• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

How should west respond to potential (likely) Russian invasion of Ukraine?

What concessions by Russia does Dmitry Medvedev's plan involve? I don't notice any.

What would he consider an uncompromising pro-Russian position? Because that's what his proposed plan looks like to me.
It's all smoke. Adolph Putin and his cronies are going to press this war to it's end because they have no other choice. They just want to appear to be somewhat peace-loving. A bullet to the head in their bunker is the only end they can have at this point. If someone within Putinstan tosses them through a window it's another story.
 
Russia has released their "compromise position peace plan" for Ukraine:


The plan requires the following: 1) complete and unconditional surrender; 2) demilitarization; 3) dismiss all constitutional authorities; 4) "forced denazification programs encompassing all authorities; 5) Ukraine must pay compensation to Russia, including reimbursing relatives of Russian soldiers 6) officially recognize that the entire territory of Ukraine belongs to the Russian Federation".

I'd like to know if anyone honestly thinks that this is reasonable or that a sane person would give in to this?

Unless the West provides more weapons soon, they might not have any choice.
 
Johnson signals shift on Ukraine to GOP senators | The Hill
Johnson told senators that the House will send a Ukraine aid package to the Senate but floated the idea of making it a loan or lend-lease program so U.S. taxpayers would not be shelling out tens of billions of dollars without any expectation of getting a return, according to senators who participated in the discussion.

The Speaker also talked about including something similar to the REPO for Ukrainians Act, sponsored by Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas), which would authorize the confiscation of Russian sovereign assets and deposit the proceeds of liquidated property into a Ukraine support fund, senators said.
So he might go ahead with something.
 
Johnson signals shift on Ukraine to GOP senators | The Hill
Johnson told senators that the House will send a Ukraine aid package to the Senate but floated the idea of making it a loan or lend-lease program so U.S. taxpayers would not be shelling out tens of billions of dollars without any expectation of getting a return, according to senators who participated in the discussion.

The Speaker also talked about including something similar to the REPO for Ukrainians Act, sponsored by Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas), which would authorize the confiscation of Russian sovereign assets and deposit the proceeds of liquidated property into a Ukraine support fund, senators said.
So he might go ahead with something.
Most of those seized assets are in Belgium.
EU-frozen Russian assets to generate 15-20 bln until 2027, EU official says
 
Johnson signals shift on Ukraine to GOP senators | The Hill
Johnson told senators that the House will send a Ukraine aid package to the Senate but floated the idea of making it a loan or lend-lease program so U.S. taxpayers would not be shelling out tens of billions of dollars without any expectation of getting a return, according to senators who participated in the discussion.

The Speaker also talked about including something similar to the REPO for Ukrainians Act, sponsored by Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas), which would authorize the confiscation of Russian sovereign assets and deposit the proceeds of liquidated property into a Ukraine support fund, senators said.
So he might go ahead with something.
Maybe those of us who support Ukrainian independence should start quoting President Reagan and the various Presidents Bush on the subject of Russia and democracy?

They didn't have any problems with investing US taxpayer dollars fighting for freedom around the globe.
Tom
 
Johnson signals shift on Ukraine to GOP senators | The Hill
Johnson told senators that the House will send a Ukraine aid package to the Senate but floated the idea of making it a loan or lend-lease program so U.S. taxpayers would not be shelling out tens of billions of dollars without any expectation of getting a return, according to senators who participated in the discussion.

The Speaker also talked about including something similar to the REPO for Ukrainians Act, sponsored by Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas), which would authorize the confiscation of Russian sovereign assets and deposit the proceeds of liquidated property into a Ukraine support fund, senators said.
So he might go ahead with something.
Maybe those of us who support Ukrainian independence should start quoting President Reagan and the various Presidents Bush on the subject of Russia and democracy?

They didn't have any problems with investing US taxpayer dollars fighting for freedom around the globe.
Tom
But the context is different. Reagan and Bush lived in a world where Russia was a shambles and China was a badly administered disaster.

Between Bush sr and now both Russia and China got their act together.

I think also there's a bit of the little brother psychology going on. Until the 1960'ies Europe were colonial powers running the world. High prestige. USA was the new kid on the block trying to prove to Europe it was better than them. Now the shiny splendour of European power has sharply diminished. I somehow doubt contemporary Americans feel any need to prove to Europeans that they also are powerful. We all know USA is more powerful today. The memory of European grateness is fading. So USA will feel less motivated to show off their wealth by pouring it into various conflicts around the world.

Not to mention that US military spending is so high that USA can't afford the kind of generous welfare European countries have. We can only afford it because we're relying on Americans to bail us out when there's trouble brewing. Why would Americans put up with that indefinitely?
 
Not to mention that US military spending is so high that USA can't afford the kind of generous welfare European countries have. We can only afford it because we're relying on Americans to bail us out when there's trouble brewing. Why would Americans put up with that indefinitely?
US military spending IS welfare.

The vast numbers of infantrymen painting rocks white at army bases across the midwest are all sending paychecks home to mom and pop, which is the main thing keeping flyover country afloat.

And a significant employer of Americans who choose not to sign up for the military is the industrial complex that supports them. The money spent on tanks, planes, ships, and other military gear is being spent in America, and goes into the pockets of Americans.

It's welfare, but it's stealthy, inefficient, and inequitable welfare.

America's own economy depends on American military spending. They're not doing it to benefit Europeans, that's just a side effect.
 
Russian voters, answering Navalny’s call, protest Putin’s forever rule

MOSCOW — On the final day of a presidential election with only one possible result, Russians protested Vladimir Putin’s authoritarian hold on power by forming long lines to vote against him at noon Sunday — answering the call of opposition leader Alexei Navalny who had urged the midday action before dying suddenly in prison last month.


The “Noon Against Putin” protest, with voters forming queues outside polling stations in major cities like Moscow, St. Petersburg, Yekaterinburg, Chelyabinsk, Tomsk, Novosibirsk, was a striking — if futile — display of solidarity and dissent designed to counteract the Kremlin’s main message — that Putin is a legitimate president commanding massive support.
 
In America, voters stand in long lines when the government chokes off access to ballots. In Russia, people stand in long lines when the government chokes off access to democracy. I doubt that barbos will be standing in these lines. He doesn't need to vote in order to get the government he wants. Most people in Russia, of course, won't bother voting, and not because they are happy with the malevolent fool running their country.

 
Russia has released their "compromise position peace plan" for Ukraine:


The plan requires the following: 1) complete and unconditional surrender; 2) demilitarization; 3) dismiss all constitutional authorities; 4) "forced denazification programs encompassing all authorities; 5) Ukraine must pay compensation to Russia, including reimbursing relatives of Russian soldiers 6) officially recognize that the entire territory of Ukraine belongs to the Russian Federation".

I'd like to know if anyone honestly thinks that this is reasonable or that a sane person would give in to this?

But regime in Kiev was the first who suggested unconditional surrender (of Russia)
And I did not see you complaining about that.

Russia is winning this war and and will be the one imposing conditions.
 
What makes her an expert of Navalny?
What makes you an expert of Navalny?

You're the one with the outlandish nonsensicle statements about Navalny. This is a "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" situation.
Like what?
The problem with the conversations in this thread that you are involved is that you're just parroting the official Putin propaganda line. But those are obvious lies. Bizarre planted assertions to justify a Russian invasion. Its statements right out of Goebels playbook.
No, It is you who parroting western propaganda.
Just the fact that you keep repeating the fake news plant regarding Ukrainian Nazis makes any of your statements hard to believe. I find it hard to believe that you believe what you are saying
US Congress report is fake news?
 

British expat living in Russia complains about western propaganda.
His own relatives and friends in GB don't believe him :)
What chances do I have?
 
Gestapo hunts men even on cemeteries.
Woman went to a grave of her husband (lost in in illegal NATO war on Russia) with her son.
Gestapo kidnapped the son.
 
LOL,
Drunk (I think) Ukrainian in the apartment window tells president "Go fuck yourself, you faggot"
Look at the face of the president. I suspect it's Odessa. No much love for him there.


 
Back
Top Bottom