US has no good options in Ukraine

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Now hearing Bolton saying Putin's calculus was on a second Trump term, where Trump withdraws the US from NATO making it easier for him to capture Ukraine without worrying about the US.

As much as I dislike Bolton, that actually makes sense - Trump losing re-election changed Putin's scheme and messed up his planning and timeline.

Putin was probably also hoping to influence the elections in Germany and France but now he has Scholz and Macron taking harder lines than he expected.

A NATO no-fly zone would not be an attack on Russia. It would be a defense of Ukrainian air space, requested and welcomed by the Ukrainian government. The Russians could always move back to their side of the border…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now hearing Bolton saying Putin's calculus was on a second Trump term, where Trump withdraws the US from NATO making it easier for him to capture Ukraine without worrying about the US.

As much as I dislike Bolton, that actually makes sense - Trump losing re-election changed Putin's scheme and messed up his planning and timeline.

Putin was probably also hoping to influence the elections in Germany and France but now he has Scholz and Macron taking harder lines than he expected.

A NATO no-fly zone would not be an attack on Russia. It would be a defense of Ukrainian air space, requested and welcomed by the Ukrainian government. The Russians could always move back to their side of the border…

No a no fly zone will bring you into direct confrontation with Russia.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now hearing Bolton saying Putin's calculus was on a second Trump term, where Trump withdraws the US from NATO making it easier for him to capture Ukraine without worrying about the US.

As much as I dislike Bolton, that actually makes sense - Trump losing re-election changed Putin's scheme and messed up his planning and timeline.

Putin was probably also hoping to influence the elections in Germany and France but now he has Scholz and Macron taking harder lines than he expected.

A NATO no-fly zone would not be an attack on Russia. It would be a defense of Ukrainian air space, requested and welcomed by the Ukrainian government. The Russians could always move back to their side of the border…

NATO has rejected a no fly zone. One nuclear power cannot go to war against another. Nuclear weapons make war impossible. There can be sanctions. We can arm Ukraine. But a war between nuclear powers is impossible. Nuclear weapons take war off the table. If not for nuclear weapons, there would have been war during this Berlin crisis and the Cuban missile crisis. https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/nato-meets-ukraine-calls-no-fly-zone-hinder-russia-2022-03-04/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now hearing Bolton saying Putin's calculus was on a second Trump term, where Trump withdraws the US from NATO making it easier for him to capture Ukraine without worrying about the US.

As much as I dislike Bolton, that actually makes sense - Trump losing re-election changed Putin's scheme and messed up his planning and timeline.

Putin was probably also hoping to influence the elections in Germany and France but now he has Scholz and Macron taking harder lines than he expected.

A NATO no-fly zone would not be an attack on Russia. It would be a defense of Ukrainian air space, requested and welcomed by the Ukrainian government. The Russians could always move back to their side of the border…

Unfortunately a no fly zone would also prevent Ukraine from using its highly effective drones.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am not sure the Ukrainian govnerment is any less corrupt than Russia. What are they fighting for?

You might want to do your own research?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I read they are creating compassion corridors for refugees be transported out of high risk areas. I am hopeful.

They immediately shelled the corridors

We’re any civilians on them at the time?

Russia makes me sick to my stomach.

Yes of course it was on civilians. Because that is what Russia has done multiple times before - agree to a cease fire and then immediately attack the escaping civilians

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now hearing Bolton saying Putin's calculus was on a second Trump term, where Trump withdraws the US from NATO making it easier for him to capture Ukraine without worrying about the US.

As much as I dislike Bolton, that actually makes sense - Trump losing re-election changed Putin's scheme and messed up his planning and timeline.

Putin was probably also hoping to influence the elections in Germany and France but now he has Scholz and Macron taking harder lines than he expected.

A NATO no-fly zone would not be an attack on Russia. It would be a defense of Ukrainian air space, requested and welcomed by the Ukrainian government. The Russians could always move back to their side of the border…

Unfortunately a no fly zone would also prevent Ukraine from using its highly effective drones.

I’m pretty sure Ukraine is willing to accept that trade off. It would greatly reduce the rocket and missile fire from Russia.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now hearing Bolton saying Putin's calculus was on a second Trump term, where Trump withdraws the US from NATO making it easier for him to capture Ukraine without worrying about the US.

As much as I dislike Bolton, that actually makes sense - Trump losing re-election changed Putin's scheme and messed up his planning and timeline.

Putin was probably also hoping to influence the elections in Germany and France but now he has Scholz and Macron taking harder lines than he expected.

A NATO no-fly zone would not be an attack on Russia. It would be a defense of Ukrainian air space, requested and welcomed by the Ukrainian government. The Russians could always move back to their side of the border…

Unfortunately a no fly zone would also prevent Ukraine from using its highly effective drones.

Who needs a no fly zone when the Russians are struggling against pickles...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

But the problem is the Ukrainians they are killing right now. Thousands now, tens of thousands in a few weeks, PP.

If they're not careful, it's going to approach death levels like we were seeing from COVID in the U.S. a month or two ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now hearing Bolton saying Putin's calculus was on a second Trump term, where Trump withdraws the US from NATO making it easier for him to capture Ukraine without worrying about the US.

As much as I dislike Bolton, that actually makes sense - Trump losing re-election changed Putin's scheme and messed up his planning and timeline.

Putin was probably also hoping to influence the elections in Germany and France but now he has Scholz and Macron taking harder lines than he expected.

A NATO no-fly zone would not be an attack on Russia. It would be a defense of Ukrainian air space, requested and welcomed by the Ukrainian government. The Russians could always move back to their side of the border…

Unfortunately a no fly zone would also prevent Ukraine from using its highly effective drones.

Who needs a no fly zone when the Russians are struggling against pickles...

My gosh. Ya'll belive anything on the internet

[Anonymous]

How does Putin get out of this? Does he split Ukraine and walk off with the parts he wants for Russia? Does he try for the whole thing? He certainly must know by now that he has another Afghanistan on his hands if he tries to occupy.

[Anonymous]

Why the heck have we not got them the fighter jets yet? I saw something a week ago saying they were picking them up from Poland but then that didn’t happen. Can we please get them the jets before their pilots are all killed by cluster bombs? I get the no fly problem but why the hell can’t we get them planes NOW so they can protect their own skies????

And if some retired jet pilots from other countries want to volunteer with the UAF….well, that’s okay by me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now hearing Bolton saying Putin's calculus was on a second Trump term, where Trump withdraws the US from NATO making it easier for him to capture Ukraine without worrying about the US.

As much as I dislike Bolton, that actually makes sense - Trump losing re-election changed Putin's scheme and messed up his planning and timeline.

Putin was probably also hoping to influence the elections in Germany and France but now he has Scholz and Macron taking harder lines than he expected.

A NATO no-fly zone would not be an attack on Russia. It would be a defense of Ukrainian air space, requested and welcomed by the Ukrainian government. The Russians could always move back to their side of the border…

Unfortunately a no fly zone would also prevent Ukraine from using its highly effective drones.

Who needs a no fly zone when the Russians are struggling against pickles...

My gosh. Ya'll belive anything on the internet

Yeah, because the Russian military performance hasn't been a clown show so far (albeit a malicious and incompetently destructive one). How many Tik Tok videos do you need of farmers hauling away tanks? Do you need a Tik Tok of the Russian struggles against pickles as well?

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

He needs to get some sleep, he’s not thinking right. In his interview with CNN he averages three hours a night.