War in Ukraine

#6,426
#6,426
lawgator1 said:
On the issue of how this would have unfolded under Trump rather than Biden, that is a very interesting issue. I admit that the worry that this will lead to a broader confrontation and suck the US into the fray is absolutely legitimate. I completely agree and have the same worry.

And yes you can say that is more likely under Biden than under Trump. I think that is a fair point given Trump's at least quasi-isolationist positions and his insistence we not get involved in wars that, for lack of a better phrase, don't concern us.

The flip side of that is that you have to have a considered discussion of whether this concerns us. If Russia attacked the UK you'd have to say it concerns us. If they attacked France or Germany, same though there'd be more dissent certainly as our need to protect them versus the UK with whom we have at leats a culturally closer identity.

And so the question then becomes, if Trump would not be as quick to get into a confrontation as Biden, isn't it also true that such would embolden Putin more, and perhaps make it more likely that Putin would be aggressive, even more so than he is now?

That's the hard part for any President: portray enough strength to dissuade Russia and Putin from engaging in military adventurism, but not do so in a way that leads to a calamitous escalation of tensions. Very difficult line to walk, be it Biden, Trump, Republican, or Democrat.
Click to expand...

WTF? Are you drunk?
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheBigOne10, PEPPERJAX and kiddiedoc
#6,431
#6,431
Volnanza said:
Winner winner chicken dinner. I learned way back in HS geography that Crimea was the only port that had warm water access (we had real teachers back then). This means there is no chance of it freezing over in winter. It also has access to the Med and Atlantic. This means it is their MOST important port and they will never give it up. It's to bad we had idiot obama as president. He didn't realize that Crimea is more important to Russia than Norfolk is to us so he tried to be cute and Putin just took it. The smart path would have been to negotiate a long term lease with Ukraine. Russia gets their port, Ukraine gets paid, we stay out of war. Putin found it so easy to take Crimea the first time that he is back for another bite. Notice that he waited until brain dead Joe got in office.

Of course all of this could have been avoided had Ukraine kept the nukes left behind by the USSR. They were talked into giving them up in return for a promise of protection by the west to protect them. That was when the first Bush was prez. So what is the lesson here about? It's about making deals with dems and rinos. Just say NO.

Lets go Brandon.
Click to expand...

Can't see what that really gets them other than access to the Black Sea and really tight passages - less than a half mile wide through a couple of long, twisty, narrow straits that lead to the Aegean and then the Med. Battleships in a bathtub going through chokepoints controlled by other countries. Chokepoints are always the bane of military operations because of exposure - just nowhere to go fast or to hide. The Russians best hope is for global warming to keep the Artic open.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeburst
#6,432
#6,432
lawgator1 said:
On the issue of how this would have unfolded under Trump rather than Biden, that is a very interesting issue. I admit that the worry that this will lead to a broader confrontation and suck the US into the fray is absolutely legitimate. I completely agree and have the same worry.

And yes you can say that is more likely under Biden than under Trump. I think that is a fair point given Trump's at least quasi-isolationist positions and his insistence we not get involved in wars that, for lack of a better phrase, don't concern us.

The flip side of that is that you have to have a considered discussion of whether this concerns us. If Russia attacked the UK you'd have to say it concerns us. If they attacked France or Germany, same though there'd be more dissent certainly as our need to protect them versus the UK with whom we have at leats a culturally closer identity.

And so the question then becomes, if Trump would not be as quick to get into a confrontation as Biden, isn't it also true that such would embolden Putin more, and perhaps make it more likely that Putin would be aggressive, even more so than he is now?

That's the hard part for any President: portray enough strength to dissuade Russia and Putin from engaging in military adventurism, but not do so in a way that leads to a calamitous escalation of tensions. Very difficult line to walk, be it Biden, Trump, Republican, or Democrat.
Click to expand...

More ifs and hypotheticals...One could theorize any a number of scenarios..maybe Putin respects Trumps commitment more, maybe our military is better prepared, maybe if we were not so fragmented by a faux Russian collusion narrative, maybe, maybe, maybe.

The point being that this is on Biden's watch and his "tough" call on response and further escalation. He wanted the call to duty and says he is a foreign policy expert, so he better pull it through. So lets stop playing arm chair.
 
#6,433
#6,433
hog88 said:
Couldn't tell it by that post.
Click to expand...

giphy.gif
 
#6,439
#6,439
BowlBrother85 said:
Let's not paraphrase here. Trump referred to Putin's justification for this incursion as "genius." Trump then told us that Putin was a savvy guy. Nowhere was Trump critical of Putin. He was only critical of Biden.

Trump saying that Putin wouldn't have done this if he was still in office, is not a condemnation of this actual Russian incursion. You are a Trump fan boy who wants to see something which simply isn't there. Trump did nothing but praise Putin.

Also, why would Putin be afraid of Trump? Trump publicly sided with Putin's denial concerning the December 2020 massive cyber attack of American businesses, over the conclusion of his own Secretary of State. Trump always sides with any Putin denial. This time, he called him savvy too.

That is a bizarre way for a former American President to characterize an act of Russian aggression.

You are more than twisted. Your defense of Trump for this is downright pathetic. His comments were bizarre and your defense of those comments are inane and ignorant.
Click to expand...

Unlike you who began parsing out the 'genius' and 'savvy' comment, I have no need to parse or paraphrase which is why I posted the excerpt from the interview in entirety. Again:

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Well, what went wrong was a rigged election and what went wrong is a candidate that shouldn’t be there and a man that has no concept of what he’s doing. I went in yesterday and there was a television screen, and I said, “This is genius.” Putin declares a big portion of the Ukraine — of Ukraine. Putin declares it as independent. Oh, that’s wonderful.

So, Putin is now saying, “It’s independent,” a large section of Ukraine. I said, “How smart is that?” And he’s gonna go in and be a peacekeeper. That’s strongest peace force… We could use that on our southern border. That’s the strongest peace force I’ve ever seen. There were more army tanks than I’ve ever seen. They’re gonna keep peace all right. No, but think of it. Here’s a guy who’s very savvy… I know him very well. Very, very well.

By the way, this never would have happened with us. Had I been in office, not even thinkable. This would never have happened. But here’s a guy that says, you know, “I’m gonna declare a big portion of Ukraine independent,” he used the word “independent,” “and we’re gonna go out and we’re gonna go in and we’re gonna help keep peace.” You gotta say that’s pretty savvy. And you know what the response was from Biden? There was no response. They didn’t have one for that. No, it’s very sad. Very sad."

Your finding "support for Russian aggression" and that "Trump is happier than a pig in slop" over the invasion, doesn't make me a Trump fan boy for pointing out your mild insanity; it simply makes you wildly irrational and a sleazy bomb-thrower.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RavinDave, DC_Vol, Vol423 and 2 others
#6,444
#6,444
Franklin Pierce said:
In Continuation of Obama Legacy, Biden Presides Over Russian Invasion of Ukraine

Trump right again: 'Putin is playing Biden like a drum.'

biden-obama-putin.png


Andrew Stiles • February 24, 2022 1:20 pm

President Joe Biden on Thursday presided over the invasion of Ukraine by Russian forces. The failure to deter Vladimir Putin's aggression marks a continuation of Barack Obama's failed foreign policy and legacy of American weakness. It is a decisive break from Donald Trump's successful policy of powerful American strength.

Putin announced a "special military operation" in Ukraine at around 10 p.m. Eastern Time, well past Biden's bedtime. Military operations were already underway. It is the second time in eight years that Russia has invaded Ukraine on a Democratic president's watch. This violation of Ukrainian sovereignty was even more blatant than the incursion that occurred under Obama in early 2014, when unmarked Russian forces entered Ukraine and facilitated the annexation of Crimea.


Obama's response to Russia's actions was one of extraordinary weakness. "Over the last several days, we've continued to be deeply concerned by events in Ukraine," the failed president told reporters in March 2014. "Russia must know that further escalation will only isolate it further from the international community." Putin was not deterred.

Years earlier, Obama had delighted journalists by mocking Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney for naming Russia as America's top geopolitical foe. "The 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back," Obama zinged. The American press went wild, applauding the president's sick burn. The New York Times editorial board called Romney's comments "reckless and unworthy of a major presidential contender."

A month later, Obama issued his infamous warning to President Bashar al-Assad during the Syrian civil war. The use of chemical weapons against the Syrian population, Obama said, was a "red line" that would elicit a forceful American response. Assad was not deterred, either. With Putin's help, the Syrian army deployed sarin gas against civilians on multiple occasions. Obama responded by insisting that he "didn't set a red line" regarding the use of chemical weapons.

In Continuation of Obama Legacy, Biden Presides Over Russian Invasion of Ukraine - Washington Free Beacon
Click to expand...
That is a very biased perspective, which once again, ignores the fact that Donald Trump sided with Vladimir Putin's denial of Russian involvement in the December 2020 cyber attack against American businesses.

Was that an example of "Donald Trump's successful policy of powerful American strength?" Refusing to even consider the possibility that Russia was responsible for that attack, even though that is what his Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, had concluded?
 
#6,445
#6,445
kiddiedoc said:
WTH does Trump continue to be brought up in this thread? I mean, who's the sitting president, and who promised the nation that Putin didn't want him in office? Wasn't it the same person that promised to end the CV pandemic?
Click to expand...
Speaking of Covid, do you have any intel that the Russian troops aren't wearing masks and putting innocent people at risk?
 
  • Like
Reactions: NCFisher and PEPPERJAX
#6,448
#6,448
Septic said:
My comments aren't contingent on anyone else's views or arguments.

It's embarrassing for a former president to be calling Putin "savvy" or " a genius" during his armed invasion of a sovereign nation that is friendly to or (even unofficially) an ally of the United States.

It's deranged to even attempt to defend it.

I said what I said.
Click to expand...

And this what he said:
PRESIDENT TRUMP: Well, what went wrong was a rigged election and what went wrong is a candidate that shouldn’t be there and a man that has no concept of what he’s doing. I went in yesterday and there was a television screen, and I said, “This is genius.” Putin declares a big portion of the Ukraine — of Ukraine. Putin declares it as independent. Oh, that’s wonderful.

So, Putin is now saying, “It’s independent,” a large section of Ukraine. I said, “How smart is that?” And he’s gonna go in and be a peacekeeper. That’s strongest peace force… We could use that on our southern border. That’s the strongest peace force I’ve ever seen. There were more army tanks than I’ve ever seen. They’re gonna keep peace all right. No, but think of it. Here’s a guy who’s very savvy… I know him very well. Very, very well.

By the way, this never would have happened with us. Had I been in office, not even thinkable. This would never have happened. But here’s a guy that says, you know, “I’m gonna declare a big portion of Ukraine independent,” he used the word “independent,” “and we’re gonna go out and we’re gonna go in and we’re gonna help keep peace.” You gotta say that’s pretty savvy. And you know what the response was from Biden? There was no response. They didn’t have one for that. No, it’s very sad. Very sad."

You can pick up the question at 1:55. Full Interview: President Trump with C&B from Mar-a-Lago

It's embarrassing that people continue the Russia hoax in all its variants, and that you stoop to pulling a couple words out of a conversation to distort context.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#6,450
#6,450
Pacer92 said:
You are wrong...

I don’t GAF how mad you get about either..
Click to expand...

Yeah, don't think so.

In fact, historically, there was never an independent country named Palestine. There was for a time a Roman province named Palestine, when the Romans bestowed that name in the second century A.D. on an area that was previously called Judea, and which had been sovereign for a time. Having defeated the Jews in what the ancient historian Josephus labeled “the Jewish Wars,” the Romans then expelled the Jews from Jerusalem and renamed the province after the Jews’ historic archenemy, the Philistines.
Click to expand...

The Ironic History of Palestine | History News Network

Palestine
 
  • Like
Reactions: NCFisher
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top