No, he's right about one thing...Women suck at fighting and Russia would capitulate in an instant if they were in charge.
(We wouldn't be able to breathe any easier, but Russia would surely fall if women were in charge)
A woman would have been toppled by the CIA by now. Let's not forget there was an American backed coup in Ukraine not 15 years ago and, since then, several doesn't American bioweapons labs have been built in the country, right on the Russia border.
Putin is in charge because he's been surviving the crucible of American foreign policy, as well as internal skullduggery, for 20 years; that's the kind of person who can do something like that.
I don't think that reads the way he meant it to, much like the underage gangbang scene he wrote. Sounds to me like he's saying if a woman were in charge they'd lose by New Years.
Well it depends, since for a woman to rise through the ranks and be leader of Russia, she'd be the ultimate manipulative, ruthless, intelligent bitch ever so she'd probably be like Olga of Kiev or Catherine the Great.
So yes the war would be over by now.....and Ukraine's population would decrease by 80%..
I was listening to someone who escaped from NK talk about what it would be like if Kim Jung's sister were to take over & she basically came to the same conclusion - for a woman to be in that position, they would be more ruthless and more paranoid than a male counterpart.
I doubt it at least within Russia, the kinda woman I mentioned would kill them all as she'd have no time for idiots and weathervane politicians that could turn against her.
Outside it, well we all remember how hard they simped for Kim Jong Un's sister.....
Some faggot: "Lol, England won't go to war half way around the world over a shitty little Island. Not when they have a woman for a prime minister!"
Thatcher: "I've got my nuclear subs sitting off the coast of argentina, and if you don't give me the codes to disable their missiles, I'm nuking Buenos Aires."
Victoria Nuland planned the color revolution that overthrew Ukraine and put the anti-russian faction in charge. So no actually, this is specifically a woman's fault.
Somebody should tell this clown what would actually help end this BS sooner. For foreign governments to stop sending weapons, to prolong a conflict that would otherwise have zero impact on their own citizens.
I also can't tell if he's saying a woman would lose due to incompetence or that she'd react more emotionally and would've already gone nuclear by now.
Stephen King is a retarded faggot
And a pedophile.
I haven't heard of this before. Can you give me a quick rundown?
Try reading any book of his that involves a child
A cursory reading of his early work shows a genuine obsession with little girls getting their period.
And there is an eleven year old gangbang at the end of the first book of It.
That's incredibly fucked up.
I mean it's supposed to be a horror book.
Well he does have a fetish for older boys wanting to kill children. His bullies play for keeps.
And a pedophile.
No, he's right about one thing...Women suck at fighting and Russia would capitulate in an instant if they were in charge.
(We wouldn't be able to breathe any easier, but Russia would surely fall if women were in charge)
Yeah because a woman would have hit the nukes by now because her ego would have demanded that she show everyone what a girlboss she is.
And how they think there's no consequences for their actions
A woman would have been toppled by the CIA by now. Let's not forget there was an American backed coup in Ukraine not 15 years ago and, since then, several doesn't American bioweapons labs have been built in the country, right on the Russia border.
Putin is in charge because he's been surviving the crucible of American foreign policy, as well as internal skullduggery, for 20 years; that's the kind of person who can do something like that.
Women causing fewer wars is nothing but a far-left lie: https://archive.ph/DTC3O
Almost like it's the men that go to war
but women most affected
I don't think that reads the way he meant it to, much like the underage gangbang scene he wrote. Sounds to me like he's saying if a woman were in charge they'd lose by New Years.
That or they'd be so bloodthirsty as to be escalating to the point of lobbing nukes or something similarly reckless.
That's how I took it too. The woman would have capitulated at the first whiff of danger. At least, that's what he thinks.
Well it depends, since for a woman to rise through the ranks and be leader of Russia, she'd be the ultimate manipulative, ruthless, intelligent bitch ever so she'd probably be like Olga of Kiev or Catherine the Great.
So yes the war would be over by now.....and Ukraine's population would decrease by 80%..
I was listening to someone who escaped from NK talk about what it would be like if Kim Jung's sister were to take over & she basically came to the same conclusion - for a woman to be in that position, they would be more ruthless and more paranoid than a male counterpart.
Isn't there currently a genocide happening against Rohinga Muslims by Malasya's female ruler?
And everyone would declare her stunning and brave.
I doubt it at least within Russia, the kinda woman I mentioned would kill them all as she'd have no time for idiots and weathervane politicians that could turn against her.
Outside it, well we all remember how hard they simped for Kim Jong Un's sister.....
Bruh
pic unrelated
Or she would have PMSed, and the nukes would have already flown.
Some faggot: "Lol, England won't go to war half way around the world over a shitty little Island. Not when they have a woman for a prime minister!"
Thatcher: "I've got my nuclear subs sitting off the coast of argentina, and if you don't give me the codes to disable their missiles, I'm nuking Buenos Aires."
I been breathing pretty easy the whole war cause I don't care
Victoria Nuland planned the color revolution that overthrew Ukraine and put the anti-russian faction in charge. So no actually, this is specifically a woman's fault.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but haven’t there been some female leaders in history who were big fans of war?
Like Hillary Clinton and her desire to enforce a no-fly zone over Syria to protect Islamic terrorists from Russian airstrikes?
Women consider men's lives disposable and aren't used to suffering any consequences for their actions.
In no sense would a female leader not be a greater warmonger than any male counterpart.
History? What about now? There's many war mongering females in power in the West
Agreed. I was being a bit facetious because this is such a tired argument that women would bring about a great utopia if they were in charge.
Imagine Russian Kamala Harris...
Not even Boris Yeltsin was as incompetent as Kamala.
Some?
Because she would have nuked them and then ended the earth?
Yep, the war would definitely be over. Everything else too.
If the us stopped sending weapons for conscripted civilians to fight with, the war would be long over
more like Stephen Qween
I'm breathing fine because I don't worry about shit across the globe that has literally nothing to do with me, he should try it
Me: Try to convince me you know nothing about history in a single sentence.
King: Hold my cocaine, Xanax, Valium, NyQuil, marijuana, tobacco, and beer ...
Yeah because Russia would have already lost.
Leave it to a white man to white knight and whitemansplain WHAT HE THINKS A WOMAN WOULD DO in leadership.
if a woman was in charge of Russia, Vladiwostok would speak French by now.
Vladimira would have adopted scorched earth tactics? Russia would've lost sooner? Strange point to make either way.
Somebody should tell this clown what would actually help end this BS sooner. For foreign governments to stop sending weapons, to prolong a conflict that would otherwise have zero impact on their own citizens.
I also can't tell if he's saying a woman would lose due to incompetence or that she'd react more emotionally and would've already gone nuclear by now.