Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 31

Thread: Another Flip-Flop: Trump Approves Lethal Arms To Ukraine

  1. #1

    Default Another Flip-Flop: Trump Approves Lethal Arms To Ukraine

    Another Flip-Flop: Trump Approves Lethal Arms To Ukraine



    Candidate Trump was skeptical over claims of a Russian invasion of Ukraine and was confident he could work it out without escalation of tension. Just yesterday, however, he did something that even Obama did not do: approved some US weapons sales to Ukraine. Will neocons be satisfied? Or will they push for more?
    Twitter: B4Liberty@USAB4L
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Corporate-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul


    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

  4. #3

    Default

    This was an excellent episode. Discussion includes "is Trump a neocon" and the recent history of the Ukraine.

    The following is especially applicable to the episode:

    Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.
    Washington's Farewell Address
    President George Washington's Farewell Address — 1796

    ...In the execution of such a plan, nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. The nation which indulges towards another a habitual hatred or a habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable, when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur. Hence, frequent collisions, obstinate, envenomed, and bloody contests. The nation, prompted by ill-will and resentment, sometimes impels to war the government, contrary to the best calculations of policy. The government sometimes participates in the national propensity, and adopts through passion what reason would reject; at other times it makes the animosity of the nation subservient to projects of hostility instigated by pride, ambition, and other sinister and pernicious motives. The peace often, sometimes perhaps the liberty, of nations, has been the victim.

    So likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation), facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.

    As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public councils! Such an attachment of a small or weak towards a great and powerful nation dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter.

    Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government. But that jealousy to be useful must be impartial; else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defense against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.

    The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop. Europe has a set of primary interests which to us have none; or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves by artificial ties in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities.

    Our detached and distant situation invites and enables us to pursue a different course. If we remain one people under an efficient government. the period is not far off when we may defy material injury from external annoyance; when we may take such an attitude as will cause the neutrality we may at any time resolve upon to be scrupulously respected; when belligerent nations, under the impossibility of making acquisitions upon us, will not lightly hazard the giving us provocation; when we may choose peace or war, as our interest, guided by justice, shall counsel.

    Why forego the advantages of so peculiar a situation? Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor or caprice?

    It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world; so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it; for let me not be understood as capable of patronizing infidelity to existing engagements. I hold the maxim no less applicable to public than to private affairs, that honesty is always the best policy. I repeat it, therefore, let those engagements be observed in their genuine sense. But, in my opinion, it is unnecessary and would be unwise to extend them.

    Taking care always to keep ourselves by suitable establishments on a respectable defensive posture, we may safely trust to temporary alliances for extraordinary emergencies.

    Harmony, liberal intercourse with all nations, are recommended by policy, humanity, and interest. But even our commercial policy should hold an equal and impartial hand; neither seeking nor granting exclusive favors or preferences; consulting the natural course of things; diffusing and diversifying by gentle means the streams of commerce, but forcing nothing; establishing (with powers so disposed, in order to give trade a stable course, to define the rights of our merchants, and to enable the government to support them) conventional rules of intercourse, the best that present circumstances and mutual opinion will permit, but temporary, and liable to be from time to time abandoned or varied, as experience and circumstances shall dictate; constantly keeping in view that it is folly in one nation to look for disinterested favors from another; that it must pay with a portion of its independence for whatever it may accept under that character; that, by such acceptance, it may place itself in the condition of having given equivalents for nominal favors, and yet of being reproached with ingratitude for not giving more. There can be no greater error than to expect or calculate upon real favors from nation to nation. It is an illusion, which experience must cure, which a just pride ought to discard.
    ...
    Twitter: B4Liberty@USAB4L
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Corporate-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul


    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  5. #4

    Default

    Maybe he can build them a wall too.
    "The Patriarch"

  6. #5

    Default

    So it's anti Russia. The Russian collusion witch hunt is forcing these types of moves.

  7. #6

    Default

    Isn't letting people in country A sell stuff to people in country B known as the free market?
    Knowledge is Liberty!


  8. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    This was an excellent episode. Discussion includes "is Trump a neocon" and the recent history of the Ukraine.

    The following is especially applicable to the episode:


    Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.

    While true, name a time when this has not been true of Empire. Never? Right.

    Trump's far from perfect, but even Ron Paul would be playing the game because the current global political reality is the hand that we have dealt ourselves. It sucks, but it is fact and it isn't going to evaporate any time soon. But Trump at least seems to be working on it, albeit not up to the standards of some folks here. My broken-record player points out yet again that nobody on the planet has the chops to bring this cesspool to rights any time soon.

    I swear, some of you expect too much of a man. Trump may still prove a rat, but so far I would say he is actually doing some good, which is precisely that much more than Obammy did and ten times what Clinton would have done after her first year of pile-driving us deeper into Mt. Shyte.

    Being foolishly generous, let us say it's taken 150 years for Themme to bring us to this point. How could anyone think for even the briefest of moments that this crap could get straightened out in even a lifetime?

    As for selling arms to Ukraine or anyone else, we cannot judge based on our ideals alone. At this point we are all of us so far behind the 8-ball, we have little good choice but to play the game, at least awhile. Reality talks, ideals walk. Not quite that cut and dried, but pretty close.

    Seriously now, I'd love to hear what some of you folks would do, were you not to become president, but king. I mean in terms of foreign policy and all that. What would you do, in detail?

    Merry Christmas everyone. Stay happy, healthy, prosperous, and tell the Man to $#@! off.
    Last edited by osan; 12-24-2017 at 03:12 PM.
    Through lives and lives shalt thou pay, O' king.

    Pray for reset.


  9. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Galileo Galilei View Post
    Isn't letting people in country A sell stuff to people in country B known as the free market?
    You beat me to it. This is pretty much the question I was going to ask. We go on about free markets and so on, then when the president engages in something vaguely similar to what is supposed to go on in such markets, people get burs under their saddles. I don't care which position you take, but choose and stay with it for at least five minutes.
    Through lives and lives shalt thou pay, O' king.

    Pray for reset.


  10. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Galileo Galilei View Post
    Isn't letting people in country A sell stuff to people in country B known as the free market?
    I don't see how you can compare the military industrial complex to the free market. This isn't Smith and Wesson selling some rifles.
    "The Patriarch"

  11. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    While true, name a time when this has not been true of Empire. Never? Right.

    Trump's far from perfect, but even Ron Paul would be playing the game because the current global political reality is the hand that we have dealt ourselves. It sucks, but it is fact and it isn't going to evaporate any time soon. But Trump at least seems to be working on it, albeit not up to the standards of some folks here. My broken-record player points out yet again that nobody on the planet has the chops to bring this cesspool to rights any time soon.

    I swear, some of you expect too much of a man. Trump may still prove a rat, but so far I would say he is actually doing some good, which is precisely that much more than Obammy did and ten times what Clinton would have done after her first year of pile-driving us deeper into Mt. Shyte.

    Being foolishly generous, let us say it's taken 150 years for Themme to bring us to this point. How could anyone think for even the briefest of moments that this crap could get straightened out in even a lifetime?

    As for selling arms to Ukraine or anyone else, we cannot judge based on our ideals alone. At this point we are all of us so far behind the 8-ball, we have little good choice but to play the game, at least awhile. Reality talks, ideals walk. Not quite that cut and dried, but pretty close.

    Seriously now, I'd love to hear what some of you folks would do, were you not to become president, but king. I mean in terms of foreign policy and all that. What would you do, in detail?

    Merry Christmas everyone. Stay happy, healthy, prosperous, and tell the Man to $#@! off.
    I don't believe Ron Paul would be playing this game at all, I don't know why you think he would. As for what I would do, that's pretty simple. Quit meddling in the affairs of the rest of the planet by subterfuge and military action and stick to worrying about defending this country if the need arose.

    And merry Christmas to you.
    "The Patriarch"

  12. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    Seriously now, I'd love to hear what some of you folks would do, were you not to become president, but king. I mean in terms of foreign policy and all that. What would you do, in detail?

    Merry Christmas everyone. Stay happy, healthy, prosperous, and tell the Man to $#@! off.
    We marched right in, we can march right out.

  13. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Origanalist View Post
    I don't see how you can compare the military industrial complex to the free market. This isn't Smith and Wesson selling some rifles.
    The right to bear arms includes all weapons the government might have as well.
    Knowledge is Liberty!


  14. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    You beat me to it. This is pretty much the question I was going to ask. We go on about free markets and so on, then when the president engages in something vaguely similar to what is supposed to go on in such markets, people get burs under their saddles. I don't care which position you take, but choose and stay with it for at least five minutes.
    I agree 100%.
    Knowledge is Liberty!


  15. #14

    Default

    It always starts out with:

    Oh we will just supply arms.

    Then we'll just train them.

    Then we'll just send troops for peacekeeping purposes.


    Then we're in a war.

    To me it doesn't sound like 6D chess. It sounds like the same old $#@!, different figurehead.

  16. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Galileo Galilei View Post
    The right to bear arms includes all weapons the government might have as well.
    I'm not sure what your point is. Everyday citizens aren't obtaining these weapons, the Ukrainian government is. How much money do we give to the Ukraine?
    "The Patriarch"

  17. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Origanalist View Post
    I'm not sure what your point is. Everyday citizens aren't obtaining these weapons, the Ukrainian government is. How much money do we give to the Ukraine?
    If you don't like it, don't sell arms. It is none of your business if other people do it. Butt out.
    Knowledge is Liberty!


  18. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Galileo Galilei View Post
    If you don't like it, don't sell arms. It is none of your business if other people do it. Butt out.
    Uh, no. And you failed to address my point entirely. This has nothing to do with the free market.
    "The Patriarch"

  19. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Origanalist View Post
    I don't believe Ron Paul would be playing this game at all, I don't know why you think he would.
    You may be correct, and if so then Ron Paul would also be getting little accomplished. Trump's having hard enough a time with a hostile Congress. Can you imagine the love Theye'd have for a president Paul?

    You may think that President Paul would pull our troops out of this place and that, but would he really?

    Consider the ne'er-do-well Obama and his campaign promise to close Gitmo. This was one of his major vows, as was to end the war in Eye-Rack in "six months". Neither was carried through despite the only requirement being to make it so.

    There's $#@! going on that stops candidates dead in their tracks after they take their oaths of office. It has been, thus far, universal since the turn of the 20th century. Kennedy stepped out of line and paid with his brains all over the back seat. Recall his words about a conspiracy so "monstrous" - that in a day when such office holders did not resort to such wordings without demonstrably valid cause.

    Granted, this is all speculative because there will not be a president named Ron Paul in our lifetimes, but I suspect we're not very far from truth.

    As for what I would do, that's pretty simple. Quit meddling in the affairs of the rest of the planet by subterfuge and military action and stick to worrying about defending this country if the need arose.
    All well and good, but only to the degree to which you could manage it. For example, would you pull out of everything if there were an actor who stood to cause great harm to the people to whom you swore an oath? Would you, as president, abandon that oath and allow such a threat to remain unchallenged?

    Consider NK. My little brother has forgotten more about intelligence in NK than most of the rest of America will ever know. He always measures his words very carefully and while he says next tonothing about such things because he cannot speak of them in any detail, the one thing he has told me about Kim Jong Un is that he is very seriously unhinged. This, therefore, is something you can take to the bank. Given this, and the fact that he has leveled threats, is working on delivery systems, and has nukes, would you as president turn your eyes away from him? Much as I would like to, I would not be able to in all good conscience.

    This is called being between a rock and a hard place. When so situated, the world loses its black and white qualities in an instant.

    As to whether these circumstances are "organic", or arose as the result of the influences of some invisible hand, matters little to the positive fact that they are. I am all willing to accept for argument's sake that most of what we see is the product of a deep and dark global conspiracy by Themme to achieve unchallengeable universal dominance on earth. It matters no whit. There are those out there who are not our friends, regardless of the reasons. Pulling away to whatever degree is op[ssible without exposing our necks to the wolves makes all proper sense. The question is, however, just how far can you go without flirting with disaster.

    Also, how can any president know the degree to which reported threats are real or to which they have been "massaged"?

    Once in the chair, responsible for the material safety of 320 million people, I suspect the answers to all the questions and issues we raise here become less clear and certain.

    Now, if we look at what Trump is doing, there are several possible interpretations. Yes, he may be a cleverly disguised agent of Theire's. He may also not be. Consider his most recent EO. It is worrisome in its potential for abuse. It might also be part of a setup to execute a broad and deep purge of the so-called "deep state" or "swamp", pursuant to the goal of returning America to a more proper Constitutional course, for whatever that might be worth - and let us not devolve into that philosophical debate.

    And merry Christmas to you.
    Thanks.
    Last edited by osan; 12-25-2017 at 03:52 AM.
    Through lives and lives shalt thou pay, O' king.

    Pray for reset.


  20. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nikcers View Post
    We marched right in, we can march right out.
    "Can" != "should" in all cases.

    Never should have gone there, but we did. Once the threshold is crossed, things change... which is why we ought not cross them in the first place.
    Through lives and lives shalt thou pay, O' king.

    Pray for reset.


  21. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    You may think that President Paul would pull our troops out of this place and that, but would he really?
    yes

  22. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nikcers View Post
    yes

    Based on what? I don't think you know nearly enough of the realities of global circumstance to say for certain.

    And if he did, I would not be surprised if bad things ensued, whether as the natural consequences of said circumstance or because of the powerful interests heavily vested in the status quo of war, for example. As I've mentioned many times before, we live in a world where people will kill you for the two dollars in your wallet. What do you think the powerful would do for the sake of gaining and keeping their power?

    My thought on the matter is that we are in a very tight corner with powerful interests wanting certain things. Deny them, and who knows what may happen. This is why I am cutting Trump significant slack. If what we're seeing is not smoke and mirrors, then Trump is taking monumental risks in doing many of the things he's doing. Lots of people see betrayal and the SOS in what he's doing. It may well prove to be that in the end, but I also see the strong possibility of a man engaging in a complex strategy of setting up the domestic (and some foreign) enemies of America for a great coup de grace. His most recent EO smacks of this, as well as many of his other actions. I could be completely wrong about it, but if not, he stands to take bites out of Theire asses that no other president since I can recall has had the nerve to do. Only time will tell.

    I have all the respect in the world for Ron Paul's knowledge and philosophical positions. But in terms of real world tactics, I wonder how successful he would have been as a president. Even though I have questioned a goodly number of Rand's statements and moves, I have always held that what to me seems superficially unpalatable might be strategic nibbles in the right direction in a deeply hostile environment. I cannot say for certain because I have no window into the hearts and minds of other men. But in certain cases I am willing to give benefit of doubt. With years I am learning a little better patience where my expectations of returns on investment are concerned in a land so deeply entrenched with political corruption. It took a long time to get here. It's going to take patience and time; lots of it. Anyone thinking that any man taking the Office can just issue orders and the world will toe his line is fooling himself. It cannot be done as some imagine it. The circumstances will not support it in far too many ways.
    Through lives and lives shalt thou pay, O' king.

    Pray for reset.


  23. #22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    Based on what?
    Ron Paul's philosophy of non interventionism? His whole political history of supporting non interventionism. He didn't support the Clintons and then wake up one day and say wow that Ron Paul guy has some good ideas, those are his ideas.

  24. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nikcers View Post
    Ron Paul's philosophy of non interventionism? His whole political history of supporting non interventionism. He didn't support the Clintons and then wake up one day and say wow that Ron Paul guy has some good ideas, those are his ideas.
    That philosophy will take one only so far in a world stacked against you. Getting where you want to go takes some fair measure of obliquity and lots of patience.
    Through lives and lives shalt thou pay, O' king.

    Pray for reset.


  25. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    That philosophy will take one only so far in a world stacked against you. Getting where you want to go takes some fair measure of obliquity and lots of patience.
    You can't stop the neocon foreign policy by adopting it.

  26. #25

    Default

    Arming a foreign nation or faction is the very definition of a foreign entanglement.

    The founding cracker himself that these were to be avoided.

    What did he know, though.
    "Every post is about Hillary and pedophilia. I love them both soooo much!!!!!!!" Zippyjuan

  27. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nikcers View Post
    You can't stop the neocon foreign policy by adopting it.
    Can't stop it by brute force, either - unless you go for a purge of the classic variety. We should all be familiar with how those turn out.

    It's not about adopting the policy, but of transitioning away in piecemeal fashion such that you are able to achieve small victories. Congress is a den of iniquity with most members owned lock, stock, and barrel by whatever interests hit the sweet spots best. The members may not agree that much with one another in detail items, but when a boyscout comes to threaten the gravy train, they unite. They have done so even with Trump, who is seemingly not one of them if what we see is to be believed even marginally. Congress hates him, and yet he has been making headway. Ron Paul made very little of that in what, 36 years? Principles mean nothing if you cannot get things done. I esteem Ron Paul very highly, but nobody can deny that he was not the most effective representative. Had there been 300 more of him, things would have perhaps been very different. But he was an honest man surrounded by deeply institutionalized corruption. I suspect Rand may fare better in the longer run, assuming he remains in this game of rank filth. After what that prick neighbor did, I might be inclined to go elsewhere... or carry a gun everywhere I went because that neighbor should have been shot dead on the spot.

    Speaking of which, and this is an aside for perhaps another thread, has that bastard who broke Rand's ribs been investigated as to possible connections with interests that may have enticed him to do his despicable deed?
    Through lives and lives shalt thou pay, O' king.

    Pray for reset.


  28. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    Can't stop it by brute force, either - unless you go for a purge of the classic variety. We should all be familiar with how those turn out.

    It's not about adopting the policy, but of transitioning away in piecemeal fashion such that you are able to achieve small victories. Congress is a den of iniquity with most members owned lock, stock, and barrel by whatever interests hit the sweet spots best. The members may not agree that much with one another in detail items, but when a boyscout comes to threaten the gravy train, they unite. They have done so even with Trump, who is seemingly not one of them if what we see is to be believed even marginally. Congress hates him, and yet he has been making headway. Ron Paul made very little of that in what, 36 years? Principles mean nothing if you cannot get things done. I esteem Ron Paul very highly, but nobody can deny that he was not the most effective representative. Had there been 300 more of him, things would have perhaps been very different. But he was an honest man surrounded by deeply institutionalized corruption. I suspect Rand may fare better in the longer run, assuming he remains in this game of rank filth. After what that prick neighbor did, I might be inclined to go elsewhere... or carry a gun everywhere I went because that neighbor should have been shot dead on the spot.

    Speaking of which, and this is an aside for perhaps another thread, has that bastard who broke Rand's ribs been investigated as to possible connections with interests that may have enticed him to do his despicable deed?
    Principles mean nothing when you have none. Ron Paul had the election stolen from him, of course he didn't end the Iraq war or get a real audit of the fed, but he made those ideas popular, so popular that fake politicians like Trump had to copy him in order to gain popular support.

  29. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nikcers View Post
    Principles mean nothing when you have none.
    A bit tautological, methinks - not really relevant to the issue of efficacy. Do we want change for the better, or don't we?
    Through lives and lives shalt thou pay, O' king.

    Pray for reset.


  30. #29

    Default

    Strategic Culture:

    Among the weapons being sent are US-made FGM-148 Javelin anti-tank missiles … President Donald Trump approved a plan to provide lethal weapons to Kiev, including the sale of the … The package includes a license for the $41.5 million commercial sale of .50 caliber Barrett M107A1 sniper rifles and ammunition. …

    The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe has reported at least 1,000 ceasefire violations a day this month. …

    Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned US assistance would escalate the conflict. … the US can no longer cast itself as a mediator. "It's not a mediator. It's an accomplice in fueling the war." ...

    it would risk turning the Donbass conflict from cool to warm—or even hot. Kiev will see the move as an explicit expression of US backing to provoke it into taking a more aggressive stand. With US arms flowing in, Ukraine will press harder for a military solution. …

    Ukraine is hardly in a position to pay for the deliveries. …

    35 Javelin systems with 210 missiles as a well sniper rifles don’t change the balance of forces. … But the decision entails more American military instructors in Ukraine. … It will increase even more the US military presence in Ukraine and, consequently, its involvement, making it a party in the ongoing civil war. That’s what Kiev wants – to suck the US into the armed conflict. The US already operates a naval facility in Ochakov. US warships will routinely drop anchor in Ukrainian ports, trainers to teach how to operate Javelins will be accompanied by other people …

    Imagine Russia doing the same thing in Canada, Mexico or Cuba! Will the US turn a blind eye on such activities? …

    The move will trigger violations of cease-fire in eastern Ukraine … and undermine chances for the Minsk accords to succeed. …
    "Let it not be said that we did nothing." - Dr. Ron Paul. "Stand up for what you believe in, even if you are standing alone." - Sophie Magdalena Scholl
    "War is the health of the State." - Randolph Bourne "Freedom is the answer. ... Now, what's the question?" - Ernie Hancock.

  31. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AZJoe View Post
    Strategic Culture:

    Among the weapons being sent are US-made FGM-148 Javelin anti-tank missiles … President Donald Trump approved a plan to provide lethal weapons to Kiev, including the sale of the … The package includes a license for the $41.5 million commercial sale of .50 caliber Barrett M107A1 sniper rifles and ammunition. …

    The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe has reported at least 1,000 ceasefire violations a day this month. …

    Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned US assistance would escalate the conflict. the US can no longer cast itself as a mediator. "It's not a mediator. It's an accomplice in fueling the war." ...

    it would risk turning the Donbass conflict from cool to warm—or even hot. Kiev will see the move as an explicit expression of US backing to provoke it into taking a more aggressive stand. With US arms flowing in, Ukraine will press harder for a military solution. …

    Ukraine is hardly in a position to pay for the deliveries. …

    35 Javelin systems with 210 missiles as a well sniper rifles don’t change the balance of forces. … But the decision entails more American military instructors in Ukraine. … It will increase even more the US military presence in Ukraine and, consequently, its involvement, making it a party in the ongoing civil war. That’s what Kiev wants – to suck the US into the armed conflict. The US already operates a naval facility in Ochakov. US warships will routinely drop anchor in Ukrainian ports, trainers to teach how to operate Javelins will be accompanied by other people …

    Imagine Russia doing the same thing in Canada, Mexico or Cuba! Will the US turn a blind eye on such activities? …

    The move will trigger violations of cease-fire in eastern Ukraine … and undermine chances for the Minsk accords to succeed. …

    Why do you hate the free market?
    "The Patriarch"

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast





Similar Threads

  1. Trump Flip Flop on Israeli Embassy
    By jllundqu in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-01-2017, 09:02 PM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-17-2014, 06:35 PM
  3. Newt Gingrich Gingrich Defends Libya Flip-Flop By Pointing Out That This Flip-Flop Was A Flip-Flop
    By Agorism in forum 2012 Presidential Election
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-28-2012, 12:48 AM
  4. Man VS flip flop
    By Anti Federalist in forum Open Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-23-2010, 09:06 PM
  5. Yet another Flip Flopney flip flop!
    By hummtide in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-08-2007, 09:44 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •