Russia - US | Ukraine “peace negotiations”

[lawtig02]

You bitch, you moan, you hurl personal attacks but what you and wayne and boford, etc never do is offer your solution. Not some general pie in the sky "don't appease russia" bullshit.

If you don't accept russia keeping territorial gains:

How do you get russia out?
Who is going to use the weapons we send? Ukraine is about out of soldiers. Russia has more than ukraine
Why would sending them more weapons now all of a sudden work?
How long would you keep sending weapons to ukraine? 1 yr? 2 yrs. 5 yrs. 20 yrs?

There are several strategies discussed within the last 20 posts on this thread. You even responded to one of them. ANY of them would be immensely better than the appeasement Trump is proposing.

 

[finesse]

You bitch, you moan, you hurl personal attacks but what you and wayne and boford, etc never do is offer your solution. Not some general pie in the sky "don't appease russia" bullshit.

If you don't accept russia keeping territorial gains:

How do you get russia out?
Who is going to use the weapons we send? Ukraine is about out of soldiers. Russia has more than ukraine
Why would sending them more weapons now all of a sudden work?
How long would you keep sending weapons to ukraine? 1 yr? 2 yrs. 5 yrs. 20 yrs?

20 years is fine by me. The correct answer is as long as Ukraine wants to. It doesn't cost us much and it costs Russia dearly. It's been the best bang for the buck the US has gotten in my lifetime and I was born when Truman was president.

 

[Callatoroy]

Kellogg is right. It's all to force ukraine into peace discussions. Its showing him what he would face if he doesn't because trump has told him he can go it alone, or with europe

Appeasement to end conflict versus appeasement to avoid conflict may not be exactly the same thing, but it's still appeasement. Pressing Ukraine to cede its sovereign territory to Russia as part of a peace deal is appeasement regardless of whether Russia is currently occupying the territory by force.

We don't have to keep fighting, or to do anything. But giving international recognition to Russia having a rightful claim on a portion of Ukraine that it took by force and without justification s going to embolden every autocratic power with designs on adding territory (chiefly Russia and China). Everyone recognizes that the majority of human history has involved civilizations and countries constantly attacking each other, capturing territory, ceding territory by treaty, etc. But the entire point of the post-WWII order is supposed to be that the international community agrees we're not going to do that anymore. That we've moved past that into a new age of peace and stability where national borders will no longer be changed through external force. Giving up that order and returning to an age of imperialism and territorial aggression is no small thing to do. Especially given the manpower and level of weaponry available to the potential combatants in modern imperialist wars. Even without considering the possibility of nuclear war, it's terrifying.

The world has been relatively peaceful (relative to the majority of human history - I recognize that plenty of wars and atrocities have still occurred in the post-WWII era) for the last few decades. We've essentially been living under the umbrella created by a stable, US-led world order for several decades. We've been living under that umbrella for so long that people have forgotten what the rain feels like, so they don't understand why we need the umbrella. Going back to an age where the international community does not strongly reject the very concept of imperialist aggression will have potentially disastrous consequences for us all.

Why now the unfettered commitment to keep sending, or actually increase weapons shipments? Where were the cries when Crimea was invaded and we sent blankets and MREs. Why no opposition to appeasement then?

 

[Callatoroy]

20 years is fine by me. The correct answer is as long as Ukraine wants to. It doesn't cost us much and it costs Russia dearly. It's been the best bang for the buck the US has gotten in my lifetime and I was born when Truman was president.

You answered one of the questions. Appreciated. How about the others?

 

[CFordUNC]

You bitch, you moan, you hurl personal attacks but what you and wayne and boford, etc never do is offer your solution. Not some general pie in the sky "don't appease russia" bullshit.

If you don't accept russia keeping territorial gains:

How do you get russia out?
Who is going to use the weapons we send? Ukraine is about out of soldiers. Russia has more than ukraine
Why would sending them more weapons now all of a sudden work?
How long would you keep sending weapons to ukraine? 1 yr? 2 yrs. 5 yrs. 20 yrs?

Lmfao you stupid motherfucker, every single one of us has posted our ideas for solutions many times on this thread. You are either too functionally illiterate to understand them, or you don’t like them. Ain’t our problem, either way. Learn to fucking read, you petulant little slut!

 

[4thgenheel]

 

[Callatoroy]

There are several strategies discussed within the last 20 posts on this thread. You even responded to one of them. ANY of them would be immensely better than the appeasement Trump is proposing.

But I want yours specifically.

 

[rodoheel]

This is starting to sound a lot like LBJ's justification for escalating in Vietnam, with a bit of WWI strategy thrown in.

There are many ways to combat aggression other than sending soldiers into meat grinders for some abstract principle of defending artificial boundaries.

I do not think the West's response to the Ukraine invasion, even if we were to concede all that territory right now, would embolden anyone. Russia has paid an incredibly steep price for its invasion. It was absolutely 100% not worth it. They have decimated their population; their economy remains utterly in tatters (regardless of oil revenue, which is not that significant), and the import restrictions have taken a toll.

We should not "recognize" the territory taken. We should not lift sanctions on Russia. We should not unfreeze Russian assets. Those are signs of strong rejection of imperialist aggression. Continuing to fight until the enemy is completely defeated is simply not realistic and it doesn't make much sense when you drill down.

It's more like the logic the US used in arming the Mujahideen in Afghanistan than the logic we used in Vietnam. As for WWI, that was the result of what happened when the great powers of the world sought to carve up the world through imperialism and make every corner of it part of their empires. That is what I'm trying to avoid returning to.

If we sign on to/preside over a peace treaty that involves Ukraine recognizing that the territory Russia has taken is now part of Russia, how does that not constitute "recognizing" that Russia now owns that territory? And if we make peace on the posture that Trump is espousing - where the war is Ukraine's fault and not Russia's - how is that going to make China think there's any chance of the US intervening militarily if they want to take Taiwan?

And I guess we just disagree about what "Continuing to fight until the enemy is completely defeated" means. I'm not suggesting we have to put Russia to the sword and capture Moscow to force an unconditional surrender. Just back Ukraine up when it says there can be no peace until Russia leaves Ukrainian soil. Make clear that it is Russia, and only Russia, who is prolonging this war by refusing to leave. Again, sometimes you have to be willing to maintain your resolve in a smaller war to avoid a bigger one. Putin is counting on Ukraine and the West lacking the resolve to stay in the fight. Trump is giving him exactly what he wants. Anyone who thinks Putin's territorial ambitions will end after a treaty that recognizes Russian sovereignty over a portion of Ukraine is a fool.

 

[CFordUNC]

Just making sure that everyone else sees that calla can’t keep my name out of his mouth even when I’m not part of the conversation! This is the cheapest fucking real estate investment I’ll ever have in my entire life, that space between his ears.

Calla, brother, I’m not going to fuck you. Let it go, hoss!

 

[dukeman92]

Again: appeasement of an autocracy is a fundamentally self-defeating strategy.

We are an autocracy.

 

[Callatoroy]

Lmfao you stupid motherfucker, every single one of us has posted our ideas for solutions many times on this thread. You are either too functionally illiterate to understand them, or you don’t like them. Ain’t our problem, either way. Learn to fucking read, you petulant little slut!

Then repost yours and answer the questions. I don't remember reading how you would propose to do the things in the questions posed.

 

[finesse]

You answered one of the questions. Appreciated. How about the others?

All covered by as long as Ukraine wants to. They are on the ground and can judge what they can field and what they can tolerate.

I care less about a solution than I do about being a PITA to Russia. I would prefer that Russia retreats. The only thing I don't want to see is us aiding and abetting Putin. He's a slime and been a sworn enemy since he joined the KGB in 1975.

 

[4thgenheel]

i thought a map might be helpful for us.

not doing more in 2014 was a mistake, calla. you're right about that.

and it is a perfect example of why we shouldn't let russia get away with it again. they aren't going to stop.

 

[CFordUNC]

Then repost yours and answer the questions. I don't remember reading how you would propose to do the things in the questions posed.

Fuck no, bitch. Quit being a lazy motherfucker and read for yourself. Lmao I ain’t your homework for you. You’ve lost your damn mind, hombre.

 

[Callatoroy]

Just making sure that everyone else sees that calla can’t keep my name out of his mouth even when I’m not part of the conversation! This is the cheapest fucking real estate investment I’ll ever have in my entire life, that space between his ears.

Calla, brother, I’m not going to fuck you. Let it go, hoss!

you offer nothing, but you do criticize. Do you have an original thought? Tell me how you would handle the ukraine / russia war going forward. If you are afraid to answer or can't think of anything beyond what you are programmed to say then it will be self evident.

 

[Callatoroy]

Fuck no, bitch. Quit being a lazy motherfucker and read for yourself. Lmao I ain’t your homework for you. You’ve lost your damn mind, hombre.

Just what I thought. No answers and no thoughts.

 

[CFordUNC]

you offer nothing, but you do criticize. Do you have an original thought? Tell me how you would handle the ukraine / russia war going forward. If you are afraid to answer or can't think of anything beyond what you are programmed to say then it will be self evident.

You better hop off my nuts long enough to get your lazy ass to reading back through 83 pages if you want an answer.

 

[dukeman92]

some abstract principle of defending artificial boundaries.

 

[rodoheel]

Kellogg is right. It's all to force ukraine into peace discussions. Its showing him what he would face if he doesn't because trump has told him he can go it alone, or with europe

Why now the unfettered commitment to keep sending, or actually increase weapons shipments? Where were the cries when Crimea was invaded and we sent blankets and MREs. Why no opposition to appeasement then?

First of all, there was plenty of criticism at the time that the US/international response should have been harsher. But at least the US government at the time universally condemned the action by the Russians. it did not pressure the Ukrainian government to "recognize reality" and formally cede Crimea to Russia. Like the Trump admin is doing now. Rather than using his supposed influence with Putin to pressure Putin to end the war, Trump is pressuring Ukraine to sign away its sovereign territory to Russia. Did any previous US administration do that? That is the appeasement. Trump choosing to strongarm Zelenskyy into peace on terms Ukraine does not want, instead of trying to pressure Putin, tells you all you need to know.

Second of all, what happened in Crimea in 2014 was far different than what happened in 2022. It was largely a bloodless, Russian-backed coup. There was little to no immediate fighting. Ukraine did not send its own military back in to try to take Crimea. If they had chosen to do that, I certainly hope we would have supported them politically and with military aid as we did when Russia invaded in 2022.

 

[lawtig02]

But I want yours specifically.

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.