Replies

The only time I have mentioned Putin is in response to you, and never on this site as an advocate.

However, I believe Ukraine is clearly in the sphere of Russian influence and has been since 1763. Catherine the Great built the city of Odessa from a swampland. And the Russians freed Crimea from the Islamist Khanate.

Then the Russians twice defended Crimea from the Western Nations and lost over 1.5million men buried there.

Ukraine is to Russia what Texas is to America. They will fire every nuke they have to keep it.

And you are foolhardy enough to try to take it from them?

Using your logic, the UK should be able to take Ireland back; Germany should be able to take Kaliningrad back from putin; and various countries in Europe should be able to take back its former colonies in Africa. The Poles should be able to take back parts of Russia, too. These borders have changed so many times that the only thing I'd expect you to truly be consistent on is appeasing putin.

You ignore the fact that Ukraine was starved with great loss, in the millions by the Soviets, who like putin, dragged Ukraine back in to what you deem is its sacred sphere. You ignore too that Ukrainians do not agree with you, but that's apparently no big deal to you if putin wants that country. Ukrainians should give way to putin because he personally has a right to their country.

Your view of putin imperialism is more likely to lead to nuclear war than mine, which is unapologetically pro-freedom and favors independence for all nations. Presently, putin wages an undeclared war on Ukraine, which is a good sign that he's not a Christian and is a fraud. You're also using a Leftist technique that used to state that anyone who opposed the Soviets was an advocate of nuclear annihilation. It's a sign of sophistry and the emptiness of your argument that you dismiss the liberty of others by putting putin's impearial interest above others and claiming everyone not in synch with putin is a warmonger, neo-con, and advocate of nuclear war.