You're too dumb to understand your furiously googling of WW2 is completely irrelevant to what's happening today.
NO ONE is will to bleed for Ukraine except people like you who are only willing to send other people's kids to do the bleeding.
nice description of what you were just up to but again your analysis is again completely off
the point is that at Munich in 1938 they did NOT want to fight (with pretty much the same silliness you are harkening back to with your BS today) but then we’re forced to have the fight anyways
you know, there are lessons to studying history
thats the story of appeasement but a lesson that seems exempt in your VAST historical knowledge and analysis
but again, tell me how stupid i am, youre far too sweet and kind to have all this rage. i can only imagine the proclivities of your personal life but it must be an absolute joy and pleasure to be in your company!
Even if 100% of Ukraine was conquered who would fight?
You don't seem to understand what appeasement even is or what a security guarantee is...
On March 31, 1939 the UK and France announced they would fight if Poland was threatened.
Was March 1939 before or after September 1939?
What you're still too stupid to understand is that security guarantees are meaningless if you will not or cannot enforce them.
Russia offered terms in March of 2022. Total victory was not the objective.
Ukraine, following the advice of the Boris Johnson's of the world rejected peace in 2022 and went to lose the war for 3 years and now has absolutely no leverage in any peace discussions.
Three years of complete incompetence from the west and the Biden administration has completely f*cked over the Ukrainians.
They have no hope of victory and Russia has all of the leverage.
The incentive to surrender is avoiding the death of 500,000 more Ukrainians to achieve the same result.
Life isn't fair.
The alternative was the mineral deal which put the US in Ukraine and provided security guarantees but the Democrats are too evil/stupid to let that happen. They would rather see Ukraine die than see Trump have any sort of success.
Democrats literally met with Zelesnky before the Oval Office meeting and encouraged him to reject the deal.
we know youre a Republican that much is obvious
I'm not a republican I'm a libertarian that wouldn't vote for the current form of Democrat even if you put a gun to my head. Republicans can be idiots but Democrats are all mentally ill.
One of the most enjoyable traits of liberals is that you're all too stupid to understand when you're losing an argument.... lol...
You've yet to say what this plan of yours is.
Instead you went on an idiot tangent about Poland in 1939 because you're too stupid to understand what happened in WW2...
Who is going to fight for Ukraine now? You wouldn't risk your life for your own mother. Who are these imaginary people that are going to come to Ukraine's rescue?
We've established that the EU is toothless.
The US isn't going to do it.
What is your plan?
Speaking from the side that has to recruit from North Korea.
You're being lied to. There was 40 minutes of lies from Trump that irritated Zelensky before he corrected e Vance.
Even if you think you're right lecturing the VP in the Oval Office in front of the media is a pathologically stupid thing to do. Yes you do, you correct the idiot whose information on Ukraine comes from, in his words, "I have watched videos"
Why should Americans pay for a European war that Europeans are funding both sides of? Germany alone has given more to Ukraine than USA, and are not Putin's allies
Europe has shown ZERO serious commitment to winning or stopping the war. They are forming a coalition with or without USA
I'm not a republican I'm a libertarian that wouldn't vote for the current form of Democrat even if you put a gun to my head. Republicans can be idiots but Democrats are all mentally ill.
I'm not a republican I'm a libertarian that wouldn't vote for the current form of Democrat even if you put a gun to my head. Republicans can be idiots but Democrats are all mentally ill.
And if total victory is Russia’s objective, what incentive does Ukraine have to surrender?
Russia offered terms in March of 2022. Total victory was not the objective.
Ukraine, following the advice of the Boris Johnson's of the world rejected peace in 2022 and went to lose the war for 3 years and now has absolutely no leverage in any peace discussions.
Three years of complete incompetence from the west and the Biden administration has completely f*cked over the Ukrainians.
They have no hope of victory and Russia has all of the leverage.
The incentive to surrender is avoiding the death of 500,000 more Ukrainians to achieve the same result.
Life isn't fair.
The alternative was the mineral deal which put the US in Ukraine and provided security guarantees but the Democrats are too evil/stupid to let that happen. They would rather see Ukraine die than see Trump have any sort of success.
Democrats literally met with Zelesnky before the Oval Office meeting and encouraged him to reject the deal.
We’re on a thread about the Republicans torpedoing the mineral deal. Zelensky came to the White House to sign it.
Then JD Vance demanded that Ukraine accept equal complicity in the war, an obvious domestic non-starter.
That domestic political situation in Ukraine is something you’re missing in general, I think. Ukrainians do not think they need to surrender. They certainly have hope of victory, even if you disagree. They also continue to hold territory inside Russia, which is awfully inconvenient for the inevitability of Russian victory.
I'm not a republican I'm a libertarian that wouldn't vote for the current form of Democrat even if you put a gun to my head. Republicans can be idiots but Democrats are all mentally ill.
and yet youre an ‘adult’ — got it
Yes you hate me... great. My feelings a very hurt.
WHO is going to fight and enforce these security guarantees you're all in favor of?
You've yet to provide an actual answer to the question.
Pretend you're a grown up and think for once in your life.
nice description of what you were just up to but again your analysis is again completely off
the point is that at Munich in 1938 they did NOT want to fight (with pretty much the same silliness you are harkening back to with your BS today) but then we’re forced to have the fight anyways
you know, there are lessons to studying history
thats the story of appeasement but a lesson that seems exempt in your VAST historical knowledge and analysis
but again, tell me how stupid i am, youre far too sweet and kind to have all this rage. i can only imagine the proclivities of your personal life but it must be an absolute joy and pleasure to be in your company!
Even if 100% of Ukraine was conquered who would fight?
You don't seem to understand what appeasement even is or what a security guarantee is...
On March 31, 1939 the UK and France announced they would fight if Poland was threatened.
Was March 1939 before or after September 1939?
What you're still too stupid to understand is that security guarantees are meaningless if you will not or cannot enforce them.
again, nice try
the ‘layup’ of examples of appeasement in world history and you’re seriously trying to turn this ship around
modern day conservatism in a nutshell — a postmodern mess of stupidity and bravado
nice description of what you were just up to but again your analysis is again completely off
the point is that at Munich in 1938 they did NOT want to fight (with pretty much the same silliness you are harkening back to with your BS today) but then we’re forced to have the fight anyways
you know, there are lessons to studying history
thats the story of appeasement but a lesson that seems exempt in your VAST historical knowledge and analysis
but again, tell me how stupid i am, youre far too sweet and kind to have all this rage. i can only imagine the proclivities of your personal life but it must be an absolute joy and pleasure to be in your company!
Even if 100% of Ukraine was conquered who would fight?
You don't seem to understand what appeasement even is or what a security guarantee is...
On March 31, 1939 the UK and France announced they would fight if Poland was threatened.
Was March 1939 before or after September 1939?
What you're still too stupid to understand is that security guarantees are meaningless if you will not or cannot enforce them.
You don't know your history, or blatantly lying.
From M Gessen, award winning NYT columnist and author of "The Future is History: How totalitarianism reclaimed Russia
M Gessen wrote:
Putin doesn’t just want a return to the 20th century. He already resides there, and that is where anyone looking for what could happen next should turn – specifically to 1938, when British prime minister Neville Chamberlain, who fancied himself a brilliant negotiator and an expert in all things, brokered an agreement that gave Adolf Hitler Sudetenland, an area of Czechoslovakia. In exchange, the rest of Europe would, ostensibly, be safe from German aggression. A year after the resulting Munich Agreement was signed, of course, Germany invaded Poland, and World War II officially began.
i.e. the same peace and seccession without security