angrysaveruk
Member of DD Central
Back and to the left..
Posts: 1,215
Likes: 721
|
Post by angrysaveruk on May 13, 2024 9:41:05 GMT
I believe if Ukraine agree not to allow themselves to be used by anti-russian western forces to threaten Russia militarily, clamp down on Anti-Russian Banderite extremists and make land concessions to Russia they can end this conflict and start to rebuild their country. You mean if Ukraine agrees to be Vlad's special fwiend, agreeing to hand over the keys to whichever bits of itself he wants for his own... Yeh. As for "banderite"... "In propaganda the term has been used by Soviets after 1942 as a pejorative term for Ukrainians, especially western Ukrainians, or Ukrainian speakers; under Vladimir Putin-ruled Russia the term was used by state media as a pejorative for Euromaidan activists and Ukrainians who support sovereignty from Russia."Thank you for confirming exactly where you're coming from on this. Most Ukrainians are not people who want to glorify the extremely dark past of their country in WW2 and Stepan Bandera - from what I understand this is a minority of Russian hating nutters. Understandably the Russians and Putin find the views and actions of these people highly offensive and threatening. "The anti-Russian far-right in Ukraine strongly associate themselves with the legacy of Stepan Bandera and the Ukrainian Insurgent Army." - Although I guess you will say Channel 4 is pushing Russian propaganda: www.channel4.com/news/svoboda-ministers-ukraine-new-government-far-right
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,609
Likes: 5,022
|
Post by adrianc on May 13, 2024 10:07:03 GMT
We all know that Putin's attempting to label all western-leaning Ukrainians with the "neonazi" banner of a very small minority.
(There is, of course, a rather huge irony in somebody who supports Trump so wholeheartedly suggesting that neonazis might be a bad thing, given a sizable swathe of his domestic support, especially the 6th Jan shenanigans)
|
|
angrysaveruk
Member of DD Central
Back and to the left..
Posts: 1,215
Likes: 721
|
Post by angrysaveruk on May 13, 2024 10:47:16 GMT
We all know that Putin's attempting to label all western-leaning Ukrainians with the "neonazi" banner of a very small minority. (There is, of course, a rather huge irony in somebody who supports Trump so wholeheartedly suggesting that neonazis might be a bad thing, given a sizable swathe of his domestic support, especially the 6th Jan shenanigans) I am not a massive fan of Donald Trump, but I respect his personal courage* and believe he is more in tune with reality than some of the people currently running the US. * - especially given what happened to the last President of the United States who decided he would make decisions he thought were in the interest of the US contrary to what some powerful forces within the country wanted.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,609
Likes: 5,022
|
Post by adrianc on May 13, 2024 10:51:37 GMT
The only reality Trump is interested in is what's in his own personal best interest - and (assuming you mean JFK) if he thought he could get away with assassinating rivals, he'd be RIGHT THERE.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,524
Likes: 6,316
|
Post by registerme on May 13, 2024 10:53:11 GMT
I am not a massive fan of Donald Trump, but I respect his personal courage* and believe he is more in tune with reality than some of the people currently running the US. That would be Donald "Bonespurs" Trump would it?
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on May 13, 2024 11:04:06 GMT
I am not a massive fan of Donald Trump, but I respect his personal courage* and believe he is more in tune with reality than some of the people currently running the US. That would be Donald "Bonespurs" Trump would it? or the Donald Trump who cancelled a visit to the US war cemetery near Paris because it was raining, and he was worried it would mess up his hair. Bravery of the highest order. And anyway he thought there was no point going as it was "filled with losers".
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,609
Likes: 5,022
|
Post by adrianc on May 13, 2024 11:21:20 GMT
That would be Donald "Bonespurs" Trump would it? or the Donald Trump who cancelled a visit to the US war cemetery near Paris because it was raining, and he was worried it would mess up his hair. Bravery of the highest order. And anyway he thought there was no point going as it was "filled with losers". The real reasons for his refusal to participate in the centenary visit are still unknown, with the claims heavily disputed by Trump's aides (unsurprisingly), but the wider story - and umpteen similar ones - certainly does him no favours, and suggests that there may well be a lot of truth. The official reason was that the weather wasn't good enough for his helicopter, yet various other national leaders managed to get there quite happily by car... www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/04/22/murky-facts-about-trumps-failure-visit-american-war-dead-near-paris/
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on May 13, 2024 12:23:20 GMT
or the Donald Trump who cancelled a visit to the US war cemetery near Paris because it was raining, and he was worried it would mess up his hair. Bravery of the highest order. And anyway he thought there was no point going as it was "filled with losers". The real reasons for his refusal to participate in the centenary visit are still unknown, with the claims heavily disputed by Trump's aides (unsurprisingly), but the wider story - and umpteen similar ones - certainly does him no favours, and suggests that there may well be a lot of truth. The official reason was that the weather wasn't good enough for his helicopter, yet various other national leaders managed to get there quite happily by car... www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/04/22/murky-facts-about-trumps-failure-visit-american-war-dead-near-paris/As I understand it, that was what the Orange Dumpster gave as the reason, plus his "security detail weren't able to drive him there". Both aspects of which I understand were denied/debunked by other sources. And as you say, others miraculously managed to get there. Perhaps the French weren't going to enable him to get a Big Mac and Fries and a large coke while he was there and so he threw his toys out the pram (or ketchup bottle at the wall). EDIT: Thanks for the link. Interesting read.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,429
Likes: 2,895
|
Post by michaelc on May 13, 2024 12:29:04 GMT
Sunak warns 'world closer to nuclear escalation than at any point since Cuban missile crisis'
And to think I was accused of scare mongering a few pages ago.
Actually there's quite an irony as it seems to me Sunak's administration is actually more gung ho than even the USs. Look at us regularly being first to p i s s the bears off such as the latest announcement that the us is British weapons to attack virgin Russia is fine and also the statements regarding supplying arms to Israel as evidence.
So we draw a massive target on our back and then start to prepare the population for possible nuclear war in case they don't re-elect Sunak again....
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on May 13, 2024 12:55:43 GMT
Sunak warns 'world closer to nuclear escalation than at any point since Cuban missile crisis'
And to think I was accused of scare mongering a few pages ago.Actually there's quite an irony as it seems to me Sunak's administration is actually more gung ho than even the USs. Look at us regularly being first to p i s s the bears off such as the latest announcement that the us is British weapons to attack virgin Russia is fine and also the statements regarding supplying arms to Israel as evidence. So we draw a massive target on our back and then start to prepare the population for possible nuclear war in case they don't re-elect Sunak again.... I don't know who accused you of scare mongering, but you seem to regularly state that those who are in favour of support for Ukraine are being oblivious or playing down the risk of a major confrontation with Russia. Nothing could be further from the truth. Those who were quickest right at the outset in '22 in stating/acknowledging how dangerous the world had got are by and large the exact same people who have been advocates of supporting Ukr. What they aren't generally doing is jumping up and down at every new action/step/development and declaring how awful it is because its increasing the risk of a greater war. The difficulty that you and a couple of others have on here is that you are not able in your mind to square the circle and understand that these are entirely compatible, and logically reasonable, positions. You assume that advocating for military support for Ukr - with all the inherent risks that go with it - requires one to ignore/be impervious to the risks of much greater - including nuclear - conflagration. It is not. It is very much the contrary. On the flip side, I'm conscious you have advocated on here on multiple occasions for a settlement with Russia that would include a large (your words IIRC) western - indeed you have I believe specifically cited NATO - force to be stationed on Ukr territory in a buffer zone. As a peacekeeping/enforcement force. There are only a few things I can think which would increase the longer term risk of nuclear confrontation with Russia more that that. Which is just one of the reasons why it ain't going to happen (not in the way you have expressed at any length).
|
|
k6
Posts: 250
Likes: 149
|
Post by k6 on May 13, 2024 13:51:47 GMT
Sunak warns 'world closer to nuclear escalation than at any point since Cuban missile crisis'And to think I was accused of scare mongering a few pages ago. Actually there's quite an irony as it seems to me Sunak's administration is actually more gung ho than even the USs. Look at us regularly being first to p i s s the bears off such as the latest announcement that the us is British weapons to attack virgin Russia is fine and also the statements regarding supplying arms to Israel as evidence. So we draw a massive target on our back and then start to prepare the population for possible nuclear war in case they don't re-elect Sunak again.... You are scaremongering. Because Sunak said . . . OMG. russia is as strong as there other side weak. Ukraine should be armed / helped much earlier and quicker and the problem would be solved my now. Britain is not the 1st to p i s s anyone and Britain is not the only one supporting Ukraine. Baltic countries are much more aware with what sort of situation we are having to deal with. There will be larger pressure on UK cos , for once your support is significant for 2nd its easier to influence UK population ( look Brexit ) then Eastern Europeans
|
|
k6
Posts: 250
Likes: 149
|
Post by k6 on May 13, 2024 14:02:46 GMT
So just to confirm: you are in favour of Ukraine being thrown to the mercy of whatever Putin wants by way of denuding Ukr of any military support ? Rather than allowing them to go into negotiations in a stronger position by virtue of their at least being able to offer credible military resistance ? What do you think Putin should ask for ? Just the Crimea and Donbas ? + Kharkiv ? Kyiv (presumably not that as you have personal financial interest there). Installation of a puppet regime in hock to Putin ? A la Yanukovych, whose popular ousting and Putin's chagrin at that is after all one of the major reasons 2014 and 2022 happened ? Or are you genuinely of a view that Trump is going to 'end the war in 24 hours' by taking Putin/Russia down, rather than chucking Ukr to the wolves ? The fact is Ukraine has lost in this War with Russia - which to a number of people was inevitable. A large aggravating factor in this conflict is the Neo-con influenced Biden administration who are obsessed with the idea of using Ukraine as a proxy to fight Russia. I believe if Ukraine agree not to allow themselves to be used by anti-russian western forces to threaten Russia militarily, clamp down on Anti-Russian Banderite extremists and make land concessions to Russia they can end this conflict and start to rebuild their country. Trump realises that Ukraine has lost this war and like myself does not want to see more Ukrainians killed pointlessly - and unlike some people on this forum, I also suspect he is smart enough to realise he does not want to die in a nuclear war. Trump is probably one of the only people in the world who can end this conflict - and if he does he should win the Nobel Peace Prize. OMG . . . U back with your putin notes. Ukraine has lost nothing and is fighting and will continue to do so. Angrysaveruk . . . just don't know what to write sometimes about your comments as they clearly ( for me ) are pro-putinits and it seams you will just keep trying to influence others here and possibly through different platform as well. Shame
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,609
Likes: 5,022
|
Post by adrianc on May 13, 2024 17:20:23 GMT
Sunak warns 'world closer to nuclear escalation than at any point since Cuban missile crisis'And to think I was accused of scare mongering a few pages ago. Actually there's quite an irony as it seems to me Sunak's administration is actually more gung ho than even the USs. Look at us regularly being first to p i s s the bears off such as the latest announcement that the us is British weapons to attack virgin Russia is fine and also the statements regarding supplying arms to Israel as evidence. So we draw a massive target on our back and then start to prepare the population for possible nuclear war in case they don't re-elect Sunak again.... Sunak warns "vote for me, please, because I'm really quite desperate to keep my job and will sink to any depths..."
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,429
Likes: 2,895
|
Post by michaelc on May 13, 2024 18:08:39 GMT
Sunak warns 'world closer to nuclear escalation than at any point since Cuban missile crisis'
And to think I was accused of scare mongering a few pages ago.Actually there's quite an irony as it seems to me Sunak's administration is actually more gung ho than even the USs. Look at us regularly being first to p i s s the bears off such as the latest announcement that the us is British weapons to attack virgin Russia is fine and also the statements regarding supplying arms to Israel as evidence. So we draw a massive target on our back and then start to prepare the population for possible nuclear war in case they don't re-elect Sunak again.... I don't know who accused you of scare mongering, but you seem to regularly state that those who are in favour of support for Ukraine are being oblivious or playing down the risk of a major confrontation with Russia. Nothing could be further from the truth. Those who were quickest right at the outset in '22 in stating/acknowledging how dangerous the world had got are by and large the exact same people who have been advocates of supporting Ukr. What they aren't generally doing is jumping up and down at every new action/step/development and declaring how awful it is because its increasing the risk of a greater war. The difficulty that you and a couple of others have on here is that you are not able in your mind to square the circle and understand that these are entirely compatible, and logically reasonable, positions. You assume that advocating for military support for Ukr - with all the inherent risks that go with it - requires one to ignore/be impervious to the risks of much greater - including nuclear - conflagration. It is not. It is very much the contrary.On the flip side, I'm conscious you have advocated on here on multiple occasions for a settlement with Russia that would include a large (your words IIRC) western - indeed you have I believe specifically cited NATO - force to be stationed on Ukr territory in a buffer zone. As a peacekeeping/enforcement force. There are only a few things I can think which would increase the longer term risk of nuclear confrontation with Russia more that that. Which is just one of the reasons why it ain't going to happen (not in the way you have expressed at any length). I don't think I've said we shouldn't provide military support. I'm a little on the fence about it but on balance support it - certainly for the more defensive weaponry. What I am against completely, is jumped up little Britain with a neglected army but the biggest target possible for virtually no reason. Why not work with our Nato colleagues so that we work together and provide support. We are now even more aggressive/assertive than the US. We are definitely starting to see the consequences domestically: The fact that conscription can even be discussed. The PM of the UK talking about greatest chance of nuclear war and also that the next 5 years will involve more change than the last 30.
|
|
|
Post by crabbyoldgit on May 13, 2024 19:00:12 GMT
So if Ukraine seeded some territory in a peace settlement, the absolute minimum I can see is an assurance from Russia that that was it and no interference or claims on Ukraine in the future. Should Ukraine then not join NATO as part of the deal, Ukraine would have to be turned into and armed camp with a defense industry , economy to support that and fixed defences that would make those constructed by Russia or on the DMZ in Korea look like toy town. Do I think Putin would consider this , no way , I think he wants the whole pie, maybe a slice at a time but nothing less. Best outcome is he slips and falls out a window , I know we could get worse but I do not think it can be much worse. Would Russia be better off after the war , well it would face a larger more cohesive European NATO , with or without the USA , with a heavily armed unfriendly buffer state, Ukraine. It's feared invincible army having not performed well against a outnumbered , probably 6 to 1 force in a 3 day war that it did not completely succeed in winning in 3 years.
|
|