i've re-considered the entire Ukraine case.. enter *your* opinions please..

[toomuchtime_]

NATO charter requires settlement of territorial desputes.

Territorial dispute is between Ukraine and Russia who holds control of Crimea , and also DNR/LNR.

We've allowed for scenario where Ukraine signs an agreement to let Russia take over Crimea in exchange for withdrawal from DNR/LNR. In this scenario Ukraine settles it's territorial integrity issues and assuming acceptance of some reforms will be admitted into NATO.

Any agreement that would preclude Ukraine joining NATO, just as other ex-USSR states have joined NATO, is a NON STARTER and would never be agreed to by Ukraine.

No reason Estonia and Litva can join NATO, but Ukraine can't.

You are being unrealistic. There is no reason to think having NATO next door would suddenly become acceptable to Russia or that bringing Ukraine into NATO would suddenly become acceptable to the European countries that have refused to allow Ukraine to join for the last 14 years or that European countries would want to send their soldiers into war with Russia and make their cities targets for Russian bombs.

It is highly doubtful that Russia would agree to any deal that would allow NATO in Ukraine or that all 30 NATO countries would agree to put their soldiers and cities at risk to save Ukraine. Right now Ukraine serves as a buffer state between NATO and Russia and only Ukrainian soldiers and cities are at risk and that is the way the Europeans want it to stay.

 

[AntonToo]

You are being unrealistic. There is no reason to think having NATO next door would suddenly become acceptable to Russia or that bringing Ukraine into NATO would suddenly become acceptable to the European countries that have refused to allow Ukraine to join for the last 14 years or that European countries would want to send their soldiers into war with Russia and make their cities targets for Russian bombs.

It is highly doubtful that Russia would agree to any deal that would allow NATO in Ukraine or that all 30 NATO countries would agree to put their soldiers and cities at risk to save Ukraine. Right now Ukraine serves as a buffer state between NATO and Russia and only Ukrainian soldiers and cities are at risk and that is the way the Europeans want it to stay.

What do you mean "suddenly acceptable"?

There are TODAY 3 NATO countries on Russian border. This is before Sweden and Finland joining shortly.

Their membership has been accepted just fine and so will Ukraine's, it's nothing but yet another Russian excuse to reject Ukranian sovereignty.

 

[toomuchtime_]

What do you mean "suddenly acceptable"?

There are TODAY 3 NATO countries on Russian border. This is before Sweden and Finland joining shortly.

Their membership has been accepted just fine and so will Ukraine's, it's nothing but yet another Russian excuse to reject Ukranian sovereignty.

Exactly, Russia will not accept Ukrainian sovereignty until Russia has been soundly beaten in Ukraine and its economy has been so badly damaged it cannot afford to wage war. At that point, there is no reason for Ukraine to give up Crimea. Btw, Ukraine giving up its claim to Crimea to make a deal with Putin is the exact same deal Trump has been urging.

 

[ESay]

Okay. That explains everything.

Thanks for playing.

Not sure what 'playing' means in this context, but you are welcome.

 

[gipper]

What do you mean "suddenly acceptable"?

There are TODAY 3 NATO countries on Russian border. This is before Sweden and Finland joining shortly.

Their membership has been accepted just fine and so will Ukraine's, it's nothing but yet another Russian excuse to reject Ukranian sovereignty.

Dissolve NATO. There is no need for it. The USSR died long ago. Of course, the war profiteers love NATO. So it will continue and cause more death and destruction.

 

[georgephillip]

The government has lied to me many times in my life.

Like Biden saying the other day that more government spending for stupid things will stop inflation. Remember when The Worthless Negro said that increased taxes are good for the economy? How about when he said it was a good thing to bomb Libyan civilians? Remember when Slick Willy said he didn't have sex with that Lewinsky woman? How about when The FBI Director said that Crooked Hillary was innocent because she had "no intent"?

The biggest lie from the government was when the 2020 stolen election was certified by traitors to the Republic.

The Russians have been assholes my entire life and I was born when Harry Truman was President. They are being world class assholes now in Ukraine just like they have been other places in the world and I hope they get their asses kicked.



If you want the goddamn Russians to win then you can kiss my Cracker ass.

Did you vote for this liar?

 

[AntonToo]

Dissolve NATO. There is no need for it. The USSR died long ago. Of course, the war profiteers love NATO. So it will continue and cause more death and destruction.

Isn't it funny how you sound exactly like Kremlin shills?

USSR died long ago, Russians invading their neighbors is alive and well. DUH

 

[gipper]

Isn't it funny how you sound exactly like Kremlin shills?

USSR died long ago, Russians invading their neighbors is alive and well. DUH

No. I sound like a sane logical person, which is why you dislike my opinions.

The US has invaded nations all over the world, some thousands of miles away and some very close to the homeland. Why do you hate the US?

 

[georgephillip]

"Eastern Europe’s largest country is profoundly unstable.

"Ukraine has been in a state of stress ever since it gained independence in 1991 due to multiple handicaps: its location in a contested borderland; its severe ethnic and cultural cleavages; and its lack of any prior experience of either statehood, democracy or free markets.

"For ordinary people, the conditions of life are woeful.

"Since Ukraine left the Soviet Union, real GDP per capita has fallen by a fifth, there are few economic opportunities and 60% of the population lives in poverty.

"This has created an environment of permanent unresolved grievance which occasionally flares up into violence."

State Failure in Ukraine

In 2014 the US took advantage of unresolved grievances between a broad reformist citizenry centered largely in western Ukraine demanding closer ties with Europe and a more conservative constituency in the east and south which hoped to restore close trading relations with Russia.

Eight years later the only questions remaining are how long can the West keep the Ukrainian Army in the field and at what cost? Since Russian victory is a certainty, the West should stop feeding Ukraine's suicidal fantasy of rearming itself to victory.

Scott Ritter: The Fantasy of Fanaticism

 

[AntonToo]

No. I sound like a sane logical person, which is why you dislike my opinions.

The US has invaded

People making "Sane and logical" arguments don't play what-aboutism games, they DIRECTLY address what they quote.

You said there is no reason for NATO.

I explained to you that there is in fact a very clear reason - continued Russian invasions and threat that requires deterance via a defensive alliance. How many NATO countries did Russians invade? Zero.

Instead of refuting that NATO's mission is still very much relavant, you switch gears and try to steer conversation into what America has done. "Sane and logical" it is not.

 

[toomuchtime_]

"Eastern Europe’s largest country is profoundly unstable.

"Ukraine has been in a state of stress ever since it gained independence in 1991 due to multiple handicaps: its location in a contested borderland; its severe ethnic and cultural cleavages; and its lack of any prior experience of either statehood, democracy or free markets.

"For ordinary people, the conditions of life are woeful.

"Since Ukraine left the Soviet Union, real GDP per capita has fallen by a fifth, there are few economic opportunities and 60% of the population lives in poverty.

"This has created an environment of permanent unresolved grievance which occasionally flares up into violence."

State Failure in Ukraine

In 2014 the US took advantage of unresolved grievances between a broad reformist citizenry centered largely in western Ukraine demanding closer ties with Europe and a more conservative constituency in the east and south which hoped to restore close trading relations with Russia.

Eight years later the only questions remaining are how long can the West keep the Ukrainian Army in the field and at what cost? Since Russian victory is a certainty, the West should stop feeding Ukraine's suicidal fantasy of rearming itself to victory.

Scott Ritter: The Fantasy of Fanaticism

All of Ukraine's problems come from one source, Russia's efforts to undermine the institutions of state and to foment violence among various parties in order to try to get control of Ukraine.

There is no rational scenario in which Russia wins in Ukraine. Russia may destroy large parts of Ukraine but with mounting losses of men and materiel and its economy weakened and shrinking because of the sanctions, Russia is also destroying itself.

 

[gipper]

People making "Sane and logical" arguments don't play what-aboutism games, they DIRECTLY address what they quote.

You said there is no reason for NATO.

I explained to you that there is in fact a very clear reason - continued Russian invasions and threat that requires deterance via a defensive alliance. How many NATO countries on it's border did Russians invade? Zero is the right answer.

Instead of refuting that NATO's mission is still very much relavant, you switch gears and try to steer conversation into what America has done. "Sane and logical" it is not.

There are no continued Russian invasions. Why lie? Oh yeah. It’s a. IA thing.

US invasions happen all the time and you love them. Why not Russian invasions?

Hey Ton, did you hear old Joe bombed Syria? Yeah thought so. Third potus in a row to bomb there. No doubt you love it.
U.S. launches airstrikes in Syria against Iran-backed groups

 

[AntonToo]

There are no continued Russian invasions. Why lie?

...you say that on day 188 of full on Russian invasion of Ukraine.

That is REALLY not "sane and logical", and in fact begs the question: What the fuck is wrong with you?

 

[gipper]

...you say that on day 188 of full on Russian invasion of Ukraine.

That is REALLY not "sane and logical", and in fact begs the question: What the fuck is wrong with you?

Yes we know you know nothing but what the establishment tells you. Russia invaded. The USG invades all the time. They just bombed Syria again. Can you believe it? Oh the humanity!!!

When are you going to demand they stop?

 

[AntonToo]

There are no continued Russian invasions. Why lie?

Russia invaded.

Does that look "sane and logical" to you Gipper?

You can't seem to put togather any coherent, direct refutes. You keep posting contradictory, insane nonsense, so what is it that makes you think you are "sane and logical"? Seems to be just a forgone conclusion your ego has about yourself. I don't think you are sane or logical.

 

[georgephillip]

All of Ukraine's problems come from one source, Russia's efforts to undermine the institutions of state and to foment violence among various parties in order to try to get control of Ukraine.

There is no rational scenario in which Russia wins in Ukraine. Russia may destroy large parts of Ukraine but with mounting losses of men and materiel and its economy weakened and shrinking because of the sanctions, Russia is also destroying itself.

All of Ukraine's problems come from the same source as all of Iraq's, Syria's, Libya's, and Afghanistan's problems; an arrogant, fading militaristic empire which knows its best days are long gone.

Don't want to believe it?

Just ask Victoria:

Ukraine crisis: Transcript of leaked Nuland-Pyatt call

 

[gipper]

All of Ukraine's problems come from the same source as all of Iraq's, Syria's, Libya's, and Afghanistan's problems; an arrogant, fading militaristic empire which knows its best days are long gone.

Don't want to believe it?

Just ask Victoria:

Ukraine crisis: Transcript of leaked Nuland-Pyatt call

Yes the empire’s days are numbered and it knows it. This might mean it’s at its most dangerous. It just might decide to instigate a big war in the hopes of saving itself.

 

[gipper]

Does that look "sane and logical" to you Gipper?

You can't seem to put togather any coherent, direct refutes. You keep posting contradictory, insane nonsense, so what is it that makes you think you are "sane and logical"? Seems to be just a forgone conclusion your ego has about yourself. I don't think you are sane or logical.

Answer the question. Why do you support the USG’s constant wars, but disapprove of Russia’s war on its border?

 

[AntonToo]

Answer the question. Why do you support the USG’s constant wars, but disapprove of Russia’s war on its border?

Not sure what exactly you mean by "USG", but I, like many others opposed some wars Americans were involved in.

I do belive some wars are justified, others, like this Russian invasion and annexation of Ukrainian land are acts of atrocity.

That does not in any shape or form refute NATO's mission.

 

[toomuchtime_]

All of Ukraine's problems come from the same source as all of Iraq's, Syria's, Libya's, and Afghanistan's problems; an arrogant, fading militaristic empire which knows its best days are long gone.

Don't want to believe it?

Just ask Victoria:

Ukraine crisis: Transcript of leaked Nuland-Pyatt call

All of Ukraine's problems come from the same source as all of Iraq's, Syria's, Libya's, and Afghanistan's problems; an arrogant, fading militaristic empire which knows its best days are long gone.

Don't want to believe it?

Just ask Victoria:

Ukraine crisis: Transcript of leaked Nuland-Pyatt call

Are you trying to sound stupid or does it just come naturally to you? The US wanted to see a free, independent Ukraine and the EU wanted to sell out Ukraine for cheap Russian gas and oil. The EU won and joined forces with Russia to strong arm Ukraine into signing the Minsk agreement and that's what emboldened Putin to invade again. What are you? Some kind of Russian imperialist?