Who does—and doesn’t—support sending U.S. troops to Ukraine

Also Putin in particular and the Russian govt. in general, is known for being anti-homosexual.

 

Lol. Are you pro-Putin now?

 

No. I hate Putin. Always have. He should die.

 

He's messing up a great deal for the rich Russians so he just might be sacrificed.

 

I expect that's already been done. Given the age and operational requirements of their ICBMs, I think there's a good chance we could take out virtually all of them before they ever even get off the ground after a launch order has been given. I'm also counting on what may amount to some wishful, but realistic thinking, and that is that we have the tech to stalk their boomers without them knowing, and who knows how much SDI has progressed since '89.

 

The op shows nothing about the poll.
Is it real?

 

Where did this supposed poll ever address WW3?

 

Yep. According to republican leadership. Putin's move is genius.

 

...don't seem to be, to you. Guess what, most people would probably disagree. So, as I'd said-- but it is already becoming clear I will not be able to penetrate your mind, with its meaning-- your complaint only comes down to the fact that you don't share the same perspective as the MSM. So what? Let's try to stay on topic, shall we? You made your comment, in reply to my noting the somewhat inconsistent way, in which Media covers stories, based more on the expected t.v. ratings the stories will get, which is regrettable, even if understandable.

In the context of that discussion (for the 2nd, and last time), there is NO REASON TO BRING LEFT/RIGHT DISPOSITION OF THE MEDIA INTO IT, UNLESS you are maintaining that, were our Media more predominantly "Righty," it would be more attentive of ALL humanitarian crises, equally. If you cannot understand that very simple truth, I am not going to go on, beating a dead Elephant.

LMAO! An attempt by ME, to derail the thread:

That is your OP. Do you realize that you make the difference in results, by Party, an issue of your thread? Just checking, cause you just said that I was trying to derail your thread when, in fact, my reply speaks directly to your closing question-- in red, so you don't miss it, like you apparently did, in making your ridiculous accusation.

Do you not see the relation, Lil Mike? I'm not done, going through my response; I just figured I needed to cut it up into little bites for you, so we could pinpoint just where it is, that you say that I start "derailing," the thread.

Continuing, now I will show where I comment specifically on your other, OP, comment (color- coded in blue, to aid with your recognizing my being "on topic," not derailing). My reply's next paragraph:

Not only do I speak to your comment about how "surprising," the percentage of Americans, who favor our military involvement; I do so, while referencing another one of your posts:

So, my comment about the sporadic way the NEWS MEDIA COVER EVENTS, goes specifically to your comments, here, wondering why this particular humanitarian crisis, was garnering a greater buy-in, by the American public, than others. Do you see it-- or should I add some more text colorization, to give you a hand?

So, thus far, am I derailing your thread?
My first reply directly responded to 2 ideas in your OP, as well as referenced and responded to an idea in another one of your page 1 posts.

Now, here is your reply to me:

All I responded, after that, could be summed up as saying that, in lieu of anything to support your statement, above, in red (for your convenience), you have no cause to inject that opinion into this debate. And that is ME, "derailing the thread?" If you think so, then your vocabulary is even worse than I had imagined.

Now I would submit, that it is your text in red, where the thread starts being derailed-- by you-- along partisan lines. Granted, you had already been trying to make this an exercise in Democrat- bashing, or at least trying to steer focus to partisanship-- which is not identical to liberals & conservatives simply seeing things differently-- since the first page:

You do understand, I hope, that the word "partisanship" cannot help but evoke an idea of competition, of antagonism, yes?


Looking forward to reading your doubletalk- filled reply, in which you claim my methodical deconstruction of the course of our conversation, is actually a "rant," and that I am someone who is beyond being reasoned with.

 

Well hell that’s gonna get him to stop I’m sure

 

Don't see how Russia threatening aid convoys relates to nuking the USA

 

How long do these preparations take ? .. that was the question Dayton to which you are supposed to know the answer ..but do not. You are guessing .and making things up as usual - after having read how things were done in the 60s

Nor do you know anything about hypersonics ... obviously - as Russia has plenty of them. India and China also have hypersonic missiles .. and the three nations Russia - India - China making up a consortia - working together for decades on this technology.

So what are you suggesting Dayton .. China - India - Russia faked all those hypersonic missile tests -- tests which the Pentagon believes .. even though you don't.

 

What do you mean "nothing about the poll?" It's in the link.

 

It's the poll question, "sending US troops to Ukraine." If you favor that, I don't see how you avoid WWIII if you plan to engage the Russians in combat.

 

As Ukraine is a sovereign state, it would not be at all illegal for it to invite any country to station troupes on areas it controls. A force that entered western regions to occupy it in the interests of that nation would not be an act of war against Russia. The problem with this or any other move is that Putin is entirely consumed with Putin's interests and survival. We cannot know what he perceives as essential to that.

 

I do think the response would be totally different if it were the Chinese. The US establishment is beholden to the Chinese in a way that they are not to the Russians. So I'm sure if this was China, we would be getting think pieces from Vox and news sites on "Why China's invasion of Taiwan corrects a historical wrong" or some such.

I think the change towards Russia has less to do with Russia and more to do with what's going on in the US establishment. We went from "The 1980's called..." indifference to Russia in 2012 to Russia hysteria from 2013 on. It's weird.

 

"tests" in no way means a weapon is ready for deployment. And you don't even know what "hypersonic missiles" refer to obviously. Because it is not simply speed. "hypersonic missiles" refer to "hypersonic cruise missiles" which no nation on Earth has deployed yet.

If you would read books like "Big Red. Life aboard a nuclear missile submarine" (in that case the U.S.S. Nebraska) you would know the details of what is involved in launching a nuclear missile (and logically, the Russians certainly have nothing more advanced than a U.S. Ohio class SSBN).

I can't help it if you can't or won't read but insist instead on vomiting up old anti war talking points.

 

I never said hypersonic was simply speed ? Why are you making up this fantasy - and attributing it to me - so you have something to argue against ..

You do not have the faintest idea about deployment of hypersonics - just making things up as you go .. Do you deny as well that China and India have not deployed their hypersonics ? Yup .. was a rather fancy "Test" by the Chinese .. hugely successful .. better not build more of those .. right Dayton LOL

 

Are you accusing me of lying? Better be able to prove that.

 

Not sure if it was intentional .. so Lying would be a bit strong. You did however make up a fantasy - and attribute it to me - pretending that I stated hypersonics was "simply speed"

Now .. perhaps you believe this made up story you have attributed to me .... and so was not an intentional falsehood.

So .. was it an intentional falsehood on your part - or was it not .. that will allow you to be able to determine whether or not you were Lying.

 

Sure we have a nice new toy to play with.
We don't care about what oligarchs are going to do.
Who cares?

 

IF Putin uses biological/chemical weapons everyone needs to go in (including us) to stop him from genocide...we probably should do so right now to prevent a Nuclear problem in Chernobyl and in Europe's largest Nuke plant, but we wont until it is too late. It is likely going by his history and what he is doing/has said that he intends to keep invading if he takes Ukraine so we could pre-emptively stop him but we wont.

 

What actual evidence do you have that Russia, China, or India have hypersonic weapons beyond their public statements?

 

I doubt they would be saying that, but I think they would avoid trying to give it too much attention, and they would say it's not that big of a deal. They also would not send in reporters to cover all the bad things that were happening or try to generate sympathy from the public.

You can look at how little coverage the situation in Hong Kong was given (even though admittedly that is not as significant of an event as Ukraine).

 

Top U.S. general confirms 'very concerning' Chinese hypersonic weapons test

https://www.reuters.com/business/ae...g-chinese-hypersonic-weapons-test-2021-10-27/

Did you think the "Top US Military office, General Mark Milley" is lying to you .. making the whole thing up - like the crazy idea that the Earth is Round to a Flat Earther.