#notmywar

redrumloa

redrumloa

Active Member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 2, 2005
Messages
14,039
Reaction score
2,042

How Trump Stopped Putin — and Why Bush, Obama, and Biden Failed​

Donald J. Trump was the only U.S. president in the past two decades to stop Russian President Vladimir Putin. The others — George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and now Joe Biden — all saw Putin seize foreign territory by force during their terms.

The reason is simple: Trump was polite but tough, and unpredictable; while Bush, Obama, and Biden all attempted to appease the Russian leader, on the theory that past American assertiveness was the real problem, and Putin’s reaction was understandable.

n 2008, while a weakened and unpopular Bush was in Beijing, China, to watch the Olympics, Putin invaded Georgia. In 2014, after Obama had promised Putin that he would have more “flexibility”in his second term, Russia infiltrated Crimea and later annexed it.

And now, in 2022, after Biden botched the withdrawal from Afghanistan and removed sanctions from the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, Putin has invaded Ukraine.

In every case, Putin responded to American weakness with aggression.

Trump was accused, falsely, of “collusion” with Russia, and was frequently criticized for being too polite to Putin in public. A press conference in Helsinki, Finland, in 2018, where Trump accepted Putin’s public word that Russia had not interfered in the 2016 American presidential election, was said to be a disaster.

Yet during the four Trump years, Russia did not attempt to expand its earlier territorial gains in Ukraine, nor did it seriously threaten to invade any other country on its lengthy borders.

The reason: Trump was tougher on Russia than any of his predecessors, or his successor.

He attacked Syria, a Russian ally, and wiped out Russian mercenaries in a confrontation with U.S. troops there; he slapped sanctions on Russian officials, and the Nord Stream 2 pipeline; he called out Russian cheating on past nuclear treaties; he provided military aid to Ukraine; he forged closer relations with frontline NATO states; and he boosted U.S. energy production, exporting natural gas to Europe.

Trump proved he was tough with pinpoint strikes that achieved American strategic goals without sending Americans to fight wars overseas. Arguably, the fact that he showed he was willing to use force in small ways prevented him from having to do so in in large ways.

The targeted strike on Iranian terrorist general Qasem Soleimani in 2020, for example, blunted Iran’s regional ambitions. Biden, like the rest of his party, opposed that operation, claiming it would lead to war — which it did not.

Trump was also unpredictable. Putin knew that Obama and Biden, and to a lesser extent Bush, could be counted on to seek “diplomacy” as an end in itself. That was not true of Trump, whom the media warned might start World War III. (Perhaps Putin believed it.)
 
He attacked Syria.
Click to expand...
Yes, he did. The thing his supporters were telling us Hillary would do and it would be a disaster and cause WW3 and was one of the main reasons not to vote for her.*
He did that and when the hypocrisy was pointed out we were told it wasn't really up to him (but would somehow still have been up to Hillary if she had done it) and he did all he could to prevent it.
Now we're told it was his decision after all and it was a good thing?
:lol:
"Oceana had always been at war with East Asia."


-EDIT-
*A position I agreed with at the time and still think she probably would have done, so this is not a defence of Clinton.
 
Last edited:
Being tough on a country with a gazillion nukes is an illusion. Putin is working on this since his appointment regardless of what US president is in power.
 
Robert said:
Yes, he did. The thing his supporters were telling us Hillary would do and it would be a disaster and cause WW3 and was one of the main reasons not to vote for her.*
He did that and when the hypocrisy was pointed out we were told it wasn't really up to him (but would somehow still have been up to Hillary if she had done it) and he did all he could to prevent it.
Now we're told it was his decision after all and it was a good thing?
Click to expand...

If you look back here you will probably find at the time I was critical of Trump. I agreed with most of what he did while president, but that was not one of them. In hindsight though, it turned out to be effective. Putin stayed at bay while Trump was in office. What I posted above I posted without commentary. Razorfist sums up my own opinion pretty well on this.


Biden's handlers are pushing hard for WWIII. War is profitable for his handlers.
 
Speelgoedmannetje said:
Being tough on a country with a gazillion nukes is an illusion. Putin is working on this since his appointment regardless of what US president is in power.
Click to expand...

..and the US had 2 gazillion nukes, and a president that is a partially animated corpse with warmongering handlers. The US is no longer a super power. We are a complete embarrassment on the national stage. There are currently 1.5 super powers. 1 being China, 0.5 being the rebooted Soviet Union. The US is all time weak with it's leaders, and war is very profitable for Biden's handlers.
 
redrumloa said:
..and the US had 2 gazillion nukes, and a president that is a partially animated corpse with warmongering handlers. The US is no longer a super power. We are a complete embarrassment on the national stage. There are currently 1.5 super powers. 1 being China, 0.5 being the rebooted Soviet Union. The US is all time weak with it's leaders, and war is very profitable for Biden's handlers.
Click to expand...
I don't know who has the biggest arsenal nowadays, and how effective anti nuclear defense systems are or how effective hypersonic missiles are, one thing is sure, Putin has had a lot longer time to plan this properly while here the 'awaken' fight the 'woke'. If you're serious about making America great again, you better start talking over the fence again; and respect each other across the political spectrum. As long as you (we) don't do that, Russia WILL expand in eastern Europe, and China WILL invade Taiwan.
 
Speelgoedmannetje said:
Putin has had a lot longer time to plan this properly while here the 'awaken' fight the 'woke'.
Click to expand...
Indeed, the Awakening versus the Woke is a tragic-comedic metaphor for contemporary Western civilisation.
 
Putin seems to think he can justify harsh measures just by saying he is fighting Nazis. These things have to be taken step by step. First you should see if you can get away with blackface, then work your way up from there.
 
I guess better here than the muskrat thread.

ELON MUSK ACTIVATES STARLINK FOR UKRAINIAN CITIZENS UNDER SIEGE​

Stuck with limited resources, Ukraine and its government have sought every facet of help available.

Ukrainian First Vice Prime Minister Mykhailo Fedorov even reached out to Elon Musk through Twitter to request assistance through Musk’s Starlink service.

The favor was complete several hours later.

The SpaceX and Starlink founder announced that his satellite service was activated over Ukraine despite Russia’s attempt to blackout connectivity.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1497543633293266944

https://twitter.com/x/status/1497704284196155394

“Ukrainian officials requested Musk’s help with his company’s commercial internet network after Russia’s unprovoked military invasion left parts of the country offline,” reported Axios.

According to DigitalTrends:

“Starlink is a satellite constellation that provides broadband-level internet access. With this new service, SpaceX’s goal is to provide high-speed, low-latency broadband internet …”

Per the announcement by Musk, more terminals are en route to assist the ailing country left under the attack of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Musk’s swift response served as another uplifting moment in Kyiv’s fight to preserve the country’s sovereignty.

Bravo, credit where credit is due.
 
I'm not posting this because I 100% believe it. I'm just trying to find the truth, and at this point I think the vast majority of Whyzzat users do not believe mainstream media, regardless of political leanings. There is at least some truth to what he says though, like the Biden stuff.

https://www.tiktok.com/video/7069213821163949318
 
redrumloa said:
I'm not posting this because I 100% believe it. I'm just trying to find the truth, and at this point I think the vast majority of Whyzzat users do not believe mainstream media, regardless of political leanings. There is at least some truth to what he says though, like the Biden stuff.

https://www.tiktok.com/video/7069213821163949318
Click to expand...
even IF there is "corruption" in Ukraine (and this guy gives zero evidence), how does that justify invasion and killing civilians?
Right now there are thousands of children, mothers and families trying to escape by train, car, walking. This isn't exactly "pro-life".

putin doesn't give a rat's behind about anyone but himself. He's not invading another country because he cares about "corruption"
 
cecilia said:
even IF there is "corruption" in Ukraine (and this guy gives zero evidence), how does that justify invasion and killing civilians?
Right now there are thousands of children, mothers and families trying to escape by train, car, walking. This isn't exactly "pro-life".

putin doesn't give a rat's behind about anyone but himself. He's not invading another country because he cares about "corruption"
Click to expand...
I've not seen or heard anything to justify the invasion. On the fringes I've heard conspiracy theories that I've not posted here. My only angle to this right now is sadness of the US no longer being a superpower.
 
cecilia said:
www.politico.com

‘Yes, He Would’: Fiona Hill on Putin and Nukes

Putin is trying to take down the entire world order, the veteran Russia watcher said in an interview. But there are ways even ordinary Americans can fight back.
www.politico.com www.politico.com
Click to expand...
Well, I don't get the impression he has a death wish so it strikes me as unlikely.
The UK-based nuke-subs berth about 25 miles from my house so if it does come to that, things could get quite nasty round here.
 
One Fake News / propaganda after another. At this point if you read read or hear something, you have to assume it is 100% certified bullsh1t!

Fact Check: No, former Miss Ukraine is not fighting Russians in the ongoing invasion​

But later, on February 27, she clarified on Instagram that the image was meant to inspire people. She wrote, “I AM NOT A MILITARY, JUST A HUMAN. Due current situation I want to talk! I am not a military, just a woman, just normal human. Just a person, like all people of my country. I am also a airsoft player for years. You can Google what #airsoft means. All pictures in my profile to inspire people.”

Just how pervasive is the fake news and propaganda? Google UKRAINE MODEL FIGHTING and see what results it gives you. At the moment of this posting it is 100% fake news results of her going to war.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top