If the US were invaded, should we give up land for peace?

[OtterMan68]

Many on the right, such as JD Vance, are saying Ukraine should give land to Russia to end the war.

No, rewarding the invader is bad strategy as it emboldens them to attack again

Yes, peace is more important than land

[Lliam]

The Dr. Strangelove psychopaths in charge of U. S. policy instigated the war in their ongoing effort to destroy Russia. They still think of Russia as the Soviet Union, plus they want Russia's assets. And they aligned themselves with actual Nazi factions in order to achieve that.

Ukraine has no chance in regaining Crimea and the eastern provinces without arms and troops from other countries. And any country doing that will be declaring war on Russia.

There is no way in Hell that Russia would ever surrender Crimea and its only warm water naval base that had been Russian since before there was a United States. That would be akin to the U. S. surrendering its west coast.

Russia never intended to occupy or annex all of Ukraine. It tried to negotiate a satisfactory agreement for 8 years before it saw no other choice than to show that it meant business. It would not accept Ukraine as a NATO state with NATO military bases and missiles on its border.

Over those 8 years, Ukraine attacked and slaughtered Ukrainians in the Donbas region. Those ethnic Russian and Russian speaking people begged Russia to help them. They held a plebiscite and voted to become independent of Ukraine and align with Russia.

Russia actually wanted peaceful coexistence and good relations with Ukraine and the west. Instead it was met with lies and hostility.

The U. S. and its allies sacrificed Ukraine's fighting age men, it's military and infrastructure, with the intention of weakening Russia and selling off Ukraine's assets to multinational corporations like Blackrock. The U. S. also spent its own assets that could have been used to bolster the U. S. economy and help its own citizens. And who benefited? The arms manufacturers, industrialists, multinational corporations, the World Bank, and wealthy global elites who control U. S. policy.

What if a superpower that was hostile to the U. S. engineered a coup in Mexico to install a puppet government with the intention of making Mexico part an alliance with other countries that were hostile to the U. S. that had plans to build military bases and place missiles along the U. S.-Mexican border? What would the U. S. do? We already saw what it would do during the Cuban missile crisis.

What the U. S. did in Ukraine was evil. Now people like Blinken and Harris want to begin direct attacks on Russia. That's how you start WWIII.

The U. S. should cut Ukraine off and let Zelinsky realize that there is no hope in defeating Russia or recovering so-called Ukrainian territory. He needs to negotiate the best agreement he can get, save his people and rebuild his country.

Europe needs to end its irrational fear of Russia and become a trading partner.
The last thing in the world Russia wants to do is invade and occupy neighboring countries. It can't afford to. There would be no benefit. The days of classic colonialism ended with WWII.

[OtterMan68]

Ukraine was never a threat to Russia with or without NATO. When Putin invaded, he initially claimed he was sending in "peacekeepers." Then he changed his story to "denazification." Then he illegally annexed Ukrainian territory.
That's not the west's fault any more than his invasion of Georgia or the first Ukraine invasion of 2014.
Russia needs to stop invading its neighbors and become a trading partner with Europe and North America. Russia needs to ditch Putin and accept the fact the USSR is never coming back.

[Lliam]

NATO is not a threat to Russia? LOL

The U. S. engineered the coup - "Ukrainian Revolution", also known as the "Maidan Revolution" or, laughably, "The Revolution of Dignity" - that ousted pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych in 2014. It used far-right shock troops, such as the Right Sector and the neo-Nazi Svoboda Party.
THAT was the beginning of the war. It had nothing to do with any expansionist goals by Putin.

[OtterMan68]

so all of those Ukrainians protesting on the street were US crisis actors, and the Ukrainians had no idea the US was behind a coup, and they still don't. Got it.
The FACT you think the US and or NATO was going to use Ukraine to invade Russia is laughable.

[juliaanita]

you gotta be a Russian bot

[Gwendoline]

The CIA does organise these things and has gotten good at regime change, just look at the Arab spring.
During the invasion of Iraq in 2003 the media was showing how masses of Iraqis had taken to the streets to celebrate the fall of sadam, hundreds of thousands. 20 years on the footage zoomed out shows there would be lucky to have 100 people

[MisterWack]

Appeasement. We’ve seen this play out time n time again, it doesn’t help at preventing a bigger global conflict only buys time by giving the enemy more leverage when the time comes. JD Vance & Donald Trump are appeasers who can’t play 4D Chess. Ukraine was invaded before and got Crimea taken away, so when you give Russia (who makes missile deals with Iran & drone deals with China & partnership of possible nuclear armaments with North Korea) then yeah America & the West are screwed in a WWIII conflict if we don’t fight back with aid to Ukraine now. When you give an inch, they are absolutely will take a mile by force because we’ve seen this so many times.

[Anonymous]

If it would mean the deaths of hundreds of thousands and if we had no real arms industry to produce the weapons we needed, if we were relying on the support of other countries with their own vested interests and more importantly if we were unable to push out the invaders militarily in the long term then yes we would have to give up land for peace.

A big thing for Ukraine to remember is how America supported South Vietnam and then overnight stopped supplying them the weapons to fight the invading NVA. So basically a 20 year war ended with the NVA winning anyway despite us promises of unwavering support for how ever long it took to win the war. It is the same story in Afghanistan, after 20 years the US did a deal with the taliban and pulled out leaving us allies in Afghanistan to be slaughtered.

[OtterMan68]

the US was doing the fighting for S Vietnam, and the gov there was not popular

[Opinion Owner]

The us military basically invaded south Vietnam and took over the fighting, didn't even tell the south Vietnamese before they landed marines.
The us military pulled out in 73, the south Vietnamese continued fighting until 75. Like with Ukraine today the south Vietnamese were being supplied by the US and were holding back the invading NVA and probably could have continued indefinitely if the us had honoured their promises to south Vietnam but the us stopped supplying south Vietnam in 74 unlike China and the Soviets who continued supplying north Vietnam as they'd promised.
This is what Ukraine can expect that after years of war and hundred of thousands of dead the US government will abandon them and not honour their promises. So in reality it's not in Ukraine's intrest to keep fighting as they won't win.

[lightbulb27]

how does ukraine win? That seems never an optionother than russia giving up. that's not an option. so ukraine looses even if supplied. they don't have enough men. If technology catches up so they don't have to destroy men and women on the front lines, then maybe they can hold a line somewhere. but there's still a line, not necessarily the one they started with.
Agree, end it sooner than later, like today... for the sake of those being torn to shreds on daily basis.

[OtterMan68]

@lightbulb27 Russia gave up in Afghanistan in the 80s

[lightbulb27]

true. this looks different... it's their border with nato. not going to stop anytime soon. will ukraine last that long... without more foreign fighters? you've got 11,000 chinese troops stationed in Belaurs for "exercises". you see the videos of foreign fighters in there.
it's a mess... you willing to risk WWIII for this? for what exactly? makes no sense.

[OtterMan68]

@lightbulb27 China's not going to invade any European country.

[Opinion Owner]

@lightbulb27 the question is how does Ukraine force the Russian military out of donbass and crimea. They are dug and the Ukrainians have no way of breaking through their lines. So far everything they've attempted has failed. It's back to ww1 tactics as tanks are useless against dug in sighted anti tank weapons and airpower is nonexistent due to anti-aircraft weapons.

[OtterMan68]

If Ukraine gives up land for the second time, why wouldn't Russia invade a third time?

[Opinion Owner]

Gorbachev pulled the Soviets out of Afghanistan to win favour with the west. If they'd stayed there'd have been little of the afgan population left..
It's not about China invading a European country, China is sending a message and while the Chinese military is there Ukraine or nato won't attack Belarus for fear of bringing China into it.

[Opinion Owner]

Ukraine wasn't ready for the first invasions. It's at the point of stalemate. Russia can't advance any further and Ukraine can't retake what it's lost. It's all to do with the weapons technology deployed, current tanks and aircraft are now useless.

[OtterMan68]

Then why is Russia still fighting?

[lightbulb27]

@OtterMan68
you should ask yourself that question and find the answer. If I told you, you won't believe me. want to listen to other voices, I'll provide references. Russia will stop when they've met their objectives and then hold those lines. The war will go on long time unless someone draws it to close. Ukraine can't make enough offspring to fight. It would have to be robots... or foreigners.
I don't agree with opinion owner on one point... Russia is advancing, slowly. It's a slow grind... remember Bahkmut fight last year, so many killed? . It's all Russian now and they are approaching the town beyond it... across a 1400 miles border. Ukraine can do spoiling jobs, but I don't see enough to change Russias mind and send them home.
She's right about china! But there are chinese fighters in there and japanese... and polish, and german. People will fight for $, I'm not saying ordered by their govts... yet.

[OtterMan68]

@lightbulb27 you're assuming the Russian people will accept more deaths in order to expand their sphere of influence

[Opinion Owner]

The Russians are conscripting from rural Russia

[Opinion Owner]

Russians will accept a lot.

[lightbulb27]

@OtterMan68 true (I assume they will continue to accept the war). That's mind control and power... and I suspect they have it and it's why they are fighting as they are. Russia only gave up once that I know of... WWI. I don't see them doing so here. I could see them stopping at some point and saying, we are ready to talk... here are our terms... because we met our objectives. failure to oblige, means they continue and maybe shift more defensive til agreement reached. Russians overthrowing gov... anything possible... above my pay grade.

[lightbulb27]

It depends honestly. in essence we've had that issue with mexico and USA long ago, and somewhere... a line was drawn.

In Ukraine... they are losing, slowly... their men, materials being ground to dust. Russia as predicted will fight until they get what they want, or they are overthrown. That is a bad bad bad plan because we are now perched for WWIII including nuclear.

It means they are going to come looking for more boots to put on the ground and bombs, better bombs, bigger bombs... longer range ones. It be very easy to make a "big" mistake.

It's a question of where a line is drawn. So draw the line and be done. That's negotiation. Trump 100% correct and Kamala said is wrong. But USA may have very little leverage at this point... as Ukraine is being overwhelmed. Look at the battle lines.

The Ukraine/Russia map has been drawn many times in history, this is no different. But it's not worth destroying the ukranian, russian people (relatives) and quite possibly others in a civil war. I don't see a good end for Ukraine other than negotiation and soon.

I agree with Trump, end it... and end it now!

If Canada comes at us, we will have dinner with them and enjoy maple syrup together. We get along... thankfully.

[OtterMan68]

How did Russia do in Afghanistan in the early 80s?
It's not easy to invade and hold a country.

[MisterWack]

Appeasement. We’ve seen this play out time n time again, it doesn’t help at preventing a bigger global conflict only buys time by giving the enemy more leverage when the time comes. JD Vance & Donald Trump are appeasers who can’t play 4D Chess. Ukraine was invaded before and got Crimea taken away, so when you give Russia (who makes missile deals with Iran & drone deals with China & partnership of possible nuclear armaments with North Korea) then yeah America & the West are screwed in a WWIII conflict if we don’t fight back with aid to Ukraine now. When you give an inch, they are absolutely will take a mile by force because we’ve seen this so many times.

[buzzword]

The Ukraine is weak in comparison to Russia. They lost the war before they even provoked it. So as a result they will need to trade something for peace if they want to continue to exist. If that's not something they want to do, then they can be lost to history. That's their problem. America in contrast is the strongest military nation in the world. America has been invaded by extortive engineered migration already due to our enemies fearing direct confrontation. It's an asymmetric weapon of war. All we really need in America is the green light and we can not only win the war, but take territory if we so choose. We don't have to give anything up. We can take land and resources from our enemies who have a relative military power that is much less significant than ours.

[buzzword]

Can’t wait for the green light.
Teams on standby.
Q

[buzzword]

Exodus 8

Then the Lord said to Moses, “Go to Pharaoh and say to him, ‘This is what the Lord says: Let my people go, so that they may worship me. If you refuse to let them go, I will send a plague of frogs on your whole country.

miro.medium.com/.../1*pa4TTksFoZ7XliRjBDvBww.jpeg

[OtterMan68]

they provoked it? They were threatening to invade Russia?

[buzzword]

Keep smoking that crack and ignoring the actual history of the conflict. It's no skin off my back that your Nazi pals are getting decimated. The thing is if you want to lie about the history of a war, you actually have to win. Your people instigated the war, attacked Russia first, then became subject to a large scale counter attack and got your asses beat. The Russians are winning, so they obviously get to write the history. There is no were Ukrainian lies ever become useful.

[NaultD]

Within the Russian ranks, they refer to Alaska as the equivalent of the Crimean Peninsula. Currently, China and Russia are encroaching on Alaskan waters. Our military is also deploying to Alaska, preparing for any eventuality.

As a reminder, our air force stationed in interior Alaska is the closest to Moscow via going over the North Pole. Therefore, the only option for Russia is a swift military operation through Alaska. 3x the size of the nearly impossible nazi blitz kreg in Europe.

[Dargil]

The US can't be invaded. 300 million privately owned guns prevented the Russians from ever having invasion plans. And if there was an effort, we would fight an endless guerilla war like the Afghans did against Russia and the USA.

[OtterMan68]

If privat gun owners keep the US safe, why do we spend far more money on our military than any other country? Shouldn't we be slashing the military budget?

[Dargil]

Privately owned firearms are tactical. Militaries are strategic.

[Anonymous]

with the way the political climate is going between young men and young women

a lot of young military age men probably would let their country be invaded

after all, feminists love defending illegal immigrants who commit crimes against them and then they turn around and bash the same native men as being the problem because calling out the illegal immigrants would be "racist"

[Juxtapose]

How about we just stop funding Ukraine and forget about this bullshit?

But no, we're the USA. I would be disappointed in my country if we did not put up a defiant fight and went down rather than giving any concessions to an invading force.

[matchrestore]

JD Vance is a putz. He thinks he stands to gain something by supporting Putin when A) Putin's actions and policies are reprehensible and B) Putin is totally using him for his own political gain.

[RedInnocent69]

Yeah, that worked really well with Germany in the lead up to World War II 🙄

[jshm2]

Well, The Native Americans did, when the invading White settlers who were Vance's ancestors swarmed over on boats, and took over their land.

[zagor]

The Native Americans were not a nation but dozens of different nations with no cohesive policy.

[NathanDavis]

give them Florida...

let'em have Florida Man

[ChicoFromThe305]

Personally I'm not gonna do that, I'm putting up a final stand

[gatixek710]

You’ll lose your home because you are askeered of guns.

[OtterMan68]

so the US military cannot defend the country in event of invasion?

[gatixek710]

Could it? You’re claiming a land invasion would happen. that means they got by the military and are now facing 400million privately owned guns. Which is why it would never happen. The 2nd amendment thanks you for your support.

[OtterMan68]

so I guess you're all in favor of slashing the military budget since we don't need a huge military to defend the US

[gatixek710]

Sure. Let's start with no foreign military aid.

[OtterMan68]

that's a tiny fraction of what we spend on defense

[gatixek710]

It's a start.

[exitseven]

yes, lets give them California

[beefcakebradybatson]

H**L to the NO !!!

[Agape93]

Lol no.