Stalingrad: 80 Years Ago, A Victory That Changed World War II

In reality Robert, the United States helped Russia take nuclear weapons out of Ukraine. So the idea that we are meddling is completely contrary to your assertion. Now, you do not believe that the people of Ukraine are allowed to vote for anyone who disagrees with the Russian dictator which is sad.

Back in reality, Ukraine ought to have nuclear weapons which it could fire at Moscow but they do not because the United States in deference to a supposed sphere of influence for Russia compelled Ukraine to give up the nuclear weapons. In exchange the US promised to protect the sovereignty of Ukraine from Russia because the Ukrainians feared that their Homodorian neighbors might try to swallow them up again.

That is what is happening. Your denials and rationalizations do not change the Russian aggression in his case.

Your discussion of illegal immigration into places such as Texas where I live is completely irrelevant. It is simply an emotional harbor that you rest your mind in to distract you from your inability to argue the reality of Ukraine. We could close the US borders and defend Ukraine. They have no inherent tie to one another. It is your red herring in debates you have online.

Of course it ignores Putin’s long standing promise to bury us all under massive nuclear destruction with his oh so cool Satan II missile system. You don’t care and don’t mind that type of rhetoric from your friend Putin. You simply remind me that we both think the border in the US should be closed. Fascinating.

There is nothing preventing the BRICS from taking over the world as anti American reactionaries have been promising for three decades. Do it! Let’s see them create an alternative reserve currency. It never happens and it never will. Do you buy debt for these nations? I bet you don’t. Do you have any investments in BRIC countries? I bet you don’t. The reason you don’t is because they are bad investments.

We both agree Biden is bad and carrying out one inept policy upon another. None of that justifies letting one bad nation (Russia) invade a rather mediocre but aspirant nation (Ukraine). Putin is much worse for all of us than Zelensky. Zelensky represents no threat and Putin cannot stop threatening us to save his own life.

Would you pile up debt in order to build a wall at the border? Of course you would. That would not be wrong and the US can reduce debt and meet global security needs like Ukraine. If we let Russia have Ukraine you can be sure China will next take Taiwan and this Axis of Evil will keep rolling because of a lack of deterrence. As I have already said, accelerating Biden’s weaknesses with no support for Ukraine will not validate international politics. Russian aggression will increase and not decrease. All of geopolitical history points to this known reality.

Trump can urge immediate peace because he kills Russian soldiers. Putin knows he will kill russian soldiers. Trump’s weapons for Ukraine have already killed hundreds of Russian soldiers in Ukraine. It is arguably true that Trump could instantly solve the crisis.

He is not President.

He did advocate and provide lethal aid to Ukraine in opposition to Biden Obama. You have no answer for that fact. If you have some magical way to usher President Trump back into the White House I think most folks here are happy to hear. But right now Biden is president and weakening Ukraine will not make us safer.

You make a lot of irrelevant arguments because you cannot defend the central arguments about russian aggression.

American arm shipments had very little to do with the USSR beating the Germans.

The Russians beat Hitler with the T-34 tank, Katyusha rockets, the PPSH submachine gun - all Russian made, a butt load of artillery & soldiers, and the Russian weather.

Hitler lost because he chose to fight the war on multiple fronts without sufficient resources, equipment, & troops. He tried to do too much, too fast, with too little.

Anthony Beevor’s book was a savage read.

In addition, The Soviets agreed to go to war against Japan within 90 days of the German surrender. They did so just as the 90 day period was expiring.

In reality Robert, the United States helped Russia take nuclear weapons out of Ukraine.

Well, that is not exactly the case. Want to know the truth?

Ukraine decided to transfer and destroy these weapons, and become a party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, citing its inability to circumvent Russian launch codes, because the warheads were created & developed in Russia, not Ukraine. Since Russia had control of the launch sequence and operational codes, they really were not useful to Ukraine. We wanted then removed because all of these missiles were pointed at the U.S.

Leonid Kravchuk, then the president of Ukraine, told DW (Deutsche Welle) that was only formally the case. De facto, Kyiv was powerless.

"All the control systems were in Russia. The so-called black suitcase with the start button, that was with Russian president Boris Yeltsin."

I also know all about the Budapest Memorandum assurance, not guarantee, by the U.S., U.K., and Russia to respect the independence and "existing borders" of Ukraine.

But I also know that when the U.S. decided to execute a coup d'etat, that is was the signal to Russia that the U.S. was no longer acting in good faith, so why should Russia.

Back in reality, Ukraine ought to have nuclear weapons which it could fire at Moscow but they do not because the United States in deference to a supposed sphere of influence for Russia compelled Ukraine to give up the nuclear weapons. In exchange the US promised to protect the sovereignty of Ukraine from Russia because the Ukrainians feared that their Homodorian neighbors might try to swallow them up again.

Well, no again, because I just explained the reality. Ukraine had no control to fire them at anyone, so they gave up nothing but the rockets themselves.

Ukraine could have kept the nuclear weapons, but the price would have been enormous, Kravchuk(again he was the president of Ukraine at that time) says. Though the carrier rockets were manufactured in the southern Ukrainian city of Dnipropetrovsk, the nuclear warheads were not. It would have been too expensive for Ukraine to manufacture and maintain them on its own.

"It would have cost us $65 billion (53 billion euros), and the state coffers were empty," Kravchuk said.

Additionally, the West threatened Ukraine with isolation since the missiles were supposedly aimed at the United States. Therefore, "the only possible decision" was to give up the weapons, according to Kravchuk.

Your discussion of illegal immigration into places such as Texas where I live is completely irrelevant. It is simply an emotional harbor that you rest your mind in to distract you from your inability to argue the reality of Ukraine. We could close the US borders and defend Ukraine. They have no inherent tie to one another. It is your red herring in debates you have online.

We could do a lot of things, and no it is not just a distraction because I can't argue the reality of Ukraine. What is true though, is that you don't know the reality, and you do not understand the destruction & peril this nation is in with, and I'll say it again, both borders are now not secure. A nation without borders cannot survive. That is even your argument for our engagement in Ukraine. Tell me you are not really as stupid as your arguments make you appear, because I wonder if you have a functioning brain at all based upon some of the stupid nonsense you regurgitate.

Texas is a big state, I know it well as your eastern neighbor in Louisiana. Why don't you go down to the border and see what the border towns look like. Perhaps that will shine a light on why border towns that have always been Democrat voters, went for Trump in 2020.

You make a lot of irrelevant arguments because you cannot defend the central arguments about russian (sic) aggression.

No, you are just too pig headed and believe you know what you don't know in reality, and no one can make you see the errors in your thinking, except you.