WW3 Please SAY NO!

[KMayUSA6060]

Originally Posted by BobbyStrawberry

Is he actually forcing people to fight? I had not heard that.

Banned them from leaving, then handed out 10k+ firearms to them. All the while pumping propaganda and false Russian death totals in the beginning to presumably fire up a "fighting spirit".

So semantics would affect the answer to your question.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ng/6936471001/

[earlywynnfan]

Originally Posted by KMayUSA6060

I'm focused on our involvement in this "conflict". Our government is as much to blame as anyone, yet I don't hear any of that coming from the MSM/news.

So you're saying we're as much to blame as Russia for what's happening right now?

[KMayUSA6060]

Originally Posted by earlywynnfan

So you're saying we're as much to blame as Russia for what's happening right now?

Yes.

[Shoeless Moe]

All of you that are good at finding links, can you find one talking about the lead up to this, meaning the month before the Russian Army started lining up their troops on the borders.

Just curious did Putin and Zelensky meet at all?

[earlywynnfan]

Originally Posted by KMayUSA6060

Yes.

Just curious, how much blame do you place on the US for the Japanese attack in 1941?

[AustinMike]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

Imagine the US response if Cuba agreed to station Nuclear Missiles.

So, are you saying the US should have just straight up attacked Cuba with our full military force?

Since we're imagining things, imagine if the US proposed to actually put nuclear weapons in Ukraine.

What would the acceptable Russian response be to that?

Also, as part of the agreement back in 1962, the US promised not to invade Cuba. As part of the agreement back in 1991 to get nuclear weapons out of Ukraine, Russia agreed not to attack Ukraine.

[jgannon]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

I believe They planned an invasion first, but it wasnt logistically possible

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

The first thought was a military response to take the missiles out. They later decided to go with a blockade, which they called a quarantine, to prevent any more missiles from being transported to Cuba. The crisis ended when Kennedy gave Khruschev his assurance that Cuba would not be invaded, and he also privately agreed to take some missiles out of Turkey.

[earlywynnfan]

Originally Posted by jgannon

The first thought was a military response to take the missiles out. They later decided to go with a blockade, which they called a quarantine, to prevent any more missiles from being transported to Cuba. The crisis ended when Kennedy gave Khruschev his assurance that Cuba would not be invaded, and he also privately agreed to take some missiles out of Turkey.

Sounds like negotiation worked without having to shed blood. Too bad Putin (or, I guess some would say, Biden) hasn't done the same.

[jgannon]

Originally Posted by earlywynnfan

Sounds like negotiation worked without having to shed blood. Too bad Putin (or, I guess some would say, Biden) hasn't done the same.

Oh yeah, the U.S. was lucky to have the right president at the right time. That was masterful diplomacy and statesmanship on his part.

I thought Putin would only go as far as recognizing Donetsk and Luhansk. The region leans heavily toward Russia. Official recognition by Russia as to the independence of those two regions, and the presence of Russian troops may have stopped the fighting there.

Putin absolutely made a mistake by going to war. He lost whatever high ground he had. He had legitimate arguments regarding Ukraine, but there was no reason to launch an all-out war. On the United States' part, we were foolish and arrogant, and misread how serious Russia was on the matter.

[sbfinley]

Originally Posted by KMayUSA6060

You can both hate innocent people dying and question things.

Imagine if there were this much outcry against Obama when he let Russia take Crimea (and Georgia, or was that Bush?).

Apples to oranges. The annexation of Crimea was done under the guise of a “separatist” movement and Russian forces involved did so without flag on their shoulder. There was outcry. It lead to original sanctions and Russia’s eventual expulsion from the G8. The rest is shoulda woulda coulda.


Imagine if the US were to invade sovereign countries under the guise of "saving them", and kill innocent people. Oh wait...



Y'all aren't wrong for hating war. But before you go calling people "Russian stooges" or insinuating others are terrorist apologists, you should be able to answer every question possible.

Why is Zelenskyy being dubbed a hero when all he has done is refuse to negotiate with Russia, then force 18-60 year old makes to stay and fight? He takes opportunistic photos that are nothing but propaganda, yet claims to be on the front lines.

Dude is a hero, but thatÂ’s just my opinion. You claim he refuses to negotiate with Russia is categorically false in every aspect. He has called for direct talks with Putin which so far the Russia leader has refused. His government has twice met for negotiations with Russian leaders. He has been in direct contact with multiple world leaders acting as intermediaries between the two sides including must recently Israeli Prime Minister Bennett.
That claim of yours is idiotically false on all accounts.

He absolutely did close the borders to men 18-60 in the event of needed conscription. True. He did that as the commander in chief of the Ukrainian military because (you know) theyÂ’re currently being invaded (you need a link for that too)?


DudeÂ’s the leader of the Democratic government under invasion (once again you require a primary source?) Of course heÂ’s not trying to flank column with a Javelin. That propaganda you call him out on is letting his country know heÂ’s still there for them and not fleeing in the night - considering you know they are rising together to fend off an invading force.




https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...r-plant-putin/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/abcnews...%3fid=83226054



Speaking of Zelenskyy, how closely is he tied to Burisma, the same company that has Hunter Biden, CIA people, etc. all on their board? The owner of the network that produced his show which he rose to fame through is on that board as well.

What is GodÂ’s name does any of that have to do with another country INVADING a sovereign country to overthrow itÂ’s democratically elected government. ItÂ’s also possible he has Dollywood passes. How close is he to Folly Parton? Know one knows!

Even then and clap with me as I this YOU. DONT. INVADE. A. SOVEREIGN. COUNTRY. AND. BOMB. THEIR. CIVIALIANS. BECAUSE. YOU. DONÂ’T. LIKE. WHO. THEIR. LEADER. IS.

ThatÂ’s article 2 section 4 of the UN bylaws and charter if need reference.

https://www.un.org/en/about-us/un-charter/full-text




What does Nordstrom 2 have to do with this?

CLAP with me and read that last part again.

If what Putin is doing is so atrocious, why haven't US/NATO forces stepped in? If we don't want war but want to protect innocent people, why did we declare war via sanctions and leave the innocent people all but defenseless?

Because anyone with even elementary knowledge of Geopolitics knows a lethal dispute between NATO and Russia carries a large chance of nuclear response for either or both sides. Literally my 11 year old understands that. NATO keeps “calculated ambiguity” to whether or not they maintain a “use first” doctrine in the event of a lethal dispute - but without doubt the chances they are tactically used increases exponentially if the two sides met on the battlefield.


https://www.armscontrol.org/act/1999...nale-first-use



Have people forgotten the level of corruption and meddling the US has done in Ukraine? Or Soros's love of Ukraine?

I honestly donÂ’t think the give two shits about about this idiotic ramble considering they are being invaded and having their sovereignty compromised. Could be wrong. They could sit around a camp fire and cook up all kinds of X-Files BS, but just an educated guess is they just want the 100,000+ invading troops, artillery leveling their cities, missiles killing many, and hired mercenaries to GTFO.

Why did Obama/Biden allow the Clintons to sell uranium to the Russians?

For the life of me I donÂ’t have a clue what this has do with a nation invading and trying to overthrow a democratically elected government of a sovereign nation.

Why did Biden kill our energy independence, only to buy Russian energy exports?

The same.

I'm focused on our involvement in this "conflict". Our government is as much to blame as anyone, yet I don't hear any of that coming from the MSM/news.

Read slowly. Our. Government. Did. Not. Invade. The. Sovereign. Nation. Of. Ukraine.

Answered above.

[Shoeless Moe]

Well found Putin & Zelensky's 1st meeting:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=du2DjJEtc0k

[jgannon]

It's hard to have a face-saving way out of this, but something must be done. The sad truth is, the U.S. and Ukraine should have agreed to Ukraine being a neutral state a long time ago. But Russian hysteria, "Putin bad" thinking, and self-defeating U.S. delusions of hegemony kept that from happening. If they had simply dealt with Russia and engaged in the world of realpolitik, the invasion never would have happened. As far as admiring Zelensky, all I have to say, is that he is not going to defeat the Russians, and the U.S. and NATO are not going to directly fight the Russians. The U.S. encouraged Zelensky to play a dangerous game and it blew up in their faces. The U.S. never had any intentions of backing Ukraine up militarily.

The longer Zelensky holds out, the more his people are going to die. He may be trying to negotiate, but anything short of a promise to remain a neutral state will fail. Putin is not going to back down now. With some countries contemplating sending planes and Russia being on nuclear alert as well as stating that sanctions are tantamount to an act of war, the situation is getting more and more dangerous. Zelensky is frankly being selfish and self-defeating by asking the U.S. to establish a no-fly zone and not reading the handwriting on the wall.

[sbfinley]

Originally Posted by jgannon

It's hard to have a face-saving way out of this, but something must be done. The sad truth is, the U.S. and Ukraine should have agreed to Ukraine being a neutral state a long time ago. But Russian hysteria, "Putin bad" thinking, and self-defeating U.S. delusions of hegemony kept that from happening. If they had simply dealt with Russia and engaged in the world of realpolitik, the invasion never would have happened. As far as admiring Zelensky, all I have to say, is that he is not going to defeat the Russians, and the U.S. and NATO are not going to directly fight the Russians. The U.S. encouraged Zelensky to play a dangerous game and it blew up in their faces. The U.S. never had any intentions of backing Ukraine up militarily.

The longer Zelensky holds out, the more his people are going to die. He may be trying to negotiate, but anything short of a promise to remain a neutral state will fail. Putin is not going to back down now. With some countries contemplating sending planes and Russia being on nuclear alert as well as stating that sanctions are tantamount to an act of war, the situation is getting more and more dangerous. Zelensky is frankly being selfish and self-defeating by asking the U.S. to establish a no-fly zone and not reading the handwriting on the wall.

If it were America under siege from a larger invading nation would you accept our capitulation? Or would you fight and possibly die for your sovereign independence. If you wouldn’t then that’s fine, if you would however in one breath be willing to fight for the United States right to govern itself democratically and in the last breath call Zelensky selfish for doing just that - then you you’re completely missing the point.

Our country was built on the blood of people who died for our sovereign independence. Expecting another nation to hide under the covers when their moment arises is cowardice.

[jgannon]

Originally Posted by sbfinley

If it were America under siege from a larger invading nation would you accept our capitulation? Or would you fight and possibly die for your sovereign independence. If you wouldn’t then that’s fine, if you would however in one breath be willing to fight for the United States right to govern itself democratically and in the last breath call Zelensky selfish for doing just that - then you you’re completely missing the point.

Our country was built on the blood of people who died for our sovereign independence. Expecting another nation to hide under the covers when their moment arises is cowardice.

Ukraine was ostensibly "free" although it is a very corrupt country and neo-Nazis groups are a force to be reckoned within the country. By declaring neutrality, Ukraine may not have become a part of NATO, but it would have actually safeguarded it's security. They have brought on the very thing they had hoped to keep from happening. That's why elected leaders should be learned in history and politics, actually having a background for leading. Zelensky was a comedian. At any rate, Zelensky should have acknowledged the reality of the situation and avoided trouble with his nuclear power neighbor. His people are dying for his mistake. His calls for a no-fly zone show how delusional and out of touch with reality he is.

[jgannon]

I'll just add that negotiating a peace is not surrender or cowardice.

[sbfinley]

Originally Posted by jgannon

Ukraine was ostensibly "free" although it is a very corrupt country and neo-Nazis groups are a force to be reckoned within the country. By declaring neutrality, Ukraine may not have become a part of NATO, but it would have actually safeguarded it's security. They have brought on the very thing they had hoped to keep from happening. That's why elected leaders should be learned in history and politics, actually having a background for leading. Zelensky was a comedian. At any rate, Zelensky should have acknowledged the reality of the situation and avoided trouble with his nuclear power neighbor. His people are dying for his mistake. His calls for a no-fly zone show how delusional and out of touch with reality he is.

124 word response and you didn’t even come close to answering the question. If America’s sovereign right to govern itself was challenged by an invading force would you fight to defend (or expect those capable) it or would you accept an outside power dictating your governance? Don’t slyly evade the question like a corrupt politician. Answer it.

[KMayUSA6060]

Originally Posted by sbfinley

If it were America under siege from a larger invading nation would you accept our capitulation? Or would you fight and possibly die for your sovereign independence. If you wouldn’t then that’s fine, if you would however in one breath be willing to fight for the United States right to govern itself democratically and in the last breath call Zelensky selfish for doing just that - then you you’re completely missing the point.

Our country was built on the blood of people who died for our sovereign independence. Expecting another nation to hide under the covers when their moment arises is cowardice.

America is under siege - from within and abroad. That's a huge part of this discussion is recognizing the real enemy.

What if you weren't willing to die but you were banned from leaving by this so called "hero"? Is that a noble cause or corrupt politics? Prove Zelenskyy is fighting for Ukraine's sovereignty and not to protect a hidden agenda. Again, he's been posting propaganda left and right. Why falsify the number of Russian deaths within the first couple of days? Why allow people to say you're on the front lines when you're not? Question Zelenskyy. He could very well be full of integrity in this situation, but we don't know. And the fact that every single news outlet is reporting him as a hero - instantly - is extremely off to me.

I love this country (America) more than most. But I am sick and tired of it being destroyed, because this is the greatest damn country in the world. We lead by example - peace through strength. Ironically enough, the last president that exemplified that didn't see Russia grow its territory, nor did we have a single war started for 4 years. So when things don't add up, I'm going to ask questions. Facts don't care about your feelings.

You want to truly care about innocent people - Ukrainians and elsewhere? Figure out why the US is meddling in so many damn countries. Figure out why our president's son has a spot on a Ukrainian gas company's board, along with CIA, etc. Figure out why NATO still exists and is growing. Figure out why we have alliances with countries that are more pro-Russian than pro-America (Germany, Italy to name a couple). Figure out why we've stoked the flames with economic sanctions instead of taking military action against a country that is supposedly getting their asses handed to them by a bunch of under-manned, under-armed, and under-trained Ukrainians - or ask yourself if that's really happening based on those simple facts I laid out. Figure out why there are supposedly thousands of Russians dying, yet the vast majority of videos coming out are Russian attacks on Ukraine. Figure out why Russia had been staging their military for months prior to this conflict, and nobody did a damn thing about it. FIGURE OUT WHY GHISLAINE MAXWELL'S LITTLE BLACK BOOK HASN'T BEEN EXPOSED YET!

Saving lives starts with ridding the American government of as much corruption as we can - in both parties. I hate McConnell just as much as I hate Biden. I hate Ted Cruz just as much as I hate Obama. None of them give a damn about you and me - the average American citizen - so why shouldn't we be looking at every possible way to expose them?

Ask. The. Damn. Questions.

Hollywood is corruption's biggest ally. "I can't believe what I'm seeing, this is just like a movie. I never thought this would ever happen." Make reality fiction.

Sheep only say, "BAAAAAAA." Don't be a sheep.

Oh, and then do all of this questioning while paying $4+ - minimum - per gallon of gas because the person in charge right now, telling us that Putin/Russia are the enemy, cut our energy independence - only to buy 200k+ barrels of oil per day from Russia. Then ask who the real enemy is.

[jgannon]

Originally Posted by sbfinley

124 word response and you didn’t even come close to answering the question. If America’s sovereign right to govern itself was challenged by an invading force would you fight to defend (or expect those capable) it or would you accept an outside power dictating your governance? Don’t slyly evade the question like a corrupt politician. Answer it.

Bugger off. Russia doesn't have to remain an occupying force. Russia wants Ukraine to remain a neutral state.

[sbfinley]

Originally Posted by jgannon

Bugger off. Russia doesn't have to remain an occupying force. Russia wants Ukraine to remain a neutral state.

Answer the question then.

[sbfinley]

Originally Posted by KMayUSA6060

America is under siege - from within and abroad. That's a huge part of this discussion is recognizing the real enemy.

What if you weren't willing to die but you were banned from leaving by this so called "hero"? Is that a noble cause or corrupt politics? Prove Zelenskyy is fighting for Ukraine's sovereignty and not to protect a hidden agenda. Again, he's been posting propaganda left and right. Why falsify the number of Russian deaths within the first couple of days? Why allow people to say you're on the front lines when you're not? Question Zelenskyy. He could very well be full of integrity in this situation, but we don't know. And the fact that every single news outlet is reporting him as a hero - instantly - is extremely off to me.

I love this country (America) more than most. But I am sick and tired of it being destroyed, because this is the greatest damn country in the world. We lead by example - peace through strength. Ironically enough, the last president that exemplified that didn't see Russia grow its territory, nor did we have a single war started for 4 years. So when things don't add up, I'm going to ask questions. Facts don't care about your feelings.

You want to truly care about innocent people - Ukrainians and elsewhere? Figure out why the US is meddling in so many damn countries. Figure out why our president's son has a spot on a Ukrainian gas company's board, along with CIA, etc. Figure out why NATO still exists and is growing. Figure out why we have alliances with countries that are more pro-Russian than pro-America (Germany, Italy to name a couple). Figure out why we've stoked the flames with economic sanctions instead of taking military action against a country that is supposedly getting their asses handed to them by a bunch of under-manned, under-armed, and under-trained Ukrainians - or ask yourself if that's really happening based on those simple facts I laid out. Figure out why there are supposedly thousands of Russians dying, yet the vast majority of videos coming out are Russian attacks on Ukraine. Figure out why Russia had been staging their military for months prior to this conflict, and nobody did a damn thing about it. FIGURE OUT WHY GHISLAINE MAXWELL'S LITTLE BLACK BOOK HASN'T BEEN EXPOSED YET!

Saving lives starts with ridding the American government of as much corruption as we can - in both parties. I hate McConnell just as much as I hate Biden. I hate Ted Cruz just as much as I hate Obama. None of them give a damn about you and me - the average American citizen - so why shouldn't we be looking at every possible way to expose them?

Ask. The. Damn. Questions.

Hollywood is corruption's biggest ally. "I can't believe what I'm seeing, this is just like a movie. I never thought this would ever happen." Make reality fiction.

Sheep only say, "BAAAAAAA." Don't be a sheep.

Oh, and then do all of this questioning while paying $4+ - minimum - per gallon of gas because the person in charge right now, telling us that Putin/Russia are the enemy, cut our energy independence - only to buy 200k+ barrels of oil per day from Russia. Then ask who the real enemy is.

Even more words. Not even gonna count them. Still didn’t answer it.

[jgannon]

Originally Posted by sbfinley

Even more words. Not even gonna count them. Still didn’t answer it.

Here you go. Here's a link to go fight in Ukraine.

https://fightforua.org/

[sbfinley]

Originally Posted by jgannon

Here you go. Here's a link to go fight in Ukraine.

https://fightforua.org/

Still didn’t. I’m waiting. Or go away.

[sbfinley]

Lot’s of (I’m guessing) proud American’s can’t take the energy to say they’d fight for their nation’s sovereignty with their fingers on a message board got the gall to call out a nation and a leader willing to fight and die for their own. Pretty sure that’s not what we were founded on.

[jgannon]

Originally Posted by sbfinley

Still didn’t. I’m waiting. Or go away.

Whoa...


Well, you can keep waiting for all I care, lol.

[sbfinley]

Originally Posted by jgannon

Whoa...


Well, you can keep waiting for all I care, lol.

To be honest, that’s exactly the response I expected. Cheers and Happy Collecting.

[jgannon]

Originally Posted by sbfinley

To be honest, that’s exactly the response I expected. Cheers and Happy Collecting.

Ptomaine...

[sbfinley]

Originally Posted by jgannon

Ptomaine...

That Latin for “my forefathers shed their blood so I can sleep on a safe pillow, so I can critique someone else fighting for the same safe pillow?”

I’m just playing. I went to college. Sick burn. But you’re still not a patriot.

[jgannon]

Originally Posted by sbfinley

That Latin for “my forefathers shed their blood so I can sleep on a safe pillow, so I can critique someone else fighting for the same safe pillow?”

I’m just playing. I went to college. Sick burn. But you’re still not a patriot.

Glory, glory hallelujah!

[sbfinley]

These guys:

Originally Posted by jgannon

Glory, glory hallelujah!

Originally Posted by KMayUSA6060

I love this country (America) more than most.

Someone: If you're nation was invaded by a larger force bent on removing your sovereign right to govern would you fight for your God given rights?

Also these guys:

[steve B]

Originally Posted by KMayUSA6060

Banned them from leaving, then handed out 10k+ firearms to them. All the while pumping propaganda and false Russian death totals in the beginning to presumably fire up a "fighting spirit".

So semantics would affect the answer to your question.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ng/6936471001/

Oh, a country lied about casualty totals... How... surprising?

Russia themselves claimed 0 deaths for at least a couple days.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by sbfinley

These guys:







Someone: If you're nation was invaded by a larger force bent on removing your sovereign right to govern would you fight for your God given rights?

Also these guys:

Perhaps we don't feel a need to brag about what we would do?
Perhaps, just perhaps we aren't that insecure in knowing what we would do.

The loudmouths are generally the first to slink away.

[sbfinley]

Originally Posted by steve B

Perhaps we don't feel a need to brag about what we would do?
Perhaps, just perhaps we aren't that insecure in knowing what we would do.

The loudmouths are generally the first to slink away.

No....

You're just to chicken $h*t to answer the question, because it disproves your narrative (God ya'll love that word).

I'll ask again....


If it were America under siege from a larger invading nation would you accept our capitulation? Or would you fight and possibly die for your sovereign independence.

It's a pretty concise question, with really a one word answer. [The options are YES or NO. If you need my daughter to paste it out in crayola just tell me the colors you recognize.]

You've just been dancing around it like Ricky Martin. And by all means, Live La Vida Loca my friend.

[sbfinley]

While you debate how to dance around Yes or No - here is a young mother and father weeping over their dead 18 month child. A child dead because one country invaded another to overthrow their sovereign independence. The held a "Special Military Operation" to free Ukraine. To do so, they are shelling major metropolitan areas with medium range missiles and artillery. Because you know - the Ukrainian government is corrupt.

[sbfinley]

Here's another of doctors trying desperately to save a young girl fatally injured because it's totally cool to invade with overwhelming military force and lob missiles, cluster bombs, and artillery into heavily populated areas in the name of "saving" a nation from corruption.

[sbfinley]

She didn't make it.





I really hate doing this, but the fact that some of you so blatantly do not know RIGHT from WRONG sickens me as a father, a husband, and an American.

I'm still waiting. I'm waiting on the cowards calling Zelensky and the rest of Ukraine who are fighting for their sovereign right to govern themselves "selfish" to tell me whether they would or would not fight for their own

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by sbfinley

I really hate doing this, but the fact that some of you so blatantly do not know RIGHT from WRONG sickens me as a father, a husband, and an American.

I'm still waiting. I'm waiting on the cowards calling Zelensky and the rest of Ukraine who are fighting for their sovereign right to govern themselves "selfish" to tell me whether they would or would not fight for their own

+1

Nobody anywhere in the world disputes the fact Russia invaded Ukraine with a large military force designed to kill people. Nobody disputes the fact that Russian forces, missiles, and tanks are killing (murdering) people.

Yet, there will always be those pseudo-intellectuals who will say "Well, we don't know all the details..." or "There must be some convoluted way to blame the USA because, well, we like to blame the USA..." or "This isn't really happening because all media is corrupt..."

As to Zelensky, if you respect what George Washington did, at great personal risk, to firmly found the concept of self-governance into reality, you have to also give this guy credit for putting his life on the line rather than accepting the invitation of a comfortable exile.

[KMayUSA6060]

Originally Posted by sbfinley

If you're nation was invaded by a larger force bent on removing your sovereign right to govern would you fight for your God given rights?

Yes. Without question. I tried to join the military and was denied for food allergies. I'm sorry I didn't realize this was the off-base question you were so distraught over not being answered.

Also, thank you for sharing those sad images. It gives us all something to pray for, if we didn't already.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to retire myself from this thread. Good discussion, fellas.

[AustinMike]

Originally Posted by irv

You should look up the Dunning Kruger effect, Mike. You're the textbook example of it.

Project much?

As usual, another stimulating conversation with the "pot calling the kettle black" king.

[AustinMike]

Originally Posted by jgannon

Ukraine was ostensibly "free" although it is a very corrupt country and neo-Nazis groups are a force to be reckoned within the country. By declaring neutrality, Ukraine may not have become a part of NATO, but it would have actually safeguarded it's security. They have brought on the very thing they had hoped to keep from happening. That's why elected leaders should be learned in history and politics, actually having a background for leading. Zelensky was a comedian. At any rate, Zelensky should have acknowledged the reality of the situation and avoided trouble with his nuclear power neighbor. His people are dying for his mistake. His calls for a no-fly zone show how delusional and out of touch with reality he is.

I'm sure glad people don't think we are a "free" country with a recently stolen election. Also, I'm sure glad we don't have corruption in our country. Lastly, it's a blessing that we don't have neo-Nazis groups in this country, I don't know, holding rallies. Because if we did, people would think other countries would be justified in freeing us by military force.

[AustinMike]

Originally Posted by jgannon

Ukraine was ostensibly "free" although it is a very corrupt country and neo-Nazis groups are a force to be reckoned within the country. By declaring neutrality, Ukraine may not have become a part of NATO, but it would have actually safeguarded it's security. They have brought on the very thing they had hoped to keep from happening. That's why elected leaders should be learned in history and politics, actually having a background for leading. Zelensky was a comedian. At any rate, Zelensky should have acknowledged the reality of the situation and avoided trouble with his nuclear power neighbor. His people are dying for his mistake. His calls for a no-fly zone show how delusional and out of touch with reality he is.

Hey, what do you know? We agree on something! We should learn from history.

Let's make up a hypothetical situation and see if we can use history to help us formulate a way to react.

Let's assume there's a country ... let's make one up and call it Deutschdirt. Let's say they were really down on their luck and agreed to a treaty. But then later on, they got a leader that didn't like that treaty. He didn't think it was fair. So he decided to annex a bordering country because, I don't know, he claimed Deutschdirters who lived there weren't being treated properly. Let's say that no other country objected. That leader then decided to take over another country and all the other countries said, "Neville mind him taking that country. If we let him have that country, he'll stop."

Is there anything in world history that you can think of that might give us a hint at how this might play out?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by KMayUSA6060

Yes.

You are a Fu***** idiot for thinking that. Someone needs to lob a nuke on Putin's head.
.

[Shoeless Moe]

and since every thread needs a Card (...or a Ticket Stub).

Here is mine, note the date on the Ticket from this Washington Senators game (.....not the only thing going on in Washington DC that day).

July 16, 1945

"At precisely 5:30 a.m. on Monday, July 16, 1945, the nuclear age began."

https://www.osti.gov/opennet/manhatt...45/trinity.htm

First A-Bomb (might be time for another test....I know the perfect spot......................................HINT: it rhymes with Gremlin)

[KMayUSA6060]

Originally Posted by Leon

You are a Fu***** idiot for thinking that. Someone needs to lob a nuke on Putin's head.
.

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-...table-n1290831

"The fact that the NATO status question was not put on the table as Putin signaled that he was serious about an invasion — so plainly that the U.S. government was spelling it out with day-by-day updates — was an error, and potentially a catastrophic one. It may sound cruel to suggest that Ukraine could be barred, either temporarily or permanently, from entering a military alliance it wants to be in. But what’s more cruel is that Ukrainians might be paying with their lives for the United States’ reckless flirtation with Ukraine as a future NATO member without ever committing to its defense.

Analysts say it’s widely known that Ukraine had no prospect of entering NATO for many years, possibly decades, because of its need for major democracy and anti-corruption reforms and because NATO has no interest in going to war with Russia over Ukraine’s Donbas region, where Russia has meddled and backed armed conflict for years. But by dangling the possibility of Ukraine’s NATO membership for years but never fulfilling it, NATO created a scenario that emboldened Ukraine to act tough and buck Russia — without any intention of directly defending Ukraine with its firepower if Moscow decided Ukraine had gone too far."
_____________________________________

https://reason.com/2022/02/28/ukrain...urope-clinton/

"Let's start with the Clinton administration in the 1990s. As Reason's Eric Boehm pointed out, Clinton was the first U.S. president in decades to inherit a world that did not include the Soviet Union. Clinton could have completely revamped NATO now that its purpose—defending member nations against the expansion of the Soviet Union—was no longer applicable. Instead, Clinton, with the Republican Party's support, oversaw an expansion of NATO. Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Poland all joined. Years later, Putin would cite this enlargement of NATO as one of the West's "broken promises" that justified his Ukraine policy.

Again, Putin is dead wrong. Nothing justifies his Ukraine policy. But the purpose of NATO was defensive: to protect the world from Russian aggression. If NATO policy is antagonizing Russia and being used as a pretext for invasion, it clearly isn't serving that goal.

With the Clinton administration's backing, NATO also intervened in Yugoslavia in 1999 to ensure an independent Kosovo. That military action never had the backing of the United Nations; it was a violation of international law, just like Putin's attack on Ukraine.

George Bush's foreign policy has not held up well, due to the U.S.'s horrendous misadventures in the Middle East, but Bush blundered in Europe as well. At a 2008 NATO summit—one attended by Putin—Bush staunchly supported Ukraine's eventual admittance to NATO, over the objections of France, the U.K., and Germany.

The Obama administration, of course, inflamed tensions with Russia when the U.S. took sides in the 2014 Ukrainian revolution. And then came Donald Trump. Democrats and their allies in the mainstream media ceaselessly accused Trump of being a Russian stooge, even a pro-Putin plant, installed by Russia as president of the U.S. due to a subtle influence campaign on Facebook. This was of course ridiculous—and as evidence of how ridiculous the claims are, Trump's actual administration was just as foolishly tough on Russia as his predecessors. In 2017, Vice President Mike Pence even reiterated the 2008 Bucharest declaration.

The Biden administration maintained that same fiction. A clear declaration that the Ukraine would not be joining NATO might have deprived Putin of the intellectual ammo he required to move forward with this invasion. We don't know for sure. But it was incumbent on the U.S. to try. NATO is a means to an end—a more safe and secure Europe—not an end unto itself. If expansion is creating the very conditions that NATO's existence is supposed to prevent, it's not working. Yet every single U.S. president since the end of the Cold War has misunderstood this. And now here we are."
____________________________

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...year_2000.html

"VLADIMIR PUTIN: I will say one thing that I have never said before in public. I will say for the first time that in 2000 when President Bill Clinton was visiting Moscow at the end of his term, I asked him how would America see Russia joining NATO. I would not give you all the details of that conversation, but the reaction to my conversation -- look, well, let me put it this way. How did Americans really look at this possibility? You can see it in their practical stance. Open support of the terrorists in North Caucusus, ignoring our demands and concerns, withdrawing from the arms limitation treaties, and so on."
____________________________

I don't think I'm a f'ing idiot, Leon. I'm 27. My first votable election was in 2012 between two POS. Maybe the generations before me can explain how they let the US government go unchecked with so much corruption for decades. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Maybe, just maybe, if we can expose the corruption within our own government and clean it up, my kids/my grandkids/my great grankids/etc. won't grow up in a world with constant war involving the US.

[Leon]

I am not going to even read that diatribe. What Putin is doing now amounts to heinous war crimes regardless of anything else. Specifically shooting missiles at hospitals, schools and everything else will hopefully earn him a special place in Hell. I guess that is, unless you don't read unbiased reporting. But I respect your opinion and won't be changing mine on this subject. All of those kids and women just being killed. The whole country being demolished. So tragic.
.

Originally Posted by KMayUSA6060

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-...table-n1290831

"The fact that the NATO status question was not put on the table as Putin signaled that he was serious about an invasion — so plainly that the U.S. government was spelling it out with day-by-day updates — was an error, and potentially a catastrophic one. It may sound cruel to suggest that Ukraine could be barred, either temporarily or permanently, from entering a military alliance it wants to be in. But what’s more cruel is that Ukrainians might be paying with their lives for the United States’ reckless flirtation with Ukraine as a future NATO member without ever committing to its defense.

Analysts say it’s widely known that Ukraine had no prospect of entering NATO for many years, possibly decades, because of its need for major democracy and anti-corruption reforms and because NATO has no interest in going to war with Russia over Ukraine’s Donbas region, where Russia has meddled and backed armed conflict for years. But by dangling the possibility of Ukraine’s NATO membership for years but never fulfilling it, NATO created a scenario that emboldened Ukraine to act tough and buck Russia — without any intention of directly defending Ukraine with its firepower if Moscow decided Ukraine had gone too far."
_____________________________________

https://reason.com/2022/02/28/ukrain...urope-clinton/

"Let's start with the Clinton administration in the 1990s. As Reason's Eric Boehm pointed out, Clinton was the first U.S. president in decades to inherit a world that did not include the Soviet Union. Clinton could have completely revamped NATO now that its purpose—defending member nations against the expansion of the Soviet Union—was no longer applicable. Instead, Clinton, with the Republican Party's support, oversaw an expansion of NATO. Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Poland all joined. Years later, Putin would cite this enlargement of NATO as one of the West's "broken promises" that justified his Ukraine policy.

Again, Putin is dead wrong. Nothing justifies his Ukraine policy. But the purpose of NATO was defensive: to protect the world from Russian aggression. If NATO policy is antagonizing Russia and being used as a pretext for invasion, it clearly isn't serving that goal.

With the Clinton administration's backing, NATO also intervened in Yugoslavia in 1999 to ensure an independent Kosovo. That military action never had the backing of the United Nations; it was a violation of international law, just like Putin's attack on Ukraine.

George Bush's foreign policy has not held up well, due to the U.S.'s horrendous misadventures in the Middle East, but Bush blundered in Europe as well. At a 2008 NATO summit—one attended by Putin—Bush staunchly supported Ukraine's eventual admittance to NATO, over the objections of France, the U.K., and Germany.

The Obama administration, of course, inflamed tensions with Russia when the U.S. took sides in the 2014 Ukrainian revolution. And then came Donald Trump. Democrats and their allies in the mainstream media ceaselessly accused Trump of being a Russian stooge, even a pro-Putin plant, installed by Russia as president of the U.S. due to a subtle influence campaign on Facebook. This was of course ridiculous—and as evidence of how ridiculous the claims are, Trump's actual administration was just as foolishly tough on Russia as his predecessors. In 2017, Vice President Mike Pence even reiterated the 2008 Bucharest declaration.

The Biden administration maintained that same fiction. A clear declaration that the Ukraine would not be joining NATO might have deprived Putin of the intellectual ammo he required to move forward with this invasion. We don't know for sure. But it was incumbent on the U.S. to try. NATO is a means to an end—a more safe and secure Europe—not an end unto itself. If expansion is creating the very conditions that NATO's existence is supposed to prevent, it's not working. Yet every single U.S. president since the end of the Cold War has misunderstood this. And now here we are."
____________________________

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...year_2000.html

"VLADIMIR PUTIN: I will say one thing that I have never said before in public. I will say for the first time that in 2000 when President Bill Clinton was visiting Moscow at the end of his term, I asked him how would America see Russia joining NATO. I would not give you all the details of that conversation, but the reaction to my conversation -- look, well, let me put it this way. How did Americans really look at this possibility? You can see it in their practical stance. Open support of the terrorists in North Caucusus, ignoring our demands and concerns, withdrawing from the arms limitation treaties, and so on."
____________________________

I don't think I'm a f'ing idiot, Leon. I'm 27. My first votable election was in 2012 between two POS. Maybe the generations before me can explain how they let the US government go unchecked with so much corruption for decades. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Maybe, just maybe, if we can expose the corruption within our own government and clean it up, my kids/my grandkids/my great grankids/etc. won't grow up in a world with constant war involving the US.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by AustinMike

Hey, what do you know? We agree on something! We should learn from history.

Let's make up a hypothetical situation and see if we can use history to help us formulate a way to react.

Let's assume there's a country ... let's make one up and call it Deutschdirt. Let's say they were really down on their luck and agreed to a treaty. But then later on, they got a leader that didn't like that treaty. He didn't think it was fair. So he decided to annex a bordering country because, I don't know, he claimed Deutschdirters who lived there weren't being treated properly. Let's say that no other country objected. That leader then decided to take over another country and all the other countries said, "Neville mind him taking that country. If we let him have that country, he'll stop."

Is there anything in world history that you can think of that might give us a hint at how this might play out?

Gee Mike, careful there. Using logic, reason, history, and supposed intelligence doesn't always work with everyone. LOL

The real problem is we're all humans, and it doesn't matter if you're red, white, black, yellow, brown, or green with purple polka dots, there are going to be a--holes among each and every group. Always have been and always will be. We can all imagine and believe we are so intelligent, sophisticated, and developed that we can rise above our often petty, self-absorbed, insecure and instinctual natures and be something other than our true selves. But that will never happen because the human animal (and yes, we are mammals) are really no different than any other creature on this planet, except for the extremely lucky situation where our brains and intelligence have developed to an un-before known level. That still doesn't change the fact that human nature and instincts will always be part of us, no matter what we say, do, or think, and we truly are no better or different from the other creatures on this planet.

As such, there is likely no country or society on this planet that does not have some level of corruption or evil in it and controlling it to some extent, and that includes the US, which has it's more than fair share of abominable acts and treatment of others in our relatively short history, to yet live down. The vast majority of common, everyday people (regardless of race or society) really wish no one else harm, or are criminally racist, and just want to live their lives as peacefully and happily as possible. But then human nature gets in the way again, and you will always have some people that for whatever reasons will never be satisfied, and always want more. Doesn't matter what it is, they'll just want more of it, and will stop at nothing to get it. These are the kinds of people that often rise to positions or levels of power, control, and authority because due to our "human nature" again, others will adopt their beliefs and thinking and follow them, because as a group, humans tend to not think for themselves so much. They'll most always think of themselves, just not for themselves.

Sadly, most all of the leaders of our world today have deficiencies and issues that helped to create and cause virtually all of the grief and problems we are suffering for as the human race, on a daily basis. And here's the big point, even if we were somehow able to suddenly remove every single politician, ruler, military leader, business leader, and so forth, behind and responsible for how the world is being run today, it really wouldn't matter. Likely within a year, six months, or even less time, an entirely new group of horrible humans will step in to take over and allow their greed, corruption, fears, biases, insecurities, megalomanias, and whatever else they have and may be harboring to end up running the world as badly as the current group has been doing, if not even making it worse.

And as for studying history so we don't repeat it, there are some monumental problems with that logic. First off being that we are human and have instincts, hormones, and emotions that rise above any knowledge and learning we may otherwise think gets us to ignore such human traits. But it ain't ever happening. People do things every single day that are bad for them or that they know they shouldn't do, yet no matter how smart they are, they still do them. Plus, however intelligent we humans think we are, we truly are still just dumb, and in the end really no better or more deserving of being on this planet than any other creature in the world. And as for history itself, don't forget the old adage that history is written by the victors. Just think if Washington had lost the Revolutionary War instead. Chances are he would have been shot/hanged as a traitor, and would likely be no more than a footnote in history today. Or what if Hitler had somehow prevailed in WWII? Who knows what the world would look like, and how people would think today. I know this all sounds pretty depressing and bleak for mankind, but look back at experiments of John Calhoun with mice and the development of his Behavioral Sink Theory. And then ask yourself if we are really any better or different than the mice. And all this arguing, insults, and going back and forth about all this stuff in this thread just helps to further prove true most of the points I'm making.

What needs to immediately stop is the stupidity of senseless killing, and infliction of pain and suffering, ON ALL SIDES!!!!!!!!! For supposedly being the most intelligent life form on this planet, or at least thinking we are, we are pretty f---ing stupid!!!!!!

[G1911]

I’m not sure dropping nuclear bombs on the Kremlin or Putin’s head would accomplish anything but eliminating most human life across the globe, if not all of it. However pro-Ukraine people might be right now, it seems to be in the practical interest of no nation to start the exchange of nukes that ends humanity as we know it.

[sbfinley]

Originally Posted by KMayUSA6060

I don't think I'm a f'ing idiot, Leon. I'm 27. My first votable election was in 2012 between two POS. Maybe the generations before me can explain how they let the US government go unchecked with so much corruption for decades. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Maybe, just maybe, if we can expose the corruption within our own government and clean it up, my kids/my grandkids/my great grankids/etc. won't grow up in a world with constant war involving the US.

Not sure how it’s Leon’s fault you had to chose between Putin and Zyuganov in your first election.

[KMayUSA6060]

Originally Posted by Leon

I am not going to even read that diatribe. What Putin is doing now amounts to heinous war crimes regardless of anything else. Specifically shooting missiles at hospitals, schools and everything else will hopefully earn him a special place in Hell. I guess that is, unless you don't read unbiased reporting. But I respect your opinion and won't be changing mine on this subject. All of those kids and women just being killed. The whole country being demolished. So tragic.
.

Calling someone a f'ing idiot while refusing to read information that supports the basis for their opinion, doesn't exactly scream "I respect your opinion."

Much like Michael Jordan, I will retire again from this thread. Good day, gentlemen, and God Bless.

[Shoeless Moe]

Originally Posted by sbfinley

Not sure how it’s Leon’s fault you had to chose between Putin and Zyuganov in your first election.

You gotta admit this is hilarious!

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by BobC

What needs to immediately stop is the stupidity of senseless killing, and infliction of pain and suffering, ON ALL SIDES!!!!!!!!! For supposedly being the most intelligent life form on this planet, or at least thinking we are, we are pretty f---ing stupid!!!!!!

Problem is.... it's not stupidity at all, if you're a psychopathic megalomaniac.

World War 2 doesn't happen if you could remove about 4 people before it all began: Tojo, Adolf, Joe, and Benny. Your average German and Brit would've rather played a friendly game of cards over a pint or two than try to kill each other, and the average Italian wanted nothing to do with that war in the first place. They weren't bad combatants - they just weren't killers (and I've been to Italy and believe me, they love Americans and everyone else generally.)

Japanese and American people had respect for each other before the war (baseball was becoming a huge part of Japanese life in the years before the war, and still is the basis of a strong cultural bond between that country and ours.)

Generally, populations don't hate each other and wouldn't choose war; it is governments. In the case of Russia, their government tends to consist of one man - the one brutal enough to eliminate his rivals.

So when Putin gives the order to bomb hospitals and kill women and children, it isn't a matter of stupidity. The problem is, he simply doesn't care.