Is Russia about to invade Ukraine? (3 Viewers)

Users who are viewing this thread

    superchuck500

    U.S. Blues
    Joined
    Mar 26, 2019
    Messages
    4,849
    Reaction score
    12,281
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Offline
    Russia continues to mass assets within range of Ukraine - though the official explanations are that they are for various exercises. United States intelligence has noted that Russian operatives in Ukraine could launch 'false flag' operations as a predicate to invasion. The West has pressed for negotiations and on Friday in Geneva, the US Sec. State Blinken will meet with the Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov.

    Certainly the Russian movements evidence some plan - but what is it? Some analysts believe that Putin's grand scheme involves securing Western commitments that NATO would never expand beyond its current composition. Whether that means action in Ukraine or merely the movement of pieces on the chess board remains to be seen.


    VIENNA — No one expected much progress from this past week’s diplomatic marathon to defuse the security crisis Russia has ignited in Eastern Europe by surrounding Ukraine on three sides with 100,000 troops and then, by the White House’s accounting, sending in saboteurs to create a pretext for invasion.

    But as the Biden administration and NATO conduct tabletop simulations about how the next few months could unfold, they are increasingly wary of another set of options for President Vladimir V. Putin, steps that are more far-reaching than simply rolling his troops and armor over Ukraine’s border.

    Mr. Putin wants to extend Russia’s sphere of influence to Eastern Europe and secure written commitments that NATO will never again enlarge. If he is frustrated in reaching that goal, some of his aides suggested on the sidelines of the negotiations last week, then he would pursue Russia’s security interests with results that would be felt acutely in Europe and the United States.

    There were hints, never quite spelled out, that nuclear weapons could be shifted to places — perhaps not far from the United States coastline — that would reduce warning times after a launch to as little as five minutes, potentially igniting a confrontation with echoes of the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis.






     
    A person went out and asked Russian citizens what their thoughts were



    also



    I've read something that distribution of "fake news" about russian military will get you 15 years in jail, and anti-war protests can land you in jail for 5 years.
     
    Last edited:
    I'll just say that while I agree with Graham's sentiment about taking out Putin, it's irresponsible for a US Congressman to be openly calling for the assassination of Putin. It's an unnecessary escalation of rhetoric, and drastically narrows our options in dealing with Russia in regards to diplomacy.
     
    I'll just say that while I agree with Graham's sentiment about taking out Putin, it's irresponsible for a US Congressman to be openly calling for the assassination of Putin. It's an unnecessary escalation of rhetoric, and drastically narrows our options in dealing with Russia in regards to diplomacy.
    Dumb comment to make out loud, in public, and by a Congressman. Graham has a tendency to say, and believe, dumb things which is one of the reasons I never understood why McCain was so close to him.
     
    Why? And not generally speaking or in principle... Why is it a dumb comment to make in this particular situation? Are we afraid Graham is going to hurt Putin's feelings?
    I think a government official calling for the assassination of another country's leader is a violation of international law.
     
    Why? And not generally speaking or in principle... Why is it a dumb comment to make in this particular situation? Are we afraid Graham is going to hurt Putin's feelings?
    Because we're not just talking about assassinating Putin, we're talking about assassinating the President of a nuclear armed rival. It's a bad idea for a US Congressman, period.

    And I agree with Sam's point as well.

    He can express that sentiment in private, but not publicly while he's a sitting US Congressman.
     
    I think a government official calling for the assassination of another country's leader is a violation of international law.

    Which law is that? Are we going to start caring about international law now?

    And it's not like Graham suggested someone take out Boris Johnson in the UK.
     
    It’s odd to me, You and I (and large groups of the population) can say that we want Putin dead, because we don’t represent the general public. It’s when elected officials (that represent the general public) say they want Putin dead that it’s a problem.

    I do wonder if elected officials in other countries have wished death upon our leaders. I can’t imagine they haven’t, it’s just how many of us care?
     
    Last edited:
    Long article. Which one is the law?

    Last sentence in passage below prohibits any individual acting on behalf of the US government from engaging or conspiring to engage in political assassination.

    In 1977, following revelations of U.S. lethal targeting operations and ensuing Church (Senate) and the Pike (House) Committee hearings, President Gerald Ford issued Executive Order 11,905. The order prohibited Executive Branch personnel from engaging in, or conspiring to engage in, political assassination. Subsequent administrations continued the ban. Four years later, President Regan issued Executive Order 12,333, which, as amended, remains in effect today. It contains the same prohibition, although it limits application to individuals “acting on behalf of” the U.S. government.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Advertisement

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Sponsored

    Back
    Top Bottom