Well, here we go red lines crossed Biden gives the go ahead to use long range missiles

a reply to: Lazy88

So because he has nothing to lose everybody that keeps the head should capitulate and bow down to Mad Vlad?

No chance.

Its just not happening.

Anybody with an ounce of integrity understands why perfectly well.

You dont deal from weakness or madness for that matter.

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

originally posted by: CriticalStinker

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
I heard an interesting take this morning.

This can work in everyone’s favor soon if navigated properly.

You expect the Biden administration to navigate something military, properly?

I never said that.

The whole premise of my thought experiment is they’re gone soon.

I understand your thought experiment...BUT...When long-range ballistic missiles are detected inside the airspace of a nuclear superpower...retaliatory responses are made in milliseconds...not months.

I’m confident we’ll still be talking in months.

This is like the 50th red line people have casually walked past.

a reply to: andy06shake

Understands what. The responsibility of the president of the USA is to the citizens of the USA.

So if a country’s missiles are landing in your country, you get rid of the supply of missiles. Right. So what supplier would Putin hit to take care of the manufacturing of the missiles landing in his country?

a reply to: CriticalStinker

You’re probably right.

But..

If the Ukraine starts launching missiles into Russia killing civilians, is that not the new definition of genocide….

originally posted by: Lazy88
a reply to: andy06shake

Then the Ukraine fight isn’t the USA’s fight?

Are you aware of " The Budapest Memorandum " which The US was a signatory to ?

Here it is for you to read at your pleasure.

The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances for Ukraine. Russia has grossly violated the commitments it made in that document. That imposes an obligation on Washington to support Ukraine and push back against Russia. This is not just a matter of living up to U.S. obligations. It is also about preserving the credibility of security assurances, which could contribute to preventing nuclear proliferation in the future.

www.brookings.edu...

The Budapest Memorandum.

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: Lazy88

Where is Russia getting the supplies of its missiles, drones, and artillery Lazy88 as of late?

And what have they been doing to Ukraine since day dot of Putin's Special Military Operation?

Why can't Ukraine do to Russia what they have been doing to them since the beginning?

As to responsibility of the president of the USA is to the citizens of the USA.

The USA is connected to the rest of the world as far as I'm aware same as every other nation.

So I'm sure you can identify the problem there.

a reply to: Lazy88

So if a country’s missiles are landing in your country, you get rid of the supply of missiles. Right. So what supplier would Putin hit to take care of the manufacturing of the missiles landing in his country?

US, UK and France?

Does he go after all or none? I’m betting none.

a reply to: andy06shake

I asked you a simple question. In the context Russia does have intercontinental ballistic missiles. If Putin knows where the missiles killing Russians in Russian are being made, what just became a military target. By a country that has the means to launch an attack to take out those manufacturing centers.

I’m not saying it’s right or wrong. Or the missiles would make it to their objective. I’m just pointing out what became a military option, objective, priority.

originally posted by: Lazy88
a reply to: CriticalStinker

You’re probably right.

But..

If the Ukraine starts launching missiles into Russia killing civilians, is that not the new definition of genocide….

My guess is they’ll exclusively target military targets.


And while I understand the cheeky reference to the loose term of genocide in recent years, I also understand why some people make an argument for it.

While I don’t believe Russia has caused more civilian deaths than a lot of other modern conflicts, they do use rhetoric like Ukraine isn’t a real country, or people. They imply that they are Russians, and that Ukraine is Russian.

If you say a group of people isn’t valid, it causes concerns for what your ultimate intent is.

Now, I don’t think I’ve ever implied there’s a genocide going on. I try to stray from hyperbole. But I can see why some find the premise as hyperbolic, and I can also see why some find it important to discuss the possibility of it.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker

originally posted by: Lazy88
a reply to: CriticalStinker

You’re probably right.

But..

If the Ukraine starts launching missiles into Russia killing civilians, is that not the new definition of genocide….

My guess is they’ll exclusively target military targets.

The Ukraine has targeted Moscow? Has there been anything other than civilian damage and injuries?

a reply to: Lazy88

Me too, and nobody has yet to answer mine accordingly.

How can Russia skelp Ukraine with cruise missile salvos since day dot and then complain and threaten nuclear annihilation when they simply want to return the favour?

Its not about right or wrong.

Its War.

And Its about if you canny take it, dont dish it out by my guess.

Something Mr Putin might wish to ponder methinks.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Shrugs.

Holodomor is а genocide of the Ukrainian nation committed in 1932–1933. The leadership of the Soviet Union committed it in order to suppress Ukrainians and ultimately eliminate Ukrainian resistance to the regime, including efforts to build an independent Ukrainian state.

holodomormuseum.org.ua...

a reply to: Lazy88

After Russia has repeatedly targeted Kyiv, and continues to, so...............

What's the difference?

Because I'm bloody mystified if there is one.

originally posted by: Lazy88

originally posted by: CriticalStinker

originally posted by: Lazy88
a reply to: CriticalStinker

You’re probably right.

But..

If the Ukraine starts launching missiles into Russia killing civilians, is that not the new definition of genocide….

My guess is they’ll exclusively target military targets.

The Ukraine has targeted Moscow? Has there been anything other than civilian damage and injuries?

There are still military targets in Moscow. That’s where all the planning is done yea?

My point still stands, with the long range western missiles, I would be that they’re going to exclusively target military. If they don’t, the west will be furious.

That said, I could see intercepting efforts being them down where they weren’t aimed.

But Ukraine could have targeted civilians before this effort. What is the ratio of Ukrainian civilian death to Russians?

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Lazy88



How can Russia skelp Ukraine with cruise missile salvos

Because they have the means evidently.

Now. How is the Ukraine vital to the security of the USA. Other than a means for US weapons manufacturers having a customer and proving grounds.

US Aid to Ukraine Helps the American Economy and Boosts US Jobs

www.wilsoncenter.org...

Maybe there is something to this industry military complex.

Russians and Ukrainians are dying, but there are those profiting and proving their equipment over a useless war.

a reply to: Lazy88

Lately, that "mean" has come from the likes of Iranian and North Korean ordinances.

And Ukraine now has the means to return the favour, and also the go-ahead.

So again, I'm not quite sure where the difference lies.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

So. Only civilians injured so far in Moscow by Ukrainian attacks?

Moscow's regional governor, Andrei Vorobyov, called it a "massive attack" and said two houses in the village of Stanovoye, 15 miles southeast of the city, had caught fire after the drones fell. He said a 52-year-old woman was in intensive care after she was injured by shrapnel and hospitalized with burns to her face, neck and hands.

www.nbcnews.com...

What military targets were there in Stanovoye?

a reply to: andy06shake

If Russian has real power, they would start by taking out arm shipments into the Ukraine.

Shrugs.

a reply to: Lazy88

Now. How is the Ukraine vital to the security of the USA.

Directly in the sense you’re asking, it’s probably not.

But we made a defense agreement with them to help protect their sovereignty if they gave up their nukes. That agreement is younger than me, and likely all of us.

If we don’t at least give it a good effort, what happens to other countries who have similar agreements? Do they start looking at developing nukes? South Korea has at least humored that recently.

It could shake up stability in many regions.

a reply to: Lazy88

Thats not an answer through is it?

I just want to know why its ok for Russia to have done something from day dot to their adversary of choice.

And then complain when they merely threaten to return the favour.

Thats what cowards do by my guess.

Shrugs.

Putins ticking the box.