The Ukraine Crisis

[kalm]

Yes! It would be like the head of GM suggesting we negotiate with Hitler and consider giving Poland to Germany, being told to fuck off by the polish ambassador, and….

Exactly like that.

I really don't give a crap what Musk's geopolitical views are. He's not an elected official, he doesn't represent me or the United States, and other than selling access to that Starlink thing he has no other involvement in Russia's war against Ukraine. He's a military contractor in this regard. As long as he's providing a service, and we pay him for that service based on whatever contract was agreed to, then so ends the transaction. Do you think because he has crappy geopolitical views that he shouldn't be paid for the service he's providing?

I give a crap who we chose to do business with. Yes. This includes Saudi Arabia. Besides, was Musk giving the tech to us to give to UKR or giving it to UKR to support their war efforts?

Ever had to fire a vendor or a customer? It’s necessary sometimes…on principle alone.

[SeattleGriz]

Sweden says they won't involve Germany in their investigations into Nord Stream. Why is Germany being treated like crap?

[SeattleGriz]

The two shills still defending the baby rapists? Yes?

Keep dying on that hill! "bUChA wAs a FaLsE FlAg" "eVeRytHiNG iN KhErSoN is fInE."

Nice drive by.

[SeattleGriz]

You didn't bother to keep reading. Same guy admits civilians aren't really the target. He actually has no idea who is launching what.

Nice source

You're a fraud. I don't think you get to make any determinations over what is a good source any more. You've been flooding this thread with direct Russian propaganda for 8 months.

Russia is invading Ukraine. For no reason other than because they want to. And thousands of innocents, if not more, have died as a result. Nothing changes that.

Nice theatrics. You gonna throw yourself on the ground soon?

Direct Russian propaganda?

[UNI88]

FYP

Yep. The drone/missile strikes are no different that what the US did prior to pretty much any of our invasions. Remember "Shock and Awe" before we rolled tanks into Iraq in 2003? You think we only targeted military assets for all those weeks leading up to when boots hit the ground? The idea of NATO/US folks being outraged by these new aerial attacks targeting vital infrastructure is rather comical. The selective outrage is quite telling.

Apples to oranges. Yes, there was collateral damage but I don't think the US intentionally targeted civilians. I believe the Russians are intentionally targeting civilians. They don't value life and terror is an acceptable tactic to them.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

[SeattleGriz]

Yep. The drone/missile strikes are no different that what the US did prior to pretty much any of our invasions. Remember "Shock and Awe" before we rolled tanks into Iraq in 2003? You think we only targeted military assets for all those weeks leading up to when boots hit the ground? The idea of NATO/US folks being outraged by these new aerial attacks targeting vital infrastructure is rather comical. The selective outrage is quite telling.

Apples to oranges. Yes, there was collateral damage but I don't think the US intentionally targeted civilians. I believe the Russians are intentionally targeting civilians. They don't value life and terror is an acceptable tactic to them.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

I don't think.
I believe.

Lots of supposition on people dying.

[UNI88]

Yep. The drone/missile strikes are no different that what the US did prior to pretty much any of our invasions. Remember "Shock and Awe" before we rolled tanks into Iraq in 2003? You think we only targeted military assets for all those weeks leading up to when boots hit the ground? The idea of NATO/US folks being outraged by these new aerial attacks targeting vital infrastructure is rather comical. The selective outrage is quite telling.

Apples to oranges. Yes, there was collateral damage but the US didn't intentionally target civilians. The Russians are intentionally targeting civilians. They don't value life and terror is an acceptable tactic to them.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

FMP for SG and any others sucking Putin's pecker.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

[SeattleGriz]

Apples to oranges. Yes, there was collateral damage but the US didn't intentionally target civilians. The Russians are intentionally targeting civilians. They don't value life and terror is an acceptable tactic to them.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

FMP for SG and any others sucking Putin's pecker.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

You've lost.

[UNI88]

FMP for SG and any others sucking Putin's pecker.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

You've lost.

Fake news from an unreliable source without proof.

[houndawg]

I really don't give a crap what Musk's geopolitical views are. He's not an elected official, he doesn't represent me or the United States, and other than selling access to that Starlink thing he has no other involvement in Russia's war against Ukraine. He's a military contractor in this regard. As long as he's providing a service, and we pay him for that service based on whatever contract was agreed to, then so ends the transaction. Do you think because he has crappy geopolitical views that he shouldn't be paid for the service he's providing?

Musk needs to talk to Zelensky, not the Pentagon. The Pentagon might just counter-offer to protect starlink satellites from damage by unforseeable circumstances

[SDHornet]

Yep. The drone/missile strikes are no different that what the US did prior to pretty much any of our invasions. Remember "Shock and Awe" before we rolled tanks into Iraq in 2003? You think we only targeted military assets for all those weeks leading up to when boots hit the ground? The idea of NATO/US folks being outraged by these new aerial attacks targeting vital infrastructure is rather comical. The selective outrage is quite telling.

Apples to oranges. Yes, there was collateral damage but I don't think the US intentionally targeted civilians. I believe the Russians are intentionally targeting civilians. They don't value life and terror is an acceptable tactic to them.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

Apples and Oranges if we doing it because WMDs that didn't exist. Ok.

I recall there being less than 30 civilians killed in the first 2 days of the drone/missile barrage. That number has probably gone up since we are more than a week into this new aerial attack, but if they were intentionally targeting civilians I would think that number would be a lot higher.

That said, civilian casualties are inexcusable and unacceptable. Now do Ukraine and their shelling of the Donbas since the coup in 2014, or better yet, just do the civilians killed by Ukrainian shelling of civilians areas since the Russian invasion. Or does it only matter if Russia is doing the killing of civilians?

I will tangent into this, if NATO/US was so concerned about civilian casualties (or even military casualties), then why no push for negotiations to end this war? Why was a potential peace deal in April scuttled by NATO/US since human life has so much value?

[SDHornet]

BTW no significant movement on the fronts for the past 5-ish days since the aerial bombardment started. Reports of Russian troops massing in Belarus. Looks like Ukraine lost the initiative as they've made no major moves to reclaim territory. Lots of speculation on a big battle looming before the winter conditions set in.

[houndawg]

Apples to oranges. Yes, there was collateral damage but I don't think the US intentionally targeted civilians. I believe the Russians are intentionally targeting civilians. They don't value life and terror is an acceptable tactic to them.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

Apples and Oranges if we doing it because WMDs that didn't exist. Ok.

I recall there being less than 30 civilians killed in the first 2 days of the drone/missile barrage. That number has probably gone up since we are more than a week into this new aerial attack, but if they were intentionally targeting civilians I would think that number would be a lot higher.

That said, civilian casualties are inexcusable and unacceptable. Now do Ukraine and their shelling of the Donbas since the coup in 2014, or better yet, just do the civilians killed by Ukrainian shelling of civilians areas since the Russian invasion. Or does it only matter if Russia is doing the killing of civilians?

I will tangent into this, if NATO/US was so concerned about civilian casualties (or even military casualties), then why no push for negotiations to end this war? Why was a potential peace deal in April scuttled by NATO/US since human life has so much value?

You don't negotiate with invaders that deliberately target civilians, comrade, you kill them until they leave.

SDChamberlain

[houndawg]

BTW no significant movement on the fronts for the past 5-ish days since the aerial bombardment started. Reports of Russian troops massing in Belarus. Looks like Ukraine lost the initiative as they've made no major moves to reclaim territory. Lots of speculation on a big battle looming before the winter conditions set in.

Not very likely unless its against unarmed civilians. The Russian troops have no desire to fight Putin's war and it is rumored that the "accident" that killed more than a dozen recruits at a training facility near Ukraine was caused by disgruntled recruits - I don't know if its true or not but many people are saying...

[UNI88]

Will Putin stop with Ukraine? Could the Baltic states be next? What about Poland?

Am I and others being overdramatic? Is this more like Vietnam and the domino theory then Nazi Germany and Chamberlain/Churchill?

Yes.
-Putin, with the state of the Russian military now, couldn't conquer all of eastern Europe, or any of Western Europe.
-We have no treaty obligation with Ukraine. We do with Poland and the Baltics.
-We shouldn't be going to war or spending large sums of $$ on countries we don't have treaties with or don't have vital national security interest with. We don't import much from Ukraine. What is happening on our southern border has a far greater impact on the US than what is happening in Ukraine.

If only life were that simple.

• Why is the Russian military in it's current state? Could our aid to Ukraine be a contributing factor? Why not spend money but not American lives weakening a potential enemy?
• Many of the same people that are criticizing our support of Ukraine would turn their backs and argue that we should ignore our obligations if the Baltics or Poland were invaded.
• We don't import much from Ukraine but what about the Europe and the rest of the world? Ukraine is a breadbasket. Russia already uses natural gas to leverage western Europe, do we want them to be able to use grain as well?
• Ukraine and the southern border is not an either or decision. We can do both but the current administration is choosing to ignore the southern border. Not sending aid to Ukraine won't change that.

Putting this discussion where it belongs.

[houndawg]

Yes.
-Putin, with the state of the Russian military now, couldn't conquer all of eastern Europe, or any of Western Europe.
-We have no treaty obligation with Ukraine. We do with Poland and the Baltics.
-We shouldn't be going to war or spending large sums of $$ on countries we don't have treaties with or don't have vital national security interest with. We don't import much from Ukraine. What is happening on our southern border has a far greater impact on the US than what is happening in Ukraine.

If only life were that simple.

• Why is the Russian military in it's current state? Could our aid to Ukraine be a contributing factor? Why not spend money but not American lives weakening a potential enemy?
• Many of the same people that are criticizing our support of Ukraine would turn their backs and argue that we should ignore our obligations if the Baltics or Poland were invaded.
• We don't import much from Ukraine but what about the Europe and the rest of the world? Ukraine is a breadbasket. Russia already uses natural gas to leverage western Europe, do we want them to be able to use grain as well?
• Ukraine and the southern border is not an either or decision. We can do both but the current administration is choosing to ignore the southern border. Not sending aid to Ukraine won't change that.

Putting this discussion where it belongs.

The wall doesn't do shit now and never will. Most illegals just fly in and overstay their visa.

[GannonFan]

If only life were that simple.

• Why is the Russian military in it's current state? Could our aid to Ukraine be a contributing factor? Why not spend money but not American lives weakening a potential enemy?
• Many of the same people that are criticizing our support of Ukraine would turn their backs and argue that we should ignore our obligations if the Baltics or Poland were invaded.
• We don't import much from Ukraine but what about the Europe and the rest of the world? Ukraine is a breadbasket. Russia already uses natural gas to leverage western Europe, do we want them to be able to use grain as well?
• Ukraine and the southern border is not an either or decision. We can do both but the current administration is choosing to ignore the southern border. Not sending aid to Ukraine won't change that.

Putting this discussion where it belongs.

The wall doesn't do shit now and never will. Most illegals just fly in and overstay their visa.

In the past, sure that was true. Is it still true now? No one's really disputing the now 2M encounters with illegal migrants at the southern border. That's up from something like 150k. And those are just the ones that are encountered. Surely the narrative of overstaying visas (which was and is true) seems to be changing with the substantial increase of border crossings.

[houndawg]

The wall doesn't do shit now and never will. Most illegals just fly in and overstay their visa.

In the past, sure that was true. Is it still true now? No one's really disputing the now 2M encounters with illegal migrants at the southern border. That's up from something like 150k. And those are just the ones that are encountered. Surely the narrative of overstaying visas (which was and is true) seems to be changing with the substantial increase of border crossings.

An assumption that may or may not be warranted - I don't agree that its a zero sum thing, I think its way more complex than that even though the solution is simple: make an example of a few employers and there won't be any reason to come.

[GannonFan]

In the past, sure that was true. Is it still true now? No one's really disputing the now 2M encounters with illegal migrants at the southern border. That's up from something like 150k. And those are just the ones that are encountered. Surely the narrative of overstaying visas (which was and is true) seems to be changing with the substantial increase of border crossings.

An assumption that may or may not be warranted - I don't agree that its a zero sum thing, I think its way more complex than that even though the solution is simple: make an example of a few employers and there won't be any reason to come.

There will also be reasons to come. This country is still vastly better than 99% of the rest of the world. You come here and have children and they're automatically citizens. Bring your children here and they're Dreamers. Standard of living, even amongst the poorest of us, is significantly better than most anywhere else in the world. People aren't just coming here because they can get a job, that's naive and too simple. The total picture of why to come here shows all else being even, people would prefer to be here than in most of the world. And often it's easier getting here than it is getting into Europe or a similar preferred destination.

[SeattleGriz]

Germany says that it now knows who sabotaged the pipeline, but won't say. Hmmm. Certainly can't be Russia then.

I'll ask again. Who made the choice to screw Germany over?

[UNI88]

Germany says that it now knows who sabotaged the pipeline, but won't say. Hmmm. Certainly can't be Russia then.

I'll ask again. Who made the choice to screw Germany over?

Russia.

[UNI88]

Putin's Russia 'has become a fascist state' and must be stopped in Ukraine, says ex-diplomat who defected after the invasion

If Russia is not defeated in Ukraine, then it will likely move on to attack other former Soviet states, according to a former Russian diplomat who argues that Russian President Vladimir Putin has turned his country into a "fascist state."
...
Fascist states exploit two undeniable themes found in Putin's Russia: a national sense of victimhood and perceived former greatness, both of which are often addressed by way of aggression. Putin's strongest play at home is appealing to nostalgia for a Russian empire. Without it, Bondarev maintains, he has nothing — and Western policy toward Ukraine should reflect this.

"To justify his rule, Putin wants the great victory he promised and believes he can obtain," Bondarev wrote. "If he agrees to a cease-fire, it will only be to give Russian troops a rest before continuing to fight."

[GannonFan]

Putin's Russia 'has become a fascist state' and must be stopped in Ukraine, says ex-diplomat who defected after the invasion

If Russia is not defeated in Ukraine, then it will likely move on to attack other former Soviet states, according to a former Russian diplomat who argues that Russian President Vladimir Putin has turned his country into a "fascist state."
...
Fascist states exploit two undeniable themes found in Putin's Russia: a national sense of victimhood and perceived former greatness, both of which are often addressed by way of aggression. Putin's strongest play at home is appealing to nostalgia for a Russian empire. Without it, Bondarev maintains, he has nothing — and Western policy toward Ukraine should reflect this.

"To justify his rule, Putin wants the great victory he promised and believes he can obtain," Bondarev wrote. "If he agrees to a cease-fire, it will only be to give Russian troops a rest before continuing to fight."

So hard to keep track of who the fascists are these days.

[UNI88]

Putin's Russia 'has become a fascist state' and must be stopped in Ukraine, says ex-diplomat who defected after the invasion

So hard to keep track of who the fascists are these days.

to illiberals, trump is a fascist. to MAGAts, Ukraine is filled with fascists.

[SeattleGriz]

Germany says that it now knows who sabotaged the pipeline, but won't say. Hmmm. Certainly can't be Russia then.

I'll ask again. Who made the choice to screw Germany over?

Russia.