Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I've known your posts for a long time. We do have different points of view but I never suspected that you would be a true blue commie;
Until now
N0 offense intended or implied,
you commie----you
-
I had no say about the US going into VietNam, that's on the Democrat President LBJ. So do want British soldiers shipped to Ukraine? Or do you just want Americans to do the dirty work?
The “students” at Ohio State had been violently rioting for several days. It wasn’t a peaceful demonstration. The unfortunate thing was that the people shot were hit by wild rounds and were innocent bystanders.
WTF are you talking about? Good Lord now you are bringing up Kent State? What is the relevance to this topic? Go back to your Benny Hill re-runs. Good night.
What major country does not try to enrich itself with resources from another country? How do you think all of those Russian Oligarchs ended up with billions of dollars to spend on yachts and mansions? Are you justifying Putin's shelling of Ukrainian citizens because you think he is not trying to "profit" from taking Ukraine?Russia is not trying to gain any profit from the Ukraine or anyone.
They never have.
When they support someone, that cost them money, not make them profit like the US motives.
What major country does not try to enrich itself with resources from another country? How do you think all of those Russian Oligarchs ended up with billions of dollars to spend on yachts and mansions? Are you justifying Putin's shelling of Ukrainian citizens because you think he is not trying to "profit" from taking Ukraine?
What fantasy land do you live in? Every major power in the world will and does try to enrich itself by the resources of second and third world countries. That doesn't mean corruption, but whether it's cheap labor, a precious metal mine or whatever you better believe the big dog is going to get what it needs.No reasonable country would EVER try to enrich itself by stealing from other countries like the US does.
France and England USED to do that. So did Holland, Germany, Spain, and Portugal.
But now, ONLY the US does that.
What fantasy land do you live in? Every major power in the world will and does try to enrich itself by the resources of second and third world countries. That doesn't mean corruption, but whether it's cheap labor, a precious metal mine or whatever you better believe the big dog is going to get what it needs.
What is military defeat for Russia. You're assuming that Russia intends to take the entire Ukraine and that's already proving wrong.
I think Russia is going to attain their goals with the security of a peace deal on Crimea and the Donbass region that meets their demands.
Russia isn't going to accept less than that. That's almost certainly the only way to avoid nuclear war.
I doubt that Russia is looking for "security" in the region. What security didn't it have before? NATO, a defensive alliance, scaring Russia? How is a defensive alliance scary if you're not attacking NATO?
NATO defensive?
That is hilarious.
NATO has the most colonial imperialists in the world.
The US is currently the biggest colonial imperialist, with the Monroe Doctrine enslaving all of South and Central America, and France, England and Spain are the previous big colonial imperialist powers.
NATO countries were involved in the illegal invasion of Iraq, based on lies. NATO countries helped massacre Qaddafi's troops and murder him.
NATO is scary because they already put nukes in Poland for a while, and the only reason to put nukes on Russia's border is if you intend a first strike and don't want time for retaliation.
The security Russia wants and did not have, was to not have its ethnic Russian murdered by fascist terrorists in the Donetsk, to not have Kyiv violating treaties, to not have Kyiv stealing billions in oil, to not have Kyiv trying to join NATO, etc.
I'm not going to repeat the argument of the other side because you know it and are never going to accept it.I doubt that Russia is looking for "security" in the region. What security didn't it have before? NATO, a defensive alliance, scaring Russia? How is a defensive alliance scary if you're not attacking NATO?
That depends what you mean.
NATO in itself is a defensive organization. If those countries in NATO do something, then it's not really NATO, is it?
Yes, the US is the worst country for invading and causing problems. But the US does this as the US. Iraq was done just as the US and whoever else wanted to participate.
NATO took over ISAF in 2003. But 50 countries have participated in it and it was created by the UN.
The reality is the US would never attack Russia. The US picks on easy countries, just looking at what Russia is doing you know the US would never have attacked like that. The US needs to have overwhelming firepower and troop numbers to consider invading.
What Putin wanted was an excuse.
What happened in Georgia in 2008 was almost an identical play by play of what happened in the Ukraine. Putin has things in all the ex-Soviet countries except those in the EU. He can pull them out of a hat and use them as an excuse to invade, interfere, whatever he wants.
He's been messing with the Ukraine since very early on in his time as leader of Russia. The Ukraine is much poorer because of it.
I'm not going to repeat the argument of the other side because you know it and are never going to accept it.
Totally wrong.
Russia does not and never has wanted or taken any country.
It has more land and resources than it knows what to do with.
The closest Russia has ever come was to build border security by influencing neighbor politics towards it security.
And NATO is totally and completely corrupt and aggressive.
If it were not, then it would not decide to do something based completely on political desires.
It would have a constitution, laws, courts, a judicial system, etc., so it was run by the rule law instead.
It is totally and completely corrupt, and is completely offensive instead of defensive.
A principled organization would be defending little countries, not just those of equal corruption.
And you are ignorant or lying about Georgia. Russia took nothing, but stopped the aggression by Georgia against South Ossetia natives.
The problem here is that Putin's logic and yours might be very different. Russia has already taken the Crimea. If it already has "more land and resources than it know what to do with", then why take the Crimea?
Though a lot of it is to do with control. Putin is happy to have Belarus with a dictator who knows who to bow down to, so Belarus gets left alone. Ukraine started leaning towards the west, but did so too slowly because it was too poor, unlike Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.
Whatever you think NATO is, it's more or less the thing that binds the US and its allies together. Without the US there is no NATO. The US is corrupt, a war monger. Russia does not want the Ukraine becoming a US ally.
I didn't say Russia took anything in Georgia. And the Georgians went in to South Ossetia because the South Ossetian were bombarding Georgia.
Georgia, S. Ossetia talk war after 6 die in clash - Georgia
News and Press Release in English on Georgia; published on 2 Aug 2008 by Reutersreliefweb.int
"The commander of Georgia's peacekeeping force in the region, Mamuka Kurashvili, was quoted by Interfax news agency as saying South Ossetian peacekeepers shot at a Georgian village and suspected Russian peacekeepers of taking part."
Deaths in South Ossetia fighting
Georgia denies the presence of snipers and starting the exchange of fire.www.aljazeera.com
"
Shota Utiashvili, the Georgian interior ministry spokesman, denied that Georgian positions had fired first.
“The Ossetians opened fire, including with grenade launchers, and the Georgian side only returned fire.”"
Obviously it's difficult to know who did what. I've posted Georgians speaking about it.
HOWEVER, looking at what Russia does, Russia creates conflicts for its own gains. It uses these for its own purposes.
Sure I could be wrong about Putin, but why would Putin want anything in the Ukraine, a violent and troublesome group of people that are not worth the effort.
But the ethnic Russians in the east, like the Crimea and Donetsk, are an entirely different matter.
They are NOT Ukrainians and require Putin to defend if he wants to retain any credibility.
Of course it is Zelensky's western alliances that upset Putin.
They should.
The Ukraine should be politically aligned with Russia, the only country that was no threat.
NATO and the EU are historic military and economic threats.
And obviously Zelensky is a US puppet, who does not at all care for the welfare of the Ukraine.
If he was not corrupt, then he would not have been stealing billions in Russian oil, violating treaties, murdering ethnic Russians, and trying to put NATO nukes on Russia's border.
The south Ossetians may have started it. I do not know.
But the use of force by Russia to reduce the armed conflict, can not be used as an example of Russian aggression.
Russia gained nothing from their peacekeeper roll in South Ossetia.
Because Putin wants the glory of the Soviet Union back again.
He's interfering in all the old Soviet countries. He was in Kazakhstan in January.
Russia has been a threat to the Ukraine ever since Putin took over. Why should the Ukraine, a SOVEREIGN COUNTRY, be forced to align with anyone?
The problem for the Ukraine is they, like a lot of countries, have a choice between the US and Russia (or China rising up). Not a good choice and clearly the US have let the Ukraine down big time.
I didn't say Georgia was an example of Russian force to start something. I said it was an example of them being able to create situations in order to get what they want.
You think Russia gained nothing in South Ossetia, but then Russia probably thinks very differently. They put Georgia in its place and kept it's little instigator in place. Georgia is under Russian control, and Georgia knows it. Russian power. Putin is a power man.
That makes no sense.
Russia has always had more "glory" than they knew what to do with.
They never needed that.
What they do need and have always needed is a tactical buffer around their border, and strategic buffer for their economy.
The Ukraine was strategically important because they were the only pipelines to the west.
Russia needed the Ukraine as an economic emissary to the west.
Russia was NEVER any sort of "threat" to the Ukraine at all, and it was the US subverting the government in the Ukraine, that caused the Ukraine to commits deliberate acts of war against Russia.
And again, Russia had nothing to do with the situation in Georgia.
That was caused entirely by the South Ossetians and Georgiana, both screwing up.
Stalin deliberately divided up factions like Ossetia, and there are going to always be tensions due to those remnants.
The idea Russia or Putin "gained" anything from it is silly.
More likely it was just another CIA plot, like we are constantly hatching.
Of course, Russia is winning. Russia and the US always win (officially). It's the proxy saps that lose - Ukraine.Russia is winning
