Very little in the media that I can find.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-crisis-military-idUSKBN2BM1N6

But on Twitter:

EDIT - You might listen to the videos on mute. The music is bleh..

Rumors are saying that troops and military equipment are being moved to three locations along the Ukrainian border.

It almost feels like the rest of the world suddenly feels emboldened.
I wonder what changed recently that could have caused that?

O jeez, what did Trump do this time?

Please...we have more important things to worry about and for the news to report...like dogs pooping in the White House.

Yep. We are weak as hell and other countries are feeling emboldened. Vary bad times ahead.

Definitely feel sorry for them. Its a foolhardy nation that disarms from great means to trust the word of a power motivated only by money like ourselves. Far too flaky. Ukraine should have kept its nukes. They would have a bit more leverage. (And they still do have considerable leverage, don't mistake that. Not least the willingness to fight)

Well son of a bi***.

The Left doesn't care nor do the "Moderates." People are allowed to be slaughtered and treated inhumanely all over the world just so long as an orange man doesn't tweet mean things. Feeling sanctimonious is all they care about, the rest is another man's problem (to die for).

Some in Ukraine got buddy buddy with George Soros ... so I am nearly at the F-em stage with folks.

NYT article. It's getting more play now.

More HERE

Trump is going to start WWIII and he's not even president anymore.

Media is prepped and ready to explain why another Russian invasion of Ukraine is Trumps fault even though they suspiciously seem to wait for Dems to be in office before doing stuff like this

aggiehawg said:

---

NYT article. It's getting more play now.

More HERE

---

"One way or another."

Flat out saying if they don't start it then we will.

Think of this in the larger picture. This is the real challenge of setting oneself up as some arbiter. Bush and Obama between them destroyed non-proliferation by invading countries that had not yet acquired nukes or in Libya's case, had renounced them. All the ground for holding such a stance was demolished.

Now we are probably at a point where world stability might be best assured if most civilized powers had them so you wouldn't be looking at having to go to war in very distant places to no point to enforce a red line you shouldn't have had to draw.

For example a nuke armed Taiwan would probably slow the annexation threat and Ukraine would be in a better position if they still had them.

Does anyone want to go to war for Ukraine? Or even think it sensible? All this is because the Dem-MSM-Rino group-think in D.C. refused to pursue any kind of imaginative foreign policy. And now that after all our belligerence we have also made ourselves weak, its all being called in on now.

titan said:

---

Definitely feel sorry for them. Its a foolhardy nation that disarms from great means to trust the word of a power motivated only by money like ourselves. Far too flaky. Ukraine should have kept its nukes. They would have a bit more leverage. (And they still do have considerable leverage, don't mistake that. Not least the willingness to fight)

---

Are you absolutely nuts? Have you been to Ukraine? Ukraine had nukes because the USSR put them there. Sheesh - I'm sure nothing could ever go wrong with nuclear energy in Ukraine...

94chem said:

---

titan said:

---

Definitely feel sorry for them. Its a foolhardy nation that disarms from great means to trust the word of a power motivated only by money like ourselves. Far too flaky. Ukraine should have kept its nukes. They would have a bit more leverage. (And they still do have considerable leverage, don't mistake that. Not least the willingness to fight)

---

Are you absolutely nuts? Have you been to Ukraine? Ukraine had nukes because the USSR put them there. Sheesh - I'm sure nothing could ever go wrong with nuclear energy in Ukraine...

---

I am not talking from our point of view, but theirs. They lost leverage in their newly won freedom from the USSR when they went along with Clinton-Albright's promises.

We are very casual about assuming countries should sacrifice their interests for our agendas.

titan said:

---

Does anyone want to go to war for Ukraine? Or even think it sensible? All this is because the Dem-MSM-Rino group-think in D.C. refused to pursue any kind of imaginative foreign policy. And now that after all our belligerence we have also made ourselves weak, its all being called in on now.

---

Considering that China will flat out take Taiwan whenever they darn well want to, and we won't be able to do a thing about it, then no, I don't think Ukraine will even raise eyebrows.

94chem said:

---

titan said:

---

Does anyone want to go to war for Ukraine? Or even think it sensible? All this is because the Dem-MSM-Rino group-think in D.C. refused to pursue any kind of imaginative foreign policy. And now that after all our belligerence we have also made ourselves weak, its all being called in on now.

---

Considering that China will flat out take Taiwan whenever they darn well want to, and we won't be able to do a thing about it, then no, I don't think Ukraine will even raise eyebrows.

---

So how does that back your argument Ukraine and Taiwan should not have nukes from their point of view?

titan said:

---

94chem said:

---

titan said:

---

Does anyone want to go to war for Ukraine? Or even think it sensible? All this is because the Dem-MSM-Rino group-think in D.C. refused to pursue any kind of imaginative foreign policy. And now that after all our belligerence we have also made ourselves weak, its all being called in on now.

---

Considering that China will flat out take Taiwan whenever they darn well want to, and we won't be able to do a thing about it, then no, I don't think Ukraine will even raise eyebrows.

---

So how does that back your argument Ukraine and Taiwan should not have nukes from their point of view?

---

Taiwan, for sure. But I don't think Ukraine would want them, even now. Their internal chaos level is too high to manage, what with mowing down civilians, Russian secessionist minorities, leaders absconding in helicopters...

94chem said:

---

titan said:

---

94chem said:

---

titan said:

---

Does anyone want to go to war for Ukraine? Or even think it sensible? All this is because the Dem-MSM-Rino group-think in D.C. refused to pursue any kind of imaginative foreign policy. And now that after all our belligerence we have also made ourselves weak, its all being called in on now.

---

Considering that China will flat out take Taiwan whenever they darn well want to, and we won't be able to do a thing about it, then no, I don't think Ukraine will even raise eyebrows.

---

So how does that back your argument Ukraine and Taiwan should not have nukes from their point of view?

---

Taiwan, for sure. But I don't think Ukraine would want them, even now. Their internal chaos level is too high to manage, what with mowing down civilians, Russian secessionist minorities, leaders absconding in helicopters...

---

Oh, no argument there. If they don't want them, that's totally legit as well. Just they shouldn't be arbitrarily denied if we are not going to defend them.

Man, you'd think if Trump was Putin's pawn like all the CMs claimed that Russia would have moved on Ukraine back in 2017...

But..but..but.. Harris-Biden is 1000 times better than Trump.

I'm honestly surprised that of all the land grabs available to Putin, he chooses to go all in on the Ukraine. A bolder move would be to take the Baltic States, expose NATO's weakness, and create a land bridge over to Kaliningrad.

lb3 said:

---

I'm honestly surprised that of all the land grabs available to Putin, he chooses to go all in on the Ukraine. A bolder move would be to take the Baltic States, expose NATO's weakness, and create a land bridge over to Kaliningrad.

---

Putin sees himself more as a new Tsar. He wants to re-incorporate Russia's `breadbasket' of the Ukraine. Its possible to see him going for the Baltic states as well, yes. But strictly speaking--there is no indication of any desire for the old Warsaw Pact. If we are going to wait for an attack on Poland to make any kind of stand, then that might not ever come.

lb3 said:

---

I'm honestly surprised that of all the land grabs available to Putin, he chooses to go all in on the Ukraine. A bolder move would be to take the Baltic States, expose NATO's weakness, and create a land bridge over to Kaliningrad.

---

It's interesting that you say that.

There is a guy Tweeting from Eastern Ukraine that thinks those countries and others are possibly on the list, I ran across it earlier looking for more info on the actions in the area.


This is the thread (you can Google translate from Russian to English)

Some Highlights (I hate Twitter but where else can I get first hand info from around the world instantly?)

Denmark will not be dragged into the war because of the insignificance of this country. However, Russia will not end the fighting of this war, as its advance will stop the famine.

And so Russia will start military operations against Turkey and Iran. Will take over these two countries in bloody clashes, resulting in tremendous destruction.

The Russian mental sphere of interest will focus on gaining control over the Middle East oil fields, as well as control over the southeastern region of Europe.

Thus, Russia will invade the Balkans and triumph in these countries in great battles, resulting in ruthless and destructive destruction with many deaths.

Death, destruction and the rage of destruction will not only be in Europe, but also in America, which will have to endure a lot of suffering and death, as well as destruction.



Now these could just be ravings from some old man, but as things stand now in the world I would say absolutely nothing is outside the realm of possibilities.

sarcastic/semi-serious question:

What would happen if a battalion of unarmed Russian soldiers, dressed in civilian clothing and claiming political asylum, crossed over the southern border of the US?

would they be deported or allowed to stay?

ABATTBQ87 said:

---

sarcastic/semi-serious question:

What would happen if a battalion of unarmed Russian soldiers, dressed in civilian clothing and claiming political asylum, crossed over the southern border of the US?

would they be deported or allowed to stay?

---

Well I'm sure that depends on a few things....

Fortunately for the US, our new President knows a former Board member of a big Ukranian gas company who also happens to know the former Moscow mayor's wife very well. We should be able to smooth this over and patch it all up in no time.

TChaney said:

---

lb3 said:

---

I'm honestly surprised that of all the land grabs available to Putin, he chooses to go all in on the Ukraine. A bolder move would be to take the Baltic States, expose NATO's weakness, and create a land bridge over to Kaliningrad.

---

It's interesting that you say that.

There is a guy Tweeting from Eastern Ukraine that thinks those countries and others are possibly on the list, I ran across it earlier looking for more info on the actions in the area.


This is the thread (you can Google translate from Russian to English)

Some Highlights (I hate Twitter but where else can I get first hand info from around the world instantly?)

Denmark will not be dragged into the war because of the insignificance of this country. However, Russia will not end the fighting of this war, as its advance will stop the famine.

And so Russia will start military operations against Turkey and Iran. Will take over these two countries in bloody clashes, resulting in tremendous destruction.

The Russian mental sphere of interest will focus on gaining control over the Middle East oil fields, as well as control over the southeastern region of Europe.

Thus, Russia will invade the Balkans and triumph in these countries in great battles, resulting in ruthless and destructive destruction with many deaths.

Death, destruction and the rage of destruction will not only be in Europe, but also in America, which will have to endure a lot of suffering and death, as well as destruction.



Now these could just be ravings from some old man, but as things stand now in the world I would say absolutely nothing is outside the realm of possibilities.

---

Russia isn't going to attack Iran or Turkey. It's too easy to buy them off.

The only scenario where I see that as possible wold be if they are trying to break the US - Israel/Saudi alliance in order to destroy the Petro-dollar. That's a bold move but an extremely sticky diplomatic wicket to complete.

"Which boarder? They're still in my country according to my map!" - Putin

Obama/Biden "oh, yeah, I see that now. Carry on!"

And off chips another section.

If you've read Zeihan and agree with his theories then Russia is absolutely going to continue their land grabs.
They have to. Their population is diseased and dying more rapidly than they can replenish.

And who is going to stop them? The only one that can is us and we won't do anything about it. I frankly don't care depending on which country we are talking about. If it's some of the -stans counties as Zeihan predicts, then have at it.

I got to visit Ukraine a few years back for my best friend's wedding.... really great people those Ukrainians I want their country to succeed. I hope they can remain independent....

What can I actually do to help them from America? Write/call my congressmen? What else?

administrative errors said:

---

I got to visit Ukraine a few years back for my best friend's wedding.... really great people those Ukrainians I want their country to succeed. I hope they can remain independent....

What can I actually do to help them from America? Write/call my congressmen? What else?

---

Maybe just raise awareness from your special connection to maybe what is actually going on? Find out from them some stories, how things shake out, and then make those known. Our media is pure propaganda-- you need info from the scene to enlighten people either way. Sometimes that can help. Like a miniature version of what Clooney did for Darfur.

Tramp96 said:

---

Please...we have more important things to worry about and for the news to report...like dogs pooping in the White House.

---

I thought they were biting, are they pooping too? Trump has lost control of the White House.