Posts by swiftjackal11

Betty Carter3 said:I haven't seen anyone rooting for Putin. It's just about pointing out the double standards. For instance, why didn't we kick the Russians out of SWIFT?
Oh, right. They start wars in the name of democracy. I almost forgot.

It's because that's where we actually want to live, not in Russia. The paychecks there are $1000.
Even people from Mexico head to Munich instead of Vladivostok.

briskbear51 said:Does everyone really have to start every single thought with "I'm not a fan of Russia, but..."?
🤦

It’s finally come to this. Time to feel some shame. ☕

It’s pretty obvious to everyone—the longer Ukrainians hold the line against the Russians, the harder it'll be for them down the road.

We can't lose sight of the fact that there are about 5 million Russians living in Ukraine right now.

Ashley Ramirez4 said:Well, there was at least one—an F-117 pilot. I mean, if you aren't counting Mexico as part of Mexican territory from back then, then sure, maybe not.

One person who isn't really anyone.

gentleharbor3 said:Right. Americans are at their best when they're defending territory 3108 miles far away from home.
Reminds me of that long-lost Kolinda Grabar-Kitarović, who once claimed
that the US would defend itself in Afghanistan. 🙂

Exactly. It’s always better to hold the line in Luhansk than to be out there in Kyiv or fighting in Kyiv itself.

It’s never a fair fight when you’re already up 3:1.

placidnomad87 said:It feels like NATO is just sitting back, waiting for some massive turning point in the war before they finally decide to step in—maybe that’s actually the strategy all along. NOBODY IS GOING TO DEFEND YOUR COUNTRY FOR FREE!

NATO isn't jumping into a fight. They can only send weapons.

Doesn't really matter which tank it is, honestly. I'm leaning toward it being Ukrainian. There's no way a Russian tank is just cruising around Ukraine without a fight.

Paul Flores13 said:What's the current situation looking like over in Kyiv?

The Russians are out there saying "Kyiv has to fall."

Nancy Gomez26 said:For Poland, a sovereign Ukraine is a matter of vital national security. If their assessment is that this administration can hold its own against Russia, then sending aid is simply the logical conclusion. (In my view, their decision to provide help serves as a barometer for the actual situation on the ground). Past conflicts belong in history books; we are watching a new era of history being written in real-time.

It’s always better to deal with a threat far away from home.

rowdytiger13 said:I know plenty of Poles. You wouldn't want to step foot in Poland if you value your life.

That's NATO territory.

The longer people stick by Russia and Putin, the less anyone is going to like them.

gentleharbor3 said:I didn't think an invasion would happen either,
but within a realistic framework, this logic isn't irrational at all.
At least from his perspective.
The Minsk II agreement fell apart, and Ukraine wasn't following it.
It's simple cause and effect.
He didn't just wake up one morning and decide—"today I invade Ukraine."
This happened for clear reasons we've already covered,
including the broader geopolitical context.
You could call this a conflict between the USA and Russia, where Russia
is directly involved, while the USA acts through proxies.

Once again, it's all America's fault. Like Ukrainians are just too clueless to realize who the Russians actually are.

gentleharbor3 said:Easy for you to say from your comfy armchair.
The people actually dying out there only have one life.
Life is the ultimate value.
And things in Ukraine aren't exactly settled enough
to claim that 90% of Ukrainians agree
on which direction they should take.

I'm with you. You really only have two choices. It's like when an addict breaks into your house demanding cash. You either hand it over or you kick them out. Or, you give them the money and then get beaten up for it too. So there are three options. Pick one.

Kyle Nelson2 said:I wonder if they'll end up on the list for "denazification" too?

Anything can happen if you start acting like Hitler.

Christian Torres3 said:Anyone with half a brain is on the right side here.

That's just how it is for Ukraine.

gentleharbor3 said:If the US Army had even a single-digit number of nukes back in the 90s,
we’d all be speaking some weird hybrid language today.
Russia has 6,255.
It’s fascinating how many people take everything they read
on Twitter and stuff as gospel, ignoring the fact that information warfare
is a core component of every conflict, especially in the age of
the internet and social media...
The Ukrainians aren't going to win this war
because if Putin loses his mind, he'll just level everything to the ground.
And based on the messages coming out of the White House, it's obvious
that lowering the guard and returning to negotiations is smarter
than continuing this stubborn defiance.
That's the reality.
The problem is that Americans completely misinterpret
their own experiences from the American Civil War when looking at this war.

Of course they can't. But pride is stronger than Hitler's nukes.

Christian Torres3 said:Total troll move. Americans are standing with Ukraine.

Anyone with common sense sides with the underdog.

Amanda Williams13 said:If Kyiv falls, nobody’s going to give a damn about whether Zelenskyy fixed his stage presence or whatever.

I still can't wrap my head around how unprepared they were, though I guess at least they weren't steamrolled in forty-eight hours like all those pundits predicted back when everything was kicking off.

True. In three months, they could have at least rigged those key bridges with explosives. Dig trenches, or make sure there's only one road left open just for moving supplies toward the West.