War in Ukraine Thread

[An-Cap Frog]

Yet you cannot clarify a good brokered solution. Just the US giving Donbas to Russia is not a brokered solution. Donbas belongs to Ukraine, not the US. All you say is give Donbas to Russia - which is the answer of a 10 year old. Will that stop Russian aggression? What do you give Ukraine for Donbas which they are not willing to give up? Remember you said broker a deal, not just support Russia.

Give a grown-up answer with thought behind it. Can you answer the questions, I already know you are good at deflecting.

Big difference here than many other examples is that this is not civil unrest but another country attacking a sovereign nation.

No, I am not sending anyone to their death, the Russians are doing it quite nicely. Which you are supporting by rewarding them.

If a cease-fire or peace agreement doesn't work we are just back to where we are right now. There is your answer. What happens if Putin takes all of the Ukraine? Or what if Russia loses? John Mearsheimer stated the following on PBS the other day:

John Mearsheimer:

I think, Judy, this policy that the Biden administration is following is remarkably dangerous and foolish. We know that the one circumstance in which a great power is likely to use nuclear weapons is when its survival is threatened, when it thinks a decisive defeat is being inflicted on it. And what the Biden administration is bent on doing is inflicting a decisive defeat on Russia. We are threatening its survival. We are presenting the Russians with an existential threat. And this, again, is the one circumstance where they might use nuclear weapons. And I think we should be going to enormous lengths to make sure that we don't put them into a position where they even countenance using nuclear weapons, much less use them.

And Evelyn Farkas (served under Obama) sort of agreed:

Evelyn Farkas:

Well, Russia's nuclear policy does allow for the use of nuclear weapons first against an adversary if it feels that the existence of the state is in question, that it's in jeopardy. And I think that leaves a lot of room for subjective interpretation. And, of course, that will be Vladimir Putin's interpretation. So I don't think we should be deterred by this fear that he's going to reach for nuclear weapons. We cannot rule it out. I'm not dismissing it. But I also think that the objective that we have right now, the stakes are so high. It's nothing less — it's not just about Ukraine. It's about the international order.

A loss in Ukraine may feel like their state is threatened by Putin's point of view and we a dumping in all these weapons. Putin is still sore about our involvement in Chechnya and even recently said so. Russian officials have said for the hundredth time that our direct involvement risks a direct conflict with Russia and judging by Russia's past statements, like don't allow Ukraine to join NATO (against GWB's promises BTW) or we will attack the Ukraine, they have made good on their threats. Even Dmitry Medvedev has been warning us that our direct involvement is risky.

Our involvement is right now is risking further escalation in this war. In the beginning the State Department was hiding the fact that it was supplying Stinger missiles. Now we have a press-release every time that we send equipment including howitzers, heavy artillery, openly helping Poland and Czechoslovakia send tanks, helping to assassinate generals, and sink ships. Biden even toured the Javelin missile factory, in Alabama, because he was so proud that we are sending them to the Ukraine. Are you factoring this enormous risk that we are taking?

Under international law, the US is at war with Russia as we are co-belligerents in this conflict. Congress has yet to declare it...as usual. The official position of the US government is now, as quoted in the Washington Post on April the 5th, "we would rather see Ukrainians continue fighting and dying than to see the war end too early." Openly involking Afghanistan and Syria, saying we don't know how to beat an insurgency but we sure know how to support one. All while Putin's right hand men Medvedev and Sergey Lavrov have been warning us over and over again saying don't you see that this could lead to a nuclear war? These are same men for the last 10 years said don't you see that this could lead to a war in Ukraine? What is the contingency plan if one nuke goes off? They all go off...there isn't a minimal nuclear war plan. Sec. Blinken has not even talked to Russia since the beginning of February.

An now, your buddy President Biden, is sending troops back in Somalia, as if that 20-year conflict hasn't been long enough. When does it end?

Biden Approves Plan to Redeploy Several Hundred Ground Forces Into Somalia

The president also signed off on targeting about a dozen Shabab leaders in the war-torn country, from which Donald J. Trump largely withdrew in his final weeks in office.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Eight]

If a cease-fire or peace agreement doesn't work we are just back to where we are right now. There is your answer. What happens if Putin takes all of the Ukraine? Or what if Russia loses? John Mearsheimer stated the following on PBS the other day:


And Evelyn Farkas (served under Obama) sort of agreed:



A loss in Ukraine may feel like their state is threatened by Putin's point of view and we a dumping in all these weapons. Putin is still sore about our involvement in Chechnya and even recently said so. Russian officials have said for the hundredth time that our direct involvement risks a direct conflict with Russia and judging by Russia's past statements, like don't allow Ukraine to join NATO (against GWB's promises BTW) or we will attack the Ukraine, they have made good on their threats. Even Dmitry Medvedev has been warning us that our direct involvement is risky.

Our involvement is right now is risking further escalation in this war. In the beginning the State Department was hiding the fact that it was supplying Stinger missiles. Now we have a press-release every time that we send equipment including howitzers, heavy artillery, openly helping Poland and Czechoslovakia send tanks, helping to assassinate generals, and sink ships. Biden even toured the Javelin missile factory, in Alabama, because he was so proud that we are sending them to the Ukraine. Are you factoring this enormous risk that we are taking?

Under international law, the US is at war with Russia as we are co-belligerents in this conflict. Congress has yet to declare it...as usual. The official position of the US government is now, as quoted in the Washington Post on April the 5th, "we would rather see Ukrainians continue fighting and dying than to see the war end too early." Openly involking Afghanistan and Syria, saying we don't know how to beat an insurgency but we sure know how to support one. All while Putin's right hand men Medvedev and Sergey Lavrov have been warning us over and over again saying don't you see that this could lead to a nuclear war? These are same men for the last 10 years said don't you see that this could lead to a war in Ukraine? What is the contingency plan if one nuke goes off? They all go off...there isn't a minimal nuclear war plan. Sec. Blinken has not even talked to Russia since the beginning of February.

An now, your buddy President Biden, is sending troops back in Somalia, as if that 20-year conflict hasn't been long enough. When does it end?

Biden Approves Plan to Redeploy Several Hundred Ground Forces Into Somalia

The president also signed off on targeting about a dozen Shabab leaders in the war-torn country, from which Donald J. Trump largely withdrew in his final weeks in office.

www.nytimes.com

do you ever not repeat the words of someone else?

 

[An-Cap Frog]

do you ever not repeat the words of someone else?

I read a lot, how else do you learn about things?

 

[An-Cap Frog]

More blowback...how about this possibility...the weapons that we are sending are being sold for profit...

archive.ph

archive.ph

 

[An-Cap Frog]

Zelensky says Macron urged him to yield territory in bid to end Ukraine war

 

[An-Cap Frog]

Possibility of talks between Zelenskyy and Putin came to a halt after Johnson’s visit - UP sources

According Ukrainska Pravda sources close to Zelenskyy, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Boris Johnson, who appeared in the capital almost without warning, brought two simple messages.

The first is that Putin is a war criminal, he should be pressured, not negotiated with.

And the second is that even if Ukraine is ready to sign some agreements on guarantees with Putin, they are not.

So basically Zelenskyy and Putin were going to sit down, but the West didn't want peace...

After that, according to Ukrainska Pravda sources, the bilateral negotiation process was paused.

 

[Eight]

I read a lot, how else do you learn about things?

osmosis

 

[Endless Purple]

I read a lot, how else do you learn about things?

A difference in learning/memorizing things and being able to develop complex independent thoughts about them. You have shown the ability to do the first, but you cannot answer a simple question with a real adult answer.

Not quoting the long thread that does nothing about answering my question. You keep saying broker an end.... Tell me what you offer that will be accepted!

What do you offer the two sides to get them to stop?

Remember Donbas does not belong to the US to just give Russia.

 

[LVH]

I wanted to throw up yesterday when Rick Roberts came across my radio dial in my car on WBAP.

Talking about how journalists are garbage and propaganda machines, then brings on "An actual journalist who is one of the best in the business", Jennifer Griffin.

Yes, Pentagon/CIA mouthpiece Jennifer Griffin who does nothing but parrot propaganda that the Pentagon and CIA tell her to propogate. Of course she talks about how Ukraine is totally kicking Russia's ass and how Russia is on their heels and how Russia is about to lose this war.

If that is true why send Ukraine $40 billion. They got this, right?

 

[TCURiggs]

 

[vicarfrog]

I'm so relieved to know that the leaders of my country, like mindless zombies, are marching us ever closer to WW3. Here I was worried what my sons were going to do with their lives, and just like that, it's been decided. Thanks Uni-party, you're the best!

 

[East Coast]

This isn't any different than any other funding bill that goes through Congress. That's why I am a big proponent of the line item veto.

 

[gohornedfrogs]

I'm so relieved to know that the leaders of my country, like mindless zombies, are marching us ever closer to WW3. Here I was worried what my sons were going to do with their lives, and just like that, it's been decided. Thanks Uni-party, you're the best!

As much as I try to resist, I'm buying into the whole Uniparty thing.

It's not just the politicians, it's the entirety of the DC politicians, federal bureaucratic employees and lobbyists there who seem to only want to protect their own self-interests. To do so, they have to act in parallel. I never thought I would say this, but this is exactly why they went after Trump so hard. He really did threaten their little fiefdom when he said he wanted to clean up the swamp.

 

[Wexahu]

As much as I try to resist, I'm buying into the whole Uniparty thing.

It's not just the politicians, it's the entirety of the DC politicians, federal bureaucratic employees and lobbyists there who seem to only want to protect their own self-interests. To do so, they have to act in parallel. I never thought I would say this, but this is exactly why they went after Trump so hard. He really did threaten their little fiefdom when he said he wanted to clean up the swamp.

Yep. A whole bunch of truth here. It's pretty obvious really.

 

[LVH]

As much as I try to resist, I'm buying into the whole Uniparty thing.

It's not just the politicians, it's the entirety of the DC politicians, federal bureaucratic employees and lobbyists there who seem to only want to protect their own self-interests. To do so, they have to act in parallel. I never thought I would say this, but this is exactly why they went after Trump so hard. He really did threaten their little fiefdom when he said he wanted to clean up the swamp.

Part of the problem is how expensive it is to run for office and win. So you become beholden to campaign donors. This is by design so you are controlled. If you step out of line, your funding for re-election will dry up. That's a main reason Trump was hated, because he wasn't owned by anyone and didn't have IOUs sitting on his desk when sworn into office.

And this is why Kevin McCarthy and Mitch McConnell are working so hard to defeat MAGA candidates in primaries and would rather a democrat win than a MAGA candidate - they want loyal soldiers for them who will keep them in leadership and do what they are told.

 

[TCURiggs]

 

[LVH]

 

[vicarfrog]

Slava Ukraina Such wonderful freedom fighters:

 

[vicarfrog]

As much as I try to resist, I'm buying into the whole Uniparty thing.

It's not just the politicians, it's the entirety of the DC politicians, federal bureaucratic employees and lobbyists there who seem to only want to protect their own self-interests. To do so, they have to act in parallel. I never thought I would say this, but this is exactly why they went after Trump so hard. He really did threaten their little fiefdom when he said he wanted to clean up the swamp.

YES! It's a machine.

That's why if a Romney GOP was running against an open-borders liberal...I'm just not going to vote. Either of those people feeds the Globalist American Empire (GAE).

 

[LSU Game Attendee]

And this is why Kevin McCarthy and Mitch McConnell are working so hard to defeat MAGA candidates in primaries and would rather a democrat win than a MAGA candidate - they want loyal soldiers for them who will keep them in leadership and do what they are told.

These Republican-tinted swamp creatures are just new installs of John Boehner, Paul Ryan, Trent Lott, and Trey Gowdy (the master of Kabuki theater conservative outrage)