The *OFFICIAL* Russia Is About To Invade Ukraine Thread

[TheGoldStandard]

Even though that is all true the democrats will cry that you are spreading Russian propaganda.

"Russia is the aggressor" I mean just look at this map.
"It was unprovoked"

View: https://x.com/SprinterObserve/status/1802808251597140214

You haven't been taking your "nothing to do with NATO" propaganda vitamins. It's okay though here's a compilation.


View: https://x.com/0rf/status/1890407301808328972

I mean, Russia is the aggressor. Ukraine likely would not have joined NATO. I'm not justifying Putin's actions. I'm saying it helps him justify the invasion in his mind.

The U.S. thought invading Vietnam was the right thing to do.

My main point is our country's actions for years contributed to what is going on. So how can we justify not helping.

I don't think we should leave NATO, but we should tell them they need to either step up military spending to their pro rata GDP%, pay us for the coverage, or be removed as members. They'll still be receiving a bargain having the US to protect them.

 

[Red]

It Was an Ambush

Friday marked one of the grimmest days in the history of American diplomacy.

www.theatlantic.com

Leave aside, if only for a moment, the utter boorishness with which President Donald Trump and Vice President J. D. Vance treated Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky at the White House today. Also leave aside the spectacle of American leaders publicly pummeling a friend as if he were an enemy. All of the ghastliness inflicted on Zelensky today should not obscure the geopolitical reality of what just happened: The president of the United States ambushed a loyal ally, presumably so that he can soon make a deal with the dictator of Russia to sell out a European nation fighting for its very existence.

Zelensky objected, as he should have, when the vice president castigated the Ukrainian president for not showing enough personal gratitude to Trump. And then in a moment of immense hypocrisy, Vance told Zelensky that it was “disrespectful for you to come into the Oval Office and try to litigate this in front of the American media.” But baiting Zelensky into fighting in front of the media was likely the plan all along, and Trump and Vance were soon both yelling at Zelensky. (“This is going to be great television,” Trump said during the meeting.) The president at times sounded like a Mafia boss—“You don’t have the cards”; “you’re buried there”—but in the end, he sounded like no one so much as Putin himself as he hollered about “gambling with World War III,” as if starting the biggest war in Europe in nearly a century was Zelensky’s idea.

After the meeting, Trump dismissed the Ukrainian leader and then issued a statement that could only have pleased Moscow:

I have determined that President Zelensky is not ready for Peace if America is involved, because he feels our involvement gives him a big advantage in negotiations. I don’t want advantage, I want PEACE. He disrespected the United States of America in its cherished Oval Office. He can come back when he is ready for Peace.

Trump might as well have dictated this post on Truth Social before the meeting, because Zelensky didn’t stand a chance of having an actual discussion at the White House. When he showed Trump pictures of brutalized Ukrainian soldiers, Trump shrugged. “That’s tough stuff,” he muttered. Perhaps someone told Zelensky that Trump doesn’t read much, and reacts to images, but Trump, uncharacteristically, seems to have been determined to stay on message and pick a fight.

 

[Mongoose]

I mean, Russia is the aggressor. Ukraine likely would not have joined NATO. I'm not justifying Putin's actions. I'm saying it helps him justify the invasion in his mind.

The U.S. thought invading Vietnam was the right thing to do.

My main point is our country's actions for years contributed to what is going on. So how can we justify not helping.

I don't think we should leave NATO, but we should tell them they need to either step up military spending to their pro rata GDP%, pay us for the coverage, or be removed as members. They'll still be receiving a bargain having the US to protect them.

If only the US could help broker a peace deal.... oh wait.

 

[fishonjazz]

The relationship between NATO and USSR then Russia is complicated. The USSR requested NATO membership in the 50s as they were worried about Germany.

Everyone remembers Reagan saying to "tear down that wall" regarding the unification of East and West Germany, but do you remember Reagan also gave assurances to USSR that NATO would not expand as part of that agreement?

The USSR collapsed less than two years later, with Russia and a bunch of new countries remaining. Clinton broke the expansion promise, and NATO had massive expansion. And Russia did nothing in response.

There have been assurances that Ukraine, who sits strategicly on Russia's border, would not be allowed NATO membership, but the U.S. helped a regime change that was neutral on NATO/Russia (keep in mind Ukraine is made up of a lot of Russians and they did not want a war) to a pro-NATO stance.

These actions are at least partially responsible for Russia deciding to invade in 2014. You may recall Putin asked publically before the current war, for assurances Ukraine would not be allowed to join NATO, and he was not given them.

I am not a Putin fan, but I can understand why he would not want more NATO missiles on his border, just like we didnt want them in Cuba.

All of that said, I'd wish we'd stay out of these events, but we helped bake this cake.

I also find it funny that Europe is showing support by giving Zelensly a 1.9B loan yet criticizing the US for asking for reimbursement for what we have contributed.

Trump does some things well, some times we need an antagonizer on the foreign stage, and sometimes we need friendly diplomacy to get what is needed. Trump is great at the former but is abysmal at the latter.

Part of me wants to avoid a world war at all costs, including letting Ukraine handle it, but knowing we helped contribute to what is going on, I can't agree with Trump's current stance.

I believe (and may be wrong) that there are already NATO missiles at Russians border.
I think there are more countries that border Russia than just Ukraine and that they are NATO countries.
From what I can gather Poland and Lithuania (both via Kaliningrad Oblast), Norway, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Belarus, Ukraine, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, China, Mongolia, and North Korea all border Russia. I think (again I'm not sure) that some of those countries are NATO countries.

Sent from my OPD2203 using Tapatalk

 

[Deleted member 365]

I also find it funny that Europe is showing support by giving Zelensly a 1.9B loan yet criticizing the US for asking for reimbursement for what we have contributed.

@TheGoldStandard could you provide a link to this? I’d like to read this story.

 

[Deleted member 365]

It Was an Ambush

Friday marked one of the grimmest days in the history of American diplomacy.

www.theatlantic.com

Leave aside, if only for a moment, the utter boorishness with which President Donald Trump and Vice President J. D. Vance treated Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky at the White House today. Also leave aside the spectacle of American leaders publicly pummeling a friend as if he were an enemy. All of the ghastliness inflicted on Zelensky today should not obscure the geopolitical reality of what just happened: The president of the United States ambushed a loyal ally, presumably so that he can soon make a deal with the dictator of Russia to sell out a European nation fighting for its very existence.

Zelensky objected, as he should have, when the vice president castigated the Ukrainian president for not showing enough personal gratitude to Trump. And then in a moment of immense hypocrisy, Vance told Zelensky that it was “disrespectful for you to come into the Oval Office and try to litigate this in front of the American media.” But baiting Zelensky into fighting in front of the media was likely the plan all along, and Trump and Vance were soon both yelling at Zelensky. (“This is going to be great television,” Trump said during the meeting.) The president at times sounded like a Mafia boss—“You don’t have the cards”; “you’re buried there”—but in the end, he sounded like no one so much as Putin himself as he hollered about “gambling with World War III,” as if starting the biggest war in Europe in nearly a century was Zelensky’s idea.

After the meeting, Trump dismissed the Ukrainian leader and then issued a statement that could only have pleased Moscow:


Trump might as well have dictated this post on Truth Social before the meeting, because Zelensky didn’t stand a chance of having an actual discussion at the White House. When he showed Trump pictures of brutalized Ukrainian soldiers, Trump shrugged. “That’s tough stuff,” he muttered. Perhaps someone told Zelensky that Trump doesn’t read much, and reacts to images, but Trump, uncharacteristically, seems to have been determined to stay on message and pick a fight.

Why don’t we want Ukraine to have an advantage in negotiations? You’d think we’d want them to have every advantage possible to not only get back all of the territory Russia has stolen from them but to also rebuild and act as a deterrent against further Russian aggression.

Peace at any cost shouldn’t be our goal. Ending Russian aggression and helping Ukraine regain all of their land should be. Giving Ukraine every advantage would accomplish this goal of rebuilding Ukraine and making a deterrent against further Russian aggression. Putin should be the one pressured here, not Zelenskyy. Putin should be the one worried about losing power, not Zelenskyy.

Why is it so hard for republicans to admit that Russia is bad? If my tribe and tribal leader kept bashing democratic allies and pandered to the world’s worst dictators, I’d seek a different tribe. Russia is bad guys. Putin is bad. This shouldn’t be that hard to say.

 

[TheGoldStandard]

I believe (and may be wrong) that there are already NATO missiles at Russians border.
I think there are more countries that border Russia than just Ukraine and that they are NATO countries.
From what I can gather Poland and Lithuania (both via Kaliningrad Oblast), Norway, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Belarus, Ukraine, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, China, Mongolia, and North Korea all border Russia. I think (again I'm not sure) that some of those countries are NATO countries.

Sent from my OPD2203 using Tapatalk

Correct. I noted that we broke our deal and made more countries and Russia did nothing in response. I believe Finland, Estonia and Latvia (last two are very small) border Russia. Finland just recently joined. Ukraine has a large border with Russia and Russia has fewer military support in that area prior to the build up beginning in 2014.

 

[TheGoldStandard]

If only the US could help broker a peace deal.... oh wait.

Right, we contribute to conditions that cause mass death, destruction and our notion of peace is to let Russia keep a bunch of Ukrainian territory. Sounds about right.

 

[Mongoose]

Right, we contribute to conditions that cause mass death, destruction and our notion of peace is to let Russia keep a bunch of Ukrainian territory. Sounds about right.

It’s a big ask to make up for all the democrat and uniparty **** ups over the last couple of decades but ya you gotta try and start somewhere.
We’ve got our own problems.

 

[Rubashov]

The relationship between NATO and USSR then Russia is complicated. The USSR requested NATO membership in the 50s as they were worried about Germany.

Everyone remembers Reagan saying to "tear down that wall" regarding the unification of East and West Germany, but do you remember Reagan also gave assurances to USSR that NATO would not expand as part of that agreement?

The USSR collapsed less than two years later, with Russia and a bunch of new countries remaining. Clinton broke the expansion promise, and NATO had massive expansion. And Russia did nothing in response.

There have been assurances that Ukraine, who sits strategicly on Russia's border, would not be allowed NATO membership, but the U.S. helped a regime change that was neutral on NATO/Russia (keep in mind Ukraine is made up of a lot of Russians and they did not want a war) to a pro-NATO stance.

These actions are at least partially responsible for Russia deciding to invade in 2014. You may recall Putin asked publically before the current war, for assurances Ukraine would not be allowed to join NATO, and he was not given them.

I am not a Putin fan, but I can understand why he would not want more NATO missiles on his border, just like we didnt want them in Cuba.

All of that said, I'd wish we'd stay out of these events, but we helped bake this cake.

I also find it funny that Europe is showing support by giving Zelensly a 1.9B loan yet criticizing the US for asking for reimbursement for what we have contributed.

Trump does some things well, some times we need an antagonizer on the foreign stage, and sometimes we need friendly diplomacy to get what is needed. Trump is great at the former but is abysmal at the latter.

Part of me wants to avoid a world war at all costs, including letting Ukraine handle it, but knowing we helped contribute to what is going on, I can't agree with Trump's current stance.

Its not so much a loan as seized the seized proceeds of Russian oligarchs, there is talk of more of it going to Ukraine in the future.

NATO expansion under Clinton didn't happen in a vacuum, for one Russia was already some way down the road to dictatorship, they were also engaged in some very brutal fighting in Chechnya, where the Red Army was both fairly ineffective and criminal in its prosecution of the war, lets not forget that "Chechen Terrorists", have been blamed for a number of likely false flag operations that Putin used to secure his dictatorship. Then there was Russia's conduct in the war in the Balkans, lets not forget hoe close NATO peacekeepers and Russian 'Peacekeepers' came to conflict there, the Russians being quite happy to sit on their hands while their Serbian allies completed their ethnic cleansing duties.

If America wants to go isolationist it will be at their expense and loss, America benefits greatly from its global alliances, walking away from that will have significant consequences down the road for the US.

 

[TheGoldStandard]

Its not so much a loan as seized the seized proceeds of Russian oligarchs, there is talk of more of it going to Ukraine in the future.

NATO expansion under Clinton didn't happen in a vacuum, for one Russia was already some way down the road to dictatorship, they were also engaged in some very brutal fighting in Chechnya, where the Red Army was both fairly ineffective and criminal in its prosecution of the war, lets not forget that "Chechen Terrorists", have been blamed for a number of likely false flag operations that Putin used to secure his dictatorship. Then there was Russia's conduct in the war in the Balkans, lets not forget hoe close NATO peacekeepers and Russian 'Peacekeepers' came to conflict there, the Russians being quite happy to sit on their hands while their Serbian allies completed their ethnic cleansing duties.

If America wants to go isolationist it will be at their expense and loss, America benefits greatly from its global alliances, walking away from that will have significant consequences down the road for the US.

The problem is we need our allies to step up. We spend close to double what all of our NATO allies spend combined. And all we've asked is they get to the 2% minimum when we are close to 4% and a good chunk of them refuse to do that. The cap really should be raised to 3% and spending be a requirement to maintain membership.

I'm not saying we stop global support, but there is a big difference between helping our allies and interfering in country politics.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

Its not so much a loan as seized the seized proceeds of Russian oligarchs, there is talk of more of it going to Ukraine in the future.

Yes, it is Russian money the UK is liberating from banks to then "give" it to Ukraine for Ukraine to use on purchasing weapons from the UK, so the money stays in the UK, but after the war Ukraine will need to pay back the loaned money that never actually left the UK. Those English really care about the Ukrainians!