The deep state will do something drastic

quote:

---

I wouldn’t doubt if they did try and start a war

---

They already tried to start a war with Iran by blaming the assassination attempts on Iran. And as of this weekend they are trying to escalate the Ukraine/Russia conflict with NATO/US missiles that can reach deep inside Russia.

quote:

---

like allowing ukraine to shoot american missiles 200 miles in to russia?

---

Yes Sir! Just like that!

they already did two days ago

quote:

---

like allowing ukraine to shoot american missiles 200 miles into russia?

---

I think this was a move by Trump about Russia allowing the Koreans to fight in Ukraine. Just a message of we can hit you now.

There is a lot of talk Biden may have reached a deal with Trump that was made after the infamous debate when Obama threw Joe to the wolves.

All the while, Hunter's sentencing keeps getting pushed farther back. Hunter was their blackmail insurance policy on Joe.

quote:

---

can you please further explain the term "assignation attempt". Is that a sexual term?

---

I edited.

iPhone does not like the word assassination.

quote:

---

I wouldn’t doubt if they did try and start a war

---

Abroad and on our own shores.

The usual suspects in the cheap seats around here who see the relative quiet of the last nearly two weeks are incredibly naive in believing that we'll get to Jan. 20 without it getting crazy. They are either as misinformed as they appear, or just straight-up willfully ignorant.

Both are dangerous.

quote:

---

Can someone explain to me the moral difference between Russia bombing/shooting Ukrainians on Ukrainian soil and Ukrainians bombing/shooting Russians on Russian soil?

---

Sounds equivalent, if it were just between Russia and Ukraine.

quote:

---

I don't really see how the US could reasonably deny Ukraine the right to defend themselves by prohibiting them from firing on Russia. It seems like that would be a very strange position to take.

---

Again, if Ukraine were funding or manufacturing its own weapons to support its endeavors, they could do what they want and accept the consequences.

However, the US is giving them these weapons. That makes us involved. There’s a difference between our involvement causing deaths to Russian personnel inside Ukraine and our involvement causing death to Russian civilians inside Russia.

If we’re in a conflict with Russia, directly or proximally, what’s the moral difference between our causing the deaths of Russian civilians in Russian territory and Russia causing the deaths of American civilians in American territory?

You can argue the righteousness of our cause vs Russia’s cause, but our taking the step of killing Russian civilians on Russian soil is an escalation that may provoke a response. What is so important about Ukraine that we should risk American lives to protect it?

It will be a serious fight, and civil uprising could be in the mix.

quote:

---

However, the US is giving them these weapons. That makes us involved.

---

Yeah, I get that.

But that seems like it would be even stranger for us to send them weapons and aid but then prohibit them from using the weapons we gave them.

quote:

---

You can argue the righteousness of our cause vs Russia’s cause, but our taking the step of killing Russian civilians on Russian soil is an escalation that may provoke a response.

---

I get that argument too, but I personally don't think it's going to move the needle like y'all do. We've been sending weapons and aid for 2 1/2 years now. It's not a secret that we've chosen a side in the conflict and our weapons have been killing Russians for that entire time.

Maybe I'm wrong and Putin will be highly offended that Ukraine used these specific missiles in Russia instead of the bombs, missiles, guns, ammo, etc. that have killed all the other Russians since this started, but I don't think so.

Especially since Daddy is about to be back in the WH.

quote:

---

What is so important about Ukraine that we should risk American lives to protect it?

---

Nothing. That's the point. The reasoning behind all of this is that if Russia successfully steamrolled Ukraine, they would keep going and invade some other country that would require that we send American troops to defend. So it was in our best interest to do what we could to keep that from happening.

It was actually the one and only policy point I agreed with the Biden administration about. The reasoning was solid. He's was just too much of a wussy to implement it effectively.

I don't think that's as likely with Trump coming in, but Russia has demonstrated that they are very patient. They took territory under Bush, under Obama, and under Biden. There's no reason to expect that they won't just wait Trump out and if some other wussy gets elected after Trump, start the machine up again.

What will happen IMO is that Russia will try to take as much territory as they can before January—which is, IMO exactly why Ukraine is doing this right now...they are forcing Russia to shift focus from offense to defense—and both sides know exactly why.

Because when Trump is sworn in they will stop the fighting (for now) and Russia will leave, but will retain the area it has so far seized. And they both know it.

Putin would be a fool to draw the US into a conflict right now.

And whatever else he is, Putin is not a fool.