War in Ukraine

[McDad]

Nope

I am in the same boat as you.
I have zero faith that what one administration considers an "assurance" or "guarantee" will be adhered to by another administration.

It boggles my mind that a couple of rubes like us can land on that reality but world leaders cannot or do not see that reality.

 

[midnight orange]

When ND40 and I were getting into the details of the Memorandum from which our commitment to Ukraine originates, the degree of security (or protection) is somewhat debatable. Is it a promise? an obligation? an assurance? I share that right now because I wanted to provide context on my question.

If you are the leader of another country where a bigger, more powerful country has set its sights on you, do you put any confidence in America's assurance we will get into the fray should an invasion occurs?

Either way, Ukraine can get in the long line of broken promise victims of the U.S. government starting with U.S citizens. "You fudged up, you trusted us."

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

I am in the same boat as you.
I have zero faith that what one administration considers an "assurance" or "guarantee" will be adhered to by another administration.

It boggles my mind that a couple of rubes like us can land on that reality but world leaders cannot or do not see that reality.

This is what has been obliterated by the ultra partisan political climate in America.

Trump after 2016 couldn't support almost ANYTHING Obama did so he reversed everything, even the few good ideas implemented in Obama's era.

Biden in 2020 couldn't politically support almost ANYTHING Trump did and reversed it all.

Trump in 2024 couldn't support almost anything Biden did. Again, America flip flops on the world stage.

America has lost the bedrock of believing the other half of the country still loves America but just sees things differently. We feel "they" hate America so we must knee jerk reverse nearly every idea they ever had.

It's cancerous. The rhetoric is extreme and the actions are not thought out but politically knee jerk..... "We showed them who real Americans are."

Do better, America. A house divided against itself cannot stand.

 

[LSU-SIU]

I am in the same boat as you.
I have zero faith that what one administration considers an "assurance" or "guarantee" will be adhered to by another administration.

It boggles my mind that a couple of rubes like us can land on that reality but world leaders cannot or do not see that reality.

Its been the same way for 60+ years. North Vietnam is our sworn enemy. Waste American money, resources and lives on the sworn enemy. Eventually, lose and than the enemy becomes our friend. (rinse and repeat basically almost every major conflict we have been involved with)

Its all

 

[McDad]

Either way, Ukraine can get in the long line of broken promise victims of the U.S. government starting with U.S citizens. "You fudged up, you trusted us."

The Uncle Sam we see:


The Uncle Sam we should see:

 

[midnight orange]

When did America start letting any nuclear nation turn us into jelly? The USSR had nukes and Reagan and Europe CRUMBLED it.

Was Gorbie LESS desperate than Putin? His entire country was disintegrating and no nukes but you guys think Putin is going to nuke somebody over Ukraine????

Reagan bluffed with Stars Wars which would have eradicated mutually assured destruction. Reagan didn't crumble the USSR, economics did. An excellent book on this is The Struggle to Save the Soviet Economy: Mikhail ...Amazon.comhttps://www.amazon.com › Struggle-Save-Soviet-Econ...

 

[LSU-SIU]

Reagan bluffed with Stars Wars which would have eradicated mutually assured destruction. Reagan didn't crumble the USSR, economics did. An excellent book on this is The Struggle to Save the Soviet Economy: Mikhail ...Amazon.comhttps://www.amazon.com › Struggle-Save-Soviet-Econ...

The worse part about is, is really nobody benefits if any of the large nuclear powers collapse. Meaning, imagine the day the U.S. splits, and you have X number of States or sub-units with control of nuclear weapons. Its actually in everyone's self interest that China stays intact because globally things could get much worse.

The United States really has nothing to fear from large nations, empires usually collapse from within - kind of like the USSR.

 

[McDad]

America has lost the bedrock of believing the other half of the country still loves America but just sees things differently. We feel "they" hate America so we must knee jerk reverse nearly every idea they ever had.

This struck me as interesting. When do you think that changed? Is it irrepairable? Are there any "loves" that are universally cherished (or close to universally cherished) by all Americans?

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

Reagan bluffed with Stars Wars which would have eradicated mutually assured destruction. Reagan didn't crumble the USSR, economics did. An excellent book on this is The Struggle to Save the Soviet Economy: Mikhail ...Amazon.comhttps://www.amazon.com › Struggle-Save-Soviet-Econ...

I've said Reagan and Europe facilitated the economics that broke the USSR literally.

Gorbie had scientists that knew we couldn't implement Star Wars quickly enough to stop him from using nukes as the USSR fell. He had the option still because Star Wars was still decades away even if it wasn't a bluff.

No one is using nukes except as a response to a direct invasion. Even as the USSR fell, no nukes.

To suggest Putin would use them is just cowardice.

 

[midnight orange]

I've said Reagan and Europe facilitated the economics that broke the USSR literally.

Gorbie had scientists that knew we couldn't implement Star Wars quickly enough to stop him from using nukes as the USSR fell. He had the option still because Star Wars was still decades away even if it wasn't a bluff.

No one is using nukes except as a response to a direct invasion. Even as the USSR fell, no nukes.

To suggest Putin would use them is just cowardice.

The Soviet Union economy was in a free fall before Reagan took office. Reagan didn't facilitate the economics that brought down the USSR, the Soviets did. We don't know what redline would force Putin to use nuclear weapons but I'm sure he has one. We have a redline and did use nuclear weapons.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

This struck me as interesting. When do you think that changed? Is it irrepairable? Are there any "loves" that are universally cherished (or close to universally cherished) by all Americans?

Lincoln couldn't do it with a war. The South remains (and me included) only grudgingly accepting of the uptick in federal power it took to reunite the country.

I accept that succession isn't possible but I reject that the federal government should poke around in how TN runs its day to day business.

As for people, it's rhetoric and media fueled hatred that sells ads and merch so I doubt it changes very quickly. BRIEFLY, after 9-11 America nodded to the "other side" and joined arms to mourn and then to find the killers.

These days it's a continuous stream of hate on what are called news channels but are really propaganda channels of both sides. The politicians are no better spewing over the top accusations and outright lies proudly.

As long as we eat it up and feel good about our hatred of "them" instead of what should be our hatred of actors like Putin, Xi, and others...... we're pretty much screwed.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

The Soviet Union economy was in a free fall before Reagan took office. Reagan didn't facilitate the economics that brought down the USSR, the Soviets did. We don't know what redline would force Putin to use nuclear weapons but I'm sure he has one. We have a redline and did use nuclear weapons.

Again, primarily just fear to act boldly because the word "nuke" is ingrained as a "final solution" topic.

It's true the Soviet economy was awful but Reagan spent (see our huge debt rise in his era) the Soviets into collapse. Economically, the West hatched a plan to risk the world economy by allowing the USSR to fully become insolvent and break up.

Instead of keeping the USSR poor, Europe and the US facilitated a "new Russia" and turned our heads as Putin became stronger and stronger and Russia again became an issue for the world.

Now, here we are with a leader who is the old school communist who believes in "Russian exceptionalism" if you will.

Now we have to rinse and repeat hobbling Russia from menacing Eastern Bloc nations.

 

[McDad]

Lincoln couldn't do it with a war. The South remains (and me included) only grudgingly accepting of the uptick in federal power it took to reunite the country.

I accept that succession isn't possible but I reject that the federal government should poke around in how TN runs its day to day business.

As for people, it's rhetoric and media fueled hatred that sells ads and merch so I doubt it changes very quickly. BRIEFLY, after 9-11 America nodded to the "other side" and joined arms to mourn and then to find the killers.

These days it's a continuous stream of hate on what are called news channels but are really propaganda channels of both sides. The politicians are no better spewing over the top accusations and outright lies proudly.

As long as we eat it up and feel good about our hatred of "them" instead of what should be our hatred of actors like Putin, Xi, and others...... we're pretty much screwed.

Are you saying believing the other half love american changed with the civil war?

 

[midnight orange]

Again, primarily just fear to act boldly because the word "nuke" is ingrained as a "final solution" topic.

It's true the Soviet economy was awful but Reagan spent (see our huge debt rise in his era) the Soviets into collapse. Economically, the West hatched a plan to risk the world economy by allowing the USSR to fully become insolvent and break up.

Instead of keeping the USSR poor, Europe and the US facilitated a "new Russia" and turned our heads as Putin became stronger and stronger and Russia again became an issue for the world.

Now, here we are with a leader who is the old school communist who believes in "Russian exceptionalism" if you will.

Now we have to rinse and repeat hobbling Russia from menacing Eastern Bloc nations.

The Soviets would have collapsed without Reagan. They were in a death spiral before Reagan was president. There is no scenario in which the USSR doesn't collapse no matter who is president. The eastern bloc countries should worry about themselves and we should worry about ourselves as George Washington wisely advised.

 

[volbound1700]

The Soviet Union economy was in a free fall before Reagan took office. Reagan didn't facilitate the economics that brought down the USSR, the Soviets did. We don't know what redline would force Putin to use nuclear weapons but I'm sure he has one. We have a redline and did use nuclear weapons.

True. If it wasn't for World War 2, I think the Soviet Union would have been gone by the 1950s as well. I think Stalin's victory gave him legitimacy and a ton of vassal states in Eastern Europe and Asia to bleed dry to keep things afloat.

 

[midnight orange]

True. If it wasn't for World War 2, I think the Soviet Union would have been gone by the 1950s as well. I think Stalin's victory gave him legitimacy and a ton of vassal states in Eastern Europe and Asia to bleed dry to keep things afloat.

And if it weren't for lend-lease, the Soviet Union would have been gone by 1942.

 

[Vol737]

When did America start letting any nuclear nation turn us into jelly? The USSR had nukes and Reagan and Europe CRUMBLED it.

Was Gorbie LESS desperate than Putin? His entire country was disintegrating and no nukes but you guys think Putin is going to nuke somebody over Ukraine????

I think Gorbachev was a realist, understood the changing landscape around him and the weakness of Russia at the time with a failing Soviet Union. I think Putin is different, longs to see many of the old Soviet states back under Russia’s influence and he as the leading figurehead of that bloc. No way to know for sure exactly what Putin would do, but if he’s losing and losing badly, then who knows what he might resort to. I’m fine supporting Ukraine, just not with boots on the ground.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

Are you saying believing the other half love american changed with the civil war?

No. I'm saying Lincoln tried war to unite a country that held two very different economic pressures and very different moral pressures and the war did technically "unite" us but he didn't actually "unite" America.

One of the flaws in the American system is that the morals of the states and the economic pressures of the states are vastly different. What works for CA and makes their economy huge doesn't work in MS for a number of reasons. Also, what is accepted morally in CA doesn't agree with people in MS.

I believe the Founders gave great latitude to the states to control their economy and their moral ideas of acceptable vs not acceptable as long as everyone stayed within the frame of the Declaration and Constitution. Over time, the frame of the Declaration and Constitution have gotten VERY large on the federal level and state's rights have gotten VERY small.

This is my personal gripe with America: it's not supposed to be a top down govt for most things but for commerce between states, basic rights, and national safety. Most powers should be left to states. Past that, most of my personal habits, business, etc the state can keep their hands off also.

Now we've devolved to where it's VERY lucrative business for media companies to foster "us vs them" in America to a degree where the rhetoric is "they're not even Americans because they believe _____"

Now, instead of loving freedom, we love sticking it to the other side and making their life miserable. WTF? I suddenly need to want my fellow American to fail because they vote differently than me? That HELPS me? Yet we see it all over America now.

Who we should unite and want to see fail is Russia, China, various Middle Eastern terror groups and nations, etc who actually want to bring America down. But no, we want hate Joe down the street because he put a red or blue sign in his yard....... that SOB believes differently politically than me, I hate him.

 

[McDad]

No. I'm saying Lincoln tried war to unite a country that held two very different economic pressures and very different moral pressures and the war did technically "unite" us but he didn't actually "unite" America.

One of the flaws in the American system is that the morals of the states and the economic pressures of the states are vastly different. What works for CA and makes their economy huge doesn't work in MS for a number of reasons. Also, what is accepted morally in CA doesn't agree with people in MS.

I believe the Founders gave great latitude to the states to control their economy and their moral ideas of acceptable vs not acceptable as long as everyone stayed within the frame of the Declaration and Constitution. Over time, the frame of the Declaration and Constitution have gotten VERY large on the federal level and state's rights have gotten VERY small.

This is my personal gripe with America: it's not supposed to be a top down govt for most things but for commerce between states, basic rights, and national safety. Most powers should be left to states. Past that, most of my personal habits, business, etc the state can keep their hands off also.

Now we've devolved to where it's VERY lucrative business for media companies to foster "us vs them" in America to a degree where the rhetoric is "they're not even Americans because they believe _____"

Now, instead of loving freedom, we love sticking it to the other side and making their life miserable. WTF? I suddenly need to want my fellow American to fail because they vote differently than me? That HELPS me? Yet we see it all over America now.

Who we should unite and want to see fail is Russia, China, various Middle Eastern terror groups and nations, etc who actually want to bring America down. But no, we want hate Joe down the street because he put a red or blue sign in his yard....... that SOB believes differently politically than me, I hate him.

Thank you. I understand what you're driving at much better now.

Are there any attributes of America everyone cherishes despite political affiliation. As a springboard for dialogue, things like liberty, responsibility, charity, protected freedoms, etc.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

Thank you. I understand what you're driving at much better now.

Are their any attributes of America everyone cherishes despite political affiliation. As a springboard for dialogue, things like liberty, responsibility, charity, protected freedoms, etc.

I see the problem as the garbage we consume which is heavily weighted to divide us because like sex, division sells.

So if you watch Fox you tend to believe no Democrat can possibly really love liberty, charity, freedom, God, etc. If you watch MSNBC, you're certain all GOP voters are fascists, racists, etc.

John Prine was correct. Blow up your TV......

Americans need to interact civilly with people who believe differently and discuss things like men and women without the vicious rhetoric.

Absolutely NOTHING weakens America more than hating each other instead of hating our real enemies. Unfortunately, absolutely NOTHING sells more ads in America than fostering hating each other.

 

[BeardedVol]

 

[lawgator1]

Watching Trump and Zelensky now. Trump has spent the last 5 minutes taking about himself. The wars he stopped and the national guard in DC.

 

[PEPPERJAX]

Watching Trump and Zelensky now. Trump has spent the last 5 minutes taking about himself. The wars he stopped and the national guard in DC.

Not surprised really. President Z is a very boring person and he normally puts me to sleep when he babbles on TV.

 

[lawgator1]

Not surprised really. President Z is a very boring person and he normally puts me to sleep when he babbles on TV.

He gets asked a question about security guarantees and he goes on for a solid two minutes about how he won in 2020.

 

[PEPPERJAX]

He gets asked a question about security guarantees and he goes on for a solid two minutes about how he won in 2020.

Again, not surprised.