Ukraine War

[Anastasis 23,716]

41 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

See, guys…he doesn’t OPENLY root for Russia to steamroll Ukraine and have total military success against the west from the Baltic on down. Nope. He just opposes every single measure, step, or action that might stand in the way of or impede in any way Russia doing just that.
And you morons can’t see the clear difference. Brain worms.

lol. What a bunch of clowns.  
 

“Ana openly roots for Russia since this thing started”

”You won’t find a single post where I have openly rooted for Russia”

”aha, he admits that he secretly roots for Russia. Got ‘em.”

You guys actually make John Bolton look compelling in comparison.

 

 

[Brisketexan 106,874]

lol. What a bunch of clowns.  
 
“Ana openly roots for Russia since this thing started”
”You won’t find a single post where I have openly rooted for Russia”
”aha, he admits that he secretly roots for Russia. Got ‘em.”
You guys actually make John Bolton look compelling in comparison.
 
 

Do you support continuing US military aid to Ukraine?

[Willfully Horn 8,258]

I missed Ana’s concession that tfg benefitted from Russian interference in the 2016 election.

[wildcat09 29,577]

12 hours ago, Anastasis said:

You won’t find a single post where I have been openly rooting for Russia. Some of you get very confused when someone is critical of American foreign policy, historical context, and has the capability to pull together an attention span longer than my dog. 

I remember that your only reaction to the Bucha massacre was to criticize everyone here for being horrified by it.

[956 Worldwide 35,589]

7 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

I remember that your only reaction to the Bucha massacre was to criticize everyone here for being horrified by it.

“Atrocity porn.” 

[Macanudo 13,314]

9 hours ago, Anastasis said:

lol. What a bunch of clowns.  
 

“Ana openly roots for Russia since this thing started”

”You won’t find a single post where I have openly rooted for Russia”

”aha, he admits that he secretly roots for Russia. Got ‘em.”

You guys actually make John Bolton look compelling in comparison.

 

 

Your mom look like John Bolton.

[bolverk 30,313]

https://www.surlyhorns.com/board/topic/30269-india-burgeoning-global-superpower-friend-foe/?do=findComment&comment=6105046

Quote

 

I want other countries to bear the brunt, but that doesn't mean I am not pro-Ukraine. I get that Cloak Room only sees binary shades of black and white (which is ironic given the sheer number of non-binary posters who dominate the Cloak Room), but one can want to offset USA's responsibilities to EU/NATO countries and still be anti-Russia.

Especially when USA is going to ALSO have to be giving support to Israel, and potentially how much and how long who knows if they respond to Iran, etc. etc.

 

 

https://www.surlyhorns.com/board/topic/30269-india-burgeoning-global-superpower-friend-foe/?do=findComment&comment=6105380

Quote

 

Those who think the US is overburdened in its support of Ukraine are sorely mistaken.

Here's the chart showing the GDP percentage for each country:

https://app.23degrees.io/view/F1tc2gv8QzFCs1ij-bar-stacked-horizontal-figure_3_4_csv_v2-1

Estonia               4.1%
Denmark            3.0%
Lithuania            2.0%
Norway               1.7%
Latvia                  1.7%
Netherlands        1.5%
Slovakia               1.4%
Poland                 1.3%
Finland                 1.3%
Germany              1.1%
Croatia                 1.0%
Bulgaria               1.0%
Sweden                1.0%
Czech Republic    1.0%
Belgium               1.0%
Spain                    0.9%
Austria                  0.8%
Greece                  0.8%
Slovenia                0.7%    
Hungary               0.7%
Italy                      0.7%
France                  0.7%
Romania              0.6%
Portugal               0.6%
Cyprus                  0.6%
United Kingdom   0.6%
Luxembourg          0.6%
Malta                     0.5%
Ireland                   0.4%
Switzerland            0.3%
Canada                  0.3%
UNITED STATES    0.3%
Japan                     0.2%
Iceland                   0.2%
South Korea          0.1%

 

 

https://www.surlyhorns.com/board/topic/30269-india-burgeoning-global-superpower-friend-foe/?do=findComment&comment=6105448

Quote

Let's take this conversation to the other Ukraine thread, where it will be more interesting.

 

 

I guess I got lost and wandered into the wrong thread.

So, @BeardIP, you were saying something about the US being overburdened in its support for Ukraine?

 

 

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11,669]

14 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

Do you support continuing US military aid to Ukraine?

this seems to have stumped him.

 

also, lulz at the post of "you guys that openly support ukraine don't get historical context."

[InkaUtexas 26,860]

1 minute ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

this seems to have stumped him.

 

also, lulz at the post of "you guys that openly support ukraine don't get historical context."

Yeah, that one got me as well. did not respond, but would love to know what his take is.

[troph 25,198]

15 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

See, guys…he doesn’t OPENLY root for Russia to steamroll Ukraine and have total military success against the west from the Baltic on down. Nope. He just opposes every single measure, step, or action that might stand in the way of or impede in any way Russia doing just that.
And you morons can’t see the clear difference. Brain worms.

he's just asking questions.

[956 Worldwide 35,589]

If you’re looking for the best Russia proxy in the Congress, it’s not MTG. It’s Senator Vance:

Here’s how this ties together: 

- Delay Ukraine and let Russia keep its assets (obvious).

- Delay Taiwan: The PRC is currently keeping Russia’s defense industrial base on life support. Vance wants to keep the PRC comfortable and confident that they can continue to do so and face no real consequences or need to redirect away from supporting Russia.

- Border: Keep culture war fanned and attempt to distract Americans from real threats. 
 

Vance and his book rose to prominence because of a network of Viktor Orban-tied conservative influencers including Tucker Carlson but also less-known figures like Rod Dreher, formerly of the American Conservative. Dreher now lives in Hungary and works openly for a regime institute.  He connected Tucker and Orban and he also plugged in Vance, who also repeats Orban platitudes. 
 

If you’re looking at my bet for “malign and not just dumb,” it’s Vance. These consistent takes that align with everything that helps Putin and Orban are just too convenient. 

[Smax 3,800]

 

[Party_Taco 3,889]

 

I feel like there’s a rug pull coming… I hope that I’m wrong

[The Dog 44,854]

Full text of Renn's post:

Quote

The ERLC is the lobbying arm of the Southern Baptist Convention. It's not obvious what Ukraine funding has to do with the SBC or Christianity in America. This is an example of over-politicization of evangelical denominations. Let individuals voice their support for Ukraine, but evangelicals institutions shouldn't be directly involved this type of policy advocacy in most cases. It's outside of their lane.

Full text of Darling's:

Quote

Actually the SBC has significant ministry in Ukraine, including the largest presence of evangelicals and Baptists in Eastern Europe. In Russian occupied territories, they are being tortured and persecuted. We’ve lost 300 Baptist churches. This advocacy by the ERLC is consistent with SBC advocacy going back a century. Which is why the 25-year ERLC president, Richard Land, has been advocating similarly.

I don't follow these accounts - Kinzinger reposted this. Might explain how things changed.

[Smax 3,800]

 

......

[InkaUtexas 26,860]

"Fund a second Marine Corps." Yeah, we used shit from the 1990's sitting in storage.

[The Dog 44,854]

Quote

This is actually happening.  The House version of the aid bill to Ukraine REQUIRES the transfer of ATACMS missiles to Ukraine for "achieving victory against" Russia.  This House bill is even better than the Senate bill.

Yes... it is a "loan" and not direct aid.  But everyone knows Ukraine is never going to have to pay it back and this is a cheap political concession for Johnson to say he "got something."

 

[The Dog 44,854]

 

[Dahobbs 18,303]

On 4/16/2024 at 6:05 PM, Anastasis said:

You won’t find a single post where I have been openly rooting for Russia. Some of you get very confused when someone is critical of American foreign policy, historical context, and has the capability to pull together an attention span longer than my dog. 

"I haven't been openly rooting for Russia" isn't the strong rebuttal that you think it is. 

[Anastasis 23,716]

12 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

"I haven't been openly rooting for Russia" isn't the strong rebuttal that you think it is. 

Sorry I guess for directly responding to the specific charge and in the same terms that it was made. Oh, and below still suits. 

On 4/16/2024 at 9:40 PM, Anastasis said:

“Ana openly roots for Russia since this thing started”

”You won’t find a single post where I have openly rooted for Russia”

”aha, he admits that he secretly roots for Russia. Got ‘em.”

You guys actually make John Bolton look compelling in comparison.

 

[Serak The Preparer 3,484]

@Anastasis Do you think that the U.S. has been giving the appropriate amount of military aid to Ukraine, too much, too little? Don't need to get too specific but it is difficult to understand what your criticism of U.S. policy here is vs criticism of the tone of this board. Apologies if you've stated this before, I may just not be recalling.

[Huckleberry 34,578]

19 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Sorry I guess for directly responding to the specific charge and in the same terms that it was made. Oh, and below still suits. 

 

You seem to have missed a question, accidentally I'm sure.

On 4/16/2024 at 10:04 PM, Brisketexan said:

Do you support continuing US military aid to Ukraine?

 

[Brisketexan 106,874]

12 minutes ago, Serak The Preparer said:

@Anastasis Do you think that the U.S. has been giving the appropriate amount of military aid to Ukraine, too much, too little? Don't need to get too specific but it is difficult to understand what your criticism of U.S. policy here is vs criticism of the tone of this board. Apologies if you've stated this before, I may just not be recalling.

He won't answer.  He rarely does.  He'll say some version of "my position has been crystal clear, if you haven't seen it in a random post from 2 years ago, that's on you.  BRAIN WORMS"....without ever stating what his actual position is.  Because - and this is important - he knows that his actual position is indefensible.

[Anastasis 23,716]

2 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

You seem to have missed a question, accidentally I'm sure.

It's been discussed a few pages back, with the same posters.  I am sure that you missed the exchange. Accidently I'm sure.

13 minutes ago, Serak The Preparer said:

@Anastasis Do you think that the U.S. has been giving the appropriate amount of military aid to Ukraine, too much, too little? Don't need to get too specific but it is difficult to understand what your criticism of U.S. policy here is vs criticism of the tone of this board. Apologies if you've stated this before, I may just not be recalling.

Prior posts below. If you want full context you can start at page 185 or so.

 

On 2/10/2024 at 11:34 AM, Brisketexan said:

Then let me ask the questions that follow that:
Do you think the Ukrainians would choose some version of the map has Russia excluded from Ukraine either in whole or in large part (i.e., no more territory than it already holds)?
And, do you think the Ukrainians should receive western support, including weapons, to help them achieve/get closer to that goal?

I’ll even give you my answers first: they want Russia gone completely. But they will likely settle for something less, eventually.[emphasis mine] And we should continue to supply them the ammo and weapons they request, at similar levels to what we’ve done the past two years (it has varied, I’d prefer towards the higher end).

 

 

On 2/10/2024 at 11:44 AM, Anastasis said:

We are not too far apart. I agree that the bolded probably reflects reality.

I don't think that the US taxpayer should be on the hook for a blank check. To the extent that our solution to the issue is to dump more arms and weapons into the region, I think that we need to have robust controls on arms and money from US taxpayers. I know that unintended consequences are not real though, and we shouldn't spend any time thinking about them with a longer run time horizon.   

 

 

[Anastasis 23,716]

15 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Because - and this is important - he knows that his actual position is indefensible.

My positions are generally aligned with the majority of Americans. As posted earlier. 

  

On 2/22/2024 at 7:51 AM, Anastasis said:

Here is another recent poll that gets more to policy.

https://quincyinst.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Quincy-Institute_rev-tabs.pdf

https://responsiblestatecraft.org/ukraine-peace-talks-poll/

 

Full data at first link, excerpts from the summary article: 

The Harris/Quincy Institute poll involved an online survey of 2,090 American adults from Feb. 8 to 12. The results are weighted to ensure a representative sample of the U.S. population. The margin of error is 2.5% using a 95% confidence level.

...

Roughly 70% of Americans want the Biden administration to push Ukraine toward a negotiated peace with Russia as soon as possible, according to a new survey from the Harris Poll and the Quincy Institute, which publishes Responsible Statecraft.

Support for negotiations remained high when respondents were told such a move would include compromises by all parties, with two out of three respondents saying the U.S. should still pursue talks despite potential downsides. The survey shows a nine-point jump from a poll in late 2022 that surveyed likely voters. In that poll, 57% of respondents said they backed talks that would involve compromises.

...

As the House weighs whether to approve new aid for Ukraine, 48% of respondents said they support new funding as long as it is conditioned on progress toward a diplomatic solution to the war. Others disagreed over whether the U.S. should halt all aid (30%) or continue funding without specific conditions (22%).

This question revealed a sharp partisan divide on whether to continue Ukraine funding in any form. Fully 46% of Republicans favor an immediate shutoff of the aid spigot, as compared to 17% of Democrats.

Meanwhile, 54% of Democrats and 40% of Republicans favored conditioning aid on diplomatic talks.

 

[troph 25,198]

3 hours ago, The Dog said:

Full text of Renn's post:

Full text of Darling's:

I don't follow these accounts - Kinzinger reposted this. Might explain how things changed.

you won't really see me defend much about the evangelicals, but I don't have a problem with religious groups speaking with their first amendment rights about politics, especially when their position is not a violation of law or the constitution). even if you put a "stay in your lane" requirement, SBC has a humanitarian angle here too. while they can burn in hell for many of their positions, I still support their right to be in this arena speaking their mind. and on this one, I just so happen to not have to hold my nose at it.

Edited April 18 by troph

[956 Worldwide 35,589]

10 minutes ago, troph said:

you won't really see me defend much about the evangelicals, but I don't have a problem with religious groups speaking with their first amendment rights about politics, especially when their position is not a violation of law or the constitution). even if you put a "stay in your lane" requirement, SBC has a humanitarian angle here too. while they can burn in hell for many of their positions, I still support their right to be in this arena speaking their mind. and on this one, I just so happen to not have to hold my nose at it.

Yeah, religious groups have an absolute first amendment right to do this just like all associations of citizens.  They can’t directly endorse candidates but they can argue all they want for changes in law of policy. 
 

Whether they should or not is a theological debate. It is interesting that they didn’t get the memo that Ukraine is anti-Christian. But they do know what happened with the Baptists in Russia. 

[troph 25,198]

9 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Yeah, religious groups have an absolute first amendment right to do this just like all associations of citizens.  They can’t directly endorse candidates but they can argue all they want for changes in law of policy. 
 

Whether they should or not is a theological debate. It is interesting that they didn’t get the memo that Ukraine is anti-Christian. But they do know what happened with the Baptists in Russia. 

RINOs!

[The Dog 44,854]

[Dahobbs 18,303]

14 minutes ago, The Dog said:

Because he would have helped Russia. Hell, we would probably have participated in the invasion. 

[956 Worldwide 35,589]

5 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Because he would have helped Russia. Hell, we would probably have participated in the invasion. 

This is as good as it gets from him. It’s actually cover to allow people to vote for it and then make angry noises at Europe.  He doesn’t say “this aid package is bad” and in fact he says Ukraine survival is important to us. 
 

Don’t get me wrong, it’s terrible but it’s not as terrible as it could be and gives just enough to Johnson. 

[956 Worldwide 35,589]

Quincy Institute produces poll that aligns with Quincy Institute. 
 

The thing is that Anastasis knows enough on how this works. From polling to marketing, offering a choice of extremes and a vaguely worded Goldilocks middle will reliably get you the middle.
 

He’s a bad-faith poster on this issue that realizes he can’t just pump pure uncut agitprop, you have to embed it in seemingly reasonable stuff.  The nonsense about insufficient controls over weapons and just asking where they are going is a good example, the question is loaded and contains the disinformation. 

[InkaUtexas 26,860]

14 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Because he would have helped Russia. Hell, we would probably have participated in the invasion. 

He never would deploy the "Losers" in the military. Yeah, I won't forget when he said that about the POW's. No one should.

[SmokeyTheBear 5,569]

6 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Quincy Institute produces poll that aligns with Quincy Institute. 
 

The thing is that Anastasis knows enough on how this works. From polling to marketing, offering a choice of extremes and a vaguely worded Goldilocks middle will reliably get you the middle.
 

He’s a bad-faith poster on this issue that realizes he can’t just pump pure uncut agitprop, you have to embed it in seemingly reasonable stuff.  The nonsense about insufficient controls over weapons and just asking where they are going is a good example, the question is loaded and contains the disinformation. 

This would have been sufficient but, also, the added context is accurate.  

[The Dog 44,854]

His comment on Trump's Truth post in a subtweet:

Quote

FWIW we have Trump’s first public comment on aid to Ukraine, from the horse’s mouth shall we say. It’s weird that he is pushing a myth that the US has aided Ukraine more than Europe, and he can’t bring himself to say he supports the aid. However, he can’t oppose it either. A sign that he might be forced into accepting the aid in the end (while clearly being unhappy about it)

 

[locodos 5,590]

55 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

This is as good as it gets from him. It’s actually cover to allow people to vote for it and then make angry noises at Europe.  He doesn’t say “this aid package is bad” and in fact he says Ukraine survival is important to us. 
 

Don’t get me wrong, it’s terrible but it’s not as terrible as it could be and gives just enough to Johnson. 

He only said that because he knows the aid package is going to go through despite his resistance, so now he's trying to line up like it's what he wanted all along.  Fuckin prick

[Anastasis 23,716]

1 hour ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Quincy Institute produces poll that aligns with Quincy Institute. 

I understand that you are going to fall in opposition to their goal to "promote ideas that move U.S. foreign policy away from endless war, toward military restraint and diplomacy in the pursuit of international peace". But it is certainly overrepresented among the posters of this board, and particularly posters like brisket, that such positions are considered indefensible. 

[Macanudo 13,314]

8 hours ago, Smax said:

 

......

There are lies, damn lies and statistics.   Then there's a whole different category of the shit that comes out of Republican mouths.

[956 Worldwide 35,589]

LOL at citing a think tank mission statement. “Here at (think tank) we support good things and are against the bad things.” 

[atomheartbevo 90,636]

4 hours ago, The Dog said:

Interesting timing, given Fox News went after Three Toes and Johnson is pushing it to the floor.

Really wonder what is driving all of this - poll numbers showing that people are tired of it, or what I think maybe helping - Republicans threatening to resign and give the House to the Dems.

[Brisketexan 106,874]

I understand that you are going to fall in opposition to their goal to "promote ideas that move U.S. foreign policy away from endless war, toward military restraint and diplomacy in the pursuit of international peace". But it is certainly overrepresented among the posters of this board, and particularly posters like brisket, that such positions are considered indefensible. 

I’m a huge believer in two concepts: 1) the vast majority of adversarial situations can and should be resolved by negotiation and compromise, and 2) a handful can’t be, and the fight must be fought to completion. It’s not always easy to know which is which…but sometimes, it’s pretty easy.
Ana thinks that means one favors “endless war.” It doesn’t. Not even close. It means one favors avoiding war almost all the time; even take extreme measures to avoid it. But it also means that when war is the end point of a conflict, then fight it to win it. Because when a conflict has already demonstrated itself as the kind of conflict to explode into war, then a half measure to pause it instead of pursuing a path to end it definitively, it’s often a mistake.
China is a great example of an adversarial conflict that can and should be managed through diplomacy, compromise, and a deliberate and patient strategy.
Putin’s Russia has plainly demonstrated that it is a belligerent that will have to be managed - in part - with military force meeting its military force.
“Peace in our time” appeasement of the wrong adversary is destined to fail.

[956 Worldwide 35,589]

I will again draw attention to the Dreher-American Conservative/European Conservative-Vance-Orban nexus.  These people are being handled.

 

[Walser 1,125]

I have a Uke friend going to a B&B in the Carpathians this weekend so this hits no where near my home.

[Thetexashammer 1,062]

On 4/16/2024 at 6:05 PM, Anastasis said:

You won’t find a single post where I have been openly rooting for Russia. Some of you get very confused when someone is critical of American foreign policy, historical context, and has the capability to pull together an attention span longer than my dog. 

Hitler was a vegetarian. I am not saying that all vegetarians love Hitler. I am merely saying they want EXACTLY the same things, and boy that is a really weird coincidence wink wink.

The "D" is TDS stands for deranged. 

 

[YGIFS 19,458]

And yes, the man is deranged.  How so many Americans who loved Reagan (I did as well) so willingly go along with Russia's invasion and crimes against humanity will baffle me and scholars for centuries.  And the cherry on top is that people think Trump has anything to do with this.  Like he could have stopped it.  Like they only started war-gaming it once Biden was sworn into office.  The military footprints and tactical training of this began under Trump's regime with the understanding that he'd likely win again and not do anything about Russia.  But a funny thing happened on the way to the theater...of Eastern Europe.  

[atomheartbevo 90,636]

The full quote from the Jay in Kyiv tweet @956 Worldwide mentioned

The amendment that Marjorie Taylor Greene just proposed to sabotage the Ukraine bill is something that is such a nuanced Russian disinfo narrative that it could have only come directly from her Russian handlers. The notion that Hungarians are being persecuted in Ukraine is insane BUT it's being pushed by both Orban (who was promised a piece of Ukraine by Putin) and Russian disinfo machine. For an American to suggest this really confirms she is being handled.

[Anastasis 23,716]

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

Ana thinks that means one favors “endless war.” 

If I had a dollar for every time one of you sought to frame your words as my own, tell me what I think, or just simply repeated questions that were asked and addressed like seven pages earlier while acting like they remain unfulfilled, I could retire early. 

Back in reality world both your children and mine have been raised in world where the US has been engaged in war for the entirety of their lives. Maybe you don't favor the reality, but that doesn't change the reality. And it's hard to connect the dots between your rhetoric and aspirations and reality when you stand behind all of those wars in real time during the run up and the barking sounds a lot like warmongers like john bolton. 

[Willfully Horn 8,258]

52 minutes ago, Thetexashammer said:

Hitler was a vegetarian. I am not saying that all vegetarians love Hitler. I am merely saying they want EXACTLY the same things, and boy that is a really weird coincidence wink wink.

The "D" is TDS stands for deranged. 

 

The fuckstick trashed the US tradition of a peaceful transfer of power while you were grabbing your ankles. Fuck you.

Edited April 19 by Willfully Horn

[Anastasis 23,716]

3 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

LOL at citing a think tank mission statement. “Here at (think tank) we support good things and are against the bad things.” 

I understand that unless they are funded by Raytheon, they are suspect to you. 

[InkaUtexas 26,860]

The anti-aid meltdown commences now.

House passes Ukraine aid bill

The House passed the Ukraine Security Supplemental Appropriations Act with a vote of 311-112. One member – GOP Rep Dan Meuser – voted present.  

Democrats cheered and waved Ukrainian flags during the vote.

The $95 billion package contains $61 billion for Ukraine and regional partners.

One of the bills would provide nearly $61 billion to assist Ukraine and others in the region fight Russia – about the same that was included in the Senate bill.

Of that total, about $23 billion would be used to replenish US weapons, stockpiles and facilities, and more than $11 billion would fund current US military operations in the region. 

Nearly $14 billion included in the bill would help Ukraine buy advanced weapons systems and other defense equipment. 

 

From Zelensky

"Democracy and freedom will always have global significance and will never fail as long as America helps to protect it," Zelensky said in the post. "The vital U.S. aid bill passed today by the House will keep the war from expanding, save thousands and thousands of lives, and help both of our nations to become stronger."