wojtek wrote: Wed Jul 09, 2025 4:36 am We are an average country on the rise, only 20th in the world
in terms of GDP, so we are not looking for adventures.

"We are not looking for adventures."
Yet somehow, "defense" spending is leaping from 2.7% of GDP (2022) to 4.7% (2025)—a casual 74% increase in three years.

Funny, this feels… familiar. Almost like Poland been down this road before...

Das stimmt, mein Junge!

Si vis pacem, para bellum!

(I apologize to other users who are bored
with this exchange of posts.)

wojtek wrote: Wed Jul 09, 2025 5:04 am Das stimmt, mein Junge!

Si vis pacem, para bellum!

You are living proof that Goebbels would be a social media influencer today - turns out all you need is a flag, some selective outrage, and voilà critical thinking vanishes faster than budget funds during a military spending spree. Suddenly facts are 'negotiable' and history is just a buffet where you only take what you like.

I'm certainly not as much of an expert on Goebbels
as his compatriot, so I won't comment.

wojtek wrote: Wed Jul 09, 2025 5:25 am I'm certainly not as much of an expert on Goebbels
as his compatriot, so I won't comment.

At last—a post of yours that doesn’t require a fact check. A shame it’s only because it’s too vague to be wrong. But since geopolitics and your own country’s politics seem to be… unfamiliar terrain, perhaps stick to topics where elementary knowledge isn’t required. May I suggest coloring books?

I understand that you learn from Goebbels
to order others what to do? Jawohl Herr Oberst!

wojtek wrote: Wed Jul 09, 2025 5:37 am I understand that you learn from Goebbels
to order others what to do? Jawohl Herr Oberst!

Ah, the classic 'I’m going to pretend I don’t understand context so I can feign outrage' maneuver. Cute. But since you struggle with subtext: your entire argument relies on the same selective reading that makes horoscopes seem deep. Next time, try engaging with the actual point — or at least bring better deflection material.

No my dear, you use ad personam arguments
- which are always weak - to throw your opponent off balance,
which can sometimes work.

wojtek wrote: Wed Jul 09, 2025 5:52 am No my dear, you use ad personam arguments
- which are always weak - to throw your opponent off balance,
which can sometimes work.

While I admire your attempt to dress up nonsense in Latin like a toddler playing scholar, perhaps focus less on sounding smart and more on being correct. Your posts today read like a greatest hits of debunked claims — each one dismantled with embarrassing ease. But don’t despair, even a broken clock is right twice a day. With some actual research (and fewer google translate Latin phases), you might yet contribute something of value.

I'm just trying to keep up with you, dear master of rhetoric!

BTW, when it comes to military spending, it's the absolute value
that counts, not the percentage of GDP,, so notice how much more
your country (Germany) spends on military than mine. Your 5% will
be a real gamechanger (respect!). This will be like about 11.5% for Russia.