Comments posted organically
SelectSmart.com Homepage
Display Order:

Harvard Prez Claudine Gay ain't a lesbo
Education by HatetheSwamp     December 10, 2023 6:02 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (4 comments) [50 views]


Honor their sacrifice for democracy by supporting Democrats.
Government by Curt_Anderson     December 11, 2023 11:53 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Curt_Anderson (5 comments) [44 views]


How The South Won The Civil War
History by islander     December 10, 2023 1:02 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (18 comments) [206 views]


My earliest SS memory
Media by HatetheSwamp     December 11, 2023 6:17 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: (0 comments) [8 views]


The problem with Elise Stefanik's question and the university presidents' overly nuanced answers.
Government by Curt_Anderson     December 10, 2023 10:22 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (11 comments) [134 views]


Why I hope Hunter gets prison time if he's found guilty
Crime by Ponderer     December 9, 2023 7:22 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (21 comments) [181 views]


U Penn President, Woke Neo Neo-Nazi Liz Magill bites the dust
Education by HatetheSwamp     December 9, 2023 2:33 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (12 comments) [137 views]


Long read of the moment
Mythology by Indy!     December 10, 2023 8:03 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (2 comments) [110 views]


Just a quick guide to sheeple Myths of Guns
Weaponry by oldedude     December 7, 2023 10:54 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (24 comments) [242 views]


Indy loses. Supporting Genocide and Threatening a Group of People With Genocide is Wrong.
Arts & Artists by oldedude     December 9, 2023 2:58 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (9 comments) [76 views]


Military selectors, pages, etc.
How does the Doddering Old Fool define victory in Ukraine?
By HatetheSwamp
September 20, 2023 10:48 am
Category: Military

(0.0 from 0 votes)
Rules of the Post

SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com


Rate this article
5 Stars
4 Stars
3 Stars
2 Stars
1 Star
0 Stars
(5=best, 0=poor)

Watch the video.

Rand Paul pledges not to fund the war in Ukraine for many reasons. His argument is powerful.

pb's been at least as hawkish on Ukraine as anyone here but, gang, even to pb, it's beginning to seem that the Former Truck Driver is doing nuthin but arrange to send money to America's war industry.

If you can, please splain how reasonable people can support Joe Biden's handling of this war. It's becoming impossible for ol pb to support Ukraine with "that feckless dementia-ridden piece of crap" in the White House.



Comments Start Below


The views and claims expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views and beliefs of SelectSmart.com. Not every statement made here can be assumed to be a fact.
Comments on "How does the Doddering Old Fool define victory in Ukraine?":

  1. by oldedude on September 20, 2023 11:13 am
    I honestly don't think there's a win here. The more we put in, the more China puts in. And Iran. They get to test their weapons for a war with us for free. There isn't a downside for them. Russia. A bit of a different story, they get the pushback from the families of the dead. That's a pretty strong movement for them. Putin is in a lose/lose now. If he pulls back, he's weak. If he wins, he has the west to contend with. If he protracts the war with the help of China and Iran, he could sue for peace. And win(ish). One way China could help is with biological weapons. Spread a new "COVID" inside of Ukraine. We know China has the means and technology to do that. It's not a stretch to do that to the food sources, all is well. And since COVID started in the "wet markets" and not in a lab, they's be off scot free.


  2. by HatetheSwamp on September 20, 2023 11:18 am

    Putin appears to be the only person alive to have over-estimated the weakness and ineptitude of the Doddering Old Fool. He just didn't get how far Joe'd go to feed our war industry.


  3. by Ponderer on September 21, 2023 7:41 am

    "Rand Paul pledges not to fund the war in Ukraine for many reasons. His argument is powerful." -Hate

    To you perhaps. But then, you thought the argument that Biden stole the election from Trump was powerful. What you think is a "powerful argument" is which ever one that most closely agrees with whatever ludicrous buffoonery you already want to believe.


  4. by HatetheSwamp on September 21, 2023 7:44 am

    But then, you thought the argument that Biden stole the election from Trump was powerful.

    Nuh uh.


  5. by oldedude on September 21, 2023 8:30 am
    "Rand Paul pledges not to fund the war in Ukraine for many reasons. His argument is powerful." -Lead

    I agree. AND* I look at it in a different spectrum. His argument is logical and well thought out. I believe there are other factors in the equation that come to bear. I think for us, disagreement isn't a name calling battle, it's worth listening to and making a choice on your own with your own thoughts. That is impossible on this looney left. No one there has a thought of their own.

    *Because we lose 65% of the capability to communicate when we just write, especially without the aid of knowing people, I emphasize words by using caps. Honestly, if you don't like it, shagoff.


  6. by Indy! on September 21, 2023 8:39 am

    What's that old saying?

    “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”

    I would add one more to that..

    "...then Indy laughs when everyone eventually comes around to what he's been saying since day 1."

    God, I love being right. It is so refreshing to be the FIRST one to understand what a total, unnecessary clusterf*ck this entire Ukraine thing has been. The only drawback is Biden and his followers don't care. They'll buy into the next stupid unnecessary war for nothing that pops up on the radar within 12 months of Ukraine falling to Russia (and nobody really caring when it does... including Curt and Pondy). And I'll go out on a limb right now (sarcasm) and say the next one will be just another money grab too. Because that's all war is - a business.


  7. by Curt_Anderson on September 21, 2023 8:41 am
    “ His argument is logical and well thought out”. —OD

    Being logical and doing the right thing are not the same thing. If you see a woman being attacked it may be logical not to get involved, but it is not the right thing to do.


  8. by oldedude on September 21, 2023 9:00 am
    curt. I agree and never said it was the "right" thing to do. He has logical and well thought out reasons for choosing something different. I respect that. Yet again. I have the brains to disagree without calling him names or anything like that. The difference between being five years old and an adult.

    FYSA- If I am in a dim city. Like I've said many times before, 1. I don't carry. 2. If there is a woman being raped I CHOOSE not to be involved because if anything happens to the perp, I(maaning me, myself, and I) are now liable for some POS being hurt. Oh. AFTER being arrested for assault and battery. Welcome to the laws of the looney left.

    Whereas, in a jurisdiction that has laws that I am legally able to protect her (FL for example), I will (with intent and forethought) absolutely protect her life and the lives of others with reasonable force up to and including deadly force. If I have a clear shot, and he has a knife at her throat. I'd put two through the chest of that POS. More if he's still moving. And yes, I have thought about it. Ad nauseum. I can articulate that to a court if necessary.


  9. by Indy! on September 21, 2023 9:15 am

    Let's get back to this part, because this (minus the "doddering old fool part) was the same problem we had in Afghanistan...

    "How does the Doddering Old Fool define victory in Ukraine?"

    Let's put that to the Ukraine war supporters... Curt, Pondy, Islander... whoever else supports this disaster. What do you guys think is the end game?

    =============================================================

    If you feel like you need a little help - this might come in handy...

    The Powell Doctrine states that a list of questions all have to be answered affirmatively before military action is taken by the United States:

    1. Is a vital national security interest threatened?
    2. Do we have a clear attainable objective?
    3. Have the risks and costs been fully and frankly analyzed?
    4. Have all other non-violent policy means been fully exhausted?
    5. Is there a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement?

    6. Have the consequences of our action been fully considered?
    7. Is the action supported by the American people?
    8. Do we have genuine broad international support?[2]



  10. by Indy! on September 21, 2023 9:16 am

    Actually #1 should have been bold, italicized and ALL CAPS as well. Sorry - my bad.


  11. by Curt_Anderson on September 21, 2023 9:23 am
    Indy,
    Colin Powell was talking about military action is taken by the United States. It's the Ukrainians themselves that doing all the fighting. We are not taking military action there.


  12. by oldedude on September 21, 2023 10:28 am
    You skirted the question.


  13. by Curt_Anderson on September 21, 2023 10:49 am
    OD,
    Which question are you saying that I skirted? I previously answered the question about the end game in the Ukraine at comment #47 at the link below.

    Or are you referring the Indy's posting of the Powell Doctrine? I addressed that too, immediately below his comment.


    selectsmart.com


  14. by oldedude on September 21, 2023 11:51 am
    I'll re-emphasize. This is still a skirt.

    I don’t know if anybody knows what the endgame will look like in Ukraine. But that does not make it not worth fighting. When FDR and Congress declared war on Japan the day after Pearl Harbor, who envisioned that we would end the war by dropping to A-bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima?

    I don't think anyone's asking for particulars. The endgame in WWII was simple. Beat the Axis Powers into submission so bad we either take their land and industry, and kill every NAZI and Tojo, or they give up.

    Again, Rand and I disagree in this. I am worried about a protracted war, akin to VietNam. That's why I gave those other examples. Given there aren't "boots on the ground" (well, maybe a few, but no one is admitting to it). My guess is that CIA operatives (and USAID, which is an auspice of the CIA) are active and in country. Honestly, they've never counted so it's unfair to count them now.

    Unlikely for me, I haven't seen a huge issue with what pedojoe has done with this so far.

    The Poles gave them some F16s, which is a pretty good air to air, and air to ground aircraft, so maybe we can sell those over to Ukraine as we transition to the F35+.

    We also need a replacement for the A10 pig. That's a good testing ground using real targets that we'll fight against.

    Munitions are an issue. We need to make our own munitions in the US. Joe could do that and have real jobs in the job numbers. Put them in the Dakotas' or West Virginia where he ruined the economies. That would be worth running on. Small arms ammo (minus the worthless 9mm POS) is mostly made in Missouri, and they just got the contract for the new 6.8mm (we're finally getting rid of the 5.56x45mm)!

    Larger munitions (20mm through tank and howitzer ammo) is the bigger problem.

    So all in all, so far pedojoe hasn't disappointed me. It wouldn't hurt though, to have a "Foreign Legion" for volunteers. They could get paid and have bennies.

    End game. Secure the border between Ukraine & Russia. The issue with that is the more Russia loses, the more China will help, which I guess is fair. Things we MUST think about. Chemical and biological weapon use. We must have a pre-planned response to that and no chickens******g around. If they use CBNR weapons, just pull the trigger. No warning. No BS.


  15. by Indy! on September 21, 2023 6:28 pm

    Good lord, Curt - you don't know who Colin Powell is, you missed the Vietnam war and have never heard of the Powell Dontrine? 😳

    And contrary to your obviously extremely limited knowledge of military action, supplying weapons for war is considered a military action by most people. There are also US troops in Ukraine. Sorry, not sorry to ruin your argument (again). But let's say you're correct - even though you're not - you still have not answered the question...

    What is the end game in Ukraine? Your non-answer about a war that happened long before the Powell Doctrine existed is not an answer. You - like Biden, Zelensky, Powell and everybody else - have no idea what constitutes an endgame. Ergo, as every war since WWII - it's not actually a war, it's a business. A way to sell weapons at the expense of the US taxpayers who don't even want to be involved in this action defending Nazis against Russia and Putin.


  16. by Indy! on September 21, 2023 7:30 pm

    Nice vid by Rand Paul. Even if common sense sounds like "fringe left ideas" to Curt.


  17. by Curt_Anderson on September 21, 2023 8:01 pm
    Indy,
    I know what the Powell Doctrine is but you don't know what "military action" is. Show me any dictionary entry that agrees with you and says it can mean "supplying weapons of war".

    The endgame in Ukraine is a lot like the allies' endgame during WWII regarding Germany: push Russia back and out of the territory they invaded. I doubt we will bombing Russia like we did Germany. I suspect the goal is not to humiliate Russia but to humiliate Putin.

    We should all understand that other than not rewarding Putin with Ukrainian land that he invaded, Biden and western nations will not and should not make public the particulars. The Ukrainian people are ready to die before they submit to Russia.






  18. by islander on September 22, 2023 5:19 am

    ” The endgame in Ukraine is a lot like the allies' endgame during WWII regarding Germany: push Russia back and out of the territory they invaded. I doubt we will bombing Russia like we did Germany. I suspect the goal is not to humiliate Russia but to humiliate Putin.’

    Exactly !! The goal is a complete Ukrainian victory which would involve a full restoration of Ukraine’s borders and territorial integrity, not just with respect to the lines held in mid-February 2022, but also with respect to its internationally recognized borders as they held in mid-February 2014. A complete Ukrainian victory would also mean Ukraine gaining membership in both the European Union and NATO.

    Undoubtedly, compromises will probably have to be made as Republicans are already balking and threatening to cut off our aid to Ukraine, but these are the goals.


  19. by HatetheSwamp on September 22, 2023 5:34 am

    ” The endgame in Ukraine is a lot like the allies' endgame during WWII regarding Germany: push Russia back and out of the territory they invaded. I doubt we will bombing Russia like we did Germany. I suspect the goal is not to humiliate Russia but to humiliate Putin.’

    Exactly !! The goal is a complete Ukrainian victory which would involve a full restoration of Ukraine’s borders and territorial integrity, not just with respect to the lines held in mid-February 2022, but also with respect to its internationally recognized borders as they held in mid-February 2014. A complete Ukrainian victory would also mean Ukraine gaining membership in both the European Union and NATO.
    Curt & isle

    Okay, buds. Show us the Doddering Old Fool saying that himself.

    I get it. You two have just defined Ukraine victory for yourselves. But, Joe? He seems to be working toward Ukraine's slow destruction by Russia...

    ...and moving $bbbbbbbbillions into the US war industry.


  20. by oldedude on September 22, 2023 7:09 am
    I'm going to sound a tad like a broken record here. Isle. As I said before, I'm "kinda" on the same sheet of music.

    Exactly !! The goal is a complete Ukrainian victory which would involve a full restoration of Ukraine’s borders and territorial integrity, not just with respect to the lines held in mid-February 2022, but also with respect to its internationally recognized borders as they held in mid-February 2014. A complete Ukrainian victory would also mean Ukraine gaining membership in both the European Union and NATO.

    First, why did Russia invade Ukraine in the first place? Russia feels the Crimea is Russia. They propagated the area with Russians. And (most importantly) it's their ONLY warm water port. The Black Sea Fleet was one of the strongest Navy's on the globe for a long time. They also rely on the Black Sea for trade. During the winter, Russia must send all goods over land. This slows Russian international trade to a trickle. Most Americans gloss this over and don't even consider the ONE factor that made Putin do this.

    Historically, Russia has always used chemical weapons in its counter insurgency doctrine. They are saying they're not using "chemical agents" by shifting from Sarin (in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc) to Chlorine. Chlorine isn't as "dangerous" but it gets in the eyes and will blind or destroy your lungs. This process can take 10 years to almost immediately depending on dose and exposure.

    I don't think the negotiations will be within US border politics. It will be with China. In the past six months or so China has forced Russia to treat China as a liege state. Both China and Iran have "given" Russia weapons (hypersonic missiles and other A2A and A2G munitions).

    They've also given a workaround for the Russian oligarchs to funnel money for Putin without using the US financial system since pedojr left.

    China has also boasted it can raise a 200 million-man army at any time. If they can or not is immaterial. They're using their propaganda to raise nationalism against the US.


  21. by Indy! on September 22, 2023 9:01 am

    Sounds like OD is trying to say the US purposely put the squeeze on Russia in order to force Putin's hand in Ukraine. Personally, Indy doesn't care because Ukraine is...

    A. None of our business and...
    B. As corrupt as (or more so than) Russia and...
    C. Nazi

    ...but that is the reality. The U.S. has wanted war with Russia forever because... why? That's the big pay day. Perpetual war for perpetual "peace". "Eurasia has always been at war with Oceania" (or whatever the line was from Orwell's 1984). So we put the squeeze on them (using Ukraine as our puppet) until Putin had to make a move.

    The war(s) Putin is trying to start are Russia and/or China. Either one works well for the MIC.

    Call me crazy, ignore my post, make some mocking joke - whatever. A couple years from now - as always - Indy will be proven correct and y'all will still be pretending like China or Russia attacked a "sovereign country" or some such other tired U.S. fairy tale as the world burns for no reason other than the almighty dollar.


  22. by Indy! on September 22, 2023 9:02 am

    Correction:

    "The war(s) Putin is trying to start are Russia and/or China."

    should say...

    The war(s) BIDEN is trying to start are Russia and/or China.



    You really need an edit function on this board, Curt.


  23. by oldedude on September 22, 2023 9:16 am
    Sounds like OD is trying to say the US purposely put the squeeze on Russia in order to force Putin's hand in Ukraine.

    No, I responded to Isle. What we have done so far, I can live with. We have to watch though, because the harder you press Russia, the more involved China and Iran get, AND the closer Russia gets to chemical warfare.*

    *In Russian Order of Battle, chemical agents fall under the authority of the Battalion (600-800 officers and enlisted) Commander. IF that commander feels it necessary, they can pull the trigger on nerve, choking, and/or blood agents.

    I'm sure now, they have some pretty strict orders. If Putin feels like he wants to risk it, we're back to WWI and massive casualties. They can disperse the agents in tracks (mechanized artillery and tanks), artillery, air, missiles). The Russian troops have all been through the chemical warfare training, which includes a 3% mix of Sarin gas. They routinely lose people that are a tad slow to get their gear on. I'm unsure if the Ukrainians have any defense or counter to that attack. Especially in civilian areas.

    Like I said before. They've already used chlorine gas in Syria, Libya, Iraq, etc. They used Sarin in Afghanistan, and Mycotoxins in Cambodia. We know they can and will use it. That is just something to think about.


  24. by Indy! on September 22, 2023 10:26 am

    You see every conflict from the soldier's point of view, OD - "what weapons will be used". I couldn't care less how combatants kill each other - war is war and when you're dead you don't care how it happened. The point is we could have easily have made nice with Russia in the Gorbachev/Yeltsin era and we chose not to. Not because Russia is some sort of evil empire (they are a shell of their post-WWII superpower era) - no, we did it because we needed them on the "enemy board" - as a reason to continue wasting taxpayer dollars on all those weapons you are so enamored with. You see the small picture - I see the big one. But we are on the same page with Ukraine whether you realize it or not. We are there to continue the lie that we need to be at war forever.


  25. by oldedude on September 22, 2023 11:20 am
    Actually, that's extremely important in the international stage. It declares what responses will happen next. Including nuclear war (MAD). So it's something that needs to be said. Like I stated, in the Russian Military, it takes a Colonel. In the US, it takes Presidental approval. Our issue is that we don't have workable chemical threats. So how does that retaliation happen? A nuke? A tactical nuke? Fry Moscow? Bring about MAD? What's your pleasure?

    So "how soldiers kill each other" is not up to the "soldiers." It's up to the politicians as usual. The issue with chemical warfare (as I've said several times), is that it's not the soldiers, it's the millions of civilians that will die a horrible death. The city will be left standing and unless you have a CBRNE suit, you're dead. Depending on what they use, maybe like sarin a few minutes writhing in pain as every muscle in your body contracts (literally), to hours (like trichothecenes) you're actually alive as the soft tissue dissolves in your body.

    So if that doesn't matter to you, so be it. You see the small picture - I see the big one.


  26. by Indy! on September 22, 2023 2:04 pm

    I never said it was up to the soldiers to decide on war - I said you see everything from the soldier's view.

    And my pleasure would be to only go to war (or provide weapons for war) when it is absolutely necessary. It is not absolutely necessary for the US to be involved in the Ukraine conflict. We're only there to sell weapons.


  27. by Indy! on September 22, 2023 2:04 pm

    Oh, and no - you do not even know where the big picture begins.


Go To Top

Comment on: "How does the Doddering Old Fool define victory in Ukraine?"

* Anonymous comments are subject to approval before they appear. Cookies Consent Policy & Privacy Statement. All Rights Reserved. SelectSmart® is a registered trademark. | Contact SelectSmart.com | Advertise on SelectSmart.com | This site is for sale!

Find old posts & articles

Articles by category:

SelectSmart.com
Report spam & abuse
SelectSmart.com home page