• 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!

Zelenskyy says it's a 'pity' US support came 'after' Russian war began

The US leaderships, both Trump and Biden , have led the Ukrainians down the garden path to disaster. The Russian leadership bears the complete responsibility for the horrific attack on Ukraine. That said there was always a diplomatic solution and both the Ukraine and the Russian leaderships bear a responsibility for that failure along with the USA . These are the truthes of the matter imo

To bleat on by engaging in the current civil war of words in the USA itself is but a distraction and, imo, a finger to the actual nightmare that is unfolding
I don't think it was the previous administration which left Ukraine high and dry:

The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances refers to three identical political agreements signed at the OSCE conference in Budapest, Hungary on 5 December 1994 to provide security assurances by its signatories relating to the accession of Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). The memorandum was originally signed by three nuclear powers: the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States. China and France gave somewhat weaker individual assurances in separate documents.[1]
The memorandum included security assurances against threats or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan. As a result of other agreements and the memorandum, between 1993 and 1996, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons.[2]
 
American actually thinks we're all stupid enough to believe that the man who unlawfully withheld military aid from Ukraine in an attempt to extort fake dirt on a political rival's son would not only have stopped Putin himself, but would have given more aid and sooner.

:ROFLMAO:

As always, it's a situation where I have standing to say "gee, I wish we'd sent over a load of gear sooner", but American and the rest of the Trumpists have nothing to say. Of course they don't. Theirs is a hate-based ideology, so there's no principle behind anything that they spew. They'll contradict themselves three times in the same sentence if they think it'll help them say "LIBRUL BAD!"
And yet 4 years, no Russia invasion of Ukraine under Trump.
1 year into Biden's residency, and we're staring down WWIII.
 
And now this cat thinks he knows what Biden was thinking at one point and feeling at the next point. You guys are so bereft of any honest facts.
Yawn.......
 
I don't think it was the previous administration which left Ukraine high and dry:

The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances refers to three identical political agreements signed at the OSCE conference in Budapest, Hungary on 5 December 1994 to provide security assurances by its signatories relating to the accession of Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). The memorandum was originally signed by three nuclear powers: the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States. China and France gave somewhat weaker individual assurances in separate documents.[1]
The memorandum included security assurances against threats or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan. As a result of other agreements and the memorandum, between 1993 and 1996, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons.[2]
I think Trump would have headed Putin's invasion off, or I should say, continued to do so.
 
I don't think it was the previous administration which left Ukraine high and dry:

The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances refers to three identical political agreements signed at the OSCE conference in Budapest, Hungary on 5 December 1994 to provide security assurances by its signatories relating to the accession of Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). The memorandum was originally signed by three nuclear powers: the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States. China and France gave somewhat weaker individual assurances in separate documents.[1]
The memorandum included security assurances against threats or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan. As a result of other agreements and the memorandum, between 1993 and 1996, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons.[2]


I am talking about the failure of the US to put pressure on Ukraine to follow through on Minsk 2. It wasn't the best but it was/is a whole lot better than this by a country mile
 
I think Trump would have headed Putin's invasion off, or I should say, continued to do so.
Yeah, that would seem to be what was likely to be the case.

Some insiders were describing that other world leaders didn't know what to expect of Trump, that he had them on their back foot all the time, them reacting rather than having the initiative. Might been all that it would have taken to keep them on their back root. With Biden, it's all predictable political elitist responses without any unpredictability in the least, can predict his actions from a mile away, the opposition has studied this subject for decades already.

I'd further hazard a guess that it was this inherent unpredictability which drove the left to edge of, and in some cases beyond, insanity.
"This is not how the president is supposed so sound!"
"This is not how the president is supposed to act!"
"This is not how the president is supposed to make decisions!"
"This is not how the president is supposed to think!"
"He's breaking all rules!"

Yeah, yeah, yeah. All that. But sometimes is a good thing to shake up a sedentary bureaucracy. Of course that bureaucracy isn't going to like it, for much of the same reasons listed above.
 
The US leaderships, both Trump and Biden , have led the Ukrainians down the garden path to disaster. The Russian leadership bears the complete responsibility for the horrific attack on Ukraine. That said there was always a diplomatic solution and both the Ukraine and the Russian leaderships bear a responsibility for that failure along with the USA . These are the truthes of the matter imo

To bleat on by engaging in the current civil war of words in the USA itself is but a distraction and, imo, a finger to the actual nightmare that is unfolding

Hind sight is 20-20. Were both the West or Putin to know that a war of this type would emerge, I would like to think both sides would have made different choices. However, one will never know what those choices would have been or for whose side would have gained the advantage.

WWI is the classic example of a World War that erupted without any specific party wanting a conflict of that size. It was a process of falling dominos, as one nation came to the aid of another, it triggered another nation to enter against the aid giver. Austria sought revenge on Serbia, the Russians mobilized against Austria, Germany attacked Russia, and France and the UK were committed to attack Germany for it.

There are, of course, differences here. The alliances are not secret and are bi-polar. Here the ideological and personal goals of one side was obscured by the personae of one leader, Putin. And while the west was indecisive, split, and unable to commit to anything more than about three years in the future, Putin was unwilling or unable to convey his bottom-line demands as an ultimatum, given after he had essentially planned and was committed to war.

It's easy to say that the West should have mind-read Putin's real and disguised intentions, and Putin should have NOT tried to mind read NATOs. But if reports are accurate, by late January the invasion was given the green light and everything after that date was theater for Putin.
 
Yeah, that would seem to be what was likely to be the case.

Some insiders were describing that other world leaders didn't know what to expect of Trump, that he had them on their back foot all the time, them reacting rather than having the initiative. Might been all that it would have taken to keep them on their back root. With Biden, it's all predictable political elitist responses without any unpredictability in the least, can predict his actions from a mile away, the opposition has studied this subject for decades already.

I'd further hazard a guess that it was this inherent unpredictability which drove the left to edge of, and in some cases beyond, insanity.
"This is not how the president is supposed so sound!"
"This is not how the president is supposed to act!"
"This is not how the president is supposed to make decisions!"
"This is not how the president is supposed to think!"
"He's breaking all rules!"

Yeah, yeah, yeah. All that. But sometimes is a good thing to shake up a sedentary bureaucracy. Of course that bureaucracy isn't going to like it, for much of the same reasons listed above.

I'm sure all that you mentioned was part of it.
 
Another factor people don’t consider is that in both cases where Putin invaded Ukraine, Russia’s foreign reserves were at high points to withstand sanctions. That likely had more to do with the timeline than who was president.
 
Which parts of the Minsk 2 agreements did the Ukraine not follow through on?

I'm no expert on Minsk 2 and cannot say for sure but I don't think that Minsk 2 has been moved along by anyone, I recall Zelensky signing a part of it but faced a backlash as a result and has since refrained from any action on it.

As I said, it appears to be the only well supported solution on the table and can only be better than this horror show
 
Here's a tweet to make American and oneworld sad:

 
Hind sight is 20-20. Were both the West or Putin to know that a war of this type would emerge, I would like to think both sides would have made different choices. However, one will never know what those choices would have been or for whose side would have gained the advantage.

WWI is the classic example of a World War that erupted without any specific party wanting a conflict of that size. It was a process of falling dominos, as one nation came to the aid of another, it triggered another nation to enter against the aid giver. Austria sought revenge on Serbia, the Russians mobilized against Austria, Germany attacked Russia, and France and the UK were committed to attack Germany for it.

There are, of course, differences here. The alliances are not secret and are bi-polar. Here the ideological and personal goals of one side was obscured by the personae of one leader, Putin. And while the west was indecisive, split, and unable to commit to anything more than about three years in the future, Putin was unwilling or unable to convey his bottom-line demands as an ultimatum, given after he had essentially planned and was committed to war.

It's easy to say that the West should have mind-read Putin's real and disguised intentions, and Putin should have NOT tried to mind read NATOs. But if reports are accurate, by late January the invasion was given the green light and everything after that date was theater for Putin.

To think that the ongoing conflict wrt Donbas was somehow just going to fade away was never an option imo , so there had to be some sort of agreement on the application and fulfillment of the Minsk 2 solution, It was supported by virtually all organisations in the game that matter and yet hung there for years while the fighting continued and no movement on it was forthcoming.

To think also that there was any real chance of the Ukraine becoming a NATO member state or a member of the EU anytime soon also hung there like a mole on the barbed wire, That we are now witnessing this vile horror show appears to me to be born out of complete bs tbh on many sides.
 
For sure. Hey, don't you have a friend in Kiev named Vladimir Bondarenko? Here's a tweet about him:



Leftists prosecuting McCarthyism tactics here is hysterical!! But if it's all ya got............ ;)
 
Leftists prosecuting McCarthyism tactics here is hysterical!! But if it's all ya got............ ;)
I wasn't aware that "Tail Gunner Joe" used fake Facebook entries, but I guess I should read up on the 1950s more...:unsure:
 
In a pessimistic thread featuring a slanderous OP, here's an uplifting note:

 
I'm no expert on Minsk 2 and cannot say for sure but I don't think that Minsk 2 has been moved along by anyone, I recall Zelensky signing a part of it but faced a backlash as a result and has since refrained from any action on it.

As I said, it appears to be the only well supported solution on the table and can only be better than this horror show
Hmm. Depends on how the horror show plays out.

The Russians are an invading army of a nation of 40M people all of whom hate their guts.
The insurgency that follows is going to look like when the Russians went into Afghanistan (the urban theater far more dangerous than the more open planes of Afghanistan). The Russian people of today aren't nearly as compliant as the Russian people of then, so a far lower tolerance for body bags coming home.
 

I have little doubt this was intentional. Wouldn't put it passed Biden to withhold support because he wanted to meet with Putin. Either that or the Scranton Scrapper is gutless coward.


Maybe he was referring to shit like our unilateral withdrawal from the Open Skies treaty etc.
 
While Biden-obsessed Trumpers (a.k.a. "losers") like "American" dream up Biden-haunted OPs like this one, the rest of the world watches history unfold:



--by the way "American," speaking as a Navy veteran, I think your profile name denigrates the word. Just saying.
 
Last edited:
Maybe he was referring to shit like our unilateral withdrawal from the Open Skies treaty etc.
Yet another treaty which only the US was honoring?

Challenges to the treaty​

Both Russia and the United States have alleged that the other is violating the provisions of the treaty.[22] U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo cited for example Russia's access refusal in the Russian-controlled areas of Georgia.[23] On 20 September 2019, the U.S. and Canada were denied access to a military exercise in central Russia.[24]

American withdrawal​

In October 2019, it was reported that according to documents from the U.S. House of Representatives, President Donald Trump was considering withdrawing from the Open Skies Treaty.[25][26] NATO allies and partners, in particular Ukraine, were against the move, fearing it would license Russia to reduce further or ban overflights, thus reducing their knowledge of Russian military movements.[27]
In April 2020, it was reported that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Secretary of Defense Mark Esper had agreed to proceed with U.S. withdrawal from the Treaty on Open Skies.[28] On May 21, 2020, President Trump announced that the United States would be withdrawing from the treaty due to alleged Russian violations.[29]
On 22 May 2020, the United States submitted notice of withdrawal from the Treaty on Open Skies.[30][31] Senate Democrats questioned the legality, wisdom, and appropriateness of the planned withdrawal so close to the 2020 United States presidential election.[32][33] The U.S. said it would share some of its intelligence and reconnaissance information with European allies to make up for any loss of critical information from the end of the Treaty.[34]
On 22 November 2020, United States official sources—including U.S. Department of State websites, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, and the National Security Council's official Twitter account—announced that the six-month period was over and the U.S. was no longer a party to the Treaty.[35][36][37]

Russian withdrawal​

In January 2021, Russia announced that it will follow the United States in withdrawing from the Treaty on Open Skies.[38] The Biden administration informed Moscow in May 2021 that it would not re-enter the pact; on 7 June 2021 Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a law on that formalised Russia's exit from the Treaty on Open Skies.[39]
 
Biden actually threaten to withhold $1B, and it's on tape.

Big difference was that Biden was presenting the official US view, with bipartisan support from congress, and did so publicly. Trump presented his personal 'requirements' in disregard of what congress approved, and then did his best to hide/distort the fact, and punish those who made it public
 
  • Like
Reactions: jpn
Big difference was that Biden was presenting the official US view, with bipartisan support from congress, and did so publicly. Trump presented his personal 'requirements' in disregard of what congress approved, and then did his best to hide/distort the fact, and punish those who made it public
...and Trump withheld the approved assistance illegally. Not that that bothers Trumpers like "American."
 
LOL
you have to pretend some flaws make the whole thing worthless
Meh. I'm not pretending anything. Just raising an observation, based on the citation.

How useful, worth while, is a treaty which isn't complied with? If it's ignored, isn't it like is isn't not even there?
 
Back
Top Bottom