46 minutes ago, dawkins4prez said:

This interview on Fox is insane. So Putin's pitch is basically, "give me all the territories i've occupied and we'll blame it on Biden". And of course, Donald Trump loves it so much he might PAY Putin to get it done.

I think they should blame Biden, and then not give Russia any territory.

4 minutes ago, It Hurts said:

Your takes are awful. Give it up, loser. 🤣

9 minutes ago, It Hurts said:

Barho is extremely triggered right now so I can confirm this tweet is true.

Just now, HazletonEagle said:

Barho is extremely triggered right now so I can confirm this tweet is true.

Many have tried who were better than you at this game barho. All have failed. You're no match. This is pathetic. Have you been drinking tonight?

1 hour ago, HazletonEagle said:

I think they should blame Biden, and then not give Russia any territory.

good lord man, Putin is trolling you to your face and you still don't see it. Wow, that's thick.

4 hours ago, HazletonEagle said:

I think they should blame Biden, and then not give Russia any territory.

Blaming Biden makes no sense whatsoever when it comes to this conflict. All of the talking points that Putin claims, like why Ukraine belongs to Russia and why he wants his Soviet empire back, have nothing to do with Biden or any other president.

It’s just silly and seeing Trump bow down to Putin once again shows how small he truly is.

Let’s assume for fun that it’s true. Why can’t he stop it then if he is so powerful? And now it’s up to the president of Ukraine to stop the war. And Putin threatens the Europeans to not torpedo the deal?! It’s so easy to see right through this scheme and trap that Putin has laid out, but Trump is just too stupid to grasp this concept at all.

25 minutes ago, Frankfurteagle89 said:

Blaming Biden makes no sense whatsoever when it comes to this conflict. All of the talking points that Putin claims, like why Ukraine belongs to Russia and why he wants his Soviet empire back, have nothing to do with Biden or any other president.

It’s just silly and seeing Trump bow down to Putin once again shows how small he truly is.

Let’s assume for fun that it’s true. Why can’t he stop it then if he is so powerful? And now it’s up to the president of Ukraine to stop the war. And Putin threatens the Europeans to not torpedo the deal?! It’s so easy to see right through this scheme and trap that Putin has laid out, but Trump is just too stupid to grasp this concept at all.

The telling point is that the sanctions warning passed yesterday with nothing from Trump other than saying "not now, maybe we take a look again in a few weeks" (I'm paraphrasing). Putin knew exactly how this would play out.

At least the meeting didn't end with a bunch of demands on Ukraine and Trump didn't give away Alaska. That's the best you could say about anything Trump did (didn't do).

7 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

The telling point is that the sanctions warning passed yesterday with nothing from Trump other than saying "not now, maybe we take a look again in a few weeks" (I'm paraphrasing). Putin knew exactly how this would play out.

At least the meeting didn't end with a bunch of demands on Ukraine and Trump didn't give away Alaska. That's the best you could say about anything Trump did (didn't do).

It’s actually kind of sad that our country has such a low bar these days when it comes to standing up to ruthless criminal leaders. This administration attacks its own citizens more than taking the fight against regimes that want to destroy our way of life.

Sure, Trump didn’t give anything yet, but the stage has been set that Russia will keep receiving gifts from him on the world stage. They are actually talking about lifting US sanctions instead of putting on additional ones. And go even think about giving away Alaska or anything in that US state is asinine and ludicrous… This imbecile keeps on giving.🤦🏻‍♂️

1 minute ago, Frankfurteagle89 said:

It’s actually kind of sad that our country has such a low bar these days when it comes to standing up to ruthless criminal leaders. This administration attacks its own citizens more than taking the fight against regimes that want to destroy our way of life.

Sure, Trump didn’t give anything yet, but the stage has been set that Russia will keep receiving gifts from him on the world stage. They are actually talking about lifting US sanctions instead of putting on additional ones. And go even think about giving away Alaska or anything in that US state is asinine and ludicrous… This imbecile keeps on giving.🤦🏻‍♂️

Yes, agreed. I suspect the most important part of the day was the short limo ride were Putin was alone with Trump and no doubt used that moment to turn the screws. Krasnov received the repeated warning loud and clear.

For all you MAGA heads, here is the evidence of how much Putin owns Trump

46 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

Yes, agreed. I suspect the most important part of the day was the short limo ride were Putin was alone with Trump and no doubt used that moment to turn the screws. Krasnov received the repeated warning loud and clear.

Absolutely! What a disgrace to have that war criminal ride in the "beast” with POTUS. What a ****show.

Too bad no one can play the card, "hey Russia if you’re listening, please release the Epstein files”…

9 hours ago, HazletonEagle said:

Barho is extremely triggered right now so I can confirm this tweet is true.

They are easily triggered and it’s hilarious. I just sit back and laugh. No need to respond to them. Same crap different day

8 minutes ago, It Hurts said:

They are easily triggered and it’s hilarious. I just sit back and laugh. No need to respond to them. Same crap different day

Dude got dog walked and we are mocking it all.

You were SOOOO CLOSE

Incompetence. Left dossier in printer at hotel. Should they even be using a hotel printer ?

Mail Online

Trump's mystery woman plunged into Putin leak scandal

Chief of Protocol Monica Crowley has been plunged into scandal after a secret dossier detailing Donald Trump's summit with Vladimir Putin was found by guests at an Alaskan hotel.

So how's that countdown for "very serious consequences for Russia" going? He blew right past it again, huh? Right back to blaming Biden and Zelensky. Why do we pay any attention to his announcements on this anymore?

Please excuse the rather long thought dump. Oh, and F you Trumptards.

---

The Putin proposal is a non-starter. We can debate any land swaps or land concessions but if Putin insists on solving what he calls the "original problem" (paraphrasing) then there is nothing as he seeks a Ukraine that is not under independent control but rather a puppet govt under Russian control. At this point, Putin has offered nothing other than what Trump perceives as a path for Trump to get the Peace Prize. This is exactly what was expected from the Alaska meeting, i.e. a photo op for Putin and a chance for him to double down by reminding Trump of whatever hold it is that he has on Trump.

The red lines in my mind are two. First, Russia must fully recognize the legitimacy of a fully independent Ukraine with Zelensky as the leader. There could be an agreement to hold an election within say 24 months or something. Second, there must be a full military guarantee from the west with some form of interim patrol force to hold the agreement. My thinking is that the military guarantees have to be thru the US rather than NATO with a time limit on when Ukraine can seek full NATO membership, say 10-15 years. Perhaps NATO can man the peace keeping force. If Putin rejects those two items then there MUST be an immediate move to highly increased sanctions and also a real move to provide Ukraine with a significant increase in real weaponry. Putin will only "listen" to strength.

There are really only three options as I see it:

1. Aggressively move on Putin and open up the war. A very risky move as it brings the nuke question into play and starts WWIII. Probably not what anyone wants although no doubt some believe it to be inevitable.

2. Adapt (re-up) an offensive posture with sanctions, military support to Ukraine, etc. and ensure that Ukraine can actually do what they need to do to keep Putin at bay. This will be very costly and push the can down the road but with the US in control. It might go on for years and is a test of long term will. The "Biden approach". This one can include an agreement of sorts, i.e. cease fire, peace deal at some point. Any land concession could be portrayed as unofficial recognition. This would take some years of strong push back. Ultimately Putin will grow old and either lashes out pushing into Option #1 OR he gets replaced. If he gets replaced then all bets are off on which direction things take.

3. Fall back into more isolation and watch Putin slowly grind down Ukraine into bits. Can they hold on long enough until US politics swing OR until Europe can complete a buildup? Unlikely. This option then leads to more aggression in Europe from Russia with Poland, Moldova, and/or the Baltics up next.

#2 is the only viable approach as I see it. Unfortunately, Trump mouths about #2 but is slowly slipping into #3. Why? What hold does Putin have on Trump? Or is it simply Donnie's desire to win the Noble prize? Or is it both?

Watching an American president, any American president, get played like a fiddle by our greatest adversary is sad any way you slice it.

58 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

Please excuse the rather long thought dump. Oh, and F you Trumptards.

---

The Putin proposal is a non-starter. We can debate any land swaps or land concessions but if Putin insists on solving what he calls the "original problem" (paraphrasing) then there is nothing as he seeks a Ukraine that is not under independent control but rather a puppet govt under Russian control. At this point, Putin has offered nothing other than what Trump perceives as a path for Trump to get the Peace Prize. This is exactly what was expected from the Alaska meeting, i.e. a photo op for Putin and a chance for him to double down by reminding Trump of whatever hold it is that he has on Trump.

The red lines in my mind are two. First, Russia must fully recognize the legitimacy of a fully independent Ukraine with Zelensky as the leader. There could be an agreement to hold an election within say 24 months or something. Second, there must be a full military guarantee from the west with some form of interim patrol force to hold the agreement. My thinking is that the military guarantees have to be thru the US rather than NATO with a time limit on when Ukraine can seek full NATO membership, say 10-15 years. Perhaps NATO can man the peace keeping force. If Putin rejects those two items then there MUST be an immediate move to highly increased sanctions and also a real move to provide Ukraine with a significant increase in real weaponry. Putin will only "listen" to strength.

There are really only three options as I see it:

1. Aggressively move on Putin and open up the war. A very risky move as it brings the nuke question into play and starts WWIII. Probably not what anyone wants although no doubt some believe it to be inevitable.

2. Adapt (re-up) an offensive posture with sanctions, military support to Ukraine, etc. and ensure that Ukraine can actually do what they need to do to keep Putin at bay. This will be very costly and push the can down the road but with the US in control. It might go on for years and is a test of long term will. The "Biden approach". This one can include an agreement of sorts, i.e. cease fire, peace deal at some point. Any land concession could be portrayed as unofficial recognition. This would take some years of strong push back. Ultimately Putin will grow old and either lashes out pushing into Option #1 OR he gets replaced. If he gets replaced then all bets are off on which direction things take.

3. Fall back into more isolation and watch Putin slowly grind down Ukraine into bits. Can they hold on long enough until US politics swing OR until Europe can complete a buildup? Unlikely. This option then leads to more aggression in Europe from Russia with Poland, Moldova, and/or the Baltics up next.

#2 is the only viable approach as I see it. Unfortunately, Trump mouths about #2 but is slowly slipping into #3. Why? What hold does Putin have on Trump? Or is it simply Donnie's desire to win the Noble prize? Or is it both?

For number 2 to work, it's got to be 100% all in by all parties. I just don't see that happening.

Number 1 would work the best. Putin isn't a national leader who does crime, hes a criminal who does national leading. The quicker one understands that, the quicker one knows how to deal with it. Criminals always opt for self preservation. If he faced a credible threat, he would push back from the table and call it a night. His nuke stuff is just rhetoric. The way Russian doctrine is, they have three levels of options in their deck to achieve an operational breakthrough. Step one is arty. If that doesn't work, step two is bio/chem weapons (they did it in Syria). If that doesn't work, step three is tactical nuclear weapons. The fact that they have not been able to achieve an operational breakthrough in Ukraine in so long, and they haven't even left the first rung of the ladder, shows they know exactly where they're at and they know exactly what they can't do. Also, there's some self preservation amongst the oligarchs, and Putin knows it. Russia hasn't fully mobilized for this war. They're getting manpower by paying poors more money than they have ever seen, because they know the poors won't be alive long enough to collect it. And because of their lack of manpower, they're not winning. They're not losing, but they're not winning. In order for them to win, they need to fully mobilize the populace, which won't happen because that includes the kids of oligarchs. So, while yes, Putin is powerful, he's only powerful to a certain extent. You have to remember, the only reason why he was ever in politics in the first place was to help the oligarchs skim off the top and make money. It doesn't matter to the poors, because they DGAF who dies as long as they get their money.

It's an entirely different culture.

45 minutes ago, Bill said:

For number 2 to work, it's got to be 100% all in by all parties. I just don't see that happening.

Number 1 would work the best. Putin isn't a national leader who does crime, hes a criminal who does national leading. The quicker one understands that, the quicker one knows how to deal with it. Criminals always opt for self preservation. If he faced a credible threat, he would push back from the table and call it a night. His nuke stuff is just rhetoric. The way Russian doctrine is, they have three levels of options in their deck to achieve an operational breakthrough. Step one is arty. If that doesn't work, step two is bio/chem weapons (they did it in Syria). If that doesn't work, step three is tactical nuclear weapons. The fact that they have not been able to achieve an operational breakthrough in Ukraine in so long, and they haven't even left the first rung of the ladder, shows they know exactly where they're at and they know exactly what they can't do. Also, there's some self preservation amongst the oligarchs, and Putin knows it. Russia hasn't fully mobilized for this war. They're getting manpower by paying poors more money than they have ever seen, because they know the poors won't be alive long enough to collect it. And because of their lack of manpower, they're not winning. They're not losing, but they're not winning. In order for them to win, they need to fully mobilize the populace, which won't happen because that includes the kids of oligarchs. So, while yes, Putin is powerful, he's only powerful to a certain extent. You have to remember, the only reason why he was ever in politics in the first place was to help the oligarchs skim off the top and make money. It doesn't matter to the poors, because they DGAF who dies as long as they get their money.

It's an entirely different culture.

#2 is barely holding and slowly degrading at the moment and mainly blocked by Trump and the MAGA isolationists, tricky in any case

#1 also needs a 100% all in at least by the US and that also isn't happening at this point and definitely not under Trump unless Putin makes a mistake

As for Putin, I agree he isn't all powerful but he is very smart and very strategic and he knows that if he uses chems or tactical nukes he will immediately move the situation toward #1. If that were to happen he'd not only open himself up to external enemies across the West but he's also be at great risk internally. That's the prime reason imho as to why the Russians haven't moved beyond artillery. I am convinced the Putin strategy is to control Trump and slowly grind while the West loses will to continue to fund Ukraine. He is counting on increased internal support as the Russians advance over time.

#3 ultimately leads to #1 and I'd agree with you that it would be better to go now rather than later but sadly it appears as if Trump is set on pretending to be pushing #2 but in reality moving towards #3 and doing that with Putin pulling the strings

2 hours ago, DrPhilly said:

Please excuse the rather long thought dump. Oh, and F you Trumptards.

---

The Putin proposal is a non-starter. We can debate any land swaps or land concessions but if Putin insists on solving what he calls the "original problem" (paraphrasing) then there is nothing as he seeks a Ukraine that is not under independent control but rather a puppet govt under Russian control. At this point, Putin has offered nothing other than what Trump perceives as a path for Trump to get the Peace Prize. This is exactly what was expected from the Alaska meeting, i.e. a photo op for Putin and a chance for him to double down by reminding Trump of whatever hold it is that he has on Trump.

The red lines in my mind are two. First, Russia must fully recognize the legitimacy of a fully independent Ukraine with Zelensky as the leader. There could be an agreement to hold an election within say 24 months or something. Second, there must be a full military guarantee from the west with some form of interim patrol force to hold the agreement. My thinking is that the military guarantees have to be thru the US rather than NATO with a time limit on when Ukraine can seek full NATO membership, say 10-15 years. Perhaps NATO can man the peace keeping force. If Putin rejects those two items then there MUST be an immediate move to highly increased sanctions and also a real move to provide Ukraine with a significant increase in real weaponry. Putin will only "listen" to strength.

There are really only three options as I see it:

1. Aggressively move on Putin and open up the war. A very risky move as it brings the nuke question into play and starts WWIII. Probably not what anyone wants although no doubt some believe it to be inevitable.

2. Adapt (re-up) an offensive posture with sanctions, military support to Ukraine, etc. and ensure that Ukraine can actually do what they need to do to keep Putin at bay. This will be very costly and push the can down the road but with the US in control. It might go on for years and is a test of long term will. The "Biden approach". This one can include an agreement of sorts, i.e. cease fire, peace deal at some point. Any land concession could be portrayed as unofficial recognition. This would take some years of strong push back. Ultimately Putin will grow old and either lashes out pushing into Option #1 OR he gets replaced. If he gets replaced then all bets are off on which direction things take.

3. Fall back into more isolation and watch Putin slowly grind down Ukraine into bits. Can they hold on long enough until US politics swing OR until Europe can complete a buildup? Unlikely. This option then leads to more aggression in Europe from Russia with Poland, Moldova, and/or the Baltics up next.

#2 is the only viable approach as I see it. Unfortunately, Trump mouths about #2 but is slowly slipping into #3. Why? What hold does Putin have on Trump? Or is it simply Donnie's desire to win the Noble prize? Or is it both?

Good analysis. Putin isn’t really putting out a truthful proposal. He is doing a typical "Maskirovka”, which is an old Soviet military doctrine of deception, misinformation and confusion. He’s remains the cagey KGB officer, who has included a high amount of criminality into his operations. He isn’t just playing Trump, he is playing the "West” as a whole. His greatest fear isn’t that we supply Ukraine with some weapons, intel or money, it’s a united NATO and coalition. That’s why he is winning at the moment because the "West” isn’t unified as it was during the Cold War. Even back then, one of the main goals of the Soviets was to drive a wedge into NATO and separate them politically. Get them away from the herd and weaken them from within.

Trump’s win in 2016 was a jackpot for Putin, as Trump caused a major split within the ranks and Russia really didn’t have to do much to advance the "maskirovka”. He was doing their job and it doesn’t matter if it was coincidental or on purpose.

Will give Trump credit for one thing, he actually has unified most of Europe with his stance that they need to provide for their own security. He is actually right about the Europeans depending too much on the US and also on not paying their fair share on military necessities. That alone should strengthen all of NATO, but his erratic stance towards his allies and his devotion to Putin keeps the door open for Putin’s game.

For starters, Putin would need to accept an unconditional ceasefire. I wouldn’t budge on that as it would show if Putin is serious about peace. Putin really doesn’t care about any red lines, as he will always move the goalposts to justify his aggression towards Ukraine and the west.

If someone can somehow talk some sense into Donnie T., it should be a major objective to further cripple the Russian economy. Putin knows that his war is really hurting his economy, just like any war does. We are actually in a good position to really hurt this regime, if they finally follow through with sanctions. This isn’t just the US, but other European countries as well.

Good and "easy” options are very difficult to achieve when you consider Russia’s dead end stance. It will be extremely hard to get a compromise when one side keeps adding "red lines” of why Ukraine belongs to Russia.

Let’s say Trump hypothetically turns into Ronald Reagan on foreign policy.

Agree, that your option #2 is the only viable option out of the three. I would include "aggressively” move against Putin into the equation, but not with troops or a declaration of war against Russia. Real sanctions from all parties would be essential. Rearming Ukraine militarily and having Europe paying the bulk of costs would keep the "isolationists” on board. I wouldn’t give support in form of money, but just equipment. Give em older stuff and renew our equipment. The biggest concern is manpower. Ukraine doesn’t have the soldier resources that Russia has and this will be a huge problem going forward.

If Ukraine has to give up land, then it can’t be officially recognized by the US and western countries. That has to be a given.

Above all, this administration would stop the Stalinistic fantasies of Putin by "re” unifying the US with NATO and the West, not just on paper, but the way it was during the Cold War.