ADVERTISEMENT

Bob Woodward says Trump & Putin have talked 7 times on the phone since 2021

If I'm not mistaken, Russia's first incursion post the fall of the Soviet Union was Georgia in 2008. There had been a lot of NATO expansion up to that point after the fall.
Yeah, from all the Eastern European and Baltic countries that got gobbled up as either part of the Soviet Empire or one of its forced satellites. Those people spent a half century under the great rule of the Russians and when the Soviet Union came unglued they got a real taste of the West and they decided to permanently bail. Who can blame them?
 
That expansion had not happened in Ukraine. The Russians are dicks. On top of being dicks, they offer nothing of real value to those other countries to overlook the fact that they have a centuries old history of being dicks to their neighbors. I get their POV of feeling a little hemmed in, but that is all because of how they act. Attacking Ukraine does nothing but affirm the feelings of their neighbors that it is a necessity to have a big power on their side because their neighbors are dicks. Attacking the one country on their border they haven't dominated (Belarus) or isn't in NATO is a demonstration to everyone else that all the countries in the former Warsaw Pact or Soviet Union who turned West were 100% correct in that decision.

In short, **** Russia.

That being said, we also have a duty to decide how far we want to stretch our umbrella and do a cost/benefit analysis on where we are willing to existentially threaten our homeland in an effort to provide comfort and protection to others. I think that is a reasonable question to ask about Ukraine.
I agree with this, but wouldn’t we always have to decide how far we’d stretch the umbrella?

For instance, what if Putin did a Hitler and invaded a NATO member, then another, while threatening nuclear war if we get involved? Are we willing to call his bluff? Even if he’s not bluffing? Would we engage in a nuclear exchange to save Europe? We’ve always said we would.

This is where I think Trump is vs. our policy since NATO’s inception. I think he looks at it as “Russia, you can have your empire and we’ll have ours so long as you don’t invade the USA.” I think that even includes allowing them to overrun Europe. In fairness, they couldn’t overrun the Indiana National Guard with conventional forces, but my scenario includes the use/threat of tactical nukes on the battlefield and ICBM’s against us.
 
Growing up, we were always told that Wright Patterson Air Force Base was a top target for a nuclear strike. I have no idea where it might actually rank in terms of targets, but it used to scare the crap out of me as a kid.

There was a brief stretch where I thought I'd end up in some sort of Red Dawn type scenario. Nevermind the fact that I should have been thinking much, much worse apocalyptical stuff.
You may get your chance.
 
I agree with this, but wouldn’t we always have to decide how far we’d stretch the umbrella?

For instance, what if Putin did a Hitler and invaded a NATO member, then another, while threatening nuclear war if we get involved? Are we willing to call his bluff? Even if he’s not bluffing? Would we engage in a nuclear exchange to save Europe? We’ve always said we would.

This is where I think Trump is vs. our policy since NATO’s inception. I think he looks at it as “Russia, you can have your empire and we’ll have ours so long as you don’t invade the USA.” I think that even includes allowing them to overrun Europe. In fairness, they couldn’t overrun the Indiana National Guard with conventional forces, but my scenario includes the use/threat of tactical nukes on the battlefield and ICBM’s against us.
I feel we did draw our line with the countries already in NATO. They got battered in Ukraine, I think they would gladly take an off ramp now.
 
I feel we did draw our line with the countries already in NATO. They got battered in Ukraine, I think they would gladly take an off ramp now.
I think both Trump and Putin probably feel that a Trump victory is that off-ramp. Trump probably doesn't care about the terms of any peace, so long as he can take credit for it, and Putin has probably long ago abandoned his dream of a fully conquered Ukraine. At this point, he'd probably be satisfied with a promise to block Ukraine's accession into NATO, which Trump would give without pause, along with keeping territory already occupied, which I suspect Trump would also be fine with. The only remaining questions would be: 1) How would Zelenksyy respond to such a deal, and 2) Would it really matter?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aloha Hoosier
My attention span mostly allows for sound bites and headlines
Basically, he explained that it wasn't that elections would end, per se, but rather that the Dems would bring in so many immigrants, and then strategically settle them in certain areas, so as to turn possibly red areas blue. It was right up Tucker's alley, in other words. Fear of migrants.

Edit: especially coming from a, you know, migrant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Indyhorn
Basically, he explained that it wasn't that elections would end, per se, but rather that the Dems would bring in so many immigrants, and then strategically settle them in certain areas, so as to turn possibly red areas blue. It was right up Tucker's alley, in other words. Fear of migrants.

Edit: especially coming from a, you know, migrant.
Huh. That wouldn’t be a bad plan lol
 
Basically, he explained that it wasn't that elections would end, per se, but rather that the Dems would bring in so many immigrants, and then strategically settle them in certain areas, so as to turn possibly red areas blue. It was right up Tucker's alley, in other words. Fear of migrants.

Edit: especially coming from a, you know, migrant.
Why are there so many haitians in one Ohio city?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mas-sa-suta
Theologically speaking, I don't believe he has that kind of ability...not without the permission of the Big Guy...which would then make it the Big Guy doing that.
I agree. I’ve been hesitant to say this here and take the heat and/or ridicule from both political persuasions, but God is in control of all things. He may very well have spared Trump, but not necessarily to save America. He may need America out of the way to fulfill his plan. It’s a heavy lift to create the conditions for that, requiring the delusion of the very elect. Just a thought, my brother.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IUCrazy2
Is this the Old Testament God you're talking about? Did he require a sacrifice that day? Is that why Corey Comperatore was killed that day?

What if Harris wins? Any guesses on why God spared Trump and let Comperatore die?

I'm sorry, but I have a hard time believing the whole Trump is a vessel of God thing. As a life long, practicing Catholic who sees Trump for who and what he actually is, I find it insulting.

If there is a God, He's an Asshole.
 
I agree. I’ve been hesitant to say this here and take the heat and/or ridicule from both political persuasions, but God is in control of all things. He may very well have spared Trump, but not necessarily to save America. He may need America out of the way to fulfill his plan. It’s a heavy lift to create the conditions for that, requiring the delusion of the very elect. Just a thought, my brother.
So I have had the thought that maybe the two choices we have both kind of lead to that either way....like from his POV, he has stacked the deck to move things forward on his timeline no matter what.

I could make the case for things going off the rails no matter who wins in November.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Morrison
So I have had the thought that maybe the two choices we have both kind of lead to that either way....like from his POV, he has stacked the deck to move things forward on his timeline no matter what.

I could make the case for things going off the rails no matter who wins in November.

End Times, baby.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT