We are not being asked to send American troops into war, only to help the Ukrainians defend themselves. If we fail to help Ukraine, Putin will invade a NATO ...
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.
Yes, Vald is boogeyman, in the end of the day wars effects all working class people.
Where the wealthy and stock owners, the 10%, continue to profit from more wars.
We could force negotiation in all our proxy wars since we are the ones funding them, but it is always profit>people.
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.
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.
I hear “we” also have nice warm water ports, that makes us happy right comrade…errr…friend?
Friend, war only makes the wealthy richer.
The working class are the ones dying for the wealthy pushing for endless wars and profits.
Good thing all those now-NATO countries have no agency, otherwise one might think that they joined because it was better for them to do so.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
Putin claims to be worth $200 billion. Tell me how he’s a hero of the workers.
Vlad is no hero…
To be clear, the point I was making was:
War hurts the working class, while the wealthy class profits from war.
That English needs a little bit of work. Maybe duolingo of they have it available at your internet cafe
Nope, that is just my US public school education.
That is a reason I also interact in forums, so that I don’t get too rusty!