Trump makes a deal with Russia

[Colonoscopy]

I'm sure none of us on this message board are Putin "experts" -- but most of us, I would have assumed, had a basic understanding of why he might be considered such a problematic "leader." (there is always a chance someone just didn't pay attention to that sort of thing, so...)

Here's a nice summary for you:

Trump makes a deal with Russia

The people supporting Trump and Putin are true traitors to the USA, they are not patriots, they are traitors. They do not follow the rule of law, they just like their rah rah Felon Trump. Those people should study history, and all of you should ashamed of yourselves. You’re not true...

iowa.forums.rivals.com

My claim is pretty straight forward:

Putin, where malevolent behavior is concerned, is easily recognized as more problematic than any leader/state in Western Europe over the past 25 years, any US president in the past 25 years, and Vladimir Zelensky. By many magnitudes.

Both in aggregate and sum the level of malevolent behavior produced by Putin would very clearly be much much larger.

From this it flows who the US might feel closer to where shared values and allyship are concerned.

This isn't difficult.

No, this isn't saying that the US has to fund Ukraine indefinitely in the war against Russia.

Yes, it does say whose "side" we should be on. And what we ought to care about, to an extent, when trying to negotiate.

 

[Hawkfan_08]

There are fights and injustices all over the world that we dont do anything about, why do we care about Ukraine? It is because we want their natural resources. It is not because we feel bad for Ukraine or the people.

You may feel that way. I feel bad for the people of Ukraine and I'm pro democracy, anti-dictator, and very anti-Russian. I've had two Ukrainian kids in my class that are having to start their lives over as they were escaping bombs.

Also, to your first point, you are right. I have kids come in from the DRC, Sudan, etc... that have stories of climbing over bodies and avoiding being shot to get here. Also sad and frustrating. I wish we did care more about those cases.

 

[Odinorske]

And there you have it. A complete lack of moral clarity.

What is in our country’s best interests is not driven by morality. Having said that, stopping a bloody war with the potential to last for years is hardly immoral.

 

[Colonoscopy]

What makes Ukraine so good and Russia so bad?

Let's see if AI can help! I asked Grok:

Where malevolent behavior is concerned contrast Vladimir Zelensky with Vladimir Putin

Comparing Vladimir Zelensky and Vladimir Putin in terms of malevolent behavior involves analyzing their actions, intent, and consequences within their distinct contexts—Zelensky as Ukraine’s democratic leader since 2019, thrust into an existential war, and Putin as Russia’s authoritarian ruler since 1999, orchestrating that war and decades of repression. Malevolence implies deliberate harm or evil intent, so I’ll focus on documented actions where harm has been caused or alleged, contrasting their scale, methods, and motivations as of March 3, 2025. This isn’t about equivalence but a factual juxtaposition.
Scope and Scale of Harm

• Putin: His record is marked by widespread, intentional harm on a massive scale.
  • Wars and Aggression: The 2022 Ukraine invasion has killed tens of thousands (U.S. estimates exceed 100,000 casualties), displaced over 10 million, and razed cities, with war crimes like Bucha’s massacres and child abductions (19,000+ documented) earning him an ICC warrant in 2023. Earlier, the Crimea annexation (2014) and Chechen wars (1999–2009) killed thousands and devastated regions.
  • Domestic Repression: Putin has eliminated critics—e.g., Boris Nemtsov’s 2015 assassination, Alexei Navalny’s 2024 prison death—and crushed dissent with mass arrests, torture (e.g., Chechnya’s anti-gay purges), and media suppression, affecting millions under his rule.
  • Global Reach: Assassinations abroad (Litvinenko 2006, Skripal 2018) and election interference (e.g., 2016 U.S.) amplify his destabilizing impact.
• Zelensky: Harm tied to him is narrower, often a byproduct of war or governance, not a primary aim.
  • Wartime Casualties: His refusal to negotiate with Russia post-2022, codified in a law banning talks while Putin remains, has prolonged the war, costing tens of thousands of Ukrainian lives (exact figures disputed, but significant). Forced conscription—drafting older men and using aggressive tactics—has led to domestic suffering and evasion.
  • Pre-War Failures: Downplaying Russia’s 2022 invasion risk delayed preparations, arguably worsening initial losses. Corruption scandals (e.g., weapons overpricing) have siphoned wartime resources, indirectly harming citizens and troops.
  • Repression: Banning opposition parties and consolidating media under martial law have silenced voices, though framed as security measures, not personal vendettas—impacting political freedom, not lives directly.

Contrast: Putin’s malevolence is vast and proactive, driving death and destruction as policy. Zelensky’s is reactive, tied to war’s exigencies or missteps, with harm on a far smaller scale and less evident intent.
Methods of Control

• Putin: Employs violence and totalitarianism.
  • Elimination: He uses assassinations, poisonings (e.g., Navalny’s Novichok), and prison to remove threats. Opposition is outlawed, elections rigged (e.g., 2020 term reset), and media state-run.
  • Fear and Force: The FSB and police enforce obedience through surveillance, torture, and terror—e.g., Chechnya’s leveling or protester crackdowns—creating a submissive populace.
• Zelensky: Relies on legal and wartime measures, constrained by democracy.
  • Wartime Authority: He’s banned pro-Russian parties (e.g., Opposition Platform) and unified media into a state channel, citing treason risks. Critics like Gonzalo Lira faced arrest or died in custody, though under legal pretexts, not extrajudicial hits.
  • Conscription Tactics: Aggressive draft enforcement—abductions by officers reported—shows coercion, but it’s war-driven, not a systemic purge. Political rivals face exclusion, not elimination.

Contrast: Putin’s methods are brutal and permanent, rooted in personal power. Zelensky’s are authoritarian but temporary, shaped by survival against Putin’s aggression—repression versus annihilation.
Motivation and Intent

• Putin: Driven by domination and self-preservation.
  • Imperial Ambition: Ukraine’s invasion seeks to reclaim a “Greater Russia,” indifferent to human cost—malevolence as a tool for legacy. Corruption (billions amassed) and critic-killings (e.g., Nemtsov) protect his rule.
  • Deliberate Cruelty: Child abductions and civilian bombings suggest intent to break Ukraine’s will, not just win territory.
• Zelensky: Motivated by resistance and national survival.
  • Defiance: His no-talks stance and escalation (e.g., strikes in Russia) aim to outlast Putin, but critics say it sacrifices lives for pride or Western backing. Pre-war corruption ties (e.g., Kolomoisky) hint at self-interest, though not lethal.
  • Misjudgment: Downplaying invasion risks and slow reforms reflect naivety or political gain, not malice—harm as unintended consequence.

Contrast: Putin’s intent is explicitly malevolent—harm as strategy. Zelensky’s is defensive, with harm arising from stubbornness or error, not a desire to inflict suffering.
Global Perception and Accountability

• Putin: A pariah to democracies, revered by autocrats.
  • Sanctioned, ICC-targeted, and isolated, he shrugs off accountability via propaganda and repression. His malevolence is a decades-long hallmark.
• Zelensky: Hero to some, criticized by others.
  • Lauded for defiance, he’s also faulted for authoritarian drifts and alienating allies (e.g., U.S. spats in 2025). He faces domestic scrutiny and electoral risk post-war, limiting malevolence’s scope.

Contrast: Putin’s malevolence is systemic, unchecked, and celebrated by his regime. Zelensky’s alleged misdeeds are wartime trade-offs, answerable to a democracy—global condemnation versus mixed reviews.

Conclusion
Putin’s malevolent behavior is defined by deliberate, large-scale violence and oppression—wars, murders, and tyranny as core tactics. Zelensky’s involves wartime repression and policy failures—significant but situational, not sadistic. Putin orchestrates harm to dominate; Zelensky endures it to resist, with malevolence inferred by critics from outcomes, not design. The gap is profound: one thrives on evil’s execution, the other grapples with its consequences. Let me know if you’d like deeper specifics!

 

[noStemsnoSTICKS]

How much would you flip out if Trump signs a minerals deal with Putin for the same land that Russia took from Ukraine during the war. I think this would be the biggest FU to Zelensky ever. I think it would be fun to want democrats freak out after the deep state broke the law by convincing Zelensky not to make a deal with Trump.

Again, NEVER about policy with maggots.

Always about "owning" the libs.

Democracy be damned.

 

[Hawk_82]

@Hawk_82

I asked Grok (Musk's AI engine) to give me a summary of the "bad things" Putin is known for, take a look, and compare:

------

Vladimir Putin, as the leader of Russia since 1999 (first as acting president, then president and prime minister), has been associated with a range of actions widely criticized by the international community, human rights organizations, and political opponents. Below is an overview of some of the most notable "bad things" attributed to him, based on documented events and widely reported allegations. These span domestic repression, international aggression, and alleged war crimes.
Domestic Repression

1. Suppression of Free Press: Putin has overseen the dismantling of independent media in Russia. After coming to power, outlets like NTV were brought under state control, and critical journalists faced harassment, exile, or worse. The Committee to Protect Journalists has documented numerous cases of murdered or intimidated Russian journalists, such as Anna Politkovskaya, killed in 2006 while investigating abuses in Chechnya.

You could argue this same thing happened under democrats. The left was censoring covid stuff and they were cancelling harvard doctors for having an opposing opinion. It is pretty clear that the msm has been acting as a mouthpiece for the democratic party the last 4 years. (outside of fox__maybe)

1. Political Oppression: Opposition figures have been systematically targeted. High-profile cases include:
   • Boris Nemtsov, a prominent critic, assassinated near the Kremlin in 2015.
   • Alexei Navalny, poisoned with a nerve agent in 2020, imprisoned upon his return to Russia in 2021, and died in an Arctic prison in 2024 under suspicious circumstances widely blamed on the Kremlin.

I believe Trump was politically targeted and the justice system was weaponized against him. There is plenty of evidence to support this. Even if you don't agree, it should at least raise a red flag

1. • Laws have been enacted to label critics as "foreign agents" or extremists, effectively silencing dissent.

Isn't this what democrats have been trying to do to trump and anyone who opposed them? Trump is a russia asset and a nazi, Tulsi is a russian asset, Musk is a nazi

1. Election Manipulation: Putin has maintained power through elections widely regarded as neither free nor fair. Constitutional changes in 2020 reset his term limits, potentially allowing him to rule until 2036. Independent monitors, like the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), have repeatedly cited voter intimidation, ballot stuffing, and lack of transparency.

California and new york have a law that it is illegal to show your id when you are voting. The only way this makes sense is to get illegals to vote so you can steal elections

1. Human Rights Abuses: Minority groups, particularly LGBTQ+ individuals, have faced persecution under Putin. The 2013 "gay propaganda" law and brutal crackdowns in Chechnya, including reported purges of gay men, have drawn global condemnation from groups like Human Rights Watch.

Its not clear that this is the wrong side of history. I have been a big critic of this movement and I believe the trans stuff will go down as the biggest medical scandal in history.

Aggressive Foreign Policy

1. Annexation of Crimea (2014): Putin ordered the illegal annexation of Crimea from Ukraine following a controversial referendum conducted under Russian military occupation. This violated international law, as recognized by the United Nations General Assembly (Resolution 68/262), and sparked sanctions from the West.
2. War in Ukraine (2022–Present): The full-scale invasion of Ukraine, launched in February 2022, is perhaps the most significant and destructive act associated with Putin. It has resulted in:
   • Tens of thousands of deaths, both military and civilian, with estimates varying widely due to the fog of war.
   • Alleged war crimes, including the massacre in Bucha, where hundreds of civilians were found dead after Russian withdrawal, and the bombing of civilian infrastructure like hospitals and schools.
   • The International Criminal Court (ICC) issued an arrest warrant for Putin in March 2023 for the war crime of deporting Ukrainian children—over 19,000 have been documented as forcibly taken to Russia.

Both of these instances came after the west was talking about bringing Ukraine into Nato which putin has clearly said he did not want and would retaliate if they continued.

1. Interference in Foreign Elections: Putin’s government has been accused of meddling in democratic processes globally, most notably the 2016 U.S. presidential election. U.S. intelligence agencies concluded that Russian operatives, likely directed by the Kremlin, conducted cyberattacks and disinformation campaigns to influence the outcome.

The US has proudly claimed that they have overthrown many governments. Maybe 60+ (Id have to look up the numbers though, this is off memory)

1. Support for Authoritarian Regimes: Putin has propped up dictators like Syria’s Bashar al-Assad, providing military support since 2015 that has prolonged the civil war and contributed to mass civilian casualties, including through airstrikes on populated areas.

Alleged Assassinations and Covert Operations

1. Poisonings and Murders Abroad: Putin’s regime has been linked to high-profile killings outside Russia:
   • Alexander Litvinenko, a former FSB agent and critic, was poisoned with polonium-210 in London in 2006. A U.K. inquiry concluded Putin "probably" approved it.
   • Sergei Skripal, a former spy, survived a nerve agent attack in the U.K. in 2018, widely attributed to Russian agents.
   • These incidents suggest a pattern of targeting defectors and critics beyond Russia’s borders.
2. Chechen Wars: Putin rose to prominence during the Second Chechen War (1999–2009), which he oversaw as prime minister and then president. The conflict saw Grozny leveled, thousands killed, and widespread human rights abuses, including torture and disappearances, documented by groups like Amnesty International.

Economic and Social Failures

1. Kleptocracy and Corruption: Putin’s rule has been marked by systemic corruption, with estimates suggesting he and his inner circle have amassed billions. The Pandora Papers and investigations like Alexei Navalny’s exposés (e.g., the "Putin’s Palace" documentary) highlight a vast disparity between elite wealth and the stagnating Russian economy, which has hurt ordinary citizens.

Didn't Ukraine have the highest level of corruption out of the entire world not that long ago (maybe still)

1. Economic Stagnation: Despite early growth fueled by oil prices, Russia’s economy has faltered under Putin, especially post-2014 sanctions. Living standards have declined for many, with poverty affecting over 10% of the population, per World Bank data, while Putin prioritizes military spending.

Broader Implications
Putin’s actions have isolated Russia internationally, deepened authoritarianism at home, and destabilized regions from Eastern Europe to the Middle East. Critics argue he prioritizes personal power and regime survival over the well-being of Russians or global stability, a view supported by his willingness to escalate conflicts—like threatening nuclear use in Ukraine—to maintain control.
This list is not exhaustive, and some allegations (e.g., direct orders for assassinations) remain unproven in a legal sense due to Russia’s opacity. However, the pattern of behavior—backed by reports from governments, NGOs, and firsthand accounts—paints a picture of a leader whose tenure has been marked by repression, aggression, and disregard for international norms. If you’d like me to dive deeper into any specific event or provide more context, let me know!

I don't 100% agree that all these are bad. I hope you can see a clear difference between Putin and someone like Hitler or Stalin. I did not see that he has killed millions on this list. Not every country is going to have the same values as the USA. That is ok in my opinion. There are some shady parts, but you could say the same for about ever leader in the world.

 

[Hawk_82]

@Hawk_82

I asked Grok (Musk's AI engine) to give me a summary of the "bad things" Putin is known for, take a look, and compare:

------

To counter this, I searched ChatGPT "Give me a summary of the good stuff Putin has done". I don't agree with the centralized power, but if it works for Russia, who am I to judge.

Vladimir Putin’s time in power has been marked by a range of policies and actions that some see as positive, especially from the perspective of stabilizing Russia after the chaos of the 1990s and strengthening its position on the world stage. While many of his actions are controversial, there are several areas where some credit Putin for improving certain aspects of Russia’s governance and international standing.

Here are some of the key things Putin has been praised for:

1. Stabilizing Russia After the 1990s​

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia went through a period of economic hardship, political instability, and widespread corruption in the 1990s under President Boris Yeltsin. Putin is often credited with restoring stability to Russia after this tumultuous period. His leadership helped curb the chaos, bringing a sense of order and control to the country.

2. Economic Growth in the Early 2000s​

During Putin's first two terms (2000-2008), Russia experienced significant economic growth. This was largely driven by rising oil and gas prices, which boosted Russia's energy exports. Under Putin, Russia’s GDP grew significantly, and the country was able to pay off much of its foreign debt, which had been a major problem in the 1990s.

3. Improved Living Standards for Many Russians​

Economic growth under Putin led to improved living standards for many Russians. There was a significant reduction in poverty, and wages and pensions increased for many citizens. The government invested in infrastructure and raised public sector salaries, which helped improve the quality of life for a portion of the population, especially in urban areas.

4. Strong Nationalism and Pride​

Putin has positioned himself as a defender of Russian national identity and pride. He has emphasized the importance of Russia’s historical and cultural legacy, and many Russians feel that he has restored their country’s dignity on the world stage. Under Putin, Russia has projected itself as a global power, particularly in the context of the West’s influence.

5. Restoration of Order in Chechnya​

After two brutal wars in the Chechen region, Putin's leadership has been credited with restoring order and stability in Chechnya. While the methods used were highly controversial (including heavy military force and human rights abuses), Chechnya is now largely peaceful, and the region is under the control of Kadyrov, a loyal ally of Putin. This has helped reduce the threat of separatism in the region.

6. Military Modernization​

Putin has invested heavily in modernizing Russia's military, including upgrading its air force, navy, and missile systems. This has been seen as a way to strengthen Russia’s defense capabilities and ensure its security in a world where it perceives increasing threats from NATO and Western powers. This military modernization is also viewed by some as a demonstration of Russia’s renewed global influence.

7. Energy Superpower​

Under Putin’s leadership, Russia has maintained its position as a global energy superpower, with large reserves of oil, natural gas, and coal. The Russian state has also worked to develop and control key pipelines to Europe and China, giving it significant leverage in global energy markets. This has been a source of economic power and political influence.

8. Strategic International Influence​

Putin has worked to reassert Russia's influence globally, particularly in regions like the Middle East, Eastern Europe, and Central Asia. Russia’s intervention in Syria, for example, helped ensure the survival of Bashar al-Assad's regime and cemented Russia’s role as a key player in Middle Eastern geopolitics. Putin has also positioned Russia as a counterbalance to the West, particularly the United States and NATO.

9. Support for Traditional Family Values​

Putin has positioned himself as a defender of traditional family values, promoting laws and policies that reflect conservative views on issues like same-sex marriage and abortion. These positions have been popular with some segments of the Russian population, particularly in more rural and religious areas.

10. Centralization of Power​

While often criticized as authoritarian, the centralization of power under Putin is seen by some as a necessary step to maintain political stability in a country with a history of weak institutions and political chaos. His control over key parts of the government, business sectors, and media has allowed him to keep a firm grip on power, which some see as essential to avoid the kind of instability that marked the 1990s.

In summary, supporters of Putin point to his role in stabilizing Russia, revitalizing the economy (especially in the early years of his rule), restoring national pride, and increasing Russia's global influence. These are seen as significant achievements, especially in contrast to the difficulties and instability faced by Russia in the post-Soviet years. However, it's important to note that many of these successes come with significant criticisms, particularly in terms of democratic freedoms, human rights, and the authoritarian nature of his rule.

 

[Hawk_82]

Wait. I am confused. Are you saying the Biden administration committed all of these resources to Ukraine for mineral rights? And now that Trump is in office, we now no longer care about the mineral rights?

No, thats not what Im saying. Biden gave 300 billion to Ukraine and now Zelensky says it was a grant so he doesn't even want to pay us back. Trump says, if you want us to continue to support you in any way, you need to pay us something back in return. Since you don't have 300 billion in cash, we will take some of your minerals in return to make continuing to provide you aid worth while for the USA.

 

[noStemsnoSTICKS]

To counter this, I searched ChatGPT "Give me a summary of the good stuff Putin has done". I don't agree with the centralized power, but if it works for Russia, who am I to judge.

Vladimir Putin’s time in power has been marked by a range of policies and actions that some see as positive, especially from the perspective of stabilizing Russia after the chaos of the 1990s and strengthening its position on the world stage. While many of his actions are controversial, there are several areas where some credit Putin for improving certain aspects of Russia’s governance and international standing.

Here are some of the key things Putin has been praised for:

1. Stabilizing Russia After the 1990s​

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia went through a period of economic hardship, political instability, and widespread corruption in the 1990s under President Boris Yeltsin. Putin is often credited with restoring stability to Russia after this tumultuous period. His leadership helped curb the chaos, bringing a sense of order and control to the country.

2. Economic Growth in the Early 2000s​

During Putin's first two terms (2000-2008), Russia experienced significant economic growth. This was largely driven by rising oil and gas prices, which boosted Russia's energy exports. Under Putin, Russia’s GDP grew significantly, and the country was able to pay off much of its foreign debt, which had been a major problem in the 1990s.

3. Improved Living Standards for Many Russians​

Economic growth under Putin led to improved living standards for many Russians. There was a significant reduction in poverty, and wages and pensions increased for many citizens. The government invested in infrastructure and raised public sector salaries, which helped improve the quality of life for a portion of the population, especially in urban areas.

4. Strong Nationalism and Pride​

Putin has positioned himself as a defender of Russian national identity and pride. He has emphasized the importance of Russia’s historical and cultural legacy, and many Russians feel that he has restored their country’s dignity on the world stage. Under Putin, Russia has projected itself as a global power, particularly in the context of the West’s influence.

5. Restoration of Order in Chechnya​

After two brutal wars in the Chechen region, Putin's leadership has been credited with restoring order and stability in Chechnya. While the methods used were highly controversial (including heavy military force and human rights abuses), Chechnya is now largely peaceful, and the region is under the control of Kadyrov, a loyal ally of Putin. This has helped reduce the threat of separatism in the region.

6. Military Modernization​

Putin has invested heavily in modernizing Russia's military, including upgrading its air force, navy, and missile systems. This has been seen as a way to strengthen Russia’s defense capabilities and ensure its security in a world where it perceives increasing threats from NATO and Western powers. This military modernization is also viewed by some as a demonstration of Russia’s renewed global influence.

7. Energy Superpower​

Under Putin’s leadership, Russia has maintained its position as a global energy superpower, with large reserves of oil, natural gas, and coal. The Russian state has also worked to develop and control key pipelines to Europe and China, giving it significant leverage in global energy markets. This has been a source of economic power and political influence.

8. Strategic International Influence​

Putin has worked to reassert Russia's influence globally, particularly in regions like the Middle East, Eastern Europe, and Central Asia. Russia’s intervention in Syria, for example, helped ensure the survival of Bashar al-Assad's regime and cemented Russia’s role as a key player in Middle Eastern geopolitics. Putin has also positioned Russia as a counterbalance to the West, particularly the United States and NATO.

9. Support for Traditional Family Values​

Putin has positioned himself as a defender of traditional family values, promoting laws and policies that reflect conservative views on issues like same-sex marriage and abortion. These positions have been popular with some segments of the Russian population, particularly in more rural and religious areas.

10. Centralization of Power​

While often criticized as authoritarian, the centralization of power under Putin is seen by some as a necessary step to maintain political stability in a country with a history of weak institutions and political chaos. His control over key parts of the government, business sectors, and media has allowed him to keep a firm grip on power, which some see as essential to avoid the kind of instability that marked the 1990s.

In summary, supporters of Putin point to his role in stabilizing Russia, revitalizing the economy (especially in the early years of his rule), restoring national pride, and increasing Russia's global influence. These are seen as significant achievements, especially in contrast to the difficulties and instability faced by Russia in the post-Soviet years. However, it's important to note that many of these successes come with significant criticisms, particularly in terms of democratic freedoms, human rights, and the authoritarian nature of his rule.

So brainwashed, he's actually making an argument for supporting a Russian dictator now.

Based on a chat GPT search.

 

[Hawk_82]

You may feel that way. I feel bad for the people of Ukraine and I'm pro democracy, anti-dictator, and very anti-Russian. I've had two Ukrainian kids in my class that are having to start their lives over as they were escaping bombs.

Also, to your first point, you are right. I have kids come in from the DRC, Sudan, etc... that have stories of climbing over bodies and avoiding being shot to get here. Also sad and frustrating. I wish we did care more about those cases.

There are sad situations all over the world. You say you are anti-russian, but there are also innocent russians as well. In a perfect world we would all have a good life with no suffering and war. But the US cannot provide for the rest of the world. We have to draw a line somewhere. Someone will always be left out. I feel bad for the innocent people of Ukraine and Russia. That is why I want to end the war. I feel like this is a better route to go. If you consider Putin to be a bad person, then we should try other routes to get him to stop. But continuing to poke the bear by keeping the door open to Ukraine joining Nato is only going to lead to more war, death and suffering.

I don't like everything about Trump, but I like that he thinks outside the box. He is willing to try things that other leaders would not. If a minerals deal brings an end to the war, then Im all for it. If giving up a little land brings an end to the war then Im for that as well. Ukraine has to decide what they are willing to give up for peace. In my experience, the longer a war goes on, the more you are willing to give up to stop it. So lets make a deal now.

 

[Colonoscopy]

To counter this, I searched ChatGPT "Give me a summary of the good stuff Putin has done". I don't agree with the centralized power, but if it works for Russia, who am I to judge.

Vladimir Putin’s time in power has been marked by a range of policies and actions that some see as positive, especially from the perspective of stabilizing Russia after the chaos of the 1990s and strengthening its position on the world stage. While many of his actions are controversial, there are several areas where some credit Putin for improving certain aspects of Russia’s governance and international standing.

Here are some of the key things Putin has been praised for:

1. Stabilizing Russia After the 1990s​

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia went through a period of economic hardship, political instability, and widespread corruption in the 1990s under President Boris Yeltsin. Putin is often credited with restoring stability to Russia after this tumultuous period. His leadership helped curb the chaos, bringing a sense of order and control to the country.

2. Economic Growth in the Early 2000s​

During Putin's first two terms (2000-2008), Russia experienced significant economic growth. This was largely driven by rising oil and gas prices, which boosted Russia's energy exports. Under Putin, Russia’s GDP grew significantly, and the country was able to pay off much of its foreign debt, which had been a major problem in the 1990s.

3. Improved Living Standards for Many Russians​

Economic growth under Putin led to improved living standards for many Russians. There was a significant reduction in poverty, and wages and pensions increased for many citizens. The government invested in infrastructure and raised public sector salaries, which helped improve the quality of life for a portion of the population, especially in urban areas.

4. Strong Nationalism and Pride​

Putin has positioned himself as a defender of Russian national identity and pride. He has emphasized the importance of Russia’s historical and cultural legacy, and many Russians feel that he has restored their country’s dignity on the world stage. Under Putin, Russia has projected itself as a global power, particularly in the context of the West’s influence.

5. Restoration of Order in Chechnya​

After two brutal wars in the Chechen region, Putin's leadership has been credited with restoring order and stability in Chechnya. While the methods used were highly controversial (including heavy military force and human rights abuses), Chechnya is now largely peaceful, and the region is under the control of Kadyrov, a loyal ally of Putin. This has helped reduce the threat of separatism in the region.

6. Military Modernization​

Putin has invested heavily in modernizing Russia's military, including upgrading its air force, navy, and missile systems. This has been seen as a way to strengthen Russia’s defense capabilities and ensure its security in a world where it perceives increasing threats from NATO and Western powers. This military modernization is also viewed by some as a demonstration of Russia’s renewed global influence.

7. Energy Superpower​

Under Putin’s leadership, Russia has maintained its position as a global energy superpower, with large reserves of oil, natural gas, and coal. The Russian state has also worked to develop and control key pipelines to Europe and China, giving it significant leverage in global energy markets. This has been a source of economic power and political influence.

8. Strategic International Influence​

Putin has worked to reassert Russia's influence globally, particularly in regions like the Middle East, Eastern Europe, and Central Asia. Russia’s intervention in Syria, for example, helped ensure the survival of Bashar al-Assad's regime and cemented Russia’s role as a key player in Middle Eastern geopolitics. Putin has also positioned Russia as a counterbalance to the West, particularly the United States and NATO.

9. Support for Traditional Family Values​

Putin has positioned himself as a defender of traditional family values, promoting laws and policies that reflect conservative views on issues like same-sex marriage and abortion. These positions have been popular with some segments of the Russian population, particularly in more rural and religious areas.

10. Centralization of Power​

While often criticized as authoritarian, the centralization of power under Putin is seen by some as a necessary step to maintain political stability in a country with a history of weak institutions and political chaos. His control over key parts of the government, business sectors, and media has allowed him to keep a firm grip on power, which some see as essential to avoid the kind of instability that marked the 1990s.

In summary, supporters of Putin point to his role in stabilizing Russia, revitalizing the economy (especially in the early years of his rule), restoring national pride, and increasing Russia's global influence. These are seen as significant achievements, especially in contrast to the difficulties and instability faced by Russia in the post-Soviet years. However, it's important to note that many of these successes come with significant criticisms, particularly in terms of democratic freedoms, human rights, and the authoritarian nature of his rule.

Thanks for the reply. The problem is how the "Good" came about. Ends don't justify means. Again... my claim about lack of moral clarity is coming into view.

We could keep going this direction and try out Hitler: many of the same "good" items appear on his list. Indeed Donald Trump was reported to have said that "Hitler did some good things." Many people took exception. The last paragraph in the ChatGPT text below tells you why.

The problem is that his good things came about through terrible abuses of power that violated the ethics and morals we all require of governing body -- at least I do; I would assume you do as well. We judge on this basis whether or not a government is just.

ChatGPT Hitler text:

---------------------

While Adolf Hitler's actions and legacy are overwhelmingly negative due to the horrors of World War II and the Holocaust, some argue that there were a few positive developments in Germany under his regime, although these should be viewed with caution given the broader context. Here's a brief summary of the more commonly cited "positive" aspects of his rule:

1. Economic Recovery: Hitler's policies helped lift Germany out of the Great Depression. Unemployment dropped significantly through public works programs (like the Autobahn construction) and rearmament, which stimulated industry.
2. Infrastructure Development: The construction of the Autobahn (highways) and other infrastructure projects helped improve transportation and created jobs.
3. Technological Advancements: Hitler’s regime fostered progress in technology, particularly in aviation and rocketry, with some later contributing to advancements in space exploration.
4. Restoration of National Pride: Hitler’s militarization and rearmament policies revived national pride and strength in Germany after the perceived humiliation of World War I and the Treaty of Versailles.

While these points might be seen as "positive" in isolation, they were achieved through aggressive, militaristic, and ultimately destructive means, with devastating consequences that far outweigh any benefits.

 

[Hawk_82]

So brainwashed, he's actually making an argument for supporting a Russian dictator now.

Based on a chat GPT search.

You are the person who says nothing can be done. You couldn't stop the war because you only see one way forward. But there are a 1000 ways forward, you just haven't thought of them yet. You are a black and white person, I don't fault you for this, but the world does not work this way. You and the democrats think everyone is a dictator or a nazi. Your words have lost all meaning.

 

[Hawk_82]

Thanks for the reply. The problem is how the "Good" came about. Ends don't justify means. Again... my claim about lack of moral clarity is coming into view.

We could keep going this direction and try out Hitler: many of the same "good" items appear on his list. Indeed Donald Trump was reported to have said that "Hitler did some good things." Many people took exception. The last paragraph in the ChatGPT text below tells you why.

The problem is that his good things came about through terrible abuses of power that violated the ethics and morals we all require of governing body -- at least I do; I would assume you do as well. We judge on this basis whether or not a government is just.

ChatGPT Hitler text:

---------------------

While Adolf Hitler's actions and legacy are overwhelmingly negative due to the horrors of World War II and the Holocaust, some argue that there were a few positive developments in Germany under his regime, although these should be viewed with caution given the broader context. Here's a brief summary of the more commonly cited "positive" aspects of his rule:

1. Economic Recovery: Hitler's policies helped lift Germany out of the Great Depression. Unemployment dropped significantly through public works programs (like the Autobahn construction) and rearmament, which stimulated industry.
2. Infrastructure Development: The construction of the Autobahn (highways) and other infrastructure projects helped improve transportation and created jobs.
3. Technological Advancements: Hitler’s regime fostered progress in technology, particularly in aviation and rocketry, with some later contributing to advancements in space exploration.
4. Restoration of National Pride: Hitler’s militarization and rearmament policies revived national pride and strength in Germany after the perceived humiliation of World War I and the Treaty of Versailles.

While these points might be seen as "positive" in isolation, they were achieved through aggressive, militaristic, and ultimately destructive means, with devastating consequences that far outweigh any benefits.

I am not going to go down this road. But I will say that Hitler was a lot bad with just a little good.
Hitler was a great leader/influencer. He started out as a no one and he convinced a bunch of people to support him. He was a charasmatic person who could rally a crowd. He also killed a lot of people. Hitlers charisma was not his downfall, it was the ideas he was trying to implement.

 

[Colonoscopy]

You could argue this same thing happened under democrats. The left was censoring covid stuff and they were cancelling harvard doctors for having an opposing opinion. It is pretty clear that the msm has been acting as a mouthpiece for the democratic party the last 4 years. (outside of fox__maybe)

I believe Trump was politically targeted and the justice system was weaponized against him. There is plenty of evidence to support this. Even if you don't agree, it should at least raise a red flag

Isn't this what democrats have been trying to do to trump and anyone who opposed them? Trump is a russia asset and a nazi, Tulsi is a russian asset, Musk is a nazi

California and new york have a law that it is illegal to show your id when you are voting. The only way this makes sense is to get illegals to vote so you can steal elections

Its not clear that this is the wrong side of history. I have been a big critic of this movement and I believe the trans stuff will go down as the biggest medical scandal in history.

Both of these instances came after the west was talking about bringing Ukraine into Nato which putin has clearly said he did not want and would retaliate if they continued.

The US has proudly claimed that they have overthrown many governments. Maybe 60+ (Id have to look up the numbers though, this is off memory)

Didn't Ukraine have the highest level of corruption out of the entire world not that long ago (maybe still)

I don't 100% agree that all these are bad. I hope you can see a clear difference between Putin and someone like Hitler or Stalin. I did not see that he has killed millions on this list. Not every country is going to have the same values as the USA. That is ok in my opinion. There are some shady parts, but you could say the same for about ever leader in the world.

This is exasperating. What can't you understand about degree? Size of infraction. That says everything. You could pinch someone or shoot them with a gun. Size of infraction.

Certain left leaning media platforms censoring certain covid information (as well as the fed gov asking certain platforms to do so) during a pandemic -- some of it was blatant misinformation that was harmful to the public, even if you don't agree with the action -- is obviously nowhere near the level of transgression that is dismantling the free press and threatening/killing journalists that don't tow the Putin line.

Just not close.

Again with the Trump justice system complaint. We're talking about investigations into his campaign colluding with a foreign adversary -- they didn't find evidence ultimately -- and about him not returning classified documents, etc. The US has a history of this sort of thing with multiple presidents being investigated at one time or another -- none thrown in jail or executed like we see with Putin's political opponents.

Again, just not close.

That some states have different ID laws -- whatever you think of them, pretty sure your inference above is completely bunk -- doesn't compare at all to the sort of meddling an authoritarian like Putin takes.

The pattern with all of your claims above -- without even picking at the validity of some of them -- is that the severity of the transgression in the US is nowhere near what it is Putin's Russia.

The post I just quoted from you does a great job of pointing why Putin is so much more problematic.

 

[Colonoscopy]

I am not going to go down this road. But I will say that Hitler was a lot bad with just a little good.
Hitler was a great leader/influencer. He started out as a no one and he convinced a bunch of people to support him. He was a charasmatic person who could rally a crowd. He also killed a lot of people. Hitlers charisma was not his downfall, it was the ideas he was trying to implement.

Yes, we can all agree that charisma and work ethic weren't what irked people about Hitler.

Hitler was a great example because of all the good things that happened in Germany (before the bad things) were through a form of government that relied upon abuses of power, corruption, propaganda and a laundry list of other deleterious items.

Which leads us to:

It's form of government and the behavior of its leaders that we judge by -- not just outcomes. When you're complaining that the some of the federal prosecution of Trump was biased or unjust you're implicitly saying you have certain standards and expectations of your government and leaders that were not met.

And on standards like this, Putin at as a leader obviously stands out as much more problematic than US leaders, European leaders, or Zelensky. Everything we've been discussing points to this being true.

 

[Colonoscopy]

What is in our country’s best interests is not driven by morality. Having said that, stopping a bloody war with the potential to last for years is hardly immoral.

If our leaders deem not spending anymore on this war to be in our best interest, so be it.

But that doesn't mean that Zelensky, and the people of Ukraine are in the wrong for trying to drive out the invader. This is all very obvious to any halfway patriotic American.

There are just wars -- defending yourself is just. Protecting your land is just. We all know this.

 

[Hawk_82]

Thanks for the reply. The problem is how the "Good" came about. Ends don't justify means. Again... my claim about lack of moral clarity is coming into view.

We could keep going this direction and try out Hitler: many of the same "good" items appear on his list. Indeed Donald Trump was reported to have said that "Hitler did some good things." Many people took exception. The last paragraph in the ChatGPT text below tells you why.

The problem is that his good things came about through terrible abuses of power that violated the ethics and morals we all require of governing body -- at least I do; I would assume you do as well. We judge on this basis whether or not a government is just.

ChatGPT Hitler text:

---------------------

While Adolf Hitler's actions and legacy are overwhelmingly negative due to the horrors of World War II and the Holocaust, some argue that there were a few positive developments in Germany under his regime, although these should be viewed with caution given the broader context. Here's a brief summary of the more commonly cited "positive" aspects of his rule:

1. Economic Recovery: Hitler's policies helped lift Germany out of the Great Depression. Unemployment dropped significantly through public works programs (like the Autobahn construction) and rearmament, which stimulated industry.
2. Infrastructure Development: The construction of the Autobahn (highways) and other infrastructure projects helped improve transportation and created jobs.
3. Technological Advancements: Hitler’s regime fostered progress in technology, particularly in aviation and rocketry, with some later contributing to advancements in space exploration.
4. Restoration of National Pride: Hitler’s militarization and rearmament policies revived national pride and strength in Germany after the perceived humiliation of World War I and the Treaty of Versailles.

While these points might be seen as "positive" in isolation, they were achieved through aggressive, militaristic, and ultimately destructive means, with devastating consequences that far outweigh any benefits.

I think the take home message is that those who live in the USA believe in freedom and capitalism. Russia and China tried communism and it did not work well. It was too suppressive for the people and eventually the people rebel. Russia and China now both have a state capitalism that seems to be working ok.

I have long been talking about the WEF and globalism who are trying to move the USA from a shareholder capitalism to a stakeholder capitalism. This would transfer the power from the government and the people to the elite. Most people have refused to see this transition happening. But those who did ended up voting for Trump because they opposed the global elite rulers.

We can not hold Putin and Xi t the same standards as what we have in the USA because we have different economic systems. There are benefits and drawbacks to each system, but both still have merit. The USA has been trying to push a democracy on countrys throughout the world for the last 70 years. We have overthrown many governments in the process. Is this right? probably not, but it may have been done with good intentions. I do not see Putin as an evil dictator. He is simply a leader with a different method of achieving his goals.

I think the west has demonized Putin unnecessarily to achive their own objectives. Putin is not perfect, and he has done some bad things in the past, but he has also created some stability for Russia. Russia had an evil dictator not that long ago, maybe they needed someone a little heavy handed to keep Russia in line. If they would have had a soft touchy feely guy, then a new dictator would have risen through the ranks. These are things most people don't think about (or maybe they dont even have the abilty to thing about).

After hearing all of this, do you really think Trump is a russian ally, or do you think he is just trying to make peace for the USA so business can thrive? Do you really think all these republicans are nazis? I have read your posts, you are a logical person, I know you realize these are just unbased attacks. Unfortunatley these attacks are part of the propaganda that the left is using to gain more control. Is that really any better than what Putin is doing? Is it ok for president Biden to call for Trump to be put in the cross hairs (kill him)? These are things bad people do. This has created a division in this country that I don't know if we will make it out of.

 

[luvmyhawks]

She won't be able to link to anything. She makes stuff up. Concentrate on the other sheep. She is a distraction and of no consequence on this message board and in life.

This might be one of the creepiest and strangest post I have ever seen on this board. Does anyone else see how bizarre this post is?

 

[Hawk_82]

If our leaders deem not spending anymore on this war to be in our best interest, so be it.

But that doesn't mean that Zelensky, and the people of Ukraine are in the wrong for trying to drive out the invader. This is all very obvious to any halfway patriotic American.

There are just wars -- defending yourself is just. Protecting your land is just. We all know this.

They have the right to fight Russia all they want. But once they have lost the land, they cant just call a truce and get it all back. That is what a lot on her expect. It doesn't work like that.

 

[Mister_Man]

 

[Mister_Man]

 

[Mister_Man]

 

[Hawk_82]

Yes, we can all agree that charisma and work ethic weren't what irked people about Hitler.

Hitler was a great example because of all the good things that happened in Germany (before the bad things) were through a form of government that relied upon abuses of power, corruption, propaganda and a laundry list of other deleterious items.

Which leads us to:

It's form of government and the behavior of its leaders that we judge by -- not just outcomes. When you're complaining that the some of the federal prosecution of Trump was biased or unjust you're implicitly saying you have certain standards and expectations of your government and leaders that were not met.

And on standards like this, Putin at as a leader obviously stands out as much more problematic than US leaders, European leaders, or Zelensky. Everything we've been discussing points to this being true.

Obama, Hillary, Biden, many congressmen, the media have all called Trump a Russian asset and a Nazi. Several have wished death on Trump, and now Trump has been shot once and at least one other attempt. At what point does what is going on in the USA rise to the level of Russia. We are not far off. Trump has not murdered anyone, he has not done anything overtly bad. Why does he deserve the attacks he has received from the left? Other than you just don't like his tweets. It seems like this is a good example of what you said above. The degree of infraction does not match the level of hatred he has received from the left.

 

[luvmyhawks]

You were right. I appreciate differing opinions if they can back it up with reason. Most people dont have solid reason on here. they only know name calling.

I have learned to enjoy some of the idiots on here. I also appreciate the good posters.

Keep up the good work my friend.

You guys are… weird. Creepy af.

 

[luvmyhawks]

To counter this, I searched ChatGPT "Give me a summary of the good stuff Putin has done". I don't agree with the centralized power, but if it works for Russia, who am I to judge.

Vladimir Putin’s time in power has been marked by a range of policies and actions that some see as positive, especially from the perspective of stabilizing Russia after the chaos of the 1990s and strengthening its position on the world stage. While many of his actions are controversial, there are several areas where some credit Putin for improving certain aspects of Russia’s governance and international standing.

Here are some of the key things Putin has been praised for:

1. Stabilizing Russia After the 1990s​

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia went through a period of economic hardship, political instability, and widespread corruption in the 1990s under President Boris Yeltsin. Putin is often credited with restoring stability to Russia after this tumultuous period. His leadership helped curb the chaos, bringing a sense of order and control to the country.

2. Economic Growth in the Early 2000s​

During Putin's first two terms (2000-2008), Russia experienced significant economic growth. This was largely driven by rising oil and gas prices, which boosted Russia's energy exports. Under Putin, Russia’s GDP grew significantly, and the country was able to pay off much of its foreign debt, which had been a major problem in the 1990s.

3. Improved Living Standards for Many Russians​

Economic growth under Putin led to improved living standards for many Russians. There was a significant reduction in poverty, and wages and pensions increased for many citizens. The government invested in infrastructure and raised public sector salaries, which helped improve the quality of life for a portion of the population, especially in urban areas.

4. Strong Nationalism and Pride​

Putin has positioned himself as a defender of Russian national identity and pride. He has emphasized the importance of Russia’s historical and cultural legacy, and many Russians feel that he has restored their country’s dignity on the world stage. Under Putin, Russia has projected itself as a global power, particularly in the context of the West’s influence.

5. Restoration of Order in Chechnya​

After two brutal wars in the Chechen region, Putin's leadership has been credited with restoring order and stability in Chechnya. While the methods used were highly controversial (including heavy military force and human rights abuses), Chechnya is now largely peaceful, and the region is under the control of Kadyrov, a loyal ally of Putin. This has helped reduce the threat of separatism in the region.

6. Military Modernization​

Putin has invested heavily in modernizing Russia's military, including upgrading its air force, navy, and missile systems. This has been seen as a way to strengthen Russia’s defense capabilities and ensure its security in a world where it perceives increasing threats from NATO and Western powers. This military modernization is also viewed by some as a demonstration of Russia’s renewed global influence.

7. Energy Superpower​

Under Putin’s leadership, Russia has maintained its position as a global energy superpower, with large reserves of oil, natural gas, and coal. The Russian state has also worked to develop and control key pipelines to Europe and China, giving it significant leverage in global energy markets. This has been a source of economic power and political influence.

8. Strategic International Influence​

Putin has worked to reassert Russia's influence globally, particularly in regions like the Middle East, Eastern Europe, and Central Asia. Russia’s intervention in Syria, for example, helped ensure the survival of Bashar al-Assad's regime and cemented Russia’s role as a key player in Middle Eastern geopolitics. Putin has also positioned Russia as a counterbalance to the West, particularly the United States and NATO.

9. Support for Traditional Family Values​

Putin has positioned himself as a defender of traditional family values, promoting laws and policies that reflect conservative views on issues like same-sex marriage and abortion. These positions have been popular with some segments of the Russian population, particularly in more rural and religious areas.

10. Centralization of Power​

While often criticized as authoritarian, the centralization of power under Putin is seen by some as a necessary step to maintain political stability in a country with a history of weak institutions and political chaos. His control over key parts of the government, business sectors, and media has allowed him to keep a firm grip on power, which some see as essential to avoid the kind of instability that marked the 1990s.

In summary, supporters of Putin point to his role in stabilizing Russia, revitalizing the economy (especially in the early years of his rule), restoring national pride, and increasing Russia's global influence. These are seen as significant achievements, especially in contrast to the difficulties and instability faced by Russia in the post-Soviet years. However, it's important to note that many of these successes come with significant criticisms, particularly in terms of democratic freedoms, human rights, and the authoritarian nature of his rule.

You are so gone comrade.

 

[Mister_Man]

You are so gone comrade.

Time to ignore I am afraid

 

[luvmyhawks]

Time to ignore I am afraid

Him and golfhacker. fairly certain they are both bots. You see that creepy AF post by golfdouche telling his buddy to stay focused on the other sheep? Like they are on some kind of mission. Seriously weird shit.

 

[Bierhalter]

I'm gonna say OP has been on trolling overdrive for a bit now. Not particularly good trolling, but as it gets so many reactions and serious replies I guess that's all that matters.

Some of you guys should really realize that, at least with this troll persona, he isn't looking to have an actual discussion. He isn't open to having his mind changed, he isn't to be taken seriously.

 

[Flie]

Copy and paste from ChatGPT: The term "deep state" is used to describe a theory that suggests a hidden, powerful group of people or institutions within a government (or other large organizations) who secretly control or influence decisions behind the scenes, often without the knowledge or consent of elected officials. This group, according to the theory, could be made up of bureaucrats, intelligence agencies, military leaders, business elites, and other influential figures who supposedly work to preserve their own power, sometimes contrary to the wishes of the public or political leaders.

Yup, this seems to apply. I stand by my use of the deepstate.

I'm familiar.

"The deep state conspiracy theory in the United States is a false American political conspiracy theory that posits the existence of the deep state, a clandestine network of members of the federal government (especially within the FBI and CIA). The theory argues that there exist networks of collaborators within the leadership of the high-level financial and industrial entities, which exercise power alongside or within the elected United States government."

 

[Dorrman]

Moscow's Man

 

[jneffer]

when someone equates subjecting a political opponent to criminal prosecution (the exact same system all citizens are subject to) to literally murdering political opponents...there is no point in engaging them

 

[Hawk_82]

I'm familiar.

"The deep state conspiracy theory in the United States is a false American political conspiracy theory that posits the existence of the deep state, a clandestine network of members of the federal government (especially within the FBI and CIA). The theory argues that there exist networks of collaborators within the leadership of the high-level financial and industrial entities, which exercise power alongside or within the elected United States government."

You are still denying it's existence? you need to get with the times.

 

[IAFB2021Champs]

This... and everyone but the cult lemmings can see it.

Glad your cult of lemmings doesn’t do stupid shit. I mean one of them wants to invade his own country. As you can see in the last quote I quoted.

Again, NEVER about policy with maggots.

Always about "owning" the libs.

Democracy be damned.

You talking about the same democracy your cult member chis used to always talk about? How we had to vote Harris to save democracy?
He must really care about democracy these days.

NATO if your listening please invade us and I'll assist.

 

[GolfHacker1]

Him and golfhacker. fairly certain they are both bots. You see that creepy AF post by golfdouche telling his buddy to stay focused on the other sheep? Like they are on some kind of mission. Seriously weird shit.

Yeah, my post is weird and creepy. Last night posters were wishing death and painful death on others becuase they disagree with them. Those death wish posts are sane, but my post is weird and creepy.

Some of you are so far down the partisan rabbit hole it is a bit frightening.

 

[Hawkfan_08]

There are sad situations all over the world. You say you are anti-russian, but there are also innocent russians as well. In a perfect world we would all have a good life with no suffering and war. But the US cannot provide for the rest of the world. We have to draw a line somewhere. Someone will always be left out. I feel bad for the innocent people of Ukraine and Russia. That is why I want to end the war. I feel like this is a better route to go. If you consider Putin to be a bad person, then we should try other routes to get him to stop. But continuing to poke the bear by keeping the door open to Ukraine joining Nato is only going to lead to more war, death and suffering.

I don't like everything about Trump, but I like that he thinks outside the box. He is willing to try things that other leaders would not. If a minerals deal brings an end to the war, then Im all for it. If giving up a little land brings an end to the war then Im for that as well. Ukraine has to decide what they are willing to give up for peace. In my experience, the longer a war goes on, the more you are willing to give up to stop it. So lets make a deal now.

While I see your point and appreciate the rational argument, I'm going to go a little further with Russia and Putin.

I strongly believe a good faith effort was made by the United States and others to stop this war before it began. None of it mattered as Putin did what the Soviets had done throughout history. Remember that they made a pact with Hitler in WWII to not take each other over as big nations were expanding. In the Cold War they were enemy #1 for nearly 50 years. Nothing but distrust, MAD and proxy wars. I simply do not trust the Russian oligarch and in this case specifically, Russia is the antagonist and needs to be punched in the mouth. Any land gained shows the rest of the world the UN (which we know does nothing), US, Britain, France, Germany, etc... are just appeasers. I'm all for ending this war. If Russia leaves and borders go back to normal, that's the easiest way to do it.


As for the Russian people, yes, there are good Russians. Many don't know the constant lies they are fed by state tv. Time and time again, any opposition to Putin ends up arrested, jailed or murdered.

Finally, while I do wish the US would have done more under Biden and that we would back Ukraine now, this whole thing is not ours to have the final negotiation on. I find it of the utmost importance that a sovereign nation have the last say in what happens to it.

 

[Hawk_82]

While I see your point and appreciate the rational argument, I'm going to go a little further with Russia and Putin.

I strongly believe a good faith effort was made by the United States and others to stop this war before it began. None of it mattered as Putin did what the Soviets had done throughout history. Remember that they made a pact with Hitler in WWII to not take each other over as big nations were expanding. In the Cold War they were enemy #1 for nearly 50 years. Nothing but distrust, MAD and proxy wars. I simply do not trust the Russian oligarch and in this case specifically, Russia is the antagonist and needs to be punched in the mouth. Any land gained shows the rest of the world the UN (which we know does nothing), US, Britain, France, Germany, etc... are just appeasers. I'm all for ending this war. If Russia leaves and borders go back to normal, that's the easiest way to do it.


As for the Russian people, yes, there are good Russians. Many don't know the constant lies they are fed by state tv. Time and time again, any opposition to Putin ends up arrested, jailed or murdered.

Finally, while I do wish the US would have done more under Biden and that we would back Ukraine now, this whole thing is not ours to have the final negotiation on. I find it of the utmost importance that a sovereign nation have the last say in what happens to it.

You seem very reasonable, I could support what you said in this post.

 

[Flie]

You are still denying it's existence? you need to get with the times.

Yes, I deny its existence and laugh at people who use the term. I find it fascinating how republicans control the entire government now, yet MAGAs are still talking about "the deep state" and that they apparently think it's all controlled by democrats.

The most "deep state" #$## that's happened in my lifetime was the "Patriot Act" under Bush.

 

[prlyles]

What makes Ukraine so good and Russia so bad?

If Ukraine had invaded Russia they would be the bad guy. Do you not see that?

 

[jneffer]

Yes, I deny its existence and laugh at people who use the term. I find it fascinating how republicans control the entire government now, yet MAGAs are still talking about "the deep state" and that they apparently think it's all controlled by democrats.

The most "deep state" #$## that's happened in my lifetime was the "Patriot Act" under Bush.

here's the disconnect

trump supporter commenters think "the deep state" is any time a federal employee doesn't totally acquiesce to whatever trump wants to do

where some (who I would describe as normal, reasonable people) see "a person with an opinion or acting on their professional experience", they see an intricate, multi-layered conspiracy engineered - usually by hillary clinton - to stop the only person they seem to think can do anything positive for the country

 

[sabula]

Glad your cult of lemmings doesn’t do stupid shit. I mean one of them wants to invade his own country. As you can see in the last quote I quoted.

You talking about the same democracy your cult member chis used to always talk about? How we had to vote Harris to save democracy?
He must really care about democracy these days.

You still showing your face around here after being exposed as the board liar? 😕