Trump Presidency Round 2

TorontoGold

TorontoGold

Mr. Dumb Moron
Messages
7,368
Reaction score
5,716
Blazers46 said:
The conversation was if they want the war to be done. Full stop. You are correct they don’t want to give up land, that’s a completely different argument we weren’t talking about. Why would they want to or why would anyone want them too? Doesn’t make anyone wrong because you are arguing a point nobody was talking about. Congrats on being 100% correct in your argument with yourself and I will agree with myself that people don’t want this war to continue.
Click to expand...
LOL there’s numerous comments on these threads from people who want Ukraine to hand over land and be done with it. Do you disagree with them?
 
T

TracyGraham

Well-known member
Messages
511
Reaction score
556
ulukinatme said:
Ukraine isn't getting their remaining land back, not without NATO/US boots on the ground. While it's mostly been a stalemate the last few years, Ukraine has given up some ground again recently. Their best bet at this point is peace and to probably cut their losses, because no one wants to risk their own country's lives to fight for Ukraine. Russia gets a small piece to appease them, Ukraine gets peace, and the rest of us can quit throwing resources at an unwinnable war.
Click to expand...
Ok, then why do they need us? I'm sure Russia would gladly accept them not killing Russians whether we hold their hand or not, right?
Is the implication that Russia really wants to take all of Ukraine? Does that mean the european powers are correct to fear Russian expansion?
But that doesn't even make sense because I thought the US wont guarantee security.
Pretty sure even Putin was saying he is on some super secret bullshit mission to save the Russians in Donbas from the nazi Ukranians.
So, I have to ask again, why does Ukraine need America to help them surrender? How is Trump helping?
I mean the obvious conclusion in my midget sized mind is he is not helping anyone but Russia get what they want faster.

If you haven't already realized, if anyone is throwing around the word nazi in 2025 to justify their position(left or right), they are likely a pos.
 
Last edited:
ulukinatme

ulukinatme

Carr for QB 2026!
Messages
31,521
Reaction score
17,402
TracyGraham said:
Ok, then why do they need us? I'm sure Russia would gladly accept them not killing Russians whether we hold their hand or not, right?
Is the implication that Russia really wants to take all of Ukraine? Does that mean the european powers are correct to fear Russian expansion?
But that doesn't even make sense because I thought the US wont guarantee security.
Click to expand...
We're fine supplying them with arms, just not lives. Eventually Ukraine won't have the manpower to hold the line. At that point US arms won't matter. Russia could then potentially take the rest of Ukraine. Settling for peace now is the best course of action because, again, not even Europe is interested in sacrificing their own soldiers for Ukraine. Zelensky appears to be under the delusion they can win back their lost lands, but it's not looking likely given the latest movements.
 
calvegas04

calvegas04

Well-known member
Messages
11,886
Reaction score
8,474
ulukinatme said:
Ukraine isn't getting their remaining land back, not without NATO/US boots on the ground. While it's mostly been a stalemate the last few years, Ukraine has given up some ground again recently. Their best bet at this point is peace and to probably cut their losses, because no one wants to risk their own country's lives to fight for Ukraine. Russia gets a small piece to appease them, Ukraine gets peace, and the rest of us can quit throwing resources at an unwinnable war.
Click to expand...
It's easy, sounds like Ukraine just wants security guarantees at this point since russia/putin cannot be trusted. But trump just wants Ukraine to roll over dead and give putin whatever he wants and sign over all their mineral rights.
 
T

TracyGraham

Well-known member
Messages
511
Reaction score
556
ulukinatme said:
We're fine supplying them with arms, just not lives. Eventually Ukraine won't have the manpower to hold the line. At that point US arms won't matter. Russia could then potentially take the rest of Ukraine. Settling for peace now is the best course of action because, again, not even Europe is interested in sacrificing their own soldiers for Ukraine. Zelensky appears to be under the delusion they can win back their lost lands, but it's not looking likely given the latest movements.
Click to expand...
oh ok, I was under the impression Trump planned to cut off the weapons. I stand corrected.
 
ulukinatme

ulukinatme

Carr for QB 2026!
Messages
31,521
Reaction score
17,402
TracyGraham said:
oh ok, I was under the impression Trump planned to cut off the weapons. I stand corrected.
Click to expand...

Yeah, if we continue to supply them arms forever eventually Ukraine loses the war and then those arms become Russia's. Makes more sense to pressure Ukraine to come to the table and take their losses because neither we nor Europe is interested in sacrificing our own people for Ukraine. Zelensky has a deluded dream he can reclaim that lost territory and it isn't happening with just Ukraine manpower.
 
A

ab2cmiller

Troublemaker in training
Messages
11,454
Reaction score
8,533
Irish#1 said:
Considering isn’t the same as doing it. He may very well end up cutting supplies, but he hasn’t yet.
Click to expand...
Feels like a threat to try to motivate Zelensky to cut a deal. Zelensky probably knows that as well so likely will have little impact.

I doubt Trump would cut anything immediately as there would be a lot of outcry. But if he keeps sounding the warning, the cut will come eventually.
 
Polish Leppy 22

Polish Leppy 22

Well-known member
Messages
6,594
Reaction score
2,009
BilboBaggins said:
That's not what is happening, don't strawman this situation. Russia started the largest invasion in Europe since WW2 to prevent a country from westernizing... the invasion failed they are now desperate for a way out.

It's just not that complicated.

Russia doesn't have the ability to invade four other countries. They barely have the ability to stay in Ukraine. Instead of finding odd excuses to cut and run, the US should make the obvious decision and continue to bleed them in Ukraine.

But if they did invade other countries, I would probably support the US sending military aid (via payments to US companies to increase our defense production capabilities) so that Russia is bled out faster.

Remember when Conservatives praised Reagan for retooling the US military and making the USSR match the spending, therefore helping to hasten their demise? Those were the days. Now we have "conservatives" finding every lame excuse they can to throw 80 years of American policy in the garbage for inexplicable reasons.
Click to expand...
Remember when the left was anti war? Where is code pink these days?
 
NDVirginia19

NDVirginia19

Rally
Messages
4,444
Reaction score
5,153
I’ve never understood the Churchill comparisons as a means to continue devoting aid to Ukraine u conditionally, because that story concludes with the US homeland being attacked and the US getting war declared on her by the Germans and Japanese. Is that what you guys want?
 
NDShark

NDShark

Well-known member
Messages
1,343
Reaction score
563
Why would Hegseth cut off cyber offensive planning and action against Russia? Those MFers have been on the offensive against the US for years!
 
NDVirginia19

NDVirginia19

Rally
Messages
4,444
Reaction score
5,153
NDShark said:
Why would Hegseth cut off cyber offensive planning and action against Russia? Those MFers have been on the offensive against the US for years!
Click to expand...
I’m not sure any concrete sourcing has come out about this. We’ve already had multiple instances of inaccurate information being pushed from “unnamed sources” inside the pentagon from both the last Trump admin and this one. I think it’s best to not overreact to stuff like this.
 
Irish#1

Irish#1

Livin' Your Dream!
Staff member
Messages
44,608
Reaction score
20,086
NDShark said:
Why would Hegseth cut off cyber offensive planning and action against Russia? Those MFers have been on the offensive against the US for years!
Click to expand...
It's temporary, but the real priority is and always should be hardening our own security. If I were to guess, he may be wanting to move some of those resources to the defensive/protection side. Put more effort to identify and weed out everything crawling through our systems and to add additional layers of protection. Dealing with this on a regular basis, I can tell you it's a never ending battle to keep the MF'ers at bay.
 
Irish#1

Irish#1

Livin' Your Dream!
Staff member
Messages
44,608
Reaction score
20,086
calvegas04 said:
KGB is inside our government calling shots
Click to expand...
I know you're joking, but that wouldn't be considered cyber security. Someone can correct me of I'm wrong, but that would be the FBI checking out old fashion spy stuff. I wouldn't be surprised if there is a KGB agent or two working inside our government or someone working for them like Robert Hanssen.
 
Polish Leppy 22

Polish Leppy 22

Well-known member
Messages
6,594
Reaction score
2,009
BilboBaggins said:
You'd have to ask them. I grew up a Republican. Shove the whataboutism.
Click to expand...
Ah the whataboutism, your favorite go to. Most of us refer to it as applying the same standard regardless of political party/ affiliation.

And you can take the Russia- strawman accusation and toss that out the window. Germany invaded multiple countries in WWII with fewer people and way less sophisticated technological weapons than Russia has now. Do I predict Russia to invade other nations? No. Would they be capable? 100% yes.
 
drayer54

drayer54

Well-known member
Messages
8,408
Reaction score
5,828
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top