|
Post by JoyinMudville on Apr 13, 2024 16:59:18 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Apr 13, 2024 17:12:52 GMT -5
It's true that Trump doesn't accept the DC groupthink on Russia (and that's not a bad thing). He at least understands the old DC groupthink that you don't want Russia and China to become allies so we should play both against each other. That was the Cold War doctrine that seems to have been forgotten by today's western leaders. It's also true that Ukraine and Russia have been part of the same empire or the Soviet Union for most of both country's histories. So maybe that's what Trump meant? We know he's not an expert on facts or history. But as President from 2017 to 2020 (as much as you want to ignore his presidency), he filled his administration with anti-Russia people like Fiona Hill, John Bolton, Mike Pompeo, and Alex Vindman. He also was tougher on Russia than Obama was. So whatever Putin had on Trump, there isn't any evidence that Trump's Presidency benefitted him. Relations between the US and Russia got worse during Trump's presidency. Putin had a more productive relationship with Obama than Trump. Again, I love a good conspiracy theory but the Trump-Russia thing is one of the less convincing conspiracy theories if you objectively look at the history of Trump's time in office.
|
|
|
Post by guido2 on Apr 13, 2024 17:24:30 GMT -5
Ahhh. Putin has cited NATO expansion as one of the reasons for the military action against Ukraine. Which wasn't occuring till such time that he lit the fuse for Sweden, Norway and the Ukraine to want to be part of it.
He has expressed concern over NATO’s eastward expansion, particularly the possibility of Ukraine joining NATO, which he views as a provocation and a threat to Russia’s security. I will not deny that the Ukraine was talking about the possibility. But, they were being held off at arms length by NATO, till such time that they satisfactorially cleaned up their inner politics and so on. Every Soviet/Russian leader since Mikhail Gorbechev has opposed eastward expansion of NATO. Gorby and later Yeltsin said the US promised that NATO wouldn't expand East. Whether or not that claim is true, many in Russia believe that we broke our promise. In the video below from 1997, three years before Putin came to power, Sen. Biden "carried water for Putin" by arguing against NATO expansion: By the logic that some here are using, if you opposed the Iraq war, you were "carrying Putin's water" because Putin opposed the Iraq war. If you argued that invading Iraq was a bad idea, you might be accused of wanting to help Putin: 2003 - Russia's Putin Calls Iraq War A 'Mistake'Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen etc. Our country's track record in foreign interventions hasn't been very good over the past 50 years. Americans can reasonably lack confidence that the decision-makers are making wise decisions about foreign policies without being accused of being manipulated by foreign actors. My generation, people under age 45, came of age in the era of blunders like Afghanistan and Iraq so there should be no surprises about why Millennials and Gen-Zers in Congress have doubts about this stuff. Ahhh One Simple Question. When was the last time that any nation backed by NATO, actually went and put troops into a country....ANY COUNTRY ..... unless it was provoked. Please tell me, when NATO had a recruitment program to get other nations to join. Have other counties solicited joining. Yup sure. Mostly after being attacked or a nearby country being attacked. You do see the theme of my statement. Right? Sorry, NATO is pretty much a follower of the old saying 'good fences make good neighbors' or 'you stay on your side of the line and we'll stay on ours.' Now if you can post some facts that counter that.... I would be very happy to hear it.
|
|
|
Post by JoyinMudville on Apr 13, 2024 17:34:05 GMT -5
It's true that Trump doesn't accept the DC groupthink on Russia (and that's not a bad thing). He at least understands the old DC groupthink that you don't want Russia and China to become allies so we should play both against each other. That was the Cold War doctrine that seems to have been forgotten by today's western leaders. It's also true that Ukraine and Russia have been part of the same empire or the Soviet Union for most of both country's histories. So maybe that's what Trump meant? We know he's not an expert on facts or history. But as President from 2017 to 2020 (as much as you want to ignore his presidency), he filled his administration with anti-Russia people like Fiona Hill, John Bolton, Mike Pompeo, and Alex Vindman. He also was tougher on Russia than Obama was. So whatever Putin had on Trump, there isn't any evidence that Trump's Presidency benefitted him. Relations between the US and Russia got worse during Trump's presidency. Putin had a more productive relationship with Obama than Trump. Again, I love a good conspiracy theory but the Trump-Russia thing is one of the less convincing conspiracy theories if you objectively look at the history of Trump's time in office. Trump was impeached for illegally withholding aid to Ukraine while trying to extort Zelensky into launching a sham investigation into his potential political opponent. Odd, how you just repeat the same debunked boilerplate over and over again in your efforts to run cover for Putin and bolster Trump
|
|
|
Post by guido2 on Apr 13, 2024 18:14:11 GMT -5
It's true that Trump doesn't accept the DC groupthink on Russia (and that's not a bad thing). He at least understands the old DC groupthink that you don't want Russia and China to become allies so we should play both against each other. That was the Cold War doctrine that seems to have been forgotten by today's western leaders. It's also true that Ukraine and Russia have been part of the same empire or the Soviet Union for most of both country's histories. So maybe that's what Trump meant? We know he's not an expert on facts or history. But as President from 2017 to 2020 (as much as you want to ignore his presidency), he filled his administration with anti-Russia people like Fiona Hill, John Bolton, Mike Pompeo, and Alex Vindman. He also was tougher on Russia than Obama was. So whatever Putin had on Trump, there isn't any evidence that Trump's Presidency benefitted him. Relations between the US and Russia got worse during Trump's presidency. Putin had a more productive relationship with Obama than Trump. Again, I love a good conspiracy theory but the Trump-Russia thing is one of the less convincing conspiracy theories if you objectively look at the history of Trump's time in office. Trump was impeached for illegally withholding aid to Ukraine while trying to extort Zelensky into launching a sham investigation into his potential political opponent. Odd, how you just repeat the same debunked boilerplate over and over again in your efforts to run cover for Putin and bolster Trump I realized after reading this, that there are some that are going to beat the drum for Donnie against the nasty Democrats. I dunno, I watch FOX periodically, and they throw some monkey poop against the wall and I keep waiting for a tangible fact or two to back it up. And I mean facts, not some additional rhetoric. I mean documentation, videos, voice recordings. (Sidebar: Is it me but I always feel like I am watching some Evangelist mega church preacher spouting non-sense when I watch FOX. Why does "I have sinned", Jimmy come to mind?) Never see it. However, when I watch PBS, BBC, MSNBC, while they will throw their version of monkey poop, they ALWAYS back it up with tangible, documented facts. Facts that you can actually look up and validate. Just say'n
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Apr 13, 2024 18:16:19 GMT -5
Please tell me, when NATO had a recruitment program to get other nations to join. Have other counties solicited joining. Yup sure. Mostly after being attacked or a nearby country being attacked. You do see the theme of my statement. Right? Sorry, NATO is pretty much a follower of the old saying 'good fences make good neighbors' or 'you stay on your side of the line and we'll stay on ours.' Now if you can post some facts that counter that.... I would be very happy to hear it. Sounds like you're moving the goalposts now. I'm not going to argue over the merits of NATO expansion. That's a whole different topic. My point is, it was known long before Putin came to power, that the Russians oppose NATO expansion. He didn't make it up as President Biden is fully aware of given what Biden said in 1997.
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Apr 13, 2024 18:20:03 GMT -5
It's true that Trump doesn't accept the DC groupthink on Russia (and that's not a bad thing). He at least understands the old DC groupthink that you don't want Russia and China to become allies so we should play both against each other. That was the Cold War doctrine that seems to have been forgotten by today's western leaders. It's also true that Ukraine and Russia have been part of the same empire or the Soviet Union for most of both country's histories. So maybe that's what Trump meant? We know he's not an expert on facts or history. But as President from 2017 to 2020 (as much as you want to ignore his presidency), he filled his administration with anti-Russia people like Fiona Hill, John Bolton, Mike Pompeo, and Alex Vindman. He also was tougher on Russia than Obama was. So whatever Putin had on Trump, there isn't any evidence that Trump's Presidency benefitted him. Relations between the US and Russia got worse during Trump's presidency. Putin had a more productive relationship with Obama than Trump. Again, I love a good conspiracy theory but the Trump-Russia thing is one of the less convincing conspiracy theories if you objectively look at the history of Trump's time in office. Trump was impeached for illegally withholding aid to Ukraine while trying to extort Zelensky into launching a sham investigation into his potential political opponent.Right. Trump did that on his own, not because Putin was in his ear. Trump thought he could leverage our aid to Ukraine in order to extract "dirt" on Biden who pretty much ran Obama's Ukraine policy when he was the Vice President. In spite of the first impeachment, Trump to my knowledge, has never said anything negative about President Zelensky or Ukraine. Actions speak louder than words, and Trump's actions as President (including the fact that Fiona Hill worked in his White House) defy the conspiracy theory that he "carried water for Putin".
|
|
|
Post by guido2 on Apr 13, 2024 18:44:50 GMT -5
Please tell me, when NATO had a recruitment program to get other nations to join. Have other counties solicited joining. Yup sure. Mostly after being attacked or a nearby country being attacked. You do see the theme of my statement. Right? Sorry, NATO is pretty much a follower of the old saying 'good fences make good neighbors' or 'you stay on your side of the line and we'll stay on ours.' Now if you can post some facts that counter that.... I would be very happy to hear it. Sounds like you're moving the goalposts now. I'm not going to argue over the merits of NATO expansion. That's a whole different topic. My point is, it was known long before Putin came to power, that the Russians oppose NATO expansion. He didn't make it up as President Biden is fully aware of given what Biden said in 1997. God soul. I didn't think you were so slow. This is not moving the goal posts. It is stating the goal posts. Fine, the Russians have this bug up their azz about NATO expansion. But not so strangely, the only times that NATO expands is when Russia (or some other place) decides that national boundaries don't count. Rather, their perception of what is 'theirs' is what counts. For God sake listen. Sweden and Denmark have been 'neutral' and non-aligned for like ever. (If you want an exact number you can look it up for yourself). And Russia went ahead and decided to reclaim territory (The Ukraine, twice) that they feel is theirs..... or should I say Putin feels it is theirs. So to put it in blunt terms, Russia provoked expansion. (see: you stay on your side of the fence as I said before_). Look at this list and get back to me and argue that all these countries felt threatened. NOT the other way around. www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_52044.htm
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Apr 13, 2024 19:06:41 GMT -5
Sounds like you're moving the goalposts now. I'm not going to argue over the merits of NATO expansion. That's a whole different topic. My point is, it was known long before Putin came to power, that the Russians oppose NATO expansion. He didn't make it up as President Biden is fully aware of given what Biden said in 1997. God soul. I didn't think you were so slow. This is not moving the goal posts. It is stating the goal posts. Fine, the Russians have this bug up their azz about NATO expansion. But not so strangely, the only times that NATO expands is when Russia (or some other place) decides that national boundaries don't count. Rather, their perception of what is 'theirs' is what counts. For God sake listen. Sweden and Denmark have been 'neutral' and non-aligned for like ever. (If you want an exact number you can look it up for yourself). And Russia went ahead and decided to reclaim territory (The Ukraine, twice) that they feel is theirs..... or should I say Putin feels it is theirs. So to put it in blunt terms, Russia provoked expansion. (see: you stay on your side of the fence as I said before_). Look at this list and get back to me and argue that all these countries felt threatened. NOT the other way around. www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_52044.htm In the 1990s, Russia had a President that was friendly with the US and the West. And Russia was broke. They weren’t a threat to their neighbors at the time. So there was a spirited debate about whether we should or shouldn’t expand NATO back when Biden gave that speech in 1997. Today, Russia is in better shape economically than they were in the 90s and Vladimir Putin is an old school Russian dictator. So Russia’s neighbors are legitimately concerned about Russian aggression today. I’m not arguing that they shouldn’t be concerned today. My only point is that Biden and others knew that there were potential risks in expanding NATO into Russia’s backyard. Not because of Putin but because of Russia’s national security doctrine. Every nation has national security policies that are in place no matter who their leader is. Including the US and Russia…
|
|
|
Post by zenwalk on Apr 13, 2024 21:12:28 GMT -5
Little Mike is their new pet. Why wouldn't he be? What tiny sliver of a soul he has remaining from all the lies and duplicity in service to his perverted image of God must rest like bile in his throat. At least let's hope so since it's such a tiny price to pay for all the death that piles upon his plate in Ukraine. Trump said Ukraine aid can continue in the form of loans. Same policy that Sen. Lindsey Graham supports. I love a good conspiracy theory but the Trump-Russia Manchurian Candidate has gone the way of the 9/11 Truther thing at this point… Yes they are talking about loans. That can run out the clock a few more months. They won't stop the delay until trump is cuffed and hauled off or Ukraine falls and things get really ugly when Putin starts making things hard for the Baltic countries. We are on opposite sides of this coin.
|
|
|
Post by zenwalk on Apr 13, 2024 21:37:03 GMT -5
Thoughts and prayers that God is reserving a special place in Hell for those like Donnie and Johnson. I dunno if I were God, I'd be a bit ticked on how they have twisted Christianity. What I don't understand is why God hasn't handled this him/herself by now. 🌩️There are so few occasions in life where expressing your humanity coincides with your own self interest. It's stunning that we may let the opportunity slip. The US doing nothing is the biggest green light for all the autocratic sharks in the world to lose any reservations they may have put upon their behavior because of our role as the protector of the free world.
|
|
|
Post by JoyinMudville on Apr 14, 2024 0:44:47 GMT -5
Trump was impeached for illegally withholding aid to Ukraine while trying to extort Zelensky into launching a sham investigation into his potential political opponent. Right. Trump did that on his own, not because Putin was in his ear. Putin has been in Trump's ear for years now
|
|
|
Post by JoyinMudville on Apr 14, 2024 14:09:40 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by guido2 on Apr 14, 2024 15:12:20 GMT -5
Thoughts and prayers that God is reserving a special place in Hell for those like Donnie and Johnson. I dunno if I were God, I'd be a bit ticked on how they have twisted Christianity. What I don't understand is why God hasn't handled this him/herself by now. 🌩️There are so few occasions in life where expressing your humanity coincides with your own self interest. It's stunning that we may let the opportunity slip. The US doing nothing is the biggest green light for all the autocratic sharks in the world to lose any reservations they may have put upon their behavior because of our role as the protector of the free world. Care to parse that out for me. Are you talking about the Ukraine, Gaza/Israel? I'm confused.
|
|
|
Post by JoyinMudville on Apr 14, 2024 15:43:44 GMT -5
There are so few occasions in life where expressing your humanity coincides with your own self interest. It's stunning that we may let the opportunity slip. The US doing nothing is the biggest green light for all the autocratic sharks in the world to lose any reservations they may have put upon their behavior because of our role as the protector of the free world. Care to parse that out for me. Are you talking about the Ukraine, Gaza/Israel? I'm confused. He's referring to Ukraine and he is correct.
|
|
|
Post by zenwalk on Apr 14, 2024 16:39:10 GMT -5
There are so few occasions in life where expressing your humanity coincides with your own self interest. It's stunning that we may let the opportunity slip. The US doing nothing is the biggest green light for all the autocratic sharks in the world to lose any reservations they may have put upon their behavior because of our role as the protector of the free world. Care to parse that out for me. Are you talking about the Ukraine, Gaza/Israel? I'm confused. The US standing by and doing nothing in Uk signals to all our adversaries that we have lost our resolve for being the primary protector of the West. The cops have walked off their jobs. Peace is not some libertarian result from allowing bad actors their way.
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Apr 14, 2024 16:44:46 GMT -5
Care to parse that out for me. Are you talking about the Ukraine, Gaza/Israel? I'm confused. The US standing by and doing nothing in Uk signals to all our adversaries that we have lost our resolve for being the primary protector of the West. The cops have walked off their jobs. Peace is not some libertarian result from allowing bad actors their way. Define "the West". Does it not include Russia? Is Russia part of the West or not? People need to make up their minds...
|
|
|
Post by zenwalk on Apr 14, 2024 19:12:46 GMT -5
The US standing by and doing nothing in Uk signals to all our adversaries that we have lost our resolve for being the primary protector of the West. The cops have walked off their jobs. Peace is not some libertarian result from allowing bad actors their way. Define "the West". Does it not include Russia? Is Russia part of the West or not? People need to make up their minds... I doubt anyone would say Vladivostock is a European city. But you could make a case Moscow is thanks due to their executed aristocracy who built St Petersburg and Moscow. But Catherine and Peter the Great have been dead a few centuries. At bottom Russia is a Northern Asia Mongol culture cosplaying a European one. Russia has the potential to embrace the West. Instead it wants to plunder it.
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Apr 14, 2024 19:37:59 GMT -5
Define "the West". Does it not include Russia? Is Russia part of the West or not? People need to make up their minds... I doubt anyone would say Vladivostock is a European city. But you could make a case Moscow is thanks due to their executed aristocracy who built St Petersburg and Moscow. But Catherine and Peter the Great have been dead a few centuries. At bottom Russia is a Northern Asia Mongol culture cosplaying a European one. Russia has the potential to embrace the West. Instead it wants to plunder it. I don't even know what that means. At the end of the day, it's not about ideology like the Cold War or about Russia's desire to dominate Europe. It's technically a civil war between two countries that share over a thousand years of culture and history. Most Americans can't even distinguish between Russians and Ukrainians. They're brothers in terms of ethnicity and culture. That's the way Putin views it and it's why he won't tolerate them completely breaking with Russia politically or threatening Russia by joining NATO. It's not super complicated but folks insist on making it about far more than the war is really about. The differences between Russians and Ukrainians are far more likely to be healed over time than the differences between Israelis and Palestinians who have cultural and religious differences.
|
|
|
Post by zenwalk on Apr 14, 2024 19:57:57 GMT -5
I doubt anyone would say Vladivostock is a European city. But you could make a case Moscow is thanks due to their executed aristocracy who built St Petersburg and Moscow. But Catherine and Peter the Great have been dead a few centuries. At bottom Russia is a Northern Asia Mongol culture cosplaying a European one. Russia has the potential to embrace the West. Instead it wants to plunder it. I don't even know what that means. At the end of the day, it's not about ideology like the Cold War or about Russia's desire to dominate Europe. It's technically a civil war between two countries that share over a thousand years of culture and history. Most Americans can't even distinguish between Russians and Ukrainians. They're brothers in terms of ethnicity and culture. That's the way Putin views it and it's why he won't tolerate them completely breaking with Russia politically or threatening Russia by joining NATO. It's not super complicated but folks insist on making it about far more than the war is really about. The differences between Russians and Ukrainians are far more likely to be healed over time than the differences between Israelis and Palestinians who have cultural and religious differences. It means the "European" was imposed by a long executed aristocracy that spoke French instead of the native Russian. As for the war, we've determined there's few points of agreement. Rather than going over old ground and creating bitterness this is one we are going to have to agree to disagree on. The differences between the Russians and the Ukes will heal quickly with Uk independence.
|
|
|
Post by JoyinMudville on Apr 15, 2024 5:47:48 GMT -5
hmm... seems like someone on here has spent a lot of time talking about Ukrainian Nazis and those biolabs
|
|
|
Post by JoyinMudville on Apr 18, 2024 19:36:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by JoyinMudville on Apr 19, 2024 9:06:00 GMT -5
Dr Timothy Snyder schools Marjorie Taylor Greene on the Ukrainian nazi bs
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Apr 24, 2024 12:45:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by JoyinMudville on Apr 24, 2024 12:48:32 GMT -5
What's clear is that Johnson told Trump that he was facing a rebellion in the House and if he didn't bring the measure to the floor, a couple of dozen GOP representatives were prepared to force the issue by signing the discharge petition. Nice try, but no.
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Apr 24, 2024 12:59:29 GMT -5
What's clear is that Johnson told Trump that he was facing a rebellion in the House and if he didn't bring the measure to the floor, a couple of dozen GOP representatives were prepared to force the issue by signing the discharge petition. Nice try, but no. Johnson was told that Ukraine could lose the war before the end of this year if they didn't get aid soon. Republicans don't want to be blamed if it happens before November. CIA Director: Ukraine could lose by end of 2024 “There is a very real risk that the Ukrainians could lose on the battlefield by the end of 2024, or at least put Putin in a position where he could essentially dictate the terms of a political settlement.”Either way, you should thank Trump for at least not getting in the way of the Bill passing the House and giving Johnson his blessing. I don't believe Trump has any core beliefs besides "winning" so I don't get caught up in his bizarre campaign rhetoric or flip-flops on policies. Instead I pay attention to what he does or doesn't do.
|
|
|
Post by ivanbalt on Apr 24, 2024 13:04:48 GMT -5
Trump's not losing the MAGA cult no matter what he does, but he does need the Republican voters who want to support Ukraine and/or dislike Putin.
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Apr 24, 2024 13:08:57 GMT -5
Trump's not losing the MAGA cult no matter what he does, but he does need the Republican voters who want to support Ukraine and/or dislike Putin. He cleverly leaned into the cutting aid to Ukraine thing to win the GOP primaries. Now that he's locked up the nomination, he's moving back towards the GOP establishment as he did the last time he was President. And yes, his followers will stick with him no matter how much he flip-flops.
|
|
|
Post by JoyinMudville on Apr 24, 2024 13:09:04 GMT -5
What's clear is that Johnson told Trump that he was facing a rebellion in the House and if he didn't bring the measure to the floor, a couple of dozen GOP representatives were prepared to force the issue by signing the discharge petition. Nice try, but no. Johnson was told that Ukraine could lose the war before the end of this year if they didn't get aid soon. Republicans don't want to be blamed. CIA Director: Ukraine could lose by end of 2024 “There is a very real risk that the Ukrainians could lose on the battlefield by the end of 2024, or at least put Putin in a position where he could essentially dictate the terms of a political settlement.”Either way, you should thank Trump for at least not getting in the way of the Bill passing the House and giving Johnson his blessing. I don't believe Trump has any core beliefs besides "winning" so I don't get caught up in his bizarre campaign rhetoric or flip-flops on policies. Instead I pay attention to what he does or doesn't do. The two aren't mutually exclusive. Again, the discharge petition had 195 democratic signers. GOP representatives such as McCaul, Turner, and others were prepared to sign it which would have forced the Senate version of the bill to the floor. Why should I thank Trump? His obstructionism temporarily tilted the battlefield in Putin's favor. The GOP's bad faith delaying tactics on this aid cost Ukrainian lives on the battlefield and in residential areas dozens of miles from the front. Furthermore, it is easy to see how his talk about 'making the aid a loan' was just another recipe for delay. The reality is... Trump lost the argument. And so did you.
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Apr 24, 2024 13:15:11 GMT -5
The reality is... Trump lost the argument. And so did you.What was wrong with my argument? The fact that it took like six months to get it approved means I was proven correct in my assertion that politically it would be more difficult to get huge aid packages to Ukraine approved the longer the war lasts. Never said that it would be "impossible". Both sides got something they wanted (the GOP wanted to rush more aid to Israel after Iran's attacks). And yes, this won't be the last aid package and we'll see the same long-drawn out debates again next year if not before the end of this year. Politically, it's difficult to sell sending $60-100 billion to Ukraine year after year because the importance of doing so doesn't resonate with most Americans. Ian Bremmer agrees:
|
|