Russia doesn't really need Crimea any more since it's lost control of the Black Sea. They're currently relocating/hiding the remainder of their fleet at Novorossiysk.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Surprise! When Europeans get a chance to vote on it, they vote against the war. This isn't some watered down version either, but Fico declared at a rally last week, adding that if his party wins it “will not send a single round [of ammunition] to Ukraine.”

https://www.rt.com/news/583844-slovakia-parliamentary-elections-results/

If the Russians were really allowed to vote, they’d vote against war too. But they’re under the rule of a failed dictatorship, so we won’t get to see that vote.

Wrong

You don’t know many Russians clearly

Yes a majority would vote for a cease fire and negotiations

But giving up crimea is a non starter.

A majority of even small L liberal Russians would not vote for a government that would negotiate over crimea

Russia annexed Crimea illegally.

Legitimate countries don’t just steal parts of other countries and then declare any discussions about their illegal aggressions are off the table.

Outrageous position.

Tell me you've never read a history book without telling me you never read a history book.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Surprise! When Europeans get a chance to vote on it, they vote against the war. This isn't some watered down version either, but Fico declared at a rally last week, adding that if his party wins it “will not send a single round [of ammunition] to Ukraine.”

https://www.rt.com/news/583844-slovakia-parliamentary-elections-results/

If the Russians were really allowed to vote, they’d vote against war too. But they’re under the rule of a failed dictatorship, so we won’t get to see that vote.

Wrong

You don’t know many Russians clearly

Yes a majority would vote for a cease fire and negotiations

But giving up crimea is a non starter.

A majority of even small L liberal Russians would not vote for a government that would negotiate over crimea

Russia annexed Crimea illegally.

Legitimate countries don’t just steal parts of other countries and then declare any discussions about their illegal aggressions are off the table.

Outrageous position.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The average Russian soldier make's it to 4 months before they die. 20 percent die within 8 weeks. Less than 1 percent make it to to 11 months.

I imagine Ukrainian numbers are similar.

It's a brutal war.

Ukrainians have a reason to fight. Russians are absolute scum. It's an imperial country looking to recreate the Soviet empire. There's no choice but to resist.

The upside is that Russia will never be a threat to the West again. They are getting wrecked. Have lost at least 50 percent of their military capabilities so far.

The situation is awful. What is interesting though are the pro-Russian Republicans in this country. Horrible people. Regan is rolling in his grave. Republicans used to stand for something. No longer apparently. Pathetic.

I'm conservative and basically favor funding Ukraine. The problem is in the messaging. The message Americans hear is that we are protecting a faraway democracy that we've never intervened to help, and that Biden didnt take steps to protect prior to the invasion. This is simply not a compelling message.

It would be better to level with Americans that while this is expensive, we are getting massive security returns by being able to bleed the Russian military without actually going to war. The idea that Rs love Russia is silly and false. Most Americans understand the need for strategic defense and would understand our involvement better if it were presented as an investment in our own security. Which is the real reason we are doing it-- no one suddenly loves Ukraine, they are a troubled and corrupt government.

Messaging, what messaging? The elites plunged us into a proxy war with a nuclear power without deigning to discuss the interests at stake.

Truly I don't understand what you are talking about with "Biden didnt' take steps to protect". Aid to Ukraine goes back to Trump. His attempt to cut off this aid led to one of his impeachments. Also the reasons for not creating a buildup of NATO weaponry prior to the invasion were clearly stated at the time. Tired of explaining it to people who can't read. Your starting point is the demand in 2021 that the west sign a treaty permanently banning Ukraine from NATO and demilitarizing Eastern Europe.

I'm not sure if you realize this, but we have sent Ukraine aid in the form of $113B since the invasion began, and also in weapons. We were not previously providing this much money under Trump, because this aid is explicitly to help Ukraine's defense. It's quite alarming to me that you're unaware of this and think that Congress is fighting over the continuation of pre-war era aid. That isnt the case. This is over 100B in aid, which makes it quite substantial.

Here's an article from WaPo on what I was referring to about the concern that Biden did little to prevent the invasion. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/01/20/bidens-minor-incursion-remark-was-more-than-just-gaffe-it-revealed-weak-president/

um. how exactly was Biden supposed to prevent the invasion? Ukraine wasn't a member of NATO and there was no US-Ukrainian defense pact in place. You expected him to fly thousands of troops Economy using blue passports, with weapons in their checked luggage? Yeah. Uh. That's a winner...

The point is MAGA stopped the funding for the interim. Russia is planning to increase it's 'defense' budget in '24, and I'll lay odds the majority of the increase will be utilized to influence US elections. People in the 'biz, you need to up your game. Don't do the stupid "we're monitoring and learning their techniques" or "we need to keep things serene and calm and pretend everything is fine". My take is anyone doing that is probably under influence. Intel needs to start exposing what operations are afoot before they can do damage. Disrupt, Deport or Arrest and make sure it gets in the news. The US should even consider shutdown of all US-based Russian consulates and 'cultural missions', deny Russian press credentials and temporarily curtail immigration until the Presidential elections are over on the basis of past election interference. This one's for all the marbles, folks.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The average Russian soldier make's it to 4 months before they die. 20 percent die within 8 weeks. Less than 1 percent make it to to 11 months.

I imagine Ukrainian numbers are similar.

It's a brutal war.

Ukrainians have a reason to fight. Russians are absolute scum. It's an imperial country looking to recreate the Soviet empire. There's no choice but to resist.

The upside is that Russia will never be a threat to the West again. They are getting wrecked. Have lost at least 50 percent of their military capabilities so far.

The situation is awful. What is interesting though are the pro-Russian Republicans in this country. Horrible people. Regan is rolling in his grave. Republicans used to stand for something. No longer apparently. Pathetic.

I'm conservative and basically favor funding Ukraine. The problem is in the messaging. The message Americans hear is that we are protecting a faraway democracy that we've never intervened to help, and that Biden didnt take steps to protect prior to the invasion. This is simply not a compelling message.

It would be better to level with Americans that while this is expensive, we are getting massive security returns by being able to bleed the Russian military without actually going to war. The idea that Rs love Russia is silly and false. Most Americans understand the need for strategic defense and would understand our involvement better if it were presented as an investment in our own security. Which is the real reason we are doing it-- no one suddenly loves Ukraine, they are a troubled and corrupt government.

Messaging, what messaging? The elites plunged us into a proxy war with a nuclear power without deigning to discuss the interests at stake.

Truly I don't understand what you are talking about with "Biden didnt' take steps to protect". Aid to Ukraine goes back to Trump. His attempt to cut off this aid led to one of his impeachments. Also the reasons for not creating a buildup of NATO weaponry prior to the invasion were clearly stated at the time. Tired of explaining it to people who can't read. Your starting point is the demand in 2021 that the west sign a treaty permanently banning Ukraine from NATO and demilitarizing Eastern Europe.

No Trump had a private meeting with Putin where Putin offered him money in exchange for not funding the Ukrainians. This is well know in the intelligence communities.

Also, whatever happened to President Trump's interpreter at that 2 on 2 meeting involving President Trump & President Putin ?

Ever since seeing the meeting on CNN, I wondered about his safety.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The average Russian soldier make's it to 4 months before they die. 20 percent die within 8 weeks. Less than 1 percent make it to to 11 months.

I imagine Ukrainian numbers are similar.

It's a brutal war.

Ukrainians have a reason to fight. Russians are absolute scum. It's an imperial country looking to recreate the Soviet empire. There's no choice but to resist.

The upside is that Russia will never be a threat to the West again. They are getting wrecked. Have lost at least 50 percent of their military capabilities so far.

The situation is awful. What is interesting though are the pro-Russian Republicans in this country. Horrible people. Regan is rolling in his grave. Republicans used to stand for something. No longer apparently. Pathetic.

I'm conservative and basically favor funding Ukraine. The problem is in the messaging. The message Americans hear is that we are protecting a faraway democracy that we've never intervened to help, and that Biden didnt take steps to protect prior to the invasion. This is simply not a compelling message.

It would be better to level with Americans that while this is expensive, we are getting massive security returns by being able to bleed the Russian military without actually going to war. The idea that Rs love Russia is silly and false. Most Americans understand the need for strategic defense and would understand our involvement better if it were presented as an investment in our own security. Which is the real reason we are doing it-- no one suddenly loves Ukraine, they are a troubled and corrupt government.

Messaging, what messaging? The elites plunged us into a proxy war with a nuclear power without deigning to discuss the interests at stake.

Truly I don't understand what you are talking about with "Biden didnt' take steps to protect". Aid to Ukraine goes back to Trump. His attempt to cut off this aid led to one of his impeachments. Also the reasons for not creating a buildup of NATO weaponry prior to the invasion were clearly stated at the time. Tired of explaining it to people who can't read. Your starting point is the demand in 2021 that the west sign a treaty permanently banning Ukraine from NATO and demilitarizing Eastern Europe.

No Trump had a private meeting with Putin where Putin offered him money in exchange for not funding the Ukrainians. This is well know in the intelligence communities.

I do not know whether or not the above is true, but it makes sense and is worth repeating so that voters can be aware that this is a real possibility.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Surprise! When Europeans get a chance to vote on it, they vote against the war. This isn't some watered down version either, but Fico declared at a rally last week, adding that if his party wins it “will not send a single round [of ammunition] to Ukraine.”

https://www.rt.com/news/583844-slovakia-parliamentary-elections-results/

If the Russians were really allowed to vote, they’d vote against war too. But they’re under the rule of a failed dictatorship, so we won’t get to see that vote.

Wrong

You don’t know many Russians clearly

Yes a majority would vote for a cease fire and negotiations

But giving up crimea is a non starter.

A majority of even small L liberal Russians would not vote for a government that would negotiate over crimea

In fact, I do. I’m married to one.

And if he is being honest he will tell you there is no majority constituency in Russia that would willingly give up crimea. It’s a red line and not a “mulatto line” voiced by Obama

Nevertheless it’s pointless, Russia will freeze the lines of control as they are.

Yes, but Crimea is more doable than the Donbas

Russia is not freezing Crimea. It's not their choice

Russia started this shit. They will pay the consequences. Russians will continue to die. And that's ok.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Surprise! When Europeans get a chance to vote on it, they vote against the war. This isn't some watered down version either, but Fico declared at a rally last week, adding that if his party wins it “will not send a single round [of ammunition] to Ukraine.”

https://www.rt.com/news/583844-slovakia-parliamentary-elections-results/

If the Russians were really allowed to vote, they’d vote against war too. But they’re under the rule of a failed dictatorship, so we won’t get to see that vote.

Wrong

You don’t know many Russians clearly

Yes a majority would vote for a cease fire and negotiations

But giving up crimea is a non starter.

A majority of even small L liberal Russians would not vote for a government that would negotiate over crimea

In fact, I do. I’m married to one.

And if he is being honest he will tell you there is no majority constituency in Russia that would willingly give up crimea. It’s a red line and not a “mulatto line” voiced by Obama

Nevertheless it’s pointless, Russia will freeze the lines of control as they are.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Surprise! When Europeans get a chance to vote on it, they vote against the war. This isn't some watered down version either, but Fico declared at a rally last week, adding that if his party wins it “will not send a single round [of ammunition] to Ukraine.”

https://www.rt.com/news/583844-slovakia-parliamentary-elections-results/

If the Russians were really allowed to vote, they’d vote against war too. But they’re under the rule of a failed dictatorship, so we won’t get to see that vote.

Wrong

You don’t know many Russians clearly

Yes a majority would vote for a cease fire and negotiations

But giving up crimea is a non starter.

A majority of even small L liberal Russians would not vote for a government that would negotiate over crimea

In fact, I do. I’m married to one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Surprise! When Europeans get a chance to vote on it, they vote against the war. This isn't some watered down version either, but Fico declared at a rally last week, adding that if his party wins it “will not send a single round [of ammunition] to Ukraine.”

https://www.rt.com/news/583844-slovakia-parliamentary-elections-results/

If the Russians were really allowed to vote, they’d vote against war too. But they’re under the rule of a failed dictatorship, so we won’t get to see that vote.

Wrong

You don’t know many Russians clearly

Yes a majority would vote for a cease fire and negotiations

But giving up crimea is a non starter.

A majority of even small L liberal Russians would not vote for a government that would negotiate over crimea

Anonymous wrote:Surprise! When Europeans get a chance to vote on it, they vote against the war. This isn't some watered down version either, but Fico declared at a rally last week, adding that if his party wins it “will not send a single round [of ammunition] to Ukraine.”

https://www.rt.com/news/583844-slovakia-parliamentary-elections-results/

If the Russians were really allowed to vote, they’d vote against war too. But they’re under the rule of a failed dictatorship, so we won’t get to see that vote.

Anonymous wrote:Surprise! When Europeans get a chance to vote on it, they vote against the war. This isn't some watered down version either, but Fico declared at a rally last week, adding that if his party wins it “will not send a single round [of ammunition] to Ukraine.”

https://www.rt.com/news/583844-slovakia-parliamentary-elections-results/

Love the RT links.

Not even trying anymore

It's clear that Republicans are dimwitted bad people. It should be pretty apparent they're being played. Sad situation

Anonymous wrote:Surprise! When Europeans get a chance to vote on it, they vote against the war. This isn't some watered down version either, but Fico declared at a rally last week, adding that if his party wins it “will not send a single round [of ammunition] to Ukraine.”

https://www.rt.com/news/583844-slovakia-parliamentary-elections-results/

Just the European version of MAGA, tools of Putin.

Surprise! When Europeans get a chance to vote on it, they vote against the war. This isn't some watered down version either, but Fico declared at a rally last week, adding that if his party wins it “will not send a single round [of ammunition] to Ukraine.”

https://www.rt.com/news/583844-slovakia-parliamentary-elections-results/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The average Russian soldier make's it to 4 months before they die. 20 percent die within 8 weeks. Less than 1 percent make it to to 11 months.

I imagine Ukrainian numbers are similar.

It's a brutal war.

Ukrainians have a reason to fight. Russians are absolute scum. It's an imperial country looking to recreate the Soviet empire. There's no choice but to resist.

The upside is that Russia will never be a threat to the West again. They are getting wrecked. Have lost at least 50 percent of their military capabilities so far.

The situation is awful. What is interesting though are the pro-Russian Republicans in this country. Horrible people. Regan is rolling in his grave. Republicans used to stand for something. No longer apparently. Pathetic.

I'm conservative and basically favor funding Ukraine. The problem is in the messaging. The message Americans hear is that we are protecting a faraway democracy that we've never intervened to help, and that Biden didnt take steps to protect prior to the invasion. This is simply not a compelling message.

It would be better to level with Americans that while this is expensive, we are getting massive security returns by being able to bleed the Russian military without actually going to war. The idea that Rs love Russia is silly and false. Most Americans understand the need for strategic defense and would understand our involvement better if it were presented as an investment in our own security. Which is the real reason we are doing it-- no one suddenly loves Ukraine, they are a troubled and corrupt government.

Messaging, what messaging? The elites plunged us into a proxy war with a nuclear power without deigning to discuss the interests at stake.

Truly I don't understand what you are talking about with "Biden didnt' take steps to protect". Aid to Ukraine goes back to Trump. His attempt to cut off this aid led to one of his impeachments. Also the reasons for not creating a buildup of NATO weaponry prior to the invasion were clearly stated at the time. Tired of explaining it to people who can't read. Your starting point is the demand in 2021 that the west sign a treaty permanently banning Ukraine from NATO and demilitarizing Eastern Europe.

No Trump had a private meeting with Putin where Putin offered him money in exchange for not funding the Ukrainians. This is well know in the intelligence communities.