This might be a little tougher than Putin thought...
- Thread starter Nole Lou
- Start date
Nowhere now. We pulled our troops out. What, do you think we just had troops hanging out on street corners when we spent nearly 20 years there occupying the country?
Great prank or scary moment for future cannon fodder.
So your example of strengthening was new bases, but there havent been any new US bases as a result of this invasion? Why'd you bring it up?
That point is written in treaty, and it isn’t Ukraine.
There’s a phrase I first heard used back in Obama’s admin in this regard.
Escalatory Dominance.
The U.S. would nuke over Cuba.
The USSR wouldn’t nuke over Cuba.
Russia will nuke over Crimea
The U.S. wouldn’t nuke over Crimea.
Do you disagree?
The scary thing about that escalation is that we go from degrees of winners and losers in the conflict to everyone loses to some degree.
There is no making the outcome better from that moment, just the promise to keep making it exponentially worse.
Last edited:
It's fun to look back.
https://www.theatlantic.com/news/archive/2017/02/trump-obama-russia-crimea/516777/
In 2012, Mitt Romney, who at the time was seeking the presidency, called Russia the United States’s Number 1 “geopolitical foe.” He was roundly mocked for his assessment, including by President Obama, who was then seeking re-election. Just three years earlier, the Obama administration famously “reset” U.S. relations with Russia that had been damaged by Moscow’s conflict with the former Soviet republic of Georgia. As part of this initiative, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton presented her Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, with what was intended to be a “reset” button.
Obama’s response to Russia’s invasion of Crimea in March 2014, and Moscow’s subsequent support of pro-Russian rebels in eastern Ukraine was economic sanctions. Although the measures had an impact on the Russian economy, they were seen as woefully inadequate by some Republican lawmakers in Congress. Senator John McCain of Arizona, a harsh critic of Obama’s foreign policy, wanted the U.S. to send arms to Ukraine. But Obama viewed the Ukraine conflict through another lens. As Jeffrey Goldberg, The Atlantic’s editor in chief, wrote in the Obama Doctrine: “Obama’s theory here is simple: Ukraine is a core Russian interest but not an American one, so Russia will always be able to maintain escalatory dominance there.” Indeed, Obama told Jeff: “The fact is that Ukraine, which is a non-NATO country, is going to be vulnerable to military domination by Russia no matter what we do.”
Between this, Trump trying to extort aid for blackmail material, and Biden's "minor incursion" statement, no wonder why we're where we are right now.
We still have troops in Iraq.
About six months after the U.S. ended its longest war, the outgoing head of U.S. Central Command hinted that U.S. involvement in Iraq is probably going to go on even longer.
As the 19th anniversary of Operation Iraq Freedom approaches, there are roughly 2,500 troops still in Iraq, playing a strict advise-and-assist role at the invitation of the Iraqi government.
...when Ukraine didn't have remotely the army they have today.
And we were resetting relations with our new buddies in Russia since it's not the 1980's anymore and the "cold war is over".
JFC, I'm not sure if you're just a moron of an expert shill.
I'm going with both.
Last edited:
Boy that's tough to watch. Seems like killing protestors will only encourage more protests.
You have to recognize the political instability that existed in Ukraine in 2014. Quite a bit has changed in just a few years; and Russia was taking very limited gains then which wouldn't have pushed a fierce resistance if they happened today. Russia had pretty much been leasing Crimea for years, and the Donbas was a very Pro-Russian area. So while Ukraine wasn't happy about it, you weren't going to get major European forces ready to spend billions in resistance then.
Since then we've worked to help stabilize the politics (Well when Trump wasn't trying to tear it apart for his own personal gains), train and supply their armed forces, and prepare them in case Russia did try something. The hopes were that Russia would recognize it wasn't a great bet, and be satisfied with having taken Crimea and the Donbas as a border area protecting them from Ukraine as it became more European. Putin crossly miscalculated, but even with all we'd done; we had no idea whether Ukraine would be able to put up a fight. Most of us were certain Russia would have all of Ukraine in less than a week. I remember staying up till late at night just to make certain Ukraine saw another sunrise and Zelensky was still in power before I'd fall asleep. Then a week in everyone realized this was a different matter. At that point we're dealing with a full scale invasion and a country with the will and means to fight back. That changed the rules of the engagement.
Indeed; ruled by a Putin puppet, and very unstable during that transition.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 97,889
- 204,145
- 113
He or she should have stopped typing after the bolded...crazy talk.
Can't see NATO or the US wanting to get into a Nuclear exchange because...
"Russia could be decimated by the UK and France alone, never mind the US arsenal"
Any win would be a pyrrhic victory at best...
The only people left in Russia are going to be Ukrainians that the Russians kidnapped.
President Volodymyr Zelensky has stated that the most important sanction measure that must be applied to Russia is to designate it a state – sponsor of terrorism.
https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-at...nate-russia-a-state-sponsor-of-terrorism.html
......
WASHINGTON, Sept 14 (Reuters) - Democratic and Republican U.S. senators introduced legislation on Wednesday that would designate Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism, a label pushed for by Ukraine but opposed by President Joe Biden's administration.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europ...te-russia-state-sponsor-terrorism-2022-09-14/
.....
Russian media seems to be thankful we passed, despite a bi-partisan bill supporting it.
https://tass.com/politics/1503263
https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-at...nate-russia-a-state-sponsor-of-terrorism.html
......
U.S. senators introduce bill to designate Russia state sponsor of terrorism
WASHINGTON, Sept 14 (Reuters) - Democratic and Republican U.S. senators introduced legislation on Wednesday that would designate Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism, a label pushed for by Ukraine but opposed by President Joe Biden's administration.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europ...te-russia-state-sponsor-terrorism-2022-09-14/
.....
Russian media seems to be thankful we passed, despite a bi-partisan bill supporting it.
Kremlin appreciates Biden not recognizing Russia as state sponsor of terrorism
https://tass.com/politics/1503263
One of the military experts on CNN or MSNBC said that Ukraine is having trouble servicing all the equipment the West has provided. He thinks that we should provide contractors who would work in Ukraine but have to stay a couple of hundred miles from the front. He said that this worked in Iraq and Afghanistan though a total of 120 were killed. He also mentioned a defense rocket system (did not catch the acronym) they could use to defend these contractors as they had used before it in those countries. Just wanted to mention it because countries are ticked enough at Putin now to maybe go ahead and provide this support.
