Jump to content

Featured Replies

48 minutes ago, Abracadabra said:

How dare Russia put it's gigantic country in the middle of NATO territory. The nerve!

It's not like NATO was created out of fear of military aggression from Moscow or anything. Totally weird that NATO nations would end up bordering a country with such a docile nature and definitely no history of military invasions of its neighbors. Russia has totally not tried to police its former Soviet bloc neighbors through force.

  • Replies 25.3k
  • Views 624.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most Popular Posts

  • This will end the war:  

  • vikas83
    vikas83

    Here's the truly hysterical part -- the current situation is ideal for the US. Russia's military is engaged and has been seriously degraded to the point that they have to bring in foreign troops. We a

  • Yes, not only do I not rely on the western media, I came to Ukraine to see for myself that there are no NSDAPs or neo NSDAPs. Nor are there stacks of violence anywhere there isn't Russian troops. Nor

Posted Images

11 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

It's not like NATO was created out of fear of military aggression from Moscow or anything. Totally weird that NATO nations would end up bordering a country with such a docile nature and definitely no history of military invasions of its neighbors. Russia has totally not tried to police its former Soviet bloc neighbors through force.

We have always been at war with Canada.

We have always been friends with Russia.

/rightspeak

8 hours ago, Procus said:

How do you think leaders in this country would react if there was posturing for a mutual defense pact between Mexico or Canada and Russia?

Russia already does that with Cuba and Venezuela. Russia put troops in Venezuela to prop up Maduro in clear violation of the Monroe doctrine. Please spare me the Putin sycophancy. 

Speaking of Putin sycophancy, I started watching the 4 part interview series with Putin and Oliver Stone. A lot of what Putin is saying is echoed here by our resident Trumpbots, but man does Oliver Stone love him some Russia and Putin. Stone is gushing over him the entire time. I thought he might blow Putin on camera at the rate he was going.

1 hour ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

It's not like NATO was created out of fear of military aggression from Moscow or anything. Totally weird that NATO nations would end up bordering a country with such a docile nature and definitely no history of military invasions of its neighbors. Russia has totally not tried to police its former Soviet bloc neighbors through force.

Top 14 maps and charts that explain NATO - Geoawesomeness

Oh, yea, sure. Russia is the expansionist power in Europe. <_<

Russia has drawn a line. Unless the European nations have gone completely insane and want a devastating war where no one will win, they'll negotiate some sort of regional security agreement both sides can live with long term.

2 hours ago, Toastrel said:

Traded British overlords for Russkis, eh?

"The enemy of my enemy is my friend." 

2 hours ago, Gannan said:

Russia already does that with Cuba and Venezuela. Russia put troops in Venezuela to prop up Maduro in clear violation of the Monroe doctrine. Please spare me the Putin sycophancy. 

And where do we have troops?  Japan, Poland, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, among others.  Who's got who surrounded?

I'm not saying that the Russians aren't a threat - but I am saying is that Ukraine is out of our sphere of influence.  I wish this administration was concerned about what is happening on our Southern border as it is on the Russian Ukrainian border.

NATO is an open organization. Its not up to Russia to dictate who can apply for membership and who cannot. Russia has only themselves to blame for European countries wanting to distance themselves from a killer and a thug like Putin in favor of closer ties with western democracies. 

1 minute ago, Procus said:

And where do we have troops?  Japan, Poland, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, among others.  Who's got who surrounded?

I'm not saying that the Russians aren't a threat - but I am saying is that Ukraine is out of our sphere of influence.  I wish this administration was concerned about what is happening on our Southern border as it is on the Russian Ukrainian border.

See my post above. NATO is founded on the idea that any country can apply for membership. The Ukrainians want to be in NATO and the EU. It's their choice. They've been saying through this entire episode, that they don't want foreign powers telling them what to do. 

4 minutes ago, Gannan said:

See my post above. NATO is founded on the idea that any country can apply for membership. The Ukrainians want to be in NATO and the EU. It's their choice. They've been saying through this entire episode, that they don't want foreign powers telling them what to do. 

Oh, anybody can APPLY.  But that doesn't mean any country has carte blanche to be admitted as a member.  The Soviet Union wanted to join NATO - how did that go?   Otherwise, any country can decide that NATO member countries - and the U.S. in particular - will act as their own personal bodyguard - and pay for their defense.  Gimme a break.

43 minutes ago, Abracadabra said:

"The enemy of my enemy is my friend." 

The enemy of my enemy shares a common enemy.

 

That's all.

3 minutes ago, Procus said:

Oh, anybody can APPLY.  But that doesn't mean any country has carte blanche to be admitted as a member.  The Soviet Union wanted to join NATO - how did that go?   Otherwise, any country can decide that NATO member countries - and the U.S. in particular - will act as their own personal bodyguard - and pay for their defense.  Gimme a break.

You're all over the map here. If you don't want to admit more countries into NATO, that's your opinion. (It's also Trump's opinion, big shocker that you share it). You've pivoted to a seperate argument. The reality is that they have the right to apply for membership. There's a process. If they don't get in, they don't get in. I'm fine with that. What I am not fine with is Putin dictating to us who we can be allied with and who we cannot. 

1 hour ago, Procus said:

And where do we have troops?  Japan, Poland, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, among others.  Who's got who surrounded?

I'm not saying that the Russians aren't a threat - but I am saying is that Ukraine is out of our sphere of influence.  I wish this administration was concerned about what is happening on our Southern border as it is on the Russian Ukrainian border.

 

elmo-elmos-gonna-dance.gif

The southern border crisis.

You mean the crisis where they won't meaningfully punish companies for hiring illegals, so they keep coming here for better illegal jobs here than they can get at home?

That problem will not be fixed by a wall. Most illegals cross at legal checkpoints.

So until they start making the CONSEQUENCES worse than the cost of hiring illegals and slap on the wrist fines, which are hardly ever levied . . . .

3 hours ago, Abracadabra said:

Top 14 maps and charts that explain NATO - Geoawesomeness

Oh, yea, sure. Russia is the expansionist power in Europe. <_<

Russia has drawn a line. Unless the European nations have gone completely insane and want a devastating war where no one will win, they'll negotiate some sort of regional security agreement both sides can live with long term.

:roll:

The only borders that have been redrawn at all have been Russia's expanding outward. NATO is a defensive pact; if Russia doesn't have expansionist designs why are they concerned? 

The reason NATO exists is because Russia presents a threatening posture on a regular basis. I don't see Estonia lining up forces sufficient for an invasion near Russia's border.

2 hours ago, Procus said:

And where do we have troops?  Japan, Poland, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, among others.  Who's got who surrounded?

I'm not saying that the Russians aren't a threat - but I am saying is that Ukraine is out of our sphere of influence.  I wish this administration was concerned about what is happening on our Southern border as it is on the Russian Ukrainian border.

We have 4,000 troops spread across Estonia, Lithuania, and Poland. There's no invasionary force made up of NATO countries. 

But you know who DOES have a force sufficient for a successful invasion hanging outside Ukraine's borders? I'm betting you know.

58 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

:roll:

The only borders that have been redrawn at all have been Russia's expanding outward. NATO is a defensive pact; if Russia doesn't have expansionist designs why are they concerned? 

The reason NATO exists is because Russia presents a threatening posture on a regular basis. I don't see Estonia lining up forces sufficient for an invasion near Russia's border.

NATO was formed to counter the defunct Soviet Union. It has morphed into an anti-Russia organization in order to justify it's existence. If Europeans want to continue having Americans pay for their national defense, NATO needs a raison d'etre and Russia fits the bill. 

That you can look at those maps and still maintain Russia is expansionist means you've disconnected from reality. Russia is moving troops around within it's own borders. There aren't tanks massed along Ukraine's border as though an invasion was imminent. Those forces are still located at bases, in permanent barracks. Even the Ukrainians admit this. 

The idea that it's within America's national security interest to place offensive weapons on the border of a nuclear power is madness.

2 hours ago, Toastrel said:

The southern border crisis.

You mean the crisis where they won't meaningfully punish companies for hiring illegals, so they keep coming here for better illegal jobs here than they can get at home?

That problem will not be fixed by a wall. Most illegals cross at legal checkpoints.

So until they start making the CONSEQUENCES worse than the cost of hiring illegals and slap on the wrist fines, which are hardly ever levied . . . .

ding ding. 

45 minutes ago, Abracadabra said:

NATO was formed to counter the defunct Soviet Union. It has morphed into an anti-Russia organization in order to justify it's existence. If Europeans want to continue having Americans pay for their national defense, NATO needs a raison d'etre and Russia fits the bill. 

That you can look at those maps and still maintain Russia is expansionist means you've disconnected from reality. Russia is moving troops around within it's own borders. There aren't tanks massed along Ukraine's border as though an invasion was imminent. Those forces are still located at bases, in permanent barracks. Even the Ukrainians admit this. 

The idea that it's within America's national security interest to place offensive weapons on the border of a nuclear power is madness.

Pretty impressive that you can type while throating Putin's wang. 

Churlish commentary aside, Russia itself has supplied plenty of reason through its actions for NATO's continued existence.

Putin is playing a specific kind of game. One that involves betting like you have the mystique of the Soviet Union behind you when in reality you're playing the hand of a nation that has squandered the natural advantages it has been given.

It's called bluffing. And it works against weak nations. And fails against unified opposition. 

Russia should consider itself lucky if it is granted an offramp by the west.

4 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

Pretty impressive that you can type while throating Putin's wang. 

Churlish commentary aside, Russia itself has supplied plenty of reason through its actions for NATO's continued existence.

Putin is playing a specific kind of game. One that involves betting like you have the mystique of the Soviet Union behind you when in reality you're playing the hand of a nation that has squandered the natural advantages it has been given.

It's called bluffing. And it works against weak nations. And fails against unified opposition. 

Russia should consider itself lucky if it is granted an offramp by the west.

The Germans, French, Italians and others are acknowledging Russia's demand for security guarantees and are willing to negotiate. If that's what you mean by an offramp, then I'm sure Russia will take it. 

"as we amass forts and troops by your borders, we demand security guarantees that you won't invade us." -Putin

"Spank me harder daddy Putin!!" -abracadabra

4 minutes ago, Abracadabra said:

The Germans, French, Italians and others are acknowledging Russia's demand for security guarantees and are willing to negotiate. If that's what you mean by an offramp, then I'm sure Russia will take it. 

It used to be right wing people were against socialist and communist countries.

 

Now you defend Russia and hold up the French?

23 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

"as we amass forts and troops by your borders, we demand security guarantees that you won't invade us." -Putin

"Spank me harder daddy Putin!!" -abracadabra

Russia is demanding security guarantees from Europe, not Ukraine. Ukraine is not going to enter NATO so Russia has no reason, nor intention, to invade. The hysterical cries of imminent war is a British and U.S. fiction. 

4 minutes ago, Abracadabra said:

Russia is demanding security guarantees from Europe, not Ukraine. Ukraine is not going to enter NATO so Russia has no reason, nor intention, to invade. The hysterical cries of imminent war is a British and U.S. fiction. 

C4j62wb.thumb.jpg.81f714c376779ce5f1584e26e3422d9a.jpg

26 minutes ago, Toastrel said:

It used to be right wing people were against socialist and communist countries.

 

Now you defend Russia and hold up the French?

Lefties used to oppose war and the military industrial complex. There's still a few of them around. 

How do you explain the liberal shift to supporting U.S. hegemony? 

I support national sovereignty and self determination for all nations according to international law. I no longer believe in American exceptionalism.

Create an account or sign in to comment