6 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

This was one thing Merkel and France got right, if they'd been listened to the expansion of NATO into the USSR sphere of influence would not have happened. Merkel warned against it at the time.

 

This was all ignored and NATO pushed for eastwards expansion, so war with Russia became the end result. 

 

Should have listened to France and Germany at the time.

 

Eastwards expansion did not happen. (Well, technically I suppose it did: North Macedonia and Montenegro have joined NATO since 2010, but I hardly think their membership constitutes a major threat to Russia. Do you? In any event, their application to join NATO can be seen as a by-product of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, as can Finland's membership).

 

Back on topic:  Ukraine abandoned its' goal of obtaining NATO membership in 2010, so this idea that Russia's invasion can be justified on the basis that Ukraine presents a threat to Russia can be seen for what it is: Complete nonsense.

16 minutes ago, uncletiger said:

 

If you won't admit that the woke propaganda and the Russia bad/Ukraine good propaganda are all part of the same globalist operation then you are being intentionally myopic.  Both doctrines are being pushed by the same group attempting to condition you to accept a one world government.

 

Your contention that this has nothing to do with woke or not woke is deliberately false. This is a multi pronged attack against humanity, and they are very much intertwined.

The attack on humanity is from Putin.

Otherwise I find your rhetoric simple minded and INSANE. 

It's scary that people would actually buy into such garbage.

55 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

The woke aren't the ones willing to die for their country. They are the ones cheering for death and destruction.

There you go, buddy! Nothing like a little lame pearl clutching to perk you up, right?😄

5 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

Your whole political side has NEVER offered any suggestions other than fight more. Appreciate it's uncomfortable having this pointed out. But fight fight fight because we are fizzing with hate for Trump and can't allow him to end the war that our team couldn't end. Sad. So very sad.

He hasn't ended the war, not even got a ceasefire. What security guarantees? No one can do anything about Russian aggression. NATO least of all. Russia laughs at NATO, as they know NATO is toothless and will not start WW3. Russia will continue to expand, protecting Russian speakers everwhere. Perhaps deporting Russian speakers and supporters to Russia would be the only way to full the Russian Bear's claws.

11 minutes ago, BLMFem said:

There you go, buddy! Nothing like a little lame pearl clutching to perk you up, right?😄

Your comment makes no sense, buddy.

5 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

How many more corpses do you want? How much blood is enough to satisfy the left? I would have thought giving Russia back areas where the population identify as Russian is preferable to more killing, more maiming, more blood. What happened to the warmongering left? Quite bizarre.

 

It's not about left or right, it's about people. They chose Ukraine. The politicians there are either Russia supporting or not. No middle ground. The people there are pro-Russian or not. Ukraine for Ukranians, Russia for Russians. Simple as.

4 hours ago, Harrisfan said:

You lost. A win is a win.

Change the bloody subject. Oh, you have, away from issues back to Trump. It's not always all about Trump. No US government is going to stop this war. Russia will keep it going for as long as they want. Then they'll stop when they want to. Guarantees shmarantees. Meaningless drivel.

5 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

Your comment makes no sense, buddy.

Why am I not surprised you claim that, pal!

"Putin agrees to strong security promises"... lol, are you kidding me. Putler has completely gaslit Trump on so many levels... and Trump has to agree as the FSB have dirt on Trump.

So, the Kremlin is promising "guarantees" like it did when the USSR collapsed, so it could get back the nukes from Ukraine and Ukraine agreed, only to be screwed over later by Putler. Ukraine needs to be very careful of the Kremlin's forked tongue as it's always lies... and build up its defense capabilities.

Putler is president for life, Trump is only president for the next 3 or so years. Putler can play the long game, assuming he lives that long (but with all the body doubles I wouldn't surpised if Putin is still in charge in 70 years). Putler will make his next move at the end of Trump's term when he can't do anything and put pressure on the new US president straight away... easy political math.

6 hours ago, candide said:

It's not giving "back" as it wasn't part of Russia. More KGB style propaganda distortion from you.

 

This region is completely fortified and a significant obstacle to another Russian invasion. Knowing that Putin's word cannot be trusted, it's one of the main practical security guarantee for Ukraine.

 

It would be like when they gave the Sudetenland to Hitler at Munich in 38. The Sudetenland also included the Czech natural mountainous defenses and fortifications. With that gone Hitler just walked into the rest a short time later.

 

 

7 hours ago, RayC said:

 

The US hosting a bi-lateral meeting with a wanted war criminal, where the subject of discussion is redrawing a 3rd country's international borders, all without the 3rd country being present and seemingly having any input into the discussion. And the reason? The US President's obsession with being recognised with the Nobel Peace Prize. Yep; beyond sinister and amoral.

Don't forget he wants to get his hands on rare earths.

2 hours ago, Scott Tracy said:

He hasn't ended the war, not even got a ceasefire. What security guarantees? No one can do anything about Russian aggression. NATO least of all. Russia laughs at NATO, as they know NATO is toothless and will not start WW3. Russia will continue to expand, protecting Russian speakers everwhere. Perhaps deporting Russian speakers and supporters to Russia would be the only way to full the Russian Bear's claws.

NATO is toothless because the Europeans are toothless.  Europe only cares about its welfare state. 

36 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

Eastwards expansion did not happen. (Well, technically I suppose it did: North Macedonia and Montenegro have joined NATO since 2010, but I hardly think their membership constitutes a major threat to Russia. Do you? In any event, their application to join NATO can be seen as a by-product of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, as can Finland's membership).

 

Back on topic:  Ukraine abandoned its' goal of obtaining NATO membership in 2010, so this idea that Russia's invasion can be justified on the basis that Ukraine presents a threat to Russia can be seen for what it is: Complete nonsense.

Russia sees NATO as a threat, NATO sees Russia as a threat. The common denominator is... Nato. Talk about para bloody noia. Treat people like people, politics suck.

4 hours ago, Hamus Yaigh said:

 

 

The 1994 Budapest Memorandum saw Ukraine give up its nuclear arsenal in exchange for security assurances from Russia, the U.S., and others, which failed to prevent Russia’s 2014 and 2022 invasions. Critics argue those assurances were weak, lacking binding commitments. The new guarantees discussed are framed as stronger, resembling NATO’s collective defense, but specifics remain vague, and Ukraine’s sovereignty over contested territories like Donbas is still a sticking point.

 

Is Trump “totally giving in”? The shift from his initial push for an immediate ceasefire to focusing on a broader peace deal suggests flexibility, not capitulation. Witkoff and Rubio emphasized progress on security guarantees and Russia’s legislative commitment not to violate other European countries’ sovereignty, but no ceasefire was secured, and Trump faces pressure to avoid ceding Ukrainian territory. Critics, including some Republicans, warn against trusting Putin, and Zelenskyy insists on no territorial concessions, citing Ukraine’s constitution. The upcoming August 18, 2025, meeting with Zelenskyy and European leaders will clarify whether Trump’s approach compromises Ukraine’s position or balances peace with robust deterrence.

 

"Critics, including some Republicans, warn against trusting Putin..." [cue sad laugh track] Kindly refer to the 20th/21st Century history of the Empire of Lies, most recently its promise not to extend NATO any further east of Germany, its "color revolutions" in countries bordering the Russian Federation, its unwarranted invasion and destruction of Iraq, Libya, Syria and what have I left out (Mossadegh in Iran), on behalf of its genocidal ZioNazi masters. If you want to know what's up with Ukraine just take a few minutes and check out the country-simple elaboration by Professor Jeffrey Sachs (a Jew, incidentally), on the web.

6 hours ago, Scott Tracy said:

Russia sees NATO as a threat, NATO sees Russia as a threat. The common denominator is... Nato. Talk about para bloody noia. Treat people like people, politics suck.

While I agree that we should “treat people like people,” it’s a sort of a false equivalence to compare Russia with NATO. Since 1945, the Soviet Union and then Russia has attacked most of its neighbors. Meantime, NATO was indeed involved in attacking Afghanistan and Iraq after 9/11 (an Article 5 response), and they bombed Serbian units during the wars in Bosnia and Kosovo, but otherwise has been largely defensive and poses no threat to Russia.

 

Indeed, in the 1990s, there was a great deal of cooperation between NATO and Russia, with talk of Russia eventually becoming a member, but then Putin got control of Russia and started dreaming he was Peter the Great.

11 hours ago, Cameroni said:

 

This was one thing Merkel and France got right, if they'd been listened to the expansion of NATO into the USSR sphere of influence would not have happened. Merkel warned against it at the time.

 

This was all ignored and NATO pushed for eastwards expansion, so war with Russia became the end result. 

 

Should have listened to France and Germany at the time.

“Sphere of influence”? You’re thinking in the nineteenth century. All of those Eastern European and Baltic countries that joined NATO after the collapse of the Soviet Union did so OF THEIR OWN AGENCY; given the chance, they clamored to join Western institutions as a guarantee against future Russian aggression, and quite rightly as it turns out. Why should these peoples, from Finns to Bulgarians and everyone in between, not have the right to choose their own future?

21 hours ago, ezzra said:

I had to choose between who to trust, the devil himself or Putin, I put my money on the former without a worry in the world.

Somehow, I'm sure that none of the readers who didn't like my post are Russian, as most of them here are those who ran away so as not to serve in the war and die so Putin can have more land.

Why can't Zelensky just put his faith in Russia? Doesn't he understand that Russia just wants peace?

 

1919: Russia attacks Ukraine
1920: Russia attacks Poland
1920: Russia attacks Azerbaijan
1921: Russia attacks Armenia
1921: russia attacks Georgia
1939: Soviet Union attacks Poland
1939:Soviet Union attacks Finland
1940: Soviet Union attacks Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania
1956:Soviet Union attacks Hungary
1968: Soviet Union attacks Czechoslovakia
1979: Soviet Union attacks Afghanistan
1992: Russia attacks Georgia
1992: Russia attacks Moldova
1994: Russia attacks Chechnya
1999: Russia attacks Chechnya
2008: Russia attacks Georgia
2014: Russia attacks Ukraine
2015: Russia attacks Syria
2022: Russia attacks Ukraine
 

2 hours ago, Cory1848 said:

“Sphere of influence”? You’re thinking in the nineteenth century. All of those Eastern European and Baltic countries that joined NATO after the collapse of the Soviet Union did so OF THEIR OWN AGENCY; given the chance, they clamored to join Western institutions as a guarantee against future Russian aggression, and quite rightly as it turns out. Why should these peoples, from Finns to Bulgarians and everyone in between, not have the right to choose their own future?

 

Please. This is the real world, not some woke fantasyland. Great powers such as the USA and Russia and China have spheres of influence. Why do you think the US invaded Panama? China claims the South China Sea? Great powers do not tolerate non-friendly or hostile neighbours. It's just not acceptable. And if those neighbours remain hostile they pay the price. Whether it's Panama, Phiiippines or Ukraine. This was true in the 19th, the 20th and the 21st century and will be the case in the next century.

1 hour ago, Cameroni said:

 

Please. This is the real world, not some woke fantasyland. Great powers such as the USA and Russia and China have spheres of influence. Why do you think the US invaded Panama? China claims the South China Sea? Great powers do not tolerate non-friendly or hostile neighbours. It's just not acceptable. And if those neighbours remain hostile they pay the price. Whether it's Panama, Phiiippines or Ukraine. This was true in the 19th, the 20th and the 21st century and will be the case in the next century.

So in your view people should just grovel and capitulate when a bully shakes his stick. I’m not going to bother arguing with that, but really, what a weak, and misanthropic, view of the world. And cut it out with the “woke” BS, okay? That’s just a stupid word that some people throw out at anything they don’t like; it’s meaningless and lazy.

3 minutes ago, Cory1848 said:

So in your view people should just grovel and capitulate when a bully shakes his stick.

 

Well, jumping into bed with the enemy is probably not a good idea. And that's what Ukraine did. In fact whilst Russia was paying her energy bills she did a gangbang with the EU and the US. This is not a good idea.

 

Countries that are in a relationship with a more powerful power have to take into account the desires of that great power. If they don't they end up like :Ukraine has ended up now. Or how Panama did before her.

9 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

Well, jumping into bed with the enemy is probably not a good idea. And that's what Ukraine did. In fact whilst Russia was paying her energy bills she did a gangbang with the EU and the US. This is not a good idea.

Your comments are akin to that of a criminal boss. It doesn't work like that in the real world where the law and whats right always wins in the end and not the rule of the jungle. How did you end up with such a twisted way of thinking?

11 minutes ago, Hamus Yaigh said:

Your comments are akin to that of a criminal boss. It doesn't work like that in the real world where the law and whats right always wins in the end and not the rule of the jungle. How did you end up with such a twisted way of thinking?

 

That's exactly how it works out in the real world. Ukraine jumped into bed with America and the EU. How did that work out for her?

1 hour ago, Cameroni said:

 

Well, jumping into bed with the enemy is probably not a good idea. And that's what Ukraine did. In fact whilst Russia was paying her energy bills she did a gangbang with the EU and the US. This is not a good idea.

 

Countries that are in a relationship with a more powerful power have to take into account the desires of that great power. If they don't they end up like :Ukraine has ended up now. Or how Panama did before her.

Jumping into bed with *whose* enemy? Ukraine looked across the border into post-Soviet Romania and Poland and saw relative prosperity, and they chose that over the overlordship of a Russian state rapidly devolving back into authoritarianism. The EU is no enemy of Ukraine. And why should Ukraine (or any other country) have to “take into account” the “desires” of Moscow, especially Moscow under a wannabe tsar? Absurd.

 

Sure, countries with outsize power like Russia or China or the United States still often behave as though they have “spheres of interest,” but rolling over is not the way to respond. In Trump’s case, when he muses about Canada or Greenland, all you have to do is laugh in his face to make him go away. Confronting Putin requires fortitude, and that also works, as was demonstrated against Germany during World War II.