Isn't now the time for US to stop supporting Ukraine to end the conflict?

[sparky]

Since late 1949, the CIA has been using Ukraine as a blunt object to break apart the USSR and now the Russian Federation.

Operation Red Sox was the first covert mission of the Cold War, and it failed spectacularly; however, similar provocations over the next 40 years resulted in the demise of the Soviet Union.

As soon as the USSR collapsed, some Americans immediately began planning the same end for the Russian Federation; that appears to be why Ukrainians today are being told to shed their last drop of blood for regime change in Moscow.

https://www.politico.com/news/magaz...on-ukrainian-independence-haunts-cia-00029968

"Of the 85 agents who the CIA dropped into Soviet-controlled territory, it is believed that some three-quarters of them were almost immediately captured and tortured or killed outright.

"And their handlers, undone by a combination of hubris and Soviet misinformation, took years to catch on, sending agent after agent to their death along the Soviet Union’s western reaches."

Good one George

albeit we will never see such commentary in mainstream media

and folks hand me a tin hat when i claim there are sorts (deep state) with agenda's

~S~

 

[Kondor3]

Forget the Cold War. Islam Is Our Enemy Now.

Islam has been the enemy of Christendom since the 7th century AD...

It's just that they've been dormant for a few generations so The West isn't thinking Reality in that regard any longer...

But militant Islam in all its variations is reawakening and will be back to plaguing Mankind again soon enough...

Meanwhile, we have the start of a NEW Cold War on our hands, so we're gonna have to start multitasking again...

 

[sparky]

Islam has been the enemy of Christendom since the 7th century AD...

It's just that they've been dormant for a few generations so The West isn't thinking Reality in that regard any longer...

But militant Islam in all its variations is reawakening and will be back to plaguing Mankind again soon enough...

Meanwhile, we have the start of a NEW Cold War on our hands, so we're gonna have to start multitasking again...

So is Islam Russia's ally now Kondor?


~S~

 

[busybee01]

The war in Ukraine has begun three years ago, and we have been sending Ukrainians all the necessary support ever since. But the war is not over. Now it's become a slaughter where people from different countries get killed. With that, Ukraine goes on losing it's territory. I think, given the circumstances, the US has to admit that this conflict doesn't bring us any significant benefits and leads to a waste of it's weapons.

I've just watched an interview with prof. Mearsheimer who studies international relations. Having no illusions, he explained in detail why there's only one way Ukraine can end this conflict – by becoming a neutral state and refusing the idea of joining NATO. Moreover, according to him, it's neutrality must be permanent. If it doesn't happen, the war won't end, and the West's shipment of arms only encourages this scenario. I actually agree with Mearsheimer because we can supply our weaponry to Ukraine but it surely doesn't end the conflict. The only option for the US is to stop supplying the arms and steer Ukraine towards a diplomatic solution.

Also, the US is said to have something to lose, which is not true. The American Conversative (U.S.-Ukraine Security Entanglement Risks Forever War) did research on the subject. First, the shipment of arms to Ukraine earns the US nothing wasting it's resources. Second, helping Taiwan now is a priority as it has many semiconductor and IC plants. If China takes over Taiwan, the US economy, unlike Ukraine's, will suffer huge losses. Third, Ukraine's neutrality doesn't mean it's lack of independence. For example, Finland once became neutral and now is a rich and developed state. Fourth, it doesn't change the US security as we are separated from Russia by an ocean and multiple allies.

We have to think what we really want for Ukraine: endless massacre or peace? If we are to really help them, then we must encourage it's peace negotiations with Russia and use our leverage to reach a better agreement.

View attachment 956264

We should continue to send them whatever they need to kill Russian troops. Putin has made it clear that this does not end in Ukraine. They want to recreate the Soviet Union. You are either a treasonous traitor or a fool.

 

[Kondor3]

So is Islam Russia's ally now Kondor?


~S~

Islam is friend to no one but Islam... I have no idea how you managed to intertwine all that based upon what I said...

 

[georgephillip]

Good one George

albeit we will never see such commentary in mainstream media

and folks hand me a tin hat when i claim there are sorts (deep state) with agenda's

~S~

MSM is also negligent about revealing Zelensky's current lack of legitimacy since his presidential term has expired, and when corporate shills do mention that lack of democracy, they lie:

Ukraine's Zelensky stays in power despite term expiring

"While his approval ratings have inevitably waned, Volodymyr Zelensky has been able to use his enduring appeal, along with a desire for stability, to extend his term in office.

"In peacetime it would have expired, and an election would have been called. But the martial law brought in with Russia’s full-scale invasion means that can’t happen, and there’s broad public support for that too.

"'For the Ukrainians, the priority is to win the war and then have an election,' explains Anton Hrushetskyi, the head of Kyiv’s International Institute of Sociology.

"'Therefore, they don’t question the legitimacy of Zelensky.'"

Elections across the vast majority of Ukraine today would be no less possible than those that occurred in Iraq and Afghanistan during America's "full scale" invasions.

Iraq election: Purple fingers, but hard work ahead

 

[sparky]

Islam is friend to no one but Islam... I have no idea how you managed to intertwine all that based upon what I said...

because our last 'cold war' was all about allies and adversaries Kondor

~S~

 

[konradv]

The war in Ukraine has begun three years ago, and we have been sending Ukrainians all the necessary support ever since. But the war is not over. Now it's become a slaughter where people from different countries get killed. With that, Ukraine goes on losing it's territory. I think, given the circumstances, the US has to admit that this conflict doesn't bring us any significant benefits and leads to a waste of it's weapons.

I've just watched an interview with prof. Mearsheimer who studies international relations. Having no illusions, he explained in detail why there's only one way Ukraine can end this conflict – by becoming a neutral state and refusing the idea of joining NATO. Moreover, according to him, it's neutrality must be permanent. If it doesn't happen, the war won't end, and the West's shipment of arms only encourages this scenario. I actually agree with Mearsheimer because we can supply our weaponry to Ukraine but it surely doesn't end the conflict. The only option for the US is to stop supplying the arms and steer Ukraine towards a diplomatic solution.

Also, the US is said to have something to lose, which is not true. The American Conversative (U.S.-Ukraine Security Entanglement Risks Forever War) did research on the subject. First, the shipment of arms to Ukraine earns the US nothing wasting it's resources. Second, helping Taiwan now is a priority as it has many semiconductor and IC plants. If China takes over Taiwan, the US economy, unlike Ukraine's, will suffer huge losses. Third, Ukraine's neutrality doesn't mean it's lack of independence. For example, Finland once became neutral and now is a rich and developed state. Fourth, it doesn't change the US security as we are separated from Russia by an ocean and multiple allies.

We have to think what we really want for Ukraine: endless massacre or peace? If we are to really help them, then we must encourage it's peace negotiations with Russia and use our leverage to reach a better agreement.

View attachment 956264

Stop spreading Ruzzian propaganda.

#FREEUKRAINE

 

[sparky]

#FREEUKRAINE

Free it from what Konradv?

~S~

 

[konradv]

Free it from what Konradv?

~S~

RUZZIARUZZIARUZZIA

#DUH

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I know, but millions of ethnic Germans were deported from countries in Eastern Europe
after WWII. It's not like Russia has no room.

You think the Russian ethnics in Dombas should be relocated?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Fuck the Russians as well as any Americans who support them.

They paid the Bidens millions for their support

 

[Kondor3]

because our last 'cold war' was all about allies and adversaries Kondor

~S~

In a world of high-speed transport and instantaneous communication and global reach of weaponry...

Adversaries not only exist but are vastly more dangerous and likely to strike than ever before in the history of Mankind...

Consequently, alliances are more important than ever before... the days of Safe Isolationism are long, long gone...

Our two-ocean buffer and our military strength position us well but we are by no means invulnerable...

Allies strengthen us with partnerships and proxies and forward operating venues and buffers and early warning capabilities.

We are far stronger with alliances than without so long as we choose our allies intelligently and interact well with them.

 

[kyzr]

IMHO admitting Ukraine into NATO would be the cheapest, fastest, and safest way to end the war.

Ukraine would need to give up territory to Russia as part of the deal, so Putin can "save face".

Say the 2014 lines and Crimea to Russia for peace?

 

[martybegan]

The war in Ukraine has begun three years ago, and we have been sending Ukrainians all the necessary support ever since. But the war is not over. Now it's become a slaughter where people from different countries get killed. With that, Ukraine goes on losing it's territory. I think, given the circumstances, the US has to admit that this conflict doesn't bring us any significant benefits and leads to a waste of it's weapons.

I've just watched an interview with prof. Mearsheimer who studies international relations. Having no illusions, he explained in detail why there's only one way Ukraine can end this conflict – by becoming a neutral state and refusing the idea of joining NATO. Moreover, according to him, it's neutrality must be permanent. If it doesn't happen, the war won't end, and the West's shipment of arms only encourages this scenario. I actually agree with Mearsheimer because we can supply our weaponry to Ukraine but it surely doesn't end the conflict. The only option for the US is to stop supplying the arms and steer Ukraine towards a diplomatic solution.

Also, the US is said to have something to lose, which is not true. The American Conversative (U.S.-Ukraine Security Entanglement Risks Forever War) did research on the subject. First, the shipment of arms to Ukraine earns the US nothing wasting it's resources. Second, helping Taiwan now is a priority as it has many semiconductor and IC plants. If China takes over Taiwan, the US economy, unlike Ukraine's, will suffer huge losses. Third, Ukraine's neutrality doesn't mean it's lack of independence. For example, Finland once became neutral and now is a rich and developed state. Fourth, it doesn't change the US security as we are separated from Russia by an ocean and multiple allies.

We have to think what we really want for Ukraine: endless massacre or peace? If we are to really help them, then we must encourage it's peace negotiations with Russia and use our leverage to reach a better agreement.

View attachment 956264

No. We contributed to it, we need to keep them supplied until some sort of armistice can be setup.

Just dropping support for them would be bad, and reflect badly on us.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You think the Russian ethnics in Dombas should be relocated?

Better than them being used as an excuse to invade Ukraine and the rest of Russia's neighbors.
Putin can build them nice houses with the money he was going to use to invade neighbors.

WIN-WIN!!!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

IMHO admitting Ukraine into NATO would be the cheapest, fastest, and safest way to end the war.

Awful idea!
NATO is best at stopping Russia from invading NATO.
Just say no.

 

[kyzr]

No. We contributed to it, we need to keep them supplied until some sort of armistice can be setup.

Just dropping support for them would be bad, and reflect badly on us.

Actually its worse than that, the US and NATO countries signed an agreement guaranteeing Ukraine's security.

We got Ukraine to give up its nukes by guaranteeing their security via the "Budapest Memorandum".

The Budapest Memorandum and U.S. Obligations | Brookings

On the twentieth anniversary of the signing of the Budapest Memorandum, Steven Pifer, one of the negotiators of that document, writes that it is time for the Unites States to make good on the security assurances it made to Ukraine. Doing so could prevent future nuclear proliferation.

www.brookings.edu

December 5 marks the 20th anniversary of the signing of the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances for Ukraine. Russia has grossly violated the commitments it made in that document. That imposes an obligation on Washington to support Ukraine and push back against Russia. This is not just a matter of living up to U.S. obligations. It is also about preserving the credibility of security assurances, which could contribute to preventing nuclear proliferation in the future.

 

[kyzr]

Awful idea!
NATO is best at stopping Russia from invading NATO.
Just say no.

That doesn't change anything, so keep throwing money at Ukraine?

 

[martybegan]

Actually its worse than that, the US and NATO countries signed an agreement guaranteeing Ukraine's security.

We got Ukraine to give up its nukes by guaranteeing their security via the "Budapest Memorandum".

The Budapest Memorandum and U.S. Obligations | Brookings

On the twentieth anniversary of the signing of the Budapest Memorandum, Steven Pifer, one of the negotiators of that document, writes that it is time for the Unites States to make good on the security assurances it made to Ukraine. Doing so could prevent future nuclear proliferation.

www.brookings.edu

December 5 marks the 20th anniversary of the signing of the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances for Ukraine. Russia has grossly violated the commitments it made in that document. That imposes an obligation on Washington to support Ukraine and push back against Russia. This is not just a matter of living up to U.S. obligations. It is also about preserving the credibility of security assurances, which could contribute to preventing nuclear proliferation in the future.

One could say we already violated the agreement as we are just feeding them arms, and not actively helping them repel Russian aggression.