America Ready to Enter Into War with Russia - After November Elections

Jump to Last Post 1-9 of 9 discussions (84 posts)
  1. Ken Burgess profile image70
    Ken Burgessposted 2 years ago

    The U.S. Army's 101st Airborne Division has been deployed to Europe for the first time in almost 80 years amid soaring tension between Russia and the American-led NATO military alliance. The light infantry unit, nicknamed the "Screaming Eagles," is trained to deploy on any battlefield in the world within hours, ready to fight.

    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ukraine-ne … s-romania/

    The "Screaming Eagles" commanders told CBS News repeatedly that they are always "ready to fight tonight," and while they're there to defend NATO territory, if the fighting escalates or there's any attack on NATO, they're fully prepared to cross the border into Ukraine.

    Brig. Gen. John Lubas, the division's deputy commander, stressed this is "not a training deployment" but rather a "combat deployment" from which his forces "need to be ready to fight tonight, depending on how the situation escalates across the border."

    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/rest … to-ukraine

    Thoughts on the escalation of troop deployments ongoing now to the Ukraine border regions?

    1. Readmikenow profile image94
      Readmikenowposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I don't think even the biden administration is that stupid.

      They'd have to have a reason and be able to sell it in the media. I don't see any support for sending in US troops.

      I have no idea how they would sell this idea to the American public.

      Are they so crazy they won't care?

      1. Ken Burgess profile image70
        Ken Burgessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        smh... you're kidding right?

        A reason... like WMDs?     Iraq

        A reason... like chemical weapons?      Syria

        They will create the reason, and they will enter the war, this is a given.

        The media will be told what that reason is, and they will sell it to America.

        Those that rail against it, in whatever way, will be shunned, silenced, or labeled as a traitor or Russian lover or whatever.

        This IS going to happen.

        I am not hypothesizing.

        1. Readmikenow profile image94
          Readmikenowposted 2 years agoin reply to this

          Then, I predict it will end up being a disaster for this country just like Iraq, Viet Nam and others. 

          I believe there will be massive push back from the left and right.  Serious protests will occur.

          Ukrainians are winning this war.  It makes no sense.

          1. Ken Burgess profile image70
            Ken Burgessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            Ukrainians are not winning the war in the sense that they can take back Crimea and hold it.

            This has always been the emphasis of this war, for both sides, with the Donbas region being a secondary consideration IMO.

            Yes there are plenty of other factors, but Ukraine does not "win" until it takes back Crimea, Zelensky just a few days back reiterated this in one of his speeches.

            In order to take Crimea, you must defeat Russia, in Russia.

            You must be willing to go all the way to Moscow.

            This war from the outset, only had two possible endings.

            Ukraine gives up Crimea.

            Russia is toppled.

            I doubt the second can be achieved without nuclear war and a collapse of civilization the world over... but it seems fools like Biden and those backing his moves in the Pentagon believe this is achievable.  Unfortunately.

            1. Readmikenow profile image94
              Readmikenowposted 2 years agoin reply to this

              "Ukrainians are not winning the war in the sense that they can take back Crimea and hold it."

              I disagree with you. You don't seem to realize how degraded their military is right now.  You probably know nothing about the gruella warfare being conducted against the Russians in Crimea.  It has been effective in taking out military bases, munition depots and more.  Russia is sustaining such losses in Crimea right now; they are going to eventually be glad to leave.

              "Crimea sabotage signals Ukraine shift to guerrilla war
              Successful sabotage attacks on Crimea’s Saki airbase are Kiev’s new shadowy ‘answer’ to Russia’s ‘meat-grinder’ tactics

              The first attack on the Saki military airfield, in the annexed Crimean peninsula, took place on August 9, 2022. Image: Screengrab / NDTV
              Russian President Vladimir Putin has reportedly replaced the commander of his Black Sea fleet just three days after an attack on the Russian Saki airbase in Crimea, as Ukraine’s military strategy shifts towards regaining territory in the south, and especially Crimea.

              Meanwhile, Russian aircraft are being moved to bases deeper inside the peninsula or to the mainland. Sevastopol, where the Black Sea fleet command is based, is on high alert. Ukraine has threatened to attack and destroy the famous Kerch Strait bridge which links the Russian mainland to Crimea.

              There have been two major attacks in one week on military targets in Russian-occupied Crimea, where fires destroyed an ammunition dump and military aircraft. More than 3,000 people had to be evacuated.

              Although Ukraine was reluctant at first to acknowledge the attacks, it is now clear that they were the work of Ukrainian special forces."

              https://asiatimes.com/2022/08/crimea-sa … rilla-war/

              1. Ken Burgess profile image70
                Ken Burgessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                Yes, I remember those strikes.

                Drone attacks and sabotage operations are not the same as occupying and holding a territory that is filled with Russians.

                It will be interesting to see what/whose intel is correct.

                Is the Russian army severely depleted?

                If so, why is there a continuing buildup of American forces around Ukraine now?

                Either Russia has been depleted, demoralized and is on the run... in which case, there is no reason to be sending our "first-strike" Division to the border of Ukraine.

                Or Russia is readying for a very serious attack this winter, the kid gloves are coming off, and they will go all out. In which case the 101st AD and
                other forward combat units being deployed on Ukraine's border makes perfect sense.

                1. Readmikenow profile image94
                  Readmikenowposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                  "If so, why is there a continuing buildup of American forces around Ukraine now?"

                  You would have to ask the American military.  Ukraine is on the verge of taking the city of Kherson.  When that is done, it is almost over.  The Ukraine will the consolidate their forces, establish their supply lines, and them drive the Russian toward their boarder.

                  If the Russian military is not severely degraded, why would they need to mobilize 300,000 more soldiers?  That is not going well, but it is another story.

                2. Nathanville profile image93
                  Nathanvilleposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                  Picking up on your comment, “Drone attacks and sabotage operations are not the same as occupying and holding a territory that is filled with Russians.” - Such operations do play an important role in modern warfare.  For example, on the 22nd July 1940 formed the SOE (Special Operations Executive), a secret British World War II organisation, its purpose was to conduct espionage, sabotage and reconnaissance in occupied Europe.  The organisation directly employed or controlled more than 13,000 people, about 3,200 of whom were women.

                  S.O.E. SPECIAL OPERATIONS EXECUTIVE:  https://youtu.be/_WALBIzzutc

                  Yeah, the Russian army are severely depleted, and demoralised; that’s why Putin intend to send in 300,000 conscripted soldiers (with little training and poorly armed); effective to become cannon fodder.

                  The build-up of NATO forces, including the Americans, around Ukraine at a time like this is standard procedure; something which, if you lived in Europe, you’d know and be well used to e.g. ever since the end of the cold war there is always a build-up of NATO forces along the European border with Russia at times when Russia builds-up its forces on the border, with Russia claiming that it’s just ‘military exercises’ e.g. NATO responding to Russia's build-up of its military on the European border is nothing more than a precaution, ‘being prepared’ – a deterrent to ensure that Russia thinks twice before going on a land-grab.

                  Russia is not “readying for a very serious attack this winter”; I’m surprised that you don’t know that warfare literally becomes frozen over the winter months in Ukraine because of their very ‘harsh’ winter weather; so, both sides will be buckling down soon for a harsh winter, with little chance of advancement from either side until the spring.

        2. SamOliverDodge profile image60
          SamOliverDodgeposted 2 years agoin reply to this

          Anyways, I support decomacracy and freedom in the world but looking at American/NATO invasion on Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan, Yemen. Terroristan (Pakistan) I do not see USA has democratic agendas any more at international levels. In fact, It is allowing to thrive dictators/terrorist in countries which America controls them so, those can be used if needed for its self-interest. It is called directorial democracy. That is a worrisome trend for the world.

    2. Sharlee01 profile image86
      Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      This is very disturbing on many levels. First, we have a cognitively deprived man in the White House making decisions that could end us up in a  true boots-on-the-ground war. Second, I don't see any other NATO countries sending troops to the Border of Romania.  This is BS...  And hopefully, Americans will get out quickly and protest against sending in any troops into Ukraine. Otherwise, we get what we deserve, our men being killed in a war where we don't belong period.  Russia at this point does not pose a threat to America. And if comes don't buy it with me when it comes to starting a war with another nuclear-powered nation.  IT would certainly be a different problem if Russia was threatening a NATO nation. They are not. We have and are offering aid to Ukraine, that is where, in my view, where it should stop. 

      The writing was on the wall that we would be drawn into this war.  Hey, my thoughts --- I am infuriated at this administration.  As I have been saying for two years, they are dangerous and have an agenda to rip America apart.

      1. IslandBites profile image93
        IslandBitesposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        Second, I don't see any other NATO countries sending troops to the Border of Romania.  This is BS

        Yes, ^ it is BS...

        They are already there. US troops too.

        Feb 2022

        The United States will move approximately 3,000 service members to Romania, Poland and Germany in response to Russia's continuing build-up of forces on its western border with Ukraine and in Belarus, Pentagon Press Secretary John F. Kirby said today during a news conference.

        The United States is not the only nation beefing up troop presence in the front-line states. Kirby noted French President Emmanuel Macron also announced sending units to Romania and that Spain, Denmark, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands are also consulting with allies to deploy forces to reinforce NATO's eastern flank.

        LINK

        Also,

        At the 2022 NATO Summit in Madrid, Allies agreed to enhance the multinational battlegroups from battalions up to brigade size, where and when required.

        Plus, it is not only Romania.

        As of October 2022, the eight battlegroups are composed of the following Allies:

        Host nation: Bulgaria
        Framework nation: Italy
        Contributing nations: Albania, Greece, North Macedonia and the United States

        Host nation: Estonia
        Framework nation: United Kingdom
        Contributing nations: Denmark, France and Iceland

        Host nation: Hungary
        Framework nation: Hungary
        Contributing nations: Croatia, Italy, Montenegro, Türkiye and the United States

        Host nation: Latvia
        Framework nation: Canada
        Contributing nations: Albania, Czechia, Italy, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia and Spain

        Host nation: Lithuania
        Framework nation: Germany
        Contributing nations: Belgium, Czechia, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Norway

        Host nation: Poland
        Framework nation: United States
        Contributing nations: Croatia, Romania and the United Kingdom

        Host nation: Romania
        Framework nation: France
        Contributing nations: North Macedonia, Poland, Portugal, the Netherlands and the United States

        Host nation: Slovakia
        Framework nation: Czechia
        Contributing nations: Germany, the Netherlands and Slovenia

        LINK

        1. Sharlee01 profile image86
          Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

          Yes, I noted Germany sent 350 troops
          https://www.politico.eu/article/germany … ne-crisis/

          Perhaps if you are going to post information you need to be more precise, in regard to how many troops, each country sent. NATO is well known for sending token support throughout its history.

          1. IslandBites profile image93
            IslandBitesposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            Nah.
            One could say "perhaps if you are going to post, you should do research first."

            But I didnt. I decided to show you why you were wrong.

            You could do the rest, if you're interested. smile

            1. Sharlee01 profile image86
              Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

              My entire reply was written as an opinion.  Plus, not sure why you even think you have the right to tell me or anyone they are" wrong".  Maybe you should think a bit about that.  Actually, I have no more interest than what my opinion offered.  Maybe you might learn how to decipher the context of a given comment.  I guess you missed the words "  Hey, my thoughts -"

            2. Ken Burgess profile image70
              Ken Burgessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

              Semantics.

              This is America's war and the whole world knows it... except those Americans that consider the likes of CNN and MSNBC to be founts of truth.

              The support from EU for this, and any troops they send, is largely due to the strongarm tactics America has used to garner such support.

              Not that the elites running Brussels, or the UK for that matter, don't want this, they do, just as much as the Biden Administration does.  But the nations of EU, by and large, want no part of a war with Russia.

              And since the Nord Stream was sabotaged, most nations of the EU really don't trust America's motivations or willingness to sacrifice what is in their best interests.

      2. Ken Burgess profile image70
        Ken Burgessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        Those that wanted to protest our entry into the war, those that wanted to negotiate a peace, have been warned to shut up, or pay the price:

        Liberal Democrats withdraw letter to Biden that urged him to rethink Ukraine strategy

        The Congressional Progressive Caucus has withdrawn a letter, signed by 30 House liberals and sent to the White House Monday, that urged President Biden to negotiate directly with Russia to bring an end to the war in Ukraine.

        The withdrawal comes a day after the letter, led by Congressional Progressive Caucus chair Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), triggered fierce pushback from many Democrats, as well as from Ukrainian officials

        https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics … ne-letter/

        This will be the case for any others who do so.

        They will be warned, and then if that does not work, they will be labeled as Putin lovers, Russian conspirators, enemies of Democracy, etc.

      3. GA Anderson profile image83
        GA Andersonposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        Your response is the opposite of how I see it. I see the deployment, (per Ken's description), as a necessary move and a strong message to Putin. It's a commitment.

        I think the outcome of this war is important to our future, (near-future), national security. As I think it is to all European Western nations. We are, now, in an unavoidable position. Do we stand or do we fold? I think standing is the best choice for our nation.

        GA

        1. Ken Burgess profile image70
          Ken Burgessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

          America is committed.

          This includes supporting Ukraine in taking back Crimea.

          Russia considers Crimea to be as part of Russia as any other.

          Taking Crimea is invading Russian soil.

          Russia has promised to use any and all options when attacked on its soil.

          So we have a dilema don't we?

          America considers Crimea part of Ukraine, it is the prize they are after.

          Russia claims it will do anything to prevent this, including nuclear options.

          So... Biden has put America in a situation where it is royally screwed no matter what happens.  There is no good options left.  Its just a matter of how many more have to die.

          Secondly...

          When America commits to this war on Russia with its own troops, chances of China invading Taiwan go up drastically.

          While America is committed to its war on Russia, its not going to go so well when America has to war with China too.

          Biden has positioned America into a wonderful fix.

          And he has used up our Oil and Diesel reserves right on the eve of global war... the man and his staff are utterly brilliant... if there plan was to put America in a very precarious position, they have done a great job.

          1. GA Anderson profile image83
            GA Andersonposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            Yes, we are in a 'fix.' It almost doesn't matter how we got here or who is to blame, we're in the same position as Putin: " What do we do now? We both need a way out.

            With the full support of my lack of expertise and knowledge, I think we must stand strong now.

            GA

            1. Ken Burgess profile image70
              Ken Burgessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

              It matters in the sense that Biden, especially, needs to be held accountable.

              It needs to be seen by people correctly.

              Zelensky's chest thumping about taking Crimea back by force only began, and continued, when he knew he had the backing of the Biden Administration.

              In February Biden stated more than once that:

              "The United States does not, and will never, recognize Russia’s purported annexation of the peninsula, and we will stand with Ukraine against Russia’s aggressive acts. We will continue to work to hold Russia accountable for its abuses and aggression in Ukraine," Biden said.

              This was a declaration of war on Russia... it is why Russia spent a year building up its forces for its invasion.

              Russia supported Crimea's sucession and later accepted Crimea as part of the Russian Federation, it has now been part of Russia for over 8 years.

              8 years GA...

              8 years Crimea has been part of Russia.  Not occupied, not under hostile control.  As much part of Russia as any other.

              One would have to be a rather nieve individual to think the powers in control of our government today weren't pushing for this war as much as Zelensky himself... when they just as easily could have ended it. 

              Find an acceptable agreement, armistice, end to the conflict in the Donbas and accept Crimea's secession as legit.

              Done... peace... world goes on as normal, trade improves, energy prices remain stable, America is in a better position to talk tough to North Korea or China or both.

              Now America is in a compromised position, America does not have the ability to wage long term war against Russia and China... and their allies like North Korea and Iran.

              And that is very likely where we are headed until and unless Ukraine gives up the lunacy of trying to take Crimea from Russia.

              Crimea is Russia.

              There is no taking Crimea without bringing down the government of Russia, without invading Russia.

              This was always the reality... and those pushing for this war knew it.

              So it does matter who started this and how we got here.

              And don't try to tell me Biden didn't want this, there is a reason why Hunter Biden worked for the largest energy company in Ukraine, there is a reason why Biden addressed the Ukrainian assembly in 2014.

              Biden was ALWAYS about this war, he ALWAYS intended to escalate the war with Russia.

              1. Sharlee01 profile image86
                Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                All you have shared makes sense. However, I must ask --- do you feel the US will go to war with Russia even if NATO will not condone that war? I just don't see NATO joining into such a serious destructive war that will be played out in Europe. Would the US dare go it alone? 

                I think NATO has made it very clear they would not defend any nation but a NATO country.  I offered a long statement they put out at the end of Sept. It is very clear what they would not do.

                https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/115204.htm

                1. Ken Burgess profile image70
                  Ken Burgessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                  And yet NATO is supplying artillery, tanks, air defense, anti-armor, surface to air, drones, HIMARs... hundreds of billions of dollars, Special Forces "advisors" and "trainers".

                  That is not exactly what I call staying out of the war.

                  Threatening Russia is not exactly staying out of the war.
                  https://www.youtube.com/shorts/tx5P8vFb-pY
                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKJq2XVUuoM

                  They did not push Zelensky to the negotiation table to end the conflict in the Donbas region and find a way to peace.

                  They supported Ukraine in its efforts to take Crimea from Russia by force.

                  That is not staying neutral, that is sticking their noses in other nation's business.

                  In the first paragraph of the link, they lie right out of the gate:
                  "NATO does not seek confrontation and poses no threat to Russia."

                  I think arming Russia's enemies with the best weapons, funding them with billions of dollars, and training them to kill Russians is very much the definition of being a threat.

                  1. Sharlee01 profile image86
                    Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                    NATO did make the commitment to supply aid, and weapons (which the larger part comes from the US), so it is not such a hard thing to do when someone else is paying the bigger part of the bill.

                    "NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said: “I welcome that Allies are stepping up to support Ukraine, with additional military equipment, financial assistance, and humanitarian AID. Self-defense is a right enshrined in the UN Charter, and Allies are helping Ukraine uphold that right. This sends a clear message of NATO’s full support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.”
                    https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news … %2Bsupport

                    I think the statement they put out in Sept 2022, which has not been reported on, speaks loudly about what they will and won't do. It well appears they will send aid, and it ends there, thus far.

                    So, if Biden wants a war with Russia, he may end up looking like a Pariah.

                    "What happens if a NATO country attacks another NATO country?
                    A NATO Member being the initial aggressor is a violation of the NATO Treaty as it violates the UN Charter. Not only does that member state no longer enjoy protection under the NATO Treaty, but it is also a ground to expel that member state from the Alliance."

                    So, would NATO condone the US (a NATO nation) stepping into a war with Russia? 

                    I see your point, but threats and aid (in my opinion) are more like a form of pushback to make an attempt to stop a World war. I think it is all they can do without truely declaring war on Russia. My God if NATO did declare war, there is no question Putin would use all the
                    weapons at his disposal.

                    I think this is partly why NATO would not support a war with Russia or condone a US war.

                    "I think arming Russia's enemies with the best weapons, funding them with billions of dollars, and training them to kill Russians is very much the definition of being a threat."

                    I think Putin realizes the aid at some point will stop. There are already rumblings here in the US and across Europe that there needs to be some form of time limit to how long weapons will be supplied.

                    EUROPE NEWS
                    "The U.S. and Europe are running out of weapons to send to Ukraine"
                    https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/28/the-us- … raine.html
                    https://www.vox.com/world/2022/9/17/233 … pe-provide

                    I feel a new administration will look at avoiding conflict with Russia over Ukraine.

        2. Sharlee01 profile image86
          Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

          I disagree, this far Russia has not imposed itself on any NATO Nation. including the US.   NATO is not actually responsible for defending Ukraine. NATO is doing the humane thing at this point. NATO will not even admit they are at a war with Russia. I think NATO will call the Shots.  Not so sure that NATO would go to war without the provocation of Russia moving on as a NATO nation. And in my view, NATO will not be as quick to agree to war even if the US feels it necessary. The war would be fought on their continent.  And, They have cooler heads.

          I think Ken's theory is very plausible, and Biden is bucking for war. However, we are about to have elections that hopefully will give Republican's the power of  Congress to stop any war with Russia.  We need cooler heads in Congress as well as the White House.
          Russia is not a threat to us as of yet, are they? Are you joining into the 'if come crowd"?

          21 Sep. 2022 --   "At the NATO Summit in Madrid, Allies agreed that Russia is the most significant and direct threat to their security and to peace and stability in the Euro-Atlantic area. Russia's brutal war in Ukraine has shattered peace in Europe. Due to its hostile policies and actions, NATO cannot consider Russia to be our partner. NATO does not seek confrontation and poses no threat to Russia. The Alliance will continue to respond to Russian threats and actions in a united and responsible way."

          "Myth 1: NATO is at war with Russia in Ukraine ---
          Fact: NATO is not at war with Russia, and we do not seek confrontation with Russia. What NATO does is support Ukraine in its right to self-defence, as enshrined in the UN Charter. Over the past months, we have taken strictly defensive measures to increase the presence of NATO troops in the eastern part of the Alliance."

          "Myth 2: NATO promised Russia it would not expand after the Cold War
          Fact: Such an agreement was never made. NATO’s door has been open to new members since it was founded in 1949 – and that has never changed. This “Open Door Policy” is enshrined in Article 10 of NATO’s founding treaty, which says “any other European State in a position to further the principles of this Treaty and to contribute to the security of the North Atlantic” can apply for membership. Decisions on membership are taken by consensus among all Allies. No treaty signed by the United States, Europe and Russia included provisions on NATO membership."
          https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/115204.htm

          "Myth 3: NATO is aggressive and a threat to Russia
          Fact: NATO is a defensive alliance, whose purpose is to protect our members. Our official policy is that "NATO does not seek confrontation and poses no threat to the Russian Federation" NATO didn't invade Georgia; NATO didn't invade Ukraine. Russia did."
          https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/115204.htm

          Russia is fully aware if they threaten the US we will strike. Have you heard them threaten the US? We are the strongest nation on the planet.  Yes, we would need to back NATO nations if they were attacked. That has not happened, we certainly have no business starting a war with Russia. Do you feel China would sit this war out or North Korea?

          I pray NATO has cooler heads to lead us out and away from a world war. I have zero confidence in the US Government at this point. I would predict NATO will solve this problem, and certainly, war will not be their first choice, unless Putin threatens a NATO nation.

          1. GA Anderson profile image83
            GA Andersonposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            NATO was never the 'we' or 'us' or 'Western nations' I mentioned. Specifically, I am talking about the U.S.

            Do you think we are not now committed to this war? That we could just tell Ukraine to give Russia what it wants because we're done? What if Ukraine won't concede the territory, do we walk, away and watch their fate? We have a good idea of what that fate will be.

            Take your thoughts a step further. Consider this scenario: A diplomatic solution is forced. Russia keeps Crimea and the annexed regions as world-recognized, (that would include us), parts of mother Russia. The rest of Ukraine is no longer a Russian concern, so they agree to the withdrawal of all forces. Except, those needed in the annexed regions.

            They now have the landbridge and boon of new oil and gas reserves that owning Crimea gives them. They still have Europe hostage to their energy needs. They still have the gas and oil production capabilities they had before the war.

            And, they have faced the combined political and world-stage might of the Western nations and gotten what he wanted from the beginning. His losses, in all areas, will heal in a few years, (fewer than the number Europe will need to reduce their Russian energy dependence).

            Then there is the China connection. I think China is willing to wait out those Russian 'healing' years and emerge as a 'stalwart' partner with the most powerful European nation, (that would be Russian after a few years of political exile), which can also supply all, (almost?), their near-future energy needs.

            That is the most probable scenario I see for the outcome of not stopping Putin's Ukraine move.

            GA

            1. Sharlee01 profile image86
              Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

              Gosh, we are so far apart... You seem to be dwelling on
              if comes".

              "Do you think we are not now committed to this war? That we could just tell Ukraine to give Russia what it wants because we're done? What if Ukraine won't concede the territory, do we walk, away and watch their fate? We have a good idea of what that fate will be."

              We are committed along with NATO to offer aid, and weapons to defend themselves thus far. Other than that, as I pointed out NATO does not consider that they are a war.  At some point, I would think we have two choices, either step in and the war on another continent in a non-NATO nation, or we walk away as we have in all our other wars'/conflicts. So to answer your question, yes I think at some point we will walk away. I can only offer an opinion, common sense tells me NATO will not want a war with Russia unless Russia pushes into a NATO nation. I don't think they will have the stomach for a war across Europe, no matter what the US wants to do. I hope you had a look at the NATO link I offered, they clearly laid out their agenda. 

              And yes the US as well should realize the outcome of walking away, they have done this frequently have they not? I need not list the conflicts we have walked away from.

              "They now have the landbridge and boon of new oil and gas reserves that owning Crimea gives them. They still have Europe hostage to their energy needs. They still have the gas and oil production capabilities they had before the war."

              It would seem 2017  Europe has been buying and purchasing natural gas and oil from Russia in greater amounts due to going green. They have found it is not as easy as they felt it would be to go green. As we most likely are now seeing here in the US. So, they have a choice to revert back to fossil fuels and work out a passable plan to do without Russia supplying them with energy. As they have done to keep warm this
              winter. It baffles me how hypocritical leaders are being, they won't produce energy until they can work into green energy.

              "They now have the landbridge and boon of new oil and gas reserves that owning Crimea gives them. They still have Europe hostage to their energy needs. They still have the gas and oil production capabilities they had before the war."

              I would think that this is Europe's problem, and they could move ahead with their hopes of going green. Why in the world do you even feel Russia should not be allowed to produce, and sell natural gas and oil? Europe and the US have purchased our means of energy from many nations, including Russia. I mean, at present we are begging for oil from many countries. (and we have the ability in the US to produce and supply our own means of energy and be completely energy independent"

              I respect your view, but I disagree with any form of war over OIL.
              And ultimately this is what I see happening. I will stick with NATO ideology on this one. And I would predict NATO will avoid and not support war with Russia. They have made that very clear. I feel that NATO has built up troops around its nations to show Russia it will defend any NATO nation. They are using this build-up as a serious threat. I think it is wise and sensible. They are conveying they will fight if necessary, but they in the next breath say we will follow the rules  --- we will not provoke unless provoked on the Nations we protect.

              I think they would back away from the US if we wage war on Russia in Ukraine.  I think NATO will use common sense, and weighing the situation will win out. Cool heads will prevail when it comes to NATO.

              I certainly would support a war if Russia at some point pushes into any NATO countries. This would present pure aggression. At this point, we have no right to step into the Russia/Ukraine war.  If bioweapons or nukes are used, this will pose decision-making on the part of NATO. I don't feel we have the right to step away from NATO and make decisions on our own. I mean this war would be fought on their continent. 

              I won't discuss China, I find it a very complicated subject.

  2. emge profile image80
    emgeposted 2 years ago

    Wonderful, what makes Biden think the Americans will win in Europe after; losing every war they fought after  1945? The USA does not have the where with all to fight with China and Taiwan in the background. Remember the EU is not united and the French are facing agitations for France to leave NATO.

    1. Kathryn L Hill profile image78
      Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      "If you have the wherewithal for something, you have the means, especially the money, that you need for it. 'She didn't have the financial wherewithal to do it.'" on-line explanation

      The USA does not have the financial/military wherewithal to fight in/for Ukraine, due to the troubles which are brewing between China and Taiwan.

      Yes, we will have to step in to keep Taiwan sovereign over its own nation/ freedom. This issue has priority.

      True, and good point.

    2. Sharlee01 profile image86
      Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Yes, many French citizens want out of NATO, and have for a while now. And have been having large protests.
      https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2022/10/10/t … nato-exit/
      https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202203/1254222.shtml

      Many in Europe do not stomach war, and won't be on board when push comes to shove.  The US needs to let Europe handle Putin, we have no skin in this game.

      1. Fayetteville Faye profile image61
        Fayetteville Fayeposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        Much of Europe's existence is dependent on NATO. If they are that short-sighted then go ahead and withdraw. Let's see how well they do when Putin comes knocking on their door.

        1. Sharlee01 profile image86
          Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

          I see your point, Faye. However, some nations just have no taste for war and don't think about the future. Actually, I truely feel Europe needs NATO, they need it much more than the US. I would think, they need to consider bucking up, pulling together, and at best appearing to be a bigger threat to Russia. I think many Nations depend on the US to save the Day, we have done that have we not? But, at this point, American views are changing and split on NATO, and let's face it globalism.

          Europe needs to Build NATO and these countries need to put some cash into their militaries.  I would hope Putin will stop with Ukraine. If they don't they will be faced with NATO/US.

  3. Kathryn L Hill profile image78
    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

    "Remember the EU is not united and the French are facing agitations for France to leave NATO."

    So, there will be not as much support as one would expect from NATO? (Some point out that NATO never drums up much interest/power for fighting.)

    So what outcome can we expect?

    We are selling arms and munitions for skirmishes, killings and bombings and we want in on the fun?
    Guess so.
    ... and to what dismal/tragic end.

    Life is Not a Joke!

  4. Fayetteville Faye profile image61
    Fayetteville Fayeposted 2 years ago

    I see that NATO has 10 times more troops stationed around Ukraine than just last year. I have yet to find a breakdown by country. Anyone else?

    https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2022 … ith-russia

    1. Sharlee01 profile image86
      Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      NATO's response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine Oct 22 ,2022
      https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_192648.htm
      https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_136388.htm

      Number of military personnel in NATO countries in 2021
      https://www.statista.com/statistics/584 … countries/

      I did read at one point France had 350 troops in Romania. I have not come across the numbers of troops stationed around Ukraine or what countries they are in.

      I found this which gives a breakdown of US troops in Europe
      "The United States responded swiftly and effectively in close cooperation with our NATO Allies to the European security crisis brought about by Russia’s aggression against Ukraine. The U.S. contributions to the Alliance’s response were enabled by the substantial forces that we had already stationed in and deployed to Europe, including robust prepositioned equipment and stocks, as well as substantial investments in infrastructure and military mobility enabled by European Deterrence Initiative funding.

      Our response included dispersing forces already in Europe to bolster NATO’s Eastern Flank, to include the deployment of: attack aviation from Germany to Lithuania; an airborne infantry battalion from Italy to Latvia; elements of a Stryker Brigade Combat Team from Germany dispersed to Romania, Bulgaria, and Hungary; Patriot batteries from Germany to Slovakia and Poland; and F-15s from the UK to Poland. These deployments have varied in length based on operational requirements and sustainability considerations.

      Since February 2022, DoD deployed or extended over 20,000 additional forces to Europe in response to the Ukraine crisis, adding additional air, land, maritime, cyber, and space capabilities, bringing our current total to more than 100,000 service members across Europe. This included extending a Carrier Strike Group, deploying additional fighter squadrons and lift/tanker aircraft, and deploying an Amphibious Readiness Group and Marine Expeditionary Force. DoD added a Corps Headquarters, Division Headquarters, Infantry Brigade Combat Team (IBCT), Armored Brigade Combat Team (ABCT), High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS) battalion, and multiple enablers to the existing Corps Forward Command Post, Division Headquarters, and three BCTs already stationed in or deployed to Europe."
      https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/R … to-europe/

      It would seem we have supplied a huge troop presence in Europe.

      1. Ken Burgess profile image70
        Ken Burgessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        This is correct, we have deployed, and are currently deploying troops, equipment, and ships, planes, etc. in similar fashion to how we built up for Desert Shield - Desert Storm.

        We are in the Shield phase now, the Storm phase begins sometime after the November elections. It is, as they say, a done deal.

        1. Sharlee01 profile image86
          Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

          I fear you are right. I won't question you, you have been pretty much right when you made predictions. Plus I can see you have really put a lot of research into the history long prior to this Russia/Ukraine conflict.

          1. Ken Burgess profile image70
            Ken Burgessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            Lets consider the motivations why:

            Is it because we want to "defend Democracy" or "save lives"?

            No.  You can make up a long list of places America did not go, did not involve itself in, when many lives were being lost, sometimes millions (IE - Rwanda Genocide that happened in 1994).

            Where has America injected itself in the last 30 years.

            Iraq - Oil
            Libya - Oil
            Syria - Oil & Gas Pipelines that Assad refused to allow
            Ukraine - Oil & Gas pipelines & resources

            Russia arguably has the largest wealth of natural resources and energy in the world.

            When you combine what Russia has on land with what it claims in the North Pole waters, it controls the largest oil and gas resources in the world.  Especially if you add to this the Donbas and Crimea regions.

            If fully developed and under Russian control, it would have more influence in the global economy than Saudi Arabia.  It would be the single most powerful nation in OPEC+ eventually.

            Its alliance with China, combined with China's alliance with Iran, would ensure China has the resources necessary under its control to compete with America. 

            BRICS + Iran would ultimately allow China to assert itself into the position of global dominance.

            This is why the goal is to topple the Russian regime, Putin and his inner council, to somehow gain more control over Russia and its resources, to take them out of the sphere of alliance with China.

            I don't think this will be pulled off without devastation on a global scale, but I could be wrong, they could pull it off.

            But don't think this is about bringing democracy and freedom to Ukraine, its not, its about oil, gas, power and control.

            1. Sharlee01 profile image86
              Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

              Ken. just this morning I read this --- "Republicans' proclaimed skepticism of providing further multi-billion dollar aid packages to Ukraine reportedly has European allies concerned that assistance for Ukraine may start to dry up.

              House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy confirmed to reporters last week that his party won't be interested in giving Ukraine a "blank check" if they take control of Congress in November. President Biden's administration has delivered more than $50 billion in security and humanitarian aid to the country since Russia invaded in February.

              Now, some leaders in Europe are sounding the alarm that a loss of U.S. support might start a wave of aid cuts for Ukraine"

              If the Republicans sweep could this disrupt Biden's plan to go into out-and-out war with Russia?

              I don't feel Republicans will have a taste for war with Putin. I think most are campaigning on America first and would hope to usher in a Republican President in 2024. If they support a war, they will risk ushering in a Republican president.

              I think the Nov elections are shaping up to sweep. I have been making it a point to watch the debates, In my view, the Republicans  are showing very well.

            2. Readmikenow profile image94
              Readmikenowposted 2 years agoin reply to this

              George W. Bush went before the United Nations to ask for support of a war with Iraq.  Many countries from around the world sent troops.

              Do you think Biden could do such a thing? 

              If other countries get involved, it is over for Russia.

  5. emge profile image80
    emgeposted 2 years ago

    Following the trend of the discussion, I feel as a soldier and senior officer of the military that most of this is wishful thinking. Sending token troops does not win a war and people are forgetting the point that the European countries are so small that in a nuclear exchange they will just cease to exist. In 1961 Nikita Khruschev First Secretary of the Soviet communist party at that time threatened that it will require just five or six thermonuclear bombs to finish off England and Harold McMillian was perturbed. Even if the  USA sends 3000 troops with armor it's not going to make a difference. We should not forget that in Vietnam at one time the Americans had 550,000 troops on the ground and yet they lost. I have studied the war in detail and I do not see how Ukraine is going to win; they're already on the back foot and America is desperately trying to keep the pot boiling. With nearly half of humanity, India, and China not condemning Russia and continuing to trade the Americans are facing a roadblock. The latest potboiler is  Iran which is on the Russian side and supplying drones and weapons which have created devastation in Ukraine.

    1. Sharlee01 profile image86
      Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Yes, I agree we did not win the Vietnam war even with hundreds of thousands of troops. My husband served in that war, and what he felt helped us lose the war was that the other side kept sending more troops, and the flow never stopped. They Knew the terrain, and they kept a hard-ground war going, while also using mortar attacks  They fought door-to-door in the towns.    It seems Putin is doing the same. Trying to push war on the ground, and making every attempt to wear down the citizens, and ruining the cities.

  6. Fayetteville Faye profile image61
    Fayetteville Fayeposted 2 years ago

    Any talk on what their specific plans would be for that money then? Policies to benefit the American people? I mean other than more tax cuts for the morbidly rich.  I'm just not hearing any real  ideas coming out of these candidates. How will they address inflation? Oil? Crime and so on.   I've heard far too much from them in terms of election denial and pointless culture wars about issues that barely exist.  All Republicans voted against the inflation act but why didn't they put up a plan of their own??

    1. Sharlee01 profile image86
      Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I have not heard any Republicans pushing any changes in our current tax laws.  Republican have also set their sights on tax changes, with some pushing for an extension to tax cuts included in former President Trump’s 2017 signature tax law. (Do you have an example that led you to believe Republicans intend to have "more tax cuts"?)

      Most have shared  they would help reduce inflation by -- slash spending,
      They will work on easing the supply chain bottleneck. In addition to federal spending that has bolstered consumer demand. They will target the supply chain bottleneck that has curtailed supply.

      They all are running on making America energy independent.
      and promise to expand U.S. oil and gas production, "Make friends of our oil companies, not enemies. More leases, more drilling, and more creation needed refineries.

      I think the debates are working to favor of Republicans.  They also are stumping more than Democrats, in my view. In Michigan, we see our republican candidates out with the people, on local as well as Fox programming, and Trump has been in town several times and gathered great crowds for candidates.  We also have a great Republican ground crew across Michigan, the party is very much on the ball.

      I am proud of most Republican candidates and proud to see the party working to win, and get our agenda out to Americans.

  7. Kathleen Cochran profile image76
    Kathleen Cochranposted 2 years ago

    Let us hope and pray we don't have to send "boots on the ground" to Ukraine because after 20 years of war we are in no position - recruitment, training, and equipment - to get into another one right now. The support we are offering is the best we can do - and we must keep doing it. Of all the disasters the GOP has inflicted on us, pulling back support might be the worst.

    1. Ken Burgess profile image70
      Ken Burgessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      This disaster is fully on the Biden Administration.

      There is no shifting the blame.

      If you try, the best you can do is go back to the Obama Administration when Crimea seceded and became part of the Russian Federation.

      It was allowed to happen then, starting a war over it 8 years later is wrong.

      Not taking into account the devastation and suffering the world would have to endure is wrong.

      Biden, the egotistical arrogant fool that he is said after he and Zelensky goaded Russia into action that the American people were willing to pay the price, endure the hardships, to support Ukraine in it's efforts.

      I hope Americans are wiser than that, I hope they hold Biden and the warmongering Democrat party accountable, voting them out of power whenever and wherever they can.

      The world will not survive much more of their "leadership" if we can make it to 2024 at all it will be because Republicans take control of Congress and strip Biden's ability to feed this war and take on Russia directly.

    2. Sharlee01 profile image86
      Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I am so hoping we get a Republican Congress, to prevent Joe's war. Because I don't think NATO would help Joe out with a Russian war. He is so dangerous... Think you may not have realized we Republicans support MAGA , Make America Great Again. We have no taste for war.

      1. Fayetteville Faye profile image61
        Fayetteville Fayeposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        When I think of making America great I don't think of isolationism. I don't think of all the culture wars the far right is waging. I think of government addressing issues of poverty, homelessness, drug addiction, mental health issues, improving education in a meaningful way. I think of not letting drug and insurance companies rake citizens over the coals to the point of bankruptcy.  Where is that agenda, that policy platform?

        1. Sharlee01 profile image86
          Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

          " I think of government addressing issues of poverty, homelessness, drug addiction, mental health issues, improving education in a meaningful way. I think of not letting drug and insurance companies rake citizens over the coals to the point of bankruptcy.  Where is that agenda, that policy platform?"

          Me too, and all this falls under considering America's first. Putting some of our aid to work right here in America. Because all you mentioned needs fixing.

          All of what you mentioned has gotten far worse under Biden. Maybe time to reconsider a party that is concerned about your concerns. Because Republicans are at this point.  America needs fixing, and yes abortion and fair election rules are important, but not as important as the list you gave. The Dems have nothing to offer or nothing to run on.

          The Democratic party has gone off the rails and needs to go back to being for all Americans.

        2. Sharlee01 profile image86
          Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

          "When I think of making America great I don't think of isolationism"

          Neither do we... Plain and simple you are being fed lies by your chosen left media. but what you believe in this case, is in my view false. Calls for an oh well...

          " I don't think of all the culture wars the far right is waging.'
          Not waging war, just fighting for truth, and clarity for all. Repunlicans have come to the conclusion we need to do this. As a rule we are pretty much above it all, but the time came we need to take hold of the reigns.

          I have offered our agenda several time to you in comments. Ypu seem to just not want to hear it or believe we are serious in regard to hopeing to make things better for all American's.

          I can't help youunderstand at this point, losing battle, one I won't take up.

          1. wilderness profile image90
            wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            It seems that so many of the left side of the room believe there is either isolationism or simply lie down and let the rest of the world walk on us.  Or dig in our pocketbook at the minimum.  Nothing in between.

            But that's NOT the definition of isolationism (IMO); nor does it even come close to "America First", which means we demand at least a fair shake.

            1. Sharlee01 profile image86
              Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

              I look at America first pretty much as it seems you do. I will add, we need to put this country first at this point to just work on serious problems that have occurred over time. We can't worry about the world's problems until we start fixing some of our own. I am fully on board with "make America Great Again"

              And hope that Republicans get the chance to try and prove they can keep their campaign promises or at least really work at them.

              The vitriol coming from the left is outrageous,  one can see they are lashing out and desperate at this point, campaigning using out-and-out lies.

              1. Fayetteville Faye profile image61
                Fayetteville Fayeposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                I don't think I've heard one Republican midterm candidate with any sort of specific plan or idea to address any issue.  They are campaigning on criticism, complaint, dislike of liberals and meaningless culture war issues. 
                What does Dr Oz or Mr hillbilly elegy JD Vance have planned to address inflation, and I mean very specifically?
                They're running for Senate so if they win these seats they will certainly affect the entire nation and all I've heard out of those two is crazy nonsense. Mr Vance talks more about women staying in abusive relationships for the sake of the family then he does about any policy.  On this issue and others, Oz has said far more about what he wouldn’t do than what he would.

                1. Sharlee01 profile image86
                  Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                  I have listened to several debates, and I disagree. Republicans many Republicans are staying on the subjects of all the current problems that Americans are suffering from. Democrats are talking about Jan 6th, abortion rights, and voter suppression, also tossing many lies about Republicans will cut Social Security and Medicare.  They say this without making mention of even one candidate that they claim wants to do that.

                  I have asked you a couple of times what are Dem's running on. I have followed along, and I have not heard many even bring up current problems. In my view, we have a president who every time he stands in front of a podium is divisive, and spreads hate, and out and out lies

                  Republicans have stuck pretty much to current problems, and as always are respectful. You seem to be projecting.

                  "What does Dr Oz or Mr hillbilly elegy JD Vance have planned to address inflation, and I mean very specifically?"

                  IMO - this is just disrespectful, but I realize liberals feel they can call names, you have a president that called Republican vile names, as well as liberal talk show hosts ---  referring to Republican omen as roaches. I find this kind of attitude from anyone disgusting, and uncalled for.

                  As I have mentioned before citizens have a right to vote, and choose to send whoever they feel fit to Washington.

                  I would think the liberals may learn, the majority don't care for the liberal ideologies, and will boot them out of office. The majority rules and I trust this system. I think the majority will get it right this time around.

                  1. Fayetteville Faye profile image61
                    Fayetteville Fayeposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                    There is no disrespect there. JD Vance wrote the book named hillbilly elegy. But back to the question, what are their specific plans?  If they win a majority how will they come in and immediately turn things around? I do believe that President Biden was blamed on day two for pretty much all of the world's problems so I would be expecting instantaneous results from Republicans.

  8. Kathleen Cochran profile image76
    Kathleen Cochranposted 2 years ago

    I support MAGA: Make America Good Again. And if I were a Trumper, I wouldn't be calling anyone names.

  9. Kathleen Cochran profile image76
    Kathleen Cochranposted 2 years ago

    You are by far the most prolific poster on HP. Glad to see you weren't in the running for any of the awards. I only post here to provide some balance so hubbers don't think this is a site that just attracts the crazies.

     
    working

    This website uses cookies

    As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

    For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy

    Show Details
    Necessary
    HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
    LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
    Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
    AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
    Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
    CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
    Features
    Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
    Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
    Marketing
    Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
    Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
    Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
    Statistics
    Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
    ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
    ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)