US not Trying High Level Diplomacy to End Fighting.

You have an imagination and nothing more. Correlation does not equal causation. The only people claiming Putin didn't invade because Trump was in the White House are Trump's sycophants. There is literally no intelligence indicating this.
At this point I trust the calendar more than the so-called intelligence.
 
Horseshit. We have our interests but ultimately it's not up to America, it's up to Ukraine and Russia to come to terms.

Russia is damanding Ukraine drop it's Constitutional provision to join EU and recognize Crimea as part of Russia and Dombas an independent country.
That's a non-starter.
 
You have an imagination and nothing more. Correlation does not equal causation. The only people claiming Putin didn't invade because Trump was in the White House are Trump's sycophants. There is literally no intelligence indicating this.
The reason why Putin invaded isn't up for questioning. We can at least conclude that Trump didn't provide the US provocation.

Regardless of the motivation bey either Biden or Trump, there's no doubt that Trump was the better prospect for peaceful relations with Russia.

Are any Trump supporters anxious to argue that? I would suggest it's a matter of pride for Trump supporters. If not then domestic politics have been replaced with foreign policy politics.
 
The reason why Putin invaded isn't up for questioning. We can at least conclude that Trump didn't provide the US provocation.

Regardless of the motivation bey either Biden or Trump, there's no doubt that Trump was the better prospect for peaceful relations with Russia.
Dummy, Putin has obviously shown he doesn't give a shit about peaceful relations enough to not invade Ukraine.

Not a single rationalle for Putin's invasion hinges on Trump being or not being in the White House.

Ukraine is set on keeping it's territories and on joining the EU and NATO, with or without Trump as president.
 
Last edited:
Of course, your definition of "sycophant" is anyone who says Putin didn't invade because Trump was in the White House.

Circular reasoning.
The point is pissant, Putin didn't invade because he wasn't provoked by Trump. That could be to Trump's credit or against, depending on your domestic politics POV.
 
The reason why Putin invaded isn't up for questioning. We can at least conclude that Trump didn't provide the US provocation.

Regardless of the motivation bey either Biden or Trump, there's no doubt that Trump was the better prospect for peaceful relations with Russia.

Are any Trump supporters anxious to argue that? I would suggest it's a matter of pride for Trump supporters. If not then domestic politics have been replaced with foreign policy politics.

There's nothing to argue. The facts are that Putin invaded Crimea when Obama was president, and he invaded Ukraine when Biden is president. Putin knows DemoKKKrat administrations are a gift to him.
 
We need to give Putin "a win" to end his invasion of Ukraine!

Maybe instead we should show the Russians their choice is between eating beets in Jan or not invading their neighbors?
 
Dummy, Putin has obviously shown he doesn't give a shit about peaceful relations enough to not invade Ukraine.

Not a single rationalle for Putin's invasion hinges on Trump being or not being in the White House.

Ukraine is set on keeping it's territories and on joining the EU and NATO, with or without Trump as president.
The 'dummy' routine proves to me that your argument is weak and you're feeling challenged. That's fine with me!
Russia/Putin wanted to maintain the status quo in the Crimea and I'm suggesting that Russia was fine with maintaining the same in the Donbass regions.

I'm quite aware of the US propaganda talking point that's saying it's Putin and not Russia, and that Putin is intent on challenging the Nato countries of Europe to bring them back into a new Soviet Union.

If you're capable of discussion on my parameters of it being rational and be acceptable mannered, I'm willing. Your current behaviour won't do.
 
What co you appeasers propose to give away of Ukraine's territory and sovereignty?
I don't propose anything but I think that if Russia is forced to take all of it, Russia would choose to keep all of it.
But of course that would depend on the reception Russia receives from an undetermined number of Russia sympathizers?
Keep the cards and leters coming, you serve as a backboard at least.
 
Russia/Putin wanted to maintain the status quo in the Crimea and I'm suggesting that Russia was fine with maintaining the same in the Donbass regions.
You don't like me calling you dummy...but then you post this dumb nonsense.

Putin does not want "status quo" he was wants Ukraine to officially recognize the legitimacy of Russian take over of Crimea.

Putin also doesn't want status quo in Donbass, he wants Ukraine to recognize their sovernty as an independent republic, instead of being part of Ukraine and subject to it's laws and federal authority.
 
I don't propose anything but I think that if Russia is forced to take all of it, Russia would choose to keep all of it.
But of course that would depend on the reception Russia receives from an undetermined number of Russia sympathizers?
Keep the cards and leters coming, you serve as a backboard at least.
Why would Russia be forced to take all of it? You haven't explained why Ukraine should agree to anything other than no territorial or sovereignty concessions to a rapacious invader,
 
We need to give Putin "a win" to end his invasion of Ukraine!

Maybe instead we should show the Russians their choice is between eating beets in Jan or not invading their neighbors?
Fwiw, that's acknowledging that it's America's war. No, Russia doesn't need a win, they are certainly up against a formidable foe and will be content with a mutually agreeable peace that can be politically spun by both sides as a win.

When will any of you Americans start talking about the possibilities?

At least it could be acknowledged by now that both sides are resolute on their positions.
Russia is not going to be pushed out of the Ukraine, at least in part!
 
Why would Russia be forced to take all of it? You haven't explained why Ukraine should agree to anything other than no territorial or sovereignty concessions to a rapacious invader,
Russia is not being granted a partial victory and that means that Russia has no choice but to obtain control over the regions of the Ukraine that it doesn't deem to be theirs.
If you wish an understanding then the onus is on you to do so.

Can you envision America holding the western side of Iraq and being satisfied with bombdardment from the Eastern part of Iraq.

Is it time to start talking about solutions for peace.

I see the Crimea as being Russia's forever. Russia has no choice unless the US/Nato could ever revert back to the former peaceful status quo.

I see a possibility of a demilitarized Donbass region under a UN protectorate.
 
You don't like me calling you dummy...but then you post this dumb nonsense.

Putin does not want "status quo" he was wants Ukraine to officially recognize the legitimacy of Russian take over of Crimea.

Putin also doesn't want status quo in Donbass, he wants Ukraine to recognize their sovernty as an independent republic, instead of being part of Ukraine and subject to it's laws and federal authority.
Your inability to stop the childish namecalling and insults has resulted in ending any discussion we might have had.
 
There's nothing to argue. The facts are that Putin invaded Crimea when Obama was president, and he invaded Ukraine when Biden is president. Putin knows DemoKKKrat administrations are a gift to him.
Marvin, do please stifle yourself and hold up the gate.
 

US not Trying High Level Diplomacy to End Fighting.​


HOW can you say that?!?!? I mean, come on. Be fair. We sent our tip top super secret agent level international diplomat, didn’t we? If Heels-Up Harris couldn’t get it done, then who possibly else could we have used?
 

Forum List

Back
Top