New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Us finalizing plans to send Abrams tanks to Ukraine

middleview

President
Supporting Member
1. sure it will. nukes end the world. Russia occupies this world too.
2. sure it will. wait and learn.
3. false. Ukraine is presently killing everything sent it's way. tedious and costly. but by every measure Russia is getting its ass kicked. it literally sends prisoners as fodder/to slaughter.
4. false. see #1

let russia detonate one and affect the west and it will find out.
One option I heard discussed in an interview with Wesley Clark was that NATO would destroy the Russian navy base at Sebastapol and hit every Russian airbase near the border with Ukraine.

That would be with conventional weapons, not nukes. Cruise missles and drones could do the job on the Baltic fleet. B2 bombers and F22 fighters could destroy the Russian airforce and airbases being used to attack Ukraine.

Obviously, if Putin chose to use a nuclear weapon on a member of Nato, all bets are off.
 

PhilFish

Administrator
Staff member
One option I heard discussed in an interview with Wesley Clark was that NATO would destroy the Russian navy base at Sebastapol and hit every Russian airbase near the border with Ukraine.

That would be with conventional weapons, not nukes. Cruise missles and drones could do the job on the Baltic fleet. B2 bombers and F22 fighters could destroy the Russian airforce and airbases being used to attack Ukraine.

Obviously, if Putin chose to use a nuclear weapon on a member of Nato, all bets are off.
i think that could be completed in a day or two. poof. the end.
 

worldlymrb

Revenge
1. sure it will. nukes end the world. Russia occupies this world too.
2. sure it will. wait and learn.
3. false. Ukraine is presently killing everything sent it's way. tedious and costly. but by every measure Russia is getting its ass kicked. it literally sends prisoners as fodder/to slaughter.
4. false. see #1

let russia detonate one and affect the west and it will find out.
Half of Russian households still have out houses and don't own an automobile. They are more self-sufficient as a country, but much poorer.

1 Nuke will end the world as we know it for us here in the West even if Russia detonates in the Black Sea destroying a few NATO ships as a show of force.

All Western economies would collapse. International Trade would Stop, Western cities would see mass panic.

And that is if the West ends everything there and doesn't have end the world death wishes with a full nuke response.
 

worldlymrb

Revenge
One option I heard discussed in an interview with Wesley Clark was that NATO would destroy the Russian navy base at Sebastapol and hit every Russian airbase near the border with Ukraine.

That would be with conventional weapons, not nukes. Cruise missles and drones could do the job on the Baltic fleet. B2 bombers and F22 fighters could destroy the Russian airforce and airbases being used to attack Ukraine.

Obviously, if Putin chose to use a nuclear weapon on a member of Nato, all bets are off.
Putin did an interview a few months before he invaded Ukranian that a conflict with NATOs conventual forces would be unwinnable for Russia and would leave him with no choice but to defend Mother Russia with Nukes. I doubt Mad Vlad was bluffing.

I'll try to find the video.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Putin did an interview a few months before he invaded Ukranian that a conflict with NATOs conventual forces would be unwinnable for Russia and would leave him with no choice but to defend Mother Russia with Nukes. I doubt Mad Vlad was bluffing.

I'll try to find the video.
Putin's rhetoric doesn't match reality. He has invaded Ukraine. His troops are occupying Ukrainian land. If his invading army is destroyed, it will not threaten Russia. It will not indicate an imminent attack on Russia itself.
 
1. Where is the evidence that the US was turning Ukraine into a base to attack Russia? That is simply bullshit. We had not provided weapons to Ukraine until after 2014 because Russia was arming the rebels and providing troops.
Victoria Nuland bragged about spending $5 billion on "democracy promotion" in Ukraine beginning in 1991, and a Ukrainian politician warned from the floor of the parliament about the US Embassy in 2013 preparing a coup against Yanukovych:

https://www.conservapedia.com/Maidan_coup#Tech_camp.2C_terrorist_training.2C_and_Hromdske_TV

"In my role as a representative of the Ukrainian people, activists from the Volya Public Organization turned to me, providing clear evidence that within our country, with support and direct participation of the US Embassy in Kiev, a 'TechCamp' project is under way in which preparations are being made for a civil war in Ukraine."
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Victoria Nuland bragged about spending $5 billion on "democracy promotion" in Ukraine beginning in 1991, and a Ukrainian politician warned from the floor of the parliament about the US Embassy in 2013 preparing a coup against Yanukovych:

https://www.conservapedia.com/Maidan_coup#Tech_camp.2C_terrorist_training.2C_and_Hromdske_TV

"In my role as a representative of the Ukrainian people, activists from the Volya Public Organization turned to me, providing clear evidence that within our country, with support and direct participation of the US Embassy in Kiev, a 'TechCamp' project is under way in which preparations are being made for a civil war in Ukraine."
The promotion of democracy in a nation without a recent history of having democratic participation in government is probably money well spent. You seem to think it was about making bombs and tactis for street fighting.
The pro-Putin politician who made those accusations offered no evidence. He later fled to Russia.

The question was about your comment that the US was turning Ukraine into a base from which to attack Russia. Your response is nowhere close to an answer.
 

PhilFish

Administrator
Staff member
The promotion of democracy in a nation without a recent history of having democratic participation in government is probably money well spent. You seem to think it was about making bombs and tactis for street fighting.
The pro-Putin politician who made those accusations offered no evidence. He later fled to Russia.

The question was about your comment that the US was turning Ukraine into a base from which to attack Russia. Your response is nowhere close to an answer.
Conservapedia..shit rag for low brow consumption.
 
The promotion of democracy in a nation without a recent history of having democratic participation in government is probably money well spent. You seem to think it was about making bombs and tactis for street fighting.
The pro-Putin politician who made those accusations offered no evidence. He later fled to Russia.

The question was about your comment that the US was turning Ukraine into a base from which to attack Russia. Your response is nowhere close to an answer.
US intentions to turn Ukraine into a base from which to attack Moscow began in 1949 with Operation Red Sox. While that project failed spectacularly, the process succeeded fifty years later with the fall of the USSR.

Current efforts by western capitalists to destabilize Russia hide behind a fig leaf of "democracy promotion" while their primary concern is looting Ukraine the same way they pillaged Russia thirty years ago.
 

PhilFish

Administrator
Staff member
US intentions to turn Ukraine into a base from which to attack Moscow began in 1949 with Operation Red Sox. While that project failed spectacularly, the process succeeded fifty years later with the fall of the USSR.

Current efforts by western capitalists to destabilize Russia hide behind a fig leaf of "democracy promotion" while their primary concern is looting Ukraine the same way they pillaged Russia thirty years ago.
Yes..the red Sox operation was quite complex....
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
US intentions to turn Ukraine into a base from which to attack Moscow began in 1949 with Operation Red Sox. While that project failed spectacularly, the process succeeded fifty years later with the fall of the USSR.

Current efforts by western capitalists to destabilize Russia hide behind a fig leaf of "democracy promotion" while their primary concern is looting Ukraine the same way they pillaged Russia thirty years ago.
So the idea of Ukrainian independence from Moscow was an attack on Moscow?
 
So the idea of Ukrainian independence from Moscow was an attack on Moscow?
Depends on your interpretation of "independence."
When the US used Right Sector terrorists to force a duly elected president from office in 2014, a succession of puppet governments came into power in Kiev; where's the political sovereignty in that?
 

EatTheRich

President
Depends on your interpretation of "independence."
When the US used Right Sector terrorists to force a duly elected president from office in 2014, a succession of puppet governments came into power in Kiev; where's the political sovereignty in that?
Ukraine is more democratic and independent now than before 2014. The “duly elected president” had rewritten the Constitution illegally to usurp power, and was overthrown in a mass uprising which the U.S. later tried with little success to impose its chosen puppets on.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Depends on your interpretation of "independence."
When the US used Right Sector terrorists to force a duly elected president from office in 2014, a succession of puppet governments came into power in Kiev; where's the political sovereignty in that?
Do you define independence as rule from Moscow?
 

Dawg

President
Supporting Member
I posted never tell the enemy next move
Putin told tanks were coming and Putty
now sending 500,000 troops before tanks arrive
 
Ukraine is more democratic and independent now than before 2014. The “duly elected president” had rewritten the Constitution illegally to usurp power, and was overthrown in a mass uprising which the U.S. later tried with little success to impose its chosen puppets on.
Zelensky has banned 11 opposition political parties while doing nothing to reduce the abuses of neo-Nazi forces like Azov on his population; his approval rating was below 30% before the Russian invasion.
 

EatTheRich

President
Zelensky has banned 11 opposition political parties while doing nothing to reduce the abuses of neo-Nazi forces like Azov on his population; his approval rating was below 30% before the Russian invasion.
Ukraine is deeply factionally divided and its government … which is obliged to permit a measure of democracy only by popular resistance … depends on a capitalist base that cannot be maintained without suppression of the socialist parties supported by so many workers and peasants. The military reliance on Azov needed to maintain a measure of popular support for an anticommunist government is shameful, but Azov has actually been required to surrender much of its independence (through integration into the regular military) and to purge its ranks of strictly neo-Nazi elements. Zelenskyy is evidently a reactionary capitalist oppressor but that is the beginning of the analysis, not the end. Class-conscious labor gives military support to Ukraine’s defense against imperialist Russia for the same reason it supported Ethiopia under the reactionary, oppressive government of Haile Selassie against imperialist Italy. And FWIW, for all the repression of opposition parties in Ukraine that country remains much freer politically than Russia which is a model for right-wing repression and a pole of attraction for international reaction.
 
Class-conscious labor gives military support to Ukraine’s defense against imperialist Russia for the same reason it supported Ethiopia under the reactionary, oppressive government of Haile Selassie against imperialist Italy
Much of your post makes a great deal of sense to me; however, Ethiopia and Italy didn't share a common border, and there was no imperialistic military alliance like NATO involved. It seems to me, a Russian "win" in Ukraine weakens (if not destroys) NATO as an arm of US hegemony. Would that be a bad thing?
 
Top