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:And before he became a president, he was a great comedian, like Jon Stewart or Stephen Colbert. This is one of his most famous videos (yes, it's not very polite, but it's very funny):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oua0Puihrkc

My son, 16, just watched this over my shoulder and asked: "And on that basis he was elected President?"

Hmmm...

So you and your son think you are smarter than 70% of the voters in Ukraine ?

Zelenskyy's comedy also included a lot of astute political commentary. Yes, he did win a popular election, but his skeptics and critics were like the 16-year-old son and called him the "TV President" but with the leadership he's shown in the face of the invasion, he has gained massive, almost universal popularity within Ukraine.

Is is great leadership? Zelensky is an incredible, brave person, but I think his naivety is one of the ingredients leading to this situation. The outcome is most likely going to be virtually the same deal that could have been obtained from Russia prior to the outset of the war: an agreement to remain neutral in the struggle between Russia and the West, and an agreement to stay out of NATO.

Nothing will be gained in this fight, yet much will be lost. Don't get me wrong -- he is a remarkably brave person. But Putin is getting old, and it would have been wiser to simply wait him out, while quietly -- as opposed to overtly and brazenly -- developing a relationship with the West. The strategic partnership that Ukraine signed with the US on Nov 10, 2021, was a reckless move -- rather like declaring that Ukraine is engaged to the US, and will get married in the near future. A smarter strategy would have been to quietly build up Ukraine's military capabilities with help from the US, rather than to openly declare this intention.

Prior to the invasion, Zelenskyy's popularity in Ukraine was not high. He was seen as too conciliatory towards Russia, seeking compromise with the neighboring country rather than being a hardliner.

Neither Ukraine nor Zelenskyy are to blame for Russia's belligerence. Nor NATO nor the US etc.

But Zelensky signed off on the Nov 10, 2021 strategic partnership. That was clearly an aggressive move in the eyes of the Russian government. It is worth reading the agreement:

[url]
https://www.state.gov/u-s-ukraine-charter-on-strategic-partnership/
[/url]

And why did the US telegraph its moves like this? The build-up of the Ukraine military should have been handled covertly, to the extent possible.

I’ve read this. There is really nothing objectionable here. Nothing offensive - only defensive. Seeks to hold RUS accountable for violations of international law. Affirms UKR territorial integrity. Affirms right of UKR to decide without outside interference about its foreign policy choices. Affirms their NATO cooperation, which they have had for a long time and was a sort of compromise position after Maidan (to be a NATO cooperating country instead of a NATO member).

And do you think a member of the Russian government would share your view? I think the language would be considered threatening from the Russian perspective.

Wtf - Russia already stole Crimea

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Back in February, Biden said this:

“I will not send American servicemen to fight in Ukraine,” though he added that “if Russia targets Americans in Ukraine, we will respond forcefully.”

So, we have one dead American journalist and one injured.

I am awaiting this "forceful" response.

This was not just any American.

Putin’s military targeted and murdered a very prominent NYT reporter and member of the press corps.

You simply do not murder press without severe consequences.

There is now ample justification for, at a minimum, a full no-fly zone over Ukraine, if not full intervention by NATO forces.

Yes, definitely, NOBODY on dcum wants war! I just can't read, said some pp!

Yes, I apologize. You can read.

You just can't do math and understand that the immense majority do not want war.

Really? On just the last two pages we have at least 3 posts advocating for war, but sure. you are right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Back in February, Biden said this:

“I will not send American servicemen to fight in Ukraine,” though he added that “if Russia targets Americans in Ukraine, we will respond forcefully.”

So, we have one dead American journalist and one injured.

I am awaiting this "forceful" response.

This was not just any American.

Putin’s military targeted and murdered a very prominent NYT reporter and member of the press corps.

You simply do not murder press without severe consequences.

There is now ample justification for, at a minimum, a full no-fly zone over Ukraine, if not full intervention by NATO forces.

No there isn't. Unfortunately journalists are injured and killed all the time in war zones. That isn't a cause for the US to get involved.

Once again. Biden said this: “I will not send American servicemen to fight in Ukraine,” though he added that “if Russia targets Americans in Ukraine, we will respond forcefully.”

So, we should be expecting a forceful response.
Or, does he not abide by what he says?

Lead the way. You first.

Look.... it was BIDEN who said it. Nobody forced him to say these words. He said them.
So, what is he going to do? Just spout empty words? Or, is he going to take action?

Biden is really good about telling Russia what he ISN'T going to do. And, in doing so.... he is basically giving Russia permission to run roughshod over Ukraine.

I would like to hear Biden say, "All options are on the table." I would also like Biden and crew to stop saying what he won't do. I would also like Biden and crew to stop with the public negotiation regarding the jets from Poland and just get the damn jets to Ukraine.

He said that that the US would respond forcefully if Americans were targeted in Ukraine. Well, it has happened. And, we have a dead American.
If he does nothing, he will look weak. Weaker than he already appears.
Time for action.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Back in February, Biden said this:

“I will not send American servicemen to fight in Ukraine,” though he added that “if Russia targets Americans in Ukraine, we will respond forcefully.”

So, we have one dead American journalist and one injured.

I am awaiting this "forceful" response.

This was not just any American.

Putin’s military targeted and murdered a very prominent NYT reporter and member of the press corps.

You simply do not murder press without severe consequences.

There is now ample justification for, at a minimum, a full no-fly zone over Ukraine, if not full intervention by NATO forces.

No there isn't. Unfortunately journalists are injured and killed all the time in war zones. That isn't a cause for the US to get involved.

Once again. Biden said this: “I will not send American servicemen to fight in Ukraine,” though he added that “if Russia targets Americans in Ukraine, we will respond forcefully.”

So, we should be expecting a forceful response.
Or, does he not abide by what he says?

Lead the way. You first.

Look.... it was BIDEN who said it. Nobody forced him to say these words. He said them.
So, what is he going to do? Just spout empty words? Or, is he going to take action?

Biden is really good about telling Russia what he ISN'T going to do. And, in doing so.... he is basically giving Russia permission to run roughshod over Ukraine.

I would like to hear Biden say, "All options are on the table." I would also like Biden and crew to stop saying what he won't do. I would also like Biden and crew to stop with the public negotiation regarding the jets from Poland and just get the damn jets to Ukraine.

He said that that the US would respond forcefully if Americans were targeted in Ukraine. Well, it has happened. And, we have a dead American.
If he does nothing, he will look weak. Weaker than he already appears.
Time for action.

DP. And I agree completely.

Besides, a no-fly zone is not a war. We are not doing anything at all so long as Russian warplanes stay out of Ukraine’s airspace.

Moreover, NO ONE is saying this is a war! It’s not. Russia has said repeatedly its a “special operation,” and that’s not a war. And we have said “a minor incursion” is not a war.

So a no-fly zone over a nation WHICH IS NOT AT WAR, is a simple matter, and it should be imposed immediately. Besides,

- Zelinski invited us. What’s wrong with US planes accepting the invitation of a sovereign nation?

Logic dictates we impose a no-fly zone to protect US journalists. It’s only logical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Back in February, Biden said this:

“I will not send American servicemen to fight in Ukraine,” though he added that “if Russia targets Americans in Ukraine, we will respond forcefully.”

So, we have one dead American journalist and one injured.

I am awaiting this "forceful" response.

This was not just any American.

Putin’s military targeted and murdered a very prominent NYT reporter and member of the press corps.

You simply do not murder press without severe consequences.

There is now ample justification for, at a minimum, a full no-fly zone over Ukraine, if not full intervention by NATO forces.

No there isn't. Unfortunately journalists are injured and killed all the time in war zones. That isn't a cause for the US to get involved.

Once again. Biden said this: “I will not send American servicemen to fight in Ukraine,” though he added that “if Russia targets Americans in Ukraine, we will respond forcefully.”

So, we should be expecting a forceful response.
Or, does he not abide by what he says?

Lead the way. You first.

Look.... it was BIDEN who said it. Nobody forced him to say these words. He said them.
So, what is he going to do? Just spout empty words? Or, is he going to take action?

Biden is really good about telling Russia what he ISN'T going to do. And, in doing so.... he is basically giving Russia permission to run roughshod over Ukraine.

I would like to hear Biden say, "All options are on the table." I would also like Biden and crew to stop saying what he won't do. I would also like Biden and crew to stop with the public negotiation regarding the jets from Poland and just get the damn jets to Ukraine.

He said that that the US would respond forcefully if Americans were targeted in Ukraine. Well, it has happened. And, we have a dead American.
If he does nothing, he will look weak. Weaker than he already appears.
Time for action.

Jet's from Poland is the start of a bigger war. Jets from the U.S, publicly are the beginning of the Third World War. Kamala went there to tell Poland to stop publicly giving jets to Ukraine. To avoid WWIII. hopefully.
Why do you want a Third World War?
I can only think that you never experienced any kind of hardship in your life and have no idea what war is. Nobody with any brain-power advocates going to war. Particularly not on another continet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Back in February, Biden said this:

“I will not send American servicemen to fight in Ukraine,” though he added that “if Russia targets Americans in Ukraine, we will respond forcefully.”

So, we have one dead American journalist and one injured.

I am awaiting this "forceful" response.

This was not just any American.

Putin’s military targeted and murdered a very prominent NYT reporter and member of the press corps.

You simply do not murder press without severe consequences.

There is now ample justification for, at a minimum, a full no-fly zone over Ukraine, if not full intervention by NATO forces.

No there isn't. Unfortunately journalists are injured and killed all the time in war zones. That isn't a cause for the US to get involved.

Once again. Biden said this: “I will not send American servicemen to fight in Ukraine,” though he added that “if Russia targets Americans in Ukraine, we will respond forcefully.”

So, we should be expecting a forceful response.
Or, does he not abide by what he says?

Lead the way. You first.

Look.... it was BIDEN who said it. Nobody forced him to say these words. He said them.
So, what is he going to do? Just spout empty words? Or, is he going to take action?

Biden is really good about telling Russia what he ISN'T going to do. And, in doing so.... he is basically giving Russia permission to run roughshod over Ukraine.

I would like to hear Biden say, "All options are on the table." I would also like Biden and crew to stop saying what he won't do. I would also like Biden and crew to stop with the public negotiation regarding the jets from Poland and just get the damn jets to Ukraine.

He said that that the US would respond forcefully if Americans were targeted in Ukraine. Well, it has happened. And, we have a dead American.
If he does nothing, he will look weak. Weaker than he already appears.
Time for action.

DP. And I agree completely.

Besides, a no-fly zone is not a war. We are not doing anything at all so long as Russian warplanes stay out of Ukraine’s airspace.

Moreover, NO ONE is saying this is a war! It’s not. Russia has said repeatedly its a “special operation,” and that’s not a war. And we have said “a minor incursion” is not a war.

So a no-fly zone over a nation WHICH IS NOT AT WAR, is a simple matter, and it should be imposed immediately. Besides,

- Zelinski invited us. What’s wrong with US planes accepting the invitation of a sovereign nation?

Logic dictates we impose a no-fly zone to protect US journalists. It’s only logical.

Is this poster a fool or a troll or both?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Back in February, Biden said this:

“I will not send American servicemen to fight in Ukraine,” though he added that “if Russia targets Americans in Ukraine, we will respond forcefully.”

So, we have one dead American journalist and one injured.

I am awaiting this "forceful" response.

This was not just any American.

Putin’s military targeted and murdered a very prominent NYT reporter and member of the press corps.

You simply do not murder press without severe consequences.

There is now ample justification for, at a minimum, a full no-fly zone over Ukraine, if not full intervention by NATO forces.

No there isn't. Unfortunately journalists are injured and killed all the time in war zones. That isn't a cause for the US to get involved.

Once again. Biden said this: “I will not send American servicemen to fight in Ukraine,” though he added that “if Russia targets Americans in Ukraine, we will respond forcefully.”

So, we should be expecting a forceful response.
Or, does he not abide by what he says?

Lead the way. You first.

Look.... it was BIDEN who said it. Nobody forced him to say these words. He said them.
So, what is he going to do? Just spout empty words? Or, is he going to take action?

Biden is really good about telling Russia what he ISN'T going to do. And, in doing so.... he is basically giving Russia permission to run roughshod over Ukraine.

I would like to hear Biden say, "All options are on the table." I would also like Biden and crew to stop saying what he won't do. I would also like Biden and crew to stop with the public negotiation regarding the jets from Poland and just get the damn jets to Ukraine.

He said that that the US would respond forcefully if Americans were targeted in Ukraine. Well, it has happened. And, we have a dead American.
If he does nothing, he will look weak. Weaker than he already appears.
Time for action.

Biden carefully chose his words. He said "targets an American". No one thinks Renaud was targeted. He was a collateral casualty of a very dangerous job. I think the US needs to do more because, practically speaking, Russia won't stop with Ukraine...but it's flat out wrong to suggest that what happened crosses the line that Biden drew.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Back in February, Biden said this:

“I will not send American servicemen to fight in Ukraine,” though he added that “if Russia targets Americans in Ukraine, we will respond forcefully.”

So, we have one dead American journalist and one injured.

I am awaiting this "forceful" response.

This was not just any American.

Putin’s military targeted and murdered a very prominent NYT reporter and member of the press corps.

You simply do not murder press without severe consequences.

There is now ample justification for, at a minimum, a full no-fly zone over Ukraine, if not full intervention by NATO forces.

No there isn't. Unfortunately journalists are injured and killed all the time in war zones. That isn't a cause for the US to get involved.

Once again. Biden said this: “I will not send American servicemen to fight in Ukraine,” though he added that “if Russia targets Americans in Ukraine, we will respond forcefully.”

So, we should be expecting a forceful response.
Or, does he not abide by what he says?

Lead the way. You first.

Look.... it was BIDEN who said it. Nobody forced him to say these words. He said them.
So, what is he going to do? Just spout empty words? Or, is he going to take action?

Biden is really good about telling Russia what he ISN'T going to do. And, in doing so.... he is basically giving Russia permission to run roughshod over Ukraine.

I would like to hear Biden say, "All options are on the table." I would also like Biden and crew to stop saying what he won't do. I would also like Biden and crew to stop with the public negotiation regarding the jets from Poland and just get the damn jets to Ukraine.

He said that that the US would respond forcefully if Americans were targeted in Ukraine. Well, it has happened. And, we have a dead American.
If he does nothing, he will look weak. Weaker than he already appears.
Time for action.

Biden carefully chose his words. He said "targets an American". No one thinks Renaud was targeted. He was a collateral casualty of a very dangerous job. I think the US needs to do more because, practically speaking, Russia won't stop with Ukraine...but it's flat out wrong to suggest that what happened crosses the line that Biden drew.

From the account of his colleague, they were indeed targeted.
Biden didn't give any caveats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Back in February, Biden said this:

“I will not send American servicemen to fight in Ukraine,” though he added that “if Russia targets Americans in Ukraine, we will respond forcefully.”

So, we have one dead American journalist and one injured.

I am awaiting this "forceful" response.

This was not just any American.

Putin’s military targeted and murdered a very prominent NYT reporter and member of the press corps.

You simply do not murder press without severe consequences.

There is now ample justification for, at a minimum, a full no-fly zone over Ukraine, if not full intervention by NATO forces.

No there isn't. Unfortunately journalists are injured and killed all the time in war zones. That isn't a cause for the US to get involved.

Once again. Biden said this: “I will not send American servicemen to fight in Ukraine,” though he added that “if Russia targets Americans in Ukraine, we will respond forcefully.”

So, we should be expecting a forceful response.
Or, does he not abide by what he says?

Lead the way. You first.

Look.... it was BIDEN who said it. Nobody forced him to say these words. He said them.
So, what is he going to do? Just spout empty words? Or, is he going to take action?

Biden is really good about telling Russia what he ISN'T going to do. And, in doing so.... he is basically giving Russia permission to run roughshod over Ukraine.

I would like to hear Biden say, "All options are on the table." I would also like Biden and crew to stop saying what he won't do. I would also like Biden and crew to stop with the public negotiation regarding the jets from Poland and just get the damn jets to Ukraine.

He said that that the US would respond forcefully if Americans were targeted in Ukraine. Well, it has happened. And, we have a dead American.
If he does nothing, he will look weak. Weaker than he already appears.
Time for action.

Biden carefully chose his words. He said "targets an American". No one thinks Renaud was targeted. He was a collateral casualty of a very dangerous job. I think the US needs to do more because, practically speaking, Russia won't stop with Ukraine...but it's flat out wrong to suggest that what happened crosses the line that Biden drew.

From the account of his colleague, they were indeed targeted.
Biden didn't give any caveats.

Now, now children. Why don't you go play and let the grownups talk?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And before he became a president, he was a great comedian, like Jon Stewart or Stephen Colbert. This is one of his most famous videos (yes, it's not very polite, but it's very funny):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oua0Puihrkc

My son, 16, just watched this over my shoulder and asked: "And on that basis he was elected President?"

Hmmm...

So you and your son think you are smarter than 70% of the voters in Ukraine ?

Zelenskyy's comedy also included a lot of astute political commentary. Yes, he did win a popular election, but his skeptics and critics were like the 16-year-old son and called him the "TV President" but with the leadership he's shown in the face of the invasion, he has gained massive, almost universal popularity within Ukraine.

Is is great leadership? Zelensky is an incredible, brave person, but I think his naivety is one of the ingredients leading to this situation. The outcome is most likely going to be virtually the same deal that could have been obtained from Russia prior to the outset of the war: an agreement to remain neutral in the struggle between Russia and the West, and an agreement to stay out of NATO.

Nothing will be gained in this fight, yet much will be lost. Don't get me wrong -- he is a remarkably brave person. But Putin is getting old, and it would have been wiser to simply wait him out, while quietly -- as opposed to overtly and brazenly -- developing a relationship with the West. The strategic partnership that Ukraine signed with the US on Nov 10, 2021, was a reckless move -- rather like declaring that Ukraine is engaged to the US, and will get married in the near future. A smarter strategy would have been to quietly build up Ukraine's military capabilities with help from the US, rather than to openly declare this intention.

Prior to the invasion, Zelenskyy's popularity in Ukraine was not high. He was seen as too conciliatory towards Russia, seeking compromise with the neighboring country rather than being a hardliner.

Neither Ukraine nor Zelenskyy are to blame for Russia's belligerence. Nor NATO nor the US etc.

But Zelensky signed off on the Nov 10, 2021 strategic partnership. That was clearly an aggressive move in the eyes of the Russian government. It is worth reading the agreement:

[url]
https://www.state.gov/u-s-ukraine-charter-on-strategic-partnership/
[/url]

And why did the US telegraph its moves like this? The build-up of the Ukraine military should have been handled covertly, to the extent possible.

I’ve read this. There is really nothing objectionable here. Nothing offensive - only defensive. Seeks to hold RUS accountable for violations of international law. Affirms UKR territorial integrity. Affirms right of UKR to decide without outside interference about its foreign policy choices. Affirms their NATO cooperation, which they have had for a long time and was a sort of compromise position after Maidan (to be a NATO cooperating country instead of a NATO member).

And do you think a member of the Russian government would share your view? I think the language would be considered threatening from the Russian perspective.

Wtf - Russia already stole Crimea

Yes, but in the Russians' view, the rightful leader of Ukraine was pushed out by an unlawful revolution (perhaps with CIA involvement), and the unlawful govt that took over wanted to cancel the lease for the Crimea base, which would have been a huge strategic loss for Russia. I am not saying that I agree with this analysis, but I believe it is the Russian view of events. Also, what do you think the U.S. would have done were we faced with the loss of critical military base? My guess is that we would have found some way to keep it in our possession.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And before he became a president, he was a great comedian, like Jon Stewart or Stephen Colbert. This is one of his most famous videos (yes, it's not very polite, but it's very funny):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oua0Puihrkc

My son, 16, just watched this over my shoulder and asked: "And on that basis he was elected President?"

Hmmm...

So you and your son think you are smarter than 70% of the voters in Ukraine ?

Zelenskyy's comedy also included a lot of astute political commentary. Yes, he did win a popular election, but his skeptics and critics were like the 16-year-old son and called him the "TV President" but with the leadership he's shown in the face of the invasion, he has gained massive, almost universal popularity within Ukraine.

Is is great leadership? Zelensky is an incredible, brave person, but I think his naivety is one of the ingredients leading to this situation. The outcome is most likely going to be virtually the same deal that could have been obtained from Russia prior to the outset of the war: an agreement to remain neutral in the struggle between Russia and the West, and an agreement to stay out of NATO.

Nothing will be gained in this fight, yet much will be lost. Don't get me wrong -- he is a remarkably brave person. But Putin is getting old, and it would have been wiser to simply wait him out, while quietly -- as opposed to overtly and brazenly -- developing a relationship with the West. The strategic partnership that Ukraine signed with the US on Nov 10, 2021, was a reckless move -- rather like declaring that Ukraine is engaged to the US, and will get married in the near future. A smarter strategy would have been to quietly build up Ukraine's military capabilities with help from the US, rather than to openly declare this intention.

Prior to the invasion, Zelenskyy's popularity in Ukraine was not high. He was seen as too conciliatory towards Russia, seeking compromise with the neighboring country rather than being a hardliner.

Neither Ukraine nor Zelenskyy are to blame for Russia's belligerence. Nor NATO nor the US etc.

But Zelensky signed off on the Nov 10, 2021 strategic partnership. That was clearly an aggressive move in the eyes of the Russian government. It is worth reading the agreement:

[url]
https://www.state.gov/u-s-ukraine-charter-on-strategic-partnership/
[/url]

And why did the US telegraph its moves like this? The build-up of the Ukraine military should have been handled covertly, to the extent possible.

I’ve read this. There is really nothing objectionable here. Nothing offensive - only defensive. Seeks to hold RUS accountable for violations of international law. Affirms UKR territorial integrity. Affirms right of UKR to decide without outside interference about its foreign policy choices. Affirms their NATO cooperation, which they have had for a long time and was a sort of compromise position after Maidan (to be a NATO cooperating country instead of a NATO member).

And do you think a member of the Russian government would share your view? I think the language would be considered threatening from the Russian perspective.

Wtf - Russia already stole Crimea

Yes, but in the Russians' view, the rightful leader of Ukraine was pushed out by an unlawful revolution (perhaps with CIA involvement), and the unlawful govt that took over wanted to cancel the lease for the Crimea base, which would have been a huge strategic loss for Russia. I am not saying that I agree with this analysis, but I believe it is the Russian view of events. Also, what do you think the U.S. would have done were we faced with the loss of critical military base? My guess is that we would have found some way to keep it in our possession.

That is not the Russian's point of view. It's their bs cover story. Stop treating them like theyre mentally handicapped. Stop giving credence to their lies. They know they're lying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Back in February, Biden said this:

“I will not send American servicemen to fight in Ukraine,” though he added that “if Russia targets Americans in Ukraine, we will respond forcefully.”

So, we have one dead American journalist and one injured.

I am awaiting this "forceful" response.



This was not just any American.

Putin’s military targeted and murdered a very prominent NYT reporter and member of the press corps.

You simply do not murder press without severe consequences.

There is now ample justification for, at a minimum, a full no-fly zone over Ukraine, if not full intervention by NATO forces.


No there isn't. Unfortunately journalists are injured and killed all the time in war zones. That isn't a cause for the US to get involved.


Once again. Biden said this: “I will not send American servicemen to fight in Ukraine,” though he added that “if Russia targets Americans in Ukraine, we will respond forcefully.”

So, we should be expecting a forceful response.
Or, does he not abide by what he say



Lead the way. You first.


Look.... it was BIDEN who said it. Nobody forced him to say these words. He said them.
So, what is he going to do? Just spout empty words? Or, is he going to take action?

Biden is really good about telling Russia what he ISN'T going to do. And, in doing so.... he is basically giving Russia permission to run roughshod over Ukraine.

I would like to hear Biden say, "All options are on the table." I would also like Biden and crew to stop saying what he won't do. I would also like Biden and crew to stop with the public negotiation regarding the jets from Poland and just get the damn jets to Ukraine.

He said that that the US would respond forcefully if Americans were targeted in Ukraine. Well, it has happened. And, we have a dead American.
If he does nothing, he will look weak. Weaker than he already appears.
Time for action.

Jet's from Poland is the start of a bigger war. Jets from the U.S, publicly are the beginning of the Third World War. Kamala went there to tell Poland to stop publicly giving jets to Ukraine. To avoid WWIII. hopefully.
Why do you want a Third World War?
I can only think that you never experienced any kind of hardship in your life and have no idea what war is. Nobody with any brain-power advocates going to war. Particularly not on another continet.


I responded to you but my post was deleted.

A shipment of planes will not escalate the war anymore than a shipment of Javelins or anti-aircraft missiles will. And, we have sent plenty of those.
Biden is weak. He just is. He is letting Putin determine the terms of this conflict.

And, as for me.... my son served in Afghanistan. So, I know plenty about war and its toll on families.
I am not for getting involved in war. But, I would like to know what Biden has in mind in terms of the "forceful" response he promised.

You will complain about Biden no matter what he does so why should anyone take you seriously?


When it comes to things like this, Biden has proven himself to be pretty bad. We watched what happened in Afghanistan. We saw him say that the threat of sanctions was to serve as a deterrent and only a week later he said that the sanctions weren't intended to prevent anything.
So, I have absolutely no confidence in this administration. None.
I cannot think of one thing they have done well in the past year.

So, until he does something well, yes - I will complain.

This is basically it. You have no nuanced analysis of what Biden has done. I did not vote for Trump, but I'll bet I could fine one thing he did in his first year that I might say, "yes, that was done well". So you are not credible . . . just a complainer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And before he became a president, he was a great comedian, like Jon Stewart or Stephen Colbert. This is one of his most famous videos (yes, it's not very polite, but it's very funny):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oua0Puihrkc

My son, 16, just watched this over my shoulder and asked: "And on that basis he was elected President?"

Hmmm...

So you and your son think you are smarter than 70% of the voters in Ukraine ?

Zelenskyy's comedy also included a lot of astute political commentary. Yes, he did win a popular election, but his skeptics and critics were like the 16-year-old son and called him the "TV President" but with the leadership he's shown in the face of the invasion, he has gained massive, almost universal popularity within Ukraine.

Is is great leadership? Zelensky is an incredible, brave person, but I think his naivety is one of the ingredients leading to this situation. The outcome is most likely going to be virtually the same deal that could have been obtained from Russia prior to the outset of the war: an agreement to remain neutral in the struggle between Russia and the West, and an agreement to stay out of NATO.

Nothing will be gained in this fight, yet much will be lost. Don't get me wrong -- he is a remarkably brave person. But Putin is getting old, and it would have been wiser to simply wait him out, while quietly -- as opposed to overtly and brazenly -- developing a relationship with the West. The strategic partnership that Ukraine signed with the US on Nov 10, 2021, was a reckless move -- rather like declaring that Ukraine is engaged to the US, and will get married in the near future. A smarter strategy would have been to quietly build up Ukraine's military capabilities with help from the US, rather than to openly declare this intention.

Prior to the invasion, Zelenskyy's popularity in Ukraine was not high. He was seen as too conciliatory towards Russia, seeking compromise with the neighboring country rather than being a hardliner.

Neither Ukraine nor Zelenskyy are to blame for Russia's belligerence. Nor NATO nor the US etc.

But Zelensky signed off on the Nov 10, 2021 strategic partnership. That was clearly an aggressive move in the eyes of the Russian government. It is worth reading the agreement:

[url]
https://www.state.gov/u-s-ukraine-charter-on-strategic-partnership/
[/url]

And why did the US telegraph its moves like this? The build-up of the Ukraine military should have been handled covertly, to the extent possible.

I’ve read this. There is really nothing objectionable here. Nothing offensive - only defensive. Seeks to hold RUS accountable for violations of international law. Affirms UKR territorial integrity. Affirms right of UKR to decide without outside interference about its foreign policy choices. Affirms their NATO cooperation, which they have had for a long time and was a sort of compromise position after Maidan (to be a NATO cooperating country instead of a NATO member).

And do you think a member of the Russian government would share your view? I think the language would be considered threatening from the Russian perspective.

Wtf - Russia already stole Crimea

Yes, but in the Russians' view, the rightful leader of Ukraine was pushed out by an unlawful revolution (perhaps with CIA involvement), and the unlawful govt that took over wanted to cancel the lease for the Crimea base, which would have been a huge strategic loss for Russia. I am not saying that I agree with this analysis, but I believe it is the Russian view of events. Also, what do you think the U.S. would have done were we faced with the loss of critical military base? My guess is that we would have found some way to keep it in our possession.

US has pulled out of many bases when asked, most recently in Iraq.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And before he became a president, he was a great comedian, like Jon Stewart or Stephen Colbert. This is one of his most famous videos (yes, it's not very polite, but it's very funny):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oua0Puihrkc

My son, 16, just watched this over my shoulder and asked: "And on that basis he was elected President?"

Hmmm...

So you and your son think you are smarter than 70% of the voters in Ukraine ?

Zelenskyy's comedy also included a lot of astute political commentary. Yes, he did win a popular election, but his skeptics and critics were like the 16-year-old son and called him the "TV President" but with the leadership he's shown in the face of the invasion, he has gained massive, almost universal popularity within Ukraine.

Is is great leadership? Zelensky is an incredible, brave person, but I think his naivety is one of the ingredients leading to this situation. The outcome is most likely going to be virtually the same deal that could have been obtained from Russia prior to the outset of the war: an agreement to remain neutral in the struggle between Russia and the West, and an agreement to stay out of NATO.

Nothing will be gained in this fight, yet much will be lost. Don't get me wrong -- he is a remarkably brave person. But Putin is getting old, and it would have been wiser to simply wait him out, while quietly -- as opposed to overtly and brazenly -- developing a relationship with the West. The strategic partnership that Ukraine signed with the US on Nov 10, 2021, was a reckless move -- rather like declaring that Ukraine is engaged to the US, and will get married in the near future. A smarter strategy would have been to quietly build up Ukraine's military capabilities with help from the US, rather than to openly declare this intention.

Prior to the invasion, Zelenskyy's popularity in Ukraine was not high. He was seen as too conciliatory towards Russia, seeking compromise with the neighboring country rather than being a hardliner.

Neither Ukraine nor Zelenskyy are to blame for Russia's belligerence. Nor NATO nor the US etc.

But Zelensky signed off on the Nov 10, 2021 strategic partnership. That was clearly an aggressive move in the eyes of the Russian government. It is worth reading the agreement:

[url]
https://www.state.gov/u-s-ukraine-charter-on-strategic-partnership/
[/url]

And why did the US telegraph its moves like this? The build-up of the Ukraine military should have been handled covertly, to the extent possible.

I’ve read this. There is really nothing objectionable here. Nothing offensive - only defensive. Seeks to hold RUS accountable for violations of international law. Affirms UKR territorial integrity. Affirms right of UKR to decide without outside interference about its foreign policy choices. Affirms their NATO cooperation, which they have had for a long time and was a sort of compromise position after Maidan (to be a NATO cooperating country instead of a NATO member).

And do you think a member of the Russian government would share your view? I think the language would be considered threatening from the Russian perspective.

Wtf - Russia already stole Crimea

Yes, but in the Russians' view, the rightful leader of Ukraine was pushed out by an unlawful revolution (perhaps with CIA involvement), and the unlawful govt that took over wanted to cancel the lease for the Crimea base, which would have been a huge strategic loss for Russia. I am not saying that I agree with this analysis, but I believe it is the Russian view of events. Also, what do you think the U.S. would have done were we faced with the loss of critical military base? My guess is that we would have found some way to keep it in our possession.

What's "in the Russians' view" is about as legit as Sidney Powell and Mr. Pillow guy claiming a zombified Hugo Chavez rose from the dead and used Smartmatic and Dominion to hack all of the voting machines in America to steal the election for Biden and a pedophile cabal, and that the evidence for all of it is sitting on a secret Kraken server in Germany.

[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:And before he became a president, he was a great comedian, like Jon Stewart or Stephen Colbert. This is one of his most famous videos (yes, it's not very polite, but it's very funny):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oua0Puihrkc

My son, 16, just watched this over my shoulder and asked: "And on that basis he was elected President?"

Hmmm...

So you and your son think you are smarter than 70% of the voters in Ukraine ?

Zelenskyy's comedy also included a lot of astute political commentary. Yes, he did win a popular election, but his skeptics and critics were like the 16-year-old son and called him the "TV President" but with the leadership he's shown in the face of the invasion, he has gained massive, almost universal popularity within Ukraine.

Why would anyone repeat Russian propaganda like this?
Is is great leadership? Zelensky is an incredible, brave person, but I think his naivety is one of the ingredients leading to this situation. The outcome is most likely going to be virtually the same deal that could have been obtained from Russia prior to the outset of the war: an agreement to remain neutral in the struggle between Russia and the West, and an agreement to stay out of NATO.

Nothing will be gained in this fight, yet much will be lost. Don't get me wrong -- he is a remarkably brave person. But Putin is getting old, and it would have been wiser to simply wait him out, while quietly -- as opposed to overtly and brazenly -- developing a relationship with the West. The strategic partnership that Ukraine signed with the US on Nov 10, 2021, was a reckless move -- rather like declaring that Ukraine is engaged to the US, and will get married in the near future. A smarter strategy would have been to quietly build up Ukraine's military capabilities with help from the US, rather than to openly declare this intention.

Prior to the invasion, Zelenskyy's popularity in Ukraine was not high. He was seen as too conciliatory towards Russia, seeking compromise with the neighboring country rather than being a hardliner.

Neither Ukraine nor Zelenskyy are to blame for Russia's belligerence. Nor NATO nor the US etc.

But Zelensky signed off on the Nov 10, 2021 strategic partnership. That was clearly an aggressive move in the eyes of the Russian government. It is worth reading the agreement:

[url]
https://www.state.gov/u-s-ukraine-charter-on-strategic-partnership/
[/url]

And why did the US telegraph its moves like this? The build-up of the Ukraine military should have been handled covertly, to the extent possible.

I’ve read this. There is really nothing objectionable here. Nothing offensive - only defensive. Seeks to hold RUS accountable for violations of international law. Affirms UKR territorial integrity. Affirms right of UKR to decide without outside interference about its foreign policy choices. Affirms their NATO cooperation, which they have had for a long time and was a sort of compromise position after Maidan (to be a NATO cooperating country instead of a NATO member).

And do you think a member of the Russian government would share your view? I think the language would be considered threatening from the Russian perspective.

Wtf - Russia already stole Crimea

Yes, but in the Russians' view, the rightful leader of Ukraine was pushed out by an unlawful revolution (perhaps with CIA involvement), and the unlawful govt that took over wanted to cancel the lease for the Crimea base, which would have been a huge strategic loss for Russia. I am not saying that I agree with this analysis, but I believe it is the Russian view of events. Also, what do you think the U.S. would have done were we faced with the loss of critical military base? My guess is that we would have found some way to keep it in our possession.

That is not the Russian's point of view. It's their bs cover story. Stop treating them like theyre mentally handicapped. Stop giving credence to their lies. They know they're lying.