Both sides have conscription.   It's nothing new.  Most major wars have it.   Hell we even had it for vietnam....

Both sides have conscription.   It's nothing new.  Most major wars have it.   Hell we even had it for vietnam....

1 side to the agreement that Putin wants is to have no NATO or like forces in Ukraine.  I guess that if he wants to invade attack again, he doesn't want to kill NATO forces, which would increase the chances of that nation responding.  But what he is probably going to say is that he doesnt want them to invade Russia.  Cause you know, invading Russia has worked so well in military history.

The US has a history of staying out of world wars.  We never entered WW1 until years have passed and same with WW2.  I hope the EU didn't forget about this.

Like China, Russia has no intention of attacking its neighbors unless provoked.

It was the US empire's betrayal to Russia by moving NATO to its borders that got Russia's ire and specifically prepping Ukraine's entry into NATO among other things that broke the camel's back.


The people of America historically followed Washington's decree by not wanting to get involved in any foreign entanglements.

However, the proto imperialists at the turn of the 20th century were hell bent and working behind the scenes on becoming a US empire; just ask any Hawaiian national regarding that.

They claim that Ukraine is just Russian land that they're taking back.  Is there any other countries/land that would cause Russia to make a similar claim?  I mean, obviously England or Germany isn't Russian land.

Like China, Russia has no intention of attacking its neighbors unless provoked.

It was the US empire's betrayal to Russia by moving NATO to its borders that got Russia's ire and specifically prepping Ukraine's entry into NATO among other things that broke the camel's back.[/color]


The people of America historically followed Washington's decree by not wanting to get involved in any foreign entanglements.

However, the proto imperialists at the turn of the 20th century were hell bent and working behind the scenes on becoming a US empire; just ask any Hawaiian national regarding that.

So, in your opinion, armed violence on another country's sovereign soil is justified if the aggressor felt "provoked?"

Did Russia have no other response to Ukraine wishing to join NATO?

Seems like Russia validated Ukraine's need for NATO protection by invading and starting a protracted war.

Only if the provocation is an existential threat to a sovereign nation's national security.

Having Ukraine joining or hosting NATO troops and/or material is like Mexico joining an alliance and/or having Russian bases with long range missiles along the southern border of the continental US empire.


None, since it was an existential threat to Russia's national security according to the Russians.


I believe that is what all the neocons and imperialists are and have been saying on the mainstream media.   

I would agree with that if the weapons were first-strike offensive weapons -- such as nukes based in Cuba targeting US cities.

But that's not the case.  In fact, if you followed the news, Ukraine was unable to launch a successful counter-offensive until after they received ATACMS missiles from the US AND received permission from Biden to launch into the area around Kursk.

Deploying defensive weapons is not a provocation -- unless you are just looking for any reason to justify an invasion of your neighboring counties.

"Existential threat" is libtard-speak for "those people are evil."  i don't recall anyone urging Ukraine to invade Russia.

don't disagree with the forum SME...

I would agree with that if the weapons were first-strike offensive weapons -- such as nukes based in Cuba targeting US cities.

But that's not the case.  In fact, if you followed the news, Ukraine was unable to launch a successful counter-offensive until after they received ATACMS missiles from the US AND received permission from Biden to launch into the area around Kursk.

First, the fact that the US empire was slowly arming Ukraine to NATO standards, thereby, furthering the US empire's offensive reach into Russia was not the only reason why Russia began its Special Military Operation in Ukraine.

Second, the US empire is no position to question Russian actions to defend its national security especially in the face of its recent takeover of the ports of Panama due to unfounded anti-Chinese threats to its own national security.   

That's the stupidest thing I've seen from you.  The US didn't do anything in Panama except negotiate.  how does that justify Special Military Operation in Ukraine when Panama doesn't have anything to do with Russia?



There is no reason to believe such weaponry you mentioned above would not have been given to Ukraine at a later date if Russia did not begin its Special Military Operation. 

I live in reality.  There is no reason to believe that weaponry would have been given to Ukraine at a later date if Russian had not INVADED Ukraine.  The Russians invaded in 2014.  The missiles were delivered last year.  That's reality.  predicting anything else is just playing mind games and demonizing the US for something they MIGHT have done but DID NOT DO.


In addition, the fact you even confirmed the missiles that were fired to support the now failed invasion of Kursk was from Biden just further proves the notion that it has always been the US empire dictating the Ukrainian actions of its proxy war against Russia.   

That's the definition of spinning things I said into something i never said.  I acknowledge defensive weapons were sent AFTER Russia invaded Ukraine.  If Ukraine had invaded Russia, maybe you'd be able to claim it's a proxy war, but that's just more anti-American BS.  What you call a proxy war I call sending assistance to the victim of a violent armed aggression against their nation.  I'm not a fan of the amount of assistance the US has provided considering how nuetral Biden tried to appear in the aid provided to both Isreal and Palestine.  But, since Russia is still one of our top adversaries, sitting around while they attack neighboring countries we have an interest in would be irresponsible, too.

The US didn't do anything in Panama except negotiate.

If Ukraine had invaded Russia, maybe you'd be able to claim it's a proxy war, but that's just more anti-American BS.

What you call a proxy war I call sending assistance to the victim of a violent armed aggression against their nation.  But, since Russia is still one of our top adversaries, sitting around while they attack neighboring countries we have an interest in would be irresponsible, too.

Once again, your response is exactly what a neocon and imperialist would say.

The Panamanians did not want Blackrock or any other company from the US empire to manage its ports.  It is amazing how difficult it is for you to understand this.


Anti-US imperial BS?

Even the neocon Mark Rubio refers to the Ukrainian war as a proxy war between the US empire and Russia via Ukraine.


Where did you get the idea that Russia is top adversary of the people of America?

So according to you, if any nation is not one of the US empire's vassal states, that nation must be an enemy and subject to color revolutions, economic sanctions, proxy war, etc., right?

You ignored my question:  how does anyhing in Panama relate to any justifications for Russia's actions.  Look at the timeline.  Russia invaded in 2014.  They ramped up the invasion in 2018.  Trump was relected in 2024 which is when the Panama situation became an issue.

In the 2012 debate between Obama and Romney, the question posed was "Who is the US's biggest adversary."  Romney stated "Russia is without question, our No. 1 geopolitical foe", and Obama quipped back "The 80s called,  They want their foreign policy back."  Romney was right.

The US empire decided that the Chinese companies that were legally contracted to manage the ports of Panama a threat to its national security.  Hence, the US empire used its political and military power behind the scenes as well as veiled threats to compel Panama to give control of its ports to Blackrock of all companies.

Russia deemed the prepping of Ukraine's armed forces to NATO standards as a prelude to absorption into NATO a national security threat, which served as one of the main reasons that led to Russia's Special Military Operation against Ukraine.


The fact that you had to dig up something that presidential loser Romney said as proof that Russia is a national security threat to the US empire is laughable.

Russia and China for that matter are major leaders in the multipolar World today.  You need to get past the specter of the Cold War and begin to accept the fact that the unipolar domination of the US empire is no more.

Second Cold War or New Cold War -- it's a real thing.  Pick the label of your preference.