If we don't send military aid to Ukraine... Putin wins... no?
And he would have done to the rest of Ukraine what he's done to Mariupol! and in Chenya and Syria.
Back to threaded view
Full conversation · 44 posts
-
Level 1
If we don't send military aid to Ukraine, peace treaty will be signed. A neutral Ukraine, like Swiss
good for Ukraine and Europe. Neutral counties enjoy peace and prosperity, just ask Swissland, Finland...
-
Level 2
So Russia should be able to dictate Ukraine’s future? I’m all for supporting…
the Ukraine. Anyone that supports Russia is a treasonous waste of space.
We're all born bald baby! -
Level 2
You misspelled "like Belarus." Let's at least be realistic here.
Russia wanted another Belarus, not another Switzerland.
Evil preaches tolerance until it is dominant, then it tries to silence good. -
Level 2
I must of missed a few critical threads, but do you support Russia's invasion of Ukraine?
I'm really just curious, because the responses to your post point in that direction.
-
Level 3
You missed a lot of my posts since 2014. I'm the first one, on 2nd day of the war and one of the
Only two posters here openly waned to stop the war. But war mongers here want to fight Russians from day one and want to continue to fight.
I guess what you missed about my point is the war is a result of our NATO eastward expansion. This was predicted by many strategists years ago. We poked the bear, a nuclear bear.
Link: https://forum.uhnd.com/forum/index.php?action=display&forumid=2&msgid=59727
-
Level 3
Yes. He does. He has been consistent on that.
(no message)Evil preaches tolerance until it is dominant, then it tries to silence good.-
-
Level 5
I wasn't trying to insult you. I was just trying to accurately describe your position.
If I'm wrong, let me know. Have you not always supported the invasion?...at least once it occurred?
Happy to try to explain any inconsistencies you think I may have shown. In general, I think:
I have consistently been sympathetic to Ukraine. They were attacked, after all. And, I don't believe the nazi BS. (And, full disclosure, I used to work with a bunch of Kyivans.)
I have always thought the US should assist Ukraine with military aid.
I have always thought we should keep such military assistance quiet.
I initially thought Biden was not helping enough; I have lately thought that Biden is going overboard with helping them (the comparison of our aid to Ukraine and the Russian military budget is eyeopening).
Regarding Russia: I always hoped that US and Russian relations would improve, and Russia would become an ally of the US in opposition to China. I recognize that the expansion of NATO was foolish, and it threatened Russia, but I think Putin is fighting a needless battle against the west, because the West never actually wanted to harm Russia...they are just afraid of Russia (Democrat and Hollywood demonization of Russia notwithstanding). He is fighting on the basis of last century geopolitics (e.g., West vs. Russia + China), when he should be concerned with this century's geopolitics (e.g., West + Russia vs. China). I now think that Putin will have to go before relations can improve. He is harming Russia's position in the world.
Evil preaches tolerance until it is dominant, then it tries to silence good.-
Level 6
I didn't intend to play gotcha. But your position from non-interventionist to interventionist is
confusing. Even this post from you is not very convincing. But I should leave more room for you wrestling with this complicated issue.
I don't support this invasion. I can find the post I said that very clearly. That's my record. But unlike you and almost all posters here, I think the invasion is the consequence of what we did since 2014, especially since last September. We broke Russia's red line. I understand Russia's red line and agree their security concern: a neighbor country of increasingly hostile to Russia, abolished peace treaty of 20+ years with Russia, wants to join NATO. I defend Russia's stand regarding to red line. I don't defend their action after red line being broken, i.e. their full scale invasion. But I use their invasion to justify my point: Western's Ukraine policy is wrong. Neocon is wrong, neolib is wrong. Not just wrong, but also dangerous. Their policy leads to this war and will lead to a bigger war.
P.S. I also against propaganda and lies from our government and MSM about this war. For example, they left a false sense of winning the war to people. I know their purpose. Americans like winner. Only making Americans believe Ukraine is winning can they get support for more $$$$ sent to Ukraine.
-
Level 7
So, I don't know, but the only thing I remember being forcefully adamant about was...
...that we should keep quiet, and stop calling press conferences to have the president himself announce what we are doing to the world.
My position is developing. I do have both non-interventionist (what business is it of ours, we can't be the world's policeman) and interventionist (we should help if we can) leanings. The passion says intervene; the intellect says we should mind our own business. A middle path seems the best...send lower level weapons quietly, bloody the active aggressor (Putin) to teach him a lesson but not grossly shift the balance of power (which the $40B aid bill might do), and teach future aggressors (China) a lesson about little guys fighting for their homelands (not a lesson about the United States intervening).
I agree with Rand Paul...the lion's share of this $40B is likely unnecessary, and typical American overkill that may convince Russia it needs to escalate.
Evil preaches tolerance until it is dominant, then it tries to silence good.
-
-
-
-
-
Level 3
He and Trucker Carlson are butt buddies. Whatever Trucker says, Eli is sure
jimbasil 55050 poststo repeat it.
Jack, he is a banker
and Jane, she is a clerk-
-
Level 5
He knows gonads like you need a little tanning every once-in-a-while to make men like you, men.
jimbasil 55050 postsAt least that's what he claims.
Jack, he is a banker
and Jane, she is a clerk
-
-
Level 4
I must have missed an episode. Do you have a link for Tucker's support of Russia?
(no message)Evil preaches tolerance until it is dominant, then it tries to silence good.
-
-
-
-
Level 3
Do you want to go over the history from months before the war all the way back to 2008?
I can do that if you want.
Of course other issues such as Ukraine has to implement Minsk agreement that they signed. But those issue are byproducts of the central issue - Ukraine refuse to be neutral.
-
Level 4
I forgot that Ukraine was such a threat to Putin.
That why they invaded and began shelling civilians.
-
Level 5
You also forgot that Cuba was such a threat to US that we embargo against Cuba for 60 yrs
(no message)-
Level 6
Embargoes and genocide are not analogous, dummy. How many Cuban civilians have we killed…
since 1959?
We're all born bald baby!-
Level 7
Is Cuba a threat to U.S.? Answer it, sick man. If you can't answer, ask help from doctor.
(no message)-
Level 8
Cuba is a sworn enemy of the USA. If would have allowed it…
There would be Nukes deployed in Cuba. Stupid ass.
We're all born bald baby!
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Level 1
If this had gone like Putin and Eli had hoped, there would be panic in Europe
If the Russians had swept into Kiev, other countries would be (justifiably) worried that Putin would not stop there.
But since his army has turned out to be shit, further attacks seem unlikely. At least for now.
So yeah, it's important that he loses.
-
Level 1
What do you mean "Putin wins"? What's Russia's goal? Furthermore how do you define our win?
(no message)-
Level 2
You're probably right... Putin was only kidding about restoring the Soviet Union.
We should trust these depots... like maybe Khamenei as well?
-
-
-
Level 4
"Shittin' pants" means "diapers"...I believe. Second place guess would be..."assless chaps".
TakethetrainKnute 35769 posts(no message)-
Level 5
Well, that Depends. Usually he sits in the corner with his sippy cup.
jimbasil 55050 posts(no message)Jack, he is a banker
and Jane, she is a clerk
-
-
-
-
-
Level 1
It's not just aid. We've helped kill Russian generals, sailors, and troops. Why are you so
willing to increase our chances of a nuclear conflagration?
-
Level 2
There are rules for this kind of thing. The Soviets did the same during the war in Vietnam.
I share some of your concerns...but we are not (yet) running a high risk of WWIII.
-
Level 1
For most people, it is a question of "how much"?
$53bn seems like a lot. Could we get the job done with less? I think this is a valid question. Of course, there has been no attempt to justify the package on the merits. If anyone asks a question, he is immediately a Russian sympathizer or hates Ukraine or something.
-
Level 2
Only for people who are unprincipled or who fail to understand the gravity of what’s at stake.
(no message)The American Dream belongs to all of us. — Kamala Harris -
Level 2
We've sent more aid than Russia spends on its military in a year.
The EU should be funding this. Not us.
-
Level 3
Solid point.
(no message)Evil preaches tolerance until it is dominant, then it tries to silence good. -
Level 3
Fact check: False
Not nearly that much yet. And half the money we've spent has gone to the Pentagon.
So you're wrong.
-
Level 4
Did you remember to add $0 for every howitzer we are giving them.
(no message)Evil preaches tolerance until it is dominant, then it tries to silence good.
-
-
-
End of conversation