heybruce

I don't know if you're trolling or being intentionally funny.

And without any independent observers or a free press no one can prove it was legitimate, though having a vote under military occupation in an ethnically cleansed area certainly indicates illegitimate.

You still haven't figured out that Putin is the fascist in this war.

I tend to believe the posters who provide a link. Do you have one?

Russia is already an international pariah. And Putin has repeatedly demonstrated that any attempts at appeasement will be met with further aggression. I'm seriously beginning to think you are a Russian troll.

Seriously? Russia doesn't even allow real elections in Russia. You think the elections in Russian occupied areas of Ukraine were legitimate? You must be trolling. I didn't say I wanted to monitor the elections, I was thinking international agencies with experience in the matter. But I would settle for letting the Ukrainian government doing the monitoring.

He does back up his claims with sources. Usually that shows superior knowledge than those who refuse to proved sources.

I consider them thugs sponsored by Putin to keep Ukraine unstable. However if a legitimate, internationally monitored vote of all the residents of these regions prior to 2014 were held and these voters actually voted to become part of Russia I would reconsider. What do you think the chances of that happening are?

Oh, be nice to the Russians. Like when President George W. Bush peered into Putin's soul and President Barrack Obama offered the reset in relations. What could go wrong with that? Russia is now China's bitch. Putin made it so. That's not going to change.

So you want to let Russia keep the land that it stole. I assume you also want to let Russia keep the tens of thousands of Ukrainian children it kidnapped as well.

It's curious that the anti-war posters save most or all of their condemnation for the defenders, not the aggressors.

There are a lot of farmers and businesses that will be happy to hire the Venezuelans. We should take in more.

“This is a whole new concept of individuals that just want to burn the whole place down. That doesn’t work.” Has he just now figured that out? It's been obvious to most of the country for years.

Poland and other countries on the eastern edge of the EU are upset about Ukraine grain being sold at a discount in their countries. The grains is being sold there because Russia is restricting exports by sea. The Polish government is playing politics, but has indicated that it will continue to give old military equipment to Ukraine as it upgrades its forces. https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/20/europe/poland-ukraine-weapons-grain-intl-hnk/index.html This is nothing by a political/economic spat that will be resolved soon. It will have little effect on the war.

Is anyone besides Russia in favor of the war?

Obama was very good for the country domestically, not so much for international affairs. President Biden is much better at the international stuff.

Yet people think the disgusting man is a patriot.

Don't you support a US Presidential candidate who refuses to release financial information?

Are you aware that both sides are facing munitions shortages? And that the west has a greater ability to ramp up production than Russia?

To the National Unity Government of Myanmar: Please get you act together, meet with representatives of the many ethnic groups and armies that have successfully resisted central government domination for decades, agree on a republican form of democracy that protects the rights and interests of the many ethnic groups, then form a unified fighting force to kick the Tatmadaw to hell! If you have a unified movement with credible plans for a post-military government, you might get more than lip-service support from other countries. So long as Myanmar appears to be composed of groups with no interest in cooperating you are on your own.

Only if Russia takes the suicidal step of going nuclear.

The biggest problem with your preference is that it isn't the preference of the Ukrainian people. There's also the issue of the Crimean election held under Russian military invasion having no credibility. Finally the fact that if Putin gets the concessions he wants and you want to give him he will use the seized territories to ensure that Ukraine never gets into NATO.

What worked for the NATO countries was Putin; he reminded them why they need an effective military. Proliferation is a slow fact; in the last fifty years four countries, India, Pakistan, North Korea and (probably) Israel have acquired nuclear weapons. Ideally it would be none, but slowing proliferation down is better than throwing up ones hands and green lighting any and all to acquire the weapons. Also, as Biden has demonstrated in his talks with South Korea, the US President can do a lot. That has been known since the Cuban missile crisis. I get the distinct impression you are making up your position on nukes on the fly, just like Trump. You shouldn't be President either.

Yes, Trump attempted to publicly shame democratic NATO allies. That played well with his base and made it even more difficult for the European leaders to convince their citizens that they needed to spend more on defense. Diplomacy works better than shame; shame causes people to dig in their heels and resist. One of the many ways in which Trump demonstrated his incompetence. Trump played "kissy face" with Kim until he learned that Kim wasn't going to give up anything of significance, then he gave up and went home. Nothing was accomplished. And, as noted, Trump's ignorance about nuclear weapons and the importance of preventing proliferation almost led to nuclear proliferation in east Asia and beyond. It's difficult to present that as a positive. Putting Trump in charge of the US military is like giving a loaded gun to a chimpanzee. Just because the chimpanzee doesn't use the gun the first time doesn't mean it's a good idea to try the idiotic stunt a second time.

When you post "put America first" I assume you mean making America isolationist. Cut our Asian and European allies loose, let them acquire their own nuclear deterrence capability. I could go on and on about why that's a bad idea, but you don't seem receptive to the logic.