I am getting close to supporting NATO forces. I believe it is time for direct conflict to push Russia back into their own territory and further.....to make Putin sue for peace. I don't think Putin will answer to anything other than his own self being threatened..... He is murdering civilians, they are not engaging armies they are wiping out populations..... DD
https://reason.com/2022/04/19/sending-u-s-troops-to-ukraine-would-be-a-massive-mistake/ Sending U.S. Troops to Ukraine Would Be a Massive Mistake But politicians like Sen. Chris Coons are still flirting with the idea of direct American military intervention. FIONA HARRIGAN | 4.19.2022 11:45 AM The White House has made it clear that American soldiers won't be joining the fight in Ukraine, and rightfully so. Having just withdrawn U.S. troops from a protracted war, President Joe Biden seems unwilling to assume the risks of entering another far-off conflict in the name of the American interest. But that hasn't stopped Sen. Chris Coons (D–Del.) from making interventionist overtures. On Face the Nation this weekend, host Margaret Brennan questioned Coons on his recent statement that Congress and the Biden administration must "come to a common position about when we are willing to go the next step and to send not just arms but troops to the aid in defense of Ukraine." "You said if the answer is never, then we are inviting another level of escalation and brutality by Putin," said Brennan. "Are you arguing that President Biden…was wrong when he said he would not send troops to Ukraine? Are you asking him to set a red line?" Worrying that we might "see Ukraine turn into Syria," Coons did not reject the idea that U.S. troops should remain uninvolved in the conflict in Ukraine. "The American people cannot turn away from this tragedy in Ukraine," the senator asserted. "I think the history of the 21st century turns on how fiercely we defend freedom in Ukraine and that Putin will only stop when we stop him." Coons later backtracked on Twitter, saying he's "not calling for U.S. troops to go into the war in Ukraine." But his initial comments—which very clearly turn on the possibility of sending U.S. troops to Ukraine—highlight a worrying trend of politicians refusing to recognize the costs of direct U.S. military intervention in the conflict there. In addition to the question of putting American boots on the ground, some members of Congress are pushing for forms of entanglement that could be truly devastating. Several politicians have become enamored with the idea of a NATO-enforced no-fly zone over Ukraine. Sens. Joe Manchin (D–W.Va.) and Roger Wicker (R–Miss.), as well as Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R–Ill.), have all publicly advocated for a no-fly zone. Proponents of the measure fail to mention that a no-fly zone must be enforced somehow, or at least decline to engage in a realistic discussion about how disastrous a direct shooting war with Russia would be. Downing Russian planes would only serve to escalate tensions and entangle more military powers in the conflict in Ukraine. When polled by Quinnipiac last month, Americans overwhelmingly favored a cautious approach to U.S. assistance for Ukraine. Three-quarters said the "U.S. should do whatever it can to help Ukraine, without risking a direct war between the U.S. and Russia." A YouGov/CBS News poll in late February showed 71 percent of Americans oppose a troop deployment to Ukraine, and more recent polls have garnered similar results. Though economic measures like sanctions are popular as ways to counter Russia, military action is not. "Senator Coons is a close friend of the president's and the administration, and we just respectfully disagree with his proposal," said Jen Psaki, the White House press secretary, in a briefing yesterday. "The president has no plans to send troops to fight a war with Russia. He doesn't think that's in our national security interests." It isn't, and it's deeply concerning that many politicians continue to downplay the unavoidable risks of military engagement. Interventionist members of Congress won't be the ones to bear the potentially catastrophic brunt of the policies they're pushing. Those costs will be borne by the American people—and they've made clear that they're uninterested in taking them on. DD
I still think we need to be very very cautious about direct US involvement in Ukraine. I understand the more horror we see out of Ukraine and especially if we see Russia getting the upper hand there will be more of a desire to go in. I still don't think anyone knows what might happen once NATO and Russian troops actually start shooting at each other. Maybe it will dissuade Putin and drive him back. Maybe he will just decide he has nothing to lose and use nukes against NATO.
Yes, but who cares? Putin is killing people - I don't think he will use Nukes unless he is about to be killed.....that has to be his last option - he needs to be put back in a box, - and his people need to be freed from the disinformation umbrella they are under.... Putin is bad for the world, he needs to go.......he just kills people...... I would be in favor of a multinational hit squad to take out dictators and people that disrupt the world's peace......lots of Saudi's should be taken out too. DD
Who cares if we have a nuclear war? Sending NATO Troops into Ukraine is a gamble where the loss is potentially the end of civilization. Even a "limited" use of nuclear weapons will poison a lot of Eurasia with fallout likely leave where they hit unlivable for 100's of years.
Video games aren’t real life. You probably think CoD is real war right? nice coming from a guy that needs a scooter to pick up his cheese puffs from Walmart
Drums of war start to beat in Democrats' chests https://theweek.com/russo-ukrainian-war/1012753/drums-of-war-start-to-beat-in-democrats-chests
What a stupid opinion. I mean this is really really freaking dumb even for you. What party led the charge to invade Iraq again? This is yet ANOTHER attempt to use the Russian propaganda method of accusing the other side of what you are doing in order to create a fog of lies. FYI Adam Kinzinger.... a Republican has said publicly that he supports a no-fly zone which means the US would be at war with Russia essentially. I haven't seen any Democratic elected official publicly call for a no-fly zone which means the Republicans are more in favor of a direct war with Russia making your article or online blog or whatever fake news.
Is DD an elected member of the Democratic Party? DD also thought we should fire Morey. Does that mean ALL Rockets personnel (not JUST fans) supported firing Morey?? The elevation of DD to party governing figure really shows how much your disinformation campaign here is based in seriousness. So back to my question… what party again lied about WMD’s in Iraq as an excuse to invade for the purpose of taking control of oil fields?? So yeah sorry not sorry that one party potentially debates fighting for democracy and fighting tyranny while the other party debates which countries they can invade in order to line the pockets of oil tycoons.
Well not yet, but I do think we will probably have to fight Putin directly in order to stop the genocide going on in the Ukraine....... Standing by a proxying this war is not saving lives.......IMHO, you deal with a bully by going at him harder......and I don't believe he or his country will launch nukes.... DD
Biden already sent trial balloons with his senility by calling for Putin to be removed. No one, domestically or internationally, liked the gaffe, but they don't mind having our foot in the door? Sounds like foolish and unrealistic cake-havings-n-eatings reserved for back seat drivers who have nothing to lose.
