Comments by "Tim Trewyn" (@timtrewyn453) on "'Russia Is Not Going To Lose The War': JD Vance Blasts Senate Voting To Send Funding To Ukraine" video.

Where is it docked? How often does he take it out? Surely the Russian navy has pictures.
6
@ВладимирМозговой-л5э No. I imagine a world in which all nations are able to trade with all other nations, without becoming Russia's or America's or China's "turf" or sphere of influence. Russia benefited from Western oil extraction technology and international pipelines to market its oil and gas to the world. It then used the economic power it gained to violently expand its jurisdiction over areas of other nations such as Georgia and Ukraine. Russia was not forced to use violence. That is pretext, a false excuse that Russian's use steal and kill. The world sees it, whatever Russia thinks. We are not giving in to Russian attempts at mind control. Russia's neighbors do not trust Russia, especially when it makes excuses for violent expansion. Inexpensive drones are demonstrating that the notion of a navy base on Crimea that is used to project violence is perhaps obsolete. The planet faces serious consequences due to the changing climate. Meanwhile Russian leadership harbors delusions of grandeur. Ukraine should be able to trade with all nations, and not be subject to Russian approval.
5
I did. See my post. I have had the honor of hosting two Ukrainian families recently in my home here in Florida. Fine people. Good parents. Well behaved children. They don't want to live under "Russian mind control". Their words. If we are not going to help them keep their country, then how many of them will we allow to come to ours? If what makes Russia the inevitable winner of this war is its superior population numbers, as the Senator asserts, does it not make sense for America to increase its population to improve its security?
4
While the Senator makes some good points, I think he mischaracterizes the destination of $60 billion for Ukraine. The great majority of that money goes to the US defense industry to manufacture new weaponry for US inventory, while inventory about to expire and scheduled for decommissioning is instead sent to Ukraine. It is aid to Ukraine, but it is not cash to Ukraine. It is material to Ukraine. He also mischaracterizes the motivation of his fellow Senators. Stopping Russia in Ukraine means US troops will not have to stop them in Moldova or Romania or the Baltics or Poland or Finland. Also, delaying munitions deliveries to Taiwan increases the likelihood of a Chinese invasion. Would Putin have invaded Ukraine if Ukraine had a potent air force with several hundred F-16s and the munitions and services that go with them? He would be hurting a lot more if that had been in place. Senator, we are trying to head off foreign leaders who have publicly declared their intentions. The Senator is also incomplete in his characterization of strategy. He made no mention of sanctions and the realignment of the European economy away from Russia. Sanctions do not themselves end a war and they take time to produce effects. But effects are being felt. The Russian economy is being reorganized into a top heavy defense economy in the style of the Soviet economy. History shows how that worked for them. The strategy is to weaken Russia, discredit Russia, raise Chinese doubt as to its own strategy, solidify NATO, and improve the security of free Europe, Taiwan, and the United States global economy. That strategy is working. It's plain to see. Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has put itself into a self-defeating level of stress. The Senator lays out no strategy for bringing the conflict to a diplomatic resolution. Russia is pressing its attack. Russia is not stopping. Russia's terms for settlement involve Ukraine surrendering land Russia does not currently occupy, Ukraine staying out of NATO and the EU, and Ukraine demilitarizing. It just tees up Ukraine for future losses. If he wants a fast, diplomatic solution, I am afraid the only way to achieve that is a significant Ukrainian capitulation, OR, a form of Western escalation that convinces Putin that he is on a steady trend of losing Ukrainian territory. The latter is perhaps too dangerous for the Senator's temperament. The Senator also, in making his case on Russian oil and gas sales, ignores Ukraine's agency to significantly damage Russia's oil and gas infrastructure, a program it has already begun, perhaps as far back as Nordstream 2. The Senator sees expanding the "industrial base" as not helpful if we send all the munitions made to Ukraine. Who were we going to use the munitions on? And is it not an improvement in capacity if a larger industrial base can make more munitions? More munitions can bring the war to a more favorable end for Ukraine. The Senator is indirectly advocating capitulation. In essence the Senator dismisses the superior population numbers and industrial capacity of Ukraine's friends vs. Russia and its friends. He acknowledges Russia's team, but is dismissive of Ukraine's team. He projects the same fatalism that is used in Russian propaganda. Are you ready to absorb millions of Ukrainians, Senator? As for time for debate, the selection of specific materials to be shipped to Ukraine has been the subject of months of dialogue between the Ukrainian military and NATO defense ministers. I don't think the Senator's expertise exceeds theirs. To the extent that there are certain clauses affecting the execution of the funded programs and monitoring the integrity of those programs, proper objects of the Senate's attention, again I would think that long ago standard language and procedures were formulated and should be found in the bill. How long does it take to confirm that? Time is of the essence on the battlefield. Yes, Senator, people are dying out there. Could we expect you to be keeping up on this for their sake?
3
Senator Vance, did anything stop you from sending Senator Lankford a letter with your conditions for casting your vote in favor of a negotiated bill as soon as the negotiating committee was formed? Are you saying committee members refused Senate input? What an odd thing for them to do if they know they need to pass cloture. I guess they had the votes without you.
3
JD Vance (with a V please note) will not get in the way of American businesses who hire cheap labor.
2
@ihatesignupsgrrrrrrr If corruption is the metric, then Ukraine, not Russia, is the lesser of two evils. Ukraine did not invade Russia. Russian justifications are increasingly contorted and unpersuasive.
2
@leojmullins No. Russia invaded Ukraine, and it did not need to do that.
2
I"ve visited Central America. It's fine for some people. I could also see why some could want to get out. I've made a friend from Honduras who has come to America, legally. They speak both English and Spanish and have a productive job. They have two daughters that are doing very well. They say most people they know come here to build a better life for their family. So I think Senator Rubio is right, there are mostly good migrants, but there is also a lot of bad ones. We catch the bad ones and send them back, where they become gang members, which just incentivizes poor people who can't afford to live in a gated and barbed wire protected community to get away from them even more. If you want to call this an invasion, then you have to admit that we are in a fight, in a war with every migrant sending nation. We could say those nations would like us to bear the cost of maintaining their criminals in our prisons. This is an argument for the United States to, forcibly if need be, establish very large consulates, in effect, military bases, in the migrant sending nations. Its a consulate with a prison, but also with training areas to prepare native born forces to put pressure on the migrant sending nation's government to work on making their country a better place to live. This could all cost a lot of money. I've also been to our southern border. It's a very longer border that takes a lot of effort to monitor, much less close. This could all cost a lot of money.
1
@tonykirby4809 So Senator Vance serves your interests?
1
@ВладимирМозговой-л5э 1994 Budapest Memorandum does not require Ukraine in NATO. It called on Russia to respect Ukraine after Ukraine turned over Soviet nuclear weapons to Russia. The US and UK could have converted Soviet nuclear weapons to Ukrainian nuclear weapons. US, UK and Ukraine respected Russia's concerns and did not do that. Russia does not respect the US, UK or Ukraine. Do not be surprised if they fight back until they are respected.
1
@ВладимирМозговой-л5э With the world's largest nuclear arsenal, Russia should not be afraid of defensive forces on its border. What is plain for everyone to see on a map, is that Russia seeks to weaken its neighbors so it can expand its territory when it chooses to do so. Russia is like the Republicans in the US Congress. You give them what they ask for and then they tell you that you did not give them what they asked for. I do not deny that the UK and US were seeking their own interests in the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, but they were also showing respect for Russia's security concerns by removing nuclear weapons from a neighboring nation. I appreciate that you present a thoughtful position, but we seem to be talking right past each other. I wish you well as a person. I am sad for Russia and Ukraine.
1
@ВладимирМозговой-л5э I hosted some Ukrainians in my home for awhile. To run his business in Ukraine, tribute needed to be paid, both to a Ukrainian official and a Russian official for protection. There is jurisdiction over territory, and then there is power over economic "turf" or "sphere of influence". That's not the same as independence. Obviously the current Russian regime disagrees with the 1994 Budapest Memorandum on Ukraine. That does not mean the UK and US disagree with the Memorandum. It was a statement that Ukraine was not a gift, but an independent nation to which the UK and US pledged support. There should be no surprise that Ukraine is fighting for its jurisdiction and the US and UK are supporting them. It is now a fight like Korea. I think Russia will always be trying to take more control over Ukraine. It will only stop when something else takes priority. Chernobyl had that kind of effect. A strong economic recession in Russia could have that effect. Yes, the West is doing many things to try to start a recession in Russia to bring the war to a stop.
1
@legaleeblonde4310 Everybody is biased. "All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God." Only God can be objective, anyone else who claims objectivity is a "know it all." That doesn't mean I stop debating. Why was there no uproar when thousands of Ukrainians entered the United States? I hosted a Ukrainian family that came over the southern border. Nice people. Good parents. Well behaved kids. Visited our church more than once. I have a friend from Honduras, hardworking in a profitable business. Smart. Do we have to weed out the spies and criminals? Yes, that's been an ongoing task for decades. Why were there, twice, recently and long ago, Spanish speaking young men putting a new roof on my house, a process plainly visible to aerial surveillance, but no official came by to deport them and fine, much less prosecute, the citizen contractor who hired them? Tell me Republican businessmen do not like cheap labor. We have had that southern border for over a century to work on. Ukraine didn't start fighting for its life until 2014. Time is of the essence for Ukraine. We have decades ahead of us to scale up control of our borders. Take a look at the history of staffing of the Border Patrol. Looks like it plateaued. I hear they have a recruiting problem. Know anything about that? Yes, both Republicans and Democrats have been in a race to see which party could use up America's credit for its own policies since Reagan cut taxes and raised defense spending at the same time. There was that blip when Gingrich and Clinton balanced the budget, but then W fixed that with another tax cut and more defense spending. You are right and wrong, because the only way out of a looming debt crisis is Ronnie Reagan's way out, grow the economy. Part of how you do that is grow the population with energetic young people from abroad. They made quick work of my roof. I say the crisis at the border is manufactured for political purposes, and the purpose of politics these days is who gets the government's borrowed money. Dig for better premises for your short arguments if you want to be persuasive. Or just be a venting YouTube commenter. It's a free country.
1