NATO has expanded its reach since its inception. Putin is responding.

quote:

Originally posted by Gustofer:

quote:

Originally posted by sigalert:
I’m behind in this thread, and this my be an ignorant take, but aside from dragging us into a proxy war with Russia, isn’t our support for Ukraine preventing Putin and Zelensky from reaching an off-ramp?

Let's just say, for the sake of argument, that Canada decided to "annex" the New England states and started lobbing missiles and artillery into Boston, Albany, Syracuse, Buffalo, and NYC.

Would that be OK with anyone? In all seriousness, they are mostly communist states, so...commies, nazis, tomato, tomahto....

Would anyone here be asking for an "off-ramp" if that happened?

In this scenario, we’re we part of Canada thirty years ago?

By which I mean from your example the New England states.

To be clear.

Here's the point: Russia has NO RIGHT, whatsoever to "annex" any country. Period.

What they have done is wrong legally and morally. Every effort must be taken to stop what they have done. Yeah, it's a lot of money, but it's worth it. I'd even go so far as sending "boots on the ground". Ivan cannot be allowed to do what he wants.

He’s done it before. We did nothing. Not willing to go toe to toe with a hollowed out nuclear power with nothing to lose.

quote:

Originally posted by sigalert:
He’s done it before. We did nothing. Not willing to go toe to toe with a hollowed out nuclear power with nothing to lose.

What's the alternative? Let them do whatever they want?

quote:

Originally posted by Gustofer:

quote:

Originally posted by sigalert:
He’s done it before. We did nothing. Not willing to go toe to toe with a hollowed out nuclear power with nothing to lose.

What's the alternative? Let them do whatever they want?

If it’s not a NATO country? Yes.

EDIT: I was over broad. We should not be funding a proxy war on behalf of a non NATO country. There are humanitarian concerns, but we’re far beyond that in this case.

We'll have to disagree then.

Right is right and wrong is wrong...wherever it occurs. Like it or not, we are the moral authority in the world (and I wouldn't have it any other way), and that authority needs to be exercised with a fist from time to time.

Evil will always try to gain ground. It is our obligation to resist that.

quote:

Originally posted by sigalert:
We should not be funding a proxy war on behalf of a non NATO country.

We've been doing that for generations. Afghanistan for one. IMO, it's much better to fund a proxy war than to fund a real war.

quote:

Originally posted by Gustofer:
We'll have to disagree then.

Right is right and wrong is wrong...wherever it occurs. Like it or not, we are the moral authority in the world (and I wouldn't have it any other way), and that authority needs to be exercised with a fist from time to time.

Evil will always try to gain ground. It is our obligation to resist that.

I agree. If we are the moral authority, we should grant Ukraine into NATO and make the issue a non starter for Putin.

But we don’t.

My opinion isn’t worth much but something about Ukraine doesn’t sit right with me. Hunter Biden, Trump’s impeachment. We keep them at arm’s length but give them billions to fight a war with Putin and no end in sight. The whole thing stinks.

EDIT: If we stop funding this war it ends in three weeks.

quote:

Originally posted by sigalert:
The whole thing stinks.

Yeah, it kind of does, I agree.

But it is what it is.

If it were up to me, I'd grant them NATO membership and make it all official. It should have been done back in the 90s IMO.

quote:

Originally posted by sigalert:
EDIT: If we stop funding this war it ends in three weeks.

I don't know about that.

I think that the guerrilla war would go on for a long time and would not be in Russia's best interest. It actually boggles my mind that Putin ever thought that this would be a good idea.

Since the Berlin Wall fell, most of those former Soviet Bloc nations couldn't get into NATO fast enough. Those nations spent decades under Moscow's thumb, and want nothing to do with it again. Putin and those that subscribe to his propaganda should grab a few books on how the Warsaw Pact nations and non-Russian Soviet Republics were treated by Moscow. Problem is Putin's invasion of his neighbors is only reinforcing the continued need for NATO.

Thanks for saying what needs to be said loudly and clearly, Gustofer.
I’m amazed that on a forum that places so much emphasis on self-defense that one of the most glaringly obvious self-defense situations should be met by anyone with, “Well, just give up, and all will be better.”

A gang breaks into a neighbor’s house, cripples and maims the husband, kills some of his children, rapes his wife and daughters, and steals all the property they want. They next come to your house and what’s the advice from the pundits? “Don’t fight; that will just provoke them. Find an off-ramp and give them what they want so they won’t threaten any of the rest of us.” Disgusting.

I’ve remarked before about how many similarities there are between this war of aggression and the one that was started in Europe 83 years ago by Hitler. Now we have the despot responding to an attack on a legitimate military target by indiscriminate bombardment of civilian targets. At least Hitler was responding to bombs falling on his civilians (albeit by mistake), and he assumed that bombing civilians would “break the spirit” of his enemies. If that’s what Putin has in mind and ever has a chance to meet Hitler in hell, he can ask him how well that worked with the British.

quote:

Originally posted by Gustofer:
Here's the point: Russia has NO RIGHT, whatsoever to "annex" any country. Period.

What they have done is wrong legally and morally. Every effort must be taken to stop what they have done. Yeah, it's a lot of money, but it's worth it. I'd even go so far as sending "boots on the ground". Ivan cannot be allowed to do what he wants.

OK you first. No one is stopping you.

Do you have a son you can send as well?

quote:

Originally posted by Gustofer:

Right is right and wrong is wrong...wherever it occurs. Like it or not, we are the moral authority in the world (and I wouldn't have it any other way), and that authority needs to be exercised with a fist from time to time.

Evil will always try to gain ground. It is our obligation to resist that.

Well, there are limits to what we can do. Vietnam (should have) taught us that.

I agree that evil must be confronted, but there is also the thing about picking one's battles. Look how quickly the US grew weary of our involvement in A-stan and Iraq. We finally cut and run, and much of the country was ok with that.

Do we go back into North Korea? Overthrow the govts in Iran, Cuba, Lybia? And those are the small countries. It would be monumentally stupid to pick a fight with Russia or China. Our war in Korea (should have) taught us that.

If we used our 'moral obligation' every time a despot did something bad, we would quickly go bankrupt and run out of room to bury our dead.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
I’ve remarked before about how many similarities there are between this war of aggression and the one that was started in Europe 83 years ago by Hitler. Now we have the despot responding to an attack on a legitimate military target by indiscriminate bombardment of civilian targets. At least Hitler was responding to bombs falling on his civilians (albeit by mistake), and he assumed that bombing civilians would “break the spirit” of his enemies. If that’s what Putin has in mind and ever has a chance to meet Hitler in hell, he can ask him how well that worked with the British.

I’m not siding with Putin. But he isn’t Hitler. There are many differences, not the least of which is Hitler didn’t have nuclear weapons.

^^^ If, as is the case, Putin has denied the right of Ukraine to exist as a country, a culture or even a language group, is actively kidnapping its citizens and sending them off to Siberia for forced "russianization", gleefully spent millions (including an estimated $700 million just a couple of days ago) to deliberately kill civilians, and created bizarre stories of 'nazis', 'bioweapons labs' and 'NATO conspiracies' to justify it all, then guess what? When it comes to dealing with Putin there are no practical differences between Putin and Hitler.

As for nukes, well, there has yet to be any evidence at all that Putin dares use nukes against the Ukrainians in the face of the US' statement that it would intervene directly if Russia did that. That means that there's even less chance that Putin would use nukes against us, because that would unquestionably trigger nuclear retaliation. The nukes count if we invade the pre-2009 borders of Russia (so called for clarity). They don't mean squat otherwise.

quote:

Originally posted by sigalert:
In this scenario, we’re we part of Canada thirty years ago?

In this scenario, did Canada invade the US a hundred years ago, drain the US of resources and intellectual talent, cause millions of deaths by starvation, declare the US a "separate but equal country" (being an SSR and all), and then state TWICE, by formal treaty, that Canada recognizes the US as an independent and sovereign nation? Or are we cherry-picking here?

quote:

He's done it before. We did nothing.

There was nothing we could do since the Ukrainians didn't think they were in a position to fight back. Now, after at least eight years of preparation, training and investment (by both Ukraine and the West), there is.

As for granting them NATO status, that's why Putin did a partial invasion (as he did in Georgia and Moldova). NATO can't admit a country in the middle of a territorial dispute - hell, Finland had to give up its claims to the eastern half of the country (which Russia stole in WWII) just to apply for membership - and Putin knows that. That's why the way to end this is for the Ukrainians to get the Russians out (with our help, to be sure) and then get brought into NATO so the attacks stop.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
There's never a comet around when you need one.

We're tracking a fraction of the rocks zipping around our planet. A little science may help out from time to time.
Update: I just watched a youtube video of a science dude discussing these rocks. Of the medium sized ones we're tracking, that is, those that can do real damage on some scale, we are only tracking a small percentage. The bulk of the others running in similar paths, are not known or being tracked. We're talking 25 thousand or more, of those sizes that can do real damage, all running around the earth in similar paths to the ones we actually ARE tracking. That's a lot of big rocks we don't have a clue about. So the question is, how does that reduce the chances that the right sized rock could pay us a visit during a time of maximum national stupidity. What if it came when common sense prevailed again ? That just wouldn't be right.

Well it's coming either way, sooner or later, along with any number of other natural disasters. Sun eruptions, Yellowstone blowing up, etc. Enjoy life while we can.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: wrightd,