The War in Ukraine

[jesmu84]

Fluffy, we could have supplied Ukraine with far more weapons much, much, earlier. I also believe this "WW3 narrative" if NATO or us provided a no-fly zone isn't really rational.  I've said from day one I would have had special ops take the guy out but I know that bothers people.  The fact is all of our moves have been reactive to Putin. I actually agree with Biden's "gaffe" that he can't remain in power unless we truly destroy his economy and ability to use his cash cow..

Hold on

So you think if a US jet shot down a Russian jet, it wouldn't be perceived as an act of war? You don't believe it would lead to direct conflict between the US and Russia?

[forgetful]

But anyway the fact is that we have been mismanaging the Russia situation for quite a while now.  Under Putin they have a history of invading other countries, such as Georgia and Ukraine, with little recourse.  (Those occurred under the Bush and Obama administrations respectively.)

We were too busy invading other countries, without recourse, to worry about Russia invading countries outside our sphere of influence.

[jficke13]

Hold on

So you think if a US jet shot down a Russian jet, it wouldn't be perceived as an act of war? You don't believe it would lead to direct conflict between the US and Russia?

He’s been wishcasting escalation for the entire conflict. It’s not worth taking seriously.

[MuggsyB]

Hold on

So you think if a US jet shot down a Russian jet, it wouldn't be perceived as an act of war? You don't believe it would lead to direct conflict between the US and Russia?

As opposed to our javelins and stingers??  Or if we gave them the old MIG 29's the Ukrainians have been begging for?  I don't think Putin has any intention of a direct conflict with thec US despite his constant threats.  He's not suicidal.  He could certainly justify direct conflict with a number of nations, inuding us, that would lead to nuclear war if that's his goal.  From my perspective he will not stop unless he's stopped by NATO or us.   

It doesn't matter if Ukraine delays his plans, we know his ultimate goals.  So if Ukraine cannot defend themselves, and there are say 10 million refugees, and Putin stays in power, are you telling me he will not try to attack Poland, former s-bloc countries,  or the Baltics?  My preference is for it not to get to that point. 

[ZiggysFryBoy]

NM. No point.

Finally, a post of yours I can agree with.

[Hards Alumni]

Fluffy, we could have supplied Ukraine with far more weapons much, much, earlier. I also believe this "WW3 narrative" if NATO or us provided a no-fly zone isn't really rational.  I've said from day one I would have had special ops take the guy out but I know that bothers people.  The fact is all of our moves have been reactive to Putin. I actually agree with Biden's "gaffe" that he can't remain in power unless we truly destroy his economy and ability to use his cash cow..

Just here to say that I'm glad you're not in charge of US foreign policy.

[Hards Alumni]

As opposed to our javelins and stingers??  Or if we gave them the old MIG 29's the Ukrainians have been begging for?  I don't think Putin has any intention of a direct conflict with thec US despite his constant threats.  He's not suicidal.  He could certainly justify direct conflict with a number of nations, inuding us, that would lead to nuclear war if that's his goal.  From my perspective he will not stop unless he's stopped by NATO or us.   

It doesn't matter if Ukraine delays his plans, we know his ultimate goals.  So if Ukraine cannot defend themselves, and there are say 10 million refugees, and Putin stays in power, are you telling me he will not try to attack Poland, former s-bloc countries,  or the Baltics?  My preference is for it not to get to that point.

AGAIN, The Migs are worthless.  Do you think Russia doesn't have a metric ass load of anti aircraft weapons? 

For the record, what are his 'ultimate goals'?  You keep saying this, but I've never read nor heard anywhere what they are.

And yes, I'm 100% saying that Putin will never attack a NATO country.

[pbiflyer]

Yeah and I think Zelensky knows this. Ask for the stars to get the moon.

[Hards Alumni]

Yeah and I think Zelensky knows this. Ask for the stars to get the moon.

100%

[4everwarriors]

So, Jill Biden was Obama's VP. Woo new, hey?

[MuggsyB]

AGAIN, The Migs are worthless.  Do you think Russia doesn't have a metric ass load of anti aircraft weapons? 

For the record, what are his 'ultimate goals'?  You keep saying this, but I've never read nor heard anywhere what they are.

If the Ukranians want them how do you know they're "worthless"?  They probably have a better idea what would help than you or I do.

And yes, I'm 100% saying that Putin will never attack a NATO country.

[Hards Alumni]

See pbiflyer's post.

[MuggsyB]

Just here to say that I'm glad you're not in charge of US foreign policy.

Who is in charge of US foreign policy? 

[Hards Alumni]

Who is in charge of US foreign policy?

The President

[MuggsyB]

The President

Oh..  that's reassuring.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Oh..  that's reassuring.

So now instead of attempting logical debate, you’re just resorting to political shots. 🙄🙄🙄

[MuggsyB]

So now instead of attempting logical debate, you’re just resorting to political shots. 🙄🙄🙄

It's not a political shot at all.  I asked a question and I disagree with his answer.

[jesmu84]

As opposed to our javelins and stingers??  Or if we gave them the old MIG 29's the Ukrainians have been begging for?  I don't think Putin has any intention of a direct conflict with thec US despite his constant threats.  He's not suicidal.  He could certainly justify direct conflict with a number of nations, inuding us, that would lead to nuclear war if that's his goal.  From my perspective he will not stop unless he's stopped by NATO or us.   

It doesn't matter if Ukraine delays his plans, we know his ultimate goals.  So if Ukraine cannot defend themselves, and there are say 10 million refugees, and Putin stays in power, are you telling me he will not try to attack Poland, former s-bloc countries,  or the Baltics?  My preference is for it not to get to that point.

Dude. You're psychotic.

[Pakuni]

Finally, a post of yours I can agree with.

When it comes to not having a point, I defer to your expertise.

[MuggsyB]

Dude. You're psychotic.

Is it psychotic we've given Ukraine like $14b in military aid?  If the goal is to "avoid World War 3" or a "direct confrontation" why are we giving them anything?  Why should we upset Putin at all and risk him going nuclear?

[WarriorFan]

The Ukranian request for a no fly zone provided by NATO is clever positioning and nothing more.  There's no way in the world NATO is going to provide a no fly zone over a non-NATO country.  Heck, they would struggle to agree to do it for a NATO country.
It is clever positioning by Ukraine so that when this situation is all in final negotiations, they can "refuse" to join NATO as a compromise to put on the table for Russia, on the basis that NATO wouldn't help them anyway. 

As for any US role in all of this, "selling" arms is (like it or not) globally accepted.  Piloting a fighter jet that engages in active combat is an act of war with all of the relevant consequences.

[Hards Alumni]

Is it psychotic we've given Ukraine like $14b in military aid?  If the goal is to "avoid World War 3" or a "direct confrontation" why are we giving them anything?  Why should we upset Putin at all and risk him going nuclear?

Again, nuance.  Things are not always black and white.  Back channel politics are a thing.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Is it psychotic we've given Ukraine like $14b in military aid?  If the goal is to "avoid World War 3" or a "direct confrontation" why are we giving them anything?  Why should we upset Putin at all and risk him going nuclear?

I wouldn't say THE goal is to "avoid World War 3."  I would say it's A goal and likely the most important one.  But there are others, such as containing Russian aggression, providing humanitarian support for people who need it, etc., and oftentimes those act in conflict with one another.

You are looking for black and white in a world where many shades of gray exist.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Oh..  that's reassuring.

Ummm, who do you think is supposed to be in charge of U.S. Foreign Policy?

Look, IMO there isn't much daylight to criticize how the U.S. has played this. U.S. Intelligence agencies recognized that Russia was determined to invade and preemptively called Putin out on it so that he couldn't surprise anyone with false flag operations. We immediately increased our military support to Ukraine and provided the sorts of weapons that they've used to stymie the Russia offensive.

Most importantly, we've galvanized the West in unified opposition in a way many people didn't think was possible, and that credit goes to Biden again IMO. We are not going to engage in a direct military conflict as you've been asking for. I'm not sure what you think should have been done in August, given the above.

[4everwarriors]

In August, FD wuz mucking up and bungling da Afghanistan pull out, aina?