• 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!

Ukraine Defense Chief Says "Low Probability" Of Major Conflict With Russia, Contradicting Biden

NATO might be hard put to get more than a few hundred non US troops into Ukey Land .
Those countries want Russian Gas and not to be carted off in body bags like the US special units will be--- those which have been training the Ukeys for several months .
No one is going in to fight Ukraine's war for them. Do you ever read the (real) news?
 
Who the **** brought the NYT up?

I did. You challenged the claim that, in the 20th Century, it was elements on the left who chose to be pro-Russia. NYT's covering for the abuses and crimes of the Soviet Union is simply one example.


Oh, right. You're just pulling stink nuggets out for us all to smell. I see you haven't changed.

I've gotten less acerbic over the years, but, both the fools on the left and the fools on the right still tend to loathe me when I tell them inconvenient things :).
 
minor incursion -if at all

Russia has been in Ukraine since 2014. If your yardstick for "minor incursion" includes the better part of a decade, then maybe buy a new yardstick.
 
NATO has been trying to get the Ukraine to join since the Warsaw Pact fell in 1989. Those nations that refuse NATO get destroyed. Just ask Yugoslavia. Oh wait, that's right you can't because Clinton declared that Yugoslavia no longer exists.

After four consecutive years of media lies about Russian collusion, and you still believe what the enemy of the people tell you? That is simply pathetic.

That is why Poland, Hungry, and the Baltic nations joined NATO. They were coerced by the US.
Nations that refuse NATO get destroyed? Why does Ukraine still exist? What nations have been "destroyed" by not joining NATO? Let's see the list.

I find it ridiculous how pro-Russia and anti-America the Trump cult has become.
 
I did. You challenged the claim that, in the 20th Century, it was elements on the left who chose to be pro-Russia. NYT's covering for the abuses and crimes of the Soviet Union is simply one example.

I've gotten less acerbic over the years, but, both the fools on the left and the fools on the right still tend to loathe me when I tell them inconvenient things :).
You're simply lying. The NYT covered the human rights abuses in the USSR extensively. There are records of it.

The NYT did, however, not cover the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts worth a shit, which were wars totally promoted and backed by Bush, and continued by very conservative Pentagons.

You need to up your game. You've gotten rusty since I've been away.
 
No one is going in to fight Ukraine's war for them. Do you ever read the (real) news?
Biden has been very, very, very clear that Ukraine is not a NATO country, and not entitled to US military protection, and that his weapon will be economic sanctions and other non military measures.

These people are just outright liars.
 
When did this happen?
The incident I was thinking of in particular would be when the NY Times decided to cover up / deny the Holodomore in Ukraine (when the Soviets decided to engineer a famine so as to starve millions to death and bring that country to heel).

However, they continue that cover up in a soft way (they never returned the Pulitzer they got for it); their "celebration" of the 100 year anniversary of the Bolshevik revolution (which featured hard-hitting articles such as "Why Women Had Better Sex Under Socialism"), as I recall, certainly didn't focus on it or the many, many, other horrific abuses, so it's a sort of continued-by-absence-or-downplaying.
 
The incident I was thinking of in particular would be when the NY Times decided to cover up / deny the Holodomore in Ukraine (when the Soviets decided to engineer a famine so as to starve millions to death and bring that country to heel).

However, they continue that cover up in a soft way (they never returned the Pulitzer they got for it); their "celebration" of the 100 year anniversary of the Bolshevik revolution (which featured hard-hitting articles such as "Why Women Had Better Sex Under Socialism"), as I recall, certainly didn't focus on it or the many, many, other horrific abuses, so it's a sort of continued-by-absence-or-downplaying.
19****ing32 is how far you have to go back?

That is so pathetic and desperate, it's not even worth engagement.
 
|fresh and accurate input
Like Covid vaccines making spoons stick to your forehead?

Yes, that's "fresh input," otherwise known as fiction, which is the same as your read on the Russia/Ukraine situation.
 
You're simply lying. The NYT covered the human rights abuses in the USSR extensively.

I simply am not, as a 10 second google search would have confirmed for you.


Gotta protect Socialism, Doncha Know. ;)


You need to up your game. You've gotten rusty since I've been away.

:) Mayhaps so. But, in this instance, the minimum of due dilligence would have saved you from a false accusation. Perhaps I'm not the only one who could use a little game upping ;)
 
Biden has been very, very, very clear that Ukraine is not a NATO country, and not entitled to US military protection, and that his weapon will be economic sanctions and other non military measures.

These people are just outright liars.

I have to say, many of the kneejerk takes that I have read on this forum about anything related to Ukraine and NATO--or Ukraine and Russia--almost always tell me like they read a single article on the topic from a dubious source and now feel their expertise sprouting like a chia pet.

If a problem in Mongolia breaks out tomorrow, Monica will soon be telling us what will happen next after she got the inside scoop ordering khorkhog from a waitress in Darhan.
 
19****ing32 is how far you have to go back?

That is so pathetic and desperate, it's not even worth engagement.

Ah. So you have shifted from "That has never happened" to "okay that happened but it was a long time ago"

?
 
The incident I was thinking of in particular would be when the NY Times decided to cover up / deny the Holodomore in Ukraine (when the Soviets decided to engineer a famine so as to starve millions to death and bring that country to heel).

However, they continue that cover up in a soft way (they never returned the Pulitzer they got for it); their "celebration" of the 100 year anniversary of the Bolshevik revolution (which featured hard-hitting articles such as "Why Women Had Better Sex Under Socialism"), as I recall, certainly didn't focus on it or the many, many, other horrific abuses, so it's a sort of continued-by-absence-or-downplaying.
A little before my time. You sure are digging deep to slam the leftist MSM this morning. Maybe you could find something a little more timely? Duranty and his editors are long gone.
 
Ah. So you have shifted from "That has never happened" to "okay that happened but it was a long time ago"

?
The NYT as entity did not cover up the famine, one propagandist who worked for them chose to lie and cover up the famine.

Are the NYT's conservative since they backed the Iraq war with Bush? Oh, I'm sure that's different.

Stop wasting bandwidth.
 
A little before my time. You sure are digging deep to slam the leftist MSM this morning. Maybe you could find something a little more timely? Duranty and his editors are long gone.
Well, the original point was "I guess this century the right has decided it's their turn to be apologists for Russia" - agreeably when we are talking centuries the timelines are a bit longer than the last presidential cycle or two :)

Its not covering up a genocide (that's pretty horrific), but, as it happens, I do, in fact, recall a more recent event of Democrats denied/downplaying the threat from Russia, and mocking the idea that Russia was a geopolitical foe with "the 1980s called and they want their foreign policy back".

Romney Not Ready.gif
 
The NYT as entity did not cover up the famine, one propagandist who worked for them chose to lie and cover up the famine.

Are the NYT's conservative since they backed the Iraq war with Bush? Oh, I'm sure that's different.

Stop wasting bandwidth.
Oh; is that like saying "Fox didn't run Patriot Purge, one opinion show host who worked for them chose to run Patriot Purge"?
 
Well, the original point was "I guess this century the right has decided it's their turn to be apologists for Russia" - agreeably when we are talking centuries the timelines are a bit longer than the last presidential cycle or two :)

Its not covering up a genocide (that's pretty horrific), but, as it happens, I do, in fact, recall a more recent event of Democrats denied/downplaying the threat from Russia, and mocking the idea that Russia was a geopolitical foe with "the 1980s called and they want their foreign policy back".

View attachment 67375814
You finished? Could we get back to Ukraine now?
 
Well, the original point was "I guess this century the right has decided it's their turn to be apologists for Russia" - agreeably when we are talking centuries the timelines are a bit longer than the last presidential cycle or two :)

Its not covering up a genocide (that's pretty horrific), but, as it happens, I do, in fact, recall a more recent event of Democrats denied/downplaying the threat from Russia, and mocking the idea that Russia was a geopolitical foe with "the 1980s called and they want their foreign policy back".

View attachment 67375814
Which president imposed sanctions on Russia for invading Ukraine the last time? Which president met with Putin and began the process of lifting sanctions without any concessions given?

If you answered 1. Obama and 2. Trump, congrats. Your memory is working well.
 
You finished? Could we get back to Ukraine now?
No, he's never finished baiting people. It's all he does.

Anyways, Biden is handling this well thus far. Most near Europe has to a war in two generations, and he's led well.
 
Which president imposed sanctions on Russia for invading Ukraine the last time? Which president met with Putin and began the process of lifting sanctions without any concessions given?

If you answered 1. Obama and 2. Trump, congrats. Your memory is working well.

I like how you said "met with and began the process", because that allowed you to then conveniently ignore that not only did Trump increase sanctions against Russia, he killed a bunch of Russians in Syria.

The disconnect between rhetoric and action was typical of his administration. With the exception of Iran and (relatedly and to a much lesser extent) Israel, however the foreign policy overlap in the last couple of administrations is actually pretty high.
 
Oh; is that like saying "Fox didn't run Patriot Purge, one opinion show host who worked for them chose to run Patriot Purge"?
You know, one would think after the international embarrassment the conservative movement gave us in Trump, and how he fellated dictators from Putin to Kim Jong Un alike, that that the right wing would be ashamed to even discuss "who's tougher" on Russia or North Korea. But because conservatives in the US are incapable of feeling shame and caring about their hypocrisy being open for all to see, they feel free to throw countless stones from their glass houses.
 
You know, one would think after the international embarrassment the conservative movement gave us in Trump, and how he fellated dictators from Putin to Kim Jong Un alike, that that the right wing would be ashamed to even discuss "who's tougher" on Russia or North Korea. But because conservatives in the US are incapable of feeling shame and caring about their hypocrisy being open for all to see, they feel free to throw countless stones from their glass houses.

Feel free to check back and see what my position was on Trump kowtowing to dictators :) You'll find that there is a reason the fools on the right wing here don't like me any more than the fools on the left wing do.
 
I have to say, many of the kneejerk takes that I have read on this forum about anything related to Ukraine and NATO--or Ukraine and Russia--almost always tell me like they read a single article on the topic from a dubious source and now feel their expertise sprouting like a chia pet.

If a problem in Mongolia breaks out tomorrow, Monica will soon be telling us what will happen next after she got the inside scoop ordering khorkhog from a waitress in Darhan.
I dunno. I get the feeling Monica's sources might be a little more official than that.

1645356445680.png
 
....I was responding to your questions to me.
And I appreciate your answer about the Holodomor. Not Romney and all since.
 
Back
Top Bottom