Russia Russia Russia

[Foxx]

13 minutes ago, snafu said:

 

The question forgets that NATO didn't cross the western Ukrainian border toward Russia whereas Russia crossed the eastern Ukrainian border toward NATO countries.  He might be a dork, but that Pentagon guy's answer is right.  NATO is a security alliance. Look at the Baltic States (in NATO) vs. Ukraine (not in NATO).  The countries that joined did so without being invaded by western States. Russia is trying to prevent, by force, Ukraine from voluntarily acting in what it believes to be its sovereign best interest.  

 

Perhaps not but the question portends the fact that NATO was going to be considering Ukraine for membership. Russia has stated emphatically that Ukraine membership in NATO was no bueno for a long time. Not to mention, NATO has been encroaching upon Russian borders for decades.

 

Please do not misunderstand what I am saying here. I'm not saying what Russia has done is okay, anything but. However, to omit the provocation the West has foisted upon the situation, is also not okay.

 

All of that aside, it would not surprise me in the slightest if this was the distraction to deflect from the monetary problems all across the West. Nothing upon the world stage is an accident.

[snafu]

14 minutes ago, Foxx said:

Perhaps not but the question portends the fact that NATO was going to be considering Ukraine for membership. Russia has stated emphatically that Ukraine membership in NATO was no bueno for a long time. Not to mention, NATO has been encroaching upon Russian borders for decades.

 

Building NATO on Russia's borders for decades at what cost to the Russians?

Ukraine renewing calls for membership after 2014?  Can you see how a "security alliance" might be attractive after chunks of land were annexed by their neighbor?

 

 

14 minutes ago, Foxx said:

 

Please do not misunderstand what I am saying here. I'm not saying what Russia has done is okay, anything but. However, to omit the provocation the West has foisted upon the situation, is also not okay.

 

If you're pro or anti (whatever) this is just a chicken/egg/justification issue.

 

 

14 minutes ago, Foxx said:

 

All of that aside, it would not surprise me in the slightest if this was the distraction to deflect from the monetary problems all across the West. Nothing upon the world stage is an accident.

 

Maybe this was timed by the Russians to take advantage of international post-covid economic slowdowns, distractions, and instability.  Not necessarily to cover up monetary problems all across the West (if that's a thing) but to exacerbate them.

 

 

[IDBillzFan]

On 2/15/2023 at 3:03 PM, Deranged Rhino said:

Whoa. Color me shocked.

 

 

I'm kinda disappointed he didn't end it with "If I can change, and you can change, maybe everybody can change!"

 

 

[Ann]

Putin would look at it this way
 

 

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

41 minutes ago, Ann said:

Putin would look at it this way
 

 

 

I find it curious that he's in uniform (retired rear admiral) and showing off his salad bar as a civilian official.  Maybe it's a flag officer thing...but Powell never did that as Secretary of State.  Or maybe it's just an ancient video - he retired in 2015.

 

And point of note: he hasn't been a Pentagon bullshitter since last May.  He's on the NSC now.

[Deranged Rhino]

Got that? 

 

It's about two things, and two things alone: 

1) $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

2) Removing Putin

 

Nothing else matters - not Ukraine, not its people, and certainly not the US citizens footing the bill. 

[Deranged Rhino]

(But this is bullshit - not trying to amplify it, just point out the stupidity found on all sides of this topic)

 

 

[Billsandhorns]

12 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

Got that? 

 

It's about two things, and two things alone: 

1) $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

2) Removing Putin

 

Nothing else matters - not Ukraine, not its people, and certainly not the US citizens footing the bill. 

Why the &#%$ should we be funding Ukraine pensions? 

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, Billsandhorns said:

Why the &#%$ should we be funding Ukraine pensions? 

 

Because the more money flowing into the country, the more kickbacks and $$$ Biden and the US gov't can skim off the top.

[Foxx]

1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said:

(But this is bullshit - not trying to amplify it, just point out the stupidity found on all sides of this topic)

 

 

This might explain the Nordstream...

[Nouseforaname]

32 minutes ago, Foxx said:

This might explain the Nordstream...

Nordstream was not operational.

[Billsandhorns]

6 minutes ago, Nouseforaname said:

Nordstream was not operational.

And because if the damage caused. If it comes online it will take a lot longer 

[Nouseforaname]

5 minutes ago, Billsandhorns said:

And because if the damage caused. If it comes online it will take a lot longer 

My point was that is has no impact on Germany’s current consumption.

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

2 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

Got that? 

 

It's about two things, and two things alone: 

1) $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

2) Removing Putin

 

Nothing else matters - not Ukraine, not its people, and certainly not the US citizens footing the bill. 

 

I want someone to ask him how funding Ukrainian pensions is defending democracy.

 

 

[4merper4mer]

3 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Because the more money flowing into the country, the more kickbacks and $$$ Biden and the US gov't can skim off the top.

[4merper4mer]

3 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

It's about two things, and two things alone: 

1) $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

2) Removing Putin

 

Nothing else matters - not Ukraine, not its people, and certainly not the US citizens footing the bill. 

Once 2) is achieved it leads to:

 

3) $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Edited February 18, 2023 by 4merper4mer

[Deranged Rhino]

First they said they would never send tanks. 

Then they sent tanks. 

Then they said they would never send long range missiles. 

Now they're sending long range missiles. 

Next they'll repeat how they'll never send fighter jets. 

In about a week or two, they'll send fighter jets. 

 

This conflict must continue from the west's perspective, regardless of the human cost for Ukraine, regardless if there's an escalation of the fighting beyond the borders of Ukraine - it must continue. They've sunk all their eggs into this basket and can't allow it to end until they get their desired result... or we're all dead. Whichever comes first.

 

 

Ask yourself again: is Ukraine, a country that's been Russian longer than it's been independent - a country where large swaths of the population want to be Russian - a country that serves no cultural, tactical, strategic, or economic value to the West (and never has) - a country that's so corrupt even leaders from other nations come there to get their beaks wet - is that a country worth gambling all our lives on to keep it (checks notes) "free"?

 

Or maybe, just maybe, there should be serious consideration given to finding a diplomatic solution to the problem - even if it means carving up Ukraine?

Edited February 18, 2023 by Deranged Rhino

[Nouseforaname]

15 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

First they said they would never send tanks. 

Then they sent tanks. 

Then they said they would never send long range missiles. 

Now they're sending long range missiles. 

Next they'll repeat how they'll never send fighter jets. 

In about a week or two, they'll send fighter jets. 

 

This conflict must continue from the west's perspective, regardless of the human cost for Ukraine, regardless if there's an escalation of the fighting beyond the borders of Ukraine - it must continue. They've sunk all their eggs into this basket and can't allow it to end until they get their desired result... or we're all dead. Whichever comes first.

 

 

Ask yourself again: is Ukraine, a country that's been Russian longer than it's been independent - a country where large swaths of the population want to be Russian - a country that serves no cultural, tactical, strategic, or economic value to the West (and never has) - a country that's so corrupt even leaders from other nations come there to get their beaks wet - is that a country worth gambling all our lives on to keep it (checks notes) "free"?

 

Or maybe, just maybe, there should be serious consideration given to finding a diplomatic solution to the problem - even if it means carving up Ukraine?

Yes large swaths.

 

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/03/06/regional-polls-show-few-ukrainians-russians-want-a-united-single-state/

 

 

[Deranged Rhino]

33 minutes ago, Nouseforaname said:

Yes large swaths.

 

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/03/06/regional-polls-show-few-ukrainians-russians-want-a-united-single-state/

 

 

 

Polls are always reliable, never manipulated - especially by the establishment. Good call. 😉 

[Deranged Rhino]

Since 2014... gee. 

 

 

You cannot align this truth with the narrative of the day that the Russians simply took Ukraine because they're big meanies. 

 

Actions have consequences. And in this case, the west knew exactly what those consequences would be and have been angling to get this conflict for 8+ years. Not to save Ukraine, but to use Ukraine to get Putin out of power. 

 

It's what happens when runaway hubris meets myopia.