World War Three

[Eddi]

We are on the road...

Putin: lifting Ukraine missile restrictions would put Nato ‘at war’ with Russia

If humanity starts a new world war then I will hate humanity

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

We are on the road...

Putin: lifting Ukraine missile restrictions would put Nato ‘at war’ with Russia

Putin's "red lines" keep moving further and further back.

He's been saying such things about every new weapon system that was provided to Ukraine.
I can't even count the amount of times he made similar threats about supplying F16's.
Ukraine has F16's now. And once again his "red line" moved further back.

It's all bark and no bite.

 

[Wandering Monk]

Putin's "red lines" keep moving further and further back.

He's been saying such things about every new weapon system that was provided to Ukraine.
I can't even count the amount of times he made similar threats about supplying F16's.
Ukraine has F16's now. And once again his "red line" moved further back.

It's all bark and no bite.

If any of this is true, Russia is in serious economic trouble:

 

[an anarchist]

If humanity starts a new world war then I will hate humanity

View attachment 97058

I have moved past hate and gone to pity

 

[TransmutingSoul]

If humanity starts a new world war then I will hate humanity

View attachment 97058

Well, it has started and there will be no turning back. We were warned 150 years ago.

Regards Tony

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Putin is getting stomped in Ukraine and we're supposed to think he's gonna start WWIII?

 

[Ponder This]

I don't think Putin can ever win, meaning Ukraine cannot reasonably be conquered and ruled. It's a fool's errand. But that doesn't mean he can't cause immense harm along the way. And it doesn't mean that the U.S. is doing all it should do under this really quite terrible Biden administration. That Ukraine only managed to get F16s this year... and the U.S. imposed on them to not attack inside Russia for the past two years... effectively forcing almost the entire war to be fought in and on Ukraine land only. It's unbelievable, and yet, that's what happened under the Biden administration.

 

[danieldemol]

I don't think Putin can ever win, meaning Ukraine cannot reasonably be conquered and ruled. It's a fool's errand. But that doesn't mean he can't cause immense harm along the way. And it doesn't mean that the U.S. is doing all it should do under this really quite terrible Biden administration. That Ukraine only managed to get F16s this year... and the U.S. imposed on them to not attack inside Russia for the past two years... effectively forcing almost the entire war to be fought in and on Ukraine land only. It's unbelievable, and yet, that's what happened under the Biden administration.

What a gainsaying of history in my view.

It was wisdom to tread cautiously when fighting a nuclear armed power, and the republicans blocked aid to Ukraine which was a much bigger setback than allowing them to fight on home turf in my view.

 

[danieldemol]

Well, it has started and there will be no turning back. We were warned 150 years ago.

Regards Tony

Yeah, vague and ambiguous warnings such as "an unforeseen calamity" as if God Almighty is so blind as to not be able to foresee in detail and instead gave a warning that any pretender to divinity could make in my view.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Yeah, vague and ambiguous warnings such as "an unforeseen calamity" as if God Almighty is so blind as to not be able to foresee in detail and instead gave a warning that any pretender to divinity could make in my view.

There are a lot of clear guidelines, that enable our free will chance to change the direction the world is now heading towards.

Regards Tony

 

[RestlessSoul]

If humanity starts a new world war then I will hate humanity

View attachment 97058

Americans are counting on none of this directly affecting them. The US exports war, it doesn’t expect to import it.

 

[Ponder This]

What a gainsaying of history in my view.

It was wisdom to tread cautiously when fighting a nuclear armed power, and the republicans blocked aid to Ukraine which was a much bigger setback than allowing them to fight on home turf in my view.

"allowing them to fight on home turf"
wow, did the U.S. really have the power to decide that Ukraine was not going to fight at all, not even on their home turf? In your view, is Ukraine a full on sock puppet of the Biden administration?

But you don't deny that the F16s were delayed until this year and that U.S. aid was conditioned on not being able to attack inside Russia, do you? Nor do you deny that the war for the first two years was fought almost exclusively in Ukraine, do you? So none of that was gainsaid, was it?

So it's just that you think hamstringing Ukraine's defense was wise because if the U.S. hadn't told Ukraine not to fight back against Russia, then Putin would've launched nukes.

 

[danieldemol]

"allowing them to fight on home turf"
wow, did the U.S. really have the power to decide that Ukraine was not going to fight at all, not even on their home turf? In your view, is Ukraine a full on sock puppet of the Biden administration?

No

But you don't deny that the F16s were delayed until this year and that U.S. aid was conditioned on not being able to attack inside Russia, do you? Nor do you deny that the war for the first two years was fought almost exclusively in Ukraine, do you? So none of that was gainsaid, was it?

It was a gainsaying because it represented a misleading partial truth in my view, the truth is that it was a choice between Democrats or republicans who blocked aid to Ukraine.

So it's just that you think hamstringing Ukraine's defense was wise because if the U.S. hadn't told Ukraine not to fight back against Russia, then Putin would've launched nukes.

No, I think it was wise because at the time we didn't know if Putin was unhinged enough to launch nukes. With hindsight it seems less likely, but when we didn't know it was wise to act with caution, and also no one told Ukraine not to fight back against Russia, they were simply told not to do it on Russian soil in my view.

 

[Ponder This]

No

We can agree on something.

It was a gainsaying because it represented a misleading partial truth in my view, the truth is that it was a choice between Democrats or republicans who blocked aid to Ukraine.

For the record none of the F-16s currently deployed in Ukraine were provided by the U.S. Denmark and the Netherlands provided F16s. Moreover, I'm not aware of any vote in the House or the Senate about F-16s for Ukraine. And it was Biden's decision to train Ukrainians on how to use F-16 aircraft - this had nothing to do with House or Senate votes. Similarly, there is no House or Senate vote that I'm aware of that addresses the question of Ukraine being allowed or disallowed to strike targets inside Russia. That appears also to be a Biden decision. So if you have some additional information about this, please share it before you make claims of misleading truth.

No, I think it was wise because at the time we didn't know if Putin was unhinged enough to launch nukes. With hindsight it seems less likely, but when we didn't know it was wise to act with caution, and also no one told Ukraine not to fight back against Russia, they were simply told not to do it on Russian soil in my view.

it was wise - we didn't know if it was wise; he would've launched nukes - we aren't sure if he would've launched nukes; they weren't told to not fight back - they were told not to fight on Russian soil... Your response didn't make much sense, imv. But let's at least agree on some facts: Putin did threaten the use of nuclear weapons.
Ukrainian defenses were limited as a condition for U.S. aid.
Whether or not it was wise is a matter of opinion - not fact.
The blocking of aid to Ukraine in the House did not affect either the provision of F-16s or the decision to condition Ukraine aid on preventing Ukraine from attacking targets in Russia.