If Ukraine loses the war and Russia occupies Ukraine, the US and Europe may not have a choice, but to go to war

[Tom Paine 1949]

and your "50%" is just another lie in your
long, long history of lying on this board.

TOOMUCHTIME
​

You and Tom Payne have more in common than one might think at first glance so maybe you should stop trying "to rip each other a new one" as Alexander said in a previous post.

Your constant referrences to "Ukraine this", "Ukraine that", clearly shows that you confuse the country that exists outside your heads, that for 30 years and counting, was utterly unable to come to an agreement about its place in Europe (a rift so profound that ended up destroying the ukrainian democracy and territorial integrity themselves) with the part of the ukrainian society that currently controls the federal government in Kiev and has been trying to impose its vision for Ukraine on the rest of the country for the entire existence of Ukraine as an independent state.

I know it's extremely painful for people in the West to abandon the idealized view of a united democratic nation fighting for its survival against the totalitarian hordes of autocratic Russia, it's hard to give up the simplistic notion of a unequivocal fight between "Good vs Evil" but the fact remains that what they call "Ukraine" is nothing but a self-serving figment of their own imagination.

I wish if you have something to say to me you would be more direct and less cryptic. Whatever you are trying to say, I think I have been clear that “The Ukraine” of the past for better or worse, is gone. That “borderland” and deeply Russian-influenced culture is no more, especially after Putin’s invasion.

Perhaps you think the Russians should retake Kiev?

As much as I would have preferred to see Ukraine evolve into a healthy, neutral, multinational country, hard Ukrainian nationalism has become much stronger and essentially won supremacy, probably for generations. One might as well expect the return of hundreds of thousands of Jews to Odessa, or Moslem Tatars to retake Crimea, as to expect a return to the days you describe. The scars of this bloody war will last for generations. But I confess I’m not exactly sure what you are hoping for, or saying.

 

[toomuchtime_]

It is a violation of the free sea trade, outside American territorial waters. And, technically, it was an act of war. But, of course, that act of the war was justified by the vital necessarity of the national safety of the USA, same way, as the Russian operation in Ukraine is justified by the existencial threat from possible deployment of American missiles in Ukraine.

So we are agreed that there was no blockade, good. There is no similarity between what happened in Cuba and Russian depredations in Ukraine. There have never been any nuclear missiles in any former soviet state, and there is no rational basis for thinking there might ever be.

The fact is that by virtue of its nuclear arsenal, NATO does have to potential to destroy most of Russia, just as Russia has the same potential to destroy much of Europe and the US and there would be no point in putting nuclear missiles in Ukraine because it would not affect the outcome of a nuclear exchange between NATO and Russia.

Russia has broken all nuclear treaties by moving its intermediate range nuclear missile west in a foolish effort to try to frighten the civilized world into abandoning Ukraine, but if a nuclear exchange were to take place, repositioning these missiles would not have an effect on the outcome.

The whole world already understands that what we are seeing in Ukraine is rampant Russian imperialism, and these preposterous claims Putin and his Putinheads are making about threats to Russian security are nonsense.

 

[Silver Cat]

So we are agreed that there was no blockade, good.

No. Even Wikipedia doesn't agree with you.

There is no similarity between what happened in Cuba and Russian depredations in Ukraine. There have never been any nuclear missiles in any former soviet state, and there is no rational basis for thinking there might ever be.

The fact is that by virtue of its nuclear arsenal, NATO does have to potential to destroy most of Russia, just as Russia has the same potential to destroy much of Europe and the US and there would be no point in putting nuclear missiles in Ukraine because it would not affect the outcome of a nuclear exchange between NATO and Russia

Of course it would. As well as the Soviet missiles in Cuba, the medium and intermediate range missiles is the best way to avoid launch under attack and achieve actual first strike capability.

Russia has broken all nuclear treaties by moving its intermediate range nuclear missile west in a foolish effort to try to frighten the civilized world into abandoning Ukraine, but if a nuclear exchange were to take place, repositioning these missiles would not have an effect on the outcome.

Sure, it will. Shorten distance means lesser time for reaction, and better capabilities for the first counter-force strike.

The whole world already understands that what we are seeing in Ukraine is rampant Russian imperialism, and these preposterous claims Putin and his Putinheads are making about threats to Russian security are nonsense.

Man, you mantras about "the whole world" becomes so boring... It's not even the "whole western world", who believes in all that pro-Ukrainian (actually, pro-Biden) nonsense.

 

[toomuchtime_]

I wish if you have something to say to me you would be more direct and less cryptic. Whatever you are trying to say, I think I have been clear that “The Ukraine” of the past for better or worse, is gone. That “borderland” and deeply Russian-influenced culture is no more, especially after Putin’s invasion.

Perhaps you think the Russians should retake Kiev?

As much as I would have preferred to see Ukraine evolve into a healthy, neutral, multinational country, hard Ukrainian nationalism has become much stronger and essentially won supremacy, probably for generations. One might as well expect the return of hundreds of thousands of Jews to Odessa, or Moslem Tatars to retake Crimea, as to expect a return to the days you describe. The scars of this bloody war will last for generations. But I confess I’m not exactly sure what you are hoping for, or saying.

I have been very direct, Putinhead, in exposing you as a fraud, and that's why you are so angry.

There is no borderland, Putinhead, just Ukraine and Russia next to it, and their borders are well defined and recognized by the whole world, including by Russia post 1991 in various treaties and contracts until Putin decided to play Peter the Great and expand Russia's borders to the West.

What I expect and what virtually every western military expert expects is that Russia will eventually be driven from Ukraine because of its battlefield losses and because of its economic difficulties and because of its shrinking influence in the world.

Everyday this war goes on, Ukraine grows stronger because of the newer and better weapons its allies send to replace its battlefield losses, and everyday Russia grows weaker because it cannot replace its battlefield losses. All the factors favor an Ukrainian victory, Putinhead, but sadly, it will come more slowly than hoped for.

 

[toomuchtime_]

No one said there was a blockade of any Cuban port.

But, you're 100% right, just as you always are right.

Kennedy imposes naval blockade of Cuba , Oct. 22, 1962

On this day in 1962, President John F. Kennedy imposed a U.S. naval blockade of Cuba after U.S. spy planes found Soviet missile sites on the Communist-ruled island.

www.politico.com

Clearly they got it wrong.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

I have been very direct, Putinhead, in exposing you as a fraud, and that's why you are so angry.

There is no borderland, Putinhead, just Ukraine and Russia next to it, and their borders are well defined and recognized by the whole world, including by Russia post 1991 in various treaties and contracts until Putin decided to play Peter the Great and expand Russia's borders to the West.

You are responding to a comment I made to José , genius.

You are also repeating your childish insults.

You are ALSO showing misunderstanding of the real history of Ukraine and even of its name, which I had reason to refer to in my reply to José … given things he had written concerning how most Westerners thought statically and singularly about that country.

For your edification:

“The name of Ukraine … comes from the old Slavic term for 'borderland', as does the word krajina. In the English-speaking world during most of the 20th century, Ukraine (whether independent or not) was referred to as ‘the Ukraine’.”
— Wikipedia

 

[toomuchtime_]

You are responding to a comment I made to José , genius.

You are also repeating your childish insults.

You are ALSO showing misunderstanding of the real history of Ukraine and even of its name, which I had reason to refer to in my reply to José … given things he had written concerning how most Westerners thought statically and singularly about that country.

For your edification:

“The name of Ukraine … comes from the old Slavic term for 'borderland', as does the word krajina. In the English-speaking world during most of the 20th century, Ukraine (whether independent or not) was referred to as ‘the Ukraine’.”
— Wikipedia

Interesting but entirely irrelevant to a discussion of the current conflict or the future prospects of either nation. Whatever Ukraine may have been thought of in the past, today it is a sovereign nation with clearly defined borders recognized by the entire world, including post USSR Russia and which Russia has pledged to never violate, so the problem is not with Ukraine, as Jose suggests, or with the West, which you and Jose suggest, but with Russia's unrealistic imperialist ambitions.

 

[ralfy]

The EU and US trade with everyone but Russia and its trade practices are monitored by the WTO, so you are posting nonsense.

NATO is an obstacle to Russian imperialism, but otherwise it is not a problem for Russia.

The EU trades with Russia via India, and Japan trades with Russia directly.

NATO is an obstacle to the Global South.

 

[ralfy]

You clearly have no idea at all what is going on in the world.

Oh, the irony.

De-Dollarisation Is Happening at a 'Stunning' Pace, Jen Says

The dollar is losing its reserve status at a faster pace than generally accepted as many analysts have failed to account for last year's wild exchange rate moves, according to Stephen Jen. The greenback's share in global reserves slid last year at 10 times the average speed of the past two...

www.tbsnews.net

 

[toomuchtime_]

The EU trades with Russia via India, and Japan trades with Russia directly.

NATO is an obstacle to the Global South.

As is your custom now, you are talking nonsense.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Oh, the irony.

De-Dollarisation Is Happening at a 'Stunning' Pace, Jen Says

The dollar is losing its reserve status at a faster pace than generally accepted as many analysts have failed to account for last year's wild exchange rate moves, according to Stephen Jen. The greenback's share in global reserves slid last year at 10 times the average speed of the past two...

www.tbsnews.net

If you understood the article, you would realize how foolish you have made yourself look, but you are shielded from such a realization by your ignorance and stupidity.

"That said, the dollar's role as an international currency won't be challenged anytime soon as developing countries don't yet have the ability to divest from the greenback for transactions due to its large, liquid and well-functioning financial markets, Jen and Freire wrote."

 

[ralfy]

As is your custom now, you are talking nonsense.

That's only because you don't know that European countries have been buying oil from Russia via India, and Japan directly, and that NATO has been engaged in adventurism in Afghanistan, Syria, and elsewhere, as well as trying to set up shop in Japan.

But why should you know? You're a neocon ignoramus.

 

[ralfy]

If you understood the article, you would realize how foolish you have made yourself look, but you are shielded from such a realization by your ignorance and stupidity.

"That said, the dollar's role as an international currency won't be challenged anytime soon as developing countries don't yet have the ability to divest from the greenback for transactions due to its large, liquid and well-functioning financial markets, Jen and Freire wrote."

Still, the persistence of those conditions "is not preordained" and there may come a time when the rest of the world actively avoids using the dollar, they wrote.

"The prevailing view of 'nothing-to-see-here' on the US dollar as a reserve currency seems too innocuous and complacent," the two wrote. "What needs to be appreciated by investors is that, while the Global South is unable to totally avoid using the dollar, much of it has already become unwilling to do so."

 

[toomuchtime_]

That's only because you don't know that European countries have been buying oil from Russia via India, and Japan directly, and that NATO has been engaged in adventurism in Afghanistan, Syria, and elsewhere, as well as trying to set up shop in Japan.

But why should you know? You're a neocon ignoramus.

Everyone has long known the US and EU have allowed India to import Russian crude and export refined petroleum products to the West without imposing sanctions, and Japan and a few other nations have been exempted from sanctions because abruptly ending oil purchases from Russia would have done too much damage to their economies.

That you think this is news is an example of your own ignorance.

The rest of your post is, as usual, nonsense.

 

[toomuchtime_]

In other words, it's much ado about nothing.

 

[Devils_Advocate]

More Zionist Fascist bullshit.

Y'all have wasted billions $$ on this laundromat of US taxpayer money.

How about we find everyone who got money from Ukraine, put them in front of a firing squad, and off all of them, no trial, total asset forfeiture?

Fine!

But

Pootin also gets a belly full of lead while at it or is he special?

 

[Silver Cat]

Interesting but entirely irrelevant to a discussion of the current conflict or the future prospects of either nation. Whatever Ukraine may have been thought of in the past, today it is a sovereign nation with clearly defined borders recognized by the entire world, including post USSR Russia and which Russia has pledged to never violate, so the problem is not with Ukraine, as Jose suggests, or with the West, which you and Jose suggest, but with Russia's unrealistic imperialist ambitions.

You see, if the present of Ukraine doesn't depend on its past, therefore, the future of Ukraine and its very existence have nothing to do with the Ukrainian present. Lets finish existence of the Kievan regime, lets allow people to decide where do they want to live - in denazificated Ukraine or in Russia, and then let bygones be bygones.

 

[ralfy]

Everyone has long known the US and EU have allowed India to import Russian crude and export refined petroleum products to the West without imposing sanctions, and Japan and a few other nations have been exempted from sanctions because abruptly ending oil purchases from Russia would have done too much damage to their economies.

That you think this is news is an example of your own ignorance.

The rest of your post is, as usual, nonsense.

That was my point! So, it's now both nonsense and known by all.

Next time, think before you post.

 

[EMH]

Fine!

But

Pootin also gets a belly full of lead while at it or is he special?

Zionist Fascism and Ukraine have cost America $$ trillions and thousands of lives.

Putin has nothing like that....

 

[Ringo]

NATO Military Committee Chairman Rob Bauer said that Zelensky's regime will not receive F-16s during the current counteroffensive.
There are tanks - no airplanes. There are airplanes - tanks are out.
NATO is driving the Ukrainians to the slaughter, realizing the futility of their efforts, but not letting them retreat