thor
Legend
Posts: 20,460
|
Post by thor on Oct 11, 2022 18:51:11 GMT
Ssssshh! I'm trying to lure Wyatt. As to my point, Ukraine would have given away territory, promised to be a neutral party and Putin still would have invaded, hoping for the whole pie. Had Ukraine conceded, just how bold would that have made Putin? Would he be happy and stop right there? I don't believe so. He's an aging authoritarian and they all seem to follow a similar path, war for glory. SOB has his war now and his country's corruption has neutered his military. Some 1.5 million winter uniforms disappeared just as he's calling up hundreds of thousands to deploy, in the winter! Master strategist who's relying on his people fighting his neighbors and not him. Keeping everyone else out with his nuke threats. He lost. The real question is how do we give him a face saving out that doesn't included illegally annexed territory his military can't even hold? Six Years to the Day.
It ain't over Mojo. This is exactly what guys like Wyatt and me were warning about. The US has helped Ukraine to the point where this is going to go on, and on, and on.
Remember how our own "leaders" were saying things like "You go to war with the Army you have, not the Army you might want or wish to have at a later time?" Remember when the Pink Brigade or wtfever was holding mass peace demonstrations? Remember how we are still in Iraq 20 years later in this democracy? And we think it's going to move the needle in an autocracy?
As I've explained time and time again. This is about the oil and natgas deposits Ukraine discovered right before the US led a coup in Ukraine. NATO protestations are the pretext. The "casus belli" if you will.
If Putin is forced to step down, someone worse and more right wing will replace him. The "Putin's war" rhetoric plays well to Western audiences saying "Glory (not victory weirdly) to Ukraine!" on twitter, but that's about it. This is about the existence of the imagined order currently ruling Russia whose entire way of life and system of rule is based on the exploitation of gas and oil.
This is a long haul affair Mojo. And if you read non Western outlets, Russian citizens are figuring out they don't need 87 different cheeses from France to survive. They're discovering they can do just fine with Gollandsky. And Rossiysky. And Kromstromkoy. (Well played Jeffrey Sonnenfeld?)
Whether Europe survives this intact is a bigger question than whether Russia survives this intact.
And I'll be honest. I don't give a shit whether Shell and BP or Gazprom get the contracts to exploit those resources. And I'm never going to.
That's a lot of words to admit that you are a Trump-Slave, Que-Anon. |
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,203
Member is Online
|
Post by demos on Oct 11, 2022 20:02:48 GMT
Presumably about more aid, specifically missile defense systems. Yup... Source
Regarding talks, the New York Times reported that Zelensky "did not see any possibility for diplomatic negotiations with Russia at this time." ( Source)
|
|
petep
Legend
Posts: 26,001
Member is Online
|
Post by petep on Oct 11, 2022 21:20:11 GMT
I suspect if the west had strong leaders led by a strong us leader Putin never would have thought about doing what he did.
A bully who knows he will not be hit back will throw a punch and keep going. If the bully knows his punch will be met with a slap. He will punch again and again. If the bully knows he will be annihilated if he throws a punch he will stay at home.
Look around the world. Every idiot authoritarian is flexing his muscles and wreaking havoc. It’s harming us in many ways.
Biden and key western leaders are weak. Simple as that.
|
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,203
Member is Online
|
Post by demos on Oct 11, 2022 21:28:10 GMT
I suspect if the west had strong leaders led by a strong us leader Putin never would have thought about doing what he did. You mean like in 2008 when Bush was President and Putin invaded Georgia?
Would you include the ones flexing their muscle and wreaking havoc with our help?
|
|
|
|
Post by Lomelis on Oct 12, 2022 7:44:25 GMT
It might be time for NATO ( aka the US ) to actually work towards peace. Put NATO expansion on the negotiating table and see what happens. ^^^ Translation: "I am a vagina whose shitcan ideology of 'mUH fReeDumB' was ALWAYS bullshit and has been exposed for the excrement that it is." Be honest, Shitbag - just declare that you believe a free people should roll over and surrender so that you can feel 'safe'. Pathetic. NeanderThor LeakingBrain thinks Ukraine is part of NATO. NeanderThor LeakingBrain thinks it's brave for us Americans to sacrifice Ukrainians in a proxy war with Russia. NeanderThor LeakingBrain is scared what would happen if we ( the US and our Euoropean minions) put Ukrainian NATO membership, neutrality, on the table for negotiotian. NeanderThor LeakingBrain isn't very bright, doesn't understand English, is scared of freedom ( the moron can't even spell it right ), and thinks that direct negotiation between the US and Russia implies that Ukraine shouldn't defend itself. Poor NeanderThor LeakingBrain owned so hard again. Owned x infinity x infinity. My dumb slave can't stop licking my boots. Hahahaha 😂🤣👏 |
|
|
|
Post by limey² on Oct 12, 2022 17:19:55 GMT
^^^ Translation: "I am a vagina whose shitcan ideology of 'mUH fReeDumB' was ALWAYS bullshit and has been exposed for the excrement that it is." Be honest, Shitbag - just declare that you believe a free people should roll over and surrender so that you can feel 'safe'. Pathetic. NeanderThor LeakingBrain thinks Ukraine is part of NATO. NeanderThor LeakingBrain thinks it's brave for us Americans to sacrifice Ukrainians in a proxy war with Russia. NeanderThor LeakingBrain is scared what would happen if we ( the US and our Euoropean minions) put Ukrainian NATO membership, neutrality, on the table for negotiotian. NeanderThor LeakingBrain isn't very bright, doesn't understand English, is scared of freedom ( the moron can't even spell it right ), and thinks that direct negotiation between the US and Russia implies that Ukraine shouldn't defend itself. Poor NeanderThor LeakingBrain owned so hard again. Owned x infinity x infinity. My dumb slave can't stop licking my boots. Hahahaha 😂🤣👏 Why do you think there should be direct negotiation between the US and Russia over Ukraine? |
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,203
Member is Online
|
Post by demos on Oct 12, 2022 19:23:41 GMT
Why do you think there should be direct negotiation between the US and Russia over Ukraine? Well, the US was already negotiating directly with Russia on this issue prior to their re-invasion (see here and here), so why not now? And considering that NATO membership or neutrality (which has been an age-old issue at stake in this conflict) is on the table and the United States has been pressing Ukrainian membership for some time, then yes, we should be at the negotiating table.
Plus, we and the UK have previously scuttled a potential agreement back in April (see earlier in this thread), so might as well be up front in the process. No reason to be sitting in some backroom when everyone knows what one of the major issues is and who is involved.
|
|
|
|
Post by limey² on Oct 13, 2022 5:14:33 GMT
Why do you think there should be direct negotiation between the US and Russia over Ukraine? Well, the US was already negotiating directly with Russia on this issue prior to their re-invasion (see here and here), so why not now? And considering that NATO membership or neutrality (which has been an age-old issue at stake in this conflict) is on the table and the United States has been pressing Ukrainian membership for some time, then yes, we should be at the negotiating table.
Plus, we and the UK have previously scuttled a potential agreement back in April (see earlier in this thread), so might as well be up front in the process. No reason to be sitting in some backroom when everyone knows what one of the major issues is and who is involved.
No, I asked about "should" not "is". |
|
|
|
Post by Lomelis on Oct 13, 2022 5:55:03 GMT
NeanderThor LeakingBrain thinks Ukraine is part of NATO. NeanderThor LeakingBrain thinks it's brave for us Americans to sacrifice Ukrainians in a proxy war with Russia. NeanderThor LeakingBrain is scared what would happen if we ( the US and our Euoropean minions) put Ukrainian NATO membership, neutrality, on the table for negotiotian. NeanderThor LeakingBrain isn't very bright, doesn't understand English, is scared of freedom ( the moron can't even spell it right ), and thinks that direct negotiation between the US and Russia implies that Ukraine shouldn't defend itself. Poor NeanderThor LeakingBrain owned so hard again. Owned x infinity x infinity. My dumb slave can't stop licking my boots. Hahahaha 😂🤣👏 Why do you think there should be direct negotiation between the US and Russia over Ukraine? If Russia is concerned about NATO (the US) on its borders, truly believes that NATO (the US) is a real threat, that it is such a threat that it would trigger an invasion then perhaps it nakes sense to negotiate with Russia about the issue. Even if someone disagrees about that, the threat of NATO (the US) being probably the most significant cause of the invasion, it still doesn't mean we shouldn't throw Ukrainian neutrality out there and see what happens. There is an absolute refusal to make any effort towards peace by the US and our NATO lackeys because 1.) Corporate interests are making billions and 2 ) Popular support is easier to maintain as we aren't directly losing troops...yet. |
|
|
|
Post by limey² on Oct 13, 2022 6:36:54 GMT
Why do you think there should be direct negotiation between the US and Russia over Ukraine? If Russia is concerned about NATO (the US) on its borders, truly believes that NATO (the US) is a real threat, that it is such a threat that it would trigger an invasion then perhaps it nakes sense to negotiate with Russia about the issue. Even if someone disagrees about that, the threat of NATO (the US) being probably the most significant cause of the invasion, it still doesn't mean we shouldn't throw Ukrainian neutrality out there and see what happens. There is an absolute refusal to make any effort towards peace by the US and our NATO lackeys because 1.) Corporate interests are making billions and 2 ) Popular support is easier to maintain as we aren't directly losing troops...yet. 1. Nobody in Russian government believes NATO on their borders is a threat. Poland has been in Nato a long time. Norway even longer. At present, NATO has land borders with Russia spanning 754 miles across northern Norway, eastern Latvia and Estonia, and the borders with Poland and Lithuania around Russia's Kaliningrad region. 2. If Ukraine wants to be neutral, that's on them. Other countries can't declare it. 3. Peace will come when Russian forces are no longer inside Ukranian territory. Negotiations should be focussed on that, in parallel with physical efforts to hasten this outcome. |
|
|
|
Post by Lomelis on Oct 13, 2022 6:50:46 GMT
If Russia is concerned about NATO (the US) on its borders, truly believes that NATO (the US) is a real threat, that it is such a threat that it would trigger an invasion then perhaps it nakes sense to negotiate with Russia about the issue. Even if someone disagrees about that, the threat of NATO (the US) being probably the most significant cause of the invasion, it still doesn't mean we shouldn't throw Ukrainian neutrality out there and see what happens. There is an absolute refusal to make any effort towards peace by the US and our NATO lackeys because 1.) Corporate interests are making billions and 2 ) Popular support is easier to maintain as we aren't directly losing troops...yet. 1. Nobody in Russian government believes NATO on their borders is a threat. Poland has been in Nato a long time. Norway even longer. At present, NATO has land borders with Russia spanning 754 miles across northern Norway, eastern Latvia and Estonia, and the borders with Poland and Lithuania around Russia's Kaliningrad region. 2. If Ukraine wants to be neutral, that's on them. Other countries can't declare it. 3. Peace will come when Russian forces are no longer inside Ukranian territory. Negotiations should be focussed on that, in parallel with physical efforts to hasten this outcome. And you're wrong. But let's assume you're correct, why should the US -not- directly negotiate NATO neutrality in Ukraine? Why not throw that out there and see what happens, see what can be negotiated? What harm is there in even talking about it if there is the slightest possibility it could lead to an end of the conflict? |
|
thor
Legend
Posts: 20,460
|
Post by thor on Oct 13, 2022 13:07:00 GMT
If Russia is concerned about NATO (the US) on its borders, truly believes that NATO (the US) is a real threat, that it is such a threat that it would trigger an invasion then perhaps it nakes sense to negotiate with Russia about the issue. Even if someone disagrees about that, the threat of NATO (the US) being probably the most significant cause of the invasion, it still doesn't mean we shouldn't throw Ukrainian neutrality out there and see what happens. There is an absolute refusal to make any effort towards peace by the US and our NATO lackeys because 1.) Corporate interests are making billions and 2 ) Popular support is easier to maintain as we aren't directly losing troops...yet. 1. Nobody in Russian government believes NATO on their borders is a threat. Poland has been in Nato a long time. Norway even longer. At present, NATO has land borders with Russia spanning 754 miles across northern Norway, eastern Latvia and Estonia, and the borders with Poland and Lithuania around Russia's Kaliningrad region. 2. If Ukraine wants to be neutral, that's on them. Other countries can't declare it. 3. Peace will come when Russian forces are no longer inside Ukranian territory. Negotiations should be focussed on that, in parallel with physical efforts to hasten this outcome. Reality slaps Shitbag on his pointy little head. Looks like the USMC logistics school doesn't teach map reading. Holy shit!  |
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,203
Member is Online
|
Post by demos on Oct 13, 2022 13:37:41 GMT
No, I asked about "should" not "is". And the should is there as well.
Some of the issues related to it involve the U.S. and the Russians think that we are influencing Ukrainian policy.
This is not an entirely accurate statement. The Russian government is very concerned about Ukraine being in NATO. They've made that quite clear for a long time. And If you don't believe what Russian leaders themselves have said for the last 30 years, here's what William Burns (currently CIA director) said about it in 2008:
"Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest of all redlines for the Russian elite (not just Putin). In more than two and a half years of conversations with key Russian players... I have yet to find anyone who views Ukraine in NATO as anything other than a direct challenge to Russian interests." ( Source) Great. So, why have the UK and US undermined negotiations which would've led to that?
If we're going to stay out of it, then we need to stay out it. But we haven't. Nor can we stay out of it at this point.
|
|
thor
Legend
Posts: 20,460
|
Post by thor on Oct 13, 2022 16:29:54 GMT
No, I asked about "should" not "is". And the should is there as well.
Some of the issues related to it involve the U.S. and the Russians think that we are influencing Ukrainian policy.
This is not an entirely accurate statement. The Russian government is very concerned about Ukraine being in NATO. They've made that quite clear for a long time. And If you don't believe what Russian leaders themselves have said for the last 30 years, here's what William Burns (currently CIA director) said about it in 2008:
"Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest of all redlines for the Russian elite (not just Putin). In more than two and a half years of conversations with key Russian players... I have yet to find anyone who views Ukraine in NATO as anything other than a direct challenge to Russian interests." ( Source) Great. So, why have the UK and US undermined negotiations which would've led to that?
If we're going to stay out of it, then we need to stay out it. But we haven't. Nor can we stay out of it at this point.
NATO has been on the USSR/Russian Federation's border since its inception. Their 'concern' is weak baloney to distract/deflect (another habitual Russian behavior) from their own bad faith BS. There is nothing to 'negotiate'. Russian is trying to forcibly re-integrate the Ukraine into their country by force when the people of the Ukraine are clearly not interested. Start from there and ask yourself why we SHOULDN'T be involved. |
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,203
Member is Online
|
Post by demos on Oct 13, 2022 16:52:19 GMT
NATO has been on the USSR/Russian Federation's border since its inception. Their 'concern' is weak baloney to distract/deflect (another habitual Russian behavior) from their own bad faith BS. Yeah, as an defensive alliance aimed at them, so describing their concern as "weak baloney" is BS. And dismissing that concern is not the best strategy overall.
And as mentioned, Russia has had long standing concerns specifically about Ukraine joining NATO. Ignoring of all that is the road that got us here. As Burns said in 2019, "I think what happened in later years was we sort of stayed on autopilot with regard to NATO expansion." First, Russia isn't trying to re-integrate all of Ukraine; the reasons why have been discussed exhaustively.
Second, some of the people in Ukraine have wanted greater autonomy, independence or reintegration with Russia (e.g. Crimea and Donbas) pretty soon after Ukrainian independence. What happens to those people presuming Ukraine retakes those areas? Do they forcibly remove them?
Third, we are involved. We've been involving ourselves in this since we began pushing NATO expansion to Ukraine years ago. If we shouldn't be involved, then why aren't more of you advocating nonintervention? Should we have stayed out of it when Ukraine and Russia were close to a negotiated settlement back in April; or was that ok because interfering then meant no resolution of this conflict in which Russia gained something?
Your entire comment here just completely ignores history and any context as it relates to this conflict.
|
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,203
Member is Online
|
Post by demos on Oct 13, 2022 17:56:45 GMT
|
|
petep
Legend
Posts: 26,001
Member is Online
|
Post by petep on Oct 13, 2022 18:39:32 GMT
no matter the outcome - russia attacked a sovereign nation, and leveled the entire country...it will take decades to recover from an image perspective...we used to have some development done there and in the ukraine
I'm not aware of any companies who will do business in russia...before it was corruption...now they are just jerks to put it mildly
|
|
thor
Legend
Posts: 20,460
|
Post by thor on Oct 13, 2022 18:46:15 GMT
NATO has been on the USSR/Russian Federation's border since its inception. Their 'concern' is weak baloney to distract/deflect (another habitual Russian behavior) from their own bad faith BS. Yeah, as an defensive alliance aimed at them, so describing their concern as "weak baloney" is BS. And dismissing that concern is not the best strategy overall.
And as mentioned, Russia has had long standing concerns specifically about Ukraine joining NATO. Ignoring of all that is the road that got us here. As Burns said in 2019, "I think what happened in later years was we sort of stayed on autopilot with regard to NATO expansion." First, Russia isn't trying to re-integrate all of Ukraine; the reasons why have been discussed exhaustively.
Second, some of the people in Ukraine have wanted greater autonomy, independence or reintegration with Russia (e.g. Crimea and Donbas) pretty soon after Ukrainian independence. What happens to those people presuming Ukraine retakes those areas? Do they forcibly remove them?
Third, we are involved. We've been involving ourselves in this since we began pushing NATO expansion to Ukraine years ago. If we shouldn't be involved, then why aren't more of you advocating nonintervention? Should we have stayed out of it when Ukraine and Russia were close to a negotiated settlement back in April; or was that ok because interfering then meant no resolution of this conflict in which Russia gained something?
Your entire comment here just completely ignores history and any context as it relates to this conflict.
1. You continuing to claim this does not change the reality, demos. The seat of the Ukrainian government was attacked at the very beginning in an (obvious) attempt to decapitate it. At this point, I can only conclude that you are fully emotionally invested in defending Russia's actions. 2. Let me guess, you also have bought into the BS 'referendum', haven't you? 3. As well we should be involved. You might think it is cool to ask a free people to roll over so that you here in the US can feel 'safe'. I am not. Also, you ran from the reality that NATO has been on the USSR/Russian Federation's border from its inception. Because that fact demolishes your argument. |
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,203
Member is Online
|
Post by demos on Oct 13, 2022 18:59:20 GMT
1. You continuing to claim this does not change the reality, demos. And you repeating your claim doesn't make it so.And why has been discussed. Instead of addressing that argument you just dismissed it out of hand.
Let me guess, you don't know any of the history before those BS referendums do you?
So, are we talking at cross purposes here? Because I think we should be involved in negotiations. Do you agree with that?
I directly addressed this. Let me repeat it for you since it seems you want to play this game again:
Yeah, as a defensive alliance aimed at them, so describing their concern as "weak baloney" is BS. And dismissing that concern is not the best strategy overall.
And as mentioned, Russia has had long standing concerns specifically about Ukraine joining NATO. Ignoring of all that is the road that got us here. As Burns said in 2019, "I think what happened in later years was we sort of stayed on autopilot with regard to NATO expansion."
Care to respond to that? Cause it seems like you're ignoring an important variable in the "NATO has been on the USSR/Russian Federation's border from its inception" (i.e., why) which undermines whatever you were trying to argue.
|
|
thor
Legend
Posts: 20,460
|
Post by thor on Oct 13, 2022 19:39:14 GMT
1. You continuing to claim this does not change the reality, demos. And you repeating your claim doesn't make it so.And why has been discussed. Instead of addressing that argument you just dismissed it out of hand.
Let me guess, you don't know any of the history before those BS referendums do you?
So, are we talking at cross purposes here? Because I think we should be involved in negotiations. Do you agree with that?
I directly addressed this. Let me repeat it for you since it seems you want to play this game again:
Yeah, as a defensive alliance aimed at them, so describing their concern as "weak baloney" is BS. And dismissing that concern is not the best strategy overall.
And as mentioned, Russia has had long standing concerns specifically about Ukraine joining NATO. Ignoring of all that is the road that got us here. As Burns said in 2019, "I think what happened in later years was we sort of stayed on autopilot with regard to NATO expansion."
Care to respond to that? Cause it seems like you're ignoring an important variable in the "NATO has been on the USSR/Russian Federation's border from its inception" (i.e., why) which undermines whatever you were trying to argue.
More baloney, demos. More whataboutery. More of you twisting in the wind to avoid addressing things that make you uncomfortable. You must be a graduate of the Kellyanne Conway School of Alternative Facts. You have not addressed anything that I (and others) have pointed out for you in a satisfactory manner. It would be best at this point if you came clean and demanded that the free people of Ukraine roll over in the face of Russian aggression. |
|
