DOD Priority Shift

13,528 Views | 170 Replies | Last: 10 days ago by Get Off My Lawn
Rossticus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AgLA06 said:

Ags4DaWin said:

rgag12 said:

I think Europe should guarantee Ukraine's sovereignty in a separate agreement outside of NATO. Otherwise Russia will be tempted to recoup what it sees it "lost" in the upcoming treaty in the future.


Nope. That is for Europe to do.

If Europe wants to protect Ukraine then they better ****ing do it.

The US has to worry about China and keeping them from global hegemony. We can't do that and protect Europe's backyard at the same time.

They need to do some of their own goddam heavy lifting for once.
You don't get it. We don't negotiate for their rare earth metals (in eastern Ukraine near the fighting) and not guarantee their safety. We don't get them without it.

That's why it's hilarious to see the first couple of pages of this thread. This place is nothing but parroting talking points without understanding anything.


I'm not sure that the administration hadn't decided to go in a different direction. Ukraine may have offered them up but we haven't committed to anything. And you don't marginalize one party to negotiations while publicly weakening their leverage if they're the team you've decided to back. The winds could change but I'm just not getting the same vibe that you are.
Tom Kazansky 2012
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Trump to Zelenskyy:

Look dude. This war is over. Putin and I will figure it out and let you know what we agree to.

Then you're paying back every red cent of what we gave you and then some. If you don't like it we will sanction you into the Stone Age.

Wait for my secretary's email with your homework of what to sign and when. I'll be sending over Hecla and Southern copper to start surveying those mining sites next week. Make sure they don't have any bull**** to put up with while they are there.
AgLA06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

AgLA06 said:

Ags4DaWin said:

rgag12 said:

I think Europe should guarantee Ukraine's sovereignty in a separate agreement outside of NATO. Otherwise Russia will be tempted to recoup what it sees it "lost" in the upcoming treaty in the future.


Nope. That is for Europe to do.

If Europe wants to protect Ukraine then they better ****ing do it.

The US has to worry about China and keeping them from global hegemony. We can't do that and protect Europe's backyard at the same time.

They need to do some of their own goddam heavy lifting for once.
You don't get it. We don't negotiate for their rare earth metals (in eastern Ukraine near the fighting) and not guarantee their safety. We don't get them without it.

That's why it's hilarious to see the first couple of pages of this thread. This place is nothing but parroting talking points without understanding anything.


The **** we don't
So you think we won't get F'ed by Russia? Because we will. That's the only other way to try and get them.

Only a fool makes that deal
Tom Kazansky 2012
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
AgLA06 said:

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

AgLA06 said:

Ags4DaWin said:

rgag12 said:

I think Europe should guarantee Ukraine's sovereignty in a separate agreement outside of NATO. Otherwise Russia will be tempted to recoup what it sees it "lost" in the upcoming treaty in the future.


Nope. That is for Europe to do.

If Europe wants to protect Ukraine then they better ****ing do it.

The US has to worry about China and keeping them from global hegemony. We can't do that and protect Europe's backyard at the same time.

They need to do some of their own goddam heavy lifting for once.
You don't get it. We don't negotiate for their rare earth metals (in eastern Ukraine near the fighting) and not guarantee their safety. We don't get them without it.

That's why it's hilarious to see the first couple of pages of this thread. This place is nothing but parroting talking points without understanding anything.


The **** we don't
So you think we won't get F'ed by Russia? Because we will. That's the only other way to try and get them.

Only a fool makes that deal


What deal? What if Russia offers a good deal?

You're saying it's foolish to trust them for anything? Just as a blanket assumption?

Cool I'm the fool. Nice.
AgLA06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

Trump to Zelenskyy:

Look dude. This war is over. Putin and I will figure it out and let you know what we agree to.

Then you're paying back every red cent of what we gave you and then some. If you don't like it we will sanction you into the Stone Age.

Wait for my secretary's email with your homework of what to sign and when. I'll be sending over Hecla and Southern copper to start surveying those mining sites next week. Make sure they don't have any bull**** to put up with while they are there.
This is penthouse letters fiction level of delusion.

We don't get a cent back if that's the case. There isn't a country left to give them. And the best part is all your fake bravado does is give everything of value to Russia. That's idiotic.
AgLA06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

AgLA06 said:

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

AgLA06 said:

Ags4DaWin said:

rgag12 said:

I think Europe should guarantee Ukraine's sovereignty in a separate agreement outside of NATO. Otherwise Russia will be tempted to recoup what it sees it "lost" in the upcoming treaty in the future.


Nope. That is for Europe to do.

If Europe wants to protect Ukraine then they better ****ing do it.

The US has to worry about China and keeping them from global hegemony. We can't do that and protect Europe's backyard at the same time.

They need to do some of their own goddam heavy lifting for once.
You don't get it. We don't negotiate for their rare earth metals (in eastern Ukraine near the fighting) and not guarantee their safety. We don't get them without it.

That's why it's hilarious to see the first couple of pages of this thread. This place is nothing but parroting talking points without understanding anything.


The **** we don't
So you think we won't get F'ed by Russia? Because we will. That's the only other way to try and get them.

Only a fool makes that deal


What deal? What if Russia offers a good deal?

You're saying it's foolish to trust them for anything? Just as a blanket assumption?

Cool I'm the fool. Nice.
absolutely.

Show me a deal we've done historically that they haven't.
Get Off My Lawn
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AgLA06 said:

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

AgLA06 said:

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

AgLA06 said:

Ags4DaWin said:

rgag12 said:

I think Europe should guarantee Ukraine's sovereignty in a separate agreement outside of NATO. Otherwise Russia will be tempted to recoup what it sees it "lost" in the upcoming treaty in the future.


Nope. That is for Europe to do.

If Europe wants to protect Ukraine then they better ****ing do it.

The US has to worry about China and keeping them from global hegemony. We can't do that and protect Europe's backyard at the same time.

They need to do some of their own goddam heavy lifting for once.
You don't get it. We don't negotiate for their rare earth metals (in eastern Ukraine near the fighting) and not guarantee their safety. We don't get them without it.

That's why it's hilarious to see the first couple of pages of this thread. This place is nothing but parroting talking points without understanding anything.


The **** we don't
So you think we won't get F'ed by Russia? Because we will. That's the only other way to try and get them.

Only a fool makes that deal


What deal? What if Russia offers a good deal?

You're saying it's foolish to trust them for anything? Just as a blanket assumption?

Cool I'm the fool. Nice.
absolutely.

Show me a deal we've done historically that they haven't.
They were pretty helpful in WWII where we sent manufacturing experts to them and they cranked out the largest attrition machine global warfare has ever seen… that's a deal we made with them that worked out ok.
flown-the-coop
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
AgLA06 said:

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:





What deal? What if Russia offers a good deal?

You're saying it's foolish to trust them for anything? Just as a blanket assumption?

Cool I'm the fool. Nice.
absolutely.

Show me a deal we've done historically that they haven't.
They sort of safely ferried US astronauts back and forth to the ISS along with supplies between Obama killing the shuttle (with no replacement) and Mr Elon coming along with his fancy low cost rockets.

The Russians want to make money and control their little sphere. They seem to get most aggressive when the US becomes arrogant and complacent.

Russia is not the big boogey man people think they are. Just makes for grandstanding by the politicals when convenient and when the grift needs to be juiced.
Tom Kazansky 2012
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
AgLA06 said:

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

Trump to Zelenskyy:

Look dude. This war is over. Putin and I will figure it out and let you know what we agree to.

Then you're paying back every red cent of what we gave you and then some. If you don't like it we will sanction you into the Stone Age.

Wait for my secretary's email with your homework of what to sign and when. I'll be sending over Hecla and Southern copper to start surveying those mining sites next week. Make sure they don't have any bull**** to put up with while they are there.
This is penthouse letters fiction level of delusion.

We don't get a cent back if that's the case. There isn't a country left to give them. And the best part is all your fake bravado does is give everything of value to Russia. That's idiotic.


Rare earth minerals that China and others covet to the tune of 500 billion worth we get to take is nothing of value?

Seems you're too emotionally attached to this to make sense.
Rossticus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Get Off My Lawn said:

AgLA06 said:

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

AgLA06 said:

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

AgLA06 said:

Ags4DaWin said:

rgag12 said:

I think Europe should guarantee Ukraine's sovereignty in a separate agreement outside of NATO. Otherwise Russia will be tempted to recoup what it sees it "lost" in the upcoming treaty in the future.


Nope. That is for Europe to do.

If Europe wants to protect Ukraine then they better ****ing do it.

The US has to worry about China and keeping them from global hegemony. We can't do that and protect Europe's backyard at the same time.

They need to do some of their own goddam heavy lifting for once.
You don't get it. We don't negotiate for their rare earth metals (in eastern Ukraine near the fighting) and not guarantee their safety. We don't get them without it.

That's why it's hilarious to see the first couple of pages of this thread. This place is nothing but parroting talking points without understanding anything.


The **** we don't
So you think we won't get F'ed by Russia? Because we will. That's the only other way to try and get them.

Only a fool makes that deal


What deal? What if Russia offers a good deal?

You're saying it's foolish to trust them for anything? Just as a blanket assumption?

Cool I'm the fool. Nice.
absolutely.

Show me a deal we've done historically that they haven't.
They were pretty helpful in WWII where we sent manufacturing experts to them and they cranked out the largest attrition machine global warfare has ever seen… that's a deal we made with them that worked out ok.


I mean, that was after they tried to team up with the Nazis, but before they started taking over countries and genociding people. But, yeah, that part in the middle was helpful. Gotta give Hitler the assist for back-stabbing Stalin at the most opportune moment for us, though.
Get Off My Lawn
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Hey - I didn't see a need to contextualize - just give an example.
Rossticus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Lol
AgLA06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Get Off My Lawn said:

AgLA06 said:

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

AgLA06 said:

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

AgLA06 said:

Ags4DaWin said:

rgag12 said:

I think Europe should guarantee Ukraine's sovereignty in a separate agreement outside of NATO. Otherwise Russia will be tempted to recoup what it sees it "lost" in the upcoming treaty in the future.


Nope. That is for Europe to do.

If Europe wants to protect Ukraine then they better ****ing do it.

The US has to worry about China and keeping them from global hegemony. We can't do that and protect Europe's backyard at the same time.

They need to do some of their own goddam heavy lifting for once.
You don't get it. We don't negotiate for their rare earth metals (in eastern Ukraine near the fighting) and not guarantee their safety. We don't get them without it.

That's why it's hilarious to see the first couple of pages of this thread. This place is nothing but parroting talking points without understanding anything.


The **** we don't
So you think we won't get F'ed by Russia? Because we will. That's the only other way to try and get them.

Only a fool makes that deal


What deal? What if Russia offers a good deal?

You're saying it's foolish to trust them for anything? Just as a blanket assumption?

Cool I'm the fool. Nice.
absolutely.

Show me a deal we've done historically that they haven't.
They were pretty helpful in WWII where we sent manufacturing experts to them and they cranked out the largest attrition machine global warfare has ever seen… that's a deal we made with them that worked out ok.


The country Patton wanted to fight as soon as the Germans conceded? Yah, went really well. Especially the next 4 decades of cold war.
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Get Off My Lawn said:

pagerman @ work said:

GenericAggie said:

Eliminatus said:

pagerman @ work said:

BusterAg said:

BlueSmoke said:

NOT covered under article 5....YUGE!
explain that, please, for the casual f16 news absorber.
What it means is that Putin can attack European troops that are part of the peacekeeping force and it will not be seen as an attack on NATO.

It's a ridiculous notion and serves to absolutely gut the authority of any European troops participating in the peacekeeping efforts.
Gotta agree. The whole point of peacekeeping troops is that they are meant to be a trip wire. If there is nothing on the end of that trip wire though, it nullifies the entire concept. This may just be kicking the can down the road, again. Massive mistake IMO, but honestly expected given his stances even before his nomination.


Europe should pay for the trip wire. Not the US.
Again, keeping Article 5 as a deterrent to Russia costs the US precisely nothing. At all.
It costs nothing… until the moment it costs everything. It's an obligation I have no interest of hanging around our young men's necks.
Putin has said that Ukraine in NATO is a red line for Russia.

Russia attacking a Ukraine that is in NATO is a red line for NATO.

Putin is full of ***** He's not dumb enough to attack NATO.

That would end EVERYTHING he has. He's no longer a billionaire. He's a dead man.

Rossticus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The fact is, however, that it's not going to happen. NATO membership is dead in the water. It's a non-starter for this administration, as the priority has shifted to working with Russia to our benefit, where possible, over opposing Russia. That's the reality and it's time to start viewing this matter through that lens.
titan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
S
Get Off My Lawn said:

Ellis Wyatt said:

We did nothing but allow it to happen and then fund it. Of course, we had to fund it to launder billions. Corrupt politicians are the only winners in this was.
Oh - "we" did more than jump into defense. Look into the line of thinking where Hunter Biden claims his Barisma gig was patriotic duty. "Mr Foreign Policy" was strong arming for Ukrainian and European energy independence from Russia - along with wetting his beak. The Nord Stream attack was part of that equation. The Swamp was working to cut off Russia's financial future.

This doesn't excuse a Russian invasion any more than our oil embargo excused Pearl Harbor. But it's disingenuous to frame our role in the conflict as a valiant knight just happening by a distressed damsel besieged by the red bear.
Certainly not a `neutral' in either case. Considering its right on their border its just beyond ridiculous the instabilities involved. We are increasingly talking about acting against Mexico on our border for enabling and hosting instability --- its not longer a far stretch to see us doing a bit more.Now imagine if China was getting into Mexico. This thing has been a miscarriage since the start of 2021.
pagerman @ work
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

AgLA06 said:

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

Trump to Zelenskyy:

Look dude. This war is over. Putin and I will figure it out and let you know what we agree to.

Then you're paying back every red cent of what we gave you and then some. If you don't like it we will sanction you into the Stone Age.

Wait for my secretary's email with your homework of what to sign and when. I'll be sending over Hecla and Southern copper to start surveying those mining sites next week. Make sure they don't have any bull**** to put up with while they are there.
This is penthouse letters fiction level of delusion.

We don't get a cent back if that's the case. There isn't a country left to give them. And the best part is all your fake bravado does is give everything of value to Russia. That's idiotic.


Rare earth minerals that China and others covet to the tune of 500 billion worth we get to take is nothing of value?

Seems you're too emotionally attached to this to make sense.

And you think Russia would give those to us if we hand them Ukraine (forgetting for a moment that Ukraine is not ours to give in the first place and that the rest of Europe is diametrically opposed to doing)?
“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy. It's inherent virtue is the equal sharing of miseries." - Winston Churchill
PlaneCrashGuy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Hullabaloonatic said:

PlaneCrashGuy said:

Ags4DaWin said:

rgag12 said:

I think Europe should guarantee Ukraine's sovereignty in a separate agreement outside of NATO. Otherwise Russia will be tempted to recoup what it sees it "lost" in the upcoming treaty in the future.


Nope. That is for Europe to do.

If Europe wants to protect Ukraine then they better ****ing do it.

The US has to worry about China and keeping them from global hegemony. We can't do that and protect Europe's backyard at the same time.

They need to do some of their own goddam heavy lifting for once.
Well said, Not our war not our problem. America first.
Meanwhile, Trump: "We're going to take Gaza"

So is it America first? or no new wars? or...how do we slogan this contradiction?


Also, Hegseth saying that NATO is off the table and re-establishing borders from 2014 is not happening...why is he just giving away negotiating chips with Russia? Why concede these in public if Trump just started his negotiations with Putin?


Well, for starters, nobody said no new wars, just that the war in Ukraine was not our war. But as for your derail regarding Gaza, that seems to be a war Israel has already won for us.
flown-the-coop
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Just to point out rare earth minerals are not… rare.

There are varying costs to extract as it is a "messy" process. Hence we buy it cheap from China and other places that don't seem to have issues with slave labor, poor working conditions and environmental rules.

We have plenty of it right within our own secure borders. And it would be better to make the deal on Greenland than to protect the Ukes and their rare earths.

Let Moscow have what they want. Tell Europe to rebuild what they want to in what remains of Ukraine.

Ukraine is neither strategic nor that important to US interests. The sooner more people understand that, the sooner we can end the grift.
Get Off My Lawn
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AgLA06 said:

Get Off My Lawn said:

AgLA06 said:

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

AgLA06 said:

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

AgLA06 said:

Ags4DaWin said:

rgag12 said:

I think Europe should guarantee Ukraine's sovereignty in a separate agreement outside of NATO. Otherwise Russia will be tempted to recoup what it sees it "lost" in the upcoming treaty in the future.


Nope. That is for Europe to do.

If Europe wants to protect Ukraine then they better ****ing do it.

The US has to worry about China and keeping them from global hegemony. We can't do that and protect Europe's backyard at the same time.

They need to do some of their own goddam heavy lifting for once.
You don't get it. We don't negotiate for their rare earth metals (in eastern Ukraine near the fighting) and not guarantee their safety. We don't get them without it.

That's why it's hilarious to see the first couple of pages of this thread. This place is nothing but parroting talking points without understanding anything.


The **** we don't
So you think we won't get F'ed by Russia? Because we will. That's the only other way to try and get them.

Only a fool makes that deal


What deal? What if Russia offers a good deal?

You're saying it's foolish to trust them for anything? Just as a blanket assumption?

Cool I'm the fool. Nice.
absolutely.

Show me a deal we've done historically that they haven't.
They were pretty helpful in WWII where we sent manufacturing experts to them and they cranked out the largest attrition machine global warfare has ever seen… that's a deal we made with them that worked out ok.


The country Patton wanted to fight as soon as the Germans conceded? Yah, went really well. Especially the next 4 decades of cold war.
The country that was drawing the vast bulk of Nazi exertion east on June 6, 1944. Yeah… that itsy bitsy little detail…
Get Off My Lawn
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Ag with kids said:

Get Off My Lawn said:

pagerman @ work said:

GenericAggie said:

Eliminatus said:

pagerman @ work said:

BusterAg said:

BlueSmoke said:

NOT covered under article 5....YUGE!
explain that, please, for the casual f16 news absorber.
What it means is that Putin can attack European troops that are part of the peacekeeping force and it will not be seen as an attack on NATO.

It's a ridiculous notion and serves to absolutely gut the authority of any European troops participating in the peacekeeping efforts.
Gotta agree. The whole point of peacekeeping troops is that they are meant to be a trip wire. If there is nothing on the end of that trip wire though, it nullifies the entire concept. This may just be kicking the can down the road, again. Massive mistake IMO, but honestly expected given his stances even before his nomination.


Europe should pay for the trip wire. Not the US.
Again, keeping Article 5 as a deterrent to Russia costs the US precisely nothing. At all.
It costs nothing… until the moment it costs everything. It's an obligation I have no interest of hanging around our young men's necks.
Putin has said that Ukraine in NATO is a red line for Russia.

Russia attacking a Ukraine that is in NATO is a red line for NATO.

Putin is full of ***** He's not dumb enough to attack NATO.

That would end EVERYTHING he has. He's no longer a billionaire. He's a dead man.


You're inferring past what's being said. Putin hasn't attacked Poland and I'd be similarly shocked if he did. What I've been saying is that we should avoid doing what some advocate in considering Ukraine a NATO mission or extending her membership. Because in both cases: Russia is committed to this conflict and it'd be akin to NATO pushing the trip wire past his foot.
Flavius Agximus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The warmongers and neo-cons always reveal themselves quickly on these threads.
FlyRod
How long do you want to ignore this user?
will25u said:

Looks like Sec. of Defense is making big changes when it comes to the US and being involved in operations worldwide.

OUT: Ukraine and Europe security
IN: United States of America, Thwarting China





Please explain how ceding…basically every aspect of U.S. soft power to China is "thwarting China." I'm genuinely curious.
OverSeas AG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aggie93 said:

Doesn't he understand the importance of us subsidizing those poor Western European countries with our military because they haven't been able to rebuild since WWII and they can't afford their own defense?
WELP! I guess their socialized medicine is off the table. They won't be able to afford it since they are going to have to start paying for defense.
Flavius Agximus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
OverSeas AG said:

aggie93 said:

Doesn't he understand the importance of us subsidizing those poor Western European countries with our military because they haven't been able to rebuild since WWII and they can't afford their own defense?
WELP! I guess their socialized medicine is off the table. They won't be able to afford it since they are going to have to start paying for defense.



There's a silver lining: the freeloaders from Africa and the Middle East will quit coming en masse.
Ags4DaWin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AgLA06 said:

Ags4DaWin said:

rgag12 said:

I think Europe should guarantee Ukraine's sovereignty in a separate agreement outside of NATO. Otherwise Russia will be tempted to recoup what it sees it "lost" in the upcoming treaty in the future.


Nope. That is for Europe to do.

If Europe wants to protect Ukraine then they better ****ing do it.

The US has to worry about China and keeping them from global hegemony. We can't do that and protect Europe's backyard at the same time.

They need to do some of their own goddam heavy lifting for once.
You don't get it. We don't negotiate for their rare earth metals (in eastern Ukraine near the fighting) and not guarantee their safety. We don't get them without it.

That's why it's hilarious to see the first couple of pages of this thread. This place is nothing but parroting talking points without understanding anything.


So you are saying we should ONCE AGAIN go to war over natural resources.

I mean I know they are rare earth metals and not OIL....so this is totally a different situation and not at all like Iraq.
Ags4DaWin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Hullabaloonatic said:

PlaneCrashGuy said:

Ags4DaWin said:

rgag12 said:

I think Europe should guarantee Ukraine's sovereignty in a separate agreement outside of NATO. Otherwise Russia will be tempted to recoup what it sees it "lost" in the upcoming treaty in the future.


Nope. That is for Europe to do.

If Europe wants to protect Ukraine then they better ****ing do it.

The US has to worry about China and keeping them from global hegemony. We can't do that and protect Europe's backyard at the same time.

They need to do some of their own goddam heavy lifting for once.
Well said, Not our war not our problem. America first.
Meanwhile, Trump: "We're going to take Gaza"

So is it America first? or no new wars? or...how do we slogan this contradiction?


Also, Hegseth saying that NATO is off the table and re-establishing borders from 2014 is not happening...why is he just giving away negotiating chips with Russia? Why concede these in public if Trump just started his negotiations with Putin?

You don't know what's going on here. Sit down I will explain it to you.

Trump isn't giving away negotiating chips.

Trump IS chipping away at Putin's publicly stated reasons for going into Ukraine in the first place. Putin has publicly declared that this is a NOBLE WAR for the benefit of oppressed peoples, root out corruption and Nazis, and to defend Russia from those who would attack her.

Putin has said that invading Ukraine was necessary because
1) crimes against humanity regarding ethnic Russians and prorussian people in the Donbas region
2) the USA threatened to annex Ukraine into NATO which would put us missiles in Russia's backyard
3) corruption in Ukraine that was affecting Russians (Ukraine's US funded bioweapons lab)

Now if Trump tells putin that NATO admission is off the table, and that the Donbas regions are not going g to return to Ukraine that means that Putin now has very few reasons and excuses to continue a NOBLE and JUSTIFIED war.

If Putin pivots and says the war is still necessary then he is showing his ass to the world.

Putin is a bully but he's also not ******ed. You can't claim you are fighting a "NOBLE" war if all the noble reasons are addressed.

Trump is taking away Putin's ability to call the war a "noble" undertaking which means if putin continues the war then he shows the world that he is the villain in the story.

That puts the ball squarely in Putin's court.

If Putin decides to publicly turn heel then that gives the rest of the world the excuse to take the gloves off and make attacking internal Russian territory fair game.

Putin doesn't want that. There has so far been a gentleman's agreement to not give Ukraine offensive weapons capable of hitting Russia.

Putin shows his ass now and that agreement goes out the window. Putin doesn't want that.
TheEternalOptimist
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The Kraken said:

Quote:

None of this would have happened had Obama, Merkel, and the EU not facilitated a coup against a legit

President in 2014.
Not this crap again.
Facts.

The "Euromaiden" was facilitated by Victoria Nuland, Alexandra Chalupa, the Bidens, and a host of others who wanted to exercise EU/US influence in Ukraine.
Infection_Ag11
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Ags4DaWin said:

Hullabaloonatic said:

PlaneCrashGuy said:

Ags4DaWin said:

rgag12 said:

I think Europe should guarantee Ukraine's sovereignty in a separate agreement outside of NATO. Otherwise Russia will be tempted to recoup what it sees it "lost" in the upcoming treaty in the future.


Nope. That is for Europe to do.

If Europe wants to protect Ukraine then they better ****ing do it.

The US has to worry about China and keeping them from global hegemony. We can't do that and protect Europe's backyard at the same time.

They need to do some of their own goddam heavy lifting for once.
Well said, Not our war not our problem. America first.
Meanwhile, Trump: "We're going to take Gaza"

So is it America first? or no new wars? or...how do we slogan this contradiction?


Also, Hegseth saying that NATO is off the table and re-establishing borders from 2014 is not happening...why is he just giving away negotiating chips with Russia? Why concede these in public if Trump just started his negotiations with Putin?

You don't know what's going on here. Sit down I will explain it to you.

Trump isn't giving away negotiating chips.

Trump IS chipping away at Putin's publicly stated reasons for going into Ukraine in the first place. Putin has publicly declared that this is a NOBLE WAR for the benefit of oppressed peoples, root out corruption and Nazis, and to defend Russia from those who would attack her.

Putin has said that invading Ukraine was necessary because
1) crimes against humanity regarding ethnic Russians and prorussian people in the Donbas region
2) the USA threatened to annex Ukraine into NATO which would put us missiles in Russia's backyard
3) corruption in Ukraine that was affecting Russians (Ukraine's US funded bioweapons lab)

Now if Trump tells putin that NATO admission is off the table, and that the Donbas regions are not going g to return to Ukraine that means that Putin now has very few reasons and excuses to continue a NOBLE and JUSTIFIED war.

If Putin pivots and says the war is still necessary then he is showing his ass to the world.

Putin is a bully but he's also not ******ed. You can't claim you are fighting a "NOBLE" war if all the noble reasons are addressed.

Trump is taking away Putin's ability to call the war a "noble" undertaking which means if putin continues the war then he shows the world that he is the villain in the story.

That puts the ball squarely in Putin's court.

If Putin decides to publicly turn heel then that gives the rest of the world the excuse to take the gloves off and make attacking internal Russian territory fair game.

Putin doesn't want that. There has so far been a gentleman's agreement to not give Ukraine offensive weapons capable of hitting Russia.

Putin shows his ass now and that agreement goes out the window. Putin doesn't want that.


Let's say this is true: The plan only works if you're actually willing to give Ukraine the ability to hit them hard in the scenario where Putin doesn't back down. Otherwise it's just hollow posturing.

It also fails to recognize the real reason for this conflict that Putin is using the "noble war" lie to distract from. That real reason doesn't really give him the option to back down.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
FireAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
A lot of armchair strategists in here who think they know the right strategy, but they are looking at it from the wrong angle…

Seems pretty apparent that the Trump administration is looking to do a couple of things:

1. End the huge "financial support" of Ukraine because it has been rife with money laundering that has kicked back great wealth to certain individuals in our own government, at the expense of the US taxpayer…

2. Work with Russia to, in turn, keep China in line…I'm quite confident that there is a China angle here, behind the curtain, that many are failing to see, and that's by design…
ts5641
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It's surreal. Four years of biden's administration literally doing everything against common sense. Just to even see these things Trump and his people are doing, it doesn't seem real.
We actually have an America First administration!
Ags4DaWin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Infection_Ag11 said:

Ags4DaWin said:

Hullabaloonatic said:

PlaneCrashGuy said:

Ags4DaWin said:

rgag12 said:

I think Europe should guarantee Ukraine's sovereignty in a separate agreement outside of NATO. Otherwise Russia will be tempted to recoup what it sees it "lost" in the upcoming treaty in the future.


Nope. That is for Europe to do.

If Europe wants to protect Ukraine then they better ****ing do it.

The US has to worry about China and keeping them from global hegemony. We can't do that and protect Europe's backyard at the same time.

They need to do some of their own goddam heavy lifting for once.
Well said, Not our war not our problem. America first.
Meanwhile, Trump: "We're going to take Gaza"

So is it America first? or no new wars? or...how do we slogan this contradiction?


Also, Hegseth saying that NATO is off the table and re-establishing borders from 2014 is not happening...why is he just giving away negotiating chips with Russia? Why concede these in public if Trump just started his negotiations with Putin?

You don't know what's going on here. Sit down I will explain it to you.

Trump isn't giving away negotiating chips.

Trump IS chipping away at Putin's publicly stated reasons for going into Ukraine in the first place. Putin has publicly declared that this is a NOBLE WAR for the benefit of oppressed peoples, root out corruption and Nazis, and to defend Russia from those who would attack her.

Putin has said that invading Ukraine was necessary because
1) crimes against humanity regarding ethnic Russians and prorussian people in the Donbas region
2) the USA threatened to annex Ukraine into NATO which would put us missiles in Russia's backyard
3) corruption in Ukraine that was affecting Russians (Ukraine's US funded bioweapons lab)

Now if Trump tells putin that NATO admission is off the table, and that the Donbas regions are not going g to return to Ukraine that means that Putin now has very few reasons and excuses to continue a NOBLE and JUSTIFIED war.

If Putin pivots and says the war is still necessary then he is showing his ass to the world.

Putin is a bully but he's also not ******ed. You can't claim you are fighting a "NOBLE" war if all the noble reasons are addressed.

Trump is taking away Putin's ability to call the war a "noble" undertaking which means if putin continues the war then he shows the world that he is the villain in the story.

That puts the ball squarely in Putin's court.

If Putin decides to publicly turn heel then that gives the rest of the world the excuse to take the gloves off and make attacking internal Russian territory fair game.

Putin doesn't want that. There has so far been a gentleman's agreement to not give Ukraine offensive weapons capable of hitting Russia.

Putin shows his ass now and that agreement goes out the window. Putin doesn't want that.


Let's say this is true: The plan only works if you're actually willing to give Ukraine the ability to hit them hard in the scenario where Putin doesn't back down. Otherwise it's just hollow posturing.

It also fails to recognize the real reason for this conflict that Putin is using the "noble war" lie to distract from. That real reason doesn't really give him the option to back down.


Half of international relations is creating the perception that what your doing is justified which gives allies reasons to aid you and legitimacy to your regime and actions.

For example-

1) being recognized as a country...once you are recognized it opens the door for all sorts of foreign aid.
2) justified vs unjustified wars- gives other countries legitimate ways to help you.

If we take away the appearance of legitimacy to further war then Russia has two choices-

A) continue the war knowing that other countries now have the "freedom" to put their own soldiers on the ground to help Ukraine defend itself and counterattack into Russia proper. This then ALSO gives Europe a legitimate reason to give Ukraine missiles that can be used to strike into Russia proper, something Europe has not yet done as part of the gentleman's agreement. This possibility will scare the hell out of Putin. Moscow is ridiculously close to Ukraine's border 490 kM or appr. 250 miles. If Ukraine is given missiles with even a decent strike range then Moscow then becomes fair game for Ukraine to strike.

B) take your win and go home. Russia has achieved all of its noble stated objectives- freed Donbas from the oppression of western Ukraine, uncovered illegal US bioweapons labs in Ukraine and shut them down, and regained access to the black sea via Crimea.

The cost of Russia engaging in a war in which Moscow becomes fair game for missile strikes is not worth what little else they would gain from continued war.

Trump giving them their "noble" win allows them to quit while they are ahead and claim the Noble Victory Putin desires. From their it will be on Europe to finally get their militaries on line to ensure Putin doesn't get itchy again.

Additionally they need to stop thinking they can do whatever they want because the Americans will come in to save them.

Sometimes you negotiate with a stick via Teddy Roosevelt.

Sometimes the previous administration ****s up so bad you have to give your adversary a way to gracefully claim victory because the previous administration ****ed up any way to force concessions without engaging in all out war and risk nuclear holocaust.

The US is not in a position to force concessions and any attempt to negotiate from a position of power is just going to make the situation worse....the US has no power here. We blew our wad because we were slinging our dick around like we were the biggest kid on the block and Putin called our bluff.

And now that our wad is shot we need to realm and prepare for the upcoming conflict with China....because that has been half of the game being played here- China watching and testing the waters to see just how worn down the US military has become due to its endless wars in the middle east and just how much of a materiale reserve we can muster if they decide to act on some of their designs on countries like Taiwan.

What has happened here is the second option. Trump knows this. He knows the only big stick we can wave at this point js going to all out war and there is ZERO reason we should risk that for a piece of **** land like Ukraine.

If Obama had let Ukraine continue to be Russia's puppet instead of forcibly installing a Russia antagonistic regime and laundering their dirty money through the new government (which was just as corrupt as the Russian government btw) then this would never have happened.

Putin isn't a dumbass.
No Spin Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Ellis Wyatt said:

We did nothing but allow it to happen and then fund it. Of course, we had to fund it to launder billions. Corrupt politicians are the only winners in this was.


We allowed Putin to invade Ukraine? That makes it seem like Putin was Biden's little puppet beech.

As muy macho as Putin is, I don't see him being the type to allow himself to be allowed anything.

All he had to do was not do it. I think we can all agree that he pulled the trigger and he never had to.
There are in fact two things, science and opinion; the former begets knowledge, the later ignorance. Hippocrates
PA24
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Screw Europe!!!!

We live in the Western hemisphere, our ancestors got the hell outta of Europe. Their food and beer sucks.

Actual Talking Thermos
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PA24 said:

[European] food and beer sucks.

One of the wrongest takes I have read on F16
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.