Ukraine Crisis

[marke]

It's possible that whoever replaces Putin could end up being worse than Putin. It's possible that whoever replaces Putin could end up being better than Putin. Let's hope!

I agree. Whoever replaces Putin will be chosen from a pool of leftist communist fascists who have no fear of launching nuclear missiles at the US.

 

[Hoping]

Not much to say to unsubstantiated claims that Putin is dead.

He may be dead, but that is unsubstantiated. He certainly appears to have been very ill recently judging by his appearance. Let's hope.

As the word says we are not to speak badly of any man, (Titus 3:2), I will only pray that he comes to repentance for his sins.

 

[Hoping]

I don't hope for that at all. How on Earth would you be sure that the devil we don't know's going to be any better than the one we do?

A replacement might be far better though too.
Don't be a pessimist.

 

[Hoping]

36 experts agree: Stay the course in Ukraine​

Russia’s egregious violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity and numerous war crimes — from the indiscriminate bombardment of hospitals, schools and residential areas, to use of cluster and vacuum bombs, summary executions, widespread rape, mass deportations, including of children, and torture — have engendered strong popular support in the United States and other Western countries for Ukraine. The Biden administration and bipartisan leadership in Congress have risen to the challenge through close coordination with allies and partners in implementing punishing sanctions on Russia, supplying major weapons to Ukraine, strengthening NATO’s force posture on its eastern flank, and supporting the bids by Finland and Sweden to join NATO. Quick passage of the Lend-Lease Act and a $40 billion assistance package (that provides, among other things, $6 billion in military aid to Ukraine) provides a much-needed boost to Kyiv’s efforts but must also include stringent oversight to ensure proper use.

Putin’s war on Ukraine may be 5,000 miles from Washington, but it directly threatens critical American interests and deliberately risks a global food crisis. Putin’s war on Ukraine is a direct attack on international law and the global order which enshrines sovereignty, territorial integrity and the peaceful resolution of disputes and has given the world 75 years of prosperity and the absence of great power war. What’s more, Putin’s aggressive designs may not end with the subjugation of Ukraine. If successful there, he might be tempted to seek to restore Moscow’s influence throughout the entire area once controlled by the Soviet Union. That would pose a direct threat to NATO allies in the Baltic region and elsewhere in eastern Europe, allies to whose defense the United States is committed under the security guarantee in Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty.

President Volodymyr Zelensky and Ukraine’s soldiers are not asking NATO to fight their battles for them, but they do need American and NATO weapons and economic assistance to prevail. It is in America’s national interest to see Ukraine emerge from this war as a truly sovereign and democratic state, in charge of its own foreign policy, militarily strong, territorially secure, and economically viable.

The United States and Europe must avoid the urge to encourage Kyiv to negotiate a cease fire that falls short of Ukraine’s goals and could consign millions of Ukrainians to Russian control; after all, Putin denies the legitimacy of a unique Ukrainian identity, and Russian forces have already committed countless war crimes against them. Moreover, the Ukrainian side has tried to engage in good-faith negotiations, but got nowhere because Putin has shown no interest in serious negotiations. Western pressure on Kyiv to begin negotiations or accept a cease fire that the Ukrainians do not want would likely harden the Kremlin’s attitude and prolong the fighting.

The United States should instead continue to exert leadership in the Western effort to provide Ukraine the weapons it needs, to impose additional sanctions on Moscow, and to bolster NATO’s military presence on its eastern flank. This includes sending Ukraine in a timely fashion more advanced weapons, such as long-range fires, high-altitude air defense systems and anti-ship missiles.

It also means intensified economic pressure, including measures to cut Russian revenues from oil sales either through a phased-in embargo by the European Union (EU) or, alternatively, EU price caps or tariffs on Russian sales backed up by U.S. secondary sanctions. Finally, it means traditional U.S. freedom of navigation exercises in the Black Sea, and a careful look at a multinational military escort of cargo ships to and from Odesa to ease the mounting global food shortage.

No one wants direct confrontation with Russia, but helping Ukraine to defend its land and freedom is in the West’s security interest. While the United States and NATO must certainly take into account Russian nuclear capacity, they should respond calmly and not be intimidated.

This unjustified war has a clear aggressor — Russia — and a clear victim — Ukraine. The West should aim to see that the Kremlin’s aggression fails and that Ukraine prevails on the battlefield or achieves an outcome that Kyiv can accept.

I wonder where all this sympathy and support was when Russia took Crimea from Ukraine in 2014?

 

[Idolater]

A replacement might be far better though too.

Of course it might. We might get another Gorbachev who knows, but maybe we get another Putin or worse too.

Don't be a pessimist.

I'm not a pessimist I'm an optometrist.

Have you ever been in a situation where the devil you know is better than the devil you don't know? Cliches exist for a reason, they didn't catch on because people were bored.

 

[User Name]

As the word says we are not to speak badly of any man, (Titus 3:2), I will only pray that he comes to repentance for his sins.

Let Putin be accursed:

"If anyone does not love the Lord, let him be accursed." (1 Corinthians 16:22)

 

[Hoping]

Of course it might. We might get another Gorbachev who knows, but maybe we get another Putin or worse too.

I myself will lean to the hopeful side.

I'm not a pessimist I'm an optometrist.

I think they make a salve for that...

Have you ever been in a situation where the devil you know is better than the devil you don't know? Cliches exist for a reason, they didn't catch on because people were bored.

Not that I can recall.

 

[Hoping]

Let Putin be accursed:

"If anyone does not love the Lord, let him be accursed." (1 Corinthians 16:22)

I guess you could say the same thing about the Jewish Zelenskyy .
At best, he is an OT, uninformed Jew, and at worst, a Jesus/Christian hater.

I choose to pray for the conversion of both men.

 

[User Name]

I guess you could say the same thing about the Jewish Zelenskyy .

Wrong. You can say whatever you choose, but don't try to put words in my mouth ever again.

 

[Arthur Brain]

It's possible that whoever replaces Putin could end up being worse than Putin. It's possible that whoever replaces Putin could end up being better than Putin. Let's hope!

Well, it would take some doing to have someone replacing Putin that could be worse so the odds favour the latter if there's any substance to this.

 

[Idolater]

Well, it would take some doing to have someone replacing Putin that could be worse so the odds favour the latter if there's any substance to this.

The hierarchical organization Putin the Idiot set up for his ascendancy to apparent absolute autocracy, is not going to produce moral men, no absolute autocrats' organizations ever do. That's why we have to ask if maybe Putin the Imbecile isn't the better option than his replacement or successor could be. Putin's had decades to get used to having all that power. His successor might just become quickly either drunk on power or disoriented by power, we don't know. Of course maybe he would be better, and we hope that that would be the case, but we don't know, and so I have to repeat that here maybe the devil we know is better than the devil we don't know.

 

[Arthur Brain]

The hierarchical organization Putin the Idiot set up for his ascendancy to apparent absolute autocracy, is not going to produce moral men, no absolute autocrats' organizations ever do. That's why we have to ask if maybe Putin the Imbecile isn't the better option than his replacement or successor could be. Putin's had decades to get used to having all that power. His successor might just become quickly either drunk on power or disoriented by power, we don't know. Of course maybe he would be better, and we hope that that would be the case, but we don't know, and so I have to repeat that here maybe the devil we know is better than the devil we don't know.

Bring back Gorbachev frankly. However, sans Putin is still odds on rather than with him. I'm well aware that there are doubtless others who would take up a similar mantle but with far less experience in such a position and the disarray would be something at least. It would be a bet I'd take.

 

[Idolater]

Bring back Gorbachev frankly. However, sans Putin is still odds on rather than with him. I'm well aware that there are doubtless others who would take up a similar mantle but the disarray would be something at least and it would be a bet I'd take.

I can't help but be reminded that there are city ending nuclear guns involved here. I just don't buy that "disarray" is something we ought to be hoping for. I don't take that bet.

I've said before that because of how Russian politics has collapsed completely into Stupid Putin's personal autocracy that the only real way to end this through assassination would need to involve hitting him plus all his lieutenants plus all his lieutenants' lieutenants, and all coordinated and synchronized, to bring that regime down to its knees and prevent anything nuclear. At minimum. Unless we have witting Manchurian candidates all over Moscow and Russia rn that's not going to happen.

I think our best bet is to tempt Putin the Moron to quit this war and go home. Make him an offer he can't refuse.

 

[Arthur Brain]

I can't help but be reminded that there are city ending nuclear guns involved here. I just don't buy that "disarray" is something we ought to be hoping for. I don't take that bet.

I've said before that because of how Russian politics has collapsed completely into Stupid Putin's personal autocracy that the only real way to end this through assassination would need to involve hitting him plus all his lieutenants plus all his lieutenants' lieutenants, and all coordinated and synchronized, to bring that regime down to its knees and prevent anything nuclear. At minimum. Unless we have witting Manchurian candidates all over Moscow and Russia rn that's not going to happen.

I think our best bet is to tempt Putin the Moron to quit this war and go home. Make him an offer he can't refuse.

Nobody needs reminding of Russia's nuclear arsenal but all I'm saying is that if the most prominent dictator were to be out of office then it's unlikely that his 'successor' would be as vehement as him or as assured in destructive courses of action. It's not celebration day or anything by any means but in relation to poker it's having pocket rockets rather than a seven two off suit.

 

[Idolater]

Nobody needs reminding of Russia's nuclear arsenal but all I'm saying is that if the most prominent dictator were to be out of office then it's unlikely that his 'successor' would be as vehement as him or as assured in destructive courses of action. It's not celebration day or anything by any means but in relation to poker it's having pocket rockets rather than a seven two off suit.

Arthur, you have no idea about that. That's unsubstantiated. There easily could be a more evil man in his organization. I mean, you know the story of Stalin right? We thought Lenin was bad. We had no idea.

 

[User Name]

We thought Lenin was bad. We had no idea.

The guy who repaces Putin might at least be sane. That alone would be an improvement over what we have now.

 

[Idolater]

The guy who repaces Putin might at least be sane. That alone would be an improvement over what we have now.

Even though the devil we know is a devil, we know this devil. This devil is less likely to surprise us, because we know this devil.

Maybe the successor won't be a devil at all, but maybe he will be. And if he is, maybe he won't be as bad a devil, or maybe he'd be the same bad, and maybe he'd be even worse. And if he is a devil, and he is a worse devil, now combine that with he's an unknown devil, as opposed to the devil we currently have----we know this one.

Here's what happens if you bet wrong. WWIII, glass craters where European cities used to stand. Global catastrophe. And the real kind, not "climate change" global catastrophe. That's what you're wagering with your bet, you're betting that won't happen. You need to think harder and longer about this bet before you place it.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Arthur, you have no idea about that. That's unsubstantiated. There easily could be a more evil man in his organization. I mean, you know the story of Stalin right? We thought Lenin was bad. We had no idea.

Putin is an absolute despot. The odds are favourable that a replacement could hardly be any worse.

 

[annabenedetti]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1532734703299710978

 

[Idolater]

Putin is an absolute despot. The odds are favourable that a replacement could hardly be any worse.

You made that up. It's not based on history or any relevant fact. The odds are non-zero that his successor could be worse and a lot worse. You Europeans ... smh. You can't bury your head in the sand. You need to get Russia to stop and get out. You need to do it, not just for Europe, but for the whole rest of the world. We do not want to fight WWIII thank you very much.