Death of a Myth

3,948 Views | 74 Replies | Last: 1 yr ago by quash
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Death of a Myth

Americans need to wake up to the realities of a post-unipolar world before it's too late.

George D. O'Neill Jr.
Mar 9, 2023 12:03 AM

As we witness the collapse of various mainstream narratives, especially those surrounding the U.S./NATO war with Russia in Ukraine, Americans should begin to reassess their understanding of U.S. national leadership. Most American citizens have no notion of the great disparity between what their government does overseas and the stories they hear from its mouthpieces. As a result, Americans unwittingly support all sorts of foreign operations with little or no understanding of what is actually going on. For years, they have been misled by a non-stop propaganda campaign that is only now beginning to crumble.

We are experiencing the death throes of the United States' unipolar hegemony over large parts of world. Until citizens begin to realize the magnitude of their government's policy deceptions, it will become increasingly difficult to understand the United States' changing global position and adjust to the effects of the growing negative perception of our country held by many people around the world.

Since World War II, and particularly after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the United States was the dominant and unrivaled world power. Instead of being a peacekeeper and honest "world's policeman," the U.S. has increasingly been a destabilizing bully. Many leaders worldwide have been reluctant to speak up about the increasingly destructive nature of U.S. foreign policy for fear of being punished. But as U.S. stature and power declines, large parts of the world have been seeking arrangements to protect themselves from U.S. predation.

Most Americans do not understand why such realignments are occurring, thanks to a constant stream of propaganda about America being the "most generous," the "exceptional nation," a "nation that sets aside its interests for the benefit of the world," an "important source of good" around the globe as the "protector of the rules based order," always shouldering the heavy responsibility to protect the international system and weak nations from bad actors, ad nauseam. According to a number of sources U.S.-caused wars have been directly responsible for the deaths of more than 10 million people since World War II. The neoconservatives will scoff at these facts and their sources, but most of the rest of the world believes this to be true.

Most Americans cannot accept these observations because they contradict the narrative given them by the omnipresent state propaganda machine. While the ever growing list of American misdeeds abroad has for years been largely unchallenged at home, it has become increasingly obvious to many across the globe. Americans should take note. For example, the Chinese Foreign Ministry has just published an overview of what they see as U.S. misbehavior. The U.S. establishment and well-meaning patriots may dismiss the Chinese observations, but they ring true to many who live outside of the neoconservative propaganda bubble.

Contrary to establishment mythology, the U.S. is famous for breaking its promises, violating treaties, and abandoning agreements. The list is long: the U.S.'s 1990 promise not to move NATO east into former Warsaw Convention countries, the abrogation of the ABM, INF, Open Skies, START treaties, the JCPOA, the agreement with Libya, and others. The U.S. has also repeatedly flouted nternational law by invading countries that do not bow to U.S. hegemony.

There are a number of U.S. agencies that covertly fund NGO election interference operations. Most Americans have no idea that the Cold War-era National Endowment for Democracy was created to influence elections in countries around the world, and has interfered in many (The National Endowment for Democracy was spending money in Russia until the Russians expelled them.) Then there are the famous "Color Revolutions" sponsored by various U.S. agencies. Some estimate the U.S. has interfered in as many as fifty countries.


The days of pretending to ignore this destructive behavior are drawing to a close. We are entering a period in which the populations of many countries may decide that being subject to American hegemony is not in their interests. Increasing numbers of countries have joined and formed alternative alliances outside U.S. influence. SCO, BRICS+, OPEC+, and others have experienced growing membership as countries that believe their interests are better protected by these non-U.S. affiliated alliances sign on.

The fallout of the tragic and unnecessary Ukraine war has accelerated this movement to seek other cooperative associations. As America's European allies are learning, there can be huge political and economic costs to being associated with the U.S. The populations of Europe have watched their own economies suffer and paid dearly for energy because of the ten rounds of self-destructive sanctions imposed on Russia.

The purveyor and protector of the "rules-based order" decided that Germany should not import cheap Russian natural gas. America's president and a senior State Department official threatened to cut off the pipeline supplying Russian natural gas if Russia did not bow to Washington's wishes. Coincidentally, the Nord Stream gas pipelines were blown up not long after. The U.S. Secretary of State said the sabotage was an "opportunity," and the assistant secretary of State appeared to be satisfied. The neoconservatives lauding this act of terrorism against an ally of the U.S. may believe pretending Washington was not responsible will reassure America and Europe, but the rest of the world believes otherwise.

Many will ignore or diminish the consequences of a possible U.S. role in the destruction of the Nord Stream pipelines. But this addition to the list of callous acts believed abroad to be perpetrated by the U.S. further would undermine the narrative of America as the "generous nation," "leader of the free world," "protector of the rules-based order." For years, these contradictions were skillfully finessed and ignored by a compliant press and complicit institutions that profited from these deceptions. But as the U.S. appears less powerful, the rest of the world is beginning to take notice and are moving to seek other protective friendships.

Less than two years ago, the "most powerful military in the history of man" was chased out of Afghanistan by a group of ragtag militants armed with small arms and mounted on donkeys, bicycles, and motor scooters. The Taliban now has $80 billion worth of U.S. military equipment our leaders left behind. The excuses may have been convincing to the Washington elites and were sold strenuously by regime-aligned media outlets. The rest of the world knows better. The old post-Vietnam collapse tropes, claiming "we would have won if only we were really allowed to fight," ring hollow after twenty years, hundreds of thousands killed and made homeless, and several trillion dollars spent on that disaster.

Contrary to the many assertions that the Russians would collapse from the shock and awe of the "sanctions from Hell," the ruble has not turned into rubble as Joe Biden predicted. The U.S. and its NATO clients are running out of ammunition and arms to send to Ukraine, which is being bled white at their behest. It appears that Russia will steadily grind down the Ukrainian military. All of this is reminiscent of World War I. The proto-neoconservatives sold that war as a quick engagement that would be over by Christmas 1914. Four years later, 20 million were dead and many more were wounded or displaced; subsequently most of the European Christian monarchies collapsed, Russia descended into communism's seventy-year nightmare, and the "War to End all Wars" to make the world "safe for democracy" set the stage for the even more horrific World War II.

A century later, we are sleepwalking into World War III. Americans should ignore the state-sponsored propaganda (eerily similar to that which led up to WWI), wake up, look at what their leaders have wrought, and do all they can to end support for this cruel war before we face a Great War-like conflagration or worse.


https://www.theamericanconservative.com/death-of-a-myth/
RD2WINAGNBEAR86
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The Ukraine /Russia war is the biggest money laundering scheme in history. Thanks to the Big Guy, Joe Biden. I would not be surprised if every member of Congress is getting a piece of the pie. This includes Republicans. Our tax dollars at work.
"Never underestimate Joe's ability to **** things up!"

-- Barack Obama
drahthaar
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A century later, we are sleepwalking into World War III. Americans should ignore the state-sponsored propaganda (eerily similar to that which led up to WWI), wake up, look at what their leaders have wrought, and do all they can to end support for this cruel war before we face a Great War-like conflagration or worse.


We're not sleepwalking into WW3; we've given inept leadership permission to take us there by any means they deem acceptable. Not only is current action similar to pre-WW1, it is strikingly similar to pre-WW2, especially to the history in England. Ending our involvement in Ukraine only gives Putin open gates to expanding into eastern Europe, posing a worse threat than Hitler did in the '30's. And we are less prepared now than then to respond. Make no mistake, a great conflagration is coming, uncontested by the U.S. government leadership.

It does not appear that we have a Churchill to lead when he is most needed.
Wangchung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
So odd that our politicians can spend decades overtly and covertly influencing elections and politics around the world but acknowledging the evidence of voter fraud from our own elections, BY THOSE SAME PEOPLE, is suddenly beyond the pale and traitorous.
Our vibrations were getting nasty. But why? I was puzzled, frustrated... Had we deteriorated to the level of dumb beasts?
Wangchung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Nm
Our vibrations were getting nasty. But why? I was puzzled, frustrated... Had we deteriorated to the level of dumb beasts?
Redbrickbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
drahthaar said:

A century later, we are sleepwalking into World War III. Americans should ignore the state-sponsored propaganda (eerily similar to that which led up to WWI), wake up, look at what their leaders have wrought, and do all they can to end support for this cruel war before we face a Great War-like conflagration or worse.


We're not sleepwalking into WW3; we've given inept leadership permission to take us there by any means they deem acceptable. Not only is current action similar to pre-WW1, it is strikingly similar to pre-WW2, especially to the history in England. Ending our involvement in Ukraine only gives Putin open gates to expanding into eastern Europe, posing a worse threat than Hitler did in the '30's. And we are less prepared now than then to respond. Make no mistake, a great conflagration is coming, uncontested by the U.S. government leadership.

It does not appear that we have a Churchill to lead when he is most needed.
Germany was a competent State ruled by very competent people in 1938.

Russia is not...its corrupt, incompetent, and not that powerful of a military.

They can't even beat Ukraine...much less march into the rest of Europe.

And in 1938 Germany did not face off with a large united military bloc like NATO.

If Russia tried to attack a NATO nation it would face a 30 nation military alliance. An alliance that includes the largest military on earth (USA) and some of the largest economies on earth (USA, Canada, UK, France, Germany, Netherlands, etc.)

That alliance has 900+ million people vs Russia's 144 million
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Incredible that a simple security guarantee such as promising Ukraine would never become part of NATO could have avoided all of this. But Biden instead elected to shoot his mouth, and make Russia pay for "meddling" in the 2016 election.

Hate to say "I told you so."
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
drahthaar said:

Ending our involvement in Ukraine only gives Putin open gates to expanding into eastern Europe, posing a worse threat than Hitler did in the '30's.
Yawn.
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
drahthaar said:

Ending our involvement in Ukraine only gives Putin open gates to expanding into eastern Europe, posing a worse threat than Hitler did in the '30's. And we are less prepared now than then to respond.
A couple of things...

1) We didn't have to be involved in Ukraine at all had Biden provided a security guarantee on Ukraine's NATO membership;

2) It is doubtful Russia, given it's heavy losses at the hands of Ukrainians, could mount any semblance of a conventional war beyond Ukraine, at this point. The idea that we need to sustain this proxy war in order to avoid a Hitler-like march across Europe isn't supported by the evidence.
muddybrazos
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mothra said:

Incredible that a simple security guarantee such as promising Ukraine would never become part of NATO could have avoided all of this. But Biden instead elected to shoot his mouth, and make Russia pay for "meddling" in the 2016 election.

Hate to say "I told you so."
They didnt want to avoid all of this. This fight with Russia was supposed to happen after Hillary won the 2016 election but the plans were changed.
Redbrickbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mothra said:

drahthaar said:

Ending our involvement in Ukraine only gives Putin open gates to expanding into eastern Europe, posing a worse threat than Hitler did in the '30's. And we are less prepared now than then to respond.
A couple of things...

1) We didn't have to be involved in Ukraine at all had Biden provided a security guarantee on Ukraine's NATO membership;

2) It is doubtful Russia, given it's heavy losses at the hands of Ukrainians, could mount any semblance of a conventional war beyond Ukraine, at this point. The idea that we need to sustain this proxy war in order to avoid a Hitler-like march across Europe isn't supported by the evidence.


People keep living in this fantasy world were Russia is right about to drive deep into the heart of Europe with its armies.

Instead of living in the real world were the Russian state has low capacity to do just about anything and high levels of corruption.

And where NATO is right up on Russia's butt






ATL Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The US never promised or negotiated any agreement to not expand NATO. The US can't negotiate on behalf of NATO anyway.
Wrecks Quan Dough
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The myth died suddenly at a young age after receiving an untested gene therapy.
ATL Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
By the way fellas. Careful who you lean into. George D O'Neill Jr. was part of the Maria Butina Russian spy scandal. He literally has facilitated meets with Russian agents.
Redbrickbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ATL Bear said:

The US never promised or negotiated any agreement to not expand NATO. The US can't negotiate on behalf of NATO anyway.
That of course is not the issue.

NATO can expand or retract as it wants.

But it just looks ridiculous for the Western corporate media to spin a narrative that it is Russia that is prime expansionist and aggressive power about to put tanks in Berlin...when what it views as a hostile alliance is moving right up to its borders....and has been doing so since the 1990s.
ATL Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

The US never promised or negotiated any agreement to not expand NATO. The US can't negotiate on behalf of NATO anyway.
That of course is not the issue.

NATO can expand or retract as it wants.

But it just looks ridiculous for the Western corporate media to spin a narrative that it is Russia that is prime expansionist and aggressive power about to put tanks in Berlin...when what it views as a hostile alliance is moving right up to its borders....and has been doing so since the 1990s.
I would take issue with the idea that alliance expansion and invading and taking land are equivalent. If you want a nation to move away from being a competitor, economically or militarily, be a better partner, diplomat, and/or option.
Redbrickbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

The US never promised or negotiated any agreement to not expand NATO. The US can't negotiate on behalf of NATO anyway.
That of course is not the issue.

NATO can expand or retract as it wants.

But it just looks ridiculous for the Western corporate media to spin a narrative that it is Russia that is prime expansionist and aggressive power about to put tanks in Berlin...when what it views as a hostile alliance is moving right up to its borders....and has been doing so since the 1990s.
I would take issue with the idea that alliance expansion and invading and taking land are equivalent. If you want a nation to move away from being a competitor, economically or militarily, be a better partner, diplomat, and/or option.
You are right....NATO recruiting members and Russia invading Ukraine are not the same.

But Russia's increasingly unhinged military actions are a direct result of the leadership in Moscow feeling that they are being surrounded by a hostile force.

If you keep poking the Bear...it will lash out.

The same as if we had an Asian NATO that was getting closer to China...the Red Dragon would lash out.

If we really desire peace...why are we pushing a military alliance closer and closer to a potential flash point? We are playing with a powder keg and with matches.
ATL Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

The US never promised or negotiated any agreement to not expand NATO. The US can't negotiate on behalf of NATO anyway.
That of course is not the issue.

NATO can expand or retract as it wants.

But it just looks ridiculous for the Western corporate media to spin a narrative that it is Russia that is prime expansionist and aggressive power about to put tanks in Berlin...when what it views as a hostile alliance is moving right up to its borders....and has been doing so since the 1990s.
I would take issue with the idea that alliance expansion and invading and taking land are equivalent. If you want a nation to move away from being a competitor, economically or militarily, be a better partner, diplomat, and/or option.
You are right....NATO recruiting members and Russia invading Ukraine are not the same.

But Russia's increasingly unhinged military actions are a direct result of the leadership in Moscow feeling that they are being surrounded by a hostile force.

If you keep poking the Bear...it will lash out.

The same as if we had an Asian NATO that was getting closer to China...the Red Dragon would lash out.

If we really desire peace...why are we pushing a military alliance closer and closer to a potential flash point? We are playing with a powder keg and with matches.
Russia has been as active in war and expansion (moreso) as the US if not more. From Chechnya, to Georgia, to Crimea, to Donbas, now Ukraine. Let's not forget Syria and their North Pole excursions. We haven't been the only one playing with matches around a powder keg. Once the oil money started flowing, Putin started looking toward a greater Russia.

We missed a prime shot at a different relationship in 2001/2002. Putin went rogue a couple years later, and alas we've been at odds since, despite the awesome Clinton "reset" button and Obama "I'll have more flexibility" efforts (sarc).
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

The US never promised or negotiated any agreement to not expand NATO. The US can't negotiate on behalf of NATO anyway.
That of course is not the issue.

NATO can expand or retract as it wants.

But it just looks ridiculous for the Western corporate media to spin a narrative that it is Russia that is prime expansionist and aggressive power about to put tanks in Berlin...when what it views as a hostile alliance is moving right up to its borders....and has been doing so since the 1990s.
I would take issue with the idea that alliance expansion and invading and taking land are equivalent. If you want a nation to move away from being a competitor, economically or militarily, be a better partner, diplomat, and/or option.
You are right....NATO recruiting members and Russia invading Ukraine are not the same.

But Russia's increasingly unhinged military actions are a direct result of the leadership in Moscow feeling that they are being surrounded by a hostile force.

If you keep poking the Bear...it will lash out.

The same as if we had an Asian NATO that was getting closer to China...the Red Dragon would lash out.

If we really desire peace...why are we pushing a military alliance closer and closer to a potential flash point? We are playing with a powder keg and with matches.
At least one of Zelensky's top advisors made no secret of their plan--to dissolve the Ukrainian parliament (so much for democracy) and provoke Russia to war.

(see from 6:00-10:00)
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

The US never promised or negotiated any agreement to not expand NATO. The US can't negotiate on behalf of NATO anyway.
That of course is not the issue.

NATO can expand or retract as it wants.

But it just looks ridiculous for the Western corporate media to spin a narrative that it is Russia that is prime expansionist and aggressive power about to put tanks in Berlin...when what it views as a hostile alliance is moving right up to its borders....and has been doing so since the 1990s.
I would take issue with the idea that alliance expansion and invading and taking land are equivalent. If you want a nation to move away from being a competitor, economically or militarily, be a better partner, diplomat, and/or option.
You are right....NATO recruiting members and Russia invading Ukraine are not the same.

But Russia's increasingly unhinged military actions are a direct result of the leadership in Moscow feeling that they are being surrounded by a hostile force.

If you keep poking the Bear...it will lash out.

The same as if we had an Asian NATO that was getting closer to China...the Red Dragon would lash out.

If we really desire peace...why are we pushing a military alliance closer and closer to a potential flash point? We are playing with a powder keg and with matches.
Russia has been as active in war and expansion (moreso) as the US if not more. From Chechnya, to Georgia, to Crimea, to Donbas, now Ukraine. Let's not forget Syria and their North Pole excursions. We haven't been the only one playing with matches around a powder keg. Once the oil money started flowing, Putin started looking toward a greater Russia.

We missed a prime shot at a different relationship in 2001/2002. Putin went rogue a couple years later, and alas we've been at odds since, despite the awesome Clinton "reset" button and Obama "I'll have more flexibility" efforts (sarc).
We had many opportunities.
Redbrickbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

The US never promised or negotiated any agreement to not expand NATO. The US can't negotiate on behalf of NATO anyway.
That of course is not the issue.

NATO can expand or retract as it wants.

But it just looks ridiculous for the Western corporate media to spin a narrative that it is Russia that is prime expansionist and aggressive power about to put tanks in Berlin...when what it views as a hostile alliance is moving right up to its borders....and has been doing so since the 1990s.
I would take issue with the idea that alliance expansion and invading and taking land are equivalent. If you want a nation to move away from being a competitor, economically or militarily, be a better partner, diplomat, and/or option.
You are right....NATO recruiting members and Russia invading Ukraine are not the same.

But Russia's increasingly unhinged military actions are a direct result of the leadership in Moscow feeling that they are being surrounded by a hostile force.

If you keep poking the Bear...it will lash out.

The same as if we had an Asian NATO that was getting closer to China...the Red Dragon would lash out.

If we really desire peace...why are we pushing a military alliance closer and closer to a potential flash point? We are playing with a powder keg and with matches.
Russia has been as active in war and expansion (moreso) as the US if not more. From Chechnya, to Georgia, to Crimea, to Donbas, now Ukraine. Let's not forget Syria and their North Pole excursions. We haven't been the only one playing with matches around a powder keg. Once the oil money started flowing, Putin started looking toward a greater Russia.

We missed a prime shot at a different relationship in 2001/2002. Putin went rogue a couple years later, and alas we've been at odds since, despite the awesome Clinton "reset" button and Obama "I'll have more flexibility" efforts (sarc).
I think you know well that Chechnya is a part of the Russian Federation.

If you want to condemn Russia for fighting a war to keep a break away region from getting its independence.

You have to condemn Ukraine for fighting a war to keep Donbass from getting its independence.

(And Lincoln for making war on the Southern States to keep them from getting independence)

And of course Chechnya was under the sway of Islamic Jihadists so they were no freedom fighters in the sense most people mean.


But in general you are right that Russia has consistently show a willingness to use violence in areas inside its territory (Chechnya) and right on its borders (Georgia, Ukraine)

So why provoke them by letting the US intelligence services get mixed up in bordering countries or try to expand NATO up to its borders?

It's like people want to get a nuclear war started with Russia.

They have show you time and time again they will react violently to protect their near abroad and local sphere of influence.
ATL Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

The US never promised or negotiated any agreement to not expand NATO. The US can't negotiate on behalf of NATO anyway.
That of course is not the issue.

NATO can expand or retract as it wants.

But it just looks ridiculous for the Western corporate media to spin a narrative that it is Russia that is prime expansionist and aggressive power about to put tanks in Berlin...when what it views as a hostile alliance is moving right up to its borders....and has been doing so since the 1990s.
I would take issue with the idea that alliance expansion and invading and taking land are equivalent. If you want a nation to move away from being a competitor, economically or militarily, be a better partner, diplomat, and/or option.
You are right....NATO recruiting members and Russia invading Ukraine are not the same.

But Russia's increasingly unhinged military actions are a direct result of the leadership in Moscow feeling that they are being surrounded by a hostile force.

If you keep poking the Bear...it will lash out.

The same as if we had an Asian NATO that was getting closer to China...the Red Dragon would lash out.

If we really desire peace...why are we pushing a military alliance closer and closer to a potential flash point? We are playing with a powder keg and with matches.
Russia has been as active in war and expansion (moreso) as the US if not more. From Chechnya, to Georgia, to Crimea, to Donbas, now Ukraine. Let's not forget Syria and their North Pole excursions. We haven't been the only one playing with matches around a powder keg. Once the oil money started flowing, Putin started looking toward a greater Russia.

We missed a prime shot at a different relationship in 2001/2002. Putin went rogue a couple years later, and alas we've been at odds since, despite the awesome Clinton "reset" button and Obama "I'll have more flexibility" efforts (sarc).
We had many opportunities.
As did they.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ATL Bear said:

Sam Lowry said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

The US never promised or negotiated any agreement to not expand NATO. The US can't negotiate on behalf of NATO anyway.
That of course is not the issue.

NATO can expand or retract as it wants.

But it just looks ridiculous for the Western corporate media to spin a narrative that it is Russia that is prime expansionist and aggressive power about to put tanks in Berlin...when what it views as a hostile alliance is moving right up to its borders....and has been doing so since the 1990s.
I would take issue with the idea that alliance expansion and invading and taking land are equivalent. If you want a nation to move away from being a competitor, economically or militarily, be a better partner, diplomat, and/or option.
You are right....NATO recruiting members and Russia invading Ukraine are not the same.

But Russia's increasingly unhinged military actions are a direct result of the leadership in Moscow feeling that they are being surrounded by a hostile force.

If you keep poking the Bear...it will lash out.

The same as if we had an Asian NATO that was getting closer to China...the Red Dragon would lash out.

If we really desire peace...why are we pushing a military alliance closer and closer to a potential flash point? We are playing with a powder keg and with matches.
Russia has been as active in war and expansion (moreso) as the US if not more. From Chechnya, to Georgia, to Crimea, to Donbas, now Ukraine. Let's not forget Syria and their North Pole excursions. We haven't been the only one playing with matches around a powder keg. Once the oil money started flowing, Putin started looking toward a greater Russia.

We missed a prime shot at a different relationship in 2001/2002. Putin went rogue a couple years later, and alas we've been at odds since, despite the awesome Clinton "reset" button and Obama "I'll have more flexibility" efforts (sarc).
We had many opportunities.
As did they.
Not really. We've made incessant demands on Russia to "reform" their government and society, even to the point of Biden calling for regime change. They've made no such demands on us. We've invaded countries halfway around the world, in violation of international law, and demanded Russian approval. We've supported revolutions in Russian republics and Russian neighbors. We've attacked Russia's ally in Syria while training and supporting Islamic terrorists to do the same. We lied about expanding NATO. We lied about supporting the Minsk agreements, while helping Ukraine prepare for war. We supported fascist militias in Ukraine, who were on the verge of renewed atrocities against ethnic Russians when Putin invaded.

Other than haunt Rachel Maddow's nightmares, what has Russia done in our hemisphere lately?
ATL Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

The US never promised or negotiated any agreement to not expand NATO. The US can't negotiate on behalf of NATO anyway.
That of course is not the issue.

NATO can expand or retract as it wants.

But it just looks ridiculous for the Western corporate media to spin a narrative that it is Russia that is prime expansionist and aggressive power about to put tanks in Berlin...when what it views as a hostile alliance is moving right up to its borders....and has been doing so since the 1990s.
I would take issue with the idea that alliance expansion and invading and taking land are equivalent. If you want a nation to move away from being a competitor, economically or militarily, be a better partner, diplomat, and/or option.
You are right....NATO recruiting members and Russia invading Ukraine are not the same.

But Russia's increasingly unhinged military actions are a direct result of the leadership in Moscow feeling that they are being surrounded by a hostile force.

If you keep poking the Bear...it will lash out.

The same as if we had an Asian NATO that was getting closer to China...the Red Dragon would lash out.

If we really desire peace...why are we pushing a military alliance closer and closer to a potential flash point? We are playing with a powder keg and with matches.
Russia has been as active in war and expansion (moreso) as the US if not more. From Chechnya, to Georgia, to Crimea, to Donbas, now Ukraine. Let's not forget Syria and their North Pole excursions. We haven't been the only one playing with matches around a powder keg. Once the oil money started flowing, Putin started looking toward a greater Russia.

We missed a prime shot at a different relationship in 2001/2002. Putin went rogue a couple years later, and alas we've been at odds since, despite the awesome Clinton "reset" button and Obama "I'll have more flexibility" efforts (sarc).
I think you know well that Chechnya is a part of the Russian Federation.

If you want to condemn Russia for fighting a war to keep a break away region from getting its independence.

You have to condemn Ukraine for fighting a war to keep Donbass from getting its independence.

(And Lincoln for making war on the Southern States to keep them from getting independence)

And of course Chechnya was under the sway of Islamic Jihadists so they were no freedom fighters in the sense most people mean.


But in general you are right that Russia has consistently show a willingness to use violence in areas inside its territory (Chechnya) and right on its borders (Georgia, Ukraine)

So why provoke them by letting the US intelligence services get mixed up in bordering countries or try to expand NATO up to its borders?

It's like people want to get a nuclear war started with Russia.

They have show you time and time again they will react violently to protect their near abroad and local sphere of influence.
I definitely don't want a nuclear war. And if I'm being honest we're getting close to my redline limit of the type of support we provide to Ukraine. But I do have a fundamental belief that the small war/big war dynamic has been in play since we departed Vietnam, and we're approaching 50 years of that, including the collapse and chaos of a fallen nuclear power and numerous global upheavals that could have been much worse. Big wars get started with the types of actions Russia took with Ukraine. We can argue nuance and semantics of the policies of NATO vs not, Ukrainian ethnicity, and regional politics, but the overt act of invasion with intent to conquer and rule is a rubicon crossing type moment, and it needs to be established, even if Ukraine has to acquiesce at some point in the future, that there are severe consequences to this type of act. Russia has been playing a series of small wars that continue to encroach closer to big war potential conflicts.

It's culminating in Ukraine and I'm hopeful at the end of this the lessons will be learned by all. A Russian loss (without American or NATO boots) is a good outcome/signal. A Russian "tie" (gets Donbas or some Eastern parts) is not a good outcome/signal, but in exchange for peace ends up an ok message. Letting them roll Ukraine as the world stands by is a terrible outcome/approach.
ATL Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

ATL Bear said:

Sam Lowry said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

The US never promised or negotiated any agreement to not expand NATO. The US can't negotiate on behalf of NATO anyway.
That of course is not the issue.

NATO can expand or retract as it wants.

But it just looks ridiculous for the Western corporate media to spin a narrative that it is Russia that is prime expansionist and aggressive power about to put tanks in Berlin...when what it views as a hostile alliance is moving right up to its borders....and has been doing so since the 1990s.
I would take issue with the idea that alliance expansion and invading and taking land are equivalent. If you want a nation to move away from being a competitor, economically or militarily, be a better partner, diplomat, and/or option.
You are right....NATO recruiting members and Russia invading Ukraine are not the same.

But Russia's increasingly unhinged military actions are a direct result of the leadership in Moscow feeling that they are being surrounded by a hostile force.

If you keep poking the Bear...it will lash out.

The same as if we had an Asian NATO that was getting closer to China...the Red Dragon would lash out.

If we really desire peace...why are we pushing a military alliance closer and closer to a potential flash point? We are playing with a powder keg and with matches.
Russia has been as active in war and expansion (moreso) as the US if not more. From Chechnya, to Georgia, to Crimea, to Donbas, now Ukraine. Let's not forget Syria and their North Pole excursions. We haven't been the only one playing with matches around a powder keg. Once the oil money started flowing, Putin started looking toward a greater Russia.

We missed a prime shot at a different relationship in 2001/2002. Putin went rogue a couple years later, and alas we've been at odds since, despite the awesome Clinton "reset" button and Obama "I'll have more flexibility" efforts (sarc).
We had many opportunities.
As did they.
Not really. We've made incessant demands on Russia to "reform" their government and society, even to the point of Biden calling for regime change. They've made no such demands on us. We've invaded countries halfway around the world, in violation of international law, and demanded Russian approval. We've supported revolutions in Russian republics and Russian neighbors. We've attacked Russia's ally in Syria while training and supporting Islamic terrorists to do the same. We lied about expanding NATO. We lied about supporting the Minsk agreements, while helping Ukraine prepare for war. We supported fascist militias in Ukraine, who were on the verge of renewed atrocities against ethnic Russians when Putin invaded.

Other than haunt Rachel Maddow's nightmares, what has Russia done in our hemisphere lately?
We aren't restricted to our hemisphere and you know it. Let's stop making excuses for what they've done by overlaying some mostly uneventful diplomatic clashing while they invaded and conquered sovereign territory.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ATL Bear said:

Sam Lowry said:

ATL Bear said:

Sam Lowry said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

The US never promised or negotiated any agreement to not expand NATO. The US can't negotiate on behalf of NATO anyway.
That of course is not the issue.

NATO can expand or retract as it wants.

But it just looks ridiculous for the Western corporate media to spin a narrative that it is Russia that is prime expansionist and aggressive power about to put tanks in Berlin...when what it views as a hostile alliance is moving right up to its borders....and has been doing so since the 1990s.
I would take issue with the idea that alliance expansion and invading and taking land are equivalent. If you want a nation to move away from being a competitor, economically or militarily, be a better partner, diplomat, and/or option.
You are right....NATO recruiting members and Russia invading Ukraine are not the same.

But Russia's increasingly unhinged military actions are a direct result of the leadership in Moscow feeling that they are being surrounded by a hostile force.

If you keep poking the Bear...it will lash out.

The same as if we had an Asian NATO that was getting closer to China...the Red Dragon would lash out.

If we really desire peace...why are we pushing a military alliance closer and closer to a potential flash point? We are playing with a powder keg and with matches.
Russia has been as active in war and expansion (moreso) as the US if not more. From Chechnya, to Georgia, to Crimea, to Donbas, now Ukraine. Let's not forget Syria and their North Pole excursions. We haven't been the only one playing with matches around a powder keg. Once the oil money started flowing, Putin started looking toward a greater Russia.

We missed a prime shot at a different relationship in 2001/2002. Putin went rogue a couple years later, and alas we've been at odds since, despite the awesome Clinton "reset" button and Obama "I'll have more flexibility" efforts (sarc).
We had many opportunities.
As did they.
Not really. We've made incessant demands on Russia to "reform" their government and society, even to the point of Biden calling for regime change. They've made no such demands on us. We've invaded countries halfway around the world, in violation of international law, and demanded Russian approval. We've supported revolutions in Russian republics and Russian neighbors. We've attacked Russia's ally in Syria while training and supporting Islamic terrorists to do the same. We lied about expanding NATO. We lied about supporting the Minsk agreements, while helping Ukraine prepare for war. We supported fascist militias in Ukraine, who were on the verge of renewed atrocities against ethnic Russians when Putin invaded.

Other than haunt Rachel Maddow's nightmares, what has Russia done in our hemisphere lately?
We aren't restricted to our hemisphere and you know it. Let's stop making excuses for what they've done by overlaying some mostly uneventful diplomatic clashing while they invaded and conquered sovereign territory.
What does it matter if they invade and conquer sovereign territory? We do it any time we feel like it. In their hemisphere.
ATL Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

ATL Bear said:

Sam Lowry said:

ATL Bear said:

Sam Lowry said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

The US never promised or negotiated any agreement to not expand NATO. The US can't negotiate on behalf of NATO anyway.
That of course is not the issue.

NATO can expand or retract as it wants.

But it just looks ridiculous for the Western corporate media to spin a narrative that it is Russia that is prime expansionist and aggressive power about to put tanks in Berlin...when what it views as a hostile alliance is moving right up to its borders....and has been doing so since the 1990s.
I would take issue with the idea that alliance expansion and invading and taking land are equivalent. If you want a nation to move away from being a competitor, economically or militarily, be a better partner, diplomat, and/or option.
You are right....NATO recruiting members and Russia invading Ukraine are not the same.

But Russia's increasingly unhinged military actions are a direct result of the leadership in Moscow feeling that they are being surrounded by a hostile force.

If you keep poking the Bear...it will lash out.

The same as if we had an Asian NATO that was getting closer to China...the Red Dragon would lash out.

If we really desire peace...why are we pushing a military alliance closer and closer to a potential flash point? We are playing with a powder keg and with matches.
Russia has been as active in war and expansion (moreso) as the US if not more. From Chechnya, to Georgia, to Crimea, to Donbas, now Ukraine. Let's not forget Syria and their North Pole excursions. We haven't been the only one playing with matches around a powder keg. Once the oil money started flowing, Putin started looking toward a greater Russia.

We missed a prime shot at a different relationship in 2001/2002. Putin went rogue a couple years later, and alas we've been at odds since, despite the awesome Clinton "reset" button and Obama "I'll have more flexibility" efforts (sarc).
We had many opportunities.
As did they.
Not really. We've made incessant demands on Russia to "reform" their government and society, even to the point of Biden calling for regime change. They've made no such demands on us. We've invaded countries halfway around the world, in violation of international law, and demanded Russian approval. We've supported revolutions in Russian republics and Russian neighbors. We've attacked Russia's ally in Syria while training and supporting Islamic terrorists to do the same. We lied about expanding NATO. We lied about supporting the Minsk agreements, while helping Ukraine prepare for war. We supported fascist militias in Ukraine, who were on the verge of renewed atrocities against ethnic Russians when Putin invaded.

Other than haunt Rachel Maddow's nightmares, what has Russia done in our hemisphere lately?
We aren't restricted to our hemisphere and you know it. Let's stop making excuses for what they've done by overlaying some mostly uneventful diplomatic clashing while they invaded and conquered sovereign territory.
What does it matter if they invade and conquer sovereign territory? We do it any time we feel like it. In their hemisphere.
We looking to annex Iraq and Afghanistan?
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ATL Bear said:

Sam Lowry said:

ATL Bear said:

Sam Lowry said:

ATL Bear said:

Sam Lowry said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

The US never promised or negotiated any agreement to not expand NATO. The US can't negotiate on behalf of NATO anyway.
That of course is not the issue.

NATO can expand or retract as it wants.

But it just looks ridiculous for the Western corporate media to spin a narrative that it is Russia that is prime expansionist and aggressive power about to put tanks in Berlin...when what it views as a hostile alliance is moving right up to its borders....and has been doing so since the 1990s.
I would take issue with the idea that alliance expansion and invading and taking land are equivalent. If you want a nation to move away from being a competitor, economically or militarily, be a better partner, diplomat, and/or option.
You are right....NATO recruiting members and Russia invading Ukraine are not the same.

But Russia's increasingly unhinged military actions are a direct result of the leadership in Moscow feeling that they are being surrounded by a hostile force.

If you keep poking the Bear...it will lash out.

The same as if we had an Asian NATO that was getting closer to China...the Red Dragon would lash out.

If we really desire peace...why are we pushing a military alliance closer and closer to a potential flash point? We are playing with a powder keg and with matches.
Russia has been as active in war and expansion (moreso) as the US if not more. From Chechnya, to Georgia, to Crimea, to Donbas, now Ukraine. Let's not forget Syria and their North Pole excursions. We haven't been the only one playing with matches around a powder keg. Once the oil money started flowing, Putin started looking toward a greater Russia.

We missed a prime shot at a different relationship in 2001/2002. Putin went rogue a couple years later, and alas we've been at odds since, despite the awesome Clinton "reset" button and Obama "I'll have more flexibility" efforts (sarc).
We had many opportunities.
As did they.
Not really. We've made incessant demands on Russia to "reform" their government and society, even to the point of Biden calling for regime change. They've made no such demands on us. We've invaded countries halfway around the world, in violation of international law, and demanded Russian approval. We've supported revolutions in Russian republics and Russian neighbors. We've attacked Russia's ally in Syria while training and supporting Islamic terrorists to do the same. We lied about expanding NATO. We lied about supporting the Minsk agreements, while helping Ukraine prepare for war. We supported fascist militias in Ukraine, who were on the verge of renewed atrocities against ethnic Russians when Putin invaded.

Other than haunt Rachel Maddow's nightmares, what has Russia done in our hemisphere lately?
We aren't restricted to our hemisphere and you know it. Let's stop making excuses for what they've done by overlaying some mostly uneventful diplomatic clashing while they invaded and conquered sovereign territory.
What does it matter if they invade and conquer sovereign territory? We do it any time we feel like it. In their hemisphere.
We looking to annex Iraq and Afghanistan?
No, but I have heard some talk of annexing Puerto Rico. Should I alert the UN Security Council?
ATL Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

ATL Bear said:

Sam Lowry said:

ATL Bear said:

Sam Lowry said:

ATL Bear said:

Sam Lowry said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

The US never promised or negotiated any agreement to not expand NATO. The US can't negotiate on behalf of NATO anyway.
That of course is not the issue.

NATO can expand or retract as it wants.

But it just looks ridiculous for the Western corporate media to spin a narrative that it is Russia that is prime expansionist and aggressive power about to put tanks in Berlin...when what it views as a hostile alliance is moving right up to its borders....and has been doing so since the 1990s.
I would take issue with the idea that alliance expansion and invading and taking land are equivalent. If you want a nation to move away from being a competitor, economically or militarily, be a better partner, diplomat, and/or option.
You are right....NATO recruiting members and Russia invading Ukraine are not the same.

But Russia's increasingly unhinged military actions are a direct result of the leadership in Moscow feeling that they are being surrounded by a hostile force.

If you keep poking the Bear...it will lash out.

The same as if we had an Asian NATO that was getting closer to China...the Red Dragon would lash out.

If we really desire peace...why are we pushing a military alliance closer and closer to a potential flash point? We are playing with a powder keg and with matches.
Russia has been as active in war and expansion (moreso) as the US if not more. From Chechnya, to Georgia, to Crimea, to Donbas, now Ukraine. Let's not forget Syria and their North Pole excursions. We haven't been the only one playing with matches around a powder keg. Once the oil money started flowing, Putin started looking toward a greater Russia.

We missed a prime shot at a different relationship in 2001/2002. Putin went rogue a couple years later, and alas we've been at odds since, despite the awesome Clinton "reset" button and Obama "I'll have more flexibility" efforts (sarc).
We had many opportunities.
As did they.
Not really. We've made incessant demands on Russia to "reform" their government and society, even to the point of Biden calling for regime change. They've made no such demands on us. We've invaded countries halfway around the world, in violation of international law, and demanded Russian approval. We've supported revolutions in Russian republics and Russian neighbors. We've attacked Russia's ally in Syria while training and supporting Islamic terrorists to do the same. We lied about expanding NATO. We lied about supporting the Minsk agreements, while helping Ukraine prepare for war. We supported fascist militias in Ukraine, who were on the verge of renewed atrocities against ethnic Russians when Putin invaded.

Other than haunt Rachel Maddow's nightmares, what has Russia done in our hemisphere lately?
We aren't restricted to our hemisphere and you know it. Let's stop making excuses for what they've done by overlaying some mostly uneventful diplomatic clashing while they invaded and conquered sovereign territory.
What does it matter if they invade and conquer sovereign territory? We do it any time we feel like it. In their hemisphere.
We looking to annex Iraq and Afghanistan?
No, but I have heard some talk of annexing Puerto Rico. Should I alert the UN Security Council?
Only if we roll the tanks in.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ATL Bear said:

Sam Lowry said:

ATL Bear said:

Sam Lowry said:

ATL Bear said:

Sam Lowry said:

ATL Bear said:

Sam Lowry said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

The US never promised or negotiated any agreement to not expand NATO. The US can't negotiate on behalf of NATO anyway.
That of course is not the issue.

NATO can expand or retract as it wants.

But it just looks ridiculous for the Western corporate media to spin a narrative that it is Russia that is prime expansionist and aggressive power about to put tanks in Berlin...when what it views as a hostile alliance is moving right up to its borders....and has been doing so since the 1990s.
I would take issue with the idea that alliance expansion and invading and taking land are equivalent. If you want a nation to move away from being a competitor, economically or militarily, be a better partner, diplomat, and/or option.
You are right....NATO recruiting members and Russia invading Ukraine are not the same.

But Russia's increasingly unhinged military actions are a direct result of the leadership in Moscow feeling that they are being surrounded by a hostile force.

If you keep poking the Bear...it will lash out.

The same as if we had an Asian NATO that was getting closer to China...the Red Dragon would lash out.

If we really desire peace...why are we pushing a military alliance closer and closer to a potential flash point? We are playing with a powder keg and with matches.
Russia has been as active in war and expansion (moreso) as the US if not more. From Chechnya, to Georgia, to Crimea, to Donbas, now Ukraine. Let's not forget Syria and their North Pole excursions. We haven't been the only one playing with matches around a powder keg. Once the oil money started flowing, Putin started looking toward a greater Russia.

We missed a prime shot at a different relationship in 2001/2002. Putin went rogue a couple years later, and alas we've been at odds since, despite the awesome Clinton "reset" button and Obama "I'll have more flexibility" efforts (sarc).
We had many opportunities.
As did they.
Not really. We've made incessant demands on Russia to "reform" their government and society, even to the point of Biden calling for regime change. They've made no such demands on us. We've invaded countries halfway around the world, in violation of international law, and demanded Russian approval. We've supported revolutions in Russian republics and Russian neighbors. We've attacked Russia's ally in Syria while training and supporting Islamic terrorists to do the same. We lied about expanding NATO. We lied about supporting the Minsk agreements, while helping Ukraine prepare for war. We supported fascist militias in Ukraine, who were on the verge of renewed atrocities against ethnic Russians when Putin invaded.

Other than haunt Rachel Maddow's nightmares, what has Russia done in our hemisphere lately?
We aren't restricted to our hemisphere and you know it. Let's stop making excuses for what they've done by overlaying some mostly uneventful diplomatic clashing while they invaded and conquered sovereign territory.
What does it matter if they invade and conquer sovereign territory? We do it any time we feel like it. In their hemisphere.
We looking to annex Iraq and Afghanistan?
No, but I have heard some talk of annexing Puerto Rico. Should I alert the UN Security Council?
Only if we roll the tanks in.
Only Biden would try that. Any other POTUS would send them on a boat.
ATL Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

ATL Bear said:

Sam Lowry said:

ATL Bear said:

Sam Lowry said:

ATL Bear said:

Sam Lowry said:

ATL Bear said:

Sam Lowry said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

The US never promised or negotiated any agreement to not expand NATO. The US can't negotiate on behalf of NATO anyway.
That of course is not the issue.

NATO can expand or retract as it wants.

But it just looks ridiculous for the Western corporate media to spin a narrative that it is Russia that is prime expansionist and aggressive power about to put tanks in Berlin...when what it views as a hostile alliance is moving right up to its borders....and has been doing so since the 1990s.
I would take issue with the idea that alliance expansion and invading and taking land are equivalent. If you want a nation to move away from being a competitor, economically or militarily, be a better partner, diplomat, and/or option.
You are right....NATO recruiting members and Russia invading Ukraine are not the same.

But Russia's increasingly unhinged military actions are a direct result of the leadership in Moscow feeling that they are being surrounded by a hostile force.

If you keep poking the Bear...it will lash out.

The same as if we had an Asian NATO that was getting closer to China...the Red Dragon would lash out.

If we really desire peace...why are we pushing a military alliance closer and closer to a potential flash point? We are playing with a powder keg and with matches.
Russia has been as active in war and expansion (moreso) as the US if not more. From Chechnya, to Georgia, to Crimea, to Donbas, now Ukraine. Let's not forget Syria and their North Pole excursions. We haven't been the only one playing with matches around a powder keg. Once the oil money started flowing, Putin started looking toward a greater Russia.

We missed a prime shot at a different relationship in 2001/2002. Putin went rogue a couple years later, and alas we've been at odds since, despite the awesome Clinton "reset" button and Obama "I'll have more flexibility" efforts (sarc).
We had many opportunities.
As did they.
Not really. We've made incessant demands on Russia to "reform" their government and society, even to the point of Biden calling for regime change. They've made no such demands on us. We've invaded countries halfway around the world, in violation of international law, and demanded Russian approval. We've supported revolutions in Russian republics and Russian neighbors. We've attacked Russia's ally in Syria while training and supporting Islamic terrorists to do the same. We lied about expanding NATO. We lied about supporting the Minsk agreements, while helping Ukraine prepare for war. We supported fascist militias in Ukraine, who were on the verge of renewed atrocities against ethnic Russians when Putin invaded.

Other than haunt Rachel Maddow's nightmares, what has Russia done in our hemisphere lately?
We aren't restricted to our hemisphere and you know it. Let's stop making excuses for what they've done by overlaying some mostly uneventful diplomatic clashing while they invaded and conquered sovereign territory.
What does it matter if they invade and conquer sovereign territory? We do it any time we feel like it. In their hemisphere.
We looking to annex Iraq and Afghanistan?
No, but I have heard some talk of annexing Puerto Rico. Should I alert the UN Security Council?
Only if we roll the tanks in.
Only Biden would try that. Any other POTUS would send them on a boat.

LOL. Touche
Fre3dombear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mothra said:

drahthaar said:

Ending our involvement in Ukraine only gives Putin open gates to expanding into eastern Europe, posing a worse threat than Hitler did in the '30's. And we are less prepared now than then to respond.
A couple of things...

1) We didn't have to be involved in Ukraine at all had Biden provided a security guarantee on Ukraine's NATO membership;

2) It is doubtful Russia, given it's heavy losses at the hands of Ukrainians, could mount any semblance of a conventional war beyond Ukraine, at this point. The idea that we need to sustain this proxy war in order to avoid a Hitler-like march across Europe isn't supported by the evidence.


I never understand our resident dolts that suggest this when it's clear, to them at least, that Russia is getting destroyed by ukraines army and can't even March across Ukraine. Yet if we let them win (which they've told us they aren't and in fact they are getting annihilated as we speak), they will March across Europe

So which is it we ask these military and political geniuses?
curtpenn
How long do you want to ignore this user?
drahthaar said:

A century later, we are sleepwalking into World War III. Americans should ignore the state-sponsored propaganda (eerily similar to that which led up to WWI), wake up, look at what their leaders have wrought, and do all they can to end support for this cruel war before we face a Great War-like conflagration or worse.


We're not sleepwalking into WW3; we've given inept leadership permission to take us there by any means they deem acceptable. Not only is current action similar to pre-WW1, it is strikingly similar to pre-WW2, especially to the history in England. Ending our involvement in Ukraine only gives Putin open gates to expanding into eastern Europe, posing a worse threat than Hitler did in the '30's. And we are less prepared now than then to respond. Make no mistake, a great conflagration is coming, uncontested by the U.S. government leadership.

It does not appear that we have a Churchill to lead when he is most needed.


It isn't obvious to me that Russian expansion into Eastern Europe is a given or even really that big of an issue to Americans. It's not as if they haven't been there before. Are we really better off now post the collapse of the former USSR? China is the real threat. We should be finding ways to make common cause with Russia who is culturally closer to us. Putin won't live forever.
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Wangchung said:

So odd that our politicians can spend decades overtly and covertly influencing elections and politics around the world but acknowledging the evidence of voter fraud from our own elections, BY THOSE SAME PEOPLE, is suddenly beyond the pale and traitorous.


Baseless charge believed by those who consented to be lied to.

But let's get back to the OP narrative as it is longer and larger than any one administration or party.

Travel outside the US and talk to people who don't make their living from tourism and you'll see the payoff from the policies outlined in the OP.

I said a year ago that Putin would take the Donbas and that Biden could do nothing to stop him. And that Ukraine was lead by a thug.

I stand behind that still, both parts.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
Doc Holliday
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

The US never promised or negotiated any agreement to not expand NATO. The US can't negotiate on behalf of NATO anyway.
That of course is not the issue.

NATO can expand or retract as it wants.

But it just looks ridiculous for the Western corporate media to spin a narrative that it is Russia that is prime expansionist and aggressive power about to put tanks in Berlin...when what it views as a hostile alliance is moving right up to its borders....and has been doing so since the 1990s.
I would take issue with the idea that alliance expansion and invading and taking land are equivalent. If you want a nation to move away from being a competitor, economically or militarily, be a better partner, diplomat, and/or option.
You are right....NATO recruiting members and Russia invading Ukraine are not the same.

But Russia's increasingly unhinged military actions are a direct result of the leadership in Moscow feeling that they are being surrounded by a hostile force.

If you keep poking the Bear...it will lash out.

The same as if we had an Asian NATO that was getting closer to China...the Red Dragon would lash out.

If we really desire peace...why are we pushing a military alliance closer and closer to a potential flash point? We are playing with a powder keg and with matches.
Russia has been as active in war and expansion (moreso) as the US if not more. From Chechnya, to Georgia, to Crimea, to Donbas, now Ukraine. Let's not forget Syria and their North Pole excursions. We haven't been the only one playing with matches around a powder keg. Once the oil money started flowing, Putin started looking toward a greater Russia.

We missed a prime shot at a different relationship in 2001/2002. Putin went rogue a couple years later, and alas we've been at odds since, despite the awesome Clinton "reset" button and Obama "I'll have more flexibility" efforts (sarc).
I think you know well that Chechnya is a part of the Russian Federation.

If you want to condemn Russia for fighting a war to keep a break away region from getting its independence.

You have to condemn Ukraine for fighting a war to keep Donbass from getting its independence.

(And Lincoln for making war on the Southern States to keep them from getting independence)

And of course Chechnya was under the sway of Islamic Jihadists so they were no freedom fighters in the sense most people mean.


But in general you are right that Russia has consistently show a willingness to use violence in areas inside its territory (Chechnya) and right on its borders (Georgia, Ukraine)

So why provoke them by letting the US intelligence services get mixed up in bordering countries or try to expand NATO up to its borders?

It's like people want to get a nuclear war started with Russia.

They have show you time and time again they will react violently to protect their near abroad and local sphere of influence.
It's culminating in Ukraine and I'm hopeful at the end of this the lessons will be learned by all. A Russian loss (without American or NATO boots) is a good outcome/signal. A Russian "tie" (gets Donbas or some Eastern parts) is not a good outcome/signal, but in exchange for peace ends up an ok message. Letting them roll Ukraine as the world stands by is a terrible outcome/approach.
That makes us hypocrites.

Congress just voted to continue occupying part of a sovereign nation (Syria)…but denounces Russia for occupying part of a sovereign nation.
Last Page
Page 1 of 3
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.