Pope Francis Says NATO Started War in Ukraine by ‘Barking at Putin’s Door’

If you wanted to save Ukraine, its people, its infrastructure, its nation, you would push for a settlement now. You would have done it two months ago, but they're not doing that. They've rejected it out of hand. So that's not their goal, saving Ukraine, saving human lives. No, that's not their goal. Instead, the war in Ukraine is designed to cause regime change in Moscow. They want to topple the Russian government. That would be payback for the 2016 election. So, this is the logical, maybe the inevitable end stage of Russiagate. Now, we should have seen this coming because they said it out loud years ago. Here's Adam Schiff from two years ago, predicting it, saying it. Watch this.

SCHIFF: As one witness put it during our impeachment inquiry, the United States aids Ukraine and her people so that we can fight Russia over there and we don't have to fight Russia here.

o, we arm Ukraine so we can fight Russia. Now, how many Americans (whatever you think of Putin, probably not much, justifiably. Probably don’t have a lot of interest in moving to Russia), but how many Americans then or now want to "fight Russia?" A very small group, but Adam Schiff said it out loud at the time in the House of Representatives. We don't arm Ukraine so we can help the Ukrainians. They're merely unfortunate pawns in all of this. We arm Ukraine so that we can punish Russia.


PELOSI: We believe that we are visiting you to say thank you for your fight for freedom, that we are on a frontier for freedom and that your fight is in fight for everyone and so our commitment is to be there for you until fight is done.

you probably didn't think you were signing up for this. Nancy Pelosi telling us we're in a war with a nuclear-armed power with no clear end date.This is an open-ended conflict, said Nancy Pelosi

Lavrov. So, what they're saying is "we will use nuclear weapons against you and your allies if you don't back off."
If, for example, this seems existential like you're trying to overthrow our government. It's hardly a defense of Russia to say that's a real possibility and has been for quite some time. So, it's two years ago that Vladimir Putin revised Russia's nuclear deterrent policy.

Now the new policy allows Russia to use nuclear weapons in response to a conventional strike. That means some sort of non-nuclear provocation. Now, in March, Russia's former president, Dmitry Medvedev, who sits on Russia's Security Council, reminded our country of this policy. He warned Joe Biden that Russia would indeed use nuclear weapons against the West in response to any "act of aggression that is committed against Russia and its allies."

Now, what would that look like? Would it include helping to shoot down a Russian transport plane carrying hundreds of Russian troops? The Pentagon has admitted doing that. You don't have to be for Russia to see that as a pretty reckless act and not just doing it, but then bragging about it to NBC News. Where does that get us?


We do know that Putin has placed Russia's nuclear forces on high alert and again, Russia has the largest nuclear arsenal in the world and again, why wouldn't he use those weapons? They tell us daily he is evil and insane and he may well be a risk. Yeah, but no one in Washington seems worried in the slightest. In fact, Congressman Adam Kinzinger, who has clearly something to live for at this point, is now calling for a blank check, an open-ended conflict in Ukraine using the same legal justification that got us into Iraq for nearly 20 years. He wants an authorization to use military force.
 
you have sitting members of Congress with access to high-level intelligence talking casually about using chemical weapons or nuclear weapons against a nuclear-armed state.

So, it's not a defense of Russia. You don't have to believe Russia was justified in invading Ukraine. They weren't. It's not a defense of Putin to think to yourself, "Hold on a second here. How did we get here? Talking about nuclear war on the Sunday shows. Should we be? Are we ready for that?"

It's clear no one in the Biden administration cares or is worried about it at all.
The escalation continues at a remarkable pace, and you know that if you watch the money. We're continuing to shovel cash to the government of Ukraine, which just last year Democrats described as one of the most corrupt in the world, but whatever and we're sending money to Ukraine at levels that are astounding.

Joe Biden signed off on a funding package in March for $13.6 billion in aid for Ukraine. Then he sent an additional $1.3 billion in late April. Then he sent $350 million in February. He also said $800 million in March. In addition to all of that, Joe Biden has requested another $33 billion for Ukraine and that request includes funding for "longer-range artillery" of a heavier caliber than the howitzers we've already been sending there that can reach into Russia
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker-inevitable-end-stage-russiagate
 
There will be one eventually, of that I have no doubt. In my lifetime? Won’t predict that. But I predict the initial one would be limited then stopped after both sides see the insanity of it.
thing about wars - just like this one - is it may start off limited, but that doesn't mean it stays there
we are at war with Russia - bet you didnt see that coming when this started?
 
Russian nationalists have considered Ukraine to be an integral part of Holy Russia since at least Tsarina Catherine the Great, and have sought to dominate Ukraine ever since.

NATO's existence has never changed that calculus.

Putin has wanted to stitch back together the Holy Rus empire since the early 1990s, at least.
yet the war just started. why not 5, or ten year ago?
Because NATO expansion and heavy weaponization of Ukraine became the threat matrix to Russia
 
Always w/ the ad homs.
So, what concessions are you willing to give an international outlaw/mass murderer?
dont act stupid I wont call you on it
It's called "negotiated peace" -and it needs to be brokered. we cant do it.
It's Europe's war -
they are going to have to do it- but because we keep escalating it it gets more difficult to do so

The point of this in particular is the USA doesn't want an end to the war -they want Putin's hide
 
dont act stupid I wont call you on it
It's called "negotiated peace" -and it needs to be brokered. we cant do it.
It's Europe's war -
they are going to have to do it- but because we keep escalating it it gets more difficult to do so

The point of this in particular is the USA doesn't want an end to the war -they want Putin's hide

It was a typical ad hom. I wasn't "acting stupid." I was asking a pretty basic, legit question - which YOU DID NOT AND COULD NOT ANSWER.

Do some research on the geopolitics.
 
It was a typical ad hom. I wasn't "acting stupid." I was asking a pretty basic, legit question - which YOU DID NOT AND COULD NOT ANSWER.

Do some research on the geopolitics.
I specifically answered -a brokered negotiation
when you start talking about Putin invading the USA , and then tell me about geopolitics.. ROFL
 
I specifically answered -a brokered negotiation
when you start talking about Putin invading the USA , and then tell me about geopolitics.. ROFL

A "brokered negotiation?" That's a cop out.

What, specifically, do you think Putin would settle for, and withdraw his troops?
 
What, specifically, do you think Putin would settle for, and withdraw his troops?
He might settle for permanent annexation of territory now controlled by Russia. The Donbas and I’d speculate all of Uk along the Black Sea to Moldova .
Then Moldova would be easy pickings.
I seriously doubt Zelenskyy would go for that.
 
He might settle for permanent annexation of territory now controlled by Russia. The Donbas and I’d speculate all of Uk along the Black Sea to Moldova .
Then Moldova would be easy pickings.
I seriously doubt Zelenskyy would go for that.
pretty much agreed
But i dont think this is about Uk anymore from the USA
I think it's about removing Putin.. do you hear anyone in US government suing for a peace deal?

The wild card is still the tactical nukes -which i posted Russia now says are possible first strike
if Russia feels threatened.
 
He might settle for permanent annexation of territory now controlled by Russia. The Donbas and I’d speculate all of Uk along the Black Sea to Moldova .
Then Moldova would be easy pickings.
I seriously doubt Zelenskyy would go for that.

I'd agree that he might settle for that - but it's a non-starter. The Ukraine won't agree to it, nor should they.

Imagine a world where we start making these kinds of major concessions to mass murderers. They're right to not capitulate.
 
pretty much agreed
But i dont think this is about Uk anymore from the USA
I think it's about removing Putin.. do you hear anyone in US government suing for a peace deal?

The wild card is still the tactical nukes -which i posted Russia now says are possible first strike
if Russia feels threatened.
It’s Uk’s call. Not the US or NATO.
They wouldn’t settle for what Putin wants anyway. They’d rather die than let go of such a large swath of their country.
 
feel that before going to Kyiv, I must go to Moscow,” he told Corriere Della Sera in an interview that ran Tuesday. But the meeting would not exactly be to condemn Putin, based on what he told the paper. He said that the real “scandal” of Putin’s war is “NATO barking at Russia’s door,” which he said caused the Kremlin to “react badly and unleash the conflict.”
In Ukraine, it seems that it was others who created the conflict. I am pessimistic but we must do everything possible to stop the war.”

https://www.yahoo.com/news/pope-francis-says-nato-started-135952616.html
The Pope needs to stick to religion.
 
Back
Top