I'm not coddling anyone, guy. And your use of the world "coddling" tells me everything I need to know. You think we're in charge of everything,don't you? Other nations are not your children. In a world of nukes, we're not the Big Dog, you understand me?
All speculation ^^
Germany in 1945? Please enlighten me. As for other countries being my children, what exactly are you babbling about? We have all the nukes necessary, you understand that, right? Having more than that doesn't change anything.
I'd love a resolution but Russia has already violated the terms of multiple agreements. What makes you think they wouldn't do so again?
The other guys also have nukes now, Big Dog. An nuclear armed world is a polite world, unless, God forbid, you become in charge..Germany in 1945? Please enlighten me. As for other countries being my children, what exactly are you babbling about? We have all the nukes necessary, you understand that, right? Having more than that doesn't change anything.
For the foreseeable future, yes, we are the Big Dog. Im sorry if our power and wealth upsets you, I really am.
Germany in 1945 is quite simple. Arrogant assholes in Germany in 1933 and before led Germany to obliteration in 1945. Same with Japan. I'm surprised that you questioned Germany 1945 and not France 1970. Same thing, anyway.Germany in 1945? Please enlighten me. As for other countries being my children, what exactly are you babbling about? We have all the nukes necessary, you understand that, right? Having more than that doesn't change anything.
For the foreseeable future, yes, we are the Big Dog. Im sorry if our power and wealth upsets you, I really am.
Lazy attempts at discrediting. A sort of reverse virtue signaling. Is that the best you can do?
I'd never launch without a massive launch coming towards us. Wouldn't you do the same?
Germany’s in NATO. NATO can defend against Russia.
Not to me, though. Putin didn't tell me to "stay home and stay safe". Putin didn't lock me down and cost me thousand of dollars in income. Putin didn't make me a wear a mask. Putin didn't make me take a vaccine to travel. Whatever he did in Russia was relatively benign compared to what happened here, but, whatever happened there is not my problem. Putin has never done a thing to me. Putin is not an American problem. You actually do know what the American problem is, specifically, the Left, yet align yourself with the Left to fight the Putin boogieman. Who has never done anything to you, either. You need to a hobby, or to go fight him yourself, if you feel so strongly, and, I realize that you have said that you are not personally physically able, which means that you should go do it another manner, perhaps through intelligence work, but fighting him on message boards is laughable. You can do better, if you really wanted to
What are you babbling about now? Those issues have nothing to do with one another. Back to your ridiculous analogy, Germany and Japan were the arrogant aggressors. Now it is Russia. Why you try to blend in covid is beyond me. It has nothing to do with any of this conversation.
On what planet should I support the Ukraine? I owe you no explanation for my lack of support, and will not provide one. I do support the military and the police with my taxes. I don't give a damn about the Ukraine, but, courtesy of your new-found political party, I guess one could say I support the Uraine as well- with my tax dollars. Involuntary. I wouldn't give them a dime if left to me.
The flip side of that argument is why don't all you Putin water carriers surrender? Wave white flags and fly to Russia and give yourselves up. You can take Brittney Griner's cell as it's empty at the moment.
What is your point? How must this end so that you could trust Russia in the future?
No shit. Did it ever occur to you that Putin won't stop unless he's defeated?
Hmmmm.
China has a written obligation to come to the aid of Ukraine, should anyone use Nuclear weapons against Ukraine.
www.wsj.com
Bizarre take: no one short of Russian TV commentators and Vlad Putin have shown a desire this war continue.
It takes a special kind of stupidity to think anyone wants a war to continue. I’ll ask, if the US was attacked and occupied, under what circumstances would you want fighting to end?
But, then, you are not a moderator (I would make you one, but I have zero power over such things). So, if a discussion (debate) is to continue, civility appears to be required. That said, “poopy-diaper heads” is extreme low end of offensive, while doubtful a compliment. But, I would need to see it in context to be sure.
I don’t know if fear over nukes is “muddle-headed,” but I liked this post.China has a written obligation to come to the aid of Ukraine, should anyone use Nuclear weapons against Ukraine.
Under New Scrutiny: China’s Nuclear Pledge to Ukraine
Beijing’s 2013 promise to protect Ukraine in a nuclear attack appears to now further muddy its stance on Russia’s invasion.
From the link:
“Beijing appeared to be promising more than it had in past commitments, and why it singled out Ukraine for such an arrangement has confounded nuclear experts ever since.”
Now that China and India have openly condemned the possibility of such a move by Russia, that which was already extremely unlikely becomes an even more remote possibility. . . a Russian use of a nuclear device would require a very muscular response by China, only implicitly nuclear in kind, but certainly of a strong military nature.
Hence, Putin’s box of options grow far more limited. Any nuclear saber-rattling will draw further ire from his only effective ally, China, and be laughably hollow and counter-productive.
Frankly, that Saber rattling was already laughably hollow, though taken seriously by the muddle-headed of both extreme right and left. (See some responses in this thread.)
China’s strong stand effectively places Russia “in check” in Ukraine: it is still a war they can lose, but is now extremely unlikely to be a war they can win, as their ultimate bluff has been called, not by the US, nor by the UK, nor by NATO, but by their putative ally.
Hack, the hyperbole is strong in you. If a party in litigation refuses mediation, that party wants a trial. If a position about the war refuses the same, they want a war to the very end. Accepting that there may be a resolution outside of continued war is not a refutation of the illegality of one sovereign invading another. Those two thoughts are independent. I think it morally perilous to only accept a warring end to this battle as the solution. A denial of the possibility of compromise is a commitment to more senseless death and destruction.
Wow. Way to go EU. Pulling your weight for a war that is in your hemisphere. Pat your collective selves on the heinies (German for butts).
Thanks for calling me special. That highbrow response is unique here. If your sons and daughters were being slaughtered, you may want the war to end. Just saying. But, obviously not everyone feels that way. Nevertheless, history shows that at some point people who cheer on war want war to stop. Especially those who question whether the war truly includes them.
Suit up soldier, the Ukrainians need you. Good luck.
