Ukranian's view of American presidential debate

Ethnic Mexicans lived in US and ethnic Russians lived in Alaska, so ******* what?

It's suddenly ok if Mexico or Russia invades to annex America's lands?
If Russia ran a coup in Mexico and installed a pro-Russian Government, there and then moved to enter into a military alliance with Mexico arming and training their armed forces how long do you think it would take for the US to invade them?
 
Harris is correct in that maintaining international borders is important. The problem is Ukraine can't win this war.

Well it's good that you understand that part.

And thats just your opinion, part of which is the very definition about what winning means.

Ukraine certainly didn't lose the war and it is because we, along with 51 other countries, materially supported and continue to support them. In fact Russia's failed attempts to take over Ukraine is a loss in terms of them failing to achieve their goals of controlling Kiev. So now it's down to how big the defeat of "2nd army in the world" will be.
 
Last edited:
If Russia ran a coup in Mexico and installed a pro-Russian Government, there and then moved to enter into a military alliance with Mexico arming and training their armed forces how long do you think it would take for the US to invade them?

You are suggesting America ran a coup and installed a regime in Ukraine? :cuckoo:

What you are talking about are Russian myths (often propagated on the right), Ukraine was commited to nuetrality when Russia invaded in 2014, annexed Crimea and forced Ukraine to seek security guarantees only NATO membership would provide.

"Coup" was not about NATO millitary alliance membership, it was about Ukranians fighting for their freedom of speech and economic membership in EU. National commitment to a goal of joining NATO was only established after Russians invaded.
 
Last edited:
Ukraine maintaining its borders can be in the interests of the US at the same time as the US voter not giving a shit about what Ukrainians think about our Presidential candidates.

People can decide that for themselves just fine.

For some, perspective of those with a front row to the conflict is of interest.

You don't need to speak for me, or any other Americans what to give a shit about.
 
Last edited:
So he would know the speaker's personal reasons for not being on the front?

No, that was just dumb trolling.
I thought that Antoshka is a grown up enough boy for speaking for himself. Or you are his secretary? Okay.

1. If someone decides to post a peace of opinion of another one, it is supposed to mean that this someone values their opinion.

2. To value opinion of another one, this someone should base this valuation on some background check of 'another one'. Rushing to publish someone's silly face and artificial laughter, just because this someone shares your opinion, is somewhat stupid (though, I don't expect too much from Antoshka).

3. Of course, if some guy advocates a war I expect him to be on the frontline, or at least somewhere nearby. Otherwise, he is just a loudmouth.

Are my answers enough for you, Madam Secretar?
 
I thought that Antoshka is a grown up enough boy for speaking for himself. Or you are his secretary? Okay.

1. If someone decides to post a peace of opinion of another one, it is supposed to mean that this someone values their opinion.

2. To value opinion of another one, this someone should base this valuation on some background check of 'another one'. Rushing to publish someone's silly face and artificial laughter, just because this someone shares your opinion, is somewhat stupid (though, I don't expect too much from Antoshka).

3. Of course, if some guy advocates a war I expect him to be on the frontline, or at least somewhere nearby. Otherwise, he is just a loudmouth.

Are my answers enough for you, Madam Secretar?
No, those answers are stupid and make you look stupid.

You asked a stupid trolling question to avoid the thread material.

Because you're a sissy shill and a useful idiot for Putin.

Clear enough?
 
No, those answers are stupid and make you look stupid.

You asked a stupid trolling question to avoid the thread material.

Because you're a sissy shill and a useful idiot for Putin.

Clear enough?
Not at all. My answers are simple, clear, and quite logical. You understand that quite well, but can't admit that because you are a little chicken.
 
I thought that Antoshka is a grown up enough boy for speaking for himself.

Can you get any smaller? Pathetic.

Stop littering the thread already.
 
Don't blame me, Antoshka. It is you who posted this dumb thread.
I'll blame you for the garbage bs you post all I want.

How about you put togather a few constructive thoughts on the topic and actualy say what you, as a Ukranian think of Trump's promises of "24 hour deal" with Putin and what it realistically would look like.
 
Last edited:
I thought that Antoshka is a grown up enough boy for speaking for himself. Or you are his secretary? Okay.

1. If someone decides to post a peace of opinion of another one, it is supposed to mean that this someone values their opinion.

2. To value opinion of another one, this someone should base this valuation on some background check of 'another one'. Rushing to publish someone's silly face and artificial laughter, just because this someone shares your opinion, is somewhat stupid (though, I don't expect too much from Antoshka).

3. Of course, if some guy advocates a war I expect him to be on the frontline, or at least somewhere nearby. Otherwise, he is just a loudmouth.

Are my answers enough for you, Madam Secretar?
He’s a ******* chicken hawk.
 
15th post
Who cares what any foreigner thinks about our election? They should concern themselves with their country.
 
Do you give a crap about Trump’s “24 hour” deal promises and how he talks about Orban, who subverted freedom of speech and democratic process in his country?
I mostly care about democrat's destructive policies and weaponizing the justice system against people they don't like.
 
I mostly care about democrat's destructive policies and weaponizing the justice system against people they don't like.

Who specifically "weaponized" what and against what specific people? Conservatives sure like to bring it up but don't bring any serious evidence anyone in a Democrat White House involved. Trump claimed whole bunch of BS about Obama, never panned out. Trump now claims that he was prosecuted at Biden's direction, but again, zero evidence - cases against him are solid on the merrits, grand juries keep handing down inctments against him and he was in fact convicted already by a jury of peers that his own lawyers vetted.


Trump is also openly telling you that he feels the justice system is his to use to go after people.

“Look, when this election is over, based on what they’ve done, I would have every right to go after them, and it would be easy because it’s Joe Biden,”

 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom