Ukraine and the point of view that Russia aggression is ito protect against nato eastern expansion

[Dadar]

Do you really believe nato is looking to invade Russia. If your next door neighbor is Russia with the actions it has taken would you not be concerned about sovereign border territories being seized with no restraint in bombing civilians in all locations with thermal weapons that emit an initial burst of material that then ignites a 2nd explosion creating a vacuum that sucks the guts out of everyone within a large range or the confines of a building? How can any pro life advocate not care about the atrocities by Russia with no concern for any civilian life?

In WW II Europe stayed in denial until Germany pushed things to the tipping point of no return. Why would Nato go down that road again?

Just curious to hear why anyone believes otherwise

Hard also to understand restricting use of US weapons across Russia border other than fear of opening door to Russia taking actions to further arm Cuba and any foothold in South America and other BRIC allies? Some reports that Russia is increasing nuclear delivery capability for N Korea in return for the troops and weapon supplies N Korea is providing Russia invading a sovereign European country?

Glad there are indications restrictions are finally being lifted. Seems like a window is open until Trump is sworn in just like Russian expanding push at high cost to establish favorable conditions for negotiations giving it all seized territory and have the Kurst region in Russia handed back

These are questions I keep pondering. Maybe many just don't care.

The US responsibility was largely set by Bretton Woods that established the US dollar as the reserve currency for global trade. This gave the US a huge economic advantage. Not sure whether in writing, but this also put an increased responsibility that is also in the the best interest of US which dwarfs other nations in Naval capability to protect the shipping lanes of earth which is predominantly covered by water.

After Nixon (was elected by the largest margin in history I believe) took away the last ties to gold and threw all doors open for money mischief by all foxes in the hen house. Add to that weaponizing the USD as leverage against any enemies or perceived foreign threat. Not criticizing the action, just how we got there.

Granted, many allies grew overly dependent on the US and let their defense contributions diminish and are now acting to correct this with the threats posed.

There are 2 sides to this coin and one seems to be overlooked or just taken as something we feel to simply be entitled to.

 

[Dadar]

This is an amazing story of a Clemson graduate and his experience as a 2nd Lt just out of college who was stationed in Japan and was with the initial forces to Korea in the early action being pushed to the Pusan Peninsula limit and counter atack at the front where he was shot in the foot. He was given orders to hold his position and not fire on the Chinese crossing the river border who were thought to be only securing hydroelectric facilities

Was just putting this into perspective with Ukraine war 1,000 days old now. He was also the last prisoner released I believe.

William was a career Clemson employee in the extension service and passed away several years ago. William was a good friend that I regret not spending more time with. He rarely talked about his experience unless asked about it and put into words his experience as a way to relieve continuous night mares recounting the experience. Documenting his experience alleviated the night mares. His book is available at the military museum near Willy Brice and is highly recommended for anyone interested in stories of true heroes who endured extreme obstacles for survival.

Bill Fuchness, Korea POW, A thousand days of torment, by William H. Funchess, Life # 1725, Companys B & C, 19th Infantry Regiment

This is the official website of the 24th Infantry Division Association. It contains information about the 24th infantry Divison's wartime activities, copies of selected Taro Leaf publications, our Reunions, its officers, TAPS information, many first hand stories by our members of their actions...

24thida.com

 

[DW4_2016]

Wrong board man. Most of this board is pro Putin and pro Russia. They’re likely to deny it now, but when it popped off with russia to begin this round of fighting they were all showing how much they loved communism and putin. Real weird, but they’ve made their choice.

 

[Dadar]

Wrong board man. Most of this board is pro Putin and pro Russia. They’re likely to deny it now, but when it popped off with russia to begin this round of fighting they were all showing how much they loved communism and putin. Real weird, but they’ve made their choice.

Maybe not pro putin but either unaware of the depth of how evil Putin is, the global threat posed or they just don't care.

 

[firegiver]

I've heard it argued pretty convincingly that Russia population is in decline, that the only way they can revitalize and secure their nation is to expand its boarders. That the big plan, is to keep going till they hit Portugal.
They truly thought they would be through Poland by now. They started this because the timeline for their military aged combatants is expiring, it was now or never.

The fools who wish to help sanction 'peace' do not understand that Putin is fully devoted to his plan to reestablish the Russian empire.

 

[Dadar]

I've heard it argued pretty convincingly that Russia population is in decline, that the only way they can revitalize and secure their nation is to expand its boarders. That the big plan, is to keep going till they hit Portugal.
They truly thought they would be through Poland by now. They started this because the timeline for their military aged combatants is expiring, it was now or never.

The fools who wish to help sanction 'peace' do not understand that Putin is fully devoted to his plan to reestablish the Russian empire.

Yep, they have destroyed their population demographics. Lost significant physical and intellectual resources in lower age density

 

[Dadar]

Do you ever watch any of the video snippets from Russia TV? All of the comentators are jacked up to nuke the world and feeding Putin's narrative to the population.

 

[Dadar]

Do you ever watch any of the video snippets from Russia TV? All of the comentators are jacked up to nuke the world and feeding Putin's narrative to the population.

 

[Dadar]

Do you ever watch any of the video snippets from Russia TV? All of the comentators are jacked up to nuke the world and feeding Putin's narrative to the population.

Propaganda machine in an isolated society

 

[uuuuuuuuuuuuuuu]

Do you really believe nato is looking to invade Russia. If your next door neighbor is Russia with the actions it has taken would you not be concerned about sovereign border territories being seized with no restraint in bombing civilians in all locations with thermal weapons that emit an initial burst of material that then ignites a 2nd explosion creating a vacuum that sucks the guts out of everyone within a large range or the confines of a building? How can any pro life advocate not care about the atrocities by Russia with no concern for any civilian life?

In WW II Europe stayed in denial until Germany pushed things to the tipping point of no return. Why would Nato go down that road again?

Just curious to hear why anyone believes otherwise

Hard also to understand restricting use of US weapons across Russia border other than fear of opening door to Russia taking actions to further arm Cuba and any foothold in South America and other BRIC allies? Some reports that Russia is increasing nuclear delivery capability for N Korea in return for the troops and weapon supplies N Korea is providing Russia invading a sovereign European country?

Glad there are indications restrictions are finally being lifted. Seems like a window is open until Trump is sworn in just like Russian expanding push at high cost to establish favorable conditions for negotiations giving it all seized territory and have the Kurst region in Russia handed back

These are questions I keep pondering. Maybe many just don't care.

The US responsibility was largely set by Bretton Woods that established the US dollar as the reserve currency for global trade. This gave the US a huge economic advantage. Not sure whether in writing, but this also put an increased responsibility that is also in the the best interest of US which dwarfs other nations in Naval capability to protect the shipping lanes of earth which is predominantly covered by water.

After Nixon (was elected by the largest margin in history I believe) took away the last ties to gold and threw all doors open for money mischief by all foxes in the hen house. Add to that weaponizing the USD as leverage against any enemies or perceived foreign threat. Not criticizing the action, just how we got there.

Granted, many allies grew overly dependent on the US and let their defense contributions diminish and are now acting to correct this with the threats posed.

There are 2 sides to this coin and one seems to be overlooked or just taken as something we feel to simply be entitled to.

Russia's perception is that a hostile military alliance has continually expanded and squeezed them, and they weren't going to let it happen again in Ukraine. Is NATO a serious threat to invade Russia? No, but that sort of logic sure as hell hasn't stopped us in the past. Ask the Vietnamese or Saddam. What were our justifications there? Stopping the spread of communism on the other side of the globe and outright lies about WMDs and connections to al-Qaeda. We should frankly be ashamed of the Iraq War, and the cowards responsible haven't faced the smallest consequence for their lies to the American people and their brutality towards Iraqi civilians whose lives we destroyed.

The Hitler appeasement thing is unfairly criticized. What was the alternative? Going to war with Germany when Britain and France were in no shape to fight at all? You also have to consider that the British felt, with legitimate reason, that Germany did get screwed over by Versailles, and moreover, it wasn't entirely clear that Nazi Germany was more of a threat than the USSR, who Germany balanced. People jump to the conclusion that it was some obvious, idiotic mistake without looking into it. Nobody seems to think that reaching an armistice in Korea was appeasement.

You are right about Bretton Woods. It weaponized the dollar and meant aggresively using the military to protect an economy built on deficit spending.

 

[Dadar]

Russia's perception is that a hostile military alliance has continually expanded and squeezed them, and they weren't going to let it happen again in Ukraine. Is NATO a serious threat to invade Russia? No, but that sort of logic sure as hell hasn't stopped us in the past. Ask the Vietnamese or Saddam. What were our justifications there? Stopping the spread of communism on the other side of the globe and outright lies about WMDs and connections to al-Qaeda. We should frankly be ashamed of the Iraq War, and the cowards responsible haven't faced the smallest consequence for their lies to the American people and their brutality towards Iraqi civilians whose lives we destroyed.

The Hitler appeasement thing is unfairly criticized. What was the alternative? Going to war with Germany when Britain and France were in no shape to fight at all? You also have to consider that the British felt, with legitimate reason, that Germany did get screwed over by Versailles, and moreover, it wasn't entirely clear that Nazi Germany was more of a threat than the USSR, who Germany balanced. People jump to the conclusion that it was some obvious, idiotic mistake without looking into it. Nobody seems to think that reaching an armistice in Korea was appeasement.

You are right about Bretton Woods. It weaponized the dollar and meant aggresively using the military to protect an economy built on deficit spending.

Vietnam was when the cold war was running in a very different global perspective. The weapons of mass destruction talking point for Iraq was complete BS.

Most of the NATO expansion bringing in Baltic countries and Sweden has been in reaction to Russia aggression. Russian leadership made to move to break up the USSR. So now they have changed their mind and want everything back?

By this rational the US would return our lands to England, Mexico and France, not to mention the Indian Nations who should have 1st claim

 

[firegiver]

Yep, they have destroyed their population demographics. Lost significant physical and intellectual resources in lower age density

China too, its crazy whats happening over there.

 

[Dadar]

Russia's perception is that a hostile military alliance has continually expanded and squeezed them, and they weren't going to let it happen again in Ukraine. Is NATO a serious threat to invade Russia? No, but that sort of logic sure as hell hasn't stopped us in the past. Ask the Vietnamese or Saddam. What were our justifications there? Stopping the spread of communism on the other side of the globe and outright lies about WMDs and connections to al-Qaeda. We should frankly be ashamed of the Iraq War, and the cowards responsible haven't faced the smallest consequence for their lies to the American people and their brutality towards Iraqi civilians whose lives we destroyed.

The Hitler appeasement thing is unfairly criticized. What was the alternative? Going to war with Germany when Britain and France were in no shape to fight at all? You also have to consider that the British felt, with legitimate reason, that Germany did get screwed over by Versailles, and moreover, it wasn't entirely clear that Nazi Germany was more of a threat than the USSR, who Germany balanced. People jump to the conclusion that it was some obvious, idiotic mistake without looking into it. Nobody seems to think that reaching an armistice in Korea was appeasement.

You are right about Bretton Woods. It weaponized the dollar and meant aggresively using the military to protect an economy built on deficit spending.

Bretton Woods was a double edged sword. Easy to look back on history and criticize things but we have no idea how things would have morphed out of different decisions.

Things would likely be very different today. Better or worse, who knows.

 

[firegiver]

Russia's perception is that a hostile military alliance has continually expanded and squeezed them, and they weren't going to let it happen again in Ukraine. Is NATO a serious threat to invade Russia? No, but that sort of logic sure as hell hasn't stopped us in the past. Ask the Vietnamese or Saddam. What were our justifications there? Stopping the spread of communism on the other side of the globe and outright lies about WMDs and connections to al-Qaeda. We should frankly be ashamed of the Iraq War, and the cowards responsible haven't faced the smallest consequence for their lies to the American people and their brutality towards Iraqi civilians whose lives we destroyed.

The Hitler appeasement thing is unfairly criticized. What was the alternative? Going to war with Germany when Britain and France were in no shape to fight at all? You also have to consider that the British felt, with legitimate reason, that Germany did get screwed over by Versailles, and moreover, it wasn't entirely clear that Nazi Germany was more of a threat than the USSR, who Germany balanced. People jump to the conclusion that it was some obvious, idiotic mistake without looking into it. Nobody seems to think that reaching an armistice in Korea was appeasement.

You are right about Bretton Woods. It weaponized the dollar and meant aggresively using the military to protect an economy built on deficit spending.

Yep, and Russia knows there are no geographical boarders to stop NATO from just walking, straight into Russia. So they must expand to secure.
Russia a long time ago, forced a vote to join NATO, just to prove the point that it was an Anti Soviet union. Of course the NATO members rejected their addition. It was an embarrassment for NATO.

 

[Dadar]

Are you saying that Russia should have been taken into NATO considering where things stood in 1954.? That is just bizarre.

Maybe I am missing something, but in 1954 (are you familiar with the Korean conflict and the cold war) the only reason for Russia to join nato would have been to get in a position to have veto power and disrupt things through any subversive means they could orchestrate. Talk about putting a fox in the hen house. Hard to understand why so many just want to give Russia a pass because they have been mind F'd by X or whatever biased news source they accept without 2nd level thought and then just parrot it as truth.

Think about your premis that Russia has to expand it's border for security purposes. What is the geographical area of Russia relative to Europe. Is there a particular border in Europe where they will suddenly say - ok we are here and all is good now so we can just go about our business within our boundaries. If you believe this you may be interested in buying the Brookland Bridge

 

[leetp]

Do you really believe nato is looking to invade Russia. If your next door neighbor is Russia with the actions it has taken would you not be concerned about sovereign border territories being seized with no restraint in bombing civilians in all locations with thermal weapons that emit an initial burst of material that then ignites a 2nd explosion creating a vacuum that sucks the guts out of everyone within a large range or the confines of a building? How can any pro life advocate not care about the atrocities by Russia with no concern for any civilian life?

In WW II Europe stayed in denial until Germany pushed things to the tipping point of no return. Why would Nato go down that road again?

Just curious to hear why anyone believes otherwise

Hard also to understand restricting use of US weapons across Russia border other than fear of opening door to Russia taking actions to further arm Cuba and any foothold in South America and other BRIC allies? Some reports that Russia is increasing nuclear delivery capability for N Korea in return for the troops and weapon supplies N Korea is providing Russia invading a sovereign European country?

Glad there are indications restrictions are finally being lifted. Seems like a window is open until Trump is sworn in just like Russian expanding push at high cost to establish favorable conditions for negotiations giving it all seized territory and have the Kurst region in Russia handed back

These are questions I keep pondering. Maybe many just don't care.

The US responsibility was largely set by Bretton Woods that established the US dollar as the reserve currency for global trade. This gave the US a huge economic advantage. Not sure whether in writing, but this also put an increased responsibility that is also in the the best interest of US which dwarfs other nations in Naval capability to protect the shipping lanes of earth which is predominantly covered by water.

After Nixon (was elected by the largest margin in history I believe) took away the last ties to gold and threw all doors open for money mischief by all foxes in the hen house. Add to that weaponizing the USD as leverage against any enemies or perceived foreign threat. Not criticizing the action, just how we got there.

Granted, many allies grew overly dependent on the US and let their defense contributions diminish and are now acting to correct this with the threats posed.

There are 2 sides to this coin and one seems to be overlooked or just taken as something we feel to simply be entitled to.

No, I do not think we nor NATO want to invade Russia. If I lived anywhere in Eastern Europe I'd be terrified of Russia and would be clamoring for any support I could get to challenge and repel Russia. They must be held to account not just for the unprovoked invasion but for the atrocities they committed.

I do agree that this is not unlike 1938 and the Anschluss (Germain invasion and annexation of Austria) --or perhaps more analogous still, the 1938 Germain invasion of Czechoslovakia. Russia invading Georgia being more comparable to the Austrian invasion and the subsequent invasion of the Crimea and Ukraine being comparable to the Czechoslovakian invasion.

So, yes, it's not hyperbole to say that it is 1938 all over again. Any government representative that does not recognize that is a fool.

Onto what I presume you are singling in on as root causes for Russia's predicament? I guess I don't quite follow the shift to Bretton Woods, the IMF and establishing the US dollar as the reserve currency for trade. However, you can count me as among those who blame a global economic playing field being slanted to favor one party of another as a cause of much word strife. The world is safer with a prosperous Russian (and Chinese) economy. Speaking strictly of modern times, global conflagrations tend to arise out of desperate nations.

Nevertheless, here we are. So, what should we do about it? To tell the truth, I am not entirely sure. I do know Russia must be stopped, and all Ukrainian territory, including Crimea, must be restored.

Ukraine is a corrupt debased debauched, er, not a country who had their crap together prior to the invasion. And as far as the rest of Europe, weakness is complicity. Thier namby-pamby fecklessness invites aggression from despots like Putin. It is an outrage how weak NATO has become. I know you hate all-things-Trump, but his browbeating insistence that NATO nations pay up or we are pulling out is a masterstroke of foreign policy. Of course, we'd never pull out; but even the notion of shifting priorities away from NATO was enough to spur increase NATO investment among European nations. THIS PRESSURE MUST BE MAINTAINED!

So, any agreement of assistance to Ukraine MUST come with assurances from NATO members that defense spending benchmarks be met FIRST AND FOREMOST!

Second, whatever we provide in materiel (i.e. military arms and equipment) must either be paid for by some combination of NATO and Ukraine or AT LEAST be matched in proportion by NATO countries.

And third, it is the height of utterly vapid stupidity to provide materiel to Ukraine and then tell them how and where they can use it. If we don't want them to use it, then don't send it to them.

And fourth, any NATO member bypassing Russian sanctions must be halted immediately.

 

[Dadar]

Thank you for the thoughtful response.

My preceeding post was in response to firegiver bashing NATO over not wanting Russia as a member back in the Cold War days. I do not believe there are any communist countries in NATO.

So far the Trump cabinet picks has only reinforced my view of him.

We agree on many things..

👍 ✌️

 

[yoshi121374]

I don't have a real depth of knowledge about this issue so I appreciate the measured,weighted discussion. Thanks for bringing this to the board. God we need more of this stuff. Thanks @Dadar and @leetp

 

[uuuuuuuuuuuuuuu]

No, I do not think we nor NATO want to invade Russia. If I lived anywhere in Eastern Europe I'd be terrified of Russia and would be clamoring for any support I could get to challenge and repel Russia. They must be held to account not just for the unprovoked invasion but for the atrocities they committed.

I do agree that this is not unlike 1938 and the Anschluss (Germain invasion and annexation of Austria) --or perhaps more analogous still, the 1938 Germain invasion of Czechoslovakia. Russia invading Georgia being more comparable to the Austrian invasion and the subsequent invasion of the Crimea and Ukraine being comparable to the Czechoslovakian invasion.

So, yes, it's not hyperbole to say that it is 1938 all over again. Any government representative that does not recognize that is a fool.

Onto what I presume you are singling in on as root causes for Russia's predicament? I guess I don't quite follow the shift to Bretton Woods, the IMF and establishing the US dollar as the reserve currency for trade. However, you can count me as among those who blame a global economic playing field being slanted to favor one party of another as a cause of much word strife. The world is safer with a prosperous Russian (and Chinese) economy. Speaking strictly of modern times, global conflagrations tend to arise out of desperate nations.

Nevertheless, here we are. So, what should we do about it? To tell the truth, I am not entirely sure. I do know Russia must be stopped, and all Ukrainian territory, including Crimea, must be restored.

Ukraine is a corrupt debased debauched, er, not a country who had their crap together prior to the invasion. And as far as the rest of Europe, weakness is complicity. Thier namby-pamby fecklessness invites aggression from despots like Putin. It is an outrage how weak NATO has become. I know you hate all-things-Trump, but his browbeating insistence that NATO nations pay up or we are pulling out is a masterstroke of foreign policy. Of course, we'd never pull out; but even the notion of shifting priorities away from NATO was enough to spur increase NATO investment among European nations. THIS PRESSURE MUST BE MAINTAINED!

So, any agreement of assistance to Ukraine MUST come with assurances from NATO members that defense spending benchmarks be met FIRST AND FOREMOST!

Second, whatever we provide in materiel (i.e. military arms and equipment) must either be paid for by some combination of NATO and Ukraine or AT LEAST be matched in proportion by NATO countries.

And third, it is the height of utterly vapid stupidity to provide materiel to Ukraine and then tell them how and where they can use it. If we don't want them to use it, then don't send it to them.

And fourth, any NATO member bypassing Russian sanctions must be halted immediately.

“They must be held to account not just for the unprovoked invasion but for the atrocities they committed.”

Held accountability by whom? Us? We have no right to. What price did we pay for invading Iraq and employing torture (often of innocent people)? We gave ourselves permission to use military force to protect our servicemen and officials from the ICC, and Blinken wants to cry about Putin violating international law. Our country is so back asswards that we sent people to be tortured by Assad in Syria before citing his human rights record as a reason to get rid of him.

“I do know Russia must be stopped, and all Ukrainian territory, including Crimea, must be restored.”

Sure, it will cost Ukraine a few hundred thousand more men dying so they can govern Russian-speaking people that don’t identify with the people in Kyiv or Lviv. We have to separate the moral issue of Ukraine being invaded from the reality of this war. It is not a war that Ukraine has the manpower to win, and it’s strengthened ties between our adversaries.

 

[yoshi121374]

“They must be held to account not just for the unprovoked invasion but for the atrocities they committed.”

Held accountability by whom? Us? We have no right to. What price did we pay for invading Iraq and employing torture (often of innocent people)? We gave ourselves permission to use military force to protect our servicemen and officials from the ICC, and Blinken wants to cry about Putin violating international law. Our country is so back asswards that we sent people to be tortured by Assad in Syria before citing his human rights record as a reason to get rid of him.

“I do know Russia must be stopped, and all Ukrainian territory, including Crimea, must be restored.”

Sure, it will cost Ukraine a few hundred thousand more men dying so they can govern Russian-speaking people that don’t identify with the people in Kyiv or Lviv. We have to separate the moral issue of Ukraine being invaded from the reality of this war. It is not a war that Ukraine has the manpower to win, and it’s strengthened ties between our adversaries.

I don't think it has strengthened Russia at all. They look incredibly weak and their military looks inept and obsolete. It's has also really crushed their economy.

 

[TigerRagRob]

“They must be held to account not just for the unprovoked invasion but for the atrocities they committed.”

Held accountability by whom? Us? We have no right to. What price did we pay for invading Iraq and employing torture (often of innocent people)? We gave ourselves permission to use military force to protect our servicemen and officials from the ICC, and Blinken wants to cry about Putin violating international law. Our country is so back asswards that we sent people to be tortured by Assad in Syria before citing his human rights record as a reason to get rid of him.

“I do know Russia must be stopped, and all Ukrainian territory, including Crimea, must be restored.”

Sure, it will cost Ukraine a few hundred thousand more men dying so they can govern Russian-speaking people that don’t identify with the people in Kyiv or Lviv. We have to separate the moral issue of Ukraine being invaded from the reality of this war. It is not a war that Ukraine has the manpower to win, and it’s strengthened ties between our adversaries.

Lets not forget that this isn't the legit Gov of Ukraine. The lawful Gov was overthrown by the west in a coup and a pro-west Gov was put in its place. That Gov then did a hard crackdown on the majority Russian areas of Ukraine to squash any protest of that coup. This didn't just start when Russian invaded a few years ago. Also as I have said the whole time there are no good guys in this fight. Both suck and both are bad. Neither is worth risking WW3 over imo...

 

[leetp]

“They must be held to account not just for the unprovoked invasion but for the atrocities they committed.”

Held accountability by whom? Us? We have no right to. What price did we pay for invading Iraq and employing torture (often of innocent people)? We gave ourselves permission to use military force to protect our servicemen and officials from the ICC, and Blinken wants to cry about Putin violating international law. Our country is so back asswards that we sent people to be tortured by Assad in Syria before citing his human rights record as a reason to get rid of him.

“I do know Russia must be stopped, and all Ukrainian territory, including Crimea, must be restored.”

Sure, it will cost Ukraine a few hundred thousand more men dying so they can govern Russian-speaking people that don’t identify with the people in Kyiv or Lviv. We have to separate the moral issue of Ukraine being invaded from the reality of this war. It is not a war that Ukraine has the manpower to win, and it’s strengthened ties between our adversaries.

They are accountable to Ukraine. Insofar as Ukraine is too weak to repel the bully and bring about the necessary reckoning, then if falls on those sufficiently incensed or otherwise harmed by the activity.

Whatever your opinion of America's behavior on the world stage is your prerogative. We have certainly made some missteps, but we are not Russia. Not even close.

I don't know if you realize it, but you are engaging in some of the same rhetoric Hitler used to justify to the world his actions in Austria and Czechoslovakia--that these were territories full of native Germain-speaking people who were facing oppression in their native lands. Also, Russia has been successfully able to foment pollical unrest in our country. You don't think they are capable for doing much worse in Ukraine? I read absolutely nothing into the notion that there are segments of Ukrainian population that favor Russian annexation.

Afghanistan took Russia's best shot and survived. Heck, North Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan took the US's best shot and survived. So, I am certainly not counting Ukraine out. That they have not only survived through 1,000 days of vicious warfare, but that they have also given at least as well as they have taken indicates we should not be counting Ukraine out.

I'd like to think the longer this war drags on the weaker Putin gets and the closer he gets to being deposed. Imagine a world where Russia can be an ally on par with the UK, Japan or Australia? Don't you want that?

 

[leetp]

Lets not forget that this isn't the legit Gov of Ukraine. The lawful Gov was overthrown by the west in a coup and a pro-west Gov was put in its place. That Gov then did a hard crackdown on the majority Russian areas of Ukraine to squash any protest of that coup. This didn't just start when Russian invaded a few years ago. Also as I have said the whole time there are no good guys in this fight. Both suck and both are bad. Neither is worth risking WW3 over imo...

While you are not entirely wrong, there is so much to unpack that I am not sure I have the energy.

I am at least slightly amenable to the notion that this is Russia's rightful territory, but we cannot ignore that during the days of the former USSR that the USA was not faced with an existential crisis and that both the USSR and the USA were doing all they could to destabilize the other.

 

[TigerRagRob]

They are accountable to Ukraine. Insofar as Ukraine is too weak to repel the bully and bring about the necessary reckoning, then if falls on those sufficiently incensed or otherwise harmed by the activity.

Whatever your opinion of America's behavior on the world stage is your prerogative. We have certainly made some missteps, but we are not Russia. Not even close.

I don't know if you realize it, but you are engaging in some of the same rhetoric Hitler used to justify to the world his actions in Austria and Czechoslovakia--that these were territories full of native Germain-speaking people who were facing oppression in their native lands. Also, Russia has been successfully able to foment pollical unrest in our country. You don't think they are capable for doing much worse in Ukraine? I read absolutely nothing into the notion that there are segments of Ukrainian population that favor Russian annexation.

Afghanistan took Russia's best shot and survived. Heck, North Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan took the US's best shot and survived. So, I am certainly not counting Ukraine out. That they have not only survived through 1,000 days of vicious warfare, but that they have also given at least as well as they have taken indicates we should not be counting Ukraine out.

I'd like to think the longer this war drags on the weaker Putin gets and the closer he gets to being deposed. Imagine a world where Russia can be an ally on par with the UK, Japan or Australia? Don't you want that?

I would just add if they are facts whats being stated, then it cant be called rhetoric. Propaganda is rhetoric. Propaganda tends to be lies for the most part...

 

[Dadar]

“They must be held to account not just for the unprovoked invasion but for the atrocities they committed.”

Held accountability by whom? Us? We have no right to. What price did we pay for invading Iraq and employing torture (often of innocent people)? We gave ourselves permission to use military force to protect our servicemen and officials from the ICC, and Blinken wants to cry about Putin violating international law. Our country is so back asswards that we sent people to be tortured by Assad in Syria before citing his human rights record as a reason to get rid of him.

“I do know Russia must be stopped, and all Ukrainian territory, including Crimea, must be restored.”

Sure, it will cost Ukraine a few hundred thousand more men dying so they can govern Russian-speaking people that don’t identify with the people in Kyiv or Lviv. We have to separate the moral issue of Ukraine being invaded from the reality of this war. It is not a war that Ukraine has the manpower to win, and it’s strengthened ties between our adversaries.

Agree about Iraq and the weapons of mass destruction. Weigh it all together. None of us are perfect.

 

[TigerRagRob]

While you are not entirely wrong, there is so much to unpack that I am not sure I have the energy.

I am at least slightly amenable to the notion that this is Russia's rightful territory, but we cannot ignore that during the days of the former USSR that the USA was not faced with an existential crisis and that both the USSR and the USA were doing all they could to destabilize the other.

i would say they both still do...

 

[leetp]

I would just add if they are facts whats being stated, then it cant be called rhetoric. Propaganda is rhetoric. Propaganda tends to be lies for the most part...

Well, not to be pedantic, but.... rhetoric is nothing more than the spoken or written word. Depending on the context in which the word is used, it can be either complementary or insulting. Propaganda is just information, although almost never used as anything but a pejorative.

Hitler used rhetoric to great effect. Joseph Goebbels used propaganda to great effect.

 

[leetp]

i would say they both still do...

Yes, not doubt.

 

[TigerRagRob]

Well, not to be pedantic, but.... rhetoric is nothing more than the spoken or written word. Depending on the context in which the word is used, it can be either complementary or insulting. Propaganda is just information, although almost never used as anything but a pejorative.

Hitler used rhetoric to great effect. Joseph Goebbels used propaganda to great effect.

I tend to go with this- language designed to have a persuasive or impressive effect on its audience, but often regarded as lacking in sincerity or meaningful content...Good example is when Trump said "because you would be in jail" as rhetoric, because he had no real intention of doing it. It was just to get a reaction from the live crowd that had influence on the people watching on tv...

 

[leetp]

I tend to go with this- language designed to have a persuasive or impressive effect on its audience, but often regarded as lacking in sincerity or meaningful content...

Read further down the dictionary.

Nevertheless, I was only using it as a way to bring attention to the words, spoken and written, being similar to those used by Hitler to justify his early land grabs.

For what it's worth, it was true that there were many Germans living in Austria and Czechoslovakia.

 

[TigerRagRob]

Read further down the dictionary.

Nevertheless, I was only using it as a way to bring attention to the words, spoken and written, being similar to those used by Hitler to justify his early land grabs.

For what it's worth, it was true that there were many Germans living in Austria and Czechoslovakia.

Yes, but Austria and Ukraine are very different. The people of Ukraine elected a Gov that the west didn't like. This really has everything to do with Natural Gas and the supply to Europe. This is why we ended up in Syria and supporting ISIS due to what happen in Ukraine. The west needed a pipeline into southern Europe and it had to go thru Syria...

 

[uuuuuuuuuuuuuuu]

Vietnam was when the cold war was running in a very different global perspective. The weapons of mass destruction talking point for Iraq was complete BS.

Most of the NATO expansion bringing in Baltic countries and Sweden has been in reaction to Russia aggression. Russian leadership made to move to break up the USSR. So now they have changed their mind and want everything back?

By this rational the US would return our lands to England, Mexico and France, not to mention the Indian Nations who should have 1st claim

We traded the containment of communism for the containment of terrorism for the containment of Russian imperial ambitions. The rationale never really changes.

The Soviets and later the Russians were informally told that NATO wasn’t going to expand eastward. Yeltsin brought it up in the 90s. Was Russian aggression on the menu then? No, they were weak, and Clinton pushed NATO on them. It’s naive to present NATO as this innocent organization and not an extension of American military power. Nobody would allow a geopolitical enemy to dominate its neighborhood, “defensive” alliance or not, and the Russians have acted in a more or less rational way against that possibility. Ukraine is of considerably more importance to Russia than Finland.

Why wouldn’t they have invaded Kazakhstan if it were purely about getting the Soviet gang back together? It would have been a thousand times easier

 

[CUTiger1977]

 

[TheValley91]

We traded the containment of communism for the containment of terrorism for the containment of Russian imperial ambitions. The rationale never really changes.

The Soviets and later the Russians were informally told that NATO wasn’t going to expand eastward. Yeltsin brought it up in the 90s. Was Russian aggression on the menu then? No, they were weak, and Clinton pushed NATO on them. It’s naive to present NATO as this innocent organization and not an extension of American military power. Nobody would allow a geopolitical enemy to dominate its neighborhood, “defensive” alliance or not, and the Russians have acted in a more or less rational way against that possibility. Ukraine is of considerably more importance to Russia than Finland.

Why wouldn’t they have invaded Kazakhstan if it were purely about getting the Soviet gang back together? It would have been a thousand times easier

lol Russia has shown how weak their military is and also invaded a sovereign country while crying that they are defending themselves.

Then to bring in North Korean soldiers for support as well. This isn’t a rational or reasonable response to Ukraine being thought of as a possible NATO country.

It’s clearly backfired and shouldn’t be supported at all.

 

[uuuuuuuuuuuuuuu]

lol Russia has shown how weak their military is and also invaded a sovereign country while crying that they are defending themselves.

Then to bring in North Korean soldiers for support as well. This isn’t a rational or reasonable response to Ukraine being thought of as a possible NATO country.

It’s clearly backfired and shouldn’t be supported at all.

What was the war in Iraq then? It’s pathetic when the Russian army asks for reinforcements, but when we do it, it’s called a “surge.” You can feel them mocking us with the term “Special Military Operation.”

Russia is winning the war by the rules that we are willing to play with. That’s all that matters.

It’s frankly sad to see Americans clamor to send Ukrainians to die by the hundreds of thousands. There’s not a single area of the front line where they aren’t on the defensive. And I’ll ask for the thousandth time: What happens in the dream world where Ukraine wins and the people in eastern Ukraine prefer to be with Russia?

It wasn’t irrational for Russia to take control of the North Crimean Canal. It wasn’t irrational for Russia to want the Sea of Azov under its control. It wasn’t irrational for Russia to want to keep Ukraine away from Western alignment. We can say all of that without passing a moral judgement.

 

[TigerRagRob]

What was the war in Iraq then? It’s pathetic when the Russian army asks for reinforcements, but when we do it, it’s called a “surge.” You can feel them mocking us with the term “Special Military Operation.”

Russia is winning the war by the rules that we are willing to play with. That’s all that matters.

It’s frankly sad to see Americans clamor to send Ukrainians to die by the hundreds of thousands. There’s not a single area of the front line where they aren’t on the defensive. And I’ll ask for the thousandth time: What happens in the dream world where Ukraine wins and the people in eastern Ukraine prefer to be with Russia?

It wasn’t irrational for Russia to take control of the North Crimean Canal. It wasn’t irrational for Russia to want the Sea of Azov under its control. It wasn’t irrational for Russia to want to keep Ukraine away from Western alignment. We can say all of that without passing a moral judgement.

Looks like the Deep state and left will get their war. Lets make sure they get put on the frontlines like Trump suggested...

 

[Dadar]

What was the war in Iraq then? It’s pathetic when the Russian army asks for reinforcements, but when we do it, it’s called a “surge.” You can feel them mocking us with the term “Special Military Operation.”

Russia is winning the war by the rules that we are willing to play with. That’s all that matters.

It’s frankly sad to see Americans clamor to send Ukrainians to die by the hundreds of thousands. There’s not a single area of the front line where they aren’t on the defensive. And I’ll ask for the thousandth time: What happens in the dream world where Ukraine wins and the people in eastern Ukraine prefer to be with Russia?

It wasn’t irrational for Russia to take control of the North Crimean Canal. It wasn’t irrational for Russia to want the Sea of Azov under its control. It wasn’t irrational for Russia to want to keep Ukraine away from Western alignment. We can say all of that without passing a moral judgement.

Good grief 😔

 

[TheValley91]

What was the war in Iraq then? It’s pathetic when the Russian army asks for reinforcements, but when we do it, it’s called a “surge.” You can feel them mocking us with the term “Special Military Operation.”

Russia is winning the war by the rules that we are willing to play with. That’s all that matters.

It’s frankly sad to see Americans clamor to send Ukrainians to die by the hundreds of thousands. There’s not a single area of the front line where they aren’t on the defensive. And I’ll ask for the thousandth time: What happens in the dream world where Ukraine wins and the people in eastern Ukraine prefer to be with Russia?

It wasn’t irrational for Russia to take control of the North Crimean Canal. It wasn’t irrational for Russia to want the Sea of Azov under its control. It wasn’t irrational for Russia to want to keep Ukraine away from Western alignment. We can say all of that without passing a moral judgement.

Yeah your argument fell apart the moment you brought up the Iraq war. If you can’t see how they aren’t comparable then we won’t be able to move forward in discussing further.

The rest is exactly what Russia wants you and its own citizens to believe. That is what is sad.