FLBear5630 said:You pick and choose what you want to show. That is one piece of the puzzle and the financial is secondary to public sympathies. You also don't mention the U-Boat attacks or that the USS Aztec was torpedoed resulting in 28 US deaths just before the US entering the war.Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:How do you guys make it through the day with all the conspiracies impacting every aspect of life? Everything is some Cabal conspiracy by the rich.Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:You left out the German U-Boats sinking US shipping. You guys are so conspiracy driven,Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:Fair enough, I was looking at your last paragraph.Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:If WW1 and WW2 were not worthy of the US entering,Redbrickbear said:whiterock said:FLBear5630 said:Yet, Ukraine asks for help. Hmm, who do I believe?Sam Lowry said:The false sympathy and exploitation of Ukraine by the West is indeed disgusting.Bear8084 said:Sam Lowry said:I think you mean disproportionately old. The idea that Ukraine has a largely young population and is saving it for a rainy day while their aging army collapses is completely illogical.whiterock said:indeed. But Russia doesn't care about that if they subsume Ukraine into the Russia. They pick up 40m people, disproportionately young & female (given that Ukraine is fighting this war with +30 year old men).Redbrickbear said:whiterock said:2.6% unemployment rate is full employment, which means, from this point forward, every single soldier mobilized and sent to the front has a negative effect on GDP. Sure, Russia can keep transferring resources to keep war production at current levels, but they can't do it forever. Eventually people are going to need new clothes, new cars, replacement household items, etc......trey3216 said:"All resources in Russian economy are exhausted. Inflation is rising, interest rates cannot be significantly increased. Extreme lack of the workforce. Adding money from reserves to market will just increase inflation without bringing new growth. Russia is likely facing stagnation… pic.twitter.com/rXRQULbrKt
— Jaanika Merilo (@jaanikamerilo) July 29, 2024
Russia will be able to sustain current war production into at least the summer of 2025, but they stay at that level indefinitely. They'll have to increasingly rob Peter (private sector) to pay Paul (war production).
More importantly than that is the loss of any solider is a devastating thing for Russia.
They don't have the birth rate to replace any losses.
[Russia's death rate has been higher than its birth rate for years, resulting in a natural population decline. In 2022, Russia's crude birth rate was 8.9 per 100,000 people, the lowest it's been since 2000, while its death rate was about 1.7 times higher than its birth rate. Russia's fertility rate is also one of the lowest in the world, with women having an average of 1.42 children in 2022, compared to the 2.1 children needed to maintain the population]
As for the women, they'll be better off under Russian rule than fleeing west to fill the brothels of Europe. Those poor souls will be putting the "slav" in slavery for years to come, naturally without a word of complaint from the West. It's the only thing Europe really likes about them.
Good grief what a disgusting post. Not super surprising it's from the Russian.
The guy with a Baylor Law Degree living a great Capitalist life in America pleading to let the Russian's have Ukraine as the humanitarian thing to do or the Ukranian President whose Nation was invaded asking for military hardware so they can repel the invader???
Sorry, rings hollow. I will go with the guy that was invaded asking for help...
In March of 1914, 9 months before we entered WWII, the US passed the Lend-Lease Act, under which we supplied the following to the USSR (then at war with Germany):
- 400,000 jeeps & trucks
- 14,000 airplanes
- 8,000 tractors
- 13,000 tanks
- 1.5 million blankets
- 15 million pairs of army boots
- 107,000 tons of cotton
- 2.7 million tons of petrol products
- 4.5 million tons of food
Was that exploitation?
Was that false sympathy?
Nope. It was Realpolitik. It was national interest.
1. I assume you mean 1941
World War I was a very foolish internal European civil war that we should have stayed out of.
2. Its probably time we even re-evaluated the WWII mythology and nostalgia as well.
Its getting dangerous considering how you pro-War Chick-Hawks use it as an endless bloody shirt to try and get American boys killed in more foreign wars....and apparently will use it as a excuse for more wars forever and ever and ever.
The USA got into that war because it was actually physically attacked by the Empire of Japan...it was probably the last legitimate large scale war we have fought.
But lets also be honest... Peter Hitchens hits the nail on the head in terms of how that war ended.
"World War II began as a war to save Poland from a ruthless totalitarian doctorship. It ended with Poland under the control of a ruthless totalitarian dictatorship...along with half of the entire European continent. And along the way 50 million people died"
WWI was not
I did not say the same for WW2....Japan attacked the USA....I specially said it was the last large scale legitimate war the USA has fought.
I do believe WW1 was worth the US entering. The Freedom of Navigation alone.
I can assure you the powers that be in the USA did not enter that war to "defend the right of navigation"
[When WWI began in Europe in 1914, many Americans wanted the United States to stay out of the conflict, forcing President Woodrow Wilson to adopt a policy of strict neutrality...
.
Despite the U.S. position, many Americans personally sympathized with Britain, France and their allies. American institutions lent large sums to the Allied governments, giving the U.S. a financial stake in the outcome of the war. Nearly 10% of Americans identified as ethnic Germans, most of whom hoped the United States would remain neutral in the war....
While the country was at peace, American banks made huge loans to the Entente powers, which were used mainly to buy munitions, raw materials, and food from across the Atlantic. Although US President Woodrow Wilson made preparations for a land war before 1917, he also authorize a shipbuilding program for the United States Navy. Wilson was narrowly re-elected in 1916 on an anti-war platform.]
1. That is well know...so is the Zimmerman telegram to Mexico.
https://www.theworldwar.org/learn/about-wwi/zimmermann-telegram
2. Its not conspiracy to say that the US leadership and financial elite had a preferred out come of that war in mind. And that they were not as interested in saying neutral as the majority of the population.
America's political and financial elite were looking for reasons to get into the war...the average America was looking for reasons to stay out of it.
Buddy there are entire books written about World War I and the politics involved in our decision to enter that war.
As some point you have to stop labeling facts and opinions you don't like as "conspiracy" theories.
Unless of course you think the U.S. fights all wars without input from the American business and financial community.
PS
The text I quoted was right from the National World War I museum and memorial
A bunch of "conspiracy" theorists right?
https://www.theworldwar.org/learn/about-wwi/us-enters-war
"Despite the U.S. position, many Americans personally sympathized with Britain, France and their allies. American institutions lent large sums to the Allied governments, giving the U.S. a financial stake in the outcome of the war."
And you of course pick and choose what points you want to emphasize….thats part of debate
German naval attacks not with standing the American pubic was not on board with getting into WWI even long after it was declared.
It took a large PR and propaganda campaign to get them in line.