Russia fires missiles into Poland

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NATO has a sophisticated ground based radar system along the Polish-Ukrainian border. They also have AWACS and satellite monitoring. The data is fed into the NATO defense system in real time. NATO almost certainly was able to track the missile in real time and the information was available to Polish military before the Russian attaché was summoned in Warsaw.

Did Duda act precipitously? We don’t know. What we do not is that the missile strike occurred while Russia was launching up to 100 cruise missiles and other munitions at Ukrainian population centers. So one might be inclined to cut Zelenskyy and his command structure a little slack after 10 months of carnage. It’s also understandable the reasons they seek to keep Western pressure on Putin by highlighting the indiscriminate use of munitions against civilians.

The US maneuvered quickly to calm the situation. Either way, it remains clear NATO has no desire to invoke Article 5, particularly over an errant Russian missile if that is proven to be what happened. The world will know more in a few days. Meanwhile we can take some comfort in the measured diplomatic response from Biden and other NATO leaders. It is yet another indication that any future military escalation would be proportionate and non-escalatory. This comports with NATO’s initial response to the special military operation, which was to mobilize the NATO Response Force (NRF) and implement a series of collective defense and deterrence measures in accordance with Article 5.

It wasn't an errant Russian missile---that much as already been acknowledged. It was an errant Ukrainian missile; but our Ukrainian "friend" Zelensky and falsely claimed (as if he had facts to back it up) that it was a Russian missile hitting Poland. Knowing the severe risks of WW3 and nuclear holocaust that could come about as a result of a NATA clash, Zelensky's lies demonstrates a level of deceit or stupidity that is breathtaking.

Did Trump ever find the missing servers hidden in Ukraine? The ones for which he illegally sought to withhold military aid?

Just think of how much better off everyone would be had Ukraine been cut off years ago. They couldn't afford to purposely launch missiles at Poland and blame Russia.

So it would be better for us to stand aside while Russia gobbles up independent states which were once part of the USSR?

Yes. It would be better for us to stay out of foreign border wars involving thermonuclear-armed military superpowers with the capability of wiping our country off the map.

"America ... has seen that probably for centuries to come, all the contests of ... the European world, will be contests of inveterate power, and emerging right.

Wherever the standard of freedom and Independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and
her prayers be. But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. "

- John Quincy Adams, 1821

DP.

Yeah, tell that to the greatest generation ok? Guess we should have just let Germany have Europe.

One doesn't need to take the bait and get dragged into pointless historical analogies; it is enough to simply point out that Germany never possessed thermonuclear weapons capable of obliterating the United States at the push of a button.

This is 2022, not 1942.

Russia has had those weapons for quite some time and stayed out of Europe because why exactly?

Russia “stayed out of Europe” since when? First, Russia is in Europe. Second, Russians were also in control of Eastern Europe — from Berlin and Budapest — for about half a century until the mid-1990s. The world did not end because Russia controlled Eastern Europe; this was not an existential threat worth risking nuclear war over.

Now, a thousand miles further east right on the border between Russia and Ukraine, we are making overwrought hysterical comparisons to “Hitler” because Russians invaded eastern Ukraine.

Europe as a whole is far less important to the United States in 2022 than it was from 1945- 1995; and Russia’s presence (even if they took all of Ukraine, for which they seem to have no appetite) it would not be an existential threat worth risking thermonuclear war over. To do so would be both terrifyingly reckless and entirely deviant from the policies that have kept us out of nuclear war for over half a century.

We need to push for peace talks—immediately, before this spirals out of control.

What?

The Cold War was widely considered an existential threat and nuclear war was risked multiple times.

Russia did not invade Eastern Ukraine. They invaded the entire country but got their butts kicked everywhere else.

We don't need to do anything. Russia can end this war whenever they want. All they have to do is go back home, preferably without stealing anymore toilets.

We never risked nuclear war in an attempt to get the Russians out of Eastern Europe, much less get them out of Ukraine which they completely controlled for half a century. We were perfectly able to coexist without risking nuclear war when Russian tanks rolled into Czechoslovakia or when people were getting shot trying to cross from East Berlin into West Berlin.

Not once during the entire Cold War did we ever risk nuclear war over or militarily challenge Russian control over Eastern Europe (including all of Ukraine). But suddenly we're supposed to believe is an existential threat whether Donbass is ruled from Kiev or Moscow. Nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NATO has a sophisticated ground based radar system along the Polish-Ukrainian border. They also have AWACS and satellite monitoring. The data is fed into the NATO defense system in real time. NATO almost certainly was able to track the missile in real time and the information was available to Polish military before the Russian attaché was summoned in Warsaw.

Did Duda act precipitously? We don’t know. What we do not is that the missile strike occurred while Russia was launching up to 100 cruise missiles and other munitions at Ukrainian population centers. So one might be inclined to cut Zelenskyy and his command structure a little slack after 10 months of carnage. It’s also understandable the reasons they seek to keep Western pressure on Putin by highlighting the indiscriminate use of munitions against civilians.

The US maneuvered quickly to calm the situation. Either way, it remains clear NATO has no desire to invoke Article 5, particularly over an errant Russian missile if that is proven to be what happened. The world will know more in a few days. Meanwhile we can take some comfort in the measured diplomatic response from Biden and other NATO leaders. It is yet another indication that any future military escalation would be proportionate and non-escalatory. This comports with NATO’s initial response to the special military operation, which was to mobilize the NATO Response Force (NRF) and implement a series of collective defense and deterrence measures in accordance with Article 5.

It wasn't an errant Russian missile---that much as already been acknowledged. It was an errant Ukrainian missile; but our Ukrainian "friend" Zelensky and falsely claimed (as if he had facts to back it up) that it was a Russian missile hitting Poland. Knowing the severe risks of WW3 and nuclear holocaust that could come about as a result of a NATA clash, Zelensky's lies demonstrates a level of deceit or stupidity that is breathtaking.

Did Trump ever find the missing servers hidden in Ukraine? The ones for which he illegally sought to withhold military aid?

Just think of how much better off everyone would be had Ukraine been cut off years ago. They couldn't afford to purposely launch missiles at Poland and blame Russia.

So it would be better for us to stand aside while Russia gobbles up independent states which were once part of the USSR?

Yes. It would be better for us to stay out of foreign border wars involving thermonuclear-armed military superpowers with the capability of wiping our country off the map.

"America ... has seen that probably for centuries to come, all the contests of ... the European world, will be contests of inveterate power, and emerging right.

Wherever the standard of freedom and Independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and
her prayers be. But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. "

- John Quincy Adams, 1821

DP.

Yeah, tell that to the greatest generation ok? Guess we should have just let Germany have Europe.

One doesn't need to take the bait and get dragged into pointless historical analogies; it is enough to simply point out that Germany never possessed thermonuclear weapons capable of obliterating the United States at the push of a button.

This is 2022, not 1942.

Russia has had those weapons for quite some time and stayed out of Europe because why exactly?

Russia “stayed out of Europe” since when? First, Russia is in Europe. Second, Russians were also in control of Eastern Europe — from Berlin and Budapest — for about half a century until the mid-1990s. The world did not end because Russia controlled Eastern Europe; this was not an existential threat worth risking nuclear war over.

Now, a thousand miles further east right on the border between Russia and Ukraine, we are making overwrought hysterical comparisons to “Hitler” because Russians invaded eastern Ukraine.

Europe as a whole is far less important to the United States in 2022 than it was from 1945- 1995; and Russia’s presence (even if they took all of Ukraine, for which they seem to have no appetite) it would not be an existential threat worth risking thermonuclear war over. To do so would be both terrifyingly reckless and entirely deviant from the policies that have kept us out of nuclear war for over half a century.

We need to push for peace talks—immediately, before this spirals out of control.

What?

The Cold War was widely considered an existential threat and nuclear war was risked multiple times.

Russia did not invade Eastern Ukraine. They invaded the entire country but got their butts kicked everywhere else.

We don't need to do anything. Russia can end this war whenever they want. All they have to do is go back home, preferably without stealing anymore toilets.

We never risked nuclear war in an attempt to get the Russians out of Eastern Europe, much less get them out of Ukraine which they completely controlled for half a century. We were perfectly able to coexist without risking nuclear war when Russian tanks rolled into Czechoslovakia or when people were getting shot trying to cross from East Berlin into West Berlin.

Not once during the entire Cold War did we ever risk nuclear war over or militarily challenge Russian control over Eastern Europe (including all of Ukraine). But suddenly we're supposed to believe is an existential threat whether Donbass is ruled from Kiev or Moscow. Nonsense.

Gary Powers risked nuclear war so that's not true.

More importantly we are neither risking nor threatening nuclear war. Russia is. Russia is the one making threats to destroy the world if the world doesn't give them something that is not the world's to give. There's nothing for us to do about the naked schizophrenic ranting on the corner threatening to pee on everyone unless we stop the transmitting the voices into their head.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NATO has a sophisticated ground based radar system along the Polish-Ukrainian border. They also have AWACS and satellite monitoring. The data is fed into the NATO defense system in real time. NATO almost certainly was able to track the missile in real time and the information was available to Polish military before the Russian attaché was summoned in Warsaw.

Did Duda act precipitously? We don’t know. What we do not is that the missile strike occurred while Russia was launching up to 100 cruise missiles and other munitions at Ukrainian population centers. So one might be inclined to cut Zelenskyy and his command structure a little slack after 10 months of carnage. It’s also understandable the reasons they seek to keep Western pressure on Putin by highlighting the indiscriminate use of munitions against civilians.

The US maneuvered quickly to calm the situation. Either way, it remains clear NATO has no desire to invoke Article 5, particularly over an errant Russian missile if that is proven to be what happened. The world will know more in a few days. Meanwhile we can take some comfort in the measured diplomatic response from Biden and other NATO leaders. It is yet another indication that any future military escalation would be proportionate and non-escalatory. This comports with NATO’s initial response to the special military operation, which was to mobilize the NATO Response Force (NRF) and implement a series of collective defense and deterrence measures in accordance with Article 5.

It wasn't an errant Russian missile---that much as already been acknowledged. It was an errant Ukrainian missile; but our Ukrainian "friend" Zelensky and falsely claimed (as if he had facts to back it up) that it was a Russian missile hitting Poland. Knowing the severe risks of WW3 and nuclear holocaust that could come about as a result of a NATA clash, Zelensky's lies demonstrates a level of deceit or stupidity that is breathtaking.

Did Trump ever find the missing servers hidden in Ukraine? The ones for which he illegally sought to withhold military aid?

Just think of how much better off everyone would be had Ukraine been cut off years ago. They couldn't afford to purposely launch missiles at Poland and blame Russia.

So it would be better for us to stand aside while Russia gobbles up independent states which were once part of the USSR?

Yes. It would be better for us to stay out of foreign border wars involving thermonuclear-armed military superpowers with the capability of wiping our country off the map.

"America ... has seen that probably for centuries to come, all the contests of ... the European world, will be contests of inveterate power, and emerging right.

Wherever the standard of freedom and Independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and
her prayers be. But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. "

- John Quincy Adams, 1821

DP.

Yeah, tell that to the greatest generation ok? Guess we should have just let Germany have Europe.

One doesn't need to take the bait and get dragged into pointless historical analogies; it is enough to simply point out that Germany never possessed thermonuclear weapons capable of obliterating the United States at the push of a button.

This is 2022, not 1942.

Russia has had those weapons for quite some time and stayed out of Europe because why exactly?

Russia “stayed out of Europe” since when? First, Russia is in Europe. Second, Russians were also in control of Eastern Europe — from Berlin and Budapest — for about half a century until the mid-1990s. The world did not end because Russia controlled Eastern Europe; this was not an existential threat worth risking nuclear war over.

Now, a thousand miles further east right on the border between Russia and Ukraine, we are making overwrought hysterical comparisons to “Hitler” because Russians invaded eastern Ukraine.

Europe as a whole is far less important to the United States in 2022 than it was from 1945- 1995; and Russia’s presence (even if they took all of Ukraine, for which they seem to have no appetite) it would not be an existential threat worth risking thermonuclear war over. To do so would be both terrifyingly reckless and entirely deviant from the policies that have kept us out of nuclear war for over half a century.

We need to push for peace talks—immediately, before this spirals out of control.

What?

The Cold War was widely considered an existential threat and nuclear war was risked multiple times.

Russia did not invade Eastern Ukraine. They invaded the entire country but got their butts kicked everywhere else.

We don't need to do anything. Russia can end this war whenever they want. All they have to do is go back home, preferably without stealing anymore toilets.

We never risked nuclear war in an attempt to get the Russians out of Eastern Europe, much less get them out of Ukraine which they completely controlled for half a century. We were perfectly able to coexist without risking nuclear war when Russian tanks rolled into Czechoslovakia or when people were getting shot trying to cross from East Berlin into West Berlin.

Not once during the entire Cold War did we ever risk nuclear war over or militarily challenge Russian control over Eastern Europe (including all of Ukraine). But suddenly we're supposed to believe is an existential threat whether Donbass is ruled from Kiev or Moscow. Nonsense.

Gary Powers risked nuclear war so that's not true.

More importantly we are neither risking nor threatening nuclear war. Russia is. Russia is the one making threats to destroy the world if the world doesn't give them something that is not the world's to give. There's nothing for us to do about the naked schizophrenic ranting on the corner threatening to pee on everyone unless we stop the transmitting the voices into their head.

Your description of the world's purported neutrality on the matter does not match with reality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NATO has a sophisticated ground based radar system along the Polish-Ukrainian border. They also have AWACS and satellite monitoring. The data is fed into the NATO defense system in real time. NATO almost certainly was able to track the missile in real time and the information was available to Polish military before the Russian attaché was summoned in Warsaw.

Did Duda act precipitously? We don’t know. What we do not is that the missile strike occurred while Russia was launching up to 100 cruise missiles and other munitions at Ukrainian population centers. So one might be inclined to cut Zelenskyy and his command structure a little slack after 10 months of carnage. It’s also understandable the reasons they seek to keep Western pressure on Putin by highlighting the indiscriminate use of munitions against civilians.

The US maneuvered quickly to calm the situation. Either way, it remains clear NATO has no desire to invoke Article 5, particularly over an errant Russian missile if that is proven to be what happened. The world will know more in a few days. Meanwhile we can take some comfort in the measured diplomatic response from Biden and other NATO leaders. It is yet another indication that any future military escalation would be proportionate and non-escalatory. This comports with NATO’s initial response to the special military operation, which was to mobilize the NATO Response Force (NRF) and implement a series of collective defense and deterrence measures in accordance with Article 5.

It wasn't an errant Russian missile---that much as already been acknowledged. It was an errant Ukrainian missile; but our Ukrainian "friend" Zelensky and falsely claimed (as if he had facts to back it up) that it was a Russian missile hitting Poland. Knowing the severe risks of WW3 and nuclear holocaust that could come about as a result of a NATA clash, Zelensky's lies demonstrates a level of deceit or stupidity that is breathtaking.

Did Trump ever find the missing servers hidden in Ukraine? The ones for which he illegally sought to withhold military aid?

Just think of how much better off everyone would be had Ukraine been cut off years ago. They couldn't afford to purposely launch missiles at Poland and blame Russia.

So it would be better for us to stand aside while Russia gobbles up independent states which were once part of the USSR?

Yes. It would be better for us to stay out of foreign border wars involving thermonuclear-armed military superpowers with the capability of wiping our country off the map.

"America ... has seen that probably for centuries to come, all the contests of ... the European world, will be contests of inveterate power, and emerging right.

Wherever the standard of freedom and Independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and
her prayers be. But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. "

- John Quincy Adams, 1821

DP.

Yeah, tell that to the greatest generation ok? Guess we should have just let Germany have Europe.

One doesn't need to take the bait and get dragged into pointless historical analogies; it is enough to simply point out that Germany never possessed thermonuclear weapons capable of obliterating the United States at the push of a button.

This is 2022, not 1942.

Russia has had those weapons for quite some time and stayed out of Europe because why exactly?

Russia “stayed out of Europe” since when? First, Russia is in Europe. Second, Russians were also in control of Eastern Europe — from Berlin and Budapest — for about half a century until the mid-1990s. The world did not end because Russia controlled Eastern Europe; this was not an existential threat worth risking nuclear war over.

Now, a thousand miles further east right on the border between Russia and Ukraine, we are making overwrought hysterical comparisons to “Hitler” because Russians invaded eastern Ukraine.

Europe as a whole is far less important to the United States in 2022 than it was from 1945- 1995; and Russia’s presence (even if they took all of Ukraine, for which they seem to have no appetite) it would not be an existential threat worth risking thermonuclear war over. To do so would be both terrifyingly reckless and entirely deviant from the policies that have kept us out of nuclear war for over half a century.

We need to push for peace talks—immediately, before this spirals out of control.

What?

The Cold War was widely considered an existential threat and nuclear war was risked multiple times.

Russia did not invade Eastern Ukraine. They invaded the entire country but got their butts kicked everywhere else.

We don't need to do anything. Russia can end this war whenever they want. All they have to do is go back home, preferably without stealing anymore toilets.

We never risked nuclear war in an attempt to get the Russians out of Eastern Europe, much less get them out of Ukraine which they completely controlled for half a century. We were perfectly able to coexist without risking nuclear war when Russian tanks rolled into Czechoslovakia or when people were getting shot trying to cross from East Berlin into West Berlin.

Not once during the entire Cold War did we ever risk nuclear war over or militarily challenge Russian control over Eastern Europe (including all of Ukraine). But suddenly we're supposed to believe is an existential threat whether Donbass is ruled from Kiev or Moscow. Nonsense.

Gary Powers risked nuclear war so that's not true.

More importantly we are neither risking nor threatening nuclear war. Russia is. Russia is the one making threats to destroy the world if the world doesn't give them something that is not the world's to give. There's nothing for us to do about the naked schizophrenic ranting on the corner threatening to pee on everyone unless we stop the transmitting the voices into their head.

Your description of the world's purported neutrality on the matter does not match with reality.

Then go whine to your Congressperson. I'll do something equally as productive and go outside to fart in the wind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NATO has a sophisticated ground based radar system along the Polish-Ukrainian border. They also have AWACS and satellite monitoring. The data is fed into the NATO defense system in real time. NATO almost certainly was able to track the missile in real time and the information was available to Polish military before the Russian attaché was summoned in Warsaw.

Did Duda act precipitously? We don’t know. What we do not is that the missile strike occurred while Russia was launching up to 100 cruise missiles and other munitions at Ukrainian population centers. So one might be inclined to cut Zelenskyy and his command structure a little slack after 10 months of carnage. It’s also understandable the reasons they seek to keep Western pressure on Putin by highlighting the indiscriminate use of munitions against civilians.

The US maneuvered quickly to calm the situation. Either way, it remains clear NATO has no desire to invoke Article 5, particularly over an errant Russian missile if that is proven to be what happened. The world will know more in a few days. Meanwhile we can take some comfort in the measured diplomatic response from Biden and other NATO leaders. It is yet another indication that any future military escalation would be proportionate and non-escalatory. This comports with NATO’s initial response to the special military operation, which was to mobilize the NATO Response Force (NRF) and implement a series of collective defense and deterrence measures in accordance with Article 5.

It wasn't an errant Russian missile---that much as already been acknowledged. It was an errant Ukrainian missile; but our Ukrainian "friend" Zelensky and falsely claimed (as if he had facts to back it up) that it was a Russian missile hitting Poland. Knowing the severe risks of WW3 and nuclear holocaust that could come about as a result of a NATA clash, Zelensky's lies demonstrates a level of deceit or stupidity that is breathtaking.

Did Trump ever find the missing servers hidden in Ukraine? The ones for which he illegally sought to withhold military aid?

Just think of how much better off everyone would be had Ukraine been cut off years ago. They couldn't afford to purposely launch missiles at Poland and blame Russia.

So it would be better for us to stand aside while Russia gobbles up independent states which were once part of the USSR?

Yes. It would be better for us to stay out of foreign border wars involving thermonuclear-armed military superpowers with the capability of wiping our country off the map.

"America ... has seen that probably for centuries to come, all the contests of ... the European world, will be contests of inveterate power, and emerging right.

Wherever the standard of freedom and Independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and
her prayers be. But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. "

- John Quincy Adams, 1821

DP.

Yeah, tell that to the greatest generation ok? Guess we should have just let Germany have Europe.

One doesn't need to take the bait and get dragged into pointless historical analogies; it is enough to simply point out that Germany never possessed thermonuclear weapons capable of obliterating the United States at the push of a button.

This is 2022, not 1942.

Russia has had those weapons for quite some time and stayed out of Europe because why exactly?

Russia “stayed out of Europe” since when? First, Russia is in Europe. Second, Russians were also in control of Eastern Europe — from Berlin and Budapest — for about half a century until the mid-1990s. The world did not end because Russia controlled Eastern Europe; this was not an existential threat worth risking nuclear war over.

Now, a thousand miles further east right on the border between Russia and Ukraine, we are making overwrought hysterical comparisons to “Hitler” because Russians invaded eastern Ukraine.

Europe as a whole is far less important to the United States in 2022 than it was from 1945- 1995; and Russia’s presence (even if they took all of Ukraine, for which they seem to have no appetite) it would not be an existential threat worth risking thermonuclear war over. To do so would be both terrifyingly reckless and entirely deviant from the policies that have kept us out of nuclear war for over half a century.

We need to push for peace talks—immediately, before this spirals out of control.

What?

The Cold War was widely considered an existential threat and nuclear war was risked multiple times.

Russia did not invade Eastern Ukraine. They invaded the entire country but got their butts kicked everywhere else.

We don't need to do anything. Russia can end this war whenever they want. All they have to do is go back home, preferably without stealing anymore toilets.

We never risked nuclear war in an attempt to get the Russians out of Eastern Europe, much less get them out of Ukraine which they completely controlled for half a century. We were perfectly able to coexist without risking nuclear war when Russian tanks rolled into Czechoslovakia or when people were getting shot trying to cross from East Berlin into West Berlin.

Not once during the entire Cold War did we ever risk nuclear war over or militarily challenge Russian control over Eastern Europe (including all of Ukraine). But suddenly we're supposed to believe is an existential threat whether Donbass is ruled from Kiev or Moscow. Nonsense.

Gary Powers risked nuclear war so that's not true.

More importantly we are neither risking nor threatening nuclear war. Russia is. Russia is the one making threats to destroy the world if the world doesn't give them something that is not the world's to give. There's nothing for us to do about the naked schizophrenic ranting on the corner threatening to pee on everyone unless we stop the transmitting the voices into their head.

Your description of the world's purported neutrality on the matter does not match with reality.

The UN Charter is pretty straight forward about this. So was the UNGA vote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NATO has a sophisticated ground based radar system along the Polish-Ukrainian border. They also have AWACS and satellite monitoring. The data is fed into the NATO defense system in real time. NATO almost certainly was able to track the missile in real time and the information was available to Polish military before the Russian attaché was summoned in Warsaw.

Did Duda act precipitously? We don’t know. What we do not is that the missile strike occurred while Russia was launching up to 100 cruise missiles and other munitions at Ukrainian population centers. So one might be inclined to cut Zelenskyy and his command structure a little slack after 10 months of carnage. It’s also understandable the reasons they seek to keep Western pressure on Putin by highlighting the indiscriminate use of munitions against civilians.

The US maneuvered quickly to calm the situation. Either way, it remains clear NATO has no desire to invoke Article 5, particularly over an errant Russian missile if that is proven to be what happened. The world will know more in a few days. Meanwhile we can take some comfort in the measured diplomatic response from Biden and other NATO leaders. It is yet another indication that any future military escalation would be proportionate and non-escalatory. This comports with NATO’s initial response to the special military operation, which was to mobilize the NATO Response Force (NRF) and implement a series of collective defense and deterrence measures in accordance with Article 5.

It wasn't an errant Russian missile---that much as already been acknowledged. It was an errant Ukrainian missile; but our Ukrainian "friend" Zelensky and falsely claimed (as if he had facts to back it up) that it was a Russian missile hitting Poland. Knowing the severe risks of WW3 and nuclear holocaust that could come about as a result of a NATA clash, Zelensky's lies demonstrates a level of deceit or stupidity that is breathtaking.

Did Trump ever find the missing servers hidden in Ukraine? The ones for which he illegally sought to withhold military aid?

Just think of how much better off everyone would be had Ukraine been cut off years ago. They couldn't afford to purposely launch missiles at Poland and blame Russia.

So it would be better for us to stand aside while Russia gobbles up independent states which were once part of the USSR?

Yes. It would be better for us to stay out of foreign border wars involving thermonuclear-armed military superpowers with the capability of wiping our country off the map.

"America ... has seen that probably for centuries to come, all the contests of ... the European world, will be contests of inveterate power, and emerging right.

Wherever the standard of freedom and Independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and
her prayers be. But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. "

- John Quincy Adams, 1821

DP.

Yeah, tell that to the greatest generation ok? Guess we should have just let Germany have Europe.

One doesn't need to take the bait and get dragged into pointless historical analogies; it is enough to simply point out that Germany never possessed thermonuclear weapons capable of obliterating the United States at the push of a button.

This is 2022, not 1942.

Russia has had those weapons for quite some time and stayed out of Europe because why exactly?

Russia “stayed out of Europe” since when? First, Russia is in Europe. Second, Russians were also in control of Eastern Europe — from Berlin and Budapest — for about half a century until the mid-1990s. The world did not end because Russia controlled Eastern Europe; this was not an existential threat worth risking nuclear war over.

Now, a thousand miles further east right on the border between Russia and Ukraine, we are making overwrought hysterical comparisons to “Hitler” because Russians invaded eastern Ukraine.

Europe as a whole is far less important to the United States in 2022 than it was from 1945- 1995; and Russia’s presence (even if they took all of Ukraine, for which they seem to have no appetite) it would not be an existential threat worth risking thermonuclear war over. To do so would be both terrifyingly reckless and entirely deviant from the policies that have kept us out of nuclear war for over half a century.

We need to push for peace talks—immediately, before this spirals out of control.

What?

The Cold War was widely considered an existential threat and nuclear war was risked multiple times.

Russia did not invade Eastern Ukraine. They invaded the entire country but got their butts kicked everywhere else.

We don't need to do anything. Russia can end this war whenever they want. All they have to do is go back home, preferably without stealing anymore toilets.

We never risked nuclear war in an attempt to get the Russians out of Eastern Europe, much less get them out of Ukraine which they completely controlled for half a century. We were perfectly able to coexist without risking nuclear war when Russian tanks rolled into Czechoslovakia or when people were getting shot trying to cross from East Berlin into West Berlin.

Not once during the entire Cold War did we ever risk nuclear war over or militarily challenge Russian control over Eastern Europe (including all of Ukraine). But suddenly we're supposed to believe is an existential threat whether Donbass is ruled from Kiev or Moscow. Nonsense.

Gary Powers risked nuclear war so that's not true.

More importantly we are neither risking nor threatening nuclear war. Russia is. Russia is the one making threats to destroy the world if the world doesn't give them something that is not the world's to give. There's nothing for us to do about the naked schizophrenic ranting on the corner threatening to pee on everyone unless we stop the transmitting the voices into their head.

Your description of the world's purported neutrality on the matter does not match with reality.

The UN Charter is pretty straight forward about this. So was the UNGA vote.

You say this like it means anything.

[Anonymous]

Bitter Russian troll is bitter. You can’t have Ukraine and you’re not going to get away with threatening nuclear holocaust just because Ukraine and it’s friends are telling you “No”.

[Anonymous]

It seems like you’re warming up for a lot of handwringing over the winter. Russia is in big trouble. They have no strategy, no momentum, they’re outgunned, out trained, with no winter clothes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It seems like you’re warming up for a lot of handwringing over the winter. Russia is in big trouble. They have no strategy, no momentum, they’re outgunned, out trained, with no winter clothes.

Russia is irrelevant by February. China is next to spectacularly fall from importance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It seems like you’re warming up for a lot of handwringing over the winter. Russia is in big trouble. They have no strategy, no momentum, they’re outgunned, out trained, with no winter clothes.

And yet some people continue to claim they will take Europe next and Asia third.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like you’re warming up for a lot of handwringing over the winter. Russia is in big trouble. They have no strategy, no momentum, they’re outgunned, out trained, with no winter clothes.

And yet some people continue to claim they will take Europe next and Asia third.

They are the only ones that claim that. The rest of us roll our eyes and wonder why they steal toilets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like you’re warming up for a lot of handwringing over the winter. Russia is in big trouble. They have no strategy, no momentum, they’re outgunned, out trained, with no winter clothes.

And yet some people continue to claim they will take Europe next and Asia third.

They are the only ones that claim that. The rest of us roll our eyes and wonder why they steal toilets.

... and send them $100 billion dollars. There's also that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like you’re warming up for a lot of handwringing over the winter. Russia is in big trouble. They have no strategy, no momentum, they’re outgunned, out trained, with no winter clothes.

And yet some people continue to claim they will take Europe next and Asia third.

They are the only ones that claim that. The rest of us roll our eyes and wonder why they steal toilets.

... and send them $100 billion dollars. There's also that.

Why would we send $100b of toilets to Russia? If Russia wants to attack NATO or launch nuclear weapons, as they keep explicitly threatening, then we will respond in kind. Until then we will protect Ukrainian toilets and washing machines by sending our old weapons to Kyiv.

[Anonymous]

NATO allies get to offload old Soviet derived derived weapons and munitions to be replaced with modern NATO weaponry that is substantially superior to 90% of what Russia can deploy when operational. Putin is really bad at this. He is still capable of causing great damage to civilian and military infrastructure and destabilizing democratically elected governments in the West.

If Kyiv had fallen as Putin believed would happen then Russia would be in an entirely different position in terms of the power dynamic in Eastern Europe. His goal was to fracture NATO and exploit differences between the US and it’s German and French counterparts. Ukraine would have been returned to its states as a de facto SSR much like Belarus — but with a thriving industrial and agricultural economy — and NATO having to reallocate resources to an expansive border with Poland and Romania, not to mention a more capable Russian warm water navy operating out of Odesa to supplement its Crimean-based naval operations from Sevastopol m. This too would have given greater leverage to the likes of Erdogan and Orban.

His mistake was misjudging Biden and Zelenskyy as weak leaders. He was not prepared to wage an extended war of attrition under the weight of severe sanctions. He never understood his own logistical limitations and that he might need to mobilize and supply large numbers of middle aged men. And yet Putin still remains a threat because he is content to fight a land war as if he is Stalin in the 1940s, but without the industrial might of America supporting him. The Ladas being manufactured for sale in Russia without airbags and antilock brake technology is the perfect metaphor. He no longer has a civil aviation industry. And it’s increasingly difficult for him to keep producing oil to sell to India and China. He has set Russia back economically by at least a decade and its harder for the oligarchs who have supported him to profit from corruption.

Anyone who thinks Putin respects international law and is interested in a long-term diplomatic solution is sadly naive and hasn’t been paying attention. While he may not pose a direct threat to other nations at this very moment he seeks to militarize the Arctic/Bering Sea and provoke confrontation whenever possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So why was Ukraine firing missiles in the direction of Poland in the first place? I'm not an expert in geography, but I'm pretty sure Russia is the other direction.

The more disturbing question is: Why did Ukraine and Zelensky immediately jump to accusing Russia of hitting Poland with missiles, instead of accepting Ukrainian responsibility and explaining it was an accident? Ukraine is trying to start WW3 between NATO and Russia on false pretenses.

Anyone paying attention has known this for months. Zelenzsky is a lunatic. Glad people are finally catching on.

GTH you Drumpf loving Putin boot licker.