After Bakhmut

[Professor Pigworth]

Even the Ukrainians now admit they've lost Bakhmut. The Ukrainians are said to have the best-trained army in Europe and have had the full backing of NATO, yet they lost to Russian militia fighters.  Almost none of the fighting on the ground in the city was done by the Russian army, which mainly provided artillery support, e.g.   

After the loss of Bakhmut, the MSM is suddenly all about how strategically unimportant Bakhmut is.  All but forgotten now is Zelensky's statement last year that holding Bakhmut was critical and that it could spell the end of the Ukraine if they lost it.  

What is the US strategy?  How is it in the US's national interest to continue supplying the Ukrainians with unlimited funds, equipment, weapons, training, etc., especially in a cause that is almost certainly a lost one? The warmonger-in-chief had previously said that too much involvement could lead to WWIII, but since then he's been involving the US more and more by providing tanks, missiles, training, logistical support, etc. The latest pledge to Ukraine is to provide F-16s.

But a few dozen F-16s aren't going to make any difference.  Even the Pentagon has admitted this.  

The possible risk of escalation into WWIII remains and the economies of the West continue to suffer, but, well, as long as we can weaken Russia by fighting them with Ukrainians to the last man -- which seems to be the unstated policy of the US government -- then everything's just fine, I guess.

 

 

[shiva2999]

"If we go down, we're taking the rest of the world with us!" - Proud Ukrainian patriots

[SpikedLemonade]

1 minute ago, shiva2999 said:

"If we go down, we're taking the rest of the world with us!" - Proud Ukrainian patriots

The longer this "tour" of the Uke goes on, the longer Putin will need your services Shiva.

That means a continuous supply of Russian Whore Piss (R.W.P.) and double rides at the back of a horse with your arms wrapped around the bare chested one.

 

[shiva2999]

 

[HipKat]

1 hour ago, Professor Pigworth said:

Even the Ukrainians now admit they've lost Bakhmut. The Ukrainians are said to have the best-trained army in Europe and have had the full backing of NATO, yet they lost to Russian militia fighters.  Almost none of the fighting on the ground in the city was done by the Russian army, which mainly provided artillery support, e.g.   

After the loss of Bakhmut, the MSM is suddenly all about how strategically unimportant Bakhmut is.  All but forgotten now is Zelensky's statement last year that holding Bakhmut was critical and that it could spell the end of the Ukraine if they lost it.  

What is the US strategy?  How is it in the US's national interest to continue supplying the Ukrainians with unlimited funds, equipment, weapons, training, etc., especially in a cause that is almost certainly a lost one? The warmonger-in-chief had previously said that too much involvement could lead to WWIII, but since then he's been involving the US more and more by providing tanks, missiles, training, logistical support, etc. The latest pledge to Ukraine is to provide F-16s.

But a few dozen F-16s aren't going to make any difference.  Even the Pentagon has admitted this.  

The possible risk of escalation into WWIII remains and the economies of the West continue to suffer, but, well, as long as we can weaken Russia by fighting them with Ukrainians to the last man -- which seems to be the unstated policy of the US government -- then everything's just fine, I guess.

 

What did Russia win?? Bakhmut looks like the surface of the moon after all the extended, non-stop bombing.

Meanwhile...

Prigozhin begins withdrawal from Bakhmut after admitting loss of 20,000 troops and warning Putin’s invasion of Ukraine has backfired

Also...

Wagner chief says his fighters leaving Bakhmut, handing control to Moscow: Live Ukraine updates

The head of the Russian private military contractor Wagner said Thursday that his fighrers have begun withdrawing from the hotly contested Bakhmut as they hand control of the eastern city to Russia's military.

The announcement comes days after Wagner chief Yevgeny Prigozhin claimed his troops had captured the city after a grueling nine-month battle.

Prigozhin said in a video published on Telegram that the handover will be completed by June 1.

Ukrainian officials have insisted pockets of resistance remain in the eastern Ukrainian city, and Deputy Minister of Defense Hanna Maliar said Ukrainian forces still have a foothold in southwestern outskirts.

Bakhmut delivered a badly needed win for Russia as its invasion of Ukraine has lost momentum and Russian troops brace for a Ukrainian counteroffensive using weapons from Western allies.

Ukrainian presidential adviser Mykhailo Podolyak said Thursday that Ukraine’s counteroffensive was already underway. He said the counteroffensive would not be "a single event that will begin at a specific hour of a specific day."

"These are dozens of different actions to destroy the Russian occupation forces in different directions, which have already been taking place yesterday, are taking place today and will continue tomorrow," Podolyak said on Twitter.

 

I wouldn't get too excited yet

 

 

 

[shiva2999]

33 minutes ago, HipKat said:

.

I wouldn't get too excited yet

 

 

 

Wagner doesn't need to stick around and can move on now that Bakhmut is free of Ukrainian troops.

 

[Professor Pigworth]

 

[Herodotus]

8 hours ago, HipKat said:

What did Russia win?? Bakhmut looks like the surface of the moon after all the extended, non-stop bombing.

Meanwhile...

Prigozhin begins withdrawal from Bakhmut after admitting loss of 20,000 troops and warning Putin’s invasion of Ukraine has backfired

Also...

Wagner chief says his fighters leaving Bakhmut, handing control to Moscow: Live Ukraine updates

The head of the Russian private military contractor Wagner said Thursday that his fighrers have begun withdrawing from the hotly contested Bakhmut as they hand control of the eastern city to Russia's military.

The announcement comes days after Wagner chief Yevgeny Prigozhin claimed his troops had captured the city after a grueling nine-month battle.

Prigozhin said in a video published on Telegram that the handover will be completed by June 1.

Ukrainian officials have insisted pockets of resistance remain in the eastern Ukrainian city, and Deputy Minister of Defense Hanna Maliar said Ukrainian forces still have a foothold in southwestern outskirts.

Bakhmut delivered a badly needed win for Russia as its invasion of Ukraine has lost momentum and Russian troops brace for a Ukrainian counteroffensive using weapons from Western allies.

Ukrainian presidential adviser Mykhailo Podolyak said Thursday that Ukraine’s counteroffensive was already underway. He said the counteroffensive would not be "a single event that will begin at a specific hour of a specific day."

"These are dozens of different actions to destroy the Russian occupation forces in different directions, which have already been taking place yesterday, are taking place today and will continue tomorrow," Podolyak said on Twitter.

 

I wouldn't get too excited yet

 

 

 

Copium is a hell of a drug. . . .

 

[Herodotus]

Hey private Hockaloogie because huuah sounds like something a dumbass does before spitting on the sidewalk, ever hear of troop rotation? Yeah, Wagner did the job and are cycling out.  You? Well Cocainsky told CONgress that more money meant they would hold Bakhmut? Guess what didn't happen you stupid mothetfucker? They didn't hold it.

 

Why is Artemovsk important? Well it was used to shell a city of a 1 million people for nearly 9 years. Its part of a defensive line NATO forces spent the better part of a decade building up, and its on a high ground.  

 

Also, thanks for proving the old meme true:

 

The town will never be taken

The Russians must not be allowed to take the town

The town is insignificant and the Russians lost too much for nothing <you are here.

[HipKat]

4 hours ago, Herodotus said:

Hey private Hockaloogie because huuah sounds like something a dumbass does before spitting on the sidewalk, ever hear of troop rotation? Yeah, Wagner did the job and are cycling out.  You? Well Cocainsky told CONgress that more money meant they would hold Bakhmut? Guess what didn't happen you stupid mothetfucker? They didn't hold it.

 

Why is Artemovsk important? Well it was used to shell a city of a 1 million people for nearly 9 years. Its part of a defensive line NATO forces spent the better part of a decade building up, and its on a high ground.  

 

Also, thanks for proving the old meme true:

 

The town will never be taken

The Russians must not be allowed to take the town

The town is insignificant and the Russians lost too much for nothing <you are here.

I notice you ignoring that Ukraine claims to still have troops in the western part of the city

[Herodotus]

4 minutes ago, HipKat said:

I notice you ignoring that Ukraine claims to still have troops in the western part of the city

There is a bum on the bus who swears he is the president of the United States too.  I ignore his claim because he is high on crack and out of touch with reality.  I ignore Ukrainian claims too, and for the same reason.

[Professor Pigworth]

I didn't even know that Noam Chomsky was still alive. Here he is looking like he just came back from two years of living in a remote cabin in the woods. Nonetheless, he spouts some words of wisdom. I don't think it's true, however, what he says about Brazil being one of the countries not willing to go along with the US position on the war. The new (third-term) president there, Lula, is a classic example of a corrupt, pseudo-populist, semi-literate, anti-elite leader that does almost anything the US government and big corporations tell him to do and which is ruinous to the long-term prosperity of his own country. Maybe Chomsky was thinking of the previous Brazilian government. Too much time spent in the woods maybe.

And to illustrate just how low a regard Lula is held in around the world, he recently tried to kiss up to Zelensky at the G7 meeting in Japan.  He was desperate to meet with Zelensky, yet Zelensky stood him up.  You know your reputation must be really bad when you get stood up by Zelensky.

[shiva2999]

27 minutes ago, Professor Pigworth said:

I didn't even know that Noam Chomsky was still alive. Here he is looking like he just came back from two years of living in a remote cabin in the woods. Nonetheless, he spouts some words of wisdom. I don't think it's true, however, what he says about Brazil being one of the countries not willing to go along with the US position on the war. The new (third-term) president there, Lula, is a classic example of a corrupt, pseudo-populist, semi-literate, anti-elite leader that does almost anything the US government and big corporations tell him to do and which is ruinous to the long-term prosperity of his own country. Maybe Chomsky was thinking of the previous Brazilian government. Too much time spent in the woods maybe.

And to illustrate just how low a regard Lula is held in around the world, he recently tried to kiss up to Zelensky at the G7 meeting in Japan.  He was desperate to meet with Zelensky, yet Zelensky stood him up.  You know your reputation must be really bad when you get stood up by Zelensky.

Uh, where are you getting your information from?

IMO, Lula is a hero. It's Bolsonaro who's the right wing villain.

Do you have a link for the G7 story?

[shiva2999]

https://en.mercopress.com/2023/05/24/lula-says-zelensky-stood-him-up

 

Lula says Zelensky stood him up

Wednesday, May 24th 2023 - 10:05 UT

 

 

Lula insisted there was no point in meeting with Zelensky or Putin when “both are convinced that they are going to win the war”

Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula Da Silva said he was supposed to have met with his Ukrainian colleague Volodymyr Zelensky last weekend in Hiroshima but that the European leader must have had more important engagements. “I'm not disappointed, I'm upset,” Lula was quoted as saying while confirming the meeting had been arranged.

Read also: No Lula-Zelensky meeting in Hiroshima after all

“We waited, we received information that they had been delayed, and in the meantime, I attended to the leader of Vietnam. He left, we waited and Ukraine did not show up. That's what happened,” Lula told Folha while adding that he perceived a certain “disinterest” of his Ukrainian counterpart “in negotiating peace”.

“If he had another more serious problem, a more important meeting, I don't know. The concrete fact is that I was scheduled to meet with Zelensky here in this room at 3:15 p.m. and he never showed up,” said Lula, according to a Folha report. “Zelensky is of age, he knows what he is doing,” Lula added. “Although the meeting did not take place now, there will be other opportunities in the future,” he went on.

“I am trying, with India, China, Indonesia, and other countries, to build a bloc to try a policy of peace in the world,” Lula said. “We are a group of countries of the South that want to find the peace that the North is not achieving,” the Workers' Party leader explained.

Lula was criticized last month when he accused the United States of “encouraging” war. On Monday he upped the ante when saying that US President Joseph Biden's message that [Russian President Vladimir] “Putin must surrender and pay for everything he destroyed” was “not helping.”

The Brazilian President also said he did not understand the point of meeting with Zelensky at this time because neither the Ukrainian leader nor Putin show signs of wanting peace. “For now, both are convinced that they are going to win the war,” he said.

Meanwhile, Zelensky was sarcastic: “Perhaps the scheduling problems disappointed Lula,” he said.

 

[Professor Pigworth]

27 minutes ago, shiva2999 said:

Uh, where are you getting your information from?

IMO, Lula is a hero. It's Bolsonaro who's the right wing villain.

Do you have a link for the G7 story?

I used to live there for several years and still have ties to people who live there.

Lula being a hero is an invention of the media.  He's a clown and a fraud and utterly corrupt.   His popularity is built on taking money from the middle class and driving them close to extinction and handing over money and benefits to the poor in exchange for their votes. Yes, Bolsonaro is a right-wing villain, but Lula is a left-wing villain.  Both are contemptible. 

https://www.wionews.com/world/zelensky-was-late-brazils-lula-on-fell-through-meet-with-ukrainian-counterpart-594926

From this, you can see that even Zelensky doesn't respect Lula:

 

Quote

 

In response to a media query seeking answers if the Ukrainian president is disappointed that the meeting did not happen, Zelensky in a news presser gave a roundabout answer. Instead of speaking on his own take on the meeting, Zelensky smirked, saying, "I think it disappointed him."

 

It drew a laughter from the reporters who were present at the news conference. 

 

 

[shiva2999]

1. Taxing the wealthy to improve the lot of the poor isn't a novel idea. And the fact that the poor reward him with their votes for doing so doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

2. I'm sure Zelensky wouldn't respect me either. Big deal. Zelensky is a stooge. Seems to me this story is about Lula trying to help and Zelensky telling him to go fuck himself.

[Professor Pigworth]

10 minutes ago, shiva2999 said:

Lula was criticized last month when he accused the United States of “encouraging” war. On Monday he upped the ante when saying that US President Joseph Biden's message that [Russian President Vladimir] “Putin must surrender and pay for everything he destroyed” was “not helping.”

The Brazilian President also said he did not understand the point of meeting with Zelensky at this time because neither the Ukrainian leader nor Putin show signs of wanting peace. “For now, both are convinced that they are going to win the war,” he said.

 

To this, all I can say is I'm surprised to learn that Lula said something critical of the US position on the war. My second thought is, "Why? And what's in it for him?"

[Professor Pigworth]

3 minutes ago, shiva2999 said:

1. Taxing the wealthy to improve the lot of the poor isn't a novel idea. And the fact that the poor reward him with their votes for doing so doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

2. I'm sure Zelensky wouldn't respect me either. Big deal. Zelensky is a stooge. Seems to me this story is about Lula trying to help and Zelensky telling him to go fuck himself.

He didn't tax the wealthy.  He taxed the middle class.  The wealthy put him in power. 

[shiva2999]

1 minute ago, Professor Pigworth said:

To this, all I can say is I'm surprised to learn that Lula said something critical of the US position on the war. My second thought is, "Why? And what's in it for him?"

You still haven't given me a rational reason for considering Lula bad guy.

It's like claiming Lula is a proven bad guy because Bolsonaro railroaded him into the slammer for purely political reasons. 

[shiva2999]

2 minutes ago, Professor Pigworth said:

He didn't tax the wealthy.  He taxed the middle class.  The wealthy put him in power. 

Really?

How did the wealthy elect the left wing populist instead of the right wing fascist?

Did Bolsonaro raise taxes on them?

[Professor Pigworth]

3 minutes ago, shiva2999 said:

You still haven't given me a rational reason for considering Lula bad guy.

It's like claiming Lula is a proven bad guy because Bolsonaro railroaded him into the slammer for purely political reasons. 

Lula was sentenced to prison for corruption on the basis of compelling evidence. He probably could have been sentenced for any one of dozens of instances of corruption. He's also said to have ordered the killing of several people in his party, though he did not serve time for that.  During the investigation against him that resulted in him going to prison, one of Lula's cohorts, in exchange for a lesser sentence, claimed that Lula has one hundred million dollars stashed away in a secret offshore account in the Cayman Islands.

But the problem with tracing and recovering this stolen money is, as with everything else in Brazilian politics, that we are talking about corrupt people (judges, i.e.) that are investigating other corrupt people (politicians). Both parties are uber corrupt. The judiciary is uber corrupt. No one really wants to go all out against somebody for fear that they themselves will be investigated. 

Lula, a hero?  All right.  A lot of people outside of Brazil actually believe that, but I don't. You might as well tell me that Bolsonaro is a hero. 

[Professor Pigworth]

38 minutes ago, shiva2999 said:

Really?

How did the wealthy elect the left wing populist instead of the right wing fascist?

Did Bolsonaro raise taxes on them?

The wealthy control both the left and the right in Brazil.

No, as I said, he raised taxes on the middle class, not the wealthy.

Lula is a fake left-wing politician. He's all about neo liberalism, austerity, the curtailing of labour laws, etc.  He pays lip service to identity politics -- black lives matter, homosexual rights, etc. --  but there's little of substance to it.

Generally speaking and in my opinion, when the international media heap abundant praise on a politician, that politician is usually no good.  Look at Erdogan, who will probably be re-elected. Most of the international media hate him -- and I don't particularly like a lot of things about him either -- but he's nonetheless popular in Turkey and thinks of his own country's people first as opposed to all the globalists in power in other countries.  I do think it's great that a peace settlement in the Ukraine will be more likely than if his pro-Western, pro-austerity opponent gets elected.

[HipKat]

5 hours ago, shiva2999 said:

https://en.mercopress.com/2023/05/24/lula-says-zelensky-stood-him-up

 

Lula says Zelensky stood him up

Wednesday, May 24th 2023 - 10:05 UT

 

Lula insisted there was no point in meeting with Zelensky or Putin when “both are convinced that they are going to win the war”

Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula Da Silva said he was supposed to have met with his Ukrainian colleague Volodymyr Zelensky last weekend in Hiroshima but that the European leader must have had more important engagements. “I'm not disappointed, I'm upset,” Lula was quoted as saying while confirming the meeting had been arranged.

Read also: No Lula-Zelensky meeting in Hiroshima after all

“We waited, we received information that they had been delayed, and in the meantime, I attended to the leader of Vietnam. He left, we waited and Ukraine did not show up. That's what happened,” Lula told Folha while adding that he perceived a certain “disinterest” of his Ukrainian counterpart “in negotiating peace”.

“If he had another more serious problem, a more important meeting, I don't know. The concrete fact is that I was scheduled to meet with Zelensky here in this room at 3:15 p.m. and he never showed up,” said Lula, according to a Folha report. “Zelensky is of age, he knows what he is doing,” Lula added. “Although the meeting did not take place now, there will be other opportunities in the future,” he went on.

“I am trying, with India, China, Indonesia, and other countries, to build a bloc to try a policy of peace in the world,” Lula said. “We are a group of countries of the South that want to find the peace that the North is not achieving,” the Workers' Party leader explained.

Lula was criticized last month when he accused the United States of “encouraging” war. On Monday he upped the ante when saying that US President Joseph Biden's message that [Russian President Vladimir] “Putin must surrender and pay for everything he destroyed” was “not helping.”

The Brazilian President also said he did not understand the point of meeting with Zelensky at this time because neither the Ukrainian leader nor Putin show signs of wanting peace. “For now, both are convinced that they are going to win the war,” he said.

Meanwhile, Zelensky was sarcastic: “Perhaps the scheduling problems disappointed Lula,” he said.

 

That’s so weird because he was in Japan

Ukraine's Zelenskyy arrives in Hiroshima for G7 summit

so I can only imagine what the leader of the country with the most gun deaths on the planet, just about, I would have that was so pressing. I mean, it’s not like he was waiting to meet with somebody who’s country is at war

[shiva2999]

11 hours ago, Professor Pigworth said:

The wealthy control both the left and the right in Brazil.

No, as I said, he raised taxes on the middle class, not the wealthy.

Lula is a fake left-wing politician. He's all about neo liberalism, austerity, the curtailing of labour laws, etc.  He pays lip service to identity politics -- black lives matter, homosexual rights, etc. --  but there's little of substance to it.

Generally speaking and in my opinion, when the international media heap abundant praise on a politician, that politician is usually no good.  Look at Erdogan, who will probably be re-elected. Most of the international media hate him -- and I don't particularly like a lot of things about him either -- but he's nonetheless popular in Turkey and thinks of his own country's people first as opposed to all the globalists in power in other countries.  I do think it's great that a peace settlement in the Ukraine will be more likely than if his pro-Western, pro-austerity opponent gets elected.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luiz_Inácio_Lula_da_Silva

Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (Brazilian Portuguese: [luˈiz iˈnasju ˈlulɐ dɐ ˈsiwvɐ] (listen); born Luiz Inácio da Silva; 27 October 1945),^[1] also known as Lula da Silva or simply Lula, is a Brazilian politician who is the 39th and current president of Brazil. A member of the Workers' Party, he previously served as the 35th president of Brazil from 2003 to 2010.

 

Of working-class origin, Lula migrated as a child from Pernambuco to São Paulo with his family. As a teenager, he began his career as a metalworker and became a trade unionist. During the military dictatorship in Brazil, he led major workers' strikes between 1978 and 1980, and helped start the Workers' Party in 1980, during Brazil's political opening. Lula was one of the main leaders of the Diretas Já movement, which demanded democratic elections. In the 1986 Brazilian legislative election, he was elected as a federal deputy in the state of São Paulo, with the most votes nationwide. He ran his first major campaign in the 1989 Brazilian presidential election, losing in the second round to Fernando Collor de Mello. He went on to lose two other presidential elections in 1994 and 1998 to Fernando Henrique Cardoso, before becoming president in the 2002 Brazilian presidential election, in which he defeated José Serra in the runoff. In 2006, he was re-elected as president, defeating Geraldo Alckmin in the second round.^[3]

Described as left-wing,^[4][5][6] his first presidency, which coincided with the first pink tide in the region, was marked by the consolidation of social welfare programs such as Bolsa Família and Fome Zero, which propelled Brazil to leave the United Nations' Hunger Map.^[7] During his two terms in office, he undertook radical reforms in the country, which eventually led to growth in GDP, reduction in public debt and inflation, and helping 20 million Brazilians escape poverty.^[8] Poverty, inequality, illiteracy, unemployment, infant mortality, and child labor rates fell significantly, while the minimum wage and average income increased, and access to school, university, and health care was expanded. He also played a prominent role in foreign policy, both on a regional level (as part of the BRICS) and as part of global trade and environmental negotiations.^[9] Lula was considered one of the most popular politicians in the history of Brazil, and was one of the most popular in the world while president.^[10][11][12] Although popular, his first term was marked by notable scandals, such as the Mensalão scandal and Escândalo dos sanguessugas [pt]. After the 2010 Brazilian general election, he was succeeded by his former Chief of Staff, Dilma Rousseff.^[13]

After his first presidency, Lula remained active in politics, and began giving lectures in Brazil and abroad. In 2016, he was appointed as Rousseff's Chief of Staff, but the appointment was suspended by the Supreme Federal Court.^[14][15] In July 2017, Lula was convicted on charges of money laundering and corruption in a controversial trial that was later nullified in April 2021 by the Supreme Court Justices, due to the court lacking proper jurisdiction over his case.^[16][17] Lula attempted to run in the 2018 Brazilian presidential election but was disqualified under Brazil's Ficha Limpa law.^[18] Before the annulment of his cases, he was sentenced to nine and a half years in prison, and after an unsuccessful appeal, Lula was arrested in April 2018 and spent 580 days in jail, until being released in November 2019, when the Supreme Federal Court ruled that his imprisonment was unlawful.^{[19][20][21][22]} In March 2021, the Supreme Court ruled that the federal judge presiding over the case, Sergio Moro, who served as Minister of Justice and Public Security in the presidency of Jair Bolsonaro,^[23] was biased,^[24] and all of the cases Moro had brought against Lula were annulled in June 2021. Following the court ruling, Lula was legally allowed to make another run for president in the 2022 elections, defeating Bolsonaro in the runoff.^[25] He became the first Brazilian president to have been elected to a third term, and the first to have defeated an incumbent president in an election. At age 77, he was sworn in on 1 January 2023, as the oldest Brazilian president at the time of inauguration.^[26][27][4] A week later, the Praça dos Três Poderes was attacked in an invasion led by pro-Bolsonaro rioters. Lula condemned the attack.

...more...

You would think that wikipedia, an American site, would be happy to excoriate Lula if the accusations had any credibility, but they don't.

Why?

Cuz I have no doubts that if Lula was as bad as you say an American Web site wouldn't be shy about making the accusations, but they don't either.

Why?

 

[Professor Pigworth]

11 hours ago, shiva2999 said:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luiz_Inácio_Lula_da_Silva

Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (Brazilian Portuguese: [luˈiz iˈnasju ˈlulɐ dɐ ˈsiwvɐ] (listen); born Luiz Inácio da Silva; 27 October 1945),^[1] also known as Lula da Silva or simply Lula, is a Brazilian politician who is the 39th and current president of Brazil. A member of the Workers' Party, he previously served as the 35th president of Brazil from 2003 to 2010.

 

Of working-class origin, Lula migrated as a child from Pernambuco to São Paulo with his family. As a teenager, he began his career as a metalworker and became a trade unionist. During the military dictatorship in Brazil, he led major workers' strikes between 1978 and 1980, and helped start the Workers' Party in 1980, during Brazil's political opening. Lula was one of the main leaders of the Diretas Já movement, which demanded democratic elections. In the 1986 Brazilian legislative election, he was elected as a federal deputy in the state of São Paulo, with the most votes nationwide. He ran his first major campaign in the 1989 Brazilian presidential election, losing in the second round to Fernando Collor de Mello. He went on to lose two other presidential elections in 1994 and 1998 to Fernando Henrique Cardoso, before becoming president in the 2002 Brazilian presidential election, in which he defeated José Serra in the runoff. In 2006, he was re-elected as president, defeating Geraldo Alckmin in the second round.^[3]

Described as left-wing,^[4][5][6] his first presidency, which coincided with the first pink tide in the region, was marked by the consolidation of social welfare programs such as Bolsa Família and Fome Zero, which propelled Brazil to leave the United Nations' Hunger Map.^[7] During his two terms in office, he undertook radical reforms in the country, which eventually led to growth in GDP, reduction in public debt and inflation, and helping 20 million Brazilians escape poverty.^[8] Poverty, inequality, illiteracy, unemployment, infant mortality, and child labor rates fell significantly, while the minimum wage and average income increased, and access to school, university, and health care was expanded. He also played a prominent role in foreign policy, both on a regional level (as part of the BRICS) and as part of global trade and environmental negotiations.^[9] Lula was considered one of the most popular politicians in the history of Brazil, and was one of the most popular in the world while president.^[10][11][12] Although popular, his first term was marked by notable scandals, such as the Mensalão scandal and Escândalo dos sanguessugas [pt]. After the 2010 Brazilian general election, he was succeeded by his former Chief of Staff, Dilma Rousseff.^[13]

After his first presidency, Lula remained active in politics, and began giving lectures in Brazil and abroad. In 2016, he was appointed as Rousseff's Chief of Staff, but the appointment was suspended by the Supreme Federal Court.^[14][15] In July 2017, Lula was convicted on charges of money laundering and corruption in a controversial trial that was later nullified in April 2021 by the Supreme Court Justices, due to the court lacking proper jurisdiction over his case.^[16][17] Lula attempted to run in the 2018 Brazilian presidential election but was disqualified under Brazil's Ficha Limpa law.^[18] Before the annulment of his cases, he was sentenced to nine and a half years in prison, and after an unsuccessful appeal, Lula was arrested in April 2018 and spent 580 days in jail, until being released in November 2019, when the Supreme Federal Court ruled that his imprisonment was unlawful.^{[19][20][21][22]} In March 2021, the Supreme Court ruled that the federal judge presiding over the case, Sergio Moro, who served as Minister of Justice and Public Security in the presidency of Jair Bolsonaro,^[23] was biased,^[24] and all of the cases Moro had brought against Lula were annulled in June 2021. Following the court ruling, Lula was legally allowed to make another run for president in the 2022 elections, defeating Bolsonaro in the runoff.^[25] He became the first Brazilian president to have been elected to a third term, and the first to have defeated an incumbent president in an election. At age 77, he was sworn in on 1 January 2023, as the oldest Brazilian president at the time of inauguration.^[26][27][4] A week later, the Praça dos Três Poderes was attacked in an invasion led by pro-Bolsonaro rioters. Lula condemned the attack.

...more...

You would think that wikipedia, an American site, would be happy to excoriate Lula if the accusations had any credibility, but they don't.

Why?

Cuz I have no doubts that if Lula was as bad as you say an American Web site wouldn't be shy about making the accusations, but they don't either.

Why?

 

I can't answer to why this or that article or site doesn't speak ill of Lula.

I can only guess that whoever wrote this for Wikipedia -- and let's remember that almost anybody can write anything they want for Wikipedia -- probably relied on sources from the mainstream media. 

The mainstream media are all in favour of Lula and think he's swell and that any accusations against him must be false. For whatever reason, that's the narrative they've chosen to go with. So maybe if you consult independent news sources, you might get closer to the truth. 

I will say that it speaks well of him that he criticised the US policy against Russia. I consulted a Brazilian friend of mine about this, and was told that after he did that, he was chastised by Biden and that, spineless US lackey that he is, he has now backed down and fallen in line with the US government's policy that states Russia is all evil all of the time and completely at fault for the war and that the Ukraine and NATO bear no responsibility for the war.

P.S.:  I now see that I confused Lula with Bolsonaro when you asked earlier on if he, Bolsonaro, raised taxes on the rich. No, Bolsonaro didn't raise taxes on the rich either. Both Bolsonaro and Lula defend their own social class. The difference is that Lula pretends to care about the poor.