If Russia invades Ukraine pt 2

lotr10 said:
This is the kind of "gotcha" stuff that reduces our politics to screaming at each other. And here is why this "gotcha" misses the target badly:

* In 2015 DeSantis was calling for arms to Ukraine as a way to deter FUTURE Russian aggression against Ukraine. DeSantis was NOT asking for delivery of more weapons into an active war zone. This is a big difference. Had we heeded DeSantis here and provided Ukraine with a large amount of lethal weaponry it may have deterred Putin from invading.

* Providing extra arms to our NATO allies on the border with Russia also makes sense in light of Russia's recent annexation of Crimea.

* It was clear that DeSantis was arguing the well established idea of PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH.
Click to expand...
Yes DeSantis has flip flopped to appeal to the Qrazy MAGA Base that follows Tucker and Russian Propaganda to win the primary. Will he flip back for the general? Who knows.
 
Happier said:
Yes DeSantis has flip flopped to appeal to the Qrazy MAGA Base that follows Tucker and Russian Propaganda to win the primary. Will he flip back for the general? Who knows.
Click to expand...
You have no concept of context do you?
 
The guy on Glenn Beck right now connecting the dots between power Democrats and Russia since the early 2000s, even Putin's own finance companies, is shocking af
 
Happier said:
Yes DeSantis has flip flopped to appeal to the Qrazy MAGA Base that follows Tucker and Russian Propaganda to win the primary. Will he flip back for the general? Who knows.
Click to expand...
DeSantis has NOT flip flopped on this issue. Calling for arming a country as a way to deter aggression against that country is a completely different thing then arming that country while it is waging war.

To me DeSantis has shown that his foreign policy inclinations are quite good. He is NOT an interventionist but at the same time understands the value of the concept of PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH. This is a classic conservative principal. And it has served those nations well that have fully embraced it.
 
lotr10 said:
This is the kind of "gotcha" stuff that reduces our politics to screaming at each other. And here is why this "gotcha" misses the target badly:

* In 2015 DeSantis was calling for arms to Ukraine as a way to deter FUTURE Russian aggression against Ukraine. DeSantis was NOT asking for delivery of more weapons into an active war zone. This is a big difference. Had we heeded DeSantis here and provided Ukraine with a large amount of lethal weaponry it may have deterred Putin from invading.

* Providing extra arms to our NATO allies on the border with Russia also makes sense in light of Russia's recent annexation of Crimea.

* It was clear that DeSantis was arguing the well established idea of PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH.
Click to expand...
Russia invaded in 2014. The Ukrainians have been fighting them ever since. Just because Russia decided to up the intensity in 2022 does not mean they didn't actually invade in 2014.
 
  • Like
Reactions: y2h
lotr10 said:
DeSantis has NOT flip flopped on this issue. Calling for arming a country as a way to deter aggression against that country is a completely different thing then arming that country while it is waging war.

To me DeSantis has shown that his foreign policy inclinations are quite good. He is NOT an interventionist but at the same time understands the value of the concept of PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH. This is a classic conservative principal. And it has served those nations well that have fully embraced it.
Click to expand...
US support for Ukraine is not a “vital” national interest is not exactly PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH.

Calling it a "territorial dispute" and not backing the NATO alliance position is definitely not PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH.

GOP in disarray.
 
lotr10 said:
DeSantis has NOT flip flopped on this issue. Calling for arming a country as a way to deter aggression against that country is a completely different thing then arming that country while it is waging war.
Click to expand...
Except Ukraine absolutely was at war with Russian then.
lotr10 said:
To me DeSantis has shown that his foreign policy inclinations are quite good. He is NOT an interventionist but at the same time understands the value of the concept of PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH. This is a classic conservative principal. And it has served those nations well that have fully embraced it.
Click to expand...
Sure. But the horse had left the stable by 2015.
 
Indiandad said:
Russia invaded in 2014. The Ukrainians have been fighting them ever since. Just because Russia decided to up the intensity in 2022 does not mean they didn't actually invade in 2014.
Click to expand...
"Up the intensity" is a bit of an understatement, no? The Ukraine did not resist the Russian invasion of Crimea because the people of Crimea welcomed the Russians and wanted no part of Ukraine. On top of that Ukraine had no legitimate historical claim to Crimea.

DeSantis recognized in 2015 that Russian adventurism aimed at Ukraine was a threat to the US & NATO. Not the greatest threat but a threat nonetheless. He then smartly urged that we fortify Ukraine to make it a less desirable target by Putin. This is basic, common sense conservative foreign policy 101.

Flash forward 8 years and Ukraine is locked in a death match with Russia. We're sending massive amounts of arms and aid to Ukraine while the war appears to have no end in sight. At the same time the global economy, already under stress, is further weakened by this war. Now throw in the very real potential for this to escalate into WW3 and the use of nukes and DeSantis is concluding that it's no longer in America's best interests to fully back the Ukraine in this fight. Again this is conservative foreign policy 101.
 
Happier said:
US support for Ukraine is not a “vital” national interest is not exactly PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH.

Calling it a "territorial dispute" and not backing the NATO alliance position is definitely not PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH.

GOP in disarray.
Click to expand...
Maintaining peace in Ukraine and Eastern Europe was and is in America's interest. DeSantis was calling on the Obama administration to extend peace through strength to Ukraine. Obama rejected it.

It is a territorial dispute.

The GOP is engaged in a healthy debate between those that want to support Ukraine in their fight more robustly and those that want to reign in our support of Ukraine. This is a good thing for the GOP and for the country. Why any sane person would think otherwise is beyond me.
 
lotr10 said:
"Up the intensity" is a bit of an understatement, no? The Ukraine did not resist the Russian invasion of Crimea because the people of Crimea welcomed the Russians and wanted no part of Ukraine. On top of that Ukraine had no legitimate historical claim to Crimea.
Click to expand...
BS.
They didn't resist because they didn't have the means to and they certainly did not have the backing of NATO at the time. Anything more than a ceasefire and guerilla warfare would have resulted in a full fledged war with Russia that Ukraine had no chance to win.
lotr10 said:
DeSantis recognized in 2015 that Russian adventurism aimed at Ukraine was a threat to the US & NATO. Not the greatest threat but a threat nonetheless. He then smartly urged that we fortify Ukraine to make it a less desirable target by Putin. This is basic, common sense conservative foreign policy 101.

Flash forward 8 years and Ukraine is locked in a death match with Russia. We're sending massive amounts of arms and aid to Ukraine while the war appears to have no end in sight. At the same time the global economy, already under stress, is further weakened by this war. Now throw in the very real potential for this to escalate into WW3 and the use of nukes and DeSantis is concluding that it's no longer in America's best interests to fully back the Ukraine in this fight. Again this is conservative foreign policy 101.
Click to expand...
Apparently conservative foreign policy also includes losing a strategically important position to Russia to spite the Dems.
 
lotr10 said:
This is revisionist thinking. Ukraine was NOT in a hot war with Russia in 2015 unless you define war very differently then I do.
Click to expand...
Lol

Ukraine and Russians were showing each other in 2015.

Just because they didn't use heavy weapons doesn't mean those on both sides were any less dead.
 
lotr10 said:
This is the kind of "gotcha" stuff that reduces our politics to screaming at each other. And here is why this "gotcha" misses the target badly:

* In 2015 DeSantis was calling for arms to Ukraine as a way to deter FUTURE Russian aggression against Ukraine. DeSantis was NOT asking for delivery of more weapons into an active war zone. This is a big difference. Had we heeded DeSantis here and provided Ukraine with a large amount of lethal weaponry it may have deterred Putin from invading.

* Providing extra arms to our NATO allies on the border with Russia also makes sense in light of Russia's recent annexation of Crimea.

* It was clear that DeSantis was arguing the well established idea of PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH.
Click to expand...
Oh boy. Lol. 🤦‍♂️

It's not "gotcha" stuff. It's literally in the public square. Since he's now chosen to wade into the issue, this stuff is fair game. He's free to opine on his stance then vs. his stance now, no?
 
lotr10 said:
Maintaining peace in Ukraine and Eastern Europe was and is in America's interest. DeSantis was calling on the Obama administration to extend peace through strength to Ukraine. Obama rejected it.

It is a territorial dispute.

The GOP is engaged in a healthy debate between those that want to support Ukraine in their fight more robustly and those that want to reign in our support of Ukraine. This is a good thing for the GOP and for the country. Why any sane person would think otherwise is beyond me.
Click to expand...
We obviously need to stay engaged, but also AUDIT THIS YIT SHOW!!!!
 
Indiandad said:
BS.
They didn't resist because they didn't have the means to and they certainly did not have the backing of NATO at the time. Anything more than a ceasefire and guerilla warfare would have resulted in a full fledged war with Russia that Ukraine had no chance to win.

Apparently conservative foreign policy also includes losing a strategically important position to Russia to spite the Dems.
Click to expand...
You'd seem to ignore the elements of regime-change engineering on the timeline, as well.

Some peoiple just want war. Or the fog of war and the potential reveue streams, above board and otherwise.
 
cabezadecaballo said:
And Joe, Mitch, and Mitt ignored a slow build that could have been addressed far better.
Click to expand...
I agree and have said as much a number of times.
When Russia was massing on the border, Ukraine should have requested NATO peacekeepers and we should have moved assets in quickly.
 
utsherman said:
Oh boy. Lol. 🤦‍♂️

It's not "gotcha" stuff. It's literally in the public square. Since he's now chosen to wade into the issue, this stuff is fair game. He's free to opine on his stance then vs. his stance now, no?
Click to expand...
Just don't ignore the record like he came out of nowhere. He was Navy JAG, with a history in the House. The binary oppositional portrayal of a sober position, well-articulated, is the hackiest of the hack.

And you idiots to pretend to want a sober, responsible centrist. Here he is, on the foreign policy tip, and you can't see past the programming. LOL You idiots on Dem and Trump sides go pure tribal. You couldn't make this level of stupid up.
 
cabezadecaballo said:
You'd seem to ignore the elements of regime-change engineering on the timeline, as well.
Click to expand...
Please explain.
cabezadecaballo said:
Some peoiple just want war. Or the fog of war and the potential reveue streams, above board and otherwise.
Click to expand...
That isn't me.

I'd rather not get into a shooting war with Russia or China. I believe that by arming Ukraine will help prevent that.
 
cabezadecaballo said:
Just don't ignore the record like he came out of nowhere. He was Navy JAG, with a history in the House. The binary oppositional portrayal of a sober position, well-articulated, is the hackiest of the hack.

And you idiots to pretend to want a sober, responsible centrist. Here he is, on the foreign policy tip, and you can't see past the programming. LOL You idiots on Dem and Trump sides go pure tribal. You couldn't make this level of stupid up.
Click to expand...
Yikes. You're really emotional about a lot of this stuff, huh. Lol.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top