War in Ukraine

#75,476
#75,476
Vol8188 said:
All nations are founded on war.
Click to expand...
SIGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! OK, re-reading my post you're responding to, I realized it may not be that you don't read well, you're an echo. As I said, Besides, the USA is war-loving, not that we are alone in being so.
1708099228207.png
Hi, hog88, you trio?
 
#75,477
#75,477
lawgator1 said:
No one in their right mind believes that Putin would stop at Ukraine. Ukraine may, or may not, "win" the war. They may, or may not, have to let Putin save face by giving up 10 % or so of their territory to reach a conclusion.

But if Ukraine was completely overrun and turned into a Russian state, and if that happened without significant cost to Putin, he'd angle for additional territory somewhere else.

And remember, its not just a question of who controls the territory, i.e. the land. Its a question of who controls the government and any infrastructure. Putin may well be content to run Ukraine, in a Soviet bloc manner, even if it has its own flag and supposed national identity.
Click to expand...
the question was why to CONTINUE to fund the war. Putin has already paid a pretty high cost.

and no one in their right mind is thinking that Putin is going to be ABLE to use Ukraine as a spring board.

He built up 8 years to seize ~25% of Ukraine, after already controlling a good chunk of that land.
and that was with his army at full strength against a very week Ukraine.
Poland, and probably 2/3 of the UK, France, and Germany, are all stronger than Ukraine is.
It would take him 5 years to replace his losses. and who knows how long to build up to fight a stronger, combined NATO. Putin is 100% bluster, all anti-NATO expansion, except for all that NATO expansion.

not saying NATO could even reach Moscow, but Putin is no threat to an awakened NATO in a conventional fight. Ukraine has proven that.
 
#75,478
#75,478
WoodsmanVol said:
SIGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! OK, re-reading my post you're responding to, I realized it may not be that you don't read well, you're an echo. As I said, Besides, the USA is war-loving, not that we are alone in being so.
View attachment 620334
Hi, hog88, you trio?
Click to expand...

If your point wasn’t that we are alone in that attribute, why would you take the time bringing it up? Why bring up attributes of all countries?

“I don’t like Trump, because he has blood and organs. Clearly you don’t read well! I’m not saying he’s the only person with blood and organs! Just that he has them and I don’t like it!”
 
#75,479
#75,479
LouderVol said:
the question was why to CONTINUE to fund the war. Putin has already paid a pretty high cost.

and no one in their right mind is thinking that Putin is going to be ABLE to use Ukraine as a spring board.

He built up 8 years to seize ~25% of Ukraine, after already controlling a good chunk of that land.
and that was with his army at full strength against a very week Ukraine.
Poland, and probably 2/3 of the UK, France, and Germany, are all stronger than Ukraine is.
It would take him 5 years to replace his losses. and who knows how long to build up to fight a stronger, combined NATO. Putin is 100% bluster, all anti-NATO expansion, except for all that NATO expansion.

not saying NATO could even reach Moscow, but Putin is no threat to an awakened NATO in a conventional fight. Ukraine has proven that.
Click to expand...


That makes no sense. We can't signal Putin that expansion by him will go only partially checked.

The worst thing about this is Putin's cold war mentality. If he would just wake up and realize the massive power he could have if he stood down on the bellicose threats and became a trading power and economic force, rather than a hindrance to innovation and the benefits of more capitalism, he could declare himself King of Russia. I suspect the Russian people would welcome that and prosper, giving him even more power.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#75,480
#75,480
lawgator1 said:
No one in their right mind believes that Putin would stop at Ukraine. Ukraine may, or may not, "win" the war. They may, or may not, have to let Putin save face by giving up 10 % or so of their territory to reach a conclusion.

But if Ukraine was completely overrun and turned into a Russian state, and if that happened without significant cost to Putin, he'd angle for additional territory somewhere else.

And remember, its not just a question of who controls the territory, i.e. the land. Its a question of who controls the government and any infrastructure. Putin may well be content to run Ukraine, in a Soviet bloc manner, even if it has its own flag and supposed national identity.
Click to expand...

After seeing Russian military capability in Ukraine how can you seriously be concerned about them attacking a NATO member or even attempting further expansion?
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary, McDad, TheDeeble and 2 others
#75,481
#75,481
LouderVol said:
when has Putin cared about the suspicions? who is going to hold it against him? you think any investigation is going to turn up ANYTHING different than exactly whatever Putin claimed before any of the facts were known?

If someone was wanting to effect the elections against Putin with this move it would have been better to kill him closer to the elections. This just removes Navalny from starting any push against Putin.
Click to expand...
The guy started a war for no reason and that fool thinks he’d be cautious about killing a political enemy he already tried to kill in the past.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BeardedVol
#75,482
#75,482
lawgator1 said:
That makes no sense. We can't signal Putin that expansion by him will go only partially checked.

The worst thing about this is Putin's cold war mentality. If he would just wake up and realize the massive power he could have if he stood down on the bellicose threats and became a trading power and economic force, rather than a hindrance to innovation and the benefits of more capitalism, he could declare himself King of Russia. I suspect the Russian people would welcome that and prosper, giving him even more power.
Click to expand...
Sure we can. our support was never going to be literally unlimited. we are supporting, not fighting directly. we have shown that throwing away some 1980s guns and missiles we are able to give him a bloody nose. he knows first hand what our equipment can do in the hands of untrained Ukrainians, and he knows we have better in our trained hands.

Putin has had several expansions of his that we haven't stopped. for some reason Ukraine is the first we cared about enough to throw away our future.

how many wars do you think we can continuously fund? Ukraine, Israel, Yemen, Tawain? Venezuela? whatever is going on in Serbia/Kosovo? we can't, nor should we, try to fully fund any war that pops up. we are just pissing away our money for absolutely no return.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#75,484
#75,484
lawgator1 said:
No one in their right mind believes that Putin would stop at Ukraine. Ukraine may, or may not, "win" the war. They may, or may not, have to let Putin save face by giving up 10 % or so of their territory to reach a conclusion.
Click to expand...


I would say no one in their right mind believes Putin would not stop at eastern Ukraine. You think he wants direct conflict with the West? He has tip toed through Ukraine so as not to give the West any justification to get directly into this conflict.

Also, Ukraine lost this war when it started. Any rational reasonable person knew that.
 
#75,485
#75,485
NorthDallas40 said:
It’s been answered Larry. But just as in all the other cases of you doing this dance you will do your exact same “no that’s not it. So why. Why? No I told you that’s not it. So really why? Why?”

He did it stooge. Navalny is dead like all the rest who oppose the midget. And that is all the world will ever know but it’s plenty to know he did it.
Click to expand...

You said the upcoming election, which actually argues against your assertion that Putin had him killed. Try again. This time try and use some logic to back up your point.

This isn't going well for you, as usual.
 
#75,486
#75,486
volgr said:
You said the upcoming election, which actually argues against your assertion that Putin had him killed. Try again. This time try and use some logic to back up your point.

This isn't going well for you, as usual.
Click to expand...
LMAO it’s obvious to anybody paying attention. The bald dwarf makes another really dumbass choice and you and the rest of the stooge triumvirate are pulling shifts carrying water to justify it. So when is the shift change and you tap out to another stooge Larry? 🤡
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanhill and BeardedVol
#75,487
#75,487
volgr said:
I would say no one in their right mind believes Putin would not stop at eastern Ukraine. You think he wants direct conflict with the West? He has tip toed through Ukraine so as not to give the West any justification to get directly into this conflict.

Also, Ukraine lost this war when it started. Any rational reasonable person knew that.
Click to expand...
Odessa doesn't count as eastern ukraine, and that was a stated goal. it got dropped with the russians getting their butts kicked.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tvolsfan, BeardedVol and NorthDallas40
#75,489
#75,489
Vol8188 said:
If your point wasn’t that we are alone in that attribute, why would you take the time bringing it up? Why bring up attributes of all countries?

“I don’t like Trump, because he has blood and organs. Clearly you don’t read well! I’m not saying he’s the only person with blood and organs! Just that he has them and I don’t like it!”
Click to expand...
This is the land of freedom of speech, no matter how much you want to restrict my right to use it. A better question is, why do you read my posts?
As for Trumpy, I don't hate the man. I hate his hypocrisy, lying, dishonest business practices, vainglorious behavior, greed, and being infected with Nazism. But if the man was hanging on a cliff for dear life, I'd still do all I could to help him to safety. You see? One can dislike behavior without hating the one misbehaving. I don't expect folks of your ilk to ever, ever, ever, understand that. I got family members whom I feel the same way I do about Trump. You wouldn't understand that either. I think Alfred was right. Some folks like you, I guess, just want to see the world burn. Don't worry, it will. Human nature will see that it does. Bet you understand that, even if you deny it.
 
#75,490
#75,490
It should go without saying that Ukraine under the boot of Putin would be a threat to Europe, especially our allies in eastern Europe who are the biggest supporters of Ukraine. And it is decidedly not in the strategic interest of the United States to let our chief adversary expand its territory so significantly.

And allowing Russia to take control of the eastern Donbas region would be a disaster for Ukraine: Russia would ceaselessly try to undermine any democratic, western-leaning government in that country by any and all means necessary. Putin wouldn't stop until a Russian puppet was installed as head of Ukraine. Ukraine would be harassed on many different levels constantly. It would like giving Putin control of the eastern seaboard of the United States---uh, no.

The war has enabled us to weaken Russia and Putin at very little cost, though China has boosted its ties--and supplies--to Russia, and that's a problem. But then we have existential conflicts with totalitarian nations, and sometimes it's not a bad thing to just get it all out in the open and slug it out--at least with Russia, via proxy. If NATO and others continue to supply Ukraine, Ukraine will make it increasingly difficult and costly for Russia to continue to occupy the Donbas and even Crimea. Keep in mind too that Ukraine is starting to build up its own military weapons manufacturing capabilities. Time is on Ukraine's side. Would Russians really want to occupy military or administrative facilities in the Donbas when there is a daily threat that a Himars or other missile could destroy your building--and you? Many such targets have already been destroyed. Ukraine can certainly make it untenable to continue to occupy the east.
 
#75,493
#75,493
turbovol said:
A fascist comment if I've ever word one. Democratic leaders do not kill people, so Carlson is spouting nonsense.
Click to expand...
I really can't tell if he's gone full-on Russian asset or if he's just being a contrarian because he's an attention whore.
 
#75,494
#75,494
turbovol said:
It should go without saying that Ukraine under the boot of Putin would be a threat to Europe, especially our allies in eastern Europe who are the biggest supporters of Ukraine. And it is decidedly not in the strategic interest of the United States to let our chief adversary expand its territory so significantly.

And allowing Russia to take control of the eastern Donbas region would be a disaster for Ukraine: Russia would ceaselessly try to undermine any democratic, western-leaning government in that country by any and all means necessary. Putin wouldn't stop until a Russian puppet was installed as head of Ukraine. Ukraine would be harassed on many different levels constantly. It would like giving Putin control of the eastern seaboard of the United States---uh, no.

The war has enabled us to weaken Russia and Putin at very little cost, though China has boosted its ties--and supplies--to Russia, and that's a problem. But then we have existential conflicts with totalitarian nations, and sometimes it's not a bad thing to just get it all out in the open and slug it out--at least with Russia, via proxy. If NATO and others continue to supply Ukraine, Ukraine will make it increasingly difficult and costly for Russia to continue to occupy the Donbas and even Crimea. Keep in mind too that Ukraine is starting to build up its own military weapons manufacturing capabilities. Time is on Ukraine's side. Would Russians really want to occupy military or administrative facilities in the Donbas when there is a daily threat that a Himars or other missile could destroy your building--and you? Many such targets have already been destroyed. Ukraine can certainly make it untenable to continue to occupy the east.
Click to expand...
so which is it?

Ukraine is a big boy who can fight Russia on its own, like your third paragraph says; or do we have to provide a never ending supply of weapons to give Ukraine any chance to survive as you suggest in paragraph 2?
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#75,495
#75,495
turbovol said:
A fascist comment if I've ever word one. Democratic leaders do not kill people, so Carlson is spouting nonsense.
Click to expand...
bwhahahahahahahahahahaha.

www.aclu.org

ACLU & CCR Lawsuit: American Boy Killed By U.S. Drone Strike

The ACLU and CCR have filed a lawsuit challenging the government's targeted killing of three U.S. citizens in drone strikes far from any armed conflict zone.In Al-Aulaqi v. Panetta (Al-Awlaki v. Panetta) the groups charge that the U.S. government's killings of U.S. citizens Anwar Al-Aulaqi...
www.aclu.org www.aclu.org
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#75,499
#75,499
LouderVol said:
so which is it?

Ukraine is a big boy who can fight Russia on its own, like your third paragraph says; or do we have to provide a never ending supply of weapons to give Ukraine any chance to survive as you suggest in paragraph 2?
Click to expand...
Russia with a GDP on par with Canada and a population slightly larger than Mexico, in two years is unable to mount a successful invasion of a country with a GDP on par with Nebraska and a population like California.

I have no idea why Russia /Putin is so scary to people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
#75,500
#75,500
McDad said:
Russia with a GDP on par with Canada and a population slightly larger than Mexico, in two years is unable to mount a successful invasion of a country with a GDP on par with Nebraska and a population like California.

I have no idea why Russia /Putin is so scary to people.
Click to expand...
Hypersonic enemas.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top