Russia - Ukraine “peace negotiations”

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 3K
  • Views: 78K
  • Politics 
ZenMode said:
Your subjective views of me don't change the fact that, as of now, and if facts and evidence matter, we shouldn't believe that Trump conspired with Russia to interfere in the 2016 election.

Again, if you believe he/they did, then you must also believe that you have access to more information/evidence than the US government.
Click to expand...
It's not about you per se. It's that you are misinterpreting the report and making false claims. Which you have repeated here.

Why are you trying to argue law with me? Or any of the other board lawyers? We know what the report did and didn't actually say. We know what the actual evidence is. Well, I don't remember all the details any more, but let's put it this way: if it was a civil suit, Trump would have lost. When Mueller writes "did not establish" he's writing that against a backdrop of "no reasonable doubt." Beyond the shadow of a doubt is a useful standard when assessing the culpability of someone in order to justify imprisoning them. It is useless for making policy.
 


“… President Donald Trump has told his advisers that he wants to announce the agreement in his address to Congress Tuesday evening, three of the sources said, cautioning that the deal had yet to be signed and the situation could change….”

Good enough, maybe?:

IMG_5364.jpeg
IMG_5365.jpeg
 
Last edited:
CFordUNC said:
Swing and a miss again, hoss. Go read the transcripts of those speeches that Obama gave in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and France. Not once was the word 'apologize' in those speeches. His speeches in the Middle East acknowledged that "there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive.” But in a speech in France- the one to which my preferred 2012 presidential candidate Mitt Romney referenced in a debate with Obama- Obama called out Europeans for an “anti-Americanism that is at once casual but can also be insidious. Instead of recognizing the good that America so often does in the world, there have been times where Europeans choose to blame America for much of what’s bad.”

Look, man, far be it from me to advise an old man on anything, but you really can just take an extra 30-60 seconds to fact check yourself before posting something on this board that you know is going to get fact-checked. It would save you a lot of humiliation, if that's even something you wish to avoid. Hard to tell.
Click to expand...
I said he apologized to Muslim countries, i.e. Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Turkey and he did. You just counter that he didn't say "apologize" when he was apologizing. OK.

You brought up France not me.
 
Ramrouser said:
I said he apologized to Muslim countries, i.e. Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Turkey and he did. You just counter that he didn't say "apologize" when he was apologizing. OK.

You brought up France not me.
Click to expand...
Wait, what? *You* said he apologized. I said that the word 'apologize' isn't in any of the transcripts of the speeches he gave in the Middle East. Not one place.

Words have meaning, man!
 
superrific said:
It's not about you per se. It's that you are misinterpreting the report and making false claims. Which you have repeated here.

Why are you trying to argue law with me? Or any of the other board lawyers? We know what the report did and didn't actually say. We know what the actual evidence is. Well, I don't remember all the details any more, but let's put it this way: if it was a civil suit, Trump would have lost. When Mueller writes "did not establish" he's writing that against a backdrop of "no reasonable doubt." Beyond the shadow of a doubt is a useful standard when assessing the culpability of someone in order to justify imprisoning them. It is useless for making policy.
Click to expand...
What am I misinterpreting when I say the current belief, until proven otherwise, is that Trump & Co. didn't conspire with Russians as it pertains to the email hacking/social media campaign. The Mueller report laid out everything. They interviewed everyone involved, under threat of lengthy prison terms for lying, and couldn't not establish that there was a conspiracy.

Why would you, right now, today, believe Trump & Co. conspired?
 
ZenMode said:
What am I misinterpreting when I say the current belief, until proven otherwise, is that Trump & Co. didn't conspire with Russians as it pertains to the email hacking/social media campaign. The Mueller report laid out everything. They interviewed everyone involved, under threat of lengthy prison terms for lying, and couldn't not establish that there was a conspiracy.

Why would you, right now, today, believe Trump & Co. conspired?
Click to expand...
I've already said why. Because they were operating against a standard of proof that is far higher than what is warranted. You know, UNC got rid of Mack last year. Did they establish beyond a reasonable doubt that he couldn't rebuild UNC to a top 10 program? They did not. They did not try. Because that's not the right standard.

Honestly, I don't really give a fuck about the Mueller report or the 2016 campaign. If Trump had come into office and done a good job, and stopped sucking up to Putin, then it wouldn't matter at all. He's not done any of that, and is indeed more obsequious than he used to be. That's a huge problem regardless of what happened in 2016.

But I'm always going to push back on falsehoods and error. I've done that. Now the conversation is over. Once you ask a question a second time, after it has been clearly answered and you've made no attempt to counter it, it's time to stop.
 
Ramrouser said:
I said he apologized to Muslim countries, i.e. Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Turkey and he did. You just counter that he didn't say "apologize" when he was apologizing. OK.

You brought up France not me.
Click to expand...
There is no meaning of the word "apologize" that applies to what Obama said. None.

I would have liked him to apologize. It was clearly warranted. But he didn't. What he did do was acknowledge that America fucked up in Iraq, which nobody doubts -- both sides of the aisle recognize that was a calamity. And so Obama had to acknowledge that in order to rebuild trust. That's the way the world works.

I have a pretty good read on who you are as a person, I think. Of course you think acknowledge = apologize. It fits with everything else.
 
lawtig02 said:
You mean except for the hope Putin would not attack US business interests in Ukraine?
Click to expand...
I mean except for we will own half of the minerals, the mines, equipment, and have thousands of people there scattered all over the country. If you think russia is going to attack that again anytime in the foreseeable future then I'm afraid you are just playing zzl games.
 
Callatoroy said:
I mean except for we will own half of the minerals, the mines, equipment, and have thousands of people there scattered all over the country. If you think russia is going to attack that again anytime in the foreseeable future then I'm afraid you are just playing zzl games.
Click to expand...
If you think any of that will happen, then you're just playing games.

What Z is signing isn't even a deal. It's the precursor to a deal, and both parties can opt out. There's no enforcement mechanism. The minute that the Russia threat is over, Ukraine can walk (which is why, I suspect, Trump refuses to give security guarantees).

There are no confirmed deposits anywhere, and the rumored ones are in the territories Russia will control. Even if there are, exploiting them would be expensive. It would be impossible at the moment, given the devastation to the country. There is no universe in which the Ukrainian people are going to allow the needs of American minerals companies or the American government to take priority over their own welfare.

Trump is getting nothing of value. Nothing. There's a reason why those deposits are not developed, and why there has been no interest in developing them.

This whole thing was just theater designed to rip apart the Western alliance and do Putin's bidding. Start to finish. Trump gave nothing, he got nothing.
 
Callatoroy said:
And Putin isn’t going to attack us companies that the US G’ment will protect.
Click to expand...
Do you seriously believe this? In a zone of armed conflict, in a country where Trump has refused to send US personnel as peacekeepers, US companies are just going to fly in and start work, trusting that Putin won’t mess with them because of an unexpressed threat of retaliation from forces that aren’t in theater?
 
The US just became (assuming brokered peace is the result)

less dependent on china for minerals
led the effort to end a 3.5 year war in less than 3 months in office (was joe asleep at the wheel? No, just mentally incapable)
solidified the US as the dominant leader of the free world
locked up the nobel prize for trump

Sadly, that is going to greatly disappoint many here.
 
Icky Mettle said:
I’m pretty sure that right about now, Ukraine is very much regretting giving up that third largest nuclear arsenal in the world.
Click to expand...
That begs the question - which nations will soon build their first nuclear weapons?

Germany? Italy? Japan? Taiwan? South Korea? Australia? Indonesia? Saudi Arabia? UAE? Turkey? Canada? Mexico? Brazil? Chile? Argentina?
 
BlooVooDoo said:
Do you seriously believe this? In a zone of armed conflict, in a country where Trump has refused to send US personnel as peacekeepers, US companies are just going to fly in and start work, trusting that Putin won’t mess with them because of an unexpressed threat of retaliation from forces that aren’t in theater?
Click to expand...
I think Europe will provide peace keepers for a period of time and the US will provide security assurances for its people / businesses / infrastructure. From the day a truce is signed, within 6 months the US will have resources in ukraine getting to work on mining minerals.
 
Callatoroy said:
The US just became (assuming brokered peace is the result)

less dependent on china for minerals
led the effort to end a 3.5 year war in less than 3 months in office (was joe asleep at the wheel? No, just mentally incapable)
solidified the US as the dominant leader of the free world
locked up the nobel prize for trump

Sadly, that is going to greatly disappoint many here.
Click to expand...
LOL LOL LOL LOL.

I've got bad news for you. There are no minerals in Ukraine. Ending a war on the aggressors' terms is not peace, except in the Neville Chamberlain sense. Absolutely nobody in the free world sees the US as a leader, which is sort of a prerequisite to being a leader. In fact, most of our allies in the free world are drawing up concrete plans to ditch the US and let the US work on its own.

Trump will never, ever, ever, ever win a Nobel Prize for anything. Again, capitulation is not peace.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top