Wtf is wrong with this guys

Everytime we correct your foolish posts by the facts you reply something like that of no value. Just stop posting already and get outside your basement

you keep towing the russian line of "cia operation" as if it wouldnt have happened without cia involvement.

we didnt pull up into a peaceful happy country and jackboot a coup. we entered into a deeply divided nation on the cusp of a coup and helped it happen, and were paid with western loyalty as a result. they were violently protesting in the streets in a wildly pro western capital with a pro eastern newly voted in president*. Homeboy would have gotten Gaddafi'd i'd wager within the year or fled east and tried to legally relocate the state's govt. we greased the wheels.

and the moment that happened, w/o cia invovement, daddy putin rolls in to "keep the peace", just as he's doing now. but with less bombs and more mock trial executions, cementing eastern govt for another 5 decades.

so we could have ceded the entire nation to him for half a century, or let him burn cash to take half of it after a war that kills off a pile of Ukranians. do i support it? no. but from a warhawk world police perspective it makes total sense as long as nuclear war is avoided. even the destruction makes sense, we'll own half of Ukraine after the rebuild on bonds that will pay interest for a century.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Jan 26 2023 02:24pm

but again from a moral lens, all those what-ifs are really moot when a CIA color revolution is what actually happened. From a pragmatic lens, are we actually gaining anything from this scenario?
I think most of these calculations are premised in a zero sum game where Russia's loss is our game, as if China doesn't exist. Even if we avoid nuclear war and bleed out Russia effectively, what are we actually costing/benefiting? We put the world economy in tumult, expended great resources, put the EU into an energy crisis, and drove the unaligned india/israel/south africa/etc away from us and towards Russia in our with-us-or-against-us push, particularly undermining the petrodollar with the KSA. So there are very real and tangible costs to us. What did we gain? The shitty half of the poorest and most corrupt country in europe, except now its been bombed to shit and is filled with heavily armed literal nazis. The lions share of wealth and resources of Ukraine remain with Russia and largely unscathed, while the western half of Ukraine is by far the least desirable part of europe, to the point the EU did not want them until it became a full blown NATO vs Russia war. And on top of that, a refugee / humanitarian crisis like Syria all over again.


I've said a few times that unlike the bleeding heart liberals, I'm perfectly willing to embrace an interventionalist foreign policy when its to our benefit. Not when we're arming Sunnis in Syria to fight Russians only to turn around and arm Kurds to kill Sunnis to help Russians. Not when we're risking nuclear war to fight over a plot of land worth even less than Afghanistan at this point

98.9%

Seems like a free and fair referendum

Official result 96.6 my bad.

Crimea is 60% russians, 23% ukrainians, 12% tatars. But >80% russian speakers. Got it bich ?

It means that even in crimea's minorities, a majority didn't want to be part anymore of that shit country

This post was edited by Melatonina on Jan 26 2023 03:10pm

Null vote. Do Russian nukes even work anymore?

REPOST

How about Texas ?

https://americanmilitarynews.com/2021/01/russia-says-nuclear-missile-it-claims-can-destroy-texas-almost-ready-for-service/

For sure Russians are not stupid up to poison themselves: destroying anything in a too large radius in EU would also destroy nearby nuclear plants, meaning western Russia would be contaminated.

Best example France, La Hague: biggest nuclear waste recycling center in the world: if it's destroyed the whole planet will be contaminated since it's arround 110 reactors equivalent.

Solution: Do it on US, not Europe. This said France + Uk submarines can manage to destroy Russia several times. US will do the same thing.

So Yet Putin can be dying of ass cancer and don't care about anyone else, order the nukes; military leaders may not follow.




____________


If you ask me for a small tactical nuke in Ukraine, it would be Bakhmut

.

This post was edited by Meanwhile on Jan 26 2023 03:47pm

Fair point based on how its conventional army has performed.

The questions ought to be
"Which Russian city will be left standing if Russia decides to use a nuclear weapon in Ukraine?"

I'll drop a hint, the answer is not Moscow or St. Petersburg.

This post was edited by Prox1m1ty on Jan 26 2023 03:48pm

Finally I agree on something with you. That solution is on the table since so many years, there are even some close us/ru islands on north pacific where they could play for years.