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.
Sweet summer child. How do you think no fly zones are enforced? How do you think Russia responds - the country that’s literally attacking and obliterating a sovereign nation, bombing schools and hospitals, and dangling nuclear weapons on “high alert”?
This is “check”. Unless the west wants WWIII, there’s no no fly zones.
DP here. I think far too many of us are in denial that the opening volleys of WWIII have already been lobbed. I don't personally want to advocate for a no-fly zone, and I've never been happier not to be responsible for such a decision, but I also think that this doesn't end at the Ukrainian border. The question is really when do we want to get into the fight.
And why were didthe WWIII not start when the U.S. invaded Iraq? You do see a hypocrosy here We are to die for Ukraine and cause the world to die, but we "liberated" Iraq?
Iraq = / = Russia in terms of military might. Period. Not sure what you’re suggesting is hypocrisy. If it’s the fact that we are treating Putin as a dangerous invader who must be stopped but also carries nuclear might and missiles aimed at the US and other targets, but didn’t take that same approach with Iraq, you’re right. But that’s fact not hypocrisy.
How is that not a hypocrisy? Why did Russia and the world not punish us for that act?
Why are you equating Iraq with Ukraine? As in, what is the parallel and equivalence you are drawing?
Why should I not equate it?
Oh, and at least Russia has some connection to Ukraine, historical that is. U.S. had no such thing with Iraq.
Oh, Russia had some historical connection to Ukraine, so that makes it OK for them to kill pregnants Ukrainian women and their children?
It doesn't make it OK. But the point is that USA hasn't exactly provided a great example to the world, have we, with respect to how we treat smaller, less powerful countries? We seem to view Putin as a barbarian -- but, so far, he has less blood on his hands that George Bush Jr, and perhaps a couple other presidents as well. 900K dead in Iraq. That is a staggering number. We pretend to have some kind of moral authority -- yet we don't hold ourselves to the same standard that we hold others.
Huh? Iraq was and is a deeply unpopular wat that many Americans protested. Prosecuted on made up vs weapons of mass destruction. It was a disaster and plenty of Americans hated it ac much as the hate this BS war currently being prosecuted by russia.
Yes, but do we consider George W. a mad-man or a lunatic? No, we don't. Putin, in contrast, is viewed as an insane barbarian by many Americans.
We seem to view our stupid wars as entirely independent of our national character. Our wars-of-choice were just stupid mistakes. It doesn't mean that our leaders are evil or barbaric.
But when another country commits a similar act, their leaders are evil barbarians -- or, going a step further, we think that the people themselves (the Russians, in this case) are evil.
Why do we exhibit this asymmetric pattern of thinking in which our character is never stained by our mistakes, while other leaders are assumed to be the devil incarnate?
Bush was a democratically elected american president, not a dictator. I remember the disgust was and is shared by the architects of that war like rumsfeld and wolfowitz and cheney. And it was accepted and legal to actively protest that war and that was done by many americans.
I'm not sure what you are trying to say. Our conscience is clean with respect to the 900K deaths in Iraq because we are a democracy? That makes no sense. Surely you mean something else, but I'm not sure what.
Our conscience is not clear and we talk about it and fight about it and it enters into our elections. Politicians are still dragged over voting for this war.
And? America did not become a pariah nation and its citizens were not affected. Not sure how internal political hassles in any way reflect accountability for the invasion and attendant body count.
We are responsible for the invasion and the body count because we elected the fools that prosecuted the war. ( Although we will never really know since scotus stopped the vote count in Florida. Bush lost the popular vote)
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.
Sweet summer child. How do you think no fly zones are enforced? How do you think Russia responds - the country that’s literally attacking and obliterating a sovereign nation, bombing schools and hospitals, and dangling nuclear weapons on “high alert”?
This is “check”. Unless the west wants WWIII, there’s no no fly zones.
DP here. I think far too many of us are in denial that the opening volleys of WWIII have already been lobbed. I don't personally want to advocate for a no-fly zone, and I've never been happier not to be responsible for such a decision, but I also think that this doesn't end at the Ukrainian border. The question is really when do we want to get into the fight.
And why were didthe WWIII not start when the U.S. invaded Iraq? You do see a hypocrosy here We are to die for Ukraine and cause the world to die, but we "liberated" Iraq?
Iraq = / = Russia in terms of military might. Period. Not sure what you’re suggesting is hypocrisy. If it’s the fact that we are treating Putin as a dangerous invader who must be stopped but also carries nuclear might and missiles aimed at the US and other targets, but didn’t take that same approach with Iraq, you’re right. But that’s fact not hypocrisy.
How is that not a hypocrisy? Why did Russia and the world not punish us for that act?
Why are you equating Iraq with Ukraine? As in, what is the parallel and equivalence you are drawing?
Why should I not equate it?
Oh, and at least Russia has some connection to Ukraine, historical that is. U.S. had no such thing with Iraq.
Oh, Russia had some historical connection to Ukraine, so that makes it OK for them to kill pregnants Ukrainian women and their children?
It doesn't make it OK. But the point is that USA hasn't exactly provided a great example to the world, have we, with respect to how we treat smaller, less powerful countries? We seem to view Putin as a barbarian -- but, so far, he has less blood on his hands that George Bush Jr, and perhaps a couple other presidents as well. 900K dead in Iraq. That is a staggering number. We pretend to have some kind of moral authority -- yet we don't hold ourselves to the same standard that we hold others.
Huh? Iraq was and is a deeply unpopular wat that many Americans protested. Prosecuted on made up vs weapons of mass destruction. It was a disaster and plenty of Americans hated it ac much as the hate this BS war currently being prosecuted by russia.
Yes, but do we consider George W. a mad-man or a lunatic? No, we don't. Putin, in contrast, is viewed as an insane barbarian by many Americans.
We seem to view our stupid wars as entirely independent of our national character. Our wars-of-choice were just stupid mistakes. It doesn't mean that our leaders are evil or barbaric.
But when another country commits a similar act, their leaders are evil barbarians -- or, going a step further, we think that the people themselves (the Russians, in this case) are evil.
Why do we exhibit this asymmetric pattern of thinking in which our character is never stained by our mistakes, while other leaders are assumed to be the devil incarnate?
Bush was a democratically elected american president, not a dictator. I remember the disgust was and is shared by the architects of that war like rumsfeld and wolfowitz and cheney. And it was accepted and legal to actively protest that war and that was done by many americans.
I'm not sure what you are trying to say. Our conscience is clean with respect to the 900K deaths in Iraq because we are a democracy? That makes no sense. Surely you mean something else, but I'm not sure what.
Our conscience is not clear and we talk about it and fight about it and it enters into our elections. Politicians are still dragged over voting for this war.
And? America did not become a pariah nation and its citizens were not affected. Not sure how internal political hassles in any way reflect accountability for the invasion and attendant body count.
America didn't threaten to nuke the world if anyone intervened. Russia has. They'll even nuke you, regardless of your proselytizing for them.
Anonymous wrote:
A fire started near a nuclear power plant means that Putin is a barbarian, while 900K Iraqi deaths mean nothing at all, in your view?
DP. I don't understand your main point. You're saying that US invading Iraq is the same as and as bad as Russia invading Ukraine.
Either you're disingenuos or you really don't know what's going on. Russia is not invading Ukraine on any real-or-fictitious pretext. They are trying to expand their country. Whatever theory of "we're taking their oil", the US never intended to make Iraq the 51st state.
We don't fuss about internal disorder (China and the Ughyrs). That won't start WWIII. A land war of expansion in Europe? That's a different kettle of fish.
Ooh child you’re saying there’s bad invasions and, like, virtuous invasions? When we invade, it ain’t all bad?
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.
Sweet summer child. How do you think no fly zones are enforced? How do you think Russia responds - the country that’s literally attacking and obliterating a sovereign nation, bombing schools and hospitals, and dangling nuclear weapons on “high alert”?
This is “check”. Unless the west wants WWIII, there’s no no fly zones.
DP here. I think far too many of us are in denial that the opening volleys of WWIII have already been lobbed. I don't personally want to advocate for a no-fly zone, and I've never been happier not to be responsible for such a decision, but I also think that this doesn't end at the Ukrainian border. The question is really when do we want to get into the fight.
And why were didthe WWIII not start when the U.S. invaded Iraq? You do see a hypocrosy here We are to die for Ukraine and cause the world to die, but we "liberated" Iraq?
Iraq = / = Russia in terms of military might. Period. Not sure what you’re suggesting is hypocrisy. If it’s the fact that we are treating Putin as a dangerous invader who must be stopped but also carries nuclear might and missiles aimed at the US and other targets, but didn’t take that same approach with Iraq, you’re right. But that’s fact not hypocrisy.
How is that not a hypocrisy? Why did Russia and the world not punish us for that act?
Why are you equating Iraq with Ukraine? As in, what is the parallel and equivalence you are drawing?
Why should I not equate it?
Oh, and at least Russia has some connection to Ukraine, historical that is. U.S. had no such thing with Iraq.
Oh, Russia had some historical connection to Ukraine, so that makes it OK for them to kill pregnants Ukrainian women and their children?
It doesn't make it OK. But the point is that USA hasn't exactly provided a great example to the world, have we, with respect to how we treat smaller, less powerful countries? We seem to view Putin as a barbarian -- but, so far, he has less blood on his hands that George Bush Jr, and perhaps a couple other presidents as well. 900K dead in Iraq. That is a staggering number. We pretend to have some kind of moral authority -- yet we don't hold ourselves to the same standard that we hold others.
Huh? Iraq was and is a deeply unpopular wat that many Americans protested. Prosecuted on made up vs weapons of mass destruction. It was a disaster and plenty of Americans hated it ac much as the hate this BS war currently being prosecuted by russia.
Yes, but do we consider George W. a mad-man or a lunatic? No, we don't. Putin, in contrast, is viewed as an insane barbarian by many Americans.
We seem to view our stupid wars as entirely independent of our national character. Our wars-of-choice were just stupid mistakes. It doesn't mean that our leaders are evil or barbaric.
But when another country commits a similar act, their leaders are evil barbarians -- or, going a step further, we think that the people themselves (the Russians, in this case) are evil.
Why do we exhibit this asymmetric pattern of thinking in which our character is never stained by our mistakes, while other leaders are assumed to be the devil incarnate?
Bush was a democratically elected american president, not a dictator. I remember the disgust was and is shared by the architects of that war like rumsfeld and wolfowitz and cheney. And it was accepted and legal to actively protest that war and that was done by many americans.
I'm not sure what you are trying to say. Our conscience is clean with respect to the 900K deaths in Iraq because we are a democracy? That makes no sense. Surely you mean something else, but I'm not sure what.
Our conscience is not clear and we talk about it and fight about it and it enters into our elections. Politicians are still dragged over voting for this war.
And? America did not become a pariah nation and its citizens were not affected. Not sure how internal political hassles in any way reflect accountability for the invasion and attendant body count.
America didn't threaten to nuke the world if anyone intervened. Russia has. They'll even nuke you, regardless of your proselytizing for them.
I got you. Invading others is ok as long as you don’t threaten people who don’t like you.
Zelensky said today that he might be willing to abandon hopes for NATO membership. So as much as the Russian military has underperformed, they’ve potentially done enough to strongarm Zelensky into considering a major compromise.
Anonymous wrote:
A fire started near a nuclear power plant means that Putin is a barbarian, while 900K Iraqi deaths mean nothing at all, in your view?
DP. I don't understand your main point. You're saying that US invading Iraq is the same as and as bad as Russia invading Ukraine.
Either you're disingenuos or you really don't know what's going on. Russia is not invading Ukraine on any real-or-fictitious pretext. They are trying to expand their country. Whatever theory of "we're taking their oil", the US never intended to make Iraq the 51st state.
We don't fuss about internal disorder (China and the Ughyrs). That won't start WWIII. A land war of expansion in Europe? That's a different kettle of fish.
Ooh child you’re saying there’s bad invasions and, like, virtuous invasions? When we invade, it ain’t all bad?
Why are you trying to make Russia's invasion of Ukraine about us?
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.
Sweet summer child. How do you think no fly zones are enforced? How do you think Russia responds - the country that’s literally attacking and obliterating a sovereign nation, bombing schools and hospitals, and dangling nuclear weapons on “high alert”?
This is “check”. Unless the west wants WWIII, there’s no no fly zones.
DP here. I think far too many of us are in denial that the opening volleys of WWIII have already been lobbed. I don't personally want to advocate for a no-fly zone, and I've never been happier not to be responsible for such a decision, but I also think that this doesn't end at the Ukrainian border. The question is really when do we want to get into the fight.
And why were didthe WWIII not start when the U.S. invaded Iraq? You do see a hypocrosy here We are to die for Ukraine and cause the world to die, but we "liberated" Iraq?
Iraq = / = Russia in terms of military might. Period. Not sure what you’re suggesting is hypocrisy. If it’s the fact that we are treating Putin as a dangerous invader who must be stopped but also carries nuclear might and missiles aimed at the US and other targets, but didn’t take that same approach with Iraq, you’re right. But that’s fact not hypocrisy.
How is that not a hypocrisy? Why did Russia and the world not punish us for that act?
Why are you equating Iraq with Ukraine? As in, what is the parallel and equivalence you are drawing?
Why should I not equate it?
Oh, and at least Russia has some connection to Ukraine, historical that is. U.S. had no such thing with Iraq.
Oh, Russia had some historical connection to Ukraine, so that makes it OK for them to kill pregnants Ukrainian women and their children?
It doesn't make it OK. But the point is that USA hasn't exactly provided a great example to the world, have we, with respect to how we treat smaller, less powerful countries? We seem to view Putin as a barbarian -- but, so far, he has less blood on his hands that George Bush Jr, and perhaps a couple other presidents as well. 900K dead in Iraq. That is a staggering number. We pretend to have some kind of moral authority -- yet we don't hold ourselves to the same standard that we hold others.
Huh? Iraq was and is a deeply unpopular wat that many Americans protested. Prosecuted on made up vs weapons of mass destruction. It was a disaster and plenty of Americans hated it ac much as the hate this BS war currently being prosecuted by russia.
Yes, but do we consider George W. a mad-man or a lunatic? No, we don't. Putin, in contrast, is viewed as an insane barbarian by many Americans.
We seem to view our stupid wars as entirely independent of our national character. Our wars-of-choice were just stupid mistakes. It doesn't mean that our leaders are evil or barbaric.
But when another country commits a similar act, their leaders are evil barbarians -- or, going a step further, we think that the people themselves (the Russians, in this case) are evil.
Why do we exhibit this asymmetric pattern of thinking in which our character is never stained by our mistakes, while other leaders are assumed to be the devil incarnate?
Bush was a democratically elected american president, not a dictator. I remember the disgust was and is shared by the architects of that war like rumsfeld and wolfowitz and cheney. And it was accepted and legal to actively protest that war and that was done by many americans.
I'm not sure what you are trying to say. Our conscience is clean with respect to the 900K deaths in Iraq because we are a democracy? That makes no sense. Surely you mean something else, but I'm not sure what.
Our conscience is not clear and we talk about it and fight about it and it enters into our elections. Politicians are still dragged over voting for this war.
And? America did not become a pariah nation and its citizens were not affected. Not sure how internal political hassles in any way reflect accountability for the invasion and attendant body count.
America didn't threaten to nuke the world if anyone intervened. Russia has. They'll even nuke you, regardless of your proselytizing for them.
I got you. Invading others is ok as long as you don’t threaten people who don’t like you.
No, you don't got me, but whatever. You're pushing a childish talking point that might be relevant if you have the life experiences of an 8th grader.
Anonymous wrote:
A fire started near a nuclear power plant means that Putin is a barbarian, while 900K Iraqi deaths mean nothing at all, in your view?
DP. I don't understand your main point. You're saying that US invading Iraq is the same as and as bad as Russia invading Ukraine.
Either you're disingenuos or you really don't know what's going on. Russia is not invading Ukraine on any real-or-fictitious pretext. They are trying to expand their country. Whatever theory of "we're taking their oil", the US never intended to make Iraq the 51st state.
We don't fuss about internal disorder (China and the Ughyrs). That won't start WWIII. A land war of expansion in Europe? That's a different kettle of fish.
Ooh child you’re saying there’s bad invasions and, like, virtuous invasions? When we invade, it ain’t all bad?
Hi, adult. I thought from as soon as Bush started blabbering about WMD that invading Iraq was one of the worst thing we've ever done. But I can see what's happening, understand the world. Unlike some...
Anonymous wrote:Zelensky said today that he might be willing to abandon hopes for NATO membership. So as much as the Russian military has underperformed, they’ve potentially done enough to strongarm Zelensky into considering a major compromise.
They performed like a bunch of terrorist thugs. Why call that a military?
Anonymous wrote:
A fire started near a nuclear power plant means that Putin is a barbarian, while 900K Iraqi deaths mean nothing at all, in your view?
DP. I don't understand your main point. You're saying that US invading Iraq is the same as and as bad as Russia invading Ukraine.
Either you're disingenuos or you really don't know what's going on. Russia is not invading Ukraine on any real-or-fictitious pretext. They are trying to expand their country. Whatever theory of "we're taking their oil", the US never intended to make Iraq the 51st state.
We don't fuss about internal disorder (China and the Ughyrs). That won't start WWIII. A land war of expansion in Europe? That's a different kettle of fish.
This is the MAIN Putin talking point, has been using it for a couple decades, with effectiveness too. Stop taking the bait.
Iraq was engulfed in sectarian violence before US entered the scene and continues to this day. The whole region is still fighting senseless sectarian wars. US made the strategic blunder of getting entangled in that region.
Anonymous wrote:Zelensky said today that he might be willing to abandon hopes for NATO membership. So as much as the Russian military has underperformed, they’ve potentially done enough to strongarm Zelensky into considering a major compromise.
They performed like a bunch of terrorist thugs. Why call that a military?
Whatever you call them, it appears Ukraine is open to a significant compromise to Moscow.
Anonymous wrote:Zelensky said today that he might be willing to abandon hopes for NATO membership. So as much as the Russian military has underperformed, they’ve potentially done enough to strongarm Zelensky into considering a major compromise.
This is the smart move to save his country.
It is a bitter pill to swallow -- having fought a brave fight and pushed back against Putin -- but if Ukraine fights this out to the bitter end there will be nothing left to fight for.
Anonymous wrote:Zelensky said today that he might be willing to abandon hopes for NATO membership. So as much as the Russian military has underperformed, they’ve potentially done enough to strongarm Zelensky into considering a major compromise.
This is the smart move to save his country.
It is a bitter pill to swallow -- having fought a brave fight and pushed back against Putin -- but if Ukraine fights this out to the bitter end there will be nothing left to fight for.
Abandoning NATO membership means he ultimately lost.
Anonymous wrote:
A fire started near a nuclear power plant means that Putin is a barbarian, while 900K Iraqi deaths mean nothing at all, in your view?
DP. I don't understand your main point. You're saying that US invading Iraq is the same as and as bad as Russia invading Ukraine.
Either you're disingenuos or you really don't know what's going on. Russia is not invading Ukraine on any real-or-fictitious pretext. They are trying to expand their country. Whatever theory of "we're taking their oil", the US never intended to make Iraq the 51st state.
We don't fuss about internal disorder (China and the Ughyrs). That won't start WWIII. A land war of expansion in Europe? That's a different kettle of fish.
Ooh child you’re saying there’s bad invasions and, like, virtuous invasions? When we invade, it ain’t all bad?
Hi, adult. I thought from as soon as Bush started blabbering about WMD that invading Iraq was one of the worst thing we've ever done. But I can see what's happening, understand the world. Unlike some...
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}