U.S. Sam is a Sucker

not our war, but we cant help ourselves.. The goal is regime change (as always) in Russia

20,000 Ukrainians jumped U.S. border in April
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/may/17/20000-ukrainians-jumped-us-border-april/

I'd love to see regime change in Russia, since Putin is a war criminal. However, the immediate goal is simply to stop Russia's military expansionism. That's very much something that should be an objective for everyone on earth, because the precedent set here ends up mattering elsewhere. If Russia fails to acquire new territory, such that this is just a huge loss of life and national value for nothing, it sends a message around the world that military expansionism remains a counter-productive and doomed policy, so we'll see fewer such attempts. If, on the other hand, they come away with a bigger Russian empire as a reward for this lawbreaking, then that sends a signal that such a strategy can pay off, and we'll see more of it elsewhere -- e.g., China going after Taiwan, and maybe even eventually trying to swipe islands from Japan. So, we all have a vested interest in making sure this gamble fails for Russia.

That's the same reason that even if you, say, were wise enough to oppose Bush's regime-change invasion of Iraq, it was still possible to think that liberating Kuwait was a good policy, back in the early 1990's, because the world had to send a signal to other potential conquerors that military acquisition of new land was never going to be allowed to stand. Only if we send that message clearly and consistently will such gambits be kept from becoming commonplace. Every would-be expansionist needs to understand that the world will come together to make sure that plan fails.
 
Fuck off, shitbird. None of that makes anybody's world go 'round. Democrats cheating the election and installing a Weekend at Bernie's motherfucker is hurting most Americans right fucking

now, you piece of dogshit. Go take a long walk off a short pier into tiger shark infested water, ok?

You are a useless piece of shit.

Oh damn, one of the fellers today said he was bitching about 58 cents a gallon gas when he first moved here. :palm: (from a different American state)

Gas was fine for 80 years until Carter, and then Bush with the diesel fuckery, wtf was that about?

That was definitely an intentional Bah Fongula to Americans.

Diesel always used to be a little more than half the price of gas for around a century. It's a byproduct of refining gas.

True story, look it up!

Neither Sean, Tucker, Bill, Adam, Laura, Joe, nor any other of the umpteen Fox/talk radio demagogues could have said it any better
 
I'd love to see regime change in Russia, since Putin is a war criminal. However, the immediate goal is simply to stop Russia's military expansionism. That's very much something that should be an objective for everyone on earth, because the precedent set here ends up mattering elsewhere. If Russia fails to acquire new territory, such that this is just a huge loss of life and national value for nothing, it sends a message around the world that military expansionism remains a counter-productive and doomed policy, so we'll see fewer such attempts. If, on the other hand, they come away with a bigger Russian empire as a reward for this lawbreaking, then that sends a signal that such a strategy can pay off, and we'll see more of it elsewhere -- e.g., China going after Taiwan. So, we all have a vested interest in making sure this gamble fails for Russia.

That's the same reason that even if you, say, were wise enough to oppose Bush's regime-change invasion of Iraq, it was still possible to think that liberating Kuwait was a good policy, back in the early 1990's, because the world had to send a signal to other potential conquerors that military acquisition of new land was never going to be allowed to stand. Only if we send that message clearly and consistently will such gambits be kept from becoming commonplace. Every would-be expansionist needs to understand that the world will come together to make sure that plan fails.
- learn brevity/paragraphs. everytime i look at your posts is a freaking wall of partisan text.
Or such blandishment geopolitics it;s barely worth a response..
~~
Start here: Russia couldn't touch a NATO state if it wanted to and it doesn't
If you can't see the difference between Uk -with long established cultural, linguistic and economic ties to Russia...well join the club..i'll give you than much

I'm sitting around healing a swollen cornea after cataract surgery, I can give you the predicate for this war but it ain't "Russian empire" "expansionism" or any of that crap
It's because the USA turned Ukraine into a hostile defacto NATO state- intolerable for Russia
 
$54 billion (not million) can easily run a proxy war. do you have any idea of the quantity
of expensive high tech weapons we've given ( by Lend Lease) to Ukraine? obviously not

The $40 billion Rand Paul has stalled passage will probably get thru the Senate this week
I bet yours and mine bottom dollar they'll be back for more soon enough - they are committed to "victory"

54 billion is more then it costs for a year of funding our Marine Corps
Yes indeed we are warring against Russia.

Not our "boots"
but training , real time intelligence, logistical support and baskets full of our most advanced weaponry

If you think it's worth it to war against Russia we can have that discussion,
but dont delude yourself otherwise we aren't in a hot war against Russia

We are not in a hot war with Russia, as I said, if we were, fifty billion would a fraction of the cost, we spent over 300 million a day just to keep a presence in Afghanistan, so doing the math, how much do you think a full scale war would cost

Plus the Gov’t also shells out close to fifty billion a year to corporations, and last I knew they weren’t in war with anyone
 
We are not in a hot war with Russia, as I said, if we were, fifty billion would a fraction of the cost, we spent over 300 million a day just to keep a presence in Afghanistan, so doing the math, how much do you think a full scale war would cost

Plus the Gov’t also shells out close to fifty billion a year to corporations, and last I knew they weren’t in war with anyone
corps have nothing to do with anything
~~
we dont have a zillion boots on the ground like we did Afghan -hence the costs
but the uber-weaponizaton of Afghan is similar in costs -
if different because we didn't have our advanced weaponry in Afghan

Between 2010 to 2012, when the US for a time had more than 100,000 soldiers in the country, the cost of the war grew to more than $100bn a year, -not too far off without the personnel..and more to come..

Austin: U.S. believes Ukraine 'can win' war against Russia -wise up
 
We're all confused, what's to lose?
You can call this all the United States Blues.
Wave that flag, wave it wide and high.
(US Blues)
 
corps have nothing to do with anything
~~
we dont have a zillion boots on the ground like we did Afghan -hence the costs
but the uber-weaponizaton of Afghan is similar in costs -
if different because we didn't have our advanced weaponry in Afghan

Between 2010 to 2012, when the US for a time had more than 100,000 soldiers in the country, the cost of the war grew to more than $100bn a year, -not too far off without the personnel..and more to come..

Austin: U.S. believes Ukraine 'can win' war against Russia -wise up

Wasn’t only a zillion boots on the ground, point being it was a limited involvement, nothing compare to what the cost and effort of a “hot war” would require
 
Wasn’t only a zillion boots on the ground, point being it was a limited involvement, nothing compare to what the cost and effort of a “hot war” would require
sticking your head in the sand
Is this a hot war? -yes
Did not a few let the cat out of the bag -it's about "degradng Russian military"
"victory" and "Putin must go? -yes

are we training Uk soldiers in the USA, sharing intel, sharing real time target acqusition -yes
training in Ukraine, sending our best weapons specific to countering Russian assets? - yes

It's everything but the boots -because we dont need the boots
 
sticking your head in the sand
Is this a hot war? -yes
Did not a few let the cat out of the bag -it's about "degradng Russian military"
"victory" and "Putin must go? -yes

are we training Uk soldiers in the USA, sharing intel, sharing real time target acqusition -yes
training in Ukraine, sending our best weapons specific to countering Russian assets? - yes

It's everything but the boots -because we dont need the boots

You can employ the same scenario for just about any proxy war the U.S. has been involved in going back to the Monroe Doctrine, but only a handful of those turned into a “hot war.” If we were in a hot war with Russia it would be comparable to one of the World Wars, and fifty billion would be a drop in the bucket
 
Friedman pointed to two recent leaks; one that the United States provided Ukrainian forces with intelligence used to kill Russian generals, and the second that America provided intelligence to Ukrainian forces to sink Russia’s Moskva, its flagship battleship.

Friedman reported how President Biden never intended for the U.S.’s involvement in these strikes to be known, and was "livid" when said knowledge became public.

"From everything I have been able to glean from senior U.S. officials, who spoke to me on condition of anonymity, the leaks were not part of any thought-out strategy, and President Biden was livid about them," he wrote. "The staggering takeaway from these leaks is that they suggest we are no longer in an indirect war with Russia but rather are edging toward a direct war — and no one has prepared the American people or Congress for that."
https://www.foxnews.com/media/new-y...ksTX_02oQ6LOwrMt6HO8M53A61SlWY2uGrw6DSOdHvZ6Q
 
You can employ the same scenario for just about any proxy war the U.S. has been involved in going back to the Monroe Doctrine, but only a handful of those turned into a “hot war.” If we were in a hot war with Russia it would be comparable to one of the World Wars, and fifty billion would be a drop in the bucket
what?? we never shard target acquisition, real time intel and our best weapons with any other nation
No it's NOT comparable with "world war" those are wars with many countries involved
NATO isn't involved anything near to want we are. a few token weapons is about it

we are upto our eyeballs in this - and it's escalating, and we dont want peace because we never condition talks on weapons

I give you a bunch of evidence that shows we are depolying all of our war machine, less boots
into Ukraine -and the target is Russia. our Congress critters, POTUS and Defense officials have all said so
 
- learn brevity/paragraphs.

If you practice reading more, you'll find that you stop being overwhelmed by brief things like what I wrote. That was just 258 words consisting of two short paragraphs. In 19th-century literature, you regularly encounter single sentences twice that long. Les Miserables has one sentence with 823 words in it. Once you're a proficient reader, you'll find that things like what I wrote will take you all of 30-45 seconds to read. Good luck!


I'm sitting around healing a swollen cornea after cataract surgery, I can give you the predicate for this war but it ain't "Russian empire" "expansionism" or any of that crap
It's because the USA turned Ukraine into a hostile defacto NATO state- intolerable for Russia

The US didn't turn Ukraine into anything; Russia did, with its expansionistic policies. When they seized Crimea, the writing was on the wall, and Ukraine tried to protect itself from further land grabs. Putin's apologists want to obscure that, by pretending somehow the US forced their hand with NATO, when in fact the whole reason Putin took his chances starting this war is because he calculated the US and NATO WOULDN'T intervene.
 
It's called containment, small price to pay to clip Putin's wings. A cordon sanitaire needs to applied to the Russia at least until the people wake the fuck up. Putin's attack on Ukraine is just another variation on the Nazi doctrine of Lebensraum.

Then force the Ukrainian oligarchs to pay and the EU to pay and for EU member states to stop funding the Russian war machine by purchasing their oil and gas at the expense of their massive welfare states, they won't contribute anything, we're funding their yachts in Monaco and they're fucking laughing at us.

NO MORE FREE RIDERS AMERICA FIRST!
 
If you practice reading more, you'll find that you stop being overwhelmed by brief things like what I wrote. That was just 258 words consisting of two short paragraphs. In 19th-century literature, you regularly encounter single sentences twice that long. Les Miserables has one sentence with 823 words in it. Once you're a proficient reader, you'll find that things like what I wrote will take you all of 30-45 seconds to read. Good luck!
I took speed reading - but i post with brevity and clarity
If I want to read literature it wont be here

The US didn't turn Ukraine into anything; Russia did, with its expansionistic policies. When they seized Crimea, the writing was on the wall, and Ukraine tried to protect itself from further land grabs. Putin's apologists want to obscure that, by pretending somehow the US forced their hand with NATO, when in fact the whole reason Putin took his chances starting this war is because he calculated the US and NATO WOULDN'T intervene.
got any clues what's on Crimean peninsula? Sevastopol ( home of the Black Sea Fleet) for sure but a lot or Russian military assets as well
Part of the problem is that the government sworn in last week had little connection to Ukraine's more Russophile east. One of its first actions was to repeal a 2012 law recognising Russian as an official regional language.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26415508

the lease
http://www.geopolitika.lt/?artc=2731
It is obvious that after 2017 Kiev will not prolong the lease agreement with Russia. There is no doubt that during the coming nine years Russia will not manage to construct new fleet facilities.

oday the Black Sea Fleet is squeezed in the Troick bay, since because of the buried ships its sailing into the open sea waters is problematic and the Russian forces could be blocked here by several Ukrainian security boats. Besides, the supply of headquarters within the 5000 km coastal line is controlled by Ukraine.
If Ukraine becomes member of NATO the Russian fleet in the Black Sea would be squeezed in the hands of hostile forces. Then the question would arise where to escape from the land formerly occupied by the Russian czars and now a sovereign state.
 
I took speed reading - but i post with brevity and clarity

I do, too. However, since I actually have ideas worth communicating, you'll find that it sometimes takes more words than what you use.

got any clues what's on Crimean peninsula?

Yes: sovereign Ukrainian territory, which is currently subject to an illegal Russian occupation.

If Ukraine becomes member of NATO the Russian fleet in the Black Sea would be squeezed in the hands of hostile forces.

If Ukraine become a member of NATO, Russia's fleet has nothing to worry about unless they fuck with Ukraine. That's the real hitch: Putin wants to be able to expand Russian territory, whether by way of direct conquests or setting up puppet governments, in order to restore the Soviet-era zone of influence. It's not going very well for them, though. Since they're governed by a gibbering halfwit, they have a tendency to stumble thigh-deep into shit, and now they're in a situation where not only have they destroyed a good chunk of their economy, but they've really exposed their once-feared military as a paper tiger that can't even handle a small neighbor. A bet Putin would give anything for a mulligan on this one.
 
I do, too. However, since I actually have ideas worth communicating, you'll find that it sometimes takes more words than what you use.
Brevity is the soul of wit comes from the play Hamlet, written by English poet William Shakespeare around 1603. Polonius says it in act 2, scene 2. Simply put,
brevity is the soul of wit means that clever people can express intelligent things using very few words.

Yes: sovereign Ukrainian territory, which is currently subject to an illegal Russian occupation.
still clueless on the lease, and the bases ,and Sevastopol


If Ukraine become a member of NATO, Russia's fleet has nothing to worry about unless they fuck with Ukraine. That's the real hitch: Putin wants to be able to expand Russian territory, whether by way of direct conquests or setting up puppet governments, in order to restore the Soviet-era zone of influence. It's not going very well for them, though. Since they're governed by a gibbering halfwit, they have a tendency to stumble thigh-deep into shit, and now they're in a situation where not only have they destroyed a good chunk of their economy, but they've really exposed their once-feared military as a paper tiger that can't even handle a small neighbor. A bet Putin would give anything for a mulligan on this one.
no evidence of Russian expansionism. Still clueless that Ukaine is a defato NATO state-
with advanced US weapons in their hands

Crimea and Ukraine are unique in their ties to Russia
I'm not getting US meddling in the Euromaidan turned out the pro-Russian president-
which started all this in violation of the Budapest Memorandum

you simply lack the understanding of the complexities that led to the annexation/predicate for war.
 
Back
Top