US has no good options in Ukraine

[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:IMO we need elder statesmen to be involved in some type of diplomatic resolution (and maybe they are, behind the scenes) Obama, Clinton, Bush, even Jimmy Carter. We need seasoned experienced leaders to get involved and behind this.

You are joking.
The same "seasoned experienced leaders" who have got us where we are?

I agree this administration has failed in its efforts. And, it makes me angry.
They didn't enact sanctions soon enough.
They didn't send lethal arms to Ukraine for their defense soon enough, even though they had weeks if not months to do this.
They are still buying oil from Russia.
These are the same people who planned the withdrawal from Afghanistan, so I was not optimistic.

But, most of the people you listed are not any more capable of dealing with Russia. Remember Hillary's "reset" with Russia? Remember what happened to Crimea under Obama?
And, Jimmy Carter? Probably the worst in terms of decision making when it comes to foreign policy?
No thanks.

Most of the things you suggest would have rapidly and needlessly escalated the situation. Also would have made it impossible for US to rally support from around the world and would have antagonized China.

We can't keep overstretching ourselves in conflicts around the world. The painful reality is that our leadership has to make very tough choices. I think Biden and team have handled this very well thus far.

BS. The situation escalated on Putin's timeline because we didn't act.
You are believing the narrative this administration is spinning because they have been utter failures.

The US was warning the world that Putin was going to invade, and no one believed them. Plenty of people on this site didn't believe it. How much could the US have done at that point?

Once Putin made the decision to invade, there was nothing the US could have done. Sending in troops to Ukraine would have led to Russians shooting at US soldiers, and vice versa. Does anyone really want the countries that hold the world’s two largest nuclear arsenals shooting at each other?

Honestly, we should have been more aggressive with Putin after he annexed Crimea. The US and European response to that was weak and sent the message to Putin that he could escalate and the response would not be anything he couldn’t handle.

By doing what? Specifically?

And how do you suppose Trump repeating Russian propaganda and the GOP falling in line may have negatively impacted things over the past 4 years?

I never said Trump didn’t negatively impact things, but if you’ve been following Russia since 2014, you can see that the cycle of Putin becoming more aggressive globally really started with the Crimea annexation and the lackluster Western response.

Specifically, we should have placed US/NATO forces on high alert and placed US aircraft carriers in the Bosporus strait. European leaders should have called Putin and told him that if he does not withdraw all Russian presence from Crimea (outside of Black Sea fleet access, which we could negotiate), we will not remove the carriers. Blocking him into the Black Sea would have been disastrous for him and I believe there’s a chance he would have backed down at that point.

Republicans would not support any democrat president. You reap what you sow.

Like I noted.

You can live life under fantasy and conjecture but it’s not healthy so seek help.

But what we DO KNOW and can PROVE:

Under Trump:
Heavy sanctions on Russia
No Wars
Russia didn’t invade Ukraine

Under Biden
Lifted sanctions
Zelensky and others tried to encourage Biden to our sanctions back on, Biden refused
Russia invaded Ukraine

Under Obama:
Russia annexes Crimea
Weak response led by US hurts Russia a little but not enough
Russia continues to be belligerent


Those are facts we can actually see.

Under trump
- trump meets with Putin by himself who knows what deal was struck.
- Trump tries to breakup nato
- trump tries to stop all weapon deals with Ukraine
- trump threatens Ukraine
- Putin places bounties on US military personnel
- Russians attack use forces in Syria
- Russian systematically attack US elections
- Russians lunch hacking attacks against US.
- all conservatives organizations(NRA, etc) are under Russia influence
- republicans storm the Capitol with Russian support
- all republicans/conservatives fall inline with trump’s Putin love.

Under Democrat President
- republicans/conservatives undermine any action against Russia
- republicans/conservatives blindly support Putin.
- republicans/conservatives work to destroy NATO

Once again conjecture with little or no facts.

Lien I said
Under Trump:
No war
No invasion
Economic prosperity despite the lefts attempts to undermine all of it


Under Biden:
High gas prices
Empty shelves
Skyrocketing inflation
War
Chaos
Listed sanctions despite resistance from Zelensky and others who said it was a bad idea
Imports more Russian oil



Those are visible and tangible facts.

They are also outcomes from previous administrations. Nothing happens in a vacuum. Changes in policy on a national or global scale are hardly ever immediate. Its built upon what has previously happened.

With that comment, I think it appropriate to take a trip down memory lane.

He can state being against Russian Oil/one source being foolhardy while also being pro-Putin. Trump wanted to expand American oil because he is about American business. The Polish oil line he referenced is (I assume) the one run by the Saudis. Saudi > Russia in Trumps needs so in that moment Russia was the bad one. Nothing should ever be looked at in isolation with Trump. It always has some personal grift behind it.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:IMO we need elder statesmen to be involved in some type of diplomatic resolution (and maybe they are, behind the scenes) Obama, Clinton, Bush, even Jimmy Carter. We need seasoned experienced leaders to get involved and behind this.

You are joking.
The same "seasoned experienced leaders" who have got us where we are?

I agree this administration has failed in its efforts. And, it makes me angry.
They didn't enact sanctions soon enough.
They didn't send lethal arms to Ukraine for their defense soon enough, even though they had weeks if not months to do this.
They are still buying oil from Russia.
These are the same people who planned the withdrawal from Afghanistan, so I was not optimistic.

But, most of the people you listed are not any more capable of dealing with Russia. Remember Hillary's "reset" with Russia? Remember what happened to Crimea under Obama?
And, Jimmy Carter? Probably the worst in terms of decision making when it comes to foreign policy?
No thanks.

Most of the things you suggest would have rapidly and needlessly escalated the situation. Also would have made it impossible for US to rally support from around the world and would have antagonized China.

We can't keep overstretching ourselves in conflicts around the world. The painful reality is that our leadership has to make very tough choices. I think Biden and team have handled this very well thus far.

BS. The situation escalated on Putin's timeline because we didn't act.
You are believing the narrative this administration is spinning because they have been utter failures.

The US was warning the world that Putin was going to invade, and no one believed them. Plenty of people on this site didn't believe it. How much could the US have done at that point?

Once Putin made the decision to invade, there was nothing the US could have done. Sending in troops to Ukraine would have led to Russians shooting at US soldiers, and vice versa. Does anyone really want the countries that hold the world’s two largest nuclear arsenals shooting at each other?

Honestly, we should have been more aggressive with Putin after he annexed Crimea. The US and European response to that was weak and sent the message to Putin that he could escalate and the response would not be anything he couldn’t handle.

By doing what? Specifically?

And how do you suppose Trump repeating Russian propaganda and the GOP falling in line may have negatively impacted things over the past 4 years?

I never said Trump didn’t negatively impact things, but if you’ve been following Russia since 2014, you can see that the cycle of Putin becoming more aggressive globally really started with the Crimea annexation and the lackluster Western response.

Specifically, we should have placed US/NATO forces on high alert and placed US aircraft carriers in the Bosporus strait. European leaders should have called Putin and told him that if he does not withdraw all Russian presence from Crimea (outside of Black Sea fleet access, which we could negotiate), we will not remove the carriers. Blocking him into the Black Sea would have been disastrous for him and I believe there’s a chance he would have backed down at that point.

If i remember correctly, Putin and Erdogan were buddy buddy at the time. NATO was unfortunately not unified then.

True. However, the US could have unilaterally placed aircraft carriers, if not in the Bosphorus Strait (if Turkey wouldn’t have allowed it), in international waters as close as we could get to it.

That would have been a bad move. Our (NATO and EU, Japan, et al) unity has been our strength. A go it alone strategy would have demonstrated weakness.

Well, the alternative was essentially no action, which—as we’ve seen—has led to Putin feeling empowered to escalate for the past 8 years around the world, culminating in a brazen invasion of Ukraine.

...which has led to the complete destruction of the Russian economy, humiliation of the Russian military, and the reunified strength of NATO.

And the destruction of Ukraine, which continues.

And it's unstoppable rebirth. They did not have Zelensky then. They weren't fully unified. Now they are.

I am concerned that it will not be enough. Russia is not getting the military victory they wanted, but it’s clear they will stop at nothing to subjugate Ukraine.

I believe the Ukrainians when they say they will never forget or forgive these monstrous war crimes. Russia will not win their hearts and souls and the world will hopefully declare this annexation illegal. Russia will be too bankrupt to run this neo Soviet empire by force …

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMO we need elder statesmen to be involved in some type of diplomatic resolution (and maybe they are, behind the scenes) Obama, Clinton, Bush, even Jimmy Carter. We need seasoned experienced leaders to get involved and behind this.

You are joking.
The same "seasoned experienced leaders" who have got us where we are?

I agree this administration has failed in its efforts. And, it makes me angry.
They didn't enact sanctions soon enough.
They didn't send lethal arms to Ukraine for their defense soon enough, even though they had weeks if not months to do this.
They are still buying oil from Russia.
These are the same people who planned the withdrawal from Afghanistan, so I was not optimistic.

But, most of the people you listed are not any more capable of dealing with Russia. Remember Hillary's "reset" with Russia? Remember what happened to Crimea under Obama?
And, Jimmy Carter? Probably the worst in terms of decision making when it comes to foreign policy?
No thanks.

Most of the things you suggest would have rapidly and needlessly escalated the situation. Also would have made it impossible for US to rally support from around the world and would have antagonized China.

We can't keep overstretching ourselves in conflicts around the world. The painful reality is that our leadership has to make very tough choices. I think Biden and team have handled this very well thus far.

BS. The situation escalated on Putin's timeline because we didn't act.
You are believing the narrative this administration is spinning because they have been utter failures.

The US was warning the world that Putin was going to invade, and no one believed them. Plenty of people on this site didn't believe it. How much could the US have done at that point?

Once Putin made the decision to invade, there was nothing the US could have done. Sending in troops to Ukraine would have led to Russians shooting at US soldiers, and vice versa. Does anyone really want the countries that hold the world’s two largest nuclear arsenals shooting at each other?

Honestly, we should have been more aggressive with Putin after he annexed Crimea. The US and European response to that was weak and sent the message to Putin that he could escalate and the response would not be anything he couldn’t handle.

By doing what? Specifically?

And how do you suppose Trump repeating Russian propaganda and the GOP falling in line may have negatively impacted things over the past 4 years?

I never said Trump didn’t negatively impact things, but if you’ve been following Russia since 2014, you can see that the cycle of Putin becoming more aggressive globally really started with the Crimea annexation and the lackluster Western response.

Specifically, we should have placed US/NATO forces on high alert and placed US aircraft carriers in the Bosporus strait. European leaders should have called Putin and told him that if he does not withdraw all Russian presence from Crimea (outside of Black Sea fleet access, which we could negotiate), we will not remove the carriers. Blocking him into the Black Sea would have been disastrous for him and I believe there’s a chance he would have backed down at that point.

If i remember correctly, Putin and Erdogan were buddy buddy at the time. NATO was unfortunately not unified then.

True. However, the US could have unilaterally placed aircraft carriers, if not in the Bosphorus Strait (if Turkey wouldn’t have allowed it), in international waters as close as we could get to it.

That would have been a bad move. Our (NATO and EU, Japan, et al) unity has been our strength. A go it alone strategy would have demonstrated weakness.

Well, the alternative was essentially no action, which—as we’ve seen—has led to Putin feeling empowered to escalate for the past 8 years around the world, culminating in a brazen invasion of Ukraine.

...which has led to the complete destruction of the Russian economy, humiliation of the Russian military, and the reunified strength of NATO.

And the destruction of Ukraine, which continues.

And it's unstoppable rebirth. They did not have Zelensky then. They weren't fully unified. Now they are.

I am concerned that it will not be enough. Russia is not getting the military victory they wanted, but it’s clear they will stop at nothing to subjugate Ukraine.

I believe the Ukrainians when they say they will never forget or forgive these monstrous war crimes. Russia will not win their hearts and souls and the world will hopefully declare this annexation illegal. Russia will be too bankrupt to run this neo Soviet empire by force …

I don’t doubt the will of the Ukrainian people, nor the global will to condemn this. But do not underestimate what a desperate leader can do. Russia retains a military that can do a huge amount of damage, even without achieving its desired goals in Ukraine.

[Anonymous]

👀

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, it sucks. But 20/20 hindsight is always difficult. Biden has played the hand he was dealt as good as can be and it's all the more remarkable considering where we were as an alliance and a domestic polity the past two decades.

In 2014, there were many calling for a stronger western response. The will was not there. But we should not pretend as though no one thought it could embolden Putin. His desires have been known for a long time.

There are always many calling for war. The least provocation from another country always prompts some number of people to call for a belligerent U.S. response.

[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:IMO we need elder statesmen to be involved in some type of diplomatic resolution (and maybe they are, behind the scenes) Obama, Clinton, Bush, even Jimmy Carter. We need seasoned experienced leaders to get involved and behind this.

You are joking.
The same "seasoned experienced leaders" who have got us where we are?

I agree this administration has failed in its efforts. And, it makes me angry.
They didn't enact sanctions soon enough.
They didn't send lethal arms to Ukraine for their defense soon enough, even though they had weeks if not months to do this.
They are still buying oil from Russia.
These are the same people who planned the withdrawal from Afghanistan, so I was not optimistic.

But, most of the people you listed are not any more capable of dealing with Russia. Remember Hillary's "reset" with Russia? Remember what happened to Crimea under Obama?
And, Jimmy Carter? Probably the worst in terms of decision making when it comes to foreign policy?
No thanks.

Most of the things you suggest would have rapidly and needlessly escalated the situation. Also would have made it impossible for US to rally support from around the world and would have antagonized China.

We can't keep overstretching ourselves in conflicts around the world. The painful reality is that our leadership has to make very tough choices. I think Biden and team have handled this very well thus far.

BS. The situation escalated on Putin's timeline because we didn't act.
You are believing the narrative this administration is spinning because they have been utter failures.

The US was warning the world that Putin was going to invade, and no one believed them. Plenty of people on this site didn't believe it. How much could the US have done at that point?

Once Putin made the decision to invade, there was nothing the US could have done. Sending in troops to Ukraine would have led to Russians shooting at US soldiers, and vice versa. Does anyone really want the countries that hold the world’s two largest nuclear arsenals shooting at each other?

Honestly, we should have been more aggressive with Putin after he annexed Crimea. The US and European response to that was weak and sent the message to Putin that he could escalate and the response would not be anything he couldn’t handle.

By doing what? Specifically?

And how do you suppose Trump repeating Russian propaganda and the GOP falling in line may have negatively impacted things over the past 4 years?

I never said Trump didn’t negatively impact things, but if you’ve been following Russia since 2014, you can see that the cycle of Putin becoming more aggressive globally really started with the Crimea annexation and the lackluster Western response.

Specifically, we should have placed US/NATO forces on high alert and placed US aircraft carriers in the Bosporus strait. European leaders should have called Putin and told him that if he does not withdraw all Russian presence from Crimea (outside of Black Sea fleet access, which we could negotiate), we will not remove the carriers. Blocking him into the Black Sea would have been disastrous for him and I believe there’s a chance he would have backed down at that point.

Republicans would not support any democrat president. You reap what you sow.

Like I noted.

You can live life under fantasy and conjecture but it’s not healthy so seek help.

But what we DO KNOW and can PROVE:

Under Trump:
Heavy sanctions on Russia
No Wars
Russia didn’t invade Ukraine

Under Biden
Lifted sanctions
Zelensky and others tried to encourage Biden to our sanctions back on, Biden refused
Russia invaded Ukraine

Under Obama:
Russia annexes Crimea
Weak response led by US hurts Russia a little but not enough
Russia continues to be belligerent


Those are facts we can actually see.

Under trump
- trump meets with Putin by himself who knows what deal was struck.
- Trump tries to breakup nato
- trump tries to stop all weapon deals with Ukraine
- trump threatens Ukraine
- Putin places bounties on US military personnel
- Russians attack use forces in Syria
- Russian systematically attack US elections
- Russians lunch hacking attacks against US.
- all conservatives organizations(NRA, etc) are under Russia influence
- republicans storm the Capitol with Russian support
- all republicans/conservatives fall inline with trump’s Putin love.

Under Democrat President
- republicans/conservatives undermine any action against Russia
- republicans/conservatives blindly support Putin.
- republicans/conservatives work to destroy NATO

Once again conjecture with little or no facts.

Lien I said
Under Trump:
No war
No invasion
Economic prosperity despite the lefts attempts to undermine all of it


Under Biden:
High gas prices
Empty shelves
Skyrocketing inflation
War
Chaos
Listed sanctions despite resistance from Zelensky and others who said it was a bad idea
Imports more Russian oil



Those are visible and tangible facts.

They are also outcomes from previous administrations. Nothing happens in a vacuum. Changes in policy on a national or global scale are hardly ever immediate. Its built upon what has previously happened.

With that comment, I think it appropriate to take a trip down memory lane.

He can state being against Russian Oil/one source being foolhardy while also being pro-Putin. Trump wanted to expand American oil because he is about American business. The Polish oil line he referenced is (I assume) the one run by the Saudis. Saudi > Russia in Trumps needs so in that moment Russia was the bad one. Nothing should ever be looked at in isolation with Trump. It always has some personal grift behind it.

He also tried to pull USA out of NATO and pushed for Putin to be invited back into G7.

He acted like Putin’s poodle at international forums and showered him in praise.

Trump has zero credibility as being tough on Russia …

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:👀

Do you realize how old this is? Russia and Japan have been fighting over these islands ever since the end of World War II.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:IMO we need elder statesmen to be involved in some type of diplomatic resolution (and maybe they are, behind the scenes) Obama, Clinton, Bush, even Jimmy Carter. We need seasoned experienced leaders to get involved and behind this.

You are joking.
The same "seasoned experienced leaders" who have got us where we are?

I agree this administration has failed in its efforts. And, it makes me angry.
They didn't enact sanctions soon enough.
They didn't send lethal arms to Ukraine for their defense soon enough, even though they had weeks if not months to do this.
They are still buying oil from Russia.
These are the same people who planned the withdrawal from Afghanistan, so I was not optimistic.

But, most of the people you listed are not any more capable of dealing with Russia. Remember Hillary's "reset" with Russia? Remember what happened to Crimea under Obama?
And, Jimmy Carter? Probably the worst in terms of decision making when it comes to foreign policy?
No thanks.

Most of the things you suggest would have rapidly and needlessly escalated the situation. Also would have made it impossible for US to rally support from around the world and would have antagonized China.

We can't keep overstretching ourselves in conflicts around the world. The painful reality is that our leadership has to make very tough choices. I think Biden and team have handled this very well thus far.

BS. The situation escalated on Putin's timeline because we didn't act.
You are believing the narrative this administration is spinning because they have been utter failures.

The US was warning the world that Putin was going to invade, and no one believed them. Plenty of people on this site didn't believe it. How much could the US have done at that point?

Once Putin made the decision to invade, there was nothing the US could have done. Sending in troops to Ukraine would have led to Russians shooting at US soldiers, and vice versa. Does anyone really want the countries that hold the world’s two largest nuclear arsenals shooting at each other?

Honestly, we should have been more aggressive with Putin after he annexed Crimea. The US and European response to that was weak and sent the message to Putin that he could escalate and the response would not be anything he couldn’t handle.

By doing what? Specifically?

And how do you suppose Trump repeating Russian propaganda and the GOP falling in line may have negatively impacted things over the past 4 years?

I never said Trump didn’t negatively impact things, but if you’ve been following Russia since 2014, you can see that the cycle of Putin becoming more aggressive globally really started with the Crimea annexation and the lackluster Western response.

Specifically, we should have placed US/NATO forces on high alert and placed US aircraft carriers in the Bosporus strait. European leaders should have called Putin and told him that if he does not withdraw all Russian presence from Crimea (outside of Black Sea fleet access, which we could negotiate), we will not remove the carriers. Blocking him into the Black Sea would have been disastrous for him and I believe there’s a chance he would have backed down at that point.

If i remember correctly, Putin and Erdogan were buddy buddy at the time. NATO was unfortunately not unified then.

True. However, the US could have unilaterally placed aircraft carriers, if not in the Bosphorus Strait (if Turkey wouldn’t have allowed it), in international waters as close as we could get to it.

That would have been a bad move. Our (NATO and EU, Japan, et al) unity has been our strength. A go it alone strategy would have demonstrated weakness.

Well, the alternative was essentially no action, which—as we’ve seen—has led to Putin feeling empowered to escalate for the past 8 years around the world, culminating in a brazen invasion of Ukraine.

...which has led to the complete destruction of the Russian economy, humiliation of the Russian military, and the reunified strength of NATO.

And the destruction of Ukraine, which continues.

And it's unstoppable rebirth. They did not have Zelensky then. They weren't fully unified. Now they are.

I am concerned that it will not be enough. Russia is not getting the military victory they wanted, but it’s clear they will stop at nothing to subjugate Ukraine.

What military Victory you think they wanted?

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMO we need elder statesmen to be involved in some type of diplomatic resolution (and maybe they are, behind the scenes) Obama, Clinton, Bush, even Jimmy Carter. We need seasoned experienced leaders to get involved and behind this.

You are joking.
The same "seasoned experienced leaders" who have got us where we are?

I agree this administration has failed in its efforts. And, it makes me angry.
They didn't enact sanctions soon enough.
They didn't send lethal arms to Ukraine for their defense soon enough, even though they had weeks if not months to do this.
They are still buying oil from Russia.
These are the same people who planned the withdrawal from Afghanistan, so I was not optimistic.

But, most of the people you listed are not any more capable of dealing with Russia. Remember Hillary's "reset" with Russia? Remember what happened to Crimea under Obama?
And, Jimmy Carter? Probably the worst in terms of decision making when it comes to foreign policy?
No thanks.

Most of the things you suggest would have rapidly and needlessly escalated the situation. Also would have made it impossible for US to rally support from around the world and would have antagonized China.

We can't keep overstretching ourselves in conflicts around the world. The painful reality is that our leadership has to make very tough choices. I think Biden and team have handled this very well thus far.

BS. The situation escalated on Putin's timeline because we didn't act.
You are believing the narrative this administration is spinning because they have been utter failures.

The US was warning the world that Putin was going to invade, and no one believed them. Plenty of people on this site didn't believe it. How much could the US have done at that point?

Once Putin made the decision to invade, there was nothing the US could have done. Sending in troops to Ukraine would have led to Russians shooting at US soldiers, and vice versa. Does anyone really want the countries that hold the world’s two largest nuclear arsenals shooting at each other?

Honestly, we should have been more aggressive with Putin after he annexed Crimea. The US and European response to that was weak and sent the message to Putin that he could escalate and the response would not be anything he couldn’t handle.

By doing what? Specifically?

And how do you suppose Trump repeating Russian propaganda and the GOP falling in line may have negatively impacted things over the past 4 years?

I never said Trump didn’t negatively impact things, but if you’ve been following Russia since 2014, you can see that the cycle of Putin becoming more aggressive globally really started with the Crimea annexation and the lackluster Western response.

Specifically, we should have placed US/NATO forces on high alert and placed US aircraft carriers in the Bosporus strait. European leaders should have called Putin and told him that if he does not withdraw all Russian presence from Crimea (outside of Black Sea fleet access, which we could negotiate), we will not remove the carriers. Blocking him into the Black Sea would have been disastrous for him and I believe there’s a chance he would have backed down at that point.

If i remember correctly, Putin and Erdogan were buddy buddy at the time. NATO was unfortunately not unified then.

True. However, the US could have unilaterally placed aircraft carriers, if not in the Bosphorus Strait (if Turkey wouldn’t have allowed it), in international waters as close as we could get to it.

That would have been a bad move. Our (NATO and EU, Japan, et al) unity has been our strength. A go it alone strategy would have demonstrated weakness.

Well, the alternative was essentially no action, which—as we’ve seen—has led to Putin feeling empowered to escalate for the past 8 years around the world, culminating in a brazen invasion of Ukraine.

...which has led to the complete destruction of the Russian economy, humiliation of the Russian military, and the reunified strength of NATO.

And the destruction of Ukraine, which continues.

And it's unstoppable rebirth. They did not have Zelensky then. They weren't fully unified. Now they are.

I am concerned that it will not be enough. Russia is not getting the military victory they wanted, but it’s clear they will stop at nothing to subjugate Ukraine.

What military Victory you think they wanted?

They have been clear about what they want: the demilitarization of Ukraine and regime change, so that they could install a pro-Russian government. From a military perspective, that requires taking and occupying Kyiv at least, but ideally other major/strategic cities as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, it sucks. But 20/20 hindsight is always difficult. Biden has played the hand he was dealt as good as can be and it's all the more remarkable considering where we were as an alliance and a domestic polity the past two decades.

In 2014, there were many calling for a stronger western response. The will was not there. But we should not pretend as though no one thought it could embolden Putin. His desires have been known for a long time.

There are always many calling for war. The least provocation from another country always prompts some number of people to call for a belligerent U.S. response.

Trump was impeached for withholding military support for Ukraine to defend themselves from Russia. He tried to condition it on Ukraine providing political dirt on Biden’s son.

He has zero credibility as wanting a tougher military response to Russia.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMO we need elder statesmen to be involved in some type of diplomatic resolution (and maybe they are, behind the scenes) Obama, Clinton, Bush, even Jimmy Carter. We need seasoned experienced leaders to get involved and behind this.

You are joking.
The same "seasoned experienced leaders" who have got us where we are?

I agree this administration has failed in its efforts. And, it makes me angry.
They didn't enact sanctions soon enough.
They didn't send lethal arms to Ukraine for their defense soon enough, even though they had weeks if not months to do this.
They are still buying oil from Russia.
These are the same people who planned the withdrawal from Afghanistan, so I was not optimistic.

But, most of the people you listed are not any more capable of dealing with Russia. Remember Hillary's "reset" with Russia? Remember what happened to Crimea under Obama?
And, Jimmy Carter? Probably the worst in terms of decision making when it comes to foreign policy?
No thanks.

Most of the things you suggest would have rapidly and needlessly escalated the situation. Also would have made it impossible for US to rally support from around the world and would have antagonized China.

We can't keep overstretching ourselves in conflicts around the world. The painful reality is that our leadership has to make very tough choices. I think Biden and team have handled this very well thus far.

BS. The situation escalated on Putin's timeline because we didn't act.
You are believing the narrative this administration is spinning because they have been utter failures.

The US was warning the world that Putin was going to invade, and no one believed them. Plenty of people on this site didn't believe it. How much could the US have done at that point?

Once Putin made the decision to invade, there was nothing the US could have done. Sending in troops to Ukraine would have led to Russians shooting at US soldiers, and vice versa. Does anyone really want the countries that hold the world’s two largest nuclear arsenals shooting at each other?

Honestly, we should have been more aggressive with Putin after he annexed Crimea. The US and European response to that was weak and sent the message to Putin that he could escalate and the response would not be anything he couldn’t handle.

By doing what? Specifically?

And how do you suppose Trump repeating Russian propaganda and the GOP falling in line may have negatively impacted things over the past 4 years?

I never said Trump didn’t negatively impact things, but if you’ve been following Russia since 2014, you can see that the cycle of Putin becoming more aggressive globally really started with the Crimea annexation and the lackluster Western response.

Specifically, we should have placed US/NATO forces on high alert and placed US aircraft carriers in the Bosporus strait. European leaders should have called Putin and told him that if he does not withdraw all Russian presence from Crimea (outside of Black Sea fleet access, which we could negotiate), we will not remove the carriers. Blocking him into the Black Sea would have been disastrous for him and I believe there’s a chance he would have backed down at that point.

If i remember correctly, Putin and Erdogan were buddy buddy at the time. NATO was unfortunately not unified then.

True. However, the US could have unilaterally placed aircraft carriers, if not in the Bosphorus Strait (if Turkey wouldn’t have allowed it), in international waters as close as we could get to it.

That would have been a bad move. Our (NATO and EU, Japan, et al) unity has been our strength. A go it alone strategy would have demonstrated weakness.

Well, the alternative was essentially no action, which—as we’ve seen—has led to Putin feeling empowered to escalate for the past 8 years around the world, culminating in a brazen invasion of Ukraine.

...which has led to the complete destruction of the Russian economy, humiliation of the Russian military, and the reunified strength of NATO.

And the destruction of Ukraine, which continues.

And it's unstoppable rebirth. They did not have Zelensky then. They weren't fully unified. Now they are.

I am concerned that it will not be enough. Russia is not getting the military victory they wanted, but it’s clear they will stop at nothing to subjugate Ukraine.

What military Victory you think they wanted?

They have been clear about what they want: the demilitarization of Ukraine and regime change, so that they could install a pro-Russian government. From a military perspective, that requires taking and occupying Kyiv at least, but ideally other major/strategic cities as well.

Unlike Russia, Ukraine is not a regime but a democracy.

Putin is not merely going after military targets - now more civilians than soldiers are dying each day.

Russia is a rogue state run by a war criminal spreading lies and propaganda to his people to justify an unjustifiable war.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMO we need elder statesmen to be involved in some type of diplomatic resolution (and maybe they are, behind the scenes) Obama, Clinton, Bush, even Jimmy Carter. We need seasoned experienced leaders to get involved and behind this.

You are joking.
The same "seasoned experienced leaders" who have got us where we are?

I agree this administration has failed in its efforts. And, it makes me angry.
They didn't enact sanctions soon enough.
They didn't send lethal arms to Ukraine for their defense soon enough, even though they had weeks if not months to do this.
They are still buying oil from Russia.
These are the same people who planned the withdrawal from Afghanistan, so I was not optimistic.

But, most of the people you listed are not any more capable of dealing with Russia. Remember Hillary's "reset" with Russia? Remember what happened to Crimea under Obama?
And, Jimmy Carter? Probably the worst in terms of decision making when it comes to foreign policy?
No thanks.

Most of the things you suggest would have rapidly and needlessly escalated the situation. Also would have made it impossible for US to rally support from around the world and would have antagonized China.

We can't keep overstretching ourselves in conflicts around the world. The painful reality is that our leadership has to make very tough choices. I think Biden and team have handled this very well thus far.

BS. The situation escalated on Putin's timeline because we didn't act.
You are believing the narrative this administration is spinning because they have been utter failures.

The US was warning the world that Putin was going to invade, and no one believed them. Plenty of people on this site didn't believe it. How much could the US have done at that point?

Once Putin made the decision to invade, there was nothing the US could have done. Sending in troops to Ukraine would have led to Russians shooting at US soldiers, and vice versa. Does anyone really want the countries that hold the world’s two largest nuclear arsenals shooting at each other?

Honestly, we should have been more aggressive with Putin after he annexed Crimea. The US and European response to that was weak and sent the message to Putin that he could escalate and the response would not be anything he couldn’t handle.

By doing what? Specifically?

And how do you suppose Trump repeating Russian propaganda and the GOP falling in line may have negatively impacted things over the past 4 years?

I never said Trump didn’t negatively impact things, but if you’ve been following Russia since 2014, you can see that the cycle of Putin becoming more aggressive globally really started with the Crimea annexation and the lackluster Western response.

Specifically, we should have placed US/NATO forces on high alert and placed US aircraft carriers in the Bosporus strait. European leaders should have called Putin and told him that if he does not withdraw all Russian presence from Crimea (outside of Black Sea fleet access, which we could negotiate), we will not remove the carriers. Blocking him into the Black Sea would have been disastrous for him and I believe there’s a chance he would have backed down at that point.

If i remember correctly, Putin and Erdogan were buddy buddy at the time. NATO was unfortunately not unified then.

True. However, the US could have unilaterally placed aircraft carriers, if not in the Bosphorus Strait (if Turkey wouldn’t have allowed it), in international waters as close as we could get to it.

That would have been a bad move. Our (NATO and EU, Japan, et al) unity has been our strength. A go it alone strategy would have demonstrated weakness.

Well, the alternative was essentially no action, which—as we’ve seen—has led to Putin feeling empowered to escalate for the past 8 years around the world, culminating in a brazen invasion of Ukraine.

...which has led to the complete destruction of the Russian economy, humiliation of the Russian military, and the reunified strength of NATO.

And the destruction of Ukraine, which continues.

And it's unstoppable rebirth. They did not have Zelensky then. They weren't fully unified. Now they are.

I am concerned that it will not be enough. Russia is not getting the military victory they wanted, but it’s clear they will stop at nothing to subjugate Ukraine.

What military Victory you think they wanted?

They have been clear about what they want: the demilitarization of Ukraine and regime change, so that they could install a pro-Russian government. From a military perspective, that requires taking and occupying Kyiv at least, but ideally other major/strategic cities as well.

Unlike Russia, Ukraine is not a regime but a democracy.

Putin is not merely going after military targets - now more civilians than soldiers are dying each day.

Russia is a rogue state run by a war criminal spreading lies and propaganda to his people to justify an unjustifiable war.

By “regime” I simply mean leadership. I am not using it in the colloquial sense. I also never said that Russia is only targeting military sites. I simply specifying the parameters of what Russia would consider a military victory.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMO we need elder statesmen to be involved in some type of diplomatic resolution (and maybe they are, behind the scenes) Obama, Clinton, Bush, even Jimmy Carter. We need seasoned experienced leaders to get involved and behind this.

You are joking.
The same "seasoned experienced leaders" who have got us where we are?

I agree this administration has failed in its efforts. And, it makes me angry.
They didn't enact sanctions soon enough.
They didn't send lethal arms to Ukraine for their defense soon enough, even though they had weeks if not months to do this.
They are still buying oil from Russia.
These are the same people who planned the withdrawal from Afghanistan, so I was not optimistic.

But, most of the people you listed are not any more capable of dealing with Russia. Remember Hillary's "reset" with Russia? Remember what happened to Crimea under Obama?
And, Jimmy Carter? Probably the worst in terms of decision making when it comes to foreign policy?
No thanks.

Most of the things you suggest would have rapidly and needlessly escalated the situation. Also would have made it impossible for US to rally support from around the world and would have antagonized China.

We can't keep overstretching ourselves in conflicts around the world. The painful reality is that our leadership has to make very tough choices. I think Biden and team have handled this very well thus far.

BS. The situation escalated on Putin's timeline because we didn't act.
You are believing the narrative this administration is spinning because they have been utter failures.

The US was warning the world that Putin was going to invade, and no one believed them. Plenty of people on this site didn't believe it. How much could the US have done at that point?

Once Putin made the decision to invade, there was nothing the US could have done. Sending in troops to Ukraine would have led to Russians shooting at US soldiers, and vice versa. Does anyone really want the countries that hold the world’s two largest nuclear arsenals shooting at each other?

Honestly, we should have been more aggressive with Putin after he annexed Crimea. The US and European response to that was weak and sent the message to Putin that he could escalate and the response would not be anything he couldn’t handle.

By doing what? Specifically?

And how do you suppose Trump repeating Russian propaganda and the GOP falling in line may have negatively impacted things over the past 4 years?

I never said Trump didn’t negatively impact things, but if you’ve been following Russia since 2014, you can see that the cycle of Putin becoming more aggressive globally really started with the Crimea annexation and the lackluster Western response.

Specifically, we should have placed US/NATO forces on high alert and placed US aircraft carriers in the Bosporus strait. European leaders should have called Putin and told him that if he does not withdraw all Russian presence from Crimea (outside of Black Sea fleet access, which we could negotiate), we will not remove the carriers. Blocking him into the Black Sea would have been disastrous for him and I believe there’s a chance he would have backed down at that point.

If i remember correctly, Putin and Erdogan were buddy buddy at the time. NATO was unfortunately not unified then.

True. However, the US could have unilaterally placed aircraft carriers, if not in the Bosphorus Strait (if Turkey wouldn’t have allowed it), in international waters as close as we could get to it.

That would have been a bad move. Our (NATO and EU, Japan, et al) unity has been our strength. A go it alone strategy would have demonstrated weakness.

Well, the alternative was essentially no action, which—as we’ve seen—has led to Putin feeling empowered to escalate for the past 8 years around the world, culminating in a brazen invasion of Ukraine.

...which has led to the complete destruction of the Russian economy, humiliation of the Russian military, and the reunified strength of NATO.

And the destruction of Ukraine, which continues.

And it's unstoppable rebirth. They did not have Zelensky then. They weren't fully unified. Now they are.

I am concerned that it will not be enough. Russia is not getting the military victory they wanted, but it’s clear they will stop at nothing to subjugate Ukraine.

I believe the Ukrainians when they say they will never forget or forgive these monstrous war crimes. Russia will not win their hearts and souls and the world will hopefully declare this annexation illegal. Russia will be too bankrupt to run this neo Soviet empire by force …

I don’t doubt the will of the Ukrainian people, nor the global will to condemn this. But do not underestimate what a desperate leader can do. Russia retains a military that can do a huge amount of damage, even without achieving its desired goals in Ukraine.

Yes this is tragically very true. It is beyond belief how depraved and desperate Putin is acting with no regard for life, land or property.

There are over a million refugees and I believe the world will help them to rebuild. As they are mostly women and children, hopefully they will be strong care takers of the future collective soul of the Ukraine.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMO we need elder statesmen to be involved in some type of diplomatic resolution (and maybe they are, behind the scenes) Obama, Clinton, Bush, even Jimmy Carter. We need seasoned experienced leaders to get involved and behind this.

You are joking.
The same "seasoned experienced leaders" who have got us where we are?

I agree this administration has failed in its efforts. And, it makes me angry.
They didn't enact sanctions soon enough.
They didn't send lethal arms to Ukraine for their defense soon enough, even though they had weeks if not months to do this.
They are still buying oil from Russia.
These are the same people who planned the withdrawal from Afghanistan, so I was not optimistic.

But, most of the people you listed are not any more capable of dealing with Russia. Remember Hillary's "reset" with Russia? Remember what happened to Crimea under Obama?
And, Jimmy Carter? Probably the worst in terms of decision making when it comes to foreign policy?
No thanks.

Most of the things you suggest would have rapidly and needlessly escalated the situation. Also would have made it impossible for US to rally support from around the world and would have antagonized China.

We can't keep overstretching ourselves in conflicts around the world. The painful reality is that our leadership has to make very tough choices. I think Biden and team have handled this very well thus far.

BS. The situation escalated on Putin's timeline because we didn't act.
You are believing the narrative this administration is spinning because they have been utter failures.

The US was warning the world that Putin was going to invade, and no one believed them. Plenty of people on this site didn't believe it. How much could the US have done at that point?

Once Putin made the decision to invade, there was nothing the US could have done. Sending in troops to Ukraine would have led to Russians shooting at US soldiers, and vice versa. Does anyone really want the countries that hold the world’s two largest nuclear arsenals shooting at each other?

Honestly, we should have been more aggressive with Putin after he annexed Crimea. The US and European response to that was weak and sent the message to Putin that he could escalate and the response would not be anything he couldn’t handle.

By doing what? Specifically?

And how do you suppose Trump repeating Russian propaganda and the GOP falling in line may have negatively impacted things over the past 4 years?

I never said Trump didn’t negatively impact things, but if you’ve been following Russia since 2014, you can see that the cycle of Putin becoming more aggressive globally really started with the Crimea annexation and the lackluster Western response.

Specifically, we should have placed US/NATO forces on high alert and placed US aircraft carriers in the Bosporus strait. European leaders should have called Putin and told him that if he does not withdraw all Russian presence from Crimea (outside of Black Sea fleet access, which we could negotiate), we will not remove the carriers. Blocking him into the Black Sea would have been disastrous for him and I believe there’s a chance he would have backed down at that point.

If i remember correctly, Putin and Erdogan were buddy buddy at the time. NATO was unfortunately not unified then.

True. However, the US could have unilaterally placed aircraft carriers, if not in the Bosphorus Strait (if Turkey wouldn’t have allowed it), in international waters as close as we could get to it.

That would have been a bad move. Our (NATO and EU, Japan, et al) unity has been our strength. A go it alone strategy would have demonstrated weakness.

Well, the alternative was essentially no action, which—as we’ve seen—has led to Putin feeling empowered to escalate for the past 8 years around the world, culminating in a brazen invasion of Ukraine.

...which has led to the complete destruction of the Russian economy, humiliation of the Russian military, and the reunified strength of NATO.

And the destruction of Ukraine, which continues.

And it's unstoppable rebirth. They did not have Zelensky then. They weren't fully unified. Now they are.

I am concerned that it will not be enough. Russia is not getting the military victory they wanted, but it’s clear they will stop at nothing to subjugate Ukraine.

What military Victory you think they wanted?

They have been clear about what they want: the demilitarization of Ukraine and regime change, so that they could install a pro-Russian government. From a military perspective, that requires taking and occupying Kyiv at least, but ideally other major/strategic cities as well.

Demilitarization qnd denazification dont mean anything. From a military perspective, demilitarization means destroy everything and kill all who resist. To achieve that they will have to slaughter 100s of thousands if not millions.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMO we need elder statesmen to be involved in some type of diplomatic resolution (and maybe they are, behind the scenes) Obama, Clinton, Bush, even Jimmy Carter. We need seasoned experienced leaders to get involved and behind this.

You are joking.
The same "seasoned experienced leaders" who have got us where we are?

I agree this administration has failed in its efforts. And, it makes me angry.
They didn't enact sanctions soon enough.
They didn't send lethal arms to Ukraine for their defense soon enough, even though they had weeks if not months to do this.
They are still buying oil from Russia.
These are the same people who planned the withdrawal from Afghanistan, so I was not optimistic.

But, most of the people you listed are not any more capable of dealing with Russia. Remember Hillary's "reset" with Russia? Remember what happened to Crimea under Obama?
And, Jimmy Carter? Probably the worst in terms of decision making when it comes to foreign policy?
No thanks.

Most of the things you suggest would have rapidly and needlessly escalated the situation. Also would have made it impossible for US to rally support from around the world and would have antagonized China.

We can't keep overstretching ourselves in conflicts around the world. The painful reality is that our leadership has to make very tough choices. I think Biden and team have handled this very well thus far.

BS. The situation escalated on Putin's timeline because we didn't act.
You are believing the narrative this administration is spinning because they have been utter failures.

The US was warning the world that Putin was going to invade, and no one believed them. Plenty of people on this site didn't believe it. How much could the US have done at that point?

Once Putin made the decision to invade, there was nothing the US could have done. Sending in troops to Ukraine would have led to Russians shooting at US soldiers, and vice versa. Does anyone really want the countries that hold the world’s two largest nuclear arsenals shooting at each other?

Honestly, we should have been more aggressive with Putin after he annexed Crimea. The US and European response to that was weak and sent the message to Putin that he could escalate and the response would not be anything he couldn’t handle.

By doing what? Specifically?

And how do you suppose Trump repeating Russian propaganda and the GOP falling in line may have negatively impacted things over the past 4 years?

I never said Trump didn’t negatively impact things, but if you’ve been following Russia since 2014, you can see that the cycle of Putin becoming more aggressive globally really started with the Crimea annexation and the lackluster Western response.

Specifically, we should have placed US/NATO forces on high alert and placed US aircraft carriers in the Bosporus strait. European leaders should have called Putin and told him that if he does not withdraw all Russian presence from Crimea (outside of Black Sea fleet access, which we could negotiate), we will not remove the carriers. Blocking him into the Black Sea would have been disastrous for him and I believe there’s a chance he would have backed down at that point.

If i remember correctly, Putin and Erdogan were buddy buddy at the time. NATO was unfortunately not unified then.

True. However, the US could have unilaterally placed aircraft carriers, if not in the Bosphorus Strait (if Turkey wouldn’t have allowed it), in international waters as close as we could get to it.

That would have been a bad move. Our (NATO and EU, Japan, et al) unity has been our strength. A go it alone strategy would have demonstrated weakness.

Well, the alternative was essentially no action, which—as we’ve seen—has led to Putin feeling empowered to escalate for the past 8 years around the world, culminating in a brazen invasion of Ukraine.

...which has led to the complete destruction of the Russian economy, humiliation of the Russian military, and the reunified strength of NATO.

And the destruction of Ukraine, which continues.

And it's unstoppable rebirth. They did not have Zelensky then. They weren't fully unified. Now they are.

I am concerned that it will not be enough. Russia is not getting the military victory they wanted, but it’s clear they will stop at nothing to subjugate Ukraine.

What military Victory you think they wanted?

They have been clear about what they want: the demilitarization of Ukraine and regime change, so that they could install a pro-Russian government. From a military perspective, that requires taking and occupying Kyiv at least, but ideally other major/strategic cities as well.

Demilitarization qnd denazification dont mean anything. From a military perspective, demilitarization means destroy everything and kill all who resist. To achieve that they will have to slaughter 100s of thousands if not millions.

I never said it didn’t mean that.