Once again your not looking back far enough before this current crisis. Ukraine conflict with Russia started only 8 yrs ago. Putin has been publicly announcing concerns for 20yrs. This issue is no where near recent times. Hence where we are today.
www.thedrive.com
he said no u.s troops..what about the other nato countries?
It will end with a deal. Now I think there are 3 possible agreements, Russia can take Kyiv or Kharkiv, then negotiate with maximum gains in territories with Ukraine. Russia is unable to advance and manages to keep the territories and accepts a smaller deal, something quite impossible knowing Putin. And then there's the third scenario, Putin does something to escalate the conflict and create the climate of nuclear war. Agreement made, but with the great powers. Currently I bet more on the latter scenario. It's the only one that Putin can come out not as a winner, but a draw.
No I have considered Russia’s claims of the last twenty years.
What you are omitting or forgetting is that the US first use policy is in response to a significant and imminent threat directed at the US. Not the use of nukes to save themselves from failure in a conventional war we might have initiated.
I know this sounds harsh and maybe even an insanely ridged position to take.
True but in war principles and morals quickly come second place for some. From all walks of life. You can take a perfectly hard working ,law abideing family man and turn him into a dangerous human being in short time given the right circumstances. Not because of mental instability but the environmental impact created. Eg. Take away job ,food,shelter, and you create a desperate husband, father trying to do his best to survive and provide for family. You know like Ukraine, mums and or children sent across border for safety while a or both parents stay to fight. Eg. Apocalyptic times no need for details there. Now even if this cannot be related to a leader of a country failing to protect or provide for his people, then simply he is desperate to change a situation he is not satisfied with. Basically I'm saying right or wrong desperate times can call for desperate measures no matter who feels it is wrong. Sometimes the affected party concerned knows it is wrong but felt like know choice. As far as your comments on losing a conventional war you voluntarily got involved with or not , using wmd. Japan was easy no-one else had it. But remember Vietnam? And how close America was considering using a nuke. Please. I understand your points and agree with some .But not all. Not a personal attack here. But some Americans have a short or convenient memory Sometimes. Eg. Most of Putins or should I say Russian military decisions on weapons use and attacks that we claim war crimes. Wow nothing new. Americans have done the same thing in several conflicts. The rest of this topic simply falls under hypocrisy. Because Americans cannot be held accountable through the Hague. Sorry I do have a massive issue with this system. And those that use and support it. While having immunity from the international community. Otherwise every country should have the right to disciplinary of their own accord. And the Hague be dismantled in all fairness. But nooooo. And we know why. But know one dares talk about it ,asks questions or challenges. Convenient. Fuck yeah. Just not for anyone else.
Shit remember the the reactions of of international communities and war crime responses when pictures of victims women and children were burnt from phosphorus shells and napalm. Or atomic bombs. What's good for the goose surely is good for the gander.True but in war principles and morals quickly come second place for some. From all walks of life. You can take a perfectly hard working ,law abideing family man and turn him into a dangerous human being in short time given the right circumstances. Not because of mental instability but the environmental impact created. Eg. Take away job ,food,shelter, and you create a desperate husband, father trying to do his best to survive and provide for family. You know like Ukraine, mums and or children sent across border for safety while a or both parents stay to fight. Eg. Apocalyptic times no need for details there. Now even if this cannot be related to a leader of a country failing to protect or provide for his people, then simply he is desperate to change a situation he is not satisfied with. Basically I'm saying right or wrong desperate times can call for desperate measures no matter who feels it is wrong. Sometimes the affected party concerned knows it is wrong but felt like know choice. As far as your comments on losing a conventional war you voluntarily got involved with or not , using wmd. Japan was easy no-one else had it. But remember Vietnam? And how close America was considering using a nuke. Please. I understand your points and agree with some .But not all. Not a personal attack here. But some Americans have a short or convenient memory Sometimes. Eg. Most of Putins or should I say Russian military decisions on weapons use and attacks that we claim war crimes. Wow nothing new. Americans have done the same thing in several conflicts. The rest of this topic simply falls under hypocrisy. Because Americans cannot be held accountable through the Hague. Sorry I do have a massive issue with this system. And those that use and support it. While having immunity from the international community. Otherwise every country should have the right to disciplinary of their own accord. And the Hague be dismantled in all fairness. But nooooo. And we know why. But know one dares talk about it ,asks questions or challenges. Convenient. Fuck yeah. Just not for anyone else.
It depends if he means his regime, or Russia as a nation. No one is going to invade Russia, but his regime might collapse in the future. Only an extremist would give the order to self destroy what you have build up, and I dont see Putin as an extremist.
Desperate times can call for desperate measures. History shows that.
You will remember I have not made the claims of war crimes on Putin.Shit remember the the reactions of of international communities and war crime responses when pictures of victims women and children were burnt from phosphorus shells and napalm. Or atomic bombs. What's good for the goose surely is good for the gander.
In all fairness.?I didn't even mention the other chemical weapons used in conflicts by Americans. Just saying like America desperate times call for desperate measures.
Oh if Ukraine was a nato country we wouldn't be having this conversation. Hats off to Ukraine for fighting like they are. Full respect for Ukraine. But surely not being a nato country makes it a regional conflict. Like Israel and Iran or India and Pakistan or etcetc. So why the concern in this situation? Not sure where I referred to zylenski and population but like I said it is regional and hats off. In another post I did say if it wasn't for western weapons supply it may have been a shorter situation and the result of supply may well have extended the conflict. In saying that there are other areas globally in conflict that hardly get a mention or support militarily or publicly. Even in military cews against governments like African continent. Yet lots of outside countries are there in the form of military bases and peacekeeping forces. So not being nato what makes this such a big deal? Russia have done this in other parts of their region before? Obviously the only real reason for such attention this time isn't because of the Ukraine people otherwise this would be 8 yrs in mainstream media. This conflict is old news. But now so many yrs after the initial threat it's a huge deal. Meanwhile in so many other parts of the world men,women and children get slaughtered everyday. Other parts conventional missiles fly between countries on a regular basis. Some have nuke access. Yes they don't make threats with them simply because it is a whole different story. Let's be honest with why this is so big now when the conflict and threat has been there nearly a decade. US declares war against isis. Well that was a ? Isis in Africa yet hardly a reaction or reports . Why ?not on American soil na couldn't be US navy was capable in middle east but not Africa? To many questions not enough answers.
I’m fairly sure he only even said it because a CNN reporter pressed him about it
Honestly for me it’s is that the Ukrainians are fighting for themselves. It is not a situation where a civilian population being driven by warlords or forced to fight because of a dictator.
