Russia vs Ukraine

[TexasTiger 12,836]

5 minutes ago, Grumps said:

My apologies for stating what you may or may not know.

I believe that killing the Keystone XL pipeline project was a blow to North American oil production and energy independence (and jobs). As we have found out, you never know what might happen that make dependence on other nations a real problem.

Can we get Putin to promise not to spend the money that we send to them for their oil on weapons to kill Ukrainians?

The Keystone Pipeline is one of those handful of talking points used to make all kinds of arguments beyond what makes logical sense. Like any construction project, there would be short-term jobs created. Same is true for wind farms, solar farms, schools, bridges, etc. How much of a difference would it ultimately make years from now on energy dependence? Opinions differ widely:

https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.5882313

Anyone serious about energy independence will consider transitioning to nuclear & renewables and not whine about the move to electric vehicles.

[I_M4_AU 7,803]

20 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

This is about the perceived "strength" of our leader?    Beyond simplistic.  Beyond ignorant. 

Our entire country is racing to become Alabama/Mississippi.

 

 

 

This from the Daily Wire (I know) that sites a NYT article:

Democrat President Joe Biden’s administration turned over intelligence to communist China for months about Russia’s plans to invade Ukraine in an attempt to get China to convince Russia to not invade, according to a report.

“Over three months, senior Biden administration officials held half a dozen urgent meetings with top Chinese officials in which the Americans presented intelligence showing Russia’s troop buildup around Ukraine and beseeched the Chinese to tell Russia not to invade,” The New York Times reported. “Each time, the Chinese officials, including the foreign minister and the ambassador to the United States, rebuffed the Americans, saying they did not think an invasion was in the works. After one diplomatic exchange in December, U.S. officials got intelligence showing Beijing had shared the information with Moscow, telling the Russians that the United States was trying to sow discord — and that China would not try to impede Russian plans and actions.”

The report comes after Russia launched a full-scale invasion into Ukraine late this week and fighting has already reached the country’s capital city of Kyiv, although U.S. officials claim that Russia’s advance has been slowed down some by Ukrainian resistance.

The meetings in which the Biden administration turned over intelligence to Beijing started after Biden held a video summit with Chinese dictator Xi Jinping in mid-November.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/biden-turned-over-intelligence-to-china-on-russias-plans-to-invade-ukraine-china-gave-it-to-russia-report-says?%3Futm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=dwtwitter

And you think our perception of our leader as weak is beyond simplistic and ignorant?

Remember, China just inked a deal with Russia for $1.17 Billion for Russian oil.

Go back to face palms.

[Grumps 3,704]

17 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

This is about the perceived "strength" of our leader?    Beyond simplistic.  Beyond ignorant. 

Our entire country is racing to become Alabama/Mississippi.

 

 

 

Great to hear from you!!! I agree with you except there is a lot of good in Alabama and Mississippi if you know where to look. This should be about policies and not about the perceived strength of current or former leaders. It is pathetic that the repubs want to use the Russia/Ukraine invasion to win the midterm elections. People are dying.

[bigbird 60,513]

https://www.the-sun.com/news/4774963/ukrainian-heroes-fight-to-death-with-russian-invaders-kyiv/

Inspiring

[I_M4_AU 7,803]

Thanks @icanthearyou

[bigbird 60,513]

@icanthearyou, I completely agree.

[I_M4_AU 7,803]

24 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Anyone serious about energy independence will consider transitioning to nuclear

Germany on Friday is shutting down half of the six nuclear plants it still has in operation, a year before the country draws the final curtain on its decades-long use of atomic power.

The decision to phase out nuclear power and shift from fossil fuels to renewable energy was first taken by the centre-left government of former Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder in 2002.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/12/31/germany-shuts-down-half-of-its-remaining-nuclear-plants

You’re right.

[homersapien 11,367]

6 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

This from the Daily Wire (I know) that sites a NYT article:

Democrat President Joe Biden’s administration turned over intelligence to communist China for months about Russia’s plans to invade Ukraine in an attempt to get China to convince Russia to not invade, according to a report.

“Over three months, senior Biden administration officials held half a dozen urgent meetings with top Chinese officials in which the Americans presented intelligence showing Russia’s troop buildup around Ukraine and beseeched the Chinese to tell Russia not to invade,” The New York Times reported. “Each time, the Chinese officials, including the foreign minister and the ambassador to the United States, rebuffed the Americans, saying they did not think an invasion was in the works. After one diplomatic exchange in December, U.S. officials got intelligence showing Beijing had shared the information with Moscow, telling the Russians that the United States was trying to sow discord — and that China would not try to impede Russian plans and actions.”

The report comes after Russia launched a full-scale invasion into Ukraine late this week and fighting has already reached the country’s capital city of Kyiv, although U.S. officials claim that Russia’s advance has been slowed down some by Ukrainian resistance.

The meetings in which the Biden administration turned over intelligence to Beijing started after Biden held a video summit with Chinese dictator Xi Jinping in mid-November.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/biden-turned-over-intelligence-to-china-on-russias-plans-to-invade-ukraine-china-gave-it-to-russia-report-says?%3Futm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=dwtwitter

And you think our perception of our leader as weak is beyond simplistic and ignorant?

Remember, China just inked a deal with Russia for $1.17 Billion for Russian oil.

Go back to face palms.

"beseeched"? 

[AU9377 4,928]

10 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

You have got to get Trump out of your mind.  He is no longer President.  Trump has nothing to do with the mess we are in right now.

Yes, Russia is the aggressor in this situation, my post had more to do with why we got into this mess and how it could have been prevented.  Unfortunately, that is water under the bridge so to speak, we have weak leadership and he is kowtowing to interests that are not necessarily what America needs.  Europe is too afraid they will lose their energy source to put hard sanctions on Russia because they can’t replace their energy requirements with anyone else.  Too bad there isn’t another country that has a ready supply isn’t it?

Biden has gone all in on the Green New Deal way too early as no country’s infrastructure is set up to handle replacing fossil fuels with alternate sources.  Putin took advantage. It’s pretty simple.

Trump inserts himself and you all constantly use the man when trying to pretend that Russia would not have invaded Ukraine had he still been President, which is beyond nonsensical.

[AU9377 4,928]

21 hours ago, GoAU said:

I’m ok with you being ok with electric vehicles, as long as you guys don’t try and force it on me    
 

I’ll stick with my F-350 turbo diesel….

I have no issue with that.  However, unless you need it for work, don't complain about the cost of fuel.  I see too many people driving $60,000 plus trucks (and urs is closer to $90,000) that park them in a parking deck every day and use them only for transportation that act shocked that it costs them so much money a week to fill up. 

Like I said, that doesn't apply if someone uses their truck for work or even farm work. 

[homersapien 11,367]

11 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

I have no issue with that.  However, unless you need it for work, don't complain about the cost of fuel.  I see too many people driving $60,000 plus trucks (and urs is closer to $90,000) that park them in a parking deck every day and use them only for transportation that act shocked that it costs them so much money a week to fill up. 

Like I said, that doesn't apply if someone uses their truck for work or even farm work. 

I've made the same observation in supermarket parking lots, with moms driving humongous SUVs to fetch groceries. 

[AUFAN78 3,894]

7 hours ago, Grumps said:

This should be about policies and not about the perceived strength of current or former leaders. It is pathetic that the repubs want to use the Russia/Ukraine invasion to win the midterm elections. People are dying.

Dan Abrams had a great piece on journalists using the invasion to score political points. It included clips of Tucker Carlson, Joy Reid and Andrea Mitchell. It truly is a "both sides" tactic.

[GoAU 1,600]

40 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

I have no issue with that.  However, unless you need it for work, don't complain about the cost of fuel.  I see too many people driving $60,000 plus trucks (and urs is closer to $90,000) that park them in a parking deck every day and use them only for transportation that act shocked that it costs them so much money a week to fill up. 

Like I said, that doesn't apply if someone uses their truck for work or even farm work. 

Use it to pull a 5th wheel RV. Can’t do that with a Tesla.  
 

I don’t typically complain about the cost of fuel until it goes up significantly because of stupid policy decisions, however I think we’re getting off track here.  

[AUFAN78 3,894]

45 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

I have no issue with that.  However, unless you need it for work, don't complain about the cost of fuel.  I see too many people driving $60,000 plus trucks (and urs is closer to $90,000) that park them in a parking deck every day and use them only for transportation that act shocked that it costs them so much money a week to fill up. 

Like I said, that doesn't apply if someone uses their truck for work or even farm work. 

The people driving $60K plus trucks aren't likely the ones complaining unless that's their nature on everything. Some people are just unhappy. Every day.

Contrast that to the single mom paying $1 more per gallon for any used car she can afford and it's an entirely different story.

Empathy is great.

[Shoney'sPonyBoy 338]

10 hours ago, homersapien said:

I've made the same observation in supermarket parking lots, with moms driving humongous SUVs to fetch groceries. 

As have I.

You'll know when gas actually gets too high because people will stop choosing to own and drive vehicles the size of small busses and start choosing vehicles that get good gas mileage.  Until then, they are just bitching around the water cooler.

By definition.  That's Free Market Econ 101.

[I_M4_AU 7,803]

16 hours ago, AU9377 said:

Trump inserts himself and you all constantly use the man when trying to pretend that Russia would not have invaded Ukraine had he still been President, which is beyond nonsensical.

That would be your perception of Republicans.  Not all think that way.  I couldn’t guess what he would do if he were still President and could careless now that he isn’t. This is Biden’s mess to get out of.

[homersapien 11,367]

19 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

That would be your perception of Republicans.  Not all think that way.  I couldn’t guess what he would do if he were still President and could careless now that he isn’t. This is Biden’s mess to get out of.

No, it's everyone's mess.  Every democratic country and every person in that country, including you.

It's not "Biden's" mess, it's our mess.

Edited February 27, 2022 by homersapien

[homersapien 11,367]

Forget partisan scorekeeping. Our Ukraine policy isn’t about instant results.

It should come as no surprise that the largest ground war in Europe in 80 years and a shift in the entire geopolitical terrain got reduced to partisan scorekeeping and petty blame-casting by many in the media. Did President Biden misread Russia? (Actually, thanks to brilliant intelligence work, the administration knew the die was cast but had an obligation to try everything and spent months preparing a response.) Didn’t he fail? ( Russian President Vladimir Putin was not one to be deterred, as we learned last week from his bellicose public rant, bizarre justification for war and grandiose scheme to remake Europe.)

We are all too familiar with the journalistic inclination to make every story into a political sporting contest denuded of moral content or policy substance. Who does this help? How did Biden fail? Aren’t the Republicans clever?

This sort of framing is unserious and unenlightening, failing to serve the cause of democracy, which is under assault around the globe. (If you think the media’s role is pure entertainment and coverage must be morally neutral in the struggle between democracies and totalitarian states, this critique may be mystifying.)

Let’s get some perspective. Russia’s invasion was decades in the making. Under three presidents, two Republican and one Democratic, we failed to address the threat Russia posed to democracy and the international order. President George W. Bush’s response to the invasion of Georgia in 2008 was entirely insufficient; President Barack Obama’s reaction to the seizure of Crimea in 2014 was equally feckless.

Then came Putin’s dream president, who could amplify Russian propaganda, divide the Western allies, abandon democratic principles, extort Ukraine in wartime, vilify the press and interrupt the peaceful transfer of power. Donald Trump and Putin had a sort of call-and-response relationship, damaging democracies and bolstering autocrats.

No wonder Putin got the idea that he could erase national borders, stare down the West and reconstruct the Soviet empire. (If you think this all came about because Biden withdrew from Afghanistan, you’ve missed decades of Putin’s deep-seated paranoia and crazed ambition to reassemble the U.S.S.R.)

NATO should have been beefing up forces for decades, the European Union and United States should never have become so dependent on Russian energy, and we should have helped Ukraine become a world-class military power.

In one year, Biden sent more than $650 million in military aid to Ukraine (now approaching $1 billion), applied sanctions for Russian cyberattacks, reestablished close ties with NATO and identified the central challenge of our time as a struggle between liberal and illiberal regimes. That’s as dramatic a redirection from a predecessor in a year as you are likely to see in national security policy. (By comparison, Obama’s caution in breaking from Bush policy was evident in his February 2009 troop surge in Afghanistan and expanded drone warfare.)

With eerily accurate intelligence, Biden warned that Putin was dead set on going into Ukraine. (“My guess is he will move in. He has to do something,” Biden said in January.) Biden worked diligently for months to create the most cohesive Western alliance since World War II and prepare severe sanctions.

Publicly using U.S. intelligence and making a consistent case against Russian aggression, the United States, for once, came out ahead in the battle for world opinion and inoculated the public against Putin’s false flags. Biden also successfully severed Russia from all but the world’s worst dictatorships (e.g., China, North Korea). Biden arguably did more than any president since the collapse of the U.S.S.R. to mobilize the West.

Finally on offense, we are squeezing Putin’s kleptocracy, going beyond traditional notions of deterrence or containment. While we don’t call it “regime change,” we have set out to cripple Putin’s financial position and undermine his grip on power, stoking Russian oligarchs’ resentment.

If financial meltdown and a long, bloody and ultimately unwinnable war force a change in Russian leadership, it would be a triumph. (Don’t we think Ukrainians will keep up a guerrilla war as fierce as the Afghans did when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan?) But “just” wrecking the Russian economy and making Russia a long-term international outcast would also deny Putin victory in any meaningful sense. Either outcome would send a powerful message to other would-be aggressors.

Try as he might, Putin cannot convince the world that Ukraine does not or should not exist. He cannot subdue the spirit of a free people nor eliminate all resistance. He could turn Ukraine into rubble only to find that it bleeds Russian military forces while the international community crushes Russian aspirations to become a top-tier power. There is no “winning” for Putin so long as the West remains unified and fierce.

Moreover, Ukraine is a means to an end; Putin wants to rebuild an empire. Even if he decapitates Ukraine’s government, he will still find himself trailing the West (technologically, economically, diplomatically). If we don’t falter, we can ensure that Putin’s scheme fails, just as 20th century dictatorships did. (Ronald Reagan succinctly explained how the Cold War would end: “We win, they lose.”)

The Cold War took more than 40 years to win. Assessing who was “winning” year by year would have been an inane exercise.

Our current battle against authoritarian aggression will take years. There will be great suffering, in Ukraine and perhaps elsewhere. Since roused, however, the West has newfound purpose and momentum to boost our military alliance, wean ourselves from Russian energy and regain the moral high ground. Putin has given the United States and our allies (some of whom have not fully appreciated the threats to the rule of law and democracy at home) an organizing principle: Democracy at home and abroad.

“All this will not be finished in the first one hundred days. Nor will it be finished in the first one thousand days, nor in the life of this administration, nor even perhaps in our lifetime on this planet. But let us begin,” President John F. Kennedy declared more than 60 years ago. We will prevail in the 21st century, if we manage to answer “a call to bear the burden of a long twilight struggle.” Just don’t expect that we will subdue the enemies of freedom according to the media’s timetable.

Jennifer Rubin

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/02/27/media-narrative-ukraine/

[I_M4_AU 7,803]

10 minutes ago, homersapien said:

No, it's everyone's mess.  Every democratic country and every person in that country, including you.

It's not "Biden's" mess, it's our mess.

I remember in early 2020 when the pandemic of all pandemics hit the US and you weren’t preaching unity.  If I’m not mistaken you went hard on the Leader of the Free World and blamed him for over 400,000 American deaths.

Was that you, or am I misremembering?

[DKW 86 7,419]

"Ladies and Gentlemen: I give you the PCV, The Penis Compensation Vehicle."

Footnote: I drive a Mazda B3000 extended cab. My dozens of friends at a local boat and power sports dealer OPENLY Refer to these trucks as PCVs.

\

Edited February 27, 2022 by DKW 86

[homersapien 11,367]

10 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

I remember in early 2020 when the pandemic of all pandemics hit the US and you weren’t preaching unity.  If I’m not mistaken you went hard on the Leader of the Free World and blamed him for over 400,000 American deaths.

Was that you, or am I misremembering?

No, it wasn't me.  You need to either offer up some evidence of your claims or withdraw them and apologize.

And BTW, criticism of the POTUS for any particular act or policy does not indicate you are against "unity" or against the country's interest, it could be just the opposite.  Regardless, I never said or implied the pandemic was caused by Trump and he bore sole responsibility for it as a whole. 

I did criticize him for specific actions (such as downplaying the risk early on and even denying it existed, among many other things.

But portraying any national crisis as being solely due to, and therefore the sole problem of any given president is the opposite of patriotism. 

I regret you apparently don't see the distinction.

Edited February 27, 2022 by homersapien

[I_M4_AU 7,803]

8 minutes ago, homersapien said:

No, it wasn't me.  You need to either offer up some evidence of your claims or withdraw them and apologize.

And BTW, criticism of the POTUS for any particular act or policy does not indicate you are against "unity" or against the country's interest, it could be just the opposite.  Regardless, I never said or implied the pandemic was caused by Trump and he bore sole responsibility for it as a whole. 

I did criticize him for specific actions (such as downplaying the risk early on and even denying it existed, among many other things.

But portraying any national crisis as being solely due to, and therefore the sole problem of any given president is the opposite of patriotism. 

I regret you apparently don't see the distinction.

You have a hard time seeing what is in front of you.  As YOU stated you did criticize him for specific actions (as I have with Biden) and go on to say criticizing a POTUS for any particular act or policy does not indicate you are against *unity or against the country’s interest* (same as what I am doing)

I also never implied you said the pandemic was caused by Trump, I did imply you were in the group that blamed him for 400,000 deaths by his policies concerning the pandemic.  After all it was the rallying cry of the Democratic Presidential Nominee at the time.

I regret you apparently can’t comprehend.

[I_M4_AU 7,803]

@DKW 86these trucks are obviously owned by young males with good knees.  The older you get the less height is found in the truck.  They have to compensate in other ways.

One way is the brass ba!!s dangling off the trailer hitch.

[DKW 86 7,419]

4 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

@DKW 86these trucks are obviously owned by young males with good knees.  The older you get the less height is found in the truck.  They have to compensate in other ways.

One way is the brass ba!!s dangling off the trailer hitch.

Well if the truck is a Penis....CV, wouldnt the balls be hanging right about there? 

Edited February 27, 2022 by DKW 86

[homersapien 11,367]

9 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

You have a hard time seeing what is in front of you.  As YOU stated you did criticize him for specific actions (as I have with Biden) and go on to say criticizing a POTUS for any particular act or policy does not indicate you are against *unity or against the country’s interest* (same as what I am doing)

I also never implied you said the pandemic was caused by Trump, I did imply you were in the group that blamed him for 400,000 deaths by his policies concerning the pandemic.  After all it was the rallying cry of the Democratic Presidential Nominee at the time.

I regret you apparently can’t comprehend.

 

1 hour ago, I_M4_AU said:

That would be your perception of Republicans.  Not all think that way.  I couldn’t guess what he would do if he were still President and could careless now that he isn’t. This is Biden’s mess to get out of.

I suggest you come clean and own your statements before trying to lecture me on "comprehension".

I keep you active pretty much to use as a foil. (And you occasionally stumble upon a fact which gives me hope for you.)

But if you are going to simply lie about what you posted it's not worth my time to argue with you.