Liberal Forum

ConservativeWave » 06 Nov 2024, 5:00 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Nov 2024, 5:00 pm

Mmmm... CAAAAWK! I love CAAAAAWK...
 

Oh, just STFU, and quit pretending to speak for Trump, loser. 

Trump is going to settle the war in Ukraine by giving Putin all of the territory he has taken - and likely some that he has not taken. I would not be shocked to see Trump draw the line at the Dnipro River.
 

DeezerShoove » 06 Nov 2024, 6:05 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Nov 2024, 6:05 pm

What good is NATO to the US?

Why should we US citizens fear/hate Russians?

NATO is how we rob Europe and make vassals of them. 

We should fear/hate Russians because they castrate their ENEMIES, not themselves. 
 

Mrkelly » 06 Nov 2024, 6:07 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Nov 2024, 6:07 pm

never said any of the above

just splainin how it’s gonna go for Ukraine

Trump will not settle the war in Putin's favor because there is affinity. At the level of monsters, affinities play no role. Strengths and weaknesses dictate outcomes. 

He will settle it in Putin's favor because there is no other way TO settle it. Conditions on the ground favor Putin, and it should go without saying that Trump's hand is constrained by conditions on the ground. 

If the United States were to just "drop out," Ukraine would be no more. 
If the United States were to "go all in," Putin would be royally **** for the duration of his role - and make no mistake, his role is savior of Russia on a level similar to the role that FDR played in the USA. History will agree with me that Putin was the pivotal leader of the 21st century. 

Trump has it IN HIS HANDS - as feckless Biden does, fruitlessly - to settle this war very quickly. Not in 24 hours. That is just silly campaign rhetoric. But quickly. He can walk into a room with the green t-shirt and say, here is the end of the war. Agree, or you are on your own with zero support from the U.S., NATO, or any European nation that matters. The green t-shirt will have NO CHOICE but to accept it. 

He can then walk into a room with Putin, show him the same plan, and say, "Here is what the green t-shirt has agreed to. This is the deal. If you take it, everything is golden. If you do not, we are all in." 

Now, in the case of Putin, Trump might still have to negotiate a few small matters - but Putin is going to take that deal. Why do you think Putin has thrown more men and machines and money at the front lines in the past three months than in the past year? He understands that Trump is serious about ending the war, has the power to do so, and will be constrained in what he offers each side by conditions on the ground. So he is doing everything in his power - costs be damned - to affect conditions on the ground before the rains come, and then the freeze.

Putin was unwilling to gamble on a Cameluh victory. He HAD BEEN spending x number of lives per kilometer of land gained. The number was relatively conservative. He was fighting for attrition, not for territory - so moving forward was far less important than killing Ukrainian soldiers. In the three months leading up to the election, however, his strategy became far more frenzied and far less concerned about losses. Because he KNEW that if Trump won, an end to the war would come - and conditions on the ground would decide where the borders were drawn. For the past three months, Putin has been fighting not for attrition but for territory - which is why his gains have eclipsed in three months what they were in the preceding twelve.

Bear in mind, Trump is also constrained. He is constrained by the fact that this conflict is an existential issue for Russia. Russia absolutely will not have NATO on its border. So Trump cannot simply dictate. But within the constraints of respecting Russia's red lines - Russia's existential concerns, - Trump's word in Ukraine will be law. Whichever side tells him to **** off suffers FAR beyond what might be gained by continuing the war. 
 
 
 

Mrkelly » 06 Nov 2024, 5:59 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Nov 2024, 5:59 pm

  Elections have consequences 

tRump hates NATO and wants it gone

tRump has a friendship with Putin that is going to say “**** you” to Ukraine 

but you will think that it is a good idea once tRump says so 

ConWave is not well.  Never has been I suspect.
 

DeezerShoove » 06 Nov 2024, 6:05 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Nov 2024, 6:05 pm

What good is NATO to the US?

Why should we US citizens fear/hate Russians?

1.  NATO is cash cow for the MIC...MIC doesn't care about the US. They care about profit and empire.

2.  Because the Oligarchs want you to.
 

DeezerShoove » 06 Nov 2024, 6:16 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Nov 2024, 6:16 pm

I merely asked your opinion on two things you brought up.

US investment in NATO has been enormous over the decades. Has that org. saved us from being attacked or in conflicts? Has the cost yielded commensurate benefits? Like paying for a burglar alarm system - you don't know if the window stickers stopped the break-in or not. IMHO it's damned hard to see the benefits but easy to see the membership creep.

Personally, I do not "fear" the Russians like I'm apparently supposed to...

These are two opinions I'm not afraid of voicing, scaredy cat.

NATO was NEVER about protecting anyone.

It is about controlling Europe and demonizing Russia
so that there is no alignment between them.

'Keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down'
– those were the words of Nato's first Secretary General, Lord Ismay.


 

Cannonpointer » 06 Nov 2024, 8:18 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Nov 2024, 8:18 pm

Oh, just STFU, and quit pretending to speak for Trump, loser. 

Trump is going to settle the war in Ukraine by giving Putin all of the territory he has taken - and likely some that he has not taken. I would not be shocked to see Trump draw the line at the Dnipro River.

Quite the optimist.
 

Sumela » 06 Nov 2024, 8:54 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Nov 2024, 8:54 pm

Quite the optimist.

There is nothing optimistic in my assertion. Trump has promised to end the war - and he likes to keep his promises. The entire world wants this war to end, and Trump ending it will let him preen. And preening is his favorite pastime. 

And most importantly, he has the power to end it. He can force the green t-shirt to accept his dictates by the threat of dropping him like a hot rock and leaving him to Putin's tender mercies. Likewise, he can threaten Putin with NATO going all in - which would be very stupid of NATO, but would also be extremely inconvenient to Putin, who is a builder, not a squanderer. And it isn't like Putin doesn't want the war to end, after all. He does - and Trump is certainly smart enough not to make ending it more painful than continuing it. 
 
Perhaps the Dnipro is optimistic. But Trump likes clean lines. Rivers are wonderful borders.

Cannonpointer » 06 Nov 2024, 9:15 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Nov 2024, 9:15 pm

There is nothing optimistic in my assertion. Trump has promised to end the war - and he likes to keep his promises. The entire world wants this war to end, and Trump ending it will let him preen. And preening is his favorite pastime. 

And most importantly, he has the power to end it. He can force the green t-shirt to accept his dictates by the threat of dropping him like a hot rock and leaving him to Putin's tender mercies. Likewise, he can threaten Putin with NATO going all in - which would be very stupid of NATO, but would also be extremely inconvenient to Putin, who is a builder, not a squanderer. And it isn't like Putin doesn't want the war to end, after all. He does - and Trump is certainly smart enough not to make ending it more painful than continuing it. 
 
Perhaps the Dnipro is optimistic. But Trump likes clean lines. Rivers are wonderful borders.

Putin will bow to Trump?
Trump will tell Putin what to do?
Sorry sir...but...sound like colonialism.
"""Good lil Putie...do as I tell you"""

Maybe Putin will tell Trump what Putin will do.


 

Sumela » 06 Nov 2024, 8:53 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Nov 2024, 8:53 pm

NATO was NEVER about protecting anyone.

It is about controlling Europe and demonizing Russia
so that there is no alignment between them.

'Keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down'
– those were the words of Nato's first Secretary General, Lord Ismay.

I was taught in school that NATO was meant to prevent Soviet aggression.
So I guess that was more or less correct.
Seems that "aggression" was assumed to be innate in being born Russian.
Nothing NATO could do but defend like a ****.

Sumela » 06 Nov 2024, 8:48 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Nov 2024, 8:48 pm

1.  NATO is cash cow for the MIC...MIC doesn't care about the US. They care about profit and empire.

2.  Because the Oligarchs want you to.

MrKelly coulda said that. I am quite sure he would be of the same mind.
 

Cannonpointer » 06 Nov 2024, 8:18 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Nov 2024, 8:18 pm

Oh, just STFU, and quit pretending to speak for Trump, loser. 

Trump is going to settle the war in Ukraine by giving Putin all of the territory he has taken - and likely some that he has not taken. I would not be shocked to see Trump draw the line at the Dnipro River.

That would suit you and Vlad, no?
 

DeezerShoove » 06 Nov 2024, 9:40 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Nov 2024, 9:40 pm

That would suit you and Vlad, no?

Yes. Vlad never wanted this war to start. Now he wants it to end. He is a builder. Not a squanderer. He wants to build up Russia - not tear down Ukraine.

This war was forced onto Russia. Everyone with any understanding of global politics knows this. And they know why. Because NATO is just a money grabbing scheme for Blackrock. 
 
 

DeezerShoove » 06 Nov 2024, 9:39 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Nov 2024, 9:39 pm

MrKelly coulda said that. I am quite sure he would be of the same mind.

He is. As am I. 

What do YOU think the purpose of NATO is? Protecting democracy?
 

DeezerShoove » 06 Nov 2024, 9:39 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Nov 2024, 9:39 pm

MrKelly coulda said that. I am quite sure he would be of the same mind.

I guess he could have and he prolly would concur.

But, answering questions on here is quite often
a fools errand into an "I GOTCHA" trap.  
 

DeezerShoove » 06 Nov 2024, 9:37 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Nov 2024, 9:37 pm

I was taught in school that NATO was meant to prevent Soviet aggression.

Those same schools are now teaching that many girls have penises. 

You might want to rethink whatever you learned from those schools. 
 
 

DeezerShoove » 06 Nov 2024, 9:37 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Nov 2024, 9:37 pm

I was taught in school that NATO was meant to prevent Soviet aggression.
So I guess that was more or less correct.
Seems that "aggression" was assumed to be innate in being born Russian.
Nothing NATO could do but defend like a ****.

Not sure what Soviet aggression is.

Sounds like a cliche of some kind...jingoism.
 

Sumela » 06 Nov 2024, 9:27 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Nov 2024, 9:27 pm

Putin will bow to Trump?
Trump will tell Putin what to do?
Sorry sir...but...sound like colonialism.
"""Good lil Putie...do as I tell you"""

Maybe Putin will tell Trump what Putin will do.

Even a monkey can hurt you, if he has a monkey wrench. 

The U.S. is ABSOLUTELY a colonial power. It has 32 vassals in Europe alone. It has a record of involving itself in disastrous and retarded conflicts. Avoiding a knock-down, drag-out with a retard does not make one a coward or a vassal. I never suggested that Trump could make Putin accept any redline-crossing ****. I merely said that Trump can make Putin an offer he doesn't refuse. Indeed, I EXPRESSLY stated that Trump will end the war on conditions favorable to Putin. 

Putin doesn't run on pride - he runs on intelligence and cunning. All Trump has to do, if he wants to sway Vlad this way or that, is convince Vlad that there is more pain for Russia in this course of action than there is in that course of action.

Let me put it to you this way: The deep state forced Putin into this war. Since they made him fight a war he did not want to fight, are YOU saying that makes Putin our bitch? They DID force his hand, did they not? And if Nigbama's deep state can force Putin's hand, without Putin being our bitch, what makes you suppose that Trump cannot? And in the scenario that I describe, Putin gets what he wants: an end to the hostilities on terms that he can live with. That is PRECISELY Putin's victory condition.
 
 
 

Cannonpointer » 06 Nov 2024, 9:44 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Nov 2024, 9:44 pm

He is. As am I. 

What do YOU think the purpose of NATO is? Protecting democracy?

I think it was a reaction to fears after WWII and those fears were displaced with a cold war detente.
Which was a "permanent" madness on both sides.
NATO became useful in that cold war and kept it semi-relevant as a so-called defensive/deterrent org.
Expansion of that org. wasn't supposed to be in the cards but it came anyway.
So, Russia got whipsawed by China on one side and Nato on the other while the Soviet structure grew thin.

Whatever they claimed at the start of NATO has long been displaced.
Are they protecting democracy? Hardly. Seems like they want to be big enough to be invincible, though.
Advancing on a sworn enemy over time. Pissing people off.

The more countries they can claim as members,
the more opportunities they can claim they got their noses bent out of shape.
When Peru joins I'm going to start to wonder...
 
 

DeezerShoove » 06 Nov 2024, 10:01 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Nov 2024, 10:01 pm

I think it was a reaction to fears after WWII and those fears were displaced with a cold war detent.
Which was a "permanent" madness on both sides.
NATO became useful in that cold war and kept it semi-relevant as a so-called defensive/deterrent org.
Expansion of that org. wasn't supposed to be in the cards but it came anyway.

When I asked its purpose, I asked in the present tense. This is not to agree with your history, but to say that the history is not worth arguing about in the present. In MY view of NATO's history, it was always intended to make vassals of Europe's nations.

DeezerShoove » 06 Nov 2024, 10:01 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Nov 2024, 10:01 pm

So, Russia got whipsawed by China on one side and Nato on the other while the Soviet structure grew thin.

Whatever they claimed at the start of NATO has long been displaced.
Are they protecting democracy? Hardly. Seems like they want to be big enough to be invincible, though.

The more countries they can claim as members,
the more opportunities they can claim they got their noses bent out of shape.
When Peru joins I'm going to start to wonder...

Every nation that joins NATO must immediately gear up, as a condition of membership, to NATO's military standards.

That means buying a ton of weapons from America's MIC. Which is owned by blackrock.

Follow the money.