Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Yes, but we aren't discussing Ukrainian resolve.

---

But if it weren't for that resolve to delay the full takeover of Ukraine we never would have gone all in with aid.

So yes, it was about that resolve.

In Oct. 2014, after Ukraine had already begun shelling the Donbas, a speech from President Petro Poroshenko went viral when he said, "Our children will go to schools and kindergartens — their children will sit in basement bomb shelters." pic.twitter.com/Sd0NxMm2DM

— kanekoa.substack.com (@KanekoaTheGreat) March 22, 2023

What's your thoughts about this clip?

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Teslag said:

---

No the argument is that Russia doesn't get to invade sovereign nations unless they are directly attacked. The end.

---

Why is it our job to get involved?

---

It may not be. And saying we shouldn't be giving them aid is a valid argument. But they do have a right to exist and fight for that existence.

---

Has anyone argued otherwise?

---

Yes, several on this thread. The argument is basically that Ukraine deserves to be invaded for considering joining nato

---

They don't deserve to be invaded, but they definitely underestimated the Russian response. An invasion was of high probability and they called Russias bluff. Big mistake.

---

Believe it was the Russians who underestimated Ukraine and it was a Big Mistake!

willtackleforfood said:

---

In Oct. 2014, after Ukraine had already begun shelling the Donbas, a speech from President Petro Poroshenko went viral when he said, "Our children will go to schools and kindergartens — their children will sit in basement bomb shelters." pic.twitter.com/Sd0NxMm2DM

— kanekoa.substack.com (@KanekoaTheGreat) March 22, 2023

What's your thoughts about this clip?

---

That's from the previous guy five years before Zelensky got in office. What's the connection to what that guy is saying and Putin invading Ukraine and committing war crimes day in and day out?

If you have to ask, are you sure you're avidly supporting the right side?

Do you history bro?

willtackleforfood said:

---

In Oct. 2014, after Ukraine had already begun shelling the Donbas, a speech from President Petro Poroshenko went viral when he said, "Our children will go to schools and kindergartens — their children will sit in basement bomb shelters." pic.twitter.com/Sd0NxMm2DM

— kanekoa.substack.com (@KanekoaTheGreat) March 22, 2023

What's your thoughts about this clip?

---

Nahhh man...Ukraine was totally not committing atrocities in Donbas.

That is Russian disinformation.

willtackleforfood said:

---

If you have to ask, are you sure you're avidly supporting the right side?

Do you history bro?

---

I see what is happening in the present to innocent people that were living their lives like you and I are until Putin turned their lives to living hell.

Teslag said:

---

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Teslag said:

---

No the argument is that Russia doesn't get to invade sovereign nations unless they are directly attacked. The end.

---

Why is it our job to get involved?

---

It may not be. And saying we shouldn't be giving them aid is a valid argument. But they do have a right to exist and fight for that existence.

---

Has anyone argued otherwise?

---

Yes, several on this thread. The argument is basically that Ukraine deserves to be invaded for considering joining nato

---

Noone has argued that.

Post a direct quote that shows this.

We have said that Ukraine joining NATO posed a national defense issue for Russia. And noone on here has had the balls to address any of the valid points that have been made.

Just Russia bad. Russia bad.

Jesus christ. I didn't have much hope for ur intelligence.

But I was hoping a service member would at least have the integrity to avoid blatant lies.

Too much to ask?

Weak. You're weak. You're over taken by propaganda from the US government and the lap dog media.

We have a severe shortage of critical thinkers.

The Obama administration overthrew Ukraine's elected government in 2014.

John McCain rallied protestors, and Victoria Nuland was caught on tape planning Ukraine's new government.

What role did this have on the current NATO proxy war in Ukraine?https://t.co/njtg2yzLLd pic.twitter.com/nYe5LTcpKj

— kanekoa.substack.com (@KanekoaTheGreat) February 5, 2023

Did you make it through all 4 minutes of "Russian propaganda"? LOL!!

What do you see? Or what better yet, what are you being shown and have accepted as truth?

willtackleforfood said:

---

What do you see? Or what better yet, what are you being shown and have accepted as truth?

---

By that logic, literally nothing should be believed unless one is seeing it with their eyes in person. That eliminates every media (including social) outlet and website.

It seems there's confusion as to Who has what rights.

The people - Ukrainian, Russian, American, or otherwise have all of the inalienable God-given rights.

The governments (and government officials) have responsibilities to their citizens.

Now - government officials can have honest opinions and perspectives - even factually wrong ones - but the only thing that matters in this equation is that they owe their respective citizens.

No government has an inalienable right to exist or rule. They have temporary charters. And from time to time, it is appropriate for a government to allow itself to be terminated for the sake of the people she represents. (Ex: 1945 Japan (where an aggressor abdicated) or South Vietnam 1975 (where the aggressed abdicated).)

So - while the Ukrainian people have every right to self defense and self determination - it does not automatically provide a moral blanket for Zelinski to accept US bribes to use his people in a proxy war rather than negotiating some form of defeat.

No, it requires discernment friend. And that doesn't come from reading the top lines. It comes from going back into time to figure out what transpired that got us here.

The US government terminally corrupted Ukraine.

“I said: ‘We’re leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor’s not fired, you’re not getting the money. 'Well, son of a bitch, he got fired.”

-- @JoeBiden discussing Ukraine at a @CFR_org event with @RichardHaass Jan. 23, 2018

h/t @kenvogel in here: https://t.co/AP7koGARDG pic.twitter.com/gDAcZTNOpd

— Howard Mortman (@HowardMortman) September 23, 2019

Get Off My Lawn said:

---

It seems there's confusion as to Who has what rights.

The people - Ukrainian, Russian, American, or otherwise have all of the inalienable God-given rights.

The governments (and government officials) have responsibilities to their citizens.

Now - government officials can have honest opinions and perspectives - even factually wrong ones - but the only thing that matters in this equation is that they owe their respective citizens.

No government has an inalienable right to exist or rule. They have temporary charters. And from time to time, it is appropriate for a government to allow itself to be terminated for the sake of the people she represents. (Ex: 1945 Japan (where an aggressor abdicated) or South Vietnam 1975 (where the aggressed abdicated).)

So - while the Ukrainian people have every right to self defense and self determination - it does not automatically provide a moral blanket for Zelinski to accept US bribes to use his people in a proxy war rather than negotiating some form of defeat.

---

Or, Putin, who is in the wrong by starting all of this, could just stop and leave.

Also, what every nation, not just us, is providing to Ukraine isn't being done as a bribe as per definition. And while it has turned into a proxy war, it's not just us that's a part of it, it's every nation that's helping out Ukraine.

Also, why should Ukraine have to negotiate a defeat when that would only benefit Putin?

Quote:

---

That's from the previous guy five years before Zelensky got in office. What's the connection to what that guy is saying and Putin invading Ukraine and committing war crimes day in and day out?

---

Is this a serious question?

willtackleforfood said:

---

No, it requires discernment friend. And that doesn't come from reading the top lines. It comes from going back into time to figure out what transpired that got us here.

The US government terminally corrupted Ukraine.

“I said: ‘We’re leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor’s not fired, you’re not getting the money. 'Well, son of a bitch, he got fired.”

-- @JoeBiden discussing Ukraine at a @CFR_org event with @RichardHaass Jan. 23, 2018

h/t @kenvogel in here: https://t.co/AP7koGARDG pic.twitter.com/gDAcZTNOpd

— Howard Mortman (@HowardMortman) September 23, 2019

---

I'm sure I can find a historian that can show how Lincoln's assassination helped get things here.

That doesn't take away from the fact that Putin invaded and is the cause of the rape and deaths of innocent people.

I take it you agree with that statement, at least.

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Teslag said:

---

No the argument is that Russia doesn't get to invade sovereign nations unless they are directly attacked. The end.

---

Why is it our job to get involved?

---

It may not be. And saying we shouldn't be giving them aid is a valid argument. But they do have a right to exist and fight for that existence.

---

Has anyone argued otherwise?

---

Yes, several on this thread. The argument is basically that Ukraine deserves to be invaded for considering joining nato

---

Noone has argued that.

Post a direct quote that shows this.

We have said that Ukraine joining NATO posed a national defense issue for Russia. And noone on here has had the balls to address any of the valid points that have been made.

Just Russia bad. Russia bad.

Jesus christ. I didn't have much hope for ur intelligence.

But I was hoping a service member would at least have the integrity to avoid blatant lies.

Too much to ask?

---

1. Russia is bad.

2. Ukriane has the right to join whoever they want.

3. You don't get to say you're afraid of a neighbor joining someone for defense then invade and validate their fears

Get Off My Lawn said:

---

It seems there's confusion as to Who has what rights.

The people - Ukrainian, Russian, American, or otherwise have all of the inalienable God-given rights.

The governments (and government officials) have responsibilities to their citizens.

Now - government officials can have honest opinions and perspectives - even factually wrong ones - but the only thing that matters in this equation is that they owe their respective citizens.

No government has an inalienable right to exist or rule. They have temporary charters. And from time to time, it is appropriate for a government to allow itself to be terminated for the sake of the people she represents. (Ex: 1945 Japan (where an aggressor abdicated) or South Vietnam 1975 (where the aggressed abdicated).)

So - while the Ukrainian people have every right to self defense and self determination - it does not automatically provide a moral blanket for Zelinski to accept US bribes to use his people in a proxy war rather than negotiating some form of defeat.

---

Those Ukes fight pretty hard for a guy a they want to surrender their nation

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Teslag said:

---

No the argument is that Russia doesn't get to invade sovereign nations unless they are directly attacked. The end.

---

Why is it our job to get involved?

---

It may not be. And saying we shouldn't be giving them aid is a valid argument. But they do have a right to exist and fight for that existence.

---

Has anyone argued otherwise?

---

Yes, several on this thread. The argument is basically that Ukraine deserves to be invaded for considering joining nato

---

Noone has argued that.

Post a direct quote that shows this.

We have said that Ukraine joining NATO posed a national defense issue for Russia. And noone on here has had the balls to address any of the valid points that have been made.

Just Russia bad. Russia bad.

Jesus christ. I didn't have much hope for ur intelligence.

But I was hoping a service member would at least have the integrity to avoid blatant lies.

Too much to ask?

---

Trying to understand your point of view here - in your opinion how does Ukraine (or anyone else) joining a defensive organization like NATO pose a national defense issue for Russia?

Are there any sources you have read as to the Russian perspective on nato expansion you consider credible?

Rapier108 said:

---

Democrats love them some war without end.

---

As long as they don't get in the skirmish! Ted Kennedy

nortex97 said:

---

Are there any sources you have read as to the Russian perspective on nato expansion you consider credible?

---

When will the Russians be justifiably invading Finland since they have committed the gravest of Russians sins?

willtackleforfood said:

---

Weak. You're weak. You're over taken by propaganda from the US government and the lap dog media.

We have a severe shortage of critical thinkers.

The Obama administration overthrew Ukraine's elected government in 2014.

John McCain rallied protestors, and Victoria Nuland was caught on tape planning Ukraine's new government.

What role did this have on the current NATO proxy war in Ukraine?https://t.co/njtg2yzLLd pic.twitter.com/nYe5LTcpKj

— kanekoa.substack.com (@KanekoaTheGreat) February 5, 2023

Did you make it through all 4 minutes of "Russian propaganda"? LOL!!

---

Just because you have a countercultural opinion doesn't inherently make you a critical thinker. I can't believe the mental gymnastics some of you all will put on to try to explain how invading a soveriegn nation with the goal of territorial conquest is not inherently evil. The future of global security depends on the lack of reward for such evil.

But it's America's fault -"critcal thinkers"

This why I think our tax forms aught to come with a designation as to where we want our money to go. Rather than politicians making that decision, we the tax paying citizen make the decision. That would pretty clearly define the will of the people.

No problem paying my taxes, I just want a say in where it goes. You want Ukraine, choose foreign aid box. You want free healthcare choose the healthcare box. I know, I know, they will just print more money to make up the shortfall for their pet projects, but I would feel better at night.

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Deputy Travis Junior said:

---

1) The US and Russia were both ****ing around with the Ukrainian government. Neither of us were innocent of meddling, not by far. sp once again. It's okay when WE do it. Not okay when Russia does it. Hypocrisy much?
2) It's not like we drummed up a revolution out of nothing. The pro west faction was huge and powerful and had long been jockeying for control with the pro Russia side. So it's okay when we go in and tip the scales in our favor and the government that is corrupt lines our politicians' pockets? But bad when the corruption benefits russia.
3) Russia has been throwing its weight around and picking fights. Syria, Georgia, threatening Europe, actively working to frustrate American interests, bombing its own citizens to justify another invasion of Chechnya... and we have been bombing waaaay more people, actively working to frustrate Russia's interests, destabilizing the middle east, funding ISIS, lying to the security council to make war in Iraq, funding Islamic terrorists. The US had zero moral high ground to do what they did. Biden and the US interfered because it was a way to get money. We knew it could cause an armed conflict when it was done. And we ****ing did it anyway. And now we want to prolong the conflict because of "principles". If you haven't noticed our foreign policy has ZERO principles. It's all about making the wealthy and the MIC richer.

You play at the big boy table expect to be treated like a big boy. (Ironically our actions in Ukraine are in line with the realpolitik that Putin follows.)the problem is that Russia is following your advice the only way Rusians know how. To the Russians playing with the big boys is bombing **** and ham fisted diplomacy. your attitude is "we have the biggest dick in the room so we are going to swing it and screw everyone who doesn't like it. Eventually you swing that divk around enough and you get punched in the face.

---

Except in this case the US swung its dick so Ukraine got punched in the face.

Once again, our foreign policy is crap.

---

I think you're missing my point. It's not that everything the US does is wonderful and virtuous and everything Russia does is awful and immoral. It's that the great game is amoral and has high stakes, and yet Russia has insisted on playing for the better part of the last millennia and with Ukraine, gave us free shots to their belly until our arms get tired AFTER spending the last decade antagonizing us. We're not wrong for using an opening to ***** slap a geopolitical antagonist. Biden is a moron, but he's right about that at least. Machiavelli, Richelieu, basically every British foreign minister from 1600-1900, Bismarck, and a host more would agree.

As for your screeds on the Ukraine war as a giant money laundering operation, the real opportunities aren't present yet. Yea you can skim guns and the like and sell them on the black market, but the real, epic fraud will be in the aftermath when they ask for money to rebuild. THAT is when billions of real, hard cash will disappear.

So, you military gurus, this is above my pay grade. What is your prognostication on how this Ukraine/Russia fight ends? Does Ukraine win by driving Russian troops out of their territory? Does Russia take over Ukraine? Does Putin say to hell with it, got better things to do? Does it go back and forth for 10 or so years, with us providing aid the entire time?

Will our aid reach a trillion dollars and, if so, when?

The ukes are planning a major counter offensive. We will know more after that and how it goes.

So far I haven't seen anything that objectively makes sense to me as to what threat NATO causes to Russia or anyone's national security (unless that security relies on having the option to go on the offensive against a neighbor), so was curious as to his viewpoint or since he has said it a few times.

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

So far I haven't seen anything that objectively makes sense to me as to what threat NATO causes to Russia or anyone's national security (unless that security relies on having the option to go on the offensive against a neighbor), so was curious as to his viewpoint or since he has said it a few times.

---

Have you actually read anything that you find unpersuasive but discusses their motivation/rationale?

Teslag said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

Are there any sources you have read as to the Russian perspective on nato expansion you consider credible?

---

When will the Russians be justifiably invading Finland since they have committed the gravest of Russians sins?

---

I think that's about your fifth or sixth strawman in just this thread. Quite a day for you, kudos!

nortex97 said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

So far I haven't seen anything that objectively makes sense to me as to what threat NATO causes to Russia or anyone's national security (unless that security relies on having the option to go on the offensive against a neighbor), so was curious as to his viewpoint or since he has said it a few times.

---

Have you actually read anything that you find unpersuasive but discusses their motivation/rationale?

---

No, that's why I'm asking where that viewpoint is coming from, because I currently can't figure out an objective reason why they'd be threatened.

Edit: I do understand why Russia would say they feel threatened, but not clear how that would be supported.

Teslag said:

---

Get Off My Lawn said:

---

It seems there's confusion as to Who has what rights.

The people - Ukrainian, Russian, American, or otherwise have all of the inalienable God-given rights.

The governments (and government officials) have responsibilities to their citizens.

Now - government officials can have honest opinions and perspectives - even factually wrong ones - but the only thing that matters in this equation is that they owe their respective citizens.

No government has an inalienable right to exist or rule. They have temporary charters. And from time to time, it is appropriate for a government to allow itself to be terminated for the sake of the people she represents. (Ex: 1945 Japan (where an aggressor abdicated) or South Vietnam 1975 (where the aggressed abdicated).)

So - while the Ukrainian people have every right to self defense and self determination - it does not automatically provide a moral blanket for Zelinski to accept US bribes to use his people in a proxy war rather than negotiating some form of defeat.

---

Those Ukes fight pretty hard for a guy a they want to surrender their nation

---

Some of those Ukes are far better men than any of us. But that doesn't mean Zelinski is leading the populace down the wisest and most humane path. Nor that his government is the picture of purity in a clear cut fight between Evil & Good.

What matters is the future of the people who called Ukraine home at the time when Putin invaded.

At some point the cost of a flawed government "winning" against a bad government isn't worth the cost in dead and displaced.

As an American I would hope my president would fight to the very last man to keep us sovereign.

You may differ.

No Spin Ag said:

---

Get Off My Lawn said:

---

It seems there's confusion as to Who has what rights.

The people - Ukrainian, Russian, American, or otherwise have all of the inalienable God-given rights.

The governments (and government officials) have responsibilities to their citizens.

Now - government officials can have honest opinions and perspectives - even factually wrong ones - but the only thing that matters in this equation is that they owe their respective citizens.

No government has an inalienable right to exist or rule. They have temporary charters. And from time to time, it is appropriate for a government to allow itself to be terminated for the sake of the people she represents. (Ex: 1945 Japan (where an aggressor abdicated) or South Vietnam 1975 (where the aggressed abdicated).)

So - while the Ukrainian people have every right to self defense and self determination - it does not automatically provide a moral blanket for Zelinski to accept US bribes to use his people in a proxy war rather than negotiating some form of defeat.

---

Or, Putin, who is in the wrong by starting all of this, could just stop and leave.

Also, what every nation, not just us, is providing to Ukraine isn't being done as a bribe as per definition. And while it has turned into a proxy war, it's not just us that's a part of it, it's every nation that's helping out Ukraine.

Also, why should Ukraine have to negotiate a defeat when that would only benefit Putin?

---

"Every nation" is a funny description of < 25% where a single country is the pivotal financier.

Also - don't kid yourself - these non-auditable aid packages are absolutely siphoned as political bribes. Z is and his fellow officials are getting incredibly wealthy for turning their country into a meat grinder.

Teslag said:

---

As an American I would hope my president would fight to the very last man to keep us sovereign.

You may differ.

---

There was a time when I was staunchly in that camp. But given the current nature and trajectory of our government there is a chasm developing between alliance to the constitution and alliance to this government.