Russia & Ukraine
- Thread starter UsualName
- Start date
Wrong. Putin can at that moment start a nuclear war too. What is your guarantee he will not do that? And he knows we are afraid for a nuclear war. He uses our fear to win the fight.
Do you think Putin wants to risk a nuclear war for Ukraine? A completelly destroyed country with people that will go in resistance. A country that is so big that it can never be controlled by Russians.
If the answer is yes, then Putin is a huge idiot.
Last edited:
Macron because he is just trying to win an election by grandstanding and it is not working.
The germans are a confused pain in the arse and are a more than a little bit too tight with Putin- especially under Angela- until they couldn;t avoid distancing themselves. But - and here is where it get's dicey- I do acknowledge that the issue of imposing sanctions that may hurt their country more than it hurts Putin is a vaild one for discussion. I did not say that it does not need to still happen, only that it is an issue that requires serious consideration and advocacy on the part of a country's leader- versus Macron just posturing for an election.
Okay have at me. And the west- Biden included- enabled their dependency on German gas by approving the second pipleline and cheering the Germans on - especially Camp Biden- in regard to putting themselves and the west at risk by shifting over ot all that unreliable green shiite.
And Trump was right. Once again. And again.
I have to agree with you here. The fucking French just cannot get their froggy heads out of their ass on this and are causing more trouble than anything. Macron just caused a whole controversy in his pursuit of a modus vivendi calling the Ukrainians and Russians “brothers.”
You are right, what I said wasn't correct. Instead, I'll speak to it for me and mine and rephrase. If there is a risk to direct confrontation that could result in nuclear armageddon, but I am not being directly attacked (NATO in this case) then I am OK not doing anything, because there is no risk to me. Now, before you say "what about those being killed", if it were a conventional enemy, I'd be all for intervention. But not at the risk of the whole planet going up. Hopefully that is more clear, even if you don't like the answer.
I disagree here. If you are telling me that direct confrontation won't cause escalation in a nuclear fashion, then you being wrong means it does cause nuclear escalation. And then we're talking about world impact. Unless you think it is possible to have a localized nuclear conflict in some manner (I have no idea how this would be contained and neither do you).
If NATO has direct conflict with Russia and that leads to nuclear escalation, then it is foolish to say it will be localized. Sorry, never happen.
Yep. Trump told them to their faces that they would be reliant on Russian energy, and they laughed at him. Who is laughing now?
It's amazing how this crude, narcissistic idiot who could not put two words together is proven right again and again while the refined, educated, very professional European politicians who opposed everything he said are shown to be completely wrong.
Careful, you'll trigger a lot of folks on this thread.
So did literally everyone else. Are you saying Trump took any actions Biden didn’t? It’s not like Nordstream wasn’t 99% built during Trump's presidency.