Support of hopeless country that could lead to nuclear war

[Quasar44]

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

By who ???

 

[Quasar44]

Russia is the country that is helpless and hopeless.

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

USA is in far worse shape than Russia and we have become the new USSR

 

[Zavulon]

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

If Russia uses nukes - you'll not have enough nukes to obliterate Russian main cities.

 

[Zavulon]

And anyway, as we know from our common experience (Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan and many others) - when the USA have the choice between leaving their ally and a nuclear war, actually endangering American citizens - America always choose "to play chiken". I'm almost sure that this time will be the same thing.

 

[sparky]

the economics are what's relevant here

~S~

 

[ESay]

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

Hey, petty oligarch, eager to hear your story about the millions.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

If Russia uses nukes - you'll not have enough nukes to obliterate Russian main cities.

less than 1/4 of your weapons work, they are not anywhere as good as ours

 

[Zebra]

what con we do?

 

[Litwin]

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

genocidal pig- dog , how is weather in Moscow ?

 

[Litwin]

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

it´ll be no next Muscovite leader, putin is the last one


Moscow horde´s war record :-1856 defeated by Britain and France1905 defeated by Japan1917 defeated by Germany1920 defeated by Poland, Finland, Estonia and all Baltic states 1939 defeated by Finland1969 defeated by China1989 defeated by Afghanistan 1989 defeated in the Cold War. 1996 defeated by Chechnya 2022 defeated by UkraineWW2 won USA/Britain , meanwhile Stalin's officers were shot or sent to the Gulags. Millions went to the Gulags, including Solzhenitsyn Moscow's only victories come from invading smaller countries :-a) Hungary 1956b) Czechoslovakia 1968c) Moldova 1992d) Georgia 2008

 

[Litwin]

Another one in the meat grinder

 

[Litwin]

They want that old guy to fight for Ukraine?

ask him :


ps

Moscow WANT to take Guantanamo away from the United States. | Peter Zeihan: Putin 'is done' as losses in Ukraine degrade Kremlin's force projection

Imagine how delusional is the domestic audience that watches this Orwellian theater. Ivan and Natasha , whats About to lose 🇺🇦Sevastopol AGAIN ? question : should we take 🇺🇦 Sevastopol back again ? Putin 'is done' as losses in Ukraine degrade Kremlin's force projection | Peter Zeihan

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[Zavulon]

less than 1/4 of your weapons work, they are not anywhere as good as ours

Another portion of wishful thinking?
Ukrainians already got themselves in deep troubles with this poor method.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Another portion of wishful thinking?
Ukrainians already got themselves in deep troubles with this poor method.

... and that is why you are mired in Ukraine?

 

[Zavulon]

... and that is why you are mired in Ukraine?

That's why we are solving their problems in Ukraine. We help them to understand all consequences of their false hopes and believes. This war is not about control over territory. This war is about control over hearts and minds. And when you are healing hearts and minds mitigated that much - you must be patient and accurate. Both Russia and Ukraine together killed much less children in two years, than Israel in two months.

 

[frigidweirdo]

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

Imagine if they hadn't given up on Czechoslovakia in 1938

 

[Zavulon]

Imagine if they hadn't given up on Czechoslovakia in 1938

Then, highly likely, the Great Britain would be facing the competition or direct war between French+Czechoslovakia+USSR+some other countries and Great Britain+Germany+some other countries alliances.
WWII was practically inevitable (just like now is almost inevitable WWIII). The only question was in the possible configurations and alliances.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Then, highly likely, the Great Britain would be facing the competition or direct war between French+Czechoslovakia+USSR+some other countries and Great Britain+Germany+some other countries alliances.
WWII was practically inevitable (just like now is almost inevitable WWIII). The only question was in the possible configurations and alliances.

So, if it's inevitable, why are people blaming Biden?

 

[Zavulon]

So, if it's inevitable, why are people blaming Biden?

It depends. May be, it's because he is starting it stupid way. But may be, he is doing his best.

 

[frigidweirdo]

It depends. May be, it's because he is starting it stupid way. But may be, he is doing his best.

Biden's only real recourse would have been to call Putin's bluff and send US troops into the Ukraine before the war started.

Putin started the war, not Biden.