Some nascent spines in the GOP Caucus
-
It seems Trump is most interested in ending the conflict, regardless of who wins and who loses. He wants the "I ended the war" headline (just like his other headlines he's chasing) without thinking about the true impact. Many times in our country's past we could've taken the easier path to placate to an enemy in order to resolve a conflict, but to what end... to what precedent...?
I'm guessing in a few months the war will be over and Russia will have annexed a good 20% of the country (east side), which makes Putin the semi-winner. SAD
-
It seems Trump is most interested in ending the conflict, regardless of who wins and who loses. He wants the "I ended the war" headline (just like his other headlines he's chasing) without thinking about the true impact. Many times in our country's past we could've taken the easier path to placate to an enemy in order to resolve a conflict, but to what end... to what precedent...?
I'm guessing in a few months the war will be over and Russia will have annexed a good 20% of the country (east side), which makes Putin the semi-winner. SAD
-
It seems Trump is most interested in ending the conflict, regardless of who wins and who loses. He wants the "I ended the war" headline (just like his other headlines he's chasing) without thinking about the true impact. Many times in our country's past we could've taken the easier path to placate to an enemy in order to resolve a conflict, but to what end... to what precedent...?
I'm guessing in a few months the war will be over and Russia will have annexed a good 20% of the country (east side), which makes Putin the semi-winner. SAD
@89th said in Some nascent spines in the GOP Caucus:
It seems Trump is most interested in ending the conflict, regardless of who wins and who loses. He wants the "I ended the war" headline (just like his other headlines he's chasing) without thinking about the true impact. Many times in our country's past we could've taken the easier path to placate to an enemy in order to resolve a conflict, but to what end... to what precedent...?
I'm guessing in a few months the war will be over and Russia will have annexed a good 20% of the country (east side), which makes Putin the semi-winner. SAD
So you continue underfunding Ukraine and not giving them the tools to win? Or do you escalate? What’s your answer?
The Brad
-
It seems Trump is most interested in ending the conflict, regardless of who wins and who loses. He wants the "I ended the war" headline (just like his other headlines he's chasing) without thinking about the true impact. Many times in our country's past we could've taken the easier path to placate to an enemy in order to resolve a conflict, but to what end... to what precedent...?
I'm guessing in a few months the war will be over and Russia will have annexed a good 20% of the country (east side), which makes Putin the semi-winner. SAD
@89th said in Some nascent spines in the GOP Caucus:
It seems Trump is most interested in ending the conflict, regardless of who wins and who loses. He wants the "I ended the war" headline (just like his other headlines he's chasing) without thinking about the true impact. Many times in our country's past we could've taken the easier path to placate to an enemy in order to resolve a conflict, but to what end... to what precedent...?
I'm guessing in a few months the war will be over and Russia will have annexed a good 20% of the country (east side), which makes Putin the semi-winner. SAD
This perspective does not even motion towards an alternative path forward that doesn't end with either Russia taking Ukraine, or a military escalation between nuclear powers. The conversation is not serious until at least that much is understood.
-
@89th said in Some nascent spines in the GOP Caucus:
It seems Trump is most interested in ending the conflict, regardless of who wins and who loses. He wants the "I ended the war" headline (just like his other headlines he's chasing) without thinking about the true impact. Many times in our country's past we could've taken the easier path to placate to an enemy in order to resolve a conflict, but to what end... to what precedent...?
I'm guessing in a few months the war will be over and Russia will have annexed a good 20% of the country (east side), which makes Putin the semi-winner. SAD
So you continue underfunding Ukraine and not giving them the tools to win? Or do you escalate? What’s your answer?
@LuFins-Dad said in Some nascent spines in the GOP Caucus:
@89th said in Some nascent spines in the GOP Caucus:
It seems Trump is most interested in ending the conflict, regardless of who wins and who loses. He wants the "I ended the war" headline (just like his other headlines he's chasing) without thinking about the true impact. Many times in our country's past we could've taken the easier path to placate to an enemy in order to resolve a conflict, but to what end... to what precedent...?
I'm guessing in a few months the war will be over and Russia will have annexed a good 20% of the country (east side), which makes Putin the semi-winner. SAD
So you continue underfunding Ukraine and not giving them the tools to win? Or do you escalate? What’s your answer?
Yes, escalation to one degree or another was the answer. Certainly the credible threat of it was step one. Trump has the personality to do it rather credibly if he had tried, IMO.
-
Yeah step one is to make it 100% clear that this will not end with Russia taking even one inch of Ukraine. Negotiate from there. The art of the deal... no?
Since I'm playing with monopoly money, to answer your question @LuFins-Dad , I would force Ukraine to join NATO and immediately call Russia's bluff. Might end the war, might convert it into a Russia-China-Iran world war conflict that they quickly back away from knowing it would dismantle their already crumbling economies.
-
Imagine if Trump had just started trolling Russia. Talking about how ruinous the war has been for their economy. How many soldiers they’ve lost. Stories about their ever desperate methods of recruitment. How they controlled more Ukrainian territory in March of 2022 than they do now (true story). Teasing them for needing to import weapons and men from the third world. Quoting Russian strategists talking about how this would be a theee day war. Etc etc. He’d have been good at it. Really.
-
He would have been good at that. But brinksmanship over nuclear war with Russia is not what he ran on. It is hardly obvious that such brinksmanship would have ended up better for Ukraine and the west, but anybody is free to have that opinion and attempt to back it up, as they please.
-
But then again, the Trumpigula’s Republican Party abandoned American conservatism some time ago in favour of something else. Not sure what that something else is other than an illiberal reactionary populism with more than just a hint of oligarchic technocracy built around a cult of personality. In short, a disgrace.
-
The counter-factual of Trump being Trump with nuclear brinksmanship would be fascinating to watch, not just for the outcome with Ukraine, but for the public discourse surrounding it. It goes without saying that the American left leaning media would be going insane about Trump bringing about the end of Western civilization, but each individual's response would be informative still.
-
The counter-factual of Trump being Trump with nuclear brinksmanship would be fascinating to watch, not just for the outcome with Ukraine, but for the public discourse surrounding it. It goes without saying that the American left leaning media would be going insane about Trump bringing about the end of Western civilization, but each individual's response would be informative still.
@Horace said in Some nascent spines in the GOP Caucus:
The counter-factual of Trump being Trump with nuclear brinksmanship would be fascinating to watch, not just for the outcome with Ukraine, but for the public discourse surrounding it. It goes without saying that the American left leaning media would be going insane about Trump bringing about the end of Western civilization, but each individual's response would be informative still.
It also goes without saying that pretty much all of Trump's supporters would be creaming themselves, and posting those computer generated vaguely homo-erotic pictures of him in superhero costume and riding a big train that were at one time so popular.
-
Nothing wrong with being gay, or having a feminine mindset. But if one has an issue with it, I would suggest not paying any close attention to the male phenotypes that end up resonating with left-leaning politics.
Education is extremely important.
-
The field is wide open for Trump to earn a Nobel Peace Prize to a far greater extent than Barack Obama's glorified DEI participation trophy, but I'm sure even Trump is aware enough to know that the Nobel referees would sooner rewrite the rules mid-game than signal a touchdown for him.
-
The field is wide open for Trump to earn a Nobel Peace Prize to a far greater extent than Barack Obama's glorified DEI participation trophy, but I'm sure even Trump is aware enough to know that the Nobel referees would sooner rewrite the rules mid-game than signal a touchdown for him.
@Horace said in Some nascent spines in the GOP Caucus:
even Trump is aware enough to know that the Nobel referees would sooner rewrite the rules mid-game than signal a touchdown for him.That's why he'll threaten to Nuke Norway - can seem the meme already.
-
Nothing wrong with being gay, or having a feminine mindset. But if one has an issue with it, I would suggest not paying any close attention to the male phenotypes that end up resonating with left-leaning politics.
@Horace said in Some nascent spines in the GOP Caucus:
Link to videoNothing wrong with being gay, or having a feminine mindset.
I always think of that funny Seinfeld show. 555
