Mingle2 apple store icon
Try Mingle2 app for better experience
Community Recent My Topics
Community > Politics, Current News & Events
Topic: No Country can Control Putin/Russia including America
Reply
Bart's photo

Bart

Sun 04/06/25 05:22 AM

Not everybody has the good sense to see that Ukraine becoming another NATO member would probally push Putin the brink of launching nukes. .. If you back a dog into the corner, that dog is gonna fight.. Biden’s idea of diplomacy is to demonize the adversaries before trying to negotiate. Not a good plan for success..but that’s how the dems roll.
no photo

Toodygirl5

Sun 04/06/25 04:09 PM

Wonder what Promises J Biden kept that he made to the American Citizens that voted for him and Kamala.

ha
no photo

Toodygirl5

Sun 04/06/25 04:10 PM

https://www.newsmax.com/world/globaltalk/gabbard-russia-trump-putin-zelenskyy-ukraine-india/2025/03/17/id/1203217/



Negotiating is a way to come to some agreement!
Mortman's photo

Mortman

Sun 04/06/25 10:06 PM

Not everybody has the good sense to see that Ukraine becoming another NATO member would probally push Putin the brink of launching nukes. .. If you back a dog into the corner, that dog is gonna fight.. Biden’s idea of diplomacy is to demonize the adversaries before trying to negotiate. Not a good plan for success..but that’s how the dems roll.

Biden was negotiating with Russia way before any demonization, and Russia wasn't having any of it. Russia promised they weren't going to invade Ukraine despite all actual intelligence on the matter showed the opposite. Troop formations and international monetary activity showed anybody willing to look that Russia was set on attacking Ukraine. That's why Biden exposed it, and why Russia went ahead with it anyway. The operation was years in the making so it happened. Coincidentally, it would've happened even if Trump won reelection.

However, it's also unlikely that Putin will resort to nukes. Firstly, because that would be a huge escalation that even Russia doesn't want. Even if *only* Ukraine was struck by nukes, the NATO countries would rightfully have to respond by taking out all the Russian nuclear delivery systems. Every Russian ICBM-carrying submarine, military installation and strategic bomber (they've only got a few dozen) would be targeted by systems that have been built to fly deep into Russia to take them out. Secondly, Russia's nuclear stockpile is completely unreliable. They've gone decades without the needed maintenance, and even Russia's newest missiles have a 50% failure rate. You think a Russian ICBM still exists that hasn't fallen into disrepair or had its copper wiring stripped to pay for someone's vodka? I don't.
Bart's photo

Bart

Mon 04/07/25 04:58 AM


Not everybody has the good sense to see that Ukraine becoming another NATO member would probally push Putin the brink of launching nukes. .. If you back a dog into the corner, that dog is gonna fight.. Biden’s idea of diplomacy is to demonize the adversaries before trying to negotiate. Not a good plan for success..but that’s how the dems roll.

Biden was negotiating with Russia way before any demonization, and Russia wasn't having any of it. Russia promised they weren't going to invade Ukraine despite all actual intelligence on the matter showed the opposite. Troop formations and international monetary activity showed anybody willing to look that Russia was set on attacking Ukraine. That's why Biden exposed it, and why Russia went ahead with it anyway. The operation was years in the making so it happened. Coincidentally, it would've happened even if Trump won reelection.

However, it's also unlikely that Putin will resort to nukes. Firstly, because that would be a huge escalation that even Russia doesn't want. Even if *only* Ukraine was struck by nukes, the NATO countries would rightfully have to respond by taking out all the Russian nuclear delivery systems. Every Russian ICBM-carrying submarine, military installation and strategic bomber (they've only got a few dozen) would be targeted by systems that have been built to fly deep into Russia to take them out. Secondly, Russia's nuclear stockpile is completely unreliable. They've gone decades without the needed maintenance, and even Russia's newest missiles have a 50% failure rate. You think a Russian ICBM still exists that hasn't fallen into disrepair or had its copper wiring stripped to pay for someone's vodka? I don't.

I don’t assume I know anything about Russias arsenal and I don’t think you do either. I think you are just parroting what you hear from people on the left that want to make themselves sound like they have inside knowledge. I’m not buying it. But I do believe that Trump would have stopped Russia from invading. Biden told Putin a small incursion would be acceptable. Biden was negotiating with Putin? When? When he was calling him a war criminal and said his regime should be overthrown. Some negotiating skills..
Edited by Bart on Mon 04/07/25 05:00 AM
Mortman's photo

Mortman

Mon 04/07/25 07:24 AM

I don’t assume I know anything about Russias arsenal and I don’t think you do either. I think you are just parroting what you hear from people on the left that want to make themselves sound like they have inside knowledge. I’m not buying it. But I do believe that Trump would have stopped Russia from invading. Biden told Putin a small incursion would be acceptable. Biden was negotiating with Putin? When? When he was calling him a war criminal and said his regime should be overthrown. Some negotiating skills..

I only based my 50% failure rate on the published statistics from the war in Ukraine, where Russian cruise missiles often land so short of their target that they hit Russian cities, and several major hardware failed because of theft. The post-nuke strike strategy is just NATO doctrine. Nobody really knows how a nuclear war would go with Russia, but I'd guess that Russia would be way more open about their testing if they knew their stuff worked.