Fighter_Puncch This is also monkey behavior.

[Tay / messyfightz4u 😘 @Tay1166733]

She said her 🐈 smells 😭😬

[Tim @TimWhite777]

@LaufmanPete @Fighter_Puncch You should get accustomed to them because by 2052, one in five people on Earth will be African.

[Tim @TimWhite777]

That’s a low IQ comment. Go do your research on the Mali Empire, the Songhai Empire, the Kingdom of Kongo, the Kingdom of Benin, Great Zimbabwe, the Kanem Bornu Empire, the Ethiopian Empire, the Ashanti Empire, and the Hausa city states. These societies had governments, armies, laws, trade networks, taxation systems, agriculture, and major cities long before European colonization.

And while you’re at it, look into the Tang Dynasty, Song Dynasty, Ming Dynasty, Maurya Empire, Gupta Empire, Khmer Empire, and Mughal Empire. The idea that Europeans found nothing but “ unstabilized savages” is historically illiterate.

Europeans did not arrive and invent civilization. They traded with, learned from, and borrowed from other civilizations for centuries. Paper, printing, gunpowder, the compass, advanced mathematics, navigation techniques, and countless other innovations came from outside Europe. History is full of civilizations exchanging knowledge, not one group single handedly civilizing the rest of the world.

[Tim @TimWhite777]

They’re not just filming. A lot of these First Amendment auditors are intentionally trying to provoke reactions. If the goal was simply to exercise their right to record in public, they could do that almost anywhere. Instead, many choose to stand outside businesses or government buildings specifically because they know it increases the chances of a confrontation and gets them more views. Don’t get me wrong, I support auditing the government and law enforcement.

[Tim @TimWhite777]

@Remo111480 @NationalAware I agree 100%.

[Tim @TimWhite777]

@anon11456 @Pataramesh He’s making that claim, so it’s on him to provide evidence for it. The burden of proof is on the person making the accusation.

[Tim @TimWhite777]

Patriot and THAAD were never designed to create an impenetrable shield that can defeat an unlimited number of missiles forever. Every air defense system on Earth has magazine limits, reload times, and cost considerations.

The real question is whether they reduce the number of missiles that hit their targets. The answer is yes. If Patriot and THAAD were ineffective, countries targeted by ballistic missiles would be suffering far higher casualties and damage than they do today.

As for “just taking the U.S. at its word,” Patriot’s combat record isn’t based solely on Pentagon press releases. Missile strikes leave wreckage, impact sites, casualties, satellite imagery, and eyewitness evidence. We can see when missiles hit and when they don’t. If these systems were failing at the rates critics claim, it would be obvious.

And the fact that some countries are exploring cheaper solutions doesn’t prove Patriot or THAAD don’t work. It proves interceptors are expensive and countries want additional layers of defense. That’s why modern air defense relies on a mix of systems, not a single missile battery.

Even in Ukraine, Patriot has repeatedly intercepted advanced ballistic missiles that many other systems struggle to defeat. The reason Ukraine uses them carefully isn’t because they don’t work. It’s because they’re valuable assets and interceptor missiles are limited.

Also, no other air defense system on the planet has intercepted more ballistic missiles in actual combat than Patriot. It has dealt with hundreds of ballistic missile engagements across multiple wars and conflicts over decades. Critics love to point to its limitations, but they rarely name another system with a larger real world combat record against ballistic missile threats.

And if Patriot is supposedly so ineffective, why is Ukraine desperately trying to get more of them and even asking the United States for a license to manufacture Patriot interceptor missiles domestically? Just days ago, President Zelensky said Ukraine wants permission to produce Patriot missiles itself because they are so important to defending the country from Russian ballistic missile attacks.

Nobody serious claims Patriot or THAAD can stop an infinite missile barrage. The fact that they have limits doesn’t mean they’re a gimmick. It means they’re weapons systems operating in the real world. https://t.co/EOLEnHlP15

[Tim @TimWhite777]

They buy U.S. air defense systems because they work. If they didn’t, the death toll in countries targeted by Iranian missiles would be far higher. Patriot and THAAD are not gimmicks. No air defense system is 100% effective, but Patriot has intercepted hundreds of ballistic missiles in real world combat, while THAAD has maintained an extremely high success rate in testing and combat deployments. During recent Iranian missile attacks, U.S. and allied missile defense networks achieved interception rates exceeding 90%, and in some cases around 95% or higher against ballistic missile threats. If these systems were ineffective, countries wouldn’t keep spending billions of dollars to buy and deploy them. They save lives every time they’re used.

[Tim @TimWhite777]

@Pataramesh I’ve only witnessed a handful of such instances out of hundreds.

[Tim @TimWhite777]

Plus you fail to realize the United States is only using about 2 to 5 percent of its total military strength against Iran. The U.S. military is divided into 11 combatant commands, and only one of them, United States Central Command (@CENTCOM), is primarily responsible for that region. CENTCOM covers the Middle East, including Iran, Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, and the Persian Gulf.

The rest of the military is still spread across other commands like United States Indo-Pacific Command (@INDOPACOM), United States European Command (@US_EUCOM), United States Northern Command, United States Southern Command, and United States Africa Command (@USAfricaCommand). Those commands all have their own missions, forces, and ongoing operations that have nothing to do with Iran.

On top of that, the United States operates over 800 military bases across more than 80 countries, most of them outside the CENTCOM area. The U.S. still maintains 11 aircraft carriers, dozens of amphibious assault ships, and thousands of combat aircraft, with major forces positioned in Europe and the Indo-Pacific watching Russia, China, and North Korea. None of that has been fully shifted toward Iran.

The United States has the capability to take care of Iran. The reality is it has not committed anywhere near its full strength, because pulling large amounts of forces from other commands would leave other critical regions exposed.

[Tim @TimWhite777]

You're confusing military victories with political outcomes. The U.S. military destroyed the Taliban government in weeks, overthrew Saddam Hussein's government in weeks, and won nearly every major conventional battle in Vietnam. The problem wasn't defeating enemy forces. The problem was trying to occupy countries and build stable governments while fighting insurgencies for years afterward.

And as for Iran, nobody is rushing to send hundreds of thousands of troops into a country of nearly 90 million people with mountains, deserts, and decades of preparation for asymmetric warfare. That's called learning from history, not fear.

You say the U.S. "can't beat them," but the Taliban, Iraqi insurgents, and Viet Cong never invaded the United States, never destroyed its military, and never came close to defeating it in a conventional war. The U.S. lost political support for long occupations, which is not the same thing as losing on the battlefield.

If a ground invasion of Iran doesn't happen, it won't be because America is scared. It will be because the cost in lives, money, and regional instability would be enormous compared to the objectives.

[Tim @TimWhite777]

@fightazon He believed he was superior.