Search results

...So your argument for legitimacy is 'might makes right'?

You know, I have some issues with the rest of your post, but right here, you're wrong. Russia having control of Ukraine absolutely impacts US security, because it has a major impact on food markets in Europe, some impact on oil markets, and gives much better warm-water port access to Russia...

'Tippy says' is not proof. A link to the person saying so would be the start of proof. And if it's just 'we supported,' that isn't proof. Because 'we supported' is entirely possible in the 'freedom fighters overthrowing a Russian puppet' perspective as well. It'd actually have to be something...

That the 2014 coup was illegitimate, rather than the citizens of Ukraine overthrowing a Russian puppet ruler?

To be blunt, I think you have no idea what you're talking about, and are credulously falling for Russian propaganda. Since the Cold War ended, the US has decommissioned like 90% of its nuclear arsenal. We've retired most of our B-52 fleet, and we cut back on production numbers for missile...

On top of Marduk's point about a unit not needing endurance for first strike, nuclear submarines have months of endurance, and can launch with basically just a couple minute's notice. Further, you're contradicting yourself by trying to both argue that Putin's fear of NATO using Ukraine for a...

That this change of regime happened is not the question, that this was a puppeteered coup by western powers that removed a legitimate government and replaced it with an illegitimate one, that is what you have been operating on the assumption on, that many of the rest of us find dubious. Can you...

It's ~350 miles from Latvia (a NATO member) to Moscow. Ukraine to Moscow is ~270. The difference there in travel time for missiles is seconds. Do some bloody research before you repeat nonsensical claims like this. I have yet to see you present a single shred of evidence that this is true...

If the US parks its military on the border of Iran after having already taken parts of two provinces of Iran, then you can draw an equivalency. Also, Ukraine isn't a world leader in sponsoring terrorism in other states, so your example also falls apart there. That said, if they picked a nation...

If you're willing to roll the troops up to the conflict line, park them there, and say 'I double dog dare you,' you don't need to fight the war 9 times out of 10, when it comes to gray zone actors like this. To take the specific example of Ukraine, I wouldn't advocate starting a war with Russia...

You're making the same mistake that Chamberlain did, and assuming that by not presenting strength and willingness to fight, you make war less likely, not more. Putin is no Hitler, but he's certainly a terrible man, and if he (or a likeminded successor) think they can keep pushing the envelope...

EU membership is a negative, not a plus, especially in the long run.

That's a lot of assertions without any sourcing. Also, I'm skeptical that any government in Ukraine that is pro-Russian was fully, if at all, 'legitimate.' It's certainly possible, but it's also something that should be looked very carefully into.

Might want to think how confident you are of your understanding of politics around military deployments then.

Sell the Ukrainians all the guns they want. Load them up to make Russia bleed white if it invades Ukraine. Offer space for Ukrainian refugees if there is a war. Or just give them back the nukes they gave up in exchange for a guarantee from the West *and* Russia. But yes. We have no need to go...