That's a strawman. The issue is whether or not Russia can take over Europe when they cant defeat Ukraine. The answer is no.
People in msm and this very thread constantly guffawed at how dumb they were and how old was their equipment.
The Ukraine war. (Yes, we'll mind our manners)
- Thread starter BigBlueFanGA
- Start date
That's a strawman. The issue is whether or not Russia can take over Europe when they cant defeat Ukraine. The answer is no.
People in msm and this very thread constantly guffawed at how dumb they were and how old was their equipment.
Strawman. Adjacent countries & Europe are different. They've already done at least parts of adjacent countries beside Ukraine.
Hardly. The entire argument for intervention was to stop Putin from taking over Europe. If he cant take Ukraine, he cant take Europe.
Actually it started with stopping Putin from taking over Ukraine. But your claim soon followed.
Aren't you all the "learn from history" crowd with ww2. Remember the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact?
It would be easier for china to take large swaths ot Russia right now than it would be Taiwan
So, by the same line of thinking, if Putin could take Ukraine, he could take Europe, or another part of it. Especially with a presumed capture/consolidation of the national/economic value of Ukraine.
Had Ukraine not received Billions of US and European assistance, massive military (satellite ) intelligence, and the physical assistance of fighters from around the world, Putin might well have taken Ukraine and be peering at countries bordering it to the West.
Your very premise is an implicit endorsement of the lengthy, strong support of Ukraine, which support now allows your juxtaposition . . . Putin has not been able to take Ukraine, and hence, is of far less threat to other Western European countries.
Nope. That is a false equivalency. If Putin cannot take Ukraine, he certainly cannot take Europe. But, if he could take Ukraine, that does not mean he will or can take Europe.
No, that certainly was not the entire argument
In fact, that was a minor concern.
Yes, stringing along is what he's saying. Trump no longer believes Putin wants to stop the war. We've been telling you guys this for years now. Putin plans to take Ukraine as a whole. After that we'll see if he wants to absorb other countries that lack NATO protections.
“He won’t stop” was not a minor concern expressed. That and the “threat to democracy” were voiced often. And, were the predominant public proclamations.
But, the real reason for continuing this indefinitely is money and power.
Not allowing revisionist history. The entire argument for intervention was we have to stop him now or he will take over Europe. That was THE prevailing argument.
UK intel behind Ukraine’s disastrous Krynky invasion, leaked documents reveal - The Grayzone
Leaked documents reviewed by The Grayzone reveal that a blueprint for Ukraine’s failed effort to capture the village of Krynky was assembled by Project Alchemy, a secret military-intelligence cell created by the British Ministry of Defence which sought “at all costs” to “keep Ukraine fighting.”...
thegrayzone.com
"He won't stop" referred more towards non-NATO countries. I dont remember "he's a threat to democracy" at all but I'm sure it was said at some point.
The Grayzone?UK intel behind Ukraine’s disastrous Krynky invasion, leaked documents reveal - The Grayzone
Leaked documents reviewed by The Grayzone reveal that a blueprint for Ukraine’s failed effort to capture the village of Krynky was assembled by Project Alchemy, a secret military-intelligence cell created by the British Ministry of Defence which sought “at all costs” to “keep Ukraine fighting.”...
I'd love peace but I understand what Putin is. He's proving it to Trump now. Putin doesn't want peace, he wants Ukraine and he doesn't care how many die for him to get it.
Even if he signs a peace deal you may as well use it as toilet paper. Putin won't adhere to the terms. He's proven that repeatedly. It's the living embodiment of the frog and the scorpion parable. Unfortunately, you guys are the frog in this story and you still don't realize it.
You can say whatever you want, but even a cursory scan of this thread proves otherwise. Nevermind the endless msm propaganda that we all saw and heard up through present day.
This thread was not the beginning. A mod closed the original thread mainly because I was intentionally being nasty with a couple of oddballs that I was trying to run off. I'll do a cursory scan on this one.
Last edited:
Whether Putin can/can't take Ukraine or not, and thus Europe, any "agreement" with him doesn't mean he won't keep trying there or at other areas around Russia. It's in his DNA to keep trying to expand Russia.
Still don't see it. It was mentioned but its never been a primary factor in these threads. In fact one of my early posts was emphatic that Russia won't pick a fight with NATO. I have no idea what you think you're seeing.
You don't understand putin; that's just narrative.... thought-terminating narrative.
Nor was thatt why the thread was closed. I made an objectionable pos consisting of pre invasion man on the street interviews. 30 minutes later that post was deleted and the thread locked.
That thread still exists. You know he's right: it was always the case that the crux of the pro-war "argument" was that if we don't stop him from taking Ukraine, he would use it as a stepping stone on to Poland, the Baltics and the West in general. It's why the Htiler/WW2 strawman was/is so "effective" at manufacturing consent.
Now you're just parroting. If you want credit for closing the thread, by all means, you can have it. I'd love to see you or @bigblueinsanity go thru the first 5 pages of this thread and quote all the posts that say that. Someone on your side of the aisle mentioned it but even then it was hardly a primary focus. I doubt either of you do this because you'll see I'm right.
The threads are a combined 500 pages long. Here's a post from the beginning which perfectly encapsulates it.
And on this very page the hack is substantiating the idea with that stupid contortion of a counterfactual. It's worse than just the false equivalence caveman noted, i'ts begging the question to mislead and obfuscate. The "argument" only "makes sense" by assuming the conclusion as its premise.
Congrats, you found 2. That is hardly what bigblueinsanity is claiming. You're proving my point.The threads are a combined 500 pages long. Here's a post from the beginning which perfectly encapsulates it.
And on this very page the hack is substantiating the idea with that stupid contortion of a counterfactual. It's worse than just the false equivalence caveman noted, i'ts begging the question to mislead and obfuscate. The "argument" only "makes sense" by assuming the conclusion as its premise.
Interestingly and sadly, we are just now finding out whether Putin will accept some measure of peace. We should have answered that question 2 years ago. Many “experts” have speculated both ways. If Putin will not accept a negotiated resolution, what do you predict we do? Keep throwing money at the war until Putin gives up or wins? If he gives up, are we to rebuild Ukraine? If he wins, was it worth it?
Ukraine was a key part of the USSR with missile silos and research labs. I don’t really think anyone seriously believes NATO was ever at risk of his evil intentions. Yet, another narrative that permeated the pro war class was that NATO was at risk.
Wow. Thanks for the ancient history lesson.
If true, if you were going to support Ukraine, why not go all in to begin with? Answer, at least some thought nukes were in play.
The pro war class is a fake idea/group - as you know & yet repat over & over. It's your go to come back to everything without having any substance.
Hell its still the prevailing argument for our involvement lol. Its hard for me to fathom someone even arguing it isn't the case, as if we all just were born yesterday.
I don't know. Today he's back on the ceasefire option but I trust that as much as having a meth-head in charge of an evidence room. No one can continue this forever. Let's just hope the ceasefire sticks.
Most of the more serious posters, like me, laughed at the idea of Putin attacking NATO in any way. Its ludicrous.
I've been in this from the beginning. That is not the case. You keep saying it but never support it. If its so pervasive, supporting it should be easy.
I didn't say it was your argument. I said it was the prevailing argument.
I specifically addressed that above because i knew youd have to eventually fall back to this strawman.
Best not to forget the facts while you snarkily make your pro war arguments. It is relevant to the fact that Putin is not going to invade NATO.
You are so imprecise with your language in this thread you come across as all over the board. YOU are not “all in.” So, why do you continue to criticize others for not being all in? My position has been consistent. I said we should support Ukraine while aggressively seeking peace, with the rational understanding that Americans do not want to aid the persistence of a foreign war indefinitely. Instead, we puffed that Ukraine would defeat Russia. So, if puffing about Ukraine defeating Russia is “all in,” I am not all in. Even Zelensky knows Ukraine cannot alone defeat Russia. Being “all in” demands more and I am definitely not for more.
False. We all know this war will not end with Ukraine victorious without actual involvement of foreign powers, something everyone says cannot happen. So, pretending Ukraine is going to win this war while advocating for continued assistance and mocking peace attempts is pro war. Congrats and welcome to reality.
Its no strawman and you still haven't provided a shred of evidence to support your claim. The reason you don't is quite obvious, you can't.
This is recent history:
“MOSCOW, Dec 17 (Reuters) - Kremlin chief Vladimir Putin dismissed as complete nonsense remarks by U.S. President Joe Biden that Russia would attack a NATO country if it won the war in Ukraine, adding that Russia had no interest in fighting the NATO military alliance.”
“MOSCOW, Dec 17 (Reuters) - Kremlin chief Vladimir Putin dismissed as complete nonsense remarks by U.S. President Joe Biden that Russia would attack a NATO country if it won the war in Ukraine, adding that Russia had no interest in fighting the NATO military alliance.”
Similar threads
