Is Russia about to invade Ukraine? (1 Viewer)

[superchuck500]

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.

Russia Issues Subtle Threats More Far-Reaching Than a Ukraine Invasion

If the West fails to meet its security demands, Moscow could take measures like placing nuclear missiles close to the U.S. coastline, Russian officials have hinted.

www.nytimes.com

Blinken Will Meet With Russia as U.S. Pushes for More Diplomacy

Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken will meet with Foreign Minister Sergey V. Lavrov of Russia in Geneva on Friday as the United States warns that Russia could soon attack Ukraine.

www.nytimes.com

How to think about war in Ukraine

Start with the Ukrainians

snyder.substack.com

 

[SaintForLife]

This is a prime example of the issue people have including myself). I asked you for your stance on something, and you responded with a vague false equivalency sandwiched between a dozen questions.

I answered your question:

If Biden or Trump broke the law with the classified documents(or anything else) I have no problem with them being prosecuted, but the law has to be applied evenly. But we all know the cases will be handled differently. The Hunter Biden case is an example of that. If you support the establishment then you either won't be prosecuted or just slap on the wrist. If you oppose the establishment then the legal system will try to destroy you.

I can't help it if you don't like my answer or how I answered the question.

 

[SaintForLife]

It is in my experience. For example, we were having what I thought was a reasonable and agreeable discussion in this thread a few weeks ago and when I asked you a question to find common ground as well as clarify my position, you stopped responding, but you kept on going with adversarial replies to others.

You constantly lecture me on how to post. Are you surprised that I didn't jump when you wanted me to?

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

If Biden or Trump broke the law with the classified documents(or anything else) I have no problem with them being prosecuted, but the law has to be applied evenly.

Explain how those cases are the same?

But we all know the cases will be handled differently.

Once you answered the 1st question, you should understand why they would be handled differently.

The Hunter Biden case is an example of that. If you support the establishment then you either won't be prosecuted or just slap on the wrist. If you oppose the establishment then the legal system will try to destroy you.

There are likely millions of examples of individuals that have failed to pay their taxes on time but paid them once the IRS identified them and those individuals were fined and did not face criminal charges.

Now name one other individual that was prosecuted for falsifying the gun document without any other criminal act tied to that weapon.

And you and your masters cry about a 2 tier criminal justice system while ignoring the people that are truly subjugated to said system.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

I answered your question:

If Biden or Trump broke the law with the classified documents(or anything else) I have no problem with them being prosecuted, but the law has to be applied evenly. But we all know the cases will be handled differently. The Hunter Biden case is an example of that. If you support the establishment then you either won't be prosecuted or just slap on the wrist. If you oppose the establishment then the legal system will try to destroy you.

I can't help it if you don't like my answer or how I answered the question.

You didn't give a straight answer, though. You insisted on adding Joe Biden to it. This isn't a discussion about Joe Biden. We (the collective 'we' of this board) have had discussions ad nauseam about the very real differences in the situations and why they are not the same, thus the false equivalency.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

You constantly lecture me on how to post. Are you surprised that I didn't jump when you wanted me to?

If you feel that I lecture you on how to post, then why engage in the first place? We had a back-and-forth dialogue re: a resolution to Russia's invasion of Ukraine that was civil and productive. You said you weren't sure what the parameters should be for a cease-fire. I gave my thoughts and asked if you agreed.

At no point in that conversation did either of us act out of line or in any manner other than two adults having a calm and rational conversation. Why get that far and then suddenly stop? I don't feel that assuming someone is willing to continue a conversation in which they're been engaged is jumping on command. I was under the impression that we were finding common ground, to be honest.

 

[SaintForLife]

If you feel that I lecture you on how to post, then why engage in the first place? We had a back-and-forth dialogue re: a resolution to Russia's invasion of Ukraine that was civil and productive. You said you weren't sure what the parameters should be for a cease-fire. I gave my thoughts and asked if you agreed.

At no point in that conversation did either of us act out of line or in any manner other than two adults having a calm and rational conversation. Why get that far and then suddenly stop? I don't feel that assuming someone is willing to continue a conversation in which they're been engaged is jumping on command. I was under the impression that we were finding common ground, to be honest

Can you point out which post you are talking about? I don't remember what conversation you are talking about.

 

[SaintForLife]

You didn't give a straight answer, though. You insisted on adding Joe Biden to it. This isn't a discussion about Joe Biden. We (the collective 'we' of this board) have had discussions ad nauseam about the very real differences in the situations and why they are not the same, thus the false equivalency.

Both Trump & Biden had a special counsels appointed for each of their classified documents cases. They both supposedly retained classified documents when they shouldn't have. Considering the Biden DOJ appointed the special counsel for Trump its absolutely imperative to compare how each situation is handled.

 

[MT15]

We can all read the posts. That's not true. I said anyone who believes any criticism of US foreign policy is Russian propaganda is a CIA simp. You said you don't believe that so it doesn't apply to you.

You accuse me of calling everything Russian propaganda and then say anyone who believes that is a CIA simp. At least own your own slams.

 

[bdb13]

Both Trump & Biden had a special counsels appointed for each of their classified documents cases. They both supposedly retained classified documents when they shouldn't have. Considering the Biden DOJ appointed the special counsel for Trump its absolutely imperative to compare how each situation is handled.

I agree but you also have to compare where the cases are similar and where they're different as well.

 

[bdb13]

That's fine if you have that opinion, but I don't hate you and think you are evil for feeling that way as some people here do(not you) for conservatives or Trump supporters.

Just wanted to revisit this. First off, I don't hate you either. Do I hate Trump supporters in general? I'd say I hate their support of Trump.

Being that I feel there's very strong evidence indicating that Trump purposely and/or recklessly facilitated a terrorist attack against fellow Americans for his own personal and political gain, what is an appropriate way for me to feel towards individuals who are wanting to place him back into power? I certainly feel hostility - I'm not going to lie - towards them for the indifference or support they show towards Trump post-election/January 6th.. and I'm just curious that if you accept that it's rational of me to believe that Trump facilitated what occurred on January 6 (which again, I absolutely consider terrorism), in your opinion what is the appropriate way for me to feel towards the individuals who continue to support him? Thanks.

 

[DaveXA]

I agree but you also have to compare where the cases are similar and where they're different as well.

Yeah, the only similarities between the cases were they involved classified documents. They couldn't be more different otherwise.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

Can you point out which post you are talking about? I don't remember what conversation you are talking about.

Posts 1969 to 1980 in this thread.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

Both Trump & Biden had a special counsels appointed for each of their classified documents cases. They both supposedly retained classified documents when they shouldn't have. Considering the Biden DOJ appointed the special counsel for Trump its absolutely imperative to compare how each situation is handled.

Trump took active steps to conceal documents once he was informed that he had them. Biden immediately arranged to have people come in and look through hi paperwork to make sure nothing was missed. Do you see the difference?

 

[bdb13]

Trump took active steps to conceal documents once he was informed that he had them. Biden immediately arranged to have people come in and look through hi paperwork to make sure nothing was missed. Do you see the difference?

Right I think I've compared it to a cop catching someone speeding before.. so two cars going the same speed, cops turns on his lights and the one guy pulls over.. the other one attempts to evade.

Is it the same? Well, it started the same but based upon the actions chosen it becomes a different situation for one than the other.

 

[CoolBrees]

All I want to know is why isn't the Georgia case listed?

That's where he is most forked. It is the one that destroys the whole argument.

Oh wait, now I know why it wasn't listed.

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

Right I think I've compared it to a cop catching someone speeding before.. so two cars going the same speed, cops turns on his lights and the one guy pulls over.. the other one attempts to evade.

Is it the same? Well, it started the same but based upon the actions chosen it becomes a different situation for one than the other.

More like one guy was speeding and when he realized he was speeding, he pulled over and called the cops himself.

 

[MT15]

Back to Ukraine: why should we care if Russia wants to take over Ukraine? A thread of reasons. I will post a couple. There are more if you care to read the thread:

 

[SaintForLife]

Posts 1969 to 1980 in this thread.

You asked me what the parameters should be for a ceasefire and I said I had no idea. Then you asked me to agree to certain conditions for a ceasefire. I could have responded again and said what I said previously, but I didn't see the need to repeat myself.