LOL at this notion of Russia struggling. Never mind Ukraine, it’s grinding down (at its own pace) the US and NATO.
Russia is again whining and threatening to kick over the game board if they are defeated in Ukraine. Strange language to use when you’re “winning” … Putin ally Medvedev warns NATO of nuclear war if Russia is defeated in Ukraine
Fake news. We saw above that Russia has been crushing not just the Ukrainian fighters, but all of NATO (even though, of course, NATO is not engaged in the battlefield)!!!
I know, right? Which is why it’s so weird that they would engage in more “Give us what we want or we end civilization!!!” histrionics. Maybe the Foreign Ministry hasn’t been read in on exactly how much the military is crushing the Ukraine-NATO Coalition.
Also having to raid a previously undisclosed cache of artillery shells Israel. How many more Ukrainian troops does the US want to die by extending a war it can’t possibly win ?
When do we get an apology from Russia for providing jet fighters AND military pilots to North Korea during the Korean War? Your Putin seems to have a selective memory.
Are you serious? There is no proof of that--when did the U.S. try to put a base in Ukraine, for example? How many weapons did the U.S. give Ukraine before the invasion? I would say that the U.S. is and has been very eager to stop the next Hitler in his tracks, should one emerge and start invading other countries. That doesn't mean Putin has to invade other countries to defend Russia against this stance--not invading other countries would be a far more logical way to prevent the U.S. from trying to defeat Russia militarily. Declaring that Ukraine was full of Nazis was Putin's way to distance himself from the world leader he was actually emulating. Hitler was on his way to building a new global empire on the backs of his neighbors; and now Putin is doing the same. Frankly, I'm a little shocked that you are defending the new Hitler here. You are starting to sound like Comrade.
So a nation having corruption is a good reason to let them be enslaved? I wonder who taught them to be corrupt? Seems like there was a country that controlled Ukraine for decades after WWII, and was known for corruption (in fact, even their top generals put self-enrichment above national security), what was the name of that country? Help me out here.
Children can lay waste to an undefended house or yard, but that doesn't make them a powerful and cohesive military force. (I'm fairly certain that my kids are the exception.)
The petroleum and munitions situation are completely correctable by this Administration. The Congressman is within the right to ask why the Administration is not taking action to ramp up petroleum, munitions, and food production, actions that it should have started taking 10 months ago. The South Korea bullet is barely worth mentioning. Of course, we are asking our other allies to contribute to Ukrainian material assistance, even if it’s just for political purposes. The more, the better. If the implication there is that South Korea would be accepting unnecessary risk by losing the munitions, then I would say the Congressman needs to get a little better informed on the current power disparity between North and South. The short version is the North is no longer in any realistic position to invade, and the South has plenty of excess munitions that can be gainfully employed against Russia.
One point of clarification: Until 1991, Russia had dominated Ukraine for centuries, going back to the 1600s, not merely for the decades following WW2.
True, but I tend to believe that communist Russia (the USSR) was responsible for much of the corruption in the satellite nations of the USSR. Corruption seems to be a by-product of communism.
Germany refuses to send tanks to Ukraine until the US sends tanks. And I have no doubt that the US doesn’t want to send it’s own tanks because if those unruly Russian children destroyed them it might damage the reputation of America’s military supremacy.
The U.S. may have to send some M1A1 Abrams tanks to Ukraine to get Germany to loosen up and send their Leopards (and authorize Poland to send theirs). Ukraine may not have the logistical ability to support the use of Abrams on the front (certainly not for extended periods), but if that's what it takes to get Germany on board, then it's probably necessary. The British have made the first token offer of 14 Challenger tanks (they are withholding 213 Challengers for some reason). Poland wants to donate 100 Leopards, but needs Germany to consent to it. I would at least bring some Ukrainian tanker personnel to Poland or Germany for training on the Abrams and Leopard tanks. That alone would probably terrify Russian troops in the combat zone. Allies bolster Ukraine with more weapons pledges; but no sign of U.S., German tank agreement (yahoo.com)
Well, the US has had years to negotiate. None of this was inevitable. Now 160,000 Ukrainian troops are dead or presumed dead.
Sometimes you have to read between the lines ... That NATO continues to pile weapons into Ukraine is proof they don’t really believe Putin’s an unhinged madman with his finger on the button. And Denmark giving away all its artillery - it basically doesn’t have an army now - is proof that Europe isn’t really afraid of Russia trying to take over Europe.
