Create Account



The Jungle is self-supported by showing advertisements via Google Adsense.
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show significantly less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!
Questions or concerns about this ad? Take a screenshot and comment in the thread. We do value your feedback.
Russia, Saudi Arabia may be manipulating oil prices to help Trump: MSNBC

#41
(This post was last modified: 04-24-2024, 03:32 PM by Lucky2Last. Edited 1 time in total.)

(04-24-2024, 07:15 AM)mikesez Wrote:
(04-23-2024, 09:46 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: No. I'm talking about strictly geopolitically. The US played a role in "influencing" their elections to a pro-US government. Previously, Ukraine had essentially been a puppet of Russia. Think of all those resources and access Putin loses in addition to the US being able to build defenses right on its boarder. Additionally, the pro-US government starts a civil war against pro-Russian territories. The US, imo, was the aggressor in this situation in virtually every way.

You should ask yourself why there are "pro Russian" territories in Ukraine's internationally recognized borders in the first place. Going back to the time of the czars, Russian governments moved people to strategic locations to thwart any possible nationalist or separatist movement.  There is also a "Russian zone" in Moldova, in Latvia, in Kazakhstan, and in Kyrgyzstan. There used to be one in Tajikstan as well.  Lenin didn't like this policy and tried to draw the internal borders of the USSR to keep the Russians in Russia, but Stalin went back to the czarist policy of jumbling borders and forcing folks to move until most non Russian populations had a Russian population "supervising" them in a manner of speaking.

Thanks for those irrelevant facts.
Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!


#42

(04-24-2024, 03:31 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote:
(04-24-2024, 07:15 AM)mikesez Wrote: You should ask yourself why there are "pro Russian" territories in Ukraine's internationally recognized borders in the first place. Going back to the time of the czars, Russian governments moved people to strategic locations to thwart any possible nationalist or separatist movement.  There is also a "Russian zone" in Moldova, in Latvia, in Kazakhstan, and in Kyrgyzstan. There used to be one in Tajikstan as well.  Lenin didn't like this policy and tried to draw the internal borders of the USSR to keep the Russians in Russia, but Stalin went back to the czarist policy of jumbling borders and forcing folks to move until most non Russian populations had a Russian population "supervising" them in a manner of speaking.

Thanks for those irrelevant facts.

It's not at all irrelevant. It determines who was the aggressor, what a just outcome might be, and what Russia might try next after getting what it wants.  As tempting as it is to say that most of what Russia occupies in Ukraine should have been Russian in the first place, Moldova and Latvia have a similar situation.
My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.
Reply

#43

(04-24-2024, 03:49 PM)mikesez Wrote:
(04-24-2024, 03:31 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: Thanks for those irrelevant facts.

It's not at all irrelevant. It determines who was the aggressor, what a just outcome might be, and what Russia might try next after getting what it wants.  As tempting as it is to say that most of what Russia occupies in Ukraine should have been Russian in the first place, Moldova and Latvia have a similar situation.

We are the aggressor.
Reply

#44

(04-24-2024, 04:21 PM)snarkyguy_he_him_his Wrote:
(04-24-2024, 03:49 PM)mikesez Wrote: It's not at all irrelevant. It determines who was the aggressor, what a just outcome might be, and what Russia might try next after getting what it wants.  As tempting as it is to say that most of what Russia occupies in Ukraine should have been Russian in the first place, Moldova and Latvia have a similar situation.

We are the aggressor.

Sending advisors and influencers to other countries is not aggression. 

Russia expected Ukraine to always be in their sphere of influence but our influence efforts (and the EU's, which were larger) persuaded the Ukrainian majority to break that deal at any cost.  The majority should get what the majority wants.  

The Russian minority, placed there over time by czars and communist dictators, complicates matters.  If influencing people is aggression, forcing them to move or redrawing national borders without any real discussion is also aggression.
My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.
Reply

#45

(04-23-2024, 09:46 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote:
(04-22-2024, 08:32 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: There are a hundred problems with it, the most profound being the most fundamental. I've advocated for the continued funding of warfare in which to kill other inhabitants of spaceship Earth. 

Yes, we can tick off multitudes of problematic political standpoints here, but ultimately, they are of little consequence compared to the fact there are countries led by cabals who desire to subjugate and control others. At the close of WWII, we created and assumed the role as the superpower of freedom. A mantle we embrace and cannot concede, or the world falls into chaos. One only has to look at the weak foreign and domestic policies of the current administration to see the effects of that not only on the global stage, but on our very own doorstep. 

I understand the frustration of giving foreign aid money when our own domestic situation begs for need - they are two sides of the same coin. We are obligated in our role, even if sometimes it seems that obligation is out of balance.

No. I'm talking about strictly geopolitically. The US played a role in "influencing" their elections to a pro-US government. Previously, Ukraine had essentially been a puppet of Russia. Think of all those resources and access Putin loses in addition to the US being able to build defenses right on its boarder. Additionally, the pro-US government starts a civil war against pro-Russian territories. The US, imo, was the aggressor in this situation in virtually every way.

It’s not like the U.S. fomented anti-Russian sentiment and Ukrainian desire to be aligned with the West out of thin air.
Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!


#46

(04-25-2024, 06:59 AM)homebiscuit Wrote:
(04-23-2024, 09:46 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: No. I'm talking about strictly geopolitically. The US played a role in "influencing" their elections to a pro-US government. Previously, Ukraine had essentially been a puppet of Russia. Think of all those resources and access Putin loses in addition to the US being able to build defenses right on its boarder. Additionally, the pro-US government starts a civil war against pro-Russian territories. The US, imo, was the aggressor in this situation in virtually every way.

It’s not like the U.S. fomented anti-Russian sentiment and Ukrainian desire to be aligned with the West out of thin air.

Those 12 CIA bases probably helped with those ops
Reply

#47

(04-25-2024, 08:18 AM)snarkyguy_he_him_his Wrote:
(04-25-2024, 06:59 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: It’s not like the U.S. fomented anti-Russian sentiment and Ukrainian desire to be aligned with the West out of thin air.

Those 12 CIA bases probably helped with those ops

What 12 CIA bases?
Reply

#48

(04-25-2024, 06:59 AM)homebiscuit Wrote:
(04-23-2024, 09:46 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: No. I'm talking about strictly geopolitically. The US played a role in "influencing" their elections to a pro-US government. Previously, Ukraine had essentially been a puppet of Russia. Think of all those resources and access Putin loses in addition to the US being able to build defenses right on its boarder. Additionally, the pro-US government starts a civil war against pro-Russian territories. The US, imo, was the aggressor in this situation in virtually every way.

It’s not like the U.S. fomented anti-Russian sentiment and Ukrainian desire to be aligned with the West out of thin air.

You sure about that? You openly express your frustration when people on this board do not understanding military strategy, and I have no problem with that. Yet, you seemingly disregard state strategy. I agree these things don't happen out of thin air. They are also not entirely organic. I am not going to pretend the pro-Russian government was on the up-and-up. There was definitely corruption. But you think that corruption was just overcome naturally by the pro-Western Ukrainians?
Reply

#49

(04-25-2024, 10:28 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote:
(04-25-2024, 06:59 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: It’s not like the U.S. fomented anti-Russian sentiment and Ukrainian desire to be aligned with the West out of thin air.

You sure about that? You openly express your frustration when people on this board do not understanding military strategy, and I have no problem with that. Yet, you seemingly disregard state strategy. I agree these things don't happen out of thin air. They are also not entirely organic. I am not going to pretend the pro-Russian government was on the up-and-up. There was definitely corruption. But you think that corruption was just overcome naturally by the pro-Western Ukrainians?

If there is considerable impetus within Ukraine to align with the West, why wouldn’t we be the catalyst? Isn’t that valid state strategy?

I did not say corruption was overcome.
Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!


#50

Russian kleptocrats expect to be able to buy Ukrainian goods at below market prices, indefinitely.

We lose sight of some things because we are so far from eastern Europe. But the satellite states of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw pact countries didn't experience communism in much of a Marxist sense. They experienced Russia stealing their stuff, and calling it communism. Russia still wants to steal their stuff, even though no one calls it communism anymore.
My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.
Reply

#51

(04-25-2024, 11:53 AM)mikesez Wrote: Russian kleptocrats expect to be able to buy Ukrainian goods at below market prices, indefinitely.

We lose sight of some things because we are so far from eastern Europe.  But the satellite states of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw pact countries didn't experience communism in much of a Marxist sense.  They experienced Russia stealing their stuff, and calling it communism.  Russia still wants to steal their stuff, even though no one calls it communism anymore.

So learn to fight better or accept being a vassal state.

It's happened all through history but because America has a big ol stick we are expected to help everyone?

Fine. But then accept being OUR vassal state and pay us tribute like every single world power ever. Oh wait, we still pay THEM tribute.
Reply

#52

Close. We pay our corrupt elites and their corrupted elites tribute. The common people are paying or dying.
Reply




Users browsing this thread:
5 Guest(s)

The Jungle is self-supported by showing advertisements via Google Adsense.
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!
Questions or concerns about this ad? Take a screenshot and comment in the thread. We do value your feedback.


ABOUT US
The Jungle Forums is the Jaguars' biggest fan message board. Talking about the Jags since 2006, the Jungle was the team-endorsed home of all things Jaguars.

Since 2017, the Jungle is now independent of the team but still run by the same crew. We are here to support and discuss all things Jaguars and all things Duval!