Posted on 04/24/2022 6:06:41 PM PDT by RandFan
@matt_boose
Mark Levin going on about how “America First” conservatives who oppose intervention in Ukraine actually “hate America”. Truly awful to see neocon shills try to co-opt the Trump movement.
(Excerpt) Read more at twitter.com ...
Levin’s always been a tightly wound...time bomb.
Him and Hannity can go sign up and fight for Ukraine.
“The U.S. State Department installed a criminal government that aligned with George Soros, Klaus Schwab, Jao Bai-din, Hunter Biden, Paul Pelosi, John Kerry Jr., Christopher Heinz (Kerry), and Alex Vindman. Included in that group are those who conspired to interfere with our government and impeach a dutifully elected President Trump. That list of names is all anyone needs to be suspicious of anything supporting Ukraine.”
Thank you, T.B. Apparently many here have zero knowledge of Ukrainian history.
Mark Levin going on about how “America First” conservatives who oppose intervention in Ukraine actually “hate America”.
***That’s a bridge too far. These appeasement oriented pantywaist isolationists are just wrong about Ukraine, they don’t hate America any more than appeasers in 1938 hated whatever country they were in when Germany was doing its rumblings in Sudetenland. They’re just p^$$ies, they don’t hate America.
Truly awful to see neocon shills try to co-opt the Trump movement.
***That statement is so full of nonsense. First of all, I agree with Levin and Trump on giving Ukraine far more aid than even Biden has given. That doesn’t make me nor Trump a neocon [I’m a PALEOcon] nor does it make us SHILLS of neocons. And how is the Trump movement getting co-opted when Trump AGREEs with us on this issue?
Getting involved, demanding that we get involved, or spending taxpayer money for wars that are not our business is NOT a conservative position.
I support Ukraine, but adamantly oppose sending OUR KIDS over there to be killed!(nothing personal Ukraine, but I would say the same about nearly any overseas conflict)
***This conflict is unique because we signed an assurance towards Ukrainian borders and sovereignty when we took away their nukes. As a country, as a world, we need to get nuclear nonproliferation right, otherwise every tinhorn dictator in Africa and other hotspots will be building nukes. It was the right thing to take those nukes from the Ukes, it is the right thing to uphold their sovereignty when they’re invaded.
The way I see it is we should follow the emBASEee strategee. Very AmericaFirsty.
The Budapest Agreement was an “accession” to a signed international United Nations, ratified nuclear nonproliferation treaty. The Ukes honored it and gave up those nukes. The Rukes violated it twice by invading twice, by happenstance it was when there were weak-kneed democrap presidents in office whom Vlad knew would not do anything about an invasion. And the USA has been looking for all kinds of ways to abrogate our responsibility in this treaty/agreement even though it points to disaster down the road for nuclear nonproliferation.
So when I say give back the Ukes their nukes, it is an acknowledgement that nukes are sovereignty. They gave up some nukes in exchange for “assurances” for borders and sovereignty. Since they are in an existential war, who are we to scold them for building nukes since that is what we did when we were in our existential war, and we are the ones who have betrayed them.
If the Ukes develop and deploy a suitcase nuke on a Russian city, it is because they got pushed into an existential corner. What we really should be doing is putting CONVENTIONAL forces into this fight in a way that genuinely “assures” borders and sovereignty for a country that did the right thing. After all, the Russian bear has been shown to be rather toothless compared to what most of us thought they would be in this fight, so the US would kick some serious @$$.
And if we send in American boots on the ground, we damned well better be negotiating American Land as the thing to fight for. Big, sweeping American EmBASEees along the border between Russia and Ukraine. A Lend Lease project. Americans fighting for American land. For generations we could use that land to build airports and fight terrorism in that region. I would call it the BBudapest AAgreement LLend LLease program because it would take BALLs.
from my home page
I have been advocating for several years a policy I call ‘embaseees’. Embassy + AirBase —> EmBASEeees. We go into a terrorist country, clear out their taliban equivalent, then withdraw to very large Embassies, perhaps 3 of them. Have them big enough to encompass a military airbase where we can use it for decades on end to conduct anti-terrorism operations. As long as the ‘host’ country aint killing Americans then we let them have self-sovereignty. Kind of like how we operated in the Phillipines for decades. We could even have an intermediate zone that we patrol but it would be autonomous. Let them have their taste of freedom. A referendum every 10 years to see how large the boundaries of the intermediate autonomous zone should be.
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/4043681/posts
__________________________________________________________
I would put my clan before others, yes. I believe even Jesus did this Himself when He said to the immigrant CyroPhoenician woman “Let the children eat first.”
The way I see it is we should follow the emBASEee strategee.
Very AmericaFirsty.
The Budapest Agreement was an “accession” to a signed international United Nations, ratified nuclear nonproliferation treaty. The Ukes honored it and gave up those nukes. The Rukes violated it twice by invading twice, by happenstance it was when there were weak-kneed democrap presidents in office whom Vlad knew would not do anything about an invasion. And the USA has been looking for all kinds of ways to abrogate our responsibility in this treaty/agreement even though it points to disaster down the road for nuclear nonproliferation.
So when I say give back the Ukes their nukes, it is an acknowledgement that nukes are sovereignty. They gave up some nukes in exchange for “assurances” for borders and sovereignty. Since they are in an existential war, who are we to scold them for building nukes since that is what we did when we were in our existential war, and we are the ones who have betrayed them.
If the Ukes develop and deploy a suitcase nuke on a Russian city, it is because they got pushed into an existential corner. What we really should be doing is putting CONVENTIONAL forces into this fight in a way that genuinely “assures” borders and sovereignty for a country that did the right thing. After all, the Russian bear has been shown to be rather toothless compared to what most of us thought they would be in this fight, so the US would kick some serious @$$.
And if we send in American boots on the ground, we damned well better be negotiating American Land as the thing to fight for. Big, sweeping American EmBASEees along the border between Russia and Ukraine. A Lend Lease project. Americans fighting for American land. For generations we could use that land to build airports and fight terrorism in that region. I would call it the BBudapest AAgreement LLend LLease program because it would take BALLs.
from my home page
I have been advocating for several years a policy I call ‘embaseees’. Embassy + AirBase —> EmBASEeees. We go into a terrorist country, clear out their taliban equivalent, then withdraw to very large Embassies, perhaps 3 of them. Have them big enough to encompass a military airbase where we can use it for decades on end to conduct anti-terrorism operations. As long as the ‘host’ country aint killing Americans then we let them have self-sovereignty. Kind of like how we operated in the Phillipines for decades. We could even have an intermediate zone that we patrol but it would be autonomous. Let them have their taste of freedom. A referendum every 10 years to see how large the boundaries of the intermediate autonomous zone should be.
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/4043681/posts
__________________________________________________________
This should be on the backs of Europe
***We stuck our noses in it when there were nukes involved in 1994, and assured Ukrainian sovereignty & borders. It was the right thing to do, denuke the Ukes; it is the right thing to do, uphold their sovereignty as we signed in that accession to the UN Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. If we don’t get nuclear nonproliferation right, the world is screwed. Europe should definitely take the lion’s share of the burden, agreed, but they won’t. Europe never learnt the lesson of Sudetenland appeasement leading to 50-60 million deaths in WW2.
I think Americans care about our country doing the right thing. It was the right thing to denuke the Ukes, and assure their sovereignty in exchange. So it’s the right thing to... assure their sovereignty. The last thing we need for them to do is get pushed into a nuke corner and develop their own suitcase nuke in this their existential war. We developed our nukes in our existential war, so who are we to scold them for doing so in their existential war, especially when it was us who are betraying them?
We need to get nuclear nonproliferation right. The rest of the world is watching, knowing that the US cannot be trusted even over such an important issue as that, so they’ll develop their own nukes to assure their own sovereignty. Talk about ships that are already sailing.
The democraps and GOPeRINO uniparty will not be doing the right thing when it comes to illegal colonization. At this point the democraps are willing to do the right thing when it comes to assuring sovereignty against a regional tyrant bully like Hitler was with the Sudetenland. Just because the democraps are willing to do the right thing in one instance and unwilling in the other instance, doesn’t make it the wrong thing in the Uke sovereignty instance. Isolationists are using our border problems, which they know will not be addressed by the current administration, as a red herring. It is a classic fallacy.
I don’t trust our government enough to do the “right thing” and will probably just make things worse for everyone and cost us billions of dollars that we don’t have. This should teach our leaders a lesson to not get involved in other country’s problems but I Doubt it.
The USA has no business getting involved in Europe’s affairs.
***Then we had no bizness signing the accession to the United Nations Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty which led to the Ukes giving up their nukes in exchange for assurances of their sovereignty. We were so willing to denuke them at the time, no one thought to screach about getting involved in Europe’s affairs, but now that our obligation towards Uke sovereignty has come to light, all of a sudden the appeasing isolationists insist we not get involved. That’s cool — just give them back their nukes. Sovereignty assured.
The end of our republic was Berg vs. Obama and the official ushering in of the oligarchy by SCOTUS. Our republic was dealt a lethal blow by them refusing to do their job — historians will look at it as the end of our republic and beginning of the oligarchy just as they do with Caesar crossing the Rubicon river and ending the Roman republic.
The way I see it is we should follow the emBASEee strategee. Very AmericaFirsty.
The Budapest Agreement was an “accession” to a signed international United Nations, ratified nuclear nonproliferation treaty. The Ukes honored it and gave up those nukes. The Rukes violated it twice by invading twice, by happenstance it was when there were weak-kneed democrap presidents in office whom Vlad knew would not do anything about an invasion. And the USA has been looking for all kinds of ways to abrogate our responsibility in this treaty/agreement even though it points to disaster down the road for nuclear nonproliferation.
So when I say give back the Ukes their nukes, it is an acknowledgement that nukes are sovereignty. They gave up some nukes in exchange for “assurances” for borders and sovereignty. Since they are in an existential war, who are we to scold them for building nukes since that is what we did when we were in our existential war, and we are the ones who have betrayed them.
If the Ukes develop and deploy a suitcase nuke on a Russian city, it is because they got pushed into an existential corner. What we really should be doing is putting CONVENTIONAL forces into this fight in a way that genuinely “assures” borders and sovereignty for a country that did the right thing. After all, the Russian bear has been shown to be rather toothless compared to what most of us thought they would be in this fight, so the US would kick some serious @$$.
And if we send in American boots on the ground, we damned well better be negotiating American Land as the thing to fight for. Big, sweeping American EmBASEees along the border between Russia and Ukraine. A Lend Lease project. Americans fighting for American land. For generations we could use that land to build airports and fight terrorism in that region. I would call it the BBudapest AAgreement LLend LLease program because it would take BALLs.
from my home page
I have been advocating for several years a policy I call ‘embaseees’. Embassy + AirBase —> EmBASEeees. We go into a terrorist country, clear out their taliban equivalent, then withdraw to very large Embassies, perhaps 3 of them. Have them big enough to encompass a military airbase where we can use it for decades on end to conduct anti-terrorism operations. As long as the ‘host’ country aint killing Americans then we let them have self-sovereignty. Kind of like how we operated in the Phillipines for decades. We could even have an intermediate zone that we patrol but it would be autonomous. Let them have their taste of freedom. A referendum every 10 years to see how large the boundaries of the intermediate autonomous zone should be.
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/4043681/posts
_________________________________________________________
I disagree with sending our military to Ukraine.
***Do you disagree with us having denuking the Ukes? It was the right thing to do at the time, in exchange for assurances of their sovereignty.
They are not a NATO country and we have no duty to become involved.
***We signed up for that duty when we signed the Budapest Accession to the UN Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
Send YOUR son if you wish, but do not send mine.
***I think that makes some sense. Russia invaded Ukraine. They seem to think that by calling it a “special military exercise” they are still respecting the borders and sovereignty of the Ukraine. So we can not-invade ourselves, call it a “special military exercise” which really DOES respect the borders and sovereignty of the Ukraine and according to Russia’s viewpoint, we would still be in compliance with the agreement. Russia has proven to be a less-than-efficient military juggernaut, so we would probably push them back to their own borders within 2 weeks.
We should send in plenty of soldiers into western Ukraine where there are no Russian boots on the ground fighting. That would free up Uke guys to fight in the east.
We should also set up a volunteer force for any American soldier who wants to fight in the east. We would have a lend-lease program for American emBASEeees in exchange for the help.
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/4043681/posts
Americans would be fighting for American territory, emBASEees. We could call it the BBudapest AAgreement LLend LLease policy, because it would take BALLs.
When it comes to nukes, “other countries problems” quickly become our country’s problems. We gotta get nuke nonproliferation right. We also really should learn the lesson of Sudetenland Appeasement of the local tyrant in 1938, which led to 50-60 million deaths. These are big ticket items.
Russia already has nukes so the ship already sailed on that one.
The Budapest Accession to the UN Nuclear NonProliferation Treaty wasn’t about Russia having nukes, it was about Ukraine having nukes.
Mark has a penchant for winding up on the wrong side of history. The first was when Trump threw his hat in the ring for President. Day after day he harangued the air waves over the dangers of Trump becoming President. Those where the days I simple turned the radio off as soon as I sensed he was going off on one of his “Trump Bad’ rants. I don’t believe he has ever apologized for his arrogant behavior. Now he’s going off on Ukraine. He gets more extreme every day on the subject. I have again taken to turning the radio off when it daily gets going on bling rage over ‘Russia Bad’ routine, so I didn’t hear his latest arrogant swipe at Americans. What an outrageous statement to make about his audience - that if we don’t agree with his neo-con Ukraine approach, we hate America. He ought to take another cue from his audience as he should have done early on with Trump, but no apologies will ever be forthcoming from this arrogant blowhard.
Exactly.
“The last remnants of the Old Republic have been swept away”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.