tmay said:

boltsfan17 said:

genovelle said:

tmay said:

danox said:

9secondkox2 said:

Weak. 

Gotta love the pundits Talking up this cop out like it’s something amazing. 

America is supposed to be the international policeman. Walking softly but carrying a big stick to use when necessary. 

Instead of defending freedom, we stand by and watch it crushed while shaking dollar signs the the bad guys with missiles. 

Putin has China as an ally and Russia counterfeits American goods anyway. This isn’t going to do squat unfortunately. 

Sanctions suck. Go and do some good in the world. Add the sanctions to that. 

You let a bully beat up other kids and he just gets worse. Not looking good. 

God help Ukraine. 

Ukraine had 20 years before Putin to get their corrupt selves together they didn’t, see Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania for a lesson on how it’s done….They thought they were special….

I'll repost this;

To the surprise of everyone in Moscow, Kyiv, Brussels, and Washington, Yanukovych’s decision to scuttle this agreement with the EU triggered mass demonstrations in Ukraine again, bringing hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians into the streets in what would become known as the Euromaidan or “Revolution of Dignity” to protest Yanukovych’s turn away from the democratic West. The street protests lasted several weeks, punctuated by the killing of dozens of peaceful protestors by Yanukovych’s government, the eventual collapse of that government and Yanukovych’s flight to Russia in February 2014, and a new pro-Western government taking power in Kyiv. Putin had “lost” Ukraine for the second time in a decade.

Yeah, having that shot at democracy in 2014 hasn't worked out perfectly, but it is evident that Ukraine wants to succeed. Putin can't allow that, hence, the invasion.

Putin has succeeded in further dividing the US and helping diminish us as a beacon for democracy, so he is attempting to use this moment in time to make his move. 

When you have a President who's foreign policy has been a complete disaster, it makes sense Putin would make his move for Ukraine. Putin is essentially playing chess while Biden is playing checkers. Putin was probably laughing histerically as Biden announced the sanctions that will do nothing to stop Russia. 

Compared to the previous Trump administration, Biden's administration is hitting nothing but home runs. But of course, Biden did have to clean up the mess that Trump left...

Thanks for playing though.

tmay said:

GeorgeBMac said:

JWSC said:

tmay said:

JWSC said:

GeorgeBMac said:

tmay said:

GeorgeBMac said:

22july2013 said:

tmay said:

... Stupid.   Very, very stupid.

The post above is chock full of misinformation.
Given the many times that I have countered George since he has been here, I'll spare you the details. Do your own searches on the details.

It's actually entertaining whenever GBM speaks. I always wonder how he's going to defend brutal dictatorships, and he always manages. I would like to have seen him defend the dictatorships back around 1940.

I wish websites like this would have a way we could block certain users from being seen by us. I know a few people would block me, but I think GBM would take top spot.

I don;t defend "brutal dictatorships".

But I do object to instigating totally unnecessary wars.

All we have to do is guarantee that NATO will not threaten Russia by moving into (another of) its neighbor(s).

But, we instead favor war.   Economic war (at least for us).  But still, war.

Who is going to pay for this war of ours?   As usual, it will be us.

But, I am sorry if the truth does not support your war mongering imperialism.  Perhaps it is YOU that should be blocked?

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/china/2022-02-21/chinas-ukraine-crisis?utm_campaign=tw_daily_soc&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter_posts

The Ukraine crisis is primarily a standoff between Russia and the West, but off to the side, another player stands awkwardly: China. Beijing has tried to walk a fine line on Ukraine. On one hand, it has taken Russia’s side, blaming NATO expansion for causing the crisis and alleging that U.S. predictions of an imminent invasion are aggravating it. On the other hand, especially as the risk of military conflict has grown, it has called for diplomacy over war. 

If Beijing had its way, it would maintain strong ties with Moscow, safeguard its trade relationship with Ukraine, keep the EU in its economic orbit, and avoid the spillover from U.S. and EU sanctions on Moscow—all while preventing relations with the United States from significantly deteriorating. Securing any one of these objectives may well be possible. Achieving all of them is not. 

If Russia invades Ukraine, Beijing could throw Moscow a lifeline: economic relief to alleviate the effect of U.S. sanctions. But doing so would damage Chinese relations with Europe, invite severe repercussions from Washington, and drive traditionally nonaligned countries such as India further into the arms of the West. If Beijing snubs Moscow, by contrast, it may weaken its closest strategic partnership at a time when, given deteriorating security in Asia, it is most in need of outside help.

China should throw Russia under the bus, because Russia is already a failed state, and it wouldn't take much for it to collapse yet again. Might as well give it a push.

We are pushing Russia and China (and a few others) together. 

We are falling back on our last bullet:  financial sanctions  -- and we not using it wisely.   Soon they will have a work-around (actually, they probably already do).

We should have settled this while we could.

As all of you know, I rarely agree with George. But in the above statement he is absolutely right.  The bombastic antagonism we have we heard coming from the US and UK has only exacerbated an already tense situation. We are pushing our adversaries together while implementing ineffective policies.

It was not inevitable that Putin would choose to invade. But from a political standpoint we pushed him into it. We armed and provided intelligence to an adversarial government along their border. We advocated that the Ukraine stand it’s ground and attempt to regain control of the Russian language dominated regions. In doing so we provided political ammunition to Putin to make the case to the Russian people that Ukraine was a threat. It’s a spectacular fail.

And why should we care about a spat between two kleptocratic regimes that could care less about their own citizens.  All we have done is help to fan the flames of war, sans evidence (you just have to trust us - right), which will end up getting those caught in the middle killed. If two decades of intelligence failure isn’t enough to teach us to beware of government spokespeople, I don’t know what is.

None of what you stated is accurate, but please, keep digging.

This whole "the West made Putin do it" meme is complete and utter bullshit.

Guess what Russia was doing up until yesterday in those "Russian Language Dominated regions"? Did you guess false flag operations that were so poorly thought out, that the video's that were posted became the evidence of the false flag operations. 

https://www.jpost.com/international/article-698132

Pro-Russia forces commit 'false flag' op, shelling from civilian areas - Ukraine MoD

"In the absence of any aggressive action by Ukrainian defenders, the invaders themselves blow up infrastructure facilities in the occupied territories and carry out chaotic shelling of settlements."

Oh yeah, the West made them do that...

Perhaps you are aware that Russia, the Ukraine, the US and the UK are waging vociferous disinformation campaigns through their various media mouthpieces.  At this point I trust the NYT or WaPo no more than TASS.  They all repeat what their government contacts tell them without doing any independent investigation.
...

I seem to remember playing this game once before, not too long ago.

I follow a lot of different independent journalists, from many different countries. Guess what I found out?
  
Excepting authoritarians, no on likes Putin. Given that Russian citizens don't really have a choice, it's hard to imagine anyone liking Putin at all. Go figure.

tmay said:

GeorgeBMac said:

tmay said:

GeorgeBMac said:

tmay said:

GeorgeBMac said:

tmay said:

GeorgeBMac said:

22july2013 said:

tmay said:

... Stupid.   Very, very stupid.

The post above is chock full of misinformation.
Given the many times that I have countered George since he has been here, I'll spare you the details. Do your own searches on the details.

It's actually entertaining whenever GBM speaks. I always wonder how he's going to defend brutal dictatorships, and he always manages. I would like to have seen him defend the dictatorships back around 1940.

I wish websites like this would have a way we could block certain users from being seen by us. I know a few people would block me, but I think GBM would take top spot.

I don;t defend "brutal dictatorships".

But I do object to instigating totally unnecessary wars.

All we have to do is guarantee that NATO will not threaten Russia by moving into (another of) its neighbor(s).

But, we instead favor war.   Economic war (at least for us).  But still, war.

Who is going to pay for this war of ours?   As usual, it will be us.

But, I am sorry if the truth does not support your war mongering imperialism.  Perhaps it is YOU that should be blocked?

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/china/2022-02-21/chinas-ukraine-crisis?utm_campaign=tw_daily_soc&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter_posts

The Ukraine crisis is primarily a standoff between Russia and the West, but off to the side, another player stands awkwardly: China. Beijing has tried to walk a fine line on Ukraine. On one hand, it has taken Russia’s side, blaming NATO expansion for causing the crisis and alleging that U.S. predictions of an imminent invasion are aggravating it. On the other hand, especially as the risk of military conflict has grown, it has called for diplomacy over war. 

If Beijing had its way, it would maintain strong ties with Moscow, safeguard its trade relationship with Ukraine, keep the EU in its economic orbit, and avoid the spillover from U.S. and EU sanctions on Moscow—all while preventing relations with the United States from significantly deteriorating. Securing any one of these objectives may well be possible. Achieving all of them is not. 

If Russia invades Ukraine, Beijing could throw Moscow a lifeline: economic relief to alleviate the effect of U.S. sanctions. But doing so would damage Chinese relations with Europe, invite severe repercussions from Washington, and drive traditionally nonaligned countries such as India further into the arms of the West. If Beijing snubs Moscow, by contrast, it may weaken its closest strategic partnership at a time when, given deteriorating security in Asia, it is most in need of outside help.

China should throw Russia under the bus, because Russia is already a failed state, and it wouldn't take much for it to collapse yet again. Might as well give it a push.

We are pushing Russia and China (and a few others) together. 

We are falling back on our last bullet:  financial sanctions  -- and we not using it wisely.   Soon they will have a work-around (actually, they probably already do).

We should have settled this while we could.

Well, evidently it is being settled, as we speak, and I would love Russia and China being forced together, with the end result that the U.S., EU, NATO, and our Indo-Pacific Allies are all on the same page in containing both countries.

How cool would that be!

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2022/2/22/2081709/-Russia-s-economy-can-t-handle-a-war-but-Putin-can-t-handle-the-Russian-economy

It won't be "both countries".   It will be a world wide cold war.   Again.

Anybody who wants that is a fool.

The first one was created and fed by Russia trying to propagate communism around the world.

They openly admitted that.

This one will be created and fed by the U.S. trying to propagate democracy around the world.

We openly admit that.

It doesn't matter who does it:  Either way the world suffers.

Putin started this latest conflict, and the West will have to finish it.

China can step out of the way, throw Russia under the bus, or double down on its authoritarian alliance. Either way, Putin is dealing with a hell of a large body of countries that are economically much more powerful than Russia, and are now working together against Putin.

Nope!  Hillary started this conflict when she promised Ukraine a membership in NATO if they sided with us against Russia.

She must have forgotten that countries don't like it when you put missiles on their border aimed at them.

This coalition?  Let's see how the EU feels when their houses start getting cold (or us when we're paying $4+ dollars for gas).  Most of them have been saying:  let's not go there.  Yes, they'll placate us.  To a point.  But, they won't get sucked into another Iraq war.

You seem to think we are all powerful and can push whomever we want around. Hopefully Biden knows better.

Of course, you didn't state the facts; Hillary never promised Ukraine membership.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has said that the door to Nato remains open for Ukraine. 

Speaking after arriving in the capital, Kiev, she said Ukraine had the right to choose its own alliances.

She will travel to Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaijan on a tour of former Soviet states, as well as visiting Poland.

The trip, announced over a month ago, is intended to reaffirm relations with ex-Soviet states, after a renewal of ties between Washington and Moscow.

You obviously don't understand how membership to NATO works. Secretary of State Clinton could have advised Ukraine to seek NATO membership, sure, but it is up to NATO to allow that, not Secretary of State Clinton. Either way, Ukraine is not qualified to apply, yet anyway.

https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/what-putin-fears-most/

In a very clear pattern, Moscow’s complaints about NATO spike after democratic breakthroughs. While the tragic invasions and occupations of Georgia and Ukraine have secured Putin a de facto veto over their NATO aspirations, since the alliance would never admit a country under partial occupation by Russian forces, this fact undermines Putin’s claim that the current invasion is aimed at NATO membership.

You seem to think that the people of the EU, NATO, and the Indo-Pacific have no interest in seeing a nascent democracy survive invasion by a brutal authoritarian power. Biden isn't going to budge on Ukraine independence.

My own opinion is that Russia can't have a working democracy on its border; the contrast between success and failures would be obvious.

But U.S.-Russian relations deteriorated ever further in 2014, again because of new democratic expansion. The next democratic mobilization to threaten Putin happened a second time in Ukraine in 2013–14. After the Orange Revolution in 2004, Putin did not invade Ukraine, but wielded other instruments of influence to help his protégé, Viktor Yanukovych, narrowly win the Ukrainian presidencysix years later. Yanukovych, however, turned out not to be a loyal Kremlin servant, but tried to cultivate ties with both Russia and the West. Putin finally compelled Yanukovych to make a choice, and the Ukrainian president chose Russia in the fall of 2013 when he reneged on signing an EU association agreement in favor of membership in Russia’s Eurasian Economic Union.

To the surprise of everyone in Moscow, Kyiv, Brussels, and Washington, Yanukovych’s decision to scuttle this agreement with the EU triggered mass demonstrations in Ukraine again, bringing hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians into the streets in what would become known as the Euromaidan or “Revolution of Dignity” to protest Yanukovych’s turn away from the democratic West. The street protests lasted several weeks, punctuated by the killing of dozens of peaceful protestors by Yanukovych’s government, the eventual collapse of that government and Yanukovych’s flight to Russia in February 2014, and a new pro-Western government taking power in Kyiv. Putin had “lost” Ukraine for the second time in a decade.

"Wanna end the invasion?", "Offer every Russian soldier defecting, citizenship in the EU"

Yeah, because Russia is a failed state, of course people want what the EU provides; a better life.

tmay said:

GeorgeBMac said:

tmay said:

GeorgeBMac said:

22july2013 said:

tmay said:

... Stupid.   Very, very stupid.

The post above is chock full of misinformation.
Given the many times that I have countered George since he has been here, I'll spare you the details. Do your own searches on the details.

It's actually entertaining whenever GBM speaks. I always wonder how he's going to defend brutal dictatorships, and he always manages. I would like to have seen him defend the dictatorships back around 1940.

I wish websites like this would have a way we could block certain users from being seen by us. I know a few people would block me, but I think GBM would take top spot.

I don;t defend "brutal dictatorships".

But I do object to instigating totally unnecessary wars.

All we have to do is guarantee that NATO will not threaten Russia by moving into (another of) its neighbor(s).

But, we instead favor war.   Economic war (at least for us).  But still, war.

Who is going to pay for this war of ours?   As usual, it will be us.

But, I am sorry if the truth does not support your war mongering imperialism.  Perhaps it is YOU that should be blocked?

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/china/2022-02-21/chinas-ukraine-crisis?utm_campaign=tw_daily_soc&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter_posts

The Ukraine crisis is primarily a standoff between Russia and the West, but off to the side, another player stands awkwardly: China. Beijing has tried to walk a fine line on Ukraine. On one hand, it has taken Russia’s side, blaming NATO expansion for causing the crisis and alleging that U.S. predictions of an imminent invasion are aggravating it. On the other hand, especially as the risk of military conflict has grown, it has called for diplomacy over war. 

If Beijing had its way, it would maintain strong ties with Moscow, safeguard its trade relationship with Ukraine, keep the EU in its economic orbit, and avoid the spillover from U.S. and EU sanctions on Moscow—all while preventing relations with the United States from significantly deteriorating. Securing any one of these objectives may well be possible. Achieving all of them is not. 

If Russia invades Ukraine, Beijing could throw Moscow a lifeline: economic relief to alleviate the effect of U.S. sanctions. But doing so would damage Chinese relations with Europe, invite severe repercussions from Washington, and drive traditionally nonaligned countries such as India further into the arms of the West. If Beijing snubs Moscow, by contrast, it may weaken its closest strategic partnership at a time when, given deteriorating security in Asia, it is most in need of outside help.

China should throw Russia under the bus, because Russia is already a failed state, and it wouldn't take much for it to collapse yet again. Might as well give it a push.

We are pushing Russia and China (and a few others) together. 

We are falling back on our last bullet:  financial sanctions  -- and we not using it wisely.   Soon they will have a work-around (actually, they probably already do).

We should have settled this while we could.

Well, evidently it is being settled, as we speak, and I would love Russia and China being forced together, with the end result that the U.S., EU, NATO, and our Indo-Pacific Allies are all on the same page in containing both countries.

How cool would that be!

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2022/2/22/2081709/-Russia-s-economy-can-t-handle-a-war-but-Putin-can-t-handle-the-Russian-economy

22july2013 said:

GeorgeBMac said:

22july2013 said:

tmay said:

... Stupid.   Very, very stupid.

The post above is chock full of misinformation.
Given the many times that I have countered George since he has been here, I'll spare you the details. Do your own searches on the details.

It's actually entertaining whenever GBM speaks. I always wonder how he's going to defend brutal dictatorships, and he always manages. I would like to have seen him defend the dictatorships back around 1940.

I wish websites like this would have a way we could block certain users from being seen by us. I know a few people would block me, but I think GBM would take top spot.

I don;t defend "brutal dictatorships".

But I do object to instigating totally unnecessary wars.

All we have to do is guarantee that NATO will not threaten Russia by moving into (another of) its neighbor(s).

But, we instead favor war.   Economic war (at least for us).  But still, war.

Who is going to pay for this war of ours?   As usual, it will be us.

But, I am sorry if the truth does not support your war mongering imperialism.  Perhaps it is YOU that should be blocked?

Firstly, I never said your posts should be blocked from anyone else but myself. I said I wanted to be able to block your posts so that I don't have to see them. Your constant stream of defending dictators is very tiring to me.

And yes, I would fully support your desires to block me from your own view. In fact, I'd be happy to do it myself if this website allowed me to do that.