J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

This is magical. I cant wait for you guys to explain away point blank everything you professed to this board.

About what I expected.

---

We're still waiting for you to explain this, seems like a pretty simple question.

Quote:

---

Do you still think "American tanks" and "American tanks driven by American soldiers" are the same thing?

---

---

I have already explained this multiple times on this thread. Thanks for playing. You still never answered my question.

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

You believe one document that says the Ukrainians have fired almost 10,000 GMLR's and a million 155 rds but also believe the Russians lost 16,000 men? I guess they miss a LOT.

---

And?

---

Your gullibility is cute

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

Teslag said:

---

A massive flaw in your argument is more than a "technicality".

---

Would anyone disagree we are escalating our support with more funds and more equipment and more powerful offensive equipment?

Anyone?

---

Edit: J. Walter Weatherman? Any comment?

GAC06 said:

---

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

You believe one document that says the Ukrainians have fired almost 10,000 GMLR's and a million 155 rds but also believe the Russians lost 16,000 men? I guess they miss a LOT.

---

And?

---

Your gullibility is cute

---

From what I just posted that takes an incredible amount of cognitive dissonance on your part to say that to me based on your earlier claims on this thread.

No, we aren't escalating. If your standard is JSOC and SOCOM assets on the ground then we are escalating in basically every front in every conflict around the globe for the past 40 years, which would make Ukraine nothing special or different.

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

You believe one document that says the Ukrainians have fired almost 10,000 GMLR's and a million 155 rds but also believe the Russians lost 16,000 men? I guess they miss a LOT.

---

And?

---

Your gullibility is cute

---

From what I just posted that takes an incredible amount of cognitive dissonance on your part to say that to me based on your earlier claims on this thread.

---

I've been right. "14 SOF" in a document of questionable veracity isn't "troops" in the sense that anyone with any sense means. Yet here you are breathlessly claiming we're engaged in WWIII. And the Russians have a 4 to 1 kill ratio. LOL

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

Teslag said:

---

A massive flaw in your argument is more than a "technicality".

---

Would anyone disagree we are escalating our support with more funds and more equipment and more powerful offensive equipment?

Anyone?

---

Edit: J. Walter Weatherman? Any comment?

---

Wait, so now you've moved from "lol biden said we weren't putting tanks on the ground but now we are haha got him" as if there was no difference in what he said vs what you're implying he said, to now just "escalation is bad", and you think that somehow wins the argument?

Not gonna lie, I thought this thread was bumped cause Steve Deace almost died last night

I want a draft. Good enough for my generation, good enough for these clowns.

2 year minimum service for all.

PA24 said:

---

I want a draft. Good enough for my generation, good enough for these clowns.

2 year minimum service for all.

---

A draft would be more harm than good

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

Teslag said:

---

A massive flaw in your argument is more than a "technicality".

---

Would anyone disagree we are escalating our support with more funds and more equipment and more powerful offensive equipment?

Anyone?

---

Edit: J. Walter Weatherman? Any comment?

---

Wait, so now you've moved from "lol biden said we weren't putting tanks on the ground but now we are haha got him" as if there was no difference in what he said vs what you're implying he said, to now just "escalation is bad", and you think that somehow wins the argument?

---

And still no answer. On page one, you are arguing semantics about a meme instead of answering the escalation question.

Yea Id say your refusal to answer a simple question is evident of me "winning" as you look like a coward or a doofus. Pick one or answer the question. I've responded to the meme semantics about 8 times now in this very thread.

The amount of Putin apologists on this board is disgusting.

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

Rossticus said:

---

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

Rossticus said:

---

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

Peace talks would be detrimental to Zelinsky as the people who are in the Russian annexed area overwhelmingly think they are and want to be Russian.

I don't think Russia nor the people in the regions Russia annexed would accept not ceding territory.

---

Bearing in mind, of course, that Russia "annexed" regions that were far broader than the limited area within which there was any prior conflict and much of which had expressed no prior separatist sentiment at any point.

Additionally, considering the fact that much of the population of those areas have either fled into Europe or Western Ukraine, have been deported by Russia into Russia proper, as well as the active repopulation of certain areas with Russian citizens from within Russia, it seems somewhat skewed to hand over all of Russia's claimed areas of annexation based on their current occupancy one year after the fact instead of considering their original composition and known sentiments prior to the start of the war.

This seems less of a compromise and more "pay Russia's asking price".

To be clear, are you in favor of negotiation in good faith and a true mutual compromise or are you in favor of giving Russia whatever it takes to make them happy (to include lands that it's not clear they have the strategic ability to acquire) so as to encourage them to walk away with most of their original goals accomplished, and a clear W for their efforts?

---

I'm suggesting let the people who live in the area decide where they want to go and defend the people's choice.

Again this is the sensible thing to do now that we are involved. It's not that hard. That would be the correct thing to do and the true concession by either side.

We won't because the guys in power are in this for their own grift and they don't care about you, us, or Putin beyond him messing up their gravy train.

That said if there was a right way to sue for peace, let the people decide. Last I looked the area that sensibly wants to be Russian is being held up against their will by zelensky for his own party's economic desires.

---

Have a link to something showing the bolded point? They sure seem to be fighting hard for people who would allegedly rather be in Russia.

And regardless, if a bunch of counties in south Texas wake up one day and decide they want to be a part of Mexico should we just let them do that whenever they want?

---

See countless Ukrainian threads last year. If they don't then leave it up to the people. My opinion or ignorance on what they want doesn't change my suggestion.

And no they didn't fight that hard in those regions in the beginning.

We as in texas or the US? I think the people should decide their government and their allegiance. Don't you?

In your hypothetical, is the US a tyrannical government and is Mexico a more fitting option for freedom and self autonomy?



Edit: I don't consider wiki to be a legit source, but they sure don't seem very pro Ukraine based on recent history:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donetsk_People%27s_Republic

Maybe the people just voted in a bunch of pro Russian yahoos by accident or they are subverting their elections?

---

This was addressed numerous times over the first 6 months of the war. Lots of threads and posts covering it. Going to keep it simple because I'm just tired of writing dissertations on this same issue. Prior to Russia seeding, supporting, supplying, training, etc a relatively small initial group of separatists in 2014 there was no broad movement for independence from Ukraine outside of areas containing a high volume of illegal Russian immigrants. Yes. Eastern Ukraine had Russian illegals. Not surprising.

Via direct Russian influence and support, the group expanded and, via violence, bribery, and other coercive means ensured that pro-Russian elements were installed in local and regional government positions. They also ensured that there was little choice as to where local allegiances would lie if you lived in that area. It's a poor area. People didn't have an option to pick up and leave. Most residents who weren't men of fighting age just tried to keep their heads down and keep living. Men of fighting age didn't have a lot of options if they wanted to remain alive and keep their families safe. Their "opinions" and "voting" practices were whatever kept them safe and off the radar.

Eventually, as we know, this all boiled over into direct conflict between the Russian backed contingent (which was also comprised of actual illegal Russian citizens and literal Russian military), local Ukrainian nationalist militias, and Ukrainian government. There was never some wholly organic movement of Ukrainians who wanted to join Russia out of desire for some greater liberty or escape from Ukrainian tyranny. Russia manufactured it, pitched a pretty story, and when things got ugly, as they do in conflict, they pointed fingers as justification of their narrative.

If you want to talk about negotiation of a portion of the Donbas region in eastern Ukraine where the MOST pro Russian concentration of residents lived (many being literal Russian citizens) in order to cease hostilities and save lives then I don't see that as being unreasonable.

Advocating for permitting Russia to annex an area of 4 oblasts nearly 1/3 the size of Texas (whose residents, outside of the Donbas conflict, literally never pushed to leave Ukraine) based on what a limited group of people supported in a limited border region due largely to Russian subversion and destabilization seems a bit much, unless your logic is that the greater good is to end the war at all costs, with the quickest way of doing so being to offer Russia a sweetheart deal that allows them to achieve, for all practical purposes, victory.

And if that's your logic then that's your logic. Just trying to hone in on the heart of your pov.

---

That's my logic as we have no reason to be there and Ukraine is not a NATO country. To say that area is not ethnically Russian beyond the rest of Ukraine is silly and untrue. Not saying you said that but you are heavily implying the only people that want to be a part of Russia in the region are some separatists and they all love Ukraine, which isn't true nor verifiable one way or the other.

Ukraine is a corrupt haven for our corrupt leaders.

Us getting involved costs us untold resources and creates a new foreign war we are supplying and escalating with more equipment and said resources.

Personally, I also think that if you sued for peace and got Putin what he wanted in that small victory, he would be dead soon anyway. After that there may be a new tyrant but you fight that battle when it comes instead of throwing more resources into Ukraine. That and during peacetime you can create new economic levers that stop Russia from taking aggression. Like we had before Biden ****ed it all up.

Say what you will about my logic but there is no end to this besides the US spending soldiers, money and equipment on a pyrrhic war of attrition OR Ukraine losing outright. We don't even have a strategy for victory except "making Putin give up". Which speaks for the dumbasses running our current foreign policy.

---

Two years ago almost to the day.

Lets see the convos get those *edited* tags.

Anyone with a brain could have forseen this ending. Billions and billions and all those lives lost later, here we are.

GAC06 said:

---

I guess the other nonsense isolationist arguments fell flat so now we need fear mongering over a draft

---

How are the "isolationists" looking now?

Teslag said:

---

IndividualFreedom said:

---

Well joe and his woke team destroyed the greatest volunteer army of all times with their non sense. They will have to send all their lebesians and tranknees to go fight and die. This generation of young men are not going to die for the elite's money laundering scheme.

---

I'm fairly certain that an army of woke LGBT soldiers could easily defeat Russia after what we've seen out of them the past year.

---

Great call.

So was there a draft?

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

Lets see the convos get those *edited* tags.

Anyone with a brain could have forseen this ending. Billions and billions and all those lives lost later, here we are.

---

Lather, rinse, repeat…progressive politicians (including George Bush) have perfected the art of personal financial gain and power through senseless US involvement in foreign wars.

At least there won't be any future funding for senseless US foreign war involvement under the current administration.

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

Teslag said:

---

IndividualFreedom said:

---

Well joe and his woke team destroyed the greatest volunteer army of all times with their non sense. They will have to send all their lebesians and tranknees to go fight and die. This generation of young men are not going to die for the elite's money laundering scheme.

---

I'm fairly certain that an army of woke LGBT soldiers could easily defeat Russia after what we've seen out of them the past year.

---

Great call.

---

Not sure this is the bump you think it is. Russia is still bogged down in a quagmire against a country much smaller and led by a former comedian.

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

I guess the other nonsense isolationist arguments fell flat so now we need fear mongering over a draft

---

How are the "isolationists" looking now?

---

Is there a draft? Are you ok? Did that seem like a "gotcha" to you?

Putin fans with a room temperature IQ are trying to spike the football. Very entertaining.

Me: "This war is stupid and will go nowhere except trampling lives senselessly and wasting billions of tax dollars"

Uke bois: Putin is a monster! Stack em up like cordwood!

Me: well this went nowhere. What a waste.

Uke bois: they held their own! Don't spike the football!

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Am I missing some kind of push to send troops to Ukraine? Why is this even a talking point?

---

You can't be that naiive

---

Feel free to provide any information to the contrary.

---

Escalation is real in this conflict. Just like when some of us rolled our eyes when Ukraine fanbois said this war was going to be a bargain when the original 40-some-odd billion was budgeted for Ukraine.

Some of us see where this is logically headed, and others want to talk tackti-cool stuff on the ukraine thread and pound their chest and pretend Biden is Reagan.

Hope that helps. for the record, we already have troops over there.

---

Let's check what you actually said on this thread. Oh yeah, you were hilariously dead ass wrong. Thanks for bumping it though. lol

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

2012heisman said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Am I missing some kind of push to send troops to Ukraine? Why is this even a talking point?

---

You can't be that naiive

---

Feel free to provide any information to the contrary.

---

Escalation is real in this conflict. Just like when some of us rolled our eyes when Ukraine fanbois said this war was going to be a bargain when the original 40-some-odd billion was budgeted for Ukraine.

Some of us see where this is logically headed, and others want to talk tackti-cool stuff on the ukraine thread and pound their chest and pretend Biden is Reagan.

Hope that helps. for the record, we already have troops over there.

---

https://www.factcheck.org/2023/02/posts-misquote-bidens-year-old-remarks-on-tanks-for-ukraine

---

Your Soros funded fact check is garbage.

---

I posted the video too and these goobers sure are sounding like leftist memes with their walls of words trying to explain how brandon isn't going back on what he said and that he is totally sound and functional with all his talks about their precious proxy war.

---

Quote:

---

But look, the idea the idea that we're going to send in offensive equipment and have planes and tanks and trains going in with American pilots and American crews, just understand and don't kid yourself, no matter what you all say that's called "World War Three." Okay?

---

There is a distinct and important difference in saying we're not sending in American tanks and we're not sending in American tanks with American crews. It's ironic that in response to, "Where is this push to send troops to Ukraine?" you have to misquote a quote about exactly that, not sending troops to Ukraine, to try to make an argument that there is some new push to send troops to Ukraine and Biden is somehow going back on his words last March about about not sending troops because we've given them 30 uncrewed tanks.

---

When there are service men and women in those tanks soon we're going to revisit this thread and your arguing semantics won't make you look less dumb.

When you're defending joe Biden with technicalities you really should reconsider your position.

Not trolling. You guys will just never admit you're being taken for a ride.

---

When there are servicemen in those tanks soon we'll revisit this thread. lol

GAC06 said:

---

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Am I missing some kind of push to send troops to Ukraine? Why is this even a talking point?

---

You can't be that naiive

---

Feel free to provide any information to the contrary.

---

Escalation is real in this conflict. Just like when some of us rolled our eyes when Ukraine fanbois said this war was going to be a bargain when the original 40-some-odd billion was budgeted for Ukraine.

Some of us see where this is logically headed, and others want to talk tackti-cool stuff on the ukraine thread and pound their chest and pretend Biden is Reagan.

Hope that helps. for the record, we already have troops over there.

---

Let's check when you actually said on this thread. Oh yeah, you were hilariously dead ass wrong. Thanks for bumping it though. lol

---

I'm shocked he's able to post from the front lines considering I'm assuming he was drafted along with the rest of us. Starlink coming in handy.

No no no. You guys got to bloviate saying 80 billion was cheap a few years ago and that there was "great oversight of the funds" according to Dan Crenshaw. Also Russia was crumbled and devastated. AND it would be Pennie's on the dollar cheap so it's a no brainer.

This revisionist nonsense is why this board makes fun of you.

You looked very very silly on this thread with your histrionics about an impending draft. Now you look silly firing off strawmen to distract from how poorly this has gone for you.

nortex97 said:

---

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Am I missing some kind of push to send troops to Ukraine? Why is this even a talking point?

---

You can't be that naiive

---

Methinks the lady doth protest too much.

So far, Biden's Ukraine crisis has led to a spike in world hunger, massive inflation (mainly in Africa/places no one cares about), global energy crisis, a renewed/strengthened Russo-China alliance, and a very significant ramp up in weapons procurement across the US-Europe and the middle east.

This fight over the donbas farmland is going great! Poopy Pants even got a photo op out of it, and lots of ukrainian flags on twitter/social media!

---

I apologize for being wrong, in that the inflation attendant to the energy spike in Europe/elsewhere from the policies of this war wound up being 100 percent global and not just to places no one cares about.

Of course it would have been vastly preferable for the US to stay out of it, heck, going back to 2014 at least this is true. Hopefully Trump's plan to negotiate for a 50% cut in defense spending among the CN-US-RU triad comes to fruition, but I'm skeptical.

Trump: "One of the first meetings I want to have is with President Xi of China, President Putin of Russia, and I want to say, 'let's cut our military budget in half.' And we can do that." pic.twitter.com/Z8osuKnHVg

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) February 13, 2025

At least the neocons would be displeased, and the Euro's encouraged even further to take care of themselves/not be so needy.

Tom: You make a lot of good points, but you picked a VERY strange thead to bump to prove it! lol

When I saw it last night, I thought it as a pro-Ukraine person bumping it!

Im Gipper said:

---

Tom: You make a lot of good points, but you picked a VERY strange thead to bump to prove it! lol

When I saw it last night, I thought it as a pro-Ukraine person bumping it!

---

It doesnt matter what thread i bump.

Supporting this war was stupid. That's what history will remember, which is why there is no Zelensky bromance with Trump. It is rightfully coming to an end with the superpower and B team talking while Ukraine gets to wait outside and await our decided outcome.

If there is a war with Russia, we will not need draftees, only grave diggers.

🚨 #BREAKING: British Prime Minister Keir Starmer is ready to send British troops into Ukraine - Telegraph pic.twitter.com/THjChaODxG

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) February 16, 2025

When you hear the name Keir Starmer just think British AOC.

He said he's ready to send them to Ukraine as part of a security guarantee after a peace deal is signed, not send them into conflict with Russia.

Completely reasonable for Ukraine to have security assurances in any deal and it's fair for Europeans to be the ones to do it.

PA24 said:

---

I want a draft. Good enough for my generation, good enough for these clowns.

2 year minimum service for all.

---

We do not need a draft nor everyone doing 2 years minimum service. We can't afford to hire, feed, clothe, house, transport, and insure all those people and we have no need for them. We are way past broke already.

Sounds like Putin may be proving slow to warm up to negotiation.

Trump suggests the U.S. will continue to send "secured" aid to Ukraine in exchange for rare earth. "If we didn't do that, then Putin would say he won. We're the thing that's holding it back. We'll go as long as we have to go." pic.twitter.com/dmXzWR35pP

— unusual_whales (@unusual_whales) February 16, 2025

I am fine strip mining the Ukraine