PDA

View Full Version : If you take anymore of Ukraine Mr Putin



texan
07-21-2014, 11:49 PM
You will be further isolated pal.

Take that!

Redrose
07-21-2014, 11:50 PM
You will be further isolated pal.

Take that!
Run for president.

texan
07-21-2014, 11:53 PM
Its ironic that Obama will take unilateral action inside our borders that is likely illegal in many cases. But abroad he needs to build support and make sure all rules are followed.

Green Arrow
07-22-2014, 02:26 AM
If Putin takes more of Ukraine...

...I will wake up the next day, eat my breakfast, read about it in the newspaper, have a chuckle, kiss my wife, and go to work. I'll bust my ass at work, get off work, go home, eat dinner, make love to my wife, and go to sleep.

'Cause if Putin takes more of Ukraine, I still won't give a shit.

zelmo1234
07-22-2014, 04:12 AM
If Putin takes more of Ukraine...

...I will wake up the next day, eat my breakfast, read about it in the newspaper, have a chuckle, kiss my wife, and go to work. I'll bust my ass at work, get off work, go home, eat dinner, make love to my wife, and go to sleep.

'Cause if Putin takes more of Ukraine, I still won't give a shit.

Then one day he will take Poland, and you will be drafted an go off to a real war, kiss your wife for the last time

But that is the way appeasement works

Green Arrow
07-22-2014, 04:16 AM
Then one day he will take Poland, and you will be drafted an go off to a real war, kiss your wife for the last time

But that is the way appeasement works

Yes, Putin is going to take Poland, and then Europe, and then Alaska, Canada, and soon the whole world will be one giant Russian empire.

Make sure you lock your doors at night and check your closet for KGB!

*EDIT* And by the way, no, you will not be drafting me. You'll either be throwing me in prison or hunting me down in Scotland, Scandinavia, or Russia.

zelmo1234
07-22-2014, 04:18 AM
Yes, Putin is going to take Poland, and then Europe, and then Alaska, Canada, and soon the whole world will be one giant Russian empire.

Make sure you lock your doors at night and check your closet for KGB
!
*EDIT* And by the way, no, you will not be drafting me. You'll either be throwing me in prison or hunting me down in Scotland, Scandinavia, or Russia.

Yes peace in our time, Mr. Chamberlin Peace in our time

The other? Why am I not surprised

Green Arrow
07-22-2014, 04:24 AM
Yes peace in our time, Mr. Chamberlin Peace in our time

The other? Why am I not surprised

I know you warmongers love to name-drop Chamberlain, but what you guys conveniently leave out is the fact that he saved Europe from complete domination by the Nazis. England did not have the means to fight Hitler. Had someone like you been in charge, you would have started a war you had no hope of winning, and England would have fallen to the Nazis. By putting off a confrontation with Hitler, Chamberlain allowed England to build up the money and resources they needed to put up a sufficient defense. And even then, they were still fighting with piss poor weapons and silverware.

zelmo1234
07-22-2014, 04:33 AM
I know you warmongers love to name-drop Chamberlain, but what you guys conveniently leave out is the fact that he saved Europe from complete domination by the Nazis. England did not have the means to fight Hitler. Had someone like you been in charge, you would have started a war you had no hope of winning, and England would have fallen to the Nazis. By putting off a confrontation with Hitler, Chamberlain allowed England to build up the money and resources they needed to put up a sufficient defense. And even then, they were still fighting with piss poor weapons and silverware.

Wow that is a bit revisionist!

If they would have stood up to Hitler when he took Austria, Hitler would not have had the power to wage war, Brittan had the world most powerful Navy and was the military super power of the day, France was among the worlds super powers as well

History Credits Chamberlin with allowing Hitler to rise to power! He was fought politically in his country by Churchill, who wanted to confront Hitler before he built his military machine.

Again I am not surprised at your take on the situation.

Green Arrow
07-22-2014, 04:38 AM
Wow that is a bit revisionist!

If they would have stood up to Hitler when he took Austria, Hitler would not have had the power to wage war, Brittan had the world most powerful Navy and was the military super power of the day, France was among the worlds super powers as well

History Credits Chamberlin with allowing Hitler to rise to power! He was fought politically in his country by Churchill, who wanted to confront Hitler before he built his military machine.

Again I am not surprised at your take on the situation.

It's not revisionist, it's a fact. England was still recovering from WWI (Europe's response to which directly caused WWII, by the way) and did not physically have the power to wage war. Hitler was still powerful and the Nazi war machine was still strong when Hitler took Austria.

zelmo1234
07-22-2014, 04:45 AM
Here is want really baffles me!

To the left, there are 2 options

#1 Let Putin, X KGB USSR expansionists do whatever he wants and tell him that he is naughty after he does it

#2 complete military confrontation and world war.

both options are completely stupid,

The first will lead to war, the second would be completely stupid.

So here is the deal were as a country are broke, the Progressives in both parties have made sure of that. So we need money!

So we need to sell the missile defense system to all of the countries that seek protection from Soviet expansion! Next we need to provide a training program and some offensive military equipment to the NATO countries that seek this help and possibly the Ukraine. All sold at a profit to the USA!
Training to use this equipment can be done in the USA

This might be enough to put Putin in his place. The Russians hate the missile defense shield.

Next we need to position 2 carrier groups of the coast of Alaska and run military maneuvers. Including the practice of beach landings

this will cause the Russian Military to look to the pacific shores and take assets form the European countries.

Next we need to work with Canada and start to explore, and produce as much fossil fuel energy as possible we need to step up natural gas production to the maximum levels and export as much as possible to the European Nations causing the price of oil and natural gas to drop!

This will not only help the poor and middle class of the USA, but it will remove the money Putin is suing for this expansion, plunging Russia into economic depression.

And of course we need to have real and devastating sanctions!

THESE ARE NOT COMITTING TROOPS AND COSTING AMERICA LIVES, BUT THEY WOULD DEFEAT PUTINS ARMIES JUST AS COMPLETELY

1751_Texan
07-22-2014, 04:52 AM
You will be further isolated pal.

Take that!

This sad drama has yet to even begin. Next is the returning of the remains to their home countries. Putin has not even yet begun to squirm.

The US does not have to take the lead on this...the world can make Putin a pariah. Persona non grata.

Green Arrow
07-22-2014, 04:53 AM
I disagree. I think our best solution is to do nothing until 2016, elect a President who has not blustered against Russia, and then have said President negotiate an alliance with Russia.

1751_Texan
07-22-2014, 04:56 AM
Here is want really baffles me!

To the left, there are 2 options

#1 Let Putin, X KGB USSR expansionists do whatever he wants and tell him that he is naughty after he does it

#2 complete military confrontation and world war.

both options are completely stupid,

The first will lead to war, the second would be completely stupid.

So here is the deal were as a country are broke, the Progressives in both parties have made sure of that. So we need money!

So we need to sell the missile defense system to all of the countries that seek protection from Soviet expansion! Next we need to provide a training program and some offensive military equipment to the NATO countries that seek this help and possibly the Ukraine. All sold at a profit to the USA!
Training to use this equipment can be done in the USA

This might be enough to put Putin in his place. The Russians hate the missile defense shield.

Next we need to position 2 carrier groups of the coast of Alaska and run military maneuvers. Including the practice of beach landings

this will cause the Russian Military to look to the pacific shores and take assets form the European countries.

Next we need to work with Canada and start to explore, and produce as much fossil fuel energy as possible we need to step up natural gas production to the maximum levels and export as much as possible to the European Nations causing the price of oil and natural gas to drop!

This will not only help the poor and middle class of the USA, but it will remove the money Putin is suing for this expansion, plunging Russia into economic depression.

And of course we need to have real and devastating sanctions!

THESE ARE NOT COMITTING TROOPS AND COSTING AMERICA LIVES, BUT THEY WOULD DEFEAT PUTINS ARMIES JUST AS COMPLETELY

Those are certainly not the only options.

zelmo1234
07-22-2014, 04:59 AM
Those are certainly not the only options.
'
No they are not, there are many more things that can drive Russia into and economic depression and send them crawling back to the rock that they crawled out from under!

Green Arrow
07-22-2014, 05:01 AM
'
No they are not, there are many more things that can drive Russia into and economic depression and send them crawling back to the rock that they crawled out from under!

The Cold War is over. There's no reason to punish 143.8 million people for the actions of one man.

zelmo1234
07-22-2014, 05:06 AM
The Cold War is over. There's no reason to punish 143.8 million people for the actions of one man.

Did you see the words of Tony Blair!

The new cold war is just beginning, the European nations can't count on the USA any longer, and there will be an Arms race in Europe.

Just how much of a buffer do you think Putin will want a s the EU starts to build a military machine

The cold war is just starting again! The vacuum created by the deliberate destruction of the USA as a world power, by the Obama administration has created a much more dangerous world!


Israel, the Nato countries and Japan all will need to start building Military strength to provide the protection that their people require


This comes as a direct threat to the Arab nations, China and Russia!


The race is on!

Green Arrow
07-22-2014, 05:08 AM
Did you see the words of Tony Blair!

No, nor do I care to.


The new cold war is just beginning, the European nations can't count on the USA any longer, and there will be an Arms race in Europe.

Just how much of a buffer do you think Putin will want a s the EU starts to build a military machine

The cold war is just starting again! The vacuum created by the deliberate destruction of the USA as a world power, by the Obama administration has created a much more dangerous world!


Israel, the Nato countries and Japan all will need to start building Military strength to provide the protection that their people require


This comes as a direct threat to the Arab nations, China and Russia!


The race is on!

People like you will destroy the world before it ever has a chance to grow.

Peter1469
07-22-2014, 05:17 AM
Some of these are good ideas. But we also have to consider what Russia can actually do. It no longer has the massive armies to do much invading on a large scale. Taking Ukraine would tax its capabilities. It wouldn't make much sense for them to try.

Also we aren't sure where are allies are. Germany is just as like to take Russia's side as to do nothing. It won't help us.


Here is want really baffles me!

To the left, there are 2 options

#1 Let Putin, X KGB USSR expansionists do whatever he wants and tell him that he is naughty after he does it

#2 complete military confrontation and world war.

both options are completely stupid,

The first will lead to war, the second would be completely stupid.

So here is the deal were as a country are broke, the Progressives in both parties have made sure of that. So we need money!

So we need to sell the missile defense system to all of the countries that seek protection from Soviet expansion! Next we need to provide a training program and some offensive military equipment to the NATO countries that seek this help and possibly the Ukraine. All sold at a profit to the USA!
Training to use this equipment can be done in the USA

This might be enough to put Putin in his place. The Russians hate the missile defense shield.

Next we need to position 2 carrier groups of the coast of Alaska and run military maneuvers. Including the practice of beach landings

this will cause the Russian Military to look to the pacific shores and take assets form the European countries.

Next we need to work with Canada and start to explore, and produce as much fossil fuel energy as possible we need to step up natural gas production to the maximum levels and export as much as possible to the European Nations causing the price of oil and natural gas to drop!

This will not only help the poor and middle class of the USA, but it will remove the money Putin is suing for this expansion, plunging Russia into economic depression.

And of course we need to have real and devastating sanctions!

THESE ARE NOT COMITTING TROOPS AND COSTING AMERICA LIVES, BUT THEY WOULD DEFEAT PUTINS ARMIES JUST AS COMPLETELY

1751_Texan
07-22-2014, 05:33 AM
The Cold War is over. There's no reason to punish 143.8 million people for the actions of one man.

You're exactly right; but it seems that the sanctions the US has on the money people in Russia is having a impact. It was reported that Putin was on the phone with Obama discussing those sanctions when Putin advised Obama about the downing.

Why would Putin be on the phone discussing sanctions if they were not having an effect? I don't think I have to tell you...the theory of sanctions in the days of Cuba was that placing hardships on the people would cause pressure on the government. That did not work.

These new types of strategic sanctioning places hardships on the power brokers and money people...those with real influence on Putin.

People say that the EU is in a hard place because their energy comes for Russia...well Russia is also in a bind because The EU is a paying customer. That means Petrol dollars not coming in. Bad for the economy.

China is an alternative energy customer, but the pipelines are not there of yet.

It all comes down to pragmatism. Is eastern Ukraine all vital to Putin?

Green Arrow
07-22-2014, 05:42 AM
You're exactly right; but it seems that the sanctions the US has on the money people in Russia is having a impact. It was reported that Putin was on the phone with Obama discussing those sanctions when Putin advised Obama about the downing.

Why would Putin be on the phone discussing sanctions if they were not having an effect? I don't think I have to tell you...the theory of sanctions in the days of Cuba was that placing hardships on the people would cause pressure on the government. That did not work.

These new types of strategic sanctioning places hardships on the power brokers and money people...those with real influence on Putin.

People say that the EU is in a hard place because their energy comes for Russia...well Russia is also in a bind because The EU is a paying customer. That means Petrol dollars not coming in. Bad for the economy.

China is an alternative energy customer, but the pipelines are not there of yet.

It all comes down to pragmatism. Is eastern Ukraine all vital to Putin?

I'm not arguing that the sanctions are ineffective, just that they are unnecessary. All this talk about comparing Putin to Hitler and Ukraine to Poland is just that - talk. There's no logical reason to buy the bullshit that Putin is trying to rebuild the Soviet Union and relentlessly take over former satellite states.

*EDIT* And even if the sanctions aren't hurting the Russian people, zelmo's crazy idea of pushing Russia into economic depression most certainly will.

Matty
07-22-2014, 06:23 AM
Its ironic that Obama will take unilateral action inside our borders that is likely illegal in many cases. But abroad he needs to build support and make sure all rules are followed.
I just need to remind you that we have no frickin borders.

Cigar
07-22-2014, 07:01 AM
Its ironic that Obama will take unilateral action inside our borders that is likely illegal in many cases. But abroad he needs to build support and make sure all rules are followed.


Time to send in the troops ... right McCain :rollseyes:

Cigar
07-22-2014, 07:06 AM
Putin is a problem for Europe, it's high time Europe Man up.

Green Arrow
07-22-2014, 07:10 AM
Putin is a problem for Europe, it's high time Europe Man up.

Obama disagrees, and so does Hillary.

Cigar
07-22-2014, 07:13 AM
Obama disagrees, and so does Hillary.


I'm betting within a few days, evidence will be presented at the UN and a lot of people will be eating their words :laugh:

texan
07-22-2014, 08:52 AM
Yes, Putin is going to take Poland, and then Europe, and then Alaska, Canada, and soon the whole world will be one giant Russian empire.

Make sure you lock your doors at night and check your closet for KGB!

*EDIT* And by the way, no, you will not be drafting me. You'll either be throwing me in prison or hunting me down in Scotland, Scandinavia, or Russia.






That's okay buddy, guys like me have been standing up to bullies my entire life so you can go home to your wife. We will continue to do so to protect the weak and make it safe for your family. I wouldn't have it any other way.

Mainecoons
07-22-2014, 10:21 AM
Then one day he will take Poland, and you will be drafted an go off to a real war, kiss your wife for the last time

But that is the way appeasement works

Ah yes, the domino theory rears its head once more.

Green Arrow
07-22-2014, 02:23 PM
That's okay buddy, guys like me have been standing up to bullies my entire life so you can go home to your wife. We will continue to do so to protect the weak and make it safe for your family. I wouldn't have it any other way.

You know, I invented this special tool, a "KGB radar," of you will. Turn this baby on and any KGB agents in your area will show up as little blips on the map. Only $150!

donttread
07-22-2014, 02:49 PM
You will be further isolated pal.

Take that!

Russia and Ukraine fall under the noneya plan for Washington as in its noneya business America

Peter1469
07-22-2014, 03:43 PM
We can certainly use Ukraine in a way that causes Russia to waste its dwindling resources.


Russia and Ukraine fall under the noneya plan for Washington as in its noneya business America

Green Arrow
07-22-2014, 04:06 PM
We can certainly use Ukraine in a way that causes Russia to waste its dwindling resources.

We could, certainly. But why?

Peter1469
07-22-2014, 04:16 PM
We could, certainly. But why?Just to have some influence in the region. Also we have NATO allies not far away. If we don't intend to honor Article 5 we might consider getting out of NATO now.

The Sage of Main Street
07-22-2014, 04:29 PM
Time to send in the troops ... right McCain :rollseyes: Draft only the unpatriotic coward types who didn't have to fight in Vietnam. Bushian preppies and Cheneyan class-climbing college students--they can both finish college later. Those types owe us the lives of 60,000 twenty-year-olds.

The Xl
07-22-2014, 04:32 PM
Then one day he will take Poland, and you will be drafted an go off to a real war, kiss your wife for the last time

But that is the way appeasement works

You're regurgitating fear-mongering and propaganda.

Think about it logically, anyhow. If there was a war between us and Russia, all it would be is big mushroom clouds and the end of the world.

Russia is different than small fry like Iraq or Iran. There can be no war with Russia.

The Xl
07-22-2014, 04:36 PM
Draft only the unpatriotic coward types who didn't have to fight in Vietnam. Bushian preppies and Cheneyan class-climbing college students--they can both finish college later. Those types owe us the lives of 60,000 twenty-year-olds.

How are college going 20 year olds of this generation responsible for the shit pulled nearly half a century ago?

Actually, don't answer that. I don't need to read your illogical, insane rambling.

zelmo1234
07-22-2014, 06:28 PM
Time to send in the troops ... right McCain :rollseyes:

No the only people that are advocating sending the troops are McCain and the left. Wait that is redundant!

But there is not reason not to apply economic pressure, especially if it will put Americans back to work in high paying jobs.

zelmo1234
07-22-2014, 06:29 PM
I'm betting within a few days, evidence will be presented at the UN and a lot of people will be eating their words :laugh:

Yes the UN can do exactly shit in this situation, because Russia has veto power

zelmo1234
07-22-2014, 06:30 PM
Ah yes, the domino theory rears its head once more.

Last time Green was telling me how peaceful and nice that Putin was, but the next day and airliner was shot down

The Xl
07-22-2014, 06:35 PM
Their can't be any war with Russia. Don't you guys get it?

War can't exist between nuclear superpowers such as the US and Russia. It would be the end.

zelmo1234
07-22-2014, 06:39 PM
You're regurgitating fear-mongering and propaganda.

Think about it logically, anyhow. If there was a war between us and Russia, all it would be is big mushroom clouds and the end of the world.

Russia is different than small fry like Iraq or Iran. There can be no war with Russia.

I don't remember calling for war with Russia

I guess that you all were not alive when Carter Was President and the world was watching the USSR expand every few years.

Carter was a pussy like Obama and did nothing but talk.

Reagan came in and used economic pressure and in the end bankrupt the USSR! And of course caused an economic boom in this country at the same time.

Now If putting up a missile defense shield for our allies at there expense is going to war, Then Yes we should do it

If selling our allies weapons that their military can use to prevent the Russians form taking over their country is going to war, then we should do it.

If putting Americans back to work in the oil and natural gas fields to dramatically lower the price of fossil fuels around the world is going to war, then we should do it!

If putting economic sanctions on Russia to deprive her of the money needed for expansion is going to war, then we should do it.

But I have not called for going to war with Russia, but of course the left only has 2 policies the blessing of Russian expansion called appeasement, and WWIII

It is because they don't have a brain. Reagan defeated the Russian Army and nations without firing a shot, so can we.

zelmo1234
07-22-2014, 06:39 PM
Their can't be any war with Russia. Don't you guys get it?

War can't exist between nuclear superpowers such as the US and Russia. It would be the end.

I did miss some posts so there could be lot of people calling for War, But I am not!

Who is? can you post a link?

The Xl
07-22-2014, 06:43 PM
I did miss some posts so there could be lot of people calling for War, But I am not!

Who is? can you post a link?

Aren't you the one who said Arrow and others would be drafted if Russia kept taking places over?

Highly unlikely.

The Xl
07-22-2014, 06:44 PM
I don't remember calling for war with Russia

I guess that you all were not alive when Carter Was President and the world was watching the USSR expand every few years.

Carter was a pussy like Obama and did nothing but talk.

Reagan came in and used economic pressure and in the end bankrupt the USSR! And of course caused an economic boom in this country at the same time.

Now If putting up a missile defense shield for our allies at there expense is going to war, Then Yes we should do it

If selling our allies weapons that their military can use to prevent the Russians form taking over their country is going to war, then we should do it.

If putting Americans back to work in the oil and natural gas fields to dramatically lower the price of fossil fuels around the world is going to war, then we should do it!

If putting economic sanctions on Russia to deprive her of the money needed for expansion is going to war, then we should do it.

But I have not called for going to war with Russia, but of course the left only has 2 policies the blessing of Russian expansion called appeasement, and WWIII

It is because they don't have a brain. Reagan defeated the Russian Army and nations without firing a shot, so can we.

If anything, economically pressuring the Russians would be the most likely cause of a war....

I don't think we should involve ourselves in these sort of affairs.

zelmo1234
07-22-2014, 06:50 PM
Aren't you the one who said Arrow and others would be drafted if Russia kept taking places over?

Highly unlikely.

First there will be no possible way that Russia will continue their Expansion if we act responsibly now.

But if we do nothing then they will have opportunity for expansion, but why would they?

If Russia Takes the Ukraine they will do it for a security buffer just a Peter has talked about. Because of the weakness of the USA, this will cause an arms race in Europe!

This will mean that the security buffer would need to be larger. If Russia decided that they needed Poland in that buffer?

The USA has a choice respond with troops and go to war, or leave Nato. Both would lead to a war that we would get sucked into!

but history has been forgotten, so we are likely to repeat it

zelmo1234
07-22-2014, 06:52 PM
If anything, economically pressuring the Russians would be the most likely cause of a war....

I don't think we should involve ourselves in these sort of affairs.

Well they did not Declare war on us when Reagan did it so I am much more comfortable with dong something.

Appeasement does not have a record of leading to peace! A former British Prime Minister is already calling for a military build up in their country

Peter1469
07-22-2014, 06:58 PM
Yes the UN can do exactly shit in this situation, because Russia has veto power

So do other nations with veto power that depend on Russian energy. We can take over that market if we wanted to. Of course it would take time.

zelmo1234
07-22-2014, 07:00 PM
So do other nations with veto power that depend on Russian energy. We can take over that market if we wanted to. Of course it would take time.

But not that long if we made the decision today.

And if we put a full court press on energy exploration and focused on all forms of energy. The speculation market would collapse. lowering prices by about 15% within weeks

Ransom
07-22-2014, 07:02 PM
I did miss some posts so there could be lot of people calling for War, But I am not!

Who is? can you post a link?

No, he cannot post a link and I've asked this several times. This is a straw man tactic but you are exchanging with Xl

Peter1469
07-22-2014, 07:04 PM
Russia does not have the military capacity to take Poland. It might attack it to see NATO fall apart. Laugh then go home.



First there will be no possible way that Russia will continue their Expansion if we act responsibly now.

But if we do nothing then they will have opportunity for expansion, but why would they?

If Russia Takes the Ukraine they will do it for a security buffer just a Peter has talked about. Because of the weakness of the USA, this will cause an arms race in Europe!

This will mean that the security buffer would need to be larger. If Russia decided that they needed Poland in that buffer?

The USA has a choice respond with troops and go to war, or leave Nato. Both would lead to a war that we would get sucked into!

but history has been forgotten, so we are likely to repeat it

Peter1469
07-22-2014, 07:06 PM
But it will take a while to be able to transport energy to Europe. We need to get them to build some natural gas terminals for us to ship too.



But not that long if we made the decision today.

And if we put a full court press on energy exploration and focused on all forms of energy. The speculation market would collapse. lowering prices by about 15% within weeks

zelmo1234
07-22-2014, 07:08 PM
Russia does not have the military capacity to take Poland. It might attack it to see NATO fall apart. Laugh then go home.

No but they have time and no opposition, so that is not a problem.

Germany did not have the military to attack Poland in 1937 and 38 either

zelmo1234
07-22-2014, 07:12 PM
But it will take a while to be able to transport energy to Europe. We need to get them to build some natural gas terminals for us to ship too.

Again I agree but during WWII we were building a liberty ship (The ships used to transport military goods to Britain) every 30 days. 3 ship yards were working around the clock so a ship every 10 days was hitting the water. All this with Women workers taking the place of the men that went off to war.

Building dock can happen quickly if needed.

And you know and I know that at the first sign of the EU building those docks, Russia will take note! that spells economic disaster for them, and they know it

The Xl
07-22-2014, 07:15 PM
No, he cannot post a link and I've asked this several times. This is a straw man tactic but you are exchanging with Xl

::Sigh::


Then one day he will take Poland, and you will be drafted an go off to a real war, kiss your wife for the last time

But that is the way appeasement works

Lean how to read, Ransom

Peter1469
07-22-2014, 07:15 PM
Did the Poles rely on horse cav, or did they stop that after WWI?


No but they have time and no opposition, so that is not a problem.

Germany did not have the military to attack Poland in 1937 and 38 either

zelmo1234
07-22-2014, 07:18 PM
::Sigh::

Lean how to read, Ransom

Yes that is a possibility if we do NOTHING!

But that is not be calling for WWIII! or military action of any kind.

You can't read this thread and not know my position on this issue. Missile defense shield for our allies. selling of military weapons to our allies. expansion of US energy to apply economic pressure on Russia.

Notice that is not calling for the USA to go to war. Or can't you read?

zelmo1234
07-22-2014, 07:20 PM
Did the Poles rely on horse cav, or did they stop that after WWI?

actually Horses were still used by both sides in WWII, one of the tragedies of the surrender of France was the loss of horses in the retreat

zelmo1234
07-22-2014, 07:22 PM
Here is a question for you?

Did Germany have the ability to provide the needed fuel for the tactic of Blitzkrieg, or did they need to import oil and gasoline?

Peter1469
07-22-2014, 07:26 PM
They had it in the beginning but start to run low as factories were bombed. That is why Hitler wanted the Caucasus region. They also developed synthetics too late to help.

Green Arrow
07-22-2014, 08:48 PM
Just to have some influence in the region. Also we have NATO allies not far away. If we don't intend to honor Article 5 we might consider getting out of NATO now.

I would support that.

zelmo1234
07-22-2014, 10:14 PM
They had it in the beginning but start to run low as factories were bombed. That is why Hitler wanted the Caucasus region. They also developed synthetics too late to help.

They also did not have much for a navy, other than the Subs. So a Naval Blockade and bombing the refineries in 1938 would likely have prevent Hitler's march across Europe

Green Arrow
07-22-2014, 10:21 PM
They also did not have much for a navy, other than the Subs. So a Naval Blockade and bombing the refineries in 1938 would likely have prevent Hitler's march across Europe

Says you. Historians disagree.

Private Pickle
07-22-2014, 10:42 PM
Says you. Historians disagree.

He is correct. They had the Bismarck but it was sunk pretty early on...

Green Arrow
07-22-2014, 10:51 PM
He is correct. They had the Bismarck but it was sunk pretty early on...

I'm talking about his (continued) assertion that Hitler could have been stopped before 1945.

Private Pickle
07-22-2014, 11:00 PM
I'm talking about his (continued) assertion that Hitler could have been stopped before 1945.

Ahhh...well he did give his Generals orders to withdraw immediately back to Germany if the French engaged his troops while retaking the Rhineland.

Dr. Who
07-22-2014, 11:24 PM
But not that long if we made the decision today.

And if we put a full court press on energy exploration and focused on all forms of energy. The speculation market would collapse. lowering prices by about 15% within weeks
And that wouldn't happen because interested parties wouldn't want their portfolios to drop by 15%.

Green Arrow
07-22-2014, 11:35 PM
Ahhh...well he did give his Generals orders to withdraw immediately back to Germany if the French engaged his troops while retaking the Rhineland.

Yeah, well, it's the French. Ain't happening.

Peter1469
07-23-2014, 04:19 AM
They also did not have much for a navy, other than the Subs. So a Naval Blockade and bombing the refineries in 1938 would likely have prevent Hitler's march across Europe

They had an air force. Churchill likely would not have bombed Germany in 1938 had he been in power then.

zelmo1234
07-23-2014, 05:12 AM
Says you. Historians disagree.

No liberal historians trying to justify appeasement disagree!

zelmo1234
07-23-2014, 05:14 AM
They had an air force. Churchill likely would not have bombed Germany in 1938 had he been in power then.

That of course we will never know, but Churchill was talking about containing Germany for several years before he came to power.

Peter1469
07-23-2014, 05:16 AM
No liberal historians trying to justify appeasement disagree!

This is where some people start to think that some Necons today really are advocating for war with Russia, even when they claim that they are not. The UK should have bombed German factories in 1938.... Appeasement to not do so....

I am on bored with soft power, economic power, and putting missile defense and troops in Poland. But Ukraine has nothing to offer the US to merit military intervention.

zelmo1234
07-23-2014, 05:17 AM
And that wouldn't happen because interested parties wouldn't want their portfolios to drop by 15%.

Not that many people play the commodities market.

The reduction in the price of oil has little to no effect on the profits of the oil companies. They have a set margin. and it is likely that if prices were lower, then people would drive further.

Also this adds to the disposable income of families, thus they have more purchasing power and consumer confidence goes up!

The market would likely gain not lose, but that is just economics 101

zelmo1234
07-23-2014, 05:20 AM
This is where some people start to think that some Necons today really are advocating for war with Russia, even when they claim that they are not. The UK should have bombed German factories in 1938.... Appeasement to not do so....

I am on bored with soft power, economic power, and putting missile defense and troops in Poland. But Ukraine has nothing to offer the US to merit military intervention.

Well that is because using soft power is boring, but effective.

I believe that you are correct there is nothing to gain and the US military should not be deployed to Ukraine. But it should never have to be.

We can send Russia back into a deep recession and pull out of our own in one move

Green Arrow
07-23-2014, 06:28 AM
No liberal historians trying to justify appeasement disagree!

If you want to be childish, just say so and I'll back out of this thread right now. I'm tired of offering you logic and facts only for you to toss it back with your regurgitated talking points. My thirteen year old sister can develop better arguments. Step it up or step out.

zelmo1234
07-23-2014, 07:35 AM
If you want to be childish, just say so and I'll back out of this thread right now. I'm tired of offering you logic and facts only for you to toss it back with your regurgitated talking points. My thirteen year old sister can develop better arguments. Step it up or step out.

Ok you said Historians disagree!

I said liberal historians do, and they use it to justify appeasement, which both of our articles did

Do I really need to post the links again to those that feel if the world had acted sooner the damage Hitler did in WWII would have been minimized?

There is plenty on the topic, But I was trying to use the same type of argument that you were.

Nice attack on me personally though. much more adult than Talking about liberal historians

Green Arrow
07-23-2014, 07:42 AM
Ok you said Historians disagree!

I said liberal historians do, and they use it to justify appeasement, which both of our articles did

Do I really need to post the links again to those that feel if the world had acted sooner the damage Hitler did in WWII would have been minimized?

There is plenty on the topic, But I was trying to use the same type of argument that you were.

Nice attack on me personally though. much more adult than Talking about liberal historians

I called your arguments what they were: pathetic, regurgitated partisan talking points. You can 't address anything I've said. Oh well.

zelmo1234
07-23-2014, 08:26 AM
I called your arguments what they were: pathetic, regurgitated partisan talking points. You can 't address anything I've said. Oh well.

I can read, you called me childish. And said that your 13 year old sister could make a better argument.

While not addressing anything that I said.

Now on the left that counts for debate, but on the right that is a personal attack!

I can see how you can't tell the difference.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/the-road-to-world-war-ii-how-appeasement-failed-to-stop-hitler-a-646481.html

IF you will not in all the writings Hitler gloated in besting the leaders of the West. Much like good Mr Putin does now!

The Sage of Main Street
07-23-2014, 11:10 AM
How are college going 20 year olds of this generation responsible for the shit pulled nearly half a century ago?

. They're exactly the same types; that hasn't changed. If we had a draft, they'd be exempt. The "voluntary" army is a coerced economic draft anyway.

The Xl
07-23-2014, 11:13 AM
They're exactly the same types; that hasn't changed. If we had a draft, they'd be exempt. The "voluntary" army is a coerced economic draft anyway.

It doesn't matter if they're the same "type" or if they aren't, they still didn't do anything involving warfare and setting up/supporting a draft, so your "logic" is an epic fail, like it always is.

The Sage of Main Street
07-23-2014, 11:20 AM
And that wouldn't happen because interested parties wouldn't want their portfolios to drop by 15%. Of course. All these Greenhead restrictions on drilling are to keep the supply low and the profit margins obscenely high. Leading Leftists don't have minds of their own but are solely driven by class instinct. They lie to themselves about their Right Wing motivations, which is the worse kind of insincerity.

The Sage of Main Street
07-23-2014, 11:24 AM
This is where some people start to think that some Necons today really are advocating for war with Russia, even when they claim that they are not. The UK should have bombed German factories in 1938.... Appeasement to not do so....

. Hitler was not appeased for anti-war reasons. The Allies' ruling classes saw him as a useful weapon against world Communism. It took them awhile to realize that the cure was worse than the disease.

Dr. Strangelove
07-23-2014, 02:06 PM
You will be further isolated pal.

Take that!

Well, you should thank Mr. Obama for his tough sanctions against Russia.

But we all know you wont!

Dr. Strangelove
07-23-2014, 02:16 PM
I know you warmongers love to name-drop Chamberlain, but what you guys conveniently leave out is the fact that he saved Europe from complete domination by the Nazis. England did not have the means to fight Hitler. Had someone like you been in charge, you would have started a war you had no hope of winning, and England would have fallen to the Nazis. By putting off a confrontation with Hitler, Chamberlain allowed England to build up the money and resources they needed to put up a sufficient defense. And even then, they were still fighting with piss poor weapons and silverware.

True. That, and the fact that FDR kept dragging his feet on helping England for far too long, as the pro Nazi Americans like Henry Ford, the DuPont family, and Charles Lindberg kept the isolation movement alive, and America undecided about the whole issue for too long, as the German U-boats sank so many ships in the Atlantic, that finally we had to act. But only after the Pearl Harbor bombing did FDR act.

Dr. Strangelove
07-23-2014, 02:21 PM
Wow that is a bit revisionist!

If they would have stood up to Hitler when he took Austria, Hitler would not have had the power to wage war, Brittan had the world most powerful Navy and was the military super power of the day, France was among the worlds super powers as well

History Credits Chamberlin with allowing Hitler to rise to power! He was fought politically in his country by Churchill, who wanted to confront Hitler before he built his military machine.

Again I am not surprised at your take on the situation.

Wrong! England and France were woefully prepared to fight in the beginning! And the USA & Russia as well.

Look how easily Hitler swarmed into France & Belgium, and went right around the Maginot Line.

You should stick with slum housing. History & politics is not your forte.

Mister D
07-23-2014, 02:24 PM
Wrong! England and France were woefully prepared to fight in the beginning! And the USA & Russia as well.

Look how easily Hitler swarmed into France & Belgium, and went right around the Maginot Line.

You should stick with slum housing. History & politics is not your forte.



France was thought to have the best army in Europe at the time.

Mister D
07-23-2014, 02:24 PM
True. That, and the fact that FDR kept dragging his feet on helping England for far too long, as the pro Nazi Americans like Henry Ford, the DuPont family, and Charles Lindberg kept the isolation movement alive, and America undecided about the whole issue for too long, as the German U-boats sank so many ships in the Atlantic, that finally we had to act. But only after the Pearl Harbor bombing did FDR act.

The American public dragged its feet not FDR. That's because they didn't want to get involved in a European war.

Mister D
07-23-2014, 02:27 PM
Oh, and Hitler forbade U-boat attacks on American shipping prior to America's entry. That was actually pretty cool of him since we were waging an undeclared war

Dr. Strangelove
07-23-2014, 02:31 PM
'
No they are not, there are many more things that can drive Russia into and economic depression and send them crawling back to the rock that they crawled out from under!

You must think you are General Jack D. Ripper of the movie, Dr. Stranglove!

Bomb anything that moves! Turn Moscow into a sea of glass! Commies under every bed! This isn't 1963, Cletus. The Cold War ended long ago!

Hurting Russia economically will hurt all of Europe, and destabilize the world economy.

Ethereal
07-23-2014, 02:34 PM
Wow that is a bit revisionist!

If they would have stood up to Hitler when he took Austria, Hitler would not have had the power to wage war, Brittan had the world most powerful Navy and was the military super power of the day, France was among the worlds super powers as well

History Credits Chamberlin with allowing Hitler to rise to power! He was fought politically in his country by Churchill, who wanted to confront Hitler before he built his military machine.

Again I am not surprised at your take on the situation.

Churchill? The guy who was responsible for the death of millions of Indians? The guy who wanted an elephant to stomp Ghandi to death while the viceroy rode atop it? The guy who initiated the strategic bombing campaign which resulted in the death of millions of European civilians? The guy who insisted on fighting a war with Germany, even though they had no intention of going to war with the west? That Churchill?

Ethereal
07-23-2014, 02:39 PM
The American public dragged its feet not FDR. That's because they didn't want to get involved in a European war.

Indeed. FDR was desperately trying to embroil the US in a war, any war, to distract the American people from his failed domestic policies.

Dr. Strangelove
07-23-2014, 02:42 PM
Last time Green was telling me how peaceful and nice that Putin was, but the next day and airliner was shot down

Its all the Rethuglicans that are swooning over Putin!

Forty years ago, that would have been treasonous!

Mister D
07-23-2014, 02:42 PM
Indeed. FDR was desperately trying to embroil the US in a war, any war, to distract the American people from his failed domestic policies.

That and his adminstration understood what the real threat to the western liberal order was.

Mister D
07-23-2014, 02:43 PM
Churchill? The guy who was responsible for the death of millions of Indians? The guy who wanted an elephant to stomp Ghandi to death while the viceroy rode atop it? The guy who initiated the strategic bombing campaign which resulted in the death of millions of European civilians? The guy who insisted on fighting a war with Germany, even though they had no intention of going to war with the west? That Churchill?

Yes, that Churchill. Washington's lackey.

Ethereal
07-23-2014, 02:43 PM
You should stick with slum housing. History & politics is not your forte.

Good one!

:grin:

Ethereal
07-23-2014, 02:44 PM
Yes, that Churchill. Washington's lackey.

Churchill was a monster. No wonder Zelmo admires him so much.

Ethereal
07-23-2014, 02:45 PM
That and his adminstration understood what the real threat to the western liberal order was.

By the time FDR became President, classical liberalism had already died an ignominious death in America.

Mister D
07-23-2014, 02:47 PM
By the time FDR became President, classical liberalism had already died an ignominious death in America.

The current order is still liberal although I acknowledge the philosophical differences between the various strands.

Mister D
07-23-2014, 02:50 PM
I recently read an interesting observation. We all know that story about how people panicked when War of the Worlds first appeared on radio, right? Well, whats typically left out is that the public had been kept on edge for years about a potential war and other threats to the US.

Ethereal
07-23-2014, 02:53 PM
The current order is still liberal although I acknowledge the philosophical differences between the various strands.

I must strenuously disagree. Classical liberalism is characterized by its emphasis on political decentralization, defensive wars, local government, and individual liberty. It was also associated with commodity money like the gold standard. Lincoln utterly decimated these principles, and his successors cemented their destruction with the implementation of central banking, FIAT money, international government, imperialism, federal drug prohibition, and other means of centralization. If we are living under a liberal paradigm, then I hasten to disavow myself of the label.

Dr. Strangelove
07-23-2014, 03:03 PM
The American public dragged its feet not FDR. That's because they didn't want to get involved in a European war.

True.
FDR was frozen with indecision, and was always testing the winds to see which way to go.

But on hindsight, he should have acted much sooner to help England and Russia.

Dr. Strangelove
07-23-2014, 03:08 PM
Churchill was a monster. No wonder Zelmo admires him so much.

And that's why England dumped him so unceremoniously after WW II.

Good for war, but terrible for peace!

Dr. Strangelove
07-23-2014, 03:14 PM
I must strenuously disagree. Classical liberalism is characterized by its emphasis on political decentralization, defensive wars, local government, and individual liberty. It was also associated with commodity money like the gold standard. Lincoln utterly decimated these principles, and his successors cemented their destruction with the implementation of central banking, FIAT money, international government, imperialism, federal drug prohibition, and other means of centralization. If we are living under a liberal paradigm, then I hasten to disavow myself of the label.

This sounds like Ron Paul today!

Of which the establishment resists at all costs!

Perhaps, rightfully so?

Mister D
07-23-2014, 03:48 PM
I must strenuously disagree. Classical liberalism is characterized by its emphasis on political decentralization, defensive wars, local government, and individual liberty. It was also associated with commodity money like the gold standard. Lincoln utterly decimated these principles, and his successors cemented their destruction with the implementation of central banking, FIAT money, international government, imperialism, federal drug prohibition, and other means of centralization. If we are living under a liberal paradigm, then I hasten to disavow myself of the label.

I tend to see liberalism as an ideology predicated on liberty, equality, individualism, and economism. Some of you cry foul at the latter but when it comes down to it they treat money or the economy as if it were the only thing worth talking about. Anyway, it has several branches and the focus often shifts from one aspect to another. For example, the socialists and communists put much greater emphasis on equality whereas classical liberals, like yourself, place more emphasis on liberty. There are differences between you and Zelmo, for example, but from my perspective, as someone who has come to reject liberalism, you're both liberals regardless of your specific disagreements.

Green Arrow
07-23-2014, 03:56 PM
Churchill? The guy who was responsible for the death of millions of Indians? The guy who wanted an elephant to stomp Ghandi to death while the viceroy rode atop it? The guy who initiated the strategic bombing campaign which resulted in the death of millions of European civilians? The guy who insisted on fighting a war with Germany, even though they had no intention of going to war with the west? That Churchill?

And he was also the sole reason for the CIA engaging Operation Ajax, the effects of which still linger today in Iran.

Peter1469
07-23-2014, 04:46 PM
Oh, and Hitler forbade U-boat attacks on American shipping prior to America's entry. That was actually pretty cool of him since we were waging an undeclared war

It was also pretty smart of him.

Peter1469
07-23-2014, 04:47 PM
True.
FDR was frozen with indecision, and was always testing the winds to see which way to go.

But on hindsight, he should have acted much sooner to help England and Russia.

Why. That was deliberate- at least to let Russia and Germany bleed themselves.

The Sage of Main Street
07-24-2014, 11:52 AM
Well, you should thank Mr. Obama for his tough sanctions against Russia.

But we all know you wont! Putin can well afford to embargo gas and oil against Europe, which should collapse the US economy. After all, our globalist elite are deeply invested there.

ChoppedLiver
07-24-2014, 07:07 PM
You will be further isolated pal.

Take that!

:pw:

:cool: