Ukraine

Halifax2TheMax

mickeyrat said:

so if the goal was avoidance of nato on its borders, he did a bang up fucking job.

Hi Finland!!!!

huh, seems they share a much longer border than does ukraine. gasp, what to do?

Let Russia invade and blame Harris.

mrussel1

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

dignin said:

Lerxst1992 said:

BF25394 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

War over yet? Weren’t we told Putin on the ritz was ready for a ceasefire because COOTWH was leading and happy days are here again? I’m confused because the peace president is bombing places.

Something that I heard repeated during the campaign, from both everyday voters and from at least one billionaire professional investor who backed Trump, was that, when Trump was president the first time, "there were no wars." One might generously allow that they meant that the U.S. was not involved in any wars but, of course, the U.S. was at war in Afghanistan for the entire length of Trump's first term (a war that ended under Biden, not Trump). This is not to mention the fact that the U.S. was involved militarily in Syria, Iran and various other countries from 2017 to 2021. This talking point was further detached from reality by the facts that there were numerous other wars going on around the world during that period, including in Yemen and Congo, to name two.

He may have been referring to wars either started or significantly influenced by the USA, for which Ukraine unfortunately qualifies.

Ukraine unfortunately qualifies?

How so?

Kamala Harris 2022 before russia invasion :  "The United States stands firmly with the Ukrainian people in defense of the NATO alliance."

Are you being serious with this statement?

First, she said this in March of 2022, AFTER the invasion started.  Get your facts right when you're making declarations.   https://www.axios.com/2022/03/12/kamala-harris-unity-russian-invasion-ukraine

Second, let's play in your make-believe world where this statement came before the invasion.  You think had she not said this, Putin would not have invaded?  Is this a joke post?  Did someone steal your account?

Feb 20 2022

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Let me start by saying I appreciate and admire President Zelenskyy's desire to join NATO. And one of, again, the founding principles of NATO is that each country must have the ability -- unimpaired, unimpeded -- to determine their own future, both in terms of their form of government and, in this case, whether they desire to be a member of NATO.

That is not the quote you referenced.  Get your facts right.  Your point is absurd anyways.  Do you know what was happening in 2014 during the Crimean invasion?  The Ukraine gov't was unstable because they overthrew their corrupt leader Yanukoyvich.  The country was transitioning to a western oriented democracy and were unable to muster a defense of Crimea and Putin took advantage of it.  Sure, it's Harris's fault that Russia, which had been threatening its neighbors and had already conducted brutal military campaigns in Georgia and Chechnya, attacked Ukraine.  A country that Russia has long believed belongs to them.  It's our fault.  WTF happened to you?

The intital tweet posted by Harris was made, edited and removed several times. Her comments to reporters posted above were four days before the Russian invasion, and since she spoke openly to reporters she was unable to retract.

The US did not have significant influence in Putins decision to invade? The Biden administration and nato leadership did not make it clear they welcomed Ukraine into nato for many years? The US did not have a role in the removal of Yanukoyvich?

Again, I disagree with Putins aggression. However my only point here is the US had a big influence in how the 2022 invasion transpired.

that's really sweet that you 'disagree' with Putin's war crimes and killing of innocent Ukrainians.  That's great comfort to everyone that you find it disagreeable.  It's good to see your moral compass so aligned.  But now you are moving the needle to "HOW the 2022 invasion transpired", ignoring the Crimean invasion and arming of separatists across the Eastern oblasts for the last decade.  

Certainly fear of NATO has some effect, but that's window dressing to Putin's long-term strategy.  If you ever really studied Rus history and the relationship between Ukrainians and Russians, you would know that this has been a looming threat as Ukraine has been oppressed by Russians for hundreds of years.  Holodomor.  

Next, let's talk about how the US freezing of Japanese assets in 1940 was the cause of Pearl Harbor and that the Pacific Theater was our fault.  That has more credibility than you quoting Harris from February, after Crimea, after the buildup of forces on the border.  

My original point was only that the US had influence in the events that led to Russia's invasion. The “moving needle” part are responses to whataboutisms posted by others. Not only did Harris and Biden and NATO leadership make many comments that could be interpreted as threatening to Russia in 2021 and early 2022, Biden issued three EOs in 2021 threatening Russia. Maybe Russia deserved it, but there are various ways to avoid bloodshed. And the Biden administration picked its choice.

So Ukraine says they would like to join NATO and you think the right position would have been to publicly refuse to allow them to do so, rather than keep the door open.  And you think that would have stopped Putin from invading?  If this is your perspective, you are as naive as Trump.  

Choosing that course of action, as much as I’d love the result, believing that could provoke a Russian invasion, would temper my belief of right and wrong. There’s good reason not even Biden went that far.

If it is I who is naive, and the author of whataboutisms, as much as I disagree with their aggressions, are Russia and Chinas desire for territory for protection of its respective homelands all that different to US actions that achieved that result over the past several decades?

My point is, dem communication to the public and media, is very one sided. So much so we lose general elections that we should win. Dems repeatedly are unable to identify the issues that will shape an election, and when they are identified for them, have no idea how to argue them successfully .

Because when we exist in our echo chamber, it only takes a tiny little fact to make us look like the purveyors of fake news. Obviously I don’t fully agree with that, but trump has been able to prove it true many times.

So now you think D lost the election because of Ukraine support?  

Lerxst1992

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

dignin said:

Lerxst1992 said:

BF25394 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

War over yet? Weren’t we told Putin on the ritz was ready for a ceasefire because COOTWH was leading and happy days are here again? I’m confused because the peace president is bombing places.

Something that I heard repeated during the campaign, from both everyday voters and from at least one billionaire professional investor who backed Trump, was that, when Trump was president the first time, "there were no wars." One might generously allow that they meant that the U.S. was not involved in any wars but, of course, the U.S. was at war in Afghanistan for the entire length of Trump's first term (a war that ended under Biden, not Trump). This is not to mention the fact that the U.S. was involved militarily in Syria, Iran and various other countries from 2017 to 2021. This talking point was further detached from reality by the facts that there were numerous other wars going on around the world during that period, including in Yemen and Congo, to name two.

He may have been referring to wars either started or significantly influenced by the USA, for which Ukraine unfortunately qualifies.

Ukraine unfortunately qualifies?

How so?

Kamala Harris 2022 before russia invasion :  "The United States stands firmly with the Ukrainian people in defense of the NATO alliance."

Are you being serious with this statement?

First, she said this in March of 2022, AFTER the invasion started.  Get your facts right when you're making declarations.   https://www.axios.com/2022/03/12/kamala-harris-unity-russian-invasion-ukraine

Second, let's play in your make-believe world where this statement came before the invasion.  You think had she not said this, Putin would not have invaded?  Is this a joke post?  Did someone steal your account?

Feb 20 2022

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Let me start by saying I appreciate and admire President Zelenskyy's desire to join NATO. And one of, again, the founding principles of NATO is that each country must have the ability -- unimpaired, unimpeded -- to determine their own future, both in terms of their form of government and, in this case, whether they desire to be a member of NATO.

That is not the quote you referenced.  Get your facts right.  Your point is absurd anyways.  Do you know what was happening in 2014 during the Crimean invasion?  The Ukraine gov't was unstable because they overthrew their corrupt leader Yanukoyvich.  The country was transitioning to a western oriented democracy and were unable to muster a defense of Crimea and Putin took advantage of it.  Sure, it's Harris's fault that Russia, which had been threatening its neighbors and had already conducted brutal military campaigns in Georgia and Chechnya, attacked Ukraine.  A country that Russia has long believed belongs to them.  It's our fault.  WTF happened to you?

The intital tweet posted by Harris was made, edited and removed several times. Her comments to reporters posted above were four days before the Russian invasion, and since she spoke openly to reporters she was unable to retract.

The US did not have significant influence in Putins decision to invade? The Biden administration and nato leadership did not make it clear they welcomed Ukraine into nato for many years? The US did not have a role in the removal of Yanukoyvich?

Again, I disagree with Putins aggression. However my only point here is the US had a big influence in how the 2022 invasion transpired.

that's really sweet that you 'disagree' with Putin's war crimes and killing of innocent Ukrainians.  That's great comfort to everyone that you find it disagreeable.  It's good to see your moral compass so aligned.  But now you are moving the needle to "HOW the 2022 invasion transpired", ignoring the Crimean invasion and arming of separatists across the Eastern oblasts for the last decade.  

Certainly fear of NATO has some effect, but that's window dressing to Putin's long-term strategy.  If you ever really studied Rus history and the relationship between Ukrainians and Russians, you would know that this has been a looming threat as Ukraine has been oppressed by Russians for hundreds of years.  Holodomor.  

Next, let's talk about how the US freezing of Japanese assets in 1940 was the cause of Pearl Harbor and that the Pacific Theater was our fault.  That has more credibility than you quoting Harris from February, after Crimea, after the buildup of forces on the border.  

My original point was only that the US had influence in the events that led to Russia's invasion. The “moving needle” part are responses to whataboutisms posted by others. Not only did Harris and Biden and NATO leadership make many comments that could be interpreted as threatening to Russia in 2021 and early 2022, Biden issued three EOs in 2021 threatening Russia. Maybe Russia deserved it, but there are various ways to avoid bloodshed. And the Biden administration picked its choice.

So Ukraine says they would like to join NATO and you think the right position would have been to publicly refuse to allow them to do so, rather than keep the door open.  And you think that would have stopped Putin from invading?  If this is your perspective, you are as naive as Trump.  

Choosing that course of action, as much as I’d love the result, believing that could provoke a Russian invasion, would temper my belief of right and wrong. There’s good reason not even Biden went that far.

If it is I who is naive, and the author of whataboutisms, as much as I disagree with their aggressions, are Russia and Chinas desire for territory for protection of its respective homelands all that different to US actions that achieved that result over the past several decades?

My point is, dem communication to the public and media, is very one sided. So much so we lose general elections that we should win. Dems repeatedly are unable to identify the issues that will shape an election, and when they are identified for them, have no idea how to argue them successfully .

Because when we exist in our echo chamber, it only takes a tiny little fact to make us look like the purveyors of fake news. Obviously I don’t fully agree with that, but trump has been able to prove it true many times.

So now you think D lost the election because of Ukraine support?  

Dem actions with Ukraine certainly did not get them their anticipated impact at ballot box. I’ll add that Bidens actions were one step short of the most extreme, direct military contact with another superpower. In the context of the dem bubble this seemed almost reasonable. To everyone else outside, perhaps not so much.

mrussel1

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

dignin said:

Lerxst1992 said:

BF25394 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

War over yet? Weren’t we told Putin on the ritz was ready for a ceasefire because COOTWH was leading and happy days are here again? I’m confused because the peace president is bombing places.

Something that I heard repeated during the campaign, from both everyday voters and from at least one billionaire professional investor who backed Trump, was that, when Trump was president the first time, "there were no wars." One might generously allow that they meant that the U.S. was not involved in any wars but, of course, the U.S. was at war in Afghanistan for the entire length of Trump's first term (a war that ended under Biden, not Trump). This is not to mention the fact that the U.S. was involved militarily in Syria, Iran and various other countries from 2017 to 2021. This talking point was further detached from reality by the facts that there were numerous other wars going on around the world during that period, including in Yemen and Congo, to name two.

He may have been referring to wars either started or significantly influenced by the USA, for which Ukraine unfortunately qualifies.

Ukraine unfortunately qualifies?

How so?

Kamala Harris 2022 before russia invasion :  "The United States stands firmly with the Ukrainian people in defense of the NATO alliance."

Are you being serious with this statement?

First, she said this in March of 2022, AFTER the invasion started.  Get your facts right when you're making declarations.   https://www.axios.com/2022/03/12/kamala-harris-unity-russian-invasion-ukraine

Second, let's play in your make-believe world where this statement came before the invasion.  You think had she not said this, Putin would not have invaded?  Is this a joke post?  Did someone steal your account?

Feb 20 2022

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Let me start by saying I appreciate and admire President Zelenskyy's desire to join NATO. And one of, again, the founding principles of NATO is that each country must have the ability -- unimpaired, unimpeded -- to determine their own future, both in terms of their form of government and, in this case, whether they desire to be a member of NATO.

That is not the quote you referenced.  Get your facts right.  Your point is absurd anyways.  Do you know what was happening in 2014 during the Crimean invasion?  The Ukraine gov't was unstable because they overthrew their corrupt leader Yanukoyvich.  The country was transitioning to a western oriented democracy and were unable to muster a defense of Crimea and Putin took advantage of it.  Sure, it's Harris's fault that Russia, which had been threatening its neighbors and had already conducted brutal military campaigns in Georgia and Chechnya, attacked Ukraine.  A country that Russia has long believed belongs to them.  It's our fault.  WTF happened to you?

The intital tweet posted by Harris was made, edited and removed several times. Her comments to reporters posted above were four days before the Russian invasion, and since she spoke openly to reporters she was unable to retract.

The US did not have significant influence in Putins decision to invade? The Biden administration and nato leadership did not make it clear they welcomed Ukraine into nato for many years? The US did not have a role in the removal of Yanukoyvich?

Again, I disagree with Putins aggression. However my only point here is the US had a big influence in how the 2022 invasion transpired.

that's really sweet that you 'disagree' with Putin's war crimes and killing of innocent Ukrainians.  That's great comfort to everyone that you find it disagreeable.  It's good to see your moral compass so aligned.  But now you are moving the needle to "HOW the 2022 invasion transpired", ignoring the Crimean invasion and arming of separatists across the Eastern oblasts for the last decade.  

Certainly fear of NATO has some effect, but that's window dressing to Putin's long-term strategy.  If you ever really studied Rus history and the relationship between Ukrainians and Russians, you would know that this has been a looming threat as Ukraine has been oppressed by Russians for hundreds of years.  Holodomor.  

Next, let's talk about how the US freezing of Japanese assets in 1940 was the cause of Pearl Harbor and that the Pacific Theater was our fault.  That has more credibility than you quoting Harris from February, after Crimea, after the buildup of forces on the border.  

My original point was only that the US had influence in the events that led to Russia's invasion. The “moving needle” part are responses to whataboutisms posted by others. Not only did Harris and Biden and NATO leadership make many comments that could be interpreted as threatening to Russia in 2021 and early 2022, Biden issued three EOs in 2021 threatening Russia. Maybe Russia deserved it, but there are various ways to avoid bloodshed. And the Biden administration picked its choice.

So Ukraine says they would like to join NATO and you think the right position would have been to publicly refuse to allow them to do so, rather than keep the door open.  And you think that would have stopped Putin from invading?  If this is your perspective, you are as naive as Trump.  

Choosing that course of action, as much as I’d love the result, believing that could provoke a Russian invasion, would temper my belief of right and wrong. There’s good reason not even Biden went that far.

If it is I who is naive, and the author of whataboutisms, as much as I disagree with their aggressions, are Russia and Chinas desire for territory for protection of its respective homelands all that different to US actions that achieved that result over the past several decades?

My point is, dem communication to the public and media, is very one sided. So much so we lose general elections that we should win. Dems repeatedly are unable to identify the issues that will shape an election, and when they are identified for them, have no idea how to argue them successfully .

Because when we exist in our echo chamber, it only takes a tiny little fact to make us look like the purveyors of fake news. Obviously I don’t fully agree with that, but trump has been able to prove it true many times.

So now you think D lost the election because of Ukraine support?  

Dem actions with Ukraine certainly did not get them their anticipated impact at ballot box. I’ll add that Bidens actions were one step short of the most extreme, direct military contact with another superpower. In the context of the dem bubble this seemed almost reasonable. To everyone else outside, perhaps not so much.

Your comments grow more repulsive with each one you make. Now you are saying the reason Democrats support Ukraine was for the political benefit.  Fucking disgusting.  Can you explain why those in the Democratic bubble at the National Review, AEI, Bulwark, and half of the GOP caucus supported Biden's actions?  

Lerxst1992

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

dignin said:

Lerxst1992 said:

BF25394 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

War over yet? Weren’t we told Putin on the ritz was ready for a ceasefire because COOTWH was leading and happy days are here again? I’m confused because the peace president is bombing places.

Something that I heard repeated during the campaign, from both everyday voters and from at least one billionaire professional investor who backed Trump, was that, when Trump was president the first time, "there were no wars." One might generously allow that they meant that the U.S. was not involved in any wars but, of course, the U.S. was at war in Afghanistan for the entire length of Trump's first term (a war that ended under Biden, not Trump). This is not to mention the fact that the U.S. was involved militarily in Syria, Iran and various other countries from 2017 to 2021. This talking point was further detached from reality by the facts that there were numerous other wars going on around the world during that period, including in Yemen and Congo, to name two.

He may have been referring to wars either started or significantly influenced by the USA, for which Ukraine unfortunately qualifies.

Ukraine unfortunately qualifies?

How so?

Kamala Harris 2022 before russia invasion :  "The United States stands firmly with the Ukrainian people in defense of the NATO alliance."

Are you being serious with this statement?

First, she said this in March of 2022, AFTER the invasion started.  Get your facts right when you're making declarations.   https://www.axios.com/2022/03/12/kamala-harris-unity-russian-invasion-ukraine

Second, let's play in your make-believe world where this statement came before the invasion.  You think had she not said this, Putin would not have invaded?  Is this a joke post?  Did someone steal your account?

Feb 20 2022

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Let me start by saying I appreciate and admire President Zelenskyy's desire to join NATO. And one of, again, the founding principles of NATO is that each country must have the ability -- unimpaired, unimpeded -- to determine their own future, both in terms of their form of government and, in this case, whether they desire to be a member of NATO.

That is not the quote you referenced.  Get your facts right.  Your point is absurd anyways.  Do you know what was happening in 2014 during the Crimean invasion?  The Ukraine gov't was unstable because they overthrew their corrupt leader Yanukoyvich.  The country was transitioning to a western oriented democracy and were unable to muster a defense of Crimea and Putin took advantage of it.  Sure, it's Harris's fault that Russia, which had been threatening its neighbors and had already conducted brutal military campaigns in Georgia and Chechnya, attacked Ukraine.  A country that Russia has long believed belongs to them.  It's our fault.  WTF happened to you?

The intital tweet posted by Harris was made, edited and removed several times. Her comments to reporters posted above were four days before the Russian invasion, and since she spoke openly to reporters she was unable to retract.

The US did not have significant influence in Putins decision to invade? The Biden administration and nato leadership did not make it clear they welcomed Ukraine into nato for many years? The US did not have a role in the removal of Yanukoyvich?

Again, I disagree with Putins aggression. However my only point here is the US had a big influence in how the 2022 invasion transpired.

that's really sweet that you 'disagree' with Putin's war crimes and killing of innocent Ukrainians.  That's great comfort to everyone that you find it disagreeable.  It's good to see your moral compass so aligned.  But now you are moving the needle to "HOW the 2022 invasion transpired", ignoring the Crimean invasion and arming of separatists across the Eastern oblasts for the last decade.  

Certainly fear of NATO has some effect, but that's window dressing to Putin's long-term strategy.  If you ever really studied Rus history and the relationship between Ukrainians and Russians, you would know that this has been a looming threat as Ukraine has been oppressed by Russians for hundreds of years.  Holodomor.  

Next, let's talk about how the US freezing of Japanese assets in 1940 was the cause of Pearl Harbor and that the Pacific Theater was our fault.  That has more credibility than you quoting Harris from February, after Crimea, after the buildup of forces on the border.  

My original point was only that the US had influence in the events that led to Russia's invasion. The “moving needle” part are responses to whataboutisms posted by others. Not only did Harris and Biden and NATO leadership make many comments that could be interpreted as threatening to Russia in 2021 and early 2022, Biden issued three EOs in 2021 threatening Russia. Maybe Russia deserved it, but there are various ways to avoid bloodshed. And the Biden administration picked its choice.

So Ukraine says they would like to join NATO and you think the right position would have been to publicly refuse to allow them to do so, rather than keep the door open.  And you think that would have stopped Putin from invading?  If this is your perspective, you are as naive as Trump.  

Choosing that course of action, as much as I’d love the result, believing that could provoke a Russian invasion, would temper my belief of right and wrong. There’s good reason not even Biden went that far.

If it is I who is naive, and the author of whataboutisms, as much as I disagree with their aggressions, are Russia and Chinas desire for territory for protection of its respective homelands all that different to US actions that achieved that result over the past several decades?

My point is, dem communication to the public and media, is very one sided. So much so we lose general elections that we should win. Dems repeatedly are unable to identify the issues that will shape an election, and when they are identified for them, have no idea how to argue them successfully .

Because when we exist in our echo chamber, it only takes a tiny little fact to make us look like the purveyors of fake news. Obviously I don’t fully agree with that, but trump has been able to prove it true many times.

So now you think D lost the election because of Ukraine support?  

Dem actions with Ukraine certainly did not get them their anticipated impact at ballot box. I’ll add that Bidens actions were one step short of the most extreme, direct military contact with another superpower. In the context of the dem bubble this seemed almost reasonable. To everyone else outside, perhaps not so much.

Your comments grow more repulsive with each one you make. Now you are saying the reason Democrats support Ukraine was for the political benefit.  Fucking disgusting.  Can you explain why those in the Democratic bubble at the National Review, AEI, Bulwark, and half of the GOP caucus supported Biden's actions?  

No that is not what I said. I said bidens moves were one step short from the most extreme possible, direct military confrontation with another superpower. And political actions have impact with voters. 

mrussel1

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

dignin said:

Lerxst1992 said:

BF25394 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

War over yet? Weren’t we told Putin on the ritz was ready for a ceasefire because COOTWH was leading and happy days are here again? I’m confused because the peace president is bombing places.

Something that I heard repeated during the campaign, from both everyday voters and from at least one billionaire professional investor who backed Trump, was that, when Trump was president the first time, "there were no wars." One might generously allow that they meant that the U.S. was not involved in any wars but, of course, the U.S. was at war in Afghanistan for the entire length of Trump's first term (a war that ended under Biden, not Trump). This is not to mention the fact that the U.S. was involved militarily in Syria, Iran and various other countries from 2017 to 2021. This talking point was further detached from reality by the facts that there were numerous other wars going on around the world during that period, including in Yemen and Congo, to name two.

He may have been referring to wars either started or significantly influenced by the USA, for which Ukraine unfortunately qualifies.

Ukraine unfortunately qualifies?

How so?

Kamala Harris 2022 before russia invasion :  "The United States stands firmly with the Ukrainian people in defense of the NATO alliance."

Are you being serious with this statement?

First, she said this in March of 2022, AFTER the invasion started.  Get your facts right when you're making declarations.   https://www.axios.com/2022/03/12/kamala-harris-unity-russian-invasion-ukraine

Second, let's play in your make-believe world where this statement came before the invasion.  You think had she not said this, Putin would not have invaded?  Is this a joke post?  Did someone steal your account?

Feb 20 2022

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Let me start by saying I appreciate and admire President Zelenskyy's desire to join NATO. And one of, again, the founding principles of NATO is that each country must have the ability -- unimpaired, unimpeded -- to determine their own future, both in terms of their form of government and, in this case, whether they desire to be a member of NATO.

That is not the quote you referenced.  Get your facts right.  Your point is absurd anyways.  Do you know what was happening in 2014 during the Crimean invasion?  The Ukraine gov't was unstable because they overthrew their corrupt leader Yanukoyvich.  The country was transitioning to a western oriented democracy and were unable to muster a defense of Crimea and Putin took advantage of it.  Sure, it's Harris's fault that Russia, which had been threatening its neighbors and had already conducted brutal military campaigns in Georgia and Chechnya, attacked Ukraine.  A country that Russia has long believed belongs to them.  It's our fault.  WTF happened to you?

The intital tweet posted by Harris was made, edited and removed several times. Her comments to reporters posted above were four days before the Russian invasion, and since she spoke openly to reporters she was unable to retract.

The US did not have significant influence in Putins decision to invade? The Biden administration and nato leadership did not make it clear they welcomed Ukraine into nato for many years? The US did not have a role in the removal of Yanukoyvich?

Again, I disagree with Putins aggression. However my only point here is the US had a big influence in how the 2022 invasion transpired.

that's really sweet that you 'disagree' with Putin's war crimes and killing of innocent Ukrainians.  That's great comfort to everyone that you find it disagreeable.  It's good to see your moral compass so aligned.  But now you are moving the needle to "HOW the 2022 invasion transpired", ignoring the Crimean invasion and arming of separatists across the Eastern oblasts for the last decade.  

Certainly fear of NATO has some effect, but that's window dressing to Putin's long-term strategy.  If you ever really studied Rus history and the relationship between Ukrainians and Russians, you would know that this has been a looming threat as Ukraine has been oppressed by Russians for hundreds of years.  Holodomor.  

Next, let's talk about how the US freezing of Japanese assets in 1940 was the cause of Pearl Harbor and that the Pacific Theater was our fault.  That has more credibility than you quoting Harris from February, after Crimea, after the buildup of forces on the border.  

My original point was only that the US had influence in the events that led to Russia's invasion. The “moving needle” part are responses to whataboutisms posted by others. Not only did Harris and Biden and NATO leadership make many comments that could be interpreted as threatening to Russia in 2021 and early 2022, Biden issued three EOs in 2021 threatening Russia. Maybe Russia deserved it, but there are various ways to avoid bloodshed. And the Biden administration picked its choice.

So Ukraine says they would like to join NATO and you think the right position would have been to publicly refuse to allow them to do so, rather than keep the door open.  And you think that would have stopped Putin from invading?  If this is your perspective, you are as naive as Trump.  

Choosing that course of action, as much as I’d love the result, believing that could provoke a Russian invasion, would temper my belief of right and wrong. There’s good reason not even Biden went that far.

If it is I who is naive, and the author of whataboutisms, as much as I disagree with their aggressions, are Russia and Chinas desire for territory for protection of its respective homelands all that different to US actions that achieved that result over the past several decades?

My point is, dem communication to the public and media, is very one sided. So much so we lose general elections that we should win. Dems repeatedly are unable to identify the issues that will shape an election, and when they are identified for them, have no idea how to argue them successfully .

Because when we exist in our echo chamber, it only takes a tiny little fact to make us look like the purveyors of fake news. Obviously I don’t fully agree with that, but trump has been able to prove it true many times.

So now you think D lost the election because of Ukraine support?  

Dem actions with Ukraine certainly did not get them their anticipated impact at ballot box. I’ll add that Bidens actions were one step short of the most extreme, direct military contact with another superpower. In the context of the dem bubble this seemed almost reasonable. To everyone else outside, perhaps not so much.

Your comments grow more repulsive with each one you make. Now you are saying the reason Democrats support Ukraine was for the political benefit.  Fucking disgusting.  Can you explain why those in the Democratic bubble at the National Review, AEI, Bulwark, and half of the GOP caucus supported Biden's actions?  

No that is not what I said. I said bidens moves were one step short from the most extreme possible, direct military confrontation with another superpower. And political actions have impact with voters. 

You keep saying crazy shit and then trying to back away from it.  You get your quotes wrong.  You blame the US for the invasion of 2022, ignoring the other invasions.  Then say that isn't what you're doing.  You say our support for Ukraine is a D bubble even though the majority of Americans support Ukraine, including half of the GOP.  Then you act like you didn't. 

There was a time that I had respect for your opinion.  That time is gone.  

benjs

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

dignin said:

Lerxst1992 said:

BF25394 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

War over yet? Weren’t we told Putin on the ritz was ready for a ceasefire because COOTWH was leading and happy days are here again? I’m confused because the peace president is bombing places.

Something that I heard repeated during the campaign, from both everyday voters and from at least one billionaire professional investor who backed Trump, was that, when Trump was president the first time, "there were no wars." One might generously allow that they meant that the U.S. was not involved in any wars but, of course, the U.S. was at war in Afghanistan for the entire length of Trump's first term (a war that ended under Biden, not Trump). This is not to mention the fact that the U.S. was involved militarily in Syria, Iran and various other countries from 2017 to 2021. This talking point was further detached from reality by the facts that there were numerous other wars going on around the world during that period, including in Yemen and Congo, to name two.

He may have been referring to wars either started or significantly influenced by the USA, for which Ukraine unfortunately qualifies.

Ukraine unfortunately qualifies?

How so?

Kamala Harris 2022 before russia invasion :  "The United States stands firmly with the Ukrainian people in defense of the NATO alliance."

Are you being serious with this statement?

First, she said this in March of 2022, AFTER the invasion started.  Get your facts right when you're making declarations.   https://www.axios.com/2022/03/12/kamala-harris-unity-russian-invasion-ukraine

Second, let's play in your make-believe world where this statement came before the invasion.  You think had she not said this, Putin would not have invaded?  Is this a joke post?  Did someone steal your account?

Feb 20 2022

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Let me start by saying I appreciate and admire President Zelenskyy's desire to join NATO. And one of, again, the founding principles of NATO is that each country must have the ability -- unimpaired, unimpeded -- to determine their own future, both in terms of their form of government and, in this case, whether they desire to be a member of NATO.

That is not the quote you referenced.  Get your facts right.  Your point is absurd anyways.  Do you know what was happening in 2014 during the Crimean invasion?  The Ukraine gov't was unstable because they overthrew their corrupt leader Yanukoyvich.  The country was transitioning to a western oriented democracy and were unable to muster a defense of Crimea and Putin took advantage of it.  Sure, it's Harris's fault that Russia, which had been threatening its neighbors and had already conducted brutal military campaigns in Georgia and Chechnya, attacked Ukraine.  A country that Russia has long believed belongs to them.  It's our fault.  WTF happened to you?

The intital tweet posted by Harris was made, edited and removed several times. Her comments to reporters posted above were four days before the Russian invasion, and since she spoke openly to reporters she was unable to retract.

The US did not have significant influence in Putins decision to invade? The Biden administration and nato leadership did not make it clear they welcomed Ukraine into nato for many years? The US did not have a role in the removal of Yanukoyvich?

Again, I disagree with Putins aggression. However my only point here is the US had a big influence in how the 2022 invasion transpired.

that's really sweet that you 'disagree' with Putin's war crimes and killing of innocent Ukrainians.  That's great comfort to everyone that you find it disagreeable.  It's good to see your moral compass so aligned.  But now you are moving the needle to "HOW the 2022 invasion transpired", ignoring the Crimean invasion and arming of separatists across the Eastern oblasts for the last decade.  

Certainly fear of NATO has some effect, but that's window dressing to Putin's long-term strategy.  If you ever really studied Rus history and the relationship between Ukrainians and Russians, you would know that this has been a looming threat as Ukraine has been oppressed by Russians for hundreds of years.  Holodomor.  

Next, let's talk about how the US freezing of Japanese assets in 1940 was the cause of Pearl Harbor and that the Pacific Theater was our fault.  That has more credibility than you quoting Harris from February, after Crimea, after the buildup of forces on the border.  

My original point was only that the US had influence in the events that led to Russia's invasion. The “moving needle” part are responses to whataboutisms posted by others. Not only did Harris and Biden and NATO leadership make many comments that could be interpreted as threatening to Russia in 2021 and early 2022, Biden issued three EOs in 2021 threatening Russia. Maybe Russia deserved it, but there are various ways to avoid bloodshed. And the Biden administration picked its choice.

So Ukraine says they would like to join NATO and you think the right position would have been to publicly refuse to allow them to do so, rather than keep the door open.  And you think that would have stopped Putin from invading?  If this is your perspective, you are as naive as Trump.  

Choosing that course of action, as much as I’d love the result, believing that could provoke a Russian invasion, would temper my belief of right and wrong. There’s good reason not even Biden went that far.

If it is I who is naive, and the author of whataboutisms, as much as I disagree with their aggressions, are Russia and Chinas desire for territory for protection of its respective homelands all that different to US actions that achieved that result over the past several decades?

My point is, dem communication to the public and media, is very one sided. So much so we lose general elections that we should win. Dems repeatedly are unable to identify the issues that will shape an election, and when they are identified for them, have no idea how to argue them successfully .

Because when we exist in our echo chamber, it only takes a tiny little fact to make us look like the purveyors of fake news. Obviously I don’t fully agree with that, but trump has been able to prove it true many times.

So now you think D lost the election because of Ukraine support?  

Dem actions with Ukraine certainly did not get them their anticipated impact at ballot box. I’ll add that Bidens actions were one step short of the most extreme, direct military contact with another superpower. In the context of the dem bubble this seemed almost reasonable. To everyone else outside, perhaps not so much.

Your comments grow more repulsive with each one you make. Now you are saying the reason Democrats support Ukraine was for the political benefit.  Fucking disgusting.  Can you explain why those in the Democratic bubble at the National Review, AEI, Bulwark, and half of the GOP caucus supported Biden's actions?  

No that is not what I said. I said bidens moves were one step short from the most extreme possible, direct military confrontation with another superpower. And political actions have impact with voters. 

Your post started with “Dem actions with Ukraine certainly did not get them their anticipated impact at ballot box.” How else was one supposed to interpret this but to read it as Dem’s support for Ukraine was a self-serving political action? 

Lerxst1992

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

dignin said:

Lerxst1992 said:

BF25394 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

War over yet? Weren’t we told Putin on the ritz was ready for a ceasefire because COOTWH was leading and happy days are here again? I’m confused because the peace president is bombing places.

Something that I heard repeated during the campaign, from both everyday voters and from at least one billionaire professional investor who backed Trump, was that, when Trump was president the first time, "there were no wars." One might generously allow that they meant that the U.S. was not involved in any wars but, of course, the U.S. was at war in Afghanistan for the entire length of Trump's first term (a war that ended under Biden, not Trump). This is not to mention the fact that the U.S. was involved militarily in Syria, Iran and various other countries from 2017 to 2021. This talking point was further detached from reality by the facts that there were numerous other wars going on around the world during that period, including in Yemen and Congo, to name two.

He may have been referring to wars either started or significantly influenced by the USA, for which Ukraine unfortunately qualifies.

Ukraine unfortunately qualifies?

How so?

Kamala Harris 2022 before russia invasion :  "The United States stands firmly with the Ukrainian people in defense of the NATO alliance."

Are you being serious with this statement?

First, she said this in March of 2022, AFTER the invasion started.  Get your facts right when you're making declarations.   https://www.axios.com/2022/03/12/kamala-harris-unity-russian-invasion-ukraine

Second, let's play in your make-believe world where this statement came before the invasion.  You think had she not said this, Putin would not have invaded?  Is this a joke post?  Did someone steal your account?

Feb 20 2022

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Let me start by saying I appreciate and admire President Zelenskyy's desire to join NATO. And one of, again, the founding principles of NATO is that each country must have the ability -- unimpaired, unimpeded -- to determine their own future, both in terms of their form of government and, in this case, whether they desire to be a member of NATO.

That is not the quote you referenced.  Get your facts right.  Your point is absurd anyways.  Do you know what was happening in 2014 during the Crimean invasion?  The Ukraine gov't was unstable because they overthrew their corrupt leader Yanukoyvich.  The country was transitioning to a western oriented democracy and were unable to muster a defense of Crimea and Putin took advantage of it.  Sure, it's Harris's fault that Russia, which had been threatening its neighbors and had already conducted brutal military campaigns in Georgia and Chechnya, attacked Ukraine.  A country that Russia has long believed belongs to them.  It's our fault.  WTF happened to you?

The intital tweet posted by Harris was made, edited and removed several times. Her comments to reporters posted above were four days before the Russian invasion, and since she spoke openly to reporters she was unable to retract.

The US did not have significant influence in Putins decision to invade? The Biden administration and nato leadership did not make it clear they welcomed Ukraine into nato for many years? The US did not have a role in the removal of Yanukoyvich?

Again, I disagree with Putins aggression. However my only point here is the US had a big influence in how the 2022 invasion transpired.

that's really sweet that you 'disagree' with Putin's war crimes and killing of innocent Ukrainians.  That's great comfort to everyone that you find it disagreeable.  It's good to see your moral compass so aligned.  But now you are moving the needle to "HOW the 2022 invasion transpired", ignoring the Crimean invasion and arming of separatists across the Eastern oblasts for the last decade.  

Certainly fear of NATO has some effect, but that's window dressing to Putin's long-term strategy.  If you ever really studied Rus history and the relationship between Ukrainians and Russians, you would know that this has been a looming threat as Ukraine has been oppressed by Russians for hundreds of years.  Holodomor.  

Next, let's talk about how the US freezing of Japanese assets in 1940 was the cause of Pearl Harbor and that the Pacific Theater was our fault.  That has more credibility than you quoting Harris from February, after Crimea, after the buildup of forces on the border.  

My original point was only that the US had influence in the events that led to Russia's invasion. The “moving needle” part are responses to whataboutisms posted by others. Not only did Harris and Biden and NATO leadership make many comments that could be interpreted as threatening to Russia in 2021 and early 2022, Biden issued three EOs in 2021 threatening Russia. Maybe Russia deserved it, but there are various ways to avoid bloodshed. And the Biden administration picked its choice.

So Ukraine says they would like to join NATO and you think the right position would have been to publicly refuse to allow them to do so, rather than keep the door open.  And you think that would have stopped Putin from invading?  If this is your perspective, you are as naive as Trump.  

Choosing that course of action, as much as I’d love the result, believing that could provoke a Russian invasion, would temper my belief of right and wrong. There’s good reason not even Biden went that far.

If it is I who is naive, and the author of whataboutisms, as much as I disagree with their aggressions, are Russia and Chinas desire for territory for protection of its respective homelands all that different to US actions that achieved that result over the past several decades?

My point is, dem communication to the public and media, is very one sided. So much so we lose general elections that we should win. Dems repeatedly are unable to identify the issues that will shape an election, and when they are identified for them, have no idea how to argue them successfully .

Because when we exist in our echo chamber, it only takes a tiny little fact to make us look like the purveyors of fake news. Obviously I don’t fully agree with that, but trump has been able to prove it true many times.

So now you think D lost the election because of Ukraine support?  

Dem actions with Ukraine certainly did not get them their anticipated impact at ballot box. I’ll add that Bidens actions were one step short of the most extreme, direct military contact with another superpower. In the context of the dem bubble this seemed almost reasonable. To everyone else outside, perhaps not so much.

Your comments grow more repulsive with each one you make. Now you are saying the reason Democrats support Ukraine was for the political benefit.  Fucking disgusting.  Can you explain why those in the Democratic bubble at the National Review, AEI, Bulwark, and half of the GOP caucus supported Biden's actions?  

No that is not what I said. I said bidens moves were one step short from the most extreme possible, direct military confrontation with another superpower. And political actions have impact with voters. 

You keep saying crazy shit and then trying to back away from it.  You get your quotes wrong.  You blame the US for the invasion of 2022, ignoring the other invasions.  Then say that isn't what you're doing.  You say our support for Ukraine is a D bubble even though the majority of Americans support Ukraine, including half of the GOP.  Then you act like you didn't. 

There was a time that I had respect for your opinion.  That time is gone.  

I’ll repost the “offensive comment” here. I am saying actions have anticipated impacts and that 2022 action was about as extreme as possible (short of direct military conflict with another superpower). The point of the comment was to categorize the action as bold and extreme when dealing with a superpower. I am not blaming the US for the invasion, but I have repeatedly said US actions had significant impact in how Russia acted. I think those are clearly two different things, perhaps that is not correct thinking.

Most Americans in polling, yes, supported these actions, but unfortunately trump was able to win the Russia argument with voters. IIRC well over half of republican voters supported the invasion, but almost zero republicans and independents voted in that manner. 

Politicians need to win arguments in order to maintain power. That’s the influence onto my comment on the below. The US could have supported Ukraine while at the same time not push nato, among many less inflammatory courses of possible actions. 

..

“Dem actions with Ukraine certainly did not get them their anticipated impact at ballot box. I’ll add that Bidens actions were one step short of the most extreme, direct military contact with another superpower. In the context of the dem bubble this seemed almost reasonable. To everyone else outside, perhaps not so much.”

mrussel1

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

dignin said:

Lerxst1992 said:

BF25394 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

War over yet? Weren’t we told Putin on the ritz was ready for a ceasefire because COOTWH was leading and happy days are here again? I’m confused because the peace president is bombing places.

Something that I heard repeated during the campaign, from both everyday voters and from at least one billionaire professional investor who backed Trump, was that, when Trump was president the first time, "there were no wars." One might generously allow that they meant that the U.S. was not involved in any wars but, of course, the U.S. was at war in Afghanistan for the entire length of Trump's first term (a war that ended under Biden, not Trump). This is not to mention the fact that the U.S. was involved militarily in Syria, Iran and various other countries from 2017 to 2021. This talking point was further detached from reality by the facts that there were numerous other wars going on around the world during that period, including in Yemen and Congo, to name two.

He may have been referring to wars either started or significantly influenced by the USA, for which Ukraine unfortunately qualifies.

Ukraine unfortunately qualifies?

How so?

Kamala Harris 2022 before russia invasion :  "The United States stands firmly with the Ukrainian people in defense of the NATO alliance."

Are you being serious with this statement?

First, she said this in March of 2022, AFTER the invasion started.  Get your facts right when you're making declarations.   https://www.axios.com/2022/03/12/kamala-harris-unity-russian-invasion-ukraine

Second, let's play in your make-believe world where this statement came before the invasion.  You think had she not said this, Putin would not have invaded?  Is this a joke post?  Did someone steal your account?

Feb 20 2022

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Let me start by saying I appreciate and admire President Zelenskyy's desire to join NATO. And one of, again, the founding principles of NATO is that each country must have the ability -- unimpaired, unimpeded -- to determine their own future, both in terms of their form of government and, in this case, whether they desire to be a member of NATO.

That is not the quote you referenced.  Get your facts right.  Your point is absurd anyways.  Do you know what was happening in 2014 during the Crimean invasion?  The Ukraine gov't was unstable because they overthrew their corrupt leader Yanukoyvich.  The country was transitioning to a western oriented democracy and were unable to muster a defense of Crimea and Putin took advantage of it.  Sure, it's Harris's fault that Russia, which had been threatening its neighbors and had already conducted brutal military campaigns in Georgia and Chechnya, attacked Ukraine.  A country that Russia has long believed belongs to them.  It's our fault.  WTF happened to you?

The intital tweet posted by Harris was made, edited and removed several times. Her comments to reporters posted above were four days before the Russian invasion, and since she spoke openly to reporters she was unable to retract.

The US did not have significant influence in Putins decision to invade? The Biden administration and nato leadership did not make it clear they welcomed Ukraine into nato for many years? The US did not have a role in the removal of Yanukoyvich?

Again, I disagree with Putins aggression. However my only point here is the US had a big influence in how the 2022 invasion transpired.

that's really sweet that you 'disagree' with Putin's war crimes and killing of innocent Ukrainians.  That's great comfort to everyone that you find it disagreeable.  It's good to see your moral compass so aligned.  But now you are moving the needle to "HOW the 2022 invasion transpired", ignoring the Crimean invasion and arming of separatists across the Eastern oblasts for the last decade.  

Certainly fear of NATO has some effect, but that's window dressing to Putin's long-term strategy.  If you ever really studied Rus history and the relationship between Ukrainians and Russians, you would know that this has been a looming threat as Ukraine has been oppressed by Russians for hundreds of years.  Holodomor.  

Next, let's talk about how the US freezing of Japanese assets in 1940 was the cause of Pearl Harbor and that the Pacific Theater was our fault.  That has more credibility than you quoting Harris from February, after Crimea, after the buildup of forces on the border.  

My original point was only that the US had influence in the events that led to Russia's invasion. The “moving needle” part are responses to whataboutisms posted by others. Not only did Harris and Biden and NATO leadership make many comments that could be interpreted as threatening to Russia in 2021 and early 2022, Biden issued three EOs in 2021 threatening Russia. Maybe Russia deserved it, but there are various ways to avoid bloodshed. And the Biden administration picked its choice.

So Ukraine says they would like to join NATO and you think the right position would have been to publicly refuse to allow them to do so, rather than keep the door open.  And you think that would have stopped Putin from invading?  If this is your perspective, you are as naive as Trump.  

Choosing that course of action, as much as I’d love the result, believing that could provoke a Russian invasion, would temper my belief of right and wrong. There’s good reason not even Biden went that far.

If it is I who is naive, and the author of whataboutisms, as much as I disagree with their aggressions, are Russia and Chinas desire for territory for protection of its respective homelands all that different to US actions that achieved that result over the past several decades?

My point is, dem communication to the public and media, is very one sided. So much so we lose general elections that we should win. Dems repeatedly are unable to identify the issues that will shape an election, and when they are identified for them, have no idea how to argue them successfully .

Because when we exist in our echo chamber, it only takes a tiny little fact to make us look like the purveyors of fake news. Obviously I don’t fully agree with that, but trump has been able to prove it true many times.

So now you think D lost the election because of Ukraine support?  

Dem actions with Ukraine certainly did not get them their anticipated impact at ballot box. I’ll add that Bidens actions were one step short of the most extreme, direct military contact with another superpower. In the context of the dem bubble this seemed almost reasonable. To everyone else outside, perhaps not so much.

Your comments grow more repulsive with each one you make. Now you are saying the reason Democrats support Ukraine was for the political benefit.  Fucking disgusting.  Can you explain why those in the Democratic bubble at the National Review, AEI, Bulwark, and half of the GOP caucus supported Biden's actions?  

No that is not what I said. I said bidens moves were one step short from the most extreme possible, direct military confrontation with another superpower. And political actions have impact with voters. 

You keep saying crazy shit and then trying to back away from it.  You get your quotes wrong.  You blame the US for the invasion of 2022, ignoring the other invasions.  Then say that isn't what you're doing.  You say our support for Ukraine is a D bubble even though the majority of Americans support Ukraine, including half of the GOP.  Then you act like you didn't. 

There was a time that I had respect for your opinion.  That time is gone.  

I’ll repost the “offensive comment” here. I am saying actions have anticipated impacts and that 2022 action was about as extreme as possible (short of direct military conflict with another superpower). The point of the comment was to categorize the action as bold and extreme when dealing with a superpower. I am not blaming the US for the invasion, but I have repeatedly said US actions had significant impact in how Russia acted. I think those are clearly two different things, perhaps that is not correct thinking.

Most Americans in polling, yes, supported these actions, but unfortunately trump was able to win the Russia argument with voters. IIRC well over half of republican voters supported the invasion, but almost zero republicans and independents voted in that manner. 

Politicians need to win arguments in order to maintain power. That’s the influence onto my comment on the below. The US could have supported Ukraine while at the same time not push nato, among many less inflammatory courses of possible actions. 

..

“Dem actions with Ukraine certainly did not get them their anticipated impact at ballot box. I’ll add that Bidens actions were one step short of the most extreme, direct military contact with another superpower. In the context of the dem bubble this seemed almost reasonable. To everyone else outside, perhaps not so much.”

Voters prioritize their decisions.  Democrats tried to make abortion and Trump the key issues.  Trump made inflation and immigration the key issue.  Your conclusion that somehow the election was a referendum on Ukraine is just not even close to being accurate.  I didn't see one ad during the election about Ukraine.  

BF25394

Lerxst1992 said:

My original point was only that the US had influence in the events that led to Russia's invasion. The “moving needle” part are responses to whataboutisms posted by others. Not only did Harris and Biden and NATO leadership make many comments that could be interpreted as threatening to Russia in 2021 and early 2022, Biden issued three EOs in 2021 threatening Russia. Maybe Russia deserved it, but there are various ways to avoid bloodshed. And the Biden administration picked its choice.

It was "threatening to Russia" that Ukraine, a sovereign country, sought to join a defensive alliance, and that we supported their inclusion in that alliance? This is so twisted. Is it your position that we should be intimidated by a bully and kowtow to his vision of history?

BF25394

Halifax2TheMax said:

Has NATO ever invaded a sovereign country?

Yes. Afghanistan, in 2001, in response to the September 11 attacks on the U.S.

BF25394

Lerxst1992 said:

Most Americans in polling, yes, supported these actions, but unfortunately trump was able to win the Russia argument with voters. IIRC well over half of republican voters supported the invasion, but almost zero republicans and independents voted in that manner. 

************************

Elections are multifactorial. The plurality-- not majority-- of votes that Trump received were cast by voters based on a wide variety of priorities. Very few voters in exit polls listed Ukraine as a primary reason for why they voted the way they did. And, again, even if every Trump voter opted for him because of his stance on Ukraine, more people didn't vote for Trump than voted for him.

Halifax2TheMax

BF25394 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Has NATO ever invaded a sovereign country?

Yes. Afghanistan, in 2001, in response to the September 11 attacks on the U.S.

Let me rephrase, has NATO ever invaded a sovereign nation “just because”, for shit and giggles or for grabbing coveted resources or for another strategic purpose?

Some posters don’t understand NATO’s purpose nor organizational structure.

Lerxst1992

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

dignin said:

Lerxst1992 said:

BF25394 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

War over yet? Weren’t we told Putin on the ritz was ready for a ceasefire because COOTWH was leading and happy days are here again? I’m confused because the peace president is bombing places.

Something that I heard repeated during the campaign, from both everyday voters and from at least one billionaire professional investor who backed Trump, was that, when Trump was president the first time, "there were no wars." One might generously allow that they meant that the U.S. was not involved in any wars but, of course, the U.S. was at war in Afghanistan for the entire length of Trump's first term (a war that ended under Biden, not Trump). This is not to mention the fact that the U.S. was involved militarily in Syria, Iran and various other countries from 2017 to 2021. This talking point was further detached from reality by the facts that there were numerous other wars going on around the world during that period, including in Yemen and Congo, to name two.

He may have been referring to wars either started or significantly influenced by the USA, for which Ukraine unfortunately qualifies.

Ukraine unfortunately qualifies?

How so?

Kamala Harris 2022 before russia invasion :  "The United States stands firmly with the Ukrainian people in defense of the NATO alliance."

Are you being serious with this statement?

First, she said this in March of 2022, AFTER the invasion started.  Get your facts right when you're making declarations.   https://www.axios.com/2022/03/12/kamala-harris-unity-russian-invasion-ukraine

Second, let's play in your make-believe world where this statement came before the invasion.  You think had she not said this, Putin would not have invaded?  Is this a joke post?  Did someone steal your account?

Feb 20 2022

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Let me start by saying I appreciate and admire President Zelenskyy's desire to join NATO. And one of, again, the founding principles of NATO is that each country must have the ability -- unimpaired, unimpeded -- to determine their own future, both in terms of their form of government and, in this case, whether they desire to be a member of NATO.

That is not the quote you referenced.  Get your facts right.  Your point is absurd anyways.  Do you know what was happening in 2014 during the Crimean invasion?  The Ukraine gov't was unstable because they overthrew their corrupt leader Yanukoyvich.  The country was transitioning to a western oriented democracy and were unable to muster a defense of Crimea and Putin took advantage of it.  Sure, it's Harris's fault that Russia, which had been threatening its neighbors and had already conducted brutal military campaigns in Georgia and Chechnya, attacked Ukraine.  A country that Russia has long believed belongs to them.  It's our fault.  WTF happened to you?

The intital tweet posted by Harris was made, edited and removed several times. Her comments to reporters posted above were four days before the Russian invasion, and since she spoke openly to reporters she was unable to retract.

The US did not have significant influence in Putins decision to invade? The Biden administration and nato leadership did not make it clear they welcomed Ukraine into nato for many years? The US did not have a role in the removal of Yanukoyvich?

Again, I disagree with Putins aggression. However my only point here is the US had a big influence in how the 2022 invasion transpired.

that's really sweet that you 'disagree' with Putin's war crimes and killing of innocent Ukrainians.  That's great comfort to everyone that you find it disagreeable.  It's good to see your moral compass so aligned.  But now you are moving the needle to "HOW the 2022 invasion transpired", ignoring the Crimean invasion and arming of separatists across the Eastern oblasts for the last decade.  

Certainly fear of NATO has some effect, but that's window dressing to Putin's long-term strategy.  If you ever really studied Rus history and the relationship between Ukrainians and Russians, you would know that this has been a looming threat as Ukraine has been oppressed by Russians for hundreds of years.  Holodomor.  

Next, let's talk about how the US freezing of Japanese assets in 1940 was the cause of Pearl Harbor and that the Pacific Theater was our fault.  That has more credibility than you quoting Harris from February, after Crimea, after the buildup of forces on the border.  

My original point was only that the US had influence in the events that led to Russia's invasion. The “moving needle” part are responses to whataboutisms posted by others. Not only did Harris and Biden and NATO leadership make many comments that could be interpreted as threatening to Russia in 2021 and early 2022, Biden issued three EOs in 2021 threatening Russia. Maybe Russia deserved it, but there are various ways to avoid bloodshed. And the Biden administration picked its choice.

So Ukraine says they would like to join NATO and you think the right position would have been to publicly refuse to allow them to do so, rather than keep the door open.  And you think that would have stopped Putin from invading?  If this is your perspective, you are as naive as Trump.  

Choosing that course of action, as much as I’d love the result, believing that could provoke a Russian invasion, would temper my belief of right and wrong. There’s good reason not even Biden went that far.

If it is I who is naive, and the author of whataboutisms, as much as I disagree with their aggressions, are Russia and Chinas desire for territory for protection of its respective homelands all that different to US actions that achieved that result over the past several decades?

My point is, dem communication to the public and media, is very one sided. So much so we lose general elections that we should win. Dems repeatedly are unable to identify the issues that will shape an election, and when they are identified for them, have no idea how to argue them successfully .

Because when we exist in our echo chamber, it only takes a tiny little fact to make us look like the purveyors of fake news. Obviously I don’t fully agree with that, but trump has been able to prove it true many times.

So now you think D lost the election because of Ukraine support?  

Dem actions with Ukraine certainly did not get them their anticipated impact at ballot box. I’ll add that Bidens actions were one step short of the most extreme, direct military contact with another superpower. In the context of the dem bubble this seemed almost reasonable. To everyone else outside, perhaps not so much.

Your comments grow more repulsive with each one you make. Now you are saying the reason Democrats support Ukraine was for the political benefit.  Fucking disgusting.  Can you explain why those in the Democratic bubble at the National Review, AEI, Bulwark, and half of the GOP caucus supported Biden's actions?  

No that is not what I said. I said bidens moves were one step short from the most extreme possible, direct military confrontation with another superpower. And political actions have impact with voters. 

You keep saying crazy shit and then trying to back away from it.  You get your quotes wrong.  You blame the US for the invasion of 2022, ignoring the other invasions.  Then say that isn't what you're doing.  You say our support for Ukraine is a D bubble even though the majority of Americans support Ukraine, including half of the GOP.  Then you act like you didn't. 

There was a time that I had respect for your opinion.  That time is gone.  

I’ll repost the “offensive comment” here. I am saying actions have anticipated impacts and that 2022 action was about as extreme as possible (short of direct military conflict with another superpower). The point of the comment was to categorize the action as bold and extreme when dealing with a superpower. I am not blaming the US for the invasion, but I have repeatedly said US actions had significant impact in how Russia acted. I think those are clearly two different things, perhaps that is not correct thinking.

Most Americans in polling, yes, supported these actions, but unfortunately trump was able to win the Russia argument with voters. IIRC well over half of republican voters supported the invasion, but almost zero republicans and independents voted in that manner. 

Politicians need to win arguments in order to maintain power. That’s the influence onto my comment on the below. The US could have supported Ukraine while at the same time not push nato, among many less inflammatory courses of possible actions. 

..

“Dem actions with Ukraine certainly did not get them their anticipated impact at ballot box. I’ll add that Bidens actions were one step short of the most extreme, direct military contact with another superpower. In the context of the dem bubble this seemed almost reasonable. To everyone else outside, perhaps not so much.”

Voters prioritize their decisions.  Democrats tried to make abortion and Trump the key issues.  Trump made inflation and immigration the key issue.  Your conclusion that somehow the election was a referendum on Ukraine is just not even close to being accurate.  I didn't see one ad during the election about Ukraine.  

Didn’t say it was a referendum. I did imply it didn’t resonate with voters as a key issue. If it were me, I would have supported Ukraine while trying to assure Putin that nato was not expanding to his border. Would have told nato to tread easy publicly on this topic. Just one persons opinion, that’s all.

mickeyrat

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c7782kgj8r4o

mrussel1

This is an extortion document.  It's disgraceful by the US.  Ukraine has to choose to be a vassal state of the US or Russia.  The only good news is that a president who isn't a dick could kill this in three years.  

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/03/27/revealed-trump-plan-force-ukraine-restore-putin-gas-empire/

mrussel1

The question is whether this is a treaty that needs to be ratified by the Senate or is it under the full sphere of the executive branch.  

Halifax2TheMax

War over yet? Maybe JD Byryder and his wife can convince Greenland to put an end to it. Speaking of which, why are they allowing them to visit? Should just say, “sorry, we’re closed.”

mrussel1

Halifax2TheMax said:

War over yet? Maybe JD Byryder and his wife can convince Greenland to put an end to it. Speaking of which, why are they allowing them to visit? Should just say, “sorry, we’re closed.”

We do have a base there.  It's common for visits. 

Halifax2TheMax

mrussel1 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

War over yet? Maybe JD Byryder and his wife can convince Greenland to put an end to it. Speaking of which, why are they allowing them to visit? Should just say, “sorry, we’re closed.”

We do have a base there.  It's common for visits. 

They should be restricted to it.