Can we offer this Ukranian solider a scholarship?

PostGameOrangeSlices · August 2023

Blueduck said:

show previous quotes
PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:
If Putin is the biggest threat since Hitler and wants to go to the English Channel if not stopped in Ukraine why would world War 3 be ridiculous?

Have you seen what Germany looked like when Hitler lost? If he had nukes he would have used them

PGOS is willing to fuck around and find out because of his boyfriend Zelensky
He's not but that doesn't mean Russia isn't the enemy.

When you're Alabama playing Mississippi State you don't quit when you're up 34-17.

Or in this case, when you're playing for the North championship you root for Wazzu to knock Oregon off by even a field goal.

I agree that the admin is lying about the "why". I just overall see it as a net gain to neuter Russia and send a signal to Chy-na about Taiwan(to actually prevent ww3).
Quite honestly I don't disagree with a lot of this

My opposition has always been about the bad actors in America and the globalist cabal being behind this

And Zelensky is a piece of shit

The bullshit about this whole thing is well, bullshit

Let them kill each other.
Agree with most of this.

What's happening in Ukraine IS horrible but so long as the Ukrainians are willing to be the ones to fight and die for their country then that's their choice.

I, and I suspect many here who aren't pinkos, would do the same for our own country(not government).

I'll be rooting for Wazzu this week. Things may change next week. Ups and downs of realpolitik.
It there is a problem, it's a European problem. They don't act like it's a problem, so why are we carrying most of the freight?
What would you consider "acting like it's a problem" that is beyond the current response while also not dangerously escalating things towards WW3 as you so claim to be concerned about? Should France send Nukes? What exactly is the critique of the European response beyond "not enough" which you also seem to be against "dangerous escalation"? Which is it?

Please draw the middle road you are advocating for and do so in detail with specifics by country since Europe is hardly monolithic in its response.

As per raw numbers the US is the leader but as a percentage of gdp or military spending we aren't close to many other countries. I doubt you expect Luxembourg to out donate even say, Canada, despite the relative interests in security concerns.
The middle road I'm advocating is that we don't have a national interest in being the world's policeman and rescuing a corrupt Ukraine. Let the Euros figure it out. I don't see the UK, Germany or France on the top list below for some reason. Luxembourg clearly is pulling it's weight though.

==========
As a share of its GDP, Poland is the biggest defense spender in NATO, budgeting 3.9 percent in 2023. The U.S. is second, spending 3.49 percent, followed by Greece at 3.01 percent, Estonia at 2.73 percent, and Lithuania at 2.54 percent. Luxembourg, at 0.72 percent, is the smallest spender, followed by Belgium at 1.13 percent, Spain at 1.26 percent, Turkey at 1.31 percent, and Slovenia at 1.35 percent.
Now do percentage of that spending/gdp donated. Belgium/Netherlands basically both donated their entire air forces.

And then bought new stuff from the US.

Similar situations with the Baltic states.

You can argue that the US should be more isolationist, and I have sympathy for that position as @RaceBannon could probably attest to but, ultimately it's hard to maintain unless you want a multipolar world with Russia and the CCP getting to call the shots.

I think you have to be the big dick and throw the big dick energy around. Teddy and Trump style. Smartly, but none the less. #rocketman #solemanishredded

Ad in a long talk about prevention ism and US foreign policy in general.
Russia has nukes and oil. That's it. NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today. The problem is China and that's where our focus should be. The dems dirty expensive non-reliable US energy policy is a boon for both Russia and China as our energy costs have soared and we are hooked on China's metals and solar panels and wind turbines. So, we have no articulable direct interest in the Ukraine being run by corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs rather than corrupt Russian oligarchs. We do have articulable interests in a secure US border and disengaging from China. The Euros still aren't spending what we do on the military on a GDP percentage.

Your first point is correct. Poland would win a war against Russia, by itself. We know that now, we didn't in early 2022.

.
The statement was...

NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today.

Extrapolating "NATO without the US could handle Russian conventional forces"
into
"Poland would win a war against Russia by itself" is hilarious!

If you mean Poland without NATO, you are playing with about a dozen cards short of a full deck.
Now do Russia vs Ukraine from 2022

2023 Russia could not take over 2023 Poland. Case closed
False

If Poland is such a bad ass wtf does Ukraine need 100 billion from us for.

Send in the Pols

Notice no NATO troops are fighting, dipshit
Oh nice, start with the name calling when you cant answer the question

Why dont they send in the Pols to take care of old Puty Poot?
Clearly they would mop the the floor with Putin's conventional forces.
Dont even need NATO ..right?

Why doesn't Russia send in the troops that can beat Ukraine?

Why doesn't Poland send in troops in a war they aren't part of?

See how dumb this is?
You haven't been listening for 183 pages that's how dumb this is.

YOU made the ridiculous claim Poland can take Russia all by it's lonesome.
I call BULLSHIT.
That was the point and now you're waffling around and moving goal poasts and deflecting as you always do.
By the stats and numbers and assets you are wrong unless Poland has NATO backing. Case closed.

Russia would not be able to invade Poland.

Blueduck · August 2023

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

show previous quotes
Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:
If Putin is the biggest threat since Hitler and wants to go to the English Channel if not stopped in Ukraine why would world War 3 be ridiculous?

Have you seen what Germany looked like when Hitler lost? If he had nukes he would have used them

PGOS is willing to fuck around and find out because of his boyfriend Zelensky
He's not but that doesn't mean Russia isn't the enemy.

When you're Alabama playing Mississippi State you don't quit when you're up 34-17.

Or in this case, when you're playing for the North championship you root for Wazzu to knock Oregon off by even a field goal.

I agree that the admin is lying about the "why". I just overall see it as a net gain to neuter Russia and send a signal to Chy-na about Taiwan(to actually prevent ww3).
Quite honestly I don't disagree with a lot of this

My opposition has always been about the bad actors in America and the globalist cabal being behind this

And Zelensky is a piece of shit

The bullshit about this whole thing is well, bullshit

Let them kill each other.
Agree with most of this.

What's happening in Ukraine IS horrible but so long as the Ukrainians are willing to be the ones to fight and die for their country then that's their choice.

I, and I suspect many here who aren't pinkos, would do the same for our own country(not government).

I'll be rooting for Wazzu this week. Things may change next week. Ups and downs of realpolitik.
It there is a problem, it's a European problem. They don't act like it's a problem, so why are we carrying most of the freight?
What would you consider "acting like it's a problem" that is beyond the current response while also not dangerously escalating things towards WW3 as you so claim to be concerned about? Should France send Nukes? What exactly is the critique of the European response beyond "not enough" which you also seem to be against "dangerous escalation"? Which is it?

Please draw the middle road you are advocating for and do so in detail with specifics by country since Europe is hardly monolithic in its response.

As per raw numbers the US is the leader but as a percentage of gdp or military spending we aren't close to many other countries. I doubt you expect Luxembourg to out donate even say, Canada, despite the relative interests in security concerns.
The middle road I'm advocating is that we don't have a national interest in being the world's policeman and rescuing a corrupt Ukraine. Let the Euros figure it out. I don't see the UK, Germany or France on the top list below for some reason. Luxembourg clearly is pulling it's weight though.

==========
As a share of its GDP, Poland is the biggest defense spender in NATO, budgeting 3.9 percent in 2023. The U.S. is second, spending 3.49 percent, followed by Greece at 3.01 percent, Estonia at 2.73 percent, and Lithuania at 2.54 percent. Luxembourg, at 0.72 percent, is the smallest spender, followed by Belgium at 1.13 percent, Spain at 1.26 percent, Turkey at 1.31 percent, and Slovenia at 1.35 percent.
Now do percentage of that spending/gdp donated. Belgium/Netherlands basically both donated their entire air forces.

And then bought new stuff from the US.

Similar situations with the Baltic states.

You can argue that the US should be more isolationist, and I have sympathy for that position as @RaceBannon could probably attest to but, ultimately it's hard to maintain unless you want a multipolar world with Russia and the CCP getting to call the shots.

I think you have to be the big dick and throw the big dick energy around. Teddy and Trump style. Smartly, but none the less. #rocketman #solemanishredded

Ad in a long talk about prevention ism and US foreign policy in general.
Russia has nukes and oil. That's it. NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today. The problem is China and that's where our focus should be. The dems dirty expensive non-reliable US energy policy is a boon for both Russia and China as our energy costs have soared and we are hooked on China's metals and solar panels and wind turbines. So, we have no articulable direct interest in the Ukraine being run by corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs rather than corrupt Russian oligarchs. We do have articulable interests in a secure US border and disengaging from China. The Euros still aren't spending what we do on the military on a GDP percentage.

Your first point is correct. Poland would win a war against Russia, by itself. We know that now, we didn't in early 2022.

.
The statement was...

NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today.

Extrapolating "NATO without the US could handle Russian conventional forces"
into
"Poland would win a war against Russia by itself" is hilarious!

If you mean Poland without NATO, you are playing with about a dozen cards short of a full deck.
Now do Russia vs Ukraine from 2022

2023 Russia could not take over 2023 Poland. Case closed
False

If Poland is such a bad ass wtf does Ukraine need 100 billion from us for.

Send in the Pols

Notice no NATO troops are fighting, dipshit
Oh nice, start with the name calling when you cant answer the question

Why dont they send in the Pols to take care of old Puty Poot?
Clearly they would mop the the floor with Putin's conventional forces.
Dont even need NATO ..right?

Why doesn't Russia send in the troops that can beat Ukraine?

Why doesn't Poland send in troops in a war they aren't part of?

See how dumb this is?
You haven't been listening for 183 pages that's how dumb this is.

YOU made the ridiculous claim Poland can take Russia all by it's lonesome.
I call BULLSHIT.
That was the point and now you're waffling around and moving goal poasts and deflecting as you always do.
By the stats and numbers and assets you are wrong unless Poland has NATO backing. Case closed.

Russia would not be able to invade Poland.

You are unbelievable!
That is not the claim you made.
Now you are moving the goal poasts again.

I gave you the out...all you had to do is say "of course I meant "with" NATO backing" but you just double down.

Poland would need help if Russia tried to invade Poland

SMH

PostGameOrangeSlices · August 2023

Blueduck said:

show previous quotes
PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:
If Putin is the biggest threat since Hitler and wants to go to the English Channel if not stopped in Ukraine why would world War 3 be ridiculous?

Have you seen what Germany looked like when Hitler lost? If he had nukes he would have used them

PGOS is willing to fuck around and find out because of his boyfriend Zelensky
He's not but that doesn't mean Russia isn't the enemy.

When you're Alabama playing Mississippi State you don't quit when you're up 34-17.

Or in this case, when you're playing for the North championship you root for Wazzu to knock Oregon off by even a field goal.

I agree that the admin is lying about the "why". I just overall see it as a net gain to neuter Russia and send a signal to Chy-na about Taiwan(to actually prevent ww3).
Quite honestly I don't disagree with a lot of this

My opposition has always been about the bad actors in America and the globalist cabal being behind this

And Zelensky is a piece of shit

The bullshit about this whole thing is well, bullshit

Let them kill each other.
Agree with most of this.

What's happening in Ukraine IS horrible but so long as the Ukrainians are willing to be the ones to fight and die for their country then that's their choice.

I, and I suspect many here who aren't pinkos, would do the same for our own country(not government).

I'll be rooting for Wazzu this week. Things may change next week. Ups and downs of realpolitik.
It there is a problem, it's a European problem. They don't act like it's a problem, so why are we carrying most of the freight?
What would you consider "acting like it's a problem" that is beyond the current response while also not dangerously escalating things towards WW3 as you so claim to be concerned about? Should France send Nukes? What exactly is the critique of the European response beyond "not enough" which you also seem to be against "dangerous escalation"? Which is it?

Please draw the middle road you are advocating for and do so in detail with specifics by country since Europe is hardly monolithic in its response.

As per raw numbers the US is the leader but as a percentage of gdp or military spending we aren't close to many other countries. I doubt you expect Luxembourg to out donate even say, Canada, despite the relative interests in security concerns.
The middle road I'm advocating is that we don't have a national interest in being the world's policeman and rescuing a corrupt Ukraine. Let the Euros figure it out. I don't see the UK, Germany or France on the top list below for some reason. Luxembourg clearly is pulling it's weight though.

==========
As a share of its GDP, Poland is the biggest defense spender in NATO, budgeting 3.9 percent in 2023. The U.S. is second, spending 3.49 percent, followed by Greece at 3.01 percent, Estonia at 2.73 percent, and Lithuania at 2.54 percent. Luxembourg, at 0.72 percent, is the smallest spender, followed by Belgium at 1.13 percent, Spain at 1.26 percent, Turkey at 1.31 percent, and Slovenia at 1.35 percent.
Now do percentage of that spending/gdp donated. Belgium/Netherlands basically both donated their entire air forces.

And then bought new stuff from the US.

Similar situations with the Baltic states.

You can argue that the US should be more isolationist, and I have sympathy for that position as @RaceBannon could probably attest to but, ultimately it's hard to maintain unless you want a multipolar world with Russia and the CCP getting to call the shots.

I think you have to be the big dick and throw the big dick energy around. Teddy and Trump style. Smartly, but none the less. #rocketman #solemanishredded

Ad in a long talk about prevention ism and US foreign policy in general.
Russia has nukes and oil. That's it. NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today. The problem is China and that's where our focus should be. The dems dirty expensive non-reliable US energy policy is a boon for both Russia and China as our energy costs have soared and we are hooked on China's metals and solar panels and wind turbines. So, we have no articulable direct interest in the Ukraine being run by corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs rather than corrupt Russian oligarchs. We do have articulable interests in a secure US border and disengaging from China. The Euros still aren't spending what we do on the military on a GDP percentage.

Your first point is correct. Poland would win a war against Russia, by itself. We know that now, we didn't in early 2022.

.
The statement was...

NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today.

Extrapolating "NATO without the US could handle Russian conventional forces"
into
"Poland would win a war against Russia by itself" is hilarious!

If you mean Poland without NATO, you are playing with about a dozen cards short of a full deck.
Now do Russia vs Ukraine from 2022

2023 Russia could not take over 2023 Poland. Case closed
False

If Poland is such a bad ass wtf does Ukraine need 100 billion from us for.

Send in the Pols

Notice no NATO troops are fighting, dipshit
Oh nice, start with the name calling when you cant answer the question

Why dont they send in the Pols to take care of old Puty Poot?
Clearly they would mop the the floor with Putin's conventional forces.
Dont even need NATO ..right?

Why doesn't Russia send in the troops that can beat Ukraine?

Why doesn't Poland send in troops in a war they aren't part of?

See how dumb this is?
You haven't been listening for 183 pages that's how dumb this is.

YOU made the ridiculous claim Poland can take Russia all by it's lonesome.
I call BULLSHIT.
That was the point and now you're waffling around and moving goal poasts and deflecting as you always do.
By the stats and numbers and assets you are wrong unless Poland has NATO backing. Case closed.

Russia would not be able to invade Poland.
You are unbelievable!
That is not the claim you made.
Now you are moving the goal poasts again.

I gave you the out...all you had to do is say "of course I meant "with" NATO backing" but you just double down.

Poland would need help if Russia tried to invade Poland

SMH

You seem upset. Lol.

RaceBannon · August 2023

Easy to criticize hiding behind a computer screen

Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba hit out on Thursday at critics of Kyiv's tactics in its counteroffensive against Russia's invasion, saying they were spitting in the faces of Ukrainian soldiers and should "shut up."

"Criticizing the slow pace of (the) counteroffensive equals ... spitting into the face of (the) Ukrainian soldier who sacrifices his life every day, moving forward and liberating one kilometer of Ukrainian soil after another," Kuleba told reporters at a meeting of EU foreign ministers in Toledo, Spain.

The New York Times last week quoted U.S. and other Western officials as saying that the offensive had made limited progress because Ukraine had too many troops in the wrong places.

"I would recommend all critics to shut up, come to Ukraine and try to liberate one square centimeter by themselves," Kuleba said, standing alongside Spanish Foreign Minister Jose Manuel Albares.

PurpleThrobber · August 2023

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

show previous quotes
PurpleThrobber said:
Ukrainian corruption is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.

Bullshit.

Absolute and utter bullshit.

I'm sure the nukes will fly any day now buddy.

More bullshit deflection.

Chickenhawk endorses corrupt Ukraine government laundering funds for corrupt US government.

Bob_C · August 2023

PurpleThrobber said:

show previous quotes
PostGameOrangeSlices said:

PurpleThrobber said:
Ukrainian corruption is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.

Bullshit.

Absolute and utter bullshit.

I'm sure the nukes will fly any day now buddy.
More bullshit deflection.

Chickenhawk endorses corrupt Ukraine government laundering funds for corrupt US government.

Don’t hear much about saving Ukraines democracy these days.

PurpleThrobber · August 2023

Bob_C said:

show previous quotes
PurpleThrobber said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

PurpleThrobber said:
Ukrainian corruption is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.

Bullshit.

Absolute and utter bullshit.

I'm sure the nukes will fly any day now buddy.
More bullshit deflection.

Chickenhawk endorses corrupt Ukraine government laundering funds for corrupt US government.

Don’t hear much about saving Ukraines democracy these days.

DeMocRacY in Ukraine can be saved for a cool $5 Billion.

Z-midget already said that's the going rate.

PostGameOrangeSlices · August 2023

PurpleThrobber said:

show previous quotes
PostGameOrangeSlices said:

PurpleThrobber said:
Ukrainian corruption is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.

Bullshit.

Absolute and utter bullshit.

I'm sure the nukes will fly any day now buddy.
More bullshit deflection.

Chickenhawk endorses corrupt Ukraine government laundering funds for corrupt US government.

Not deflection. You told me nukes are en route. Im waiting

pawz · August 2023

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

show previous quotes
PurpleThrobber said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

PurpleThrobber said:
Ukrainian corruption is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.

Bullshit.

Absolute and utter bullshit.

I'm sure the nukes will fly any day now buddy.
More bullshit deflection.

Chickenhawk endorses corrupt Ukraine government laundering funds for corrupt US government.

Not deflection. You told me nukes are en route. Im waiting

The myopia is unrivaled.

RoadTrip · August 2023

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

show previous quotes
Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:
If Putin is the biggest threat since Hitler and wants to go to the English Channel if not stopped in Ukraine why would world War 3 be ridiculous?

Have you seen what Germany looked like when Hitler lost? If he had nukes he would have used them

PGOS is willing to fuck around and find out because of his boyfriend Zelensky
He's not but that doesn't mean Russia isn't the enemy.

When you're Alabama playing Mississippi State you don't quit when you're up 34-17.

Or in this case, when you're playing for the North championship you root for Wazzu to knock Oregon off by even a field goal.

I agree that the admin is lying about the "why". I just overall see it as a net gain to neuter Russia and send a signal to Chy-na about Taiwan(to actually prevent ww3).
Quite honestly I don't disagree with a lot of this

My opposition has always been about the bad actors in America and the globalist cabal being behind this

And Zelensky is a piece of shit

The bullshit about this whole thing is well, bullshit

Let them kill each other.
Agree with most of this.

What's happening in Ukraine IS horrible but so long as the Ukrainians are willing to be the ones to fight and die for their country then that's their choice.

I, and I suspect many here who aren't pinkos, would do the same for our own country(not government).

I'll be rooting for Wazzu this week. Things may change next week. Ups and downs of realpolitik.
It there is a problem, it's a European problem. They don't act like it's a problem, so why are we carrying most of the freight?
What would you consider "acting like it's a problem" that is beyond the current response while also not dangerously escalating things towards WW3 as you so claim to be concerned about? Should France send Nukes? What exactly is the critique of the European response beyond "not enough" which you also seem to be against "dangerous escalation"? Which is it?

Please draw the middle road you are advocating for and do so in detail with specifics by country since Europe is hardly monolithic in its response.

As per raw numbers the US is the leader but as a percentage of gdp or military spending we aren't close to many other countries. I doubt you expect Luxembourg to out donate even say, Canada, despite the relative interests in security concerns.
The middle road I'm advocating is that we don't have a national interest in being the world's policeman and rescuing a corrupt Ukraine. Let the Euros figure it out. I don't see the UK, Germany or France on the top list below for some reason. Luxembourg clearly is pulling it's weight though.

==========
As a share of its GDP, Poland is the biggest defense spender in NATO, budgeting 3.9 percent in 2023. The U.S. is second, spending 3.49 percent, followed by Greece at 3.01 percent, Estonia at 2.73 percent, and Lithuania at 2.54 percent. Luxembourg, at 0.72 percent, is the smallest spender, followed by Belgium at 1.13 percent, Spain at 1.26 percent, Turkey at 1.31 percent, and Slovenia at 1.35 percent.
Now do percentage of that spending/gdp donated. Belgium/Netherlands basically both donated their entire air forces.

And then bought new stuff from the US.

Similar situations with the Baltic states.

You can argue that the US should be more isolationist, and I have sympathy for that position as @RaceBannon could probably attest to but, ultimately it's hard to maintain unless you want a multipolar world with Russia and the CCP getting to call the shots.

I think you have to be the big dick and throw the big dick energy around. Teddy and Trump style. Smartly, but none the less. #rocketman #solemanishredded

Ad in a long talk about prevention ism and US foreign policy in general.
Russia has nukes and oil. That's it. NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today. The problem is China and that's where our focus should be. The dems dirty expensive non-reliable US energy policy is a boon for both Russia and China as our energy costs have soared and we are hooked on China's metals and solar panels and wind turbines. So, we have no articulable direct interest in the Ukraine being run by corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs rather than corrupt Russian oligarchs. We do have articulable interests in a secure US border and disengaging from China. The Euros still aren't spending what we do on the military on a GDP percentage.

Your first point is correct. Poland would win a war against Russia, by itself. We know that now, we didn't in early 2022.

.
The statement was...

NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today.

Extrapolating "NATO without the US could handle Russian conventional forces"
into
"Poland would win a war against Russia by itself" is hilarious!

If you mean Poland without NATO, you are playing with about a dozen cards short of a full deck.
Now do Russia vs Ukraine from 2022

2023 Russia could not take over 2023 Poland. Case closed
False

If Poland is such a bad ass wtf does Ukraine need 100 billion from us for.

Send in the Pols

Notice no NATO troops are fighting, dipshit
Oh nice, start with the name calling when you cant answer the question

Why dont they send in the Pols to take care of old Puty Poot?
Clearly they would mop the the floor with Putin's conventional forces.
Dont even need NATO ..right?

Why doesn't Russia send in the troops that can beat Ukraine?

Why doesn't Poland send in troops in a war they aren't part of?

See how dumb this is?
You haven't been listening for 183 pages that's how dumb this is.

YOU made the ridiculous claim Poland can take Russia all by it's lonesome.
I call BULLSHIT.
That was the point and now you're waffling around and moving goal poasts and deflecting as you always do.
By the stats and numbers and assets you are wrong unless Poland has NATO backing. Case closed.

Russia would not be able to invade Poland.

Again, you started this thread because you were worried if Russia wasn't stopped immediately they would continue to invade other counties. Now your opinion is they are so weak they couldn't put a dent in Poland. Why the change in opinion?

Bob_C · August 2023

RoadTrip said:

show previous quotes
PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:
If Putin is the biggest threat since Hitler and wants to go to the English Channel if not stopped in Ukraine why would world War 3 be ridiculous?

Have you seen what Germany looked like when Hitler lost? If he had nukes he would have used them

PGOS is willing to fuck around and find out because of his boyfriend Zelensky
He's not but that doesn't mean Russia isn't the enemy.

When you're Alabama playing Mississippi State you don't quit when you're up 34-17.

Or in this case, when you're playing for the North championship you root for Wazzu to knock Oregon off by even a field goal.

I agree that the admin is lying about the "why". I just overall see it as a net gain to neuter Russia and send a signal to Chy-na about Taiwan(to actually prevent ww3).
Quite honestly I don't disagree with a lot of this

My opposition has always been about the bad actors in America and the globalist cabal being behind this

And Zelensky is a piece of shit

The bullshit about this whole thing is well, bullshit

Let them kill each other.
Agree with most of this.

What's happening in Ukraine IS horrible but so long as the Ukrainians are willing to be the ones to fight and die for their country then that's their choice.

I, and I suspect many here who aren't pinkos, would do the same for our own country(not government).

I'll be rooting for Wazzu this week. Things may change next week. Ups and downs of realpolitik.
It there is a problem, it's a European problem. They don't act like it's a problem, so why are we carrying most of the freight?
What would you consider "acting like it's a problem" that is beyond the current response while also not dangerously escalating things towards WW3 as you so claim to be concerned about? Should France send Nukes? What exactly is the critique of the European response beyond "not enough" which you also seem to be against "dangerous escalation"? Which is it?

Please draw the middle road you are advocating for and do so in detail with specifics by country since Europe is hardly monolithic in its response.

As per raw numbers the US is the leader but as a percentage of gdp or military spending we aren't close to many other countries. I doubt you expect Luxembourg to out donate even say, Canada, despite the relative interests in security concerns.
The middle road I'm advocating is that we don't have a national interest in being the world's policeman and rescuing a corrupt Ukraine. Let the Euros figure it out. I don't see the UK, Germany or France on the top list below for some reason. Luxembourg clearly is pulling it's weight though.

==========
As a share of its GDP, Poland is the biggest defense spender in NATO, budgeting 3.9 percent in 2023. The U.S. is second, spending 3.49 percent, followed by Greece at 3.01 percent, Estonia at 2.73 percent, and Lithuania at 2.54 percent. Luxembourg, at 0.72 percent, is the smallest spender, followed by Belgium at 1.13 percent, Spain at 1.26 percent, Turkey at 1.31 percent, and Slovenia at 1.35 percent.
Now do percentage of that spending/gdp donated. Belgium/Netherlands basically both donated their entire air forces.

And then bought new stuff from the US.

Similar situations with the Baltic states.

You can argue that the US should be more isolationist, and I have sympathy for that position as @RaceBannon could probably attest to but, ultimately it's hard to maintain unless you want a multipolar world with Russia and the CCP getting to call the shots.

I think you have to be the big dick and throw the big dick energy around. Teddy and Trump style. Smartly, but none the less. #rocketman #solemanishredded

Ad in a long talk about prevention ism and US foreign policy in general.
Russia has nukes and oil. That's it. NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today. The problem is China and that's where our focus should be. The dems dirty expensive non-reliable US energy policy is a boon for both Russia and China as our energy costs have soared and we are hooked on China's metals and solar panels and wind turbines. So, we have no articulable direct interest in the Ukraine being run by corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs rather than corrupt Russian oligarchs. We do have articulable interests in a secure US border and disengaging from China. The Euros still aren't spending what we do on the military on a GDP percentage.

Your first point is correct. Poland would win a war against Russia, by itself. We know that now, we didn't in early 2022.

.
The statement was...

NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today.

Extrapolating "NATO without the US could handle Russian conventional forces"
into
"Poland would win a war against Russia by itself" is hilarious!

If you mean Poland without NATO, you are playing with about a dozen cards short of a full deck.
Now do Russia vs Ukraine from 2022

2023 Russia could not take over 2023 Poland. Case closed
False

If Poland is such a bad ass wtf does Ukraine need 100 billion from us for.

Send in the Pols

Notice no NATO troops are fighting, dipshit
Oh nice, start with the name calling when you cant answer the question

Why dont they send in the Pols to take care of old Puty Poot?
Clearly they would mop the the floor with Putin's conventional forces.
Dont even need NATO ..right?

Why doesn't Russia send in the troops that can beat Ukraine?

Why doesn't Poland send in troops in a war they aren't part of?

See how dumb this is?
You haven't been listening for 183 pages that's how dumb this is.

YOU made the ridiculous claim Poland can take Russia all by it's lonesome.
I call BULLSHIT.
That was the point and now you're waffling around and moving goal poasts and deflecting as you always do.
By the stats and numbers and assets you are wrong unless Poland has NATO backing. Case closed.

Russia would not be able to invade Poland.
Again, you started this thread because you were worried if Russia wasn't stopped immediately they would continue to invade other counties. Now your opinion is they are so weak they couldn't put a dent in Poland. Why the change in opinion?

That is the mind boggling argument. The case for money, weapons and unquantifiable realpolitik gains is much better if they are more capable. Doublethink frankly.

PostGameOrangeSlices · August 2023

RoadTrip said:

show previous quotes
PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:
If Putin is the biggest threat since Hitler and wants to go to the English Channel if not stopped in Ukraine why would world War 3 be ridiculous?

Have you seen what Germany looked like when Hitler lost? If he had nukes he would have used them

PGOS is willing to fuck around and find out because of his boyfriend Zelensky
He's not but that doesn't mean Russia isn't the enemy.

When you're Alabama playing Mississippi State you don't quit when you're up 34-17.

Or in this case, when you're playing for the North championship you root for Wazzu to knock Oregon off by even a field goal.

I agree that the admin is lying about the "why". I just overall see it as a net gain to neuter Russia and send a signal to Chy-na about Taiwan(to actually prevent ww3).
Quite honestly I don't disagree with a lot of this

My opposition has always been about the bad actors in America and the globalist cabal being behind this

And Zelensky is a piece of shit

The bullshit about this whole thing is well, bullshit

Let them kill each other.
Agree with most of this.

What's happening in Ukraine IS horrible but so long as the Ukrainians are willing to be the ones to fight and die for their country then that's their choice.

I, and I suspect many here who aren't pinkos, would do the same for our own country(not government).

I'll be rooting for Wazzu this week. Things may change next week. Ups and downs of realpolitik.
It there is a problem, it's a European problem. They don't act like it's a problem, so why are we carrying most of the freight?
What would you consider "acting like it's a problem" that is beyond the current response while also not dangerously escalating things towards WW3 as you so claim to be concerned about? Should France send Nukes? What exactly is the critique of the European response beyond "not enough" which you also seem to be against "dangerous escalation"? Which is it?

Please draw the middle road you are advocating for and do so in detail with specifics by country since Europe is hardly monolithic in its response.

As per raw numbers the US is the leader but as a percentage of gdp or military spending we aren't close to many other countries. I doubt you expect Luxembourg to out donate even say, Canada, despite the relative interests in security concerns.
The middle road I'm advocating is that we don't have a national interest in being the world's policeman and rescuing a corrupt Ukraine. Let the Euros figure it out. I don't see the UK, Germany or France on the top list below for some reason. Luxembourg clearly is pulling it's weight though.

==========
As a share of its GDP, Poland is the biggest defense spender in NATO, budgeting 3.9 percent in 2023. The U.S. is second, spending 3.49 percent, followed by Greece at 3.01 percent, Estonia at 2.73 percent, and Lithuania at 2.54 percent. Luxembourg, at 0.72 percent, is the smallest spender, followed by Belgium at 1.13 percent, Spain at 1.26 percent, Turkey at 1.31 percent, and Slovenia at 1.35 percent.
Now do percentage of that spending/gdp donated. Belgium/Netherlands basically both donated their entire air forces.

And then bought new stuff from the US.

Similar situations with the Baltic states.

You can argue that the US should be more isolationist, and I have sympathy for that position as @RaceBannon could probably attest to but, ultimately it's hard to maintain unless you want a multipolar world with Russia and the CCP getting to call the shots.

I think you have to be the big dick and throw the big dick energy around. Teddy and Trump style. Smartly, but none the less. #rocketman #solemanishredded

Ad in a long talk about prevention ism and US foreign policy in general.
Russia has nukes and oil. That's it. NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today. The problem is China and that's where our focus should be. The dems dirty expensive non-reliable US energy policy is a boon for both Russia and China as our energy costs have soared and we are hooked on China's metals and solar panels and wind turbines. So, we have no articulable direct interest in the Ukraine being run by corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs rather than corrupt Russian oligarchs. We do have articulable interests in a secure US border and disengaging from China. The Euros still aren't spending what we do on the military on a GDP percentage.

Your first point is correct. Poland would win a war against Russia, by itself. We know that now, we didn't in early 2022.

.
The statement was...

NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today.

Extrapolating "NATO without the US could handle Russian conventional forces"
into
"Poland would win a war against Russia by itself" is hilarious!

If you mean Poland without NATO, you are playing with about a dozen cards short of a full deck.
Now do Russia vs Ukraine from 2022

2023 Russia could not take over 2023 Poland. Case closed
False

If Poland is such a bad ass wtf does Ukraine need 100 billion from us for.

Send in the Pols

Notice no NATO troops are fighting, dipshit
Oh nice, start with the name calling when you cant answer the question

Why dont they send in the Pols to take care of old Puty Poot?
Clearly they would mop the the floor with Putin's conventional forces.
Dont even need NATO ..right?

Why doesn't Russia send in the troops that can beat Ukraine?

Why doesn't Poland send in troops in a war they aren't part of?

See how dumb this is?
You haven't been listening for 183 pages that's how dumb this is.

YOU made the ridiculous claim Poland can take Russia all by it's lonesome.
I call BULLSHIT.
That was the point and now you're waffling around and moving goal poasts and deflecting as you always do.
By the stats and numbers and assets you are wrong unless Poland has NATO backing. Case closed.

Russia would not be able to invade Poland.
Again, you started this thread because you were worried if Russia wasn't stopped immediately they would continue to invade other counties. Now your opinion is they are so weak they couldn't put a dent in Poland. Why the change in opinion?

I thought Russia had a second wind in them.

Turns out they dont

Bob_C · August 2023

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

show previous quotes
RoadTrip said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:
If Putin is the biggest threat since Hitler and wants to go to the English Channel if not stopped in Ukraine why would world War 3 be ridiculous?

Have you seen what Germany looked like when Hitler lost? If he had nukes he would have used them

PGOS is willing to fuck around and find out because of his boyfriend Zelensky
He's not but that doesn't mean Russia isn't the enemy.

When you're Alabama playing Mississippi State you don't quit when you're up 34-17.

Or in this case, when you're playing for the North championship you root for Wazzu to knock Oregon off by even a field goal.

I agree that the admin is lying about the "why". I just overall see it as a net gain to neuter Russia and send a signal to Chy-na about Taiwan(to actually prevent ww3).
Quite honestly I don't disagree with a lot of this

My opposition has always been about the bad actors in America and the globalist cabal being behind this

And Zelensky is a piece of shit

The bullshit about this whole thing is well, bullshit

Let them kill each other.
Agree with most of this.

What's happening in Ukraine IS horrible but so long as the Ukrainians are willing to be the ones to fight and die for their country then that's their choice.

I, and I suspect many here who aren't pinkos, would do the same for our own country(not government).

I'll be rooting for Wazzu this week. Things may change next week. Ups and downs of realpolitik.
It there is a problem, it's a European problem. They don't act like it's a problem, so why are we carrying most of the freight?
What would you consider "acting like it's a problem" that is beyond the current response while also not dangerously escalating things towards WW3 as you so claim to be concerned about? Should France send Nukes? What exactly is the critique of the European response beyond "not enough" which you also seem to be against "dangerous escalation"? Which is it?

Please draw the middle road you are advocating for and do so in detail with specifics by country since Europe is hardly monolithic in its response.

As per raw numbers the US is the leader but as a percentage of gdp or military spending we aren't close to many other countries. I doubt you expect Luxembourg to out donate even say, Canada, despite the relative interests in security concerns.
The middle road I'm advocating is that we don't have a national interest in being the world's policeman and rescuing a corrupt Ukraine. Let the Euros figure it out. I don't see the UK, Germany or France on the top list below for some reason. Luxembourg clearly is pulling it's weight though.

==========
As a share of its GDP, Poland is the biggest defense spender in NATO, budgeting 3.9 percent in 2023. The U.S. is second, spending 3.49 percent, followed by Greece at 3.01 percent, Estonia at 2.73 percent, and Lithuania at 2.54 percent. Luxembourg, at 0.72 percent, is the smallest spender, followed by Belgium at 1.13 percent, Spain at 1.26 percent, Turkey at 1.31 percent, and Slovenia at 1.35 percent.
Now do percentage of that spending/gdp donated. Belgium/Netherlands basically both donated their entire air forces.

And then bought new stuff from the US.

Similar situations with the Baltic states.

You can argue that the US should be more isolationist, and I have sympathy for that position as @RaceBannon could probably attest to but, ultimately it's hard to maintain unless you want a multipolar world with Russia and the CCP getting to call the shots.

I think you have to be the big dick and throw the big dick energy around. Teddy and Trump style. Smartly, but none the less. #rocketman #solemanishredded

Ad in a long talk about prevention ism and US foreign policy in general.
Russia has nukes and oil. That's it. NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today. The problem is China and that's where our focus should be. The dems dirty expensive non-reliable US energy policy is a boon for both Russia and China as our energy costs have soared and we are hooked on China's metals and solar panels and wind turbines. So, we have no articulable direct interest in the Ukraine being run by corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs rather than corrupt Russian oligarchs. We do have articulable interests in a secure US border and disengaging from China. The Euros still aren't spending what we do on the military on a GDP percentage.

Your first point is correct. Poland would win a war against Russia, by itself. We know that now, we didn't in early 2022.

.
The statement was...

NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today.

Extrapolating "NATO without the US could handle Russian conventional forces"
into
"Poland would win a war against Russia by itself" is hilarious!

If you mean Poland without NATO, you are playing with about a dozen cards short of a full deck.
Now do Russia vs Ukraine from 2022

2023 Russia could not take over 2023 Poland. Case closed
False

If Poland is such a bad ass wtf does Ukraine need 100 billion from us for.

Send in the Pols

Notice no NATO troops are fighting, dipshit
Oh nice, start with the name calling when you cant answer the question

Why dont they send in the Pols to take care of old Puty Poot?
Clearly they would mop the the floor with Putin's conventional forces.
Dont even need NATO ..right?

Why doesn't Russia send in the troops that can beat Ukraine?

Why doesn't Poland send in troops in a war they aren't part of?

See how dumb this is?
You haven't been listening for 183 pages that's how dumb this is.

YOU made the ridiculous claim Poland can take Russia all by it's lonesome.
I call BULLSHIT.
That was the point and now you're waffling around and moving goal poasts and deflecting as you always do.
By the stats and numbers and assets you are wrong unless Poland has NATO backing. Case closed.

Russia would not be able to invade Poland.
Again, you started this thread because you were worried if Russia wasn't stopped immediately they would continue to invade other counties. Now your opinion is they are so weak they couldn't put a dent in Poland. Why the change in opinion?
I thought Russia had a second wind in them.

Turns out they dont

So are we calling the August Spring offensive a success? Or still in LIP territory?

RoadTrip · August 2023

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

show previous quotes
RoadTrip said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:
If Putin is the biggest threat since Hitler and wants to go to the English Channel if not stopped in Ukraine why would world War 3 be ridiculous?

Have you seen what Germany looked like when Hitler lost? If he had nukes he would have used them

PGOS is willing to fuck around and find out because of his boyfriend Zelensky
He's not but that doesn't mean Russia isn't the enemy.

When you're Alabama playing Mississippi State you don't quit when you're up 34-17.

Or in this case, when you're playing for the North championship you root for Wazzu to knock Oregon off by even a field goal.

I agree that the admin is lying about the "why". I just overall see it as a net gain to neuter Russia and send a signal to Chy-na about Taiwan(to actually prevent ww3).
Quite honestly I don't disagree with a lot of this

My opposition has always been about the bad actors in America and the globalist cabal being behind this

And Zelensky is a piece of shit

The bullshit about this whole thing is well, bullshit

Let them kill each other.
Agree with most of this.

What's happening in Ukraine IS horrible but so long as the Ukrainians are willing to be the ones to fight and die for their country then that's their choice.

I, and I suspect many here who aren't pinkos, would do the same for our own country(not government).

I'll be rooting for Wazzu this week. Things may change next week. Ups and downs of realpolitik.
It there is a problem, it's a European problem. They don't act like it's a problem, so why are we carrying most of the freight?
What would you consider "acting like it's a problem" that is beyond the current response while also not dangerously escalating things towards WW3 as you so claim to be concerned about? Should France send Nukes? What exactly is the critique of the European response beyond "not enough" which you also seem to be against "dangerous escalation"? Which is it?

Please draw the middle road you are advocating for and do so in detail with specifics by country since Europe is hardly monolithic in its response.

As per raw numbers the US is the leader but as a percentage of gdp or military spending we aren't close to many other countries. I doubt you expect Luxembourg to out donate even say, Canada, despite the relative interests in security concerns.
The middle road I'm advocating is that we don't have a national interest in being the world's policeman and rescuing a corrupt Ukraine. Let the Euros figure it out. I don't see the UK, Germany or France on the top list below for some reason. Luxembourg clearly is pulling it's weight though.

==========
As a share of its GDP, Poland is the biggest defense spender in NATO, budgeting 3.9 percent in 2023. The U.S. is second, spending 3.49 percent, followed by Greece at 3.01 percent, Estonia at 2.73 percent, and Lithuania at 2.54 percent. Luxembourg, at 0.72 percent, is the smallest spender, followed by Belgium at 1.13 percent, Spain at 1.26 percent, Turkey at 1.31 percent, and Slovenia at 1.35 percent.
Now do percentage of that spending/gdp donated. Belgium/Netherlands basically both donated their entire air forces.

And then bought new stuff from the US.

Similar situations with the Baltic states.

You can argue that the US should be more isolationist, and I have sympathy for that position as @RaceBannon could probably attest to but, ultimately it's hard to maintain unless you want a multipolar world with Russia and the CCP getting to call the shots.

I think you have to be the big dick and throw the big dick energy around. Teddy and Trump style. Smartly, but none the less. #rocketman #solemanishredded

Ad in a long talk about prevention ism and US foreign policy in general.
Russia has nukes and oil. That's it. NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today. The problem is China and that's where our focus should be. The dems dirty expensive non-reliable US energy policy is a boon for both Russia and China as our energy costs have soared and we are hooked on China's metals and solar panels and wind turbines. So, we have no articulable direct interest in the Ukraine being run by corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs rather than corrupt Russian oligarchs. We do have articulable interests in a secure US border and disengaging from China. The Euros still aren't spending what we do on the military on a GDP percentage.

Your first point is correct. Poland would win a war against Russia, by itself. We know that now, we didn't in early 2022.

.
The statement was...

NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today.

Extrapolating "NATO without the US could handle Russian conventional forces"
into
"Poland would win a war against Russia by itself" is hilarious!

If you mean Poland without NATO, you are playing with about a dozen cards short of a full deck.
Now do Russia vs Ukraine from 2022

2023 Russia could not take over 2023 Poland. Case closed
False

If Poland is such a bad ass wtf does Ukraine need 100 billion from us for.

Send in the Pols

Notice no NATO troops are fighting, dipshit
Oh nice, start with the name calling when you cant answer the question

Why dont they send in the Pols to take care of old Puty Poot?
Clearly they would mop the the floor with Putin's conventional forces.
Dont even need NATO ..right?

Why doesn't Russia send in the troops that can beat Ukraine?

Why doesn't Poland send in troops in a war they aren't part of?

See how dumb this is?
You haven't been listening for 183 pages that's how dumb this is.

YOU made the ridiculous claim Poland can take Russia all by it's lonesome.
I call BULLSHIT.
That was the point and now you're waffling around and moving goal poasts and deflecting as you always do.
By the stats and numbers and assets you are wrong unless Poland has NATO backing. Case closed.

Russia would not be able to invade Poland.
Again, you started this thread because you were worried if Russia wasn't stopped immediately they would continue to invade other counties. Now your opinion is they are so weak they couldn't put a dent in Poland. Why the change in opinion?
I thought Russia had a second wind in them.

Turns out they dont

Ok. Then if they are so incapable of taking on Ukraine, let alone any other country after them, why should the United States be giving them hundreds of billions of dollars? Why not let the other NATO countries, who should or would have a direct concern of invasion, fund the Ukraine?

WestlinnDuck · August 2023

RoadTrip said:

show previous quotes
PostGameOrangeSlices said:

RoadTrip said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:
If Putin is the biggest threat since Hitler and wants to go to the English Channel if not stopped in Ukraine why would world War 3 be ridiculous?

Have you seen what Germany looked like when Hitler lost? If he had nukes he would have used them

PGOS is willing to fuck around and find out because of his boyfriend Zelensky
He's not but that doesn't mean Russia isn't the enemy.

When you're Alabama playing Mississippi State you don't quit when you're up 34-17.

Or in this case, when you're playing for the North championship you root for Wazzu to knock Oregon off by even a field goal.

I agree that the admin is lying about the "why". I just overall see it as a net gain to neuter Russia and send a signal to Chy-na about Taiwan(to actually prevent ww3).
Quite honestly I don't disagree with a lot of this

My opposition has always been about the bad actors in America and the globalist cabal being behind this

And Zelensky is a piece of shit

The bullshit about this whole thing is well, bullshit

Let them kill each other.
Agree with most of this.

What's happening in Ukraine IS horrible but so long as the Ukrainians are willing to be the ones to fight and die for their country then that's their choice.

I, and I suspect many here who aren't pinkos, would do the same for our own country(not government).

I'll be rooting for Wazzu this week. Things may change next week. Ups and downs of realpolitik.
It there is a problem, it's a European problem. They don't act like it's a problem, so why are we carrying most of the freight?
What would you consider "acting like it's a problem" that is beyond the current response while also not dangerously escalating things towards WW3 as you so claim to be concerned about? Should France send Nukes? What exactly is the critique of the European response beyond "not enough" which you also seem to be against "dangerous escalation"? Which is it?

Please draw the middle road you are advocating for and do so in detail with specifics by country since Europe is hardly monolithic in its response.

As per raw numbers the US is the leader but as a percentage of gdp or military spending we aren't close to many other countries. I doubt you expect Luxembourg to out donate even say, Canada, despite the relative interests in security concerns.
The middle road I'm advocating is that we don't have a national interest in being the world's policeman and rescuing a corrupt Ukraine. Let the Euros figure it out. I don't see the UK, Germany or France on the top list below for some reason. Luxembourg clearly is pulling it's weight though.

==========
As a share of its GDP, Poland is the biggest defense spender in NATO, budgeting 3.9 percent in 2023. The U.S. is second, spending 3.49 percent, followed by Greece at 3.01 percent, Estonia at 2.73 percent, and Lithuania at 2.54 percent. Luxembourg, at 0.72 percent, is the smallest spender, followed by Belgium at 1.13 percent, Spain at 1.26 percent, Turkey at 1.31 percent, and Slovenia at 1.35 percent.
Now do percentage of that spending/gdp donated. Belgium/Netherlands basically both donated their entire air forces.

And then bought new stuff from the US.

Similar situations with the Baltic states.

You can argue that the US should be more isolationist, and I have sympathy for that position as @RaceBannon could probably attest to but, ultimately it's hard to maintain unless you want a multipolar world with Russia and the CCP getting to call the shots.

I think you have to be the big dick and throw the big dick energy around. Teddy and Trump style. Smartly, but none the less. #rocketman #solemanishredded

Ad in a long talk about prevention ism and US foreign policy in general.
Russia has nukes and oil. That's it. NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today. The problem is China and that's where our focus should be. The dems dirty expensive non-reliable US energy policy is a boon for both Russia and China as our energy costs have soared and we are hooked on China's metals and solar panels and wind turbines. So, we have no articulable direct interest in the Ukraine being run by corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs rather than corrupt Russian oligarchs. We do have articulable interests in a secure US border and disengaging from China. The Euros still aren't spending what we do on the military on a GDP percentage.

Your first point is correct. Poland would win a war against Russia, by itself. We know that now, we didn't in early 2022.

.
The statement was...

NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today.

Extrapolating "NATO without the US could handle Russian conventional forces"
into
"Poland would win a war against Russia by itself" is hilarious!

If you mean Poland without NATO, you are playing with about a dozen cards short of a full deck.
Now do Russia vs Ukraine from 2022

2023 Russia could not take over 2023 Poland. Case closed
False

If Poland is such a bad ass wtf does Ukraine need 100 billion from us for.

Send in the Pols

Notice no NATO troops are fighting, dipshit
Oh nice, start with the name calling when you cant answer the question

Why dont they send in the Pols to take care of old Puty Poot?
Clearly they would mop the the floor with Putin's conventional forces.
Dont even need NATO ..right?

Why doesn't Russia send in the troops that can beat Ukraine?

Why doesn't Poland send in troops in a war they aren't part of?

See how dumb this is?
You haven't been listening for 183 pages that's how dumb this is.

YOU made the ridiculous claim Poland can take Russia all by it's lonesome.
I call BULLSHIT.
That was the point and now you're waffling around and moving goal poasts and deflecting as you always do.
By the stats and numbers and assets you are wrong unless Poland has NATO backing. Case closed.

Russia would not be able to invade Poland.
Again, you started this thread because you were worried if Russia wasn't stopped immediately they would continue to invade other counties. Now your opinion is they are so weak they couldn't put a dent in Poland. Why the change in opinion?
I thought Russia had a second wind in them.

Turns out they dont
Ok. Then if they are so incapable of taking on Ukraine, let alone any other country after them, why should the United States be giving them hundreds of billions of dollars? Why not let the other NATO countries, who should or would have a direct concern of invasion, fund the Ukraine?

No money for the US MIC if we aren't burning up our military armaments. The other answer is that the US never demanded any accountability out of our NATO "allies" until Trump leaned on them and then Bolton and the rest of the US eternal war machine had a cow. You raise a spoiled child and you end up with a spoiled irresponsible adult. Go figure.

PostGameOrangeSlices · August 2023

Bob_C said:

show previous quotes
PostGameOrangeSlices said:

RoadTrip said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:
If Putin is the biggest threat since Hitler and wants to go to the English Channel if not stopped in Ukraine why would world War 3 be ridiculous?

Have you seen what Germany looked like when Hitler lost? If he had nukes he would have used them

PGOS is willing to fuck around and find out because of his boyfriend Zelensky
He's not but that doesn't mean Russia isn't the enemy.

When you're Alabama playing Mississippi State you don't quit when you're up 34-17.

Or in this case, when you're playing for the North championship you root for Wazzu to knock Oregon off by even a field goal.

I agree that the admin is lying about the "why". I just overall see it as a net gain to neuter Russia and send a signal to Chy-na about Taiwan(to actually prevent ww3).
Quite honestly I don't disagree with a lot of this

My opposition has always been about the bad actors in America and the globalist cabal being behind this

And Zelensky is a piece of shit

The bullshit about this whole thing is well, bullshit

Let them kill each other.
Agree with most of this.

What's happening in Ukraine IS horrible but so long as the Ukrainians are willing to be the ones to fight and die for their country then that's their choice.

I, and I suspect many here who aren't pinkos, would do the same for our own country(not government).

I'll be rooting for Wazzu this week. Things may change next week. Ups and downs of realpolitik.
It there is a problem, it's a European problem. They don't act like it's a problem, so why are we carrying most of the freight?
What would you consider "acting like it's a problem" that is beyond the current response while also not dangerously escalating things towards WW3 as you so claim to be concerned about? Should France send Nukes? What exactly is the critique of the European response beyond "not enough" which you also seem to be against "dangerous escalation"? Which is it?

Please draw the middle road you are advocating for and do so in detail with specifics by country since Europe is hardly monolithic in its response.

As per raw numbers the US is the leader but as a percentage of gdp or military spending we aren't close to many other countries. I doubt you expect Luxembourg to out donate even say, Canada, despite the relative interests in security concerns.
The middle road I'm advocating is that we don't have a national interest in being the world's policeman and rescuing a corrupt Ukraine. Let the Euros figure it out. I don't see the UK, Germany or France on the top list below for some reason. Luxembourg clearly is pulling it's weight though.

==========
As a share of its GDP, Poland is the biggest defense spender in NATO, budgeting 3.9 percent in 2023. The U.S. is second, spending 3.49 percent, followed by Greece at 3.01 percent, Estonia at 2.73 percent, and Lithuania at 2.54 percent. Luxembourg, at 0.72 percent, is the smallest spender, followed by Belgium at 1.13 percent, Spain at 1.26 percent, Turkey at 1.31 percent, and Slovenia at 1.35 percent.
Now do percentage of that spending/gdp donated. Belgium/Netherlands basically both donated their entire air forces.

And then bought new stuff from the US.

Similar situations with the Baltic states.

You can argue that the US should be more isolationist, and I have sympathy for that position as @RaceBannon could probably attest to but, ultimately it's hard to maintain unless you want a multipolar world with Russia and the CCP getting to call the shots.

I think you have to be the big dick and throw the big dick energy around. Teddy and Trump style. Smartly, but none the less. #rocketman #solemanishredded

Ad in a long talk about prevention ism and US foreign policy in general.
Russia has nukes and oil. That's it. NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today. The problem is China and that's where our focus should be. The dems dirty expensive non-reliable US energy policy is a boon for both Russia and China as our energy costs have soared and we are hooked on China's metals and solar panels and wind turbines. So, we have no articulable direct interest in the Ukraine being run by corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs rather than corrupt Russian oligarchs. We do have articulable interests in a secure US border and disengaging from China. The Euros still aren't spending what we do on the military on a GDP percentage.

Your first point is correct. Poland would win a war against Russia, by itself. We know that now, we didn't in early 2022.

.
The statement was...

NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today.

Extrapolating "NATO without the US could handle Russian conventional forces"
into
"Poland would win a war against Russia by itself" is hilarious!

If you mean Poland without NATO, you are playing with about a dozen cards short of a full deck.
Now do Russia vs Ukraine from 2022

2023 Russia could not take over 2023 Poland. Case closed
False

If Poland is such a bad ass wtf does Ukraine need 100 billion from us for.

Send in the Pols

Notice no NATO troops are fighting, dipshit
Oh nice, start with the name calling when you cant answer the question

Why dont they send in the Pols to take care of old Puty Poot?
Clearly they would mop the the floor with Putin's conventional forces.
Dont even need NATO ..right?

Why doesn't Russia send in the troops that can beat Ukraine?

Why doesn't Poland send in troops in a war they aren't part of?

See how dumb this is?
You haven't been listening for 183 pages that's how dumb this is.

YOU made the ridiculous claim Poland can take Russia all by it's lonesome.
I call BULLSHIT.
That was the point and now you're waffling around and moving goal poasts and deflecting as you always do.
By the stats and numbers and assets you are wrong unless Poland has NATO backing. Case closed.

Russia would not be able to invade Poland.
Again, you started this thread because you were worried if Russia wasn't stopped immediately they would continue to invade other counties. Now your opinion is they are so weak they couldn't put a dent in Poland. Why the change in opinion?
I thought Russia had a second wind in them.

Turns out they dont
So are we calling the August Spring offensive a success? Or still in LIP territory?

LIPO territory

PostGameOrangeSlices · August 2023

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-ukraine-drone-strikes-putin-latest-b2402318.html

liveuamap.com

Ukraine is pushing into a breach now

RoadTrip · August 2023

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

show previous quotes
Bob_C said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

RoadTrip said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:
If Putin is the biggest threat since Hitler and wants to go to the English Channel if not stopped in Ukraine why would world War 3 be ridiculous?

Have you seen what Germany looked like when Hitler lost? If he had nukes he would have used them

PGOS is willing to fuck around and find out because of his boyfriend Zelensky
He's not but that doesn't mean Russia isn't the enemy.

When you're Alabama playing Mississippi State you don't quit when you're up 34-17.

Or in this case, when you're playing for the North championship you root for Wazzu to knock Oregon off by even a field goal.

I agree that the admin is lying about the "why". I just overall see it as a net gain to neuter Russia and send a signal to Chy-na about Taiwan(to actually prevent ww3).
Quite honestly I don't disagree with a lot of this

My opposition has always been about the bad actors in America and the globalist cabal being behind this

And Zelensky is a piece of shit

The bullshit about this whole thing is well, bullshit

Let them kill each other.
Agree with most of this.

What's happening in Ukraine IS horrible but so long as the Ukrainians are willing to be the ones to fight and die for their country then that's their choice.

I, and I suspect many here who aren't pinkos, would do the same for our own country(not government).

I'll be rooting for Wazzu this week. Things may change next week. Ups and downs of realpolitik.
It there is a problem, it's a European problem. They don't act like it's a problem, so why are we carrying most of the freight?
What would you consider "acting like it's a problem" that is beyond the current response while also not dangerously escalating things towards WW3 as you so claim to be concerned about? Should France send Nukes? What exactly is the critique of the European response beyond "not enough" which you also seem to be against "dangerous escalation"? Which is it?

Please draw the middle road you are advocating for and do so in detail with specifics by country since Europe is hardly monolithic in its response.

As per raw numbers the US is the leader but as a percentage of gdp or military spending we aren't close to many other countries. I doubt you expect Luxembourg to out donate even say, Canada, despite the relative interests in security concerns.
The middle road I'm advocating is that we don't have a national interest in being the world's policeman and rescuing a corrupt Ukraine. Let the Euros figure it out. I don't see the UK, Germany or France on the top list below for some reason. Luxembourg clearly is pulling it's weight though.

==========
As a share of its GDP, Poland is the biggest defense spender in NATO, budgeting 3.9 percent in 2023. The U.S. is second, spending 3.49 percent, followed by Greece at 3.01 percent, Estonia at 2.73 percent, and Lithuania at 2.54 percent. Luxembourg, at 0.72 percent, is the smallest spender, followed by Belgium at 1.13 percent, Spain at 1.26 percent, Turkey at 1.31 percent, and Slovenia at 1.35 percent.
Now do percentage of that spending/gdp donated. Belgium/Netherlands basically both donated their entire air forces.

And then bought new stuff from the US.

Similar situations with the Baltic states.

You can argue that the US should be more isolationist, and I have sympathy for that position as @RaceBannon could probably attest to but, ultimately it's hard to maintain unless you want a multipolar world with Russia and the CCP getting to call the shots.

I think you have to be the big dick and throw the big dick energy around. Teddy and Trump style. Smartly, but none the less. #rocketman #solemanishredded

Ad in a long talk about prevention ism and US foreign policy in general.
Russia has nukes and oil. That's it. NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today. The problem is China and that's where our focus should be. The dems dirty expensive non-reliable US energy policy is a boon for both Russia and China as our energy costs have soared and we are hooked on China's metals and solar panels and wind turbines. So, we have no articulable direct interest in the Ukraine being run by corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs rather than corrupt Russian oligarchs. We do have articulable interests in a secure US border and disengaging from China. The Euros still aren't spending what we do on the military on a GDP percentage.

Your first point is correct. Poland would win a war against Russia, by itself. We know that now, we didn't in early 2022.

.
The statement was...

NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today.

Extrapolating "NATO without the US could handle Russian conventional forces"
into
"Poland would win a war against Russia by itself" is hilarious!

If you mean Poland without NATO, you are playing with about a dozen cards short of a full deck.
Now do Russia vs Ukraine from 2022

2023 Russia could not take over 2023 Poland. Case closed
False

If Poland is such a bad ass wtf does Ukraine need 100 billion from us for.

Send in the Pols

Notice no NATO troops are fighting, dipshit
Oh nice, start with the name calling when you cant answer the question

Why dont they send in the Pols to take care of old Puty Poot?
Clearly they would mop the the floor with Putin's conventional forces.
Dont even need NATO ..right?

Why doesn't Russia send in the troops that can beat Ukraine?

Why doesn't Poland send in troops in a war they aren't part of?

See how dumb this is?
You haven't been listening for 183 pages that's how dumb this is.

YOU made the ridiculous claim Poland can take Russia all by it's lonesome.
I call BULLSHIT.
That was the point and now you're waffling around and moving goal poasts and deflecting as you always do.
By the stats and numbers and assets you are wrong unless Poland has NATO backing. Case closed.

Russia would not be able to invade Poland.
Again, you started this thread because you were worried if Russia wasn't stopped immediately they would continue to invade other counties. Now your opinion is they are so weak they couldn't put a dent in Poland. Why the change in opinion?
I thought Russia had a second wind in them.

Turns out they dont
So are we calling the August Spring offensive a success? Or still in LIP territory?
LIPO territory

We shouldn't be here. Peace should have been negotiated but all the political powers you claim to not support wanted nothing to do with peace because they couldnt continue to profit from the corruption.

PostGameOrangeSlices · August 2023

RoadTrip said:

show previous quotes
PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Bob_C said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

RoadTrip said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:
If Putin is the biggest threat since Hitler and wants to go to the English Channel if not stopped in Ukraine why would world War 3 be ridiculous?

Have you seen what Germany looked like when Hitler lost? If he had nukes he would have used them

PGOS is willing to fuck around and find out because of his boyfriend Zelensky
He's not but that doesn't mean Russia isn't the enemy.

When you're Alabama playing Mississippi State you don't quit when you're up 34-17.

Or in this case, when you're playing for the North championship you root for Wazzu to knock Oregon off by even a field goal.

I agree that the admin is lying about the "why". I just overall see it as a net gain to neuter Russia and send a signal to Chy-na about Taiwan(to actually prevent ww3).
Quite honestly I don't disagree with a lot of this

My opposition has always been about the bad actors in America and the globalist cabal being behind this

And Zelensky is a piece of shit

The bullshit about this whole thing is well, bullshit

Let them kill each other.
Agree with most of this.

What's happening in Ukraine IS horrible but so long as the Ukrainians are willing to be the ones to fight and die for their country then that's their choice.

I, and I suspect many here who aren't pinkos, would do the same for our own country(not government).

I'll be rooting for Wazzu this week. Things may change next week. Ups and downs of realpolitik.
It there is a problem, it's a European problem. They don't act like it's a problem, so why are we carrying most of the freight?
What would you consider "acting like it's a problem" that is beyond the current response while also not dangerously escalating things towards WW3 as you so claim to be concerned about? Should France send Nukes? What exactly is the critique of the European response beyond "not enough" which you also seem to be against "dangerous escalation"? Which is it?

Please draw the middle road you are advocating for and do so in detail with specifics by country since Europe is hardly monolithic in its response.

As per raw numbers the US is the leader but as a percentage of gdp or military spending we aren't close to many other countries. I doubt you expect Luxembourg to out donate even say, Canada, despite the relative interests in security concerns.
The middle road I'm advocating is that we don't have a national interest in being the world's policeman and rescuing a corrupt Ukraine. Let the Euros figure it out. I don't see the UK, Germany or France on the top list below for some reason. Luxembourg clearly is pulling it's weight though.

==========
As a share of its GDP, Poland is the biggest defense spender in NATO, budgeting 3.9 percent in 2023. The U.S. is second, spending 3.49 percent, followed by Greece at 3.01 percent, Estonia at 2.73 percent, and Lithuania at 2.54 percent. Luxembourg, at 0.72 percent, is the smallest spender, followed by Belgium at 1.13 percent, Spain at 1.26 percent, Turkey at 1.31 percent, and Slovenia at 1.35 percent.
Now do percentage of that spending/gdp donated. Belgium/Netherlands basically both donated their entire air forces.

And then bought new stuff from the US.

Similar situations with the Baltic states.

You can argue that the US should be more isolationist, and I have sympathy for that position as @RaceBannon could probably attest to but, ultimately it's hard to maintain unless you want a multipolar world with Russia and the CCP getting to call the shots.

I think you have to be the big dick and throw the big dick energy around. Teddy and Trump style. Smartly, but none the less. #rocketman #solemanishredded

Ad in a long talk about prevention ism and US foreign policy in general.
Russia has nukes and oil. That's it. NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today. The problem is China and that's where our focus should be. The dems dirty expensive non-reliable US energy policy is a boon for both Russia and China as our energy costs have soared and we are hooked on China's metals and solar panels and wind turbines. So, we have no articulable direct interest in the Ukraine being run by corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs rather than corrupt Russian oligarchs. We do have articulable interests in a secure US border and disengaging from China. The Euros still aren't spending what we do on the military on a GDP percentage.

Your first point is correct. Poland would win a war against Russia, by itself. We know that now, we didn't in early 2022.

.
The statement was...

NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today.

Extrapolating "NATO without the US could handle Russian conventional forces"
into
"Poland would win a war against Russia by itself" is hilarious!

If you mean Poland without NATO, you are playing with about a dozen cards short of a full deck.
Now do Russia vs Ukraine from 2022

2023 Russia could not take over 2023 Poland. Case closed
False

If Poland is such a bad ass wtf does Ukraine need 100 billion from us for.

Send in the Pols

Notice no NATO troops are fighting, dipshit
Oh nice, start with the name calling when you cant answer the question

Why dont they send in the Pols to take care of old Puty Poot?
Clearly they would mop the the floor with Putin's conventional forces.
Dont even need NATO ..right?

Why doesn't Russia send in the troops that can beat Ukraine?

Why doesn't Poland send in troops in a war they aren't part of?

See how dumb this is?
You haven't been listening for 183 pages that's how dumb this is.

YOU made the ridiculous claim Poland can take Russia all by it's lonesome.
I call BULLSHIT.
That was the point and now you're waffling around and moving goal poasts and deflecting as you always do.
By the stats and numbers and assets you are wrong unless Poland has NATO backing. Case closed.

Russia would not be able to invade Poland.
Again, you started this thread because you were worried if Russia wasn't stopped immediately they would continue to invade other counties. Now your opinion is they are so weak they couldn't put a dent in Poland. Why the change in opinion?
I thought Russia had a second wind in them.

Turns out they dont
So are we calling the August Spring offensive a success? Or still in LIP territory?
LIPO territory
We shouldn't be here. Peace should have been negotiated but all the political powers you claim to not support wanted nothing to do with peace because they couldnt continue to profit from the corruption.

Fuck off

Ukraine can defend themselves from Russia. Deal with it.

RoadTrip · August 2023

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

show previous quotes
RoadTrip said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Bob_C said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

RoadTrip said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:
If Putin is the biggest threat since Hitler and wants to go to the English Channel if not stopped in Ukraine why would world War 3 be ridiculous?

Have you seen what Germany looked like when Hitler lost? If he had nukes he would have used them

PGOS is willing to fuck around and find out because of his boyfriend Zelensky
He's not but that doesn't mean Russia isn't the enemy.

When you're Alabama playing Mississippi State you don't quit when you're up 34-17.

Or in this case, when you're playing for the North championship you root for Wazzu to knock Oregon off by even a field goal.

I agree that the admin is lying about the "why". I just overall see it as a net gain to neuter Russia and send a signal to Chy-na about Taiwan(to actually prevent ww3).
Quite honestly I don't disagree with a lot of this

My opposition has always been about the bad actors in America and the globalist cabal being behind this

And Zelensky is a piece of shit

The bullshit about this whole thing is well, bullshit

Let them kill each other.
Agree with most of this.

What's happening in Ukraine IS horrible but so long as the Ukrainians are willing to be the ones to fight and die for their country then that's their choice.

I, and I suspect many here who aren't pinkos, would do the same for our own country(not government).

I'll be rooting for Wazzu this week. Things may change next week. Ups and downs of realpolitik.
It there is a problem, it's a European problem. They don't act like it's a problem, so why are we carrying most of the freight?
What would you consider "acting like it's a problem" that is beyond the current response while also not dangerously escalating things towards WW3 as you so claim to be concerned about? Should France send Nukes? What exactly is the critique of the European response beyond "not enough" which you also seem to be against "dangerous escalation"? Which is it?

Please draw the middle road you are advocating for and do so in detail with specifics by country since Europe is hardly monolithic in its response.

As per raw numbers the US is the leader but as a percentage of gdp or military spending we aren't close to many other countries. I doubt you expect Luxembourg to out donate even say, Canada, despite the relative interests in security concerns.
The middle road I'm advocating is that we don't have a national interest in being the world's policeman and rescuing a corrupt Ukraine. Let the Euros figure it out. I don't see the UK, Germany or France on the top list below for some reason. Luxembourg clearly is pulling it's weight though.

==========
As a share of its GDP, Poland is the biggest defense spender in NATO, budgeting 3.9 percent in 2023. The U.S. is second, spending 3.49 percent, followed by Greece at 3.01 percent, Estonia at 2.73 percent, and Lithuania at 2.54 percent. Luxembourg, at 0.72 percent, is the smallest spender, followed by Belgium at 1.13 percent, Spain at 1.26 percent, Turkey at 1.31 percent, and Slovenia at 1.35 percent.
Now do percentage of that spending/gdp donated. Belgium/Netherlands basically both donated their entire air forces.

And then bought new stuff from the US.

Similar situations with the Baltic states.

You can argue that the US should be more isolationist, and I have sympathy for that position as @RaceBannon could probably attest to but, ultimately it's hard to maintain unless you want a multipolar world with Russia and the CCP getting to call the shots.

I think you have to be the big dick and throw the big dick energy around. Teddy and Trump style. Smartly, but none the less. #rocketman #solemanishredded

Ad in a long talk about prevention ism and US foreign policy in general.
Russia has nukes and oil. That's it. NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today. The problem is China and that's where our focus should be. The dems dirty expensive non-reliable US energy policy is a boon for both Russia and China as our energy costs have soared and we are hooked on China's metals and solar panels and wind turbines. So, we have no articulable direct interest in the Ukraine being run by corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs rather than corrupt Russian oligarchs. We do have articulable interests in a secure US border and disengaging from China. The Euros still aren't spending what we do on the military on a GDP percentage.

Your first point is correct. Poland would win a war against Russia, by itself. We know that now, we didn't in early 2022.

.
The statement was...

NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today.

Extrapolating "NATO without the US could handle Russian conventional forces"
into
"Poland would win a war against Russia by itself" is hilarious!

If you mean Poland without NATO, you are playing with about a dozen cards short of a full deck.
Now do Russia vs Ukraine from 2022

2023 Russia could not take over 2023 Poland. Case closed
False

If Poland is such a bad ass wtf does Ukraine need 100 billion from us for.

Send in the Pols

Notice no NATO troops are fighting, dipshit
Oh nice, start with the name calling when you cant answer the question

Why dont they send in the Pols to take care of old Puty Poot?
Clearly they would mop the the floor with Putin's conventional forces.
Dont even need NATO ..right?

Why doesn't Russia send in the troops that can beat Ukraine?

Why doesn't Poland send in troops in a war they aren't part of?

See how dumb this is?
You haven't been listening for 183 pages that's how dumb this is.

YOU made the ridiculous claim Poland can take Russia all by it's lonesome.
I call BULLSHIT.
That was the point and now you're waffling around and moving goal poasts and deflecting as you always do.
By the stats and numbers and assets you are wrong unless Poland has NATO backing. Case closed.

Russia would not be able to invade Poland.
Again, you started this thread because you were worried if Russia wasn't stopped immediately they would continue to invade other counties. Now your opinion is they are so weak they couldn't put a dent in Poland. Why the change in opinion?
I thought Russia had a second wind in them.

Turns out they dont
So are we calling the August Spring offensive a success? Or still in LIP territory?
LIPO territory
We shouldn't be here. Peace should have been negotiated but all the political powers you claim to not support wanted nothing to do with peace because they couldnt continue to profit from the corruption.
Fuck off

Ukraine can defend themselves from Russia. Deal with it.

No need to lose your shit. Everyone here agrees with that last sentence or least their opinion is the Ukraine should be financially responsible for defending themselves. If like you, other surrounding countries are worried about further advancement, they should fund and support the Ukraine. You seem to have changed your position over the last 183 pages. Now you're confident they don't need help and there's absolutely no way Russia would be able to advance beyond Ukraine if that were to happen.

PostGameOrangeSlices · August 2023

RoadTrip said:

show previous quotes
PostGameOrangeSlices said:

RoadTrip said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Bob_C said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

RoadTrip said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:
If Putin is the biggest threat since Hitler and wants to go to the English Channel if not stopped in Ukraine why would world War 3 be ridiculous?

Have you seen what Germany looked like when Hitler lost? If he had nukes he would have used them

PGOS is willing to fuck around and find out because of his boyfriend Zelensky
He's not but that doesn't mean Russia isn't the enemy.

When you're Alabama playing Mississippi State you don't quit when you're up 34-17.

Or in this case, when you're playing for the North championship you root for Wazzu to knock Oregon off by even a field goal.

I agree that the admin is lying about the "why". I just overall see it as a net gain to neuter Russia and send a signal to Chy-na about Taiwan(to actually prevent ww3).
Quite honestly I don't disagree with a lot of this

My opposition has always been about the bad actors in America and the globalist cabal being behind this

And Zelensky is a piece of shit

The bullshit about this whole thing is well, bullshit

Let them kill each other.
Agree with most of this.

What's happening in Ukraine IS horrible but so long as the Ukrainians are willing to be the ones to fight and die for their country then that's their choice.

I, and I suspect many here who aren't pinkos, would do the same for our own country(not government).

I'll be rooting for Wazzu this week. Things may change next week. Ups and downs of realpolitik.
It there is a problem, it's a European problem. They don't act like it's a problem, so why are we carrying most of the freight?
What would you consider "acting like it's a problem" that is beyond the current response while also not dangerously escalating things towards WW3 as you so claim to be concerned about? Should France send Nukes? What exactly is the critique of the European response beyond "not enough" which you also seem to be against "dangerous escalation"? Which is it?

Please draw the middle road you are advocating for and do so in detail with specifics by country since Europe is hardly monolithic in its response.

As per raw numbers the US is the leader but as a percentage of gdp or military spending we aren't close to many other countries. I doubt you expect Luxembourg to out donate even say, Canada, despite the relative interests in security concerns.
The middle road I'm advocating is that we don't have a national interest in being the world's policeman and rescuing a corrupt Ukraine. Let the Euros figure it out. I don't see the UK, Germany or France on the top list below for some reason. Luxembourg clearly is pulling it's weight though.

==========
As a share of its GDP, Poland is the biggest defense spender in NATO, budgeting 3.9 percent in 2023. The U.S. is second, spending 3.49 percent, followed by Greece at 3.01 percent, Estonia at 2.73 percent, and Lithuania at 2.54 percent. Luxembourg, at 0.72 percent, is the smallest spender, followed by Belgium at 1.13 percent, Spain at 1.26 percent, Turkey at 1.31 percent, and Slovenia at 1.35 percent.
Now do percentage of that spending/gdp donated. Belgium/Netherlands basically both donated their entire air forces.

And then bought new stuff from the US.

Similar situations with the Baltic states.

You can argue that the US should be more isolationist, and I have sympathy for that position as @RaceBannon could probably attest to but, ultimately it's hard to maintain unless you want a multipolar world with Russia and the CCP getting to call the shots.

I think you have to be the big dick and throw the big dick energy around. Teddy and Trump style. Smartly, but none the less. #rocketman #solemanishredded

Ad in a long talk about prevention ism and US foreign policy in general.
Russia has nukes and oil. That's it. NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today. The problem is China and that's where our focus should be. The dems dirty expensive non-reliable US energy policy is a boon for both Russia and China as our energy costs have soared and we are hooked on China's metals and solar panels and wind turbines. So, we have no articulable direct interest in the Ukraine being run by corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs rather than corrupt Russian oligarchs. We do have articulable interests in a secure US border and disengaging from China. The Euros still aren't spending what we do on the military on a GDP percentage.

Your first point is correct. Poland would win a war against Russia, by itself. We know that now, we didn't in early 2022.

.
The statement was...

NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today.

Extrapolating "NATO without the US could handle Russian conventional forces"
into
"Poland would win a war against Russia by itself" is hilarious!

If you mean Poland without NATO, you are playing with about a dozen cards short of a full deck.
Now do Russia vs Ukraine from 2022

2023 Russia could not take over 2023 Poland. Case closed
False

If Poland is such a bad ass wtf does Ukraine need 100 billion from us for.

Send in the Pols

Notice no NATO troops are fighting, dipshit
Oh nice, start with the name calling when you cant answer the question

Why dont they send in the Pols to take care of old Puty Poot?
Clearly they would mop the the floor with Putin's conventional forces.
Dont even need NATO ..right?

Why doesn't Russia send in the troops that can beat Ukraine?

Why doesn't Poland send in troops in a war they aren't part of?

See how dumb this is?
You haven't been listening for 183 pages that's how dumb this is.

YOU made the ridiculous claim Poland can take Russia all by it's lonesome.
I call BULLSHIT.
That was the point and now you're waffling around and moving goal poasts and deflecting as you always do.
By the stats and numbers and assets you are wrong unless Poland has NATO backing. Case closed.

Russia would not be able to invade Poland.
Again, you started this thread because you were worried if Russia wasn't stopped immediately they would continue to invade other counties. Now your opinion is they are so weak they couldn't put a dent in Poland. Why the change in opinion?
I thought Russia had a second wind in them.

Turns out they dont
So are we calling the August Spring offensive a success? Or still in LIP territory?
LIPO territory
We shouldn't be here. Peace should have been negotiated but all the political powers you claim to not support wanted nothing to do with peace because they couldnt continue to profit from the corruption.
Fuck off

Ukraine can defend themselves from Russia. Deal with it.
No need to lose your shit. Everyone here agrees with that last sentence or least their opinion is the Ukraine should be financially responsible for defending themselves. If like you, other surrounding countries are worried about further advancement, they should fund and support the Ukraine. You seem to have changed your position over the last 183 pages. Now you're confident they don't need help and there's absolutely no way Russia would be able to advance beyond Ukraine if that were to happen.

"fuck off" is not losing my shit amigo. There is literally a fuck off button for poasts on this website, lol

A big reason why Ukraine has been able to have success is due to the help they have received from the rest of the world.

UW_Doog_Bot · August 2023

RoadTrip said:

show previous quotes
PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Bob_C said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

RoadTrip said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:
If Putin is the biggest threat since Hitler and wants to go to the English Channel if not stopped in Ukraine why would world War 3 be ridiculous?

Have you seen what Germany looked like when Hitler lost? If he had nukes he would have used them

PGOS is willing to fuck around and find out because of his boyfriend Zelensky
He's not but that doesn't mean Russia isn't the enemy.

When you're Alabama playing Mississippi State you don't quit when you're up 34-17.

Or in this case, when you're playing for the North championship you root for Wazzu to knock Oregon off by even a field goal.

I agree that the admin is lying about the "why". I just overall see it as a net gain to neuter Russia and send a signal to Chy-na about Taiwan(to actually prevent ww3).
Quite honestly I don't disagree with a lot of this

My opposition has always been about the bad actors in America and the globalist cabal being behind this

And Zelensky is a piece of shit

The bullshit about this whole thing is well, bullshit

Let them kill each other.
Agree with most of this.

What's happening in Ukraine IS horrible but so long as the Ukrainians are willing to be the ones to fight and die for their country then that's their choice.

I, and I suspect many here who aren't pinkos, would do the same for our own country(not government).

I'll be rooting for Wazzu this week. Things may change next week. Ups and downs of realpolitik.
It there is a problem, it's a European problem. They don't act like it's a problem, so why are we carrying most of the freight?
What would you consider "acting like it's a problem" that is beyond the current response while also not dangerously escalating things towards WW3 as you so claim to be concerned about? Should France send Nukes? What exactly is the critique of the European response beyond "not enough" which you also seem to be against "dangerous escalation"? Which is it?

Please draw the middle road you are advocating for and do so in detail with specifics by country since Europe is hardly monolithic in its response.

As per raw numbers the US is the leader but as a percentage of gdp or military spending we aren't close to many other countries. I doubt you expect Luxembourg to out donate even say, Canada, despite the relative interests in security concerns.
The middle road I'm advocating is that we don't have a national interest in being the world's policeman and rescuing a corrupt Ukraine. Let the Euros figure it out. I don't see the UK, Germany or France on the top list below for some reason. Luxembourg clearly is pulling it's weight though.

==========
As a share of its GDP, Poland is the biggest defense spender in NATO, budgeting 3.9 percent in 2023. The U.S. is second, spending 3.49 percent, followed by Greece at 3.01 percent, Estonia at 2.73 percent, and Lithuania at 2.54 percent. Luxembourg, at 0.72 percent, is the smallest spender, followed by Belgium at 1.13 percent, Spain at 1.26 percent, Turkey at 1.31 percent, and Slovenia at 1.35 percent.
Now do percentage of that spending/gdp donated. Belgium/Netherlands basically both donated their entire air forces.

And then bought new stuff from the US.

Similar situations with the Baltic states.

You can argue that the US should be more isolationist, and I have sympathy for that position as @RaceBannon could probably attest to but, ultimately it's hard to maintain unless you want a multipolar world with Russia and the CCP getting to call the shots.

I think you have to be the big dick and throw the big dick energy around. Teddy and Trump style. Smartly, but none the less. #rocketman #solemanishredded

Ad in a long talk about prevention ism and US foreign policy in general.
Russia has nukes and oil. That's it. NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today. The problem is China and that's where our focus should be. The dems dirty expensive non-reliable US energy policy is a boon for both Russia and China as our energy costs have soared and we are hooked on China's metals and solar panels and wind turbines. So, we have no articulable direct interest in the Ukraine being run by corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs rather than corrupt Russian oligarchs. We do have articulable interests in a secure US border and disengaging from China. The Euros still aren't spending what we do on the military on a GDP percentage.

Your first point is correct. Poland would win a war against Russia, by itself. We know that now, we didn't in early 2022.

.
The statement was...

NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today.

Extrapolating "NATO without the US could handle Russian conventional forces"
into
"Poland would win a war against Russia by itself" is hilarious!

If you mean Poland without NATO, you are playing with about a dozen cards short of a full deck.
Now do Russia vs Ukraine from 2022

2023 Russia could not take over 2023 Poland. Case closed
False

If Poland is such a bad ass wtf does Ukraine need 100 billion from us for.

Send in the Pols

Notice no NATO troops are fighting, dipshit
Oh nice, start with the name calling when you cant answer the question

Why dont they send in the Pols to take care of old Puty Poot?
Clearly they would mop the the floor with Putin's conventional forces.
Dont even need NATO ..right?

Why doesn't Russia send in the troops that can beat Ukraine?

Why doesn't Poland send in troops in a war they aren't part of?

See how dumb this is?
You haven't been listening for 183 pages that's how dumb this is.

YOU made the ridiculous claim Poland can take Russia all by it's lonesome.
I call BULLSHIT.
That was the point and now you're waffling around and moving goal poasts and deflecting as you always do.
By the stats and numbers and assets you are wrong unless Poland has NATO backing. Case closed.

Russia would not be able to invade Poland.
Again, you started this thread because you were worried if Russia wasn't stopped immediately they would continue to invade other counties. Now your opinion is they are so weak they couldn't put a dent in Poland. Why the change in opinion?
I thought Russia had a second wind in them.

Turns out they dont
So are we calling the August Spring offensive a success? Or still in LIP territory?
LIPO territory
We shouldn't be here. Peace should have been negotiated but all the political powers you claim to not support wanted nothing to do with peace because they couldnt continue to profit from the corruption.

Russia used the last negotiated peace to arm up and prepare a new offensive.

RoadTrip · August 2023

And by the rest of the world you really mean primarily the US? Look, I want to believe what you're saying is true; that Russia is close to being defeated and they've been so damaged they present no threat to any surrounding countries. If that's the case, then the Ukraine doesn't need us right? Unfortunately, I believe it's the other way around, we? (the deep state) desperately needs the Ukraine and this proxy war with Russia to continue.

UW_Doog_Bot · August 2023

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

show previous quotes
Bob_C said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

RoadTrip said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:
If Putin is the biggest threat since Hitler and wants to go to the English Channel if not stopped in Ukraine why would world War 3 be ridiculous?

Have you seen what Germany looked like when Hitler lost? If he had nukes he would have used them

PGOS is willing to fuck around and find out because of his boyfriend Zelensky
He's not but that doesn't mean Russia isn't the enemy.

When you're Alabama playing Mississippi State you don't quit when you're up 34-17.

Or in this case, when you're playing for the North championship you root for Wazzu to knock Oregon off by even a field goal.

I agree that the admin is lying about the "why". I just overall see it as a net gain to neuter Russia and send a signal to Chy-na about Taiwan(to actually prevent ww3).
Quite honestly I don't disagree with a lot of this

My opposition has always been about the bad actors in America and the globalist cabal being behind this

And Zelensky is a piece of shit

The bullshit about this whole thing is well, bullshit

Let them kill each other.
Agree with most of this.

What's happening in Ukraine IS horrible but so long as the Ukrainians are willing to be the ones to fight and die for their country then that's their choice.

I, and I suspect many here who aren't pinkos, would do the same for our own country(not government).

I'll be rooting for Wazzu this week. Things may change next week. Ups and downs of realpolitik.
It there is a problem, it's a European problem. They don't act like it's a problem, so why are we carrying most of the freight?
What would you consider "acting like it's a problem" that is beyond the current response while also not dangerously escalating things towards WW3 as you so claim to be concerned about? Should France send Nukes? What exactly is the critique of the European response beyond "not enough" which you also seem to be against "dangerous escalation"? Which is it?

Please draw the middle road you are advocating for and do so in detail with specifics by country since Europe is hardly monolithic in its response.

As per raw numbers the US is the leader but as a percentage of gdp or military spending we aren't close to many other countries. I doubt you expect Luxembourg to out donate even say, Canada, despite the relative interests in security concerns.
The middle road I'm advocating is that we don't have a national interest in being the world's policeman and rescuing a corrupt Ukraine. Let the Euros figure it out. I don't see the UK, Germany or France on the top list below for some reason. Luxembourg clearly is pulling it's weight though.

==========
As a share of its GDP, Poland is the biggest defense spender in NATO, budgeting 3.9 percent in 2023. The U.S. is second, spending 3.49 percent, followed by Greece at 3.01 percent, Estonia at 2.73 percent, and Lithuania at 2.54 percent. Luxembourg, at 0.72 percent, is the smallest spender, followed by Belgium at 1.13 percent, Spain at 1.26 percent, Turkey at 1.31 percent, and Slovenia at 1.35 percent.
Now do percentage of that spending/gdp donated. Belgium/Netherlands basically both donated their entire air forces.

And then bought new stuff from the US.

Similar situations with the Baltic states.

You can argue that the US should be more isolationist, and I have sympathy for that position as @RaceBannon could probably attest to but, ultimately it's hard to maintain unless you want a multipolar world with Russia and the CCP getting to call the shots.

I think you have to be the big dick and throw the big dick energy around. Teddy and Trump style. Smartly, but none the less. #rocketman #solemanishredded

Ad in a long talk about prevention ism and US foreign policy in general.
Russia has nukes and oil. That's it. NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today. The problem is China and that's where our focus should be. The dems dirty expensive non-reliable US energy policy is a boon for both Russia and China as our energy costs have soared and we are hooked on China's metals and solar panels and wind turbines. So, we have no articulable direct interest in the Ukraine being run by corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs rather than corrupt Russian oligarchs. We do have articulable interests in a secure US border and disengaging from China. The Euros still aren't spending what we do on the military on a GDP percentage.

Your first point is correct. Poland would win a war against Russia, by itself. We know that now, we didn't in early 2022.

.
The statement was...

NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today.

Extrapolating "NATO without the US could handle Russian conventional forces"
into
"Poland would win a war against Russia by itself" is hilarious!

If you mean Poland without NATO, you are playing with about a dozen cards short of a full deck.
Now do Russia vs Ukraine from 2022

2023 Russia could not take over 2023 Poland. Case closed
False

If Poland is such a bad ass wtf does Ukraine need 100 billion from us for.

Send in the Pols

Notice no NATO troops are fighting, dipshit
Oh nice, start with the name calling when you cant answer the question

Why dont they send in the Pols to take care of old Puty Poot?
Clearly they would mop the the floor with Putin's conventional forces.
Dont even need NATO ..right?

Why doesn't Russia send in the troops that can beat Ukraine?

Why doesn't Poland send in troops in a war they aren't part of?

See how dumb this is?
You haven't been listening for 183 pages that's how dumb this is.

YOU made the ridiculous claim Poland can take Russia all by it's lonesome.
I call BULLSHIT.
That was the point and now you're waffling around and moving goal poasts and deflecting as you always do.
By the stats and numbers and assets you are wrong unless Poland has NATO backing. Case closed.

Russia would not be able to invade Poland.
Again, you started this thread because you were worried if Russia wasn't stopped immediately they would continue to invade other counties. Now your opinion is they are so weak they couldn't put a dent in Poland. Why the change in opinion?
I thought Russia had a second wind in them.

Turns out they dont
So are we calling the August Spring offensive a success? Or still in LIP territory?
LIPO territory

Big tim lipo. The Kherson offensive was criticized for the same lack of movement. Until Russian logistics and reserves collapsed then half an oblast was liberated in less than a week. Not saying that will happen don't twist.

If the Ukrainians take either bakhmut or tokmak I'd say it's a success. Bakhmut bc politically that would cause the Russians major embarrassment and they just snuffed the guy that took it. Tokmak bc it would sever Russian logistics between the eastern and western fronts and leave Crimea in a precarious position.

That's the bar for a 9-3 season imo. We can talk bowl season after the rain sets in.

WestlinnDuck · August 2023

UW_Doog_Bot said:

show previous quotes
PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Bob_C said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

RoadTrip said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:
If Putin is the biggest threat since Hitler and wants to go to the English Channel if not stopped in Ukraine why would world War 3 be ridiculous?

Have you seen what Germany looked like when Hitler lost? If he had nukes he would have used them

PGOS is willing to fuck around and find out because of his boyfriend Zelensky
He's not but that doesn't mean Russia isn't the enemy.

When you're Alabama playing Mississippi State you don't quit when you're up 34-17.

Or in this case, when you're playing for the North championship you root for Wazzu to knock Oregon off by even a field goal.

I agree that the admin is lying about the "why". I just overall see it as a net gain to neuter Russia and send a signal to Chy-na about Taiwan(to actually prevent ww3).
Quite honestly I don't disagree with a lot of this

My opposition has always been about the bad actors in America and the globalist cabal being behind this

And Zelensky is a piece of shit

The bullshit about this whole thing is well, bullshit

Let them kill each other.
Agree with most of this.

What's happening in Ukraine IS horrible but so long as the Ukrainians are willing to be the ones to fight and die for their country then that's their choice.

I, and I suspect many here who aren't pinkos, would do the same for our own country(not government).

I'll be rooting for Wazzu this week. Things may change next week. Ups and downs of realpolitik.
It there is a problem, it's a European problem. They don't act like it's a problem, so why are we carrying most of the freight?
What would you consider "acting like it's a problem" that is beyond the current response while also not dangerously escalating things towards WW3 as you so claim to be concerned about? Should France send Nukes? What exactly is the critique of the European response beyond "not enough" which you also seem to be against "dangerous escalation"? Which is it?

Please draw the middle road you are advocating for and do so in detail with specifics by country since Europe is hardly monolithic in its response.

As per raw numbers the US is the leader but as a percentage of gdp or military spending we aren't close to many other countries. I doubt you expect Luxembourg to out donate even say, Canada, despite the relative interests in security concerns.
The middle road I'm advocating is that we don't have a national interest in being the world's policeman and rescuing a corrupt Ukraine. Let the Euros figure it out. I don't see the UK, Germany or France on the top list below for some reason. Luxembourg clearly is pulling it's weight though.

==========
As a share of its GDP, Poland is the biggest defense spender in NATO, budgeting 3.9 percent in 2023. The U.S. is second, spending 3.49 percent, followed by Greece at 3.01 percent, Estonia at 2.73 percent, and Lithuania at 2.54 percent. Luxembourg, at 0.72 percent, is the smallest spender, followed by Belgium at 1.13 percent, Spain at 1.26 percent, Turkey at 1.31 percent, and Slovenia at 1.35 percent.
Now do percentage of that spending/gdp donated. Belgium/Netherlands basically both donated their entire air forces.

And then bought new stuff from the US.

Similar situations with the Baltic states.

You can argue that the US should be more isolationist, and I have sympathy for that position as @RaceBannon could probably attest to but, ultimately it's hard to maintain unless you want a multipolar world with Russia and the CCP getting to call the shots.

I think you have to be the big dick and throw the big dick energy around. Teddy and Trump style. Smartly, but none the less. #rocketman #solemanishredded

Ad in a long talk about prevention ism and US foreign policy in general.
Russia has nukes and oil. That's it. NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today. The problem is China and that's where our focus should be. The dems dirty expensive non-reliable US energy policy is a boon for both Russia and China as our energy costs have soared and we are hooked on China's metals and solar panels and wind turbines. So, we have no articulable direct interest in the Ukraine being run by corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs rather than corrupt Russian oligarchs. We do have articulable interests in a secure US border and disengaging from China. The Euros still aren't spending what we do on the military on a GDP percentage.

Your first point is correct. Poland would win a war against Russia, by itself. We know that now, we didn't in early 2022.

.
The statement was...

NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today.

Extrapolating "NATO without the US could handle Russian conventional forces"
into
"Poland would win a war against Russia by itself" is hilarious!

If you mean Poland without NATO, you are playing with about a dozen cards short of a full deck.
Now do Russia vs Ukraine from 2022

2023 Russia could not take over 2023 Poland. Case closed
False

If Poland is such a bad ass wtf does Ukraine need 100 billion from us for.

Send in the Pols

Notice no NATO troops are fighting, dipshit
Oh nice, start with the name calling when you cant answer the question

Why dont they send in the Pols to take care of old Puty Poot?
Clearly they would mop the the floor with Putin's conventional forces.
Dont even need NATO ..right?

Why doesn't Russia send in the troops that can beat Ukraine?

Why doesn't Poland send in troops in a war they aren't part of?

See how dumb this is?
You haven't been listening for 183 pages that's how dumb this is.

YOU made the ridiculous claim Poland can take Russia all by it's lonesome.
I call BULLSHIT.
That was the point and now you're waffling around and moving goal poasts and deflecting as you always do.
By the stats and numbers and assets you are wrong unless Poland has NATO backing. Case closed.

Russia would not be able to invade Poland.
Again, you started this thread because you were worried if Russia wasn't stopped immediately they would continue to invade other counties. Now your opinion is they are so weak they couldn't put a dent in Poland. Why the change in opinion?
I thought Russia had a second wind in them.

Turns out they dont
So are we calling the August Spring offensive a success? Or still in LIP territory?
LIPO territory
Big tim lipo. The Kherson offensive was criticized for the same lack of movement. Until Russian logistics and reserves collapsed then half an oblast was liberated in less than a week. Not saying that will happen don't twist.

If the Ukrainians take either bakhmut or tokmak I'd say it's a success. Bakhmut bc politically that would cause the Russians major embarrassment and they just snuffed the guy that took it. Tokmak bc it would sever Russian logistics between the eastern and western fronts and leave Crimea in a precarious position.

That's the bar for a 9-3 season imo. We can talk bowl season after the rain sets in.

I put out this scenario early in this thread and it was pretty much ignored. Ukraine begins to have a successful offensive and the Crimea is threatened. Putin announces he will set off a tactical nuke on the Ukrainian forces. If NATO responds with a tactical nuclear response Putin says he will take out Dallas. Putin now in a box does set off a nuke and then the dementia patient does what?

PostGameOrangeSlices · August 2023

WestlinnDuck said:

show previous quotes
UW_Doog_Bot said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Bob_C said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

RoadTrip said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:
If Putin is the biggest threat since Hitler and wants to go to the English Channel if not stopped in Ukraine why would world War 3 be ridiculous?

Have you seen what Germany looked like when Hitler lost? If he had nukes he would have used them

PGOS is willing to fuck around and find out because of his boyfriend Zelensky
He's not but that doesn't mean Russia isn't the enemy.

When you're Alabama playing Mississippi State you don't quit when you're up 34-17.

Or in this case, when you're playing for the North championship you root for Wazzu to knock Oregon off by even a field goal.

I agree that the admin is lying about the "why". I just overall see it as a net gain to neuter Russia and send a signal to Chy-na about Taiwan(to actually prevent ww3).
Quite honestly I don't disagree with a lot of this

My opposition has always been about the bad actors in America and the globalist cabal being behind this

And Zelensky is a piece of shit

The bullshit about this whole thing is well, bullshit

Let them kill each other.
Agree with most of this.

What's happening in Ukraine IS horrible but so long as the Ukrainians are willing to be the ones to fight and die for their country then that's their choice.

I, and I suspect many here who aren't pinkos, would do the same for our own country(not government).

I'll be rooting for Wazzu this week. Things may change next week. Ups and downs of realpolitik.
It there is a problem, it's a European problem. They don't act like it's a problem, so why are we carrying most of the freight?
What would you consider "acting like it's a problem" that is beyond the current response while also not dangerously escalating things towards WW3 as you so claim to be concerned about? Should France send Nukes? What exactly is the critique of the European response beyond "not enough" which you also seem to be against "dangerous escalation"? Which is it?

Please draw the middle road you are advocating for and do so in detail with specifics by country since Europe is hardly monolithic in its response.

As per raw numbers the US is the leader but as a percentage of gdp or military spending we aren't close to many other countries. I doubt you expect Luxembourg to out donate even say, Canada, despite the relative interests in security concerns.
The middle road I'm advocating is that we don't have a national interest in being the world's policeman and rescuing a corrupt Ukraine. Let the Euros figure it out. I don't see the UK, Germany or France on the top list below for some reason. Luxembourg clearly is pulling it's weight though.

==========
As a share of its GDP, Poland is the biggest defense spender in NATO, budgeting 3.9 percent in 2023. The U.S. is second, spending 3.49 percent, followed by Greece at 3.01 percent, Estonia at 2.73 percent, and Lithuania at 2.54 percent. Luxembourg, at 0.72 percent, is the smallest spender, followed by Belgium at 1.13 percent, Spain at 1.26 percent, Turkey at 1.31 percent, and Slovenia at 1.35 percent.
Now do percentage of that spending/gdp donated. Belgium/Netherlands basically both donated their entire air forces.

And then bought new stuff from the US.

Similar situations with the Baltic states.

You can argue that the US should be more isolationist, and I have sympathy for that position as @RaceBannon could probably attest to but, ultimately it's hard to maintain unless you want a multipolar world with Russia and the CCP getting to call the shots.

I think you have to be the big dick and throw the big dick energy around. Teddy and Trump style. Smartly, but none the less. #rocketman #solemanishredded

Ad in a long talk about prevention ism and US foreign policy in general.
Russia has nukes and oil. That's it. NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today. The problem is China and that's where our focus should be. The dems dirty expensive non-reliable US energy policy is a boon for both Russia and China as our energy costs have soared and we are hooked on China's metals and solar panels and wind turbines. So, we have no articulable direct interest in the Ukraine being run by corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs rather than corrupt Russian oligarchs. We do have articulable interests in a secure US border and disengaging from China. The Euros still aren't spending what we do on the military on a GDP percentage.

Your first point is correct. Poland would win a war against Russia, by itself. We know that now, we didn't in early 2022.

.
The statement was...

NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today.

Extrapolating "NATO without the US could handle Russian conventional forces"
into
"Poland would win a war against Russia by itself" is hilarious!

If you mean Poland without NATO, you are playing with about a dozen cards short of a full deck.
Now do Russia vs Ukraine from 2022

2023 Russia could not take over 2023 Poland. Case closed
False

If Poland is such a bad ass wtf does Ukraine need 100 billion from us for.

Send in the Pols

Notice no NATO troops are fighting, dipshit
Oh nice, start with the name calling when you cant answer the question

Why dont they send in the Pols to take care of old Puty Poot?
Clearly they would mop the the floor with Putin's conventional forces.
Dont even need NATO ..right?

Why doesn't Russia send in the troops that can beat Ukraine?

Why doesn't Poland send in troops in a war they aren't part of?

See how dumb this is?
You haven't been listening for 183 pages that's how dumb this is.

YOU made the ridiculous claim Poland can take Russia all by it's lonesome.
I call BULLSHIT.
That was the point and now you're waffling around and moving goal poasts and deflecting as you always do.
By the stats and numbers and assets you are wrong unless Poland has NATO backing. Case closed.

Russia would not be able to invade Poland.
Again, you started this thread because you were worried if Russia wasn't stopped immediately they would continue to invade other counties. Now your opinion is they are so weak they couldn't put a dent in Poland. Why the change in opinion?
I thought Russia had a second wind in them.

Turns out they dont
So are we calling the August Spring offensive a success? Or still in LIP territory?
LIPO territory
Big tim lipo. The Kherson offensive was criticized for the same lack of movement. Until Russian logistics and reserves collapsed then half an oblast was liberated in less than a week. Not saying that will happen don't twist.

If the Ukrainians take either bakhmut or tokmak I'd say it's a success. Bakhmut bc politically that would cause the Russians major embarrassment and they just snuffed the guy that took it. Tokmak bc it would sever Russian logistics between the eastern and western fronts and leave Crimea in a precarious position.

That's the bar for a 9-3 season imo. We can talk bowl season after the rain sets in.
I put out this scenario early in this thread and it was pretty much ignored. Ukraine begins to have a successful offensive and the Crimea is threatened. Putin announces he will set off a tactical nuke on the Ukrainian forces. If NATO responds with a tactical nuclear response Putin says he will take out Dallas. Putin now in a box does set off a nuke and then the dementia patient does what?

Putin isn't using nukes. He isn't suicidal.

pawz · August 2023

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

show previous quotes
WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Bob_C said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

RoadTrip said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Blueduck said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WestlinnDuck said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:
If Putin is the biggest threat since Hitler and wants to go to the English Channel if not stopped in Ukraine why would world War 3 be ridiculous?

Have you seen what Germany looked like when Hitler lost? If he had nukes he would have used them

PGOS is willing to fuck around and find out because of his boyfriend Zelensky
He's not but that doesn't mean Russia isn't the enemy.

When you're Alabama playing Mississippi State you don't quit when you're up 34-17.

Or in this case, when you're playing for the North championship you root for Wazzu to knock Oregon off by even a field goal.

I agree that the admin is lying about the "why". I just overall see it as a net gain to neuter Russia and send a signal to Chy-na about Taiwan(to actually prevent ww3).
Quite honestly I don't disagree with a lot of this

My opposition has always been about the bad actors in America and the globalist cabal being behind this

And Zelensky is a piece of shit

The bullshit about this whole thing is well, bullshit

Let them kill each other.
Agree with most of this.

What's happening in Ukraine IS horrible but so long as the Ukrainians are willing to be the ones to fight and die for their country then that's their choice.

I, and I suspect many here who aren't pinkos, would do the same for our own country(not government).

I'll be rooting for Wazzu this week. Things may change next week. Ups and downs of realpolitik.
It there is a problem, it's a European problem. They don't act like it's a problem, so why are we carrying most of the freight?
What would you consider "acting like it's a problem" that is beyond the current response while also not dangerously escalating things towards WW3 as you so claim to be concerned about? Should France send Nukes? What exactly is the critique of the European response beyond "not enough" which you also seem to be against "dangerous escalation"? Which is it?

Please draw the middle road you are advocating for and do so in detail with specifics by country since Europe is hardly monolithic in its response.

As per raw numbers the US is the leader but as a percentage of gdp or military spending we aren't close to many other countries. I doubt you expect Luxembourg to out donate even say, Canada, despite the relative interests in security concerns.
The middle road I'm advocating is that we don't have a national interest in being the world's policeman and rescuing a corrupt Ukraine. Let the Euros figure it out. I don't see the UK, Germany or France on the top list below for some reason. Luxembourg clearly is pulling it's weight though.

==========
As a share of its GDP, Poland is the biggest defense spender in NATO, budgeting 3.9 percent in 2023. The U.S. is second, spending 3.49 percent, followed by Greece at 3.01 percent, Estonia at 2.73 percent, and Lithuania at 2.54 percent. Luxembourg, at 0.72 percent, is the smallest spender, followed by Belgium at 1.13 percent, Spain at 1.26 percent, Turkey at 1.31 percent, and Slovenia at 1.35 percent.
Now do percentage of that spending/gdp donated. Belgium/Netherlands basically both donated their entire air forces.

And then bought new stuff from the US.

Similar situations with the Baltic states.

You can argue that the US should be more isolationist, and I have sympathy for that position as @RaceBannon could probably attest to but, ultimately it's hard to maintain unless you want a multipolar world with Russia and the CCP getting to call the shots.

I think you have to be the big dick and throw the big dick energy around. Teddy and Trump style. Smartly, but none the less. #rocketman #solemanishredded

Ad in a long talk about prevention ism and US foreign policy in general.
Russia has nukes and oil. That's it. NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today. The problem is China and that's where our focus should be. The dems dirty expensive non-reliable US energy policy is a boon for both Russia and China as our energy costs have soared and we are hooked on China's metals and solar panels and wind turbines. So, we have no articulable direct interest in the Ukraine being run by corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs rather than corrupt Russian oligarchs. We do have articulable interests in a secure US border and disengaging from China. The Euros still aren't spending what we do on the military on a GDP percentage.

Your first point is correct. Poland would win a war against Russia, by itself. We know that now, we didn't in early 2022.

.
The statement was...

NATO without the US can handle Russian conventional forces. Russia couldn't take Poland today.

Extrapolating "NATO without the US could handle Russian conventional forces"
into
"Poland would win a war against Russia by itself" is hilarious!

If you mean Poland without NATO, you are playing with about a dozen cards short of a full deck.
Now do Russia vs Ukraine from 2022

2023 Russia could not take over 2023 Poland. Case closed
False

If Poland is such a bad ass wtf does Ukraine need 100 billion from us for.

Send in the Pols

Notice no NATO troops are fighting, dipshit
Oh nice, start with the name calling when you cant answer the question

Why dont they send in the Pols to take care of old Puty Poot?
Clearly they would mop the the floor with Putin's conventional forces.
Dont even need NATO ..right?

Why doesn't Russia send in the troops that can beat Ukraine?

Why doesn't Poland send in troops in a war they aren't part of?

See how dumb this is?
You haven't been listening for 183 pages that's how dumb this is.

YOU made the ridiculous claim Poland can take Russia all by it's lonesome.
I call BULLSHIT.
That was the point and now you're waffling around and moving goal poasts and deflecting as you always do.
By the stats and numbers and assets you are wrong unless Poland has NATO backing. Case closed.

Russia would not be able to invade Poland.
Again, you started this thread because you were worried if Russia wasn't stopped immediately they would continue to invade other counties. Now your opinion is they are so weak they couldn't put a dent in Poland. Why the change in opinion?
I thought Russia had a second wind in them.

Turns out they dont
So are we calling the August Spring offensive a success? Or still in LIP territory?
LIPO territory
Big tim lipo. The Kherson offensive was criticized for the same lack of movement. Until Russian logistics and reserves collapsed then half an oblast was liberated in less than a week. Not saying that will happen don't twist.

If the Ukrainians take either bakhmut or tokmak I'd say it's a success. Bakhmut bc politically that would cause the Russians major embarrassment and they just snuffed the guy that took it. Tokmak bc it would sever Russian logistics between the eastern and western fronts and leave Crimea in a precarious position.

That's the bar for a 9-3 season imo. We can talk bowl season after the rain sets in.
I put out this scenario early in this thread and it was pretty much ignored. Ukraine begins to have a successful offensive and the Crimea is threatened. Putin announces he will set off a tactical nuke on the Ukrainian forces. If NATO responds with a tactical nuclear response Putin says he will take out Dallas. Putin now in a box does set off a nuke and then the dementia patient does what?
Putin isn't using nukes. He isn't suicidal.

This logic flies in the face of everything you were saying about his character the first 95% of this thread.

Bob_C · August 2023

No wonder they are running out of ammo (notice what is missing from the video).

http://twitter.com/iYoddl/status/1695221071404761100?s=20

Blueduck · August 2023

Bob_C said:
No wonder they are running out of ammo (notice what is missing from the video).

http://twitter.com/iYoddl/status/1695221071404761100?s=20

People shooting back?

Sledog · August 2023

What trench? Guys trimming the underbrush.

Can we offer this Ukranian solider a scholarship?

Comments

Welcome!

Welcome!

Quick Links