Portuguese FM: Ukraine can prevail, Russia a 'Paper Tiger' | Talk to Al Jazeera 

Does that Justify invading Ukraine ? 😂

@@alexandreturgeon9831 Yes because ultimately open borders and drag queen story hour (ie liberalism) has been stopped in Ukraine.

I know many Russians and they have all been unhappy with their government. Even before the war

@@FlorianKrober I'd rather be merely unhappy with my government than have no country, people, borders or actual sovereignty of my own.

@@user-gu1ti9me6i Russians have no "their" government, nor country, borders or actual sovereignty. They are serfs. They also don't have freedom, political rights, freedom of press, civil rights and many, many more that you take for granted in UK.

It's very weak actually, it can't even gain air or sea superiority against a country that barely has an Airforce and navy left lol

The Paper Tiger no need to beg for money and weapons and ammunition, unlike Zelensky who is desperately begging for money and weapons and recruits.

@@chekeocha4923 I also think that the paper tiger refers more to the west

can't get air superiority, sea superiority, and yet they are fking the ukr good. @@jonathanbelanger6574

@@chekeocha4923 _The Paper Tiger no need to beg for money and weapons and ammunition, unlike Zelensky who is desperately begging for money and weapons and recruits_ - What are you talking about? Haven't you seen Putin himself traveling to Iran in 2022 to ask for drones and missiles? Or Shoigu traveling to North Korea to ask for shells? Russia is the biggest country in the world, with incomparably greater resources than Ukraine, but even Russia can't find this war alone and needs help from Iran, North Korea, China and India. What western help did was simply evening the odds. Still, back in 2014 Putin boasted about being able to take Kyiv in 2 weeks. Before the invasion started, most of military analysts also expexted Ukraine to fall within weeks if invaded by Russia, yet in a month the war will enter its 3rd year. However you try to paint it, Russian army extremely underperformed, most of the western support (artillery, tanks, armored vehicles etc.) would never reach Ukraine in time, if the invasion didn't stall like it did. That is not what you would expect from the supposedly 2nd army in the world. I think that's what he meant when he said Russia turned out to be a paper tiger.

Lie stop spreading lies oppressor

As a disporia Ukrainian I am over Zelensky and his proxy war for the Zionist US and Israel.

​@@GoldenBoss-yb4uznato is oppressor. Stop spreading your propaganda. You lost

It is good that you listed all of those western articles criticizing the conduct of Ukrainian war. This is why freedom of press is important, so we can learn from our mistakes, adapt and improve. The fact that Russian media don't report on such things on Russian side doesn't mean they don't happen, cause they do. It means they are thrown under the rug and propaganda is lying that everything is going swimmingly instead.

@@dogifish0078 _nato is oppressor_ - That is a lie. Hundreds of millions of people in Europe joined NATO out of their own free will. My country had to actually try really hard and have done a lot, before we were finally accepted into NATO. Furthermore, it is completely voluntary, every nation can leave NATO if they wish to (like France almost did in 1966). They just don't, because the alliance is mutually beneficial for all members, and new nations still line up to join that "oppressive" NATO out of their free will (like Finland, Sweden, Ukraine).

lol!! Watch Zelensky's comedy show it will lighten up your mood a bit

@@ibvlogsshorts I really do wish my prayers worked although doesn't change the fact that the beast that deceives the nation's is in charge. Revelation 13. Watch Netanyahu address the UN Assembly on 23 September 2023.. Touted the peace corridor in the Middle East. Then of course there is the Journey Through Time project, spearheaded by Crown Princess MBS. All this has been planned in advance for years. There is nothing we can do to stop this.

He's delusional

@@diegoflores9237 tell me what you are not happy with what he said ?

​@@alexandreturgeon9831because is very far from reality. Israel is not defending its territory, Israel is further from their territory. Ukraine cannot win. Besife he Donass declared it independence. Why when Lituania and Croatia (also unilaterally) did it was ok and everybody agreed but when it is against the west interest it is not?

When are you going to interview Crown Princess MBS. We are all wanting to know what he is doing to help Palestinians.....

You're nothing but a fool. Portugal invented modern times, made the first globalization, closed forever medieval times, etc, and you in a petty dismissive way only talk about slavery, that always existed, and still does, practiced all over the world, and it was the africans themselves who sold them to the portuguese. As we speak, there are 50 million slaves in the world, mainly in Asia, Arabic countries and Africa, where there's open market slaves in some countries, but you don't seem to mind, just prefer to live in silly resentfulness. As for theft, it wasn't quite as you put it, but i'm sure you wanna cancel the History of the world. You better study real History again, and not marxist history...

@@JustinCase-ld4ih _Slavery - the Past_ You are nothing but a dishonest imbecile. What you referred to as "globalization" is _, in reality,_ the cancerous *spread of colonial terror.* The "end of the medieval era" was not an overnight event that Portugal alone had a part in. Indeed, slavery had existed in remote antiquity, but in the African context, it was not an _irredeemable_ state of servitude or one that called for the absolute _removal of humanity._ The Europeans, _led by the Portuguese,_ turned servitude into something even uglier: *_industrializing_* slavery, making slavery an _irredeemable, hereditary_ state of servitude, and turning human beings into _chattel,_ stripping them of all humanity. Indeed, African rulers had occasionally sold captives to their trading partners, as was customary in the world at the time, thinking that the Europeans viewed Africans as human beings. If they had any idea about Europeans' perceptions of Africans, they might have reconsidered their dealings with them. These occasional transactions, however, did not _satisfy_ the likes of the Portuguese; they *undertook raids* into African territory on their own accord, kidnapped people, and transported them out of the continent or took them to stolen lands (colonies) in deplorable conditions. The slaves the Europeans obtained through transactions with African kingdoms were _male-biased_ because much of the captives came from regional conflicts. The folks Europeans kidnapped via raids included _men, women,_ and _children._ When raids proved too dangerous since Europeans could not take on every African locality militarily, they forged allies with African kingdoms and _influenced_ them to _engage in conflicts_ they might not have otherwise considered necessary. Again, the interactions between Africans and Europeans in the Sahel and beyond were in their infancy, and, therefore, the Africans were not intimately familiar with the true nature of Europeans or their intentions. Through these gratuitous conflicts, Europeans were able to convince their African partners to sell them captives as slaves. It was only a matter of time before they turned on their African "allies" to reconfigure their kingdoms into slave colonies. So, slavery was not just relegated to those they transported to Europe and their colonies overseas. _Modern-day Slavery_ The Slavery that "still exists" is called _human trafficking._ Contrary to your dogmatic thinking, it is as prevalent in the "West" as it is in the other parts of the world you mentioned, if not more so. Human trafficking is named as such because, unlike the slavery of the past, it is considered _illegal._ Name the countries where slavery is a legal transactional institution! Do not confuse modern-day slavery with those of the past. _Theft_ I call it as I see it. *Violently* intruding on someone's property, ransacking it, murdering the residents, holding them as hostages, and taking off with property is *_stealing._* When someone willingly gives you something, you are not going to kill them for that or cause them bodily harm - are you?! You are eager to cancel _reality,_ but you better snap out of your dreamy state and join us in the _real_ world.

Why?

@@lekjaku7378 Because 3 super powers in the world USA russia and China so think

@@was1992 _Because 3 super powers in the world USA russia and China so think_ - USA has the strongest military in the world, and yet they've lost wars in Afghanistan and in Vietnam. Russia (USSR) has also lost a war in Afghanistan, back when it was much bigger and stronger than it is today. More recently, Russia has lost a war to tiny Chechenya (1st Chechen War), that was not even an independent country, just Russian province. China has also lost a war with Vietnam. In short, being a global superpower doesn't mean you can't lose wars. It is not the same when you are the invader, fighting on foreign territory in a war in which you have little to lose.

@@flopoz2575 it never lost a war it wasn't worth our time and money.

@@was1992 Who didn't? Russia? If you really believe that, then you are blind. No one nation is invincible, and every country had lost a war at some point in its history. If we talk about Russia, then it lost WW1, which was worth everything for Russian ruling class back then (the whole country collapsed, Russian Empire had lost a huge chunk of its most valuable territories in the west and the whole ruling class was exiled or killed). More importantly, war in Ukraine is most definitely not worth Russian time and money, since Russia has not much too lose, very little to gain (some territory, which Russia already has more than it needs and _maybe_ a few million new citizens, which won't solve Russian structural demographic problems anyway). So by your own words, this is very much a loseable war for Russia, time will show if it will be indeed lost, but it is definitely loseable.

That's nonsense. Not a single NATO soldier was killed, while Russia has lost over 300000 soldiers (KIA and wounded). NATO nations are supporting Ukraine, yes, but mostly with older military equipment from magazines and not providing more advanced weaponry (like fighterjets). More importantly, this divagation is pointless, because NATO would never invade Russia. Firstly, because NATO nations don't need or want anything from Russia, and secondly because of the mutually assured desctruction.

@@flopoz2575 Ukraine was a de facto a NATO country even the biggest NATO army after the one of US. Everything Ukrainian soldier killed is lost to NATO. NATO is also the supplier of Ukraine in terms of military and civilian logistics, money, mercenaries, intelligence, and coordination.

@@alf2chod I'm sorry, but what you wrote is complete nonsense. No, Ukraine is most definitely not a "de facto NATO country", the core of NATO is collective security and article 5, which specifically states that attack on one member state is considered an attack on them all. Which means if Ukraine was a de facto member, we would have a full on war between Russia and USA, and not a proxy conflict like now. Secondly, even if Ukraine were a NATO member (which it is not), it wouldn't be "the biggest NATO army after the one of US" like you claim, because that's Turkiye (state for 2022). Of course Ukraine has mobilised a lot of men since the invasion started, but Turkiye, Germany, France, UK and Italy could mobilize even more men in case of war. Thirdly, every Ukrainian soldier killed in this war is a tragedy, and it is cerainly in NATO's best interest that Ukraine does not lose many soldiers. But those are not NATO losses, because again, there are no NATO soldiers on the front. NATO armies have the same capacities as in 2022 (or even bigger in some cases), because they didn't lose any men or equipment, while Russia has lost approximately 300k men (again, KIA and wounded). And last, but not least, yes, NATO nations are supplying Ukraine with military equipment, money and intelligence. But, before February 2022 it was only defensive weapons (like Javelins and NLAWs) and whatever Ukraine could buy, which is not much, since they are the poorest country in Europe. Since the invasion started NATO nations started sending more equipment, but it was mostly older stuff, that was either collecting dust in magazines, outdated or to be replaced anyway. For instance, Poland gave its old T-72 tanks to Ukraine and is replacing them with brand new K2 tanks from Korea. In short: Russia still has a huge army, menpower potential and can do a lot of harm to Ukraine for sure, which is a tragedy. But while Russia has switched much of its economy to war effort, is depleting its resources and losing a lot of people, NATO countries haven't experienced any negative consequences of this war and are actually using it to modernize their armies.

@@flopoz2575 You pretend to be so informed but don't know that NATO industrial capability has been outmatched by Russia. Russia produces more ammunition than all NATO countries. NATO stockpile is depleted. You can check on the independent media outlets. That Russia might have lost 300.000 men to this war is a fantasy of your mind victim of propaganda. Russia has proven to be economical about the way it spends its resources. For one Russian dead Ukraine losses 8 to 10 of its men. This has made the Russian army the most experienced of the world when it comes actual combats. NATO countries have spent decades fighting small armies in Middle East and Africa and therefore lack real combat experience with modern warfare weapons such as drones, anti-drones technology, and so on. Russian army is getting even stronger by the day that some NATO countries are afraid Russia might attack them after the war in Ukraine. You can check all this with independent media outlets.

Is he also an atlantist neocon bred in the US when he calls for immediate ceasefire in Gaza and creation of independent Palestinian state that includes Gaza, the West Bank and with capital in East Jerusalem?

Yes of course. Neocons have always supported the 2 states solution while financing the take over of Judea. There is no incompatibility here. . You are being fooled. Lastly there is no such thing as East Jerusalem like there is no such thing as East berlin. @@flopoz2575

Simple answer: nothing

@@brehgankage6242 I really do wish my prayers worked although doesn't change the fact that the beast that deceives the nation's is in charge. Revelation 13. Watch Netanyahu address the UN Assembly on 23 September 2023.. Touted the peace corridor in the Middle East. Then of course there is the Journey Through Time project, spearheaded by Crown Princess MBS. All this has been planned in advance for years. There is nothing we can do to stop this.

Nothing. He allowed Saudi Arabian airspace to be used to attack houthis who are actually doing something to help

@@diegoflores9237 I really do wish my prayers worked although doesn't change the fact that the beast that deceives the nation's is in charge. Revelation 13. Watch Netanyahu address the UN Assembly on 23 September 2023.. Touted the peace corridor in the Middle East. Then of course there is the Journey Through Time project, spearheaded by Crown Princess MBS. All this has been planned in advance for years. There is nothing we can do to stop this.

Russia never said 3 days. You're lying. Also, it's not a disaster for Russia because they are winning

@@diegoflores9237 Back in 2014 Putin boasted, that he could take Kyiv in 2 weeks if he wanted. So maybe not exactly 3 days, but still closer to it than the disastrous war that is entering the 3rd year.

​@flomamapoz2575 I can't find that quote from putin. Let me know where I can find so I can read it or view it, thank you. Unless it doesn't exist .........

Has to be top of the list😅🤣😂

Why do you said that?

​@josephmurphy1509 why?

Paper tiger when compared to NATO potential, or even to what everyone expected of Russian military prior to Putin's botched invasion. Which doesn't change the fact, that Russia is still 4 times bigger in population and 10 times bigger in GDP compared to Ukraine. So more than a challenge for Ukraine and capable of bringing a lot of destruction. So Russia can be a extremely challenging opponent (for Ukraine) and a paper tiger (compared to NATO and to Russia's perceived potential prior to 2022 invasion). The two are not mutually exclusive.