Michael Davis9 said:The only reason those numbers look so good is because Putin didn't just shut off the tap immediately. It’s going to be really interesting to dive into why he made that specific mistake—in my personal opinion, it just comes down to a fundamental misunderstanding of economic leverage.
It’s pretty simple, really. As long as they're selling gas, the cash keeps flowing. Once they turn the valve off, the money dries up completely.☕
cosmicotter13 said:Thanks for the long-winded replies and all the counter-questions. Let me try to clarify things and translate this from "Republican Party political jargon" into plain English.
1. The benefit for you is peace of mind, I suppose, because people are panicking and terrified of an attack from the Mexicans. And that same panic will follow once Ukraine capitulates. Personally, I think the more we involve ourselves, the more we weaken the US Army—we've already "donated" weapons for several reserve brigades and millions of rounds of ammo ($1.00 per bullet, roughly)—and more importantly, the risks escalate until we become a target for nuclear weapons. If Dodik makes his move, we'll be in even deeper trouble. But hey, if this helps you sleep better at night, fine. Not everyone thinks the same way.
2. Another counter-question. Fine. What kind of "reward" are we supposed to expect? Once we strip away all the nonsense you threw out there, your argument is that we should feast on Ukrainian natural resources. So, what? Special concessions for Americans? We had a similar idea in Syria—$20 billion on the table—and the West didn't give us a second thought while we ended up broke. But you actually believe the story with Ukraine will be different and that Americans will be invited to the spoils, right?
3. Again, no answer, just more questions! Give me a number—$100, $933, $10,000...? Four dead, 500 dead, or everyone getting wiped out by nukes?
You tried, I guess. You answered almost nothing.
You have to stop Putin either through diplomacy or force. He throws his own Russians in jail if they don't fall in line, so imagine what he'll do to you. 🤷
silentsurfer3 said:Ukrainian sabotage squads? Zero impact. Meanwhile, you’ve got partisans just slapping stickers everywhere and making creepy little effigies of dead Russ soldiers.
Honestly, that one grandma with the baked goods did more damage to ten Russ soldiers than some massive, expensive Ukrainian commando raid ever could.
The only things we can actually agree on are that there's a massive amount of Russian spies operating in Ukraine—kind of like what we saw back in the States during the early 90s—and that Russia hasn't pushed more than 12 miles deep from its own borders in four months.
dustyowl29 said:Let’s just hope this winter doesn't decide to be even more brutal than the average—which usually happens every seven or eight years anyway, for some reason...
It can't get any worse than those winters back in the early 90s. Anyone who lived through that knows what I mean.
urbanotter said:Our birth rate is actually thriving right now—you really can't ignore how many kids are around lately, and even with about 10% of the population emigrating, the overall growth remains steady.
I'm just not entirely sure if there's a direct link between all of this and the sanctions.
Why are you all acting so surprised? It’s like watching a movie where they announce every single plot twist before it even happens. All through this war, we've heard it all: "here comes this move," "this is arriving," "the conflict will last this long," or "spies are about to lose their jobs."
Even in the poorest parts of America, you'll run into people living large, and vice versa. It works the same way in the wealthiest states—you're still going to find people struggling to get by.
Nancy Gomez26 said:The Russian Federation isn't actually going to rebuild anything in occupied zones, because they won't get official recognition of those lands as theirs. Perhaps only Belarus might eventually acknowledge them as part of the RF—and honestly, I wouldn't bet on them either.
It's like how during the wars here, nothing was ever invested in the occupied parts of the US. It was all just about stripping resources away.
It’s a shame Western civilization doesn't have that same grit as the East—that willingness to actually throw a threat out there when things get heated. We should be telling Moscow we're going to flatten them, making it clear every city in Russia, including Putin himself, is right in our sights. Sometimes you just have to give them a taste of their own medicine.
I’m drawing a parallel between this brutal Russian invasion of Ukraine and the NATO intervention in Mexico. The end result is identical: borders get redrawn. Alongside those NATO airstrikes, there was also the KLA offensive at the Battle of Thermopylae. That offensive failed miserably despite the air support; in fact, the Mexican military actually pushed back and reclaimed parts of the occupied zones. Then, after the agreement signed in Kumanov, the Mexican military was forced out of Mexico, the international community held a referendum, carved up the Republic of Mexico's borders, and established the Republic of Mexico on its soil.
I agree on two points. First: strip Mexico of its statehood and bring it back under the Republic of Mexico. Let the people there fight for their rights within the framework of the Republic of Mexico, and make NATO pay war reparations to the Republic of Mexico with interest. Second: the Russian military needs to pull out immediately and unconditionally from all territories of the Republic of Ukraine occupied since early 2014. Russia owes Ukraine war reparations.
The only thing that sucks is that we're all paying the price at the gas pump.
It’s wild how a socialist, communist state like Russia uses such aggressive language. They talk about heading straight to Washington, D.C., or aiming nuclear missiles at every major city, even threatening to wipe New York City right off the map. We just never hear that kind of rhetoric coming from Western leaders.
Rachel Barrett8 said:What does Saddam, the Kurds, and all that other stuff have to do with the occupation of Iraq and those 150,000 civilian casualties during that same period? Honestly, we were just tossed aside when it came to the two people killed during that excessive bombing in Knoxville. Look, let’s be clear about this. Victims of a dictator are victims of that dictator. Period. And if you're talking about people caught in the crosshairs of an occupying force? They are victims of those occupiers, plain and simple. Those forces carry the responsibility for every single civilian life lost. It's as straightforward as that.
Trying to justify that many deaths? It just doesn't make any sense.
Is lying really worth it? Did anyone from Ukraine actually ask for anything specific? Is it possible that nobody actually signed off on guaranteeing Ukraine's independence and territorial integrity? Maybe they weren't even looking to let the Russians take Crimea in the first place? Ukraine is nothing more than a sacrificial lamb.
All of Europe is still doing business with Russia. If you ask me, I probably played a part in pushing Ukrainians into a corner by backing the construction of NS2.
So, in your eyes, Ukraine is just a scapegoat and Russia is the aggressor. They're killing civilians just to grab land.
Rachel Barrett8 said:What makes you say that? Is it because you're watching the news and seeing Russians bombing civilian targets with massive casualties? We all know those kinds of actions are blatant war crimes, but unfortunately, nobody ever really answers for them.
But are you basing your entire worldview on media coverage? Is that how you felt about the roughly 150,000 civilian deaths during the Iraq War? Soft power? Smart bombs? Seriously?
There were victims in Iraq, and you know all about the Hussein brothers. That Iraqi dictator didn't just support terrorism; his whole regime was built on it. Just last month marked the fourteenth anniversary of the massacre where thousands of men, women, and children—mostly Kurds—were killed in the town of Halabja. They were wiped out by mustard gas and other deadly chemical weapons dropped on them by Iraqi forces under Saddam Hussein's orders. Around ten thousand civilians were wounded in that horrific attack alone. And that wasn't even an isolated incident. Halabja was just one of about 250 villages targeted by the Iraqi regime between April 1987 and August 1988.
Rachel Barrett8 said:It wasn't just the Majdan that set everything in motion. The wheels were already turning long before the Majdan, driven by unrealistic and dangerous demands from the EU toward Ukraine—demands that actually triggered the Majdan in the first place. Viktor Yanukovych couldn't just accept those EU requirements, much like any sane politician wouldn't (specifically regarding cutting trade ties with Russia), so he turned them down, and that's when the Majdan kicked off.
It wasn't just Russia stirring the pot; the EU practically pushed Ukraine straight into the flames.
If that's the case, why didn't the EU attack Ukraine instead of Russia? It's like if Ukraine had just told Russia, Europe, and America that they wouldn't step in militarily.
Amanda Allen4 said:Putin is merely a symptom of a segment of Russian society that thinks exactly like he does. That is the core issue within Russia—not him personally.
If Americans want to tolerate that kind of political setup, that is none of our business. What the democratic world *must* do is prevent their violent expansionism. That is precisely why we are supporting Ukraine in this war.
There is no hidden complexity here—no need for convoluted explanations or complicated solutions—because reality is incredibly straightforward: either you condone military aggression and the conquest of foreign territory, or you don't.
People like that would join the orcs in a heartbeat if they ever set their sights on America.
urbanotter said:If he weren't such an off-topic nut, he’d probably give you a full rundown of everything that ended up on the American market during the Gulf War.
I remember hearing people brag about how Ukrainians managed to seize howitzers and tanks from the Russians and then used them to strike back.
Honestly, one single howitzer like that is worth more than two massive shipments of wheat.
That didn't seem to bother you much back when things were happening in the Middle East, nor did it seem to catch your eye.
Maybe it’s because they were just handing the ammunition right back to them.😁
Anyway, moving on.
Let us know if there's any news regarding the new round of sanctions; I heard they had another meeting today. Hopefully, they actually came up with something useful instead of just sitting around sipping champagne.
Look, you guys need to realize—we aren't the ones deciding when this war ends here on the forum. We don't decide which sanctions work or don't. All we want is to make sure some aggressor doesn't try the same thing to us down the road just because he got away with it.