- Joined
- Jan 31, 2010
- Messages
- 31,645
- Reaction score
- 7,598
- Location
- Canada, Costa Rica
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Where the Ukraine is is debatable.
And how is Obama abandoning something the Europeans fault?
And what would mobilization accomplish, besides upsetting the majority of the Nation who were against bombing Syria?
Amusing to watch all the Libertarians who are isolationists wanting a show of force for Ukraine .
The GOP complains when Obama is or isn't their waterboy.
I prefer this NO Drama Obama, without taking credit in public.
We saw how the right went ape-**** when he spoke of bin Laden .
Speaking past another's post with snark?
Stay focused on the thread or take a break .
I never said what I am to you. I guess it's been stated enough times in threads you haven't visited though. I really don't see what relevance it is at any rate.
Here's one link to show how much I'm lying.
John McCain Wants To Push The United States Into A Full Scale War With Russia
But shoot the messenger, not the message.
And there's plenty of links out there calling for a 2nd Cold War--coming right up .
So GOPs calling for a new Cold war is not War.
What comes after a Cold War CalGun?
Top Republicans Call for Return to Cold War - The Daily Beast
GOPs have one set of talking points, Cold War and Hot War.
Since righties are so quick to fling the LIE word around, eat this crow .
GOP senators seek trade actions against Russia - Eric Bradner - POLITICO.com
At the beginning of this article, Rubio specifically calls for an end to all talks on anything except the Ukraine.
Sever trade talks with Russia.
Kick Russia out of international organizations.
Suspend Russia from the World Trade Organization.
Suspend Russia from the United Nations Security council.
Most objective posters on dp would say this is a good way to start a war.
Aren't you glad Rubio and Cruz put their own personal ambitions above those of their Nation?
Sending supplies would do absolutely nothing. I don't think Ukrainian soldiers will even try to stand up to Russian forces, whatever armaments we give them.
Mobilizing American naval and air forces is the only meaningful thing we can do to show Russia that we mean business, and to show the Ukrainian military that they aren't alone if war breaks out. This, I think, would stiffen Ukrainian resolve and weaken Russian resolve, enough that Russia withdraws.
Will that happen? Almost certainly not. Russia will come out on top in this, I think.
So much for winning the Cold War.
MAD has kept the peace in Europe for half a century. Call this a crazy idea but if you want real world peace then every country, no matter how small, should be armed with hundreds of nukes, that way nobody would be dumb enough to start a war with one another.
If every free nation, without the support of the US, sent missions to the Ukraine offering financial and moral assistance then I believe it would make a difference.
"Making a difference" covers a lot of ground. It may give the Ukrainians confidence in their moral position, but "financial and moral assistance" don't stop the largest tank army in the world.
I agree with you, EU should take the lead and I feel the US should stay out of it since personally I am politically an advocate for non-interventionism but however we did sign that treaty with them so you know... :doh
Do you really believe Russia would start a war with the United States??
Even with Obama in charge they would never do that. Putin is making his moves only because Obama is weak and ineffective.
You may be right but it also seems that Putin wants the respect of the rest of the world, as we have seen from his promotion of the Olympic games held there. Of course he dismisses Obama but would he risk the moral wrath of all the other democracies? I'm not so sure. In any case it would be a good effort for the free world, apart from the US, to commit to.
Canada threatens sanctions if Russia disrupts peace in Ukraine as U.S. warns sending troops would be ‘grave mistake’ | National Post
Your problem is that you have the guy sitting in the White House TODAY that goes about threatening war and then drawing impotent 'red lines' and making empty threats.Since there's more than one Ukraine thread, I'm not sure if this is the one I added a comment to several days ago or not. My point was that the leaked conversation...which has gone almost completely unreported in MSM between Victoria Nuland and the U.S. ambassador to the Ukraine, gave us some candid insight into the scheming and plotting against the Yanukovitch Government at the time. Like it or not, he was the elected president of the Ukraine, who was removed by mob action...sort of like Morsi in Egypt. From my own limited awareness of the goings on in the Ukraine, Russia is the country with a vested interest in what goes on there...not the U.S.! Russia has that large naval base in Crimea...an autonomous territory that is mostly Russian and was added to the Ukraine by the Soviet Government in the 1950's.
If we can make a quick comparison: look at how the U.S. is propping up a ruthless potentate in the U.S. client state of Bahrain....a despot who even sent military forces into hospitals to shoot doctors and patients...without getting his name added to the list of bad actors in the ME and subject for regime change. Why? Because he gets the oil out of the ground and to western markets, and he hosts the largest U.S. naval base in the ME. What would the U.S. be willing to do to maintain the continued operation of that base? I would guess, just about anything...legal, illegal...at any cost. And yet, we're supposed to take idiot U.S. warhawks and chicken hawks seriously, as they keep rattling the cage of the beast who still has about 8000 nuclear warheads! The Neocon warhawks, who are so addicted to money from military procurements, would risk nuclear annihilation, to make a few more bucks selling their war toys and finding new wars to justify their existence and continued production!
I think it's a problem that he's threatening war in the first place! If he wasn't aware of what his staffers like Nuland were doing, he should have removed them as soon as possible afterwards. The Ukraine almost broke up in the immediate aftermath gaining independence in the aftermath of the fall of the Soviet Union. How did they not know that trying to pry the Ukraine out of the Russian orbit, would cause a break up?Your problem is that you have the guy sitting in the White House TODAY that goes about threatening war and then drawing impotent 'red lines' and making empty threats.
I dont know if sending in the troops is the right answer. I DO know for certain that you cant threaten to hold your breath til you pass out as an effective foreign policy strategy. Obama is a limp moron and the world sees it and knows it.
MAD has kept the peace in Europe for half a century.Call this a crazy idea but if you want real world peace then every country, no matter how small, should be armed with hundreds of nukes, that way nobody would be dumb enough to start a war with one another.
Sounds like a crazy idea to me.
Read some history, A Lot of dumb wars have been fought (Mostly without nuclear weapons.)
Do you really believe Russia would start a war with the United States??
Even with Obama in charge they would never do that. Putin is making his moves only because Obama is weak and ineffective.
Can't say that he isn't trying to get those powers, isn't he? But that is not what makes a strong leader, and Obama doesn't have it. Reagan, Bush(s), even Clinton had the world's respect. Obama sowed the seeds for this way back on his apology tour and when Putin walked all over him when he sold out Poland. Remember his little groveling "I'll have more flexibility after the election"? Kind of sad, disgraceful, and bad for America. And now people are suffering because of it.
Ive read plenty, thank you. Why hasnt North Korea been attacked? Nukes. Why do you think Iran wants nukes?If Ukraine had their nukes Russia wouldnt be occupying half their country now.
Lets not blame all this on Obama! There's plenty americans now a days that are tired of US blood and treasure being consumed on the defense of or destruction of countries that aren't either a threat to us or vital to us. Obama had 70% of Americans opposed to him meddling in Syria.
North Korea having nukes is a fairly recent development. The real reason there has been another Korean war initally was China and or the USSR getting in the mix, then the North created a fail safe. That fail safe is some 50k rocket and artillary tube emplacements poised to strike Seoul a city of 19 million. When I was deployed out in that part of the world I got to help in a war game planning. The estimates are between 50 and 65% casualty for the civilian population in the first 12 hours of a major conflict. That's with just conventional munitions. The very real possibility is that Chem Bio Radiological weapons will be used. The nukes nk has are large, unwieldy barely weaponized for show more than having a serious militaey valuemIve read plenty, thank you. Why hasnt North Korea been attacked? Nukes. Why do you think Iran wants nukes? If Ukraine had their nukes Russia wouldnt be occupying half their country now.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?