100% agree with Para, smschulz, and any others that think we need to stay out of this.

Russia is attacking Ukraine largely because of our country and NATO non-stop talking about adding Ukraine to NATO. Putin is not going to accept the Ukraine being armed up and supported by NATO (The West).

He has repeatedly said that and was ignored. Russia's negotiators have also repeatedly said that if Ukraine were to change their constitution to state that Ukraine is a neutral country it'll be over.

Why isn't that being agreed to? CORRUPT politicians in Ukraine and the U.S. putting our tax payer money in their pockets.

All of this and the suffering and lives lost is due to corrupt politicians.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
We need to stay out of it, and if a no-fly zone is implemented and the United States is involved in that action, this nation will rue the day.

Concur.

cdr salamander puts it perfectly: Tuesday, March 08, 2022: The Blob Wants a War

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
Even if Russia does not prevail in the Ukraine, Putin will still have won, ...

Disagree. Even if Putin does prevail in Ukraine: He has lost. There is no way for a good outcome for him or Russia in his initiating this aggression.

Let's say he prevails in Ukraine. What's he got? A region that hates him with all their heart and soul. A region that will continue throwing sand in the gears at every opportunity. A governmental and civilian infrastructure that will require billions to repair--billions Russia didn't have to spend even before Putin started this.

Meanwhile: He's solidified the EU and NATO--the latter in ways Trump couldn't accomplish in four years. Finland is on the verge of joining NATO. (Sweden less likely--for now.) Several independent Baltic states are going to formally file requests for EU membership. The former Soviet states that are already in NATO have re-enforced seven ways from Sunday. He's trashed an already weak Russian economy. He's alerted everybody to the fact that depending upon Russia for energy is a bad idea. He's making a laughing stock of Russia's military. Russia has possibly lost allies in Latin America. The list goes on.

Putin may "win" in Ukraine, but it will be a Pyrrhic victory if he does.

Us using Ukraine to develop Bio weapons on Russia border

https://www.thegatewaypundit.c...nsticator-commenting

Where is Fauci ?

The Jones Act

https://www.defensenews.com/op...ded-100-years-later/

The Jones Act requires that all vessels carrying goods between two U.S. points be American-built, -owned, -crewed and -flagged. This policy provides stability to the U.S. maritime industry and helps to sustain 650,000 American jobs, resulting in $150 billion in economic benefits each year. Most importantly, the Jones Act advances our national security by helping maintain a vibrant domestic shipbuilding industry and maritime workforce. Our shipbuilders supply the military with warships, and U.S. mariners play a key role in transporting military personnel and equipment overseas in times of crisis.

quote:

Originally posted by Wino:

quote:

Originally posted by LS1 GTO:
Mr Potato Head just stated we (the US) are a net exporter of petroleum and then stated we are cutting off imports from Russia.

Let that sink in for a moment....

Which was the lie - we are a net exporter or, we are importing Russian oil??

Both are true.

2020 was the first year we became a net exporter of petroleum.

However, every year we both export and import crude and refined petroleum. Why? Supply timing, futures contract pricing, weather, logistics.

Of the petroleum we import, close to 10% comes from Russia.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
We need to stay out of it, and if a no-fly zone is implemented and the United States is involved in that action, this nation will rue the day.
Even if Russia does not prevail in the Ukraine, Putin will still have won, because he will have wrecked that country, terrified its people and will have put the Western nations on notice with a loud message: Do not fuck with me or I will make a huge mess for you to clean up, a mess that will take years to correct and that will upset your comfortable lives.
All the brainwashed nimrods who want to "do something" because the television tells them to, need to find hobbies- something to occupy their minds.
This is not our problem. The Ukraine is not part of NATO. Of course it's tragic, what's going on in that country. All wars are obscene. It's not a matter of picking your favorite obscenity. Any US involvement in foreign wars should always be a matter of protecting our national interest, and not because the evening news tugged on our heart strings.

I agree completely.

quote:

Originally posted by oldbill123:
NATO signed a treaty stating no expansion in 1990.

Actually, no.

Of course I see you have now taken up the "biolabs in Ukraine" mantle, so whatever.

quote:

Originally posted by MikeinNC:
And yet the Poles say they are not….

Don't believe anything this administration says. Because they are lying.

You know, there is another possibility in this case. The US keeps saying "it's happening", whereas the Poles keep saying "it ain't happening".

What are the odds that the Poles would be happy to QUIETLY work something out but the jerkoffs squatting in the White House with Biden just won't keep their big fucking mouths shut?

As for our having no "vital" or "strategic" interest in Ukraine, that's horse manure. We decided long ago to secure our vital and strategic national interests by forming and supporting NATO. What NATO does or doesn't do depends on what the Europeans in NATO do. By seizing Ukraine Putin puts a head lock on the bulk of petroleum and nuclear energy in Europe and removes what has been, for NATO, a buffer state. Isolationism doesn't work when you've told the rest of the world that NATO is the all-singing, all-dancing solution to keeping the peace in a nuclear world.

^^^You’re assuming that Putin wants to occupy Ukraine. He only wants to keep Ukraine out of NATO. Biden has been VERY vocal in his support of them joining NATO since he has been president. His use of soft power is dangerous. This is Biden’s war, plain and simple.

^we don’t have any spare F16s laying around to backfill the Polish AF. The F16 is on the way out in the US, we’ve sold any spares already to other countries . And Poland knows they don’t want to poke the bear.

BTW I agree with the boss. We don’t need to get involved, it ain’t our fight. The only reason the POTATUS is even worried is that the Ukraine is the political money laundering services to all our corrupt “leaders”

quote:

Originally posted by Gustofer:
I don't know that Putin is dumb enough to send his pilots up if NATO is enforcing a no-fly zone. That would be just asking for an escalation that neither he nor anyone else wants.

I'm with kidcop here and believe that NATO needs to stand up and say, "Enough". At the very least, let's have a fair fight.

More often than not these days, I'm reminded of the quote misattributed to Edmund Burke, "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing". We (us, NATO, Ukraine) are the "good men", here...for all of our warts, and we must stop evil. It will not stop itself. Putting an end to the killing of these innocent people is the right and moral thing to do, IMO.

We sent millions of men to defend Europe 80 years ago and it was the right thing to do then. Everyone lauds that action as being a great thing. Why not now?

quote:

Originally posted by sigmonkey:
I believe Putin will not stop if he succeeds in annexing Ukraine.

The next step will be to test NATO and the EU outright.

He will step on someone's lawn and see if Kowalski has the balls to to pull the trigger, or simply point his finger gun while Putin drives of with his Torino.

Why? Because if he does, and NATO/UE does nothing, Putin likely will pull out, having "pantsed" them and that will pretty much force EU/West to scramble to reboot its image.

That will cost considerable time and money, meanwhile Putin "renegotiates" from the point of a real power player.

Should NATO respond with force and push Putin back, he can withdraw and flippantly shrug it off as "momentum" and "fog of war" without any (more than already earned) repercussion, and he now knows more about the cards NATO/West holds.

...

Yeah, this is where I'm at also. Si vis pacem parabellum.

The moral argument for U.S./ NATO intervention in Ukraine:

- a sovereign nation, an ally of the U.S., has been invaded by by an adversary of the U.S. in an unprovoked invasion, in which civilians are being targeted. The war in Afghanistan was a U.S. cause, and yet Ukraine sent troops in and sustained KIAs in service to our cause.

Lest we forget, the American Revolutionary War was won, not just by American Patriots, but by the money, weapons, supplies, of foreign countries, and especially the French Army and Navy, and notable foreign military leaders that both trained and led the Continental Army to eventual victories. It's doubtful we would've won without their help and intervention. In the case of France, they supported the American Revolution to the edge of bankruptcy, and some historians point out that France's economic collapse led to their own civil war, during the French Revolution.

Not convinced by the moral argument?

The ethical argument for U.S./ NATO intervention in Ukraine:

- After the fall of the Soviet Union, several former Soviet nations were thrown into chaos as they scrambled to adopt Western ways and economies. In the case of Ukraine, they inherited a parting gift from the U.S.S.R., the third largest stockpile of nuclear weapons on the planet.

A newly formed government learning how to adapt to new ways by adapting to a new economic system of freedom, has a lot to do and a lot of concerns. Not having much money to build a military capable of defending a fledgling nation, having nukes is an attractive deterrent to use as an Ace up Ukraine's sleeve. It would've taken billions of dollars and a decade or more to develop and build what they already had possession of.

But there are problems that come with that card. For one, they had possession of the nukes, but the Russian Federation had the control systems. Also, it would have required billions of dollars more for the new government to maintain them, or build new control systems.

The U.S. and the West had legitimate concerns that the nukes would be sold or stolen and used by terrorists or other Axis of Evil countries, so they went to Ukraine using the carrot and stick approach. If Ukraine refused to give them up, the West would isolate and ignore them and they would be left to fend for themselves with an aggressive neighbor next door. If they agreed to surrender the nukes, the U.S./ West promised to acknowledge and guarantee their sovereignty, would give them financial aid, as well as energy concessions. Despite the deterrence the nukes offered, Ukraine wanted to be a part of the West and agreed to play ball.

The Budapest Agreement

Whether the letter of the agreement is violated or not, there can be no question that, by not providing for their defense, the U.S., the West, and Russia have violated the intent of the agreement. Just as in South Vietnam, when we withdrew troops first with the promise of continuing aid only to, shortly after, see Democrats end that aid that led to their overthrow.

The U.S. (Biden regime) has already violated the trust of NATO and coalition partners with the debacle of the Afghanistan surrender. Do we really want to lose further credibility that we are an unreliable partner and that the agreements and obligations we enter into will be abrogated when they become politically inconvenient?

I've posted interviews by others in this thread who make the case that this isn't a war between Russia and Ukraine, but a war between East and West. For all our flawed leaders and the mistaken decisions they've made, and the increasing corruption observed, so too is this true of the East. One... or the other... at some point people will have to decide which ideology they want to be governed by.

For all our failed leaders, mistakes, and corruption, I choose the West. A strong free Ukraine benefits the Western alliance.

Still not convinced by the ethical argument?

The Strategic Geo-political and Military argument for U.S./ West intervention in Ukraine:

- Ukraine is the 4th largest grain producer in the world. In addition to feeding Ukrainians, a large amount feeds Africa, the Middle East, and China. It has significant natural resources, including oil and natural gas, iron ore, coal, manganese, salt, sulfur, graphite, titanium, magnesium, nickel, mercury among others. It has strategic ports that are vital to trade in the region, and are also used by Russia to project naval power into the world. Ukraine also has two major rivers, the Dnieper and the Danube, that lead from Russia right straight to the front doors of our NATO allies.

Ukraine is a gateway, a hub, between East and West... Russia and Europe.

That Ukrainian grain, yeah that can be used to feed a lot of hungry Russian and Chinese military forces while they are fighting. That Ukrainian oil and natural gas and other important natural resources, yeah, Russia can sell those to prop up their faltering economy and to pay for increasing war efforts by them or sell them to China for their war efforts. Those strategic ports, yeah, Russia can use those to control trade and prop up their economy too, and also use them to resupply their warships as they fight elsewhere in the world... oh, and I'm sure China has some warships that wouldn't mind having access to those Ukrainian ports as well.

2008 - Russia invades Georgia and installs a puppet government.

2014 - Russia invades and annexes the Crimea.

2022 - Russia invades Ukraine with a pretext for justification, and targets civilians.

I'd say that establishes a pattern of behavior that demonstrates intent.

One of the tenets of warfare is to deny your enemy the strategic position, the money, and the resources they need to continue to wage war.

Intervention, whatever shape that takes, isn't about starting WW III... it's about preventing it.

Lastly, I'll leave Ronald Reagan's thoughts for consideration. Different time, different war (or is it?).. but the premise still holds true.



https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GUQm7UqF-YA

quote:

Originally posted by PowerSurge:
^^^You’re assuming that Putin wants to occupy Ukraine. He only wants to keep Ukraine out of NATO. Biden has been VERY vocal in his support of them joining NATO since he has been president. His use of soft power is dangerous. This is Biden’s war, plain and simple.

If Putin wants to keep Ukraine out of NATO he picked a bizarre way of showing it. I don't recall Biden speaking to Ukraine joining NATO once, if you can cite an example I'd like to see it. All I found was:

"KYIV, Dec 9 2021 (Reuters) - U.S. President Joe Biden assured Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy that Kyiv's bid to join the NATO military alliance was in its own hands, Zelenskiy's chief of staff said after the two leaders spoke on Thursday."

and from NBC News:

"June 14, 2021, 4:52 PM EDT
By Dareh Gregorian
President Joe Biden made clear Monday that Ukraine does not yet have the go-ahead to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, a move long sought by Ukraine and vehemently opposed by Russia."

Which hardly sounds like much vocal support.

The Budapest Memorandum was pretty clear in assuring Russian non-aggression to Ukraine. If Russia is willing to break that agreement, it puts any others that they have signed of on in doubt.

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
We need to stay out of it, and if a no-fly zone is implemented and the United States is involved in that action, this nation will rue the day.

Concur.

cdr salamander puts it perfectly: Tuesday, March 08, 2022: The Blob Wants a War

As always, Sal articulates it way better than I could ever:

quote:

Well, there it is. Over at Politico we have an open letter calling for a limited no-fly zone.

This letter is signed by people who should know better. I would put the substance somewhere in the wtf grid bounded by "irresponsible" & "insulting."

Too many people have misremembered both recent and longer-term history. We are talking about Russia here. Not Serbia. Not Libya. Not Iraq.

Let us be clear on this point; a No Fly Zone (NFZ) requires you shoot down aircraft over a specified area. Over Ukraine, what this letter calls for is for us to shoot down Russian aircraft. It says “NATO” but as anyone who served in Afghanistan knows, this will mean the USA, and possibly the United Kingdom with an assist from Denmark and Poland, maybe.

That is asking for war. You don’t want a wider European war. No sane person does.

These people do, but they are not being honest about it.

If you want a war, ask for it. Assuming that everyone will either be silent or stupid, instead the authors decided to be too clever by half to the rubes while winking at their peers who know exactly what they are doing. Not unlike the build up to the Iraq invasion of 2003, I’m not sure that they believe their own distortions, or simply that they are not as good as they tell everyone they are. I’m beginning to think both.

Someone in this group must know where a NFZ would lead. Once everything blows up – which it may NFZ or not – a note from this crowd of, "Oh, no, we never expected this escalation..." won't wash at the moment & damn sure won't wash on the 1st through last draft of history.

I’m sorry, I don’t trust them. After you read the letter, if you still do, I can’t help you.

quote:

Originally posted by BansheeOne:

quote:

Originally posted by oldbill123:
NATO signed a treaty stating no expansion in 1990.

Actually, no.
.

^^^^
Here's a good link debunking the no expansion and other NATO misperceptions.

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_111767.htm

Whether we should intervene is something I'm not commenting on.

An interesting article on the
2013/2014 Ukraine coup and
the Obama administration.

https://moderndiplomacy.eu/201...014-coup-in-ukraine/


Modern Diplomacy
Modern Diplomacy
EASTERN EUROPEHow and why the U.S. Government Perpetrated the 2014 Coup in UkrainePublished 4 years ago on June 4, 2018By Eric Zuesse

SHARETWEET
5 Comments
This will document that the ‘new Cold War’ between the U.S. and Russia did not start, as the Western myth has it, with Russia’s involvement in the breakaway of Crimea and Donbass from Ukraine, after Ukraine — next door to Russia — had suddenly turned rabidly hostile toward Russia in February 2014. Ukraine’s replacing its democratically elected neutralist Government in February 2014, by a rabidly anti-Russian Government, was a violent event, which produced many corpses. It’s presented in The West as having been a ‘revolution’ instead of a coup; but whatever it was, it certainly generated the ‘new Cold War’ (the economic sanctions and NATO buildup on Russia’s borders); and, to know whether it was a coup, or instead a revolution, is to know what actually started the ‘new Cold War’, and why. So, this is historically very important.

I.

Good grief.

quote:

Originally posted by Modern Day Savage:
Intervention, whatever shape that takes, isn't about starting WW III... it's about preventing it.

Thanks for all that. We agree—once again.

quote:

Originally posted by 98XJRC:
I'm not against cutting of the Russian imports, however to do so without ramping up domestic production and ensuring alternative sources that don't want to see our country fail is beyond short sighted and insane.

Whenever confronted with this, Psaki never fails to point out that this will help reduce our dependence on fossil fuels in the fight against the great "existential threat" of global warming. Few if any of the serious problems the country faces now, and will face in the immediate future, cannot be directly attributed to this leftist point of view. Misery and recession be d_mned

Perhaps this will be helpful for those questioning Zelenski's election.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/w...ential-election/amp/

Arguendo, even if the 2014 election was flawed, that so has sailed. Zelenski's was not.

Usually I’m one for at least conceding points to the other side in a debate. I find myself completely unconvinced that this is something we should get involved in at any level. Nope on a stick. Nope on a rope. All new packaging, same great Nope flavor, now with 100% more Nope, free! Operators are standing by, act now to get your complimentary Nope while supplies last! Buy one Nope, get one Nope free!

Nope.

quote:

Originally posted by Underdog:


Russia is attacking Ukraine largely because of our country and NATO non-stop talking about adding Ukraine to NATO. Putin is not going to accept the Ukraine being armed up and supported by NATO (The West).

He has repeatedly said that and was ignored. Russia's negotiators have also repeatedly said that if Ukraine were to change their constitution to state that Ukraine is a neutral country it'll be over.

^^ Bingo, bango, bongo ~ exactly right!