Russia Versus The Ukraine

Homesteading & Country Living Forum

Help Support Homesteading & Country Living Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
who is actually telling the truth!
If you do not read the papers or watch the news...you are NOT INFORMED...
If you do read the papers and watch the news... you are FALSELY INFORMED...
Even the people on the ground there will tell you a different story of the same situation. They see a situation, but do not know first hand what really happened there. Too many stories come out of a single situation, just being observed by a different person, a different side of the warring peoples or by a person INTENDING to mis-use the story for propaganda purposes...Yes there are massacres happening. By whom? Only the survivors or perps know...but definitely NOT THE JOURNALISTS...
 
There should definitely be investigations of war crimes by the Ukrainians.
IF: the president of russia (Putin) is responsible for war crimes commited from his soldiers the last MONTH....
THEN: the president of ukraine (Zelensky) is responsible for war crimes commited from his soldiers for EIGHT YEARS...
THEN: the president of America (bush, bush, obama) are responsible for war crimes commited for 20 years....
THEN: the mayor of chicago is responsible for the crimes commited by the police there...
THEN: THE POTUS (bidump) is responsible for the tragedy of the economy, borders, food, gas, water and health of America and the impending WWIII.....
It is easy to point a finger at someone else to take responsibility for something under their COMMAND but only to divert attention to <YOUR OWN RESPONSIBILITY> Stand up and be a MAN and take command and responsibility-...
OR ELSE SHUT THE F. UP ALREADY AND GET OUT OF THE WAY OF A REAL MAN!!!
 
https://files.catbox.moe/v69wub.mp4Rocket used on Civilians in Ukraine has visible serial number tracing back to Ukraine Army.

https://files.catbox.moe/kl4u8g.mp4
Bucha, Ukrainian Military laying out the corpses in the road.? My Hunny seems to think that they were just pulling them out so they could get to the bodies easier. . I don't buy that though.
 
Communist-sympathizer Franklin Delano Roosevelt knew about the attack on Pearl Harbor at least 2 weeks beforehand.

He wanted the USA in the war because he was a crappy Socialist who couldn't figure out how to get out of the Great Depression without a war.

Because of his lack of leadership, and a lack of understanding of basic economics, he let 2,500 Americans get killed in Pearl Harbor and 400,000 more Americans in the war.

Ukraine killing its own citizens isn't unique. And because they're a weaker power than Russia, false flags would be a major part of their war effort.
 
I dont trust anything that I read or hear about this war. I dont know who is right or who is wrong here, except if our corrupt government is supporting one side, then I tend to support the other.
For years now many people here, Left and Right, have been wanting war with Russia. China is our true enemy and yet we keep importing their cheap junk, which goes to growing their military. Of course China has learned long ago that they don't need to invade the US to take over, we'll destroy ourselves from within and sell out to them.
All I know for sure is that we shouldn't be sending a penny of taxpayers money to Ukraine, the US is broke. We could very well end up in another never ending war, like Afghanistan, where we'll eventually surrender after wasting a couple trillion $$ and 20 years.
 
Communist-sympathizer Franklin Delano Roosevelt knew about the attack on Pearl Harbor at least 2 weeks beforehand.

He wanted the USA in the war because he was a crappy Socialist who couldn't figure out how to get out of the Great Depression without a war.

Because of his lack of leadership, and a lack of understanding of basic economics, he let 2,500 Americans get killed in Pearl Harbor and 400,000 more Americans in the war.

Ukraine killing its own citizens isn't unique. And because they're a weaker power than Russia, false flags would be a major part of their war effort.

FDR wasn't the war leader that history portrays him - he was actually out of the Pentagon intelligence loop - everything was done on a direct verbal basis because of his general lack of security awareness - he'd leave paperwork strewn around the WH ...

FDR's refusal to step down and the DNC Congress refusal to act in any capacity (no 25A back then) doomed the world to the Cold War and the Commie enslaving of Western Europe ...

SICK OLD SENILE PEOPLE SHOULDN'T BE IN POWER !!!!!
 
EU chief diplomat Josep Borrell made the statement that the conflict in Ukraine will be solved by military and not diplomatic means and that the arms supplies will be tailored to Ukrainian needs.

This will probably mean that this war will soon spread to Europe and if the EU now starts to supply tanks and fighter jets to Ukraine as Germany is planning to do, Moscow will eventually send a response to Europe.
There are currently too many idiots in the governments who no longer have a clear vision of what their decisions can cause.

https://www.anti-spiegel.ru/2022/eu...sung-des-ukrainisch-russischen-konflikts-aus/
 
This Priest get it. . .

https://rumble.com/v10idad-u.s.-pri...nsky-is-an-adamant-supporter-of-the-new-.html
https://rairfoundation.com/u-s-prie...-an-adamant-supporter-of-the-new-world-order/
“It is very important to make a distinction between the Russia of today and the Soviet Union of 30 years ago – they are not the same.” – Father Nolan
Father Daniel Nolan of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter (FSSP) is no stranger to controversy. His controversial nature was on full display as offered his sermon at Our Lady of Mount Carmel parish in Littleton, Colorado. In this sermon, he reminded the congregation that there are two sides to every issue regarding the Ukraine War. While he did not ask the congregation to choose a side, he did ask them to fully consider the facts and circumstances jumping on the bandwagon promoted by the world.
“We ought to obey God rather than men.” Acts 5:29
In September 2020, Father Nolan’s superiors banned him from posting videos online after stating Catholics need not follow draconian coronavirus mask mandates from their bishop or governor. In the ensuing outrage, the point of his message was missed entirely: he seemed to want people to exercise control over their own health and not to let others do it for them.
Ukraine’s sin versus Putin’s Carnage
Last month, in Father Nolan’s sermon, which was recorded privately by someone and posted to YouTube (it has since been removed), his true message may have been overwhelmed and missed by the liberal anger.
He spoke about the entire world running in outrage to hate Vladimir Putin and referred to it as a “rush to condemn.” He is concerned about the lack of balance in response to the invasion of Ukraine and the lack of media truth.
Father Nolan also revealed some little-known details about the former actor, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Specifically, he referenced Zelensky’s stand for abortion, legalizing prostitution, same-sex marriage, the LGBTQ lifestyle, and transgenderism. He reminded the congregation that, in Biblical terms, these are sins,
“This is not good. This is not good for the Ukrainian people. Who’s worse? Putin, who physically invaded Ukraine, or Zelensky, who invaded Ukraine spiritually? What’s worse? To cause someone to end up in a grave or to cause someone to go to hell?”
Globalist Zelenskyy
Nolan explained that Zelensky had been installed by “elites” like George Soros, Klaus Schwab, and other Globalists. Father Nolan explained that the goal of these elites is to usher in a New World Order with “One World Government” and no God. Father Nolan also referred to their Agenda 2030 communist plans, “In 2030, you will own nothing, and you will be happy. This is communism. This is the old Soviet Union.” RAIR Foundation USA has posted numerous articles about these Globalist goals (see below).
He claimed that many of the pictures of the Ukraine War were recycled from the 2014 Crimean war. However, he did not provide references for that statement.
Father Nolan remarked that the Russia of today is not the USSR of history because it is no longer Communist or Atheist. He referred to a Putin statement about Christianity via the Orthodox Churches being the foundation of Europe. He mentioned that Russia today is “no longer corrupt institutionally,” a controversial statement that only the Russian Oligarchs could answer.
Father Nolan once again has become a point of controversy, becoming the antithesis of the world’s actions.
 
https://nitter.net/Polk_Azov/status/1513596048983441408
Translation :
WARNING!!! About an hour ago, Russian occupation forces used a poisonous substance of unknown origin against Ukrainian military and civilians in the city of Mariupol, which was dropped from an enemy UAV.
The victims have respiratory failure,
-- end translation --
From ozrifles
Note - this is from the "official" Azov Battalion account on Twitter.
That's right - they get a twitter account, but your (legal) president gets banned.
Anyway - the much anticipated chemical attack looks like its arrived !

So this is the next thing to expect on Ukraine citizens? I wouldn't be surprised at all. I have been watching MULTIPLE videos from the Mariupol citizens saying it is the Ukraine's firing upon them along with rescues. They were getting 3 elder women out and then one jumped into an ambulance where there was a woman along with an older son. The Ukraine's had told them to basically get out of their house and they were not willing to go. They had nowhere else to go, so the Ukrainians burnt down their home. . . Her son was shot in the stomach. He was NOT a fighter and both has stayed home since the war broke out.
 
The accusations from Ukraine make no sense.

What end goal is it for Russia? However, committing war crimes against its own citizens has an end goal for Ukraine: drag NATO in.
 
The accusations from Ukraine make no sense.

What end goal is it for Russia? However, committing war crimes against its own citizens has an end goal for Ukraine: drag NATO in.

Russian kids are being shanghaied by Putin into the invasion of Ukraine - seeing their tank buddies blown to hell and ambushed nilly willy >>> Think they are waiting to get their hands on Putin? - first Ukrainian mother with kids seen gets machine gunned by the stupid *******s ...

and - Putin is sending in the cream of his crop of thugs & insane miscreants >>> they live for this kind of opportunity - they can't wait to get their chance at some Romanian or Finnish carnage - PUTIN is their man !!!!
 
TOO MUCH PROPAGANDA FROM BOTH SIDES; TOO MANY YEARS OF PSYOPS IN RUSSIA; TOO MANY PEOPLE ARE HARDENED TO THE WAYS AND MEANS OF STAYING IN POWER::::JUST LIKE IN AMERICA: TOO MANY DECADES OF DEMOCRATIC LIES AND PSYOPS TOO AND "WINNING" VOTING...
NOBODY CARES ENOUGH TO FIGHT OPENLY ON THE STREETS IN MOSCOW (GET ARRESTED)
NOBODY CARES ENOUGH TO FIGHT OPENLY ON THE STREETS OF D.C. (GET ARRESTED)

Here is another view from another group of persons...



The sociologist Greg Yudin believes that’s unlikely to happen. A professor of political philosophy at the Moscow School of Social and Economic Sciences, Yudin said in an interview this week that most people under Vladimir Putin’s rule passively support his “special military operation” in Ukraine because Russian society has become thoroughly “depoliticized.” It’s been difficult to gauge how Russia’s war is playing at home after the country abolished the last of its free press and outlawed speech critical of the war, but Yudin — who is also an expert on public-opinion research — says two decades of authoritarian rule have made the Kremlin’s line easy to accept. If the war lasts for longer than a few months though, the mood may change, and Putin may be tempted to escalate.

The images out of Bucha have shocked the world, but how are they received in Russia? Is there any chance they will undermine the propaganda that’s coming out of the government?

I don’t think so. The dominant attitude is to preserve your everyday life. A Russian citizen might say, “What am I supposed to do?” It’s impossible to imagine what would be the response to that. And of course, the government gives them the story line and the talking points to reject it, and they’re willing to believe it, not because they believe the propaganda — Russians don’t believe anything and anyone — but because it reconciles them with the reality that helps you protect your everyday life. I haven’t seen anyone so far saying, “I was kind of supporting this war, but now there’s just too much.”


One thing that I’ve been curious about for a while is the Kremlin’s emphasis on the “denazification” of Ukraine. Does this line really resonate with the public?

That’s difficult to say. People are swallowing it, and they kind of buy this narrative. Are they really emotionally invested in denazifying Ukraine? I think that it might be true about the elderly generation.

What I find more disturbing is that this denazification narrative turns into an operational concept for the troops on the ground, and that’s very, very worrying. I mean, we already see what it leads to because once the troops perceive the situation as a battle against Nazis, they start doing what they were doing in Bucha. They were trying to purge, to purify, to clean the land from the Nazis. And since Ukrainians have resisted, it obviously implies that they, too, seem to be nazified. Therefore soldiers have to denazify them completely, meaning purges. And I don’t know if you had a chance to read it, but the main news agency, RIA Novosti, just published an article by Timofei Sergeitsev, who basically says precisely that, We were wrong about Ukrainians: They turned out to be much more nazified than we expected, and therefore they have to pay the price.

That is dangerous, once again, because it gets transferred into the operational concept on the ground. But it also infects Russian society because this kind of narrative becomes more and more acceptable. We heard about those crazy ideas, the ideas of the Nazis in Ukraine and Nazis in the government, but it never took such a terrible turn until now. It never was like, We have to purify the whole 40 million people near us. This is a Nazi vision of national purity, of attaining the purity of a whole nation through force.

What should Americans understand about the political climate in Russia right now?

The most important thing to keep in mind is that Russia is a completely depoliticized country. People generally don’t want to have anything in common with politics. There is an incredible contempt and disdain for all kinds of politics just because Russians are completely certain that there is no possible way to change anything through politics, that no change is possible in general. So for that reason, people prefer to lead their private lives. They have opportunities to do that because most of them are better off under Putin. Any kind of political activity is all just complete nonsense to a vast majority of Russians. If you believe in extraterrestrials, that’s at least interesting. If you are into politics, you’re silly. Particularly for people in business, that’s a complete no go. I always say the best way to spoil the party is to start talking about politics in Russia. You will never be invited again.

Against this background, I think it might become a little bit easier to understand the perception of what is going on. The vast majority is either in denial of what is going on in Ukraine or assume this attitude of passive support that the narrative produced by the state is enough for them to keep leading their everyday lives. This narrative tells them, This is not particularly serious, everything’s under control. It was necessary because it was a threat, and a threat means, of course, the destruction of everyday lives, and we don’t want that. You have people who are militarized and amplified by the state media. On the other hand, you have people who are vehemently against the war, protesting. But in the middle, you have the vast majority, which is still in denial and trying to stick to those stories because it brings reconciliation.

There’s what I call the “few months” theory. People keep believing that in two or three months, all the sanctions will be lifted, the war will be over, and Ukrainians will be, of course, happy with being part of Russia.

Depoliticization to this degree doesn’t happen overnight. Can you tell me a little bit more about its roots?

I think there are several factors to it. One of them is, of course, the late Soviet Union, where it was an endless swamp and there was a kind of specific atomization of life. The second factor was radical market reform in the 1990s. It was brutal. It completely destroyed the ways of life people were used to. It was very traumatic for many people because they kind of learned that there are no friends. You have to fight all the time. So that was like an unchained market where, basically, there’s a war of all against all.

And then comes Putin. There was already a lot of disenchantment by the end of the ’90s that was not used strategically, but he turned it into a strategic weapon. His media was constantly trying to depoliticize people even further. It is precisely under Putin that this disdain for politics took shape. This is how his system worked for quite a long time because everyone knows that Putin and his party always win the elections. But very few people know how they do it, technically. Turnout is very low because people are persuaded that it makes more sense to tune out at the elections.

Elections are a masquerade. They were flooded with all kinds of ideas just to create repulsion toward politics. You had all kinds of porn stars, like complete kooks. And that, of course, created the impression that you shouldn’t show up. Then you have like 20 percent turnout, with 15 percent of those mobilized for your party. And that gives you 75 percent of support. And then nobody, of course, cares about looking at the turnout numbers. You have this perception that there is a vast majority for the president or for the ruling party.

The TV show House was actually incredibly popular in Russia precisely because the motto is “Everyone lies.” This is so to the point with what Russians feel. Everyone lies. There’s no truth at all. It’s endless relativism. And the media was saying all the time that you should never trust anyone, including the media, of course. That destroys any kind of social bond between people.

Sociologists have this tool, asking, “Do you think that people, in general, can be trusted?” Russia has very high levels of distrust. I’ve seen it as a sociologist. Often people don’t even understand the question — “How on earth can you trust people?” You can trust dogs, cats, but with people, this is impossible. I’m sure it was strategic for Putin to depoliticize the country and to trade relative economic prosperity for complete civic disengagement.

What degree of repression do intellectuals, antiwar activists, and other dissenters experience now?

It’s definitely worse than what we have ever seen under Putin. We have criminal cases against people here who protest against the war. Otherwise, people are easily fired. Just yesterday, I was told that civil servants are asked by their employers if they have relatives in Ukraine, which means that, of course, you have to say no. If you say yes, you are suspicious. So basically, you’re told to sever ties with your family in Ukraine and your friends in Ukraine. So there’s this sort of pressure. People are fired from universities over their position, even if they didn’t make it explicit. Students are expelled.
 
CONTINUED REPORT:

Can you expand on what the situation is like in universities? Has there been, for example, a chilling effect on research?

Oh, I think academic life is over. First of all, there’s a lot of ideological stuff now in the universities. Students are made to attend school lectures that are basically promoting Putin’s crazy views of Ukrainian history. Many universities are doing that, many schools are doing that, and even kindergartens. They’re basically imposing this theory on children. They have to pass the tests on this, and if you have to pass a test, that means that you are not free to make up your mind.

As for scholars, well, obviously the vast majority of the international connections are now broken. International scholars really depend on access to academic articles and papers, and some of the journals are now severing their dealings with Russian universities, and it’s impossible to work meaningfully without them. Many international partners have pulled out of Russian journals. This transformed the whole orientation of academic science. For instance, in almost all universities, one of the key indicators for scholars was to publish articles in the leading international journals. So now it is, of course, no longer possible.

You’ve talked about how depoliticized the public is. With that in mind, I’m curious to know how worried people are about the threat of a nuclear conflict? Do they take it seriously?

In many respects, the attitude that Putin himself developed but also imposes on society is that nuclear blackmail is okay. And it was like that even before the war. But when the war started, I think it got even worse. Because there was just this deep belief that the more we’re bragging about the ability to start a nuclear war, the more concessions we will get. The belief is that the United States is weak and is not going to start a nuclear war over some country in Eastern Europe or Europe in general. And for that reason, we just have to be strong enough, and that will be enough for them to give us whatever we want. There’s deep resentment in Russia. Putin has done everything to amplify this resentment about the loss of the Cold War. There is this deep revanchism, this longing for revenge. I mean, Putin at some point said that if there’s no Russia, there’s no point for the world to exist. And by Russia, he means himself. Make no mistake.

What do you think might happen if the war drags on longer than a few months?

Well, after the “few months” theory, there will be another “few months” theory. But still, it becomes more and more difficult for people to pretend that everything’s all right. And it is for that reason that I don’t really feel that Putin has so much time. I honestly think he will escalate once he understands he isn’t making progress.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
 
ounterfactuals always involve guessing. But one counterfactual proposition that seems increasingly obvious is that if Donald Trump had secured a second term in office, Ukraine would be losing the war right now.

Ukraine’s successful defense has required several factors, including the bravery and skill of its armed forces and continued Russian bungling. But it has also relied on a unified and energetic response from its western allies, which has included moral solidarity, economic sanctions, intelligence sharing, and a massive infusion of weapons. If Trump still occupied the Oval Office, none of these would be occurring.

A month ago, Trump’s close friend and supporter Sean Hannity tried repeatedly to coax him to call Vladimir Putin a bad person or admit his slaughter of civilians was wrong. Trump kept refusing. After Trump declined the first opportunity, Hannity offered another: “You came under some fire when you said that Vladimir Putin is very smart. I think I know you a little bit better than most people in the media, and I think you also recognize he’s evil, do you not?”

After Trump declined again and boasted of his closeness with Putin, Hannity tried suggesting Russia was an “enemy” Trump was strategically keeping close. Trump declined that opportunity, too, saying, “I got along with these people. I got along with them well.”

Last night, Hannity tried again. Referring back to their previous conversation, he asked Trump if Russia’s invasion was “evil.” Trump declined, instead ranting about the weakness of NATO: “I think in a hundred years, people are gonna look back and they’re going to say, ‘How did we stand back, and NATO stand back?’ — which, in many ways, I’ve called a paper tiger.” He did not concede Russia was morally wrong to invade.


Russia hawks within the Republican Party have tried to cast Trump as the true Russia hawk, and they have turned his obsessive attacks on NATO into evidence he was cleverly trying to strengthen the alliance all along by prodding fellow members to increase their defense spending.

His rant last night ought to dispel that notion. NATO allies have increased their military spending in response to Russia’s invasion. But rather than acknowledge this success — the outcome he supposedly wants — Trump continued to bash them as worthless leeches.

What truly gave the game away was when Trump segued to his economic grievances with western Europe. “And then they take advantage of us on trade,” he ranted to Hannity, revising his long-standing claim that western Europe is the true enemy of the American people (“Every bit as bad as China”). It is beyond obvious that Trump’s insults to NATO allies were not intended to strengthen their commitment but a bad-faith demand put forward as a pretext for the United States to abandon the alliance altogether. (Several of Trump’s former national security advisers have said Trump would have done so in a second term, and the loss of this expected outcome is the best explanation of why Putin decided to invade Ukraine now.)

In private, Trump has repeatedly expressed his existential loathing for Ukraine, which he has described as “corrupt” — an epithet he does not use for more corrupt states like Russia — and not a real country, insisting that its eastern regions properly belong to Russia. The public analog of those beliefs can be seen in the votes of the Republican Party’s anti-Ukraine wing in Congress, which has voted against sanctions on Russia and support for NATO.

That wing, not coincidentally, comprises the faction of the party that genuinely shares his foreign-policy outlook. If you want to imagine a Trumpian response to the invasion, merely project the voting record of the America First wing onto the executive branch.

The sanctions put together by the Biden administration would almost certainly not exist. There would likely be little or no military assistance or intelligence sharing. NATO might not exist at all. And rather than a president who goes off script with an overly aggressive condemnation of Putin’s culpability, we would have a president who does the opposite.

Trump has never been willing to even state clearly Putin’s most heinous acts. When Russia poisoned Alexei Navalny, a crime condemned across the globe, Trump repeatedly refused to admit Putin had anything to do with it, and reporters eventually gave up asking him about it. (Trump still hasn’t admitted Putin’s culpability.) Trump’s priorities would be to ensure cheap gasoline and keep Ukrainian refugees out of the country.

Trump’s anger at the “deep state” was not mere paranoia. The bureaucracy often thwarted his goals — most notably around Ukraine, where his efforts to withhold military aid and extort Volodymyr Zelensky into smearing Joe Biden ultimately petered out. But a reelected, or reinstalled, President Trump would have a much freer hand. Had 44,000 votes in Georgia, Arizona, and Wisconsin swung the other way, Zelensky would probably at this moment be in exile, in a Russian prison, or dead.
 
1649976078699.png
 
ounterfactuals always involve guessing. But one counterfactual proposition that seems increasingly obvious is that if Donald Trump had secured a second term in office, Ukraine would be losing the war right now.

Ukraine’s successful defense has required several factors, including the bravery and skill of its armed forces and continued Russian bungling. But it has also relied on a unified and energetic response from its western allies, which has included moral solidarity, economic sanctions, intelligence sharing, and a massive infusion of weapons. If Trump still occupied the Oval Office, none of these would be occurring.

A month ago, Trump’s close friend and supporter Sean Hannity tried repeatedly to coax him to call Vladimir Putin a bad person or admit his slaughter of civilians was wrong. Trump kept refusing. After Trump declined the first opportunity, Hannity offered another: “You came under some fire when you said that Vladimir Putin is very smart. I think I know you a little bit better than most people in the media, and I think you also recognize he’s evil, do you not?”

After Trump declined again and boasted of his closeness with Putin, Hannity tried suggesting Russia was an “enemy” Trump was strategically keeping close. Trump declined that opportunity, too, saying, “I got along with these people. I got along with them well.”

Last night, Hannity tried again. Referring back to their previous conversation, he asked Trump if Russia’s invasion was “evil.” Trump declined, instead ranting about the weakness of NATO: “I think in a hundred years, people are gonna look back and they’re going to say, ‘How did we stand back, and NATO stand back?’ — which, in many ways, I’ve called a paper tiger.” He did not concede Russia was morally wrong to invade.


Russia hawks within the Republican Party have tried to cast Trump as the true Russia hawk, and they have turned his obsessive attacks on NATO into evidence he was cleverly trying to strengthen the alliance all along by prodding fellow members to increase their defense spending.

His rant last night ought to dispel that notion. NATO allies have increased their military spending in response to Russia’s invasion. But rather than acknowledge this success — the outcome he supposedly wants — Trump continued to bash them as worthless leeches.

What truly gave the game away was when Trump segued to his economic grievances with western Europe. “And then they take advantage of us on trade,” he ranted to Hannity, revising his long-standing claim that western Europe is the true enemy of the American people (“Every bit as bad as China”). It is beyond obvious that Trump’s insults to NATO allies were not intended to strengthen their commitment but a bad-faith demand put forward as a pretext for the United States to abandon the alliance altogether. (Several of Trump’s former national security advisers have said Trump would have done so in a second term, and the loss of this expected outcome is the best explanation of why Putin decided to invade Ukraine now.)

In private, Trump has repeatedly expressed his existential loathing for Ukraine, which he has described as “corrupt” — an epithet he does not use for more corrupt states like Russia — and not a real country, insisting that its eastern regions properly belong to Russia. The public analog of those beliefs can be seen in the votes of the Republican Party’s anti-Ukraine wing in Congress, which has voted against sanctions on Russia and support for NATO.

That wing, not coincidentally, comprises the faction of the party that genuinely shares his foreign-policy outlook. If you want to imagine a Trumpian response to the invasion, merely project the voting record of the America First wing onto the executive branch.

The sanctions put together by the Biden administration would almost certainly not exist. There would likely be little or no military assistance or intelligence sharing. NATO might not exist at all. And rather than a president who goes off script with an overly aggressive condemnation of Putin’s culpability, we would have a president who does the opposite.

Trump has never been willing to even state clearly Putin’s most heinous acts. When Russia poisoned Alexei Navalny, a crime condemned across the globe, Trump repeatedly refused to admit Putin had anything to do with it, and reporters eventually gave up asking him about it. (Trump still hasn’t admitted Putin’s culpability.) Trump’s priorities would be to ensure cheap gasoline and keep Ukrainian refugees out of the country.

Trump’s anger at the “deep state” was not mere paranoia. The bureaucracy often thwarted his goals — most notably around Ukraine, where his efforts to withhold military aid and extort Volodymyr Zelensky into smearing Joe Biden ultimately petered out. But a reelected, or reinstalled, President Trump would have a much freer hand. Had 44,000 votes in Georgia, Arizona, and Wisconsin swung the other way, Zelensky would probably at this moment be in exile, in a Russian prison, or dead.

you know guy - why don't you take your commie crap and just leave the site - if you actually knew anything outside what your local Pravda media shoved up your borsht azzhole - you just might be able to contribute something ....

one of the very first international steps Prez Trump took was take the Obammy arms embargo off Ukraine - sent in the very anti-tank weapons and sniper rifles that are causing Putin grief - it was a VERY PERSONAL slug in the eye to Putin and was intended to be - along with the weapons went US trainer Green Berets >>>> THIS IS VERIFIED HISTORY - NOT YOUR USUAL PRAVDA BORSHT **** DIET ....
 
you know guy - why don't you take your commie crap and just leave the site - if you actually knew anything outside what your local Pravda media shoved up your borsht azzhole - you just might be able to contribute something ....

one of the very first international steps Prez Trump took was take the Obammy arms embargo off Ukraine - sent in the very anti-tank weapons and sniper rifles that are causing Putin grief - it was a VERY PERSONAL slug in the eye to Putin and was intended to be - along with the weapons went US trainer Green Berets >>>> THIS IS VERIFIED HISTORY - NOT YOUR USUAL PRAVDA BORSHT **** DIET ....

Got triggered again!
 

Latest posts

Back
Top