Russian spy ship docks in Havana during surprise visit to Cuba

[Avatar4321]

Do not be surprised if we are in global conflict by the summer.

Every time we have had a progressive to Obama's caliber in the white house, we have had major wars and conflicts. Russia is eyeing Ukraine and Georgia. They want their Evil Empire back.

But also don't loose hope. It always looks darkest right before the light breaks through. We live in amazing days. We live in the days our forefathers looked to with hope and excitement.

As the darkness darkens, the light will shine brighter. Have faith and hope. We will make it through.

BTW, I wrote this about an hour before I heard that Russia had invaded the Ukraine. I was kind of shocked.

 

[candycorn]

So, that's like saying (Godwin's law shall now be in effect) whatever Hitler was doing to the Jews and Europe, didn't justify the millions of allied deaths and insane spending by FDR in the 1940's.

I'm sure you can agree that it's the President's job to only put US soldiers in harm's way (in such great numbers) when absolutely necessary. You cannot compare then need to send in troops to stop Hitler (at the moment FDR sent in troops) with the need to stop Saddam (at the moment Bush sent our guys into battle). I mean, Hitler was actively conquering Europe and Japan (allied with Hitler) had just attacked Pearl Harbor! I think that’s an unfair comparison you presented.

This merits some consideration. Although, what were we going to do, sit there a moan like a child after being punched by the bully in the schoolyard when something like that happens? Bush wanted to finish his father's work, while also taking down the actual people who committed that heinous act.

9/11 right? Of course I don’t think we should have just sat there and moaned, as I was all for going full force against the terrorist organization that orchestrated these attacks. Afghanistan made sense. But Iraq “because Bush wanted to finish his father’s work”? It was completely dishonest for the government to piggy-back off the 9/11 tragedy as a means to garner support for an Iraq war – ie something that was wholly unrelated.

Hitler was an imminent threat to mankind in 1942. Saddam was not in 2003.

I wonder what the conservatives want Obama to do...go to war over the Ukraine? There are places where the US has influence and there are places where we do not. This has been the case since 1787 and it will be the case forever.

There is no place America cannot fight. The question is should we. I think not just as I thought it with Syria.

 

[Avatar4321]

So, that's like saying (Godwin's law shall now be in effect) whatever Hitler was doing to the Jews and Europe, didn't justify the millions of allied deaths and insane spending by FDR in the 1940's.

I'm sure you can agree that it's the President's job to only put US soldiers in harm's way (in such great numbers) when absolutely necessary. You cannot compare then need to send in troops to stop Hitler (at the moment FDR sent in troops) with the need to stop Saddam (at the moment Bush sent our guys into battle). I mean, Hitler was actively conquering Europe and Japan (allied with Hitler) had just attacked Pearl Harbor! I think that’s an unfair comparison you presented.

This merits some consideration. Although, what were we going to do, sit there a moan like a child after being punched by the bully in the schoolyard when something like that happens? Bush wanted to finish his father's work, while also taking down the actual people who committed that heinous act.

9/11 right? Of course I don’t think we should have just sat there and moaned, as I was all for going full force against the terrorist organization that orchestrated these attacks. Afghanistan made sense. But Iraq “because Bush wanted to finish his father’s work”? It was completely dishonest for the government to piggy-back off the 9/11 tragedy as a means to garner support for an Iraq war – ie something that was wholly unrelated.

Hitler was an imminent threat to mankind in 1942. Saddam was not in 2003.

I wonder what the conservatives want Obama to do...go to war over the Ukraine? There are places where the US has influence and there are places where we do not. This has been the case since 1787 and it will be the case forever.

There is no place America cannot fight. The question is should we. I think not just as I thought it with Syria.

You don't have to go to war to be firm and show some leadership.

 

[candycorn]

I'm sure you can agree that it's the President's job to only put US soldiers in harm's way (in such great numbers) when absolutely necessary. You cannot compare then need to send in troops to stop Hitler (at the moment FDR sent in troops) with the need to stop Saddam (at the moment Bush sent our guys into battle). I mean, Hitler was actively conquering Europe and Japan (allied with Hitler) had just attacked Pearl Harbor! I think that’s an unfair comparison you presented.




9/11 right? Of course I don’t think we should have just sat there and moaned, as I was all for going full force against the terrorist organization that orchestrated these attacks. Afghanistan made sense. But Iraq “because Bush wanted to finish his father’s work”? It was completely dishonest for the government to piggy-back off the 9/11 tragedy as a means to garner support for an Iraq war – ie something that was wholly unrelated.

Hitler was an imminent threat to mankind in 1942. Saddam was not in 2003.

I wonder what the conservatives want Obama to do...go to war over the Ukraine? There are places where the US has influence and there are places where we do not. This has been the case since 1787 and it will be the case forever.

There is no place America cannot fight. The question is should we. I think not just as I thought it with Syria.

You don't have to go to war to be firm and show some leadership.

Can you give us some examples of what you would want the President to do...short of going to war that shows firmness and leadership?

 

[candycorn]

I suppose he could seize Russian assets in the US and urge our allies to do the same...expel diplomats and that sort of thing.

Isn't that pretty weak anyway? And wouldn't the Rooskies do the same to us.

 

[Avatar4321]

I wonder what the conservatives want Obama to do...go to war over the Ukraine? There are places where the US has influence and there are places where we do not. This has been the case since 1787 and it will be the case forever.

There is no place America cannot fight. The question is should we. I think not just as I thought it with Syria.

You don't have to go to war to be firm and show some leadership.

Can you give us some examples of what you would want the President to do...short of going to war that shows firmness and leadership?

Send a few ships into the Caspian Sea. Bluff a little. His problem is he can't because no one believes he will follow through on anything.

He can call for immediate sanctions. Send relief to the Ukranians. Calll a meeting of NATO to determine what to do.

He could pull our Ambassador from Russia. And call for the other nations of the world to do likewise.

There are many things he can do before he gets to a place where war is necessary. Instead he gives a poor speech telling the Russians he knows what's in their interests better than they do. Do you think they really are going to believe them even if he is correct?

i don't think I have given an extensive list. Some of the things ive suggested might be better than others. The point is there are more options than War & Capitulation.

 

[candycorn]

You don't have to go to war to be firm and show some leadership.

Can you give us some examples of what you would want the President to do...short of going to war that shows firmness and leadership?

Send a few ships into the Caspian Sea. Bluff a little. His problem is he can't because no one believes he will follow through on anything.

He can call for immediate sanctions. Send relief to the Ukranians. Calll a meeting of NATO to determine what to do.

He could pull our Ambassador from Russia. And call for the other nations of the world to do likewise.

There are many things he can do before he gets to a place where war is necessary. Instead he gives a poor speech telling the Russians he knows what's in their interests better than they do. Do you think they really are going to believe them even if he is correct?

i don't think I have given an extensive list. Some of the things ive suggested might be better than others. The point is there are more options than War & Capitulation.

Saber rattling. Didn't you learn anything from Iraq? When the other guy doesn't back down..then what? No way do we want to put some ships into the Black Sea. For one thing, we're out numbered and for another the vessels would be well within the air umbrella for land based attack planes. No contest.

Endangering American soldiers lives on a weak assed bluff like that is something that Obama should be criticized for.

Pulling the ambassador is pretty weak (as I said) but that is all there is. Then they pull their ambassador. What then?

Can I ask you another question though.

Why is Ukraine important? If you woke up tomorrow and the Russian flag is flying over Kiev...what would that mean to your pocket book, your kids' future, your job prospects...etc? Nobody I know thinks that Syria was worth one drop of American blood. A poll on here had some sort of 9000% in favor of us not going in. And that is right next to Israel and the oil interest in the Middle East. Ukraine seems to be even less important from a geopolitical standpoint than Syria.

So can you enumerate the reasons you want to go to the mat for Ukraine?