Russia - US | Ukraine “peace negotiations”

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 2K
  • Views: 35K
  • Politics 
superrific said:
Yes, but it does nothing to help lurkers, nor do anything to induce would-be posters to start posting. And letting misinformation flow unchecked is arguably contributing to the problem.

The bigger problem is that I'm not sure the board can function without the trolls. Engagement with them is a big part of the traffic. It's a big spur of posting energy. Without them, I'm just not sure anyone will participate. Even I have limits on how much I can pontificate.

Think back to the ZZL. This dynamic has been with us for a long time. I think there's a psychological dependence. Liberal posters like to use the trolls as proxies for MAGA, and it gives people an opportunity, so to speak, to yell at the idiocy. I don't know why the trolls are here, but it obviously fills a psychological need for them too. Maybe they need conflict in their life, or have conflict in their life, and they use this board to keep the conflict contained to something that doesn't really matter as opposed to unloading on family or friends.

I have my doubts that a co-dependent relationship that has lasted decades is going to easily be reversed without a more comprehensive plan.
Click to expand...
I think all this is just an argument for super ignore. Those that need the adversary get to keep them.
 
Let's say Europe rallies and we aren't needed for muscle going forward. Do we close down bases? Are we forced to close down bases? What happens to our ability to project power? Do we wake up one day and realize our military looks like Russia's current mess?
 
It is reasonable to offer criticism of the Obama administration for their reaction to the Russian annexation of Crimea and the border regions of Ukraine. However, as several have pointed out, there was not an invasion and little that the EU or US could do. It is not reasonable to completely misrepresent that outside forces had any real opportunity to stop Putin/Russia in 2014.

We can all be critical of the actions or nonactions taken by administrations that we didn't vote for. The Biden administration, at a minimum, set roadblocks to slow the Russia efforts. Quibbling with the specific choices is hindsight. Trump 1.0 may have been willing to help create roadblocks as well, but only if they got something in return and when that did not materialize, they stepped on their own dicks. Trump 2.0 so far seems to be focused on removing all roadblocks to Russian aggression in Ukraine. Now the basis for the current strategy could be
1. That this strategy supports Trump's vision for the future of the world power structure (3 spheres of influence US RUS CH)
2. Reverse anything Biden did out of spite
3. Spite Zelensky for not giving him real or imagined kompromat before the 2020 election.

Trump has always been an isolationist. He is going to advance an isolationist foreign policy and economic policy (IMO).
 
Rock said:
What does everyone else think? Personally, I think Michael Flynn is a disgraceful human being. Pretty much the same with Elon Musk. But, I’m aware others may have a different view.

Do we want an opposing side to have a voice or is this just blatant “trolling”?
Click to expand...
Give the opposing side a voice. Super ignore exists for a reason. This is your board, but I would draw the line at blatant racism, Naziism, etc, not at simply being an annoying MAGA sycophant. Don't repeat the mistakes (IMO) that the original ZZL Politics made.
 
Silence Dogood said:
Relax. When people do what you're doing its a sign they don't like being exposed or the truth they hear is offensive. Its always the left calling for bans, so odd.
Click to expand...
Is that why your hero and President Elon has a record of firing or silencing people that are critical of his actions? Hell, the dude even refused to sell a Tesla to a journalist who once wrote a column that was critical of him.
 
Rock said:
What does everyone else think? Personally, I think Michael Flynn is a disgraceful human being. Pretty much the same with Elon Musk. But, I’m aware others may have a different view.

Do we want an opposing side to have a voice or is this just blatant “trolling”?
Click to expand...
They have opinions. I don't agree with them in the slightest, but let them speak. Like another poster said, we've done too much ignoring these folks, and it didn't work.

I scroll past these posts if I think they are just trolling, so I don't see a need to 'cancel.' Cancel culture is unfortunate. Engage only if it seems fruitful (which admittedly, is rare).
 
Lando said:
Let's say Europe rallies and we aren't needed for muscle going forward. Do we close down bases? Are we forced to close down bases? What happens to our ability to project power? Do we wake up one day and realize our military looks like Russia's current mess?
Click to expand...
We may very well wake up in the near future and realize our country looks like Russia (or Hungary).
 
Lando said:
Let's say Europe rallies and we aren't needed for muscle going forward. Do we close down bases? Are we forced to close down bases? What happens to our ability to project power? Do we wake up one day and realize our military looks like Russia's current mess?
Click to expand...
That is certainly Putin’s objective. The Trump administration’s continuing efforts to move things in Putin’s direction is more than just a bit curious to me.
 
Lando said:
Let's say Europe rallies and we aren't needed for muscle going forward. Do we close down bases? Are we forced to close down bases? What happens to our ability to project power? Do we wake up one day and realize our military looks like Russia's current mess?
Click to expand...
If in a decade or so Europe has been able to do this, I imagine we would close some bases. But we’re still a long ways from that.
 

Peace is not Zelenskyy’s priority, Tulsi Gabbard says​

“President Zelenskyy has different aims in mind,” she said.


“… “President Trump is committed to peace and to freedom,” Gabbard told host Shannon Bream on “Fox News Sunday.” “We’re seeing this big divergence here between his position, his commitment to these values and the interests of the American people and the interests of President Zelenskyy and these European leaders.”

… President Zelenskyy has different aims in mind,” she said. “He has said that he wants to end this war, but he will only accept an end apparently that leads to what he views as Ukraine’s victory even if it comes at an incredibly high cost of potentially World War III or even a nuclear war.”

… Gabbatd put the onus on Zelenskyy to repair the damaged Ukraine-U.S. relationship.

“When President Zelenskyy directly challenged President Trump and Vice President Vance in front of the media and the American people, he really showed his lack of interest in any real, good faith negotiations,” Gabbard told Bream. “This has created a huge rift in the relationship.”

And now?

“There’s going to have to be a rebuilding of any kind of interest in good faith negotiations I think before President Trump is going to be willing to reengage on this,” Gabbard said.

Gabbard also assailed Zelenskyy’s leadership over his country, telling Bream that Kyiv had canceled elections and silenced its political opposition. Trump in February called Zelenskyy, who was elected in 2019, a “dictator without elections” and American negotiators have discussed the prospect of new elections in Ukraine in peace talks with Russian counterparts.

But elections now could be perilous for Ukraine, and even Zelenskyy’s top critics are opposed to the idea of holding votes during wartime, due in large part to the risk of Russians influencing campaigns.

“We could go down a whole laundry list of issues that are against the values of democracy and freedom,” Gabbard said,

“So it really begs the question as Vice President Vance said again in Munich, it’s clear that they’re standing against Putin, obviously that’s clear. But what are they actually really fighting for? And are they aligned with the values that they claim to hold in agreement with us?” …”
 
dcphx said:
Trump has always been an isolationist. He is going to advance an isolationist foreign policy and economic policy (IMO).
Click to expand...
I agree with the majority of your post, so I didn't bother to quote it here.

I don't think Trump is an isolationist as much as he is a transactionalist. He only offers to support others insofar as they offer him something that he values, either before they seek his help or as payment for receiving his help.

He is very much willing to help Russia because Russia assisted him, both in his private financial dealings and in his efforts to be elected as POTUS. Zelensky refused to help him when he requested Zelensky's assistance against Biden in 2019/2020 and so he will refuse to assist Ukraine now unless Zelensky provides a large payoff to Trump/the US (mineral rights).

Trump assists Israel because they have assisted him in the past and because he expects to gain from the transaction in the future (Trump Gaza).

Trump is very interested in international engagements in Greenland and in Panama, even though those nations have sought nothing from him, but solely because he wants something from them.

I don't think you can correctly label Trump an isolationist because he is more than willing to take on international causes/issues, but you can label him a transactionalist because he only wants involvement with causes/issues where he stands to gain from the engagement.
 
nycfan said:

Peace is not Zelenskyy’s priority, Tulsi Gabbard says​

“President Zelenskyy has different aims in mind,” she said.


“… “President Trump is committed to peace and to freedom,” Gabbard told host Shannon Bream on “Fox News Sunday.” “We’re seeing this big divergence here between his position, his commitment to these values and the interests of the American people and the interests of President Zelenskyy and these European leaders.”

… President Zelenskyy has different aims in mind,” she said. “He has said that he wants to end this war, but he will only accept an end apparently that leads to what he views as Ukraine’s victory even if it comes at an incredibly high cost of potentially World War III or even a nuclear war.”

… Gabbatd put the onus on Zelenskyy to repair the damaged Ukraine-U.S. relationship.

“When President Zelenskyy directly challenged President Trump and Vice President Vance in front of the media and the American people, he really showed his lack of interest in any real, good faith negotiations,” Gabbard told Bream. “This has created a huge rift in the relationship.”

And now?

“There’s going to have to be a rebuilding of any kind of interest in good faith negotiations I think before President Trump is going to be willing to reengage on this,” Gabbard said.

Gabbard also assailed Zelenskyy’s leadership over his country, telling Bream that Kyiv had canceled elections and silenced its political opposition. Trump in February called Zelenskyy, who was elected in 2019, a “dictator without elections” and American negotiators have discussed the prospect of new elections in Ukraine in peace talks with Russian counterparts.

But elections now could be perilous for Ukraine, and even Zelenskyy’s top critics are opposed to the idea of holding votes during wartime, due in large part to the risk of Russians influencing campaigns.

“We could go down a whole laundry list of issues that are against the values of democracy and freedom,” Gabbard said,

“So it really begs the question as Vice President Vance said again in Munich, it’s clear that they’re standing against Putin, obviously that’s clear. But what are they actually really fighting for? And are they aligned with the values that they claim to hold in agreement with us?” …”
Click to expand...
I read ,but can't vouch for the truth of it, that their constitution forbade elections during war time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top