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

I guess not. What was the point?

Resorting to military action is not a disqualifier. A person who has served will have a better understanding of what it means.

 

You're right that it's not in the US's best interest for Russia to win this engagement, but the time to have acted on that was before the invasion started. At this point, the best that can be hoped for is somehow negotiating a settlement.

 

Well that seems somehow worse if people are not really aware of the implications of their policy preferences. To "punch a bully in the face" is a rather stupid way to direct foreign policy.

 

Never altered your post. Soviet Union in 1942 had 5 to 7 million. In 1939 it was closer to 5 million, including some very good units. The KV1 and KV2 outmatched any Panzer 4 tank on the battlefield. You also fail to include the great purge of military commanders by Stalin in the later 1930's, the Conquest of Poland by both German and Russia in their infamous pact, and so on and so forth. The Soviets were more than capable in Conquering Europe. They just did not see any net change to do so in the 1930s. Bear in mind, Stalin in the 1920's conquered Estonia, Latvia, Georgia, Ukraine, and other smaller nations on the border with Russia that made it into the Soviet Union.

 

As I recall Hillary ran on implementing a no fly zone in Syria, which would have accomplished roughly the same thing as implementing one in Ukraine, WW III, with the exception that NATO would have sat that one out.

A Syrian no fly zone would have worked if we had established one before the Russians were pulled into the war, but once that happened, it was Russian air space. However Hillary didn't suggest it until after the Russians moved in. Someone's been trying to get us in a war for years.

 

I actually posted the proof that you altered my post and you are still going to deny it? Even though I put the evidence right there? Pretty ballsy I'll admit.

To be clear, this is what I posted:



Emphasis on the key statement: "Russia has maybe a million and a half."

First off, I said Russia, not the Soviet Union. If I meant the Soviets I would have said so.

But more importantly, I used the present tense "has" in my statement, which you altered to "had" when you reposted it.

Now explain why I should listen to a word you say when you are lying about what I wrote?

 

Me and mine do not have a dog in this fight. I'm not just unwilling to go myself, I'm outraged that so much as a copper penny might come out of my pocket to pay for this violence. Where is our peace movement when we need them?

 

They are not directing foreign policy. Sounds more like regular people speaking their mind.

 

do you think.....I mean based on the sanctions regimes now imposed on Russia I think the odds of China "invading" Taiwan have gone to pretty much zero!

 

Speaking of Kim, we should turn Russia into a North Korea 2.0. Isolated and impoverished. Im sure China would be willing to help them out like they do N Korea.

 

As far as getting us into a war goes, I think there are elements of the military and government that want to confront Russia. The only problem is when and how to do it. It's obvious that the Russian people are not going to take care of their problem which is the Putin government of Russia. I think they're all suffering from a bad case of learned helplessness. Well someone's going to have to splash some cold water in their faces and make them realize that what happens in Russia doesn't stay in Russia.

 

Hillary wants an 80s Afghanistan style insurgency in Ukraine to wear Russia down.

Weapons and dollars for insurgents: Hillary Clinton chalks out the Afghanistan model for Ukraine to drive out Russia (opindia.com)

 

Imposing similar sanctions on China would result in serious shortages in our stores.
I think we should take Chinese support for Russia seriously and start a disinvestment campaign - make it expensive for businesses to produce in China. There are many countries in this world who would happily create necessary legal framework to host assembly plants on their soil. Africa is like an untapped resource and such investment would help African economies.

 

Putin humiliating Biden after he humiliated Obama.

 

We certainly do need to diversify and get away from our dependence on China. Otherwise we would be in a worse position than Europe is now vis-a-vis Russia in the event of a conflict.

There has been far too much wishful thinking among American and other western business leaders and politicians in this regard, apparently always assuming that our economic ties would cause China would become more liberal and democratic, and prevent aggression on their part. While these ties undoubtedly have a great amount of influence on the Chinese, they are no guarantee. China has indeed grown more capitalistic over the years, but it's still an authoritarian system that could turn and go to war on a dime and would have no problem locking down information and keeping pesky truth and dissent from causing problems for them domestically, and it is obvious that they are purposely building up sufficient military force to be able to fend us off and take Taiwan if they so choose. We absolutely do not want to be dependent on them for the vast majority of our consumer products and more if and when they decide to act.

 

What's similar to this one? It kind of makes me think of Saddam invading Kuwait. Only this time the people look like us and were trying to become more like us. It's easy to see why it strikes an emotional cord and can be seen as a battle of good vs evil. I've been hesitant about a no-fly zone because of the threat of nuclear war. On the other hand, Putin probably knows that his country would do better losing a conventional war than even winning a nuclear war. But his decisions seem to take into account things like pride - maybe he really would sacrifice millions of his own people to equalize with the west. This whole incursion of his, and more particularly how he has managed or not managed it, makes me question his rationality. Either he's irrational, or his intelligence services have been failing him.

 

Personally...and its not based on any depth of knowledge about China....but I don't think China supports Russia per se...I think they maintain a state of ambivalence towards Russia. Both China and Russia have a number of things in common. China want to close down freedom of information, they want to make themselves less susceptible to financial pressure and the "power" of the USD and they want the freedom to run their autocratic systems without being hectored about their appalling human rights regime. However, China also firmly believes in national sovereignty, territorial integrity and not intervening violently in another neighboring country; they do that for their own purposes they don't want people claiming Tibet is independent or preventing them, in due course, from re-integrating Taiwan into mainland China. The Chinese have got strong principles of these views and want to protect them as well!
In terms of Russia and the Chinese, I think the Chinese regard themselves as pragmatically more skillful, more thoughtful and more long term....they play chess! and they think themselves as less brutal. Look at where China is now compared to back in the Cold War days. Now think about Russia; if you look back at the Brezhnev era, the Chinese see a failure of Brezhnev to modernise and rejuvenate the Communist Party which ultimately led to its demise. Then Gorbachev tried to bring in economic reform and political reform at the same time and again failed and again led to the collapse of the system. And now the Chinese are looking a third Russian leader making a massive mistake of strategic proportions; they'll be studying whats going wrong on the battlefields but more importantly they'll be studying this new level of sanctions that they would not want to get caught up in or be subjected to.
I would imagine that the Chinese are embarrassed about what the Russians are doing.

 

Interesting chart

 

A Democrat administration at Washington means [statistically] war!

No way. Obama obtained a Nobel peace Prize and he started I don't know how many wars following the format of "Arab spring".
The Academy can give me a Nobel peace Prize: I just want to start a war in Antarctica. Why? To win a Nobel peace Prize!

 

China and Russia have always been close but I think never friends. There used to be serious border disputes and clashes from time to time.

 

The Iraqi invasion of Kuwait posed a more serious threat to the world. Saddam wanted to gobble up as much mid-east oil as he could, and if he had gotten control of Saudi oil, we would have had a very different world. What happens in Ukraine...pretty much stays in Ukraine. It's not a threat to the world like the annexation of Kuwait was.

 

I think they've gone up.

The world isn't going to impose sanctions on China like they did to Russia.

 

They both represent a threat to the relatively peaceful world order, the international norm that unprovoked hostile takeovers will not be tolerated in the post WW2 world. If Putin comes out ahead, it would embolden him and other world leaders to be more aggressive when they think it fits their interests. Same could have been said if Saddam's takeover of Kuwait had gone unanswered.

 

I disagree but you may be right...we don't know...and don't really want to find out....

How do you know?

 

Well I wish the blue helmets good luck in maintaining world peace.