War in Ukraine

#101
#101
hog88 said:
they won’t move until the ground is frozen and Western Europe is dependent on their NG.
Click to expand...
That second one already exists, does it not?

Seems like they'd wait until the spring at this point to move, even if ground was frozen. That weather still gets brutal even if you aren't getting stuck in the muck. There's a reason they moved on Donbas when they did...they started in May.
 
#102
#102
Burhead said:
When you have your security forces use snipers on your own people you lose any and all credibility and legitimacy.
Click to expand...

You may well be right, but I'm reflexively skeptical of such claims, as they've been used with some regularity to whip up support for regime change around the world. Is there independent verification of the claims made against Yanukovych by the government that succeeded him after the revolution? Regardless, the fact remains that Yanukovych was the duly elected president, and his ouster made many Ukrainians feel that they had been disenfranchised.

We have a right to protest but that's it. So in your scenario should we launch a covert invasion of Canada and Mexico, steal their territory, and then create puppet governments and claim it wasn't us but the "people" of those regions that wanted independence?
Click to expand...

If a hostile nuclear power were to insinuate itself militarily into the territory of one of our neighbors, we would take such measures as were expedient for the maintenance of our national security (as we have done throughout our history). If we were justified to intervene militarily in Yugoslavia, Iraq, and Libya, we most certainly would be justified to respond militarily to a provocation on our own doorstep.

I don't see why Americans would have an issue, there would be no conflict if Ukraine was in NATO if Russia doesn't start one. NATO is not the modern day Wehrmacht itching to invade Russia no matter how badly Russian media portrays it as such.
Click to expand...

The reception of a Ukraine or a Georgia into NATO would obligate the United States to go to war on behalf of a country that is of no meaningful strategic significance to us and that can offer no meaningful assistance to us should we be attacked. If Ukraine had been a member of NATO in 2014, the United States would have been obliged to go to war with Russia over a territory that Ukraine made absolutely no effort to defend (in fact, over 9,000 of their soldiers and officers and over 7,000 of their civilian administrators defected to Russia). What benefit could possibly accrue to America from such an arrangement?

To be clear, I don't mean to take the side of the government of Russia over that of the government of Ukraine. I'm simply arguing 1) that the relationship between these two states is far more complex and intertwined than most Americans imagine and 2) that we stand only to harm ourselves by entangling ourselves in their affairs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#103
#103
05_never_again said:
That second one already exists, does it not?

Seems like they'd wait until the spring at this point to move, even if ground was frozen. That weather still gets brutal even if you aren't getting stuck in the muck. There's a reason they moved on Donbas when they did...they started in May.
Click to expand...

Europe (Germany) isn’t in the dead of winter yet so they could still offer token resistance.

If Russia is going full on invasion they would want the ground frozen because that offers so much more maneuverable ground. Their tanks, APCs aren’t near as vulnerable to the the cold as they used to be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#104
#104
DuckInAPen said:
The reception of a Ukraine or a Georgia into NATO would obligate the United States to go to war on behalf of a country that is of no meaningful strategic significance to us and that can offer no meaningful assistance to us should we be attacked. If Ukraine had been a member of NATO in 2014, the United States would have been obliged to go to war with Russia over a territory that Ukraine made absolutely no effort to defend (in fact, over 9,000 of their soldiers and officers and over 7,000 of their civilian administrators defected to Russia). What benefit could possibly accrue to America from such an arrangement?

To be clear, I don't mean to take the side of the government of Russia over that of the government of Ukraine. I'm simply arguing 1) that the relationship between these two states is far more complex and intertwined than most Americans imagine and 2) that we stand only to harm ourselves by entangling ourselves in their affairs.
Click to expand...

My contention is if Ukraine was in NATO in 2014 Russia would not have made a move on Crimea nor Donbas.
 
#106
#106
Burhead said:
When you have your security forces use snipers on your own people you lose any and all credibility and legitimacy.
Click to expand...
Yanukovych wasn't in charge of those snipers. Those were colour revolutionary mercenaries that were brought in by the US State Department ad Soros organizations.

Burhead said:
I don't see why Americans would have an issue, there would be no conflict if Ukraine was in NATO if Russia doesn't start one. NATO is not the modern day Wehrmacht itching to invade Russia no matter how badly Russian media portrays it as such.
Click to expand...
The very fact that you have NATO trying to expand into former Warsaw Pact nations is provocative and a violation of the verbal agreement that there would not be any further NATO expansion in the early 1990s.
 
#109
#109
Rasputin_Vol said:
Yanukovych wasn't in charge of those snipers. Those were colour revolutionary mercenaries that were brought in by the US State Department ad Soros organizations.


The very fact that you have NATO trying to expand into former Warsaw Pact nations is provocative and a violation of the verbal agreement that there would not be any further NATO expansion in the early 1990s.
Click to expand...

God I forgot how dedicated to the cause you were Ras.

If there was no formal, handwritten agreement between the West and Russia about not expanding into the former Warsaw Pact then there is no issues there. History is written by the victors as they say.
 
#110
#110
Burhead said:
God I forgot how dedicated to the cause you were Ras.

If there was no formal, handwritten agreement between the West and Russia about not expanding into the former Warsaw Pact then there is no issues there. History is written by the victors as they say.
Click to expand...
So our word doesn't mean jack s^^t. Thanks for answering my question.
 
#112
#112
Rasputin_Vol said:
The cause? You mean non-intervention? You mean worrying about our own borders instead of the Russia-Ukraine border? The Belarus-Poland border?

You sound silly right now.
Click to expand...

Ras you know as well as I do you're reciting Russian talking points and have since 2014.
 
#115
#115
Until we secure our own border against the INVASION that sees 200k unvetted illegals enter the US every month....I dont want to hear a WORD about any borders on the other side of the world.

Self preservation is instinct. Dimwits must consciously deny that instinct in order to be so damn stupid regarding the invasion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StarRaider, UT_Dutchman, allvol123 and 3 others
#118
#118
Matt2496 said:
Putin tells Macron US leading 'provocative' exercises in Black Sea

"According to the Elysee, Macron told Putin that France was ready to defend Ukraine's territorial integrity."

This is a good thing. Let Europe handle it
Click to expand...
The French are going to stand up to the Russians over somebody else’s country? My ass they are…

They’ll put a token number of troops in harms way to be sacrificed, get those tokens waxed, and scream for Article 5 assistance.

The damn French are gonna fight the Russians… indeed…
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and StarRaider
#119
#119
NorthDallas40 said:
The French are going to stand up to the Russians over somebody else’s country? My ass they are…

They’ll put a token number of troops in harms way to be sacrificed, get those tokens waxed, and scream for Article 5 assistance.

The damn French are gonna fight the Russians… indeed…
Click to expand...

I think you'd be surprised. The French probably have the best European military and are willing to use it since Britain and Germany quit caring about military power.
 
#120
#120
Burhead said:
I think you'd be surprised. The French probably have the best European military and are willing to use it since Britain and Germany quit caring about military power.
Click to expand...
You’re right I would be surprised if they were the most effective EU military. But good for them then let them handle a clearly European problem.

Are people are tired, our coffers are empty, and our equipment is worn out. Just leave us alone and out of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, Rasputin_Vol, DuckInAPen and 1 other person
#122
#122
Lies, lies, lies...

US Calls Belarus Migrant Crisis "Distraction" From Ukraine, Threatens Fresh Russia Sanctions | ZeroHedge

Western media reports from early this month suggested a Russian troop build-up similar to last April. In particular a viral story in Politico identified the Russian town of Yelnya as key site of a new concentration of Russian forces. But Yelnya is a full 155 miles from Ukraine's border.
Click to expand...

yelnya.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#123
#123
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top