One simple question for MAGA. Do you support Trump's support for Putin in the Ukraine Situation?

[Correll]

What sucks is all the people going to bat for peace and failing to realize that Putin wouldn’t e talking, if Russia wasn’t in deep trouble both economically and militarily.

I have CONSTANTLY discussed how Russia is fucked and how this war dragging on is fucking them up even more.


Your response seems ... weird. YOu failed to address any of my points and then said something that ignores a significant portion of what I have been saying.

BUT, thank you for admitting that I and Trump are "going to bat for peace".

 

[konradv]

I have CONSTANTLY discussed how Russia is fucked and how this war dragging on is fucking them up even more.


Your response seems ... weird. YOu failed to address any of my points and then said something that ignores a significant portion of what I have been saying.

BUT, thank you for admitting that I and Trump are "going to bat for peace".

Your solutions are nonstarters. Putin has to leave, then discussions can commence. There’s no advantage for Ukraine to negotaliate under a gun.

 

[konradv]

That was a flaw in your analogy that I was prepared to over look for discussion purposes.

I considered that you would bring that up, but then I thought, no, he won't be that bad.


Yes, Russia is the aggressor. In wwii, Japan was in a worse situation post Pearl Harbor to cut a deal than Ukraine is now. Noting that, does nothing for our current discussion. It is a moot point.

My point about the size and power of the participants, stands. Would you like to address that, or would you prefer to discuss more flaws with YOUR analogy?

I don’t care to discuss analogies at all. Putin is a dictator and it’s shameful for us to not support Ukraine 100%.

 

[Correll]

Your solutions are nonstarters. Putin has to leave, then discussions can commence. There’s no advantage for Ukraine to negotaliate under a gun.

That is completely unrealistic.

Getting a nation to give up land taken with the blood of their soldiers is the most difficult thing to do with diplomacy.

Demanding it as a precondition for negotiations is just another way of saying, endless war, or fight to the last man.


And there is advantage to negotiation "under a gun".

ie you can see how it is going, just cut a deal and get to the end scenario without lossing hundreds of thousands of more lives.

 

[Correll]

I don’t care to discuss analogies at all.

YOU brought up the analogy and I thought it was a fine one. Good points were explored, and realized. YOU just don't like what was learned.

Putin is a dictator

So? What does noting that contribute to the discussion? Are you under the impression that my position is based on SYMPATHY for PUtin or some belief that he is "elected" and thus worthy of special consideration? HAHAHAHAHAHA.

and it’s shameful for us to not support Ukraine 100%.

Nope. That's a dumb thing to say.

Zelinski while being on the relatively moral high ground, can still be WRONG about policy.

He might be overestimating his nation's abilty to fight and leading his nation to ruin. Or he might be irrationally fixated on regaining lost territory and not realizing that he would have to spend the lives of hundreds of thousand of his people to do that.

Those are real possiblities. Simply giving him a blank check is not moral nor responsible.

 

[konradv]

YOU brought up the analogy and I thought it was a fine one. Good points were explored, and realized. YOU just don't like what was learned.




So? What does noting that contribute to the discussion? Are you under the impression that my position is based on SYMPATHY for PUtin or some belief that he is "elected" and thus worthy of special consideration? HAHAHAHAHAHA.




Nope. That's a dumb thing to say.

Zelinski while being on the relatively moral high ground, can still be WRONG about policy.

He might be overestimating his nation's abilty to fight and leading his nation to ruin. Or he might be irrationally fixated on regaining lost territory and not realizing that he would have to spend the lives of hundreds of thousand of his people to do that.

Those are real possiblities. Simply giving him a blank check is not moral nor responsible.

I brought up the analogy and now I’m dropping it, since you insist on making the agressor the good guy or at least someone we can work with. Chamberlain thought so too.

 

[konradv]

That is completely unrealistic.

Getting a nation to give up land taken with the blood of their soldiers is the most difficult thing to do with diplomacy.

Demanding it as a precondition for negotiations is just another way of saying, endless war, or fight to the last man.


And there is advantage to negotiation "under a gun".

ie you can see how it is going, just cut a deal and get to the end scenario without lossing hundreds of thousands of more lives.

Who are you to decide for the Ukrainians when enough is enough? As long as they want to fight, we should be supporting democracy.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Who are you to decide for the Ukrainians when enough is enough? As long as they want to fight, we should be supporting democracy.

They are not a democracy. They WERE a democracy.

 

[Luckyone]

Bottom line is that this is not about Zelenski and Trump. This is about what is right and what is wrong.

Wrong is to invade another country without provocation and then "target" and kill innocent people.

Given that the United States is "supposed to" be the champion of Democracy and freedom in the world, Trump should put his "own" feelings aside and support what we represent.

Trump is being a self-centered asshole that is only thinking about his own feelings getting hurt by not being "properly" respected by Zelenski, who is only supporting what is best for his country.

I cannot even begin to describe my utter contempt for who Trump is. I can't believe our own people voted for him. He is a piece of shit and is not even worth being an American, much less a president.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Bottom line is that this is not about Zelenski and Trump. This is about what is right and what is wrong.

Wrong is to invade another country without provocation and then "target" and kill innocent people.

Given that the United States is "supposed to" be the champion of Democracy and freedom in the world, Trump should put his "own" feelings aside and support what we represent.

Trump is being a self-centered asshole that is only thinking about his own feelings getting hurt by not being "properly" respected by Zelenski, who is only supporting what is best for his country.

I cannot even begin to describe my utter contempt for who Trump is. I can't believe our own people voted for him. He is a piece of shit and is not even worth being an American, much less a president.

Should we send US troops to Ukraine, or just keep sending them dollars?

Before you answer, keep in mind that the dollars are not working.

 

[Correll]

I brought up the analogy and now I’m dropping it, since you insist on making the agressor the good guy or at least someone we can work with. Chamberlain thought so too.

1. I have not made the aggressor the "good guy". That was a dumb thing to say. Why did you say itt?

2. You made a point that we own Zelinski unqualified support. I made a valid counterpoint. YOu failed to address it. Are you conceeding that point?

 

[Correll]

Who are you to decide for the Ukrainians when enough is enough? As long as they want to fight, we should be supporting democracy.

I am part of MAGA. We are the ones that Zelinski needed if he wanted a realistic chance of spending ukrainian lives to get his lost lands back.

I was not prepared to see that many people die, so that he could get land back. Neither was Trump.


That is my stake in it, and that is valid. Would you like to address that, or would you like to pivot to an unrelated point to try to distract from how reasonable I am?

 

[Luckyone]

Should we send US troops to Ukraine, or just keep sending them dollars?

Before you answer, keep in mind that the dollars are not working.

Dollars are not working? are you blind?

The war in Ukraine would have lasted 3 days (Ukraine taken over by Russia) if the dollars would not have been sent. Because of the dollars sent (in the way of arms for the Ukrainians to fight), the war has now gone on for 3 years and Russia has lost an exorbitant amount of money and troops.

If the money continues to be sent, Russian losses will continue until they cannot afford it anymore and the fighting will end (and Ukraine will remain free).

Russia has already lost so many troops that they had to import mercenaries from North Korea.

Money has been the key to all of this.

Open your eyes and your mind and think.

 

[Correll]

....

If the money continues to be sent, Russian losses will continue until they cannot afford it anymore and the fighting will end (and Ukraine will remain free).
...

You sure? Or will Ukaine go on offensive to try to take lands BACK?

 

[Luckyone]

They are not a democracy. They WERE a democracy.

They still are a Democracy.

Ukrainian parliament affirms Zelenskyy's legitimacy​

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/2/25/ukrainian-parliament-affirms-zelenskyys-legitimacy
It was the war that forced the martial law to occur. That is a normal thing when a war is occurring. Steps need to be taken to defend the nation when at war, and martial law is what is REQUIRED. You do not change a ruler by vote when the ruler has been successful in maintaining the freedom of the country.

Be real, for once.

 

[Luckyone]

You sure? Or will Ukaine go on offensive to try to take lands BACK?

they are still their lands. They were taken away by force, but they are Ukrainian lands and not Russian lands. That is not being on the offensive. That is recovering what is already yours.

 

[Seymour Flops]

They still are a Democracy.

Ukrainian parliament affirms Zelenskyy's legitimacy​

Ukrainian parliament affirms Zelenskyy’s legitimacy
It was the war that forced the martial law to occur. That is a normal thing when a war is occurring. Steps need to be taken to defend the nation when at war, and martial law is what is REQUIRED. You do not change a ruler by vote when the ruler has been successful in maintaining the freedom of the country.

Be real, for once.

The people in power "affirming" their own legitimacy is not how democracy works. You know that.

You'd get more respect if you be honest for once.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Tons o' spin on the way.

Thank you for keeping us up to date on your washing cycles.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Dollars are not working? are you blind?

It's not working for what Zelenskyy insists on, which is Russia completely out of Ukraine.

The war in Ukraine would have lasted 3 days (Ukraine taken over by Russia) if the dollars would not have been sent.

Wrong. The war would have lasted 3 days if Donald Trump had not overturned Obama-Biden policy of only sending non-lethal aid like blankets. The arms that Trump provided them saved them from the Russian version of a Blitzkrieg.

Because of the dollars sent (in the way of arms for the Ukrainians to fight), the war has now gone on for 3 years and Russia has lost an exorbitant amount of money and troops.

We've lot an exorbitant amount of money also.

If the money continues to be sent, Russian losses will continue until they cannot afford it anymore and the fighting will end (and Ukraine will remain free).

It's been more than two years. What is your time line and cost estimate for that plan?

Russia has already lost so many troops that they had to import mercenaries from North Korea.

Money has been the key to all of this.

Open your eyes and your mind and think.

Even if what you say is true - which it is not - you have not explained why the American taxpayer should foot the bill.

 

[Mac1958]

Thank you for keeping us up to date on your washing cycles.

You're very welcome, Trumpster!