War in Ukraine

#60,701
#60,701
DonjoVol said:
If she is hyper partisan you and anyone else are welcome to provide proof based on legislation proposed or passed and if she's going along with most other Republicans and Democrats in their support of national socialists in Ukraine.
Click to expand...
The claim was that anyone who aligns themselves with q is by definition hyper partisan. You laughed and mocked that assertion. You were then proven to be wrong. Again, you misspelled "I was wrong."
 
  • Like
Reactions: BeardedVol, AM64 and NorthDallas40
#60,706
#60,706
NorthDallas40 said:
Hey @volinbham taje a look over this analysis when you get a second.

Constructive Ambiguity of the Budapest Memorandum at 28: Making Sense of the Controversial Agreement

I found these two points rather disturbing but really par for the course in hindsight frankly. Purposely using language differences to obfuscate

Third, the English version mentions “security assurances,” while Ukrainian and Russian texts provide for “security guarantees.” This different wording is often explained by the fact that in Ukrainian and Russian, the words “assurances” and “guarantees” are allegedly considered to be synonyms. However, there are much better, more accurate substitutes for “assurances” in Ukrainian and Russian, namely “запевнення” and “заверения.” The parties likely put different terms in different languages to create ambiguity. In retrospect, the Ukrainian Parliament probably would not have agreed to the term “assurances,” because “guarantees” represent something definitely more substantial. As a matter of international law, both terms can potentially signify political and legal obligations with varying degrees of obligations up to military support. For example, in 1975, President Nixon provided South Vietnam with “absolute assurances” of U.S. “swift and severe retaliatory actions” “with full force.” Still, the word “guarantee” is customarily used with more robust commitments like those provided within military alliances and mutual defense treaties. The particular caution of U.S. diplomats toward the use of “guarantees” in diplomatic discourse (when clear legal obligations are not at issue) is exemplified by the following comment on Iran’s request for potential guarantees of nonrepudiation of the Iran nuclear deal: “There is no such thing as a guarantee; that’s not in the nature of diplomacy.”

Fourth, the Budapest Memorandum’s Ukrainian version provides that it “enters into force upon signature.” The International Court of Justice found this specific wording to be an “indicator” of a legally binding memorandum without the need for ratification. However, English and Russian versions provide an iterated softer language that the memorandum “will become applicable upon signature,” which contributes to its ambiguity.
Click to expand...

Never trust diplomats and their weasel words. Even presidential promises are lacking if congress cuts off funding as the Vietnamese soon found out. There's no honesty or integrity when politicians and "diplomats" enter the room - trust them at your own expense or often to your own demise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40 and Orangeburst
#60,708
#60,708
NorthDallas40 said:
They’re perfectly fine with it as applied to your favorite politician Curly 😂
Click to expand...
I'm just trying to be a team player and letting you know they apparently don't like that word being used. That's all I know. Just trying to help you out Proctor.

She's not my favorite. I guess I'd have to put her in my top 10 at least.
 
#60,710
#60,710
AM64 said:
Never trust diplomats and their weasel words. Even presidential promises are lacking if congress cuts off funding as the Vietnamese soon found out. There's no honesty or integrity when politicians and "diplomats" enter the room - trust them at your own expense or often to your own demise.
Click to expand...
The background of that analysis author is pretty convincing. He’s a Ukrainian national and international law scholar working in both Kyiv and The US. His stance isn’t partisan Ukrainian that I can see it’s a technical breakdown of the multiple viewpoints and how ambiguity helped all parties.

But I was really disappointed in the multiple translations with key words changed associated to the assistance to Ukraine should the need arise. If his account is accurate that is very misleading towards the Ukrainian parliament
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#60,712
#60,712
DonjoVol said:
I'm just trying to be a team player and letting you know they apparently don't like that word being used. That's all I know. Just trying to help you out Proctor.

She's not my favorite. I guess I'd have to put her in my top 10 at least.
Click to expand...
Oh I’m sure that’s your motive. 😂 If your reading comprehension were better you wouldn’t have to try and explain your hot takes so much.
 
#60,713
#60,713
DonjoVol said:
Begging? What proof do you have that they were begging? Perhaps, those two countries simply offered to help them out or asked if they might need something. You know kind of like if I am stuck on the side of the road with a flat tire and someone comes by and offers help.
Click to expand...

Maybe if you hadn't been lobbing artillery rounds and rockets along your route, you wouldn't have driven over debris and had a flat in unfriendly territory.
 
#60,714
#60,714
DonjoVol said:
I'm just trying to be a team player and letting you know they apparently don't like that word being used. That's all I know. Just trying to help you out Proctor.

She's not my favorite. I guess I'd have to put her in my top 10 at least.
Click to expand...
It can't be directed at another poster. That's the board rule
 
#60,715
#60,715
DonjoVol said:
Once again. You still haven't provided any examples of how she is hyper partisan.

I've already said I have no problem with her and that we need more people like her in Congress.
Click to expand...

A person who personifies identity politics is a perfect representation of a partisan. She's on the fringe, it just happens to be the fringe you support so it seems absolutely normal to you.

As I suggested earlier you really should come up for air every now and then.
 
#60,716
#60,716
hog88 said:
Yes but what about the rest of his post? How long do we keep financing the Ukrainian war effort? What if Russia takes Ukraine and doesn't attack the Baltics?
Click to expand...

There are a lot of "what ifs" available. I don't see Russia marching immediately on anybody should Ukraine fall. I could see Putin eventually going after other old Soviet pieces that are not now part of NATO in an attempt to consolidate resources and power. With a Russia resembling more the old Soviet Union I could see them beginning to nibble at the old pieces that are now part of NATO. There are a ton of what if's there, though. What if the Pootin legacy dies and nobody wants to follow the path he started? What if all the little pieces he would gobble up turn into insurgencies? What if the rest of the world absolutely shuns Russian aggression and refuses any trade or other means of support, what power would an isolated Russia have? Imagine the access to the Black Sea and to St Petersburg closed. Would Russia die, or be a caged and mostly toothless tiger? Would we cower in fear of Russian nukes, and do nothing. Lots and lots of "what ifs". What might China do with an impotent Russia and a world of resources next door?
 
  • Like
Reactions: USF grad in TN
#60,719
#60,719
AM64 said:
There are a lot of "what ifs" available. I don't see Russia marching immediately on anybody should Ukraine fall. I could see Putin eventually going after other old Soviet pieces that are not now part of NATO in an attempt to consolidate resources and power. With a Russia resembling more the old Soviet Union I could see them beginning to nibble at the old pieces that are now part of NATO. There are a ton of what if's there, though. What if the Pootin legacy dies and nobody wants to follow the path he started? What if all the little pieces he would gobble up turn into insurgencies? What if the rest of the world absolutely shuns Russian aggression and refuses any trade or other means of support, what power would an isolated Russia have? Imagine the access to the Black Sea and to St Petersburg closed. Would Russia die, or be a caged and mostly toothless tiger? Would we cower in fear of Russian nukes, and do nothing. Lots and lots of "what ifs". What might China do with an impotent Russia and a world of resources next door?
Click to expand...

I don't see Putin/Russia going after the Baltics either, they know that would kick off WWIII. So that begs the question of what will we do if Russia takes Ukraine? More sanctions? Turn Poland loose? Russia has more way more men to use as cannon fodder than Ukraine does so a war of attrition favors Russia and we need to have an idea of what our next move is should they take the country.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Volsdeep4 and AM64
#60,720
#60,720
Burhead said:
You're playing up the disinformation. His full statement was that American sons and daughters would fight in Europe again if Ukraine loses because Russia will then move against NATO.
Click to expand...
Still don't see how the end result of his comment is any different. He's talking about American boots on the ground.
 
#60,721
#60,721
Rasputin_Vol said:
This right here is the 30 year problem that many in here refuse to acknowledge.

Do I think that Ukraine has the right to want to join NATO? Yes.

But the responsibility rests with NATO (if they are really a defensive alliance) on whether it would be wise to accept them into NATO. Just like the US would have legitimate security concerns if the Chinese or Russians began arming and training an army in Mexico or Cuba, it is to be expected that China and Russia should have their same security concerns recognized.

So now, we are in a position where the US and it's hubris will have this decision made for them by Russia instead of coming to this reasonable outcome on their own and with $100+ billion staying here at home.
Click to expand...

Why? You wouldn't like your neighbor having the poison pill (being a NATO member) that would keep you from taking his property?

With all the problems we have with Mexico (the invaders and the drugs), we haven't shown any inclination toward military action against Mexico, and Mexico knows that. Russian or Chinese buildup in Mexico would certainly be a reason for concern. What would be the reason for militarizing Mexico? If Mexico hasn't moved on the cartels with our support, why would they do so with the support of China or Russia?
 
#60,722
#60,722
AM64 said:
Then those people should have become good Moldavans ... unless maybe they like Ukraine better. Do you think any of the hordes crossing our own southern border should be allowed to decide they want a bit of the US as an enclave that's not part of the US? No doubt some of these misfits are the remnants of the Russians implanted in places they didn't belong during the Soviet Union days. If they stayed for one reason or another, then the correct action would have been

"If you can't be with the one you love, love the one you're with."
Click to expand...
You mean like how we grabbed Texas?
 
#60,724
#60,724
Rasputin_Vol said:
Just don't have enough to supply Ukraine and replenish if these neocons and Ukrainiacs want to tango with China.
Click to expand...
The first thing is we can't ever build another "smart" weapon because we aren't smart enough to keep our chip manufacturing in the US. The second thing is we probably depend on China to supply us brass and gunpowder, so traditional tank and artillery are over with. Other than surrendering our military weapons manufacturing along with our prescription drugs, we're doing great.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and Rasputin_Vol
#60,725
#60,725
utvolpj said:
Who was her opponent in the general?
Click to expand...
She had opponents in the primary and had a democrat challenger as well. It's a heavy R district and they love her there. She's safe. People just have to stop being so offended because the partisan news or a partisan news article told them to.

You don't see me being constantly offended over AOC or Eric Swallwell. I just don't like their politics and will likely disagree with them on 90% of what they say or legislation they propose.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top