It's all about money and power.

This just in:

BREAKING: The U.S. imposes sanctions on companies from Belarus, Armenia and China for supporting the Russian military

— Samuel Ramani (@SamRamani2) September 30, 2022

Doc Holliday said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

He Hate Me said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

He Hate Me said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

What do you think happened with the Nordstream pipelines?

A: Russia sabotaged them
B: The USA sabotaged them
C. Some other nation or group sabotaged them
D. Miraculously it wasn't sabotage

Russia could just quit delivering gas any time they wanted without needing to blow anything up. Likewise, the EU can just quit buying gas if they decided it's better to freeze. So what happened here?

The chances of the EU agreeing a peace agreement very unlikely now that there is no gas.

---

A. Russia

Like burning one's own boats, it's a message of resolve from Putin to his people and particularly his military. It's also an implicit threat to Europe and other pipelines in the vicinity.

---

So Russia destroyed their own $20 billion dollar pipeline which would make trillions over time, expand their global sphere of influence...as a way to attack the "free world"? How dare they blow up the pipeline that USA/NATO/EU has refused to open or use and has threatened to "shut down" as a threat to Russia.

It's more likely the US or another country shut this off to cut Russia's future money supply.

Gazprom already halted supply of Nordstrom 1 at the beginning of the month. Nordstream 2 was never activated in the first place or in use when it was blown up. This forces an energy problem for Europe because now it's not an option.

Is every narrative "Russia does bad things. Bad thing happened, therefore Russia did it"?

---

What makes you think most of Europe plans on working with Russia in the future for its energy needs? Why do you think Russia's land objectives make it extremely difficult to get pipelines from other places East? There's no magic agreement that results in everything back to normal at the snap of a finger. Putin made the call to invade. The consequences are evolving.

---

Energy needs.

Russia blew up their own pipeline but NOT the Norway-EU pipeline that's right next to it and just opened today?

Blame Putin, escalate the war, advance green agenda, make EU dependent.

---

Not sure how cutting gas and thereby highlighting the failure of "green energy" will advance the green agenda. But then again, I am surprised that people have bought into the green agenda as hard as they have.

---

Cutting gas means they EU will have to pump billions into green energy because EU is anti hydrocarbon, or they'll have to buy much more gas from the US. Probably both.

Fear is the most powerful motivator.

I think this is what's going on:

USA is now doing to Germany what Germany did to Greece, and really the entire EU, for the past 15 years - showing them, and not in subtle fashion, who really runs the show.

— FischerKing (@FischerKing64) September 28, 2022

---

You are probably right that the EU will not reconsider its position on nukes, coal, or green energy. It is really silly to be that hard headed, but here we (and they) are.

---

You guys really think that Biden has the balls to pull this? He and Obama sent blankets when left to their own. You really think OBiden would take this tact??? I say no way. The guy was scared to leave the basement.

Russia did this and will blame West. This is the first move on the Baltics. You will start to hear that Russia tried,but can't have the Baltics and Ukraine in the West.

---

Do you know what the CIA has done around the world for the past 70 years?!

I want to believe the US is wholesome, good and by the book...but that's not even close to reality.

---

Causing a Russian pipeline to self destruct the day before a new Norwegian pipeline becomes operational, amid overall context of Russia being caught in another military quagmire it likely cannot win, is as wholesome as it gets, brother. Time to open a bottle if King Alex and savor a good days work for the taxpayer.

---

Man I just don't want to get hoodwinked Into war based on things they're not telling us.

I don't want more people to die.

That's my motivation behind my skepticism.

---

The best way to stop a war is to win it.

---

The best way to stop a war is not to enter one .

There are many countries who have joyfully and successfully avoided the self destructive role of 'world's policeman ' .

The United States only fully embraced such role upon the conclusion of WW2 .

And the body bags have been arriving periodically ever since .

Of course the vast majority of those who promote such a role…rarely if ever risk their own lives in the resulting carnage.

They remain in the rear with the gear or safely thousands of miles away in the cushy confines of the elites .

---

You don't think there is a correlation between many smaller Nations being able to be democratic, free capitalistic societies without the threat of being invaded and the US/NATO's role in balancing against Russia, China, and other dictatorships?

You really believe if the US and NATO just say we are out, we are not doing it anymore. Those Nations will just go on like they are now? That China won't encroach on the Pacific, Russia won't encroach on Europe and Iran will not encroach on the Middle East?

When in history has there ever been a time where a counterbalance wasn't necessary?

---

Did you ever earn a Combat Infantry Badge or were you dozens or hundreds of miles from where our people were getting killed ?

---

No, I was not 11 or 18 series. That is irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

I know what an armor battle versus the Russians means, it is not pretty. I trained Fulda Gap and it could not have gotten better with the newer technology, but that does not change the political environment or the correct national posture.

You know, people (even people that did not serve) are entitled to have an opinion, the infantry and the blue chord guys are not the only ones that are allowed to weigh in or believe their service meant something. I know you think the only people that should be able to discuss Foreign Policy are Infantry since you keep bringing this subject up. I respect your CIB and your opinion. Would be nice if you would respect others. Plenty of support people serve in combat zones, get injured and worse. I have been on training jumps where people have died or severely wounded, does that make their wounds or death less?

We have a volunteer military, I am not talking conscription.

If you want to talk Foreign Policy, please join. If you want to get in a pissing contest, I really am not interested. Explain how not engaging Russia or China will save lifes?

---

Explain how nuclear war will save lives.

---

You think that this will go to nuclear war? If that is the case, when does Russia stop? There is no need to stop at all? Ok, no troops (where we are now). No additions to NATO. (OK) Now he wants us to not supply Ukraine. (OK, we do that). Economic sanctions next? Then Baltics? At what point does someone that brutally put down Georgia, invaded Crimea, invaded Ukraine stop?

Can you function as a nation if the thought is the believe is that if we push back or disagree it will be nuclear war??? Come on, how do you maintain trade? Isolationism? Is South America or the Caribbean off the table? Alaska? You have to say more than nuclear war. We all have nuclear weapons, that is a given. How do you handle the situation in Russia and China?

Canada2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

What do you think happened with the Nordstream pipelines?

A: Russia sabotaged them
B: The USA sabotaged them
C. Some other nation or group sabotaged them
D. Miraculously it wasn't sabotage

Russia could just quit delivering gas any time they wanted without needing to blow anything up. Likewise, the EU can just quit buying gas if they decided it's better to freeze. So what happened here?

The chances of the EU agreeing a peace agreement very unlikely now that there is no gas.

---

A. Russia

Like burning one's own boats, it's a message of resolve from Putin to his people and particularly his military. It's also an implicit threat to Europe and other pipelines in the vicinity.

---

So Russia destroyed their own $20 billion dollar pipeline which would make trillions over time, expand their global sphere of influence...as a way to attack the "free world"? How dare they blow up the pipeline that USA/NATO/EU has refused to open or use and has threatened to "shut down" as a threat to Russia.

It's more likely the US or another country shut this off to cut Russia's future money supply.

Gazprom already halted supply of Nordstrom 1 at the beginning of the month. Nordstream 2 was never activated in the first place or in use when it was blown up. This forces an energy problem for Europe because now it's not an option.

Is every narrative "Russia does bad things. Bad thing happened, therefore Russia did it"?

---

Russia had zero reason to destroy pipelines they could simply shut off whenever they wished.

Biden had made threats against the pipelines just months ago .

So exactly who benefits with western Europe facing a shortage of national gas and a long cold winter coming up ?

Follow the $$$$.

---

you mean the same Europe lining up contracts with UAE, Qatar, Ukraine, Norway and a dozen other countries in addition to the US? The same Europe that had gas contracts with those countries to more than supply their winter needs now with the new contracts? Follow the threats, and the money. The threat is actually to the pipelines that run through Ukraine. That's Russia's last conventional play.

---

You don't seem to understand that America is a bad guy here and Putin and Russia are as much victims as anyone. They don't have evil economic interests like the US and West. Russia doesn't have ruling elites controlling their economy or corrupt intelligence and government agencies like the big bad US…. Did I get that right?

---

Both have ruling elites controlling their economy with corrupt intelligence and government agencies.

---

You need to stay off the Twitters for a bit.

---

I wonder if most people realize that twitter skews like 90% to the liberal-left positions.

"ruling elites" & "corrupt intelligence services" is not the kind of talk that usually happens on twitter.

It's Ukraine flags and pronouns in the bios and lots of talk about "upholding international norms" and "protecting our scared democracy from fascism"

---

I vote center-right about 90% of the time. I've actually voted with you in my life more than against you more than likely. Yet you're falling for the "Ukrainian Nazi" bit and "russia is just defending themselves against NATO aggression" bit. Mind-blowing that you can't understand how disinformation campaigns work, especially by Russia/China.

---

Nobody here is defending Russia, we just don't want to turn this into WW3 or another 'War on terror' situation where escalation kills more people than brokering peace.

---

Nor do I. And the path we're on right now isn't going to have that. Russia is getting their ass kicked on the battlefield. ANd it's their own fault.

---

The more we kick their ass, the more desperate they'll become and they'll resort to desperate measures. Russia has 10-30 megaton nukes.

Would you rather have a peace deal where parts of Ukraine are lost...or would you rather see Russia resort to using these nukes on Ukraine? I fear that's where this escalation is headed.

---

most cases for caution on Ukraine are to some degree a priori. A policymaker cannot allow worry about Russian nukes unduly affect assessments about everything. Russia is not going to risk nuclear attack over conventional losses in Ukraine, as such would be insanity. They will withdraw and come back to fight another day, nibble a bit smaller. Work Ukrainian politics to get a pro-Moscow govt in place, etc.... They've done all that before and can do it again. Russia has nothing to gain and everything to lose from allowing this policy endeavor to turn into nuclear war. If we let unreasonable concerns about nuclear engagement prevent us from delivering a well-deserved ass-kicking when deserved, we will only embolden Russia to take ever more provocative actions that generate ever-more a prior reasons for us to do to little to stop ever bolder Russian actions. We have nukes, too, and should act like it.

Remember: The USA guaranteed the independence and integrity of Ukraine as part of latter surrendering the old Soviet nuclear weapons inventories on Ukrainian soil. We are doing a decent job of honoring that. Could do better, but could be doing worse, as well. There is substantial downside for us here, if we do too little. Risks the credibility of the USA in ways that could cause challenges to proliferate.

If you're strong, you better act like it, or you'll have to start using your strength.

---

So Russia recognizes the independence of Ukrainian territories, the people vote to become part of Russia…then western rulers have now decided it's a good enough reason to start WW3, potentially leading to nuclear war.

Sounds more like we're taking advantage of inter slavic border disputes.

---

THe people voted to become part of Russia just like the people of Venezuela voted for Maduro.

---

I agree. But with that attitude, we might as well take over the planet.

---

Where have I ever advocated that?

---

This is all about world policing.

---

In part .

It's also about making money .

And the dimwitted always fall for the jingoistic propaganda.


( as long as someone ELSE is doing the fighting and dying )

If 2 years of compulsory military service existed for EVERYONE….damn little of this bull**** would be going on .

---

I don't disagree with you on this point. I also believe everyone should be lower enlisted (not a plebe, but lower enlisted) and serve in a Rapid Deployment Division (not everyone needs be infantry, even cooks and clerks go) once in their life. It does give you a different perspective.

I think this goes thermobaric. FOAB.

Doc Holliday said:

---

I think this goes thermobaric. FOAB.

---

It's been thermobaric since day 1 with TOS-1 and RPO launchers.

Bear8084 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

I think this goes thermobaric. FOAB.

---

It's been thermobaric since day 1 with TOS-1 and RPO launchers.

---

No one has used an FOAB.

Canada2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

What do you think happened with the Nordstream pipelines?

A: Russia sabotaged them
B: The USA sabotaged them
C. Some other nation or group sabotaged them
D. Miraculously it wasn't sabotage

Russia could just quit delivering gas any time they wanted without needing to blow anything up. Likewise, the EU can just quit buying gas if they decided it's better to freeze. So what happened here?

The chances of the EU agreeing a peace agreement very unlikely now that there is no gas.

---

A. Russia

Like burning one's own boats, it's a message of resolve from Putin to his people and particularly his military. It's also an implicit threat to Europe and other pipelines in the vicinity.

---

So Russia destroyed their own $20 billion dollar pipeline which would make trillions over time, expand their global sphere of influence...as a way to attack the "free world"? How dare they blow up the pipeline that USA/NATO/EU has refused to open or use and has threatened to "shut down" as a threat to Russia.

It's more likely the US or another country shut this off to cut Russia's future money supply.

Gazprom already halted supply of Nordstrom 1 at the beginning of the month. Nordstream 2 was never activated in the first place or in use when it was blown up. This forces an energy problem for Europe because now it's not an option.

Is every narrative "Russia does bad things. Bad thing happened, therefore Russia did it"?

---

Russia had zero reason to destroy pipelines they could simply shut off whenever they wished.

Biden had made threats against the pipelines just months ago .

So exactly who benefits with western Europe facing a shortage of national gas and a long cold winter coming up ?

Follow the $$$$.

---

you mean the same Europe lining up contracts with UAE, Qatar, Ukraine, Norway and a dozen other countries in addition to the US? The same Europe that had gas contracts with those countries to more than supply their winter needs now with the new contracts? Follow the threats, and the money. The threat is actually to the pipelines that run through Ukraine. That's Russia's last conventional play.

---

You don't seem to understand that America is a bad guy here and Putin and Russia are as much victims as anyone. They don't have evil economic interests like the US and West. Russia doesn't have ruling elites controlling their economy or corrupt intelligence and government agencies like the big bad US…. Did I get that right?

---

Both have ruling elites controlling their economy with corrupt intelligence and government agencies.

---

You need to stay off the Twitters for a bit.

---

I wonder if most people realize that twitter skews like 90% to the liberal-left positions.

"ruling elites" & "corrupt intelligence services" is not the kind of talk that usually happens on twitter.

It's Ukraine flags and pronouns in the bios and lots of talk about "upholding international norms" and "protecting our scared democracy from fascism"

---

I vote center-right about 90% of the time. I've actually voted with you in my life more than against you more than likely. Yet you're falling for the "Ukrainian Nazi" bit and "russia is just defending themselves against NATO aggression" bit. Mind-blowing that you can't understand how disinformation campaigns work, especially by Russia/China.

---

Nobody here is defending Russia, we just don't want to turn this into WW3 or another 'War on terror' situation where escalation kills more people than brokering peace.

---

Nor do I. And the path we're on right now isn't going to have that. Russia is getting their ass kicked on the battlefield. ANd it's their own fault.

---

The more we kick their ass, the more desperate they'll become and they'll resort to desperate measures. Russia has 10-30 megaton nukes.

Would you rather have a peace deal where parts of Ukraine are lost...or would you rather see Russia resort to using these nukes on Ukraine? I fear that's where this escalation is headed.

---

most cases for caution on Ukraine are to some degree a priori. A policymaker cannot allow worry about Russian nukes unduly affect assessments about everything. Russia is not going to risk nuclear attack over conventional losses in Ukraine, as such would be insanity. They will withdraw and come back to fight another day, nibble a bit smaller. Work Ukrainian politics to get a pro-Moscow govt in place, etc.... They've done all that before and can do it again. Russia has nothing to gain and everything to lose from allowing this policy endeavor to turn into nuclear war. If we let unreasonable concerns about nuclear engagement prevent us from delivering a well-deserved ass-kicking when deserved, we will only embolden Russia to take ever more provocative actions that generate ever-more a prior reasons for us to do to little to stop ever bolder Russian actions. We have nukes, too, and should act like it.

Remember: The USA guaranteed the independence and integrity of Ukraine as part of latter surrendering the old Soviet nuclear weapons inventories on Ukrainian soil. We are doing a decent job of honoring that. Could do better, but could be doing worse, as well. There is substantial downside for us here, if we do too little. Risks the credibility of the USA in ways that could cause challenges to proliferate.

If you're strong, you better act like it, or you'll have to start using your strength.

---

So Russia recognizes the independence of Ukrainian territories, the people vote to become part of Russia…then western rulers have now decided it's a good enough reason to start WW3, potentially leading to nuclear war.

Sounds more like we're taking advantage of inter slavic border disputes.

---

THe people voted to become part of Russia just like the people of Venezuela voted for Maduro.

---

I agree. But with that attitude, we might as well take over the planet.

---

Where have I ever advocated that?

---

This is all about world policing.

---

In part .

It's also about making money .

And the dimwitted always fall for the jingoistic propaganda.


( as long as someone ELSE is doing the fighting and dying )

If 2 years of compulsory military service existed for EVERYONE….damn little of this bull**** would be going on .

---

This thinking is incorrect. Military people (current and former) are the primary drivers for war, and make up a large percentage of the defense industry. The MIC IS military people. Jingoism is military strategy.

ATL Bear said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

What do you think happened with the Nordstream pipelines?

A: Russia sabotaged them
B: The USA sabotaged them
C. Some other nation or group sabotaged them
D. Miraculously it wasn't sabotage

Russia could just quit delivering gas any time they wanted without needing to blow anything up. Likewise, the EU can just quit buying gas if they decided it's better to freeze. So what happened here?

The chances of the EU agreeing a peace agreement very unlikely now that there is no gas.

---

A. Russia

Like burning one's own boats, it's a message of resolve from Putin to his people and particularly his military. It's also an implicit threat to Europe and other pipelines in the vicinity.

---

So Russia destroyed their own $20 billion dollar pipeline which would make trillions over time, expand their global sphere of influence...as a way to attack the "free world"? How dare they blow up the pipeline that USA/NATO/EU has refused to open or use and has threatened to "shut down" as a threat to Russia.

It's more likely the US or another country shut this off to cut Russia's future money supply.

Gazprom already halted supply of Nordstrom 1 at the beginning of the month. Nordstream 2 was never activated in the first place or in use when it was blown up. This forces an energy problem for Europe because now it's not an option.

Is every narrative "Russia does bad things. Bad thing happened, therefore Russia did it"?

---

Russia had zero reason to destroy pipelines they could simply shut off whenever they wished.

Biden had made threats against the pipelines just months ago .

So exactly who benefits with western Europe facing a shortage of national gas and a long cold winter coming up ?

Follow the $$$$.

---

you mean the same Europe lining up contracts with UAE, Qatar, Ukraine, Norway and a dozen other countries in addition to the US? The same Europe that had gas contracts with those countries to more than supply their winter needs now with the new contracts? Follow the threats, and the money. The threat is actually to the pipelines that run through Ukraine. That's Russia's last conventional play.

---

You don't seem to understand that America is a bad guy here and Putin and Russia are as much victims as anyone. They don't have evil economic interests like the US and West. Russia doesn't have ruling elites controlling their economy or corrupt intelligence and government agencies like the big bad US…. Did I get that right?

---

Both have ruling elites controlling their economy with corrupt intelligence and government agencies.

---

You need to stay off the Twitters for a bit.

---

I wonder if most people realize that twitter skews like 90% to the liberal-left positions.

"ruling elites" & "corrupt intelligence services" is not the kind of talk that usually happens on twitter.

It's Ukraine flags and pronouns in the bios and lots of talk about "upholding international norms" and "protecting our scared democracy from fascism"

---

I vote center-right about 90% of the time. I've actually voted with you in my life more than against you more than likely. Yet you're falling for the "Ukrainian Nazi" bit and "russia is just defending themselves against NATO aggression" bit. Mind-blowing that you can't understand how disinformation campaigns work, especially by Russia/China.

---

Nobody here is defending Russia, we just don't want to turn this into WW3 or another 'War on terror' situation where escalation kills more people than brokering peace.

---

Nor do I. And the path we're on right now isn't going to have that. Russia is getting their ass kicked on the battlefield. ANd it's their own fault.

---

The more we kick their ass, the more desperate they'll become and they'll resort to desperate measures. Russia has 10-30 megaton nukes.

Would you rather have a peace deal where parts of Ukraine are lost...or would you rather see Russia resort to using these nukes on Ukraine? I fear that's where this escalation is headed.

---

most cases for caution on Ukraine are to some degree a priori. A policymaker cannot allow worry about Russian nukes unduly affect assessments about everything. Russia is not going to risk nuclear attack over conventional losses in Ukraine, as such would be insanity. They will withdraw and come back to fight another day, nibble a bit smaller. Work Ukrainian politics to get a pro-Moscow govt in place, etc.... They've done all that before and can do it again. Russia has nothing to gain and everything to lose from allowing this policy endeavor to turn into nuclear war. If we let unreasonable concerns about nuclear engagement prevent us from delivering a well-deserved ass-kicking when deserved, we will only embolden Russia to take ever more provocative actions that generate ever-more a prior reasons for us to do to little to stop ever bolder Russian actions. We have nukes, too, and should act like it.

Remember: The USA guaranteed the independence and integrity of Ukraine as part of latter surrendering the old Soviet nuclear weapons inventories on Ukrainian soil. We are doing a decent job of honoring that. Could do better, but could be doing worse, as well. There is substantial downside for us here, if we do too little. Risks the credibility of the USA in ways that could cause challenges to proliferate.

If you're strong, you better act like it, or you'll have to start using your strength.

---

So Russia recognizes the independence of Ukrainian territories, the people vote to become part of Russia…then western rulers have now decided it's a good enough reason to start WW3, potentially leading to nuclear war.

Sounds more like we're taking advantage of inter slavic border disputes.

---

THe people voted to become part of Russia just like the people of Venezuela voted for Maduro.

---

I agree. But with that attitude, we might as well take over the planet.

---

Where have I ever advocated that?

---

This is all about world policing.

---

In part .

It's also about making money .

And the dimwitted always fall for the jingoistic propaganda.


( as long as someone ELSE is doing the fighting and dying )

If 2 years of compulsory military service existed for EVERYONE….damn little of this bull**** would be going on .

---

This thinking is incorrect. Military people (current and former) are the primary drivers for war, and make up a large percentage of the defense industry. The MIC IS military people. Jingoism is military strategy.

---

Yep, unfortunately war is a racket.


https://www.amazon.com/War-Racket-Original-Smedley-Butler/dp/1939438586/ref=asc_df_1939438586/?tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=312168414377&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=8086084391537797665&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=m&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9016679&hvtargid=pla-567448420790&psc=1

ATL Bear said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

What do you think happened with the Nordstream pipelines?

A: Russia sabotaged them
B: The USA sabotaged them
C. Some other nation or group sabotaged them
D. Miraculously it wasn't sabotage

Russia could just quit delivering gas any time they wanted without needing to blow anything up. Likewise, the EU can just quit buying gas if they decided it's better to freeze. So what happened here?

The chances of the EU agreeing a peace agreement very unlikely now that there is no gas.

---

A. Russia

Like burning one's own boats, it's a message of resolve from Putin to his people and particularly his military. It's also an implicit threat to Europe and other pipelines in the vicinity.

---

So Russia destroyed their own $20 billion dollar pipeline which would make trillions over time, expand their global sphere of influence...as a way to attack the "free world"? How dare they blow up the pipeline that USA/NATO/EU has refused to open or use and has threatened to "shut down" as a threat to Russia.

It's more likely the US or another country shut this off to cut Russia's future money supply.

Gazprom already halted supply of Nordstrom 1 at the beginning of the month. Nordstream 2 was never activated in the first place or in use when it was blown up. This forces an energy problem for Europe because now it's not an option.

Is every narrative "Russia does bad things. Bad thing happened, therefore Russia did it"?

---

Russia had zero reason to destroy pipelines they could simply shut off whenever they wished.

Biden had made threats against the pipelines just months ago .

So exactly who benefits with western Europe facing a shortage of national gas and a long cold winter coming up ?

Follow the $$$$.

---

you mean the same Europe lining up contracts with UAE, Qatar, Ukraine, Norway and a dozen other countries in addition to the US? The same Europe that had gas contracts with those countries to more than supply their winter needs now with the new contracts? Follow the threats, and the money. The threat is actually to the pipelines that run through Ukraine. That's Russia's last conventional play.

---

You don't seem to understand that America is a bad guy here and Putin and Russia are as much victims as anyone. They don't have evil economic interests like the US and West. Russia doesn't have ruling elites controlling their economy or corrupt intelligence and government agencies like the big bad US…. Did I get that right?

---

Both have ruling elites controlling their economy with corrupt intelligence and government agencies.

---

You need to stay off the Twitters for a bit.

---

I wonder if most people realize that twitter skews like 90% to the liberal-left positions.

"ruling elites" & "corrupt intelligence services" is not the kind of talk that usually happens on twitter.

It's Ukraine flags and pronouns in the bios and lots of talk about "upholding international norms" and "protecting our scared democracy from fascism"

---

I vote center-right about 90% of the time. I've actually voted with you in my life more than against you more than likely. Yet you're falling for the "Ukrainian Nazi" bit and "russia is just defending themselves against NATO aggression" bit. Mind-blowing that you can't understand how disinformation campaigns work, especially by Russia/China.

---

Nobody here is defending Russia, we just don't want to turn this into WW3 or another 'War on terror' situation where escalation kills more people than brokering peace.

---

Nor do I. And the path we're on right now isn't going to have that. Russia is getting their ass kicked on the battlefield. ANd it's their own fault.

---

The more we kick their ass, the more desperate they'll become and they'll resort to desperate measures. Russia has 10-30 megaton nukes.

Would you rather have a peace deal where parts of Ukraine are lost...or would you rather see Russia resort to using these nukes on Ukraine? I fear that's where this escalation is headed.

---

most cases for caution on Ukraine are to some degree a priori. A policymaker cannot allow worry about Russian nukes unduly affect assessments about everything. Russia is not going to risk nuclear attack over conventional losses in Ukraine, as such would be insanity. They will withdraw and come back to fight another day, nibble a bit smaller. Work Ukrainian politics to get a pro-Moscow govt in place, etc.... They've done all that before and can do it again. Russia has nothing to gain and everything to lose from allowing this policy endeavor to turn into nuclear war. If we let unreasonable concerns about nuclear engagement prevent us from delivering a well-deserved ass-kicking when deserved, we will only embolden Russia to take ever more provocative actions that generate ever-more a prior reasons for us to do to little to stop ever bolder Russian actions. We have nukes, too, and should act like it.

Remember: The USA guaranteed the independence and integrity of Ukraine as part of latter surrendering the old Soviet nuclear weapons inventories on Ukrainian soil. We are doing a decent job of honoring that. Could do better, but could be doing worse, as well. There is substantial downside for us here, if we do too little. Risks the credibility of the USA in ways that could cause challenges to proliferate.

If you're strong, you better act like it, or you'll have to start using your strength.

---

So Russia recognizes the independence of Ukrainian territories, the people vote to become part of Russia…then western rulers have now decided it's a good enough reason to start WW3, potentially leading to nuclear war.

Sounds more like we're taking advantage of inter slavic border disputes.

---

THe people voted to become part of Russia just like the people of Venezuela voted for Maduro.

---

I agree. But with that attitude, we might as well take over the planet.

---

Where have I ever advocated that?

---

This is all about world policing.

---

In part .

It's also about making money .

And the dimwitted always fall for the jingoistic propaganda.


( as long as someone ELSE is doing the fighting and dying )

If 2 years of compulsory military service existed for EVERYONE….damn little of this bull**** would be going on .

---

This thinking is incorrect. Military people (current and former) are the primary drivers for war, and make up a large percentage of the defense industry. The MIC IS military people. Jingoism is military strategy.

---

Usually such a strategy is to keep your adversary from gaining momentum and believing they can win. Wars occur when one side believes they have an advantage and can win. Otherwise, the status quo is maintained. Nobody goes to war with the mindset to lose men, assets, ground, or position. That is why I do not believe being reactive or isolationist can work with China, Iran and Russia in play.

Germany:

Bundestag has voted against increasing arms supplies to Ukraine

179 MPs for versus 476 against.

— The Sirius Report (@thesiriusreport) September 30, 2022

Redbrickbear said:

---

Germany:

Bundestag has voted against increasing arms supplies to Ukraine

179 MPs for versus 476 against.

— The Sirius Report (@thesiriusreport) September 30, 2022

---

Well, if Russia blew the line than Putin got a response he wanted. If we did, the German's seem pissed...

Golem said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Why would Polish officials be thanking the US for this?

They not get the memo to blame Russia for the attack?

---

Why not post his other tweets about the attack where he blames Russia and calls it a 'Special Maintenance Operation"? Doesn't fit your anti-America narrative? Fool

---

For the 7,000th time Trey.

Spooks in the CIA and the unaccountable intelligence services are not America. And don't get to claim to speak for us or our Constitutional Republic.

But what's sad is they actually pay Georgetown and Ivy League grads to run interference for the intelligence services on the internet.

You just do it from Waco for free….lol

---

I don't run interference for anyone. I'm just capable of wading through a thought project without needing to look like Charlie Kelly or Carrie Matheson and their crazy boards.

---

Are there conspiracies? Of course. Are all of these? I really doubt it. I believe there is some opportunism involved, such as the Maine. Some propaganda like WMD. Lusitania was carrying munitions, which would make it a target.

I just think people mistake opportunism for conspiracy. The only 2 I know of was Watergate and Iran-Contra, they are proven.

---

Yep. WMD was a lot of propaganda, but also had some truth to it (even if it was old truth). We know for a fact Saddam had WMD's because he killed nearly a million of his own countrymen with them in the 80's. Could those have been transported to Syria and other locales prior to our invasion in '03? Absolutely. Do I think GWB is the devil because he believed the intelligence briefed to him by an extremely trustworthy former General as well as his VP? Absolutely not.

---

Sounds like a good summation of reasons not to trust the unaccountable intelligence services.

---

y'all are talking about my era here. I saw all that reporting. Given what we knew to be obviously true (Saddam made them, used them, had them, etc...was talking to AQ specifically about them, and was still trying to buy raw materials around the world), what we did not know (no direct access to the program), and that they were still pulling body parts out of the WTC rubble, 43 had no choice but to take Saddam out.

That was the default position any analyst would have to take (had, them, used them, etc....).
To change status quo assessment, one would need a credible stream of well-sourced intel saying otherwise.
We did not have that.

The idiom would be to take out all the furniture in the Oval Office except the desk. Fill the room with stacks of paper chest high. On the desk, set a manila folder with a couple dozen pieces of paper inside. Those stacks out on the floor were all the reports about acquiring materials, using them on his own people, his manufacturing capabilities, etc.... That manila folder on the desk said "he destroyed his inventory during first gulf war to deny evidence should he get tried for war crimes."

That's it.
Slam dunk analysis.
Rogue regime with WMDs, engaging in state terror operations against the USA (I was part of a "Meritoriius Unit" award for stopping one), and staring to consider helping AQ.

We should stop plowing the oceans on this.
We knew plenty enough to make a policy decision.
We made the right one.

---

The slam dunk became a curveball.

---

I agree, but don't confuse the decision to remove Saddam with the decision to turn Iraq into a democracy. Former was necessary; latter was not.

Redbrickbear said:

---

Are there conspiracies? Of course. Are all of these? I really doubt it. I believe there is some opportunism involved, such as the Maine. Some propaganda like WMD. Lusitania was carrying munitions, which would make it a target.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I just think people mistake opportunism for conspiracy. The only 2 I know of was Watergate and Iran-Contra, they are proven.

---

Yep. WMD was a lot of propaganda, but also had some truth to it (even if it was old truth). We know for a fact Saddam had WMD's because he killed nearly a million of his own countrymen with them in the 80's. Could those have been transported to Syria and other locales prior to our invasion in '03? Absolutely. Do I think GWB is the devil because he believed the intelligence briefed to him by an extremely trustworthy former General as well as his VP? Absolutely not.

---

Sounds like a good summation of reasons not to trust the unaccountable intelligence services.

---

y'all are talking about my era here. I saw all that reporting. Given what we knew to be obviously true (Saddam made them, used them, had them, etc...was talking to AQ specifically about them, and was still trying to buy raw materials around the world), what we did not know (no direct access to the program), and that they were still pulling body parts out of the WTC rubble, 43 had no choice but to take Saddam out.

That was the default position any analyst would have to take (had, them, used them, etc....).
To change status quo assessment, one would need a credible stream of well-sourced intel saying otherwise.
We did not have that.

The idiom would be to take out all the furniture in the Oval Office except the desk. Fill the room with stacks of paper chest high. On the desk, set a manila folder with a couple dozen pieces of paper inside. Those stacks out on the floor were all the reports about acquiring materials, using them on his own people, his manufacturing capabilities, etc.... That manila folder on the desk said "he destroyed his inventory during first gulf war to deny evidence should he get tried for war crimes."

That's it.
Slam dunk analysis.
Rogue regime with WMDs, engaging in state terror operations against the USA (I was part of a "Meritoriius Unit" award for stopping one), and staring to consider helping AQ.

We should stop plowing the oceans on this.
We knew plenty enough to make a policy decision.
We made the right one.

---

The slam dunk became a curveball.

---

When has not addressing a dictator or aggressive nations ever resulted in saving lifes? At some point we, the Western/1st World, will end up having to confront those nations that do not respect sovereignty . The longer you wait the more of our people that will end up dying. Ignoring or appeasement does not work. Saying we are staying out will result in a worst scenario later. Dealing with Putin in Ukraine, is better than dealing with him in the Baltics, Finland or Poland. Dealing with China now, is better than dealing with them in Taiwan or Korea.

I know we disagree on this, but I don't see how yours and Canada's view creates a better situation down the line. I actually see a self-fulfilling prophecy of more US troops being involved in dying by not engaging early.

---

exactly.

The moment Putin consolidates Ukraine, the process repeats in Poland......destabilization, usurpation, etc..... Might take a decade or two to crescendo. But as long as Kaliningrad exists, Russis will strive for a land bridge. And success of such policy will collapse Nato. Zero sum.

There is no better defense against that scenario than an independent Ukraine.

Ergo the current conflict.

---

I see where you are coming from but simply disagree.

1. Putin and Russia are simply incapable of actually taking Ukraine. Militarily they just don't have the power to do it. At best they might be able to hold on to some oblasts in the east that are already Russian speaking. And its very possible they will get beaten and driven out of there even.

2. But lets say they did and in some domino effect Poland or Slovakia were the next target. That is why we have NATO. Those countries (unlike Ukraine) are in NATO and an attack on them would mean war against the USA, Britain, France, Germany, Turkey, and the other 25 nations in the alliance. Russia would be crushed in such a conflict.

---

1. They can definitely take it. Eventually, 150m overwhelms 50m. Had Kiev fallen, they'd already have it. Had we not stepped forward with hundreds of billions of dollars in military aid, they'd already have it. Sure, they'd have an insurgency, but that'd take many, many years to succeed, and might never succeed. Look at Grozny. Russia will do the brutal things it takes to make insurgencies die by means other than losing the battel for hearts & minds. Simply amazing to be where we are at the moment. Which is why I critique Biden regime. Need to roll up the Russian lines and re-establish Ukrainian sovereignty before Russia mobilizes, which has already happened, so we are still behind.....

2. You misinterpret the scenario I laid out. Of course they will not invade Poland or Slovakia. But they can start to meddle in domestic politics and get pro-Moscow regimes elected, which would always be a threat to withdraw from Nato, etc.....

Russia will not invade a Nato nation.
Russia will seek to politically destabilize a Nato nation, causing a crisis in Nato.

Yes, all of that would be years down the road. But if we let Russia have & digest Ukraine, we have no doubt that will be the next chapter. And Poland will be the first target - land bridge to Kaliningrad.

Bear8084 said:

---

you mean the same Europe lining up contracts with UAE, Qatar, Ukraine, Norway and a dozen other countries in addition to the US? The same Europe that had gas contracts with those countries to more than supply their winter needs now with the new contracts? Follow the threats, and the money. The threat is actually to the pipelines that run through Ukraine. That's Russia's last conventional play.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

You don't seem to understand that America is a bad guy here and Putin and Russia are as much victims as anyone. They don't have evil economic interests like the US and West. Russia doesn't have ruling elites controlling their economy or corrupt intelligence and government agencies like the big bad US…. Did I get that right?

---

Both have ruling elites controlling their economy with corrupt intelligence and government agencies.

---

You need to stay off the Twitters for a bit.

---

I wonder if most people realize that twitter skews like 90% to the liberal-left positions.

"ruling elites" & "corrupt intelligence services" is not the kind of talk that usually happens on twitter.

It's Ukraine flags and pronouns in the bios and lots of talk about "upholding international norms" and "protecting our scared democracy from fascism"

---

I vote center-right about 90% of the time. I've actually voted with you in my life more than against you more than likely. Yet you're falling for the "Ukrainian Nazi" bit and "russia is just defending themselves against NATO aggression" bit. Mind-blowing that you can't understand how disinformation campaigns work, especially by Russia/China.

---

Nobody here is defending Russia, we just don't want to turn this into WW3 or another 'War on terror' situation where escalation kills more people than brokering peace.

---

Nor do I. And the path we're on right now isn't going to have that. Russia is getting their ass kicked on the battlefield. ANd it's their own fault.

---

The more we kick their ass, the more desperate they'll become and they'll resort to desperate measures. Russia has 10-30 megaton nukes.

Would you rather have a peace deal where parts of Ukraine are lost...or would you rather see Russia resort to using these nukes on Ukraine? I fear that's where this escalation is headed.

---

most cases for caution on Ukraine are to some degree a priori. A policymaker cannot allow worry about Russian nukes unduly affect assessments about everything. Russia is not going to risk nuclear attack over conventional losses in Ukraine, as such would be insanity. They will withdraw and come back to fight another day, nibble a bit smaller. Work Ukrainian politics to get a pro-Moscow govt in place, etc.... They've done all that before and can do it again. Russia has nothing to gain and everything to lose from allowing this policy endeavor to turn into nuclear war. If we let unreasonable concerns about nuclear engagement prevent us from delivering a well-deserved ass-kicking when deserved, we will only embolden Russia to take ever more provocative actions that generate ever-more a prior reasons for us to do to little to stop ever bolder Russian actions. We have nukes, too, and should act like it.

Remember: The USA guaranteed the independence and integrity of Ukraine as part of latter surrendering the old Soviet nuclear weapons inventories on Ukrainian soil. We are doing a decent job of honoring that. Could do better, but could be doing worse, as well. There is substantial downside for us here, if we do too little. Risks the credibility of the USA in ways that could cause challenges to proliferate.

If you're strong, you better act like it, or you'll have to start using your strength.

---

So Russia recognizes the independence of Ukrainian territories, the people vote to become part of Russia…then western rulers have now decided it's a good enough reason to start WW3, potentially leading to nuclear war.

Sounds more like we're taking advantage of inter slavic border disputes.

---

An illegal annexation and sham referendums under gunpoint is not "people voting".

---

Exactly. "taking advantage of inter-slavic border disputes" is a very pregnant euphemism.

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Are there conspiracies? Of course. Are all of these? I really doubt it. I believe there is some opportunism involved, such as the Maine. Some propaganda like WMD. Lusitania was carrying munitions, which would make it a target.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I just think people mistake opportunism for conspiracy. The only 2 I know of was Watergate and Iran-Contra, they are proven.

---

Yep. WMD was a lot of propaganda, but also had some truth to it (even if it was old truth). We know for a fact Saddam had WMD's because he killed nearly a million of his own countrymen with them in the 80's. Could those have been transported to Syria and other locales prior to our invasion in '03? Absolutely. Do I think GWB is the devil because he believed the intelligence briefed to him by an extremely trustworthy former General as well as his VP? Absolutely not.

---

Sounds like a good summation of reasons not to trust the unaccountable intelligence services.

---

y'all are talking about my era here. I saw all that reporting. Given what we knew to be obviously true (Saddam made them, used them, had them, etc...was talking to AQ specifically about them, and was still trying to buy raw materials around the world), what we did not know (no direct access to the program), and that they were still pulling body parts out of the WTC rubble, 43 had no choice but to take Saddam out.

That was the default position any analyst would have to take (had, them, used them, etc....).
To change status quo assessment, one would need a credible stream of well-sourced intel saying otherwise.
We did not have that.

The idiom would be to take out all the furniture in the Oval Office except the desk. Fill the room with stacks of paper chest high. On the desk, set a manila folder with a couple dozen pieces of paper inside. Those stacks out on the floor were all the reports about acquiring materials, using them on his own people, his manufacturing capabilities, etc.... That manila folder on the desk said "he destroyed his inventory during first gulf war to deny evidence should he get tried for war crimes."

That's it.
Slam dunk analysis.
Rogue regime with WMDs, engaging in state terror operations against the USA (I was part of a "Meritoriius Unit" award for stopping one), and staring to consider helping AQ.

We should stop plowing the oceans on this.
We knew plenty enough to make a policy decision.
We made the right one.

---

The slam dunk became a curveball.

---

When has not addressing a dictator or aggressive nations ever resulted in saving lifes? At some point we, the Western/1st World, will end up having to confront those nations that do not respect sovereignty . The longer you wait the more of our people that will end up dying. Ignoring or appeasement does not work. Saying we are staying out will result in a worst scenario later. Dealing with Putin in Ukraine, is better than dealing with him in the Baltics, Finland or Poland. Dealing with China now, is better than dealing with them in Taiwan or Korea.

I know we disagree on this, but I don't see how yours and Canada's view creates a better situation down the line. I actually see a self-fulfilling prophecy of more US troops being involved in dying by not engaging early.

---

exactly.

The moment Putin consolidates Ukraine, the process repeats in Poland......destabilization, usurpation, etc..... Might take a decade or two to crescendo. But as long as Kaliningrad exists, Russis will strive for a land bridge. And success of such policy will collapse Nato. Zero sum.

There is no better defense against that scenario than an independent Ukraine.

Ergo the current conflict.

---

I see where you are coming from but simply disagree.

1. Putin and Russia are simply incapable of actually taking Ukraine. Militarily they just don't have the power to do it. At best they might be able to hold on to some oblasts in the east that are already Russian speaking. And its very possible they will get beaten and driven out of there even.

2. But lets say they did and in some domino effect Poland or Slovakia were the next target. That is why we have NATO. Those countries (unlike Ukraine) are in NATO and an attack on them would mean war against the USA, Britain, France, Germany, Turkey, and the other 25 nations in the alliance. Russia would be crushed in such a conflict.

---

1. They can definitely take it. Eventually, 150m overwhelms 50m. Had Kiev fallen, they'd already have it. Had we not stepped forward with hundreds of billions of dollars in military aid, they'd already have it. Sure, they'd have an insurgency, but that'd take many, many years to succeed, and might never succeed. Look at Grozny. Russia will do the brutal things it takes to make insurgencies die by means other than losing the battel for hearts & minds. Simply amazing to be where we are at the moment. Which is why I critique Biden regime. Need to roll up the Russian lines and re-establish Ukrainian sovereignty before Russia mobilizes, which has already happened, so we are still behind.....

2. You misinterpret the scenario I laid out. Of course they will not invade Poland or Slovakia. But they can start to meddle in domestic politics and get pro-Moscow regimes elected, which would always be a threat to withdraw from Nato, etc.....

Russia will not invade a Nato nation.
Russia will seek to politically destabilize a Nato nation, causing a crisis in Nato.

Yes, all of that would be years down the road. But if we let Russia have & digest Ukraine, we have no doubt that will be the next chapter. And Poland will be the first target - land bridge to Kaliningrad.

---

I see.

That does make more sense.

And its very possible.

The US believes the process for Ukraine joining NATO “should be taken up at a different time,” NSA Sullivan says, after the country applied for membership under an “accelerated procedure.”

— Kylie Atwood (@kylieatwood) September 30, 2022

French national TV managed to capture the nord stream sabotage in video. They showed the recording in prime time yesterday. pic.twitter.com/Ijey3dQqJO

— Sylvain Catherine (@sc_cath) September 30, 2022

Redbrickbear said:

---

The US believes the process for Ukraine joining NATO “should be taken up at a different time,” NSA Sullivan says, after the country applied for membership under an “accelerated procedure.”

— Kylie Atwood (@kylieatwood) September 30, 2022

---

Ok, this is the Obiden we know and love...

whiterock said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Cutting gas means they EU will have to pump billions into green energy because EU is anti hydrocarbon, or they'll have to buy much more gas from the US. Probably both.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Fear is the most powerful motivator.

I think this is what's going on:

USA is now doing to Germany what Germany did to Greece, and really the entire EU, for the past 15 years - showing them, and not in subtle fashion, who really runs the show.

— FischerKing (@FischerKing64) September 28, 2022

---

You are probably right that the EU will not reconsider its position on nukes, coal, or green energy. It is really silly to be that hard headed, but here we (and they) are.

---

You guys really think that Biden has the balls to pull this? He and Obama sent blankets when left to their own. You really think OBiden would take this tact??? I say no way. The guy was scared to leave the basement.

Russia did this and will blame West. This is the first move on the Baltics. You will start to hear that Russia tried,but can't have the Baltics and Ukraine in the West.

---

Do you know what the CIA has done around the world for the past 70 years?!

I want to believe the US is wholesome, good and by the book...but that's not even close to reality.

---

Causing a Russian pipeline to self destruct the day before a new Norwegian pipeline becomes operational, amid overall context of Russia being caught in another military quagmire it likely cannot win, is as wholesome as it gets, brother. Time to open a bottle if King Alex and savor a good days work for the taxpayer.

---

Man I just don't want to get hoodwinked Into war based on things they're not telling us.

I don't want more people to die.

That's my motivation behind my skepticism.

---

The best way to stop a war is to win it.

---

The best way to stop a war is not to enter one .

There are many countries who have joyfully and successfully avoided the self destructive role of 'world's policeman ' .

The United States only fully embraced such role upon the conclusion of WW2 .

And the body bags have been arriving periodically ever since .

Of course the vast majority of those who promote such a role…rarely if ever risk their own lives in the resulting carnage.

They remain in the rear with the gear or safely thousands of miles away in the cushy confines of the elites .

---

Of course. If Russia had not entered into war with Ukraine, we would not be having this discussion. But they did. So we are.

---

And round and round we go.



Obama gets involved with Ukrainian politics. Putin considers the actions a form of regime change.

Harris invites Ukrainian application into NATO despite Putin's placement of over 200,000 troops along the border .

No defense treaty between Ukraine and the United States but Biden (?) commits almost 20 billion dollars to Ukrainian defense. Dollars utilized to kill Russian soldiers .



But of course this is all Putin's doing..........and whatever happens next ....it is all his responsibility .


Who could possibly doubt it ?

whiterock said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Cutting gas means they EU will have to pump billions into green energy because EU is anti hydrocarbon, or they'll have to buy much more gas from the US. Probably both.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Fear is the most powerful motivator.

I think this is what's going on:

USA is now doing to Germany what Germany did to Greece, and really the entire EU, for the past 15 years - showing them, and not in subtle fashion, who really runs the show.

— FischerKing (@FischerKing64) September 28, 2022

---

You are probably right that the EU will not reconsider its position on nukes, coal, or green energy. It is really silly to be that hard headed, but here we (and they) are.

---

You guys really think that Biden has the balls to pull this? He and Obama sent blankets when left to their own. You really think OBiden would take this tact??? I say no way. The guy was scared to leave the basement.

Russia did this and will blame West. This is the first move on the Baltics. You will start to hear that Russia tried,but can't have the Baltics and Ukraine in the West.

---

Do you know what the CIA has done around the world for the past 70 years?!

I want to believe the US is wholesome, good and by the book...but that's not even close to reality.

---

Causing a Russian pipeline to self destruct the day before a new Norwegian pipeline becomes operational, amid overall context of Russia being caught in another military quagmire it likely cannot win, is as wholesome as it gets, brother. Time to open a bottle if King Alex and savor a good days work for the taxpayer.

---

Man I just don't want to get hoodwinked Into war based on things they're not telling us.

I don't want more people to die.

That's my motivation behind my skepticism.

---

The best way to stop a war is to win it.

---

The best way to stop a war is not to enter one .

There are many countries who have joyfully and successfully avoided the self destructive role of 'world's policeman ' .

The United States only fully embraced such role upon the conclusion of WW2 .

And the body bags have been arriving periodically ever since .

Of course the vast majority of those who promote such a role…rarely if ever risk their own lives in the resulting carnage.

They remain in the rear with the gear or safely thousands of miles away in the cushy confines of the elites .

---

Of course. If Russia had not entered into war with Ukraine, we would not be having this discussion. But they did. So we are.

---

This. Full. Stop.

RMF5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

The US believes the process for Ukraine joining NATO “should be taken up at a different time,” NSA Sullivan says, after the country applied for membership under an “accelerated procedure.”

— Kylie Atwood (@kylieatwood) September 30, 2022

---

Ok, this is the Obiden we know and love...

---

Was this not the goal all along since we got involved with Ukraine more than a decade ago? (Obama administration)

Get them into NATO.

Why hesitate now?

Canada2017 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Cutting gas means they EU will have to pump billions into green energy because EU is anti hydrocarbon, or they'll have to buy much more gas from the US. Probably both.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Fear is the most powerful motivator.

I think this is what's going on:

USA is now doing to Germany what Germany did to Greece, and really the entire EU, for the past 15 years - showing them, and not in subtle fashion, who really runs the show.

— FischerKing (@FischerKing64) September 28, 2022

---

You are probably right that the EU will not reconsider its position on nukes, coal, or green energy. It is really silly to be that hard headed, but here we (and they) are.

---

You guys really think that Biden has the balls to pull this? He and Obama sent blankets when left to their own. You really think OBiden would take this tact??? I say no way. The guy was scared to leave the basement.

Russia did this and will blame West. This is the first move on the Baltics. You will start to hear that Russia tried,but can't have the Baltics and Ukraine in the West.

---

Do you know what the CIA has done around the world for the past 70 years?!

I want to believe the US is wholesome, good and by the book...but that's not even close to reality.

---

Causing a Russian pipeline to self destruct the day before a new Norwegian pipeline becomes operational, amid overall context of Russia being caught in another military quagmire it likely cannot win, is as wholesome as it gets, brother. Time to open a bottle if King Alex and savor a good days work for the taxpayer.

---

Man I just don't want to get hoodwinked Into war based on things they're not telling us.

I don't want more people to die.

That's my motivation behind my skepticism.

---

The best way to stop a war is to win it.

---

The best way to stop a war is not to enter one .

There are many countries who have joyfully and successfully avoided the self destructive role of 'world's policeman ' .

The United States only fully embraced such role upon the conclusion of WW2 .

And the body bags have been arriving periodically ever since .

Of course the vast majority of those who promote such a role…rarely if ever risk their own lives in the resulting carnage.

They remain in the rear with the gear or safely thousands of miles away in the cushy confines of the elites .

---

Of course. If Russia had not entered into war with Ukraine, we would not be having this discussion. But they did. So we are.

---

And round and round we go.



Obama gets involved with Ukrainian politics. Putin considers the actions a form of regime change.

Harris invites Ukrainian application into NATO despite Putin's placement of over 200,000 troops along the border .

No defense treaty between Ukraine and the United States but Biden (?) commits almost 20 billion dollars to Ukrainian defense. Dollars utilized to kill Russian soldiers .



But of course this is all Putin's doing..........and whatever happens next ....it is all his responsibility .


Who could possibly doubt it ?

---

Ukraine is a sovereign nation, not a Rusdian satellite. Has been since 1990, 30 years.

So when Putin took Crimea we should have?

Or China and Taiwan, never been Chinese in modern times, buy they say they thought it should be.

I guess if Putin wants Alaska, give that to him as well? After all, it was Russian once.

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

The US believes the process for Ukraine joining NATO “should be taken up at a different time,” NSA Sullivan says, after the country applied for membership under an “accelerated procedure.”

— Kylie Atwood (@kylieatwood) September 30, 2022

---

Ok, this is the Obiden we know and love...

---

Was this not the goal all along since we got involved with Ukraine more than a decade ago? (Obama administration)

Get them into NATO.

Why hesitate now?

---

Having borders in dispute is an automatic DQ for NATO membership admittance. So is being actively involved in a conflict I believe.

RMF5630 said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Cutting gas means they EU will have to pump billions into green energy because EU is anti hydrocarbon, or they'll have to buy much more gas from the US. Probably both.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Fear is the most powerful motivator.

I think this is what's going on:

USA is now doing to Germany what Germany did to Greece, and really the entire EU, for the past 15 years - showing them, and not in subtle fashion, who really runs the show.

— FischerKing (@FischerKing64) September 28, 2022

---

You are probably right that the EU will not reconsider its position on nukes, coal, or green energy. It is really silly to be that hard headed, but here we (and they) are.

---

You guys really think that Biden has the balls to pull this? He and Obama sent blankets when left to their own. You really think OBiden would take this tact??? I say no way. The guy was scared to leave the basement.

Russia did this and will blame West. This is the first move on the Baltics. You will start to hear that Russia tried,but can't have the Baltics and Ukraine in the West.

---

Do you know what the CIA has done around the world for the past 70 years?!

I want to believe the US is wholesome, good and by the book...but that's not even close to reality.

---

Causing a Russian pipeline to self destruct the day before a new Norwegian pipeline becomes operational, amid overall context of Russia being caught in another military quagmire it likely cannot win, is as wholesome as it gets, brother. Time to open a bottle if King Alex and savor a good days work for the taxpayer.

---

Man I just don't want to get hoodwinked Into war based on things they're not telling us.

I don't want more people to die.

That's my motivation behind my skepticism.

---

The best way to stop a war is to win it.

---

The best way to stop a war is not to enter one .

There are many countries who have joyfully and successfully avoided the self destructive role of 'world's policeman ' .

The United States only fully embraced such role upon the conclusion of WW2 .

And the body bags have been arriving periodically ever since .

Of course the vast majority of those who promote such a role…rarely if ever risk their own lives in the resulting carnage.

They remain in the rear with the gear or safely thousands of miles away in the cushy confines of the elites .

---

Of course. If Russia had not entered into war with Ukraine, we would not be having this discussion. But they did. So we are.

---

And round and round we go.



Obama gets involved with Ukrainian politics. Putin considers the actions a form of regime change.

Harris invites Ukrainian application into NATO despite Putin's placement of over 200,000 troops along the border .

No defense treaty between Ukraine and the United States but Biden (?) commits almost 20 billion dollars to Ukrainian defense. Dollars utilized to kill Russian soldiers .



But of course this is all Putin's doing..........and whatever happens next ....it is all his responsibility .


Who could possibly doubt it ?

---

Ukraine is a sovereign nation, not a Rusdian satellite. Has been since 1990, 30 years.

So when Putin took Crimea we should have?

Or China and Taiwan, never been Chinese in modern times, buy they say they thought it should be.

I guess if Putin wants Alaska, give that to him as well? After all, it was Russian once.

---

Did you just compare Ukraine and Taiwan with an American state?

If Russia had played the EXACT same strategic game ……..

Russia actively supports the campaign of a Mexican candidate for president who supports Russian business interests . The candidate wins beating his rival with ties to the US.

Russia invites this new Mexican government to join a Russian led defensive alliance . With the tacit understanding Mexico
could potentially allow Russian manned nuclear warheads aimed at the United States , to be installed .

The United States determines that such a situation is a direct threat to national security ; threatens a military ' police action 'and sends 200,000 troops along the Mexican - US border .

The Russian and Mexican leadership tell the US to pound sand and Russia continues with its alliance offer .

The US sends in troops….the Russians send 20 BILLION dollars worth of weapons to the Mexican military and convinces much of the world to EMBARGO US business interests .

US military DEATHS exceed 30,000 with no end in sight .
US economy crumbles from the embargo with no end in sight .




Really think Putin bares sole responsibility for this current situation?

Sam Lowry said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Cutting gas means they EU will have to pump billions into green energy because EU is anti hydrocarbon, or they'll have to buy much more gas from the US. Probably both.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Fear is the most powerful motivator.

I think this is what's going on:

USA is now doing to Germany what Germany did to Greece, and really the entire EU, for the past 15 years - showing them, and not in subtle fashion, who really runs the show.

— FischerKing (@FischerKing64) September 28, 2022

---

You are probably right that the EU will not reconsider its position on nukes, coal, or green energy. It is really silly to be that hard headed, but here we (and they) are.

---

You guys really think that Biden has the balls to pull this? He and Obama sent blankets when left to their own. You really think OBiden would take this tact??? I say no way. The guy was scared to leave the basement.

Russia did this and will blame West. This is the first move on the Baltics. You will start to hear that Russia tried,but can't have the Baltics and Ukraine in the West.

---

Do you know what the CIA has done around the world for the past 70 years?!

I want to believe the US is wholesome, good and by the book...but that's not even close to reality.

---

Causing a Russian pipeline to self destruct the day before a new Norwegian pipeline becomes operational, amid overall context of Russia being caught in another military quagmire it likely cannot win, is as wholesome as it gets, brother. Time to open a bottle if King Alex and savor a good days work for the taxpayer.

---

Man I just don't want to get hoodwinked Into war based on things they're not telling us.

I don't want more people to die.

That's my motivation behind my skepticism.

---

The best way to stop a war is to win it.

---

The best way to stop a war is not to enter one .

There are many countries who have joyfully and successfully avoided the self destructive role of 'world's policeman ' .

The United States only fully embraced such role upon the conclusion of WW2 .

And the body bags have been arriving periodically ever since .

Of course the vast majority of those who promote such a role…rarely if ever risk their own lives in the resulting carnage.

They remain in the rear with the gear or safely thousands of miles away in the cushy confines of the elites .

---

Of course. If Russia had not entered into war with Ukraine, we would not be having this discussion. But they did. So we are.

---

And round and round we go.



Obama gets involved with Ukrainian politics. Putin considers the actions a form of regime change.

Harris invites Ukrainian application into NATO despite Putin's placement of over 200,000 troops along the border .

No defense treaty between Ukraine and the United States but Biden (?) commits almost 20 billion dollars to Ukrainian defense. Dollars utilized to kill Russian soldiers .



But of course this is all Putin's doing..........and whatever happens next ....it is all his responsibility .


Who could possibly doubt it ?

---

Ukraine is a sovereign nation, not a Rusdian satellite. Has been since 1990, 30 years.

So when Putin took Crimea we should have?

Or China and Taiwan, never been Chinese in modern times, buy they say they thought it should be.

I guess if Putin wants Alaska, give that to him as well? After all, it was Russian once.

---

Did you just compare Ukraine and Taiwan with an American state?

---

Sure, used to be Russian. There have been rumblings about it.

https://www.russia-briefing.com/news/alaska-must-be-returned-to-russia-political-scientist.html/

Putin may threaten to go nuclear. We need to avoid that all costs, you read the people on this board. We don't want to risk nuclear war and it is not Putins fault.

Yep, you totally did.

Canada2017 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Cutting gas means they EU will have to pump billions into green energy because EU is anti hydrocarbon, or they'll have to buy much more gas from the US. Probably both.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Fear is the most powerful motivator.

I think this is what's going on:

USA is now doing to Germany what Germany did to Greece, and really the entire EU, for the past 15 years - showing them, and not in subtle fashion, who really runs the show.

— FischerKing (@FischerKing64) September 28, 2022

---

You are probably right that the EU will not reconsider its position on nukes, coal, or green energy. It is really silly to be that hard headed, but here we (and they) are.

---

You guys really think that Biden has the balls to pull this? He and Obama sent blankets when left to their own. You really think OBiden would take this tact??? I say no way. The guy was scared to leave the basement.

Russia did this and will blame West. This is the first move on the Baltics. You will start to hear that Russia tried,but can't have the Baltics and Ukraine in the West.

---

Do you know what the CIA has done around the world for the past 70 years?!

I want to believe the US is wholesome, good and by the book...but that's not even close to reality.

---

Causing a Russian pipeline to self destruct the day before a new Norwegian pipeline becomes operational, amid overall context of Russia being caught in another military quagmire it likely cannot win, is as wholesome as it gets, brother. Time to open a bottle if King Alex and savor a good days work for the taxpayer.

---

Man I just don't want to get hoodwinked Into war based on things they're not telling us.

I don't want more people to die.

That's my motivation behind my skepticism.

---

The best way to stop a war is to win it.

---

The best way to stop a war is not to enter one .

There are many countries who have joyfully and successfully avoided the self destructive role of 'world's policeman ' .

The United States only fully embraced such role upon the conclusion of WW2 .

And the body bags have been arriving periodically ever since .

Of course the vast majority of those who promote such a role…rarely if ever risk their own lives in the resulting carnage.

They remain in the rear with the gear or safely thousands of miles away in the cushy confines of the elites .

---

Of course. If Russia had not entered into war with Ukraine, we would not be having this discussion. But they did. So we are.

---

And round and round we go.



Obama gets involved with Ukrainian politics. Putin considers the actions a form of regime change.

Harris invites Ukrainian application into NATO despite Putin's placement of over 200,000 troops along the border .

No defense treaty between Ukraine and the United States but Biden (?) commits almost 20 billion dollars to Ukrainian defense. Dollars utilized to kill Russian soldiers .



But of course this is all Putin's doing..........and whatever happens next ....it is all his responsibility .


Who could possibly doubt it ?

---

But Obama got involved, why?

We can take that merry-go-round back 1200 years to the death of Yaroslav the Wise. the consistent facts going all the way back are: Ukraine exists. Others want it in their sphere of influence. Ukrainians get a say.

The current facts are: we are a bigger, badder mofo than Russia, so if we want to make Russia pay dearly to eat up parts of Ukraine by supporting Ukrainian self-determination, we can, we will, and there's not a damned thing Russia can do about it but go home. It happens to be in our interests to maintain a Ukrainian state that is either neutral or in our orbit (not synonymous with "in Nato"). Our position in the matter is considerably more noble than Russia's.

those who are mightily persuaded by Putin's rhetoric on nukes need to remember Putin's rhetoric on Russian influence in Eastern Europe. They want to reconstitute a Warsaw Pact structure. They will have to collapse Nato to do that. They know that collapsing Nato is a highly combustible policy. And they're willing to threaten nukes in their first faltering step on that path. If we don't grab their thumbs and holler bull****, they'll keep coming and threatening to use nukes to get their way.

There is no appeasing Russia here. Russians are bullies. We have to keep poking them in the eye until they stop being bullies. Otherwise we risk a real-life Cuban missile crisis in Eastern Europe by 2030 or so.

whiterock said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Cutting gas means they EU will have to pump billions into green energy because EU is anti hydrocarbon, or they'll have to buy much more gas from the US. Probably both.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Fear is the most powerful motivator.

I think this is what's going on:

USA is now doing to Germany what Germany did to Greece, and really the entire EU, for the past 15 years - showing them, and not in subtle fashion, who really runs the show.

— FischerKing (@FischerKing64) September 28, 2022

---

You are probably right that the EU will not reconsider its position on nukes, coal, or green energy. It is really silly to be that hard headed, but here we (and they) are.

---

You guys really think that Biden has the balls to pull this? He and Obama sent blankets when left to their own. You really think OBiden would take this tact??? I say no way. The guy was scared to leave the basement.

Russia did this and will blame West. This is the first move on the Baltics. You will start to hear that Russia tried,but can't have the Baltics and Ukraine in the West.

---

Do you know what the CIA has done around the world for the past 70 years?!

I want to believe the US is wholesome, good and by the book...but that's not even close to reality.

---

Causing a Russian pipeline to self destruct the day before a new Norwegian pipeline becomes operational, amid overall context of Russia being caught in another military quagmire it likely cannot win, is as wholesome as it gets, brother. Time to open a bottle if King Alex and savor a good days work for the taxpayer.

---

Man I just don't want to get hoodwinked Into war based on things they're not telling us.

I don't want more people to die.

That's my motivation behind my skepticism.

---

The best way to stop a war is to win it.

---

The best way to stop a war is not to enter one .

There are many countries who have joyfully and successfully avoided the self destructive role of 'world's policeman ' .

The United States only fully embraced such role upon the conclusion of WW2 .

And the body bags have been arriving periodically ever since .

Of course the vast majority of those who promote such a role…rarely if ever risk their own lives in the resulting carnage.

They remain in the rear with the gear or safely thousands of miles away in the cushy confines of the elites .

---

Of course. If Russia had not entered into war with Ukraine, we would not be having this discussion. But they did. So we are.

---

And round and round we go.



Obama gets involved with Ukrainian politics. Putin considers the actions a form of regime change.

Harris invites Ukrainian application into NATO despite Putin's placement of over 200,000 troops along the border .

No defense treaty between Ukraine and the United States but Biden (?) commits almost 20 billion dollars to Ukrainian defense. Dollars utilized to kill Russian soldiers .



But of course this is all Putin's doing..........and whatever happens next ....it is all his responsibility .


Who could possibly doubt it ?

---

But Obama got involved, why?

We can take that merry-go-round back 1200 years to the death of Yaroslav the Wise. the consistent facts going all the way back are: Ukraine exists. Others want it in their sphere of influence. Ukrainians get a say.

The current facts are: we are a bigger, badder mofo than Russia, so if we want to make Russia pay dearly to eat up parts of Ukraine by supporting Ukrainian self-determination, we can, we will, and there's not a damned thing Russia can do about it but go home. It happens to be in our interests to maintain a Ukrainian state that is either neutral or in our orbit (not synonymous with "in Nato"). Our position in the matter is considerably more noble than Russia's.

those who are mightily persuaded by Putin's rhetoric on nukes need to remember Putin's rhetoric on Russian influence in Eastern Europe. They want to reconstitute a Warsaw Pact structure. They will have to collapse Nato to do that. They know that collapsing Nato is a highly combustible policy. And they're willing to threaten nukes in their first faltering step on that path. If we don't grab their thumbs and holler bull****, they'll keep coming and threatening to use nukes to get their way.

There is no appeasing Russia here. Russians are bullies. We have to keep poking them in the eye until they stop being bullies. Otherwise we risk a real-life Cuban missile crisis in Eastern Europe by 2030 or so.

---

Thank you very much, General Turgidson.

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Cutting gas means they EU will have to pump billions into green energy because EU is anti hydrocarbon, or they'll have to buy much more gas from the US. Probably both.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Fear is the most powerful motivator.

I think this is what's going on:

USA is now doing to Germany what Germany did to Greece, and really the entire EU, for the past 15 years - showing them, and not in subtle fashion, who really runs the show.

— FischerKing (@FischerKing64) September 28, 2022

---

You are probably right that the EU will not reconsider its position on nukes, coal, or green energy. It is really silly to be that hard headed, but here we (and they) are.

---

You guys really think that Biden has the balls to pull this? He and Obama sent blankets when left to their own. You really think OBiden would take this tact??? I say no way. The guy was scared to leave the basement.

Russia did this and will blame West. This is the first move on the Baltics. You will start to hear that Russia tried,but can't have the Baltics and Ukraine in the West.

---

Do you know what the CIA has done around the world for the past 70 years?!

I want to believe the US is wholesome, good and by the book...but that's not even close to reality.

---

Causing a Russian pipeline to self destruct the day before a new Norwegian pipeline becomes operational, amid overall context of Russia being caught in another military quagmire it likely cannot win, is as wholesome as it gets, brother. Time to open a bottle if King Alex and savor a good days work for the taxpayer.

---

Man I just don't want to get hoodwinked Into war based on things they're not telling us.

I don't want more people to die.

That's my motivation behind my skepticism.

---

The best way to stop a war is to win it.

---

The best way to stop a war is not to enter one .

There are many countries who have joyfully and successfully avoided the self destructive role of 'world's policeman ' .

The United States only fully embraced such role upon the conclusion of WW2 .

And the body bags have been arriving periodically ever since .

Of course the vast majority of those who promote such a role…rarely if ever risk their own lives in the resulting carnage.

They remain in the rear with the gear or safely thousands of miles away in the cushy confines of the elites .

---

Of course. If Russia had not entered into war with Ukraine, we would not be having this discussion. But they did. So we are.

---

And round and round we go.



Obama gets involved with Ukrainian politics. Putin considers the actions a form of regime change.

Harris invites Ukrainian application into NATO despite Putin's placement of over 200,000 troops along the border .

No defense treaty between Ukraine and the United States but Biden (?) commits almost 20 billion dollars to Ukrainian defense. Dollars utilized to kill Russian soldiers .



But of course this is all Putin's doing..........and whatever happens next ....it is all his responsibility .


Who could possibly doubt it ?

---

But Obama got involved, why?

We can take that merry-go-round back 1200 years to the death of Yaroslav the Wise. the consistent facts going all the way back are: Ukraine exists. Others want it in their sphere of influence. Ukrainians get a say.

The current facts are: we are a bigger, badder mofo than Russia, so if we want to make Russia pay dearly to eat up parts of Ukraine by supporting Ukrainian self-determination, we can, we will, and there's not a damned thing Russia can do about it but go home. It happens to be in our interests to maintain a Ukrainian state that is either neutral or in our orbit (not synonymous with "in Nato"). Our position in the matter is considerably more noble than Russia's.

those who are mightily persuaded by Putin's rhetoric on nukes need to remember Putin's rhetoric on Russian influence in Eastern Europe. They want to reconstitute a Warsaw Pact structure. They will have to collapse Nato to do that. They know that collapsing Nato is a highly combustible policy. And they're willing to threaten nukes in their first faltering step on that path. If we don't grab their thumbs and holler bull****, they'll keep coming and threatening to use nukes to get their way.

There is no appeasing Russia here. Russians are bullies. We have to keep poking them in the eye until they stop being bullies. Otherwise we risk a real-life Cuban missile crisis in Eastern Europe by 2030 or so.

---

Thank you very much, General Turgidson.

---

Don't sass your betters, boy.

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Are there conspiracies? Of course. Are all of these? I really doubt it. I believe there is some opportunism involved, such as the Maine. Some propaganda like WMD. Lusitania was carrying munitions, which would make it a target.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I just think people mistake opportunism for conspiracy. The only 2 I know of was Watergate and Iran-Contra, they are proven.

---

Yep. WMD was a lot of propaganda, but also had some truth to it (even if it was old truth). We know for a fact Saddam had WMD's because he killed nearly a million of his own countrymen with them in the 80's. Could those have been transported to Syria and other locales prior to our invasion in '03? Absolutely. Do I think GWB is the devil because he believed the intelligence briefed to him by an extremely trustworthy former General as well as his VP? Absolutely not.

---

Sounds like a good summation of reasons not to trust the unaccountable intelligence services.

---

y'all are talking about my era here. I saw all that reporting. Given what we knew to be obviously true (Saddam made them, used them, had them, etc...was talking to AQ specifically about them, and was still trying to buy raw materials around the world), what we did not know (no direct access to the program), and that they were still pulling body parts out of the WTC rubble, 43 had no choice but to take Saddam out.

That was the default position any analyst would have to take (had, them, used them, etc....).
To change status quo assessment, one would need a credible stream of well-sourced intel saying otherwise.
We did not have that.

The idiom would be to take out all the furniture in the Oval Office except the desk. Fill the room with stacks of paper chest high. On the desk, set a manila folder with a couple dozen pieces of paper inside. Those stacks out on the floor were all the reports about acquiring materials, using them on his own people, his manufacturing capabilities, etc.... That manila folder on the desk said "he destroyed his inventory during first gulf war to deny evidence should he get tried for war crimes."

That's it.
Slam dunk analysis.
Rogue regime with WMDs, engaging in state terror operations against the USA (I was part of a "Meritoriius Unit" award for stopping one), and staring to consider helping AQ.

We should stop plowing the oceans on this.
We knew plenty enough to make a policy decision.
We made the right one.

---

The slam dunk became a curveball.

---

When has not addressing a dictator or aggressive nations ever resulted in saving lifes? At some point we, the Western/1st World, will end up having to confront those nations that do not respect sovereignty . The longer you wait the more of our people that will end up dying. Ignoring or appeasement does not work. Saying we are staying out will result in a worst scenario later. Dealing with Putin in Ukraine, is better than dealing with him in the Baltics, Finland or Poland. Dealing with China now, is better than dealing with them in Taiwan or Korea.

I know we disagree on this, but I don't see how yours and Canada's view creates a better situation down the line. I actually see a self-fulfilling prophecy of more US troops being involved in dying by not engaging early.

---

exactly.

The moment Putin consolidates Ukraine, the process repeats in Poland......destabilization, usurpation, etc..... Might take a decade or two to crescendo. But as long as Kaliningrad exists, Russis will strive for a land bridge. And success of such policy will collapse Nato. Zero sum.

There is no better defense against that scenario than an independent Ukraine.

Ergo the current conflict.

---

I see where you are coming from but simply disagree.

1. Putin and Russia are simply incapable of actually taking Ukraine. Militarily they just don't have the power to do it. At best they might be able to hold on to some oblasts in the east that are already Russian speaking. And its very possible they will get beaten and driven out of there even.

2. But lets say they did and in some domino effect Poland or Slovakia were the next target. That is why we have NATO. Those countries (unlike Ukraine) are in NATO and an attack on them would mean war against the USA, Britain, France, Germany, Turkey, and the other 25 nations in the alliance. Russia would be crushed in such a conflict.

---

1. They can definitely take it. Eventually, 150m overwhelms 50m. Had Kiev fallen, they'd already have it. Had we not stepped forward with hundreds of billions of dollars in military aid, they'd already have it. Sure, they'd have an insurgency, but that'd take many, many years to succeed, and might never succeed. Look at Grozny. Russia will do the brutal things it takes to make insurgencies die by means other than losing the battel for hearts & minds. Simply amazing to be where we are at the moment. Which is why I critique Biden regime. Need to roll up the Russian lines and re-establish Ukrainian sovereignty before Russia mobilizes, which has already happened, so we are still behind.....

2. You misinterpret the scenario I laid out. Of course they will not invade Poland or Slovakia. But they can start to meddle in domestic politics and get pro-Moscow regimes elected, which would always be a threat to withdraw from Nato, etc.....

Russia will not invade a Nato nation.
Russia will seek to politically destabilize a Nato nation, causing a crisis in Nato.

Yes, all of that would be years down the road. But if we let Russia have & digest Ukraine, we have no doubt that will be the next chapter. And Poland will be the first target - land bridge to Kaliningrad.

---

I see.

That does make more sense.

And its very possible.

---

I forgot to mention one thing - Moldova.

Look at what's happening there, in Transnistria. That is the template I was referring to. Russia will attempt to do that all thru the Balkans, putting pressure on Romania, Hungary, etc......

Weaker players need instability to create oxygen. Then they need the larger powers to be distracted, or reluctant.

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Are there conspiracies? Of course. Are all of these? I really doubt it. I believe there is some opportunism involved, such as the Maine. Some propaganda like WMD. Lusitania was carrying munitions, which would make it a target.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I just think people mistake opportunism for conspiracy. The only 2 I know of was Watergate and Iran-Contra, they are proven.

---

Yep. WMD was a lot of propaganda, but also had some truth to it (even if it was old truth). We know for a fact Saddam had WMD's because he killed nearly a million of his own countrymen with them in the 80's. Could those have been transported to Syria and other locales prior to our invasion in '03? Absolutely. Do I think GWB is the devil because he believed the intelligence briefed to him by an extremely trustworthy former General as well as his VP? Absolutely not.

---

Sounds like a good summation of reasons not to trust the unaccountable intelligence services.

---

y'all are talking about my era here. I saw all that reporting. Given what we knew to be obviously true (Saddam made them, used them, had them, etc...was talking to AQ specifically about them, and was still trying to buy raw materials around the world), what we did not know (no direct access to the program), and that they were still pulling body parts out of the WTC rubble, 43 had no choice but to take Saddam out.

That was the default position any analyst would have to take (had, them, used them, etc....).
To change status quo assessment, one would need a credible stream of well-sourced intel saying otherwise.
We did not have that.

The idiom would be to take out all the furniture in the Oval Office except the desk. Fill the room with stacks of paper chest high. On the desk, set a manila folder with a couple dozen pieces of paper inside. Those stacks out on the floor were all the reports about acquiring materials, using them on his own people, his manufacturing capabilities, etc.... That manila folder on the desk said "he destroyed his inventory during first gulf war to deny evidence should he get tried for war crimes."

That's it.
Slam dunk analysis.
Rogue regime with WMDs, engaging in state terror operations against the USA (I was part of a "Meritoriius Unit" award for stopping one), and staring to consider helping AQ.

We should stop plowing the oceans on this.
We knew plenty enough to make a policy decision.
We made the right one.

---

The slam dunk became a curveball.

---

When has not addressing a dictator or aggressive nations ever resulted in saving lifes? At some point we, the Western/1st World, will end up having to confront those nations that do not respect sovereignty . The longer you wait the more of our people that will end up dying. Ignoring or appeasement does not work. Saying we are staying out will result in a worst scenario later. Dealing with Putin in Ukraine, is better than dealing with him in the Baltics, Finland or Poland. Dealing with China now, is better than dealing with them in Taiwan or Korea.

I know we disagree on this, but I don't see how yours and Canada's view creates a better situation down the line. I actually see a self-fulfilling prophecy of more US troops being involved in dying by not engaging early.

---

exactly.

The moment Putin consolidates Ukraine, the process repeats in Poland......destabilization, usurpation, etc..... Might take a decade or two to crescendo. But as long as Kaliningrad exists, Russis will strive for a land bridge. And success of such policy will collapse Nato. Zero sum.

There is no better defense against that scenario than an independent Ukraine.

Ergo the current conflict.

---

I see where you are coming from but simply disagree.

1. Putin and Russia are simply incapable of actually taking Ukraine. Militarily they just don't have the power to do it. At best they might be able to hold on to some oblasts in the east that are already Russian speaking. And its very possible they will get beaten and driven out of there even.

2. But lets say they did and in some domino effect Poland or Slovakia were the next target. That is why we have NATO. Those countries (unlike Ukraine) are in NATO and an attack on them would mean war against the USA, Britain, France, Germany, Turkey, and the other 25 nations in the alliance. Russia would be crushed in such a conflict.

---

1. They can definitely take it. Eventually, 150m overwhelms 50m. Had Kiev fallen, they'd already have it. Had we not stepped forward with hundreds of billions of dollars in military aid, they'd already have it. Sure, they'd have an insurgency, but that'd take many, many years to succeed, and might never succeed. Look at Grozny. Russia will do the brutal things it takes to make insurgencies die by means other than losing the battel for hearts & minds. Simply amazing to be where we are at the moment. Which is why I critique Biden regime. Need to roll up the Russian lines and re-establish Ukrainian sovereignty before Russia mobilizes, which has already happened, so we are still behind.....

2. You misinterpret the scenario I laid out. Of course they will not invade Poland or Slovakia. But they can start to meddle in domestic politics and get pro-Moscow regimes elected, which would always be a threat to withdraw from Nato, etc.....

Russia will not invade a Nato nation.
Russia will seek to politically destabilize a Nato nation, causing a crisis in Nato.

Yes, all of that would be years down the road. But if we let Russia have & digest Ukraine, we have no doubt that will be the next chapter. And Poland will be the first target - land bridge to Kaliningrad.

---

I see.

That does make more sense.

And its very possible.

---

I forgot to mention one thing - Moldova.

Look at what's happening there, in Transnistria. That is the template I was referring to. Russia will attempt to do that all thru the Balkans, putting pressure on Romania, Hungary, etc......

Weaker players need instability to create oxygen. Then they need the larger powers to be distracted, or reluctant.

---

Moldova, Belarus just don't have the military to resist much. Ukraine had 8 years to prepare after the Crimea debacle.

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Cutting gas means they EU will have to pump billions into green energy because EU is anti hydrocarbon, or they'll have to buy much more gas from the US. Probably both.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Fear is the most powerful motivator.

I think this is what's going on:

USA is now doing to Germany what Germany did to Greece, and really the entire EU, for the past 15 years - showing them, and not in subtle fashion, who really runs the show.

— FischerKing (@FischerKing64) September 28, 2022

---

You are probably right that the EU will not reconsider its position on nukes, coal, or green energy. It is really silly to be that hard headed, but here we (and they) are.

---

You guys really think that Biden has the balls to pull this? He and Obama sent blankets when left to their own. You really think OBiden would take this tact??? I say no way. The guy was scared to leave the basement.

Russia did this and will blame West. This is the first move on the Baltics. You will start to hear that Russia tried,but can't have the Baltics and Ukraine in the West.

---

Do you know what the CIA has done around the world for the past 70 years?!

I want to believe the US is wholesome, good and by the book...but that's not even close to reality.

---

Causing a Russian pipeline to self destruct the day before a new Norwegian pipeline becomes operational, amid overall context of Russia being caught in another military quagmire it likely cannot win, is as wholesome as it gets, brother. Time to open a bottle if King Alex and savor a good days work for the taxpayer.

---

Man I just don't want to get hoodwinked Into war based on things they're not telling us.

I don't want more people to die.

That's my motivation behind my skepticism.

---

The best way to stop a war is to win it.

---

The best way to stop a war is not to enter one .

There are many countries who have joyfully and successfully avoided the self destructive role of 'world's policeman ' .

The United States only fully embraced such role upon the conclusion of WW2 .

And the body bags have been arriving periodically ever since .

Of course the vast majority of those who promote such a role…rarely if ever risk their own lives in the resulting carnage.

They remain in the rear with the gear or safely thousands of miles away in the cushy confines of the elites .

---

Of course. If Russia had not entered into war with Ukraine, we would not be having this discussion. But they did. So we are.

---

And round and round we go.



Obama gets involved with Ukrainian politics. Putin considers the actions a form of regime change.

Harris invites Ukrainian application into NATO despite Putin's placement of over 200,000 troops along the border .

No defense treaty between Ukraine and the United States but Biden (?) commits almost 20 billion dollars to Ukrainian defense. Dollars utilized to kill Russian soldiers .



But of course this is all Putin's doing..........and whatever happens next ....it is all his responsibility .


Who could possibly doubt it ?

---

But Obama got involved, why?

We can take that merry-go-round back 1200 years to the death of Yaroslav the Wise. the consistent facts going all the way back are: Ukraine exists. Others want it in their sphere of influence. Ukrainians get a say.

The current facts are: we are a bigger, badder mofo than Russia, so if we want to make Russia pay dearly to eat up parts of Ukraine by supporting Ukrainian self-determination, we can, we will, and there's not a damned thing Russia can do about it but go home. It happens to be in our interests to maintain a Ukrainian state that is either neutral or in our orbit (not synonymous with "in Nato"). Our position in the matter is considerably more noble than Russia's.

those who are mightily persuaded by Putin's rhetoric on nukes need to remember Putin's rhetoric on Russian influence in Eastern Europe. They want to reconstitute a Warsaw Pact structure. They will have to collapse Nato to do that. They know that collapsing Nato is a highly combustible policy. And they're willing to threaten nukes in their first faltering step on that path. If we don't grab their thumbs and holler bull****, they'll keep coming and threatening to use nukes to get their way.

There is no appeasing Russia here. Russians are bullies. We have to keep poking them in the eye until they stop being bullies. Otherwise we risk a real-life Cuban missile crisis in Eastern Europe by 2030 or so.

---

Thank you very much, General Turgidson.

---

... with Sam Lowry as Ambassador Alexi de Sadesky