World War 3

Should is not the same as would or could.

Should is not the same as would or could, you are right.
But it's what we want, certainly in the UK. We need to keep backing them, because it is right to do so.

They are defending their country, and people, from a larger country who invaded them, purely because the president wanted to.

We, all of us, must make it plain to Putin, that he is wrong, and that he cannot win.

comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 1 minute ago
Should is not the same as would or could, you are right.
But it's what we want, certainly in the UK. We need to keep backing them, because it is right to do so.

They are defending their country, and people, from a larger country who invaded them, purely because the president wanted to.

We, all of us, must make it plain to Putin, that he is wrong, and that he cannot win.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, I know. As posted earlier I have one Ukrainian friend who's parents are freezing in the dark in Kyiv. They won't surrender any of their country. I also know quite a few who are descended from previous waves of immigration. One of those guys is back there driving an ambulance.

comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 46 minutes ago
comment by Jalisco Red - Total Hagball (U4195)
posted 6 hours, 57 minutes ago
"America's top general has warned that Kyiv's chances in the short term of winning the war by taking back all Russian-occupied land are 'not high, militarily'."

From BBC News
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Good to know the people on JA606 think they know better though, isn’t it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nobody thinks they know better. But they know what is right. Which is to defend themselves.

comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 46 minutes ago
comment by Jalisco Red - Total Hagball (U4195)
posted 6 hours, 57 minutes ago
"America's top general has warned that Kyiv's chances in the short term of winning the war by taking back all Russian-occupied land are 'not high, militarily'."

From BBC News
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Good to know the people on JA606 think they know better though, isn’t it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nobody thinks they know better. But they know what is right. Which is to defend themselves.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I guess it depends on your perspective.

I Ukraine fight until breaking point, it will financially crush not only Ukraine and Russia but the rest of Europe, result more deaths than necessary, potentially escalate and result in years more suffering.

Maybe they will keep their land, join the EU and NATO, and Russia will have egg on their face being forced into a recluse from the rest of the world, but like that leading General said, it’s highly unlikely.

So, I like to be pragmatic, and consider the best solution available to end this ASAP. War breaks my heart, for reasons close to me, and I don’t see how this ends well for anybody.

It is the best way to end the war.
But, and it's a big but, agreeing to Russia keeping the country they currently occupy is one thing. But the people who live there don't want it.
So how can Zalensky give away millions of peoples lives, in a democracy.
As I said earlier, could the UK have given away, Cornwall, Devon and Dorset to the Germans for 'peace'.

comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 1 minute ago
It is the best way to end the war.
But, and it's a big but, agreeing to Russia keeping the country they currently occupy is one thing. But the people who live there don't want it.
So how can Zalensky give away millions of peoples lives, in a democracy.
As I said earlier, could the UK have given away, Cornwall, Devon and Dorset to the Germans for 'peace'.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can't compare that to Ukraine and Russia, totally different. Germany and UK had nothing to do with each other, they didn't have the complicated history like those countries.

Who knows what the peace treaty involved, but reports said the two sides appeared to have made tenuous progress toward a settlement to end the war until Boris pressured Zelensky to ditch peace talks with Russia. Doing the peace talks earlier would've had less of Russia occupying Ukraine.

The war is not just affecting Ukraine but the majority of the world, I'm constantly getting ads on youtube about the global food crisis affecting places in Africa due to the war in Ukraine, we are on the verge of a global food shortage crisis (but not just because of Ukraine though)

US has given already around $54 billion, this war is likely to last years, how much more would be required and is it sustainable?

comment by Passion Power - Make 1984 fiction again (U8398)
posted 22 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 1 minute ago
It is the best way to end the war.
But, and it's a big but, agreeing to Russia keeping the country they currently occupy is one thing. But the people who live there don't want it.
So how can Zalensky give away millions of peoples lives, in a democracy.
As I said earlier, could the UK have given away, Cornwall, Devon and Dorset to the Germans for 'peace'.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can't compare that to Ukraine and Russia, totally different. Germany and UK had nothing to do with each other, they didn't have the complicated history like those countries.

Who knows what the peace treaty involved, but reports said the two sides appeared to have made tenuous progress toward a settlement to end the war until Boris pressured Zelensky to ditch peace talks with Russia. Doing the peace talks earlier would've had less of Russia occupying Ukraine.

The war is not just affecting Ukraine but the majority of the world, I'm constantly getting ads on youtube about the global food crisis affecting places in Africa due to the war in Ukraine, we are on the verge of a global food shortage crisis (but not just because of Ukraine though)

US has given already around $54 billion, this war is likely to last years, how much more would be required and is it sustainable?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I can and did compare them. It's valid.
Everyone knows the cost of war, but what about the cost of peace. What solution are you suggesting, and will it involve millions of people living in a dictatorship?

comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 19 seconds ago
comment by Passion Power - Make 1984 fiction again (U8398)
posted 22 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 1 minute ago
It is the best way to end the war.
But, and it's a big but, agreeing to Russia keeping the country they currently occupy is one thing. But the people who live there don't want it.
So how can Zalensky give away millions of peoples lives, in a democracy.
As I said earlier, could the UK have given away, Cornwall, Devon and Dorset to the Germans for 'peace'.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can't compare that to Ukraine and Russia, totally different. Germany and UK had nothing to do with each other, they didn't have the complicated history like those countries.

Who knows what the peace treaty involved, but reports said the two sides appeared to have made tenuous progress toward a settlement to end the war until Boris pressured Zelensky to ditch peace talks with Russia. Doing the peace talks earlier would've had less of Russia occupying Ukraine.

The war is not just affecting Ukraine but the majority of the world, I'm constantly getting ads on youtube about the global food crisis affecting places in Africa due to the war in Ukraine, we are on the verge of a global food shortage crisis (but not just because of Ukraine though)

US has given already around $54 billion, this war is likely to last years, how much more would be required and is it sustainable?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I can and did compare them. It's valid.
Everyone knows the cost of war, but what about the cost of peace. What solution are you suggesting, and will it involve millions of people living in a dictatorship?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Your second paragraph is almost certainly untrue.

comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 38 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 19 seconds ago
comment by Passion Power - Make 1984 fiction again (U8398)
posted 22 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 1 minute ago
It is the best way to end the war.
But, and it's a big but, agreeing to Russia keeping the country they currently occupy is one thing. But the people who live there don't want it.
So how can Zalensky give away millions of peoples lives, in a democracy.
As I said earlier, could the UK have given away, Cornwall, Devon and Dorset to the Germans for 'peace'.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can't compare that to Ukraine and Russia, totally different. Germany and UK had nothing to do with each other, they didn't have the complicated history like those countries.

Who knows what the peace treaty involved, but reports said the two sides appeared to have made tenuous progress toward a settlement to end the war until Boris pressured Zelensky to ditch peace talks with Russia. Doing the peace talks earlier would've had less of Russia occupying Ukraine.

The war is not just affecting Ukraine but the majority of the world, I'm constantly getting ads on youtube about the global food crisis affecting places in Africa due to the war in Ukraine, we are on the verge of a global food shortage crisis (but not just because of Ukraine though)

US has given already around $54 billion, this war is likely to last years, how much more would be required and is it sustainable?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I can and did compare them. It's valid.
Everyone knows the cost of war, but what about the cost of peace. What solution are you suggesting, and will it involve millions of people living in a dictatorship?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Your second paragraph is almost certainly untrue.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If Russia can afford it then the USA and EU certainly can.