GAC06 said:

---

No, I think they're smarter than that.

---

I HOPE they're smarter than that, too, but don't have much faith in them given their continued mission creep.

Artorias said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Nothing says rugged patriot like sending an LGBT kid to fight in a war that little Colton is too good for. He's far more important to his select baseball team back here.

---

Feel free to send your kids to some ****hole country to die for some pointless war/conflict. My kid is staying home. If China brings the fight to US soil, different discussion.

---

Isolationist Americans think they are actually coming up with something new, when this same type of mentality has been around for thousands of years of human history.

the same things isolationists are saying today- are the exact same things they were saying back in 1941.

and THAT turned out great for the world.

"Feel free to send your kids to some ****hole country to die for some pointless war/conflict. My kid is staying home. If Japan brings the fight to US soil, different discussion."

Teslag said:

---

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

I'm perfectly fine sending the leftist Ukraine supporters first to be fair.

---

And I'm perfectly fine with sending your money instead of any of us.

---

Yeah there lies the problem. None of our money or "us" have to be there.

nortex97 said:

---

IndividualFreedom said:

---

Quote:

---

There is simply no realistic scenario where we re-institute a draft to fight in Ukraine.

---

Are democrats allowed to make decisions?

---

To your point:

The impact of Biden’s disastrous and deadly surrender in Afghanistan is still being felt. Biden is having to deploy more troops than were in Afghanistan to Poland and Taiwan in an attempt to convince our enemies we are committed to our allies. Arguably https://t.co/7z2M3P6CLX… https://t.co/X1uPoa5zN2

— @amuse (@amuse) February 23, 2023

drip, drip, drip...

---

This is why none of the Ukraine goobers will answer my question from yesterday. They have outright ignored it.

Biden has to escalate at this point, folding and forcing peace talks wouldn't be as politically sound as he and dems would be roasted over the coals for spending 100+ billion for surrendering part of Ukraine.

This ends one of two ways: escalation to US forces getting involved, or peace talks and the Russians and people of Ukraine redrawing the map.

Biden is fighting a losing game and there are plenty here that are too stuck up to admit how stupid this is.

jwoodmd said:

---

Beast of Burden said:

---

shiftyandquick said:

---

How old are you pro-Russia MAGA guys? Old enough to be alive while Ronald Reagan was president?

---

Shiftyandslow, have you ever considered trying to use some honesty during your "arguments"?

---

You didn't answer his question, comrade Russian bot

---

Care to answer my question on escalation you ignored three times yesterday?

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

jwoodmd said:

---

Beast of Burden said:

---

shiftyandquick said:

---

How old are you pro-Russia MAGA guys? Old enough to be alive while Ronald Reagan was president?

---

Shiftyandslow, have you ever considered trying to use some honesty during your "arguments"?

---

You didn't answer his question, comrade Russian bot

---

Care to answer my question on escalation you ingord three times yesterday?

---

Watch your mouth

LMCane said:

---

Artorias said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Nothing says rugged patriot like sending an LGBT kid to fight in a war that little Colton is too good for. He's far more important to his select baseball team back here.

---

Feel free to send your kids to some ****hole country to die for some pointless war/conflict. My kid is staying home. If China brings the fight to US soil, different discussion.

---

Isolationist Americans think they are actually coming up with something new, when this same type of mentality has been around for thousands of years of human history.

the same things isolationists are saying today- are the exact same things they were saying back in 1941.

and THAT turned out great for the world.

"Feel free to send your kids to some ****hole country to die for some pointless war/conflict. My kid is staying home. If Japan brings the fight to US soil, different discussion."

---

There is plenty of nuances you are ignoring but have at your black-and-white reasoning.

Under your logic, the US should be involved in every hot war conflict all over the world. We are not far off from that in recent history and here we find ourselves constantly spending billions and fanning the flames of war.

Great foreign policy you have there--total caveman *****

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

Here's the proof you all are arguing semantics.

Would anyone disagree we are escalating our support with more funds and more equipment and more powerful offensive equipment?

Anyone?

---

Still not a single response. When pushed to think ahead of where we are going, the Ukraine bois go total birdbox:

Idiot.

LOL, indeed.

oh no said:

---

If you don't have a hard-on for WW3, and you're not excited about how our weak installed leader has emboldened geopolitical and economic rivals towards hostile actions after an embarrassing Afghan exit and sabotaging offshore infrastructure, and you're not on board with sending another hundred billion dollars to one of the most corrupt places in the world, then you're an isolationist Putin stooge! Everyone knows that!

---

You forgot about the Ukraine flag waivers equating Biden to Reagan ... but overall well done.

nortex97 said:

---

IndividualFreedom said:

---

Quote:

---

There is simply no realistic scenario where we re-institute a draft to fight in Ukraine.

---

Are democrats allowed to make decisions?

---

To your point:

The impact of Biden’s disastrous and deadly surrender in Afghanistan is still being felt. Biden is having to deploy more troops than were in Afghanistan to Poland and Taiwan in an attempt to convince our enemies we are committed to our allies. Arguably https://t.co/7z2M3P6CLX… https://t.co/X1uPoa5zN2

— @amuse (@amuse) February 23, 2023

drip, drip, drip...

---

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2020/06/24/1000-more-us-troops-to-poland-as-trump-and-duda-discuss-natos-eastern-flank/

We've been building up our presence in Poland before Biden even took office. And I led a group a few years ago to shift medical assets from Kaiserslautern to Romania. Our focus shifted to that region before this conflict even started.

Quote:

---

maybe the WWIII nuclear Armageddon that Joe Biden seems to want so badly is drawing close upon us and military conscription / selective service is coming for our sons

---

pagerman @ work said:

---

Quote:

---

maybe the WWIII nuclear Armageddon that Joe Biden seems to want so badly is drawing close upon us and military conscription / selective service is coming for our sons

---

---

how old are your sons?

oh no said:

---

If you don't have a hard-on for WW3, and you're not excited about how our weak installed leader has emboldened geopolitical and economic rivals towards hostile actions after an embarrassing Afghan exit and sabotaging offshore infrastructure, and you're not on board with sending another hundred billion dollars to one of the most corrupt places in the world, then you're an isolationist Putin stooge! Everyone knows that! ...stooopid ultra-MAGA- you're not like Reagan at alllll!!!!!!

---

Withdrawing from Afghanistan emboldened geopolitical rivals, but we should abandon Ukraine to Russia because that won't embolden anyone. Do you even read what you write?

Quote:

---

We've been building up our presence in Poland before Biden even took office. And I led a group a few years ago to shift medical assets from Kaiserslautern to Romania. Our focus shifted to that region before this conflict even started.

---

This may be true, but DJT was tripling down on building a strong defense with a volunteer force. joe and his generals have been purposely destroying our armed forces with wokeness and volunteer numbers have plummeted. The democrats broke it on purpose and they can not take OUR young men to fix it or die trying. Not an option.

Take all those entering our country illegally. If they see battle, they get auto citizenship.

Definitely escalated, but we're still miles away from deploying troops to conduct combat operations.

I'm somewhat in favor of our actions in Ukraine. Until now, this has been a textbook example of offshore balancing in which we support one state to reduce the power of a rival. Even accounting for the "fraud tax" (yes, the Ukrainian government is corrupt and yes some of our support has been embezzled or wasted or who knows what else), it's still been a pretty good deal. We haven't spent that much relative to our annual defense budget and in return the Russian military has suffered ~200k casualties (estimated 50-60k dead) and has lost staggering amounts of equipment. So, its ability to project power and resist our interests across the world has been heavily damaged.

That said I'm extremely nervous about China escalating this thing. If they begin sending Russia weapons and material as we suspect they will, the FUBAR potential of this thing increases exponentially. I do not trust Biden's administration to navigate that successfully (understatement of the year). When you look at his record, his success so far with Ukraine looks more like luck than business as usual. I am terrified that Afghanistan Biden will make his return.

You've repeated the same stupid question like five times. People aren't avoiding it because it's some kind of tough question, they're avoiding it because it's silly. Russia invaded. Our position is to respect and ensure Ukraine's territorial integrity. Providing arms to counter Russia's invasion isn't escalation, it's consistency. Russia likes to talk about all the escalation and provocations they've faced since their invasion began so I guess I see where you're getting that talking point.

Quote:

---

This ends one of two ways: escalation to US forces getting involved, or peace talks and the Russians and people of Ukraine redrawing the map.

---

And why is it our job to dictate terms to the Ukrainians? Where do we get off telling other countries how much of their country is acceptable for them to cede to an outside aggressor? They don't get to (at least attempt to) decide that on their own?

We don't have to arm or support them, but we also don't have to mandate their surrender.

And the US is not going to send troops to Ukraine, period. If we were going to, it would have happened already when the conventional wisdom was that Ukraine had no chance against the Russian invasion.

The point of supporting Ukraine indirectly with arms is so that hopefully we don't have to support Latvia, Lithuania and/or Estonia directly with US troops. And FYI, those countries have sizable ethnic Russian minorities that I am sure Moscow feels would be safer under the wing of mother Russia. And they are access points into the heart of Russia. And they are NATO members and thus (in the paranoid Russian mind) direct threats to Russia's very existence.

I don't disagree with any of that. Just pointing out that our presence in Eastern Europe has been a strategic shift for a while now.

GAC06 said:

---

You've repeated the same stupid question like five times. People aren't avoiding it because it's some kind of tough question, they're avoiding it because it's silly. Russia invaded. Our position is to respect and ensure Ukraine's territorial integrity. Providing arms to counter Russia's invasion isn't escalation, it's consistency. Russia likes to talk about all the escalation and provocations they've faced since their invasion began so I guess I see where you're getting that talking point.

---

Brilliantly put

Teslag said:

---

I don't disagree with any of that. Just pointing out that our presence in Eastern Europe has been a strategic shift for a while now.

---

Biden within 2 weeks of being sworn in, cancelled that shift though, which was planned by Trump so of course it had to be wrong. The Germans still aren't hitting 2 percent on defense, even today, btw, though of course Biden cost them something like $5K per capita last year on energy emergency subsidies by emboldening Putin to launch this war.

Also:

1. The tweet below is an official NATO message. 👇

Now stop and think about it. https://t.co/CfJD9zW8qc

— TheLastRefuge (@TheLastRefuge2) February 23, 2023

oh no said:

---

pagerman @ work said:

---

Quote:

---

maybe the WWIII nuclear Armageddon that Joe Biden seems to want so badly is drawing close upon us and military conscription / selective service is coming for our sons

---

---

how old are your sons?

---

It doesn't matter if I have 0 or 100 draft age sons.

There will be no draft. For Ukraine or otherwise. Anyone saying otherwise is feeding into the paranoia of people that have come to believe everything they read of hear on the internet for political reasons. Or nuts. Or both.

Even if Russia invaded a NATO ally tomorrow and we got into a direct shooting war with Russia, there will be no draft. There wouldn't be time. It would be over (either by Russia losing handily or a general nuclear exchange) in short order. There will not be sufficient time to organize a draft much less actually draft anyone.

Shot:

jwoodmd said:

---

Beast of Burden said:

---

jwoodmd said:

---

Beast of Burden said:

---

shiftyandquick said:

---

How old are you pro-Russia MAGA guys? Old enough to be alive while Ronald Reagan was president?

---

Shiftyandslow, have you ever considered trying to use some honesty during your "arguments"?

---

You didn't answer his question, comrade Russian bot

---

jwood, I always get a good chuckle when you try and engage on f16. It's usually pretty entertaining to watch until you inevitably disappear again. What question are you referring to?

---

Weird and evasive response coming from a ten day old account. Answer shinty's question!

---

Chaser:

jwoodmd said:

---

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

jwoodmd said:

---

Beast of Burden said:

---

shiftyandquick said:

---

How old are you pro-Russia MAGA guys? Old enough to be alive while Ronald Reagan was president?

---

Shiftyandslow, have you ever considered trying to use some honesty during your "arguments"?

---

You didn't answer his question, comrade Russian bot

---

Care to answer my question on escalation you ingord three times yesterday?

---

Watch your mouth

---

GAC06 said:

---

You've repeated the same stupid question like five times. People aren't avoiding it because it's some kind of tough question, they're avoiding it because it's silly. Russia invaded. Our position is to respect and ensure Ukraine's territorial integrity. Providing arms to counter Russia's invasion isn't escalation, it's consistency. Russia likes to talk about all the escalation and provocations they've faced since their invasion began so I guess I see where you're getting that talking point.

---

Why aren't we going to free Tibet then, about which I've seen bumper stickers for 30+ years? Or Hong Kong? Or Gambia, or Somalia, or Ethiopia? When do we re-take South Vietnam for the good people there? And the Kurds? Free Cyprus/Constantinople? A bunch of Okinawans are still sick of Japanese oppression.

Beast of Burden said:

---

Shot:

jwoodmd said:

---

Beast of Burden said:

---

jwoodmd said:

---

Beast of Burden said:

---

shiftyandquick said:

---

How old are you pro-Russia MAGA guys? Old enough to be alive while Ronald Reagan was president?

---

Shiftyandslow, have you ever considered trying to use some honesty during your "arguments"?

---

You didn't answer his question, comrade Russian bot

---

jwood, I always get a good chuckle when you try and engage on f16. It's usually pretty entertaining to watch until you inevitably disappear again. What question are you referring to?

---

Weird and evasive response coming from a ten day old account. Answer shinty's question!

---

Chaser:

jwoodmd said:

---

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

jwoodmd said:

---

Beast of Burden said:

---

shiftyandquick said:

---

How old are you pro-Russia MAGA guys? Old enough to be alive while Ronald Reagan was president?

---

Shiftyandslow, have you ever considered trying to use some honesty during your "arguments"?

---

You didn't answer his question, comrade Russian bot

---

Care to answer my question on escalation you ingord three times yesterday?

---

Watch your mouth

---

---

Did it fly over your head, English is not your native language, or did you just "ingord" the sarcasm?

pagerman @ work said:

---

Quote:

---

This ends one of two ways: escalation to US forces getting involved, or peace talks and the Russians and people of Ukraine redrawing the map.

---

And why is it our job to dictate terms to the Ukrainians? Where do we get off telling other countries how much of their country is acceptable for them to cede to an outside aggressor? They don't get to (at least attempt to) decide that on their own?

We don't have to arm or support them, but we also don't have to mandate their surrender.

And the US is not going to send troops to Ukraine, period. If we were going to, it would have happened already when the conventional wisdom was that Ukraine had no chance against the Russian invasion.

The point of supporting Ukraine indirectly with arms is so that hopefully we don't have to support Latvia, Lithuania and/or Estonia directly with US troops. And FYI, those countries have sizable ethnic Russian minorities that I am sure Moscow feels would be safer under the wing of mother Russia. And they are access points into the heart of Russia. And they are NATO members and thus (in the paranoid Russian mind) direct threats to Russia's very existence.

---

It wasn't but now that we are involved we need to push for peace talks. If we don't we fight a stagnant war burning through billions.

nortex97 said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

You've repeated the same stupid question like five times. People aren't avoiding it because it's some kind of tough question, they're avoiding it because it's silly. Russia invaded. Our position is to respect and ensure Ukraine's territorial integrity. Providing arms to counter Russia's invasion isn't escalation, it's consistency. Russia likes to talk about all the escalation and provocations they've faced since their invasion began so I guess I see where you're getting that talking point.

---

Why aren't we going to free Tibet then, about which I've seen bumper stickers for 30+ years? Or Hong Kong? Or Gambia, or Somalia, or Ethiopia? When do we re-take South Vietnam for the good people there? And the Kurds? Free Cyprus/Constantinople? A bunch of Okinawans are still sick of Japanese oppression.

---

Perhaps we care more about Europe than Africa or ancient events.

Oh and of course this:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum

GAC06 said:

---

You've repeated the same stupid question like five times. People aren't avoiding it because it's some kind of tough question, they're avoiding it because it's silly. Russia invaded. Our position is to respect and ensure Ukraine's territorial integrity. Providing arms to counter Russia's invasion isn't escalation, it's consistency. Russia likes to talk about all the escalation and provocations they've faced since their invasion began so I guess I see where you're getting that talking point.

---

I repeated the question because people refused to answer it. You have a false premise that everyone here can read and it's bull*****

You still really avoided answering. The bolded is idiotic and was untrue unless Brandon had some under-the-table agreement to protect his grift of the American people.

When this started, the pro war hawks said it would be a bargain and was a no-brainer. That was their defense for us getting involved when we weren't obligated to do so. When it escalates (as it already has) the warhawk idiots will be proven wrong. It is that simple.

Is it going to escalate or not? and has it?

It is a simple question we all already know the answer to.

It hasn't escalated. Russia isn't fighting NATO. It is still a bargain for what we're achieving. If you want to be taken seriously maybe cool it with the ad homs

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Am I missing some kind of push to send troops to Ukraine? Why is this even a talking point?

---

You can't be that naiive

---

Feel free to provide any information to the contrary.

---

Escalation is real in this conflict. Just like when some of us rolled our eyes when Ukraine fanbois said this war was going to be a bargain when the original 40-some-odd billion was budgeted for Ukraine.

Some of us see where this is logically headed, and others want to talk tackti-cool stuff on the ukraine thread and pound their chest and pretend Biden is Reagan.

Hope that helps. for the record, we already have troops over there.

---

Again this was the post that pissed every one of the Uke boys off. The point was the empirical escalation and all of you reverted to semantics over some stupid meme to defend Brandon. Which is pathetic and sad.

What is even more pathetic and sad is some pog goobers reverted to making fun of dead Russians to sound tough while defending brandon's idiotic foreign policy.

GAC06 said:

---

It hasn't escalated. Russia isn't fighting NATO. It is still a bargain for what we're achieving. If you want to be taken seriously maybe cool it with the ad homs

---

I rest my case. Just outright lying or denying despite plenty of evidence to the contrary on this thread and billions of dollars that we know of.

I personally couldn't care less if you take me seriously or not. My position speaks for itself.