Support of hopeless country that could lead to nuclear war

[wwef235]

Have you ever thought of why we support Ukraine? Why do the US spend billions of dollars every year on this country? Maybe you would want to raise an objection saying that Ukraine is an important partner for both us and all Western states. However, it doesn’t seem true to me. The American Conservative has just published an analytic paper (Why Does American Folly March on in Ukraine?) where it discusses in detail why such actions don’t pay off for the US at all.

The paper says that all Western politicians keep insisting that the US could lose a lot if they stop providing military support for Ukraine. The problem is that these are lies and illusions which have no evidence whatsoever. In fact, Ukraine has no strategic value for the United States.

We did the same thing with Vietnam in 1965, although we had no need for war. The only difference is that in Vietnam we faced a much weaker state but now are at risk of the direct confrontation against a nuclear armed state. I think such actions can be necessary in only one case and that is if it directly concerns the US national interests. Since when has a small, hopeless Ukraine whom we don’t benefit from at all become so near and dear? Clearly, Ukrainian support is not worth a global catastrophe for the American nation.

But what do you think: is Ukraine which now has nothing of substance to offer worth the risk of waging a war against Russia? This will be a full-scale disaster for the whole world, not just a bunch of people. And we could definitely avoid this scenario. All it takes is just for us to stop sending weapons to Zelensky.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Russia is the country that is helpless and hopeless.

Only Putin's death will allow the oligarchs in Russia to sue for peace.

 

[Zavulon]

Russia is the country that is helpless and hopeless.

Only Putin's death will allow the oligarchs in Russia to sue for peace.

You see, oligarchs became oligarchs through very hard way. There are plenty of blood on their pretty white hands. And they became oligarchs not because they allowed any freak to steal their property. They are going to win this war and take their money back (with the big interest) from Americans, Europeans, Ukrainians. They are not a sort of sissy toffs, they are the first generation of predators.
I'm not an oligarch, but France and Italy took seven million dollars of my money, and I'm going to take from them at least seventy millions one way or another.

 

[Ringo]

 

[ESay]

I'm not an oligarch, but France and Italy took seven million dollars of my money, and I'm going to take from them at least seventy millions one way or another

Interesting story. And how did you gain these money and how they were taken away?

 

[Zavulon]

If Ukrainains can use American weapons to attack Russian civilian objects, than, of course, anybody can use Russian weapons (from Russian ships and controlled with Russian sailors, of course) to, say, attack American ports or American ships in the open ocean.
I'm sure, Mexican cartels can use Club-K missiles in the proper way.

 

[Zavulon]

Interesting story. And how did you gain these money and how they were taken away?

It actually doesn't matter. It's not really big money. But I'm not going to allow anybody to take my money and leave scot-free.

 

[Moonglow]

You see, oligarchs became oligarchs through very hard way. There are plenty of blood on their pretty white hands. And they became oligarchs not because they allowed any freak to steal their property. They are going to win this war and take their money back (with the big interest) from Americans, Europeans, Ukrainians. They are not a sort of sissy toffs, they are the first generation of predators.
I'm not an oligarch, but France and Italy took seven million dollars of my money, and I'm going to take from them at least seventy millions one way or another.

You shoulda got a receipt

 

[ESay]

It actually doesn't matter. It's not really big money. But I'm not going to allow anybody to take my money and leave scot-free.

Why it doesn't matter? You said A, and now say B; otherwise, what was the point to start that?

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

It actually doesn't matter. It's not really big money. But I'm not going to allow anybody to take my money and leave scot-free.

Sure, you will, if you have no alternative that it does not leave you vulnerable if employed.

 

[Zavulon]

Sure, you will, if you have no alternative that it does not leave you vulnerable if employed.

Right now I have an alternative. To crush NATO countries and take my money back.

 

[Ringo]

Zaluzhny liked the publication of the Ukrainian blogger with criticism of Zelensky

Former Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU) Valery Zaluzhny supported blogger Miroslav Oleshko, who criticized Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky. The blogger published a post in which he commented on the peace proposals of Russian leader Vladimir Putin.

In his Facebook post, he accused the head of state that the conditions put forward by the Russian President are the result of Zelensky's policy, while the fulfillment of these conditions will guarantee "the end of his power". He also said that Ukrainians have become hostages of the ongoing conflict.

Zaluzhny put a like under Oleshko's post, which, according to the Ukrainian edition of Focus, "caused a negative reaction on the Web." After a while, the record was deleted. According to Oleshko, it was blocked due to complaints.

On June 14, the Russian president said that Moscow was ready for talks with Kiev if it withdraws troops from the territory of new Russian regions and refuses to join NATO. The chairman of the council of the Other Ukraine Movement, Viktor Medvedchuk, said that Putin's initiative was the last chance to preserve Ukraine as a state.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Right now I have an alternative. To crush NATO countries and take my money back.

You are delusional imo, but go for it. keep us informed.

 

[Ringo]

 

[Ringo]

Another one in the meat grinder

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Have you ever thought of why we support Ukraine? Why do the US spend billions of dollars every year on this country? Maybe you would want to raise an objection saying that Ukraine is an important partner for both us and all Western states. However, it doesn’t seem true to me. The American Conservative has just published an analytic paper (Why Does American Folly March on in Ukraine?) where it discusses in detail why such actions don’t pay off for the US at all.

The paper says that all Western politicians keep insisting that the US could lose a lot if they stop providing military support for Ukraine. The problem is that these are lies and illusions which have no evidence whatsoever. In fact, Ukraine has no strategic value for the United States.

We did the same thing with Vietnam in 1965, although we had no need for war. The only difference is that in Vietnam we faced a much weaker state but now are at risk of the direct confrontation against a nuclear armed state. I think such actions can be necessary in only one case and that is if it directly concerns the US national interests. Since when has a small, hopeless Ukraine whom we don’t benefit from at all become so near and dear? Clearly, Ukrainian support is not worth a global catastrophe for the American nation.

But what do you think: is Ukraine which now has nothing of substance to offer worth the risk of waging a war against Russia? This will be a full-scale disaster for the whole world, not just a bunch of people. And we could definitely avoid this scenario. All it takes is just for us to stop sending weapons to Zelensky.
View attachment 963204

ineffective Russian propaganda

 

[leftwinger]

Have you ever thought of why we support Ukraine? Why do the US spend billions of dollars every year on this country? Maybe you would want to raise an objection saying that Ukraine is an important partner for both us and all Western states. However, it doesn’t seem true to me. The American Conservative has just published an analytic paper (Why Does American Folly March on in Ukraine?) where it discusses in detail why such actions don’t pay off for the US at all.

The paper says that all Western politicians keep insisting that the US could lose a lot if they stop providing military support for Ukraine. The problem is that these are lies and illusions which have no evidence whatsoever. In fact, Ukraine has no strategic value for the United States.

We did the same thing with Vietnam in 1965, although we had no need for war. The only difference is that in Vietnam we faced a much weaker state but now are at risk of the direct confrontation against a nuclear armed state. I think such actions can be necessary in only one case and that is if it directly concerns the US national interests. Since when has a small, hopeless Ukraine whom we don’t benefit from at all become so near and dear? Clearly, Ukrainian support is not worth a global catastrophe for the American nation.

But what do you think: is Ukraine which now has nothing of substance to offer worth the risk of waging a war against Russia? This will be a full-scale disaster for the whole world, not just a bunch of people. And we could definitely avoid this scenario. All it takes is just for us to stop sending weapons to Zelensky.
View attachment 963204

All to hide the Obiden corruption as well as the 45 Bio labs manufacturing Globalist Disease to spread when needed.

Disgraceful talk of American troops coming in to save the midget. Just give up. Join Russia. It will only seem like eternity.

 

[leftwinger]

Another one in the meat grinder

They want that old guy to fight for Ukraine?

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

If Russia uses nukes, it's major cities will be obliterated.

 

[Quasar44]

Russia is the country that is helpless and hopeless.

Only Putin's death will allow the oligarchs in Russia to sue for peace.

No Putin is a moderate !! The next Russian leaders will be hardcore