• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is Zylynsky going to burn bridges with the west?

Trump and Biden blew it by not supplying Ukraine with what it needed before this invasion. We need to eliminate stupid people from the office of President. It was obvious what Putin has had planned for years. He was able to create fake stories on the internet that he knew the Deplorables would believe. This resulted in Trump being elected. Trump looked the other way while Putin prepared. We had the worst President ever during a pandemic. We now have the worst President for a war.

Z should never have been put into such a desperate situation.
 
cpwill said:
oh noes, a bureaucrat in 2014 used a dirty word! Obviously this means that the Ukrainians actually fighting and dying for their country and liberty don't count!
Click to expand...

Dirt word is the least of it -- she was caught on tape plotting the regime change of a democratically elected govt. And you think that's okay?
 
ataraxia said:
I think the concern for many of them, like Finland or Sweden, was not to antagonize Putin and poke the bear. But that's water under the bridge now. The bear's got rabies. If I was them, I would sign up in a jiffy. Now.
Click to expand...
Except that's not how it works, NATO takes years to join.
 
poweRob said:
Pretty much. If Putin can just keep on pulling the "Give me what I want or else I'll nuke" card and get his way, he can pretty much take over whatever he wants.
Click to expand...
That's the price we pay for not getting rid of nuclear weapons. It means that instead of responding to that behavior by destroying the planet, we allow a lot of harm while we find other ways to stop him.
 
poweRob said:
Pretty much. If Putin can just keep on pulling the "Give me what I want or else I'll nuke" card and get his way, he can pretty much take over whatever he wants.
Click to expand...
Not to mention it would set a precedent for other rouge nuke nations. NK flexes on wanting an island give it to us by this date or misses fly. Pakistan and India pissing match would get upped for sure.
 
Craig234 said:
The unity of support for Ukraine is remarkable, despite support being limited to supplies because of the threat of nuclear war; Zylynsky has been viewed as providing great leadership, getting a standing ovation when he talked to the EU, support for expedited EU membership, praise from Biden in his state of the union, etc.

But now, Zylynsky not only continues to insist on a no-fly zone NATO has said is not an option because of nuclear war, Zylynsky told NATO/Europe/US that every casualty going forward is on their hands because of their refusal on a no-fly zone. I'd think that risks his alienating his allies. It seems quite ill-advised as an attack. On a related topic though, why doesn't supplying aircraft seem more discussed?
Click to expand...
The blood is on Putins hands but I generally agree with the point Zelensky is making.
 
trouble13 said:
The blood is on Putins hands but I generally agree with the point Zelensky is making.
Click to expand...
There is no rational for Zelensky's continued focus he knows we cannot give him unless he is trying to press us for planes and mobile ground to air missiles. That is what he really needs. He does not need to draw us into a major war as he does not survive that either.
 
Craig234 said:
The unity of support for Ukraine is remarkable, despite support being limited to supplies because of the threat of nuclear war; Zylynsky has been viewed as providing great leadership, getting a standing ovation when he talked to the EU, support for expedited EU membership, praise from Biden in his state of the union, etc.

But now, Zylynsky not only continues to insist on a no-fly zone NATO has said is not an option because of nuclear war, Zylynsky told NATO/Europe/US that every casualty going forward is on their hands because of their refusal on a no-fly zone. I'd think that risks his alienating his allies. It seems quite ill-advised as an attack. On a related topic though, why doesn't supplying aircraft seem more discussed?
Click to expand...

How is that alienating anyone? Everyone involved understands the reality of the situation, and what's he's REALLY asking for is stingers and MIGs.
 
jnug said:
There is no rational for Zelensky's continued focus he knows we cannot give him unless he is trying to press us for planes and mobile ground to air missiles. That is what he really needs. He does not need to draw us into a major war as he does not survive that either.
Click to expand...
Here's the thing about that. If we were to send in our airforce to secure the airspace over the Ukraine at ukraine's invitation. That's not an act of war. It's a defensive action. Russia can call it whatever they want but the truth is if Russia got back on it's side of the border they would be safe from harm.

I don't like how we are cowering to Russia, nukes or not.
 
Rexedgar said:
How is supplying aircraft w/o pilots any different from providing other weapons to be used against the Russian invaders?
Click to expand...
The difference is, providing weapons is actually helpful. A missile launcher or machine gun is basically a point-and-click shooting game from the 90's compared to how complicated and taxing it is to fly a military jet, and Ukraine doesn't exactly have a surplus of trained fighter pilots who have flown F-series jets.
 
trouble13 said:
That's not an act of war. It's a defensive action. Russia can call it whatever they want
Click to expand...

The progression to nuclear war depends on what they call it.

We are dealing with a psychopathic criminal. Nothing is too horrible to be unthinkable.
 
ataraxia said:
The progression to nuclear war depends on what they call it.

We are dealing with a psychopathic criminal. Nothing is too horrible to be unthinkable.
Click to expand...
I wonder if his military would allow him to launch a nuke?
 
Brochacholomigo said:
The difference is, providing weapons is actually helpful. A missile launcher or machine gun is basically a point-and-click shooting game from the 90's compared to how complicated and taxing it is to fly a military jet, and Ukraine doesn't exactly have a surplus of trained fighter pilots who have flown F-series jets.
Click to expand...
According to reports we have jets that are sitting collecting dust that they have qualified pilots to operate. We are choosing to not send them.
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
Putin now says that even SANCTIONS are considered an act of war.
Pretty soon expect him to say "not allowing him to be King of the Entire World" is an act of war.
Click to expand...

He's desperate and trying to intimidate us.

**** that guy.
 
trouble13 said:
Here's the thing about that. If we were to send in our airforce to secure the airspace over the Ukraine at ukraine's invitation. That's not an act of war. It's a defensive action. Russia can call it whatever they want but the truth is if Russia got back on it's side of the border they would be safe from harm.

I don't like how we are cowering to Russia, nukes or not.
Click to expand...
We would have to knock out Russian ground to air missile sites and those are actually across the border in Belarus and Russia. So NOOOOOO....it is us that would be attacking Russian assets the moment we got there. Not to mention that an air cap is not passive. We would have to attack and knock Russian aircraft out of the sky.
 
Last edited:
trouble13 said:
www.dailymail.co.uk

Biden rejected Erik Prince plan to send old fighter jets to Ukraine

The United States Air Force retires hundreds of warplanes each year, aircraft that could make the difference to Ukraine as it fights Russian invaders, according to Erik Prince.
www.dailymail.co.uk www.dailymail.co.uk
Click to expand...
Ukraine pilots can't fly them. They are not trained on them. We need former eastern bloc countries to send their eastern bloc planes to Ukraine and we have to cut a deal with them to backfill with NATO planes and NATO training.That is what the deal with Poland is about, sending eastern bloc planes to Ukraine so their pilots can fly them.

If among the volunteers showing up as expatriates to fight for Ukraine there are former NATO pilots, they can fly them because they are trained on them. Have not seen anything about former NATO pilots volunteering to fight for Ukraine as yet.
 
sanman said:
Dirt word is the least of it -- she was caught on tape plotting the regime change of a democratically elected govt. And you think that's okay?
Click to expand...
:snorts: the Ukrianians did not need our help getting rid of a would-be-Lukashenko, and, the argument that Ukrainians fighting for their independence and liberty now, secretly wish they weren't, and are only doing it because a State Department said "F the the EU" over half a decade ago is.....

....shall we say, "not compelling". It's a particularly bad from of special pleading, right up there with the Communists claim that any worker who didn't believe in Communism was suffering from "false consciousness", and the Critical Race Theorists claim that any minority who doesn't agree that they live a life of oppression "has adopted the mental framework of their oppressor".
 
The AntiDonald said:
Poland has been supplying limited aircraft. Supposedly the same type the Ukrainians have been flying. Pilots are traveling to the border to pick them up. Unfortunately, they are very limited.
Click to expand...

Thank you for this. I hope the deliveries grow.
 
Chomsky said:
He's not, IMO.
Click to expand...
You are WEAK - all the Ukrainians killed from now on are on your hands along with Putin for not doing what I demand! But I didn't attack you at all.
 
cpwill said:
:snorts: the Ukrianians did not need our help getting rid of a would-be-Lukashenko, and, the argument that Ukrainians fighting for their independence and liberty now, secretly wish they weren't, and are only doing it because a State Department said "F the the EU" over half a decade ago is.....

....shall we say, "not compelling". It's a particularly bad from of special pleading, right up there with the Communists claim that any worker who didn't believe in Communism was suffering from "false consciousness", and the Critical Race Theorists claim that any minority who doesn't agree that they live a life of oppression "has adopted the mental framework of their oppressor".
Click to expand...

Victoria Nuland is yet another Neo-Con, who is in democrat guise - just part of the Deep State. Her husband Larry Kagan was a very loud proponent of the Iraq invasion which wasted so much American blood and treasure. They were attempting to do more of the same mischief in Ukraine, where they were attempting to stir the pot.
Why support that kind of crookery among Washington's permanent class?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom