Jump to content

Democracy’s Fiery Ordeal: The War in Ukraine 🇺🇦


Tiberius

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, SoCal Deek said:

So in your world view we needed to first watch him level a country, displace millions of innocent people, and kill thousands of young men and women just to make this point? Wouldn’t it have been far better to stop him BEFORE any of that happened? 

How? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Poland?  They were never part of the USSR and are in NATO.  No it seems he wanted to reconstitute the USSR and started (continued) with Ukraine, who he overestimated the degree to which they wanted to rejoin Russia.  He was sorely mistaken and has no chance to enter into a war with any other country.

Poland was communist under the USSR rule until 89-90.  Not officially part of the USSR but 100% under their thumb.  Worse than say, Belarus now.  Belarus has at least some autonomy.   Poles were horribly oppressed during that time.   

 

All the former states that were in similar positions fookin haaate Russia (except Serbia for some reason).   

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

So in your world view we needed to first watch him level a country, displace millions of innocent people, and kill thousands of young men and women just to make this point? Wouldn’t it have been far better to stop him BEFORE any of that happened? 

to make a point?  Russia invaded Ukraine and has a mad. imperialistic dictator.  What do you propose we should have done?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:

to make a point?  Russia invaded Ukraine and has a mad. imperialistic dictator.  What do you propose we should have done?

We forecasted EXACTLY what we were going to do when our pathetic leader told the world that a small incursion would be our limit. Now 310 pages later you see the result of that! Way to go Brandon. 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Dislike 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

I'm not clear why Putin would be gunning for Poland mainly because empires and imperialism are typically driven by the desire to acquire resources, not just territory for the sake of more land.  As Russia is a resource rich country with a large land area already and Poland's main resource is coal reserves and production I don't see any strategic reason to go to the trouble.  And while the former Soviet Union engaged in gobbling up nations of Eastern Europe after WW2 that ended with the dissolution of the Union.  I'm aware of the theory being tossed about that Putin is obsessed with re-assembling the former Soviet Union but I think that's less fact and more fiction peddled by people using it to serve their own purposes rather than it being an accurate assessment of some policy objective.  For one, none of these countries are economic powerhouses and anybody taking them on would need to sink lots of cash into them.  Right now its the German's doing that though the EU and the Euro common currency.   Why not just wait until Germany gets tired of subsidizing everyone else and things fall apart to make any move?  Why start a fight?       

https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/02/21/poland-ukraine-russia-putin-imperial-dreams/

 

https://carnegieendowment.org/politika/88585

1 minute ago, SoCal Deek said:

We forecasted EXACTLY what we were going to do when our pathetic leader told the world that a small incursion would be our limit. Now 310 pages later you see the result of that! Way to go Brandon. 

So war was OK then but not now?

Edited by redtail hawk
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, L Ron Burgundy said:

Poland was communist under the USSR rule until 89-90.  Not officially part of the USSR but 100% under their thumb.  Worse than say, Belarus now.  Belarus has at least some autonomy.   Poles were horribly oppressed during that time.   

 

All the former states that were in similar positions fookin haaate Russia (except Serbia for some reason).   

 

Doesn't matter since they were never part of the USSR and thought so much of them that they decided to join NATO.

 

3 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:

So war was OK then but not now?

 

No.  The point was Joke should have said "no aggression will be tolerated, period" from the beginning.

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Doesn't matter since they were never part of the USSR and thought so much of them that they decided to join NATO.

 

They pretty much were.  They were 100% under Russian control so it is possible that Putin wants what the Ussr had.  I don't personally think that's the case but Poland is worried enough that they've beefed up their military to the point they now swing the biggest stick in Europe military wise. 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, L Ron Burgundy said:

They pretty much were.  They were 100% under Russian control so it is possible that Putin wants what the Ussr had.  I don't personally think that's the case but Poland is worried enough that they've beefed up their military to the point they now swing the biggest stick in Europe military wise.

 

Pretty much doesn't count for much when, again, they were never part of the USSR and are part of NATO.  Maybe in some fever dream Putin thought he could get Poland but it was never something he could do in reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Doc said:

"no aggression will be tolerated, period" from the beginning.

I think the US said just that by supporting Ukraine intensively right after the invasion started.  Ya think Putin didn't know what our response would be before the invasion?  I think it's extremely likely this was clearly conveyed to him via our and NATO's diplomats.

Edited by redtail hawk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Changing the subject from then to now? 

Hilarious 

So you believe our current strategy can only work when the battle line is drawn some arbitrary 60 miles INSIDE the Ukrainian border? 
Yeah that makes all kinds of sense….not. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Hilarious 

So you believe our current strategy can only work when the battle line is drawn some arbitrary 60 miles INSIDE the Ukrainian border? 
Yeah that makes all kinds of sense….not. 

Still not clear on what you thought should have happened.  Fight the war when Russia annexed Crimea?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SoCal Deek said:

How can I be any clearer? Geez! 
Crimea? Now what? 

The results would likely not have been the same in a fight over Crimea

"On 24 August 2009, anti-Ukrainian demonstrations were held in Crimea by ethnic Russian residents. Sergei Tsekov (of the Russian Bloc[68] and then deputy speaker of the Crimean parliament[69]) said then that he hoped that Russia would treat Crimea the same way as it had treated South Ossetia and Abkhazia.[70] Crimea is populated by an ethnic Russian majority and a minority of both ethnic Ukrainians and Crimean Tatars, and thus demographically possessed one of Ukraine's largest ethnically Russian populations.[71]"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, redtail hawk said:

The results would likely not have been the same in a fight over Crimea

"On 24 August 2009, anti-Ukrainian demonstrations were held in Crimea by ethnic Russian residents. Sergei Tsekov (of the Russian Bloc[68] and then deputy speaker of the Crimean parliament[69]) said then that he hoped that Russia would treat Crimea the same way as it had treated South Ossetia and Abkhazia.[70] Crimea is populated by an ethnic Russian majority and a minority of both ethnic Ukrainians and Crimean Tatars, and thus demographically possessed one of Ukraine's largest ethnically Russian populations.[71]"

 Very nice internet book report. We weren’t talking about Crimea? Were we? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, redtail hawk said:

I'm familiar with the Putin quote, that the break up of the Soviet Union was the “greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century.”  Which many have translated into some strategic intent to reclaim dominion over those countries.  I just don't see it.  As it makes no sense to re-capture countries that would be a net drain on resources and funds.  Why not let the Americans take care of them and drain their resources?  Basically, Moscow offloaded a bunch of costly States to Washington to fund.  Why would they want them back?  Let the Americans support them, like we're doing now.  While draining away funds diverted from our core national interests.  We need to re-focus our resources on our core interests.  Worrying about Poland and Ukraine.  Not on that list. 

 

 

Edited by All_Pro_Bills
  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

Worrying about Poland and Ukraine.  Not on that list. 

They're on mine...and NATO's.  NATO is a big part of the conversation and impetus on both sides.  We live in a small world, not a vacuum.

 

Do u believe that some of economic dominance springs from our military?

Edited by redtail hawk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tiberius said:

Flying Tigers? 

 

 

 

Insanity.

See how much he wants to do this without AWACS, US tanker capability, US electronic counter measures support and a host of other things that truly determine success.

 

But, I see his call sign is "Two Dogs."

That is a call sign with historic significance, and is funny.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...