It has been somewhat amusing to watch all the anti government deep state corruption folks literally hang on every talking point driven by the country that literally wrote the book on deep state government corruption and authoritarianism (Russia) and led by a man who was literally cultivated in the KGB, who authored that book.
Why do you think Trump is saying Ukraine started the war?
20,862 Views |
483 Replies |
Last: 19 min ago by Teslag
Rex Racer said:
Everybody says dumb things sometimes. Trump is far from immune.
I won't lose any sleep over it.
Do you think he meant it? How do you think this attitude will influence his negotiations?
What exactly did Zelenskyy do to try and prevent the invasion? Did he negotiate anything with Putin? Did he ever speak to Putin? Did he ask for help from other nations?
Funky Winkerbean said:
What exactly did Zelenskyy do to try and prevent the invasion? Did he negotiate anything with Putin? Did he ever speak to Putin? Did he ask for help from other nations?
You mean did he surrender before they invaded? No, he didn't do that. He doesn't and didn't owe Russia anything.
Putin wanted Ukraine to be a part of Russia. You can't negotiate that away.
And yes he asked for help. Trump was the first one to send him lethal aid prior to the invasion.
halfastros81 said:
He's posturing to get them to agree to a peace deal imo. It doesn't make it any less cringy but there is a method to his madness.
I think this is it. Twisting Ukraine's arm
So a nation who fears an inevitable attack from historical precedent , seeks protection from said attack, and is then attacked. And they are at fault?titan said:Especially now. We see the global scale of the federal laundering and theft operation with media running interference for it. And glibly risking such confrontations as this in the process.ned911 said:
From what I've read, going back to Gorbachov the Russian's have been drawing the NATO line in the sand at Ukraine. When the US forced regime change in Ukraine from anti-NATO to pro NATO and Biden pushed for them to join this is what prompted the Russian response.
Everyone knew that talking about adding Ukraine to NATO would create a Russian response. Always, always, always follow the money.
The bold was indisputable. Anyone who knows the region at all knew it.
That's analogous to a beaten wife who tries to report it but no action is taken and is then beaten to death for it. And yes, that has happened.
Chicken and egg debate at it's heart. A Russian invasion was going to occur regardless of seeking NATO or not. That is the core debate I think. I believe they would have. It may have accelerated it but Russia taking arms against Ukraine was going to happen. Even without the NATO narrative IMO.
rgvag11 said:CrackerJackAg said:rgvag11 said:US President Donald Trump has blamed Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. He made the comments after a US and Russian delegation met for talks to end the war pic.twitter.com/YborVl2Vtx
— TRT World (@trtworld) February 19, 2025
I always thought Russia was the aggressor.
I have been beating this drum for years now.
Ukraine, and the US, are not victims here. They got what they wanted and Putin was forced to respond.
If he didn't he would not be in charge today.
May we have some specific details as to how Putin was "forced" into being the aggressor?
ETA: Are you saying this is what Trump believes too?
Putin was "forced" to respond the same way a jealous abuser is "forced" to beat/kill their ex because they dared to be interested in someone else. Really says a lot about the people who think this stuff...
The US didn't "force" the Ukrainians to kick out their Russian stooge President. Most of Ukraine wants ties to the West. Why shouldn't Ukraine make decisions for themselves? If they want to align with Western Europe and join the EU, why should Russia have any say? If they feel threatened by Russia, why shouldn't they be allowed to apply for NATO membership? Why does Ukraine have to be a vassal state to Russia? Let Russia have have the majority Russian ethnic areas, tell Putin that Ukraine can join the EU and NATO if they meet the requirements since he tried and failed to take over the entire country.ned911 said:
From what I've read, going back to Gorbachov the Russian's have been drawing the NATO line in the sand at Ukraine. When the US forced regime change in Ukraine from anti-NATO to pro NATO and Biden pushed for them to join this is what prompted the Russian response.
Everyone knew that talking about adding Ukraine to NATO would create a Russian response. Always, always, always follow the money.
plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose
Stuff like this.
The people in Donetsk didn't accept the Nuland revolution so the Ukrainians fired rockets into their cities. Then, over time, it escalated.
It's all pretty well documented in Scott Horton's book for folks who are genuinely interested (he's been on Dave Smith's show at least 3 times I believe). Of course, Biden's administration played a key role in 2022 in partnership with Zelensky's regime in the provocation.
🧵
— the Lemniscat (@theLemniscat) February 11, 2024
The war in Ukraine was not unprovoked
In 2014, Ukraine began shelling it's own people in Donetsk. Human Rights Watch accused Ukraine of firing grad rockets on people's homes and the Ukrainians of course blamed the "terrorists" for trying to show Ukraine forces in a bad light. pic.twitter.com/tu8icU3hvP
The people in Donetsk didn't accept the Nuland revolution so the Ukrainians fired rockets into their cities. Then, over time, it escalated.
It's all pretty well documented in Scott Horton's book for folks who are genuinely interested (he's been on Dave Smith's show at least 3 times I believe). Of course, Biden's administration played a key role in 2022 in partnership with Zelensky's regime in the provocation.
rgvag11 said:CrackerJackAg said:rgvag11 said:US President Donald Trump has blamed Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. He made the comments after a US and Russian delegation met for talks to end the war pic.twitter.com/YborVl2Vtx
— TRT World (@trtworld) February 19, 2025
I always thought Russia was the aggressor.
I have been beating this drum for years now.
Ukraine, and the US, are not victims here. They got what they wanted and Putin was forced to respond.
If he didn't he would not be in charge today.
May we have some specific details as to how Putin was "forced" into being the aggressor?
ETA: Are you saying this is what Trump believes too?
This is what every Geo political expert diplomat and politician knew before the war.
Touching Ukraine as a buffer was a third rail and would 100% lead to a major conflict.
NATO and EU was a non option.
We knew it and we (mostly unelected bureaucrats and intelligence services) did it anyway.
Everyone knew that. It was published fact. Read the opening chapter of prisoners of geography from 2017.
The Ukraine as a buffer without NATO presence reduces the border Russia has to defend by 2000 miles.
I know everybody here reacts strongly to the Cuban missile crisis and Pearl Harbor.
If we were invaded by Europe 10 times in the last 300 years and the last time was by Nazi Germany, resulting in millions of deaths, we would not allow our leaders to **** around with our border and defenses either.
We get a few million noncombatant immigrants here and people lose their mind and flip political parties.
Put yourself in their situation and think that through for half a second and it doesn't take a lot to figure it out
I can't tell you what Trump believes.
Go back and listen to the response in the presser that they're referencing. I don't hear it as him saying Ukraine started the war, though because he's talking fast I can understand how it's getting twisted that way.
Not in the way it is sometimes pitched, but it was an understanding in the Cold War draw-down.Teslag said:ned911 said:
From what I've read, going back to Gorbachov the Russian's have been drawing the NATO line in the sand at Ukraine. When the US forced regime change in Ukraine from anti-NATO to pro NATO and Biden pushed for them to join this is what prompted the Russian response.
Everyone knew that talking about adding Ukraine to NATO would create a Russian response. Always, always, always follow the money.
Gorbachev never had a NATO expansion promise
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/did-nato-promise-not-to-enlarge-gorbachev-says-no/
THIS is what has been always true. It doesn't matter how explicitly or not articulate. Anyone knew it. This is what makes us the careless force in the equation. Its analogous to Chinese folding in Mexico or Cuba. You don't know what we are going to do, but only that you are borrowing trouble.
Notice the word "Russian Response" --- that was always certain. What was unknown is what would it be, and conceivably could go all the way to world war. But it was always clear that would happen.Quote:
Everyone knew that talking about adding Ukraine to NATO would create a Russian response. Always, always, always follow the money.
FrioAg 00:
Leftist Democrats "have completely overplayed the Racism accusation. Honestly my first reaction when I hear it today is to assume bad intentions by the accuser, not the accused."
Leftist Democrats "have completely overplayed the Racism accusation. Honestly my first reaction when I hear it today is to assume bad intentions by the accuser, not the accused."
Eliminatus said:So a nation who fears an inevitable attack from historical precedent , seeks protection from said attack, and is then attacked. And they are at fault?titan said:Especially now. We see the global scale of the federal laundering and theft operation with media running interference for it. And glibly risking such confrontations as this in the process.ned911 said:
From what I've read, going back to Gorbachov the Russian's have been drawing the NATO line in the sand at Ukraine. When the US forced regime change in Ukraine from anti-NATO to pro NATO and Biden pushed for them to join this is what prompted the Russian response.
Everyone knew that talking about adding Ukraine to NATO would create a Russian response. Always, always, always follow the money.
The bold was indisputable. Anyone who knows the region at all knew it.
That's analogous to a beaten wife who tries to report it but no action is taken and is then beaten to death for it. And yes, that has happened.
Chicken and egg debate at it's heart. A Russian invasion was going to occur regardless of seeking NATO or not. That is the core debate I think. I believe they would have. It may have accelerated it but Russia taking arms against Ukraine was going to happen. Even without the NATO narrative IMO.
Putin's actions prompted the greatest expansion of NATO since its founding. He has paid a heavy price. And he allowed the world to evaluate the effectiveness, and ineffectiveness, of Russia's military.
...and there's money to made. Don't forget about the money, because if there's one thing for certain its that Russian's don't care about people. Anyone's....TheBonifaceOption said:You are wrong.rgvag11 said:
I always thought Russia was the aggressor.
Imagine if you had an American-majority living in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, they wanted to be independent from Canada. Things devolve, and Canada decides to outlaw pro-NS/NB media so these provinces are unable to have journalism and press and they are forced to listen to Canadian-majority media. They are becoming marginalized politically without a voice or ability to engage in messaging. War breaks out.
The world learns that Canada has been torturing, raping, and targeting civilians. The world forces a cease-fire. A cease-fire which Canada breaks, with the tenuous claim that Nova Scotia broke it first. Canada is shelling towns because they support independence. Secret police are disappearing mayors and public officials.
You are sitting in America, seeing your American brothers brutalized, marginalized, and being beaten. People have fled to your town asking you and your government for help.
At what point does the big brother step in and engage the bully?
Like said above - I will put the keyboard down and just watch the mental gymnastics from here.
Trump can lean on Ukraine to force a settlement and end to hostilities.
He can't lean on Russia, He has to play to Putin's ego to help manipulate him into seeing an end to the war as a benefit to Putin and his plans. That often requires at least pretending to buy into some BS.
Once things get stopped, it will be difficult to start the war back up if it is set up properly and so the key is just getting to that point. Sometimes that is saying what Putin wants to hear. Then once the shooting stops, it is possible to make arrangements so it is too costly to resume.
He can't lean on Russia, He has to play to Putin's ego to help manipulate him into seeing an end to the war as a benefit to Putin and his plans. That often requires at least pretending to buy into some BS.
Once things get stopped, it will be difficult to start the war back up if it is set up properly and so the key is just getting to that point. Sometimes that is saying what Putin wants to hear. Then once the shooting stops, it is possible to make arrangements so it is too costly to resume.
About a week ago, I might have agreed if I were looking at it optimistically.Captain Pablo said:halfastros81 said:
He's posturing to get them to agree to a peace deal imo. It doesn't make it any less cringy but there is a method to his madness.
I think this is it. Twisting Ukraine's arm
Now though, with ALL the messaging from him and his cabinet combined, I am not nearly so sure. I have reached a point now that I think he is surrounded by by those in his ear who do fully believe all the Russian propaganda and mixed with his own weird fascination with Putin over the years (have thought this about him for years now even before his current term) and I can see this just being groundwork to step away from Europe all together. Which anyone above room temp IQ knows is not great IMO.
Orrrrr.....it can be 10D chess. I don't know. But doesn't look like it so far to me. Closed room negotiations with Russia over Ukraine is pretty black and white to the world.
All this talk about Russian disinformation misses the point.
All one needs is knowledge of the 20th C century as the Cold War wound down to Y2K to know this involvement was destabilizing folly. Yeltsin would have also reacted against this.
FrioAg 00:
Leftist Democrats "have completely overplayed the Racism accusation. Honestly my first reaction when I hear it today is to assume bad intentions by the accuser, not the accused."
Leftist Democrats "have completely overplayed the Racism accusation. Honestly my first reaction when I hear it today is to assume bad intentions by the accuser, not the accused."
Who touched Ukraine?CrackerJackAg said:rgvag11 said:CrackerJackAg said:rgvag11 said:US President Donald Trump has blamed Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. He made the comments after a US and Russian delegation met for talks to end the war pic.twitter.com/YborVl2Vtx
— TRT World (@trtworld) February 19, 2025
I always thought Russia was the aggressor.
I have been beating this drum for years now.
Ukraine, and the US, are not victims here. They got what they wanted and Putin was forced to respond.
If he didn't he would not be in charge today.
May we have some specific details as to how Putin was "forced" into being the aggressor?
ETA: Are you saying this is what Trump believes too?
This is what every Geo political expert diplomat and politician knew before the war.
Touching Ukraine as a buffer was a third rail and would 100% lead to a major conflict.
NATO and EU was a non option.
We knew it and we (mostly unelected bureaucrats and intelligence services) did it anyway.
Everyone knew that. It was published fact. Read the opening chapter of prisoners of geography from 2017.
The Ukraine as a buffer without NATO presence reduces the border Russia has to defend by 2000 miles.
I know everybody here reacts strongly to the Cuban missile crisis and Pearl Harbor.
If we were invaded by Europe 10 times in the last 300 years and the last time was by Nazi Germany, resulting in millions of deaths, we would not allow our leaders to **** around with our border and defenses either.
We get a few million noncombatant immigrants here and people lose their mind and flip political parties.
Put yourself in their situation and think that through for half a second and it doesn't take a lot to figure it out
I can't tell you what Trump believes.
Ukraine pursued a non-alignment policy, UNTIL Russia invaded Ukraine, Crimea, in 2014. Of course they wanted to join NATO after they were invaded.
Now Putin has NATO's biggest presence at his doorstep.
It's amazing how Trump can say something, let's say, ill judged, and some people will twist themselves in knots to defend it.
To the extent Trump was stating that Ukraine started the war, that is simply false. If Trump was suggesting that Ukraine bears some responsibility for not heading it off, that's open to argument. But, ultimately, its simply false for the Putin fanboys to suggest that Russia was justified to invade Ukraine.
To the extent Trump was stating that Ukraine started the war, that is simply false. If Trump was suggesting that Ukraine bears some responsibility for not heading it off, that's open to argument. But, ultimately, its simply false for the Putin fanboys to suggest that Russia was justified to invade Ukraine.
I'd like to think this is wrong but there is a small but vocal subset of conservative isolationists that have a strong confirmation bias towards any narrative that supports isolationist positions, and they have strong influence within the administration right now. Some of them make dubious claims that strongly reflect Russian propaganda intended to play to that audience and that appearance isn't good, even if the propaganda itself isn't what is actually influencing the narrative. If you are going to argue Russian grievances, they need to be made clearly and in context and weighed against Ukrainian ones.
It is one thing to understand the perspectives of both sides, but it is another to grant them equal weight and validity by default, instead of weighing them based on objective standards.
Germany as a nation had some grievances from WWI that were arguable. They did not however reasonably justify the events and actions initiating WWII in Europe, as an example.
It is one thing to understand the perspectives of both sides, but it is another to grant them equal weight and validity by default, instead of weighing them based on objective standards.
Germany as a nation had some grievances from WWI that were arguable. They did not however reasonably justify the events and actions initiating WWII in Europe, as an example.
MouthBQ98 said:
Trump can lean on Ukraine to force a settlement and end to hostilities.
He can't lean on Russia, He has to play to Putin's ego to help manipulate him into seeing an end to the war as a benefit to Putin and his plans. That often requires at least pretending to buy into some BS.
Once things get stopped, it will be difficult to start the war back up if it is set up properly and so the key is just getting to that point. Sometimes that is saying what Putin wants to hear. Then once the shooting stops, it is possible to make arrangements so it is too costly to resume.
That's a really dangerous game that could easily backfire on Trump, and even worse, leave the US looking to the rest of the world like we got played.
I have no idea if he meant it or if it will influence anything.rgvag11 said:Rex Racer said:
Everybody says dumb things sometimes. Trump is far from immune.
I won't lose any sleep over it.
Do you think he meant it? How do you think this attitude will influence his negotiations?
I do know he wants to end the war, and I think he will do everything he can to end it with America's interests in mind.
Here is the crux of the situation. The "rights" and "wrongs" of it. YES they should be able to make decisions for themselves.The Kraken said:The US didn't "force" the Ukrainians to kick out their Russian stooge President. Most of Ukraine wants ties to the West. Why shouldn't Ukraine make decisions for themselves? If they want to align with Western Europe and join the EU, why should Russia have any say? If they feel threatened by Russia, why shouldn't they be allowed to apply for NATO membership? Why does Ukraine have to be a vassal state to Russia? Let Russia have have the majority Russian ethnic areas, tell Putin that Ukraine can join the EU and NATO if they meet the requirements since he tried and failed to take over the entire country.ned911 said:
From what I've read, going back to Gorbachov the Russian's have been drawing the NATO line in the sand at Ukraine. When the US forced regime change in Ukraine from anti-NATO to pro NATO and Biden pushed for them to join this is what prompted the Russian response.
Everyone knew that talking about adding Ukraine to NATO would create a Russian response. Always, always, always follow the money.
The issue is us being on the hook for it.
From our perspective, what needed to be preserved was Ukraine neither NATO or occupied and invaded by Russia. If it took a dmz approach, that is what should have happened. We did not try to prevent the war. Arguably enabled it. But enabled is not "forced" either. That's what makes this so gray.
FrioAg 00:
Leftist Democrats "have completely overplayed the Racism accusation. Honestly my first reaction when I hear it today is to assume bad intentions by the accuser, not the accused."
Leftist Democrats "have completely overplayed the Racism accusation. Honestly my first reaction when I hear it today is to assume bad intentions by the accuser, not the accused."
[Telling another user they don't know what they are talking about without an actual counter-argument is just trolling. Make the counter-argument or ignore. Those are the two options. -Staff]
doubledog said:
Zelenski was pushing for Ukraine to join NATO and Biden administration was hinting they would go along with it.
Ukraine is sovereign and can choose to do what they want. That isn't Ukraine starting the war.
If you say you hate the state of politics in this nation and you don't get involved in it, you obviously don't hate the state of politics in this nation.
Tucker Carlson on Ukrainian "freedom-fighters" buing $100,000 handbags in Geneva and high-end cars in Romania with American taxpayers' money. pic.twitter.com/PZmKlfbjPA
— Ignorance, the root and stem of all evil (@ivan_8848) February 4, 2025
Ukrainians respond to Trump’s demand to repay the $250 billion that was given: "We don’t owe you a single cent you bastards.”pic.twitter.com/bcbBKv4Po3
— Defiant L’s (@DefiantLs) February 19, 2025
I agree. I hope they know what they are doing. His track record recently is fairly good, so I will be optimistic for now.
Detmersdislocatedshoulder
Joined:
Mar 30, 2020
Posts:
13,588
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Teslag said:
Putin was forced to invade a sovereign nation because they might have joined a defensive alliance?
no what putin was afraid of was ukraine becoming part of nato and then nato putting nuclear missiles in ukraine. this is no different than if russia wanted to put nuclear missiles in say Cuba.
what i can assure you is we played a major hand in this and that has been somewhat admitted to by victoria nuland. she admitted that the minsk agreement was a ploy to buy time for ukraine to prepare for war.
this issue is not black and white.
aTmAg said:
(Countries have every right to pursue and join whatever alliances they want. Nobody has the right to invade them because of it.)
What is this nonsense?
Where did you come up with this "right"? Who is responsible for enforcing this "right"?
If Canada formed an alliance with China you can bet America wouldn't hesitate to invade because of it.
Zelenskyy didn't start the war, but he definitely chose war over other options.
Question: if Russia had actually installed nuke missiles in Cuba in 1962, and JFK bombed the hell out of them, and invaded Cuba to keep it from happening again, who would have started the war?
The USA would have started the war.
But, Russia would have chosen war as opposed to peace by installing those missiles.
The situation in Ukraine is very analogous. Russia saw Ukraine in NATO to be an existential threat, and they would not allow it. This was not a secret. They said that Ukraine to NATO would start a war. We had a loose memorandum that said Ukraine wouldn't join NATO.
Then Ukraine tried to join NATO, and Russia made good on its promise.
There is one other factor here in that Putin really covets the return of Kiev to the Russian empire, and Ukraine won't tolerate Russian occupation because they still remember, and will always remember, the Holodomor.
But the truth is that Zelenskyy could have chosen a different path, but risked open war by trying to join NATO. Russia did not balk on their promise to go to war on this issue, even with the promise of US aid to help defend Ukraine.
We never should have got involved, and probably would not have got involved, and the Zelenskyy would have made a deal, had team Biden not promised military aid to assist in kicking out Russia. And Biden probably wouldn't have made that promise had he and his family not made so much money from Ukrainian money laundering.
There are no angels here, only demons, on all three sides. The best thing to do is find a diplomatic solution. The good news is that Ukraine still has its autonomy, and will keep it.
Question: if Russia had actually installed nuke missiles in Cuba in 1962, and JFK bombed the hell out of them, and invaded Cuba to keep it from happening again, who would have started the war?
The USA would have started the war.
But, Russia would have chosen war as opposed to peace by installing those missiles.
The situation in Ukraine is very analogous. Russia saw Ukraine in NATO to be an existential threat, and they would not allow it. This was not a secret. They said that Ukraine to NATO would start a war. We had a loose memorandum that said Ukraine wouldn't join NATO.
Then Ukraine tried to join NATO, and Russia made good on its promise.
There is one other factor here in that Putin really covets the return of Kiev to the Russian empire, and Ukraine won't tolerate Russian occupation because they still remember, and will always remember, the Holodomor.
But the truth is that Zelenskyy could have chosen a different path, but risked open war by trying to join NATO. Russia did not balk on their promise to go to war on this issue, even with the promise of US aid to help defend Ukraine.
We never should have got involved, and probably would not have got involved, and the Zelenskyy would have made a deal, had team Biden not promised military aid to assist in kicking out Russia. And Biden probably wouldn't have made that promise had he and his family not made so much money from Ukrainian money laundering.
There are no angels here, only demons, on all three sides. The best thing to do is find a diplomatic solution. The good news is that Ukraine still has its autonomy, and will keep it.
texagbeliever said:aTmAg said:
(Countries have every right to pursue and join whatever alliances they want. Nobody has the right to invade them because of it.)
What is this nonsense?
Where did you come up with this "right"? Who is responsible for enforcing this "right"?
If Canada formed an alliance with China you can bet America wouldn't hesitate to invade because of it.
We'd invade Canada over an alliance (economic, peace, military??????) with China? Sure we would.
BusterAg said:
Zelenskyy didn't start the war, but he definitely chose war over other options.
Question: if Russia had actually installed nuke missiles in Cuba in 1962, and JFK bombed the hell out of them, and invaded Cuba to keep it from happening again, who would have started the war?
The USA would have started the war.
But, Russia would have chosen war as opposed to peace by installing those missiles.
The situation in Ukraine is very analogous. Russia saw Ukraine in NATO to be an existential threat, and they would not allow it. This was not a secret. They said that Ukraine to NATO would start a war. We had a loose memorandum that said Ukraine wouldn't join NATO.
Then Ukraine tried to join NATO, and Russia made good on its promise.
There is one other factor here in that Putin really covets the return of Kiev to the Russian empire, and Ukraine won't tolerate Russian occupation because they still remember, and will always remember, the Holodomor.
But the truth is that Zelenskyy could have chosen a different path, but risked open war by trying to join NATO. Russia did not balk on their promise to go to war on this issue, even with the promise of US aid to help defend Ukraine.
We never should have got involved, and probably would not have got involved, and the Zelenskyy would have made a deal, had team Biden not promised military aid to assist in kicking out Russia. And Biden probably wouldn't have made that promise had he and his family not made so much money from Ukrainian money laundering.
There are no angels here, only demons, on all three sides. The best thing to do is find a diplomatic solution. The good news is that Ukraine still has its autonomy, and will keep it.
Please show were Ukraine tried to join NATO prior to Putin's invasion of Crimea.
When all of the Ukrainian leaders saw a 300% crease in salaries while the war was happening, that told me most of what I thought of Ukraine.
The people in that region do not like each other and have always looked for a reason to kill off the other side. Unfortunately, countrymen who don't like each other and have means to wipe out, pillage and murder the other side, when given the chance, will be more brutal than any outside force can be.
See the American Revolution and how pro-British and Pro-Americans treated each other before British forces arrived in different regions.
The people in that region do not like each other and have always looked for a reason to kill off the other side. Unfortunately, countrymen who don't like each other and have means to wipe out, pillage and murder the other side, when given the chance, will be more brutal than any outside force can be.
See the American Revolution and how pro-British and Pro-Americans treated each other before British forces arrived in different regions.
Bingo. This is not about rights but about how nations predictably react when they have sufficient power and sense of security risk to do so. Diplomacy deals with reality, not as things should be. Thats for philosophers and priests.texagbeliever said:aTmAg said:
(Countries have every right to pursue and join whatever alliances they want. Nobody has the right to invade them because of it.)
What is this nonsense?
Where did you come up with this "right"? Who is responsible for enforcing this "right"?
If Canada formed an alliance with China you can bet America wouldn't hesitate to invade because of it.
That said, Ukraine is a special case. WE asked them to disarm their arsenal in 1994 in return for guarantees. WE should have told Russia BEFORE invading --- "you remember what happened to Saddam? We are not going to let you invade Ukraine, we have that 1994 pledge remember? So don't. And you can't say its our fault and act of war because we are telling you now and you know about the 1994 arrangement. So back off that mobilization and lets discuss things."
But the reason that didn't happen is because Biden's admin were crooks, theives, bad actors. They didn't want to prevent it. They didn't care, as long as their criminal enterprises and laundering in Ukraine could remain obscured and concealed.
FrioAg 00:
Leftist Democrats "have completely overplayed the Racism accusation. Honestly my first reaction when I hear it today is to assume bad intentions by the accuser, not the accused."
Leftist Democrats "have completely overplayed the Racism accusation. Honestly my first reaction when I hear it today is to assume bad intentions by the accuser, not the accused."
Why would Canada want an alliance with China? Does China promote democracy and western values? Is the Chinese alliance strictly defensive and has been for nearly 80 years?texagbeliever said:aTmAg said:
(Countries have every right to pursue and join whatever alliances they want. Nobody has the right to invade them because of it.)
What is this nonsense?
Where did you come up with this "right"? Who is responsible for enforcing this "right"?
If Canada formed an alliance with China you can bet America wouldn't hesitate to invade because of it.
Does the US have a President who has suppressed the opposition and by default has made himself leader for life? Does the President consider Canada "not a country" and is actually US territory?
plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose
Featured Stories
See All
LIVE from Reed Arena: No. 7 Texas A&M vs. No. 6 Tennessee
by Luke Evangelist
13:35
15h ago
4.1k
No. 7 A&M seeks to respond vs. No. 6 Tennessee on Saturday morning
by Olin Buchanan
10:35
18h ago
1.3k
HotardRat
LIVE from Reed Arena: No. 7 Texas A&M vs No. 6 Tennessee
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
23
LukeEvangelist
LIVE from Reed Arena: No. 7 Texas A&M vs No. 6 Tennessee
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
21
Average Joe
Texas A&M vs Auburn Men's Basketball Tip Off Time Announced (8:00 pm)
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
19
PatriotAg02
LIVE from Reed Arena: No. 7 Texas A&M vs No. 6 Tennessee
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
15