Can you please cite the pro-russian propaganda on here?Since the other thread is spammed constantly every day with pro-russian propaganda and "we don't need to be involved in Russia's business" arguments, I decided to post a new thread with just a single video. This is why the rest of the civilized world is supporting Ukraine, this is why EVERY country that has ever broken away from Russia has no desire to return to their "friendship". It's a very simple and black and white choice, would you rather help the man in the hole, or the people outside the hole? Make your choice, live with it, but be prepared to be judged by your choice, in this life and the next.
Russian soldiers execute Ukrainian PoW after he says âGlory to Ukraineâ
Russian invaders have shot an unarmed Ukrainian prisoner of war after he said âGlory to Ukraineâ.www.pravda.com.ua
That’s all he’s saying. “If your opinion isn’t the same as mine, you’re pro Putin”Can you please cite the pro-russian propaganda on here?
And I dont think you can say that someone is pro-Russia just because they dont want to get wrapped up in this war.
Since the other thread is spammed constantly every day with pro-russian propaganda and "we don't need to be involved in Russia's business" arguments, I decided to post a new thread with just a single video. This is why the rest of the civilized world is supporting Ukraine, this is why EVERY country that has ever broken away from Russia has no desire to return to their "friendship". It's a very simple and black and white choice, would you rather help the man in the hole, or the people outside the hole? Make your choice, live with it, but be prepared to be judged by your choice, in this life and the next.
Russian soldiers execute Ukrainian PoW after he says âGlory to Ukraineâ
Russian invaders have shot an unarmed Ukrainian prisoner of war after he said âGlory to Ukraineâ.www.pravda.com.ua
Just wanted to chime in to say I'll match your $50.First, this isn't an "argument".
The idea you are "with us or against us" is the same wag-the-dog bullshit we have heard many times before.
Simple "black and white" choice? Only if you are simple minded.
Honestly, what shocks me is the same rhetoric, the same tired rah rah dogma, can get recycled every ten years, and dummies will continue to fall for it over an over and think everyone that doesn't is stupid.
If you feel so strongly about it, by all means start a go-fund-me for your trip. I've got 50$ to add to your plane ticket fund. If you won't put your ass where your mouth is, don't expect anybody else to.
It's just like the trump cult loyalists out there. If you arent wearing your trump pajamas and waving your trump pompom's, you're one of them DAGGUM LIBTARDS. Everything is binary now.That’s all he’s saying. “If your opinion isn’t the same as mine, you’re pro Putin”
I bet his vax card doesn’t have any punch slots left.
And I guarantee the response to his thread isn’t what he was expecting. Or maybe it was, either way, we’re all Putin apologists to him for not wanting to fund this war. Piss on that train of thought and anyone with it.
We can't support anybody. We are broke and not exactly united ourselves.
Ah. 4D chess. Trust the plan.This is a proxy war. We get to simultaneously look like the good guys while draining (and assessing) the strength of an adversary. We can afford to do this a lot longer than Russia can, and if Putin doesn’t deliver victory then we may get regime change from within, which will at least temporarily destabilize our adversary. If he does manage victory it turns into a guerilla war and they get to sink lives and money into it ala Afghanistan. We’ll help fund that too. It’s not a morality issue it’s one of draining Russia of military resources. Granted proxy wars haven’t always turned out great for us, but as long as China sits this one out (mostly) this is the game plan.
This is a proxy war. We get to simultaneously look like the good guys while draining (and assessing) the strength of an adversary. We can afford to do this a lot longer than Russia can, and if Putin doesn’t deliver victory then we may get regime change from within, which will at least temporarily destabilize our adversary. If he does manage victory it turns into a guerilla war and they get to sink lives and money into it ala Afghanistan. We’ll help fund that too. It’s not a morality issue it’s one of draining Russia of military resources. Granted proxy wars haven’t always turned out great for us, but as long as China sits this one out (mostly) this is the game plan.
100 billion dollars worth so far.The "game plan" is to make and launder untold billions for the military industrial complex, after taking it from your pockets.
It’s not really about trusting anything. It’s a pretty basic tactic. We send money and equipment and we don’t expend American lives. If it goes bad, we bail because we don’t want to fight a nuclear armed adversary head on. If it goes as it has been then Russia is no longer as strong an adversary as they were and potentially won’t be able to exert influence in the same way as they once were. Either way it’s a way to weaken an opponent with minimal risk to our forces.Ah. 4D chess. Trust the plan.
This, but unironically. Two guys I don't care for at all fighting in a bar, and I'm expected to jump in to save one of them?A 10 second argument for not supporting Ukraine.
Stop sending my effing money and our effing people to fight wars on foreign soil that have nothing to do with this country.
It’s none of our effing business.
Set up a gofundme for all the idiots that want to send their money and a recruitment drive for all of you morons that want to go die on foreign soil fighting for one corrupt ass nation against another.
I notice nobody was lining up to defend Rwanda. Wanna guess why? Because nobody told you to.
Hahahahaha.It’s not really about trusting anything. It’s a pretty basic tactic. We send money and equipment and we don’t expend American lives. If it goes bad, we bail because we don’t want to fight a nuclear armed adversary head on. If it goes as it has been then Russia is no longer as strong an adversary as they were and potentially won’t be able to exert influence in the same way as they once were. Either way it’s a way to weaken an opponent with minimal risk to our forces.
2 more weeks. Patriots in control.Ah. 4D chess. Trust the plan.
Ok. Think what you will, and I’ll do the same. Neither one of our opinions matters to what happens out there.Hahahahaha.
Agreed.Ok. Think what you will, and I’ll do the same. Neither one of our opinions matters to what happens out there.
It’s not really about trusting anything. It’s a pretty basic tactic. We send money and equipment and we don’t expend American lives. If it goes bad, we bail because we don’t want to fight a nuclear armed adversary head on. If it goes as it has been then Russia is no longer as strong an adversary as they were and potentially won’t be able to exert influence in the same way as they once were. Either way it’s a way to weaken an opponent with minimal risk to our forces.
Since the other thread is spammed constantly every day with pro-russian propaganda and "we don't need to be involved in Russia's business" arguments, I decided to post a new thread with just a single video. This is why the rest of the civilized world is supporting Ukraine, this is why EVERY country that has ever broken away from Russia has no desire to return to their "friendship". It's a very simple and black and white choice, would you rather help the man in the hole, or the people outside the hole? Make your choice, live with it, but be prepared to be judged by your choice, in this life and the next.
Russian soldiers execute Ukrainian PoW after he says âGlory to Ukraineâ
Russian invaders have shot an unarmed Ukrainian prisoner of war after he said âGlory to Ukraineâ.www.pravda.com.ua
This is a proxy war. We get to simultaneously look like the good guys while draining (and assessing) the strength of an adversary. We can afford to do this a lot longer than Russia can, and if Putin doesn’t deliver victory then we may get regime change from within, which will at least temporarily destabilize our adversary. If he does manage victory it turns into a guerilla war and they get to sink lives and money into it ala Afghanistan. We’ll help fund that too. It’s not a morality issue it’s one of draining Russia of military resources. Granted proxy wars haven’t always turned out great for us, but as long as China sits this one out (mostly) this is the game plan.
Shame on you assuming pronouns againThat’s all he’s saying. “If your opinion isn’t the same as mine, you’re pro Putin”
I bet his vax card doesn’t have any punch slots left.
And I guarantee the response to his thread isn’t what he was expecting. Or maybe it was, either way, we’re all Putin apologists to him for not wanting to fund this war. Piss on that train of thought and anyone with it.
This is a proxy war. We get to simultaneously look like the good guys while draining (and assessing) the strength of an adversary. We can afford to do this a lot longer than Russia can….
Reminds me of the song War Pigs by Black Sabbath. War is arguably the most money making racket ever seen by mankind.war is a racket. that's all I got to say.
The world would be a such a great place if everyone just minded their own effing business! And the US has a bad history about sticking our nose in other people’s business! But hey those sticking their nose in others business don’t have to pay for war in cash or blood, so what do they care.It’s none of our effing business.
Couple big issues with this strategy. First, like you said, it’s temporary. With the amount of natural resources it will not take them long to recover.We can afford to do this a lot longer than Russia can, and if Putin doesn’t deliver victory then we may get regime change from within, which will at least temporarily destabilize our adversary.
But hey those sticking their nose in others business don’t have to pay for war in cash or blood
Ukraine has had a civil war going on in the Donbass since 2014.
So sometimes it's okay to intervene to help dissatisfied ethnic groups dissolve a country to achieve self-determination, but at other times it's not okay.
What differentiates okay from not okay? Is it which way -western or otherwise- the government leans? Is it the religion of the minorities? Is it the sponsor countries of the government or the minorities?
But is it in the best interest of the citizens of those nations or the arms manufacturers?And every other nation responding to this invasion will LIKEWISE be acting for what's in THEIR own best interests.
Fun Bonus Fact: Camp Butler in NC was named for him
Where's Camp Butler in NC? Not familiar....
August 4, 1942: 40,000-Acre Military Camp Opens In NC
On August 4, 1942, Camp Butner, a 40,000-acre military training facility, officially opened.www.wfmynews2.com
Camp Butner Training Center | NCNG
ng.nc.gov
It’s not really about trusting anything. It’s a pretty basic tactic. We send money and equipment and we don’t expend American lives. If it goes bad, we bail because we don’t want to fight a nuclear armed adversary head on. If it goes as it has been then Russia is no longer as strong an adversary as they were and potentially won’t be able to exert influence in the same way as they once were. Either way it’s a way to weaken an opponent with minimal risk to our forces.
Well this got friendly quickly. I made an observation on what seems to be happening. We are materially supporting one side of a conflict in order to weaken an adversary. Pretty bog standard US foreign policy for the last couple decades, and I thought a fairly benign observation as I’m not sure what else you’d call this. I made no claims as to this being the right or wrong way to do it, simply that this seemed to be the game plan.Ain’t that all moral and upright? Kill as many Ukrainians as possible so you might just weaken Russia. All those supporting that should burn in hell. And not just because it is immoral. But because it is foolish and a failure.
Well this got friendly quickly. I made an observation on what seems to be happening. We are materially supporting one side of a conflict in order to weaken an adversary. Pretty bog standard US foreign policy for the last couple decades, and I thought a fairly benign observation as I’m not sure what else you’d call this. I made no claims as to this being the right or wrong way to do it, simply that this seemed to be the game plan.
I’m going to nope out of this one before I actually express a dissenting opinion rather than just an observation and someone offers to come kill my dog.