War in Ukraine

#70,601
#70,601
Burhead said:
The average American has the attention span of a gnat forgive me if I don’t think they grasp the importance of degrading the military of a geopolitical foe of the United States.
Click to expand...

Russia's military was already degraded to the point of not being much of a threat to the US. After the collapse of the USSR they are and were not our biggest geopolitical foe and would have never been again.
 
#70,602
#70,602
BeardedVol said:
So Ukrainians should just surrender their country, and allow themselves to be subjugated by Russia?

That's what you'd also advise America to do, were it ever invaded by a foreign power?
Click to expand...

Nobody is saying that, what I'm saying is that Europe should be footing the bill if the purpose of this exercise is to eliminate a Russian threat to Europe.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol
#70,604
#70,604
hog88 said:
Russia's military was already degraded to the point of not being much of a threat to the US. After the collapse of the USSR they are and were not our biggest geopolitical foe and would have never been again.
Click to expand...

The crazy thing is that if Dems hadnt so screwed it, we could have boarght Putin's Russia a lot closer with EU to bolster them against their much more concerning enemy, China. Instead they drive him right into Xi's arms.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol since 77, Orangeburst and hog88
#70,605
#70,605
hog88 said:
Nobody is saying that, what I'm saying is that Europe should be footing the bill if the purpose of this exercise is to eliminate a Russian threat to Europe.
Click to expand...

Then the US shouldn't have gotten involved in convincing newly independent Ukraine to give up their nuclear weapons, in exchange for for security guarantees; we did though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tntar heel, marcusluvsvols and AM64
#70,608
#70,608
BeardedVol said:
Then the US shouldn't have gotten involved in convincing newly independent Ukraine to give up their nuclear weapons, in exchange for for security guarantees; we did though.
Click to expand...

It was "security assurances" not guarantees but so did Russia. Those assurances were they were not going to be attacked by those giving the assurance, not promises of financial or military aid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#70,609
#70,609
BeardedVol said:
You're going to need to show your work here champ.
Click to expand...

When the doddering fool we have as a Presidential figurehead so botched the Afghanistan withdrawal that mere words cannot describe America's utter shame - the wolves were emboldened. Worse, the warmonger defense industry no longer had a way to siphon off massive corruption. So they picked a new one by supporting Zelensky. Our weakness invites attacks. Had we stayed strong Russia would not have attacked Ukraine. Also, we told Zelensky to be belligerent.
 
#70,610
#70,610
Gandalf said:
When the doddering fool we have as a Presidential figurehead so botched the Afghanistan withdrawal that mere words cannot describe America's utter shame - the wolves were emboldened. Worse, the warmonger defense industry no longer had a way to siphon off massive corruption. So they picked a new one by supporting Zelensky. Our weakness invites attacks. Had we stayed strong Russia would not have attacked Ukraine. Also, we told Zelensky to be belligerent.
Click to expand...

Yeah that's not showing how democrats are somehow responsible for Russia still being the same murderous neighbor that they have been since the country came into existence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#70,611
#70,611
hog88 said:
It was "security assurances" not guarantees but so did Russia. Those assurances were they were not going to be attacked by those giving the assurance, not promises of financial or military aid.
Click to expand...
So that simply isn’t true hog and I’ve illustrated to you the differences in the documents before. The Russian and Ukrainian documents say guarantees. In the registration cover letter to the UN they always use both English and French and the French says guarantees also. Right below the English statement saying assurances.
 
#70,612
#70,612
hog88 said:
It was "security assurances" not guarantees but so did Russia. Those assurances were they were not going to be attacked by those giving the assurance, not promises of financial or military aid.
Click to expand...

We guaranteed their independence and sovereignty as a nation.

Last time I checked, having parts of you country invaded and annexed by your neighbor, is detrimental to said independence and sovereignty.
www.brookings.edu

The Budapest Memorandum and U.S. Obligations

On the twentieth anniversary of the signing of the Budapest Memorandum, Steven Pifer, one of the negotiators of that document, writes that it is time for the Unites States to make good on the security assurances it made to Ukraine. Doing so could prevent future nuclear proliferation.
www.brookings.edu www.brookings.edu
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#70,613
#70,613
NorthDallas40 said:
So that simply isn’t true hog and I’ve illustrated to you the differences in the documents before. The Russian and Ukrainian documents say guarantees. In the registration cover letter to the UN they always use both English and French and the French says guarantees also. Right below the English statement saying assurances.
Click to expand...

What language do we transact in here in the states?
 
#70,615
#70,615
BeardedVol said:
We guaranteed their independence and sovereignty as a nation.

Last time I checked, having parts of you country invaded and annexed by your neighbor, is detrimental to said independence and sovereignty.
www.brookings.edu

The Budapest Memorandum and U.S. Obligations

On the twentieth anniversary of the signing of the Budapest Memorandum, Steven Pifer, one of the negotiators of that document, writes that it is time for the Unites States to make good on the security assurances it made to Ukraine. Doing so could prevent future nuclear proliferation.
www.brookings.edu www.brookings.edu
Click to expand...

From your link:

December 5 marks the 20th anniversary of the signing of the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances for Ukraine.
Click to expand...

A key element of the arrangement—many Ukrainians would say the key element—was the readiness of the United States and Russia, joined by Britain, to provide security assurances. The Budapest memorandum committed Washington, Moscow and London, among other things, to “respect the independence and sovereignty and existing borders of Ukraine” and to “refrain from the threat or use of force” against that country.
Click to expand...

Security assurances such as those in the Budapest memorandum do not carry as much weight as NATO security guarantees or the guarantees in the mutual security treaties that the United States has with Japan and South Korea. Still, security assurances have played a role in the effort to freeze and end North Korea’s nuclear program.
Click to expand...

Man, you guys should actually read the links before you post them.
 
#70,617
#70,617
hog88 said:
You said it, Slick Willy. Our copy of the agreement says assurances, not guarantees so 'ol Slick Willy pulled a fast one on them.
Click to expand...
Yeah I’m gonna pass on that feckless line of reasoning. When we give out word we need to stand by it. That’s all this comes down to for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#70,618
#70,618
NorthDallas40 said:
Yeah I’m gonna pass on that feckless line of reasoning. When we give out word we need to stand by it. That’s all this comes down to for me.
Click to expand...

We did not give our word that we would financially support them should they be attacked. Our assurances were that we would not attack them.
 
#70,620
#70,620
hog88 said:
We did not give our word that we would financially support them should they be attacked. Our assurances were that we would not attack them.
Click to expand...
Disagree on your interpretation. Sadly the piss poor document is so vague you can likely interpret however you want and there are also no ending or exit criteria. We should have never signed it. But we did.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and hog88
#70,621
#70,621
There is a natural tendency, particularly on big picture issues, to always want to adopt the position opposite the other political party. And then after you have done so, try to come up with a reason to justify it. But it is that kind of thinking that adds to dysfunction and categorical thinking and makes useful compromise so hard.

There is nothing wrong with Haley or others for example the other night saying that on this subject Biden has it right. They aren't giving up ground for no reason and in my view their willingness to acknowledge that the other party can be right on some things is a sign of great strength, not weakness.

I, for example, admit that Trump in philosophy has a point in illegal immigration. I might disagree about the utility of fencing, but he's right that not enough has been done over the years to address this and we cannot just keep kicking the can down the road.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rocky_Top_Vol13, AM64 and USF grad in TN
#70,622
#70,622
BeardedVol said:
It's like we're going back to third grade language arts class for you.

View attachment 573624
Click to expand...

Your own link says that a security assurance is not the same as a security guarantee.

Security assurances such as those in the Budapest memorandum do not carry as much weight as NATO security guarantees or the guarantees in the mutual security treaties that the United States has with Japan and South Korea. Still, security assurances have played a role in the effort to freeze and end North Korea’s nuclear program.
Click to expand...
 
#70,624
#70,624
lawgator1 said:
There is a natural tendency, particularly on big picture issues, to always want to adopt the position opposite the other political party. And then after you have done so, try to come up with a reason to justify it. But it is that kind of thinking that adds to dysfunction and categorical thinking and makes useful compromise so hard.

There is nothing wrong with Haley or others for example the other night saying that on this subject Biden has it right. They aren't giving up ground for no reason and in my view their willingness to acknowledge that the other party can be right on some things is a sign of great strength, not weakness.

I, for example, admit that Trump in philosophy has a point in illegal immigration. I might disagree about the utility of fencing, but he's right that not enough has been done over the years to address this and we cannot just keep kicking the can down the road.
Click to expand...

Other than the fact almost every mouth-breathing Ukrainiac on this board would have a complete opposite view if a D wasn't sitting in the WH this is not about politics.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top