-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Russians at the Ukraine border
- Thread starter Salty
- Start date
5 point Gillinist
Active Member
No. We just left our dignity behind in Afghanistan, along with the fact that wokeness seems to be more of a concern than modernizing our armed forces, with the exception of pregnancy flight suits. This will be another unnecessary conflict in which young Americans will die, the only difference being that it will be on a greater scale than the conflicts we've had over the last 30 years. Just my opinion.
KenH
Well-Known Member
No.
"As Russia continues massing troops on its side of the border with Ukraine (as well as Belarus’s), it’s worth asking a few questions before deciding what to do.
The first, and most important one, is what a Russian invasion of Ukraine means for U.S. national security. The answer is “not much,” ...
The administration loves describing its approach to international affairs as being "a foreign policy for the middle class," but the average American family could reasonably ask: “But how does this affect my family?” As Michael Brendan Dougherty notes in National Review, “As a potential NATO member, Ukraine is basically all liabilities and no benefits… This is why hawks don’t make their case with reference to Ukraine, Russia, and the United States. Instead, Ukraine is conflated with… well, everything.” ...
The second question is: does Ukraine have a shot of joining NATO? ...
NATO’s door is decidedly not open to Ukraine, because its members do not agree Ukraine’s accession would “contribute to the security of the North Atlantic area,” as the North Atlantic Treaty says aspirant members must. ...
There’s a third question here: what does Vladimir Putin want? Nobody except him can answer the question definitively, of course, and even he may not know what his lowest acceptable payoff may be. So I tend to bracket confident assertions that the 2008 NATO pledge to expand to Ukraine is merely a “convenient excuse” ...
So let’s work from three things that seem clearly true: first, the United States (and, by extension, NATO) is not going to fight Russia in Ukraine if it invades because it does not have interests that warrant the risk. Second, Ukraine’s chances of joining NATO in the policy‐relevant future approach zero. Finally, Moscow’s fear of Ukraine joining NATO is at least a central factor contributing to Russian fears and threats.
...it’s a puzzle why U.S. diplomats have declined to make a serious counteroffer to Russia's (absurdly ambitious) treaty proposal. At the center of that proposal (and almost every Russian utterance about the crisis) has been the prospect of Ukraine joining NATO. If we concede that it is not going to join NATO, and that NATO is not going to fight for Ukraine, and that fear of Ukraine joining NATO is at the center of the Russian calculus, why not try conceding the obvious? ..."
A Diplomatic Hail Mary May Be Ukraine’s Only Hope | Cato at Liberty Blog
"As Russia continues massing troops on its side of the border with Ukraine (as well as Belarus’s), it’s worth asking a few questions before deciding what to do.
The first, and most important one, is what a Russian invasion of Ukraine means for U.S. national security. The answer is “not much,” ...
The administration loves describing its approach to international affairs as being "a foreign policy for the middle class," but the average American family could reasonably ask: “But how does this affect my family?” As Michael Brendan Dougherty notes in National Review, “As a potential NATO member, Ukraine is basically all liabilities and no benefits… This is why hawks don’t make their case with reference to Ukraine, Russia, and the United States. Instead, Ukraine is conflated with… well, everything.” ...
The second question is: does Ukraine have a shot of joining NATO? ...
NATO’s door is decidedly not open to Ukraine, because its members do not agree Ukraine’s accession would “contribute to the security of the North Atlantic area,” as the North Atlantic Treaty says aspirant members must. ...
There’s a third question here: what does Vladimir Putin want? Nobody except him can answer the question definitively, of course, and even he may not know what his lowest acceptable payoff may be. So I tend to bracket confident assertions that the 2008 NATO pledge to expand to Ukraine is merely a “convenient excuse” ...
So let’s work from three things that seem clearly true: first, the United States (and, by extension, NATO) is not going to fight Russia in Ukraine if it invades because it does not have interests that warrant the risk. Second, Ukraine’s chances of joining NATO in the policy‐relevant future approach zero. Finally, Moscow’s fear of Ukraine joining NATO is at least a central factor contributing to Russian fears and threats.
...it’s a puzzle why U.S. diplomats have declined to make a serious counteroffer to Russia's (absurdly ambitious) treaty proposal. At the center of that proposal (and almost every Russian utterance about the crisis) has been the prospect of Ukraine joining NATO. If we concede that it is not going to join NATO, and that NATO is not going to fight for Ukraine, and that fear of Ukraine joining NATO is at the center of the Russian calculus, why not try conceding the obvious? ..."
A Diplomatic Hail Mary May Be Ukraine’s Only Hope | Cato at Liberty Blog
Last edited:
Sure. We should send troops. That way we can swap nukes with Russia. Always wanted to see a nuclear war. Russia has better nukes and a better delivery system than we have, but I wouldn't want a minor inconvenience that that deter us.[/QUOTE]
The problem is the voters elect the cut and run Democrats and they cut and run. So why send the coin of realm (our defenders) to Europe, only to cut and run. Look at the 50,000 deaths in about two years in Korea. Or the about 50,000 deaths in ten years in Viet Nam. Or our deaths in Afghanistan. If you are going to engage in war, you must be committed to rendering the enemy incapable of fighting a war. But proxy wars do not do that so they can become endless wars. Are the Democrats willing to flatten Russia with lethal force? Nope. China? Nope. So we should pull all our foreign forces, because all they really do is allow the enemy to shed our blood, but we are afraid to shed theirs.
Remember the 13 days in October when JFK told the Russians that any attack on the US from Cuba would be considered an attack by Russia and we would respond accordingly? No war and only our U2 pilot lost.
Remember the 13 days in October when JFK told the Russians that any attack on the US from Cuba would be considered an attack by Russia and we would respond accordingly? No war and only our U2 pilot lost.
Last edited:
WAJungleMonkey
Member
No, we should not get involved. Russia/Ukraine is a family fight and much more complicated than we Westerners could understand... being that it also involves religious disagreements within Christianity. Besides that, everyone over there is still ticked that we bombed the crap out of Serbia on Easter Day- the day of our Lord's Resurrection for God's sake!! Absolutely shameful! .... And how does Joey think he's going to fight Russia when all we did in the Middle East was create a bunch of power vacuums and then walk away? Lol! ... Even if we had a conservative President, I still think we need to stay out of it. America should strictly only defend herself, not police the world... or, "protect her interests" as they call it.
God is Sovereign.
His Will shall be done.
But the day shall come when America will pay dearly for it's Abortion Cult against Innocent Blood.
Personally, I think if the Gog-Magog Alliance war is at the start of the Tribulation, and it could be, by default America would be catapulted into a beast of a position if she stays clear of that war.
God's annihilation of those Asian powerhouses would eliminate America's chief adversaries. Magnifying her position.
I think that may be why God is allowing America's actions to embolden the Gog-Magog Alliance nations.
I think they must be convinced that America will not be a reliable interventionist Ally for them to make their move.
His Will shall be done.
But the day shall come when America will pay dearly for it's Abortion Cult against Innocent Blood.
Personally, I think if the Gog-Magog Alliance war is at the start of the Tribulation, and it could be, by default America would be catapulted into a beast of a position if she stays clear of that war.
God's annihilation of those Asian powerhouses would eliminate America's chief adversaries. Magnifying her position.
I think that may be why God is allowing America's actions to embolden the Gog-Magog Alliance nations.
I think they must be convinced that America will not be a reliable interventionist Ally for them to make their move.
No, Russia has more common sense than most of the Western Europeans. I'd rather not fight one of the few countries left with some common sense.
Watching the news tonight on this story - I got thinking - is Russia just going to the border to see what NATO - including what the USA would do - would they (NATO) over-react.....????
KenH
Well-Known Member
‘ “It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliance with any portion of the foreign world.” That was declared by George Washington in his farewell address at the end of a bloody revolution for independence. In his inaugural pledge, Thomas Jefferson opined clearly on foreign policy saying, “Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations — entangling alliances with none.” ‘
- Rest at No War With Russia | Libertarian Party (lp.org)
- Rest at No War With Russia | Libertarian Party (lp.org)
Silverhair
Well-Known Member
How easy you forget WW2. Does your history not include what Hitler did. Remember Poland and Chamberlain. You can not back down from a bully it always ends badly for both. Do you really think it wise to wait for another Pearl Harbour before you get involved.
No one wants a shooting war but the only way to prevent one is to let the other side know that it will cost them more than they want to lose.
But also ask yourself how much are you willing to lose if you do not get involved.
We have always avoided direct military confrontation between the two super powers. I believe it is wise to continue that policy. I believe you are badly mistaken if you do not think Russia will go nuclear if they begin to lose conventional. China has their back. You really willing ng to kick off a war with Russia and China? It is in Europe's back yard. Let them handle this one. I see no problem with Russia re-annexing it's former territories.
Ukraine was an imperial holding inherited by the USSR. It was not ethnically Russian no matter what the rhetoric the Kremlin used.
Silverhair
Well-Known Member
So you have no problem with Mexico re-annexing Texas & California?
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
Why are we so concerned about Ukraine's border and not our own?
If they have the military might to do it.
Question of the day right there!!!
5 point Gillinist
Active Member
Well from what my moral superiors tell me on the tv and the internets, to be concerned about our own border is racist, but to be concerned with an eastern European nation's is virtuous because Vladimir Putin is involved.
By the way, Democrats are not your moral superiors. They are Damnable reprobates.(But I did get your sarcasm)