Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Russia will gain eastern Ukraine territories and hold them, as it has Crimea

5 (45.5%)

Russia will temporarily gain eastern Ukraine territories before being forced out of them

2 (18.2%)

Efforts to confront the Russian forces and get them out of Ukraine will lead to Putin's escalating and attacking NATO countries directly with missiles or other destructive measures

0 (0%)

The NATO/World response will be so mild that Putin will go ahead and take the rest of Ukraine

3 (27.3%)

Today Ukraine, tomorrow Moldova and who knows where else

1 (9.1%)

Total Members Voted: 10

Voting closed: March 01, 2022, 01:18:43 PM

[Hairy Lime]

CNN continues boosting Ukraine status

https://www.cnn.com/europe/live-news/russia-ukraine-war-news-10-03-22#h_437069baeda2395df6c3aa109f511add

Meanwhile US paints a stronger Russia picture

https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/03/politics/ukraine-russia-putin-nuclear-weapons-us/index.html

Jesus.  Who cares if Ukraine and Russia kill each other?
Why should we borrow more money so the Alzheimer ravaged Moron-In-Chief can fight a proxy war on behalf of nothing but his ego?

Peace in our time, eh Neville?

Huh?
There is no correlation.

Tell yourself whatever comforting lies you want, Neville.

[Holly Martins]

?

How many Billions we pouring into Ukraine to prop up an autocrat while ignoring the drugs and mayhem pouring  through our Southern Border?

Red is the forum Lord Haw Haw

[Holly Martins]

Exhibit A.  Showing why reading only Right Wing talking points and back issues of The Journal of Nostril Crusts Extraction can chip away at cognitive function.

What right wing talking points?
Your argument in propping up an autocrat for no reason that benefits the USA makes no sense.
Other than we have to oppose Russia and Putin?
Why?
We have no interest in either.
Obviously you cannot really defend wasting  our money.
Or the endless stream of our money to perpetually keep Ukraine in the hands of a despot.

When you use a sharp instrument to get those nostril crusts embedded way up in there, you must remember not to push too far.  If the last seven months haven't clarified our interest in containing Russia and supporting a sovereign nation that has moved towards European style parliamentary democracy and also bolstering the security of NATO members (and member applicants) who border Russia, then you truly do live in a propaganda bubble.  And there's also the war crimes, violation of the Budapest Memorandum, theft of half a billion dollars of grain, and half a dozen other gross violations of international law that we and Europe have every interest in pushing back against. 

[Espnthree]

Exhibit A.  Showing why reading only Right Wing talking points and back issues of The Journal of Nostril Crusts Extraction can chip away at cognitive function.

What right wing talking points?
Your argument in propping up an autocrat for no reason that benefits the USA makes no sense.
Other than we have to oppose Russia and Putin?
Why?
We have no interest in either.
Obviously you cannot really defend wasting  our money.
Or the endless stream of our money to perpetually keep Ukraine in the hands of a despot.

When you use a sharp instrument to get those nostril crusts embedded way up in there, you must remember not to push too far.  If the last seven months haven't clarified our interest in containing Russia and supporting a sovereign nation that has moved towards European style parliamentary democracy and also bolstering the security of NATO members (and member applicants) who border Russia, then you truly do live in a propaganda bubble.  And there's also the war crimes, violation of the Budapest Memorandum, theft of half a billion dollars of grain, and half a dozen other gross violations of international law that we and Europe have every interest in pushing back against.

Nice cut and paste.
I swear you sound more and more like a macho right winger each day.
But you avoid the question.

What are we playing nuclear chicken over?  Not the country of Ukraine but the Donbas. The Donbas in eastern Ukraine where most of the people identify as ethnic Russians and want to be part of Russia.

So why are we sending billions of borrowed dollars there that poses only risks to us and weakens our defenses and harms our economy?
And we will not have a debate because the moment we point out this ego driven folly of Biden we are called traitors or Putin stooges.

[Holly Martins]

I don't cut and paste.  I write posts in my own words.  You seem to be projecting again.

NATO security helps our economy longterm, so the money spent towards standing up to a dictator who openly speaks of restoring a Russian Empire through brutal land grabs is well spent. 

Putin has tried to take far more than just Donbas. 

You ARE a Putin stooge.  You just haven't figured out who is pulling the strings of your Far Right influencers.

[Espnthree]

I don't cut and paste.  I write posts in my own words.  You seem to be projecting again.

NATO security helps our economy longterm, so the money spent towards standing up to a dictator who openly speaks of restoring a Russian Empire through brutal land grabs is well spent. 

Which dictator you want to support?  Ukraine surrendered nuclear weapons to Russia years ago. The reason you have nuclear weapons is so other nations do not push you around. Now Ukraine is paying a price.
But that is no reason we should spend a dime helping it since it has nothing but a downside for us.
We have a history of justifying wars by identifying tyrants as the main cause.  How are we better off by deposing Saddam, khadafi, or fighting Assad?  Why risk nuclear war by doing the same to Putin?
It is a question you keep ducking.

You ARE a Putin stooge. 

Told ya

[facilitatorn]

Ward is fervently praying to his Putin bobble head for guidance in these difficult times.

It feels like true religion to him, so I expect it will be a hard vice to talk him out of.

[Hairy Lime]

You know, I knew we could expect Russian propaganda to lodge in right wing web sites leading up to the election, but I never expected them to go full Munich.

[Hairy Lime]

I don't cut and paste.  I write posts in my own words.  You seem to be projecting again.

NATO security helps our economy longterm, so the money spent towards standing up to a dictator who openly speaks of restoring a Russian Empire through brutal land grabs is well spent. 

Which dictator you want to support?

The same people who jizz their Jockeys at the name Obran have suddenly decided the democratically elected president of Ukraine is a dictator. This is of.course the Russia party line, which claimed that it was "denazifying" Ukraine.

Ukraine surrendered nuclear weapons to Russia years ago.

Yes, with the assurance Russia would respect its territorial integrity. Psyche!

The reason you have nuclear weapons is so other nations do not push you around. Now Ukraine is paying a price.

Iran, not to mention Sadam Hussain from beyond the grave, says hello. It has been the wise policy of our country over multiple presidents from multiple parties to push for fewer nuclear states.

But that is no reason we should spend a dime helping it since it has nothing but a downside for us.
We have a history of justifying wars by identifying tyrants as the main cause.  How are we better off by deposing Saddam, khadafi, or fighting Assad?  Why risk nuclear war by doing the same to Putin?
It is a question you keep ducking.

You ARE a Putin stooge. 

Told ya

Regime change is different than defending a popularly elected legitimate government. I realize people like you know longer believe in democracy and believe like Putin that it is a weak and ineffective system.

Fighting in Ukraine, if for nothing else, keeps Russia from trying to bully, dominate or even swallow former Russian states like Moldova, or Finland, or the Baltic, which would present an even greater danger of direct US involvement in a war, even a nuclear war, with Russia. You should know that, Neville.

[Espnthree]

I don't cut and paste.  I write posts in my own words.  You seem to be projecting again.

NATO security helps our economy longterm, so the money spent towards standing up to a dictator who openly speaks of restoring a Russian Empire through brutal land grabs is well spent. 

Which dictator you want to support?

The same people who jizz their Jockeys at the name Obran have suddenly decided the democratically elected president of Ukraine is a dictator. This is of.course the Russia party line, which claimed that it was "denazifying" Ukraine.

Ukraine surrendered nuclear weapons to Russia years ago.

Yes, with the assurance Russia would respect its territorial integrity. Psyche!

The reason you have nuclear weapons is so other nations do not push you around. Now Ukraine is paying a price.

Iran, not to mention Sadam Hussain from beyond the grave, says hello. It has been the wise policy of our country over multiple presidents from multiple parties to push for fewer nuclear states.

But that is no reason we should spend a dime helping it since it has nothing but a downside for us.
We have a history of justifying wars by identifying tyrants as the main cause.  How are we better off by deposing Saddam, khadafi, or fighting Assad?  Why risk nuclear war by doing the same to Putin?
It is a question you keep ducking.

You ARE a Putin stooge. 

Told ya

Regime change is different than defending a popularly elected legitimate government. I realize people like you know longer believe in democracy and believe like Putin that it is a weak and ineffective system.

Fighting in Ukraine, if for nothing else, keeps Russia from trying to bully, dominate or even swallow former Russian states like Moldova, or Finland, or the Baltic, which would present an even greater danger of direct US involvement in a war, even a nuclear war, with Russia. You should know that, Neville.

Ah yes, of course, Hairy channels his inner LBJ along with his new found love of Dick Cheney. Are you now to be known as a NEO NEO CON?
Here is the problem. UKraine and Russian troops are killing each other over just parts of Ukraine.
Despite all your false equivalencies, historical distortions,and name calling you cannot or will not explain why  the US has to be involved, at all. Especially since a tyrant like Putin is capable of launching nukes  even if it is only to save face over his decrepit military. We have no business playing with nuclear fire over such a trivial issue as Ukrainian boundary lines.

[LarryBnDC]

I don't cut and paste.  I write posts in my own words.  You seem to be projecting again.

NATO security helps our economy longterm, so the money spent towards standing up to a dictator who openly speaks of restoring a Russian Empire through brutal land grabs is well spent. 

Which dictator you want to support?

The same people who jizz their Jockeys at the name Obran have suddenly decided the democratically elected president of Ukraine is a dictator. This is of.course the Russia party line, which claimed that it was "denazifying" Ukraine.

Ukraine surrendered nuclear weapons to Russia years ago.

Yes, with the assurance Russia would respect its territorial integrity. Psyche!

The reason you have nuclear weapons is so other nations do not push you around. Now Ukraine is paying a price.

Iran, not to mention Sadam Hussain from beyond the grave, says hello. It has been the wise policy of our country over multiple presidents from multiple parties to push for fewer nuclear states.

But that is no reason we should spend a dime helping it since it has nothing but a downside for us.
We have a history of justifying wars by identifying tyrants as the main cause.  How are we better off by deposing Saddam, khadafi, or fighting Assad?  Why risk nuclear war by doing the same to Putin?
It is a question you keep ducking.

You ARE a Putin stooge. 

Told ya

Regime change is different than defending a popularly elected legitimate government. I realize people like you know longer believe in democracy and believe like Putin that it is a weak and ineffective system.

Fighting in Ukraine, if for nothing else, keeps Russia from trying to bully, dominate or even swallow former Russian states like Moldova, or Finland, or the Baltic, which would present an even greater danger of direct US involvement in a war, even a nuclear war, with Russia. You should know that, Neville.

Ah yes, of course, Hairy channels his inner LBJ along with his new found love of Dick Cheney. Are you now to be known as a NEO NEO CON?
Here is the problem. UKraine and Russian troops are killing each other over just parts of Ukraine.
Despite all your false equivalencies, historical distortions,and name calling you cannot or will not explain why  the US has to be involved, at all. Especially since a tyrant like Putin is capable of launching nukes  even if it is only to save face over his decrepit military. We have no business playing with nuclear fire over such a trivial issue as Ukrainian boundary lines.

America First, huh?

[Holly Martins]

"trivial issue"

 Pretending the issue is only one border or one part of a country is classic logical fallacy.  Another straw man.  You should read Hair's last paragraph more carefully.  But I know you just pick out pieces of others posts you think you can throw poop at. 

While you keep repeating your leading question -why risk nuclear war?  Examine the premise, that we are raising chances of nuclear war by supporting Ukraine.   It's a shaky one, given the potential nightmare of letting Russia just march over the eastern bloc on one pretext or another of "rescue." What do you think NATO is for? 

[Espnthree]

While you keep repeating your leading question  why risk nuclear war? 

You seem pretty dense on this point.
Why risk nuclear destruction over a dispute that has nothing to do with US.?
Your lack of an answer renders you incapable of a meaningful debate.

[Hairy Lime]

While you keep repeating your leading question  why risk nuclear war? 

Your lack of an answer renders you incapable of a meaningful debate.

Except of course he answered it in the part of the post you omitted.

[Espnthree]

While you keep repeating your leading question  why risk nuclear war? 

Your lack of an answer renders you incapable of a meaningful debate.

Except of course he answered it in the part of the post you omitted.

Except, of course, he did not, he just changed the question.
Like you.