quote:

Originally posted by oldbill123:
There are no good guys or bad guys. This is about money as most wars are. The rest is spin.

So Russia hasn't sent his little green men on utterly unprovoked attacks into Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine, and hasn't spent the last two months killing, burning, stealing, threatening nuclear war and visiting untold atrocities on civilians? Really?

Somebody better go tell the Russian Army that. I bet they're gonna be in a lot of trouble when Putin finds out.

Honestly, is there anything you can point to that shows that Russia's unprovoked aggression against its neighbors is "just spin"?

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:
so I'll ask you a couple

Don't we all kinda have to know where it all ends before anyone can answer your questions? Oh, and by the way - if he exercises control over our NATO allies via the supply of oil and gas, then it isn't possible to assume he wouldn't roll into Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.

quote:

Originally posted by 1flynDO:
Tho outcome would be better for us. Finically and resources. Less loss of life on all sides.

Given that Putin's waged a series of small wars with no sign of abating and the clear goal of wrapping our allies in Europe in a headlock by controlling their access to oil and gas, there isn't any possible benefit to us - whether financially or in resources - and, given Russia's latest official pronouncements about Moldova, there's no reason to believe there would be any less loss of life.

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:
I'm curious what you think the outcome would be if the US stayed out of all this.

If Putin survives either politically or literally, I believe that sooner or later he, just like other despots before him, will push and push until we and some significant allies decide he’s gone far enough and cannot let him go further. At that point force will be the thing that stops him—as has been necessary to stop similar despots in the past. Beyond that it would be pure speculation what force would be required and what the overall results would be. In the first Gulf War the results were relatively very quick, easy, and had minor effect on the rest of the world. In World War II, not so much.

An alternative future would be the reconstituted USSR as mentioned above. Unlike Hitler, Putin may be smart (or cautious) enough to stop before someone decides he needs to be stopped. Just as Hitler’s early victories (albeit bloodless) gave him a tremendous boost with the German people in general and the armed forces in particular, I’m guessing that despite the difficulties the Russians are having in Ukraine, if they are ultimately successful as I believe they will be, a lot of Russians, including the generals will be willing to follow him anywhere and put up with anything he wants to do there to continue to recapture lost glories.

So, what do others think?

To add, I am in general agreement with the post by sigmonkey, above, and probably for similar reasons in addition to my knowledge of history. I first learned about “appeasement” from a high school world history class semester whose entire teachings were based on the then recently-published The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich. I remembered those lessons most strongly during the Vietnam War, but have had reason to ponder them again in recent times.

And a bit more:
Many people would of course actually welcome a resurrected Evil Empire (USSR). That’s obviously true of many Russians, even including some who lived under the first one. The elite there didn’t do so badly for themselves, and the minor perks provided free to the rest, even if imaginary, were missed by some when they dried up. But it’s not limited to those people. Many in the West viewed the regime as a desirable counterweight to American “Imperialism,” and the Soviets were at least able to keep their captive Muslims under control, or so it seemed.

A new (and rearmed) USSR might divert attention by the Chinese from us, and who knows, some of our military leadership might welcome having a big, scary enemy that we probably won’t have to ever fight once they’ve regained their lost vassal states and self-confidence.

The problem with that, though, is that most people now and even then have/had no appreciation of what a deadly existential danger the EE posed to the world for the last decades of its existence. The Soviets convinced themselves that the US was continually on the verge of trying to wipe them out with a preemptive attack, and therefore were ready (without proper controls) to retaliate for any perceived threat. Would a new USSR be any more rational or less determined to expand its control? As I say, though, few people are aware of all that or worried if they are, so just as many people at the time saw nothing wrong with the prospect of a Nazi empire a long way away, I’m pretty sure that’s true of attitudes about Russian aggression today.
And yes, I can only marvel at the level of ignorance necessary to believe that most wars are only about the money.

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

Putin knew with Biden in the White House, the same policy that led to the destabilization of Ukraine starting with the Maidan revolution in 2014 would continue
where it left off. Not that President Trump was soft on Russia.


Former Ukraine Ambassador Slips Up, Admits Putin Wouldn't Have Invaded Under Trump

https://www.zerohedge.com/geop...-invaded-under-trump

Former US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch accidentally admitted that Vladimir Putin would never have invaded Ukraine if President Trump had been reelected.

In an interview with PBS' Margaret Hoover, Yovanovitch - a seething anti-Trump impeachment witness - was asked about her previous comments that the Ukraine war never would have happened under Trump.

"I’ve heard that you have also suggested that Putin might not have gone to war if Trump was still in office," said Hoover.

To which Yovanovitch replied: "Trump was very dismissive of NATO – I mean, dismissive, it’s obviously a diplomatic word – very critical of NATO, critical of our allies," adding "And his close associates, including John Bolton, have said that if he had won a second term, he would have pulled us out of NATO. I mean, why go to war with Vladimir Putin if the United States is going to present kind of the corpse of NATO on a silver platter? You don’t need to do that."

Hoover then asked: "I mean, how do you think the invasion would have been different if Trump had remained as president?"

To which the former Ambassador replied: "I think that Trump would have provided Putin with enough of what he wanted that perhaps he wouldn’t have invaded."

As she dug herself deeper, Yovanovitch said when asked what Ukraine would have looked like if Russia had never invaded: "We are now getting into... this is why diplomats are told never to answer hypothetical questions..." before adding "So we’re getting into areas of– you know, I mean, it’s a hypothetical question, right? I don’t know what Trump would have done, and I don’t know what Putin would have done. But I can’t see Trump, President Trump standing up for Ukraine the way President Biden is right now."

Video :

https://twitter.com/mtracey/st...-invaded-under-trump

We have had years now of the MSM and Government blatantly lying about - well everything. Now we get one side of the story (Russia bad) and we get to feel morally smug and superior siding with the neo-nazis. You have no clue why Russia did what they did and you will never know. The one sided narrative should give sane people some pause but it does not seem to.
Similar to people's affinity for a team because when their "team" wins, they feel like winners even though they did nothing to earn that special feeling.
Just be aware that most likely, we are again being lied to on an epic scale and the truth is most likely the direct opposite of what is being put out there.
Or, just keep your head in the sand and go along with the program Comrade

Start at 1:10 to miss the commercial.

[FLASH_VIDEO] [/FLASH_VIDEO]

quote:

Originally posted by oldbill123:
You have no clue why Russia did what they did and you will never know.

Then you don't either - and their constantly shifting and consistently self-contradictory explanations don't help you make your case.

If it makes no sense to go along with the MSM's and Dems' program then it makes no sense to go along with Putin's program either.

https://redstate.com/streiff/2...n-the-future-n555837

U.S. now believes that Ukraine has more tanks than Russia on the battlefield

quote:

Originally posted by wcb6092:
Start at 1:10 to miss the commercial.

[FLASH_VIDEO]Video[/FLASH_VIDEO]

Thanks for posting that video. It was an interesting segment and hits on the thing that has both angered and concerned me the most, that being the weaponization of the US dollar. This administration, through their retarded sanctions and confiscation of the property of people this administration deems bad, has sent a very loud and unmistakable message to the entire world that if the US doesn't like you or what you are doing, well we have the might and could simply take your stuff. So why would people around the world want to hold dollars given that dynamic? And the Russians and Saudi's trading oil with the Ruble or other currency is dangerous on an cataclysmic scale for the US as a country given what it would mean to lose control of the petro dollar.

I have zero faith this administration of morons and un-American filth has thought any of this through and realizes just what they are gambling with.

Seems like Germany has finally stopped dragging their feet on providing weapons and gear to Ukraine and will be sending a bunch of Gepard tracked air defense systems ASAP. This is what my Bundeswehr partnership unit used 30 years ago when I was stationed there with a US Army Stinger Air Defense Artillery battalion:

Say that 10 times fast!

Flugabwehrkanonenpanzer Gepard



I remember our guys telling me how these things were no joke, we had Bradleys employed in an Air Defense role and each year had gunnery practice in Northern Germany at the Baltic Sea where we'd shoot the Bradley cannon at a BAT (Ballistic Aerial Target) which was basically a large orange dummy missile towed in the air behind an airplane. They said the Gepard would not only hit the shit out of the BAT most of the time but would actually cut the tow cable too.

quote:

Originally posted by Il Cattivo:

quote:

Originally posted by oldbill123:
You have no clue why Russia did what they did and you will never know.

Then you don't either - and their constantly shifting and consistently self-contradictory explanations don't help you make your case.

If it makes no sense to go along with the MSM's and Dems' program then it makes no sense to go along with Putin's program either.

Putin did not lie to me and steal an election. I am waiting for Biden's indictment for war crime after rocketing that civilian apartment in Kabul. I don't have to trust Putin to conclude that my MSM and Govt are absolute liars.
I refuse to goosestep in lockstep with proven liars just to feel morally superior.

^^^ No one's asking you to. I just pointed out that you have no more reason to believe Putin than anyone else.

Jesus would have to come down from Heaven before I’d believe anything coming out of commie Russia.

https://hotair.com/jazz-shaw/2...rovoke-wwiii-n464893

Russian attacks are not limited to the Donbas region. Showing more coordination than they had in the early stages of the war, Russian missile attacks hit five train stations and multiple sections of rail lines. This was a clear effort to prevent Ukraine from moving more personnel and equipment to the eastern front. They also struck a train station in Lviv, very close to the Polish border. That’s a staging point for much of the incoming NATO aid to the country.

The Russian spokesperson also claimed that they had destroyed an oil refinery and multiple fuel depots in Kremenchuk, in central Ukraine. Reporters were unable to verify those claims this morning, but if true, that would impact Kyiv’s ability to keep its troops in the Donbas region supplied as the fighting intensifies. So it at least appears that the Russian army has gotten its command and control situation a little more functional than it was during that assault on Kyiv. But that doesn’t mean that the Ukrainians aren’t still inflicting heavy losses. Russian jets and helicopters are still “falling out of the sky” according to reporters who are on the ground there.

Meanwhile, in some additional bad news, the British Ministry of Defense claimed last night that the city of Kreminna had effectively fallen to the Russians. Further, they have made some significant headway in advancing toward the cities of Sloviansk and Kramatorsk. In those areas, the Russians appear to be successfully coordinating a pincer attack, with coordinated units approaching simultaneously from the north and the east. This is a far more effective execution of their offensive strategy than was seen anywhere around Kyiv. It makes me sad to say it, but declarations of a complete defeat for Putin’s forces, at least in the eastern region of the country, may have been premature.

President Biden Explains Why Ukraine Needs Another $33 Billion Of US Taxpayer Money

https://www.zerohedge.com/geop...-billion-us-taxpayer

President Biden will deliver remarks this morning to explain why US taxpayers need to send another $33 billion of "aid" to Ukraine to "Support Ukrainians Defending Their Country and Their Freedom Against Russia’s Brutal War."

As AP reports, Biden’s latest proposal - which the officials said was expected to last for five months - has more than $20 billion in military assistance for Ukraine and for bolstering defenses in nearby countries.

There is also $8.5 billion in economic aid to help keep Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s government functioning and $3 billion for food and humanitarian programs to help civilians and other spending, said the officials, who briefed reporters on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to speak publicly.

The proposal would more than double the initial $13.6 billion package of defense and economic aid for Ukraine and Western allies that Congress enacted last month.

Biden last week warned that $6.5 billion earmarked for security assistance for Ukraine could soon be “exhausted” and that Congress would need to approve supplemental funding. More than half of the approved money for weapons and equipment for Ukraine’s military has already been drawn down.

...

It seemed to signal a long-term U.S. commitment to staving off Russian President Vladimir Putin's attempt to expand his nation's control of its neighbor, and perhaps beyond.

quote:

President Biden Explains Why Ukraine Needs Another $33 Billion Of US Taxpayer Money

Is it because the 'big guy' got his cut from Ukraine upfront and now it's time for the rest of us to pay the debt?

How soon before Hildabeast steps in and all "aid" has to be laundered through the Clinton Money Laundering Machine / Foundation

She cant allow this money to flow without her and Bill getting their cut

^^^ First she has to cripple every other potential Dem candidate for 2024, and that's going to take some doing. Hill the Pill really pissed off a lot of donkeys, and a lot of those donkeys rose to become gatekeepers for gates that Hillary would need to go through.