Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
7 hours ago, Tiberius said:

This I don't get. Why me? This is a politics board. We discuss the doings of the world, yet you want to make this personal about me? Who cares if i want nukes or not. 

 

You have not established the relevance of the question. 

Why you? You have been on this political board screaming for no fly zones and providing Ukraine with everything that it wants, from aid to a full scale of advanced weaponry. Should we provide Ukraine with nuclear weapons to act as a deterrent to the evil terrorist Putin?  It is a simple yes or no question, why are you so reluctant  to answer?

Posted
2 hours ago, Tenhigh said:

Why you? You have been on this political board screaming for no fly zones and providing Ukraine with everything that it wants, from aid to a full scale of advanced weaponry. Should we provide Ukraine with nuclear weapons to act as a deterrent to the evil terrorist Putin?  It is a simple yes or no question, why are you so reluctant  to answer?

Just me how the question has any relevance. I don't see it 

Posted
2 hours ago, Tiberius said:

Just me how the question has any relevance. I don't see it 

You have been the loudest voice on this board about giving Ukraine whatever they want, and I am interested in knowing how far you are comfortable with us going in their support.  I honestly can't believe that you won't just answer yes or no, what are you worried about?

Posted
5 hours ago, BillStime said:


Perfect.

 

Democracy is priceless.

 $50 billion to the country ranking 122nd on the corruption index, what could go wrong?

Posted
5 hours ago, Tenhigh said:

 $50 billion to the country ranking 122nd on the corruption index, what could go wrong?


Democracy is priceless. You do realize when authoritarianism takes over - your dictator won’t just own the libs - they will own you, too! 

Posted

The whole "Ukraine is corrupt! We should give them less, or nothing at all!" argument would be persuasive. Except:

 

1. Ukraine is currently winning the war.

2. Russia's lost about 7,300 tanks, trucks, APCs, jeeps and artillery pieces in 8 months. See for yourself.

3. Russian propaganda is bitching non stop about how good NATO gear is.

4. Russian propaganda is bitching non stop about how well the Ukrainians are using NATO gear.

 

So I think the RoI on our support is pretty decent. We're also entering month 9 of a war that was supposed to end in a week. And end in the bloodless conquest of Ukraine by Russia, followed by the very bloody forced assimilation of Ukrainians to Russian culture. As part of Russia's plan to reshape the world order to it's advantage. Which currently isnt working out exactly as they'd hoped, to say the least.

 

Now the rise or fall of Ukraine may not matter much to a lot of us Americans, given the troubles we've got ourselves. But it matters a great deal to a country that does not like us, and in fact wants to see us humbled, humiliated, and reduced in power. Balancing these issues is tricky business, but they both need to be resolved in our favor. 

  • Agree 1
Posted
4 hours ago, BillStime said:


Democracy is priceless. You do realize when authoritarianism takes over - your dictator won’t just own the libs - they will own you, too! 

Priceless even if it costs nuclear war? 

Posted
1 hour ago, Coffeesforclosers said:

The whole "Ukraine is corrupt! We should give them less, or nothing at all!" argument would be persuasive. Except:

 

1. Ukraine is currently winning the war.

2. Russia's lost about 7,300 tanks, trucks, APCs, jeeps and artillery pieces in 8 months. See for yourself.

3. Russian propaganda is bitching non stop about how good NATO gear is.

4. Russian propaganda is bitching non stop about how well the Ukrainians are using NATO gear.

 

So I think the RoI on our support is pretty decent. We're also entering month 9 of a war that was supposed to end in a week. And end in the bloodless conquest of Ukraine by Russia, followed by the very bloody forced assimilation of Ukrainians to Russian culture. As part of Russia's plan to reshape the world order to it's advantage. Which currently isnt working out exactly as they'd hoped, to say the least.

 

Now the rise or fall of Ukraine may not matter much to a lot of us Americans, given the troubles we've got ourselves. But it matters a great deal to a country that does not like us, and in fact wants to see us humbled, humiliated, and reduced in power. Balancing these issues is tricky business, but they both need to be resolved in our favor. 

I’ve not met a single person who believes Putin was correct in attacking Ukraine. Not one! The issue being discussed here is NOT about whether the US should be on the side of the Ukrainians. The discussion is about how much oversight is presently going on (if any) with our significant financial contribution to the effort. Which I believe is an entirely appropriate discussion given the Ukraine's horrible record for accountability and corruption.


It’s not complicated.

Posted
1 hour ago, SoCal Deek said:

I’ve not met a single person who believes Putin was correct in attacking Ukraine. Not one! The issue being discussed here is NOT about whether the US should be on the side of the Ukrainians. The discussion is about how much oversight is presently going on (if any) with our significant financial contribution to the effort. Which I believe is an entirely appropriate discussion given the Ukraine's horrible record for accountability and corruption.


It’s not complicated.

 

Right. And I'm saying the current level of oversight is just fine, given the results. Sorry if that wasn't clear. 

Posted
17 minutes ago, Coffeesforclosers said:

 

Right. And I'm saying the current level of oversight is just fine, given the results. Sorry if that wasn't clear. 

 

I am interested to hear how you have information on the oversight  of these weapons contributions to have an opinion on it.

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, sherpa said:

 

I am interested to hear how you have information on the oversight  of these weapons contributions to have an opinion on it.

 

I want to know why you want to fix something that isn't broken.  

 

 

Edited by Coffeesforclosers
Posted
31 minutes ago, Coffeesforclosers said:

 

I want to know why you want to fix something that isn't broken.  

 

 

 

So you didn't answer the question.

Instead you assert that I want to do something that I have never suggested.

You simply made it up.

Can you answer the question or not?

 

The reason I asked the question is that i am quite familiar with the history of weapons transfers into very unfriendly hands during surrogate war operations.

I want to know how someone on this site can claim there is adequate oversight, which is what you did.

 

Remember Benghazi?

Know what a big part of the CIA presence there was for?

I'll give you a hint.......It's related to this subject.

 

That is why I asked the question.

 

Posted
Just now, Tiberius said:

 

I hate to break it to you but McConnell is the John McCain 2.0. Just other old fart trying to do everything he can to hang onto his power seat. 

  • Agree 1
Posted
35 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

I hate to break it to you but McConnell is the John McCain 2.0. Just other old fart trying to do everything he can to hang onto his power seat. 

Sounds like you meant to say Trump 

Posted
1 minute ago, SoCal Deek said:

Tibs, in all honesty it actually applies to just about all of them on both sides of the aisle. 

And the system works 

  • Disagree 1
Posted
28 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

On that we differ. It no longer works the way it was intended to. 

I know, the cry babies are REALLY unhappy now 

×
×
  • Create New...