- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict
Posted on 6/10/24 at 1:22 pm to cypher
Posted on 6/10/24 at 1:22 pm to cypher
quote:Which was absolutely doable.
Arakhamia said that it would require a constitutional change, given that Ukraine’s Constitution states its intention to become a NATO member.
quote:Which is how Johnson scuttled the discussions. The West would not guarantee security if Ukraine consummated peace negotiations.
Additionally, he emphasized a lack of trust in the Russian position.
"There is no, and there was no, trust in the Russians that they would do it. That could only be done if there were security guarantees."
That context was previously provided.
2
Posted on 6/10/24 at 1:27 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Which is how Johnson scuttled the discussions. The West would not guarantee security if Ukraine consummated peace negotiations.
Would you be agreeable to a settlement that obligated the US to defend Ukraine with our planes, ships and soldiers? I wouldn’t. Not with Russian troops there already.
Posted on 6/10/24 at 1:29 pm to GoAwayImBaitn
You can easily spot a political talk poster based on just one post here.
Posted on 6/10/24 at 1:30 pm to Lee B
quote:You're unfamiliar with the term "verbatim." Look it up so you can respond more intelligently.
Well Nancy, you didn't quote him verbatim
quote:You're unfamiliar with the term "context." Look it up so you can respond more intelligently.
you took him out of context
quote:You apparently misread the post about BJ. Read it more carefully this time so you can respond more intelligently.
And Johnson isn't the head of the Ukrainian majority party, either...
Posted on 6/10/24 at 1:33 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Arakhamia said that it would require a constitutional change, given that Ukraine’s Constitution states its intention to become a NATO member.
Which was absolutely doable.
You're unfamiliar with the term "doable".
This post was edited on 6/10/24 at 1:35 pm
Posted on 6/10/24 at 1:33 pm to doubleb
quote:
Would you be agreeable to a settlement that obligated the US to defend Ukraine with our planes, ships and soldiers? I wouldn’t. Not with Russian troops there already.
But people want Ukraine in NATO
Posted on 6/10/24 at 1:38 pm to cypher
quote:I use doable in the context of dozens of Ukrainians stating the Constitutional amendment would not have been an impediment.
You're unfamiliar with the term "doable".
Posted on 6/10/24 at 1:42 pm to VolSquatch
quote:
quote:
Europe is waking up. Weak Biden like politicians like Scholz and Macron took a beating over the weekend.
And the way Macron has been acting since has only really proven the far right people he is concerned about correct
Well, by calling this Snap Election, which most are pretty confident will probably give him more power in an outirght majority, he comes up ahead...
But even if his party loses seats... he gets to serve out the rest of his term without another parliamentary election being able to be called unless there is a full "no confidence" vote, which is very unlikely...
So Macron is gaming things and wins either way, unless LePen's party manages to really get a big majority in Parliament, which is unlikely.
This post was edited on 6/10/24 at 1:43 pm
Posted on 6/10/24 at 1:44 pm to doubleb
quote:You mean like Ukraine joining NATO?
Would you be agreeable to a settlement that obligated the US to defend Ukraine with our planes, ships and soldiers? I wouldn’t.
Posted on 6/10/24 at 1:48 pm to VolSquatch
quote:
But people want Ukraine in NATO
... which will only be possible if there are no Russian troops left in Ukraine or if Ukraine cedes territory to Russia outright.
Though the way Putin is acting towards Estonia, it might not make much of a difference.
And if he ups his aggressions towards Estonia (he unilaterally moved the his sea territory lines, and they have seized Estonian fishing boats who "violated" this new border no one knew about)... will you oppose NATO action against Russia?
Posted on 6/10/24 at 1:50 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
You mean like Ukraine joining NATO?
Yes
And fwiw, under the current conditions I am against letting Ukraine in NATO. I don’t want the US sending troops there.
Posted on 6/10/24 at 1:50 pm to GoAwayImBaitn
quote:''
bUT wHaT dOeS a RuSsIaN vIcToRy lOok LiKE?!?
So you don't know either.
Because you went on and on about how this thread was full of a bunch of dumb asses for refusing to acknowledge the obvious truth that Russia was winning.
But you can't even say what that means.
Thanks for the deep insight. Very convincing.
Posted on 6/10/24 at 1:51 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
I use doable in the context of dozens of Ukrainians stating the Constitutional amendment would not have been an impediment.
It takes more than "dozens of Ukrainians". It takes a two thirds majority vote in parliament. Zelensky's party has over half the seats.
Posted on 6/10/24 at 1:52 pm to Lee B
quote:Nah Lee. Gosh, you're right. We really need a good, healthy, thermonuclear exchange over fishing boats.
... will you oppose NATO action against Russia?
Posted on 6/10/24 at 1:54 pm to cypher
quote:and?
It takes more than "dozens of Ukrainians". It takes a two thirds majority vote in parliament. Zelensky's party has over half the seats.
Zelensky's party would obviously have voted for amendment as would nearly all of the others ... at least according to dozens of Ukrainian officials.
Posted on 6/10/24 at 1:58 pm to Lee B
quote:
will you oppose NATO action against Russia
I think we let way too many countries into NATO. I would not be admitting places like Estonia. But the way our agreements are written, we would have to take action.
I really, really just do not see him attacking any NATO countries though. Its abundantly clear that even before the Ukraine invasion in 2022 they didn't have the strength to put up any sort of fight against NATO without trying preemptive nuclear strikes to try and take us out before the fighting even starts, which would also almost assuredly fail.
Posted on 6/10/24 at 2:09 pm to VolSquatch
quote:Yep. And if it wasn't clear before, it certainly is clear now. Perhaps that is the one blessing coming out of this thing.
Its abundantly clear that even before the Ukraine invasion in 2022 they didn't have the strength to put up any sort of fight against NATO
Posted on 6/10/24 at 2:10 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Zelensky's party would obviously have voted for amendment as would nearly all of the others ... at least according to dozens of Ukrainian officials.
Who are these mythical officials?
Posted on 6/10/24 at 2:23 pm to No Colors
quote:
So you don't know either.
Because you went on and on about how this thread was full of a bunch of dumb asses for refusing to acknowledge the obvious truth that Russia was winning.
But you can't even say what that means.
Thanks for the deep insight. Very convincing
Is this your "gotcha" moment? Weak...
Where did I state that Russia has won?
I simply stated Ukraine is currently losing.
Posted on 6/10/24 at 2:28 pm to doubleb
quote:
quote:
You mean like Ukraine joining NATO?
Yes
And fwiw, under the current conditions I am against letting Ukraine in NATO. I don’t want the US sending troops there.
But Ukraine could not join NATO "under the current conditions."
And whenever someplace he doesn't want to join NATO starts going that way, Putin invades part of their territory to create "the current conditions" and create a border dispute, disqualifying them from NATO membership.
See also Georgia.
This post was edited on 6/10/24 at 2:33 pm
Page 3880 of 5046
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News