Russia Attacks Ukraine - 23 Feb 2022 #14

[UK Girl]

The warhawks continue the madness. Meanwhile, Russia builds its war chests right along with 'em. No need to talk, just roll right on down the arms race avenue!

Donald Tusk announces military training plans for all men in Poland

Poland's prime minister said his government plans to have a model ready by the end of the year.

www.bbc.com

Aided by Trump.

 

[UK Girl]

Everyone agrees the horrors of the war in Ukraine must be stopped.

If the UK and FR and Germany and EU are so convinced that the war can be ended in Ukraine's favor via some type of military intervention, and that Russia and Putin are great evils (which I agree that they are), and that Ukraine should not seek to negotiate a peace, why are UK, FR, Germany, and EU unwilling to use the 300 billion of frozen Russian assets they control to fund the war in Ukraine and build up their militaries at warp speed so that they can arrange a D-Day like invasion on the shores of Crimea and push the Russians out of Ukraine?

What are they concerned about that they think the US should not be concerned about?

Imo it is not a winnable war (or even the type of conflict where a “genuine guaranteed peace” is feasible) without a complete and total defeat of Russia in a World War III

Jmo

Well we would be damned if we did do that and damned if we did not

 

[Simply Southern]

I know this was mentioned above, but here is the video.

Press: Do you, Mr President, think that Vladimir Putin is taking advantage of the US pause right now on intelligence and military aid to Ukraine?

Trump: I actually think he's doing what anybody else would do. I think he wants to get it stopped and settled and I think he's hitting them harder than he's been hitting them and I think probably anybody in that position would be doing that right now. He wants to get it ended ....

Total denial, total gaslighting, pandering to Putin. He wants the war to end with Ukraine being lost. Of course Putin wants it ended - by pulverising Ukraine - with the assistance of the US knobbling Ukraine JMO MOO.

This is common sense. Behavior of any normal person.

If you're winning the game you don't quit, during the game.

Trump will end the war with Ukraine and Russia.

I can't predict what Trump will do, when Russia retaliates against UK for seizing his funds. UK trying to make up their own set of international banking laws.

Moo...

 

[UK Girl]

This is common sense. Behavior of any normal person.

If you're winning the game you don't quit, during the game.

Trump will end the war with Ukraine and Russia.

I can't predict what Trump will do, when Russia retaliates against UK for seizing his funds. UK trying to make up their own set of international banking laws.

Moo...

Nothing to do with him what our Ministers decide to do tbh. Did he ask our ministers before leaving the coallition?

TBH considering he hasnt anywhere near taken Ukraine I would not say hes winning the game either. Far from it.

 

[Stunned]

Tariffs yes, Tariffs no, Tariffs yes again.

All of this kind of thing I think is to keep Trump the centre of attention, and always in the news.

Distractions, always with the distractions! IMO

 

[Arkay]

Post in thread 'Russia Attacks Ukraine - 23 Feb 2022 #13'
Russia Attacks Ukraine - 23 Feb 2022 #13

@LovesPeace2 I hope I copied your post correctly (I usually mess it up from a closed thread).

Referring to one of Putin’s henchmen threatening to retake Alaska:

I wouldn’t be surprised if this were 1) just some saber-rattling, or 2) an actual dream of Putin’s, for after he’s re-conquered all the of the former territory of the Russian Empire/Soviet Union.

What I am sure of though is that this Russian TV host, Solovyov, would NEVER voice this without the approval of Putin. Russian TV is an arm of the government and only broadcasts Kremlin-approved information.

Of course Alaska was Russian territory which was purchased by the U.S., and was notoriously labeled “Seward’s Folly” after it initially seemed to be a waste of money.

If Putin can ooze his way into trying to snatch it back from the U.S., that may possibly open Trump’s eyes to the nature of the beast with whom he’s trying to be BFFs.

(If it went down in history as “Trump’s Folly” I think he would self-implode).

For now I believe it’s just talk meant to intimidate the rest of the former U.S.S.R.
But while Putin lives he will remain president, long after Trump, and the Russians are playing the long game.

Step 1: Ukraine.

IMO

Alaska Purchase - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Stella123]

It's not what you do, it's how you do it. Trump accepts no liability for having enabled Putin that advantage.

 

[Simply Southern]

Pretty sure that the US could do the same.

And Russia is doing it as well. Won't be long before they are funding themselves with other people's money, if they are not doing it already.

Maybe Trump is supporting Russia because he doesn't want US money trapped in Russia? So he is going to lift sanctions and do all the rest of what he is doing against Ukraine. Trump certainly seems to have enough wealthy friends & family, and wealthy govt officials, who might be concerned about that.

imo


MOSCOW, Feb 7 (Reuters) - Russia is set to widen its power to retaliate for Western asset seizures with new legislation that could allow it to confiscate the frozen funds of foreign companies and investors, two sources familiar with the draft law told Reuters.

That could spell trouble for the many foreign investors, including both individuals and major U.S. investment funds, with billions of dollars of funds trapped in those accounts.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-widen-asset-seizing-power-with-new-legislation-sources-say-2025-02-07/

I don't think the US would pull a shady transaction, that would risk the integrity of our banking system. These funds do not belong to the UK, they have no entitlement. They have been frozen, as punishment for the Ukraine attack. That does not mean they have the legal jurisdiction to use these funds. There are international banking laws.

We would rather use our taxpayer money than stoop this low.

At least we gave our money willingly, up until we realized there was no into the war. I'm glad we're out.

It seems the UK, just doesn't want to pay. They are OK as long as somebody else is funding the war. Clearly they don't want to ask their taxpayers to foot the bill. They have no problem as long as the US is paying.

I wonder if they're going to add this into the total they have paid for the war.

Where did they get the money they say they gave previously? Who did they take that money from? Did they really give that money?

Moo

 

[Simply Southern]

This is not a secret nor surprise though. Macron talked about it in his televised meeting with Trump. The one with all the knee grabbing.

I don't think Trump agreed.

I'm beginning to think Europe will be in this war before it's over. I do mean active combat.

Moo....

 

[SouthAussie]

I don't think the US would pull a shady transaction

Trump was convicted of 34 felony counts for fraudulent records. He also has been sued by contractors who completed work and he refused to pay. Among other things.

Historical facts are important.

Just as it is important to note that the US promised to protect Ukraine if they gave up their nuclear weapons.

Ukraine, Nuclear Weapons, and Security Assurances at a Glance | Arms Control Association

www.armscontrol.org

imo

 

[Rush4087]

I believe they are going to use Russian assets - there was a link about it earlier.

I don't think it's whether or not it is a "winnable" war. It's about saving Ukraine from being invaded by a hostile neighbour. JMO

@Stella123, I agree. I also agree that “it’s about saving Ukraine from being invaded by a hostile neighbor”

Imo these recent thread pages have revealed that nearly everyone agrees with your statement.

The only disagreement has been regarding:

1.) can it even be done?
2.) if it can be done, who should be the one to do it?
3.) what are the risks (in particular, what is the risk of a wider European theater conflict or a global world war three type conflict)?
4.) who would pay for it?
5a.) could a “lasting” peace even be achieved (this has not been achievable in the past),
5b.) if so, who would maintain it?
5c.) who would pay to maintain it?

If you (or anybody else) thinks they have a realistic solution, I think many (most) of us are open minded and would very much like to hear it. I for one am willing to consider any and all suggestions. How can this be accomplished? Please be very very (very) specific.

Jmo

 

[Simply Southern]

We do donate our own money geez.

Well the article says the money came from Russian assets? Do you believe the UK has a right to just take money that's being held in a frozen account, without any legal action? It gets even shadier, developing their own board to approve it. Talk about the mafia... just saying.
Moo ...

 

[Simply Southern]

Trump was convicted of 34 felony counts for fraudulent records. He also has been sued by contractors who completed work and he refused to pay. Among other things.

Historical facts are important.

imo

That's records, checks out of an account of money that he owned, he didn't steal money. He isn't an Nation. This will have a financial impact on the UK. It's definitely a deterrent from US or any other foreign company the place funds in the UK account. Moo

 

[LovesPeace2]

Post in thread 'Russia Attacks Ukraine - 23 Feb 2022 #13'
Russia Attacks Ukraine - 23 Feb 2022 #13

@LovesPeace2 I hope I copied your post correctly (I usually mess it up from a closed thread).

Referring to one of Putin’s henchmen threatening to retake Alaska:

I wouldn’t be surprised if this were 1) just some saber-rattling, or 2) an actual dream of Putin’s, for after he’s re-conquered all the of the former territory of the Russian Empire/Soviet Union.

What I am sure of though is that this Russian TV host, Solovyov, would NEVER voice this without the approval of Putin. Russian TV is an arm of the government and only broadcasts Kremlin-approved information.

Of course Alaska was Russian territory which was purchased by the U.S., and was notoriously labeled “Seward’s Folly” after it initially seemed to be a waste of money.

If Putin can ooze his way into trying to snatch it back from the U.S., that may possibly open Trump’s eyes to the nature of the beast with whom he’s trying to be BFFs.

(If it went down in history as “Trump’s Folly” I think he would self-implode).

For now I believe it’s just talk meant to intimidate the rest of the former U.S.S.R.
But while Putin lives he will remain president, long after Trump, and the Russians are playing the long game.

Step 1: Ukraine.

Alaska Purchase - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

This report was from a year ago but it goes back further. It just doesn't make sense why they are so buddy buddy

 

[SouthAussie]

Well the article says the money came from Russian assets?

It doesn't say that. I have already replied directly to you that it says "in the future". Not in the past.

They have to set up a legal commission, make a demand to Russia, have that demand refused, to make it legal.

imo

 

[UK Girl]

I don't think the US would pull a shady transaction, that would risk the integrity of our banking system. These funds do not belong to the UK, they have no entitlement. They have been frozen, as punishment for the Ukraine attack. That does not mean they have the legal jurisdiction to use these funds. There are international banking laws.

We would rather use our taxpayer money than stoop this low.

At least we gave our money willingly, up until we realized there was no into the war. I'm glad we're out.

It seems the UK, just doesn't want to pay. They are OK as long as somebody else is funding the war. Clearly they don't want to ask their taxpayers to foot the bill. They have no problem as long as the US is paying.

I wonder if they're going to add this into the total they have paid for the war.

Where did they get the money they say they gave previously? Who did they take that money from? Did they really give that money?

Moo

Tbh the post just astounds me. IF Russia had not invaded Ukraine NONE of us would be paying these amounts out. The fact that Trump just walked out and left the rest of us to fund it obviously meant in the short term at least changes needed to be made quickly. AGAIN we have contributed over and over to Ukraine which is why he repeatedly thanks us! Our leaders have been to Ukraine many times. Have Trump and Vance?? Seriously this is getting boring and quite frankly considering we were supposed to be such big allies I do not get it!

 

[keek]

Tbh the post just astounds me. IF Russia had not invaded Ukraine NONE of us would be paying these amounts out. The fact that Trump just walked out and left the rest of us to fund it obviously meant in the short term at least changes needed to be made quickly. AGAIN we have contributed over and over to Ukraine which is why he repeatedly thanks us! Our leaders have been to Ukraine many times. Have Trump and Vance?? Seriously this is getting boring and quite frankly considering we were supposed to be such big allies I do not get it!

You said it. Have a key word in there! A couple, astounding is one. Time to ..

 

[UK Girl]

Well the article says the money came from Russian assets? Do you believe the UK has a right to just take money that's being held in a frozen account, without any legal action? It gets even shadier, developing their own board to approve it. Talk about the mafia... just saying.
Moo ...

Yup it is ok with me. Its ok to illegally invade a foreign country and murder and rape people and steal children so ...taking money to help those victims is ok with me

 

[Stella123]

Well the article says the money came from Russian assets? Do you believe the UK has a right to just take money that's being held in a frozen account, without any legal action? It gets even shadier, developing their own board to approve it. Talk about the mafia... just saying.
Moo ...

There was a link about it further back. I believe it said Europe had earmarked Russia's frozen assets for the purpose of rebuilding Ukraine after the war, but discussion about whether some should be used now.

Nothing shady at all Russia has been being sanctioned for years over their invasion of Ukraine.

Why - do you think it's unfair on Mr Putin?

 

[Simply Southern]

It's not what you do, it's how you do it. Trump accepts no liability for having enabled Putin that advantage.

We have no liability. All the liability lies with Zelensky. Zelensky was warned repeatedly .... If you do not seek a peace agreement the US will no longer fund the war. He chose to try to debate, force our President on national TV to guarantee military security. It was extremely inappropriate and not the purpose of the press conference. This should have been a conversation in private. He was told there would be a meeting after the luncheon to discuss this.

The US has no responsibility. We paid billions. We are done. Hopefully, the war end soon and lives will be saved.

The European countries, say they have committed money. Where's the money?

Why can't Zelensky use the money that's been committed from all those meaningful conversations he's been having. There's been media reporting billions of dollars to Ukraine. There's been two summits, European leaders have gathered twice. Many promised billions of dollars, where is it? When are they going to give this money to Ukraine? Are they waiting for a formal presentation?

Zelensky needs to use the funds that he's been given by the European countries.
Moo