Russia - Ukraine “peace negotiations”

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 4K
  • Views: 159K
  • Politics 
superrific said:
They cannot be deported to Ukraine under US law. It is illegal to refoul any person to their country if that country cannot guarantee their safety (I'm paraphrasing).

They might be deportable, but they can't be deported until the situation improves.
Click to expand...
Trump doesn't know or care about whatever that law is. Can the courts stop him quickly enough?
 
lawtig02 said:
Ok, I’ll play.

How do you get russia out?

(1) You keep the pressure on them with new weapons and technologies. (2) I don’t know if they’ll ever be forced out of a place like Crimea, but I 100% guarantee they won’t be if Trump ratifies Russia’s control of those areas.

Who is going to use the weapons we send? Ukraine is about out of soldiers. Russia has more than ukraine

Ukraine can figure that out. Russia is using freaking North Koreans. After emptying their prisons. It’s not like Russia has piles of storm troopers to keep throwing in the breach.

Why would sending them more weapons now all of a sudden work?

It’s been working all along. The question is why would it not work now?

How long would you keep sending weapons to ukraine? 1 yr? 2 yrs. 5 yrs. 20 yrs?

Until Ukraine wants to quit.

Now a question for you —

Why in the hell would Putin not keep acquiring territory if Trump ratifies what he’s done to Ukraine?

And don’t give me bullshit about attacking US companies. Putin couldn’t give a rat’s ass about US companies in countries he wants to conquer. And Trump won’t do a thing about it when a bunch of American miners get hit by a Russian missile. Assuming the miners were there in the first place, which they won’t be because the whole scheme is batshit crazy.
Click to expand...
Thank you for the response.

Sending in weapons has only worked to keep russia somewhat in a stalemate. They were able to achieve some gains. Our weapons haven't resulted in ukraine pushing russia back into its original boundaries. More weapons will slow russia down, but it won't stop them and it certainly won't allow ukraine to push russia backwards.

Ukraine wants to quit now but zel wants something he will NEVER have. He can't see it but trump does. More weapons means ukraine can hold out longer but inevitably will run out of troops and russia will end up taking what it wants. Only way to stop them is boots on the ground and I don't think pubs or dems want that.

The minerals in ukraine are spread out over a large area. The US would have mines throughout ukraine and thousands of people. The US presence would be considerable. Completely disagree that putin wouldn't hesitate to send a missle into a US mine killing hundreds of people. That is an act of war that given his beat up economy and military he can't afford to wage with the US. The pressure on trump to respond would be tremendous and he would have no recourse but to act. The initial threat isn't during trump's term if as you guys claim they are such buddies. Its after he is gone and another perceived weak president is in place. But by that time a well established US presence is in place and ukraine's rebuilding is well under way. By the US providing the technology ukraine will have money to purchase more sophisticated weapons and build a more technologically advanced military. I doubt russia wants to go another round with ukraine anytime soon given the issues it had this time. There is absolutely nothing crazy about mining ukraine's minerals as it makes us less dependent on china. That is a stated goal of the US. The longer this war goes on the less territory ukraine will have. putin has all the leverage. ukraines only hope is to align with the US on the mineral rights deal.
 
CFordUNC said:
Hey, look everyone! The very weird, very bizarre, very angry insecure little man who is psychotically obsessed with me now no longer wants my response that he was down on his knees begging for not even an hour ago! Coincidentally, it comes right after I decide to charitably humor him and regurgitate much of what I’ve already said on the preceding 83 pages of this thread.

Calla, get some help, boss man! Either psychologically, or at least get some better insults. You are boring. My two-year-old toddler somehow manages to shit talk me better than you when I tell him no to ice cream after dinner!
Click to expand...
You are looking like the one obsessed. I'm through with you. you are dismissed. skedaddle. vamoose.
 
Callatoroy said:
Criticism and condemnation means nothing. Russia invaded. The US through its actions appeased russia and russia holds that territory today. We did nothing to deter russia from invading the 2nd time. That is fact. I don't know for sure what trump is proposing but my guess is russia keeps territorial gains and no nato membership for ukraine. However, ukraine would keep 4/5ths of its territory. What if putin refuses to withdraw from ukraine and give up the territory it gained? What is the response given ukraine is running out of manpower?

Trump already knows putin wants to strike a deal. Its Zel who isn't ready for an immediate ceasefire to carry out negotiations so trump is strongarming him as you put it. Its the only way to get Zel to the table immediately.
Click to expand...
I don't think you understand what "appeasement" means. The US in no way condoned, agreed with, or acknowledged the legitimacy of Russia's occupation of Crimea. In fact it condemned it and sanctioned Russia. it is fair to argue about whether that response was strong enough. But it's not "appeasement."

Putin only wants a deal that is favorable to him. He isn't ready to make peace on any terms. If he was he would withdraw his troops. We could have a ceasefire right this second if Putin did that. But Putin won't do that. Putin only wants to come to the table because he thinks Trump is going to hand him what he wants. He isn't prepared to actually give up anything. This idea that Putin is the reasonable one ready to negotiate while Zelenskyy is being unreasonable is insane. If Putin says he isn't willing to withdraw troops, Trump should be leaning on him the way he is Zelenskyy. But he's not. Why? if Putin is the reasonable one why isn't he willing to withdraw his troops? If Trump wants to be a big businessman and Do Deals in Russia why doesn't he just make those deals contingent on Russia withdrawing troops?
 
Callatoroy said:
You are looking like the one obsessed. I'm through with you. you are dismissed. skedaddle. vamoose.
Click to expand...
You ain’t through with shit, bitch. You can’t keep my dick…sorry, my name…out of your mouth even when I’m not part of the conversation. See you around the next your humiliation fetish gets the best of you and you want to crawl up my asscrack!
 
rodoheel said:
I don't think you understand what "appeasement" means. The US in no way condoned, agreed with, or acknowledged the legitimacy of Russia's occupation of Crimea. In fact it condemned it and sanctioned Russia. it is fair to argue about whether that response was strong enough. But it's not "appeasement."

Putin only wants a deal that is favorable to him. He isn't ready to make peace on any terms. If he was he would withdraw his troops. We could have a ceasefire right this second if Putin did that. But Putin won't do that. Putin only wants to come to the table because he thinks Trump is going to hand him what he wants. He isn't prepared to actually give up anything. This idea that Putin is the reasonable one ready to negotiate while Zelenskyy is being unreasonable is insane. If Putin says he isn't willing to withdraw troops, Trump should be leaning on him the way he is Zelenskyy. But he's not. Why? if Putin is the reasonable one why isn't he willing to withdraw his troops? If Trump wants to be a big businessman and Do Deals in Russia why doesn't he just make those deals contingent on Russia withdrawing troops?
Click to expand...
Condemnations and ineffective sanctions are worthless and not worth the paper written on in this type of situation. The only thing that is real is did russia take it and do they still have it. Yes and yes. Playing semantics with the word appeasement doesn't make any difference in the reality of today. Our actions amounted to almost nothing and I'm sure we would likely agree on how that could have been handled differently.

If it ended today with russia keeping its gains, in the eyes of the world, who won? Mighty russia with a military 4 times what ukraine had but got its ass kicked and its military depleted. Or ukraine with the little engine that could attitude? putin suffers worldwide embarrassment. I read an AP article that said under no terms would putin ever cede the ground it has taken because to do so would be total humiliation. I believe that. He would use battlefield nukes before pulling out altogether.
 
Callatoroy said:
The US would have mines throughout ukraine and thousands of people. The US presence would be considerable.
Click to expand...
Let me put it as simply as I can: no American company is going to enter Ukraine to be the security guarantee.

They will invest in Ukraine with a security guarantee already in place. Nobody is going to be the canary in the coal mine.

What would happen if Russian troops started to mass on the border is what has happened every single time there has been a potential war brewing. The mining companies will withdraw their people.
 
CFordUNC said:
You ain’t through with shit, bitch. You can’t keep my dick…sorry, my name…out of your mouth even when I’m not part of the conversation. See you around the next your humiliation fetish gets the best of you and you want to crawl up my asscrack!
Click to expand...
you still here?
 
finesse said:
Almost exactly this. I don't want our people to die for them or them to die for us unless it's at the behest of NATO involvement, which I hope never happens. I'm fine with providing them materiel and intelligence as long as they want to fight and willing to support them in negotiations. That said, I'm no great admirer of Ukraine or their history. This is purely pragmatic for me. We're better off supporting them and keeping sanctions on Russia.
Click to expand...
the sanctions are effectively weak and not a deterrent. Europe and China saw to that and even if europe doesn't buy another drop of oil from russia, china and india will so nothing accomplished. Prolonging this war only works to russia's advantage as they might wind up with the whole thing or at least kyiv.
 
CFordUNC said:
You ain’t through with shit, bitch. You can’t keep my dick…sorry, my name…out of your mouth even when I’m not part of the conversation. See you around the next your humiliation fetish gets the best of you and you want to crawl up my asscrack!
Click to expand...
Bro, take a time out, stop drinking, or do whatever it takes to stop diminishing your persona on these here boards. Your insults are sophomoric and less than clever.
 
Callatoroy said:
the sanctions are effectively weak and not a deterrent. Europe and China saw to that and even if europe doesn't buy another drop of oil from russia, china and india will so nothing accomplished. Prolonging this war only works to russia's advantage as they might wind up with the whole thing or at least kyiv.
Click to expand...
That's not for us to decide. It's bad for us to stab them in the back while aiding Russia. If Russia ends up with more ,let them give blood for every inch of it the Ukraine is willing to fight for.
 
Purple Nurple said:
Bro, take a time out, stop drinking, or do whatever it takes to stop diminishing your persona on these here boards. Your insults are sophomoric and less than clever.
Click to expand...
Mind your own goddamn business, pal. This doesn’t involve you, and you should like to keep it that way. I don’t ever insult anyone unless they start it. In this particular instance, I always go out of my way to not proactively engage Callatoroy under any circumstance, but he always follows me around insulting me either in direct responses to my posts, or as he did this afternoon, in another post that didn’t even involve me. You want to police him, too, hall monitor? Or do you want to just keep virtue signaling?
 
Last edited:
superrific said:
You can take a bro out of the GOP but you can't fully take the GOP out of the bro
Click to expand...
I have literally never denied that I am willing to be a prolific shit talker when someone talks trash to me first. I have always maintained that I will not engage in shit talking or insults proactively. I have never, in all of my time on this board, acted like I’m above fighting fire with fire. Anyone who doesn’t like that is free to use the ignore button- or kick me out of the community. This particular poster has a particular hard-on for me like nobody else- I have received DMs from multiple posters asking what the hell the deal is with him and if I know him in real life. I do not. He follows me around insulting me like he does to nobody else, even though I quite literally never preemptively engage with his posts. So, yeah, I’m going to be an asshole to someone who wants to be an asshole to me. I’m not sorry about it.
 
Last edited:
superrific said:
At what point would I agree to concede, say, Alaska if the Russians were fighting us? I would do it when I recognized that it was unlikely we could take it back at any reasonable cost.
Click to expand...

I guess that’s the difference between us. I hope we’re never in a foxhole together.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top