Zelensky NATO demand

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What possible benefit to the current NATO members is it for Ukraine, a country embroiled in a war, to join NATO?

Why would want to end up in a mutual defense pact with a country with an ongoing military invasion?

Russia does represent a threat to entire world as an unstable, amoral nuclear super power.

I hear you, but pretending the US is some how moral in contrast is a bit silly.

We’ve used a nuclear bomb in other human beings, and invaded multiple countries for absurd reasons leading to millions of innocent lives lost. Then read the history of the CIA.

The nuclear weapons were used to save the world from global domination, whereas Russia is threatening nuclear war because it can't win a military conquest to seize the territory of a former ally.

True that Korea and Vietnam were invaded, which was a shameful part of U.S. history. However, as you can see, the U.S. has learned much from those experiences and now visits both countries amicably as tourists. Granada, Afghanistan, were in response to hostages or 9/11 attack on American soil.

Iraq was pushed by the Republican party, and now we may know why?

Sorry Boris, your propaganda is lacking.

The Japanese were not going to dominate the world. Germany had already surrended when we dropped the bombs. The bombs were used solely to prevent the loss of more American soldiers at the cost of targeting non-combatants. The ethics are this decision are still questioned today.

No the ethics are not in question today. There would have been a magnitude great civilian death count with a US invasion of Japan.

A study done for Stimson's staff by William Shockley estimated that invading Japan would cost 1.7–4 million American casualties, including 400,000–800,000 fatalities, and five to ten million Japanese fatalities.

I beg to differ. There isn't a strong majority opinion about the morality of the actions taken by our government.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/08/04/70-years-after-hiroshima-opinions-have-shifted-on-use-of-atomic-bomb/

[Anonymous]

It’s sad and incredible that some on this thread equate US military actions with those of Russia and the like. Sure, the US is not perfect, but there is a MASSIVE difference. For example, compare how the US fights with precise bombs on military targets vs. Russia’s indiscriminate shelling of towns, civilian infrastructure, train stations, and civilian convoys. Sure, the US sometimes hits the wrong target, but ON THE WHOLE, the US actually fights MUCH more cleanly. Also, consider how prisoners of war are treated. Yes, the US lost its moral compass a bit immediately following 9/11, but we stopped those practices and they were the exception, not the rule. Russia ROUTINELY beats, tortures, and mutilates its POWs. Again, there is no equivalency.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s sad and incredible that some on this thread equate US military actions with those of Russia and the like. Sure, the US is not perfect, but there is a MASSIVE difference. For example, compare how the US fights with precise bombs on military targets vs. Russia’s indiscriminate shelling of towns, civilian infrastructure, train stations, and civilian convoys. Sure, the US sometimes hits the wrong target, but ON THE WHOLE, the US actually fights MUCH more cleanly. Also, consider how prisoners of war are treated. Yes, the US lost its moral compass a bit immediately following 9/11, but we stopped those practices and they were the exception, not the rule. Russia ROUTINELY beats, tortures, and mutilates its POWs. Again, there is no equivalency.

Russians actually target civilians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s sad and incredible that some on this thread equate US military actions with those of Russia and the like. Sure, the US is not perfect, but there is a MASSIVE difference. For example, compare how the US fights with precise bombs on military targets vs. Russia’s indiscriminate shelling of towns, civilian infrastructure, train stations, and civilian convoys. Sure, the US sometimes hits the wrong target, but ON THE WHOLE, the US actually fights MUCH more cleanly. Also, consider how prisoners of war are treated. Yes, the US lost its moral compass a bit immediately following 9/11, but we stopped those practices and they were the exception, not the rule. Russia ROUTINELY beats, tortures, and mutilates its POWs. Again, there is no equivalency.

Disagree completely. If we are standing in opposition to a deliberate and uncalled for war of aggression by Russia ( which we should), then we sure as sh!+ need to acknowledge our own sins. Calling out Russian war crimes and crimes against humanity without doing the same with regards to our own military and political leaders who betrayed our values is hypocrisy of the nth degree. I think the administration is mostly taking the right track with Ukraine and Russia but our penance is wholly incomplete until we fully acknowledge our failings and atone for our wars of aggression, especially those in the post-911 era. If this means offering up for prosecution in The Hague the Bushes, Cheneys, Wolfowitzes, Rices, Caseys, Petreuses, Sanchezes, etc. American exceptionalism should not just be a talking point but truly real.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s sad and incredible that some on this thread equate US military actions with those of Russia and the like. Sure, the US is not perfect, but there is a MASSIVE difference. For example, compare how the US fights with precise bombs on military targets vs. Russia’s indiscriminate shelling of towns, civilian infrastructure, train stations, and civilian convoys. Sure, the US sometimes hits the wrong target, but ON THE WHOLE, the US actually fights MUCH more cleanly. Also, consider how prisoners of war are treated. Yes, the US lost its moral compass a bit immediately following 9/11, but we stopped those practices and they were the exception, not the rule. Russia ROUTINELY beats, tortures, and mutilates its POWs. Again, there is no equivalency.

Disagree completely. If we are standing in opposition to a deliberate and uncalled for war of aggression by Russia ( which we should), then we sure as sh!+ need to acknowledge our own sins. Calling out Russian war crimes and crimes against humanity without doing the same with regards to our own military and political leaders who betrayed our values is hypocrisy of the nth degree. I think the administration is mostly taking the right track with Ukraine and Russia but our penance is wholly incomplete until we fully acknowledge our failings and atone for our wars of aggression, especially those in the post-911 era. If this means offering up for prosecution in The Hague the Bushes, Cheneys, Wolfowitzes, Rices, Caseys, Petreuses, Sanchezes, etc. American exceptionalism should not just be a talking point but truly real.

Never traveled abroad, have you. Or maybe just a tourist. Yeah. It shows.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s sad and incredible that some on this thread equate US military actions with those of Russia and the like. Sure, the US is not perfect, but there is a MASSIVE difference. For example, compare how the US fights with precise bombs on military targets vs. Russia’s indiscriminate shelling of towns, civilian infrastructure, train stations, and civilian convoys. Sure, the US sometimes hits the wrong target, but ON THE WHOLE, the US actually fights MUCH more cleanly. Also, consider how prisoners of war are treated. Yes, the US lost its moral compass a bit immediately following 9/11, but we stopped those practices and they were the exception, not the rule. Russia ROUTINELY beats, tortures, and mutilates its POWs. Again, there is no equivalency.

Disagree completely. If we are standing in opposition to a deliberate and uncalled for war of aggression by Russia ( which we should), then we sure as sh!+ need to acknowledge our own sins. Calling out Russian war crimes and crimes against humanity without doing the same with regards to our own military and political leaders who betrayed our values is hypocrisy of the nth degree. I think the administration is mostly taking the right track with Ukraine and Russia but our penance is wholly incomplete until we fully acknowledge our failings and atone for our wars of aggression, especially those in the post-911 era. If this means offering up for prosecution in The Hague the Bushes, Cheneys, Wolfowitzes, Rices, Caseys, Petreuses, Sanchezes, etc. American exceptionalism should not just be a talking point but truly real.

Never traveled abroad, have you. Or maybe just a tourist. Yeah. It shows.

Nah. You’re wrong. Your reply shows that your pretty much an intellectual tourist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The point is, Boris, what do you think will happen to Russia if the Ukraine War continues? What about a nuclear war?

If you truly love Russia, shouldn't you help stop the war?

Or is Russia just a fading civilization?

What do you want for Russia's children?

You're talking to voices in your head.

It is absolutely true. You can't deny it. You can't refute it. There is nothing in your propaganda quiver to shoot it full of holes. It's fact. It's reality. You want to claim you do not see what will clearly happen and yes, it is inevitable without a massive change in policy and philosophy.

Putin will not collect Russians from all over the world into his great dominion. As the world can plainly see, many Russians don't want to take over Ukraine.

"Over 194,000 Russians had entered Kazakhstan, Georgia and Finland by Tuesday. "
https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-putin-estonia-kazakhstan-finland-f99d72765b337307355cb7f6a6a8842a

True, there are those still patriotic and stupid enough to believe Russian news, the last of this generation's lemmings. But Russia is now scraping the bottom of that barrel and the children who will become of military age soon are about HALF THE NUMBER of this generation. Do the math Boris. What will happen if the far-right ultranationalist Chinese perceive Russia to be weak? How well will that go?

Do you like chess, Boris? If you were to play chess right now, what would your next move be? Russian chess wisdom is the person who attacks first and stays on the attack usually wins. The problem with Russian obsession with chess is that it assumes both sides start out equally, that the playing field is always 8x8, and pieces taken off the board don't come back to haunt you.

Putin's best move right now is to withdraw and reinforce. It's not a good move for him, but it would give a chance to re-strategize, or reach out (not strike out) into new directions, such as internally to reconsolidate his power now that he sees who his enemies are. The Fifth Column within Russia appears to be his own ultranationalists, who will most certainly turn against him soon. Are you one of those ultranationalists, Boris? Or are you nerus or vyrus who interacts to much with the West to ever be trusted again? If so, you know very well how your own Party plays their chess game. Sacrifices must be made. Good luck to you - I hope you are able stay in the game.

Putin’s best move was to not invade in the first place. He should have worked to ensure that the legal system is applied fairly in Russia. He should have fostered entrepreneurship and creativity and protected voting rights and freedom of speech.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What possible benefit to the current NATO members is it for Ukraine, a country embroiled in a war, to join NATO?

Why would want to end up in a mutual defense pact with a country with an ongoing military invasion?

Russia does represent a threat to entire world as an unstable, amoral nuclear super power.

I hear you, but pretending the US is some how moral in contrast is a bit silly.

We’ve used a nuclear bomb in other human beings, and invaded multiple countries for absurd reasons leading to millions of innocent lives lost. Then read the history of the CIA.

The nuclear weapons were used to save the world from global domination, whereas Russia is threatening nuclear war because it can't win a military conquest to seize the territory of a former ally.

True that Korea and Vietnam were invaded, which was a shameful part of U.S. history. However, as you can see, the U.S. has learned much from those experiences and now visits both countries amicably as tourists. Granada, Afghanistan, were in response to hostages or 9/11 attack on American soil.

Iraq was pushed by the Republican party, and now we may know why?

Sorry Boris, your propaganda is lacking.

Afghanistan did not attack the American soil.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The moment someone here calls someone else ‘Boris’, they show their true personality.

Had to make sure the right person got the message, no? Isn't that why 'Boris' calls out the 'Ukies' or 'хохол', is it not? Anonymous boards get so confusing sometimes.

Besides, no matter what is said, I believe the Russian population statistics make it quite clear what is currently happening in Russia. Putin's cult of personality is failing and no number of 'motherhood medals' to pop out quantity over quality will change the outcome. Only a fundamental change in policy and philosophy can reverse the trend, and he's too old to see it through.

The real question is what will happen to all the deep-cover agents pumped into the U.S. these past 15'ish years? They're either silenced and swept away by nuclear missiles, or silenced by their own people because they know too much and would prove an embarrassment or threat, or maybe will be traded away as future bargaining chips once Putin passes to earn goodwill with the West? Their future doesn't look too bright no matter how you look at it. The smart ones are probably already cutting deals with the FBI.

Why would someone in the US be swept away by nuclear missiles?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s sad and incredible that some on this thread equate US military actions with those of Russia and the like. Sure, the US is not perfect, but there is a MASSIVE difference. For example, compare how the US fights with precise bombs on military targets vs. Russia’s indiscriminate shelling of towns, civilian infrastructure, train stations, and civilian convoys. Sure, the US sometimes hits the wrong target, but ON THE WHOLE, the US actually fights MUCH more cleanly. Also, consider how prisoners of war are treated. Yes, the US lost its moral compass a bit immediately following 9/11, but we stopped those practices and they were the exception, not the rule. Russia ROUTINELY beats, tortures, and mutilates its POWs. Again, there is no equivalency.

The body count speaks for itself. The rest is just stories you tell yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s sad and incredible that some on this thread equate US military actions with those of Russia and the like. Sure, the US is not perfect, but there is a MASSIVE difference. For example, compare how the US fights with precise bombs on military targets vs. Russia’s indiscriminate shelling of towns, civilian infrastructure, train stations, and civilian convoys. Sure, the US sometimes hits the wrong target, but ON THE WHOLE, the US actually fights MUCH more cleanly. Also, consider how prisoners of war are treated. Yes, the US lost its moral compass a bit immediately following 9/11, but we stopped those practices and they were the exception, not the rule. Russia ROUTINELY beats, tortures, and mutilates its POWs. Again, there is no equivalency.

The body count speaks for itself. The rest is just stories you tell yourself.

Yes it does. So does the reasoning. We're not the ones defending a chosen war of genocidal agression. We're not defending torture, rape and castration. We're not defending nuclear threats against the entire world. We are not defending environmental terrorism. We are not the ones pretending. We are not the ones telling stories. And for what? Whataboutism is not a cause. Whataboutism is not a reason. Whataboutism is not a justification. Whataboutism is not an excuse.

[Anonymous]

When Europe is plunged into Depression, certain financial speculators will achieve a historic wealth transfer.

It’s not a conspiracy; it’s just what will happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When Europe is plunged into Depression, certain financial speculators will achieve a historic wealth transfer.

It’s not a conspiracy; it’s just what will happen.

Do you mean financial speculators like Donald Trump, Gerhard Schröder, and Silvio Berlusconi? I agree that they have been trying to plunge Europe into a Depression for many years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What possible benefit to the current NATO members is it for Ukraine, a country embroiled in a war, to join NATO?

Why would want to end up in a mutual defense pact with a country with an ongoing military invasion?

Russia does represent a threat to entire world as an unstable, amoral nuclear super power.

Only in your eyes. Multiple commentators, including diplomats who served in the region, have stated very clearly that Putin sees NATO encroachment into Georgia and Ukraine as a red line, and will respond. It's not like it hasn't been said or warned about, for years. You may disagree that this is where the line should be, but that is where it is for him. His response was entirely predictable, and it is a fact that his government tried to get a commitment from NATO not to engage with Ukraine by diplomatic means. When he didn't get it by diplomatic means, he proceeded to non-diplomatic means.

Let's not talk about morality, that word sounds funny when said with an American accent.

I don't think that's at all the consensus. It's becoming clearer that Putin made up the NATO excuse to justify his imperial aspirations. Ukraine had already promised not to join NATO. Russia is now pulling troops from Kaliningrad and the Finnish border to send to Ukraine. They are clearly not worried that NATO is a threat to Russia, proper.

In any case, Russia doesn't get to dictate the actions of sovereign countries and their decisions to make alliances with other sovereign counties. It just doesn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s sad and incredible that some on this thread equate US military actions with those of Russia and the like. Sure, the US is not perfect, but there is a MASSIVE difference. For example, compare how the US fights with precise bombs on military targets vs. Russia’s indiscriminate shelling of towns, civilian infrastructure, train stations, and civilian convoys. Sure, the US sometimes hits the wrong target, but ON THE WHOLE, the US actually fights MUCH more cleanly. Also, consider how prisoners of war are treated. Yes, the US lost its moral compass a bit immediately following 9/11, but we stopped those practices and they were the exception, not the rule. Russia ROUTINELY beats, tortures, and mutilates its POWs. Again, there is no equivalency.

Russia could use the same logic that the US exercised in WW2. In WW2, the Japanese were not going to surrender unconditionally. The US was not willing to spend more lives to force an unconditional surrender by the Japanese. The use of the atomic bomb forced the Japanese to finally surrender. Russia could employ the same logic. They want to end the loss of Russian lives in the war. They know that Ukraine is NOT going to surrender unconditionally. They won't conditionally surrender either. So the actions would be comparable. The reasons for these actions are the difference.

Russia has tried to swing the WW2 angle by claiming Nazis, but they haven't really proven it. They have made some vague territorial claims. We didn't attack Japan with occupation in mind or any misguided attempt to find hidden Nazis. But, we also didn't give the Japanese an opportunity for a conditional surrender. A conditional surrender was rejected at Yalta by the Allies for any Axis countries. It's not clear which Allies knew that the US could drop an atomic bomb and would almost certainly have to target civilian population centers in order to damage the Japanese war machine. Would the Allies have approved such measures instead of accepting a conditional surrender? No one knows.