Dangerous Dilemma about Ukraine. Two main risky alternatives.

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

All we ever needed to do was ensure Russia that Ukraine would not become NATO, and that Donbas and that other province be declared independent, and recognize Crimea is Russia.

Simple as that.

Why should we get to decide?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Maybe you should heed your own advice and proofread when you “psot,” you illiterate gasbag fuckwit. Lol. Grab yourself another bag of dicks to suck, Ensign.

Get back on topic. I look forward to your idiocy.

 

[Hossfly]

 

[night_son]

I’m leaning toward option 1. While I reluctantly agree that this may not be our war, I think I’m more worried about teaching Putin the wrong lesson.

Then it is a good thing you are not POTUS.

The United States of America and Russia have lived in relative peace since 1963, the Cold War notwithstanding. That's fifty-nine years of the world's two biggest kids on the block not throwing fists at each other, not exchanging intercontinental thermonuclear ballistic missiles, and not reducing earth's surface to smoldering, radioactive embers.

In 2001 the United States invaded Afghanistan. Russia did not flinch. All well and good said most of the leaders of the First World, as New York city had just suffered the worst terrorist attack in American history. In 2003 however, United States armed forces invaded Iraq under pretenses not directly related to 9/11/01 and in doing so killed many Iraqi citizens who were just trying to survive Saddam and go about their daily lives.

Key question: did Russia and the rest of the "civilized" world impose sanctions on the US for invading Iraq and causing high numbers of civilian casualties? Was the internet in a non-stop uproar over US/Coalition bombs falling on Iraqi infrastructure?

No.

Suddenly however, Russia invades the Ukraine and Putin is Hitler? Putin's gonna roll across Europe? Wait a minute . . . according to every major news outlet the Russian army can't even take down poor little old Kiev, and yet is somehow a threat to all of Europe? Well, which is it? Are the Russians the new Nazis running blitzkrieg across Ukraine or are they a shoddy, has-been spare parts army?

Lastly, YOU might be okay with mass exchanges of city incinerating ICBMs (if so, that makes you a full send idiot) but most of the rest of the free world is not.

 

[SweetSue92]

I’ve gotta go with Option 2.

As much as I despise Russia and Putin, this isn’t our fight and our involvement would likely result in WW3.

I think sanctions, verbal condemnation, and aid to Ukraine has been the perfect response to this Russian aggression. Seems like it has been pretty effective in uniting the world against Russia and strengthened our alliance with NATO.

The red line, to me, is if Russia attacks anyone in NATO. That would force our hand and I think Putin knows better than to try that.

Maybe the world is shifting on its axis but I agree with this entirely

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Better than the pablum you’ve provided, ensign. Get the guys’ pubic hair out from between your teeth, ensign. It’s revolting.

And why do you bother posting at all? You offer less than nothing of value, you pompous zit.

Get back on topic. I am no longer responding to your fledgling insults.

 

[BackAgain]

Then it is a good thing you are not POTUS.

The United States of America and Russia have lived in relative peace since 1963, the Cold War notwithstanding. That's fifty-nine years of the world's two biggest kids on the block not throwing fists at each other, not exchanging intercontinental thermonuclear ballistic missiles, and not reducing earth's surface to smoldering, radioactive embers.

In 2001 the United States invaded Afghanistan. Russia did not flinch. All well and good said most of the leaders of the First World, as New York city had just suffered the worst terrorist attack in American history. In 2003 however, United States armed forces invaded Iraq under pretenses not directly related to 9/11/01 and in doing so killed many Iraqi citizens who were just trying to survive Saddam and go about their daily lives.

Key question: did Russia and the rest of the "civilized" world impose sanctions on the US for invading Iraq and causing high numbers of civilian casualties? Was the internet in a non-stop uproar over US/Coalition bombs falling on Iraqi infrastructure?

No.

Suddenly however, Russia invades the Ukraine and Putin is Hitler? Putin's gonna roll across Europe? Wait a minute . . . according to every major news outlet the Russian army can't even take down poor little old Kiev, and yet is somehow a threat to all of Europe? Well, which is it? Are the Russians the new Nazis running blitzkrieg across Ukraine or are they a shoddy, has-been spare parts army?

Lastly, YOU might be okay with mass exchanges of city incinerating ICBMs (if so, that makes you a full send idiot) but most of the rest of the free world is not.

Unlike the senile puke in the White House, I didn’t run for office. And I’m also aware of (and have even discussed the fact that) either option presents risks. You seem to imagine that avoiding the risk of war by caving-in to Putin’s illicit demands will somehow secure our safety.

You “peace in our time” folks Seem incapable of learning any lessons from history.

Your ad hominem efforts are quite weak, by the way. But just so you know, they have no actual impact nor power of persuasion. Could you post intelligently if an adult was around to help you?

 

[SweetSue92]

Then it is a good thing you are not POTUS.

The United States of America and Russia have lived in relative peace since 1963, the Cold War notwithstanding. That's fifty-nine years of the world's two biggest kids on the block not throwing fists at each other, not exchanging intercontinental thermonuclear ballistic missiles, and not reducing earth's surface to smoldering, radioactive embers.

In 2001 the United States invaded Afghanistan. Russia did not flinch. All well and good said most of the leaders of the First World, as New York city had just suffered the worst terrorist attack in American history. In 2003 however, United States armed forces invaded Iraq under pretenses not directly related to 9/11/01 and in doing so killed many Iraqi citizens who were just trying to survive Saddam and go about their daily lives.

Key question: did Russia and the rest of the "civilized" world impose sanctions on the US for invading Iraq and causing high numbers of civilian casualties? Was the internet in a non-stop uproar over US/Coalition bombs falling on Iraqi infrastructure?

No.

Suddenly however, Russia invades the Ukraine and Putin is Hitler? Putin's gonna roll across Europe? Wait a minute . . . according to every major news outlet the Russian army can't even take down poor little old Kiev, and yet is somehow a threat to all of Europe? Well, which is it? Are the Russians the new Nazis running blitzkrieg across Ukraine or are they a shoddy, has-been spare parts army?

Lastly, YOU might be okay with mass exchanges of city incinerating ICBMs (if so, that makes you a full send idiot) but most of the rest of the free world is not.

I agree we should tread carefully but it's not a great comparison, us and Iraq and a ghoul like Putin. You said it yourself: people were trying to "survive" Saddam. Did that give us the right to go in there, no. But it's much different than what Putin is doing. Not to mention bombing say, maternity hospitals on purpose.

In short it was less than great, us going into Iraq, but it doesn't compare to Putin and Ukraine. It's not a GOOD bucket and a BAD bucket. It's a continuum.

 

[Batcat]

One of my concerns is that if our fear of WWIII causes us to just back down and slink away in the face of Putzin’s aggression, then Putzin WILL learn the lesson: that we can be relied upon to be craven cowards. In that event, there is nothing to cause him to even hesitate in seizing Moldova next. Etc. etc.

Putin does seem to love threatening nuclear war.

We need a leader with the cojones to inform him that if he wants an all out nuclear war and attacks us, we will retaliate and totally destroy Russia and then strike again to make the rubble bounce.

I have a bad feeling Sleepy Joe might not launch an attack. If Putin thinks that he might just launch a first strike.

The real Joe Biden scandal: Fumbling the nuclear football

Whatever scandal Hunter Biden’s emails reveal about alleged influence-peddling schemes with his father, it is nothing compared with the fact that Joe Biden as vice president routinely put the country at risk of being annihilated in a nuclear war.

www.washingtontimes.com

Biden Provides Nuclear Codes To Scammer Pretending To Be Pentagon

WASHINGTON—In an apparent phishing attack that has severely compromised U.S. national security, sources confirmed Monday that President Joe Biden had inadvertently provided the military’s nuclear launch codes to a hacker who emailed him pretending to be the Pentagon. “I am general of the...

www.theonion.com

Note the second article is

but the first isn’t.

 

[BackAgain]

Putin does seem to love threatening nuclear war.

We need a leader with the cojones to inform him that if he wants an all out nuclear war and attacks us, we will retaliate and totally destroy Russia and then strike again to make the rubble bounce.

I have a bad feeling Sleepy Joe might not launch an attack. If Putin thinks that he might just launch a first strike.

The real Joe Biden scandal: Fumbling the nuclear football

Whatever scandal Hunter Biden’s emails reveal about alleged influence-peddling schemes with his father, it is nothing compared with the fact that Joe Biden as vice president routinely put the country at risk of being annihilated in a nuclear war.

www.washingtontimes.com

Biden Provides Nuclear Codes To Scammer Pretending To Be Pentagon

WASHINGTON—In an apparent phishing attack that has severely compromised U.S. national security, sources confirmed Monday that President Joe Biden had inadvertently provided the military’s nuclear launch codes to a hacker who emailed him pretending to be the Pentagon. “I am general of the...

www.theonion.com

Note the second article is View attachment 614457 but the first isn’t.

Lol. As a rule, libs are the ones who tend to mistake the onion for actual news.

 

[Quasar44]

BackAgain
Why don’t you try talking to him
Dimwit

 

[AlexanderPK]

I give you directions here, thailor. Now, go suck another bag of dicks.

Is it some new commodity in the US, you keep mentioning it time and time again?

 

[XponentialChaos]

I’m leaning toward option 1. While I reluctantly agree that this may not be our war, I think I’m more worried about teaching Putin the wrong lesson.

And kick off a nuclear WW3? Wow, I didn’t think you would go that route.

 

[BackAgain]

Is it some new commodity in the US, you keep mentioning it time and time again?

I mentioned it in reference to seaman. I’ve hear tell of it on this very Board quite often. I can’t imagine it’s a real commodity. But then, I wouldn’t be in that market anyway.

 

[BackAgain]

And kick off a nuclear WW3? Wow, I didn’t think you would go that route.

It might pose that risk if Putin is actually that crazy. Of course, if he’s that crazy, it might be inevitable.

And frankly, not stopping this asshole now might increase his aggressions such that eventually we will be forced to take that risk, in any event. So, I’m not really seeing the value in giving-in to his militaristic behavior, in the first place. Or ever.

But again, I’m just wondering if either option isn’t potentially dangerous in the same way, on one time frame or another.

 

[AlexanderPK]

I mentioned it in reference to seaman. I’ve hear tell of it on this very Board quite often. I can’t imagine it’s a real commodity. But then, I wouldn’t be in that market anyway.

Okay. Keep going with that dialog. It's an entertaining read for a non american.

 

[justoffal]

What to do about Putin’s atrocity in Ukraine present two main alternatives. (There are others, perhaps, but I’m hoping people can rationally discuss the two main alternatives.)
I suggest the two main options are:

1. Do whatever we can do to completely stop Putin and get him out of Ukraine. The pros include not allowing an aggressor to prevail. Here, the cons include Putin’s threat to treat any aid to Ukraine as an act of war and the escalation of that regional warfare into WWIII. Yes, that risk raises the specter of nuclear war.

2. Avoid those above risks by NOT doing things that might stop Putin. So, maybe sanctions and more sanctions. BUT no assistance with was materiel. No deal to get Polish MiGs into Ikrajnian hands. No more stingers. No airlifts to resupply besieged Kyiv with even food and medicine. Wish and hope for quick success via sanctions. Pros? Lessens the risk of WWIII. Cons? Putin succeeds and probably learns rhe “lesson” that the west can be relied upon to back down against his future aggressions.

Lady or the Tiger time.

How should it be analyzed?

Here's the problem...you're not just dealing with Putin. China is tacitly in approval and so are Iran and North Korea. This aggression in Ukraine is much, much deeper than Russia versus Ukraine....it is the communist bloc Nations versus NATO and the west. No one from the Western block is going to risk triggering Armageddon....
So they will attempt to regain control using other means. Zelensky is either an egotistical ass or a retarded dupe. The "new situation" is absolutely here and is not going away. Instead of using his nation's geography as a pissing contest
Battle ground he could have made a few harmless and temporary agreements that would most likely die with Putin.

The war in Ukraine is just the lead dance in the new global conflict that will dominate the next two decades. Russia could probably be backed out ...but not the communist bloc...it's too big and too dedicated to it's mission.

Jo

 

[justoffal]

Not sure how that will stop Putin. But I do see that Obumbler’s actions and Brandon’s lust for money via Ukrainian corruption may have helped foster a bad situation and helped push it down the road into a worse one.

Yep

 

[AlexanderPK]

SweetSue92
Not to mention bombing say, maternity hospitals on purpose.
Can you sincerely say that you believe in this "ad hominem" (I hope this expression the OP used earlier fits here) assertion? That Russians chose not the hospitals per se but maternity ones as their bomb targets out of their in born wickedness?
The fact here is that Azov militiamen chased all the mothers-to-be out of the hospital several days prior the hit and turned it into their base knowing Russians would not attack civilians much less women and babies. Many schools and kindergartens are now used similarly by those militants and when they are hit by Russians the first thing that the empathetic world sees is that babies "suffered" and emotional flurry floods the media in righteous condemnation of the aggressor, forgetting that there were no babies there except Nazi thugs trying to hide behind the imaginary babies.

 

[Rogue AI]

Option 3: Reassess.

Go back to basics and look at this again. Day 1 the Ukrainian military had 200,000 men. The highest estimates of Russian troops on the border and in Belarus is 190,000 Russians. The invasion begins Russia advances and by the end of week only 50% of Russian forces were in Ukraine. This is according to Western sources.

What does that actually tell us? Ukraine got it's ass kicked by half their number and precision Russian strikes. So bad, Zelensky mobilized every male 18-60. Russia had been steadily advancing, and is not pulling additional troops from Russia, in fact they had their infamous 40 mile convoy sitting doing nothing, yet were still gaining ground.

The US and NATO have applied sanctions, but realistically how much more can they do? Either way, sanctions haven't slowed much less stopped anything. It has increased energy prices at home and deprived us of quality vodka, which does not benefit or help Ukrainians. Which was supposed to be the point.

The bigger picture. The energy situation has been thoroughly discussed. Higher prices, begging dictators and terrorists, and much of Europe continues to use Russian oil and gas. The next big thing is the global food supply. Russia and Ukraine produce 25% of the world's wheat. There's simply no alternative or replacement. Russia is the 4th largest fertilizer producer in the world. There was already talk about shortages this year BEFORE the invasion.

What happens when nations are facing starvation and Russia is sitting on food that Western sanctions are keeping it from those who need it? Are those folks going to hate the one with the food or the ones stopping them from getting it? Time to rethink things, for America's long term goals and benefits.