Search results

The stuff about the black fleet being sunk is mostly optics. Russia is not America, and does not project power through it's fleets, but instead its geography, size, and formerly mercenaries. Its fleet is mostly irrelevant outside of its nuclear submarines, which aren't based in the Black Fleet...

The reason there was no response is because the response time for something like this is too slow. You want political approval for stuff like instigating conflict like this, because responding is more of a political action than a military one. And because of the variety of things that could...

Russians won't be behind false flag to look like Jihadis on themselves, as it doesn't advance their interests. It encourages Jihadis and distracts from the war effort with Ukraine. If the Russians were behind an attack on their own people, it would be a drone strike against a school or something...

As for the amount of Russians dead, the Ukrainian Government only claims it's 150k out of 350k total losses. A lot, but not back breaking for Russia by any means. The US estimate puts the dead at 120k, and the UK at 70k...

Yeah. The war isn't about how far Ukraine will go. It's about how far the US and Russia will go. And quite simply, Russia cares more than the US ever could. The US should negotiate a peace, if we cared at all about Ukraine. But Realpolitik, we don't. All the US wants to do is kill as many...

The only reason Zelensky doesn't consider NATO membership as available is because he can't get it. No, if you cared about impossibilities, you'd not claim Japan should invade the Kurils, or that Ukraine can take back the Donbass. You just wanted to mischaracterize my point as badly as was...

"More accurate view" You don't understand what the UN is or how it works: > Russia can be kicked off of the security council. You don't understand that Japan isn't capable of invading the Kurils, and that doing so would be a bad idea. You still think that Ukraine can win outright, which is...

> Actually thinking the UN has power > Believing that the UN would or even could kick out Russia when they didn't kick out the USSR Again, you show complete ignorance about how the world works. The actual correct take.

I think they want it, but sorta in the same way that China wants Siberia, or the US wants Panama. Occasionally you'll have a politician say they want it back, but there's no real broad desire for it, nor willingness to grab it. Russia just exposed to the world that they haven't had a military...

@AmosTrask, Civility Rule 2e says don't accuse others of being extremists (including being a nazi/communist) without hard evidence. This goes for all threads, not just this one. Simply because we have a number of reports right now, I'm going to let this slide with just a mod warning here. But...

I mean, it'd still exist, just kinda not matter much. They'd all know that soon they'd be kinda fucked. But they'd also realize that they can start war with each other without the US nearby. And we'd start to have new European wars eventually, I think, not just with Russia. It'd take a while...

This also isn't the Taiwan thread. Please stay on the topic of Ukraine.

It's an important concern though. And it's the only way the war ends. Ukraine isn't going to lose or win. The stalemate's been going for months with no progress. There's no reason to continue the war. ... It would be once Ukraine would be in NATO. Though I will thank you for admitting that you...

It's achievable, in that Putin gets something to save face. Would Putin definitely go for it? With a long enough stalemate, yes. Because that's all that will happen at this rate, more stalemate. And while a Ukraine victory is a US victory, it's not the only complete US victory. The US just...

Yeah, that looks like a bad argument to me too. Hence why I didn't make that argument. I'm not even arguing here for not supplying Ukraine. I'm arguing for a peace deal offer that's nearly a complete US victory (not Ukrainian victory, a US victory, tbc). Try again. Your entire argument...

This has nothing to do with how good or bad you are at English. You agreed that Russia didn't want to advance further here: Yet you compared it to Chamberlains appeasement, which famously failed because it didn't stop Hitler. Hitler kept invading places afterwards. In contrast, you call this...

I am aware. That's nowhere near the level of suborning whole companies and industries to the extent China does. Yes, leftists are gonna be stupid leftists. But it's the level of influence I'm looking at, and China is far more of an influence than Russia. Russia is now barely an influence...

You didn't read what I wrote: it's a threat because it influences and suborns companies, and does so in a way that lessens freedom and attacks American culture. It actually does stuff that affects Americans. Russia, quite simply, doesn't, and really hasn't since the 90s. There's also the Taiwan...

Oh, so you admitted I'm right then and this isn't at all like with the Czechoslovakia? Because the problem with appeasement wasn't that appeasement was a moral failing, it was that it didn't work but instead enabled him to grab further power, and Hitler wasn't appeased. But you admit here that...

Russia, as Ukraine shows, has at best a very limited ability to project military power. It's a threat as far as nuclear, so no, I don't advocate war with them, but that's about it. It doesn't have a huge economy, it doesn't have influence on American companies, etc. China may or may not be a...