War in Ukraine

#14,102
#14,102
Velo Vol said:
Sounds like @Rasputin_Vol.

Click to expand...


Perhaps. Or simply pragmatic.

Do you consider Biden and admin the XI and Putin wing of the DNC? Or simply pragmatic, having shared intel with China knowing they'd share with Russia - ? Don't we know that China has Joe leveraged? What we don't know is whether China is keeping the ace to themselves or has fed Putin enough to keep Russian oil flowing onto the market.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#14,106
#14,106
luthervol said:
lol. That may be the craziest post I've seen.
So you are saying that believing a country MAY attack another is an excuse to go to war?
Click to expand...
It is dicey, no question about that. But that isn't what you were suggesting. You were suggesting allowing the Ukrainians to shed blood in order to get some political cover.
 
#14,107
#14,107
Rasputin_Vol said:
I posted a video last night that explained some of this.

Also, I was very clear to say "allegedly" at the very beginning.
Click to expand...

But you know better than that. You don't just claim "allegedly" that Ukraine was preparing to be the aggressor and that US was leading them via Erik Prince type contractors simply by saying, "Unnamed sources in the pentagon say". Even RT does better than that.

Let me show you how it is done more credibly:
Exclusive: Documents Reveal Erik Prince's $10 Billion Plan to Make Weapons and Create a Private Army in Ukraine
White House nixed Erik Prince's scheme to send retired airmen to defend Ukraine: Report

Now the question is, did Biden's (or Trump's) agencies really reject all of that idea or just some of it? Perhaps they just got it from a different contractor. Clearly they were thinking it - and notice it was an ongoing war between the two of them

Documents obtained by the outlet reveal Prince's coveted venture would have given him a pivotal role in Ukraine's military industry amid it's continuous conflict with neighboring Russia. Several of the proposals required approval from the Ukrainian government, including one that would create a new private military company staffed by veterans of the ongoing conflict in eastern Ukraine, according to the magazine.

If you make allegations without a reasonable basis, especially when everyone is emotionally with the underdog Ukrainians, you are doing no better than you claim the Ukrainian propaganda aare.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, Sea Ray and Rickyvol77
#14,109
#14,109
So say this war ended with Ukraine agreeing to cede the Donbas and Crimea. Russia would have technically made gains, but would anybody really consider Russia as the winner? It would be even less of a “victory” than the Winter War.

Ukraine would have lost territory but it’s bond with Russia would be firmly broken and they would almost certainly end up in the EU, if not NATO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#14,111
#14,111
Gandalf said:
But you know better than that. You don't just claim "allegedly" that Ukraine was preparing to be the aggressor and that US was leading them via Erik Prince type contractors simply by saying, "Unnamed sources in the pentagon say". Even RT does better than that.

Let me show you how it is done more credibly:
Exclusive: Documents Reveal Erik Prince's $10 Billion Plan to Make Weapons and Create a Private Army in Ukraine
White House nixed Erik Prince's scheme to send retired airmen to defend Ukraine: Report

Now the question is, did Biden's (or Trump's) agencies really reject all of that idea or just some of it? Perhaps they just got it from a different contractor. Clearly they were thinking it - and notice it was an ongoing war between the two of them

Documents obtained by the outlet reveal Prince's coveted venture would have given him a pivotal role in Ukraine's military industry amid it's continuous conflict with neighboring Russia. Several of the proposals required approval from the Ukrainian government, including one that would create a new private military company staffed by veterans of the ongoing conflict in eastern Ukraine, according to the magazine.

If you make allegations without a reasonable basis, especially when everyone is emotionally with the underdog Ukrainians, you are doing no better than you claim the Ukrainian propaganda aare.
Click to expand...

Again, allegedly. I'm only speculating. At least I'm saying that and offering that as a preface whenever I see or hear something. These other guys don't even do that on here with their twitter posts and Russian casualty count. At least acknowledge me for doing that. Now, we will see if it is BS or truth in the next few days. I'm not sure of the majority of what is coming out, but the guy in that video is actually on the ground in Kharkiv. I also throw out a reason why I gave it some weight because I (along with mostly everyone else) has been wondering about this alleged convoy of 20 or 40 miles long outside of Kyiv and why have they been mostly unharmed in the past few days. Is it likely because the bulk (or a significant number) of the Ukrainian forces are pre-occupied somewhere else or doing something else? Also something that I didn't add but saw mentioned somewhere else, but it is alleged that the Russians were siting back and waiting for just enough of the Ukrainian forces to get within this region before they pounced on it.
 
#14,119
#14,119
All of these places attacked America and we kicked their ever loving ass. Those countries still remain. Blinken might be one of the best I've ever seen.
 
#14,120
#14,120
Speech on the North Atlantic Treaty

Senator Robert Taft, July 26, 1949 on why he voted against the NATO Pact. Also, looks like the original pact was for 20 years...


But the Atlantic Pact goes much further. It obligates us to go to war if at any time during the next 20 years anyone makes an armed attack on any of the 12 nations. Under the Monroe Doctrine we could change our policy at any time. We could judge whether perhaps one of the countries had given cause for the attack. Only Congress could declare a war in pursuance of the doctrine. Under the new pact the President can take us into war without Congress. But, above all the treaty is a part of a much larger program by which we arm all these nations against Russia… A joint military program has already been made… It thus becomes an offensive and defensive military alliance against Russia. I believe our foreign policy should be aimed primarily at security and peace, and I believe such an alliance is more likely to produce war than peace. A third world war would be the greatest tragedy the world has ever suffered. Even if we won the war, we this time would probably suffer tremendous destruction, our economic system would be crippled, and we would lose our liberties and free system just as the Second World War destroyed the free systems of Europe. It might easily destroy civilization on this earth…
 
#14,121
#14,121
0nelilreb said:
I hate it when government passes a sweeping law after a crisis. We somehow always end up losing more rights out of the deal . The big bold headlines with all the power words looks pretty , but the extra details tacked on when passing both the senate and the house is where we get screwed .
Click to expand...
Fear not. These new government powers are mostly “common sense” measures, and they are going to protect us.

The requirements included, which go beyond just reporting incidents, are largely common-sense measures to protect organizations
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland and Gandalf
#14,123
#14,123
So looks to me like the NATO agreement is the reason why we have seen all of the wars since its signing not require the blessing of Congress. In essence, it side stepped the Constitutional authority of Congress.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top