Redbrickbear said:
ATL Bear said:
Redbrickbear said:
ATL Bear said:
Redbrickbear said:
ATL Bear said:
Redbrickbear said:
ATL Bear said:
Redbrickbear said:
ATL Bear said:
Redbrickbear said:
ATL Bear said:
Redbrickbear said:
ATL Bear said:
Redbrickbear said:
sombear said:
Redbrickbear said:
sombear said:
Redbrickbear said:
ron.reagan said:
The_barBEARian said:
ron.reagan said:
The_barBEARian said:
Mothra said:
The_barBEARian said:
Mothra said:
The_barBEARian said:
Mothra said:
ron.reagan said:
We are their eternal enemy. You have to have an extreme level of gullibility to think otherwise. They choose self harm and conflict with us instead of prosperity
Bingo.
Russia is not the eternal enemy.
You and ron are just two very old and very out of touch guys that need to accept that your time has passed and stick to bingo nights and shuffle board.
There is nothing more cringe than old men cheerleading a war they are too decrepit to go fight themselves.
You remain one of the dumbest posters on this board. This post is further proof.
Don't you have some Palestinian protest to attend?
A very mature response from someone so aged... a clear demonstration of your great intellect
No less mature than the bull**** post I responded to, Jew hater.
Sir, you have a child's mind trapped inside a geriatric body.
When you aren't morbidly obese you can win Superbowls in a geriatric body
Damn! I didnt know we had a Superbowl Champion among us! Ukraine could really use a Billy Badass such as yourself. I think it would be really inspiring to see a geriatric peak physical specimen such as yourself on the front lines instead of encouraging other people to go fight endless wars.
https://ildu.com.ua/
I wonder if the thought of war or exercise terrifies you more.
Speaking of war
Have you volunteered yet to go fight the big bad Russian menace?
Have any of the other Warhawk's on this thread volunteered to go to the trenches of eastern Ukraine?
Are you risking your life defending the border?
Tracking down illegals?
Moving to tents outside abortion clinics?
Helping Bukele in El Salvador?
You make a number of good arguments. This one is plain silly.
And BTW, since when is helping a free country (through money and weapons) defend itself against a murderous aggressor being a "Warhawk?"
I get your point but its a fundamentally different thing
1. Illegals and other law enforcement issues in America are our business....in fact its a Constitutional duty of our elected leaders to enforce those laws. And we support them with our votes and tax dollars. And I would report any illegal actively I saw....and if the local elected authorities wanted to deputize more citizens and asked for help I would certainly volunteer without hesitation to help enforce the local legal laws.
Abortion is a State by State issue per our Constitution.....and falls under the same umbrella. I personally have joined several pro-life demonstrations for what its worth to make by voice heard on the issue. That is all we are allowed to do by the law....peaceful protest and vote on the issue.
2. I may sympathize with Bukele's anti-narco terrorism campaign in El Salvador but I don't in fact think the USA should send him billions or encourage him (or hinder him) in anyway.
Its a purely internal matter for the Government and Citizens of El Salvador.
I would never go there to fight or help the narco-terrorists
3. A proxy war in far off eastern Europe is another matter
People are advocating that we send billions of dollars in tax payer money to a non-NATO ally. And the we sustain them in a war long term that does not directly involve us. A war that if we did get involved directly with could go nuclear
Not to mention Bukele in El Salvador is not asking for volunteers to come fight the narco-terrorists.....Zelensky is asking for volunteers to come fight the Russians.
So for those who feel that war with Russia should be on the table.....Its not a strange question to ask if they will go fight
But it's not different. It's a basic policy position juts like the others. The same argument applies.
I'm not advocating we send troops. I've been consistent and saying the opposite.
Issues of war...especially wars overseas...rise to a whole different level than questions of the lawful enforcement of our laws at home. (who can be here, what actions are legal...aka abortion)
Sending hundreds of billions to a foreign nation fighting another foreign nation is not a part of our Constitutional system.
Heck our Founding Fathers specially warned against such things.....
[The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is, in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop. Europe has a set of primary interests, which to us have none, or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence therefore it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties, in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities. Our detached and distant situation invites and enables us to pursue a different course....when we may take such an attitude as will cause the neutrality we may at any time resolve upon to be scrupulously respected; when belligerent nations, under the impossibility of making acquisitions upon us, will not lightly hazard the giving us provocation; when we may choose peace or war, as our interest, guided by justice, shall counsel. Why forgo the advantages of so peculiar a situation? Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor, or caprice? It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world- so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it- for let me not be understood as capable of patronizing infidelity to existing engagements (I hold the maxim no less applicable to public than to private affairs, that honesty is always the best policy)I repeat it therefore, let those engagements be observed in their genuine sense. But in my opinion it is unnecessary and would be unwise to extend them. Taking care always to keep ourselves, by suitable establishments, on a respectably defensive posture, we may safely trust to temporary alliances for extraordinary emergencies. Harmony, liberal intercourse with all nations, are recommended by policy, humanity, and interest. But even our commercial policy should hold an equal and impartial hand: neither seeking nor granting exclusive favors or preferences; consulting the natural course of things; diffusing and diversifying by gentle means the streams of commerce but forcing nothing; establishing with powers so disposed in order to give to trade a stable course, to define the rights of our merchants, and to enable the government to support them conventional rules of intercourse, the best that present circumstances and mutual opinion will permit, but temporary, and liable to be from time to time abandoned or varied, as experience and circumstances shall dictate; constantly keeping in view, that it is folly in one nation to look for disinterested favors from another that it must pay with a portion of its independence for whatever it may accept under that character that by such acceptance it may place itself in the condition of having given equivalents for nominal favors and yet of being reproached with ingratitude for not giving more. There can be no greater error than to expect or calculate upon real favors from nation to nation. It is an illusion which experience must cure, which a just pride ought to discard.] WASHINGTON'S FAREWELL ADDRESS
[America, in the assembly of nations, since her admission among them, has invariably, though often fruitlessly, held forth to them the hand of honest friendship, of equal freedom, of generous reciprocity. She has uniformly spoken among them, though often to heedless and often to disdainful ears, the language of equal liberty, of equal justice, and of equal rights. She has, in the lapse of nearly half a century, without a single exception, respected the independence of other nations while asserting and maintaining her own.
She has abstained from interference in the concerns of others, even when conflict has been for principles to which she clings, as to the last vital drop that visits the heart. She has seen that probably for centuries to come, all the contests of that Aceldama the European world, will be contests of inveterate power, and emerging right. Wherever the standard of freedom and Independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be.
But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. She will commend the general cause by the countenance of her voice, and the benignant sympathy of her example. She well knows that by once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy, and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standard of freedom. The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force.... She might become the dictatress of the world. She would be no longer the ruler of her own spirit] -President John Quincy Adams
Only adds the hypocrisy that those who want us involved....won't go themselves to the fight
And we literally have been waging a "war on drugs" in our nation for 4 decades. We've provided it weapons, extra national resources, Billions of dollars to other countries, and "soldiers" (LE officers) domestically. Not to mention billions for incarceration, trimming of rights for American citizens, along with additional billions (if not Trillions) of social costs. All to stop an illicit international trade. Run that process through the founders opinions.
Absolutely…A failed war on drugs.
One that has been about as successful as our failed wars abroad over the past 20+ years.
Really makes you question letting DC elites get us into another war…
The key point was about volunteering in said conflicts.
If the US government asked for volunteers to enforce our immigration laws or drug laws I would do so since it's a Constitutional duty.
Will you volunteer for the Ukraine war? Zelensky is begging for help in the trenches of Donbas.
ICE, law enforcement, DEA, are all seeking volunteers as well. As sombear asked, are you going to sign up?
Sure I would sign up and volunteer!
If they can work around my work schedule I would be happy to help enforce our Immigration and drug laws.
Now will you go fight the war in Ukraine that you support? And the war you want America deeper involved in?
At least I have some actual skin in the game with a future Marine once he wraps up at the Naval Academy.
I have a first cousin in the Marines right now
I have two second cousins (female 1st cousins sons) who are in the Navy.
I am 100% not interested in sending them to fight wars in Donbas, Afghanistan, or the Syrian civil war
Are you willing to send your kin?
It should be a simple question to answer
I've said multiple times I'm unwilling to send US troops, so stop asking dumb questions. But that's not what you're implying. You're saying if you have an opinion supporting Ukraine in its fight against Russia, which Ukrainians are fighting, that means I or my family have to be willing to fight in Ukraine. That's idiotic logic you're applying.
The question was actually if you would volunteer personally. A question you are still avoiding answering.
You are of course entitled to your opinion on foreign policy.
But when you are pushing America policy to get us deeper and deeper into a bloody proxy war with a nuclear armed state….people will eventually ask if you would personably put your life on in the line in such a conflict.
And it's at the is point fairly obvious your real long term intention is to eventually see the Untied States directly fight Russia and engage in regime change there (for whatever reason you are not yet willing to come out and admit it)
I have already said I would volunteer to fight mass migration and enforce our borders.
Will you volunteer to fight in this Ukraine war you support?
You have no idea what my long term intentions are. You make your own realities and live in an X fueled echo chamber. But let me get this straight, unless I personally grab an assault rifle and storm trenches in Ukraine, I'm not allowed to support U.S. foreign policy? Amazing. I didn't realize geopolitical strategy was now subject to Call of Duty volunteerism.
Where else is this standard applied? Back cancer research? Better dust off the bio and chem books, and grab some scrubs. When are we suiting up to patrol the streets?
But here's the best part, and I truly thank you for this. "If they can work around my work schedule I would be happy to help enforce our immigration and drug laws." LOL! How brave. How selfless. A true warrior as long as it doesn't interfere with your schedule. So you'll let people put their lives on the line for you because it's too inconvenient for you to do it.
This is the kind of brain-dead standard that collapses the moment you apply it to literally anything else. So just like you won't actually do anything to keep our streets safe or protect our borders except support policies, we're both a no.
Multiple sentences and you still won't answer the question.
In fact no one is even demanding you get off your couch and go to the battle front.
The question was simply would you be willing to volunteer in a war that you care deeply about and that you want the USA to fund with billions of tax payer dollars…a very dangerous proxy conflict.
And yet for some strange reason you won't answer the question.
While on the other hand I have been willing to answer that I would be willing to volunteer to defend the borders and defend a US policy position I believe in's
This should not be a hard question for you to answer
I answered it in my last sentence, but you are too obtuse to pick it up.
Respectfully….you have not.
Will you volunteer for the war you support? It's not hard to answer
Somber has even said he has sent his personal money. Have you?
Me:
Quote:
So just like you won't actually do anything to keep our streets safe or protect our borders except support policies, we're both a no
I am willing to volunteer to defend our laws at any time the authorities ask.
Are you willing to volunteer for war you support? The authorities in Ukraine are asking for your help…
Very simple question to answer
Why do I have to volunteer for the Ukrainian army just because I support giving aid and tools to a nation being invaded? I haven't called for sending U.S. troops, and I've been consistent on that. That's exactly why your question is so stupid.
Strategic aid isn't a pledge to grab a rifle, it's about preventing a scenario where American soldiers might actually be needed. That's the point you keep missing. And in case you missed it, we just signed a bilateral deal with Ukraine. That means our direct interests are only increasing.
And spare us the LARPing about your commitment to our border or law enforcement. It's just a convenient hedge against your inane question you apply to me and others who support Ukraine aid. I'm sure your schedule is really booked and the mental anguish you're going through as you roast Biden, immigrants, crime, and lack of border security 9 hours a day on SicEm, but somehow can't find the time to stand a post at the border. Convenient.
You've tried to trap me and others as hypocritical about things we've never argued for (troop deployments), but instead with your "sure I'd do it, but" have exposed yourself as the true hypocrite and coward. Good work.
