Ukraine War
- Thread starter TigerGrowls
- Start date
I'm rooting for a stroke. I should say another stroke, because I think he's already had a couple of smaller ones.
Aannnnnnnnnnd ....... he got nothing. Well done, Donald. Art of the deal.
It's not a deal until it's a deal. But we have to admit that after Trump- Putin, Trump-Zalensky, Trump-zalensky-European leaders and a follow on call Trump-Putin, Peace is a lot closer than what it was just last Friday.
So now apparently we move to a Russia - Ukraine meeting and then a Russia- US - Ukraine meeting.
Long way to go, but I can't believe that agreements for all these meeting have been made without some baseline of understanding on each side's positions.
We can complain about red carpets, handshakes, ceasefires, and all that other periphery stuff, but the focus is still on peace.
Democrat being g honest.
WOW: Democrat Stephen A Smith goes scorched earth and says *ALL* of the recent Russian aggression came because of 3 Democrat presidents. x.com/JasonJournoDC/…
“We ain't gon' act like [Trump] caused this now. It's Democrats in office…It was Biden in office when a full-fledged war against Ukraine took place…It was Russia that invaded Crimea — and that was under the Obama administration!"
"It was Clinton in office when you made a deal that disarmed the Ukraine, and therefore weakened them, leaving them dependent on the United States!"
Complete truth bomb. Trump’s cleaning up the entire mess.
WOW: Democrat Stephen A Smith goes scorched earth and says *ALL* of the recent Russian aggression came because of 3 Democrat presidents. x.com/JasonJournoDC/…
“We ain't gon' act like [Trump] caused this now. It's Democrats in office…It was Biden in office when a full-fledged war against Ukraine took place…It was Russia that invaded Crimea — and that was under the Obama administration!"
"It was Clinton in office when you made a deal that disarmed the Ukraine, and therefore weakened them, leaving them dependent on the United States!"
Complete truth bomb. Trump’s cleaning up the entire mess.
I would feel worse, not better, about having Stephen A. Smith on my side in ANY debate. The guy is not just a pompous windbag; he's a dumb, pompous windbag. And those are his good points.
Trump needs to worry first about the big, steaming mess in his Depends.
Yeah. Trump hasn't done squat except dance as Putin pulls the strings. Not that it matters or anything, but a cease fire (you know, the thing that TACO was pushing for but Putin waived him off of) locks the lands won and lost in place. And is truly the only pseudo-legal (not that it matters to TACO) way to end this thing. Hyper-technically, taking any land by force and then keeping it is against international law. As to a "peace deal" where more land is ceded to Russia than Russia currently occupies, Zalensky couldn't do that if he wanted to. Giving land not already occupied would require a referendum by the Ukrainian people. Apparently Ukrainians value their constitution more than some Americans value ours - and even at the greatest costs.
I love how you guys have come up with your "solutions" to the Ukraine/russia war. You owe it to your country to get jobs at state department so our leaders can get the benefit of your vast knowledge of warfare. Short of that maybe get a job teaching at the War college they can always use people who know more than they do. I say, lets forget about peace. Let the Ukranians fight to the death to preserve our opinions of what they should do.
After all we definitely know better that Trump or Vance or Rubio what needs to be done. To the death of the last Ukranian - that's our motto!!
Lighten up, Ned! In no way am I (or anyone else here, I believe) suggesting that the Ukrainians "fight to the death to preserve our opinions of what they should do." The Ukrainians are doing what THEY want to do. I suspect that the Ukrainians are beyond weary of this fighting, but that they are also determined to fight off the Russians, as long as they get the help from Western Europe and the U.S. that they need in order to do so. If the Ukrainians want to continue the fight, we should support them. Of course Putin wants peace, provided it is on his terms. And Trump has repeatedly shown that he is disposed to do whatever Putin wants him to do.
"And Trump has repeatedly shown that he is disposed to do whatever Putin wants him to do." We shall see
Haven't we already seen, Ned? What happened with those deadlines Trump announced for a cessation of military hostilities in Ukraine? We all know. Putin ignored them. And what were the consequences? Not even a peep from Trump on the subject, and he is normally anything but reticent.
Not a “solution” or a hindrance to the same. Simply facts. Address, objectively, what I wrote and tell me where I am wrong. Thems the facts whether you like them or not.
There was a time where I would have deferred to the leaders under the auspices of their intelligence - those times have past (oh, and the facts are still the facts).
Oh look: yet another shallow social media post about some Trump drivel. That’s new and different. The thought. The mental acuity. The depth and logic.
nope, that's not the end game. Focus on the goal here...peace...along the way lots of games focus on the end goal.
When everything falls apart and war continues, then you can gloat.
....
great, right now war is ongoing and you're entitled to your perspective. No issue from me. And I don't know if you're wrong
I see things slightly differently. For the first time since this war began, there is an opening for peace...long way to go admittedly.
Both parties are jockeying for a better negotiating position. You and I would do the same thing.
But all this "posturing" (for want of a better word) is not the endgame. There are lots of players here, the US, Russia, Ukraine, the EU, NATO, and about 10 or so individual nations. Each has their own endgame goal....like I said, lots of posturing going on. And, as I've posted many times, this all may fall apart. Trump can push for all the deadlines he wants, he's only a facilitator, the principals are the ones who have to drive the process
But, some of you are jumping ahead of the game with your opinions, IMO. We have a ways to go. Next step is a Russia-Ukraine meeting. Let's hold our criticisms until then. Remember back to the Vietnam days. Again, lots of posturing, lots of back and forth, lots of room for criticism, but it all ended in end of war. Isn't that what we're pushing for?
There is no perspective, look it up. International law disallows land taken by force. The Ukrainians constitution does not allow the president of their country to give away land - the people must vote for it. Of course peace is a goal, but it doesn’t matter what Trump does if Zalensky doesn’t have the power to “do a deal” by his own country’s laws. Now here is my opinion: trump’s disregard for our laws and constitution make it almost impossible for him to recognize the limitations Zalensky is operating under. Also sets up nicely for Putin to ask for what Zalensky can’t deliver, personally, for Trump then to continue the narrative that Ukraine is to blame for the war and to declare that Ukraine doesn’t really want peace and to stop helping Ukraine, and for Putin the war monger to just keep taking whatever he wants in a slow grind.
Transcript: Trump Press Sec’s Fury at Media Erupts as Putin Mess Grows
As Karoline Leavitt browbeats reporters for failing to hail Trump as a world-historical peacemaker, an international relations expert explains the deeper reasons his handling of the Russia-Ukraine talks is so alarming.
newrepublic.com
so your answer for Ukraine not giving up territory that is currently occupied by Russian troops is for Putin the war monger to keep taking whatever he wants in a slow grind. And, of course the US and Europeans to continue to provide funding and weapons and for Ukranian troops who are being killed and wounded.
You seem to have already decided the fate of Ukraine. They can't give up territory so they have to keep fighting to take back territory that they haven't been able to take back in years. And in your secenario Russia takes more of whatever it wants. Call me crazy, but doesn't seem like a good plan to me if I'm Ukranian. You might not accept this but in order to take back territory Ukranians are going to need more troops. Patriot missiles, hellfires, air to surface missile won't take back land. Are we going to give them french, British troops? Or maybe we can send a UN force in to enforce international law? I don't think so.
Why don't you let the process play out. Zalensky and European leaders just spent 4 hours discussing a way forward. Do you think Zalensky didn't point out any limitations he might have? I'm not sure you guys pushing for the wars continuation have thought this entire sequence through to a possible conclusion. The entire peace thing might fall through and then we can just continue the war and see where it ends up. Who can outlast who. You apparently think that Ukraine can outlast Russia and take it's territory back. I'm not so sure.
Sweet baby 8 lb 10oz Jesus. Never even came close to saying, "so your answer for Ukraine not giving up territory that is currently occupied by Russian troops...". That is called a Cease Fire. That is what Europe wants. That is what Zalensky wants. That's what our simpleton POTUS wanted until Putin waived him off. That freezes the current lines. It is volitive of international law, but at least Zalensky can make that call himself.
I haven't "decided" any anything. I am simply telling you A) international law; and B) Ukrainian law per its Constitution. What I can also say is that Europe is not on board with violating international law. They tend to take that seriously. Kind of like their international criminal court that has a warrant out for Putin. the US does not acknowledge it hence why he could come and go to Alaska. Europe is going to have to balance their disdain for Russia and the violation of international law with the possibility of filling the void when TACO pulls us out (if this doesn't resolve). That's on them.
Ironic to me that you take the stance of someone predetermining Ukraine's fate when that is 100% what thin-skinned has done. He negotiates without them even present. I can't come up with a more picture perfect example of trying to determine someone else's fate then negotiating on their behalf with no authority and without them present. We absolutely could provide more to Ukraine, we just aren't. I'm not saying we should or we shouldn't, but we certainly could. And it's not for trump to decide if they are going to make a deal ceding more land. Or Europe. Or Putin. Or Zalensky. It must be done by referendum, i.e. popular vote and their most recent internal poll was overwhelmingly against ceding more land to Russia. Here's a novel idea: why don't we let Ukrainians decide what they think is best for Ukraine?
Simply as an FYI, I believe current projections have it taking Russia right around 4 more years to gain the land that Putin is currently demanding for peace. Lot can happen in 4 years.
Lastly, based upon the interactions I've had in this forum, I trust my analytical abilities and my strategic thought processes far more than many other posters.
first of all, you and I are on the same page on who is to negotiate on territory, and TACO as you refer to him. has said that. the purpose of the meeting with Putin was not to negotiate on land but to negotiate to get a Putin Zelensky meeting. Yes, Trump wanted a cease fire and didn't get it..a failure for sure. But so far the meeting between the two leaders seems to still be on. we'll see.
Where we disagree...you brought up two things..1. the international law and 2 the ukranian constitution. And, I have no issue with either of those. My point is this, if intl law precludes taking of territory and the Ukraine constitution precludes giving up territory, what are Putin and zelensky going to discuss at their meeting? A cease fire? doesn't that mean that Russia holds what they have and we violate both intl law and the Ukranian constitution? Is the only discussion about land Russia wants but does not control? OK, but what about the intl law and constitution? Or are we expecting Russia to give up land they're currently sitting on? I don't think that's likely.
I'm all for the Ukranians deciding their fate. And if they decide they want to continue fighting, then fine. Let them fight to the last man. Because if the Ukranians want to take back the territory they have lost they'll need boots on the ground to do something that so far they haven't been able to do. I personally don't see it, maybe you do. Some the other left leaning posters on here seem to see a Ukranian victory at some point. They might well be right. But what I see, is that many of the people now calling for continued support - with weapons and funding - are often the same ones calling for reductions in defense spending.
I continue by saying that if you've ever had artillery shells or mortar rounds aimed at you, you might be a little reticent to want to put others, especially civilians, in that position. But that's exactly what everyone calling for the war's continuation is doing. This is not a good situation.
Putin and Zelensky won't be meeting. Putin has made it clear that all of this - land he's gained, land he wants, no foreign soldiers in Ukraine as security measures, etc., must be decided prior to the meeting. That's not going to happen.
International law is what it is. Like I've already stated, it's a lot like the ICC - some countries recognize it and some don't. If other European countries want to truly abide by international law then they are going to have to provide the boots on the ground to help kick the Russians out. That's not going to happen gratuitously out of no where; so, a cease fire and letting everyone hold what they have, while a technical violation of international law, is what Europe is will to settle for.
Ukrainian law also is what it is and Zelensky does not seem to want to violate his own country's constitution. Good on him.
The Ukrainians want to keep fighting. Men and women. I'm not voting for putting anyone in harms way, but if it were me and it was my country then you better be damn sure I wouldn't give up. The ingenuity, grit, fight, and tenacity that those folks have shown and continue to show is worthy of a Battle of Thermopylae level legacy.
What are your projections telling you the time it will take for Ukrainian troops to take Ukrainian land held by Russia back?
Hint: Ain't happening in our lifetime.
Which has what to do with what, exactly? The offer was already on the table for a Cease Fire basically giving Russia what they've already illegally taken. But Putin didn't want that. So is your premise that Ukraine should lay down arms and give up more land than what Russia has already taken because Ukraine might not be able to take back land they've already lost? That, uh, that doesn't make a ton of sense.
As you state, Ukraine wants to keep fighting. Okay fine. It'll be fairly fruitless as their manpower is draining. At some point, if they aren't careful, they will break. Then ALL of Ukraine will be in Russian hands. Z, and Ukraine, needs to swallow their pride and accept that land will be lost. All Russia has to do and stay in the fight for this to happen. Putin owns the leverage.
Could not disagree more. That will only give Putin time to regroup and continue his attack on what remains. Keep fighting and depleting Russia (and N. Korea's and Iran's) troops/assets. Plus, the longer Putin plays Trump the more time there is for Trump to figure out he's been played. Maybe then he'll actually do something.
what would you have him do? It seems to me that neither party is willing to stop fighting. Russia wants to take more and Ukraine wants to take back land Russia has taken already.
The only way you take land is with troops on the ground. Want us to send troops? Want Europe to send troops? We're already selling weapons. We can impose more and more sanctions. Anything else??
libs won't be happy till American boots on the ground.
What we SHOULD do is sanction Russia as much as possible, and nothing else. Let Europe handle a European problem.
Is Europe still buying oil from Russia? If they are they should stop doing that first.
Gawd, take off the deeply orange hued glasses for just a moment now and then. Cheeto Hitler wants to genuflect to his Russian patron, but just because your Orange Demigod wants to do so, that doesn't mean you have to agree with him.
"Their manpower is draining" applies to both Ukraine and Russia. You realize, I hope, that Russia has been using North Korean soldiers in Ukraine for quite some time. That comes well over a year after Russia started conscripting retirement age men for their foolhardy war effort in Ukraine. Moreover, Russia has been trading crude oil to China and North Korea for munitions, and purchasing drones from Iran. They have depleted a whole lot of their military, both personnel and weaponry.
Ukraine is in a similarly feeble position, but one critical difference is that the Ukrainians are defending their own homeland. Russia brought the war to Ukraine, so where are the Ukrainians gonna go? By contrast, a whole lot of Russians would prefer to stay home, and not to be conscripted to travel to Ukraine and risk getting killed. And for what? A Black Sea port? A few thousand square miles of arable land? Russia already occupies by far the largest geographical area of any country in the world. Ukraine simply needs help from the U.S. and/or Western Europe. If that help continues, Russia cannot win. Period.
Last edited:
Hey Clem: Did Jethro tell y'all to post that? Do you by any chance play the banjo?