P01135809 says he'd allow and "encourage" Russia to do whatever they want

[Arturo Bandini]

Fun fact : There is only one country who called for article 5 of NATO and all the countries called back.

Article 5 has been invoked only once in NATO history, after the September 11 attacks on the United States in 2001. The invocation was confirmed on 4 October 2001, when NATO determined that the attacks were indeed eligible under the terms of the North Atlantic Treaty.

[BigPapaKain]

(02-13-2024, 02:12 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: No, I do not think that the GOP should be classified as Russian assets.  It's hyperbolic and inane to suggest it.  You do.  So, using your own logic, are the Dems calling for restrictions on aid to Israel, Hamas assets?

No, I do not think that the Democrats should be classified as Hamas assets.  It's hyperbolic and inane to suggest it.  You do.

See also: Ron Johnson's latest quote. But you're right - hyperbole.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(02-13-2024, 10:15 PM)BigPapaKain Wrote: No, I do not think that the Democrats should be classified as Hamas assets.  It's hyperbolic and inane to suggest it.  You do.

I think one does, Tlaib.  I think a very few blindly support her, personally (Bush, Omar, AOC).  I don't think any of them represent Dems in general on this subject.  Has not the schism over the current conflict been a major issue with the Democratic party?

Quote:See also: Ron Johnson's latest quote. But you're right - hyperbole.

The part where he called Putin a war criminal and a liar?  Can you find a similar quote from Tlaib labeling Hamas a terrorist organization?  An interesting double standard you appear to have going on here.

[GMDino]

(02-13-2024, 10:15 PM)BigPapaKain Wrote: No, I do not think that the Democrats should be classified as Hamas assets.  It's hyperbolic and inane to suggest it.  You do.

See also: Ron Johnson's latest quote. But you're right - hyperbole.

They don't have to hide their allegiance...none of their voters are smart enough anyway.

https://www.newsweek.com/ron-johnson-ukraine-aid-putin-not-lose-war-1869386

Quote:Wisconsin Senator Ron Johnson has elaborated on his decision to go against a measure to allow the House of Representatives to vote for further aid to Ukraine, saying that Russia's leader Vladimir Putin "will not lose the war."


On Monday night, a bipartisan coalition of senators approved motions to push forward a package of further aid to countries including Ukraine and Israel. Senators voted in a majority to end dilatory debate on the $95 billion package, setting up a final vote for early Tuesday morning to send it to the House. Johnson, a Republican, was among a large group of GOP senators who voted against it.

Speaking on conservative news network Real America's Voice, Johnson said that, while Putin was "a war criminal", some of the things the Russian president said in his interview with former Fox News host Tucker Carlson, that aired last week, were right.


"Our policy should be focused on how do we bring Vladimir Putin to the table," Johnson said.

Ron Johnson during a Senate Committee On Homeland Security And Governmental Affairs hearing at the US Capitol on December 18, 2019 in Washington, DC. Johnson discussed his views on Ukraine and Russia on Real America's... MorePHOTO BY SAMUEL CORUM/GETTY IMAGES


"We're cutting off our nose to spite our face with some of these sanctions," he added, saying that it was making American dollars less important as Russia starts to trade in other currencies.

Johnson said: "A lot of the points that Vladimir Putin made are accurate. They're obvious, and so many of our people here in Washington D.C. are just ignoring that, making people believe like Ukraine can win. Putin won't lose. Putin will not lose. He's not going to lose."


Johnson added that people needed to accept this reality to deal with the war and bring it to a close.

Chamberlin at least knew England needed time to prepare for war.  Johnson says lets just negotiate with the "war criminal" cause he's so awesome he just can't lose.  LOL!

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(02-13-2024, 11:18 PM)GMDino Wrote: They don't have to hide their allegiance...none of their voters are smart enough anyway.

https://www.newsweek.com/ron-johnson-ukraine-aid-putin-not-lose-war-1869386



Chamberlin at least knew England needed time to prepare for war.  Johnson says lets just negotiate with the "war criminal" cause he's so awesome he just can't lose.  LOL!

His allegiance?  I agree with funding Ukraine, but you leftist propagandists don't even attempt to be fair.  He stated the following.

“The only way this war ends is in a negotiated settlement. Every day that goes by while this war continues, more Ukrainians die, citizens and soldiers, more Russian conscripts die. I take no joy in that. More of Ukraine gets destroyed,” Johnson said. “So, the sooner that they reach a negotiated settlement, the better from my standpoint.”


Even if you disagree that is a fair statement to make.

Johnson said he thinks Russia will not lose the war against its neighbor to the southeast. The Wisconsin senator said he doesn’t “like that reality, but it’s true.”



Johnson, who previously served on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and as chairman of the Subcommittee on Europe and Regional Security Cooperation, said he has visited Ukraine a lot.



He said he has nothing but sympathy for the people of Ukraine and “nothing but contempt” for Russian President Vladimir Putin, but he said he thinks “Putin is not going to lose this war.”



“This war has to end,” Johnson said in the interview. “We’re not gonna like the result, but every day that goes by, we’re gonna like the result less.”


The "nothing but contempt for Putin" part really cements his allegiance to Russia.  He has also since clarified his position on Twitter/X

https://x.com/SenRonJohnson/status/1738607184026423546?s=20
https://x.com/SenRonJohnson/status/1738607184026423546?s=20


Putin has nukes — he will not lose this war. He also knows much of his military has been destroyed, and a protracted guerrilla-type war is what he will face if it continues.



Time to seize the opportunity and end this deadly and destructive war.


So it would appear his concern is that Putin would rather use nukes than risk a losing scenario in Ukraine.  Definitely the view of a monster, and one not coincidentally shared by many during this conflict.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenthompson/2023/11/21/why-using-nuclear-weapons-in-ukraine-is-a-real-option-for-putin/?sh=2650ba357948

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/putin-nuclear-weapons-threat-real-biden-warns-rcna90114

“They looked at me like when I said I worry about Putin using tactical nuclear weapons. It’s real,” Biden said, according to the news agency. 



Joe Biden is a known Putin sycophant/sympathizer after all.

[jmccracky]

"This would have never happened under Trump! He had Putin shaking!!! He tough n mean!!!"

Trump- "I'd let them do whatever the hell they want! Gotta pay them bills!!!

Um. Yeah??? Okey dokey.

[Arturo Bandini]

(02-14-2024, 08:48 AM)jmccracky Wrote: "This would have never happened under Trump! He had Putin shaking!!! He tough n mean!!!"

Trump- "I'd let them do whatever the hell they want! Gotta pay them bills!!!

Um. Yeah??? Okey dokey.

2nd time he impressed me. Dude was already tough on China by taking them money and calling their president a brilliant man ! 

I think US enemies are definitely terrified.

Kim, Xi and Putin were so much terrified by this dude that they called for his reelection in 2020. 

Russia is so threatened by Trump that they praise him in every late show laughing about how easy they can make him do anything just by flattering his ego. 

[GMDino]

(02-14-2024, 08:48 AM)jmccracky Wrote: "This would have never happened under Trump! He had Putin shaking!!! He tough n mean!!!"

Trump- "I'd let them do whatever the hell they want! Gotta pay them bills!!!

Um. Yeah??? Okey dokey.

(02-14-2024, 09:21 AM)Arturo Bandini Wrote: 2nd time he impressed me. Dude was already tough on China by taking them money and calling their president a brilliant man ! 

I think US enemies are definitely terrified.

Kim, Xi and Putin were so much terrified by this dude that they called for his reelection in 2020. 

Russia is so threatened by Trump that they praise him in every late show laughing about how easy they can make him do anything just by flattering his ego. 

The issue being that what P01135809 says is more important to his cult members than what he does.  

He can lie and then lie about the lie and they only believe that he is the best...because he told them he was.

I'd compare to those who say the bible is the word of god because the bible says it is the word of god.

[Luvnit2]

(02-14-2024, 08:48 AM)jmccracky Wrote: "This would have never happened under Trump! He had Putin shaking!!! He tough n mean!!!"

Trump- "I'd let them do whatever the hell they want! Gotta pay them bills!!!

Um. Yeah??? Okey dokey.

You deal in emotions void of facts.

Under Obama, Russia invaded Ukraine. Under Biden, Russia invaded Ukraine. Under Trump, no war and Putin did not invade Ukraine.

Those are the facts, under Obama wars, under Biden wars and under Trump no wars.

[jmccracky]

(02-14-2024, 01:33 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: You deal in emotions void of facts.

Under Obama, Russia invaded Ukraine. Under Biden, Russia invaded Ukraine. Under Trump, no war and Putin did not invade Ukraine.

Those are the facts, under Obama wars, under Biden wars and under Trump no wars.

Or maybe I am basing what he said from his last statement? He literally just gave the go ahead to Russia. So....if Trump wins, he's not gonna let them anymore.....AFTER HE JUST SAID HE WOULDNT DO SHIT AND LET THEM? Cmon man. I'm no Biden fan either. But Biden has nothing to do with my statement about Trump. He said what he said. Not you. Not me. What HE said. For the love of God. Lol 

[*Nately120*]

(02-14-2024, 01:33 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: You deal in emotions void of facts.

Under Obama, Russia invaded Ukraine. Under Biden, Russia invaded Ukraine. Under Trump, no war and Putin did not invade Ukraine.

Those are the facts, under Obama wars, under Biden wars and under Trump no wars.

If 9/11 taught me anything it is that people view republicans like they view guns.  If you are safe?  That's because of republicans and guns, keep voting republican and buying guns.  If you are under attack?  You need guns and republicans more than ever now, keep voting republican and buying guns.  Actually, it reminds me of people who do crazy weird "home remedies" like use their own piss as eye wash.  Do your eyes feel better?  See, that piss is working.  Are your eyes burning and discharging pusss?  See, that piss is working because your body is purging all those toxins!

To me it seems like Trump is going to avoid "war" with Putin by just saying that he's doing the right thing and letting him do it.  It's fair to say that Putin had his invasion of Ukraine in pocket while Trump was in office and assumed that Trump was going to say in office after 2020 (as in win outright, or have enough planned to otherwise stay in power).  Putin's rather unsuccessful 3-day overtaking of Ukraine still went into effect, because he's not one to let anyone talk him out of a plan, regardless of how the winds of fate change.

So in a way, if Trump had told people to vote by mail and that it was their patriotic duty to take the China Virus™ seriously, Putin would have invaded Ukraine, we just wouldn't be at war because we wouldn't have opposed it.  Methinks Putin overestimated Trump's ability to stay in power by any means necessary after being legitimately let in in the first place.


HOT TAKE - If Trump can't dodge these legal issues and/or win in 2024 he will try to claim TRUMP 2028 will spare him for another 4+ years, or move to Russia himself and maybe a significant number of conservatives head there with him.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(02-14-2024, 01:52 PM)Nately120 Wrote: If 9/11 taught me anything it is that people view republicans like they view guns.  If you are safe?  That's because of republicans and guns, keep voting republican and buying guns.  If you are under attack?  You need guns and republicans more than ever now, keep voting republican and buying guns.  Actually, it reminds me of people who do crazy weird "home remedies" like use their own piss as eye wash.  Do your eyes feel better?  See, that piss is working.  Are your eyes burning and discharging pusss?  See, that piss is working because your body is purging all those toxins!

To me it seems like Trump is going to avoid "war" with Putin by just saying that he's doing the right thing and letting him do it.  It's fair to say that Putin had his invasion of Ukraine in pocket while Trump was in office and assumed that Trump was going to say in office after 2020 (as in win outright, or have enough planned to otherwise stay in power).  Putin's rather unsuccessful 3-day overtaking of Ukraine still went into effect, because he's not one to let anyone talk him out of a plan, regardless of how the winds of fate change.

So in a way, if Trump had told people to vote by mail and that it was their patriotic duty to take the China Virus™ seriously, Putin would have invaded Ukraine, we just wouldn't be at war because we wouldn't have opposed it.  Methinks Putin overestimated Trump's ability to stay in power by any means necessary after being legitimately let in in the first place.


HOT TAKE - If Trump can't dodge these legal issues and/or win in 2024 he will try to claim TRUMP 2028 will spare him for another 4+ years, or move to Russia himself and maybe a significant number of conservatives head there with him.

It's an interestingly contradictory position for the left.  On one hand Trump supposedly coddles and enables dictators.  Yet during his presidency there was zero aggressive action on their part.  We obviously cannot say the same about Biden.  Additionally, Trump was lambasted by the left leaning posters here for taking out Iran's uber-POS, Soleimani, a move that severely handicapped Iran's state backed terror operations.  Again, an odd contradiction.

As I've said repeatedly, there's a lot of low hanging fruit in regard to attacking Trump and his actions.  Why they go after subjects that aren't exactly weaknesses of his is beyond me.

[*Nately120*]

(02-14-2024, 02:02 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: It's an interestingly contradictory position for the left.  On one hand Trump supposedly coddles and enables dictators.  Yet during his presidency there was zero aggressive action on their part.  We obviously cannot say the same about Biden.  Additionally, Trump was lambasted by the left leaning posters here for taking out Iran's uber-POS, Soleimani, a move that severely handicapped Iran's state backed terror operations.  Again, an odd contradiction.

As I've said repeatedly, there's a lot of low hanging fruit in regard to attacking Trump and his actions.  Why they go after subjects that aren't exactly weaknesses of his is beyond me.

Trump's foreign policy plans are inconsistent, yet always have this underlying "trusssttttt meeeeeee" aspect to them.  I've heard that Trump in office will keep Putin in check because Trump would stand up to him, meanwhile Trump is saying that he'd let or encourage Putin attack countries that fit his ill-defined view of "deserving it" in a sense.

If Trump were in office I think Putin would have still invaded Ukraine and we'd just declare it "not our problem" and therefore it wouldn't be an attack or a war on Trump's watch.  Trump has his best success by reshaping people's realities, not actually doing or preventing stuff.  If Trump wants to be able to use "No wars or attacks when I was president" as a talking point, he's going to do so by telling people that what they are seeing aren't attacks and aren't wars and aren't a repudiation of his status as a badass who terrifies bad countries into being peaceful.

Hell, Russia could bomb us and Trump could blame it on ANTIFA or NATO and we'd fall in line.  Not his fault...NATO Joe and Namarita Pelosi set it up to make Trump look bad.  Doesn't count.  


tl;dr - I don't trust Trump to prevent war/attacks/anything bad outside of declaring that anything that happens on his watch isn't really happening or doesn't count...or in all fairness, that's at least his main strategy.  I can't rule out him ever doing anything, but what he does will never be as effective as what he tells people and what people are willing to believe. 

[GMDino]

(02-14-2024, 02:38 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Trump's foreign policy plans are inconsistent, yet always have this underlying "trusssttttt meeeeeee" aspect to them.  I've heard that Trump in office will keep Putin in check because Trump would stand up to him, meanwhile Trump is saying that he'd let or encourage Putin attack countries that fit his ill-defined view of "deserving it" in a sense.

If Trump were in office I think Putin would have still invaded Ukraine and we'd just declare it "not our problem" and therefore it wouldn't be an attack or a war on Trump's watch.  Trump has his best success by reshaping people's realities, not actually doing or preventing stuff.  If Trump wants to be able to use "No wars or attacks when I was president" as a talking point, he's going to do so by telling people that what they are seeing aren't attacks and aren't wars and aren't a repudiation of his status as a badass who terrifies bad countries into being peaceful.

Hell, Russia could bomb us and Trump could blame it on ANTIFA or NATO and we'd fall in line.  Not his fault...NATO Joe and Namarita Pelosi set it up to make Trump look bad.  Doesn't count.  


tl;dr - I don't trust Trump to prevent war/attacks/anything bad outside of declaring that anything that happens on his watch isn't really happening or doesn't count...or in all fairness, that's at least his main strategy.  I can't rule out him ever doing anything, but what he does will never be as effective as what he tells people and what people are willing to believe. 

One thing we may never know is how much Putin was getting from P01135809 in intel.  He didn't need to invade anyone or do anything other than praise P01135809 and then have the egomaniac tell him everything.

Then Putin invades while P01135809 is out of office and he can run a campaign on how "safe" the world was.  He tries to make Biden look week and Putin gets the former guy back in office and keeps milking the old man for info.

Just a theory.

[*Nately120*]

(02-14-2024, 02:56 PM)GMDino Wrote: One thing we may never know is how much Putin was getting from P01135809 in intel.  He didn't need to invade anyone or do anything other than praise P01135809 and then have the egomaniac tell him everything.

Then Putin invades while P01135809 is out of office and he can run a campaign on how "safe" the world was.  He tries to make Biden look week and Putin gets the former guy back in office and keeps milking the old man for info.

Just a theory.

Trump is so good at convincing people that he's successful that he doesn't have to bother being successful.  That's me admitting that he's one hell of a salesman to the right audience.

[GMDino]

(02-14-2024, 03:23 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Trump is so good at convincing people that he's successful that he doesn't have to bother being successful.  That's me admitting that he's one hell of a salesman to the right audience.

[*Nately120*]

(02-14-2024, 03:26 PM)GMDino Wrote:

Well, no need to get into anything so antagonistic.  I'm just saying the whole "Trump would have prevented this" argument just smacks of the usual "If I woulda been there, I woulda stopped it" sort of ideation.  I've seen Trump convince people to accept his form of reality via his words, not his actions.  I don't see why keeping us "safe" or out of wars would be any different.

I haven't seen anything out of Trump to believe Putin invading Ukraine on his watch would have been met with anything other than "Good for him, he's very smart and powerful" or "I take no responsibility."  And that line of talk works so well on the people Trump wants to please that I almost can't blame him for going that route.  Republicans are all "America first...can't/shouldn't help" with Ukraine, so why should I believe the MAGA wing and Trump would have stopped this?  They don't want to stop it without Trump in office, why would they want to stop it with him in there?  The US government is more than 1 person, or at least it was supposed to be.

[GMDino]

(02-14-2024, 03:40 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Well, no need to get into anything so antagonistic.  I'm just saying the whole "Trump would have prevented this" argument just smacks of the usual "If I woulda been there, I woulda stopped it" sort of ideation.  I've seen Trump convince people to accept his form of reality via his words, not his actions.  I don't see why keeping us "safe" or out of wars would be any different.

I haven't seen anything out of Trump to believe Putin invading Ukraine on his watch would have been met with anything other than "Good for him, he's very smart and powerful" or "I take no responsibility."  And that line of talk works so well on the people Trump wants to please that I almost can't blame him for going that route.  Republicans are all "America first...can't/shouldn't help" with Ukraine, so why should I believe the MAGA wing and Trump would have stopped this?  They don't want to stop it without Trump in office, why would they want to stop it with him in there?  The US government is more than 1 person, or at least it was supposed to be.

Eh, the people we're talking about are buying tickets from the carnival barker.  "Come see the dumbest person in the world!" and the the room is full of mirrors....but they don't see it.  And they'll laugh and do it again the next day. So trust me, they won't think I'm talking about them.

Of course we have to have the caveat that not EVERY supporter is that mindless...but too many of them are, as you explained.  He says exactly what he is tough but would allow Putin to do whatever he wants.  And they cheer.

Clearly P01135808 will never admit to being wrong or weak or to having lost at anything ever.  If you buy that you deserve what you get.  Problem is they buy it and we have suffer because of it.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(02-14-2024, 02:38 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Trump's foreign policy plans are inconsistent, yet always have this underlying "trusssttttt meeeeeee" aspect to them.  I've heard that Trump in office will keep Putin in check because Trump would stand up to him, meanwhile Trump is saying that he'd let or encourage Putin attack countries that fit his ill-defined view of "deserving it" in a sense.

If Trump were in office I think Putin would have still invaded Ukraine and we'd just declare it "not our problem" and therefore it wouldn't be an attack or a war on Trump's watch.  Trump has his best success by reshaping people's realities, not actually doing or preventing stuff.  If Trump wants to be able to use "No wars or attacks when I was president" as a talking point, he's going to do so by telling people that what they are seeing aren't attacks and aren't wars and aren't a repudiation of his status as a badass who terrifies bad countries into being peaceful.

Hell, Russia could bomb us and Trump could blame it on ANTIFA or NATO and we'd fall in line.  Not his fault...NATO Joe and Namarita Pelosi set it up to make Trump look bad.  Doesn't count.  


tl;dr - I don't trust Trump to prevent war/attacks/anything bad outside of declaring that anything that happens on his watch isn't really happening or doesn't count...or in all fairness, that's at least his main strategy.  I can't rule out him ever doing anything, but what he does will never be as effective as what he tells people and what people are willing to believe. 

I've stated, and truly believe, that foreign policy, in regard to enemies, is Trump's strongest suit.  He's mercurial and easily offended.  he's also prone to over the top reactions.  He's not guaranteed to give a measured, well thought out response, therefore antagonizing him isn't a great idea.  Also, what can antagonize him isn't set in stone.  Now, with our allies he's awful.  The only good thing there is that where else are they going to turn, China or Russia?

(02-14-2024, 02:56 PM)GMDino Wrote: One thing we may never know is how much Putin was getting from P01135809 in intel.  He didn't need to invade anyone or do anything other than praise P01135809 and then have the egomaniac tell him everything.

Then Putin invades while P01135809 is out of office and he can run a campaign on how "safe" the world was.  He tries to make Biden look week and Putin gets the former guy back in office and keeps milking the old man for info.

Just a theory.

More accurately Biden is a lizard person who is helping George Soros destroy Western civilization through a combination of mass immigration, psy-ops designed to denigrate and vilify white people and western culture, putting weak prosecutors in place throughout the country to further destabilize our nation and promoting homosexuality and transgenderism while portraying traditional masculine behavior as toxic to make us weak.

Just a theory.

The difference being that I wrote the above as a joke and you actually believe what you wrote.

[*Nately120*]

(02-14-2024, 04:21 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I've stated, and truly believe, that foreign policy, in regard to enemies, is Trump's strongest suit.  He's mercurial and easily offended.  he's also prone to over the top reactions.  He's not guaranteed to give a measured, well thought out response, therefore antagonizing him isn't a great idea.  Also, what can antagonize him isn't set in stone.  Now, with our allies he's awful.  The only good thing there is that where else are they going to turn, China or Russia?

Maybe.  If that's Trump's actual foreign policy style then he reminds me of dudes I know who think they can beat someone who is trained in a martial art because they will "go crazy" on them.  Whether you are in a fight or a negotiation, if you are the party that has experience, calmness, and can play your cards close to the vest you welcome the chance to take on someone who is inexperienced, emotional, and thinks he can brute force his way through things.  Fights, or combat, or anything...I've come across folks who are sure they are mean and crazy and tough enough that they don't need training...they'll just instantly kick ass.  Everyone is a wimp compared to them.  Dunning Kruger and all that.  I think we are projecting a lot of our ignorance regarding politics and foreign policy onto Trump because he's crazy but he's on our side.

My advice literally and figuratively, stick your dick in crazy at your own peril.