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.

---

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.

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.

---

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.

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.

---

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

---

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?

---

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?

---

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.

---

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.

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.

---

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

---