dem activist wrote:
Maybe a war is what we need, it got us out of the last depression
Well how did that work out? The whole world is suffering inflation and on border of recession.
-
00
-
bigmig19 wrote:
dem activist wrote:
Maybe a war is what we need, it got us out of the last depression
Well how did that work out? The whole world is suffering inflation and on border of recession.
The war has very little to do with inflation...
25 -
I don't know why chicken-hawks whom are fanatics for Ukraine for one reason or another are celebrating.
U.S. Army flag officers for months were quietly telling Biden: No tanks to Ukraine.
What does this show us?
> Speaker K McCarthy is a tool but a tool of whom?
> One or more person at U.S. State Department must want U.S. to escalate for emotional reasons.
> Are C.I.A. on board with this or others in U.S. Intel community? I doubt it. Tanks move us further away from C.I.A. capabilities. Tanks don't help C.I.A.
> This is bipartisan politics. If weapons manufacturers benefit, politicians benefit.
U.S. with the help of N.A.T.O. are superior non-nuclear warriors to Russia. This is highly dangerous! Tank battles? U.S. will need low flying planes and helicopters armed with anti-tank munitions. Quietly, this puts No Fly Zone on the table. These are dangerous times and no one in charge knows what they are doing. No doubt when U.S. Army generals turned Biden down regarding tanks three plus months ago, Game Theory must have indicated the risk was not worth the reward. Do U.S. politicians have the will to stop this?
37 -
Cold War Warrior wrote:
I don't know why chicken-hawks whom are fanatics for Ukraine for one reason or another are celebrating.
U.S. Army flag officers for months were quietly telling Biden: No tanks to Ukraine.
What does this show us?
> Speaker K McCarthy is a tool but a tool of whom?
> One or more person at U.S. State Department must want U.S. to escalate for emotional reasons.
> Are C.I.A. on board with this or others in U.S. Intel community? I doubt it. Tanks move us further away from C.I.A. capabilities. Tanks don't help C.I.A.
> This is bipartisan politics. If weapons manufacturers benefit, politicians benefit.
U.S. with the help of N.A.T.O. are superior non-nuclear warriors to Russia. This is highly dangerous! Tank battles? U.S. will need low flying planes and helicopters armed with anti-tank munitions. Quietly, this puts No Fly Zone on the table. These are dangerous times and no one in charge knows what they are doing. No doubt when U.S. Army generals turned Biden down regarding tanks three plus months ago, Game Theory must have indicated the risk was not worth the reward. Do U.S. politicians have the will to stop this?
Baloney...We have a moral obligation to help Ukraine....There is NO justification for Russia invading it's neighbors...Putin has lost over 100,000 soldiers and he doesn't have long to live himself....HOORAY....
65 -
runnerboy70 wrote:
Cold War Warrior wrote:
I don't know why chicken-hawks whom are fanatics for Ukraine for one reason or another are celebrating.
U.S. Army flag officers for months were quietly telling Biden: No tanks to Ukraine.
What does this show us?
> Speaker K McCarthy is a tool but a tool of whom?
> One or more person at U.S. State Department must want U.S. to escalate for emotional reasons.
> Are C.I.A. on board with this or others in U.S. Intel community? I doubt it. Tanks move us further away from C.I.A. capabilities. Tanks don't help C.I.A.
> This is bipartisan politics. If weapons manufacturers benefit, politicians benefit.
U.S. with the help of N.A.T.O. are superior non-nuclear warriors to Russia. This is highly dangerous! Tank battles? U.S. will need low flying planes and helicopters armed with anti-tank munitions. Quietly, this puts No Fly Zone on the table. These are dangerous times and no one in charge knows what they are doing. No doubt when U.S. Army generals turned Biden down regarding tanks three plus months ago, Game Theory must have indicated the risk was not worth the reward. Do U.S. politicians have the will to stop this?
Baloney...We have a moral obligation to help Ukraine....There is NO justification for Russia invading it's neighbors...Putin has lost over 100,000 soldiers and he doesn't have long to live himself....HOORAY....
There's like 30 other wars going on right now. Why aren't you morally outraged that we aren't paying for those too?
44 -
They just need to take Odessa to have access to the Sea, They already Took and the People voted they want to be a part of Russia again the East which has 90% of the Resource, So Most of the Resources and the Sea, is what Russia needs, Without having Resources, The West can just keep financing Ukraine, Just keep that Money Printer going, The American People do not seem to care about Inflation as they keep voting for people who want to keep giving Money to Ukraine, Texas Representative Michael McCaul A Republican and Dick Durbin a Democrat assured Zelensky that both Republican and Democrats are all in on continuing to support of Ukraine. Personally I want Russia to win, But The American people overwhelmingly want to keep giving Billions To Ukraine, So Ukraine/Zelensky will continue to get Money and Weapons with The American People's Blessing
12 -
Putin is just copying how Harry Truman conquered Palestine, cleansed Europe of Jews, realizing the Nazi "final solution" to the "the Jewish Problem".
02 -
douglas burke wrote:
They just need to take Odessa to have access to the Sea, They already Took and the People voted they want to be a part of Russia again the East which has 90% of the Resource, So Most of the Resources and the Sea, is what Russia needs, Without having Resources, The West can just keep financing Ukraine, Just keep that Money Printer going, The American People do not seem to care about Inflation as they keep voting for people who want to keep giving Money to Ukraine, Texas Representative Michael McCaul A Republican and Dick Durbin a Democrat assured Zelensky that both Republican and Democrats are all in on continuing to support of Ukraine. Personally I want Russia to win, But The American people overwhelmingly want to keep giving Billions To Ukraine, So Ukraine/Zelensky will continue to get Money and Weapons with The American People's Blessing
Are you serious? You actually think that vote in eastern Ukraine was legit? They had armed Russian soldiers accompanying the ballot collectors...jeez
Someone needs to put a bullet in Putins head.
41 -
runnerboy70 wrote:
Cold War Warrior wrote:
I don't know why chicken-hawks whom are fanatics for Ukraine for one reason or another are celebrating.
U.S. Army flag officers for months were quietly telling Biden: No tanks to Ukraine.
What does this show us?
> Speaker K McCarthy is a tool but a tool of whom?
> One or more person at U.S. State Department must want U.S. to escalate for emotional reasons.
> Are C.I.A. on board with this or others in U.S. Intel community? I doubt it. Tanks move us further away from C.I.A. capabilities. Tanks don't help C.I.A.
> This is bipartisan politics. If weapons manufacturers benefit, politicians benefit.
U.S. with the help of N.A.T.O. are superior non-nuclear warriors to Russia. This is highly dangerous! Tank battles? U.S. will need low flying planes and helicopters armed with anti-tank munitions. Quietly, this puts No Fly Zone on the table. These are dangerous times and no one in charge knows what they are doing. No doubt when U.S. Army generals turned Biden down regarding tanks three plus months ago, Game Theory must have indicated the risk was not worth the reward. Do U.S. politicians have the will to stop this?
Baloney...We have a moral obligation to help Ukraine....There is NO justification for Russia invading it's neighbors...Putin has lost over 100,000 soldiers and he doesn't have long to live himself....HOORAY....
I wonder, would the world be better off if Russia just launched nukes from the subs that are very likely sitting 10 miles off the eastern and western coasts at major US cities and military targets? Just get it over with. Clearly the American government and American people want to escalate with Russia. Why wait? Yes, it would be terrible for several years in the US and likely Russia after the Americans retaliate out of spite, but from the asses possibly the world could be rid of the evil American empire. Wouldn't that be great?
01 -
TheAdultInTheRoom wrote:
runnerboy70 wrote:
Baloney...We have a moral obligation to help Ukraine....There is NO justification for Russia invading it's neighbors...Putin has lost over 100,000 soldiers and he doesn't have long to live himself....HOORAY....
There's like 30 other wars going on right now. Why aren't you morally outraged that we aren't paying for those too?
Counterpoint: embarrassing Russia and blowing up Russian invaders is great. Glad my tax dollars are doing this.
22 -
Black Kettle wrote:
I wonder, would the world be better off if Russia just launched nukes from the subs that are very likely sitting 10 miles off the eastern and western coasts at major US cities and military targets? Just get it over with. Clearly the American government and American people want to escalate with Russia. Why wait? Yes, it would be terrible for several years in the US and likely Russia after the Americans retaliate out of spite, but from the asses possibly the world could be rid of the evil American empire. Wouldn't that be great?
Lol. Putin is too terrified to do this. We've called his bluffs dozens of times. He's frail and weak.
21 -
Cold War Warrior wrote:
I don't know why chicken-hawks whom are fanatics for Ukraine for one reason or another are celebrating.
U.S. Army flag officers for months were quietly telling Biden: No tanks to Ukraine.
What does this show us?
> Speaker K McCarthy is a tool but a tool of whom?
> One or more person at U.S. State Department must want U.S. to escalate for emotional reasons.
> Are C.I.A. on board with this or others in U.S. Intel community? I doubt it. Tanks move us further away from C.I.A. capabilities. Tanks don't help C.I.A.
> This is bipartisan politics. If weapons manufacturers benefit, politicians benefit.
U.S. with the help of N.A.T.O. are superior non-nuclear warriors to Russia. This is highly dangerous! Tank battles? U.S. will need low flying planes and helicopters armed with anti-tank munitions. Quietly, this puts No Fly Zone on the table. These are dangerous times and no one in charge knows what they are doing. No doubt when U.S. Army generals turned Biden down regarding tanks three plus months ago, Game Theory must have indicated the risk was not worth the reward. Do U.S. politicians have the will to stop this?
If you're scared, get a dog. They're good emotional support animals.
31 -
a ukrainian perspective wrote:
agree with Tao of Steve here. What is often forgotten is that Europe tried to pressurize Janukowitsch into signing an associative agreement with the NATO (not binding member, but clearly the first step). Definitely a provocation towards Russia, which Janukowitsch did not want to go through with.
Next, Maidan protest (which did initially include only peaceful protesters against Janukowitsch corruptive Government) escalates by aid of US private forces which supported guns, and reportedly offered money to civilians in order to go protest on the street.
What Putin opposes is the illegal implementation of the election in February for a temporary Government in the Ukraine. Morevover, since then hundred thousands of Ukrainian with Russian roots fear to be exposed to even more discrimination (for example a law was recently passed that forbids teaching of Russian language).
Well, I also detest that Putin just walked into Krim and took it back, but we need to see both sides here are at fault. Anybody who does not understand that Ukraine is sandwiched between two super power blocks (west and Russia) and that eventually, because of the ongoing dependency of Europe for oil and gas imports, it will be the centre of strategic foreign policy by these two superpowers, does not understand much about world politics
My favorite part in all of this, is how this post nailed all of it… but, the usual suspects simply ignored it, like ‘they’ always do.
22 -
TheAdultInTheRoom wrote:
bigmig19 wrote:
Well how did that work out? The whole world is suffering inflation and on border of recession.
The war has very little to do with inflation...
This war, like all wars, has to do with resources. Russia incurred huge deficits during COVID due to the crash in oil prices (7% decline in government revenue against a 25% surge in expenses). Their response was to start a war that would increase the price of oil, and it has been successful in this endeavor, as decreased demand from Europe has been more than offset by increased demand from Asia. Likewise, the US has benefitted and been able to offset some of its COVID losses by suppyling arms, food and fossil fuels to Europe and South America at inflated prices, and has benefitted from inflation in this regard (debts are being payed back with inflated dollars). Both parties have a financial interest in continuing this war
00 -
Cold War Warrior wrote:
I don't know why chicken-hawks whom are fanatics for Ukraine for one reason or another are celebrating.
U.S. Army flag officers for months were quietly telling Biden: No tanks to Ukraine.
What does this show us?
> Speaker K McCarthy is a tool but a tool of whom?
> One or more person at U.S. State Department must want U.S. to escalate for emotional reasons.
> Are C.I.A. on board with this or others in U.S. Intel community? I doubt it. Tanks move us further away from C.I.A. capabilities. Tanks don't help C.I.A.
> This is bipartisan politics. If weapons manufacturers benefit, politicians benefit.
U.S. with the help of N.A.T.O. are superior non-nuclear warriors to Russia. This is highly dangerous! Tank battles? U.S. will need low flying planes and helicopters armed with anti-tank munitions. Quietly, this puts No Fly Zone on the table. These are dangerous times and no one in charge knows what they are doing. No doubt when U.S. Army generals turned Biden down regarding tanks three plus months ago, Game Theory must have indicated the risk was not worth the reward. Do U.S. politicians have the will to stop this?
Those that support this war are tools of the military industrial complex, and foolish to boot.
54 -
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Cold War Warrior wrote:
I don't know why chicken-hawks whom are fanatics for Ukraine for one reason or another are celebrating.
U.S. Army flag officers for months were quietly telling Biden: No tanks to Ukraine.
What does this show us?
> Speaker K McCarthy is a tool but a tool of whom?
> One or more person at U.S. State Department must want U.S. to escalate for emotional reasons.
> Are C.I.A. on board with this or others in U.S. Intel community? I doubt it. Tanks move us further away from C.I.A. capabilities. Tanks don't help C.I.A.
> This is bipartisan politics. If weapons manufacturers benefit, politicians benefit.
U.S. with the help of N.A.T.O. are superior non-nuclear warriors to Russia. This is highly dangerous! Tank battles? U.S. will need low flying planes and helicopters armed with anti-tank munitions. Quietly, this puts No Fly Zone on the table. These are dangerous times and no one in charge knows what they are doing. No doubt when U.S. Army generals turned Biden down regarding tanks three plus months ago, Game Theory must have indicated the risk was not worth the reward. Do U.S. politicians have the will to stop this?
Those that support this war are tools of the military industrial complex, and foolish to boot.
Igloi fled to the US from murderous Russian invaders. He would disagree.
32 -
Why does the US have a moral obligation when others countries do not?
Putin needs to end this. Take half of Ukraine, Pat himself on the back, and call it a day.
43 -
TheAdultInTheRoom wrote:
runnerboy70 wrote:
Baloney...We have a moral obligation to help Ukraine....There is NO justification for Russia invading it's neighbors...Putin has lost over 100,000 soldiers and he doesn't have long to live himself....HOORAY....
There's like 30 other wars going on right now. Why aren't you morally outraged that we aren't paying for those too?
Those wars are mostly internal and don't involve a nuclear power invading another country.
23 -
matter of degrees wrote:
TheAdultInTheRoom wrote:
There's like 30 other wars going on right now. Why aren't you morally outraged that we aren't paying for those too?
Those wars are mostly internal and don't involve a nuclear power invading another country.
So you're only interested in morality when your fake outrage can result in the destruction of humanity. Got it.
34
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun