Putin Threatens The West

[Magilla]

24 minutes ago, trastrick said:

I think the Bear would be happy with the old “understanding” of spheres of influence, like the old days.

That old understanding evaporated the second "America First" became a thing... for somewhat blindingly obvious reasons.

 

24 minutes ago, trastrick said:

The prospect of the U.S. (and German) and NATO nukes on his border

A prospect guaranteed by his own actions.

 

24 minutes ago, trastrick said:

a U.S. President calling for his overthrow in the New Liberal World Order, doesn’t thrill him!

You appear to be confused about the timeline...

 

24 minutes ago, trastrick said:

So the Bears do what Bears do.

**** where they eat, seemingly

 

24 minutes ago, trastrick said:

They don’t trust Western “values” 😀

Simplistic babble.

 

Most of his TV talking heads trust them well enough to invest, buy property and educate their kids there.

 

24 minutes ago, trastrick said:

Who wudda think it?

Those who don't have the faintest grasp of history, seemingly?

[altus]

2 hours ago, trastrick said:

I think the Bear would be happy with the old “understanding” of spheres of influence, like the old days.

 

The prospect of the U.S. (and German) and NATO nukes on his border, a U.S. President calling for his overthrow in the New Liberal World Order, doesn’t thrill him!

 

So the Bears do what Bears do.  They don’t trust Western “values” 😀

 

Who wudda think it?

I'm sure "the Bear" would be delighted if the world went back to the "old understanding" where the Soviet Union was still intact and most of Eastern Europe was in its sphere of influence. But a consequence of your suggestion that "Gives the people under the thumb of the Totslitarians, a chance to see the prosperity that freedom can bring!" is that they have chosen to break away from Russia's control.

 

So make your mind up. Do you want countries to have self determination of do you want them to be controlled by a totalitarian neighbour?

[L00b]

1 hour ago, altus said:

(…)

 

So make your mind up. Do you want countries to have self determination of do you want them to be controlled by a totalitarian neighbour?

Good luck with that one. 

[trastrick]

11 hours ago, altus said:

I'm sure "the Bear" would be delighted if the world went back to the "old understanding" where the Soviet Union was still intact and most of Eastern Europe was in its sphere of influence. But a consequence of your suggestion that "Gives the people under the thumb of the Totslitarians, a chance to see the prosperity that freedom can bring!" is that they have chosen to break away from Russia's control.

 

So make your mind up. Do you want countries to have self determination of do you want them to be controlled by a totalitarian neighbour?

What I or you want is of no consequence, unless perhaps it is a de-escalation of the mad rush to WW3.?

 

But unless the failed and failing Western New Liberal World Order they seek to impose on the vast majority of a World which does not share their "values" continuing conflict will be the norm,, as it has been rejected over and over again.

 

Detente with the enemy is the only way to stop the killing and destruction, in the short term.

 

The issue of how to deal with the majority in the World, who oppose the West, is a longer term issue, that requires a consistent strategy and strong leadership, that is noticeably absent at this point in history,

 

All indications are that the U.S. are preparing for another "accommodation" with the enemy,

 

According to in the latest dispatches from Washington, D.C.

 

“We’re going to have to ultimately get to a diplomatic phase of this conflict,” (U.S. National Security Advisor) Sullivan said. “Our goal is to strengthen the hand of the Ukrainians on the battlefield so that they are in the strongest position with the most leverage when they get to the negotiating table.”

 

Which I told everybody here, months ago!

 

Which coupled with Biden's. refusal to send F-16 Jets to the Ukraine so they can more effectively prosecute their war with Russia, appears to distance U.S. Policy, from Zelensky's determination to drive the Russians completely out of all Ukrainian territory, including Crimea, which was basically ceded to Russia, by the Obama Administration.

 

As far as "values", and "morality" are concerned, it is complicated by the fact that the Russian speaking regions of the Ukraine, The Peoples Republic of Donetsk, and The Peoples Republic  of  Luhansk and have declared their own right to determine their own futures.

Edited February 27, 2023 by trastrick

[Kidorry]

1 hour ago, trastrick said:

What I or you want is of no consequence, unless perhaps it is a de-escalation of the mad rush to WW3.?

 

But unless the failed and failing Western New Liberal World Order they seek to impose on the vast majority of a World which does not share their "values" continuing conflict will be the norm,, as it has been rejected over and over again.

 

Detente with the enemy is the only way to stop the killing and destruction, in the short term.

 

The issue of how to deal with the majority in the World, who oppose the West, is a longer term issue, that requires a consistent strategy and strong leadership, that is noticeably absent at this point in history,

 

All indications are that the U.S. are preparing for another "accommodation" with the enemy,

 

According to in the latest dispatches from Washington, D.C.

 

“We’re going to have to ultimately get to a diplomatic phase of this conflict,” (U.S. National Security Advisor) Sullivan said. “Our goal is to strengthen the hand of the Ukrainians on the battlefield so that they are in the strongest position with the most leverage when they get to the negotiating table.”

 

Which I told everybody here, months ago!

 

Which coupled with Biden's. refusal to send F-16 Jets to the Ukraine so they can more effectively prosecute their war with Russia, appears to distance U.S. Policy, from Zelensky's determination to drive the Russians completely out of all Ukrainian territory, including Crimea, which was basically ceded to Russia, by the Obama Administration.

 

As far as "values", and "morality" are concerned, it is complicated by the fact that the Russian speaking regions of the Ukraine, The Peoples Republic of Donetsk, and The Peoples Republic  of  Luhansk and have declared their own right to determine their own futures.

You do talk some kak. Would you vote against something if you had a gun pointing at you. As far as not sending jets to the Ukraine the logistics to support them would be enormous.

[Magilla]

2 hours ago, trastrick said:

“We’re going to have to ultimately get to a diplomatic phase of this conflict,” (U.S. National Security Advisor) Sullivan said. “Our goal is to strengthen the hand of the Ukrainians on the battlefield so that they are in the strongest position with the most leverage when they get to the negotiating table.”

 

 

Which I told everybody here, months ago!

At no time have you advocated giving Ukraine the battlefield support to provide leverage in any subsequent negotiations.... entirely the opposite...

 

...in every post you claim those in support of that action are "armchair warmongers".

 

 

Now we're supposed to believe you actually supported all those arms going to Ukraine after all... don't make me laugh!

 

It is literally the antithesis of everything you have advocated so far.

 

 

The diplomatic phase, as laid out above, from a position of strength... bears no relation to anything you have ever suggested.

 

Again, who're you trying to convince... yourself?

Edited February 27, 2023 by Magilla

[L00b]

2 hours ago, Magilla said:

Again, who're you trying to convince... yourself?

Trumpites have massively own-goaled themselves over the US support to Ukraine in recent times, never less so than when Republicans realised that they cannot cut funding to Ukraine as it would lose them support on key districts with large Ukranian and Eastern European ancestry populations, wherein the schism between GOP reps and the less extreme balance of the party grows ever wider.

 

 

 

[Guest makapaka]

20 hours ago, trastrick said:

Looks like the U.S. is backing down.

 

No F -16 Jets for Zelensky, says Biden.

 

And today his National Security Adviser comes out with this:

Thank god - now we need rishi sunak to do the same - although he’s probably lining up a photoshoot of him sat in a typhoon painted blue and yellow.

[geared]

I'd be surprised if they started sending jets in so soon after approving tanks.  It's always been a drip-feed of arms.

 

Going whole hog might make China change their mind and start shipping stuff to Russia.

[L00b]

8 minutes ago, makapaka said:

Thank god - now we need rishi sunak to do the same - although he’s probably lining up a photoshoot of him sat in a typhoon painted blue and yellow.

He doesn’t need to. The UK hasn’t got any jets to give or lend-lease. Neither have most European NATO members.

 

Carry on tanking 😏👍🏻

1 minute ago, geared said:

Going whole hog might make China change their mind and start shipping stuff to Russia.

If China is fed up of relying on Western markets for its economic growth, well, why not?

 

Better hope that Xi has a plan for dealing with the riots, though.