Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
*** Official Russia vs. Ukraine Discussion - Invasion has begun *** (7 Viewers)
- Thread starter Jayrod
- Start date
Navin Johnson
Footballguy
Why is that?
massraider
Footballguy
Because being #1 is better than any other option.
And if the US suddenly was no longer the top economic and military power on the planet, the country that takes over wouldn't be Finland, or whoever you or I think would be the best option. You think if China became the #1 world power (no chance of Russia) that they would simply allow America to continue on doing what we have been doing? Those things we have been screwing up? China would do similar or worse, but the difference would be that China's population would benefit more, rather than ours.
I have a ton of objections to the actions of my country over its' short existence, but I do not forget for a moment how lucky we all were to be born here.
![[icon]](/data/avatars/m/5/5167.jpg?1660313464){kind=avatar}
[icon]
Insoxicated
Really?
[icon]
Insoxicated
This is commendable.
Looks like UK is manning up. Glad to see Ukraine getting what it needs to continue bleeding Russia dry. Russia needs this war to end this year. Preferably by summer.
They are approaching fumes fiscally and I’m not sure their economy can handle another year of stiff sanctions and we’re starting to see the fruit of him exerting leverage on some in our government to reduce them.
culdeus
Footballguy
Communist propaganda is very effective
culdeus
Footballguy
The military industrial complex here is mostly geared towards billion dollar boats and planes we don't really need. The spin up to make shells and barrels and drones hasn't gone just great. We emptied much of our stockpile of last gen stuff already.
Ukraine wasn't really likely to get much but money from us that was useful. The eu seems on better terms to make the basic stuff and is more willing to supply it.
Problem is people but Russia is suffering there too and is now sending guys on crutches to die to locate defensive positions.
For all news, can you please share a link?
Nugget
Footballguy
Norway in fueling the U.S. Navy
Company that made the claim deleted the Facebook post. Looks like it was a reaction to the Oval Office meeting and support for Ukraine.
Stoneworker
Footballguy
Looks like EU will officially become the new intermediary to broker a deal with the existing intermediary...
LONDON—European allies led by the U.K. and France will work with Ukraine to try to forge a peace plan that they would present to President Trump.
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said Sunday that he had spoken to Trump, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and French President Emmanuel Macron over the weekend to try to revive diplomatic talks
“We have now agreed that the United Kingdom along with France and possibly one or two others will work with Ukraine on a plan to stop the fighting and then we will discuss that plan with the United States,” Starmer said Sunday.
On Sunday, leaders from around 18 countries are set to meet in London to try to map a way forward for Ukraine and discuss how Europe can take more responsibility for funding its own defense in the face of a more isolationist America.
Starmer is trying to broker a deal that could appease both Kyiv and Washington.
Source: WSJ
LONDON—European allies led by the U.K. and France will work with Ukraine to try to forge a peace plan that they would present to President Trump.
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said Sunday that he had spoken to Trump, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and French President Emmanuel Macron over the weekend to try to revive diplomatic talks
“We have now agreed that the United Kingdom along with France and possibly one or two others will work with Ukraine on a plan to stop the fighting and then we will discuss that plan with the United States,” Starmer said Sunday.
On Sunday, leaders from around 18 countries are set to meet in London to try to map a way forward for Ukraine and discuss how Europe can take more responsibility for funding its own defense in the face of a more isolationist America.
Starmer is trying to broker a deal that could appease both Kyiv and Washington.
Source: WSJ
Stoneworker
Footballguy
FYI, for a topic such as this I would highly recommend the BBC as a news source. Especially w/ UK's Starmer playing such a prominent role. The US sources are far too polluted currently with partisan politics.
www.bbc.com
BBC Home - Breaking News, World News, US News, Sports, Business, Innovation, Climate, Culture, Travel, Video & Audio
Visit BBC for trusted reporting on the latest world and US news, sports, business, climate, innovation, culture and much more.
www.bbc.com
Last edited:
Stoneworker
Footballguy
And it's not unfair to say the "adults" should have stepped up a long time ago
uwillbsoon
Footballguy
I've seen a few comments in here about how this costs the American taxpayer too much.
Curious: there were two areas -Homeland Security and Defense- that received funding increases in the budget reconciliation framework.
If we're not going to defend an ally invaded by a dictator, why are we increasing defense spending?
Seems there's a lot of money to be saved in defense given this strategic shift.
Curious: there were two areas -Homeland Security and Defense- that received funding increases in the budget reconciliation framework.
If we're not going to defend an ally invaded by a dictator, why are we increasing defense spending?
Seems there's a lot of money to be saved in defense given this strategic shift.
Andy Dufresne
Footballguy
Redwes25
Footballguy
The increases in those budgets are to increase border security.
Last edited:
TennesseeJed
Footballguy
If we are not going to spend money on Ukraine's defense, where is that money going?
Stoneworker
Footballguy
Bottom line from EU summit today...
- Keep military aid flowing into Ukraine
- The UK, France and others have agreed to work with Ukraine on a plan to stop the fighting - this plan will be discussed with the US and together they will take the plan forward
- Europe must do the heavy lifting in any peace deal, Starmer said, but the agreement would need US backing
uwillbsoon
Footballguy
I don't think that's true:
"It includes more than $100bn in new spending on immigration enforcement and the military."
US House narrowly passes Trump-backed spending bill
It is still several steps from becoming law, but marks a major victory for Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson.
www.bbc.com
This is a bit misleading. Russia doesn’t have the manpower or equipment to conquer the whole country as long as Ukraine at least has European support. Whether Zelenskyy made that statement to encourage the us/Europe to increase support, or he meant “win” as meaning pushing Russia out of the country altogether, it is exceedingly unlikely that he could lose “everything” without the us.
Stoneworker
Footballguy
It is not misleading at all. Russia is solidly backed by both China and North Korea
Chinese President Xi Jinping affirmed his “no limits” partnership in a phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday. The call appeared aimed at dispelling any such prospects — the two leaders underscored the durability and the “long-term” nature of their alliance, with its own internal dynamics that would not be impacted by any “third party.” 2/24/25 - NBC
An estimated 12,000 North Korean soldiers have been sent to Russia, according to Ukrainian officials and Western intelligence reports in January. Lair said the Pyongyang-Moscow relationship has deepened since the invasion began. “Sending your own soldiers to fight in someone else’s conflict really suggests the strength of the connection,” he said. -2/24/25 CNN
BrutalPenguin
Footballguy
We just don't borrow or print it.
Desert_Power
Footballguy
To buy crypto currency.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
So did Zelenskyy meet with those leaders yet and if so any word on result?
BobbyLayne
Footballguy
Leaders from Germany, France, Denmark, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Spain, Turkey, Finland, Sweden, Czechia and Romania, as well as the NATO secretary-general and the presidents of the European Commission and European Council, traveled to London to take part in Sunday's summit.
UK prime minister announces framework for peace plan after summit with Zelenskyy
Zelenskyy is seeking foreign support after a disastrous U.S. visit.Sparky Polastri
Footballguy
This group should sit down with Ukraine, come up with a deal and then present it to Putin.
McBokonon
Footballguy
Joe’s asked for links for stuff like this: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/tr...rs-halt-offensive-cyber-operations-rcna194435
https://www.kaine.senate.gov/in-the...ing-presidents-from-unilaterally-exiting-nato
Under the measure, advocated by Sens. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), the president would be prohibited from withdrawing from NATO without the approval of two-thirds of the Senate or separate legislation passed by Congress.
Kaine and Rubio had tried to advance similar measures since 2021. Passage of the defense policy bill this week marked the first time the House had embraced the tactic.
The Republican-led House Armed Services Committee did not respond to questions about why the chamber accepted the provision. The office of Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) declined to comment.
=============================================================================================
Rubio said in a statement: “The Senate should maintain oversight on whether or not our nation withdraws from NATO. We must ensure we are protecting our national interests and protecting the security of our democratic allies.”
=============================================================================================
For future reference
Under the measure, advocated by Sens. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), the president would be prohibited from withdrawing from NATO without the approval of two-thirds of the Senate or separate legislation passed by Congress.
Kaine and Rubio had tried to advance similar measures since 2021. Passage of the defense policy bill this week marked the first time the House had embraced the tactic.
The Republican-led House Armed Services Committee did not respond to questions about why the chamber accepted the provision. The office of Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) declined to comment.
=============================================================================================
Rubio said in a statement: “The Senate should maintain oversight on whether or not our nation withdraws from NATO. We must ensure we are protecting our national interests and protecting the security of our democratic allies.”
=============================================================================================
For future reference
BobbyLayne
Footballguy
No member state has ever rescinded their membership from NATO.
Ditto for withdrawing from the UN.
Both are possible, though - we are already well outside stable & long-established consensus norms that have guided American policy for the past 80 years, since the end of WWII.
Ditto for withdrawing from the UN.
Both are possible, though - we are already well outside stable & long-established consensus norms that have guided American policy for the past 80 years, since the end of WWII.
The Duff Man
Footballguy
It is hard to envision a scenario where Putin agrees to any deal that the West/Ukraine deem acceptable.
Because his decisions will not be based solely on logic
Because his decisions will not be based solely on logic
tommyGunZ
Footballguy
As you point out, historical norms mean little at this point.
It is telling that just a year and a half ago Rubio felt so strongly about both NATO and the rhetoric of our current President that he co-sponsored legislation to protect our membership in NATO.
Incredible the position we are in.
BobbyLayne
Footballguy
It is hard to envision a scenario where Putin agrees to any deal that the West/Ukraine deem acceptable.
Because his decisions will not be based solely on logic
historian Sarah C.M. Paine has an interesting theory on maritime vs continental powers
she explains maritime powers operate in the sphere of cooperation, trade agreements allow both sides to flourish, societies operate under international law, emphasis on sovereign coexistence
that is in contrast to the continental power worldview, which centers around acquiring territory through use of force
doing so destroys the economy and infrastructure of the country you are invading - she argues you would be much better off trading with your adversaries instead of destroying them
there's little wealth remaining once the conflict is over
for Russia, Putin's fantasy is to turn back the clock, to go back to having a ring of puppet states along their vast borders, docile states who are aligned with them
they have no interest in being part of the maritime powers system
Before now, it would have been unthinkable that the U.S. would not be a part of this.
A reminder. This thread is hanging on and I'd prefer it stay alive.
But the mods will tire of deleting all the political opinion shots. Please keep this focused on purely news. That's how it's survived when we don't allow political posts.
But it's close to being gone.
But the mods will tire of deleting all the political opinion shots. Please keep this focused on purely news. That's how it's survived when we don't allow political posts.
But it's close to being gone.
Brunell4MVP
Footballguy
https://www.statista.com/statistics/262742/countries-with-the-highest-military-spending/ Reverse inflate these numbers and extrapolate this for 80 years since the end of WW2, with the USA being relied on as the world police for democracy (which we have done both right and wrong at times), and you get a country that is $38 trillion in debt. Nixon tried to put the same screws to Europe that Trump currently is. it's not new. And if Europe with far more wealth than Russian can't stop Russia from taking this beyond Ukraine (assuming that would happen), well shame on them. Heck, they created many of these world issues we tried and failed to fix (Sykes Picot in Mid East, territories off of China, Balfour declaration in Israel, etc, etc). We just get blamed because we tried to clean it up. Which was mostly a losing proposition all along.
Agree with someone above. A complete re-think of our defense spending is in order. And it should be more for protection, a dome that stops hypersonics, IT and energy security, and border patrol rather than a world deplorable force. For instance, the DoD wants more aircraft carriers through ~2060. At an enormous cost. With the cost of the new jets to sit on those carriers and our soldiers in harms way. While China is using ships to deploy drone launching stations throughout the oceans. Just drop an undersea balloon of 1,000 drones in multiple seas, ready to be launched at the push of a button. We need to re-think the future of warfare.
I would assume we have no allies and never did. We had countries willing to latch to us so our taxpayers could protect them while they put their money into domestic social spending. Now that the faucet is being turned off, they are acting like jilted girlfriends.
The long pole in all this is the Congress. Presidents both Rep and Dem can try to fix the deficit. But Congress' bread and butter on both sides of the aisle is defense and healthcare companies. It's the Roman Senate all over again. Until we the people pass: 1) a balanced budget amendment and 2) term limits on Congress. Well it's a long haul to get Congress to make good fiscal decisions when they are totally fine spending money that isn't theirs.
Agree with someone above. A complete re-think of our defense spending is in order. And it should be more for protection, a dome that stops hypersonics, IT and energy security, and border patrol rather than a world deplorable force. For instance, the DoD wants more aircraft carriers through ~2060. At an enormous cost. With the cost of the new jets to sit on those carriers and our soldiers in harms way. While China is using ships to deploy drone launching stations throughout the oceans. Just drop an undersea balloon of 1,000 drones in multiple seas, ready to be launched at the push of a button. We need to re-think the future of warfare.
I would assume we have no allies and never did. We had countries willing to latch to us so our taxpayers could protect them while they put their money into domestic social spending. Now that the faucet is being turned off, they are acting like jilted girlfriends.
The long pole in all this is the Congress. Presidents both Rep and Dem can try to fix the deficit. But Congress' bread and butter on both sides of the aisle is defense and healthcare companies. It's the Roman Senate all over again. Until we the people pass: 1) a balanced budget amendment and 2) term limits on Congress. Well it's a long haul to get Congress to make good fiscal decisions when they are totally fine spending money that isn't theirs.
djmich
Footballguy
Did this pass?
Don't know, but we do know who was in favor of the legislation and their reasoning.
Stoneworker
Footballguy
Well that one person wasn't singularly able to get the legislation passed back then so it's kind of a joke to hold that one person singularly responsible now. Especially when the one person no longer even has a formal vote
To add some flavor:
https://people.defensenews.com/top-100/
5 of the top 6 defense contractors in the world are US based so they gobble up a large portion of defense spending.
https://www.statista.com/statistics...centage-of-gdp-in-highest-spending-countries/
US is 9th in military spending vis-a-vis GDP
Not holding anyone responsible, holding people accountable.
Sparky Polastri
Footballguy
Would have to get it out of committee first wouldn't they? I'd be shocked (in a good way) if this sees the light of day anytime soon.
Stoneworker
Footballguy
I'll bite my tongue for the sake of the thread
Not political, pertinent to the situation and where it may be headed. It's important to understand the new paradigm taking shape and to see where we as a country are headed as far our standing on the world stage. As stated previously, no country ahs ever unilaterally and voluntarily left either the UN or NATO so if either or both of those actions occur for the US, that's seismic.
djmich
Footballguy
It passed. So withdrawing from nato is a big deal and requires participation from more than just the president. Rubio agreed. What’s your point?
I'm in wait and see mode but will be interested in what arguments Secretary Rubio will put forth to buttress an attempt by the Admin to withdraw seeing as he recently felt protecting the security of our democratic allies via NATO was of paramount importance to the US. Rubio's arguments will be the memo points put out by the admin so it will give us an understanding of how, why, where the change of direction comes from and why the admin determines withdrawing the right thing to do for the sake of the security of America. And there is a line of thought that the Admin can and will do an end around of the requirement setting up a legal battle. https://www.politico.com/news/2024/11/08/trump-nato-congress-courts-00188426
![[icon]](/data/avatars/s/5/5167.jpg?1660313464){kind=avatar}