In 2012 Mitt Romney said Russia was our #1 geopolitical threat in the presidential debate with Obama and Obama laughed at him and said "the 1980s called and wants its foreign policy back" and you people all clapped like seals. Now 10 years later you're all acting like it's 1965 and the USSR is at its zenith.
^^^^^^
This is yet another example of how internally cross upped this guy gets when he's on troll mode. Here he is agreeing with Obama's theory that Russia was not a geopolitical threat (and disagreeing with Romney). But in other posts he says Russian invaded Crimea, which at least in those posts he appears to believe is somewhat of a bad thing, because Obama was weak on confronting Russia. And this is all somehow in support his larger and much more idiotic "Russia is only anti-US because the US is anti-Russia" theme. Follow all this twisted appeasement logic at your own peril.
Quite the opposite. The left was anti-war once upon a time. The entire left having Ukraine flags on their Twitter profiles signifies a flip flop on their behalf not mine.
Russia took Crimea for the same reason it invaded Ukraine in 2022. The fact that you still have no idea how they are related is yet another example of your ignorance.
1) who is "you people" I voted for Romney. I agreed with him
2) Doesn't make it right? Doesn't make it morally wrong to support those that get invaded? Weird argument
3) Never said the US is pure good? Why are you putting words in my mouth?
4) Russia is currently acting like they are our enemy, we can either be naive and magically hope we can go back in time, or... face the current situation and deal with an enemy. Sure, maybe we should have never got here, but were here, we have to act.
5) People make profit, sure. That doesn't mean whats happening to the Ukrainians is ok and that giving them support isn't in our geopolitical interests given Russia is... our stated enemy.
You are making this more complicated than it has to be. You need to accept there is a case for helping Ukraine; sure, you don't agree... but there is a case.
1. The typical Ukrainian zealot didn't vote for Romney.
2. Getting invaded doesn't automatically make you the good guy.
3. You say Russia is evil which implies that you think their adversaries are the good guys...
4. Russia is acting in the hostile environment the US has been fostering since 1991. NATO has been gobbling up territory for decades.
5. I still don't see any reason why Russia needs to be our enemy or why we should care what Russia does in Europe. If Europe isn't willing to defend Europe we sure as hell shouldn't be either.
I never denied there was a case for helping Ukraine. I simply said the case is stupid and it is.
Even if 100% of what you say is true, Europe should be the one to do the work not the US. Ukraine is a European problem.
Russia has no navy. Russia has a small economy. Russia is no threat to the US unless we provoke them into using nuclear weapons.
Is Russia really stronger now than before the invasion? This was a key part of your argument.
This post was edited 30 seconds after it was posted.
This is yet another example of how internally cross upped this guy gets when he's on troll mode. Here he is agreeing with Obama's theory that Russia was not a geopolitical threat (and disagreeing with Romney). But in other posts he says Russian invaded Crimea, which at least in those posts he appears to believe is somewhat of a bad thing, because Obama was weak on confronting Russia. And this is all somehow in support his larger and much more idiotic "Russia is only anti-US because the US is anti-Russia" theme. Follow all this twisted appeasement logic at your own peril.
Quite the opposite. The left was anti-war once upon a time. The entire left having Ukraine flags on their Twitter profiles signifies a flip flop on their behalf not mine.
Russia took Crimea for the same reason it invaded Ukraine in 2022. The fact that you still have no idea how they are related is yet another example of your ignorance.
I feel like the left is pro-little guy. They have Palestinian flags, Tibetan flags, Ukrainian Flags, they would've have Kuwaiti flags back in the day!
1. The typical Ukrainian zealot didn't vote for Romney.
2. Getting invaded doesn't automatically make you the good guy.
3. You say Russia is evil which implies that you think their adversaries are the good guys...
4. Russia is acting in the hostile environment the US has been fostering since 1991. NATO has been gobbling up territory for decades.
5. I still don't see any reason why Russia needs to be our enemy or why we should care what Russia does in Europe. If Europe isn't willing to defend Europe we sure as hell shouldn't be either.
I never denied there was a case for helping Ukraine. I simply said the case is stupid and it is.
Even if 100% of what you say is true, Europe should be the one to do the work not the US. Ukraine is a European problem.
Russia has no navy. Russia has a small economy. Russia is no threat to the US unless we provoke them into using nuclear weapons.
Is Russia really stronger now than before the invasion? This was a key part of your argument.
Are they weaker?
China certainly isn't weaker.
Russia's military is certainly stronger now than it was at the beginning of the invasion.
1) who is "you people" I voted for Romney. I agreed with him
2) Doesn't make it right? Doesn't make it morally wrong to support those that get invaded? Weird argument
3) Never said the US is pure good? Why are you putting words in my mouth?
4) Russia is currently acting like they are our enemy, we can either be naive and magically hope we can go back in time, or... face the current situation and deal with an enemy. Sure, maybe we should have never got here, but were here, we have to act.
5) People make profit, sure. That doesn't mean whats happening to the Ukrainians is ok and that giving them support isn't in our geopolitical interests given Russia is... our stated enemy.
You are making this more complicated than it has to be. You need to accept there is a case for helping Ukraine; sure, you don't agree... but there is a case.
1. The typical Ukrainian zealot didn't vote for Romney.
2. Getting invaded doesn't automatically make you the good guy.
3. You say Russia is evil which implies that you think their adversaries are the good guys...
4. Russia is acting in the hostile environment the US has been fostering since 1991. NATO has been gobbling up territory for decades.
5. I still don't see any reason why Russia needs to be our enemy or why we should care what Russia does in Europe. If Europe isn't willing to defend Europe we sure as hell shouldn't be either.
I never denied there was a case for helping Ukraine. I simply said the case is stupid and it is.
Even if 100% of what you say is true, Europe should be the one to do the work not the US. Ukraine is a European problem.
Russia has no navy. Russia has a small economy. Russia is no threat to the US unless we provoke them into using nuclear weapons.
1) I will be the "typical zealot" or whatever role you want me to play. Forget I voted for Romney ha.
2) Of course it doesn't. But it is evidence for not being being the bad-guy in a conflict. Singling out individually causes and saying "well that's not enough" is a nice rhetorical trick, but doesn't really help us solve anything. Multiple pieces of evidence can go into making a decision.
3) I could think that Russia, Ukraine, and all of Europe are terribly evil. There would still be a case for aiding Ukraine to hurt Russia. Not everything has to be a moral decision - like you said!
4) NATO is a defensive pact countries can voluntarily join. Countries that are scared of getting invaded by Russia should be allowed to seek protection from superpowers... why not?
5) Agreed, maybe Russia doesn't have to be our enemy. Right now, they are and we can hurt them by aiding Ukraine with a small fraction of our GDP and zero American lives. Seems like a good deal.
I wish Europe would do more too; but they are an economic backwater, slow to act, and not even 1/10th the global force the US is.
1. The typical Ukrainian zealot didn't vote for Romney.
2. Getting invaded doesn't automatically make you the good guy.
3. You say Russia is evil which implies that you think their adversaries are the good guys...
4. Russia is acting in the hostile environment the US has been fostering since 1991. NATO has been gobbling up territory for decades.
5. I still don't see any reason why Russia needs to be our enemy or why we should care what Russia does in Europe. If Europe isn't willing to defend Europe we sure as hell shouldn't be either.
I never denied there was a case for helping Ukraine. I simply said the case is stupid and it is.
Even if 100% of what you say is true, Europe should be the one to do the work not the US. Ukraine is a European problem.
Russia has no navy. Russia has a small economy. Russia is no threat to the US unless we provoke them into using nuclear weapons.
1. Not wanting to get invaded makes you normal, not a zealot.
2. Invading your neighbor without cause automatically makes you the bad guy.
3. Russia has been committing unspeakably evil acts at high intensity for 16 months, and for much longer.
4. NATO hasn't gobbled up any territory, ever. Nations have begged and pleaded to join NATO of their own accord.
4a. Why is it that so many countries neighboring Russia want to join NATO?
4b. Why hasn't Russia invaded any NATO members?
4c. Doesn't this show that joining NATO to defend yourself against Russian aggression is the right strategy?
5. Russia chose to be our enemy. We spent three decades trying to treat them as a trustworthy partner. They reacted by sending kill teams into Europe and the UK and armies into Ukraine and Georgia.
Russia has no navy? What do you think is launching missiles from the Black Sea, an oil platform?
Russia bombs a busy pizza restaurant in Kramatorsk, killing women and children as they tried to eat dinner. This was a guided missile strike and was clearly the intended target with the timing of the strike intended to kill as many civilians as possible. Russia has been brutal in its attacks on Kramatorsk, killing 60 civilians when it bombed the train station in April of 2022. Kramatorsk was one of the first cities seized by separatists in 2014. UA retook Kramatorsk within a few months, but RU has wanted to turn Kramatorsk into another Mariupol/Bakhmut but got pushed back during the Fall 2022 counteroffensive. Yet, Russia is still targeting Kramatorsk with missiles.
UA is improving the pace of its counteroffensive and was able to cross the Dnipro in small boats and may have been able to establish a beachhead by the Antonovsky bridge. RU moved forces from Kherson to the eastern front in order to shore up defenses after flooding made it impossible for UA to launch a major attack across the Dnipro. UA may be improvising by sending troops across the Dnipro in batches in small boats instead of trying to use a temporary river crossing. Long range artillery strikes look to be in support of a new axis of attack by the Antonovsky bridge.
Russia's military is certainly stronger now than it was at the beginning of the invasion.
What makes you say Russia is "certainly stronger." Genuine question, I would like to see your evidence and hopefully learn something.
In my eyes, they have lost of lot of men and equipment. I guess they have figured out a bunch of stuff they have to improve on? Knowledge is strength?
Going to war makes militaries stronger. The only to learn how to fight is to fight. The US hasn't faced a 1st world opponent since WW2. If you think the US wouldn't get its nose bloodied facing a modern enemy you're mistaken.
We've been told that Russia is on the brink of economic collapse but they seem to be doing just fine. Half the world is either with them or doesn't care about Ukraine so they aren't having any trouble selling their energy and food as they always have.
1. The typical Ukrainian zealot didn't vote for Romney.
2. Getting invaded doesn't automatically make you the good guy.
3. You say Russia is evil which implies that you think their adversaries are the good guys...
4. Russia is acting in the hostile environment the US has been fostering since 1991. NATO has been gobbling up territory for decades.
5. I still don't see any reason why Russia needs to be our enemy or why we should care what Russia does in Europe. If Europe isn't willing to defend Europe we sure as hell shouldn't be either.
I never denied there was a case for helping Ukraine. I simply said the case is stupid and it is.
Even if 100% of what you say is true, Europe should be the one to do the work not the US. Ukraine is a European problem.
Russia has no navy. Russia has a small economy. Russia is no threat to the US unless we provoke them into using nuclear weapons.
1. Not wanting to get invaded makes you normal, not a zealot.
2. Invading your neighbor without cause automatically makes you the bad guy.
3. Russia has been committing unspeakably evil acts at high intensity for 16 months, and for much longer.
4. NATO hasn't gobbled up any territory, ever. Nations have begged and pleaded to join NATO of their own accord.
4a. Why is it that so many countries neighboring Russia want to join NATO?
4b. Why hasn't Russia invaded any NATO members?
4c. Doesn't this show that joining NATO to defend yourself against Russian aggression is the right strategy?
5. Russia chose to be our enemy. We spent three decades trying to treat them as a trustworthy partner. They reacted by sending kill teams into Europe and the UK and armies into Ukraine and Georgia.
Russia has no navy? What do you think is launching missiles from the Black Sea, an oil platform?
2. They had cause. You not liking it doesn't make it untrue.
3. Russian have always fought this way. So have Ukrainians.
4. That's not how Russia sees it.
4a. I get why they lean west. I'm just not naive so I understand that Russia will want a say in the matter. Russia has ALWAYS said NATO in Ukraine was a red line.
4b. They have only ever said NATO was a red line in Georgia and Ukraine. By some magical coincidence these are the only 2 countries they've invaded...
4c. Yes, Russia invading has sent the exact opposite of the message they wanted to send. The problem is they cannot accept defeat now because of this.
5. Russia asked to join NATO. We laughed at them because Russia in NATO was a non-starter to the corrupt politicians who profit off of keeping the wars going.
And Russia's blue water navy is a joke. America's Navy is more powerful than the rest of the navies in the world combined.
This post was edited 11 minutes after it was posted.
A little weird that we are equating the traditional leftist “anti-war” position with appeasement. I don’t think the leftist position was ever “anti war means letting big country annex small country”
Most people want the war to end; most people do not want warmongers to be rewarded.
Tough situation but I don’t think it’s as grey area as you guys are claiming; framing it as “pro-war” and hypocritical of leftists to be anti-invasion is disingenuous. Overall this thread seems filled with rhetorical practice and no one actually wanting to learn, see other points of view, or try and reach a consensus. Kinda boring.
What cause do you think they had? When your cause is demonstrably a lie you don’t have a cause. You have an excuse.
You should ask the Ukraine Nazis among the peaceful Euromaidan crowd what cause they had to start the violence (and this war), November 24th 2013. Peace achieved all the goals. No violent fascism was ever needed. Yet, they pushed violence.
Then ask why the Ukraine government armed its Nazi problem to launch attacks into the Donbas April 2014. People wanting to vote is not reason to start attacking them.
I bet Ukraine's leaders wished they would not have started and escalated the violence Donbas. Big mistake, that.
I've been running off and on (months at a time) for over 40 years. I started at age 11/12 when my parents bought me Jim Fixx's Complete Book of Running in 1977. I lived that book for years. I always found running extremely difficult but I pushed myself hard in junior high and high school PE classes. I learned so much from my own research that I knew more about the sport than my school coaches. I did horribly on our middle school cross country team but I still loved the sport. In high school I ran a 4:40 mile and a 7:50 1.5 miles, but I got hooked on the weight training and bodybuilding bug by age 16. Running quickly took a back seat. I threw myself into cycling and triathlon training after high school but never seriously. In college I was running and cycling a lot but lifting weights more. My mile, 5K, and 10K ability and times really took a hit due to the added muscle. My mile time slowed to 5:29 by age 20 despite running more than in high school. By my mid-20s running was sort of 3-4 months on, 6-8 months off and this pattern continued until my early-40s. I had lots of major running injuries during this time like plantar faciitis, shin splints, Achilles tendinitis, stress fracture, etc. After that it was 2 or 3 months or so per year. In early 2023 I decided to stop the pattern and move on with my life. I just don't feel good during or even after a run anymore. I've been strength training all of my post-teen life and it makes me feel ABSOLUTELY wonderful and always has. I also love to walk, run short sprints, and bicycle. My guess is if you're seriously considering stopping then you probably should give it a try. You can always come back to it any time you want. If you keep in good shape through other fitness activities you'll always be able to run a few miles if you ever need to or want to. Good luck.
A collection of some of the dumbest things I've heard about the war over the past few years. 1:13 Why not negotiate?18:15 NATO!!!31:15 But they bombed the Do...
A dramatic drone footage showed Ukrainian troops trapped in a minefield in Russia’s Zaporizhzhia region amid their failed counteroffensive. The video purport...
Nazis testing mines fields with their bodies, not de-mining tools. Nazi leg blown off, then applies tourniquet themselves. Tough lessons being learners by war-starting Ukraine.
