I'm still on the fence about Ukraine - Page 7

PlaneCrashGuy

11:37p, 4/24/24

ttu_85 said:
PlaneCrashGuy said:
ttu_85 said:
PlaneCrashGuy said:
Ukraine will get smaller and Russia will get bigger. I said this very early on. It is and will remain correct.
Russia is a joke a shell of its self. 75 years of communism, 1917 to 1991 is hard to over come. Its broke, is in the midst of a demographic melt down. Its economy is smaller than the state of Texas.

I notice you troll hard for the Ruskies,

I noticed you didn't actually dispute/refute anything I said though- because I am correct.
Correct about what exactly?!All I ever see is out of you is Russian cheerleading, Don't see much in the way of details or analysis. I've long thought you are nothing but a Russian troll.

BY the way and fact is Russia is now a 2nd rate power. And thats only due old nukes that may or may not work. Your industry is a joke, your military Tech is a farce. What good stuff you do have, you cant build it in any meaningful numbers..See the SU-57. Yep without the nukes Russia is 3rd rate.

Your economy is less than the size of Georgia + Florida and that's with a population that's 4 times greater.

From the post you replied to:

Quote:
Ukraine will get smaller and Russia will get bigger

I will reiterate, I predicted this very early and now more than ever I am certain I was correct.

ttu_85

11:41p, 4/24/24

In reply to PlaneCrashGuy

PlaneCrashGuy said:
ttu_85 said:
PlaneCrashGuy said:
ttu_85 said:
PlaneCrashGuy said:
Ukraine will get smaller and Russia will get bigger. I said this very early on. It is and will remain correct.
Russia is a joke a shell of its self. 75 years of communism, 1917 to 1991 is hard to over come. Its broke, is in the midst of a demographic melt down. Its economy is smaller than the state of Texas.

I notice you troll hard for the Ruskies,

I noticed you didn't actually dispute/refute anything I said though- because I am correct.
Correct about what exactly?!All I ever see is out of you is Russian cheerleading, Don't see much in the way of details or analysis. I've long thought you are nothing but a Russian troll.

BY the way and fact is Russia is now a 2nd rate power. And thats only due old nukes that may or may not work. Your industry is a joke, your military Tech is a farce. What good stuff you do have, you cant build it in any meaningful numbers..See the SU-57. Yep without the nukes Russia is 3rd rate.

Your economy is less than the size of Georgia + Florida and that's with a population that's 4 times greater.

From the post you replied to:
Quote:
Ukraine will get smaller and Russia will get bigger

I will reiterate, I predicted this very early and now more than ever I am certain I was correct.

Russia might 'win' vs Ukraine given its 4X the size. But in terms of international respect and prestige Russia has already lost. So no you are not correct at all. Just narrow minded.

PlaneCrashGuy

11:44p, 4/24/24

In reply to ttu_85

ttu_85 said:
PlaneCrashGuy said:
ttu_85 said:
PlaneCrashGuy said:
ttu_85 said:
PlaneCrashGuy said:
Ukraine will get smaller and Russia will get bigger. I said this very early on. It is and will remain correct.
Russia is a joke a shell of its self. 75 years of communism, 1917 to 1991 is hard to over come. Its broke, is in the midst of a demographic melt down. Its economy is smaller than the state of Texas.

I notice you troll hard for the Ruskies,

I noticed you didn't actually dispute/refute anything I said though- because I am correct.
Correct about what exactly?!All I ever see is out of you is Russian cheerleading, Don't see much in the way of details or analysis. I've long thought you are nothing but a Russian troll.

BY the way and fact is Russia is now a 2nd rate power. And thats only due old nukes that may or may not work. Your industry is a joke, your military Tech is a farce. What good stuff you do have, you cant build it in any meaningful numbers..See the SU-57. Yep without the nukes Russia is 3rd rate.

Your economy is less than the size of Georgia + Florida and that's with a population that's 4 times greater.

From the post you replied to:
Quote:
Ukraine will get smaller and Russia will get bigger

I will reiterate, I predicted this very early and now more than ever I am certain I was correct.
Russia might 'win' vs Ukraine given its 4X the size. But in terms of international respect and prestige Russia has already lost. So no you are not correct at all. Just narrow minded.

What are you basing this on? BRICS is growing, so what you're saying can't be universally true.

Nothing I said has anything to do with your notion/concept of respect or prestige.

ttu_85

6:47a, 4/25/24

In reply to aTmAg

[Staff note to the board: We've issued timeouts for those who simply want to move their long running argument on the Russian tactical/strategic thread over to this one. A few posters have totally hijacked this one and stimulated personal attacks, derails, etc. It's very inconsiderate to other posters. We've issued timeouts for offenders and will lengthen them substantially if the behavior continues -- Staff]

aTmAg

7:01a, 4/25/24

How anybody can consider the Russians the "good guys" in this war is beyond me. You have to have single digit IQ. They were the ones that INVADED for crying out loud.

Tea Party

7:21a, 4/25/24

In reply to aTmAg

aTmAg said:
How anybody can consider the Russians the "good guys" in this war is beyond me. You have to have single digit IQ. They were the ones that INVADED for crying out loud.

Not wanting to give Ukraine money, nor caring how far Russia advances because Europe does not care enough to help Ukraine more, does not mean people think Russia is the "good guys".

Learn about the Texas Nationalist Movement
https://tnm.me

Monkeypoxfighter

7:28a, 4/25/24

In reply to B-1 83

B-1 83 said:
BlueSmoke said:
richardag said:
BlueSmoke said:
richardag said:
BlueSmoke
You said, "NATO has been marching east for decades now,".

That's not correct. The truth is the former Soviet block countries are marching west.
You're still wrong. Those countries petitioned to join the western alliance in order to prevent what is currently happening in Ukraine.
You are interpreting that animation completely wrong either because you are unaware of the facts or are an ideolog ignoring facts.
Even the previous head of Russia agreed there was no agreement that former Soviet states could not join NATO.

And you obviously know nothing about the history of Russia and Ukraine.

As for joining, NATO is a bloated, anachronistic, self-servicing, expansionist organization that long lost any illusions of protection or deterrence. Nations join, ignore spending requirements, and rely on the US and a few other members to do all their dirty work for them. By joining NATO, they can effectively outsource their military and fall in line with US political interests. We know this. That's the point. Further, we also know if you have a modicum of historical perspective, that encroaching on Russian states would only provoke what we are seeing now. Ukraine was always the reddest of red lines and we've known that. Again, if we wanted to end this, we could have with the Munich accords. But we didn't. We want this war.

As for being scared of Russia - If EU nations were truly terrified of Russia attacking, then why the h*ll are they all dependent on Russian O&G for their very survival?
Didn't someone warn them of this……AND approve of Johnson's handling? Hmmmmmmmm………

Bet that made some heads explode……

After reading through this thread, one post stood out above all the others and clearly summed up some of the mindset found here:

Quote:
You know that virtually zero cents of these dollars actually go to anything helpful, if you exempt kickbacks to our own ****ing corrupt ******bag congress critters, right?

I know you like to play pretend that it actually does anything (stacking russian bodies) other than enrich themselves. But do you really know where the money is going?

Ukraine doesnt need money to fight the "orc army", as you ******s say.

No one 18-35 wants anything to do with this "war" that you seem to get a boner over.

It's all fake. It's all money laundering. Just like your ******ed covid poop you 1000% bought into and the very obvious idiocy around getting an experimental gene "vaccine" for a cold virus.

Trump asked a question about where the money was going and the man was impeached for it.

If it's all fake, how can Russia be gaining ground?

It only took me a year to figure out this place is nuts!

Tea Party

7:36a, 4/25/24

In reply to Teslag

Teslag said:
BadMoonRisin said:
Can't take the L?

What L? We got $60 billion of your tax dollars to kill Russians. I'm thrilled.

At least you are finally admitting that you are a big gov stooge that likes stealing money from others.

You should redirect your desire for killing Russians to Europe who should be paying more. America is broke, thanks to people like you that spend based on emotion rather than logic.

Learn about the Texas Nationalist Movement
https://tnm.me

aTmAg

7:36a, 4/25/24

In reply to Tea Party

Tea Party said:
aTmAg said:
How anybody can consider the Russians the "good guys" in this war is beyond me. You have to have single digit IQ. They were the ones that INVADED for crying out loud.
Not wanting to give Ukraine money, nor caring how far Russia advances because Europe does not care enough to help Ukraine more, does not mean people think Russia is the "good guys".

I agree. That post wasn't talking about the people who merely want to refrain giving money to Ukraine. It was referring to people who claim Russia is in the right, that Ukraine is "their land" or are arguing that the fact that Russia doesn't support gays means they are right in the fight against Ukraine.

I respect the opinion that we shouldn't be giving money to Ukraine. I think that they are wrong. That it is in our best interest to support Ukraine (in a better way than we do now). But that is nothing like those who argue that Russia is the "good" side.

MallalieuAg

7:41a, 4/25/24

In reply to rocky the dog

rocky the dog said:

And zelensky and the bidens will be even richer.

Hoosegow

8:21a, 4/25/24

In reply to Teslag

Yes. We had no business sending our fathers and grandfathers to die in another banker war.

aTmAg

8:27a, 4/25/24

In reply to Hoosegow

Hoosegow said:
Yes. We had no business sending our fathers and grandfathers to die in another banker war.

Who is claiming we should sent Americans to fight in Ukraine? Ukrainians are doing the fighting for us.

BlueSmoke

8:34a, 4/25/24

In reply to richardag

richardag said:
BlueSmoke said:
Teslag said:

Quote:
Further, we also know if you have a modicum of historical perspective, that encroaching on Russian states would only provoke what we are seeing now.

Ukraine isn't and wasn't a "Russian state". It is a sovereign nation which Russia themselves recognized as such.
You obviously know nothing about the history between Russia and Ukraine. Ukraine has their sovereignty, but they are also the front door to Russian land going back thousands of years. It's NATO that has been expansionist, not Russia. Again, we were inches from nuclear war when Russia dared put missiles in Cuba. If Russia or China put bases in Mexico the US would intervene immediately. Going back to the early 90's it's known that any overtures of Ukraine in NATO would be a bridge too far for Russia....and we pushed anyway, knowing what it would spark. Again, we could have stopped this war within the first few months and actively threatened Ukraine with a threat of being cut off if they entertained signing the accords. This is a proxy war that we are loving every minute of and have no intentions to try and assuage.
You do not know the history of Russia nor the Ukraine.
Did NATO Promise Not to Enlarge? Gorbachev Says "No"
Quote from the article
It is abundantly evident that Russian President Vladimir Putin is no fan of NATO. Indeed, he displays a pronouncedalmost obsessiveantipathy toward the Alliance. He claims that NATO took advantage of Russian weakness after the collapse of the Soviet Union to enlarge to its east, in violation of promises allegedly made to Moscow by Western leaders. But no such promises were madea point now confirmed by someone who was definitely in a position to know: Mikhail Gorbachev, then president of the Soviet Union.
You have been lied to and are blindly regurgitating talking points that are false.

Your conflating two different things. This is about the repercussions of these moves. Actions have consequences. Jesus, Biden's own CIA director, William J. Burns, has been warning about the provocative effect of NATO expansion on Russia since 1995!

His direct quote from that time:

Quote:
Hostility to early NATO expansion is almost universally
felt across the domestic political spectrum here (Moscow)

Then a letter he wrote in 2008 in a memo to Secretary of
State Condoleezza Rice:

Quote:
Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest of all redlines

for the Russian elite (not just Putin). In more than two and
a half years of conversations with key Russian players . . .
I have yet to find anyone who views Ukraine in NATO as
anything other than a direct challenge to Russian interests

Or William Perry, who served as Defense Secretary under President Bill Clinton. In
a 2017 interview:

Quote:
In the last few years, most of the blame can be pointed at
the actions that Putin has taken. But in the early years I
have to say that the United States deserves much of the
blame.

Further:

Our first action that really set us off in a bad direction
was when NATO started to expand, bringing in eastern European
nations, some of them bordering Russia.

Too recent? In 1997 FIFTY prominent foreign policy experts signed an open letter to Clinton, saying, "We believe that the current U.S. led effort to expand NATO … is a policy error of historic proportions" that would "unsettle European stability."

Maybe George Kennen, who was the father of western Cold War containment doctrine matters - who also stated that expansion would trigger cataclysmic repercussions all the way back in 1998

Tea Party

8:36a, 4/25/24

In reply to aTmAg

aTmAg said:
Tea Party said:
aTmAg said:
How anybody can consider the Russians the "good guys" in this war is beyond me. You have to have single digit IQ. They were the ones that INVADED for crying out loud.
Not wanting to give Ukraine money, nor caring how far Russia advances because Europe does not care enough to help Ukraine more, does not mean people think Russia is the "good guys".
I agree. That post wasn't talking about the people who merely want to refrain giving money to Ukraine. It was referring to people who claim Russia is in the right, that Ukraine is "their land" or are arguing that the fact that Russia doesn't support gays means they are right in the fight against Ukraine.

I respect the opinion that we shouldn't be giving money to Ukraine. I think that they are wrong. That it is in our best interest to support Ukraine (in a better way than we do now). But that is nothing like those who argue that Russia is the "good" side.

I don't think there is as many people that share the "Russia is right" mentality. And of those that do, I would assume a decent portion of them are not advocating for sending money to Russia or other means of America help.

To that point, I wouldn't get to riled up about them, just like I wouldn't get riled up about flat earthers. I strongly disagree with their views but as long as they are not advocating for using American resources and tax payer dollars for their misguided views, then they are easy to ignore.

The people that want to fund Ukraine however, I strongly disagree with their views just like I disagree with the "Russia is right" crowd, however the pro Ukraine group is adamently enabling sending American resources and tax payer funds to support their view that others strongly disagree with. Those are the people that I have a bigger issue with, cough cough, rather than the people that think "Russia is right" but don't want to help Russia.

Learn about the Texas Nationalist Movement
https://tnm.me

BlueSmoke

8:39a, 4/25/24

In reply to Tea Party

Tea Party said:
aTmAg said:
How anybody can consider the Russians the "good guys" in this war is beyond me. You have to have single digit IQ. They were the ones that INVADED for crying out loud.
Not wanting to give Ukraine money, nor caring how far Russia advances because Europe does not care enough to help Ukraine more, does not mean people think Russia is the "good guys".

That's the talking point. If you dare question US involvement, allocation of funds to a country that was rated as the 8th most corrupt country on the planet, and escalation in this proxy war they want so bad, you are a Russian stooge.

geoag58

8:41a, 4/25/24

In reply to Jeeper79

Jeeper79 said:
Ciboag96 said:
One country thinks men in dresses are women.

The other country thinks men in dresses are freaks.

Don't believe everything you see in the media.
So that makes them the good guys? Well that's certainly a take.

In that area it makes them morally superior to us.

Fight against the dictatorship of the federal bureaucracy!

geoag58

8:44a, 4/25/24

In reply to Teslag

Teslag said:
Secolobo said:
Their leader is so scared for his life that he catches flights to the US to beg for money (to be laundered later) from our elected representatives...

Churchill visited the White House to ask for aid while they were being attacked by Nazis. He draw your ire too?

Yea everything is exactly the same as it was in 1941.

Fight against the dictatorship of the federal bureaucracy!

aTmAg

9:07a, 4/25/24

Moscow can declare whatever they want as a "bright red line", that doesn't mean anybody else is obligated to give a crap. By declaring a line around something that is not theirs, THEY are being the provocateurs. Not anybody who steps over that bogus line.

When Iran declared the Persian gulf, Reagan sent a carrier group there. We do the same when China drew a "red line" (literally) around the entire south China sea. That is the way adults handle such provocation. Not by giving into it like cowards.

Russia is 100% in the wrong. They are to blame for every aspect of this war.

aTmAg

9:11a, 4/25/24

In reply to Tea Party

Tea Party said:
aTmAg said:
Tea Party said:
aTmAg said:
How anybody can consider the Russians the "good guys" in this war is beyond me. You have to have single digit IQ. They were the ones that INVADED for crying out loud.
Not wanting to give Ukraine money, nor caring how far Russia advances because Europe does not care enough to help Ukraine more, does not mean people think Russia is the "good guys".
I agree. That post wasn't talking about the people who merely want to refrain giving money to Ukraine. It was referring to people who claim Russia is in the right, that Ukraine is "their land" or are arguing that the fact that Russia doesn't support gays means they are right in the fight against Ukraine.

I respect the opinion that we shouldn't be giving money to Ukraine. I think that they are wrong. That it is in our best interest to support Ukraine (in a better way than we do now). But that is nothing like those who argue that Russia is the "good" side.
I don't think there is as many people that share the "Russia is right" mentality. And of those that do, I would assume a decent portion of them are not advocating for sending money to Russia or other means of America help.

To that point, I wouldn't get to riled up about them, just like I wouldn't get riled up about flat earthers. I strongly disagree with their views but as long as they are not advocating for using American resources and tax payer dollars for their misguided views, then they are easy to ignore.

The people that want to fund Ukraine however, I strongly disagree with their views just like I disagree with the "Russia is right" crowd, however the pro Ukraine group is adamently enabling sending American resources and tax payer funds to support their view that others strongly disagree with. Those are the people that I have a bigger issue with, cough cough, rather than the people that think "Russia is right" but don't want to help Russia.

To pretend that people pushing for Ukrainians support are anything like people who claim "Russia is right" (and flat Earthers) is insulting and wrong.

There is a damn valid reason for us to support Ukraine in this war and it has everything to do with the security of the United States.

Tea Party

9:11a, 4/25/24

In reply to aTmAg

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
How anybody can consider the Russians the "good guys" in this war is beyond me. You have to have single digit IQ. They were the ones that INVADED for crying out loud.
Not wanting to give Ukraine money, nor caring how far Russia advances because Europe does not care enough to help Ukraine more, does not mean people think Russia is the "good guys".
I agree. That post wasn't talking about the people who merely want to refrain giving money to Ukraine. It was referring to people who claim Russia is in the right, that Ukraine is "their land" or are arguing that the fact that Russia doesn't support gays means they are right in the fight against Ukraine.

I respect the opinion that we shouldn't be giving money to Ukraine. I think that they are wrong. That it is in our best interest to support Ukraine (in a better way than we do now). But that is nothing like those who argue that Russia is the "good" side.
I don't think there is as many people that share the "Russia is right" mentality. And of those that do, I would assume a decent portion of them are not advocating for sending money to Russia or other means of America help.

To that point, I wouldn't get to riled up about them, just like I wouldn't get riled up about flat earthers. I strongly disagree with their views but as long as they are not advocating for using American resources and tax payer dollars for their misguided views, then they are easy to ignore.

The people that want to fund Ukraine however, I strongly disagree with their views just like I disagree with the "Russia is right" crowd, however the pro Ukraine group is adamently enabling sending American resources and tax payer funds to support their view that others strongly disagree with. Those are the people that I have a bigger issue with, cough cough, rather than the people that think "Russia is right" but don't want to help Russia.
To pretend that people pushing for Ukrainians support are anything like people who claim "Russia is right" (and flat Earthers) is insulting and wrong.

There is a damn valid reason for us to support Ukraine in this war and it has everything to do with the security of the United States.

You can view it as insulting, but that doesn't make it wrong.

You are advocating for a big gov fiscally liberal position because you THINK it has everything to do with the security of the Unitest States.

I would counter that the United States becoming fiscally sound and securing it's own border has a significantly greater impact on the security of the United States, and any funding of Ukraine before prioritizing our border and fiscal responsibility directly undermines achieving the important items.

You have your opinion. I have mine. I think yours is wrong but don't pretend that your big gov way is the only right way.

Learn about the Texas Nationalist Movement
https://tnm.me

BlueSmoke

9:18a, 4/25/24

In reply to aTmAg

aTmAg said:
Moscow can declare whatever they want as a "bright red line", that doesn't mean anybody else is obligated to give a crap. By declaring a line around something that is not theirs, THEY are being the provocateurs. Not anybody who steps over that bogus line.

When Iran declared the Persian gulf, Reagan sent a carrier group there. We do the same when China drew a "red line" (literally) around the entire south China sea. That is the way adults handle such provocation. Not by giving into it like cowards.

Russia is 100% in the wrong. They are to blame for every aspect of this war.

You're right, as should the rest of the world ignore all red lines the west sets out. Great plan. I mean, we almost cast the world into a nuclear winter for ours, but that's water under the bridge. Let's just keep poking the bear and poking the bear, and then when it retaliates throw up our hands and ask why the bear is so aggressive.

That we could have aggressively pushed peace accords early in the conflict and made express threats to "our" side is they entertained them tells you all you need to know about how badly we want this war and to facilitate it's continuance.

BlueSmoke

9:20a, 4/25/24

In reply to aTmAg

aTmAg said:

it has everything to do with the security of the United States.

This is a regurgitated talking point - we used it in our false flag operations in the Gulf of Tonkin. We used it as a precursor to invade Iraq on a premise of lies. But hey, this time.....

aTmAg

10:41a, 4/25/24

In reply to Tea Party

Tea Party said:

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
How anybody can consider the Russians the "good guys" in this war is beyond me. You have to have single digit IQ. They were the ones that INVADED for crying out loud.
Not wanting to give Ukraine money, nor caring how far Russia advances because Europe does not care enough to help Ukraine more, does not mean people think Russia is the "good guys".
I agree. That post wasn't talking about the people who merely want to refrain giving money to Ukraine. It was referring to people who claim Russia is in the right, that Ukraine is "their land" or are arguing that the fact that Russia doesn't support gays means they are right in the fight against Ukraine.

I respect the opinion that we shouldn't be giving money to Ukraine. I think that they are wrong. That it is in our best interest to support Ukraine (in a better way than we do now). But that is nothing like those who argue that Russia is the "good" side.
I don't think there is as many people that share the "Russia is right" mentality. And of those that do, I would assume a decent portion of them are not advocating for sending money to Russia or other means of America help.

To that point, I wouldn't get to riled up about them, just like I wouldn't get riled up about flat earthers. I strongly disagree with their views but as long as they are not advocating for using American resources and tax payer dollars for their misguided views, then they are easy to ignore.

The people that want to fund Ukraine however, I strongly disagree with their views just like I disagree with the "Russia is right" crowd, however the pro Ukraine group is adamently enabling sending American resources and tax payer funds to support their view that others strongly disagree with. Those are the people that I have a bigger issue with, cough cough, rather than the people that think "Russia is right" but don't want to help Russia.
To pretend that people pushing for Ukrainians support are anything like people who claim "Russia is right" (and flat Earthers) is insulting and wrong.

There is a damn valid reason for us to support Ukraine in this war and it has everything to do with the security of the United States.
You can view it as insulting, but that doesn't make it wrong.

You are advocating for a big gov fiscally liberal position because you THINK it has everything to do with the security of the Unitest States.

I would counter that the United States becoming fiscally sound and securing it's own border has a significantly greater impact on the security of the United States, and any funding of Ukraine before prioritizing our border and fiscal responsibility directly undermines achieving the important items.

You have your opinion. I have mine. I think yours is wrong but don't pretend that your big gov way is the only right way.

Except it is wrong.

And the notion that alliances are "big government" is hilarious. There entire purpose is to share the burden of defense. That is why NATO exists. That is why our allies in WW2 existed, etc. To let us REDUCE the size of our military. If in the future, we can count on the likes of Ukraine and Poland to hold Russia from expanding west, then that saves US money and lives. The fact that we have been going nearly alone in so many conflicts is why our recent policy has been big government. That is why we spend multiple TRILLION dollars per conflict rather than a 100 billion.

aTmAg

10:46a, 4/25/24

In reply to BlueSmoke

[When you refer to other posters as cowards you are stepping over the line. We were clear in our staff note that we won't accept that behavior. You can debate an issue without attacking others -- Staff]

aTmAg

10:51a, 4/25/24

In reply to BlueSmoke

BlueSmoke said:
aTmAg said:

it has everything to do with the security of the United States.
This is a regurgitated talking point - we used it in our false flag operations in the Gulf of Tonkin. We used it as a precursor to invade Iraq on a premise of lies. But hey, this time.....

Except standing by an ally and sticking to a past agreement is nothing like the Golf of Tonkin.

So you think we should not have alliances or treaties, and that we shouldn't stick by them?

Yeah... you are a real foreign policy savant.

(And the Iraqi WMD program thing wasn't a lie, it was an intelligence failure. Even Saddam thought he had them. His own people were lying to him.)

74OA

10:53a, 4/25/24

In reply to aTmAg

George Will is spot on.

"Heroism is not required of Ukraine's NATO and other allies, whose combined GDPs are 20 times that of Russia. The cost of losing, by ill-conceived parsimony, this proxy war with a barbarian power possessing the world's largest nuclear arsenal would be steep."

IGNOBLE

BigRobSA

10:56a, 4/25/24

Sounds like aTm is no longer "on the fence".

aTmAg

11:09a, 4/25/24

In reply to BigRobSA

BigRobSA said:
Sounds like aTm is no longer "on the fence".

The terrible arguments here have convinced me.

BigRobSA

11:12a, 4/25/24

In reply to aTmAg

aTmAg said:
BigRobSA said:
Sounds like aTm is no longer "on the fence".
The terrible arguments here have convinced me.

I'm honestly surprised a usually staunch conservative, such as yourself, would latch onto a liberal policy like the spending for Ukraine. Or Israel. Or Gaza. Or....any of it.

I expect it of a big gov lib like Tesla.

Tea Party

11:20a, 4/25/24

In reply to aTmAg

aTmAg said:
BigRobSA said:
Sounds like aTm is no longer "on the fence".
The terrible arguments here have convinced me.

Would you forgoe funding Ukraine, thus letting Europe be the decider in how much they want to help Ukraine, just for the time being until our border is secured AND Congress starts showing some semblance of fiscal responsibility?

Both of the border and attempt at fiscal responsibility could be achieved before the 2024 election if the R's pressed the issue, or in Jan 2025 if the D's refuse thus giving control to the GOP.

And in return, the populace would be ok giving Ukraine double the money to aid whatever stage the war is at against Russia?

It's the Stanford marshmallow experiment essentially and a trust that Europe shares the same urgency in stopping Russia that you do right now.

Learn about the Texas Nationalist Movement
https://tnm.me

Chips2003

11:21a, 4/25/24

In reply to Tea Party

[We're not going to allow personal attacks or disrespectful behavior -- Staff]

TRADUCTOR

11:29a, 4/25/24

Russia takes the entirety of Ukraine; essentially there will be no change to the type of government the patriotic Ukraine citizens accept.
No wait, last month Russia just re-elected President Putin and Ukraine citizens do not have a government anymore that has an election for president.
No wait, the Russian parts of Ukraine participated in a presidential election.

Looks like so far 172BB got no time for pesky elections.

Monkeypoxfighter

12:37p, 4/25/24

In reply to BigRobSA

BigRobSA said:
aTmAg said:
BigRobSA said:
Sounds like aTm is no longer "on the fence".
The terrible arguments here have convinced me.

I'm honestly surprised a usually staunch conservative, such as yourself, would latch onto a liberal policy like the spending for Ukraine. Or Israel. Or Gaza. Or....any of it.

I expect it of a big gov lib like Tesla.

What a squirrel show this place is when aiding a fight against Russian expansion and aiding Israel against terrorists is called a "liberal policy". Ronald Reagan is rolling over in his grave, and now Trump must be a liberal since he seemingly favors both.

$#@& Gaza

It only took me a year to figure out this place is nuts!

Texas velvet maestro

12:42p, 4/25/24

I just know, if my country's career politicians say there's another country in trouble and they have a heroic leader who can play piano with his pecker and he needs billions upon billions to save democracy from Russia...well. let me get my checkbook, and I don't need an accounting. just go crazy.

BigRobSA

12:47p, 4/25/24

In reply to Monkeypoxfighter

Monkeypoxfighter said:
BigRobSA said:
aTmAg said:
BigRobSA said:
Sounds like aTm is no longer "on the fence".
The terrible arguments here have convinced me.

I'm honestly surprised a usually staunch conservative, such as yourself, would latch onto a liberal policy like the spending for Ukraine. Or Israel. Or Gaza. Or....any of it.

I expect it of a big gov lib like Tesla.
What a squirrel show this place is when aiding a fight against Russian expansion and aiding Israel against terrorists is called a "liberal policy". Ronald Reagan is rolling over in his grave, and now Trump must be a liberal since he seemingly favors both.

$#@& Gaza

Trump IS a liberal, yes. Just not a progressive one.

We're way beyond broke, so yes this aid package is nothing but a liberal fiscal policy on display. We need to concentrate on America. ****NotAmerica. Israel can handle themselves and so can Ukraine. If they need help, let the Europeans help. We're closed.