US has no good options in Ukraine

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have tried to give Putin off ramp for weeks. For months,
He is sending in troops to kill civilians.
F this guy.
I just read a good piece by Fiona Hill, and she breaks it down.
We can’t be paralyzed by fear. We have to anticipate and move to act.

Fiona Hill has vomited up a horrible piece of fear porn. I have no idea who she is and care less about her "expertise", this "interview" was a shoddy propaganda piece, but it's also dangerous. She is irresponsible for inciting panic in general population, completely uneducated and uninformed on this topic, many of whom don't give a flying rat's ass about Ukraine beyond feeling sorry for the refugees. The entire purpose of this shoddy article is to paralyze our population with fear. She is literally telling people that it's for sure that Putin is trying to expand his "empire" and won't stop with Ukraine and we should expect he might drop some bombs in the process, cause.. he is capable and it's not beyond him. Dumbasses like you need to grow up, how old are you? And if you are a grown up, time to "enlist" into the AA and stop drinking that vodka all day long.

“I have no idea who she is…” you should have stopped there and saved yourself the embarrassment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some of us need to come to terms with there isn't actually a good outcome here. There's less bad and terrible.

Unfortunately we're all just pawns to the powers that be and that includes the posters who believe America and Western Europe are always morally correct

Exactly. I don't know who these outraged innocents are, but it's time to read up on some history, and become appropriately realist.

Anyone who has read any history or pays attention to the mad dictators of the world, has a very good idea where this is going. It's only a question of time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Um no. This isn't about the United States. India is going to have a choice to make, as is every country. This is about Dharma.

And for what it's worth, Pakistan is playing an even more dangerous game but is pretty much already on the other side. Why else was Imran Khan in Moscow meeting with Putin as the invasion started?

Let me go further and be more explicit. India's two threats are Pakistan and China. Both have territorial claims to land currently held by India and have started wars against India over those claims. In addition, India hosts the Tibet government in exile. Both Pakistan and China have aligned softly with Russia. Pakistan would love a green light to invade Kashmir. China wants it for Taiwan but Tibet is a secondary area of interest for it. If Russia is successful it is open season on global territorial claims. If Russia is partially successful then the world is going to break down into two spheres, China (with Russia as a vassal) and the West (including Japan etc). Pakistan is at this point completely indebted to China and China will have a huge naval base in Baluchistan. India will be isolated in that situation. Nehru's Non-Aligned Movement and protectionist economics held India back during the Cold War. India's renaissance has been contingent on the post-cold war order. In a cold war 2.0 situation it's two main adversaries have teamed up. Russia won't service its second rate weapons if something happens with Pakistan or China. Low cost Turkish drones are decimating them anyway. It is very much in India's long term geopolitical interest to align with the West before it is too late. The opportunity to do that is now.

It's also the right thing to do morally.

Indian-American here and I agree. We need rational, non-sectarian leaders at the helm in India who can see this encirclement and realize what's happening. If we want to save Kashmir from Pakistan and Arunachal Pradesh from China, it's time to side with the West.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Getting India onboard is easy —

But the us won’t do it.

Cut off Pakistan ties, fund India 50 billion a year in arms sales (Israel gets 30+ billion…India needs more if you want quad to be successful).

If the us cannot plug in russian weapon systems for India, India will chart a non-aligned path.

Remember — quad is extremely important for the us. Us will not burn India over Russian posture.

This isn't a buy support scenario. India is playing a dangerous game. I get that they are just replaying their cold war playbook and that Putin held a meeting with Imran Khan on the forst day of the invasion. It's morally reprehensible but it is what it is. India should be taking note of how bad Russian weapons and systems are doing. It's been an asbolutely humiliating product demonstration. The new axis will be China/Russia versus North America/Europe/East Asia. It's going to be hard to thread the needle.

No, the U.S. has been playing a stupid and arrogant game with India. Who armed and paid and supported Pakistan (and, by extension, Pakistani terrorism in Kashmir) during the Cold War? Who undermined India's interests at every turn for literally years until the War on Terror?
It was the U.S.

If you want Indian support, show it and do exactly what the previous PP said. Stop supporting Pakistani terrorism in Kashmir. Stop supporting Pakistan - the country that sheltered bin Laden - at all, period. India does not owe the U.S. anything.

Um no. This isn't about the United States. India is going to have a choice to make, as is every country. This is about Dharma.

And for what it's worth, Pakistan is playing an even more dangerous game but is pretty much already on the other side. Why else was Imran Khan in Moscow meeting with Putin as the invasion started?

Let me go further and be more explicit. India's two threats are Pakistan and China. Both have territorial claims to land currently held by India and have started wars against India over those claims. In addition, India hosts the Tibet government in exile. Both Pakistan and China have aligned softly with Russia. Pakistan would love a green light to invade Kashmir. China wants it for Taiwan but Tibet is a secondary area of interest for it. If Russia is successful it is open season on global territorial claims. If Russia is partially successful then the world is going to break down into two spheres, China (with Russia as a vassal) and the West (including Japan etc). Pakistan is at this point completely indebted to China and China will have a huge naval base in Baluchistan. India will be isolated in that situation. Nehru's Non-Aligned Movement and protectionist economics held India back during the Cold War. India's renaissance has been contingent on the post-cold war order. In a cold war 2.0 situation it's two main adversaries have teamed up. Russia won't service its second rate weapons if something happens with Pakistan or China. Low cost Turkish drones are decimating them anyway. It is very much in India's long term geopolitical interest to align with the West before it is too late. The opportunity to do that is now.

It's also the right thing to do morally.

+100. They will try to walk the neutral path for as long as possible, but at the end of the day, India is not stupid. This time, India will align with the West. There are also a shit ton of wealthy Indian-Americans/NRIs who actually do have some sway in the politics back home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have tried to give Putin off ramp for weeks. For months,
He is sending in troops to kill civilians.
F this guy.
I just read a good piece by Fiona Hill, and she breaks it down.
We can’t be paralyzed by fear. We have to anticipate and move to act.

Fiona Hill has vomited up a horrible piece of fear porn. I have no idea who she is and care less about her "expertise", this "interview" was a shoddy propaganda piece, but it's also dangerous. She is irresponsible for inciting panic in general population, completely uneducated and uninformed on this topic, many of whom don't give a flying rat's ass about Ukraine beyond feeling sorry for the refugees. The entire purpose of this shoddy article is to paralyze our population with fear. She is literally telling people that it's for sure that Putin is trying to expand his "empire" and won't stop with Ukraine and we should expect he might drop some bombs in the process, cause.. he is capable and it's not beyond him. Dumbasses like you need to grow up, how old are you? And if you are a grown up, time to "enlist" into the AA and stop drinking that vodka all day long.

“I have no idea who she is…” you should have stopped there and saved yourself the embarrassment.

+1. She is a clear voice of reason and truth. Sorry if that upsets people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m absolutely not willing to make very many sacrifices for Ukraine. I don’t want to pay more than I already do for anything and I damn sure don’t want my husband going to war nor do I want my life upended to make shit in factories for a war effort. Ukraine and Russia aren’t my problem just as I’m not theirs. I don’t feel bad about this either.

Enjoy your upcoming nuclear winter.

A nuclear winter that wouldn’t happen if the US and Western Europe didn’t go sticking their noses into a conflict they have no place in and cannot control. The time to do something was before Putin invaded. Having failed to stop him, we need to eat this loss and keep it moving. Anyone who thinks the way to avoid a nuclear war is to attack a country that will not hesitate to use nukes is a damn fool and should be sent to the frontlines to die first.

Putin did this. We didn't. This is the exact same appeasement argument that was made in 1939. Some things are worth fighting for.

Hitler didn’t have nukes, you dumbo.

So if Hitler had nukes we should have just given him the world? That doesnt make sense

YOu have proof that Putin wants "the world"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think one option for the West is to hit Belarus hard with ordinance and fighter jets. Make it a surprise attack, before Russia can move nuclear weapons and more manpower into the country. Their military is a lot weaker than Russia.

If you pound them into submission through the air, it will really distract Russia and Belarussian military.

Further, hitting Belarus is not a direct attack on Russia. This matters, especially if we are trying to leverage Putin onto an off-ramp.

That’s a dumb option. Russia and Belarus are treaty allies through CSTO (along with Kazakhstan and Armenia). Not as robust as NATO to be sure but if the west were to attack the Belorussians, World War III begins.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have tried to give Putin off ramp for weeks. For months,
He is sending in troops to kill civilians.
F this guy.
I just read a good piece by Fiona Hill, and she breaks it down.
We can’t be paralyzed by fear. We have to anticipate and move to act.

Fiona Hill has vomited up a horrible piece of fear porn. I have no idea who she is and care less about her "expertise", this "interview" was a shoddy propaganda piece, but it's also dangerous. She is irresponsible for inciting panic in general population, completely uneducated and uninformed on this topic, many of whom don't give a flying rat's ass about Ukraine beyond feeling sorry for the refugees. The entire purpose of this shoddy article is to paralyze our population with fear. She is literally telling people that it's for sure that Putin is trying to expand his "empire" and won't stop with Ukraine and we should expect he might drop some bombs in the process, cause.. he is capable and it's not beyond him. Dumbasses like you need to grow up, how old are you? And if you are a grown up, time to "enlist" into the AA and stop drinking that vodka all day long.

“I have no idea who she is…” you should have stopped there and saved yourself the embarrassment.

+1. She is a clear voice of reason and truth. Sorry if that upsets people.

It's very reasonable for her to be dishing out fear propaganda Even Biden had to explicitly assure Americans that there won't be a nuclear war, why is that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have tried to give Putin off ramp for weeks. For months,
He is sending in troops to kill civilians.
F this guy.
I just read a good piece by Fiona Hill, and she breaks it down.
We can’t be paralyzed by fear. We have to anticipate and move to act.

Fiona Hill has vomited up a horrible piece of fear porn. I have no idea who she is and care less about her "expertise", this "interview" was a shoddy propaganda piece, but it's also dangerous. She is irresponsible for inciting panic in general population, completely uneducated and uninformed on this topic, many of whom don't give a flying rat's ass about Ukraine beyond feeling sorry for the refugees. The entire purpose of this shoddy article is to paralyze our population with fear. She is literally telling people that it's for sure that Putin is trying to expand his "empire" and won't stop with Ukraine and we should expect he might drop some bombs in the process, cause.. he is capable and it's not beyond him. Dumbasses like you need to grow up, how old are you? And if you are a grown up, time to "enlist" into the AA and stop drinking that vodka all day long.

“I have no idea who she is…” you should have stopped there and saved yourself the embarrassment.

+1. She is a clear voice of reason and truth. Sorry if that upsets people.

It's very reasonable for her to be dishing out fear propaganda Even Biden had to explicitly assure Americans that there won't be a nuclear war, why is that?

It's expected that Biden would say that; it's the job of any leader under the current, extremely volatile, circumstances.

[Anonymous]

Is there any doubt Rudy busted up the Italian mob only to make room for the Russians to fill the void?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think one option for the West is to hit Belarus hard with ordinance and fighter jets. Make it a surprise attack, before Russia can move nuclear weapons and more manpower into the country. Their military is a lot weaker than Russia.

If you pound them into submission through the air, it will really distract Russia and Belarussian military.

Further, hitting Belarus is not a direct attack on Russia. This matters, especially if we are trying to leverage Putin onto an off-ramp.

That’s a dumb option. Russia and Belarus are treaty allies through CSTO (along with Kazakhstan and Armenia). Not as robust as NATO to be sure but if the west were to attack the Belorussians, World War III begins.

Azerbaijan shAt all over the kardashians — csto isn’t that strong.

Turkey is still around and they armed azeris to the theeth

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think some of us need to come to terms with there isn't actually a good outcome here. There's less bad and terrible.

Unfortunately we're all just pawns to the powers that be and that includes the posters who believe America and Western Europe are always morally correct

The only smart person in this entire stupid thread. Amen.

If our administration as much as exercises an idea of a full blown war with Russia because NATO may drag us into it, there will be a civil war in the USA, beause majority of Americans deep down inside don't really care to risk potential nuclear/chemical/bio/cyber or whatever devastating disaster to go fight for the independence of some country they can't even find on the map, because "democracy".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some of us need to come to terms with there isn't actually a good outcome here. There's less bad and terrible.

Unfortunately we're all just pawns to the powers that be and that includes the posters who believe America and Western Europe are always morally correct

The only smart person in this entire stupid thread. Amen.

If our administration as much as exercises an idea of a full blown war with Russia because NATO may drag us into it, there will be a civil war in the USA, beause majority of Americans deep down inside don't really care to risk potential nuclear/chemical/bio/cyber or whatever devastating disaster to go fight for the independence of some country they can't even find on the map, because "democracy".

Most Americans can barely find Canada on a map. Nevertheless most Americans still support and believe in NATO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m absolutely not willing to make very many sacrifices for Ukraine. I don’t want to pay more than I already do for anything and I damn sure don’t want my husband going to war nor do I want my life upended to make shit in factories for a war effort. Ukraine and Russia aren’t my problem just as I’m not theirs. I don’t feel bad about this either.

Enjoy your upcoming nuclear winter.

A nuclear winter that wouldn’t happen if the US and Western Europe didn’t go sticking their noses into a conflict they have no place in and cannot control. The time to do something was before Putin invaded. Having failed to stop him, we need to eat this loss and keep it moving. Anyone who thinks the way to avoid a nuclear war is to attack a country that will not hesitate to use nukes is a damn fool and should be sent to the frontlines to die first.

Putin did this. We didn't. This is the exact same appeasement argument that was made in 1939. Some things are worth fighting for.

Hitler didn’t have nukes, you dumbo.

So if Hitler had nukes we should have just given him the world? That doesnt make sense

YOu have proof that Putin wants "the world"?

He's explicitly threatened Sweden, Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Poland, Romania and Bulgaria in the past two weeks and stated repeatedly that the West is the enemy that needs to be destroyed. He's also taken control of parts of Moldova, Georgia, Armenia as well as Belarus and Kazakhstan. Only a fool would think that Ukraine is his only goal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some of us need to come to terms with there isn't actually a good outcome here. There's less bad and terrible.

Unfortunately we're all just pawns to the powers that be and that includes the posters who believe America and Western Europe are always morally correct

The only smart person in this entire stupid thread. Amen.

If our administration as much as exercises an idea of a full blown war with Russia because NATO may drag us into it, there will be a civil war in the USA, beause majority of Americans deep down inside don't really care to risk potential nuclear/chemical/bio/cyber or whatever devastating disaster to go fight for the independence of some country they can't even find on the map, because "democracy".

Most Americans can barely find Canada on a map. Nevertheless most Americans still support and believe in NATO.

Most Americans couldn't tell you what NATO stands for or what it's meant to do.