- Joined
- Sep 28, 2011
- Messages
- 15,205
- Reaction score
- 11,432
- Location
- SF Bay Area
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
The requests have been relentless and excessive. If requests become relentless and incessant, then they, for all intents and purposes, amount to demands.
I.
Zelensky is not letting Nato Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg off the hook. He was merciless today on fancy suit Jens Stoltenberg.
Should Nato deliver 1% of its tanks and planes to Zelensky?
"""""You have at least 20,000 tanks. Ukraine asks for 1 percent, 1 percent of all your tanks. Please give them to us or sell them to us. But we, so far, have not heard a clear response. This is the worst thing about war. We're not to have a clear answer from the West to requests for help....
You can give us 1 percent of all your planes, 1 percent of all your tanks, 1 percent. We cannot buy it. These supplies depend on NATO's political decisions. Multiple rocket launch systems, anti-warship systems, air defense systems, can we fight this war without it? So when we finally have it, it will give us and you 100% security. And we need only one. The only thing I ask of you after this one month of war, is to ask you on behalf of our military, after this one month war with Russia, in the war with Russia, please do not tell us that our army is not up to NATO's standards."""""
READ: Zelensky's address to NATO leaders | CNN Politics
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky addressed NATO leaders virtually Thursday as they gathered for an emergency summit on Russia's war in Ukraine. Zelensky stopped short of issuing his usual request for a no-fly zone, but he asked NATO to supply his country with military equipment. Below is a...www.cnn.com
Oh cut it out. This is bullshit you're just making up. You quoted one speech and now you want to call it relentless pleading.The limit as relentless pleas tend towards the infinite is a demand. If a man pleads at your bedroom window all night and day it is no more a plea, it is a demand.
Idemandrequest that you learn the difference between a demand and a request.
This is exactly how to create an ever creeping into war situation. We most certainly should not be doing any more lest we want to get sucked into this quagmire.give it
Then they're the ones who have to make the tough decision: whether to treat it like a declaration of war.
It's generally good to keep your opponent being the one who makes the tough decisions.
Oh cut it out. This is bullshit you're just making up. You quoted one speech and now you want to call it relentless pleading.
Be friggin honest, address Zelenskyy's request on honest terms, and don't indulge in hyperbolic crap. You have a point to make about NATO and Zelenskyy's request, make it without reducing your discussion to a cartoon flame-fest in the first post.
I reckon it would come across that way when civilians are getting bombed in apartment complexes.
Now, I demand that you understand the difference between a request and a demand, since I believe I have the right to expect that we use common definitions in a debate.A demand is a request that will not take no for an answer
All I ask is honesty. Less deliberately inflammatory language, less dishonesty. Like I said, you have a point to make about Zelenskyy's request, that's why we're here, to discuss. But you just want to ignite what we used to call 'combat prose' in the Usenet days.Now I feel like Beni in the movie Mummy. I wanna say more in my favour, but you will only be angry with me some more.
Looooove the Usenet referenceAll I ask is honesty. Less deliberately inflammatory language, less dishonesty. Like I said, you have a point to make about Zelenskyy's request, that's why we're here, to discuss. But you just want to ignite what we used to call 'combat prose' in the Usenet days.
Back then everything was unmoderated and people who indulged in combat prose were dealt with internally but now you guys get away with it and feel justified. And by you guys I mean both sides of centre.
It's not rocket science. Be honest. What you labeled a demand was a request, doesn't matter how you twist it with laughable analogies.
A demand is a request that will not take no for an answer
I was okay with it until I saw "We cannot buy it."Does this...
"Ukraine asks for 1 percent, 1 percent of all your tanks. Please give them to us or sell them to us."
...sound like a demand to you?
Damn. I despise this kind of abuse of the English language and this kind of inflammatory dishonesty.
"The idea that we're going to send in offensive equipment and have planes and tanks and trains going in with American pilots and American crews — just understand, don't kid yourself, no matter what y'all say, that's called World War III."
Joe Biden is exactly right on this. The stakes are too high to risk triggering WW III.
If Ukraine was a NATO member, then they would have full support of NATO - planes, tanks, personnel, all of it., but they are not.
U.S taxpayers have given Ukraine billions of dollars worth of humanitarian aid. Zelensky is wrong todemandask for more, IMO.
He's trying to save as many of his people as he can. This war is happening in residential streets, neighbourhoods. He's not asking himself what's good for NATO, he's asking for help for his people.I was okay with it until I saw "We cannot buy it."
Cash and carry only!
When all the news stories imply Russia being defeated by the Ukrainians, why the need of involving NATO and possibly expanding the war?
And how might Russia respond if NATO members became more involved? Maybe he should instead be seeking help from non-NATO members, like Argentina, Australia, Bahrain, Egypt, Israel, Japan, Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco, New Zealand, Pakistan, Philippines, Republic of Korea, Taiwan, and Thailand. NATO should become more involved IF Russia encroaches on a NATO member.He's trying to save as many of his people as he can. This war is happening in residential streets, neighbourhoods. He's not asking himself what's good for NATO, he's asking for help for his people.
Well, I got no problem with individual NATO countries deciding to be involved at some level. Poland supplying weapons, for example or the Baltic countries. I might not like to see personnel from NATO countries engaging Russian troops though.And how might Russia respond if NATO members became more involved? Maybe he should instead be seeking help from non-NATO members, like Argentina, Australia, Bahrain, Egypt, Israel, Japan, Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco, New Zealand, Pakistan, Philippines, Republic of Korea, Taiwan, and Thailand. NATO should become more involved IF Russia encroaches on a NATO member.
Well, I got no problem with individual NATO countries deciding to be involved at some level. Poland supplying weapons, for example or the Baltic countries. I might not like to see personnel from NATO countries engaging Russian troops though.
A NATO country has already been in Ukraine- Canada has had 200 troops training Ukraine military since 2015, when Putin took Crimea, and those were increased to 260 early this year. There's Swedes involved too but Sweden is neutral. Last I heard they had been withdrwn to Poland.
I hope they stay there. When those special forces JTF2 were training Kurds they were known to accompany them into battle engaging with ISIS which should not happen here.
Joe Biden (and I) understand Putin's motivation for the invasion of Ukraine.And just how did you or Biden determine that Joe Biden was "exactly right" on this?
Biden's "mangled and imprecise phrasing" has nothing to do with policy. His rationale for keeping a safe distance from the war in Ukraine is solid, and other NATO members have agreed with Biden's calculus.Most importantly, how is Biden's mangled and imprecise phrasing even relevant to his foot dragging on better weapons?
I don't know but I would guess it would depend on the nature of the involvement. If Poland supplied a hundred Stinger missiles, for example, and Russia bombed Poland in retaliation I would guess that that could trigger Article 5 but if Poland also supplied the soldiers to use those missiles in combat and Russia bombed Poland in retaliation that shouldn't involve NATO.Raises some Article 5 issues. Say a Nato country gets involved on an individual level, is that nation still covered by Article 5?
I don't know but I would guess it would depend on the nature of the involvement. If Poland supplied a hundred Stinger missiles, for example, and Russia bombed Poland in retaliation I would guess that that could trigger Article 5 but if Poland also supplied the soldiers to use those missiles in combat and Russia bombed Poland in retaliation that shouldn't involve NATO.
When the US was attacked on 9/11 NATO got involved but not when the Falkland Islands were invaded by Argentina because Article 5 specifies that the attack has to happen in Europe or North America.
Joe Biden (and I) understand Putin's motivation for the invasion of Ukraine.
Putin's darkest fear: Ukraine joins NATO and NATO [the U.S.] quickly establishes "defense shield" missile installations along the Ukraine/Russian border.
Note that Putin does not consider Ukraine an independent sovereign country - he still believes that Ukraine is part of Russia. He said this last month:
If NATO [the U.S.] gave aircraft or tanks to Ukraine (offensive military weapons), that would give Putin the reason to go to war with the U.S..
Obviously, China would side with Putin - - it would be WW III.
Biden's "mangled and imprecise phrasing" has nothing to do with policy. His rationale for keeping a safe distance from the war in Ukraine is solid, and other NATO members have agreed with Biden's calculus.
We must give Ukraine moral and humanitarian support - - NOT tanks and planes. If another non-NATO country wishes to give planes and tanks to Ukraine, then they can. NATO cannot because Ukraine is not a NATO member.
Based on the only invocation of Article 5 so far I would guess that Russia supplying arms to an insurrection group in Estonia would be an Article 5 issue. Afghanistan did not attack the US on 9/11 but the fact that they sheltered the people who did was enough.What you list are examples of what I had in mind. Nato nations acting alone do have the potential of triggering Article 5. What if Russia doesn't bomb in retaliation? For example, Estonia is supplying arms to Ukraine. Meaning while an Estonian canon didn't fire directly across its border on Russia, same canon can do that from Ukraine. Estonia also has a not insignificant Russian population. What if Russia does not bomb Estonia, just supplies arms to groups in Estonia?
I have no problem with the help NATO countries have/are giving him, but his talk was addressing NATO leaders. asking them to give him 1% of their tanks and planes.Well, I got no problem with individual NATO countries deciding to be involved at some level. Poland supplying weapons, for example or the Baltic countries. I might not like to see personnel from NATO countries engaging Russian troops though.
A NATO country has already been in Ukraine- Canada has had 200 troops training Ukraine military since 2015, when Putin took Crimea, and those were increased to 260 early this year. There's Swedes involved too but Sweden is neutral. Last I heard they had been withdrwn to Poland.
I hope they stay there. When those special forces JTF2 were training Kurds they were known to accompany them into battle engaging with ISIS which should not happen here.
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?