When I called out my father for his love of Putin versus his love of Reagan, he said he was wrong in the past and had to relearn a lot recently… Oceania has always been our ally.
The irony is that he accuses the media of being the thought police, he knows pieces of the story, but I’m pretty certain he’s never read an entire book in his life.
Shitty argument by a shitty person. Obviously we should not be funding any foreign wars, and if you guys want to , it should be private donations and leave me out of the death of thousands more ukrainians.
Trump’s mouth is both like the broken clock analogy and like the proverbial 10,000 monkeys with the typewriter.
He also continuously parrots the last thing he heard.
At that point he was getting presidential briefings and folders of intelligence from the 3 letter agencies when he was visiting other countries, and his top advisers about concerns he should raise with his counterpart.
He just parroted something that put his host down publicly both because it made him look smug, because he’s a brute and a sexist and because he didn’t like her.
The content may have been true but that’s no way to conduct international relations with a close ally.
These concerns are raised in private, unless your intent is to torpedo the alliance - but at the same meeting he told them the us will not come to their aid if Russia attacked, so that’s what it was.
He was by accident. What Romney and Obama were talking about during the debate was an interview Mitt had given prior.
In that interview he was talking about going all Reagan like with being antagonistic to Russia and Iran. His view on foreign policy was Obama should be gearing up for war. Building more boats, tanks, bombs to out spend enemies like Ronnie did. Negotiating with Iran was a waste of time. Let’s just bomb people kinda stuff.
Which was stupid. It was usual tough guy GOP foreign policy junk. When at the time soft power was working just fine. And even the EU felt Medvedev was being a reasonable partner. Romney was even specifically trying to twist Obama’s hot mic comments to Medvedev about negotiating after the election as selling out America.
In 2012 soft power and talking out differences was getting somewhere. Which is why Romney was roundly lambasted for acting like the US should preemptively go back to Cold War style of dealing with adversaries. That approach would have guaranteed the kind of response that has happened for different reasons.
Additional tl;dr summary thought. Obama was already in the war time President role. Romney attempting to look tougher, staked out a ludicrous position. Including claiming the US should be spending 4% of GDP on the military.
This comment isn’t wrong. Putin is evil but you trust him to be that. the usa is extremely bipolar swinging wildly in mood. Some of that being manipulated by putin, only adding to the lack of internal stability.
More Russia is a boogeyman and pushing for endless wars, not suprising from republican/democrats.
edit: summary added
Short Summary
Emphasize the importance of providing military weapons to Ukraine as a crucial vote for US senators.
Argue that helping Ukraine defend itself is necessary to prevent Putin from invading a NATO nation and maintain America’s credibility and leadership in the world.
Refute various arguments against providing aid to Ukraine, such as concerns about cost and potential repercussions.
Stress that supporting Ukraine will strengthen national security, deter aggression from Russia and China, and uphold commitments to allies.
Conclude by quoting a letter from the president of Poland urging US senators to ensure a peaceful future for their children by stopping Russia and leading the way.
Oh wow, it’s you again! The guy who gets all of his talking points straight from a right wing play book!
Man why didn’t I block you on our last interaction? Oh because I wanted to give you a chance. Yeah I’m twice bitten now. Would recommend everyone block this tool, your lemmy experience will be much better.
Putin is much more than a boogeyman because, as is currently on demonstration, he follows through on his desire to conquer.
It’s fun to say boogeyman because it attempts to put our current events as infantile. But Putin is indeed marching in Ukraine, so he’s distinctly NOT a boogeyman when he’s actually doing that whole war thing.
pushing for endless wars
The wars can end on that front the second Putin decides to go home.
As for the US military industrial complex, cool, we can have that conversation when fucksticks in Russia are no longer acting like fucksticks. But they’ve sorta been doing that whole being a giant douche since WWII ended.
That’s not to justify America’s shitty logic, but to point out if person A is acting shitty and person B is acting shitty, why are you expecting non-shitty behavior to come from either?
So it’s endless wars until BOTH countries stop collectively being shitty. Which that’s kind of hard when Putin gets a continual erection from being shitty to Europe.
So you tell Vlad when he’s ready to stop buttering his nipples on making sure Europe live their lives in continued fear and inflated energy prices, we can talk about that whole endless war thing.
US Military (NATO) moving closer to Russia was a provacation that started decades ago.
Have you seen that we have 800+ military bases outside of the US…
Our US politicians/military would need to be for negotations, which they are not for, at least majority are not.
This is another similar war strategy used in Afghanistan/Yemen/Iraq/Pakistan/Somalia/Kenya/Libya/Uganda/Niger/Iraq(again)/Syria/Libya(again)/Red Sea/Yemen(again), endless wars that are pushed for profits, negotations are not an option.
US Military (NATO) moving closer to Russia was a provacation that started decades ago
Because Russia during the Soviet era gave Europe every reason to believe the Russian desire to return to 1850s borders. Which that was distinctly something that wasn't going to happen because it would prompt the exact same situation that begat World War I.
So yeah. Duh! After World War II one would think that "oh let's finish this as oppose to leaving it hang like we did in WWI" would be something of paramount importance. Much to the chagrin of Russia who thought that they'd get a nice fat cut of the spoils with Germany's defeat. Surprise the other two members of the Alliance wanted to kind of go the other direction and dismantle colonial Europe and Africa. That's why Africa post WWII became, well, what it is mostly today.
NATO and the response thereafter has been to ensure independent nations within Europe. Russia has wanted to revive the "glory days" of the Muscovy. So you tell me, who's being provocative of who? Russia is still angry they didn't get a lion's share of Europe post-WWII seeing how they sent the most lives to die in the war, and the US was tired of having to deal with Europe every so often and isolationism just wasn't fucking working.
Have you seen that we have 800+ military bases outside of the US
Yeah have you also seen the UK's or France's? Note anything about those countries and who's who in WWII? Russia still wants that good old colonialism. I'm mean you need no further evidence of such than Crimea, or Russia's attitude towards Georgia, or we we can keep going on and on.
Now. The other guys UK/France/US, see they have moved on to, let's call it economic colonialism. Now the Nation doesn't technically have foreign governments dictating policy per se, but they use the allure of the dollar to ensure there's a bias towards being friendly. Is it a better system? It's pros and cons. It's sort of how Russia attempts to play that same game with Baltic nations and energy, to which they're abjectly losing on that front. US kind of top tiered the banking industry early in the game, which pros and cons to that too (see Housing Crisis and how US banks can bring down the world's economy).
But the point being is the military bases that being an argument for... What? There's an economic investment that a lot of nations have put in, Russia included, why do you think they have bases in Libya and Sudan? Why do you think Turkey has the relationship it does with Russia even though it's an EU member?
Our US politicians/military would need to be for negotations, which they are not for, at least majority are not.
Putin doesn't want to negotiate. Just full stop. There is a projection of strength that Putin has to maintain to keep the level of support he has. The second he says "Oopsie! I guess I got a lot of our fellow citizens killed for no reason." Is the second his key supporters turn on his ass.
endless wars that are pushed for profits
Who do you think is pushing Putin? You keep going on and on about the rich in the US, you keep forgetting rich assholes are the world around. Until the entire planet gathers around for Kumbaya and unites to destroy greed, guess what we're going to have to deal with? It's not a unique US issue, everyone likes to think that the US has some sort of monopoly on rich asshats, they do not. Putin has territorial aspirations and the rich are looking to profit from that desire. So don't give me this crap that only rich US fuckers want war in perpetuity. There are rich shitheads in every country looking to provoke their nation du jour into some conflict that potentially enriches them. It's just fun to punch on the US versions of them because the US has a lot of them, with the whole banking system being as it is. But they're everywhere, Russia included.
You seem to be going on and on about wars and rich people and I've got no complaint there, but how the fuck does that even fit into your "Oh NATO be provocating!!" Russia be doing it too. "Oh rich people just want to profit!!" Russia has that same fucking problem. I'm not seeing your argument for why the US and Russia aren't exactly what I just said.
if person A is acting shitty and person B is acting shitty, why are you expecting non-shitty behavior to come from either?
Your commentary on rich vs poor, yeah cool. What's that got to do with the price of tea in China? Russia wants it's land, taking all that land would set us up exactly like what led to World War I. That, to me, does not seem like a good idea to let happen. Russia needs to fucking chill. NATO gets to stay because Europe needs integration not separation. The latter just keeps leading to global conflict, which seems less than ideal to most people.
Add comment