超级军网纽约时报读者对于美国参与乌克兰内战的评价
来源：百度文库 编辑：超级军网 时间：2024/04/27 18:12:21
大部分持批评态度,也有10-15%的人希望美国支持乌克兰,我不知道这些人有多少来自俄罗斯,我现在贴出来(英文)让大家看看.
US 2 hours ago
“Raising the risks and costs to Russia” by shipping weapons to Ukraine will work just as well as supplying weapons to the South Vietnamese Army worked 50 years ago. When your adversary views the fight as an existential struggle (and Putin increasingly does), any escalation will simply be met by the adversary raising the stakes further. When that adversary has a few thousand nuclear warheads, as Russia does, and the fight is not existential for you, pretty soon you hit a point where the risks of further escalation become unbearable. Down that road lies defeat. The alternative is to recognize that what happens in Ukraine is much more important for Russia than it is for the US and to seek a negotiated settlement that accommodates some of Russia’s interests. Demanding capitulation and throwing more fuel into the fire of war is not going to work.
Reply
92Recommend
NC 4 hours ago
Why are generals making comments on any matters of government policy? This has become a disturbing trend. This general's job is to do what he is ordered to do not make public comments on policy.
83Recommend
BKB
Athens, Ga. 3 hours ago
Do we really want a proxy war with Russia? And why does Gen Dempsey think he should be making foreign policy?
57Recommend
Sensi
3 hours ago
"NATO’s military commander, Gen. Philip M. Breedlove, now supports providing defensive weapons and equipment to Kiev’s beleaguered forces"
An unelected military official wants to send weapons to one side of a civil war in a country which isn't even part of the supposedly defensive alliance that is NATO... More incomprehensible wish of counter-productive and dangerous meddling from NATO and US officials, some certainly wish to reignite the cold war to stay relevant...
55Recommend
New York, NY 3 hours ago
Very bad idea. This is not fighting Syria or Iraq. Escalating this conflict by sending weapons will leave more civilians dead and would only be used to justify Russia's actions. Russia would likely be forced to up the ante. The US has no real place in this fight and it is wasting its time and money as usual. It has learned nothing from its previous battles.
coushatta 3 hours ago
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The United States and its allies - NATO and the EU are already and have been providing lethal aid to the unconstitutional government in Kiev, a government which we helped to put in power in a coup. There are NATO weapons, NATO ammunition and other NATO combat equipment on the ground and being used against the people of the East of the Ukraine. The Director of the CIA has personally been to Kiev on more than one occasion. High ranking military advisers have been in Kiev and have visited the Ukrainian forces, even giving medals to the wounded. It seems that the good folk do not realize that a gun-to-gun encounter with Russia could result in a nuclear war. Nothing is worth a nuclear war, nothing, particularly not the egos of warmongers.
45Recommend
大部分持批评态度,也有10-15%的人希望美国支持乌克兰,我不知道这些人有多少来自俄罗斯,我现在贴出来(英文)让大家看看.
US 2 hours ago
“Raising the risks and costs to Russia” by shipping weapons to Ukraine will work just as well as supplying weapons to the South Vietnamese Army worked 50 years ago. When your adversary views the fight as an existential struggle (and Putin increasingly does), any escalation will simply be met by the adversary raising the stakes further. When that adversary has a few thousand nuclear warheads, as Russia does, and the fight is not existential for you, pretty soon you hit a point where the risks of further escalation become unbearable. Down that road lies defeat. The alternative is to recognize that what happens in Ukraine is much more important for Russia than it is for the US and to seek a negotiated settlement that accommodates some of Russia’s interests. Demanding capitulation and throwing more fuel into the fire of war is not going to work.
Reply
92Recommend
NC 4 hours ago
Why are generals making comments on any matters of government policy? This has become a disturbing trend. This general's job is to do what he is ordered to do not make public comments on policy.
83Recommend
BKB
Athens, Ga. 3 hours ago
Do we really want a proxy war with Russia? And why does Gen Dempsey think he should be making foreign policy?
57Recommend
Sensi
3 hours ago
"NATO’s military commander, Gen. Philip M. Breedlove, now supports providing defensive weapons and equipment to Kiev’s beleaguered forces"
An unelected military official wants to send weapons to one side of a civil war in a country which isn't even part of the supposedly defensive alliance that is NATO... More incomprehensible wish of counter-productive and dangerous meddling from NATO and US officials, some certainly wish to reignite the cold war to stay relevant...
55Recommend
New York, NY 3 hours ago
Very bad idea. This is not fighting Syria or Iraq. Escalating this conflict by sending weapons will leave more civilians dead and would only be used to justify Russia's actions. Russia would likely be forced to up the ante. The US has no real place in this fight and it is wasting its time and money as usual. It has learned nothing from its previous battles.
coushatta 3 hours ago
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The United States and its allies - NATO and the EU are already and have been providing lethal aid to the unconstitutional government in Kiev, a government which we helped to put in power in a coup. There are NATO weapons, NATO ammunition and other NATO combat equipment on the ground and being used against the people of the East of the Ukraine. The Director of the CIA has personally been to Kiev on more than one occasion. High ranking military advisers have been in Kiev and have visited the Ukrainian forces, even giving medals to the wounded. It seems that the good folk do not realize that a gun-to-gun encounter with Russia could result in a nuclear war. Nothing is worth a nuclear war, nothing, particularly not the egos of warmongers.
45Recommend
US 2 hours ago
“Raising the risks and costs to Russia” by shipping weapons to Ukraine will work just as well as supplying weapons to the South Vietnamese Army worked 50 years ago. When your adversary views the fight as an existential struggle (and Putin increasingly does), any escalation will simply be met by the adversary raising the stakes further. When that adversary has a few thousand nuclear warheads, as Russia does, and the fight is not existential for you, pretty soon you hit a point where the risks of further escalation become unbearable. Down that road lies defeat. The alternative is to recognize that what happens in Ukraine is much more important for Russia than it is for the US and to seek a negotiated settlement that accommodates some of Russia’s interests. Demanding capitulation and throwing more fuel into the fire of war is not going to work.
Reply
92Recommend
NC 4 hours ago
Why are generals making comments on any matters of government policy? This has become a disturbing trend. This general's job is to do what he is ordered to do not make public comments on policy.
83Recommend
BKB
Athens, Ga. 3 hours ago
Do we really want a proxy war with Russia? And why does Gen Dempsey think he should be making foreign policy?
57Recommend
Sensi
3 hours ago
"NATO’s military commander, Gen. Philip M. Breedlove, now supports providing defensive weapons and equipment to Kiev’s beleaguered forces"
An unelected military official wants to send weapons to one side of a civil war in a country which isn't even part of the supposedly defensive alliance that is NATO... More incomprehensible wish of counter-productive and dangerous meddling from NATO and US officials, some certainly wish to reignite the cold war to stay relevant...
55Recommend
New York, NY 3 hours ago
Very bad idea. This is not fighting Syria or Iraq. Escalating this conflict by sending weapons will leave more civilians dead and would only be used to justify Russia's actions. Russia would likely be forced to up the ante. The US has no real place in this fight and it is wasting its time and money as usual. It has learned nothing from its previous battles.
coushatta 3 hours ago
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The United States and its allies - NATO and the EU are already and have been providing lethal aid to the unconstitutional government in Kiev, a government which we helped to put in power in a coup. There are NATO weapons, NATO ammunition and other NATO combat equipment on the ground and being used against the people of the East of the Ukraine. The Director of the CIA has personally been to Kiev on more than one occasion. High ranking military advisers have been in Kiev and have visited the Ukrainian forces, even giving medals to the wounded. It seems that the good folk do not realize that a gun-to-gun encounter with Russia could result in a nuclear war. Nothing is worth a nuclear war, nothing, particularly not the egos of warmongers.
45Recommend
大部分持批评态度,也有10-15%的人希望美国支持乌克兰,我不知道这些人有多少来自俄罗斯,我现在贴出来(英文)让大家看看.
US 2 hours ago
“Raising the risks and costs to Russia” by shipping weapons to Ukraine will work just as well as supplying weapons to the South Vietnamese Army worked 50 years ago. When your adversary views the fight as an existential struggle (and Putin increasingly does), any escalation will simply be met by the adversary raising the stakes further. When that adversary has a few thousand nuclear warheads, as Russia does, and the fight is not existential for you, pretty soon you hit a point where the risks of further escalation become unbearable. Down that road lies defeat. The alternative is to recognize that what happens in Ukraine is much more important for Russia than it is for the US and to seek a negotiated settlement that accommodates some of Russia’s interests. Demanding capitulation and throwing more fuel into the fire of war is not going to work.
Reply
92Recommend
NC 4 hours ago
Why are generals making comments on any matters of government policy? This has become a disturbing trend. This general's job is to do what he is ordered to do not make public comments on policy.
83Recommend
BKB
Athens, Ga. 3 hours ago
Do we really want a proxy war with Russia? And why does Gen Dempsey think he should be making foreign policy?
57Recommend
Sensi
3 hours ago
"NATO’s military commander, Gen. Philip M. Breedlove, now supports providing defensive weapons and equipment to Kiev’s beleaguered forces"
An unelected military official wants to send weapons to one side of a civil war in a country which isn't even part of the supposedly defensive alliance that is NATO... More incomprehensible wish of counter-productive and dangerous meddling from NATO and US officials, some certainly wish to reignite the cold war to stay relevant...
55Recommend
New York, NY 3 hours ago
Very bad idea. This is not fighting Syria or Iraq. Escalating this conflict by sending weapons will leave more civilians dead and would only be used to justify Russia's actions. Russia would likely be forced to up the ante. The US has no real place in this fight and it is wasting its time and money as usual. It has learned nothing from its previous battles.
coushatta 3 hours ago
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The United States and its allies - NATO and the EU are already and have been providing lethal aid to the unconstitutional government in Kiev, a government which we helped to put in power in a coup. There are NATO weapons, NATO ammunition and other NATO combat equipment on the ground and being used against the people of the East of the Ukraine. The Director of the CIA has personally been to Kiev on more than one occasion. High ranking military advisers have been in Kiev and have visited the Ukrainian forces, even giving medals to the wounded. It seems that the good folk do not realize that a gun-to-gun encounter with Russia could result in a nuclear war. Nothing is worth a nuclear war, nothing, particularly not the egos of warmongers.
45Recommend
austin tx 3 hours ago
No, no, no, no, NO!!
45Recommend
rmp
coushatta 3 hours ago
If Putin had wanted to control the entire Ukraine, he would have conquered it when the Crimea seceded from the Ukraine. On the contrary, Putin wants the Ukraine to remain a neutral, bloc-free country. He does not want the country because it has been since its inception in 1991, a fiscal and economic nightmare. The West wants the Ukraine for two reasons: to plunder its wealth and to serve as a gateway to plunder Russia.
43Recommend
BaadDonkey
San diego 3 hours ago
Think long an hard about that. It might look like a brave move, but if it escalates are we prepared to go toe to toe with Russia on their doorstep? I hope not.
36Recommend
rusalka
NY 4 hours ago
This should have been done as soon as the Russians went on the offensive. The most critical need right now is for Western powers to aid Ukraine militarily: with equipment, strategic planning, and intelligence.
Along with every person of conscience in the world, I have watched the renewed build-up of Russian military forces and equipment in Eastern Ukraine, along with the rising death toll, with profound dread. The US Congress recently passed the Ukraine Defense Act--to aid the Ukrainian army against unceasing Russian military aggression.
This week Putin spun yet another lie (does he even believe his own propaganda?), when he claimed that there is no Ukrainian army. Of course, this fits his twisted fantasy that there is no such nation as Ukraine either. NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg dismissed as "nonsense" Putin's allegations "that a NATO legion was fighting alongside Ukraine government troops in the east of the country."
Ukraine must be given more military aid NOW.
34Recommend
Alexander Scheirer
Washington/Conecticut 2 hours ago
We would be making a very significant mistake if we become involved in this regional war.
31Recommend
Sausalito 3 hours ago
Giving Ukrainian soldiers the means to kill Russian soldiers is tantamount to us pulling the trigger. This mess could have been avoided is we had not tried to "run the table" after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Adding the Ukraine to NATO was spitting in the Russian's eye, and would have added zero to our security. . but then again it would have provided a fresh weapons market for our military contractors, An attack on the Ukraine is NOT an attack on the US, unless you see it as an attack on our potential weapons market.
30Recommend
Tampa 2 hours ago
This anti-Russian rhetoric has got to stop. Russia might be a poor country, but it has nuclear weapons and a huge military. Putin has made it clear that the Ukraine is his red line. He will not let the U.S. and Europe put another NATO base at Russia's borders. Since no President will be able to convince the American people to get into nuclear war with Russia over the Ukraine, don't make the situation any worse by arming the Ukrainians. Find another way to feed the military industrial complex.
29Recommend
Cincinnati 2 hours ago
I thought I'd add my support for arming Ukraine before this is flooded by paid Russian trolls. Having studied in Russia, I am far from a Russophobe, but it only takes a quick trip around the Russian media to know where this war has been going for months and who is at fault. I was blessed with coming of age in the Gorbachev era, and I never thought I'd see such a vile propaganda machine on European soil in my lifetime. The Radio Moscow of old looks like a bastion of unbiased truthfulness compared to the delights of Channel One.
No, no, no, no, NO!!
45Recommend
rmp
coushatta 3 hours ago
If Putin had wanted to control the entire Ukraine, he would have conquered it when the Crimea seceded from the Ukraine. On the contrary, Putin wants the Ukraine to remain a neutral, bloc-free country. He does not want the country because it has been since its inception in 1991, a fiscal and economic nightmare. The West wants the Ukraine for two reasons: to plunder its wealth and to serve as a gateway to plunder Russia.
43Recommend
BaadDonkey
San diego 3 hours ago
Think long an hard about that. It might look like a brave move, but if it escalates are we prepared to go toe to toe with Russia on their doorstep? I hope not.
36Recommend
rusalka
NY 4 hours ago
This should have been done as soon as the Russians went on the offensive. The most critical need right now is for Western powers to aid Ukraine militarily: with equipment, strategic planning, and intelligence.
Along with every person of conscience in the world, I have watched the renewed build-up of Russian military forces and equipment in Eastern Ukraine, along with the rising death toll, with profound dread. The US Congress recently passed the Ukraine Defense Act--to aid the Ukrainian army against unceasing Russian military aggression.
This week Putin spun yet another lie (does he even believe his own propaganda?), when he claimed that there is no Ukrainian army. Of course, this fits his twisted fantasy that there is no such nation as Ukraine either. NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg dismissed as "nonsense" Putin's allegations "that a NATO legion was fighting alongside Ukraine government troops in the east of the country."
Ukraine must be given more military aid NOW.
34Recommend
Alexander Scheirer
Washington/Conecticut 2 hours ago
We would be making a very significant mistake if we become involved in this regional war.
31Recommend
Sausalito 3 hours ago
Giving Ukrainian soldiers the means to kill Russian soldiers is tantamount to us pulling the trigger. This mess could have been avoided is we had not tried to "run the table" after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Adding the Ukraine to NATO was spitting in the Russian's eye, and would have added zero to our security. . but then again it would have provided a fresh weapons market for our military contractors, An attack on the Ukraine is NOT an attack on the US, unless you see it as an attack on our potential weapons market.
30Recommend
Tampa 2 hours ago
This anti-Russian rhetoric has got to stop. Russia might be a poor country, but it has nuclear weapons and a huge military. Putin has made it clear that the Ukraine is his red line. He will not let the U.S. and Europe put another NATO base at Russia's borders. Since no President will be able to convince the American people to get into nuclear war with Russia over the Ukraine, don't make the situation any worse by arming the Ukrainians. Find another way to feed the military industrial complex.
29Recommend
Cincinnati 2 hours ago
I thought I'd add my support for arming Ukraine before this is flooded by paid Russian trolls. Having studied in Russia, I am far from a Russophobe, but it only takes a quick trip around the Russian media to know where this war has been going for months and who is at fault. I was blessed with coming of age in the Gorbachev era, and I never thought I'd see such a vile propaganda machine on European soil in my lifetime. The Radio Moscow of old looks like a bastion of unbiased truthfulness compared to the delights of Channel One.
这些是受其它读者较高评价的帖子! *** Recommend 是说有***人赞成这个帖子!
Barry Schreibman
Cazenovia, New York 2 hours ago
Classic Obama dithering -- and a very clear example of how it costs lives and American prestige. As Ukraine's President Poroshenko said months ago when he addressed Congress: "Wars are not won with blankets." Russia has now demonstrated with the utmost clarity at least twice that any success on the ground Kiev attains (at the cost of many lives) will be countered and pushed back by fresh incursions of Russian armor. How in God's name are Kiev's brave soldiers to stop Russian armored assaults when, as this article states, their anti-armor missles "are out of commission." Here's a hint: They can't. See, e.g., what's happening now on the ground. The U.S. should have sent anti-tank, shoulder-fired Javelin missiles and up-to-date counter battery radar months and months ago. Let's just hope there is still a Ukrainian army left to arm by the time Professor Obama stops dithering.
27Recommend
Brooklyn, NY 3 hours ago
No, no, no! We can't save the entire world. We'd like to, but not at the expense of our young men and women! They deserve the lives they were born to, and this country is immersing itself in wars all over the map! It's unfair to our own citizens. I sympathize with all the countries who are in civil wars. And countries who try to get out from under the thumb of aggressors. But we have a lot to do for ourselves, as well. And we do have an obligation to our own citizens. When there's the slightest risk of danger to the U.S., such as ISIS, we must try to stop it. But, to get into other conflicts is wrong.
The desire for Russian confrontation is more dangerous today then the Bay of Pigs incident. There is no stopping the onward globalization of the American-NATO Empire. The poor WILL BE pawns once again as Free Enterprise and the World Banking System seek to rape the resources of yet another deluded cultural scociety in the pretense of promises of profits and freedoms that can only be amassed by the affluent few as they are in our own once great society. God bless and protect the innocents so easily led astray.
27Recommend
Nancy
2 hours ago
The refrain of Russia vilification and hatred need to stop. We have started a new Cold War and are preparing a hot war. We must stop, there is no possible reason for us to encourage the Ukraine government to wage war. I am appalled.
26Recommend
2 hours ago
1. You can just see the Military Industrial Complex and its minions--Brookings Institution, the Atlantic Council et al--salivate at the prospect of another windfall--at the expense of the US taxpayer, of course. Why don't they start a collection and pay for it themselves?
26Recommend
Mission Viejo, CA 4 hours ago
We already know that Vladimir Putin isn't deterred by much, and that includes an economy in shambles. So, if we really want them to maintain their independence, we can give the Ukranians what they really need, *so long* as we are prepared to go the rest of the way.
Are we?
25Recommend
Barry Schreibman
Cazenovia, New York 2 hours ago
Classic Obama dithering -- and a very clear example of how it costs lives and American prestige. As Ukraine's President Poroshenko said months ago when he addressed Congress: "Wars are not won with blankets." Russia has now demonstrated with the utmost clarity at least twice that any success on the ground Kiev attains (at the cost of many lives) will be countered and pushed back by fresh incursions of Russian armor. How in God's name are Kiev's brave soldiers to stop Russian armored assaults when, as this article states, their anti-armor missles "are out of commission." Here's a hint: They can't. See, e.g., what's happening now on the ground. The U.S. should have sent anti-tank, shoulder-fired Javelin missiles and up-to-date counter battery radar months and months ago. Let's just hope there is still a Ukrainian army left to arm by the time Professor Obama stops dithering.
27Recommend
Brooklyn, NY 3 hours ago
No, no, no! We can't save the entire world. We'd like to, but not at the expense of our young men and women! They deserve the lives they were born to, and this country is immersing itself in wars all over the map! It's unfair to our own citizens. I sympathize with all the countries who are in civil wars. And countries who try to get out from under the thumb of aggressors. But we have a lot to do for ourselves, as well. And we do have an obligation to our own citizens. When there's the slightest risk of danger to the U.S., such as ISIS, we must try to stop it. But, to get into other conflicts is wrong.
The desire for Russian confrontation is more dangerous today then the Bay of Pigs incident. There is no stopping the onward globalization of the American-NATO Empire. The poor WILL BE pawns once again as Free Enterprise and the World Banking System seek to rape the resources of yet another deluded cultural scociety in the pretense of promises of profits and freedoms that can only be amassed by the affluent few as they are in our own once great society. God bless and protect the innocents so easily led astray.
27Recommend
Nancy
2 hours ago
The refrain of Russia vilification and hatred need to stop. We have started a new Cold War and are preparing a hot war. We must stop, there is no possible reason for us to encourage the Ukraine government to wage war. I am appalled.
26Recommend
2 hours ago
1. You can just see the Military Industrial Complex and its minions--Brookings Institution, the Atlantic Council et al--salivate at the prospect of another windfall--at the expense of the US taxpayer, of course. Why don't they start a collection and pay for it themselves?
26Recommend
Mission Viejo, CA 4 hours ago
We already know that Vladimir Putin isn't deterred by much, and that includes an economy in shambles. So, if we really want them to maintain their independence, we can give the Ukranians what they really need, *so long* as we are prepared to go the rest of the way.
Are we?
25Recommend
认不到方言！
生肉，费劲！
超大啥时候用英文发帖了？
看不懂
都是一些字母,不知所谓.是不是乱码
Google 翻译:
把武器运给乌克兰就好比把武器供应给南越军“提高风险和成本，以俄罗斯的”工作50年前。当你的对手为生存看待战斗（普京日益一样），你的任何升级将只被对手用来进一步提高赌注。当象俄罗斯那样对手拥有几千枚核弹头,斗争无关你的生存，你很快就会打一个点，进一步升级的风险对你变得无法忍受。沿着这条道路你会失败。另外一点是认识到发生在乌克兰的事对于俄罗斯远比对美国重要，因此我们应该通过谈判解决，可以容纳一些俄罗斯的利益。苛刻的投降条件和向战争投掷更多的燃料是行不通的。
回复
92Recommend
NC 4小时前
为什么将军作出评论政府政策的任何问题？这已经成为一个令人不安的趋势。这是一般的工作是做什么，他被命令不要让政策公众意见。
83Recommend
BKB
雅典，佐治亚州3小时前
难道我们真的要代理与俄罗斯的战争？又为何登普西将军认为他应该做的外交政策？
57Recommend
森西
2小时前
“北约的军事统帅，将军菲利普·布里德洛夫，现在支持，提供防御性武器装备基辅陷入困境的力量”
一个未经选举产生的军方官员想送武器到一个处于内战的国家,而这个国家还根本不是所谓的防御联盟(北约)......北约和美国官员适得其反和危险的插手更令人费解的愿望有些当然希望重新点燃冷战留下的相关...
55Recommend
纽约2小时前
非常糟糕的主意。这不是叙利亚或伊拉克的战斗，发送武器升级这种矛盾就会有更多的平民死亡，只会被用来证明俄罗斯的行动。俄罗斯将有可能被迫加大了赌注。美国在这场斗争中没有任何真实的地方，它是浪费了时间和金钱，像往常一样。它什么也没学到，从先前的战斗。
考沙塔2小时前
女士们，先生们，
美国和它的盟友 - 北约和欧盟都已经，并已提供致命的援助违宪基辅政府，这是我们帮助把权力的政变政府。有北约的武器，北约弹药和其他北约作战装备在地上，被用来对付东方的乌克兰人。中央情报局的局长亲自到过基辅不止一次。高层军事顾问已经在基辅，并参观了乌克兰队，甚至给奖牌伤员。看来，良好的民间没有意识到，枪对枪的遭遇与俄罗斯可能导致核战争。没有什么值得一核战争，什么都没有，战争贩子特别不是自负。
把武器运给乌克兰就好比把武器供应给南越军“提高风险和成本，以俄罗斯的”工作50年前。当你的对手为生存看待战斗（普京日益一样），你的任何升级将只被对手用来进一步提高赌注。当象俄罗斯那样对手拥有几千枚核弹头,斗争无关你的生存，你很快就会打一个点，进一步升级的风险对你变得无法忍受。沿着这条道路你会失败。另外一点是认识到发生在乌克兰的事对于俄罗斯远比对美国重要，因此我们应该通过谈判解决，可以容纳一些俄罗斯的利益。苛刻的投降条件和向战争投掷更多的燃料是行不通的。
回复
92Recommend
NC 4小时前
为什么将军作出评论政府政策的任何问题？这已经成为一个令人不安的趋势。这是一般的工作是做什么，他被命令不要让政策公众意见。
83Recommend
BKB
雅典，佐治亚州3小时前
难道我们真的要代理与俄罗斯的战争？又为何登普西将军认为他应该做的外交政策？
57Recommend
森西
2小时前
“北约的军事统帅，将军菲利普·布里德洛夫，现在支持，提供防御性武器装备基辅陷入困境的力量”
一个未经选举产生的军方官员想送武器到一个处于内战的国家,而这个国家还根本不是所谓的防御联盟(北约)......北约和美国官员适得其反和危险的插手更令人费解的愿望有些当然希望重新点燃冷战留下的相关...
55Recommend
纽约2小时前
非常糟糕的主意。这不是叙利亚或伊拉克的战斗，发送武器升级这种矛盾就会有更多的平民死亡，只会被用来证明俄罗斯的行动。俄罗斯将有可能被迫加大了赌注。美国在这场斗争中没有任何真实的地方，它是浪费了时间和金钱，像往常一样。它什么也没学到，从先前的战斗。
考沙塔2小时前
女士们，先生们，
美国和它的盟友 - 北约和欧盟都已经，并已提供致命的援助违宪基辅政府，这是我们帮助把权力的政变政府。有北约的武器，北约弹药和其他北约作战装备在地上，被用来对付东方的乌克兰人。中央情报局的局长亲自到过基辅不止一次。高层军事顾问已经在基辅，并参观了乌克兰队，甚至给奖牌伤员。看来，良好的民间没有意识到，枪对枪的遭遇与俄罗斯可能导致核战争。没有什么值得一核战争，什么都没有，战争贩子特别不是自负。
如果普京本来想控制整个乌克兰，他在克里米亚从乌克兰脱离德那时就已经征服了它。相反，普京希望乌克兰保持中立，不结盟的国家。他不想要这个国家，因为它从1991年以来就一直是一个财政和经济的噩梦。西方希望乌克兰有两个原因：掠夺其财富，并作为门槛来掠夺俄罗斯。
43Recommend
BaadDonkey
圣地亚哥2小时前
刻苦的想像吧。这看起来像一个勇敢的举动，但如果内战升级,我们是不是准备去脚趾对脚趾与俄罗斯在他们的家门口决斗？我希望不会。
36Recommend
水仙女
纽约7小时前
我们在俄罗斯开始进攻乌克兰的时候就应该提供武器。现在乌克兰最关键的是西方列强在军事上帮助乌克兰：设备，战略规划和情报。
就想世界上任何一个有良心的人一样，我看到在乌克兰东部的重新集结的俄罗斯军队和装备，随着死亡人数不断上升，具有深刻的恐惧。美国国会最近通过的乌克兰国防法 - 以帮助乌克兰军队对俄罗斯不断的军事侵略。
本周普京纺另一个谎言（没有他甚至相信自己的宣传？），当他声称没有乌克兰军队。当然，这符合他的扭曲的幻想，有没有这样的国家乌克兰要么。北约秘书长斯托尔滕贝格斥为“无稽之谈”普京的指控“是北约军队并肩作战乌克兰政府军在该国东部地区。”
乌克兰现在必须给予更多的军事援助。
43Recommend
BaadDonkey
圣地亚哥2小时前
刻苦的想像吧。这看起来像一个勇敢的举动，但如果内战升级,我们是不是准备去脚趾对脚趾与俄罗斯在他们的家门口决斗？我希望不会。
36Recommend
水仙女
纽约7小时前
我们在俄罗斯开始进攻乌克兰的时候就应该提供武器。现在乌克兰最关键的是西方列强在军事上帮助乌克兰：设备，战略规划和情报。
就想世界上任何一个有良心的人一样，我看到在乌克兰东部的重新集结的俄罗斯军队和装备，随着死亡人数不断上升，具有深刻的恐惧。美国国会最近通过的乌克兰国防法 - 以帮助乌克兰军队对俄罗斯不断的军事侵略。
本周普京纺另一个谎言（没有他甚至相信自己的宣传？），当他声称没有乌克兰军队。当然，这符合他的扭曲的幻想，有没有这样的国家乌克兰要么。北约秘书长斯托尔滕贝格斥为“无稽之谈”普京的指控“是北约军队并肩作战乌克兰政府军在该国东部地区。”
乌克兰现在必须给予更多的军事援助。
给乌军提供武器杀死俄军就等于我们亲自扣动手枪扳机,我们最好避免这类混乱的情形,就像我们在苏联解体后那样没有试图去控制那里的局面;让乌克兰加入北约等于向俄罗斯眼睛上吐口水,我们不会得到任何安全利益,不过话说回来我们(提供乌克兰武器)又能给军火商打开市场, 俄罗斯对乌克兰的攻击并不等于对美国的攻击,除非你认为这个是对我们的军火市场的攻击.
反俄罗斯的宣传应该停止,虽然俄罗斯是一个穷国,但是他又核武器和巨大的军力,普京明确的说乌克兰是他的红线,他决不会让欧美把北约扩展到家门口,既然没有任何一位美国总统能够说服美国人民(为了乌克兰)去和俄罗斯打核战争,那么不要去武装乌克兰而让事态恶化; (想给军火商打开市场的话)还是想别的主意吧
我想自己还是支持向乌克兰提供军援,不过这个网站早充满(用钱收买的)支持俄罗斯的垃圾帖子,我曾经在俄罗斯学习过,我远远不是对俄罗斯恐惧的那种人,********************************** (没有时间翻译,对不起)
反俄罗斯的宣传应该停止,虽然俄罗斯是一个穷国,但是他又核武器和巨大的军力,普京明确的说乌克兰是他的红线,他决不会让欧美把北约扩展到家门口,既然没有任何一位美国总统能够说服美国人民(为了乌克兰)去和俄罗斯打核战争,那么不要去武装乌克兰而让事态恶化; (想给军火商打开市场的话)还是想别的主意吧
我想自己还是支持向乌克兰提供军援,不过这个网站早充满(用钱收买的)支持俄罗斯的垃圾帖子,我曾经在俄罗斯学习过,我远远不是对俄罗斯恐惧的那种人,********************************** (没有时间翻译,对不起)