War in Ukraine

[LSU-SIU]

No, I expect him to side with Ukraine so as to pressure Putin into making a deal that favors the aggrieved party. Pretty simple and until Trump took over it was a sentiment shared by GOP leadership.

There are no cards to play, jesus. Let Trump send a strongly worded e-mail. This is toddler mentality. Trump can only be fair to Russia as he has limited cards to play.... the U.S. is basically all in absent WWIII.

What does it matter, the Ukraine said they are not going to make a deal and Da Pootin has to pay them back i,e. endless war.

 

[Orange_Crush]

No, I expect him to side with Ukraine so as to pressure Putin into making a deal that favors the aggrieved party. Pretty simple and until Trump took over it was a sentiment shared by GOP leadership.

Glad you're not in the position Trump is in. And it really doesn't matter that the Republican warmonger neocons were as wrong as you.

 

[Orange.]

Over a million people have died in that war. Who is responsible ?...

You. Do something! Join the Brave

 

[Orange_Crush]

There are no cards to play, jesus. Let Trump send a strongly worded e-mail. This is toddler mentality.

What does it matter, the Ukraine said they are not going to make a deal and Da Pootin has to pay them back i,e. endless war.

It's actually a good thing that the war pigs are outing themselves.

 

[LSU-SIU]

It's actually a good thing that the war pigs are outing themselves.

These people are somewhere between talking to a patient from Briar Ridge and a toddler. There is no play here, other than cooperation because there are no cards. The time to play cards was 2022 and maybe earlier 2023. They're lucky Trump has put up with them this long. There is no material win for the Ukraine, it is only about how much they lose - they continue to go down the path of EVERYTHING.

Of course that Monty was saying how the Ukraine was winning the whole time, its embarrassing. But mental people don't get embarrassed.

 

[Orange_Crush]

These people are somewhere between talking to a patient from Briar Ridge and a toddler.

There is no play here, other than cooperation because there are no cards. They're lucky Trump has put up with them this long.

People seem to want the USA to become judge and jury here and excise some pound of flesh from Russia. The problem is that the US's only standing, short of military actions, is that of mediator. And it would be absolutely INSANE to start threatening Russia with military action over this.

Thus, it is neither the US's place, nor ability to seek whatever form of "justice" people in this thread are demanding.

The option here is diplomacy. The US can stand in as a mediator to help broker a deal. To even be able to take that role, Trump can't just start insulting Putin, blaming Russia, and promising to get for Ukraine at the expense of Russia. He has to either walk as a diplomat, or pull out US interest altogether and let them hammer it out, at the expense of more lives every day.

It is so funny. We were assured that Trump could never be the Presidential diplomat because he was supposedly too volatile to work for a big picture, yet his detractors prove to be exactly what they accused him of, and he's just the opposite.

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

 

[InVOLuntary]

Over a million people have died in that war. Who is responsible ? The answer is Putin and it's absolutely shameful that our President is siding with him.

 

[LSU-SIU]

People seem to want the USA to become judge and jury here and excise some pound of flesh from Russia. The problem is that the US's only standing, short of military actions, is that of mediator. And it would be absolutely INSANE to start threatening Russia with military action over this.

Thus, it is neither the US's place, nor ability to seek whatever form of "justice" people in this thread are demanding.

The option here is diplomacy. The US can stand in as a mediator to help broker a deal. To even be able to take that role, Trump can't just start insulting Putin, blaming Russia, and promising to get for Ukraine at the expense of Russia. He has to either walk as a diplomat, or pull out US interest altogether and let them hammer it out, at the expense of more lives every day.

It is so funny. We were assured that Trump could never be the Presidential diplomat because he was supposedly too volatile to work for a big picture, yet his detractors prove to be exactly what they accused him of, and he's just the opposite.

Pretty much, it basically leads to WWIII. The U.S. really has no hand to play either, they went all in already - although removal of sanctions could play a part. I think this is what Trump is getting at.

War in Ukraine
Oct 2022

The problem is the deal is going to get much worse over time, and for good reason.

I would say its fairly easy to see.. this will continue until the non-prorussian areas are flattened, as that is what they want.

 

[volbound1700]

No, I expect him to side with Ukraine so as to pressure Putin into making a deal that favors the aggrieved party. Pretty simple and until Trump took over it was a sentiment shared by GOP leadership.

That was the plan for the last 2-3 years. I will state that I think it was a worthy plan the 1st and even 2nd year of the war but it is like the game of Texas Hold'em Poker, at some point, you need to know when to fold once the river turns the other way.

 

[BigALWiLson]

EU and it's leaders were looking for the US to hold the majority of the cost. We have spent 114 billion in Ukraine alone over the last 3 years. The whole of Europe has spent 130 B. Something is wrong with that. I stand with Trump here. We want a deal but we are not doing it for free nor should we. If not let European leaders fix their own issues. I am no politician but we need to fix our own soil before hammering out Billions that could be spent here at home or even better yet paying down some of our debt.

 

[LSU-SIU]

It is super simple at this point. The Ukraine is screwed, they should have never gotten involved with the U.S. or came to the table in 2022/early 2023. But that is over now and not very material. The Ukraine has zero cards. The only cards the U.S./Europe have is removal of sanctions absent nuclear war. To avoid the Ukraine losing everything, it comes down to all parties being honest and seeing if Russia will play on the edges, which is what Trump is saying.

There is nothing else. But you have a party that says they will never make a deal, so that means that the U.S. should move along and start to have a non-hostile relationship with Russia.

The Ukraine is going to have to give basically almost everything they want. There simply is not much to play with here. Europe is next either way i.e. war with themselves.

 

[InVOLuntary]

That's stupid. Everyone knows that to get Putin to give up is to stomp around like a toddler and call him a bunch of bad names.

The only way to defeat Putin is to put western soldiers on the ground fighting Russia. Those calling for that, are you ready to send your daughters/sons, brothers/sisters, neices/nephews? And then, if you are successful, you're looking at bringing China in. And you're looking at nuclear war. Y'all good with that?

 

[volbound1700]

That's stupid. Everyone knows that to get Putin to give up is to stomp around like a toddler and call him a bunch of bad names.

The only way to defeat Putin is to put western soldiers on the ground fighting Russia. Those calling for that, are you ready to send your daughters/sons, brothers/sisters, neices/nephews? And then, if you are successful, you're looking at bringing China in. And you're looking at nuclear war. Y'all good with that?

But but Munich Conference and Chamberlain and Appeasement...

 

[hog88]

What's the statute of limitations on foreign multi-national agreements?

We lived up to our word, we never invaded or encroached upon Ukraines sovereignty. We never guaranteed nobody else would.

 

[lawgator1]

EU and it's leaders were looking for the US to hold the majority of the cost. We have spent 114 billion in Ukraine alone over the last 3 years. The whole of Europe has spent 130 B. Something is wrong with that. I stand with Trump here. We want a deal but we are not doing it for free nor should we. If not let European leaders fix their own issues. I am no politician but we need to fix our own soil before hammering out Billions that could be spent here at home or even better yet paying down some of our debt.

Where was the bulk of that "spent"?

Hint: right here

 

[volbound1700]

We lived up to our word, we never invaded or encroached upon Ukraines sovereignty. We never guaranteed nobody else would.

Agree. You can argue that we had an obligation to try (diplomatically) to have Russia respect the agreement which we more than did with sanctions, warnings, condemnation, etc. It is hard to argue that we did not do our part of that agreement. It never obligated us to go to war with Russia nor was it the intention of the parties in the United States that signed the agreement.

 

[hog88]

“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?

Really reaching there Karen. NK nor Iran has zero means to attack us conventionally or with nuclear weapons.

If your going to spend so much time typing try to make sure it’s relevant and within reason.

 

[BigALWiLson]

Where was the bulk of that "spent"?

Hint: right here

And who's President was that ? You talk all this sh1t about Trump but the cronies you elected got us here

 

[hog88]

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

We’ve went to war for Europe a few times, if we’re measuring gratitude they still owe us.

 

[apevol]

We’ve went to war for Europe a few times, if we’re measuring gratitude they still owe us.

the nazis declared war on us

France definitely owes us though

 

[Vol737]

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.

Do we have a mutual defense treaty with The Ukraine?

 

[McDad]

I just read your reply. Yes I agree the document is vague. Very vague even. The majority argument made in this forum revolves around the English language version and its use of assurances. And no we didn’t agree but as I told Orangeburst recently I can’t say either of you are wrong. Again due to the lack of any definitized actions and consequences. The document by itself is a horrible document and never should have been signed.

As I have also explained here for me at least it’s more than just the document it’s what they gave up and what their expectations were in return also. Like I said the English version says assurances. The Russian and Ukrainian version says Guarantees. Clinton signed all three. And if he didn’t know what he was signing that is our fault but I highly doubt that is the cause.

Thr document is ambiguous on purpose. But the whole concept of what was given up with all three documents at lesst to me shows we have some level of obligation. But no it’s clear we never intended that obligation to rise to article 5 level and have US troops dying in Ukraine. To counter the value that the weapons were useless it’s been offered that Ukraine could not use them due to a lack of launch codes they were useless. My answer to that is that is self defeating because why did we go to the trouble of signing this document then we clearly saw they had value.

Thanks for bringing the details back to light.

 

[MontyPython]

Really reaching there Karen. NK nor Iran has zero means to attack us conventionally or with nuclear weapons.

If your going to spend so much time typing try to make sure it’s relevant and within reason.

Oh really. Confident of their inability to nuke us huh? From a purely logistical standpoint, neither country could use a third-party container ship or similar vessel to transport then detonate a nuclear weapon in one of our harbors? Also, NK does in fact have ICBM delivery systems albeit questionable in ability.

 

[McDad]

DJT seems to me to have an idealogy that is anti war. I lean that way myself