Trump is not offering peace in Ukraine

[Immanuel Can]

Looks like Germany, France, the UK and other countries may already consider to spend a trillion euros on weapons and infrastructure. It's possible that now that after many decades the US no longer wants to play the watchdog of the planet, the European superpower will have to emerge to counter the Russian threat. This may actually be the worst possible outcome for Putin.

When has Europe ever amounted to a military "superpower"? Not since WW2, and not a good one.

It will be interesting to see if they can even organize themselves enough to stop fighting and decide what to do. I doubt they can, without resorting to totalitarianism. Their members are too fractious, and their languages, cultures and interests too diverse. Geographically, they're also wide open to invasion or nuclear destruction from the East. They'd need one heck of an arms program to bring themselves up to the levels they'd need to take on a nuclear superpower, and I doubt Putin would sit on his hands and watch that take shape.

[henry quirk]

Looks like Germany, France, the UK and other countries may already consider to spend a trillion euros on weapons and infrastructure. It's possible that now that after many decades the US no longer wants to play the watchdog of the planet, the European superpower will have to emerge to counter the Russian threat. This may actually be the worst possible outcome for Putin.

When has Europe ever amounted to a military "superpower"? Not since WW2, and not a good one.

It will be interesting to see if they can even organize themselves enough to stop fighting and decide what to do. I doubt they can, without resorting to totalitarianism. Their members are too fractious, and their languages, cultures and interests too diverse. Geographically, they're also wide open to invasion or nuclear destruction from the East. They'd need one heck of an arms program to bring themselves up to the levels they'd need to take on a nuclear superpower, and I doubt Putin would sit on his hands and watch that take shape.

The EU/NATO is countin' on US support. They don't and won't have it. RED MAN DEFIANT won't sign off on American blood and gold bein' wasted in or on Ukraine, and -- more importantly -- Americans won't send their kids or their cash to defend Ukraine.

Enough is enough.

[phyllo]

Freedom is not free. It has a cost.

Thank you to people of America for all the support for Ukraine in the past.

[Immanuel Can]

Freedom is not free. It has a cost.

Ukraine had its independence. The Democrats took it away, by provoking a war that didn't have to happen. The people of Ukraine are paying now for the loss of a freedom they should never have been deprived of.

[henry quirk]

The EU/NATO is countin' on US support. They don't and won't have it. RED MAN DEFIANT won't sign off on American blood and gold bein' wasted in or on Ukraine, and -- more importantly -- Americans won't send their kids or their cash to defend Ukraine.

Enough is enough.

As an aside: Americans aren't gonna bleed or pay to defend Taiwan either.

Again: enough is enough.

[FlashDangerpants]

Today we learned that the thing about Good v Evil is that good started it, so really it owes evil an apology.

[Atla]

LOL
LOL
LOL

I have NEVER even imagined that I was the one who started talking about 'not winning', let alone SAYING and WRITING I was NOT, NOR LET ALONE even having HINTED or ALLUDED to that ABSOLUTELY ANYWHERE, here.

Look "atla" it does NOT MATTER, ONE IOTA, that I was the one who started talking about 'not winning', here.

It appears that you have FORGOTTEN, or are just 'TRYING TO' DEFLECT AWAY, that it was ACTUALLY you CLAIMED that,
'not winning does not necessarily mean losing either'.

To which I just REPLIED by just ASKING the Truly OPEN CLARIFYING QUESTION,
'What does 'not winning' ACTUALLY MEAN, EXACTLY?' TO you.

Now, what HAS OBVIOUSLY OCCURRED, here, is 'you' INFORMED 'us' of what 'not winning' does NOT necessarily mean, TO you. So, 'now' IS your CHANCE TO INFORM 'us' of what 'not winning' ACTUALLY MEANS, TO you, EXACTLY?

But, as ALWAYS, you just DO NOT CLARIFY "yourself".

For REASONS, which are BLATANTLY OBVIOUS, by the way. Well maybe NOT TO you, that is.


ONCE MORE FOR the Truly STUPID and HARD OF HEARING, and OF COMPREHENDING and UNDERSTANDING, I have NEVER ONCE shouted in this forum. When I highlight words in capital letters, then what I am, literally, doing is just highlighting those words, ONLY.



LOL
LOL
LOL

Even, here, it uses the 'that' word. But, as it has PROVEN, there is NO USE ASKING it TO CLARIFY.

Also, and by the way, what 'we' have, here, is ANOTHER PRIME example of 'this ones' CONTINUED USE of Truly NONSENSICAL and ILLOGICAL sentences.

SUPPOSEDLY, even if you posters, here, talk TO 'me' about 'the weather' I WOULD reply, with capital letters, BUT I, ALSO, WOULD, SUPPOSEDLY, be INCAPABLE of ACTUALLY REPLYING.

So, AGAIN, "atla" PRESENTS, FOR 'us', MORE OF its, OBVIOUSLY ABSOLUTELY SELF-CONTRADICTORY BELIEFS.

Blatant liar Age pretends that it wasn't the one who brought up the issue of the US OBVIOUSLY not winning in Ukraine, and we are still waiting for Age to explain how it knows this. Age ran away from answering the question like 10 times already, it should be easy to explain it if it's obvious.

But, 'who' is 'the loser', here, exactly?

Obviously the "united states of america" is not and can not win, so it is 'losing' and 'the loser', here. Thus, why "donald trump" wants to just 'give up' and 'hand over' "ukraine" to "russia".

The "united states of america" can not beat "russia", here.

1. I have NEVER, EVER, PRETENDED that I was NOT the one who brought up the Fact that the "united states of america" is 'not winning' 'this war'.

2. you, and whoever else you reckon, WILL BE WAITING TILL "atla" CLARIFIES what 'this' IS, EXACTLY.

3. I have NEVER EVER RUN AWAY FROM ANY thing, here.

4. It IS FAR SIMPLER and FAR EASIER TO EXPLAIN some 'thing', when one INFORMS what the 'thing' IS, EXACTLY.

5. OBVIOUSLY I MADE, AT LEAST, THREE CLAIMS. So, IF "atla" EVER CLARIFIES what 'it' WANTS 'me' TO INFORM 'it' of HOW I KNOW, then "atla" WILL JUST CLARIFY.

But, "atla" does NOT WANT things TO CHANGE, here. "atla" OBVIOUSLY HAS AN AGENDA, which it is 'TRYING' its HARDEST TO ACCOMPLISH, and ACHIEVE, here. So, this IS WHY it does NOT CLARIFY things, here. its OWN GOAL, here, has DISABLED its ABILITY TO ANSWER, and CLARIFY, OPENLY and Honestly, here.

Once again a wall of shouting without answering the question.

[Atla]

Looks like Germany, France, the UK and other countries may already consider to spend a trillion euros on weapons and infrastructure. It's possible that now that after many decades the US no longer wants to play the watchdog of the planet, the European superpower will have to emerge to counter the Russian threat. This may actually be the worst possible outcome for Putin.

When has Europe ever amounted to a military "superpower"? Not since WW2, and not a good one.

It will be interesting to see if they can even organize themselves enough to stop fighting and decide what to do. I doubt they can, without resorting to totalitarianism. Their members are too fractious, and their languages, cultures and interests too diverse. Geographically, they're also wide open to invasion or nuclear destruction from the East. They'd need one heck of an arms program to bring themselves up to the levels they'd need to take on a nuclear superpower, and I doubt Putin would sit on his hands and watch that take shape.

By the way the EU+UK GDP is ten times that of Russia.

[phyllo]

Americans aren't gonna

Next up, HQ will give a lecture on natural rights (to defend his person, his liberty, and his property) which God has given to everyone.

[Atla]

Americans are free to isolate themselves from the rest of the world because soon no one will want to talk to them, and subject themselves to the whims of a total madman president. Freedom!

[Immanuel Can]

Looks like Germany, France, the UK and other countries may already consider to spend a trillion euros on weapons and infrastructure. It's possible that now that after many decades the US no longer wants to play the watchdog of the planet, the European superpower will have to emerge to counter the Russian threat. This may actually be the worst possible outcome for Putin.

When has Europe ever amounted to a military "superpower"? Not since WW2, and not a good one.

It will be interesting to see if they can even organize themselves enough to stop fighting and decide what to do. I doubt they can, without resorting to totalitarianism. Their members are too fractious, and their languages, cultures and interests too diverse. Geographically, they're also wide open to invasion or nuclear destruction from the East. They'd need one heck of an arms program to bring themselves up to the levels they'd need to take on a nuclear superpower, and I doubt Putin would sit on his hands and watch that take shape.

By the way the EU+UK GDP is ten times that of Russia.

That won't count for much if they don't have the military, the equipment and the technology for which they now depend on the Americans. The EU is trying to argue that the 2% of the GDP of member countries that America is now asking them to invest, and which they have never so far invested anyway, is too much. So we'll see what good that does them.

[Immanuel Can]

Americans are free to isolate themselves from the rest of the world because soon no one will want to talk to them, and subject themselves to the whims of a total madman president. Freedom!

So...you're arguing that America is better to be expansionist, and to interfere in the politics of other countries? I thought you Lefties were against colonialism...

[phyllo]

Americans are free to isolate themselves from the rest of the world because soon no one will want to talk to them, and subject themselves to the whims of a total madman president. Freedom!

Yes, attack their allies and trading partners and get in bed with murderous tyrants. The winning formula for making America great.

[Atla]

When has Europe ever amounted to a military "superpower"? Not since WW2, and not a good one.

It will be interesting to see if they can even organize themselves enough to stop fighting and decide what to do. I doubt they can, without resorting to totalitarianism. Their members are too fractious, and their languages, cultures and interests too diverse. Geographically, they're also wide open to invasion or nuclear destruction from the East. They'd need one heck of an arms program to bring themselves up to the levels they'd need to take on a nuclear superpower, and I doubt Putin would sit on his hands and watch that take shape.

By the way the EU+UK GDP is ten times that of Russia.

That won't count for much if they don't have the military, the equipment and the technology for which they now depend on the Americans. The EU is trying to argue that the 2% of the GDP of member countries that America is now asking them to invest, and which they have never so far invested anyway, is too much. So we'll see what good that does them.

That's because the Europeans lived in peace for the last 80 years, and since the US wanted to be the watchdog of the planet, the Europeans were good with this arrangement. You act like you don't know this. Europe also obviously has better tech than Russia. If we don't count the nukes then imo Europe could already beat Russia in a war and could produce an army several times stronger in the future.

[Atla]

Americans are free to isolate themselves from the rest of the world because soon no one will want to talk to them, and subject themselves to the whims of a total madman president. Freedom!

So...you're arguing that America is better to be expansionist, and to interfere in the politics of other countries? I thought you Lefties were against colonialism...

So you seem to think that either a country is expansionist/interferes abroad, or isolates itself and succumbs to a total madman. Interesting false dichotomy.