Winter (@Winter_Tactics) header
Winter (@Winter_Tactics) profile picture
Pine Gap, Australia
Joined April 2013
Photo by Winter (@Winter_Tactics)Photo by Winter (@Winter_Tactics)Photo by Winter (@Winter_Tactics)Photo by Winter (@Winter_Tactics)Photo by Winter (@Winter_Tactics)Photo by Winter (@Winter_Tactics)Photo by Winter (@Winter_Tactics)Photo by Winter (@Winter_Tactics)Photo by Winter (@Winter_Tactics)Photo by Winter (@Winter_Tactics)
Trump has abused the presidency and turned it into a personal grift machine, using the power of the office to benefit himself, his family, his brand, and his wealth. It’s corruption. Plain and simple.
4,248
2,272
196
12,258
187,769
Replying to @DHughesy
Thank you, Dave. I appreciate you reaching out to ask what you got wrong. The clip we’re discussing is less than 90 seconds long. What I’m about to do demonstrates Brandolini's Law: where the amount of energy required to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude greater than that required to produce it. Or, in this case, it takes around 600 words to correct 90 seconds of your economic fan fiction. 1⃣ Between 0 and 30 seconds You begin by confusing government debt with the Future Fund and appear to suggest that the Future Fund can't exist along side Govt debt. They’re different things. One can exist without the other, and in Australia they do. Australia's Future Fund was established in 2006 with an initial govt investment of about $60B. Its first annual report, in 2008, showed assets of around $64 billion - not the $100B you suggested. Then, at around 27 seconds, you talk about the Future Fund as though it ceased to exist (you used the word 'had' as in past tense). It still very much exists Dave. In fact, it's grown every single year since it was created. Today it's worth around $270 billion, or over $330 billion once the other funds under management are included (eg Medical Research / Housing Australia / Drought). So before we're even 30 seconds into the clip you've managed to confuse government debt, the Future Fund, its size, and whether it still exists. That’s a lot of economic history to get wrong in under 30 seconds. 2⃣ Around 32 seconds You then claim Kevin Rudd used the Future Fund to "flush money through the economy". Again, that’s simply false. The Future Fund wasn't used to fund the stimulus. It wasn't used to build school halls. It wasn’t used for any of the things you’re describing. In your defence, you do briefly flirt with the possibility that you don’t actually know what you’re talking about. Sadly, it was a very short-lived relationship. The GFC stimulus was funded through government borrowing. For context, construction approvals were collapsing, more than a million Australians worked in construction, and the objective was to stop unemployment exploding during the worst global financial crisis in generations. You're welcome to argue that was the wrong policy (but you didn't). You’re not entitled to rewrite where the money came from. 3⃣ At about 44 seconds You say, "I might be wrong". I concede you were correct during this part of the video. 4⃣ From 44 seconds onwards You make a series of broad claims about the GFC response. Yes, government debt increased. That's true. What you omit is that Australia's stimulus largely went directly to households rather than primarily rescuing financial institutions, as happened in many other countries. The aim was simple: keep people spending, businesses operating and Australians employed while global demand collapsed. It's known as counter-cyclical fiscal policy. Whether you agree with it politically is your business. The specific outcome for Australia isn't contested though - Australia was one of only two economies in the OECD to avoid recession during the Global Financial Crisis. There's no reality where that wasn’t a comparatively impressive outcome. The money didn’t need to "trickle down". The entire point was that it started at the bottom. 5⃣ Government debt Throughout the clip (and in life generally) you repeatedly return to the theme Labor is responsible for Australia’s debt (which btw is comparatively low). Here are the actual numbers of net debt added by each Govt since 2007. > Rudd/Gillard: about $190 billion over six years. > Abbott/Turnbull/Morrison: about $366 billion over nine years, around two-thirds of which pre-dated COVID. > Albanese: about $75 billion over four years. Those figures don’t support the story you've been telling people. And that’s really the issue. This isn't about getting one date wrong or misremembering one statistic. Nearly every claim in your 90-second clip turns out to be either wrong or misleading. If you're going to publicly lecture Australians about economic history, the bare minimum expectation is that you’ve first acquainted yourself with it. Because once the errors have been pointed out, as they have been to you multiple times, every repetition stops looking like an accident and starts looking like a strategy. Given your very public coffee with Angus Taylor last week, perhaps people are entitled to ask what that strategy might be.
530
1,664
214
7,897
1,093,552
Hi @DrewPavlou We are well aware that we are shit. That's our purpose - To show that anyone can do music. A lot like political discourse, you've proven that any dumb fuck can do it. Key difference - we're self-aware. You are a parasitic grifter. Grift! Grift! Grift! #HODL
96
295
21
3,104
68,951
Wow! I have nearly 2000 (soon to be un-) happy customers!
187
277
60
3,726
114,442
Fucking lol.
It's pretty cool how some of you who act like you're friends with me are publicly gloating over Elon's decision to unfollow me. Good to know where I stand with you!
1
2
231
This will be Sasha loves ruzzia in a few years… xitter.gq/8Two2Four/status/20593…
36
26
5
260
7,589
We’re calling it: The war in Ukraine has entered a new phase. @KatStepanenko and I have authored a new special report studying how Ukraine is actively challenging the positional character of the war that has dominated the battlefield since 2023. Data on Russia’s battlefield performance indicates that the character of the war is shifting in favor of Ukrainian forces – at least for now. Russian forces rates of advances are stagnating while Ukrainian forces are employing novel tactics and operational concepts in efforts to break out of positional warfare. Neither Russia nor Ukraine can conduct operational maneuvers yet, however. The bottom line is that the war in Ukraine is competitive and far from stalemated. Ukrainian forces are out-innovating Russian forces in both military technologies and in applying these new technologies in effective operational concepts that can help Ukrainian forces break out of positional warfare. Ukraine is employing mechanized equipment in tactical maneuvers in ways that were impossible 12 months ago. Russia’s ability to conduct infiltration missions will likely continue to degrade as Ukraine’s intermediate-range strike campaign pushes Russia’s logistics and forward operating bases further away from the frontlines, reducing resourcing to sustain infantry tasked with infiltration missions. Ukraine may be able to scale these effects if they resourced properly by international partners. Ukraine’s advantage in intermediate range strikes is notably not permanent, and Russia will very likely eventually develop countermeasures to mitigate Ukraine’s advantages. Ukraine’s international partners thus have a rare and temporary opportunity to help Ukraine exploit favorable battlefield dynamics while Ukraine has the upper hand. Key Points of the report: • Russia’s rate of advance is plummeting during the Russian Spring-Summer 2026 offensive. • Russia is losing more soldiers to make fewer gains, with monthly Russian casualty rates reportedly outpacing monthly recruitment since December 2025. • Ukraine is starting to regain more ground than it is losing for the first time since 2023. • Ukraine’ recent counterattacks feature unique characteristics and deviate from key trends that defined the positional character of the war since 2023. • Ukraine is conducting a pattern of more frequent mechanized counterattacks at the tactical level for the first time since 2023. • The Ukrainian command’s operational planning is maturing. • Ukraine’s early 2026 counterattacks in the south were successful likely due to better planning and preparation of the battlefield. • Ukraine has been conducting a coherent campaign to suppress and destroy Russian air defenses since late 2025, in order to shape the battlefield as part of more sophisticated campaign planning. • Ukraine significantly intensified its intermediate-range strike campaign against dynamic targets in Spring 2026 in order to degrade Russian logistics at operational depths ahead of planned Ukrainian maneuver. • Ukrainian forces started actively disrupting Russian railway logistics in occupied Ukraine and Russian western regions in Spring 2026. • Ukrainian intermediate-range strikes are already achieving notable operational effects, including degrading Russia's ability to use the key Russian highway connecting Russia to occupied Crimea and GLOCs around Donetsk City. • Ukrainian forces decisively seized the initiative in intermediate-range strikes by fielding new technologies such as the US-made Hornet strike UAV, among other systems. • Ukrainian forces are achieving temporary tactical drone overmatch in some frontline sectors, which is slowing Russian offensive operations by degrading the effectiveness of Russian shaping operations. • Ukrainian forces likely achieved tactical drone overmatch in certain frontline sectors after degrading Russia’s drone capabilities in late 2025 to early 2026 - primarily by suppressing drone launch positions and increasingly intercepting Russian tactical UAVs. • Ukraine’s degradation of Russian forces at operational depth combined with tactical-level drone overmatch likely is creating vulnerabilities in the Russian lines. • Ukraine’s intermediate-range strike campaign is likely far from its zenith, assuming continued support from Ukraine’s partners, and will likely intensify over 2026 as Ukraine fields new weapons capable of striking Russian’s operational rear. Link to full report: understandingwar.org/researc…
168
1,673
178
6,743
919,227
Winter retweeted
Shoutout to Volodymyr Zelenskyy for surviving actual assassination attempts and never demanding a ballroom once.
356
6,398
66
48,988
397,425
The Kremlin has officially branded NAFO as a “hacker group” whose objective is to “inflict maximum damage” against Russia. Well done, dogs!
734
2,267
370
8,857
210,839
Under 600 followers? How unNafo like, call your friends, call your neighbors, we need a dog pile @Mariafellageek
1
220
Winter retweeted
Replying to @Ravenismeee
China..... with the low quality
30
17
1,891
43,027
Much pathetic, very weak. Such Shill.
Replying to @BowesChay
As a ‘journalist’ what evidence do you present that Ukraine is either of those statements? You present them as fact. Prove it.
2
137