trey3216 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

But that is entirely untrue.

---

Of course it's true. If it wasn't true, then there would be no need to make statements that would broaden this into a Russia/NATO war, and the Russian military could simply take it out of the hide of the Ukrainians. Outside of Clown World, there's no incentive for the Russians to hit London or Paris in exchange for strikes on their territory when simply flattening Kiev or Lviv would suffice.

---

There are needs for Putin to make statements like that so he satisfies his populace on 2 fronts: 1) to make the Ukrainians look sub human and incapable of anything good so he can continue to sell the need for his meaningless war of Russian Manifest Destiny, and 2) So he can continue to look strong in the eyes of the people in any way shape or form so he continues to have a head attached to his body.

These are literally the only reasons for him to say it. Ukraine historically has been the place of higher scientific and technological achievement in that region, and he absolutely knows it, and absolutely hates it.

---

Look, we disagree a lot.

But come on.

If Putin was publicly supplying long range missiles to Mexican drug cartels …….

who were then constantly using them to attack targets within the United States…….

we would have already retaliated long ago.


Hate Putin or not ,,, he has shown surprising restraint up to now .

---

And the missile that hit Toropets was a Ukrainian Neptune missile launched along with hundreds of drones. They developed that missile over a decade ago and have been tweaking it the entirety of the war. The statements by Putin are all to save face in front of his countrymen, and apparently a bunch of posters on this site and others like it.

---

None of which alters the fact that if this situation was reversed the American people would demand a stop to missile attacks supplied by a foreign enemy.

And our president ( regardless of party ) would be forced to act.

---

None of what you just typed matters when it was not foreign provided missiles that destroyed Russia's ammo stockpiles in Toropets, and most recently in Krasnodar. You're arguing an incorrect analogy.

---

No sir.

It has been widely reported Ukraine has been firing US supplied missiles for weeks, if not months. The source of one particular attack is unimportant.

It has also been recently reported the Biden administration is considering allowing Ukraine to use long range US missiles deep into Russia.

Still another escalation which I suspect will not occur until the election is over.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

But that is entirely untrue.

---

Of course it's true. If it wasn't true, then there would be no need to make statements that would broaden this into a Russia/NATO war, and the Russian military could simply take it out of the hide of the Ukrainians. Outside of Clown World, there's no incentive for the Russians to hit London or Paris in exchange for strikes on their territory when simply flattening Kiev or Lviv would suffice.

---

Nobody is trying to broaden this into a Russia/NATO war. NATO is NOT taking part…

---

Some people are

(Though I hope the God they represent a minority position in DC and London)

[Russian failures have also aroused a discomforting war euphoria in a liberal West that has lacked a sense of moral certainty and purpose in recent years; discomforting, because while confidence can be a virtue, hubris is an all-too-familiar vice. Many analysts and commentators have been making pronouncements that a year ago they would not have dared to even imagine, including Ukraine retaking Crimea, or the downfall of the Russian government.

The most extreme example is the growing crowd of voices encouraging the political and territorial disintegration of the Russian Federation or in voguish campus rhetoric now appropriated by neoconservative hawks its "decolonization."

This irresponsible form of wishful thinking has taken hold in a surprising number of powerful and influential venues.]


https://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/3837672-russian-disintegration-is-a-dangerously-dumb-delusion/amp/

FLBear5630 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

But that is entirely untrue.

---

Of course it's true. If it wasn't true, then there would be no need to make statements that would broaden this into a Russia/NATO war, and the Russian military could simply take it out of the hide of the Ukrainians. Outside of Clown World, there's no incentive for the Russians to hit London or Paris in exchange for strikes on their territory when simply flattening Kiev or Lviv would suffice.

---

Russia is receiving aid from China, Iran and N Korea. That is part of having allies. We are not happy with China over their support of Russia, but the US is NOT going to war with China over it.

Do not even think Nukes. No one is going Nukes, except for energy.

---

Russia isn't using Chinese, Iranian, or North Korean aid to attack American soil.

Failing to consider the nuclear risk in this situation would be the height of foolishness.

KaiBear said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

But that is entirely untrue.

---

Of course it's true. If it wasn't true, then there would be no need to make statements that would broaden this into a Russia/NATO war, and the Russian military could simply take it out of the hide of the Ukrainians. Outside of Clown World, there's no incentive for the Russians to hit London or Paris in exchange for strikes on their territory when simply flattening Kiev or Lviv would suffice.

---

There are needs for Putin to make statements like that so he satisfies his populace on 2 fronts: 1) to make the Ukrainians look sub human and incapable of anything good so he can continue to sell the need for his meaningless war of Russian Manifest Destiny, and 2) So he can continue to look strong in the eyes of the people in any way shape or form so he continues to have a head attached to his body.

These are literally the only reasons for him to say it. Ukraine historically has been the place of higher scientific and technological achievement in that region, and he absolutely knows it, and absolutely hates it.

---

Look, we disagree a lot.

But come on.

If Putin was publicly supplying long range missiles to Mexican drug cartels …….

who were then constantly using them to attack targets within the United States…….

we would have already retaliated long ago.


Hate Putin or not ,,, he has shown surprising restraint up to now .

---

that's not how great power competition works, friend. The example of Ukraine disproves your statement.

The American tax payer is buying these weapons on behalf of the Ukraine whether they want to or not.

Once Ukraine starts using US "donated" long range missiles to strike deep in Russia, it will have an effect on those planning the war in Russia and it will certainly be used as propaganda.

We don't know how they will respond, how they will use the information internally, how it may motivate their public and their criminal organizations, what other countries will be motivated to aid Russia, etc. The more involved the US gets the more complicated and volatile the situation becomes. The more successful our weapons are the weaker and more desperate Russia looks, what happens then? Negotiated Peace, prolonged stalemate, or escalation?

Fwiw, Ukraine has a right to defend itself. The US also has a right to dictate how our "gifted" weapons are used.

Castro argued that Cuba needed Soviet missiles on their island to defend themselves from US aggression.

After the failed CIA invasion at the Bay of Pigs, one might understand how he would feel that way.

When US spy flights discovered the presence of missiles on Cuba the United States had a collective fit.

Kennedy was advised by the JCS to immediately launch air strikes against the missiles and US army units were out on high alert for a possible invasion.

Kennedy instead ordered a naval blockade around the island to prevent any Soviet shipping from landing their munitions.

Nuclear war was considered a real possibility.

( Anyone else remember the ' duck and cover ' drills at school ? )

However now it is the US openly and aggressively supplying missiles to Ukraine with which to hit targets in Russia.

Yet we somehow expect Putin not to respond militarily as Kennedy did under similar circumstances.

The naivety of such group think is simply ridiculous.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

But that is entirely untrue.

---

Of course it's true. If it wasn't true, then there would be no need to make statements that would broaden this into a Russia/NATO war, and the Russian military could simply take it out of the hide of the Ukrainians. Outside of Clown World, there's no incentive for the Russians to hit London or Paris in exchange for strikes on their territory when simply flattening Kiev or Lviv would suffice.

---

Russia is receiving aid from China, Iran and N Korea. That is part of having allies. We are not happy with China over their support of Russia, but the US is NOT going to war with China over it.

Do not even think Nukes. No one is going Nukes, except for energy.

---

Russia isn't using Chinese, Iranian, or North Korean aid to attack American soil.

Failing to consider the nuclear risk in this situation would be the height of foolishness.

---

America didn't invade...

You are pro-Russia and China no issue. But at least admit your bias. I am a pro-US, so I tend to give the US the benefit of the doubt. You seem to give Russia and Putin the benefit of the doubt. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

---

So you're okay with Russia and its allies firing missiles at America as long as they don't invade? That's a weird way of being pro-US.

Let's just be honest about how we'd see things if we were in their shoes. That isn't pro-Russian, unless you think there's some rule against Americans facing facts.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

But that is entirely untrue.

---

Of course it's true. If it wasn't true, then there would be no need to make statements that would broaden this into a Russia/NATO war, and the Russian military could simply take it out of the hide of the Ukrainians. Outside of Clown World, there's no incentive for the Russians to hit London or Paris in exchange for strikes on their territory when simply flattening Kiev or Lviv would suffice.

---

Russia is receiving aid from China, Iran and N Korea. That is part of having allies. We are not happy with China over their support of Russia, but the US is NOT going to war with China over it.

Do not even think Nukes. No one is going Nukes, except for energy.

---

Russia isn't using Chinese, Iranian, or North Korean aid to attack American soil.

Failing to consider the nuclear risk in this situation would be the height of foolishness.

---

America didn't invade...

You are pro-Russia and China no issue. But at least admit your bias. I am a pro-US, so I tend to give the US the benefit of the doubt. You seem to give Russia and Putin the benefit of the doubt. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

---

Not addressing Kais, Sams, or anyone specific support or lack there of. But I do get your opinion, and yes it seems like there are a lot of "pro Russian" comments out there in social media and here. Russia isn't the good guy here, and well the Ukraine isn't all that good either, corrupt to the core, but they didn't start the combat.

So I'm certainly not pro-Russia, I started this thread because I believe that the Democrats are escalating and will escalate it further to a point that it could easily spread into NATO troops on the ground. To think it *can't* boil over and spread to something much greater is wishful thinking.

Whether or not it is probable I don't know. Maybe not. Because of our military might, we're not someone to mess with obviously. It's just that world leaders and domino effect events don't always seem rational until historians looks back.

While Russia isn't the good guy, I do know for certain that I don't think any Americans should be forced into combat and dying for Ukrainian oligarchs.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

But that is entirely untrue.

---

Of course it's true. If it wasn't true, then there would be no need to make statements that would broaden this into a Russia/NATO war, and the Russian military could simply take it out of the hide of the Ukrainians. Outside of Clown World, there's no incentive for the Russians to hit London or Paris in exchange for strikes on their territory when simply flattening Kiev or Lviv would suffice.

---

Russia is receiving aid from China, Iran and N Korea. That is part of having allies. We are not happy with China over their support of Russia, but the US is NOT going to war with China over it.

Do not even think Nukes. No one is going Nukes, except for energy.

---

Russia isn't using Chinese, Iranian, or North Korean aid to attack American soil.

Failing to consider the nuclear risk in this situation would be the height of foolishness.

---

America didn't invade...

---

We just let the State Department and CIA sponsor a coup/color revolution

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

But that is entirely untrue.

---

Of course it's true. If it wasn't true, then there would be no need to make statements that would broaden this into a Russia/NATO war, and the Russian military could simply take it out of the hide of the Ukrainians. Outside of Clown World, there's no incentive for the Russians to hit London or Paris in exchange for strikes on their territory when simply flattening Kiev or Lviv would suffice.

---

Russia is receiving aid from China, Iran and N Korea. That is part of having allies. We are not happy with China over their support of Russia, but the US is NOT going to war with China over it.

Do not even think Nukes. No one is going Nukes, except for energy.

---

Russia isn't using Chinese, Iranian, or North Korean aid to attack American soil.

Failing to consider the nuclear risk in this situation would be the height of foolishness.

---

America didn't invade...

---

We just let the State Department and CIA sponsor a coup/color revolution

---

All true


Unfortunately you will now need to set aside 3-4 hours explaining, step by excruciating step, what you meant.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

But that is entirely untrue.

---

Of course it's true. If it wasn't true, then there would be no need to make statements that would broaden this into a Russia/NATO war, and the Russian military could simply take it out of the hide of the Ukrainians. Outside of Clown World, there's no incentive for the Russians to hit London or Paris in exchange for strikes on their territory when simply flattening Kiev or Lviv would suffice.

---

Russia is receiving aid from China, Iran and N Korea. That is part of having allies. We are not happy with China over their support of Russia, but the US is NOT going to war with China over it.

Do not even think Nukes. No one is going Nukes, except for energy.

---

Russia isn't using Chinese, Iranian, or North Korean aid to attack American soil.

Failing to consider the nuclear risk in this situation would be the height of foolishness.

---

America didn't invade...

You are pro-Russia and China no issue. But at least admit your bias. I am a pro-US, so I tend to give the US the benefit of the doubt. You seem to give Russia and Putin the benefit of the doubt. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

---

So you're okay with Russia and its allies firing missiles at America as long as they don't invade? That's a weird way of being pro-US.

Let's just be honest about how we'd see things if we were in their shoes. That isn't pro-Russian, unless you think there's some rule against Americans facing facts.

---

Come on Sam. Russia invaded a country and gets indignant that the country they invaded fires missiles at them? What did they expect? A warm meal and beverage?

US invades first, those being invaded had the right to fight back. Simple cure is don't invade. Keep you 200k troops on your side of the border and there are no missiles and drones flying at Russia.

---

By your logic the Russians and Chinese had the right to attack the United States when we illegally invaded Iraq.

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

But that is entirely untrue.

---

Of course it's true. If it wasn't true, then there would be no need to make statements that would broaden this into a Russia/NATO war, and the Russian military could simply take it out of the hide of the Ukrainians. Outside of Clown World, there's no incentive for the Russians to hit London or Paris in exchange for strikes on their territory when simply flattening Kiev or Lviv would suffice.

---

Russia is receiving aid from China, Iran and N Korea. That is part of having allies. We are not happy with China over their support of Russia, but the US is NOT going to war with China over it.

Do not even think Nukes. No one is going Nukes, except for energy.

---

Russia isn't using Chinese, Iranian, or North Korean aid to attack American soil.

Failing to consider the nuclear risk in this situation would be the height of foolishness.

---

America didn't invade...

You are pro-Russia and China no issue. But at least admit your bias. I am a pro-US, so I tend to give the US the benefit of the doubt. You seem to give Russia and Putin the benefit of the doubt. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

---

So you're okay with Russia and its allies firing missiles at America as long as they don't invade? That's a weird way of being pro-US.

Let's just be honest about how we'd see things if we were in their shoes. That isn't pro-Russian, unless you think there's some rule against Americans facing facts.

---

Come on Sam. Russia invaded a country and gets indignant that the country they invaded fires missiles at them? What did they expect? A warm meal and beverage?

US invades first, those being invaded had the right to fight back. Simple cure is don't invade. Keep you 200k troops on your side of the border and there are no missiles and drones flying at Russia.

---

By your logic the Russians and Chinese had the right to attack the United States when we illegally invaded Iraq.

---

They supplied weaponry to our enemies in that conflict. Most came via Syria.

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

But that is entirely untrue.

---

Of course it's true. If it wasn't true, then there would be no need to make statements that would broaden this into a Russia/NATO war, and the Russian military could simply take it out of the hide of the Ukrainians. Outside of Clown World, there's no incentive for the Russians to hit London or Paris in exchange for strikes on their territory when simply flattening Kiev or Lviv would suffice.

---

Russia is receiving aid from China, Iran and N Korea. That is part of having allies. We are not happy with China over their support of Russia, but the US is NOT going to war with China over it.

Do not even think Nukes. No one is going Nukes, except for energy.

---

Russia isn't using Chinese, Iranian, or North Korean aid to attack American soil.

Failing to consider the nuclear risk in this situation would be the height of foolishness.

---

America didn't invade...

You are pro-Russia and China no issue. But at least admit your bias. I am a pro-US, so I tend to give the US the benefit of the doubt. You seem to give Russia and Putin the benefit of the doubt. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

---

So you're okay with Russia and its allies firing missiles at America as long as they don't invade? That's a weird way of being pro-US.

Let's just be honest about how we'd see things if we were in their shoes. That isn't pro-Russian, unless you think there's some rule against Americans facing facts.

---

If we'd invaded Mexico and Mexico was using Russian supplied weaponry to fight us, I wouldn't view it as Russia invading or fighting us. You're the one who fails to contemplate the distinction.

---

That is very debatable

More likely you would be on here telling us that Russian actions were beyond the pale and a direct threat to America by funding the Mexican nationalists

And then using it as another excuse for a regime change war against Moscow.

FLBear5630 said:

---

No one is going Nukes, except for energy.

---

That's magical thinking. A leader of a country that lost 27 million during World War 2 and sees foreign militaries acting to destroy his nation is guaranteed to launch. You are failing to account for the national security risk differential that a Ukrainian loss has for us (absolutely none) vs what a hypothetical Ukrainian victory has for Russia (existential).

Realitybites said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

No one is going Nukes, except for energy.

---

That's magical thinking. A leader of a country that lost 27 million during World War 2 and sees foreign militaries acting to destroy his nation is guaranteed to launch. You are failing to account for the national security risk differential that a Ukrainian loss has for us (absolutely none) vs what a hypothetical Ukrainian victory has for Russia (existential).

---

False, Vlad.

Realitybites said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

No one is going Nukes, except for energy.

---

That's magical thinking. A leader of a country that lost 27 million during World War 2 and sees foreign militaries acting to destroy his nation is guaranteed to launch. You are failing to account for the national security risk differential that a Ukrainian loss has for us (absolutely none) vs what a hypothetical Ukrainian victory has for Russia (existential).

---

They don't care

And will never acknowledge that Russia will fight long and hard for Belarus and Ukraine

As hard if not harder than America would fight for Canada and Mexico

To pull Ukraine out of the Russian orbit (their goal) it will take direct American troop deployments eventually.

And that I suspect they know…just embarrassed to admit

KaiBear said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

But that is entirely untrue.

---

Of course it's true. If it wasn't true, then there would be no need to make statements that would broaden this into a Russia/NATO war, and the Russian military could simply take it out of the hide of the Ukrainians. Outside of Clown World, there's no incentive for the Russians to hit London or Paris in exchange for strikes on their territory when simply flattening Kiev or Lviv would suffice.

---

There are needs for Putin to make statements like that so he satisfies his populace on 2 fronts: 1) to make the Ukrainians look sub human and incapable of anything good so he can continue to sell the need for his meaningless war of Russian Manifest Destiny, and 2) So he can continue to look strong in the eyes of the people in any way shape or form so he continues to have a head attached to his body.

These are literally the only reasons for him to say it. Ukraine historically has been the place of higher scientific and technological achievement in that region, and he absolutely knows it, and absolutely hates it.

---

Look, we disagree a lot.

But come on.

If Putin was publicly supplying long range missiles to Mexican drug cartels …….

who were then constantly using them to attack targets within the United States…….

we would have already retaliated long ago.


Hate Putin or not ,,, he has shown surprising restraint up to now .

---

And the missile that hit Toropets was a Ukrainian Neptune missile launched along with hundreds of drones. They developed that missile over a decade ago and have been tweaking it the entirety of the war. The statements by Putin are all to save face in front of his countrymen, and apparently a bunch of posters on this site and others like it.

---

None of which alters the fact that if this situation was reversed the American people would demand a stop to missile attacks supplied by a foreign enemy.

And our president ( regardless of party ) would be forced to act.

---

None of what you just typed matters when it was not foreign provided missiles that destroyed Russia's ammo stockpiles in Toropets, and most recently in Krasnodar. You're arguing an incorrect analogy.

---

No sir.

It has been widely reported Ukraine has been firing US supplied missiles for weeks, if not months. The source of one particular attack is unimportant.

It has also been recently reported the Biden administration is considering allowing Ukraine to use long range US missiles deep into Russia.

Still another escalation which I suspect will not occur until the election is over.

---

Biden hasn't (yet) approved the use of US missiles in Russia.

Every attack inside of Russia, they've earned.

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

But that is entirely untrue.

---

Of course it's true. If it wasn't true, then there would be no need to make statements that would broaden this into a Russia/NATO war, and the Russian military could simply take it out of the hide of the Ukrainians. Outside of Clown World, there's no incentive for the Russians to hit London or Paris in exchange for strikes on their territory when simply flattening Kiev or Lviv would suffice.

---

Russia is receiving aid from China, Iran and N Korea. That is part of having allies. We are not happy with China over their support of Russia, but the US is NOT going to war with China over it.

Do not even think Nukes. No one is going Nukes, except for energy.

---

Russia isn't using Chinese, Iranian, or North Korean aid to attack American soil.

Failing to consider the nuclear risk in this situation would be the height of foolishness.

---

America didn't invade...

You are pro-Russia and China no issue. But at least admit your bias. I am a pro-US, so I tend to give the US the benefit of the doubt. You seem to give Russia and Putin the benefit of the doubt. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

---

So you're okay with Russia and its allies firing missiles at America as long as they don't invade? That's a weird way of being pro-US.

Let's just be honest about how we'd see things if we were in their shoes. That isn't pro-Russian, unless you think there's some rule against Americans facing facts.

---

If we'd invaded Mexico and Mexico was using Russian supplied weaponry to fight us, I wouldn't view it as Russia invading or fighting us. You're the one who fails to contemplate the distinction.

---

That is very debatable

More likely you would be on here telling us that Russian actions were beyond the pale and a direct threat to America by funding the Mexican nationalists

And then using it as another excuse for a regime change war against Moscow.

---

And you'd be arguing about DC Elites and praising Mexico.

---

No,

Unlike you I recognize the existence of spheres of influence.

Mexico belongs to DC…or more accurately "within the economic and military alliance network of the United States of America"

Russia has no right to mess around in Mexico or funnel weapons to it in the event of a conflict with America.

You for some strange reason think Ukraine also belongs to DC

Where does the American empire end to you? Does it have any natural limits?

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

But that is entirely untrue.

---

Of course it's true. If it wasn't true, then there would be no need to make statements that would broaden this into a Russia/NATO war, and the Russian military could simply take it out of the hide of the Ukrainians. Outside of Clown World, there's no incentive for the Russians to hit London or Paris in exchange for strikes on their territory when simply flattening Kiev or Lviv would suffice.

---

Russia is receiving aid from China, Iran and N Korea. That is part of having allies. We are not happy with China over their support of Russia, but the US is NOT going to war with China over it.

Do not even think Nukes. No one is going Nukes, except for energy.

---

Russia isn't using Chinese, Iranian, or North Korean aid to attack American soil.

Failing to consider the nuclear risk in this situation would be the height of foolishness.

---

America didn't invade...

You are pro-Russia and China no issue. But at least admit your bias. I am a pro-US, so I tend to give the US the benefit of the doubt. You seem to give Russia and Putin the benefit of the doubt. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

---

So you're okay with Russia and its allies firing missiles at America as long as they don't invade? That's a weird way of being pro-US.

Let's just be honest about how we'd see things if we were in their shoes. That isn't pro-Russian, unless you think there's some rule against Americans facing facts.

---

If we'd invaded Mexico and Mexico was using Russian supplied weaponry to fight us, I wouldn't view it as Russia invading or fighting us. You're the one who fails to contemplate the distinction.

---

That is very debatable

More likely you would be on here telling us that Russian actions were beyond the pale and a direct threat to America by funding the Mexican nationalists

And then using it as another excuse for a regime change war against Moscow.

---

And you'd be arguing about DC Elites and praising Mexico.

---

No,

Unlike you I recognize the existence of spheres of influence.

Mexico belongs to DC…or more accurately "within the economic and military alliance network of the United States of America"

Russia has no right to mess around in Mexico or funnel weapons to it in the event of a conflict with America.

You for some strange reason think Ukraine also belongs to DC

Where does the American empire end to you? Does it have any natural limits?

---

Ukraine belongs to Ukraine, just like Mexico belongs to Mexico. And if Russia wants to "mess around" in Mexico, they are free to do so. But the thing you don't understand is that Mexico chooses to align with the U.S. not because other countries don't attempt to "mess around" with them, but because they benefit from it more than aligning with a country like Russia. The same is true with Ukraine. What you call empire is sovereign interest that you want to suppress under some misguided concepts of geography and historicity. If we followed your line of thinking we'd still be in a colonial world.

---

We have invaded Mexico on multiple occasions

And we have interfered in their internal politics on multiple occasions

Because at the end of the day what goes on in Mexico is a vital security interest of the United States

You know that…and you know that Mexico would never be allowed to join a hostile military alliance like the Warsaw pact

(Now think about how Russia feels about Ukraine)

Shatter zone

If you're more familiar with automobiles, think crumple zone

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

But that is entirely untrue.

---

Of course it's true. If it wasn't true, then there would be no need to make statements that would broaden this into a Russia/NATO war, and the Russian military could simply take it out of the hide of the Ukrainians. Outside of Clown World, there's no incentive for the Russians to hit London or Paris in exchange for strikes on their territory when simply flattening Kiev or Lviv would suffice.

---

Russia is receiving aid from China, Iran and N Korea. That is part of having allies. We are not happy with China over their support of Russia, but the US is NOT going to war with China over it.

Do not even think Nukes. No one is going Nukes, except for energy.

---

Russia isn't using Chinese, Iranian, or North Korean aid to attack American soil.

Failing to consider the nuclear risk in this situation would be the height of foolishness.

---

America didn't invade...

You are pro-Russia and China no issue. But at least admit your bias. I am a pro-US, so I tend to give the US the benefit of the doubt. You seem to give Russia and Putin the benefit of the doubt. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

---

So you're okay with Russia and its allies firing missiles at America as long as they don't invade? That's a weird way of being pro-US.

Let's just be honest about how we'd see things if we were in their shoes. That isn't pro-Russian, unless you think there's some rule against Americans facing facts.

---

Come on Sam. Russia invaded a country and gets indignant that the country they invaded fires missiles at them? What did they expect? A warm meal and beverage?

US invades first, those being invaded had the right to fight back. Simple cure is don't invade. Keep you 200k troops on your side of the border and there are no missiles and drones flying at Russia.

---

By your logic the Russians and Chinese had the right to attack the United States when we illegally invaded Iraq.

---

Huh? What logic do you see there? You really see that? No, Iraq was able to defend themselves and they did. They fired SCUDS at us and Saudis. Killing and destroying alot. Russia was able to supply equipment and they did, we faced T-72 tanks and BMP=2 Fighting Vehicles and all sorts of Russian equipment including missile technology. So, yes. I never held it against Iraq defending themselves, their leadership were whack-jobs but if you are attacked you can defend.

So, explain to me how it is "logical" that the US Coalition attacks Iraq after invading Kuwait and it is good for Russia to attack mainland USA?

Even the 2003 war, US Coalition attacks Iraq. Iraq defends using Russian tech, just like Ukraine, and it is good for China to attack US? That is logical to you?

Finally, what has the US attacked in Ukraine? What act of aggression has the US committed? Name one attack the US has taken part in against Russia? There are none, the US is supplying material just like Russia and China do around the world for decades.

IF the US invaded Mexico, Mexico has every right to defend. Just like they did in the Mexican-American War. Reading a great book on that now. New respect for Lee pre-treason.

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

But that is entirely untrue.

---

Of course it's true. If it wasn't true, then there would be no need to make statements that would broaden this into a Russia/NATO war, and the Russian military could simply take it out of the hide of the Ukrainians. Outside of Clown World, there's no incentive for the Russians to hit London or Paris in exchange for strikes on their territory when simply flattening Kiev or Lviv would suffice.

---

Russia is receiving aid from China, Iran and N Korea. That is part of having allies. We are not happy with China over their support of Russia, but the US is NOT going to war with China over it.

Do not even think Nukes. No one is going Nukes, except for energy.

---

Russia isn't using Chinese, Iranian, or North Korean aid to attack American soil.

Failing to consider the nuclear risk in this situation would be the height of foolishness.

---

America didn't invade...

You are pro-Russia and China no issue. But at least admit your bias. I am a pro-US, so I tend to give the US the benefit of the doubt. You seem to give Russia and Putin the benefit of the doubt. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

---

So you're okay with Russia and its allies firing missiles at America as long as they don't invade? That's a weird way of being pro-US.

Let's just be honest about how we'd see things if we were in their shoes. That isn't pro-Russian, unless you think there's some rule against Americans facing facts.

---

If we'd invaded Mexico and Mexico was using Russian supplied weaponry to fight us, I wouldn't view it as Russia invading or fighting us. You're the one who fails to contemplate the distinction.

---

That is very debatable

More likely you would be on here telling us that Russian actions were beyond the pale and a direct threat to America by funding the Mexican nationalists

And then using it as another excuse for a regime change war against Moscow.

---

And you'd be arguing about DC Elites and praising Mexico.

---

No,

Unlike you I recognize the existence of spheres of influence.

Mexico belongs to DC…or more accurately "within the economic and military alliance network of the United States of America"

Russia has no right to mess around in Mexico or funnel weapons to it in the event of a conflict with America.

You for some strange reason think Ukraine also belongs to DC

Where does the American empire end to you? Does it have any natural limits?

---

Ukraine belongs to Ukraine, just like Mexico belongs to Mexico. And if Russia wants to "mess around" in Mexico, they are free to do so. But the thing you don't understand is that Mexico chooses to align with the U.S. not because other countries don't attempt to "mess around" with them, but because they benefit from it more than aligning with a country like Russia. The same is true with Ukraine. What you call empire is sovereign interest that you want to suppress under some misguided concepts of geography and historicity. If we followed your line of thinking we'd still be in a colonial world.

---

We have invaded Mexico on multiple occasions

And we have interfered in their internal politics on multiple occasions

Because at the end of the day what goes on in Mexico is a vital security interest of the United States

You know that…and you know that Mexico would never be allowed to join a hostile military alliance like the Warsaw pact

(Now think about how Russia feels about Ukraine)

---

Castro asked for aid from the Soviet Union after the failed invasion of Cuba by the CIA at the Bay of Pigs.

Soviets placed nuclear missiles in Cuba.

US spy planes spot the missiles.

Kennedy, the JCS and the American public go ape ***** Finally Kennedy retaliates with a naval blockage around Cuba.

Yet we feel entitled to supply missiles and other munitions to Ukraine; with which to kill Russians.

However we believe Putin has no right to retaliate in any capacity against our actions.

Only we 'good guys' are entitled to establish naval blockades right ?

FLBear5630 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

But that is entirely untrue.

---

Of course it's true. If it wasn't true, then there would be no need to make statements that would broaden this into a Russia/NATO war, and the Russian military could simply take it out of the hide of the Ukrainians. Outside of Clown World, there's no incentive for the Russians to hit London or Paris in exchange for strikes on their territory when simply flattening Kiev or Lviv would suffice.

---

Russia is receiving aid from China, Iran and N Korea. That is part of having allies. We are not happy with China over their support of Russia, but the US is NOT going to war with China over it.

Do not even think Nukes. No one is going Nukes, except for energy.

---

Russia isn't using Chinese, Iranian, or North Korean aid to attack American soil.

Failing to consider the nuclear risk in this situation would be the height of foolishness.

---

America didn't invade...

You are pro-Russia and China no issue. But at least admit your bias. I am a pro-US, so I tend to give the US the benefit of the doubt. You seem to give Russia and Putin the benefit of the doubt. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

---

So you're okay with Russia and its allies firing missiles at America as long as they don't invade? That's a weird way of being pro-US.

Let's just be honest about how we'd see things if we were in their shoes. That isn't pro-Russian, unless you think there's some rule against Americans facing facts.

---

If we'd invaded Mexico and Mexico was using Russian supplied weaponry to fight us, I wouldn't view it as Russia invading or fighting us. You're the one who fails to contemplate the distinction.

---

That is very debatable

More likely you would be on here telling us that Russian actions were beyond the pale and a direct threat to America by funding the Mexican nationalists

And then using it as another excuse for a regime change war against Moscow.

---

And you'd be arguing about DC Elites and praising Mexico.

---

No,

Unlike you I recognize the existence of spheres of influence.

Mexico belongs to DC…or more accurately "within the economic and military alliance network of the United States of America"

Russia has no right to mess around in Mexico or funnel weapons to it in the event of a conflict with America.

You for some strange reason think Ukraine also belongs to DC

Where does the American empire end to you? Does it have any natural limits?

---

Ukraine belongs to Ukraine, just like Mexico belongs to Mexico. And if Russia wants to "mess around" in Mexico, they are free to do so. But the thing you don't understand is that Mexico chooses to align with the U.S. not because other countries don't attempt to "mess around" with them, but because they benefit from it more than aligning with a country like Russia. The same is true with Ukraine. What you call empire is sovereign interest that you want to suppress under some misguided concepts of geography and historicity. If we followed your line of thinking we'd still be in a colonial world.

---

We have invaded Mexico on multiple occasions

And we have interfered in their internal politics on multiple occasions

Because at the end of the day what goes on in Mexico is a vital security interest of the United States

You know that…and you know that Mexico would never be allowed to join a hostile military alliance like the Warsaw pact

(Now think about how Russia feels about Ukraine)

---

Castro asked for aid from the Soviet Union after the failed invasion of Cuba by the CIA at the Bay of Pigs.

Soviets placed nuclear missiles in Cuba.

US spy planes spot the missiles.

Kennedy, the JCS and the American public go ape ***** Finally Kennedy retaliates with a naval blockage around Cuba.

Yet we feel entitled to supply missiles and other munitions to Ukraine; with which to kill Russians.

However we believe Putin has no right to retaliate in any capacity against our actions.

Only we 'good guys' are entitled to establish naval blockades right ?

---

You guys are serious? It is only fair that the Soviets get to put missiles in Cuba because we supported NATO. Let's all just get along... Putin really isn't a bad guy, he is misunderstood let him have Ukraine he said he will make it better.

Wow, this Nation is in serious trouble when people believe that we need to treat adversaries by the mantra - How would we feel if they did that to us? That is a hell of a foreign policy.

---

Entertaining to play internet Rambo sometimes.

For some it's easier than reading past and current events .

Last attempt.

A. Cuba had long been under the US sphere of influence.
B. Ukraine has long been under the Russian sphere of influence.
C. Kennedy approved a CIA invasion of Cuba in an attempt to depose Castro.
D. Putin approved a Russian invasion of Ukraine to depose Z and prevent Ukraine from aligning with NATO.
E. Castro asked for military support from the Soviet Union.
F. Z asked for military support from the US.
G. When nuclear missiles were discovered in Cuba , Kennedy retaliated with a naval blockade of Cuba. However the JCS recommended air strikes and another invasion of Cuba.
I. Putin has not yet retaliated against the US missiles and other munitions killing Russians.


But sooner or later Putin will retaliate……and Americans will be ' shocked '.

KaiBear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

But that is entirely untrue.

---

Of course it's true. If it wasn't true, then there would be no need to make statements that would broaden this into a Russia/NATO war, and the Russian military could simply take it out of the hide of the Ukrainians. Outside of Clown World, there's no incentive for the Russians to hit London or Paris in exchange for strikes on their territory when simply flattening Kiev or Lviv would suffice.

---

Russia is receiving aid from China, Iran and N Korea. That is part of having allies. We are not happy with China over their support of Russia, but the US is NOT going to war with China over it.

Do not even think Nukes. No one is going Nukes, except for energy.

---

Russia isn't using Chinese, Iranian, or North Korean aid to attack American soil.

Failing to consider the nuclear risk in this situation would be the height of foolishness.

---

America didn't invade...

You are pro-Russia and China no issue. But at least admit your bias. I am a pro-US, so I tend to give the US the benefit of the doubt. You seem to give Russia and Putin the benefit of the doubt. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

---

So you're okay with Russia and its allies firing missiles at America as long as they don't invade? That's a weird way of being pro-US.

Let's just be honest about how we'd see things if we were in their shoes. That isn't pro-Russian, unless you think there's some rule against Americans facing facts.

---

If we'd invaded Mexico and Mexico was using Russian supplied weaponry to fight us, I wouldn't view it as Russia invading or fighting us. You're the one who fails to contemplate the distinction.

---

That is very debatable

More likely you would be on here telling us that Russian actions were beyond the pale and a direct threat to America by funding the Mexican nationalists

And then using it as another excuse for a regime change war against Moscow.

---

And you'd be arguing about DC Elites and praising Mexico.

---

No,

Unlike you I recognize the existence of spheres of influence.

Mexico belongs to DC…or more accurately "within the economic and military alliance network of the United States of America"

Russia has no right to mess around in Mexico or funnel weapons to it in the event of a conflict with America.

You for some strange reason think Ukraine also belongs to DC

Where does the American empire end to you? Does it have any natural limits?

---

Ukraine belongs to Ukraine, just like Mexico belongs to Mexico. And if Russia wants to "mess around" in Mexico, they are free to do so. But the thing you don't understand is that Mexico chooses to align with the U.S. not because other countries don't attempt to "mess around" with them, but because they benefit from it more than aligning with a country like Russia. The same is true with Ukraine. What you call empire is sovereign interest that you want to suppress under some misguided concepts of geography and historicity. If we followed your line of thinking we'd still be in a colonial world.

---

We have invaded Mexico on multiple occasions

And we have interfered in their internal politics on multiple occasions

Because at the end of the day what goes on in Mexico is a vital security interest of the United States

You know that…and you know that Mexico would never be allowed to join a hostile military alliance like the Warsaw pact

(Now think about how Russia feels about Ukraine)

---

Castro asked for aid from the Soviet Union after the failed invasion of Cuba by the CIA at the Bay of Pigs.

Soviets placed nuclear missiles in Cuba.

US spy planes spot the missiles.

Kennedy, the JCS and the American public go ape ***** Finally Kennedy retaliates with a naval blockage around Cuba.

Yet we feel entitled to supply missiles and other munitions to Ukraine; with which to kill Russians.

However we believe Putin has no right to retaliate in any capacity against our actions.

Only we 'good guys' are entitled to establish naval blockades right ?

---

You guys are serious? It is only fair that the Soviets get to put missiles in Cuba because we supported NATO. Let's all just get along... Putin really isn't a bad guy, he is misunderstood let him have Ukraine he said he will make it better.

Wow, this Nation is in serious trouble when people believe that we need to treat adversaries by the mantra - How would we feel if they did that to us? That is a hell of a foreign policy.

---

Entertaining to play internet Rambo sometimes.

For some it's easier than reading past and current events .

Last attempt.

A. Cuba had long been under the US sphere of influence.
B. Ukraine has long been under the Russian sphere of influence.
C. Kennedy approved a CIA invasion of Cuba in an attempt to depose Castro.
D. Putin approved a Russian invasion of Ukraine to depose Z and prevent Ukraine from aligning with NATO.
E. Castro asked for military support from the Soviet Union.
F. Z asked for military support from the US.
G. When nuclear missiles were discovered in Cuba , Kennedy retaliated with a naval blockade of Cuba. However the JCS recommended air strikes and another invasion of Cuba.
I. Putin has not yet retaliated against the US missiles and other munitions killing Russians.


But sooner or later Putin will retaliate……and Americans will be ' shocked '.

---

Cuba continued to get military support from the Soviet Union after the missile crisis. The U.S. did nothing to Cuba even after the Soviet Union was gone.

Putin blundered by invading Ukraine with a military not up to the task of defeating it in short order. He would commit a catastrophic blunder to militarily escalate it to other EU nations.

ATL Bear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

But that is entirely untrue.

---

Of course it's true. If it wasn't true, then there would be no need to make statements that would broaden this into a Russia/NATO war, and the Russian military could simply take it out of the hide of the Ukrainians. Outside of Clown World, there's no incentive for the Russians to hit London or Paris in exchange for strikes on their territory when simply flattening Kiev or Lviv would suffice.

---

Russia is receiving aid from China, Iran and N Korea. That is part of having allies. We are not happy with China over their support of Russia, but the US is NOT going to war with China over it.

Do not even think Nukes. No one is going Nukes, except for energy.

---

Russia isn't using Chinese, Iranian, or North Korean aid to attack American soil.

Failing to consider the nuclear risk in this situation would be the height of foolishness.

---

America didn't invade...

You are pro-Russia and China no issue. But at least admit your bias. I am a pro-US, so I tend to give the US the benefit of the doubt. You seem to give Russia and Putin the benefit of the doubt. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

---

So you're okay with Russia and its allies firing missiles at America as long as they don't invade? That's a weird way of being pro-US.

Let's just be honest about how we'd see things if we were in their shoes. That isn't pro-Russian, unless you think there's some rule against Americans facing facts.

---

If we'd invaded Mexico and Mexico was using Russian supplied weaponry to fight us, I wouldn't view it as Russia invading or fighting us. You're the one who fails to contemplate the distinction.

---

That is very debatable

More likely you would be on here telling us that Russian actions were beyond the pale and a direct threat to America by funding the Mexican nationalists

And then using it as another excuse for a regime change war against Moscow.

---

And you'd be arguing about DC Elites and praising Mexico.

---

No,

Unlike you I recognize the existence of spheres of influence.

Mexico belongs to DC…or more accurately "within the economic and military alliance network of the United States of America"

Russia has no right to mess around in Mexico or funnel weapons to it in the event of a conflict with America.

You for some strange reason think Ukraine also belongs to DC

Where does the American empire end to you? Does it have any natural limits?

---

Ukraine belongs to Ukraine, just like Mexico belongs to Mexico. And if Russia wants to "mess around" in Mexico, they are free to do so. But the thing you don't understand is that Mexico chooses to align with the U.S. not because other countries don't attempt to "mess around" with them, but because they benefit from it more than aligning with a country like Russia. The same is true with Ukraine. What you call empire is sovereign interest that you want to suppress under some misguided concepts of geography and historicity. If we followed your line of thinking we'd still be in a colonial world.

---

We have invaded Mexico on multiple occasions

And we have interfered in their internal politics on multiple occasions

Because at the end of the day what goes on in Mexico is a vital security interest of the United States

You know that…and you know that Mexico would never be allowed to join a hostile military alliance like the Warsaw pact

(Now think about how Russia feels about Ukraine)

---

Castro asked for aid from the Soviet Union after the failed invasion of Cuba by the CIA at the Bay of Pigs.

Soviets placed nuclear missiles in Cuba.

US spy planes spot the missiles.

Kennedy, the JCS and the American public go ape ***** Finally Kennedy retaliates with a naval blockage around Cuba.

Yet we feel entitled to supply missiles and other munitions to Ukraine; with which to kill Russians.

However we believe Putin has no right to retaliate in any capacity against our actions.

Only we 'good guys' are entitled to establish naval blockades right ?

---

You guys are serious? It is only fair that the Soviets get to put missiles in Cuba because we supported NATO. Let's all just get along... Putin really isn't a bad guy, he is misunderstood let him have Ukraine he said he will make it better.

Wow, this Nation is in serious trouble when people believe that we need to treat adversaries by the mantra - How would we feel if they did that to us? That is a hell of a foreign policy.

---

Entertaining to play internet Rambo sometimes.

For some it's easier than reading past and current events .

Last attempt.

A. Cuba had long been under the US sphere of influence.
B. Ukraine has long been under the Russian sphere of influence.
C. Kennedy approved a CIA invasion of Cuba in an attempt to depose Castro.
D. Putin approved a Russian invasion of Ukraine to depose Z and prevent Ukraine from aligning with NATO.
E. Castro asked for military support from the Soviet Union.
F. Z asked for military support from the US.
G. When nuclear missiles were discovered in Cuba , Kennedy retaliated with a naval blockade of Cuba. However the JCS recommended air strikes and another invasion of Cuba.
I. Putin has not yet retaliated against the US missiles and other munitions killing Russians.


But sooner or later Putin will retaliate……and Americans will be ' shocked '.

---

Cuba continued to get military support from the Soviet Union after the missile crisis. The U.S. did nothing to Cuba even after the Soviet Union was gone.

Putin blundered by invading Ukraine with a military not up to the task of defeating it in short order. He would commit a catastrophic blunder to militarily escalate it to other EU nations.

---

Kennedy made a huge blunder invading Cuba ….and failing.
Made the blunder worse by then repeatedly attempting to assassinate Castro ….and failing.


The comparisons between Kennedy's actions involving Cuba and Putin's actions in Ukraine are too obvious to ignore unless one merely wants to play ' John Wayne'.

And even that is ok on an internet message board .

But not ok for our commander in chief and national media .

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

But that is entirely untrue.

---

Of course it's true. If it wasn't true, then there would be no need to make statements that would broaden this into a Russia/NATO war, and the Russian military could simply take it out of the hide of the Ukrainians. Outside of Clown World, there's no incentive for the Russians to hit London or Paris in exchange for strikes on their territory when simply flattening Kiev or Lviv would suffice.

---

Russia is receiving aid from China, Iran and N Korea. That is part of having allies. We are not happy with China over their support of Russia, but the US is NOT going to war with China over it.

Do not even think Nukes. No one is going Nukes, except for energy.

---

Russia isn't using Chinese, Iranian, or North Korean aid to attack American soil.

Failing to consider the nuclear risk in this situation would be the height of foolishness.

---

America didn't invade...

You are pro-Russia and China no issue. But at least admit your bias. I am a pro-US, so I tend to give the US the benefit of the doubt. You seem to give Russia and Putin the benefit of the doubt. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

---

So you're okay with Russia and its allies firing missiles at America as long as they don't invade? That's a weird way of being pro-US.

Let's just be honest about how we'd see things if we were in their shoes. That isn't pro-Russian, unless you think there's some rule against Americans facing facts.

---

If we'd invaded Mexico and Mexico was using Russian supplied weaponry to fight us, I wouldn't view it as Russia invading or fighting us. You're the one who fails to contemplate the distinction.

---

I don't believe that.