141 |
1,843 |
JOINED: |
Nov 2023 |
STATUS: |
OFFLINE
|

02-28-2025, 05:37 PM
This post was last modified 02-28-2025, 05:39 PM by putnam6. Edited 1 time in total. 
(02-28-2025, 05:29 PM)Oldcarpy2 Wrote: God. How many times do I have to tell you, there is no winning strategy for Ukraine?
Hello?
Hello indeed...
His mind was not for rent to any god or government, always hopeful yet discontent. Knows changes aren't permanent, but change is ....
Professor Neil Ellwood Peart
0 |
34 |
JOINED: |
Jan 2025 |
STATUS: |
OFFLINE
|

(02-28-2025, 04:57 PM)putnam6 Wrote: A good synopsis of the meeting I agree the whole thing needs to be taken into context, we will see if and how much Zelensky screwed up.
The Spaces on X is blistering with comments UK can think Vance is a c--- but Americans like the guy a lot
Vance's approval rating today is about 41%. His disapproval rating is about 43%. He's slightly underwater. No evidence Americans like him "a lot". Also, today's approval/disapproval ratings don't reflect today's altercation at the White House. Let's wait a few days and see what happens.
134 |
1,036 |
JOINED: |
Dec 2023 |
STATUS: |
OFFLINE
|

And….
just like that no one talking about the Epstein files.
141 |
1,843 |
JOINED: |
Nov 2023 |
STATUS: |
OFFLINE
|

(02-28-2025, 06:16 PM)pianopraze Wrote: And….
just like that no one talking about the Epstein files.
Hmmm very very good point
His mind was not for rent to any god or government, always hopeful yet discontent. Knows changes aren't permanent, but change is ....
Professor Neil Ellwood Peart
9 |
1,084 |
JOINED: |
Feb 2024 |
STATUS: |
OFFLINE
|

141 |
1,843 |
JOINED: |
Nov 2023 |
STATUS: |
OFFLINE
|

(02-28-2025, 06:11 PM)EXETER Wrote: Vance's approval rating today is about 41%. His disapproval rating is about 43%. He's slightly underwater. No evidence Americans like him "a lot". Also, today's approval/disapproval ratings don't reflect today's altercation at the White House. Let's wait a few days and see what happens.
Yay, let's use the same polls that predicted a Harris/Walz victory
Yes let's wait and watch Zelensky's interview on Fox and then we will see, bottom line America isn't going to participate anywhere near the level it has the last 4 years.
His mind was not for rent to any god or government, always hopeful yet discontent. Knows changes aren't permanent, but change is ....
Professor Neil Ellwood Peart
0 |
34 |
JOINED: |
Jan 2025 |
STATUS: |
OFFLINE
|

(02-28-2025, 05:06 PM)putnam6 Wrote: I think we will be all right
[Image: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Gk5K1xPWQAAE...name=large]
Funny you should show that graphic. Here's an article that shows why your interpretation is false:
https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/us-co...024-05-31/
Of that 860B$ Defense budget, the US only spends about 0.567 B$ directly on NATO. That's 0.065% of our defense budget and about 16% of the total NATO budget. We have many other combatant commands spread all over the world that use up the rest of that budget. The amount we have been spending on Ukraine directly amounts to about 38B$ per year since 2022, or about 0.4% of our defense budget. But it's a shooting war, even though no US combatants are on the front line, so it should cost more.
If you mean to imply that we'll be OK because no foreign power is likely to try to invade or attack the US militarily because of the size of our military you are probably right--at least in the immediate future. However, Trump is creating almost the perfect conditions for another major land war in Central Europe in the near future, only this time many nations will have nuclear weapons. Even if you take the position that you are morally neutral about seeing the cradle of Western Civilization destroyed by war, it is delusional to think that that scenario would not be immensely costly to the US in tangible terms. For one thing, the US has direct economic investment in Europe of about 4 Trillion$. Compared to that number, spending 38B$ to protect that investment is down in the noise. It is not in the national interest of the US to create that kind of catastrophe--there is no way to justify it on an economic cost-benefit analysis. The only way Krasnov's (oops, I meanTrump's) actions make sense is if he is doing this to improve Putin's geopolitical position.
141 |
1,843 |
JOINED: |
Nov 2023 |
STATUS: |
OFFLINE
|

02-28-2025, 07:09 PM
This post was last modified 02-28-2025, 07:13 PM by putnam6. Edited 1 time in total. 
(02-28-2025, 06:57 PM)EXETER Wrote: Funny you should show that graphic. Here's an article that shows why your interpretation is false:
https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/us-co...024-05-31/
Of that 860B$ Defense budget, the US only spends about 0.567 B$ directly on NATO. That's 0.065% of our defense budget and about 16% of the total NATO budget. We have many other combatant commands spread all over the world that use up the rest of that budget. The amount we have been spending on Ukraine directly amounts to about 38B$ per year since 2022, or about 0.4% of our defense budget. But it's a shooting war, even though no US combatants are on the front line, so it should cost more.
If you mean to imply that we'll be OK because no foreign power is likely to try to invade or attack the US militarily because of the size of our military you are probably right--at least in the immediate future. However, Trump is creating almost the perfect conditions for another major land war in Central Europe in the near future, only this time many nations will have nuclear weapons. Even if you take the position that you are morally neutral about seeing the cradle of Western Civilization destroyed by war, it is delusional to think that that scenario would not be immensely costly to the US in tangible terms. For one thing, the US has direct economic investment in Europe of about 4 Trillion$. Compared to that number, spending 38B$ to protect that investment is down in the noise. It is not in the national interest of the US to create that kind of catastrophe--there is no way to justify it on an economic cost-benefit analysis. The only way Krasnov's (oops, I meanTrump's) actions make sense is if he is doing this to improve Putin's geopolitical position.
Of course, I mean the US will be fine.
I have high confidence that America will honor Article 5 until when and if new agreements can be made.
No matter how fearful you are regarding the collapse of the cradle of Western civilization
Russia is practically begging to get out of the war, Ive said all along th UK France Poland and Germany alone should be able to hang with Russia and if they aren't they should be and needed this wake-up call.
His mind was not for rent to any god or government, always hopeful yet discontent. Knows changes aren't permanent, but change is ....
Professor Neil Ellwood Peart
141 |
1,843 |
JOINED: |
Nov 2023 |
STATUS: |
OFFLINE
|

02-28-2025, 07:24 PM
This post was last modified 02-28-2025, 07:49 PM by putnam6. Edited 1 time in total. 
His mind was not for rent to any god or government, always hopeful yet discontent. Knows changes aren't permanent, but change is ....
Professor Neil Ellwood Peart
36 |
733 |
JOINED: |
Nov 2023 |
STATUS: |
OFFLINE
|

02-28-2025, 09:22 PM
This post was last modified 02-28-2025, 09:39 PM by IdeomotorPrisoner. Edited 6 times in total. 
Well I see the mineral deal failed miserably..
We are such freaking bullies. It was all nice until they called Zelenskyy out for hatred of Putin. They call him a dictator in the media and then berate him for not kissing their asses and daring to hate our new ally Putin.
But I don't really want to get into it. I dont care what the reason is, what context I'm missing. Why he's right again. Why Russia is now the good guy. Why the underdog needs to be euthanized. Keep your mental gymnastics. The version of America I wanted on the world stage is gone. It's not healthy to watch anymore. To watch it's leaders that represent me.
Because if Zelenskyy is now the dictator, and Putin and Trump are the good guys in this equation, I don't think there's anything left to care about.
And I call now out to our new master... obviously. In stranger aeons may his madness reign.
|