Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why Israel? Israeli hate Ukrainians more than Russians hate them.
Jews are more than aware that Ukrainians were constantly committing pogroms against them and joined Fascist kill squads en masse. I am confused as to why Isreal would be helping Ukranians. Unless it is not, and it is a pretense.

When was that? 90 years ago?

Anonymous wrote:Why Israel? Israeli hate Ukrainians more than Russians hate them.
Jews are more than aware that Ukrainians were constantly committing pogroms against them and joined Fascist kill squads en masse. I am confused as to why Isreal would be helping Ukranians. Unless it is not, and it is a pretense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who is trying to negotiate a settlement between Russia and Ukraine right now? Other than themselves.

Israel.

I see reports there was a meeting a few weeks ago. I don't see anything new really. Obviously, sanctions didn't do anything. We have sanctioned Cuba since 1960s when Russia put nukes at our front door. Been over 60 years.

Sanctions are just a long term, slow way of draining a country of any military potency. It’s like shelling, in a way - lasts long, many casualties, and eventually the country can’t be aggressive any more. But since a country that large has never been sanctioned before it remains to be seen how effective it is. Its regular citizens are sure to live a miserable life though.

Anonymous wrote:Their outfits being yellow is just coincidence. They graduated from the same school and that the schools colors.

Bad imagery for Russia - it you think they made them themselves or something? That they were not built months ago?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who is trying to negotiate a settlement between Russia and Ukraine right now? Other than themselves.

Israel.

I see reports there was a meeting a few weeks ago. I don't see anything new really. Obviously, sanctions didn't do anything. We have sanctioned Cuba since 1960s when Russia put nukes at our front door. Been over 60 years.

Sanctions are just a long term, slow way of draining a country of any military potency. It’s like shelling, in a way - lasts long, many casualties, and eventually the country can’t be aggressive any more. But since a country that large has never been sanctioned before it remains to be seen how effective it is. Its regular citizens are sure to live a miserable life though.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Erdogan had a phone call with Putin and these are his 4 demands for a cease fire:

• Ukraine to be neutral, no NATO membership
• Disarmament
• De-Nazification
• Zelensky agreeing negotiations on Donbas with Putin

https://twitter.com/ragipsoylu/status/1504793432052666368?s=20&t=Ehjiem5GqGA2cbUTX-kfdg

I guess no one has the guts to tell the Big Guy he's losing.

This is easy enough to do. Both save face.

1 is easy, wouldn’t have happened anyway
2 means no foreign military bases in the country. It can keep its army.
3 can be a meaningless ritual like a decree banning nazi ideology and display or smth
4 is de facto reality, just needs documentation

Done.

Zelensky doesn't need to save face. He's done NOTHING to provoke this. Putin has gotten himself so backed into a corner, he will never be able to step away. And if he did, it'd only be a matter of time until he pulled this stunt again. When will some of you understand you CANNOT appease someone like Putin (or Trump).

The only off-ramp is a fresh pair of underwear for Putin.

Zelensky doesn’t need to save face, true, but the sooner peace comes, the better for him.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who is trying to negotiate a settlement between Russia and Ukraine right now? Other than themselves.

Israel.

I see reports there was a meeting a few weeks ago. I don't see anything new really. Obviously, sanctions didn't do anything. We have sanctioned Cuba since 1960s when Russia put nukes at our front door. Been over 60 years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
From CNN live updates:

US President Joe Biden called Russian President Vladimir Putin a "pure thug" while speaking at a St. Patrick's Day event Thursday.

https://www.cnn.com/europe/live-news/ukraine-russia-putin-news-03-17-22/index.html

Highly undiplomatic... but perfectly true.

He also called him a war criminal yesterday. Telling it like it is.

Agree that Putin is a blatant war criminal, but Biden is as well. Voted for Iraq and Afghanistan wars which whether you like it or not were essentially the same
thing Putin is doing — “the regime is [anti-democracy / nazis] and they have [weapons of mass destruction / biolabs]”. Also has been arming Ukrainian nationalists and sent CIA to train them in their battle against Donbas separatists. Armed the Free Syria Army against Assad and many of the weapons ended up in ISIS hands. Supported bloody Libya coup. Not to mention all the drone strikes under Biden and Obama. Prolific, prolific war criminal just like Putin. Both men will burn in hell because there is nothing more shameful than sowing death and destruction during your time on earth.

To be fair, all US presidents have overseen foreign military adventures--covert or otherwise--resulting in death and destruction. As a nation, we were founded through violence and we promote our interests abroad with violence. We are also the world's largest arms dealer, not to mention the country with the most armed citizens (but that's a whole other subject). So Biden is just one more in a long line of presidents who have exerted American power through violent means.

Yep. I guess the founding fathers are war criminals, too, and are roasting in hell right now.

And so is Abraham Lincoln.

One key difference between Lincoln and Putin is that Putin waited 30 years after Ukraine's separation from Russia to attempt to pull them back into the fold, while Lincoln to action immediately. But that doesn't change the fact that Lincoln has a lot of blood on his hands -- yet we consider him one of our greatest presidents .. perhaps the greatest of all.

It is interesting that some leaders who have attempted to expand their territory are considered evil, while others are heroes. What is the criteria for determining which expansionist leader is a hero and which is a monster?

Catherine the Great conquered that land—Novorossiya. Immediately before that, it wasn’t part of Russia. In Lincoln’s case the enslaver states were not another country. In the case of Putin, Ukraine is a country with an established government, president and people.

Do we consider Lincoln one of our greatest presidents? I thought just Trump did, because he sure talked about Lincoln a lot.

If the US (Bush and Condoleeza Rice) had not said that Ukraine would become part of NATO one day, maybe this war would not have happened.

I agree with your final point. I believe Bush and Rice made a serious mistake indicating that Ukraine could eventually enter NATO. This created fear in Russia, political divisions in Ukraine, and an illusory goal that never really had a serious chance of becoming reality.

We can only speculate, but perhaps Russian internal politics might have evolved in a more benign direction had the West never floated the idea of Ukraine entering NATO.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who is trying to negotiate a settlement between Russia and Ukraine right now? Other than themselves.

Israel.

Anonymous wrote:Who is trying to negotiate a settlement between Russia and Ukraine right now? Other than themselves.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
From CNN live updates:

US President Joe Biden called Russian President Vladimir Putin a "pure thug" while speaking at a St. Patrick's Day event Thursday.

https://www.cnn.com/europe/live-news/ukraine-russia-putin-news-03-17-22/index.html

Highly undiplomatic... but perfectly true.

He also called him a war criminal yesterday. Telling it like it is.

Agree that Putin is a blatant war criminal, but Biden is as well. Voted for Iraq and Afghanistan wars which whether you like it or not were essentially the same
thing Putin is doing — “the regime is [anti-democracy / nazis] and they have [weapons of mass destruction / biolabs]”. Also has been arming Ukrainian nationalists and sent CIA to train them in their battle against Donbas separatists. Armed the Free Syria Army against Assad and many of the weapons ended up in ISIS hands. Supported bloody Libya coup. Not to mention all the drone strikes under Biden and Obama. Prolific, prolific war criminal just like Putin. Both men will burn in hell because there is nothing more shameful than sowing death and destruction during your time on earth.

To be fair, all US presidents have overseen foreign military adventures--covert or otherwise--resulting in death and destruction. As a nation, we were founded through violence and we promote our interests abroad with violence. We are also the world's largest arms dealer, not to mention the country with the most armed citizens (but that's a whole other subject). So Biden is just one more in a long line of presidents who have exerted American power through violent means.

Yep. I guess the founding fathers are war criminals, too, and are roasting in hell right now.

And so is Abraham Lincoln.

One key difference between Lincoln and Putin is that Putin waited 30 years after Ukraine's separation from Russia to attempt to pull them back into the fold, while Lincoln to action immediately. But that doesn't change the fact that Lincoln has a lot of blood on his hands -- yet we consider him one of our greatest presidents .. perhaps the greatest of all.

It is interesting that some leaders who have attempted to expand their territory are considered evil, while others are heroes. What is the criteria for determining which expansionist leader is a hero and which is a monster?

Catherine the Great conquered that land—Novorossiya. Immediately before that, it wasn’t part of Russia. In Lincoln’s case the enslaver states were not another country. In the case of Putin, Ukraine is a country with an established government, president and people.

Do we consider Lincoln one of our greatest presidents? I thought just Trump did, because he sure talked about Lincoln a lot.

If the US (Bush and Condoleeza Rice) had not said that Ukraine would become part of NATO one day, maybe this war would not have happened.

I agree with your final point. I believe Bush and Rice made a serious mistake indicating that Ukraine could eventually enter NATO. This created fear in Russia, political divisions in Ukraine, and an illusory goal that never really had a serious chance of becoming reality.

We can only speculate, but perhaps Russian internal politics might have evolved in a more benign direction had the West never floated the idea of Ukraine entering NATO.