Jump to content

In defiance of Trump, I think Nato should put troops on the ground in Ukraine.


Recommended Posts

Posted

Putin didn't bank on the resolve of the west to support Ukraine. They have. He's learnt a lesson. It's been pointless and caused needless suffering to his country. 

 

But he won't walk away if he can't save face. You have to let him keep something and show he wasted lives and money for something, so he can take it to the Russian population as a win (even if it is nothing). 

 

But he also has to know (and probably has)  he can't do this <deleted> again. 

Posted
1 hour ago, NoDisplayName said:

 

Putin was a Lt.Col. in the KGB, stationed in Dresden, doing what many military folk do.  I suppose that counts.

 

The agency was a military service governed by army laws and regulations, in the same fashion as the Soviet Army or the MVD Internal Troops.

 

He was a Colonel in the KGB engaged in suppressing anti-Communist groups in East Germany. Hardly an example of noble soldiering. He's trained as a lawyer.

  • Like 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Tiger1980 said:

As a Brit can one of you Americans inform me which unit of the American service did Trump serve in and for how long.

He served in the Bone Spurs platoon, winning a pink heart for his ability to walk normally in the US during the Vietnam War.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Posted

50,000 in Ukraine, means 150,000 committed; 50,000 on rest, 50,000 in training. If these are fighting troops, you can probably double or triple the overall commitment in terms of the logistics train.

 

But we might see something like the 1991 Gulf War; the Iraqi Army was, on paper, a well equipped and combat experienced fighting force, largely using Soviet tactics, modified in light of the war with Iran (which itself was largely an American trained and equipped military). We might see the Russian Army essentially collapse in the face of a well organised NATO combined arms advance.

 

In reality, the Iraq squaddies were conscripts, not exactly motivated to fight the Infidel. Middle ranking Iraqi amry officers were of reasonable quality, but constantly overruled by a politically appointed general staff, which is rather similar to how Putin has surrounded himself with Generals more valued for their loyality than soldiering.

  • Like 1
Posted
24 minutes ago, MicroB said:

 

He was a Colonel in the KGB engaged in suppressing anti-Communist groups in East Germany. Hardly an example of noble soldiering. He's trained as a lawyer.

 

Yes, he earned a law degree, followed by KGB training schools.

 

Why would "suppressing anti-communist groups" not be noble?  Oh, I think I understand....he didn't carry a rifle or jump out of airplanes.  Well, that's just silly.  Counterintel is critical, unlike press officers and diversity officers and coffee NCO's.

 

The percentage of the U.S. military serving in combat arms roles typically hovers around 10-15% of the total force. This seemingly low percentage often surprises people, as it underscores the significant logistical, support, and strategic infrastructure required to effectively deploy and sustain a modern fighting force.

  • Haha 1
Posted
2 hours ago, NoDisplayName said:

 

Trump served his country in the same unit and for the same enlistment period as Biden, which, strangely enough, is the exact same unit and time frame that Zelensky served what's left of his country.

 

Though Robert Biden served in Iraq. Neither of the American President's adult sons have ever served their country. His youngest son holds dual Slovenian citizenship; its notabl that he declined ti renounce this citizenship when he came of age. While Slovenia abolished conscription, the government is currently reviewing that decision, given its current recruitment goals. American dual nationals are liable to overseas miitary service.

  • Like 1
Posted
10 hours ago, advancebooking said:

Trump and Vance are playing their tit for tat games. 

 

Zelenski hasn't signed away generations of his countries resources. 

 

Why doesn't Nato send 50,000 troops to Ukraine now. Fight and push out Russia. Ukraine's troops leave Russia

 

Putin will not do anything. He's all talk. 

 

Thoughts

 

Private Advancebooking reporting for duty!

 

 

army.jpg

  • Love It 1
Posted
43 minutes ago, NoDisplayName said:

 

Yes, he earned a law degree, followed by KGB training schools.

 

Why would "suppressing anti-communist groups" not be noble?  Oh, I think I understand....he didn't carry a rifle or jump out of airplanes.  Well, that's just silly.  Counterintel is critical, unlike press officers and diversity officers and coffee NCO's.

 

The percentage of the U.S. military serving in combat arms roles typically hovers around 10-15% of the total force. This seemingly low percentage often surprises people, as it underscores the significant logistical, support, and strategic infrastructure required to effectively deploy and sustain a modern fighting force.

 

He volunteered to work for an oppressive regime that murdered its own people trying to cross the border.

 

 

This is like trying to claim the Gestapo were ordinary coppers, and we should have given people like Klaus Barbie a break for merely doing their "job". He was a willing participant for a murderous regime which was one of the worst the 20th Century had ever seen.

 

Putin's major role was to facilitate the supply of weapons, from Dresden, to the Red Army Faction, who went around murdering German lawmakers, attacking unarmed Americans, and groups such as the PFLP.  How can you admire a man who supported terrorism and who was a vital cog in a criminal regime. Plenty of Soviet officers knew the true nature and paid with their lives.

  • Like 1
Posted
8 hours ago, rough diamond said:

I think you have that statement back to front;  it should IMO read;

"Zelensky is on the cusp of losing the entire country because of Trump's and Vance's tantrum with/against him".

If, and it's unlikely, the entire country is lost, does it matter who's tantrum is to blame? It's a war that should never have started, Ukraine was never going to win ( IMO ) and the US was apparently not interested in Ukraine winning, preferring to let Ukrainians die in their proxy war to weaken Russia.

  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
20 minutes ago, NoDisplayName said:

 

Bob wasn't the prez.

 

I never said he was. Why are you intent on causing an argument with purile childish spelling. Plus you have deliberately broken forum rules by using the name "Bob". No one called him Bob. He was kn own as Robert or Beau. Clearly, you are attempting to mock. Forum rules broken, as has been pointed, correctly, to me.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 2
Posted
1 hour ago, bannork said:

He served in the Bone Spurs platoon, winning a pink heart for his ability to walk normally in the US during the Vietnam War.

Same company as Biden- the "using education as a means to avoid going to Vietnam" platoon.

  • Haha 1
Posted
10 hours ago, advancebooking said:

Trump and Vance are playing their tit for tat games. 

 

Zelenski hasn't signed away generations of his countries resources. 

 

Why doesn't Nato send 50,000 troops to Ukraine now. Fight and push out Russia. Ukraine's troops leave Russia

 

Putin will not do anything. He's all talk. 

 

Thoughts

To defy Trump you want to put lots of troops in harms way? 

  • Haha 1
Posted
Just now, MicroB said:

 

I never said he was. Why are you intent on causing an argument with purile childish spelling. Plus you have deliberately broken forum rules by using the name "Bob". No one called him Bob. He was kn own as Robert or Beau. Clearly, you are attempting to mock. Forum rules broken, as has been pointed, correctly, to me.

Seriously? Considering you were the one deleted for continually altering Trump's name you have some gall to call someone out for breaking forum rules on that. :passifier:

  • Haha 1
Posted
10 hours ago, Purdey said:

Putin is losing men that he will need one day to grow the economy. A huge show of force by NATO, or just EU members, might push him to reconsider.

Nah…Putin is hard headed. 

  • Haha 1
Posted
7 hours ago, tai4de2 said:

The left is willing to incite WW3 because you're still upset about Russia's supposed role in the 2016 election.

 

Get over it already?

 

The way the MAGA leader keeps bringing this up, even at the faux-SOTU, illustrates what he and his fans are really afraid: not trans people and murderous immigrants, but rather the truth busting his stolen election claims.  Mueller proved himself to be just another spineless gov't employee, Barr the official bootlick with that joke of a redacted report synopsis. 

What deserves a good looking-into is the 2024 -- the wealthiest individual in the world contributed $290 million to the MAGA campaign, the question is why

How was that $$$ spent, and what did the declared president promise in return?  I have not heard any curiosity about this in US media.

DT and EM are not pals.  Oh, what about the bonhomie at the SOTU?  "That was good television."

 

  • Like 1
Posted
4 hours ago, Tiger1980 said:

As a Brit can one of you Americans inform me which unit of the American service did Trump serve in and for how long.

And this matters how?  Trump has started zero wars.

  • Haha 1
Posted
4 hours ago, Tiger1980 said:

As a Brit can one of you Americans inform me which unit of the American service did Trump serve in and for how long.

Briliant,not only did the loser have bone spurs, he didnt have the intelligence to pass the IQ test required.

  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, bannork said:

He served in the Bone Spurs platoon, winning a pink heart for his ability to walk normally in the US during the Vietnam War.

Trump served with Bill Clinton and Joe Biden. 

  • Confused 1
Posted
Just now, Mike_Hunt said:

And this matters how?  Trump has started zero wars.

 

Which is more egregious, starting a war or surrendering?  What happened to the old US bravado with slogans like "these colors don't run" and "Love it or leave it"?

 

  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, bendejo said:

 

Which is more egregious, starting a war or surrendering?  What happened to the old US bravado with slogans like "these colors don't run" and "Love it or leave it"?

 

It’s not our war buddy. It’s a European war.   But, the losers from Europe can’t deal with their own back yard. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
1 hour ago, MicroB said:

We might see the Russian Army essentially collapse in the face of a well organised NATO combined arms advance.

You know as well as anyone that if Russia itself was threatened by a possibly winning NATO side, it's game over for all of us. In the event of such an unlikely attack as you desire, you better hope they don't do a MacArthur and cross the border.

 

BTW, are you referring to the well organised ( basically NATO force ) that couldn't win in Afghanistan against a bunch of Taliban in a war lasting 20 years.

History tells us that anyone invading Russia doesn't win. It also said that about Afghanistan, and that was certainly true in the recent past. We should learn from history.

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Haha 1
Posted

They don't need to invade Russian,

 

1 hour ago, bannork said:

He served in the Bone Spurs platoon, winning a pink heart for his ability to walk normally in the US during the Vietnam War.

Who was the last POTUS to serve in the military? 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
20 minutes ago, MicroB said:

He volunteered to work for an oppressive regime that murdered its own people trying to cross the border.

and? Stalin ordered the murder of about 20 million or so Soviet citizens, and died in his bed. Complaining about a leader of Russia doing nasty work is as pointless as whistling into the wind.

 

How about all the murderous dictators that the US cherished, such as Sadam, when he was fighting Iraq? Do they get a pass because the US wanted them in power?

  • Haha 1
Posted
25 minutes ago, MicroB said:

He volunteered to work for an oppressive regime that murdered its own people trying to cross the border.

 

Eggs, omelettes.

 

Assuming all your allegations are true, nothing that side was doing differed much from what we were doing.

 

image.jpeg.abddc6a03b50d70de4757328edb39ece.jpeg

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
9 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You know as well as anyone that if Russia itself was threatened by a possibly winning NATO side, it's game over for all of us. In the event of such an unlikely attack as you desire, you better hope they don't do a MacArthur and cross the border.

 

BTW, are you referring to the well organised ( basically NATO force ) that couldn't win in Afghanistan against a bunch of Taliban in a war lasting 20 years.

History tells us that anyone invading Russia doesn't win. It also said that about Afghanistan, and that was certainly true in the recent past. We should learn from history.

It would not be hard to run Russia out of Ukraine if the West had the stones to do it.  The West would establish air supremacy over Ukraine and give the Russian Army a good working.    It would be like watching Desert Storm in Eastern Europe. 

  • Haha 1
Posted
11 hours ago, advancebooking said:

Trump and Vance are playing their tit for tat games. 

 

Zelenski hasn't signed away generations of his countries resources. 

 

Why doesn't Nato send 50,000 troops to Ukraine now. Fight and push out Russia. Ukraine's troops leave Russia

 

Putin will not do anything. He's all talk. 

 

Thoughts

Anyone wanting this war to continue should immediately join up to be in the final victory, LOL.

Don't miss out on the glory and a medal.

  • Haha 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now




×
×
  • Create New...