War in Ukraine

[VOLLeeann]

statute of limitations on foreign multi-national agreements

10 years.

 

[BeardedVol]

Interesting they haven't gone after Belarus since it's "historical" Russian land...

Or any of the Stans for that matter.

Lol, oh wait, you're actually serious?

Belarus is the very model of Putin's proxy dictatorship that he tried to export to Ukraine in 2010, and is attempting to do so in Romania, Moldova, and Georgia currently.

Lukashenko and Putin, Till Death Do You Part? – Northeastern University Political Review

nupoliticalreview.org

 

[volbound1700]

So how do we, as a country, negotiate in a reliable way with the world? Can our word be trusted? What's the time limit?

You are welcome to volunteer and go fight. We have aided Ukraine enough to have satisfied this 30 year old agreement.

 

[volfanhill]

You are welcome to volunteer and go fight. We have aided Ukraine enough to have satisfied this 30 year old agreement.

That did not answer my question.

 

[NorthDallas40]

You are welcome to volunteer and go fight. We have aided Ukraine enough to have satisfied this 30 year old agreement.

Let’s clear something up that is being majorly misused over the last couple of days. Ok this “you are welcome to go and fight” flex isn’t the flex y’all think it is. Nobody is wanting to see US troops in harms way not even the ones you’re debating with. If you want to play this type of flex a more accurate version would be “you are welcome to send as much of your own money as you like but I don’t want to see my money going over there”.

 

[Orange.]

I have to say, @BeardedVol, I ran across you today rooting on our Vols just like I do. lt sorta softened my heart. I guess we really are two Vols fans with different and strongly held opinions about some things.

I hope you are enjoying a victory cigar. Bama sucks.

 

[InVOLuntary]

The Russian news agency TASS was in the room.

Reuters and AP were not.

Wake up!

Well they needed only one Russian media there.

 

[InVOLuntary]

if anyone wants to reach out to send a letter or call of support to Zelenskyy, here’s the Ukrainian government’s contact page

Government contact center » About

Start a gofundme.

 

[InVOLuntary]

View attachment 725030

So Trump has Europe stepping up and taking the lead. I'd say he's a master strategist.

 

[InVOLuntary]

We would roll Russia in a conventional war within weeks. Putin would then be very compelled to start launching nukes. Has nothing to do with incapable. Yes, I think Russia is the agressor. Yes, I think Putin is a thug. I had hoped Ukraine could pull off a win and send Russia packing. They can’t at this point unless the rest of Europe steps up bigly. Why must we babysit the whole of Europe every single conflict?

Samesy

 

[Orange.]

Well they needed only one Russian media there.

Reuters and AP really are redundant and not needed, either.

 

[InVOLuntary]

Reuters and AP really are redundant and not needed, either.

That was the point i was trying to make.

 

[GroverCleveland]

FFL is overrated. They got butts spanked in Vietnam and Algeria in the 1950s.

Long time ago and vastly different attitude towards their deployment. Since then, they have pretty much been hell on wheels when needed.

 

[JFreak]

10 years.

 

[LSU-SIU]

We would roll Russia in a conventional war within weeks. Putin would then be very compelled to start launching nukes. Has nothing to do with incapable. Yes, I think Russia is the agressor. Yes, I think Putin is a thug. I had hoped Ukraine could pull off a win and send Russia packing. They can’t at this point unless the rest of Europe steps up bigly. Why must we babysit the whole of Europe every single conflict?

The US didn't roll guys living in caves for 20 years and 2.3T. It just doesn't work like that.The Ukraine lost even if europe was directly involved. I would listen to what Vance said the other day....weapons and ammo storages are gone. I agree its not our problem.

The Europeans will probably be at war at some point but not with russia...that is why the panic.

 

[McDad]

So how do we, as a country, negotiate in a reliable way with the world? Can our word be trusted? What's the time limit?

Last year, I was confused about the negotiated agreement people were discussing in this thread. @NorthDallas40 and I discussed it for several pages. The "promise" came down to (in my opinion) a vague line or two in the Budapest Memorandum. I don't think he and I agreed fully on what the BM assured but we agreed (I think) it is up for interpretation.
Bearded has always seen it as a hard line document with clear-cut stipulations that obligate America to perform on Ukraine's behalf. I disagree. It's not a treaty. It's a memo.
I shared that backstory to give better clarity on my answers to your Qs.

Negotiate reliably with the world? Communicate better with clearly defined points of negotiation and precise obligations by both parties

Can our word be trusted? No.

Time limit? Again, back to clear communication with timetables and expectations outlined.

 

[McDad]

Let’s clear something up that is being majorly misused over the last couple of days. Ok this “you are welcome to go and fight” flex isn’t the flex y’all think it is. Nobody is wanting to see US troops in harms way not even the ones you’re debating with. If you want to play this type of flex a more accurate version would be “you are welcome to send as much of your own money as you like but I don’t want to see my money going over there”.

Do you recall our convo about the Memorandum? I remember one of us found a copy (or bullet points) and went through it in detail.
If you recollect, please see if I'm accurate in my retelling of that discussion in my reply to @volfanhill.

 

[LSU-SIU]

Last year, I was confused about the negotiated agreement people were discussing in this thread. @NorthDallas40 and I discussed it for several pages. The "promise" came down to (in my opinion) a vague line or two in the Budapest Memorandum. I don't think he and I agreed fully on what the BM assured but we agreed (I think) it is up for interpretation.
Bearded has always seen it as a hard line document with clear-cut stipulations that obligate America to perform on Ukraine's behalf. I disagree. It's not a treaty. It's a memo.
I shared that backstory to give better clarity on my answers to your Qs.

Negotiate reliably with the world? Communicate better with clearly defined points of negotiation and precise obligations by both parties

Can our word be trusted? No.

Time limit? Again, back to clear communication with timetables and expectations outlined.

If you have assets at scale in other countries to collapse them most probably a country shouldn't be trusting us. The ones that were saying we didn't do that in the Ukraine got really upset when I said that the orange man should disclose Cia assets in the Ukraine.

Immaterial to the actual war at this point but just my take as a generalization.

 

[Vol737]

The US didn't roll guys living in caves for 20 years and 2.3T. It just doesn't work like that.The Ukraine lost even if europe was directly involved. I would listen to what Vance said the other day....weapons and ammo storages are gone. I agree its not our problem.

The Europeans will probably be at war at some point but not with russia...that is why the panic.

The guys living in caves fight a different war than Russia, different tactics. Yes, we would roll Russia because they haven’t learned new tactics to fighting a war since WWII. I’m not saying I’m advocating for that, I don’t. We’ve helped Ukraine about as much as we could. Will be interesting to see who squares off against whom in Europe, assuming you’re correct.

 

[MontyPython]

Every single nuclear power should be afraid to risk a nuclear war over a conflict not threatening their sovereignty.

“Afraid”. Being afraid is apparently your job. Conversely, being prudent with our military is how we operate.

Questions raised by your “sovereignty” concerns:

If N Korea invaded S Korea, would you oppose our defense? We have a mutual defense treaty with S Korea, yet N Korea has nukes. By your logic, we should be too afraid to help our ally in the event they’re attacked.

Similar question: On 3 January 2020, Qasem Soleimani, an Iranian major general, was killed by an American drone strike ordered by U.S. President Donald Trump near the Baghdad International Airport in Iraq, while travelling to meet Iraqi prime minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi.

Should we be too afraid to eliminate military leaders of our enemies like Iran? Trump didn’t think so. Was assassinating Soleimani critical to maintaining US sovereignty?

 

[MontyPython]

Finland joined NATO in response to what?

They were happily neutral until the Ukraine invasion. Same with Sweden. And frankly, neither needed to as Russia wasn't a threat to them. The Winter War of 1940 showed how it was almost impossible for an invasion to succeed in that place.

But Russia was pretty pissed about it when it happened. But the major difference is nobody has invaded Russia from that direction since the Vikings. At least not in force. But how many times have they been invaded from Eastern Europe in the last 200 years?

Dismiss the post all you want. You can't argue against it.

Gather you’ve conveniently forgotten Pooty’s rationale for invading Ukraine. “De-nazification” and Ukraine’s *potential* admittance to NATO.

Yet Finland actually joined NATO and Russia’s response was shrugs. What this really shows is Pooty’s rationale for invading Ukraine was pure BS.

 

[MontyPython]

Nice, this was signed in the early 1990s over 30 years ago. Let's go dig up other archaic treaties to start wars over.

Archaic treaties. Wow.

You know the Louisiana purchase treaty of 1803 is pretty old. We should really just ignore that as well and allow France to take all their land back.

 

[apevol]

Let’s clear something up that is being majorly misused over the last couple of days. Ok this “you are welcome to go and fight” flex isn’t the flex y’all think it is. Nobody is wanting to see US troops in harms way not even the ones you’re debating with. If you want to play this type of flex a more accurate version would be “you are welcome to send as much of your own money as you like but I don’t want to see my money going over there”.

also missing is the fact that in NATOs history, article 5 has been invoked exactly one time. For us. Europe went to war for US and there's not one inkling of gratitude from many on this board. Hell, Ukraine itself sent thousands to Iraq.

There's a wide chasm between "We should send troops" and "we should support Ukraine". An even wider one between that and "We shouldn't finance this war but I expect our CiC not to treat the president of a country threatened with extinction so disgracefully while telling our oldest allies to go **** themselves"

Europe's problems with terrorism and unassimilated migrants is partially our fault. Its been exacerbated by Putin himself and all this frothing at the mouth wishful thinking of Europe being at war with itself is something that exists because Putin himself has been trying to make it happen.

We're flirting with the devil and pointing that out is getting met with lol y dont u go die in a trench if you love cokehead midgets so much lol

Its childish foolishness

 

[rekinhavoc]

Barstool's Dave Portnoy on Trump-Zelensky Clash: 'Felt Like I Was Watching Bravo TV'

Dave Portnoy says the clash between President Trump and Volodymyr Zelensky on Friday made him think he was "watching Bravo TV."

www.breitbart.com

“If you’re anti-Trump, you’re basically saying, ‘This is the worst day in the history of America,’” Portnoy said. “We’re basically the same as Russia and a dictator and Putin and evil. And if you’re pro-Trump, you’re like, ‘Finally, somebody sticking up for American citizens, American taxpayers."

“This previous administration, Biden has [called] Putin a killer, a dictator, all the things Zelenskyy says,” Portnoy explained. “And what has that gotten us? Hundreds of billions of dollars given to Ukraine, and they’re really no closer to ending this war.”

In another moment, Portnoy spent considerable time criticizing Zelensky for not being appropriately dressed to meet President Trump in the Oval Office.

“You can say whatever you want about Trump,” Portnoy explained. “He takes signs of disrespect personally. He’s very much about, you know, respecting other things. So, Zelenskyy shows up, and he’s wearing his sweatshirt and his customary outfit, which is his way of essentially saying, ‘I’m at war. I don’t have time to play politics or any other stuff.

“For me, this is just stupid. We get you’re at war, but you’re coming to meet a new administration,” he added. ” And it’s just a sign of disrespect not to show the same level of respect (in) the Oval Office that Trump clearly thinks it deserves.”

In addition, Portnoy stressed the need for Ukraine to show “deference” to the country that has done so much to help them.

“They should show some deference to or thank you to the American taxpayers. We don’t have to continually foot this bill. But I respect or understand Trump not wanting to vilify Putin. The last administration did it every single chance they could get. It got us nowhere. Trump made it very clear he wants diplomacy. He wants to end the debt. He wants to end this war.”

Portnoy said, “I don’t necessarily have the answers, but I think Trump and Vance handled this as well as they could. Like, we’re not going to just get steamrolled by Zelenskyy at the expense of getting a deal done. And if that means we have to throw a couple flowers at Putin, so be it.”

 

[rekinhavoc]

VICTOR DAVIS HANSON: 10 bad takeaways from the Zelenskyy blow-up

Victor Davis Hanson lays out 10 takeaways from Friday's extraordinary Oval Office meeting between President Trump, Vice President Vance and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

www.foxnews.com

1. Zelenskyy does not grasp—or deliberately ignores—the bitter truth: Those with whom he feels most affinity (Western globalists, the American Left, the Europeans) have little power in 2025 to help him. And those whom he obviously does not like or seeks to embarrass (as with his Scranton, Penn. campaign-like visit in September 2024) alone have the power to save him. For his own sake, I hope he is not being "briefed" by the Obama-Clinton-Biden gang to confront Trump, given their interests are not really Ukraine’s as they feign.

2. Zelenskyy acts as if his agenda and ours are identical. So, he keeps insisting that he is fighting for us despite our two-ocean-distance that he mocks. We do have many shared interests with Ukraine, but not all by any means: Trump wants to "reset" with Russia and triangulate it against China. He seeks to avoid a 1962 DEFCON 2-like crisis over a proxy showdown in proximity to a nuclear rival. And he sincerely wants to end the deadlocked Stalingrad slaughterhouse for everyone’s sake.

3. The Europeans (and Canada) are now talking loudly of a new muscular antithesis, independent of the U.S. Promises, promises—given that would require Europeans to prune back their social welfare state, frack, use nuclear, stop the green obsession, and spend 3-5% of their GDP on defense. The U.S. does not just pay 16% of NATO’s budget, but also puts up with asymmetrical tariffs that result in a European Union trade surplus of $160 billion, plays the world cop, patrolling sea-lanes and deterring terrorists and rogue states that otherwise might interrupt Europe’s commercial networks abroad, as well as de facto including Europe under a nuclear umbrella of 6,500 nukes.

4. Zelenskyy must know that all of the once-deal-breaking impediments to peace have been settled. Ukraine is now better armed than most NATO nations, but will not be in NATO, and no president has or will ever supply Ukraine with the armed wherewithal to take back the Donbass and Crimea. So, the only two issues are a) how far will Putin be willing to withdraw to his 2022 borders and b) how will he be deterred? The first is answered by a commercial sector/tripwire, joint Ukrainian-US-Europe resource development corridor in Eastern Ukraine, coupled with a Korea-like DMZ; the second by the fact that Putin, unlike his 2008 and 2014 invasions, has now incurred a million dead and wounded to a Ukraine that will remain thusly armed.

5. What are Zelenskyy’s alternatives without much U.S. help—wait for a return of the Democrats to the White House in four years? Hope for a rearmed Europe? Pray for a Democratic House and a third Vindman-like engineered Trump impeachment? Or swallow his pride, return to the White House, sign the rare-earth minerals deal, invite in the Euros (are they seriously willing to patrol a DMZ?), and hope Trump can warn Putin, as he did successfully between 2017-21, not to dare try it again?

6. If there is a cease-fire, a commercial deal, a Euro ground presence, and influx of Western companies into Ukraine, would there be elections? And if so, would Zelenskyy and his party win? And if not, would there be a successor transparent government that would reveal exactly where all the Western financial aid money went?

7. Zelenskyy might see a model in Netanyahu. The Biden Administration was far harder on him than Trump is on Ukraine, suspending arms shipments, demanding cease-fires, prodding for a wartime, bipartisan cabinet, hammering Israel on collateral damage—none of which Westerners have demanded of Zelenskyy. Yet Netanyahu managed a hostile President Biden, kept Israel close to its patron, and, when visiting, was gracious to his host. Netanyahu certainly would never before the global media have interrupted and berated a host and patron president in the White House.

8. If Ukraine has alienated the U.S., what then is its strategic victory plan? Wait around for more Euros? Hold off an increasingly invigorated Russian military? Cede more territory? What, then, exactly are Zelenskyy’s cards he seems to think form a winning hand?

9. If one views carefully all the 50-minute tape, most of it was going quite well—until Zelenskyy started correcting Vance firstly, and Trump secondly. By Ukraine-splaining to his hosts, and by his gestures, tone, and interruptions, he made it clear that he assumed that Trump was just more of the same compliant, clueless moneybags Biden waxen effigy. And that was naïve for such a supposedly worldly leader.

10. March 2025 is not March 2022, after the heroic saving of Kyiv—but three years and 1.5 million dead and wounded later. Zelenskyy is no longer the international heartthrob with the glamorous entourage. He has postponed elections, outlawed opposition media and parties, suspended habeas corpus and walked out of negotiations when he had an even hand in spring 2022 and apparently even now when he does not in spring 2025.