Zelensky rejected peace offer days before Russian offensive – WSJ

anatta said:
did you even bother to read the OP? Do you get Ukraine WAS A THREAT TO RUSSIA because it was being armed up and trained by NATO -while Zelensky pumped the west for more?

Nothing happens in a vacuum - virtually everything has a predicate. wise up
Click to expand...

DA UKRAINIANS
 
BartenderElite said:
DA UKRAINIANS
Click to expand...
DA NATO expansion.
the existential threat to Russia with a sophisticated well armed/trained proxy NATO state on it's border
The lack of desire for peace by all involved -including Russia, but also Zelenski

Wars dont just "happen" they simmer until they boil over -
then the populace pays the price of jingoistic leaders
 
anatta said:
DA NATO expansion.
the existential threat to Russia with a sophisticated well armed/trained proxy NATO state on it's border
The lack of desire for peace by all involved -including Russia, but also Zelenski

Wars dont just "happen" they simmer until they boil over -
then the populace pays the price of jingoistic leaders
Click to expand...

This is one man's war. By all accounts, he had little to no support for doing this. Their national security was not threatened in any way.
 
BartenderElite said:
Your typical response when your arguments are debunked.

DA UKRAINIANS
Click to expand...
debunked? that would require a rebuttal and construct on your part
which i have yet to ever see. Just go back to old western movies.
The good guys wear white hats is your cognitive ability
 
BartenderElite said:
This is one man's war. By all accounts, he had little to no support for doing this. Their national security was not threatened in any way.
Click to expand...
LMAO

If Russia had missiles 90 miles away from the USA would that be an existential threat?

This is an entire advanced hostile army on it's land border
 
anatta said:
LMAO

If Russia had missiles 90 miles away from the USA would that be an existential threat?

This is an entire advanced hostile army on it's land border
Click to expand...

It's just one that isn't part of the Soviet Union anymore.

But your argument against national sovereignty is noted.
 
goat said:
There's no way a dem can win the white house in 2024 with fuel and food shortages. More proof of how out of touch the DC establishment is with we the people. Ten million refugees is a lot.
Click to expand...

With as useless as R's in Washington have generally been you are claiming that this matters?
 
anatta said:
LMAO

If Russia had missiles 90 miles away from the USA would that be an existential threat?

This is an entire advanced hostile army on it's land border
Click to expand...

Ukraine used to have nukes until they agreed to get rid of them, that seem to have been conveniently forgotten.


UKRAINE WAS ONCE home to thousands of nuclear weapons. The weapons were stationed there by the Soviet Union and inherited by Ukraine when, at the end of the Cold War, it became independent. It was the third-largest nuclear arsenal on Earth. During an optimistic moment in the early 1990s, Ukraine’s leadership made what today seems like a fateful decision: to disarm the country and abandon those terrifying weapons, in exchange for signed guarantees from the international community ensuring its future security.

The decision to disarm was portrayed at the time as a means of ensuring Ukraine’s security through agreements with the international community — which was exerting pressure over the issue — rather than through the more economically and politically costly path of maintaining its own nuclear program. Today, with Ukraine being swarmed by heavily armed invading Russian troops bristling with weaponry and little prospect of defense from its erstwhile friends abroad, that decision is looking like a bad one.

https://theintercept.com/2022/02/27/ukraine-nuclear-weapons-russia-invasion/
 
Hawkeye10 said:
With as useless as R's in Washington have generally been you are claiming that this matters?
Click to expand...
I'm claiming dems can no longer deny being the party of war. It was Clinton and then Obama who provoked this war. Now Biden is turning the screws on Europe to force them to play ball. This is not a NATO war, this is a for-profit war for missile manufacturers.
 
Although Ukraine had thousands of nuclear weapons stationed on its territory, these weapons did not really belong to Ukraine. Command and control is a core feature of an effective nuclear deterrent, but Kyiv did not have it. According to the official history written by the U.S. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, “The preplanned launch codes remained in the rocket army’s underground command and control centers…No one denied that authority to launch the nuclear forces, the third largest in the world, remained in Moscow.”

In other words, Russia retained effective command and control over the nuclear weapons on Ukrainian territory. Ukraine could not launch the missiles or use the warheads, and therefore the arsenal could not be used as a deterrent. Moreover, even if Ukraine did obtain command and control, it did not have the infrastructure to safely maintain the weapons.

Given these operational and technical limitations, the nuclear weapons in Ukrainian territory could simply not serve as an effective deterrent. They were, however, a valuable bargaining chip. Ukraine could not use the weapons, but it could trade them for other benefits.
Click to expand...
https://www.cato.org/blog/soviet-nukes-ukraine-bargaining-chip-not-deterrent
 
goat said:
I'm claiming dems can no longer deny being the party of war. It was Clinton and then Obama who provoked this war. Now Biden is turning the screws on Europe to force them to play ball. This is not a NATO war, this is a for-profit war for missile manufacturers.
Click to expand...

The are also the ones responsible for ripping apart the economic globalization that America spent 40 years leading the build....ripped it to shreds....over fucking Ukraine.

Very hard times are coming.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
The are also the ones responsible for ripping apart the economic globalization that America spent 40 years leading the build....ripped it to shreds....over fucking Ukraine.

Very hard times are coming.
Click to expand...
Lest we forget the 10 million refugees.
 
goat said:
Lest we forget the 10 million refugees.
Click to expand...

And the longer they stay gone the less likely they are to go back, and if they are spread far and wide through Europe they many of them will never go back if the EU and AMericans throw money at them and let them work. It is another means to break the Ukrainian society. We shall have to see how this goes. Its not like Ukraine has been a glorious place to live. If there are better options they will be taken.
 
Primavera said:
Ukraine used to have nukes until they agreed to get rid of them, that seem to have been conveniently forgotten.


UKRAINE WAS ONCE home to thousands of nuclear weapons. The weapons were stationed there by the Soviet Union and inherited by Ukraine when, at the end of the Cold War, it became independent. It was the third-largest nuclear arsenal on Earth. During an optimistic moment in the early 1990s, Ukraine’s leadership made what today seems like a fateful decision: to disarm the country and abandon those terrifying weapons, in exchange for signed guarantees from the international community ensuring its future security.

The decision to disarm was portrayed at the time as a means of ensuring Ukraine’s security through agreements with the international community — which was exerting pressure over the issue — rather than through the more economically and politically costly path of maintaining its own nuclear program. Today, with Ukraine being swarmed by heavily armed invading Russian troops bristling with weaponry and little prospect of defense from its erstwhile friends abroad, that decision is looking like a bad one.

https://theintercept.com/2022/02/27/ukraine-nuclear-weapons-russia-invasion/
Click to expand...

Ukraine at that time had not the money or expertise to launch operate and maintain the nukes.
I totally get the "Libya ex." If you dont have nukes you dont have strategic deterrence

But in Uk's case it's a minor point in the east/west divide, especially since Uk became a military power beefed up by NATO
 
anatta said:
Russia is responsible for it's actions, Zelensky for his lack of actions, NATO for using Ukraine as a proxy war pawn against Russia..nobody has clean hands
Click to expand...

How is NATO using Ukraine? Did NATO hold a syringe of novichok to Putin's throat and force him to invade Ukraine?
 
anatta said:
so Ukraine did not give up operational control of it's nukes because it never had such

"The preplanned launch codes remained in the rocket army’s underground command and control centers…No one denied that authority to launch the nuclear forces, the third largest in the world, remained in Moscow.”
Click to expand...

And as per usual a lot of people are not found being honest.
 
ExpressLane said:
Why should Putin dictate how Ukraine runs their country?
Click to expand...
Exactly. Uk is a sovereign country, not part of some Greater Russia as Putin seems to think.
Russia had a history of subjugating East Europe. I can see why so many of those former Soviet states would want to be a member of NATO.
Uk did not attack or even threaten Russia, NATO has not attacked or threatened Russia . Now Libya, that's a different story.
 
anatta said:
Ukraine at that time had not the money or expertise to launch operate and maintain the nukes.
I totally get the "Libya ex." If you dont have nukes you dont have strategic deterrence

But in Uk's case it's a minor point in the east/west divide, especially since Uk became a military power beefed up by NATO
Click to expand...

I'm sure that Russia had control of the codes for strategic nukes but not for tactical battlefield ones.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top