LITEROTICA PODCAST
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

At this point, the only countries that don't want negotiations and compromise are Poland, Lithuania, Estonia, Zelensky and of course the US

M

mayfly13

Literotica Guru
Joined
Nov 10, 2020
Posts
2,900
I'm with Macron's stance on this.


Counterargument:

Of course one sees the point of view of Poland, Lithuania, Estonia and some Ukrainians.
Russia was and will always be imperialistic.
The Russification (send Ukrainians from Mariupol to Siberia, replace them with Russians) is nothing new, nor Soviet -- it was and IS the modus operandi of Tsarist Russia. You go to Kazakhstan, and you feel like you're in Mother Russia.

Pro-Macron/Kissinger arguments:

By the same token, the only thing that this war is achieving is the smell of decomposing bodies in Ukrainian cities. Most people know that. The only ones who wishful-think or pretend otherwise, are eithre those who know that, the more the war goes on, the less likely it is that they will be next, or those who want to maintain their hegemony against China etc etc.

And Zelensky's judgment can no longer be trusted. He morphed from patriotic, to enjoying his stage moments a bit too much.
 
Once Putin re-installs his puppet in the White House, gasoline and bread will return to normal prices.
 
Compromise how? "Just let us have this little bit of your country, and we promise that will be it?" Worked out real well in 2014.

Munich analogies get overused all the time, but isn't that pretty much what we're talking about here? Putin has asserted Russia's right to reclaim any land that has ever at any time been considered part of imperial Russia. That's not really something that can be allowed.
 
Wrong Element said:
Compromise how? "Just let us have this little bit of your country, and we promise that will be it?" Worked out real well in 2014.

Munich analogies get overused all the time, but isn't that pretty much what we're talking about here? Putin has asserted Russia's right to reclaim any land that has ever at any time been considered part of imperial Russia. That's not really something that can be allowed.
Click to expand...
I read a translated speech he gave recently to students at a technical school in Moscow where he points out that St Petersburg was at one time part of Sweden…. And that its only natural for Russia to hold thise territories held by the slavs, etc.

Ukraine is an industrial/agricultural center and until Yeltsin gave it away, effectively Russian.

I see their point, and agree that NATO’s been expanding as well.

It’s not cut and dry and none of the players have clean hands.
 
Wrong Element said:
Compromise how? "Just let us have this little bit of your country, and we promise that will be it?" Worked out real well in 2014.

Munich analogies get overused all the time, but isn't that pretty much what we're talking about here? Putin has asserted Russia's right to reclaim any land that has ever at any time been considered part of imperial Russia. That's not really something that can be allowed.
Click to expand...

Oh puleeeease.
America's and Britains morals have always been self-serving.


Crimea was a piece of rock that always belonged to Russia, was always sparely populated by Ukrainians, was gifted to Ukraine by a leader behind his party's back.
And Crimeans VOTED to join Russia.
Don't tell me that, had it no geostrategic significance Black Sea and so on, Americans would have cared.

Americans and Brits didn't care enough when real atrocities and lqnd grabs happened in Chechnya an Georgia, nor when Russia took chunks out of other countries post-ww2.

​

Yet all of the sudden, they started defending democracy when it came to a geostrategic piece of rock.
 
The invasion was unjustified and unprovoked. If Russia gains anything from this, Russia will be encouraged to do it again.
 
mayfly13 said:
I'm with Macron's stance on this.


Counterargument:

Of course one sees the point of view of Poland, Lithuania, Estonia and some Ukrainians.
Russia was and will always be imperialistic.
The Russification (send Ukrainians from Mariupol to Siberia, replace them with Russians) is nothing new, nor Soviet -- it was and IS the modus operandi of Tsarist Russia. You go to Kazakhstan, and you feel like you're in Mother Russia.

Pro-Macron/Kissinger arguments:

By the same token, the only thing that this war is achieving is the smell of decomposing bodies in Ukrainian cities. Most people know that. The only ones who wishful-think or pretend otherwise, are eithre those who know that, the more the war goes on, the less likely it is that they will be next, or those who want to maintain their hegemony against China etc etc.

And Zelensky's judgment can no longer be trusted. He morphed from patriotic, to enjoying his stage moments a bit too much.
Click to expand...
Appeasement was a foreign policy practiced by Britain and France in the 1930’s by which they yielded to the demands of aggressive nations such as Germany, Italy and Japan in order to avoid war. In other words, it was a. conscious effort to,prevent war...by removing the causes of tensions. Concessions were given to the aggressive nations even when this was a violation of international agreements. Britain and refused to declare war even in the face of naked aggression. The British Prime minister Chamberlain was the apostle of appeasement.

https://cameroongcerevision.com/anglo-french-policy-appeasement-1921-1939/

The occupation of the Sudetenland, the border regions in the north and west of Czechoslovakia, was the first time Hitler flexed his military muscles in Europe. The region was conceded to Germany by the Czech government in an attempt to avoid war after the Germans made demands for it to be handed over.
For Hitler, this fulfilled two aims. One was to unite the German speaking people of this region with Germany, supporting his goal of a larger, united German nation. The other was that it let him test how far he could push other European powers, who backed down rather than defend Czechoslovakia from German threats.

https://www.warhistoryonline.com/wo...s-invaded-nazi-germany-invaded.html?firefox=1

“Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” Sir Winston Churchill​



Comshaw
 
Just to clarify, I'm not really worried about Russia attacking NATO countries. They're having a hard enough time with Ukraine. But they've made it clear they aim to either swallow up Ukraine (and Moldova) or allow it to live on as only nominally independent a la Belarus. Any "deal" is just postponing a reckoning over that.
 
rockcasbah said:
Once Putin re-installs his puppet in the White House, gasoline and bread will return to normal prices.
Click to expand...
Obama? he's technically via the 22nd Amendment unable to be re-installed in the White House.

President Obama was caught by a live microphone as he told President Dmitri A. Medvedev of Russia that he would have “more flexibility”, he was, to put it in terms of the current Russian election controversy, “colluding” with the Russians in the belief it was a good strategy.
https://www.wsj.com/video/obama-medvedev-hot-mic-gaffe/5F7CF09D-CFD5-4805-A72C-3378D5F8371E.html

https://www.mysanantonio.com/opinio...-talk-about-Russia-s-real-stooge-11069277.php

Obama re-set with Russia shortly after its clash with Georgia in 2008. He concluded the New START agreement with Moscow that reduced our nuclear forces but not theirs.

Obama then went on to forge an agreement with Russia’s ally Iran to allow it to preserve its nuclear program. During the red-line fiasco, he eagerly grasped a lifeline from Russia at the price of accepting its intervention in Syria. He never budged on giving Ukraine “lethal” weapons to defend itself from Russian attack.

Finally, Obama cut US defense spending and cracked down on fossil fuels — a policy that Russia welcomes, since its economy is dependent on high oil prices.

the fact that “improved relations with the Kremlin” was a long-time plank of the Democratic Party, which, as a result, was routinely vilified by the American Right as Kremlin agents and sympathizers (as were Republicans such as Nixon and Reagan when they sought better ties with Moscow). But the most glaring irony of all is that as Clinton-led Democrats in 2016 equate overtures toward Russia as evidence of Putin-loving disloyalty — whether it be Trump’s opposition to arming Ukraine or his heretical questioning of NATO — there is an American politician who has, time and again, accommodated Putin, sought to improve relations with Moscow, dismissed as fearmongering the threat Russia poses to the U.S., and repeatedly taken steps that benefited Russian interests.

That politician’s name is Barack Obama. As Trevor Timm wrote yesterday in The Guardian, “Barack Obama seems to be the only politician not playing into the cold war 2.0 hysteria.” Indeed, Obama has continually acted in accord with Russia’s agenda and sought to pour cold water on attempts to revive Cold War rhetoric and policies.

Then there’s Obama’s total passivity in the face of the "manufactured" Russia-Trump collusion accusations (which were thoroughly debunked in 2016, but still persist into 2022) from Democrats and others that Putin has been actively and maliciously interfering in U.S. elections this year through hacking, disinformation, and other subversive measures. For those who really believe these claims, shouldn’t the U.S. president be issuing strong condemnations and taking aggressive retaliatory measures? What has Obama done to punish Putin for these transgressions? By all appearances, he’s done nothing. Of course they the Democrats were all aware of Hillary Clinton's fake story narrated by the "Steele" dossier to try an pin their crimes to Trump.

Put all of this together, and it’s impossible to conclude anything other than that Obama was a Russian stooge

The CBS propaganda, spin on it.
 
mayfly13 said:
Oh puleeeease.
America's and Britains morals have always been self-serving.


Crimea was a piece of rock that always belonged to Russia, was always sparely populated by Ukrainians, was gifted to Ukraine by a leader behind his party's back.
And Crimeans VOTED to join Russia.
Don't tell me that, had it no geostrategic significance Black Sea and so on, Americans would have cared.

Americans and Brits didn't care enough when real atrocities and lqnd grabs happened in Chechnya an Georgia, nor when Russia took chunks out of other countries post-ww2.

​

Yet all of the sudden, they started defending democracy when it came to a geostrategic piece of rock.
Click to expand...
Yup… Krushchev was the head of the Ukraine before he ran the USSR… he gifted Crimea and the lands east of the river to the Ukraine…. Historically, Ukraine didnt own those regions.

This is why all the forced assimilation of those russian-speaking regions by Ukraine.

And yes, it suits American geo-interests to back Ukraine to the detriment of Russia.
 
SamSang said:
his biz owes money

ALL BIZ OWE MONEY

its BS
Click to expand...
Trump claims to be a multi billionaire. Multi billionaires have no reason to borrow money from anyone. For a long time I have suspected that Trump is not a billionaire at all, but a man who is several hundred thousand dollars in debt, and that his lavish lifestyle is a facade.
 
mayfly13 said:
I'm with Macron's stance on this.


Counterargument:

Of course one sees the point of view of Poland, Lithuania, Estonia and some Ukrainians.
Russia was and will always be imperialistic.
The Russification (send Ukrainians from Mariupol to Siberia, replace them with Russians) is nothing new, nor Soviet -- it was and IS the modus operandi of Tsarist Russia. You go to Kazakhstan, and you feel like you're in Mother Russia.

Pro-Macron/Kissinger arguments:

By the same token, the only thing that this war is achieving is the smell of decomposing bodies in Ukrainian cities. Most people know that. The only ones who wishful-think or pretend otherwise, are eithre those who know that, the more the war goes on, the less likely it is that they will be next, or those who want to maintain their hegemony against China etc etc.

And Zelensky's judgment can no longer be trusted. He morphed from patriotic, to enjoying his stage moments a bit too much.
Click to expand...
So what. It was the Russians who invaded a sovereign nation. If the Ukrainians want to fight, they have the right.
 
JohnEngelman said:
Trump claims to be a multi billionaire. Multi billionaires have no reason to borrow money from anyone. For a long time I have suspected that Trump is not a billionaire at all, but a man who is several hundred thousand dollars in debt, and that his lavish lifestyle is a facade.
Click to expand...
Trump is a a RE guy

ALL RE GUYS BORROW HUGE SUMS
 
SamSang said:
Trump is a a RE guy

ALL RE GUYS BORROW HUGE SUMS
Click to expand...
You do not prove that by asserting it. Why would some with net asserts borrow money? He would have to pay interest on that money.

Also, if Trump's net assets exceed his debts, which I doubt, we still have the right to know who he owes money to, especially if it Putin.
 
Biden owes money to Putin!


Real Estate peeps buy 100 million and put down 10% and borrow the rest!
 
JohnEngelman said:
You do not prove that by asserting it. Why would some with net asserts borrow money? He would have to pay interest on that money.

Also, if Trump's net assets exceed his debts, which I doubt, we still have the right to know who he owes money to, especially if it Putin.
Click to expand...
You do not prove that by asserting it


you have NO RIGHT tp know shit about personal info about ANYOME
 
JohnEngelman said:
You do not prove that by asserting it. Why would some with net asserts borrow money? He would have to pay interest on that money.

Also, if Trump's net assets exceed his debts, which I doubt, we still have the right to know who he owes money to, especially if it Putin.
Click to expand...
you KNOW the answer

BUT

you pretend otherwise

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/13/...evidence-that-trump-owes-money-to-russia.html

Trump Lawyers Say He Had No Russian Income or Debt, With Some Exceptions​


https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/12/us/politics/trump-russia-tax-returns.html

WASHINGTON — President Trump’s lawyers say his income tax returns do not show income from Russian sources or debt owed to Russians, with the exception of $95 million paid by a Russian billionaire for a Trump-owned estate in Florida and $12.2 million in payments in connection with holding the Miss Universe pageant in Moscow in 2013.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top