MAKAVELI
Well-Known Member
This is 2022. Ttku son....
The Russians Are Coming, The Russians Are Coming!
- Thread starter Sportello
- Start date
wilberforce15
Well-Known Member
Yes, and the United States was pulling these shenanigans 100 years ago.
Do you think Ukraine has more scruples now than we had then?
wilberforce15
Well-Known Member
I didn't say there was justification for it.
MAKAVELI
Well-Known Member
You didn't say there was no justification either. Putin can't win. He's done.
wilberforce15
Well-Known Member
Correct. I didn't say either.
It depends on how you define winning. I think there is a fair probability that he exits this with functional control or established independence over eastern provinces, and a neutral western Ukraine. That would be a big win, and it seems well within possibility.
I don't care either way.
MAKAVELI
Well-Known Member
That wasn't his goal. Moving the goalposts is not winning. Especially when you have a massive difference in size of military and military weaponry. Putin has lost any standing as a world leader and will be isolated as a brutal dictator and more likely to face pushback in Russia.
wilberforce15
Well-Known Member
That was his goal from the beginning. You can go back in this thread to my first post, and I said that was his goal. That's because I read.
He attacked to secure a neutral Ukraine, either split with his control in the Eastern half, or so he could install a puppet and at least secure a commitment not to join NATO. He attacked to keep Ukraine out of NATO.
He never wanted to run it himself. That was never even on the table, and I said so from the beginning. So did he. So did everybody except the folks trying to get your kid to fight in this Hatfields and Mccoys nonsense.
Now now, there may have been a Ukrainian with a gun in there somewhere.
No one in NATO was suggesting Ukraine would become part of NATO.
wilberforce15
Well-Known Member
Everyone in NATO, and everyone in our puppet regime in Ukraine, were working for precisely that.
Don't pretend not to know that.
wilberforce15
Well-Known Member
In September 2020, Zelenskyy and everybody else praised their National Security Strategy document, which explicitly named NATO membership as the most important objective for the country. Period.
It was the number 1 topic. It was a lynch pin.
www.atlanticcouncil.org
euromaidanpress.com
It was the number 1 topic. It was a lynch pin.
Russia as aggressor, NATO as objective: Ukraine’s new National Security Strategy
Ukraine unveiled a new National Security Strategy in September 2020 that clearly identifies Russia as the enemy and sets out NATO membership as the end goal of the country's security policy.
www.atlanticcouncil.org
Ukraine's new National Security Strategy: Russia as the aggressor, full NATO membership, and a few drawbacks - Euromaidan Press
Article by: Hans Petter Midttun Ukraine has still not established a common conceptual understanding or a common terminology.…
euromaidanpress.com
No, they clearly stated that Ukraine, because of corruption and economic issues, wasn't eligible for NATO or the EU. Surely you didn't fall for Russian propaganda. Hmm, I think you did.
wilberforce15
Well-Known Member
Ukraine's number 1 goal was NATO membership. Most of NATO was pushing for it. The expansion Eastward could not stop. Corruption and economic issues were stalling tactics by an opposition that was failing. Joining was imminent.
On a purely strategic level, Putin could act now, or be resigned to having the Ukraine in NATO. And everybody knows it....except you.
wilberforce15
Well-Known Member
Contrary to Boomer opinion, you do actually have to consider your enemy's options and perspective.
If you push a dog into a corner because he's a bad dog, that's how you get bit.
If you push a dog into a corner because he's a bad dog, that's how you get bit.
Who in NATO was pushing for it? I saw repeatedly that Ukraine as is was a long ways from qualifying.
wilberforce15
Well-Known Member
Political processes are long. But the cat was out of the bag. NATO Update: NATO launches ‘Intensified Dialogue’ with Ukraine - MFA - Vilnius 20-21 April 2005
NATO has wanted it for a very long time. It's a very aggressive, expansionary, "defensive" alliance that "defends" itself into expansion thousands of miles from its original jurisdiction. They subsumed Turkey, for Pete's sake.
If they got Turkey and Erdogan, then Ukraine is a trivial problem. This is all so terribly silly. Ukraine was going into NATO, formally or functionally. We gave Putin one chance to stop it, and he took it.
That's not a moral judgment. It's a chess calculation. I don't care if the Hatfields or Mccoys win. They've been fighting longer than I can trace my family history in the region. They'll be fighting in 100 years. I simply do not care.
Putin is a murderer and thug. Zelenskyy is a tranny puppet. Who gives a rip? Let them fight.
floridays
Well-Known Member
You condone it however.
wilberforce15
Well-Known Member
If you mean that I don't want to send my kid to die in the Ukraine's eternal war that will still be fought 100 years from now, then yes, I would allow the invasion to happen with no intervention or aid from us.
They'll be fighting over that land when my grandkids' grandkids are enlisted. So any blood or money you send there is wasted.
I don't want to die for the tranny president of a CIA coup in a region of eternal war.
Oh right, 2005. Yet everyone has been saying for years now including recently that Ukraine is a long way from qualifying. Google "are NATO members wanting Ukraine to join" and you'll get tons of articles on why they can't.
floridays
Well-Known Member
Exactly how do you know what Putin wants?
Similar threads
