Democracy’s Fiery Ordeal: The War in Ukraine 🇺🇦

[L Ron Burgundy]

4 hours ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

A trick previously perfected by the Clintons.  The difference is you conjure up some fantasy attacking a political movement without evidence of any kind to make a preposterous claim while the Clintons legacy is littered with a documented trail of bodies from Arkansas to Washington.

A documented trail lacking a small thing.  Proof.  All just conjecture and coincidence.   Which is all the right has nowadays.  That and defending an orange fraud and his idiot minions that tried to subvert an election.   No real plans to make the country better other than railing about the border.  

[All_Pro_Bills]

9 hours ago, L Ron Burgundy said:

A documented trail lacking a small thing.  Proof.  All just conjecture and coincidence.   Which is all the right has nowadays.  That and defending an orange fraud and his idiot minions that tried to subvert an election.   No real plans to make the country better other than railing about the border.  

And other than the goal to feminize men what is the Democrats plan for America? 

Edited December 27, 2022 by All_Pro_Bills

[sherpa]

Appealing to Russian prisoners to join the fight.

Sounds pretty attractive, eh?

 

Head of Wagner group "recruiting" Russian convicts.

[Tommy Callahan]

11 minutes ago, sherpa said:

Appealing to Russian prisoners to join the fight.

Sounds pretty attractive, eh?

 

Head of Wagner group "recruiting" Russian convicts.

Wagner is mercs that will hire anyone that can fight.

 

same with the western Mercs fighting on the Ukraine front lines

 

 

[Westside]

12 hours ago, L Ron Burgundy said:

A documented trail lacking a small thing.  Proof.  All just conjecture and coincidence.   Which is all the right has nowadays.  That and defending an orange fraud and his idiot minions that tried to subvert an election.   No real plans to make the country better other than railing about the border.  

You must have been asleep in 2016 with all the crying over russian interference. You keep on defending the man with oatmeal for brains who has a history of being a racist. 
 

I guess that makes you so much better than Trump supporters. 

[B-Man]

 

 

As a national strategy, though, does the US policy of “heavy aid” make long-term sense? Are we charting a wise course that will pay dividends in our own increased security, or are we getting drawn into an “entangling alliance” that will ultimately play to Russian advantage? 

 

From a sentimental Norman Rockwell perspective, we’ve enjoyed portraying ourselves as giving Little Brother a stick to fend off the town bully. It satisfies our souls on several levels: we can feel (for a change) that we did the “right thing;” we get to witness our technical superiority on an international stage; and, though we won’t much admit it, we also get to enjoy the daily spectacle of watching a tormenter’s nose get bloodied without getting any on our fronts… And God, how we love a scrappy underdog—especially one so decidedly European as a Ukrainian.

 

But the world isn’t a Rockwell painting, and things aren’t always as they seem. What is really at play here, and where do we draw the line of our national interest? We’ve become so inured to “lines” lately—red lines, bright lines, “deconfliction” lines—that it becomes difficult to even know what such a distinction would practically mean.

 

A place to start would be in clarifying our endgame.

 

https://lawliberty.org/who-should-really-support-ukraine/

 

 

.

[BillStime]

2 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

As a national strategy, though, does the US policy of “heavy aid” make long-term sense? Are we charting a wise course that will pay dividends in our own increased security, or are we getting drawn into an “entangling alliance” that will ultimately play to Russian advantage? 

 

From a sentimental Norman Rockwell perspective, we’ve enjoyed portraying ourselves as giving Little Brother a stick to fend off the town bully. It satisfies our souls on several levels: we can feel (for a change) that we did the “right thing;” we get to witness our technical superiority on an international stage; and, though we won’t much admit it, we also get to enjoy the daily spectacle of watching a tormenter’s nose get bloodied without getting any on our fronts… And God, how we love a scrappy underdog—especially one so decidedly European as a Ukrainian.

 

But the world isn’t a Rockwell painting, and things aren’t always as they seem. What is really at play here, and where do we draw the line of our national interest? We’ve become so inured to “lines” lately—red lines, bright lines, “deconfliction” lines—that it becomes difficult to even know what such a distinction would practically mean.

 

A place to start would be in clarifying our endgame.

 

https://lawliberty.org/who-should-really-support-ukraine/

 

 

.

End game:

 

[Tiberius]

4 hours ago, Chris farley said:

Wagner is mercs that will hire anyone that can fight.

 

same with the western Mercs fighting on the Ukraine front lines

 

 

Not the same. Ukraine is defending itself, Russia is trying to conquer and enslave a people. 

 

How is that the same? 

[sherpa]

6 hours ago, Chris farley said:

Wagner is mercs that will hire anyone that can fight.

 

same with the western Mercs fighting on the Ukraine front lines

 

 

 

I'm guessing the firing squad execution part of the deal is a bit different. 

[Coffeesforclosers]

8 hours ago, B-Man said:

 

 

As a national strategy, though, does the US policy of “heavy aid” make long-term sense? Are we charting a wise course that will pay dividends in our own increased security, or are we getting drawn into an “entangling alliance” that will ultimately play to Russian advantage? 

 

From a sentimental Norman Rockwell perspective, we’ve enjoyed portraying ourselves as giving Little Brother a stick to fend off the town bully. It satisfies our souls on several levels: we can feel (for a change) that we did the “right thing;” we get to witness our technical superiority on an international stage; and, though we won’t much admit it, we also get to enjoy the daily spectacle of watching a tormenter’s nose get bloodied without getting any on our fronts… And God, how we love a scrappy underdog—especially one so decidedly European as a Ukrainian.

 

But the world isn’t a Rockwell painting, and things aren’t always as they seem. What is really at play here, and where do we draw the line of our national interest? We’ve become so inured to “lines” lately—red lines, bright lines, “deconfliction” lines—that it becomes difficult to even know what such a distinction would practically mean.

 

A place to start would be in clarifying our endgame.

 

https://lawliberty.org/who-should-really-support-ukraine/

 

 

.

 

What a terrible take from someone who should know better based on their credentials.

 

None of these pseudo-intellectual op eds begins their argument with the most persuasive point they could make. Which is how Russia is better off now politically, economically, socially and militarily, than it was on February 23, 2022.  They don't because it's an impossible case to make.

 

Instead, we get a lot of SAT word salad about how we should interrupt Russia while it's making a mistake. Also about how it's a terrible diplomatic, moral and economic blunder to disincentivize pointless wars of conquest. 

 

What nonsense. 

 

[All_Pro_Bills]

2 hours ago, Coffeesforclosers said:

 

What a terrible take from someone who should know better based on their credentials.

 

None of these pseudo-intellectual op eds begins their argument with the most persuasive point they could make. Which is how Russia is better off now politically, economically, socially and militarily, than it was on February 23, 2022.  They don't because it's an impossible case to make.

 

Instead, we get a lot of SAT word salad about how we should interrupt Russia while it's making a mistake. Also about how it's a terrible diplomatic, moral and economic blunder to disincentivize pointless wars of conquest. 

 

What nonsense. 

 

I think the US goal is simple.  To maintain the uni-polar world order where the US calls the shots and makes the rules, and everybody follows those rules.  Threats to that order need to be addressed economically, politically, and if necessary, through military force.  Major threats to that order being Russia, China, Iran to name a few.  Ukraine provides an opportunity to address one of those threats via a proxy country doing the fighting while our leaders play the democracy card in order to solicit domestic support for the program without informing an American public mostly oblivious to this Imperial arrangement of the true motivation.  I think that's it.  

[Tiberius]

9 hours ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

I think the US goal is simple.  To maintain the uni-polar world order where the US calls the shots and makes the rules, and everybody follows those rules.  Threats to that order need to be addressed economically, politically, and if necessary, through military force.  Major threats to that order being Russia, China, Iran to name a few.  Ukraine provides an opportunity to address one of those threats via a proxy country doing the fighting while our leaders play the democracy card in order to solicit domestic support for the program without informing an American public mostly oblivious to this Imperial arrangement of the true motivation.  I think that's it.  

What do you mean by "uni-polar" world order? 

 

You sound like you think it would be better if Russia had more influence

[All_Pro_Bills]

1 hour ago, Tiberius said:

What do you mean by "uni-polar" world order? 

 

You sound like you think it would be better if Russia had more influence

I've explained what I mean as clearly as possible.    

[Tiberius]

47 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

I've explained what I mean as clearly as possible.    

You make it sound like the democratic rule based world order is a bad thing, just like Putin thinks 

[sherpa]

11 hours ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

I think the US goal is simple.  To maintain the uni-polar world order where the US calls the shots and makes the rules, and everybody follows those rules.  Threats to that order need to be addressed economically, politically, and if necessary, through military force.  Major threats to that order being Russia, China, Iran to name a few.  Ukraine provides an opportunity to address one of those threats via a proxy country doing the fighting while our leaders play the democracy card in order to solicit domestic support for the program without informing an American public mostly oblivious to this Imperial arrangement of the true motivation.  I think that's it.  

 

As long as the ret of the world continues to go to the US taxpayer to solve serious issues brought on by those regimes,  and I would add North Korea to the list, I think the US has earned the right to insist on a strident consideration of its views.

The useless UN and the exposure of the European NATO weaknesses should be in focus after this latest calamity.

That's not US muscle wielding.

It's long overdue common sense.

[Tiberius]

Missiles again rain down on Ukraine. Putin's mad war against an innocent people continues 

[BillStime]

Say what?

 

 

CC:  Putin got everything he wanted out of his ASSet and more.

 

On 12/26/2022 at 1:34 PM, Chris farley said:

And what was that exactly? 

 

 

fn idiots

 

 

[Tiberius]

 

[SoCal Deek]

10 minutes ago, BillStime said:

Say what?

 

 

CC:  Putin got everything he wanted out of his ASSet and more.

 

 

fn idiots

 

 

So let me get this straight. Trump didn’t get a second term. The US didn’t pull out of NATO….and Putin STILL invaded Ukraine. Yep, that entire tweet makes a lot of sense alright. 😂😂😂

[BillStime]

13 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

So let me get this straight. Trump didn’t get a second term. The US didn’t pull out of NATO….and Putin STILL invaded Ukraine. Yep, that entire tweet makes a lot of sense alright. 😂😂😂

 

No wonder Trump tried so hard to overturn the election.