Russia & Ukraine

Ah... just like the League of Nations did.
And what's your solution? Keep sending armaments until Ukraine is a complete wasteland and all of her people are dead or living abroad as refugee's? Do you realize one errant missile or something else could snowball into WW3? Do you really want that?

You're making an assumption that Putin will press on. I'm saying he won't. But one thing is unarguable here, that place is an ember sitting atop a powder keg that... trust me... we don't want to go off.
 
I'm gonna point something out that I'm sure will go over like a turd in the proverbial punch bowl... and please note I am NOT taking Russia's side nor am I minimizing the plight of the Ukranian people, but has the thought crossed anyone's mind that the more weapons we send, the longer this will drag out and the greater and greater the numbers regarding the innocent loss of life along with an exponentially larger humanitarian crisis?

The more the US and others send, the longer this will go on. Putin wants complete disarmament, why not give it to him? Give him the win. He's learned his lesson, he won't roll into any of his non NATO neighbors now. He's always wanted Ukraine, and I don't believe the hawks that are saying he won't stop there. That's bs. Give him Ukraine and he'll stop. He'll live the rest of his years as a war criminal in hiding as his own country collapses from within. That will be his ultimate undoing.

Yes this sucks for the Ukrainian people, but a deal could be negotiated that allows them some sort of autonomy. $760B of Russian funds can be used to rebuild and make restitution.

If the goal is peace, sending more and more armament is the last thing we want to do. We are putting ourselves and all of Western Europe in even greater danger, which means EVEN MORE innocents will die. Do we really want WW3, because that's exactly where this could wind up, and IT WILL hit our shores.

We can laugh at Putin's tanks bogged down with no fuel etc, but lets not forget they are very capable in other areas. Attacking America won't require an amphibious assault on our eastern seaboard gents. Our comfy way of life could be brought to a screeching halt in a blink, and OUR economy can be crushed as the markets would tumble and martial law would be instituted as our supply chain comes to a halt. We ran out of toilet paper and people panicked, what will happen when there's no food?

Ya know sometimes in chess you have to sacrifice a bishop to save your queen.
Don't shoot the messenger here, I'm only stating the facts. Put aside the idealism which I'm sure will now rain down on this post and look at the bigger picture, and all that lies in the balance. Let Putin have Ukraine, and make it clear he stops there. In the end this will save perhaps many more millions of lives. Think I'm kidding? I'm not. And in the end, that should be the ultimate goal.

This is levels of Neville Chamberlain beyond Neville Chamberlain on steroids. This Neville Chamberlain with infinity rings.

It may not be for you but people will instinctively fight to protect their land. People don’t want their families subjected to oppression and tyranny. The Ukrainians are in a noble fight. They should never surrender.
 
And what's your solution? Keep sending armaments until Ukraine is a complete wasteland and all of her people are dead or living abroad as refugee's? Do you realize one errant missile or something else could snowball into WW3? Do you really want that?

Yes, he does. He's all but stated that several times thus far with insisting we get into a shooting war with Russia.

You're making an assumption that Putin will press on. I'm saying he won't. But one thing is unarguable here, that place is an ember sitting atop a powder keg that... trust me... we don't want to go off.

Putin isn't going to press on. And even if he wanted to (he doesn't) he doesn't have the ability to do so logistically. Everyone knows this.
 
The most likely outcome with Trump, who would have been in second term, would have been no American response and a divided NATO. .

Correct. Nato would still be divided and just flopping around trying to figure out what their role in the world is. Because they would not have been unified by an outright attack by Putin.

Only one person in this world has united Nato. And that is Vladimir Putin - not Joe Biden.

If you voted for Biden, you voted for the invasion of Ukraine. 100% discussed and 100% predictable, now 100% in progress.
 
And what's your solution? Keep sending armaments until Ukraine is a complete wasteland and all of her people are dead or living abroad as refugee's? Do you realize one errant missile or something else could snowball into WW3? Do you really want that?

You're making an assumption that Putin will press on. I'm saying he won't. But one thing is unarguable here, that place is an ember sitting atop a powder keg that... trust me... we don't want to go off.

Putin told the President of France he will press on -- no matter what.

I would urge you to read this...
https://www.elitetrader.com/et/threads/russia-ukraine.364278/page-159#post-5555042
 
Can’t say I have. What’s the relevance?

Just a fictional account of how China realizes eventually that it wants to take parts of Russia that border China and the resources of those areas on the premise that these areas are "ethnically close to China" rather than Russia. Seems rather similar to Putin's justification.

Ironically, it is this military incursion that China launches on to Russia that actually has Russia ask for help from..wait for it...the US and NATO.
 
Yes.

Ok, then my comment stands.

You know, our conversations seem to be moving in the right direction on civility. I'd ask they continue so if you wouldn't mind not making our posts go "round and round" (like you used to complain about, if memory serves) that'd be a humble request.
 
Back
Top